Jewish Settler Attacks = Terrorism

yosi said:

Really the question is which one of the examples of antisemitism that the EU gives have you not dipped a toe in?

Actually, no, the question is, why are you so desperate to deflect attention from the crimes committed by the state of Israel?

yosi said:

It is simply because I believe it to be true

yosi said:

...this only makes sense if you accept that antisemitism is whatever any Jew says it is, which is an absurd position.

Here's a question for you Yosi: Do you think anti-Semitism is a special kind of racism? Do you believe that racism against Jews deserves special attention, above and beyond racism towards any other ethnic group?

What do you think about racism towards Arabs? Do you think that anti-Arab racism deserves as much attention as racism towards Jews? And if so then why have you paid it zero attention? Conversely, why have you done everything in your power to deflect attention from Jewish racism towards Arabs, including attacks by settlers which have been described as acts of terrorism?

Though I don't expect any answer from you, because in your huge arrogance you seem to think that you can only respond to my questions when they suit you.

yosi said:

All of those examples are drawn from the E.U. definition of the term. I didn't just make them up. And amazingly you don't even deny that you've engaged in them. Instead you try to justify yourself. So please, explain this to me. The European Union has a group responsible for monitoring racism. They develop a definition for antisemitism. You repeatedly make comments that clearly and repeatedly fall into the examples given by the monitoring group of the types of statements that are antisemitic. And yet, somehow, it's absurd for anyone to think that your comments are antisemitic. How does that work?

Like I already said, the wide-reaching net of so-called 'anti-Semitism' as employed by apologists of Israel like yourself, and as adopted by the E.U - no doubt as a result of pressure by supporters of Israel's crimes - has rendered the term utterly meaningless. And it's perfectly obvious that your objective here is to cast doubt on my integrity, and cast me as a racist, because you wish to deflect attention from Israels crimes against the Palestinians, who you regard as non-people.

I understand that due to your enormous arrogance, and your belief that any criticism of Israel amounts to racism, that you feel you can alter the meaning of the term 'racism' and apply it with a broad brush stroke to encompass anything and everything that casts your lunatic racist state in a negative light.
But unfortunately for you, the English language is immune to your slippery self-serving bullshit, and despite your efforts, the definition of the term 'racism' (and anti-Semitism') remains intact.

As Michael Neumann pointed out:
'..If antisemitism is going to be a term of condemnation, then, it must apply beyond explicitly racist acts or thoughts or feelings. But it cannot apply beyond clearly unjustified and serious hostility to Jews. The Nazis made up historical fantasies to justify their attacks; so do modern antisemites who trust in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. So do the closet racists who complain about Jewish dominance of the economy. This is antisemitism in a narrow, negative sense of the word. It is action or propaganda designed to hurt Jews, not because of anything they could avoid doing, but because they are what they are. It also applies to the attitudes that propaganda tries to instill. Though not always explicitly racist, it involves racist motives and the intention to do real damage. Reasonably well-founded opposition to Israeli policies, even if that opposition hurts all Jews, does not fit this description. Neither does simple, harmless dislike of things Jewish.'

http://normanfinkelstein.com/2014/nothing-new-but-needs-to-be-said-again-and-again-and-again/

Israel does not want peace

Rejectionism is embedded in Israel’s most primal beliefs. There, at the deepest level, lies the concept that this land is destined for the Jews alone.

By Gideon Levy - July 4, 2014


Israel does not want peace. There is nothing I have ever written that I would be happier to be proved wrong about. But the evidence is piling up. In fact, it can be said that Israel has never wanted peace – a just peace, that is, one based on a just compromise for both sides. It’s true that the routine greeting in Hebrew is Shalom (peace) – shalom when one leaves and shalom when one arrives. And, at the drop of a hat, almost every Israeli will say he wants peace, of course he does. But he’s not referring to the kind of peace that will bring about the justice without which there is no peace and there will be no peace. Israelis want peace, not justice, certainly not anything based on universal values. Thus, “Peace, peace, when there is no peace.” Not only is there no peace: In recent years, Israel has moved away from even the aspiration to make peace. It has despaired utterly of it. Peace has disappeared from the Israeli agenda, its place taken by the collective anxieties that are systematically implanted, and by personal, private matters that now take precedence over all else.

The Israeli longing for peace seemingly died about a decade ago, after the failure of the Camp David summit in 2000, the dissemination of the lie that there is no Palestinian partner for peace, and, of course, the horrific blood-soaked period of the second intifada. But the truth is that even before that, Israel never really wanted peace. Israel has never, not for a minute, treated the Palestinians as human beings with equal rights. It has never viewed their distress as understandable human and national distress.

...The single most overwhelming item of evidence of Israel’s rejection of peace is, of course, the settlements project. From the dawn of its existence, there has never been a more reliable or more precise litmus test for Israel’s true intentions than this particular enterprise. In plain words: The builders of settlements want to consolidate the occupation, and those who want to consolidate the occupation do not want peace. That’s the whole story in a nutshell.

On the assumption that Israel’s decisions are rational, it is impossible to accept construction in the territories and the aspiration to peace as mutually coexisting. Every act of building in the settlements, every mobile home and every balcony, conveys rejection. If Israel had wanted to achieve peace through the Oslo Accords, it would at least have stopped the construction in the settlements at its own initiative. That this did not happen proves that Oslo was fraudulent, or at best the chronicle of a failure foretold. If Israel had wanted to achieve peace at Taba, at Camp David, at Sharm el-Sheikh, in Washington or in Jerusalem, its first move should have been to end all construction in the territories. Unconditionally. Without a quid pro quo. The fact that Israel did not is proof that it did not want a just peace.

...There is no way to reach a just peace when the name of the game is the dehumanization of the Palestinians. No way to achieve peace when the demonization of the Palestinians is hammered into people’s heads day after day. Those who are convinced that every Palestinian is a suspicious person and that every Palestinian wants “to throw the Jews into the sea” will never make peace with the Palestinians. Most Israelis are convinced of the truth of both those statements.

...They have been trained to believe that there is no partner for peace – a Palestinian partner, that is – but that there is an Israeli partner.

Unfortunately, the truth is almost the reverse. The Palestinian non-partners no longer have any chance to prove that they are partners; the Israeli non-partners are convinced that they are interlocutors. So began the process in which Israeli conditions, obstacles and difficulties were heaped up, one more milestone in Israeli rejectionism. First came the demand for a cessation of terrorism; then the demand for a change of leadership (Yasser Arafat as a stumbling block); and after that Hamas became the hurdle. Now it’s the Palestinians’ refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Israel considers every step it takes – from mass political arrests to building in the territories – to be legitimate, whereas every Palestinian move is “unilateral.”

The only country on the planet with no borders is so far unwilling to delineate even the compromise borders it is ready to be satisfied with. Israel has not internalized the fact that, for the Palestinians, the borders of 1967 are the mother of all compromises, the red line of justice (or relative justice). For the Israelis, they are “suicide borders.”

...Disconnected from reality, the majority of Israelis pursue their regular way of life. In their mind’s eye the world is always against them, and the areas of occupation on their doorstep are beyond their realm of interest. Anyone who dares criticize the occupation policy is branded an anti-Semite, every act of resistance is perceived as an existential threat. All international opposition to the occupation is read as the “delegitimizing” of Israel and as a provocation to the country’s very existence. The world’s seven billion people – most of whom are against the occupation – are wrong, and six million Israeli Jews – most of whom support the occupation – are right. That’s the reality in the eyes of the average Israeli.

Add to this the repression, the concealment and the obfuscation, and you have another explanation for the rejectionism: Why should anyone strive for peace as long as life in Israel is good, calm prevails and the reality is concealed? The only way the besieged Gaza Strip can remind people of its existence is by firing rockets, and the West Bank only gets onto the agenda these days when blood is shed there. Similarly, the viewpoint of the international community is only taken into account when it tries to impose boycotts and sanctions, which in their turn immediately generate a campaign of self-victimization studded with blunt – and at times also impertinent – historical accusations.

This, then, is the gloomy picture. It contains not a ray of hope. The change will not happen on its own, from within Israeli society, as long as that society continues to behave as it does. The Palestinians have made more than one mistake, but their mistakes are marginal. Basic justice is on their side, and basic rejectionism is the Israelis’ purview. The Israelis want occupation, not peace.

I only hope I am wrong.

More here on the blatant pro-Israeli bias in the U.S media: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ3UZxWAcfw&feature=share