Antisemitism - UK adopts 'new' definition

It seems the government (with 100% support from Labour) is going to adopt the definition of antisemitism that was agreed in May at the conference of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (European countries but not Russia + USA, Canada and Israel).

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...me-jews-israel

With further detailed guidance:

https://www.holocaustremembrance.com...tisemitism.pdf

Whilst most of this looks fine, in practice it also accepts the Israeli government view that criticism of Zionism should be considered anti-semitic. It does that through the definitions that relate to the State of Israel where - although it says criticism of the Israeli government is not anti-semitic - it treats the State of Israel as if it was any other 'liberal democracy'. It isn't. It is based on a Zionist ideology (that is political not religious), and although it has open elections it has constructed an apartheid system that gives greater rights and privileges to Jewish citizens.

Much of the recent debate about (a real rise in) antisemitism in Europe and north America has been about finding ways to gag pro-Palestinian campaigners, cynically using a warped appeal to anti-racism/antisemitism to silence political opposition to the Israeli government. It appears from the brief quote from Labour that they have been completely spooked by attacks on Livingstone/Shah/Momentum/Corbyn/Chakrabarti etc and have surrendered the argument to John Mann and his like in the party.

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise." - Voltaire.

The term is used by both sides to hide their own scumbaggery.

You'll see some on twitter and previously on here say it is used to collectively dismiss all anti israel opinion. They'll even post a meme of a ultra orthodox jew being anti israel, wow :xmashehe:

Then you've got defenders of israel claiming all criticism is anti semitism. Often taken and run with by the media.

It is used by both not for the genuine reasons the term exists.

Jews have been mocked in movies and entertainment far more than any other religion. So this idea that no one can comment on on judaism is lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise." - Voltaire.

---

And the arabs are spreading their wealth and reach throughout the world due to the fact the oil will end.

Why is there no outcry?.

There are many rich christian americans flogging wares between themselves?.

Chinese?.

Anti jewish sentiment ingrained in dumb christian/islamic nations for centuries.

Arabs are Semites too. No-one gets accused of antisemitism for blowing 'em to bits. Let's keep on pretending Israel hasn't nuclear weapons (that's weapons of mass destruction, folks). That way they don't have to be inspected, the country doesn't have sanctions imposed, doesn't get blitzed and successive UK Prime Ministers bow in homage as members of the Labour and Conservative Friends of Israel groups.

The difference being I don't care about criticism of israel.

Which is what you've just commented on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordKenwyne

The term is used by both sides to hide their own scumbaggery.

You'll see some on twitter and previously on here say it is used to collectively dismiss all anti israel opinion. They'll even post a meme of a ultra orthodox jew being anti israel, wow :xmashehe:

Then you've got defenders of israel claiming all criticism is anti semitism. Often taken and run with by the media.

It is used by both not for the genuine reasons the term exists.

Jews have been mocked in movies and entertainment far more than any other religion. So this idea that no one can comment on on judaism is lying.

---

Some of the most fervent anti-Zionists are orthodox Jews. Some of the most outspoken opponents of the Israeli government's policies (including the illegal settlement programme) are orthodox Jews. There are not large numbers of them, though.

The Israeli 'apartheid' label has stuck in recent years, and the Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement has had some real success. I think that is one reason why the Israeli government and its supporters have been so determined to win the propaganda war over promoting Zionism as synonymous with Judaism and anti-Zionism with antisemitism. Whilst there is a real war to be won against deep rooted and growing antisemitism (and much faster growing Islamophobia) this redefinition 'victory' is in my view totally political.

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-speci...-hell/1.671538

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Some of the most fervent anti-Zionists are orthodox Jews. Some of the most outspoken opponents of the Israeli government's policies (including the illegal settlement programme) are orthodox Jews. There are not large numbers of them, though.

The Israeli 'apartheid' label has stuck in recent years, and the Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement has had some real success. I think that is one reason why the Israeli government and its supporters have been so determined to win the propaganda war over promoting Zionism as synonymous with Judaism and anti-Zionism with antisemitism. Whilst there is a real war to be won against deep rooted and growing antisemitism (and much faster growing Islamophobia) this redefinition 'victory' is in my view totally political.

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-speci...-hell/1.671538

---

Ye that is what I meant. Many Jews don't believe in the state.

I don't think they will ever gain widespread credibility as long as islamic countries are present in the UN. And that is what is boils down to for me.

The lack of care for Palestinian refugees by muslim governments (from what I have read?). They use them as a political football, serving their own purpose. Their hatred of jews holding the land covering the mosque.

If you take religion out of it the conflict would rarely be covered. Dai Splott had the gall to claim russias annexation of crimea was legitimate. One of the most hypocritical people I've witnessed online.

Palestinians suffer - Iran etc continue to fuel the war by releasing rhetoric that will inflame and gain violent followers. Israel continue statement building. Only one side is innocent.

It is impossible to call anything in the middle east a certain group of peoples "homeland". So much death and destruction, the original heirs were probably beheaded and put on stakes.

Dislike of islam and the "turk" has always been present. The media cover Islamophobia more and it sells papers. I really do not think we are in a crisis.

Gone a bit wide of the topic now mind!.

Meanwhile over in Googleland the far right is re-writing history to make out the holocaust was an invention of the non-white and non-right. Very sinister and very scary.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...w-we-see-world

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Meanwhile over in Googleland the far right is re-writing history to make out the holocaust was an invention of the non-white and non-right. Very sinister and very scary.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...w-we-see-world

---

Both left and right use holocaust denial.

Left leaning pro palestine/pro islam
Christian hatred of Judaism

Go hand in hand.

But ye, it is scary how history slowly dissolves. Eventually it will be forgotten of course. The species is dumb and it is a matter of time before the next disaster that we will all learn from. Saying that most people are peaceful.

People seem to be confused here, nobody is saying that you can't say nasty things about Israel or its policies

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llanedeyrnblue

People seem to be confused here, nobody is saying that you can't say nasty things about Israel or its policies

---

I may be wrong but I don't think so. I think this 'definition' is intended to close down a lot of criticism of the State of Israel's underlying political ideology: Zionism. The Guardian summary says:

The government is to formally adopt a definition of what constitutes antisemitism, which includes over-sweeping condemnation of Israel

In my opinion there are a lot of weasel words used when people say criticism of Israeli government policies is still OK (thanks) because the way many of them are couched - in relation to the state ideology - is being redefined as antisemitic.

Try this:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/213158

Israel has always been a fantastic propaganda player. I wonder if compli-sults count as over-sweeping condemnation.

There's more than enough laws already on the statute book criminalising racial and religious hatred and discrimination without Israel/Jewish people getting special protection.

As for the Holohoax, the corporate media has long since lost its monopoly on publishing news thanks to the internet. I wish some people would do their own research on the subject rather than mindlessly repeating the absurd propaganda they've been subjected to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

There's more than enough laws already on the statute book criminalising racial and religious hatred and discrimination without Israel/Jewish people getting special protection.

As for the Holohoax, the corporate media has long since lost its monopoly on publishing news thanks to the internet. I wish some people would do their own research on the subject rather than mindlessly repeating the absurd propaganda they've been subjected to.

---

Around 6 million ghosts just called you a ****.

Ah, the magic six million number once again. Have stated the following a number of times prior in other threads. Late 1940s: plaque erected outside Auschwitz which stated four million people died here. Decades later the Polish government revised the total down to 1.6 million. Then that plaque was removed to be replaced with another that reflected a new total. It was then revised again to 1.2 million. You can verify all this with a few clicks. So, how does six million minus 2.8 million still equal six million?

The real number's around 200,000. Most perished from disease at the arse end of the war. The skeletal figures we're used to seeing from film footage at liberated work camps was a result of allied bombing of supply lines; all of Germany was suffering food shortages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

Ah, the magic six million number once again. Have stated the following a number of times prior in other threads. Late 1940s: plaque erected outside Auschwitz which stated four million people died here. Decades later the Polish government revised the total down to 1.6 million. Then that plaque was removed to be replaced with another that reflected a new total. It was then revised again to 1.2 million. You can verify all this with a few clicks. So, how does six million minus 2.8 million still equal six million?

The real number's around 200,000. Most perished from disease at the arse end of the war. The skeletal figures we're used to seeing from film footage at liberated work camps was a result of allied bombing of supply lines; all of Germany was suffering food shortages.

---

I think we can all agree that THIS is some good ol fashioned anti Semitism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

I think we can all agree that THIS is some good ol fashioned anti Semitism.

---

That's not anti-semitism, it's an opinion which he is perfectly entitled to hold and to express. You don't have to agree with it.

As for the 6 million (or however many it was) relating to the definition of antisemitism by the IHRA - there shouldn’t be a league table of victimhood. Religious bigotry and racism are universal and like Organ Morgan says these are covered by legislation already in place in the UK. Do the Irish get their own special definition of prejudice against them? How about people from Tibet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

Ah, the magic six million number once again. Have stated the following a number of times prior in other threads. Late 1940s: plaque erected outside Auschwitz which stated four million people died here. Decades later the Polish government revised the total down to 1.6 million. Then that plaque was removed to be replaced with another that reflected a new total. It was then revised again to 1.2 million. You can verify all this with a few clicks. So, how does six million minus 2.8 million still equal six million?

The real number's around 200,000. Most perished from disease at the arse end of the war. The skeletal figures we're used to seeing from film footage at liberated work camps was a result of allied bombing of supply lines; all of Germany was suffering food shortages.

---

Where does the 200k figure come from then bellend.

But really you speak with such certainty.

Yet your own beliefs are based on **** all.

And instead of talking about what this thread was intended for, you bring up the holocaust. Complete scummer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

I think we can all agree that THIS is some good old fashioned simple mathematics.

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordKenwyne

Where does the 200k figure come from then bellend.

---

Look, just because I'm challenging your misguided beliefs there's no need to get arsey.

Source? The Red Cross.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

Look, just because I'm challenging your misguided beliefs there's no need to get arsey.

Source? The Red Cross.

---

You're welcome to your beliefs.

The same way the turks try to white wash their past disgraces.

Time kills all and they know it.

figures for Auchwitz is around a million, 925,000 at treblinka which was a death camp only as was belzac and sobibor which account for another 700,000, over a million shot by eiinzangruppen in the east including over 33,000 in three days at babi yar, approx 800,000 starved to death in ghettos, all adding up, we will never know the exact figure it may be 6 million it may be less, does it excuse the horror or the systematic genocide of jews plus gypsies, jehovas witnesses, people with mental handicaps, gays etc no it does not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packerman

figures for Auchwitz is around a million, 925,000 at treblinka which was a death camp only as was belzac and sobibor which account for another 700,000, over a million shot by eiinzangruppen in the east including over 33,000 in three days at babi yar, approx 800,000 starved to death in ghettos, all adding up, we will never know the exact figure it may be 6 million it may be less, does it excuse the horror or the systematic genocide of jews plus gypsies, jehovas witnesses, people with mental handicaps, gays etc no it does not.

---

thank God Organ morgan wasn't around back then, then we'd have 200,001 victims

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packerman

figures for Auchwitz is around a million, 925,000 at treblinka which was a death camp only as was belzac and sobibor which account for another 700,000, over a million shot by eiinzangruppen in the east including over 33,000 in three days at babi yar, approx 800,000 starved to death in ghettos, all adding up, we will never know the exact figure it may be 6 million it may be less, does it excuse the horror or the systematic genocide of jews plus gypsies, jehovas witnesses, people with mental handicaps, gays etc no it does not.

---

People such as organ morgan claim the figures are vastly inflated to discredit the entire event.

Speaking jokingly about the holohoax and in the next sentence saying over 200 thousand innocent women children and families died.

Deleting post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Deleting post

---

Good thing I saw what you wrote!

Some folks will never get past the moral sheep herding to dig to deeper truths. It's really difficult to challenge one's own belief system that's been conditioned into you for your whole life. 2016 has been a re-revelation for me in that respect as I hadn't realised how fast asleep I was.

The "holocost denial" phenomenon does not benefit those that would subscribe to such a view. So surely the logic would be to look to those who would benefit? The obsession with looking at national states for answers is also a mistake I feel. They are merely conduits for power grabs from more powerful forces. I might further suggest that laying blame on any religious group might also be a misstep.

If anyone on this thread is interested in a deeper dig I would thoroughly recommend Carol Quigely's Tradgedy and Hope which is a manuscript with research mined from CFR sources etc. I've only just discovered this but it's blown my tiny mind. It's a tough read as Quigely was a military man and not a writer, but I haven't yet come across a more enlightening mine into modern global history as this. Quigley was also acknowledged by Bill Clinton to be his chief mentor (but don't let that put you off!) A very important and telling note on this text is that Quigley confided with friends that he dare not overly cite certain banking families in this book as he was convinced he would be killed and his work suppressed.

Here it is for free. You can probably download to a smartphone and read like a kindle...

http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf

For some reason it went out of print for years until 2014 :sherlock:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

Some folks will never get past the moral sheep herding to dig to deeper truths. It's really difficult to challenge one's own belief system that's been conditioned into you for your whole life. 2016 has been a re-revelation for me in that respect as I hadn't realised how fast asleep I was.

The "holocost denial" phenomenon does not benefit those that would subscribe to such a view. So surely the logic would be to look to those who would benefit? The obsession with looking at national states for answers is also a mistake I feel. They are merely conduits for power grabs from more powerful forces. I might further suggest that laying blame on any religious group might also be a misstep.

If anyone on this thread is interested in a deeper dig I would thoroughly recommend Carol Quigely's Tradgedy and Hope which is a manuscript with research mined from CFR sources etc. I've only just discovered this but it's blown my tiny mind. It's a tough read as Quigely was a military man and not a writer, but I haven't yet come across a more enlightening mine into modern global history as this. Quigley was also acknowledged by Bill Clinton to be his chief mentor (but don't let that put you off!) A very important and telling note on this text is that Quigley confided with friends that he dare not overly cite certain banking families in this book as he was convinced he would be killed and his work suppressed.

Here it is for free. You can probably download to a smartphone and read like a kindle...

http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf

For some reason it went out of print for years until 2014 :sherlock:

---

Sounds interesting. :thumbup: G. Edward Griffin did a great lecture called 'The Quigley Formula' , good watch if you haven't seen it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

Sounds interesting. :thumbup: G. Edward Griffin did a great lecture called 'The Quigley Formula' , good watch if you haven't seen it.

---

I've seen this guy talk about other stuff. Hadn't realised he'd covered Quigley. Definitely going to check this out. :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llanedeyrnblue

People seem to be confused here, nobody is saying that you can't say nasty things about Israel or its policies

---

Good people dont say nasty things about anyone and try to live as one .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

thank God Organ morgan wasn't around back then, then we'd have 200,001 victims

---

Perhaps we should arrange another one so he doesn't get missed this time. :hide:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

I've seen this guy talk about other stuff. Hadn't realised he'd covered Quigley. Definitely going to check this out. :thumbup:

---

I do like Griffin, he's a good speaker, no gimmicks, no face masks, no end of the world music in the background, just how I like em. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ninianclark

I love this from Dianne Abbott saying that on the whole Mao did more good than harm - she seems to forget about the millions of people he killed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB4o5n2EGyA

---

Holy **** she really is a useful idiot!

A lot of folks link Mao to being a Bonesman, but I'm not sure if it's true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

Holy **** she really is a useful idiot!

A lot of folks link Mao to being a Bonesman, but I'm not sure if it's true

---

:hehe: It's scary how many people are willing to lie to themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

:hehe: It's scary how many people are willing to lie to themselves.

---

:hehe: I would define it as intellectual and moral narcissism