Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?That was a response to the attacks by the Zionist's settler colonial project.Whichever the reason, one is forgetting all the Jews who found themselves expelled from various areas of Judea and Samaria from 1929 to 1948.
And what was the excuse for Arab Pogroms against Palestinian Jews before Zionism?
Yep...it were the same antisemitic blood libels, BDS is just the same.
However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
Yes it does.Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?That was a response to the attacks by the Zionist's settler colonial project.Whichever the reason, one is forgetting all the Jews who found themselves expelled from various areas of Judea and Samaria from 1929 to 1948.
And what was the excuse for Arab Pogroms against Palestinian Jews before Zionism?
Yep...it were the same antisemitic blood libels, BDS is just the same.
{Like?} is all you can come up with?
It does not work Tinmore.
History does not back up your amnesia attacks.
However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
{Yes, it does. }Yes it does.Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?That was a response to the attacks by the Zionist's settler colonial project.Whichever the reason, one is forgetting all the Jews who found themselves expelled from various areas of Judea and Samaria from 1929 to 1948.
And what was the excuse for Arab Pogroms against Palestinian Jews before Zionism?
Yep...it were the same antisemitic blood libels, BDS is just the same.
{Like?} is all you can come up with?
It does not work Tinmore.
History does not back up your amnesia attacks.
Examples?However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
No problem, that's exactly the point
but it's the BDS themselves confirming their difficulty to comply with the frame of a civilized discourse, without using double standards and hate speech.
You are referencing actions that follow the start of the Zionist settler colonial project. Of course the Palestinian would oppose that.{Yes, it does. }Yes it does.Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?That was a response to the attacks by the Zionist's settler colonial project.
And what was the excuse for Arab Pogroms against Palestinian Jews before Zionism?
Yep...it were the same antisemitic blood libels, BDS is just the same.
{Like?} is all you can come up with?
It does not work Tinmore.
History does not back up your amnesia attacks.
And "that" is all the proof you are ever going to give.
Your word as to what happened (without showing proof as to what happened) is worth a million recorded reports to the contrary.
You are referencing actions that follow the start of the Zionist settler colonial project. Of course the Palestinian would oppose that.{Yes, it does. }Yes it does.Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?And what was the excuse for Arab Pogroms against Palestinian Jews before Zionism?
Yep...it were the same antisemitic blood libels, BDS is just the same.
{Like?} is all you can come up with?
It does not work Tinmore.
History does not back up your amnesia attacks.
And "that" is all the proof you are ever going to give.
Your word as to what happened (without showing proof as to what happened) is worth a million recorded reports to the contrary.
OKYou are referencing actions that follow the start of the Zionist settler colonial project. Of course the Palestinian would oppose that.{Yes, it does. }Yes it does.Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?
{Like?} is all you can come up with?
It does not work Tinmore.
History does not back up your amnesia attacks.
And "that" is all the proof you are ever going to give.
Your word as to what happened (without showing proof as to what happened) is worth a million recorded reports to the contrary.
Doesn't explain Arab war against Palestinian Jews prior to that.
Where else is another country occupying a disputed territory who’s status and ownership is yet to be settled? What other country is building new villages for one ethnic group in that territory and largely preventing any new construction for the other group that claims it? Keep in mind that in a 2016 Pew Poll 46 or 48% (don’t remember off the top of my head) of Jews in Israel want to expel all Arabs from Israel with signicantly higher numbers in certain religious subgroups. When you look at that then the issue of settlement building in occupied (according to one side) and disputed (according to the other) it looks less innocent.How many of those are newly created in occupied/disputed territory vs long established? Not all Jewish or Arab towns are settlements, the term has a specific meaning.
Yes. It does have a specific meaning. One that applies only to Jews. That alone is problematic.
You are still trying to justify why what amounts to a discriminatory act.
Do you mean to say that the Palestinian Jews had no opposition to seeing all of those invading Arabs migrate into their ancient homeland?You are referencing actions that follow the start of the Zionist settler colonial project. Of course the Palestinian would oppose that.{Yes, it does. }Yes it does.Your pathetic attempts to wipe out the attacks on Palestinian Jews since 1920 by Husseini and all the Arabs in the region has become very tiresome.Like?And what was the excuse for Arab Pogroms against Palestinian Jews before Zionism?
Yep...it were the same antisemitic blood libels, BDS is just the same.
{Like?} is all you can come up with?
It does not work Tinmore.
History does not back up your amnesia attacks.
And "that" is all the proof you are ever going to give.
Your word as to what happened (without showing proof as to what happened) is worth a million recorded reports to the contrary.
Do you not find it fascinating that once Israel got Judea and Samaria in 1967, that area became "occupied".Where else is another country occupying a disputed territory who’s status and ownership is yet to be settled? What other country is building new villages for one ethnic group in that territory and largely preventing any new construction for the other group that claims it? Keep in mind that in a 2016 Pew Poll 46 or 48% (don’t remember off the top of my head) of Jews in Israel want to expel all Arabs from Israel with signicantly higher numbers in certain religious subgroups. When you look at that then the issue of settlement building in occupied (according to one side) and disputed (according to the other) it looks less innocent.How many of those are newly created in occupied/disputed territory vs long established? Not all Jewish or Arab towns are settlements, the term has a specific meaning.
Yes. It does have a specific meaning. One that applies only to Jews. That alone is problematic.
You are still trying to justify why what amounts to a discriminatory act.
If another country is doing this I would say the exact same thing, boycott and raise awareness. What country is currently engaging in this? Saying it is anti Semitic solely because Israel is being protested and other countries aren’t ignores the fact that we all selective in what we put our attention to. Why do people here focus on Palestinian rights but not the Kurds? Why do people focus on terrorist attacks and anti semitism in/towards Israel but not what is happening in Myanmar?
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Interesting case especially with the definition of anti semitism. I wonder how many people realize that holding all responsible for the actions of some is exactly what is routinely done with Muslims here. Same card, dopifferent faces. One is condemned, the other justified. I agree with the definition...it is the ultimate irony though that many of those who do do not see how they themselves are utilizing the same rhetoric against other groups.
Do you not find it fascinating that once Israel got Judea and Samaria in 1967, that area became "occupied".Where else is another country occupying a disputed territory who’s status and ownership is yet to be settled? What other country is building new villages for one ethnic group in that territory and largely preventing any new construction for the other group that claims it? Keep in mind that in a 2016 Pew Poll 46 or 48% (don’t remember off the top of my head) of Jews in Israel want to expel all Arabs from Israel with signicantly higher numbers in certain religious subgroups. When you look at that then the issue of settlement building in occupied (according to one side) and disputed (according to the other) it looks less innocent.How many of those are newly created in occupied/disputed territory vs long established? Not all Jewish or Arab towns are settlements, the term has a specific meaning.
Yes. It does have a specific meaning. One that applies only to Jews. That alone is problematic.
You are still trying to justify why what amounts to a discriminatory act.
If another country is doing this I would say the exact same thing, boycott and raise awareness. What country is currently engaging in this? Saying it is anti Semitic solely because Israel is being protested and other countries aren’t ignores the fact that we all selective in what we put our attention to. Why do people here focus on Palestinian rights but not the Kurds? Why do people focus on terrorist attacks and anti semitism in/towards Israel but not what is happening in Myanmar?
But Jordan taking over the same area and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem from 1948 to 1967 was never considered "occupied" by the world and much less the Arabs in question.
I do not believe that you do understand why the BDS movement, started by Arabs, is exclusively a movement against Israel.
There is no BDS movement against any other country which is clearly occupying the land of another people (Turkey in Cyprus, etc) and there will never be.
How, and why is that?
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Interesting case especially with the definition of anti semitism. I wonder how many people realize that holding all responsible for the actions of some is exactly what is routinely done with Muslims here. Same card, dopifferent faces. One is condemned, the other justified. I agree with the definition...it is the ultimate irony though that many of those who do do not see how they themselves are utilizing the same rhetoric against other groups.
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Interesting case especially with the definition of anti semitism. I wonder how many people realize that holding all responsible for the actions of some is exactly what is routinely done with Muslims here. Same card, dopifferent faces. One is condemned, the other justified. I agree with the definition...it is the ultimate irony though that many of those who do do not see how they themselves are utilizing the same rhetoric against other groups.
Excuse me but.....OH, Please !!!!!
None of us has ever considered all Muslims responsible for the acts of some Muslims.
If it were so, there would be no Muslims living in Israel, as there are no Jews living in Gaza, Jordan and most of the Muslim countries.
Unfortunately, you alone as well as a few others, do not see the irony of what you post.
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Interesting case especially with the definition of anti semitism. I wonder how many people realize that holding all responsible for the actions of some is exactly what is routinely done with Muslims here. Same card, dopifferent faces. One is condemned, the other justified. I agree with the definition...it is the ultimate irony though that many of those who do do not see how they themselves are utilizing the same rhetoric against other groups.
Excuse me but.....OH, Please !!!!!
None of us has ever considered all Muslims responsible for the acts of some Muslims.
If it were so, there would be no Muslims living in Israel, as there are no Jews living in Gaza, Jordan and most of the Muslim countries.
Unfortunately, you alone as well as a few others, do not see the irony of what you post.
You are very restricted in what you read. There are countless posts here in auSMB essentially blaming all Muslims or all Palestinians for the acts of terrorism or violence. You easily see antisemitism, not so easily when the target is a group you don’t particularly agree with. Why not apply the same standards to both groups?
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Interesting case especially with the definition of anti semitism. I wonder how many people realize that holding all responsible for the actions of some is exactly what is routinely done with Muslims here. Same card, dopifferent faces. One is condemned, the other justified. I agree with the definition...it is the ultimate irony though that many of those who do do not see how they themselves are utilizing the same rhetoric against other groups.
Excuse me but.....OH, Please !!!!!
None of us has ever considered all Muslims responsible for the acts of some Muslims.
If it were so, there would be no Muslims living in Israel, as there are no Jews living in Gaza, Jordan and most of the Muslim countries.
Unfortunately, you alone as well as a few others, do not see the irony of what you post.
You are very restricted in what you read. There are countless posts here in auSMB essentially blaming all Muslims or all Palestinians for the acts of terrorism or violence. You easily see antisemitism, not so easily when the target is a group you don’t particularly agree with. Why not apply the same standards to both groups?
Trump's Education Department weighs in on anti-Semitism case
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s Education Department has reopened an old discrimination case against Rutgers University and is revisiting what constitutes anti-Semitism.
The case stems from a 2011 event sponsored at Rutgers by an outside organization that was accused of charging Jewish attendees for admission while allowing others in for free.
The initial investigation was closed by the department under President Barack Obama’s administration in 2014. But the Zionist Group of America says the department has reopened the case based on its appeal.
In a letter to the group, Kenneth Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, cites a broad definition of anti-Semitism that includes, among other things, “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”
That language was adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, an intergovernmental group that includes the United States and European Union states, and was embraced by the State Department under the Obama administration.
In his letter, Marcus also said discrimination “on the basis of actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” would violate federal discrimination laws and falls under the agency’s description. The statement appears to indicate that the department is considering anti-Semitism as discrimination against an ethnic group, not a religious one.
Interesting case especially with the definition of anti semitism. I wonder how many people realize that holding all responsible for the actions of some is exactly what is routinely done with Muslims here. Same card, dopifferent faces. One is condemned, the other justified. I agree with the definition...it is the ultimate irony though that many of those who do do not see how they themselves are utilizing the same rhetoric against other groups.
How is it that in every case people want to discuss antisemitism, Muslim groups cry foul.
Here's another fact for Your moral relativism - there're no Arab support in the combat of antisemitism (not to mention incitement), but there's a significant representation of Jewish organizations fighting for rights of the Muslim community.
