HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Foreign Affairs & National Security » Israel/Palestine (Group) » The Gatekeepers: In New F...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:04 PM

The Gatekeepers: In New Film, Ex-Shin Bet Chiefs Denounce Occupation, Compare Israel to Nazi Germany

From Democracy Now:

January 29, 2013


Amidst a spate of killings by Israeli forces of unarmed Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, we turn to the stunning Oscar-nominated documentary, "The Gatekeepers." The film brings together six former heads of Israel’s internal security agency, the Shin Bet, collectively speaking out for the first time ever. They detail their methods against Palestinian militants and civilians in the Occupied Territories, including targeted killings, torture, recruiting informants, and the suppression of mass protests during two intifadas. But in doing so, they also criticize the occupation they were assigned with defending and warn that successive Israeli governments have endangered their country’s future by refusing to make peace. "We are making the lives of millions unbearable, into prolonged human suffering, it kills me," Carmi Gillon says in the film. " a brutal occupation force similar to the Germans in World War II," adds Avraham Shalom. We are joined by the film’s director, Dror Moreh.

Transcript:

AARON MATÉ: For our first segment, we turn to Israel and the Occupied Territories, where Israeli forces have begun the year with a spate of killings of unarmed Palestinian civilians. So far this month, at least five unarmed Palestinians have been shot to death by Israeli troops. The latest we know about was a 21-year-old Palestinian woman named Lubna Hanash, who was killed when Israeli forces opened fire at a West Bank school. A witness said Hanash was standing with a group of companions when they came under fire.

AHMED ABU KHERAN: Two Israeli solders traveling in a white car pointed their weapons, shooting indiscriminately at a college, where the women were standing at the entrance, and there was another man inside. They shot three people, and then a large number of soldiers arrived.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, on Monday, the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem put out a report saying Israeli forces have been "extensively and systematically" violating their own rules of engagement when suppressing protests in the West Bank, in many cases leading to Palestinian deaths. According to B’Tselem, since 2005 at least 48 Palestinians have been killed by live ammunition fired at people throwing stones. Six more were killed by rubber-coated bullets fired at dangerously close range, and two were killed by tear-gas canisters directly fired at protesters. This is B’Tselem spokesperson Sarit Michaeli.

in full: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/1/29/the_gatekeepers_in_new_film_ex

58 replies, 3536 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 58 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Gatekeepers: In New Film, Ex-Shin Bet Chiefs Denounce Occupation, Compare Israel to Nazi Germany (Original post)
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 OP
JoeBlowToo Jan 2013 #1
mike_c Jan 2013 #2
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #3
oberliner Jan 2013 #6
shaayecanaan Jan 2013 #8
azurnoir Jan 2013 #10
shira Jan 2013 #4
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #5
oberliner Jan 2013 #7
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #14
shira Jan 2013 #16
azurnoir Jan 2013 #18
shira Jan 2013 #19
azurnoir Jan 2013 #20
shira Jan 2013 #21
azurnoir Jan 2013 #22
shira Jan 2013 #24
azurnoir Jan 2013 #27
shira Jan 2013 #28
azurnoir Jan 2013 #30
shira Jan 2013 #37
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #35
shira Jan 2013 #38
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #41
shira Jan 2013 #47
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #48
shira Jan 2013 #11
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #15
shaayecanaan Jan 2013 #36
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #43
azurnoir Jan 2013 #23
shira Jan 2013 #25
azurnoir Jan 2013 #26
shira Jan 2013 #29
azurnoir Jan 2013 #31
azurnoir Jan 2013 #32
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #44
shira Jan 2013 #45
azurnoir Jan 2013 #51
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #52
shira Jan 2013 #53
Scootaloo Jan 2013 #9
Fantastic Anarchist Jan 2013 #13
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #49
Fantastic Anarchist Jan 2013 #12
shira Jan 2013 #17
Fantastic Anarchist Jan 2013 #33
shira Jan 2013 #34
Fantastic Anarchist Jan 2013 #39
shira Jan 2013 #40
Fantastic Anarchist Jan 2013 #42
shira Jan 2013 #46
Fantastic Anarchist Jan 2013 #55
shira Jan 2013 #58
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #50
shira Jan 2013 #54
oberliner Jan 2013 #56
Jefferson23 Jan 2013 #57

Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:08 PM

1. And for saying the same thing many here have been excommunicated...

 

and otherwise pilloried.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoeBlowToo (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:14 PM

2. the world is watching, and we know vicious racism and apartheid when we see it....

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoeBlowToo (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:25 PM

3. It's a touchy subject. A snip here is quite poignant, I think.

And, by the way, Avraham Shalom was a young kid in Vienna in the 1930s. He didn’t know that he’s a Jew. He was forced to go to school after the Kristallnacht. He was almost beaten to death by his classmates. He felt firsthand what it means to be a Jew under a racist regime. And when he compares that, he compares the Israeli occupation to the Germans, that—like how the Germans treated the Poles, the Czechs, the Dutch, he knows what he speaks about. And I think that his worry is something that had resonance in me, as well, about what—where will it lead, the occupation—I mean, if it will continue like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoeBlowToo (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 11:32 PM

6. Because they are not Jewish

“Only Jews can say those kind of words,” he told Amanpour. “And only they can have the justification to speak as they spoke in the film.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #6)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 11:37 PM

8. How do you know who's Jewish on here and who isn't?

I don't think we have ever done a straw poll along those lines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:27 AM

10. there was a poster ppred within the past few days that apparently was Jewish

for saying less than that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:46 PM

4. Oh yeah. Israel is going all genocide against Palestinians. Definitely like the Nazis....

What a load of bullshit.

Who else besides Jews are compared to the Nazis?

What other countries out there massacring tens or hundreds of thousands are compared to Nazi Germany? Sudan? Rwanda? Syria?

Hell no. Never.

Only Israel.

This is filth...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:46 PM

5. Ex-Shin Bet Chiefs, send them your complaints and concerns, they made the statements.

I bet they'd enjoy communicating with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 11:32 PM

7. Only one made the comment

And the director said:

“Only Jews can say those kind of words. And only they can have the justification to speak as they spoke in the film.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:33 PM

14. Hold onto that caveat, oberliner. The group on whole has spoken quite frankly on the subject

of the occupation.

Only Jews can say those kind of words...considering the Jews who have done so already and
are banned from Israel speaks volumes as to which Jews can say those kind of words.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:21 PM

16. It's anti-semitic according to the EUMC definition, which the US state dept. adopted.

Why are some fellow "leftwing progressives" not only giving this slanderous bigotry a pass, but also participating in it themselves?

Maybe fellow Jews are banned in light of the fact it's a bigoted comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:35 PM

18. you mean the defination that was shelved and never adopted that one? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #18)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:45 PM

19. Tell that to the US State Dept., which still uses that very definition.

Try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:51 PM

20. the US state department under George Bush supposedly used it according to CIF Watch

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #20)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:54 PM

21. Wrong again. It's still being used, and not just by the US state dept....

Nevertheless, what the EUMC referred to originally as a “working definition” has become a standard for important institutions on both sides of the Atlantic. Besides the California State Assembly, it is cited by the U.S. State Department, the United Kingdom’s All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and a recent report by a University of California commission on campus prejudice. The definition, which was composed with input from B’nai Brith International and the American Jewish Committee, is also endorsed by American Jewish groups and used in reports by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/163105/anti-semitism-fight-hinges-on-definition/?p=all#ixzz2JUwtsnj6


I'm hoping you'll never again bring up the same BS you've attempted before WRT the EUMC definition, in an effort to legitimate "Israel = Nazi Germany" comparisons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:00 PM

22. under Bush small parts were cited by the US state and some special interest group in the UK

lol I do understand why you luv it so, as it basically classifies criticism of Israel as antisemitism

from your link

When the California State Assembly passed a nonbinding resolution recently, urging state-funded colleges to clamp down on anti-Semitism, the storm that followed sent some of the resolution’s supporters backtracking.

The resolution’s wording, critics said, threatened to label as anti-Semitic those who strongly criticize Israel over its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, or advocate measures to oppose its policies.

Among other things, the resolution condemned calls to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel as a “means of demonizing Israel,” and included as examples of “anti-Semitic discourse” assertions that “Israel is a racist, apartheid, or Nazi state that Israel is guilty of heinous crimes against humanity, such as ethnic cleansing and genocide.”


Read more: http://forward.com/articles/163105/anti-semitism-fight-hinges-on-definition/?p=all#ixzz2JUyjkXF6

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:12 PM

24. The US State Dept is very clear that the Nazi comparison is definitely antisemitic

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #24)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:20 PM

27. thanks with endorsments and forwards written by both Bush2 and Cheney

kind of dates them doesn't it? and still does not prove that the EU's shelved definition was adopted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:22 PM

28. Absolute Denial. Amazing. You read the Forward article, showing it's still US State Dept policy...

So the Obama Admin. has clearly adopted it as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #28)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:24 PM

30. the forward article showed nothing of the sort

what it showed was that the Ca legislature adopted a nonbinding resolution that was not exactly the same as the EU's discarded definition your touting but do keep trying

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #30)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:39 PM

37. It adopted that resolution because, like the EUMC, it believes Israel/Nazi comparisons....

...are antisemitic.

The CA legislature wants that kind of bigoted shit to stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:23 PM

35. As I said earlier, your mindset is hopeless.

You cannot appreciate why the comparison is made on any level and the distress he expressed
as to why he used it...he qualifies himself quite clearly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #35)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:42 PM

38. Bullshit. Criticism of Israel on par w/ criticism of other countries is fine....

Thing is, there are no other countries frequently compared to Nazi Germany.

And there are certainly no people or organizations out there who compare BOTH Israel and any other country in the world (take your pick) to Nazi Germany.

This is a unique charge vs. the Jewish state.

Clear antisemitism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #38)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:27 PM

41. Nah, it's only too far from your grasp why he said what he did, and as usual

you miss the bigger point. Not surprising considering your track record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #41)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:28 PM

47. The Israel/Nazi Germany analogy is considered antisemitic by not only the US State Dept....

....but also many other agencies committed to fighting antisemitism. I don't know of any organizations against anti-semitism that disagree.

That's all I'm arguing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #47)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:40 PM

48. Keep missing the point of the film, you're good at it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:41 AM

11. The Nazi comparison is being abused, and almost always WRT Israel.

As an anti-racist, you should be concerned about such bigotry. It doesn't matter if a Shin Bet chief said it. It's still wrong.

The US state dept. says it's wrong as it violates the EUMC working definition of anti-semitism.

Bigotry of any type is wrong. What's preventing you from opposing this bigotry?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:37 PM

15. After reading your posts in the thread regarding birth control and Ethiopian

women, I find your mindset a hopeless matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:34 PM

36. Yeah, its not racist to say that Black people are breeding too much

because that hasn't yet been incorporated in a US State Department white paper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #36)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:30 PM

43. I imagine she'll be providing a link sometime soon when she finds one, lol. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:01 PM

23. how can it violate a resolution that was never ever adopted? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #23)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:13 PM

25. It was clearly adopted (especially the Nazi comparison) by the US State Dept. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #25)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:14 PM

26. you keep claiming that but provide absolutely no actual proof why? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #26)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:23 PM

29. No proof? The Forward Article shows it was in effect Sept 2012....

...and the US State Dept. website clearly shows they also believe Israel/Nazi comparisons are antisemitic.

Hey, tell me. What kind or amount of evidence do you require proving this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:26 PM

31. Once again the Forward article your touting showed that the California legislature

adopted a nonbinding resolution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:28 PM

32. here is the article once again

When the California State Assembly passed a nonbinding resolution recently, urging state-funded colleges to clamp down on anti-Semitism, the storm that followed sent some of the resolution’s supporters backtracking.

The resolution’s wording, critics said, threatened to label as anti-Semitic those who strongly criticize Israel over its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, or advocate measures to oppose its policies.

Among other things, the resolution condemned calls to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel as a “means of demonizing Israel,” and included as examples of “anti-Semitic discourse” assertions that “Israel is a racist, apartheid, or Nazi state that Israel is guilty of heinous crimes against humanity, such as ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

Critics replied that such actions chill free-speech advocacy. And in response, at least one co-sponsor now says she will push a new resolution in the legislature’s next session, one that celebrates the First Amendment and promotes an environment on campuses where students can feel safe to express differing opinions.

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/163105/anti-semitism-fight-hinges-on-definition/?p=all#ixzz2JV5t9eN8

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:32 PM

44. Looks like this post will be ignored. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:22 PM

45. The CA proposal added to the EUMC/FRA definition....

That's why it's controversial.

The EUMC was replaced by the FRA (Fundamental Rights Agency). That agency still uses the EUMC definition for data collection purposes. It's to help authorities identify what could be antisemitic.

It's still relevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #45)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:24 PM

51. what the CA legislature did was a nonbinding resolution n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #51)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:51 PM

52. From the FRA

Like many others addressing the issue, the state assembly referenced a definition of anti-Semitism first put out by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, known under the acronym EUMC, in 2005. Yet oddly, it is a definition the center’s successor agency does not use in its own publications today. One of the center’s top officials for monitoring anti-Semitism refers to the definition as “an historical document” that was meant only as a “guide for data collection” for its affiliates.

“There is no issue of the FRA, as an EU agency, endorsing any definition,” the official, Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos told the Forward, referring to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the EUMC’s successor agency, by its acronym.


http://forward.com/articles/163105/anti-semitism-fight-hinges-on-definition/?p=all#ixzz2JV5t9eN8


I'm not sure why we keep reading over and over how wording is still relevant when it is apparently not in use by the FRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R. Daneel Olivaw (Reply #52)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 05:05 AM

53. You don't get it. They're reluctant (and I understand why) to label anything....

...legally (prosecutable) antisemitic.

The thing is when the Israel/Nazi Germany analogy is used, THAT is taken into consideration by authorities investigating hate crimes. It doesn't mean it can be prosecuted. And it won't. It simply means that the analogy is evidence (along with other statements) of anti-semitic incitement, crimes, jew-baiting, etc. that could lead to much worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:41 AM

9. Who else besides Jews?

Well... Pretty much everyone that has gotten on someone else's bad side, since the 1940's at least? Robert Mugabe's a Nazi. Iranians have always been Nazis; Mossadegh was a Nazi, the Shah was a Nazi, the Ayatollahs are Nazis. Saddam was a Nazi (but then so was king Faisal, go figure.) Vladimir Putin is a Nazi, and so is Jaques Chiraq. Anyone who supports Palestinians on any level is a Nazi, as if anyone who supports Israel on any level. correct someone's grammar? Ypu're a Nazi. The entire Republican party is made of nazis, and so too are all the Democrats. I've seen people called Nazis because of whether they choose Horde or Alliance in WoW. Christians are Nazis, Muslims are Nazis, Jews are Nazis too. The entire UN is Nazi, and so are gay people and feminists. Environmentalists are Nazis and industrialists, too.

You're not a special victim, snowflake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:52 AM

13. Not to mention that Shalom ...

... was speaking of 1930s Germany when systemic racism and ethnic cleansing was rampant, but not yet genocide. So, Shira is either being obtuse or constructing a straw man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:22 PM

49. Constructing a straw man??


Would she ever let that come to pass?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:46 AM

12. Nice straw man you've built.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:31 PM

17. Really? Israel is on the path to genocide? Are you serious?

Also, Hamas' charter (ideology) is genocidal. They're very clear about their goal being the obliteration of Israel and its Jews.

Do the same people/groups accusing equating Israel to Nazis do so WRT Hamas as well?

In the Sudan, there's real apartheid and genocide (at least until recent years).

Do the same people/groups accusing equating Israel to Nazis do so WRT Sudan as well?

Shall I look forward to a yes/no answer to these questions, or not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:39 PM

33. I'll refer you to my earlier post ...

... for an explanation as to why you are arguing a straw man.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113429807#post13

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:46 PM

34. You're deflecting. And what's happening in Israel now is nothing like 1930's Germany. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #34)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:46 PM

39. I'm not deflecting. You accuse me of what you were doing.

We weren't talking about Hamas or the Sudan, yet you wanted to deflect to that.

I simply pointed out your straw man, and you're now deflecting from that, as well. The Shin Bet heads describe it as similar to 1930s Germany. I'll take their word over yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #39)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:24 PM

40. The point is, it's anti-semitic to make that parallel.

If you want to believe the claim is true, that's one thing.

But it's bigoted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #40)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:28 PM

42. No, it's not "anti-semitic to make that parallel."

That's a piss-poor argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #42)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:26 PM

46. The EUMC definition (Israel/Nazi Germany) has been adopted by many agencies....

...committed to fighting racism and bigotry.

They say the analogy/parallel is antisemitic, for reasons discussed already.

You have a different opinion than the experts on antisemitism. Why do you think you know what antisemitism is but they don't? Realize that every major Jewish organization committed to fighting antisemitism agrees with the EUMC/FRA definition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #46)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 08:26 AM

55. So, you are going to keep saying that a former head of Shin Bet ...

... who committed himself to protecting Israel, is an anti-semite? Is that your argument?

To say that there are parallels between the way the Israeli government treats the Palestinians with the way the Germans (generally) and Nazis (specifically) treated undesirables (Jews, Slavs, Leftists, Enemies of the State, etc.) in the 1930s is not anti-semitic.

Many people see the parallels, as well as I. I am not an anti-semite. And if you think I am, then you are part of the forces that serve to dilute its meaning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 05:52 PM

58. The statement is bigoted. The person quoting it is not necessarily antisemitic.

It's like someone who says something derogatory about another race or ethnicity.

They may not be bigoted, but what they said sure is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #42)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:32 PM

50. Somebody is blowing smoke up your ass.


Not me BTW.
http://forward.com/articles/163105/anti-semitism-fight-hinges-on-definition/?p=all#ixzz2JV5t9eN8

“There is no issue of the FRA, as an EU agency, endorsing any definition,” the official, Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos told the Forward, referring to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the EUMC’s successor agency, by its acronym.

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/163105/anti-semitism-fight-hinges-on-definition/?p=all#ixzz2JWK4LQTt


Some in I/P just love to mix reality with fantasy. Some see it as piss poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R. Daneel Olivaw (Reply #50)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 05:12 AM

54. The FRA uses it. The problem is, you don't know how....

The FRA, in a document entitled 'Data collection and research activities on racism and xenophobia by the EUMC (2000-2006) Lessons learned for the EU Fundamental Rights Agency Working Paper 2007', stated regarding the definition:

In order to facilitate the data collection work of NFPs the EUMC developed, together with the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and Jewish organisations, and on the basis of consultation with experts, a guide to data collection on anti-Semitic incidents. (This followed on from an earlier report in which it had identified the lack of both legal and operational definitions regarding anti-Semitism). The guide includes a proposal for a non-legal working definition to be used at national level by primary datacollecting agencies. Following feedback by the NFPs and other stakeholders the guide, which is considered as ‘work in progress’, will be reviewed.’

The working definition has been adopted, used, or recommended by a number of European and other organisations which monitor and combat hate crimes, including the OSCE, the Council of Europe's European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), the UK's All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism, and the National Union of Students in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Rights_Agency

It's still relevant for data collection purposes WRT hate crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 08:30 AM

56. Have you seen this film?

If so, what did you think of it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #56)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 01:23 PM

57. No, not yet. The film opens today but for my location it's the tri-state area

that offers the only availability for me. I would need to see it in Manhattan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread