Antisemitism in the US

Agreed. That's why I didn't post before. But with the ME labeling it a "homicide", I felt that it was worth posting now. Concededly, charges have not been filed and they may not be. And they may be unwarranted even if filed. But with the ME conclusion, I felt it was at least worth posting.

Scary times, a lot of private intimidating anti-Semitism from the younger set, and a lot of institutionalized Islamophobia from the power structure.

 

"...the protest of mass killing of civilians..."

The problem is that they were not protesting this. They were CELEBRATING it.

Straight up antisemitism.

Any attempts to deny this are simply disingenuous.

Hard to believe, and you don't want to believe it, but it literally happened. Many times over, in many places.

Even here. That is the gawd awful nasty we have become.

 

Excellent editorial from the Jesuits at America. Well done. Will stick to 4 paragraphs but the whole piece is worth reading

America has long called for a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict that respects the right of both Israelis and Palestinians to live in Jerusalem and the surrounding territories and has criticized Israeli policies that have set back a much-longed-for peace or failed to uphold the human dignity of Palestinians. Last week, America called on Israel to end its total siege on Gaza and to allow in humanitarian aid adequate to the massive and growing lack of food, water, medicine and fuel. The need for such aid remains critical.

But this is not about the cycles of violence, repression and reprisals that preceded Hamas’s horrific attack on Israel on Oct. 7, nor the invasion and siege of Gaza that has followed, but what is happening today on college campuses, social media and the streets of cities around the world. The evil of antisemitism and the threat it poses to Jews around the world must be condemned clearly and distinctly, separate from criticism or support of Israel as the Jewish state.


The United States has long been a refuge for the Jewish people, a place where they could live without fear. It is incumbent on Catholics, and all people of good will, to ensure it remains so. That starts on the individual level. Our Jewish friends are scared and hurting. Many know someone who was killed, injured or kidnapped or who is currently fighting in Gaza. One need not share their politics to offer comfort and support.

Over the last month, concerned citizens—Catholic, Jewish and Muslim alike—have rallied in cities around the globe to call for an immediate ceasefire. On Sunday, Pope Francis, who has repeatedly called for the release of the hostages and an end to the siege of Gaza, appealed “in the name of God” for a ceasefire. As Catholics continue their witness for a just peace, they should remain in dialogue with Jews who see calls for a ceasefire as a double standard that would never be applied to a country that has been so ruthlessly attacked and whose adversaries show no appetite for peace. Those calling for a ceasefire out of concern for the innocent lives being lost in Gaza must also acknowledge the very real fears of Jews in Israel and in the diaspora. Solidarity with those suffering in Gaza must be held together with solidarity with Jews fearful for their security and for their loved ones in Israel.

 

From the free portion of Yair Rosenberg's newsletter. Much respect for him

Though it has received less attention, Hezbollah—which is not Palestinian and has no significant territorial dispute with Israel, unless one counts its very existence—has been firing rockets and anti-tank missiles at civilian areas in Israel’s north since the first day of the current war, killing several people and causing nearly 200,000 others to evacuate their homes. Hezbollah, too, is not coy about its endgame. In 2002, its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, predicted in a speech, “The Jews will gather from all parts of the world into occupied Palestine, not in order to bring about the anti-Christ and the end of the world, but rather … to save you from having to go to the ends of the world, for they have gathered in one place … and there the final and decisive battle will take place.”
I quote this because I agree it's hateful. But the bolded portion is pretty common Christian eschatology, especially among fundamentalists. Yet Yair rightly flags it as antisemitism.

When Anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitic

 

Police say not a hate crime

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/from-...that-led-to-rashida-tlaibs-censure-explained/

The Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea form the eastern and western boundaries, respectively, of what was the British Mandate of Palestine before 1948. It is also the heart of the biblical Land of Israel (though the ancient Jewish kingdom there extended further).

Since the 1960s, “From the river to the sea” has been used by Palestinian nationalist movements such as the Palestine Liberation Organization and, later, Hamas.

Hamas’s 2017 charter states that in principle, it “rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.” In a 2012 speech, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal said, “Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north. There will be no concession on any inch of the land.

Because the whole slogan calls for a Palestine that is “free” across all of the territory that now encompasses Israel, Israelis and their supporters in Congress and beyond view it as a call for Israel’s destruction. In an entry calling the phrase antisemitic, the Anti-Defamation League says the phrase “would mean the dismantling of the Jewish state. It is an antisemitic charge denying the Jewish right to self-determination, including through the removal of Jews from their ancestral homeland.”

 

In 2022, the ADL interpreted it the way I have always understood, as an expression of exclusive sovereignty, i.e., no Jewish state, a single state like under Ottoman rule (a position I do not remotely agree with), but not one analogous to the Nazi Judenrein, to exclude or kill Jews. Hamas did in their charter, but that was not the commonly understood meaning of the terms.




My understanding of the meaning of the phrase, consistent with the 2022 ADL, is based on 2 books I read years ago, from competing perspectives



and

 

It means what it says. It is a literally clear statement. The PLO was not looking for a two state solution in the 1960s. There is nothing recent about what it means. That the ADL said that it was commonly changed at demonstrations doesn’t change the meaning it has held. You do understand that the concept of a two state solution did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. That Jordan and Syria controlled what was colloquially the West Bank until 1967. And that the Sri state solution was rejected by the Arab nations after the 1967 war.

 

Understand all that well. My understanding is based on the books that focus a lot on the 1930s. It is not two state at all; it is one state, overlooking Israel as a Jewish state, which is why I don’t agree with it.

But as she stated, it was aspirational, not immediate or genocidal. As with Zionism for centuries, aspirational.

Nothing is clean and neat. A lot of my sentiments contradict each other.

I understand not liking the sentiment; I disagree with it. Many of the Arabs living in Palestine in the 30s, per Hoffman’s book, thought the idea of Jewish state was exclusionary and oppressive and offensive, because it would make them second class citizens where they currently lived. They fought, as did the Irgun, etc. The Brits complained about both, promised both, vacillated, etc.

And meanings change. I don’t want to sound like one of the old right wing cranks I mock, decrying that terms and words change meanings and become offensive. The way many young Westerners now use the term, it does sound immediate and threatening rather than a lament.

But that is what it meant, which is why I originally said it should be viewed akin to Begin invoking Judaea and Samaria or even annexation. I feel certain that that was how Rep. Tlaib meant it and I am very angry about the censure.

 

While Nixon made her closing arguments, nearly all the Republican lawmakers stood up and turned their backs to her.

“We are at 10,000 dead Palestinians. How many will be enough?” Nixon said.

“All of them,” an unidentified female lawmaker said on the floor.

“One of my colleagues just said, ‘All of them.’ Wow,” Nixon said.




Fla. House rejects Israel cease-fire proposal
Fla. House rejects Israel cease-fire proposal - Tampa Bay Times

 

Cemetery desecration. Long a tactic of hatred but had not heard of an incident in years

 

Hey, isn't everyone glad the WH made sure to talk about combating Islamophobia? Here are some stats from Oct in NY.

NYPD Announces Citywide Crime Statistics for October 2023

 

Didn't he talk about combating Islamophobia and antisemitism?

 

What is the name of the directive again?

 

Pretty plain what is occurring. RW hate media is playing up the Islamophobia announcement, and omitting the one against anti-Semitism from May that you posted before. But they mindlessly recite talking points without thought or care. And think they are correct.

 

You can't tell the difference between an extremely small subset group of idiots vs numerous professors/students at major universities as well as protest in major cities?

 

you mean this?
The U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism: Key Actions by Pillar | The White House

 

Exactly that

 

can't argue with that.