Quote from: gallsman on May 15, 2026, 06:16:16 AMIt says certain criticism of Israel is, and has unquestionably been used as a shieldQuote from: Baile Brigín 2 on May 14, 2026, 11:04:39 PMQuote from: gallsman on May 14, 2026, 05:54:36 PMHold up. The definition does or doesn't reference criticism of Israel? You are claiming both.Quote from: Franko on May 14, 2026, 05:24:44 PMYou said "It says nothing about criticising Israel being anti-Semitic".
Given that most people's problem with the IHRA definition is EXACTLY this, could you outline which other bit of the IHRA definition you have a problem with, that causes you not to accept it?
That's because most people, such as your good self, choose to, at best, misread or misunderstand what the definition actually says. You argued that Israel is a Jewish community institution ffs. A state is not a community institution. You have f**king idiots on here tying themselves in knots to protest that burning out Jewish ambulances in Golders Green isn't antisemitic FFS. Know what a local Jewish ambulance service is? A Jewish community institution.
And not that I owe you any explanation of anything whatsoever, the particular pieces that I have issues with are the suggestion that denying Jews have the right to self determination is in and of itself antisemitic, or that one evidences this by labelling Israel as a racist state, along with the one about not comparing contemporary Israeli state policy to the Nazism.
As I suspect you well know, the definition expressly states that criticisms of Israel that are thrown at any other country are not antisemitic.
The definition does REFERENCE criticism of Israel. Well done.
It DOES NOT say "criticism of Israel is antisemitic", which is what was and is repeatedly claimed.
Do you understand the difference? I most certainly did not claim that it both does and doesn't reference criticism of Israel.
Hold up indeed.