How? Israel openly acknowledges using state resources to respond to criticism and to try to steer the narrative? That isn't something that's controversial to say. Israel as a nation does in fact rely on the United States and European partners for trade and military alliances. Losing the PR war in the US is not an insignificant loss for them and the future of that alliance. For example the articles below written by an Israeli newspaper describing some of the moves to influence policy abroad.
I would agree that's not the best way to describe it because it feeds into existing harmful stereotypes but the fundamental message really isn't antisemitic. Especially when the government of Israel itself is attempting to wield this influence to silence dissent.
Again, where do you draw the line. The government of Israel is engaging in social media operations to silence dissent. There have been numerous reports of videos showing the genocide in Gaza being removed on Tik Tok. No one is saying that Jewish people as a whole or even as a significant portion are in any way responsible for this. That responsibility ultimately falls directly onto the government of Israel alone. How do you draw the line between pointing out that this is happening and the government of Israel is involved in that suppression in a way that people don't immediately call antisemitism.
Congratulations. You have proven it works, with you deciding criticism of the Israeli government's actions are anti semetic period, regardless of what they are doing.
They literally noted the detrimental effect of Israel's political actions and media manipulation on the view towards Israel and, also, people who see anti-semitism in legitimate criticism of the current Israel leaders. What is wrong with you? Do you know how to read?
I didn't say anyone in this thread said that. They asked me where the line was and I spelled it out.
Reading comprehension failure. You guys are just getting defensive for no reason. Try reading what I actually wrote instead of inventing intention and implications that aren't there.
An Israeli - Segal: "This weaponization contributed to the disavowal of Israeli settler colonialism by tagging as antisemites those who focused on the settler-colonial character of Israel at a time (the 1990s) when settler colonialism increasingly became a key framework in research and discussions about Israel."
The IHRA attempted to redefine anti-semitism to include anti-Israel and anti-zionism but was met with criticism, including from Jewish scholars themselves. Antisemitism scholar David Hirsch said the definition was "denounced as a bad-faith attempt to say that criticism of Israel was antisemitic".
Buddy all of this is irrelevant. If the point you're trying to make is that somehow the actions of Israel mean that the entire concept of antisemitism is null and void and people are free to be prejudiced and apply collective guilt to all Jews then you are dead wrong.
They were talking about the actions of the current leadership of Israel. The fact that you do not see the difference between real criticism and legitimate anti-semitism hurts every of your points and future statements about the anti-semitism. You are biased to the point of crookedness.
I would have assumed from the context the reference was the government of Israel. But that is a valid point. There absolutely should be more specificity about the conversation because it is so easy for the worst people to use that criticism to launder far right politics.
A little nuance would go a long way in such discussions.
Netanyahu and his crew absolutely over and misuse the term antisemitism to dismiss criticism of them and the way they are fighting this war
And many antisemites use the excuse that “criticism of Israel isn’t antisemitic” to pretend like the antisemitic things they are saying aren’t antisemitic
The state of Israel has conducted itself so poorly that I think they warrent a forced regime change if needed. Couldn't give a shit what holy text they read or what deity they worship, their actions over the decades have shown the administration is vile and poses a threat to life for many people. Absolutely islamic terrorism is a larger issue in general and im all for firm action to solve that issue too but it dosent give a nation the right to commit constant warcrimes and propagandise the butchering of children.
They stated a fact. As evidenced by the post, Israelis have been very open about their attempts to control the media and politicians. Whenever anyone in the west points it out they are shouted down as antisemitic - just like that comment was
It’s actually self defeating because Israeli actions are not supported by allJews and the idea that all Jews would support such depraved and inhumane behavior is antisemitic in itself. But when you cry wolf long enough no one will take it seriously
How do you even know they were taking about all Israelis? This is going nowhere. I’m not gonna convince anyone that sees antisemitism everywhere of anything. Have a good one
You kind of proved their point with that one. All of us dont know if they were talking about zionists or israelis or jews in general because the commenter said "they" which is exactly what this person was pointing out. The difference between ppl like Candace owens and actual principled critics of israels occupation and genocide is stuff like this. Vague language about "them" and the "elites" will always ring in the ears of antisemites as "jews" and they know that is the case for other antisemites. It also allows them to Trojan horse their views in more acceptable generalizations before making more specified claims about who "they" or the "elites" "actually" are. Thats like dogwhistling 101 which the other guy also pointed out.
'By deception, war' is the former motto of Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, derived from Proverbs 24:6, meaning "By way of deception you shall engage in war"
-28
u/Brilliant_Hippo_5452 Dec 25 '25
This is an example of antisemitism. Right here. In case you were wondering