Israel Advocating Limiting Free Speech In USA ??

[HonestJoe]

Maybe the USA could criminalise "anti-Semitism" when Israel criminalises "Islamophobia"?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Those who are concerned about real antisemitism should probably discourage the Israeli government from using accusations of such as a counter to legitimate criticisms, as "crying wolf" does them no favors.

How can anyone legitimately criticise Israel or its government and policies, with out being accused of antisemitism.
I often have misgivings about its land policies and use of military power. But I have never had occasion to disrespect a Jewish citizen.

I have sometime been accused of Anti-Americanism for criticizing Trump, the GOP or it's love of guns. but no one has suggested such criticism should be classed as a crime.

 

[rosends]

How can anyone legitimately criticise Israel or its government and policies, with out being accused of antisemitism.
I often have misgivings about its land policies and use of military power. But I have never had occasion to disrespect a Jewish citizen.

I never understood this particular concern. The criticism of Israel is the national pastime of Israel -- people find ways of criticizing the country all the time and don't need to drag religion into it. Just imagine if that cartoon had not had Trump wearing a skullcap, or Bibi wearing a Star of David on his collar. The imagery of one politician leading the other remains intact but the two visible symbols of the religion (not the country) would have been absent. The claim of anti-semitism is generally called forth because the critic starts by conflating Israel and Judaism (for any of a number of reasons, some nefarious, some not).

 

[rosends]

As long as the same standard is applies to Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, socialists, capitalists etc...

I believe that the ambassador's statement was driven by the proximity of the cartoon and the shooting which allows him to draw the (however spurious) causal link between speech and violence -- this makes the criminalizing of anti-semitic speech potentially an extension of extant US law. If one were to draw the same conclusion as regards other forms of hate speech, then one could make the same argument elsewhere.

Because of the extended history of anti-semitic violence, which has often, historically, been connected to hate speech (a history and a connection which is not there for all the other groups you make), this particular movement is more apparent and relevant than the others. The cartoon evoked specific images which tied it to a German, holocaust era newspaper. The historical connection between this form of speech and violence therefore has precedent.

 

[Revoltingest]

Were there more than one? I found one and I see your point. Still, it is free speech, which means that I may not like it, but that has no impact on the right to speak it.

Aye, tis permissible speech here in the wild west (Ameristan).
But some of our extra sensitive friends across the pond disagree.

 

[wellwisher]

The real problem is connected to the dual standards of political correctness. Political correctness censors free speech, but in a way that only benefits those who vote or donate to the DNC. This selective censorship is designed to create political division; political protection racket. Jews contribute about 50% of the money taken in by the DNC, so they get a hefty amount of PC censorship protection.

If you are white, male, straight and Christian there is no selective censorship for you, since this demographic does not traditionally vote Democrat. This group can be associated with Nazis or white supremacists, and nobody is ever censored. This association is hate speech but is protected.

Consider President Trump and the amount of hate speech that is allowed against him. Since Trump is far away from helping the Democrats, due to his position of power and his differing beliefs,Trump is wide open to hate speech. He is even under a type of amplified reverse censorship, where anything goes. This include 2 years of hate, all based on a delusion.

To discuss hate speech and censorship, we need to discuss the DNC, and how they use selective censorship to divide people. They set up two sets of rules, that allow people on their side, to cheat. This cheating creates a backlash, due to the need for fairness and one set of rules.

Jews often cry censorship, even for the slightest of provocation, because the Democrat playbook proportions censorship based on donations, activism and votes. If you paid for it, expect to get it.

If you go back to slavey days and thereafter, the Democrats were allowed to bad mouth the blacks anyway they wished. If a black person decided to play by these same rules, they would be lynch. This has not changed, it has only been extrapolated.

It was never clear to me, why the Jews originally attached their wagon to the party of slavery, segregation and dual standards; white or black only restrooms. It was well known that the American Democrats of the 1930's, taught the Nazis, how to create a legal strategy, that could victimize an entire race. The Democrat used this to segregate the blacks, and then the Nazi then used this, on the Jews. Maybe the Jewish strategy, was to keep their enemy close, and bribe them often, so they are not considered a threat.

I could just picture a different historical scenario, where the Jews had hitched their wagon to the Republicans and party of Lincoln. The KKK and the Neo-Nazis both have Jew hate clauses, that stemmed from the Democrat Nazi alliance. Maybe it was better to keep their enemy close, but stay proactive defensive.

 

[Revoltingest]

I never understood this particular concern. The criticism of Israel is the national pastime of Israel -- people find ways of criticizing the country all the time and don't need to drag religion into it. Just imagine if that cartoon had not had Trump wearing a skullcap, or Bibi wearing a Star of David on his collar. The imagery of one politician leading the other remains intact but the two visible symbols of the religion (not the country) would have been absent. The claim of anti-semitism is generally called forth because the critic starts by conflating Israel and Judaism (for any of a number of reasons, some nefarious, some not).

This conflation originates in Israel, the "Jewish State".

 

[Revoltingest]

I have sometime been accused of Anti-Americanism for criticizing Trump, the GOP or it's love of guns. but no one has suggested such criticism should be classed as a crime.

We might make it a crime....just for you though.
Btw, I've criticized more aspects of Ameristan than you just did.
(I'm not a good patriot.)

 

[Revoltingest]

You can trace this back to the 1930's when movies like the Wizard of Oz were used to subliminally inject the intentions of the Shoe Industrial Complex into popular culture. Forest Gump is another example. So is the Man with One Red Shoe. Using beloved characters like Al Bundy to mold us by the glamorization of shoe sales.

The Shoe Industrial Complex is walking all over us.

They must be behind the greatest of compliments...."goody two shoes".

Also, have you noticed how few people with no legs or even one leg you
see walking around? The SIC (Shoe Industrial Complex) has them
eliminated because they're not good shoe customers.

 

[Revoltingest]

You forgot Chinese restaurants who are subtly drugging us in their food.
This was popular in the UK in the 60s.

I admit not being well schooled in all the conspiracies.
But I do remember how the drug interferon was harvested
from murdered black folk.

 

[sooda]

I believe that the ambassador's statement was driven by the proximity of the cartoon and the shooting which allows him to draw the (however spurious) causal link between speech and violence -- this makes the criminalizing of anti-semitic speech potentially an extension of extant US law. If one were to draw the same conclusion as regards other forms of hate speech, then one could make the same argument elsewhere.

Because of the extended history of anti-semitic violence, which has often, historically, been connected to hate speech (a history and a connection which is not there for all the other groups you make), this particular movement is more apparent and relevant than the others. The cartoon evoked specific images which tied it to a German, holocaust era newspaper. The historical connection between this form of speech and violence therefore has precedent.

Never again... unless you are Palestinian.

 

[sooda]

The real problem is connected to the dual standards of political correctness. Political correctness censors free speech, but in a way that only benefits those who vote or donate to the DNC. This selective censorship is designed to create political division; political protection racket. Jews contribute about 50% of the money taken in by the DNC, so they get a hefty amount of PC censorship protection.

If you are white, male, straight and Christian there is no selective censorship for you, since this demographic does not traditionally vote Democrat. This group can be associated with Nazis or white supremacists, and nobody is ever censored. This association is hate speech but is protected.

Consider President Trump and the amount of hate speech that is allowed against him. Since Trump is far away from helping the Democrats, due to his position of power and his differing beliefs,Trump is wide open to hate speech. He is even under a type of amplified reverse censorship, where anything goes. This include 2 years of hate, all based on a delusion.

To discuss hate speech and censorship, we need to discuss the DNC, and how they use selective censorship to divide people. They set up two sets of rules, that allow people on their side, to cheat. This cheating creates a backlash, due to the need for fairness and one set of rules.

Jews often cry censorship, even for the slightest of provocation, because the Democrat playbook proportions censorship based on donations, activism and votes. If you paid for it, expect to get it.

If you go back to slavey days and thereafter, the Democrats were allowed to bad mouth the blacks anyway they wished. If a black person decided to play by these same rules, they would be lynch. This has not changed, it has only been extrapolated.

It was never clear to me, why the Jews originally attached their wagon to the party of slavery, segregation and dual standards; white or black only restrooms. It was well known that the American Democrats of the 1930's, taught the Nazis, how to create a legal strategy, that could victimize an entire race. The Democrat used this to segregate the blacks, and then the Nazi then used this, on the Jews. Maybe the Jewish strategy, was to keep their enemy close, and bribe them often, so they are not considered a threat.

I could just picture a different historical scenario, where the Jews had hitched their wagon to the Republicans and party of Lincoln. The KKK and the Neo-Nazis both have Jew hate clauses, that stemmed from the Democrat Nazi alliance. Maybe it was better to keep their enemy close, but stay proactive defensive.

Roosevelt and Truman were Democrats.

 

[Revoltingest]

Please go into a cinema and yell fire.

One cannot equate all kinds of speech in order
to limit only those which offend one group.

 

[Revoltingest]

You forgot socialists in your list.

I've never heard of naming the "socialists" as conspirators.
But Marxists....those guys are behind Ameristan's downfall.
(I hear that one regularly.)

 

[Revoltingest]

My favorite self-obsession video....

 

[rosends]

This conflation originates in Israel, the "Jewish State".

Ah, so then you would have to accept that any criticism of Israel is defacto criticism of Judaism, making anti-Zionism and anti-semitism identical. Do you agree with that?

 

[rosends]

Never again... unless you are Palestinian.

Right, in that case, still never the first time.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ah, so then you would have to accept that any criticism of Israel is defacto criticism of Judaism, making anti-Zionism and anti-semitism identical. Do you agree with that?

I don't agree with it.
But I see it happen all over the place, especially from (some) Jews.
Such has been my experience IRL & on RF.
(One staffer here was the worst offender....no names, of course. Rules.)

 

[rosends]

I don't agree with it.
But I see it happen all over the place, especially from (some) Jews.
Such has been my experience IRL & on RF.
(One staffer here was the worst offender....no names, of course. Rules.)

If you don't agree with it, but see the conflation from the get go, how can they can be made distinct?

 

[Revoltingest]

If you don't agree with it, but see the conflation from the get go, how can they can be made distinct?

I like the question.
One must recognize that while Israel exists because of Judaism,
even Jews don't all agree with its existence or policies. IOW,
Jews are individuals, with great variation. Israelis are too.