UN list targets firms linked to Israeli settlements

CJ 2.0 said:

Ridiculous.

Here are the survey results since you are clearly reality averse.

You are being redirected...


1. Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/to the countries they live in] 83%

2. Jews have too much power in the business world 91%

3. Jews have too much power in international financial markets 89%

4. Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust 64%

5. Jews don't care what happens to anyone but their own kind 84%

6. Jews have too much control over global affairs 88%

7. Jews have too much control over the United States government 85%

8. Jews think they are better than other people 72%

9. Jews have too much control over the global media 88%

10. Jews are responsible for most of the world's wars 78%

11. People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave 87% [I guess we can put you down for a yes on this one too...]


Again, this is just objective reality. These are classically antisemetic tropes that have nothing to do with "Israel" and everything to do with "Jews".

So sure, you can claim that these people are disgusting racists because of whatever cause you like (in your case, it is saying yes to Q11), but that doesn't have any impact at all on the observation that antisemitism among the Palestinians, and in the Arab world generally, is through the roof.

Or you can just pretend that Jews trying to document, quantify and publicize the racism directed against Jews is "propaganda" and dismiss it out of hand. Cause godforbid Jews actually take steps to expose antisemitism. I guess it would only be credible to you if we let Al Jazera and the Grand Mufti do the study...

But again, that goes more to how your moral lens is a complete mess than anything else.

Click to expand...

The ADL are NOT a credible objective outfit. They are the group that has set itself up as the monitor organisation of the new antisemitism. It makes sense how they would seek to inflate the figures for antisemitism seeing as it's what their business relies on. As was pointed out by another commentator , it is as believable of a smoking industries report on the dangers of secondary smoke inhalation would be.

The following article makes a good case against just how loaded and self serving the survey was and how it's figures revealed some pretty bizarre emigmas. In short it offers a very simple question that could have saved all the trouble of concocting a whole host of loaded ones. The question is as follows

"Do you believe that Jewish and non-Jewish citizens of every country in the world, including yours, should be guaranteed fully equal rights under the law?"

Oddly enough if you were to ask that question in Israeli society ,or the illegal settlements communities ,the results would probably not be too flattering to the Israeli state itself.

Additionally in the article I will link it also asks another question albeit in a roundabout way. How much do abhorrent Israeli actions negatively impact on the Jewish people as a whole and how would that effect such surveys ?

Recall all Jews are not Zionists and not all Zionists are Jewish

For anyone interested in a pretty good debunking of the ADL approach/survey

There has been a lot of criticism of the ADL’s worldwide survey of anti-Semitism, and many of the obvious flaws in the study already have been discussed (or linked to) here. At the outset, the organization that commissioned the study is hardly a disinterested, unbiased observer. An ADL study on anti-Semitism should be greeted with the same skepticism as a tobacco industry study on the effects of second-hand smoke.

Click to expand...

What’s wrong with the ADL survey and how it could be improved – Mondoweiss

oneworld2 said:

The ADL are NOT a credible objective outfit. They are the group that has set itself up as the monitor organisation of the new antisemitism. It makes sense how they would seek to inflate the figures for antisemitism seeing as it's what their business relies on. As was pointed out by another commentator , it is as believable of a smoking industries report on the dangers of secondary smoke inhalation would be.

The following article makes a good case against just how loaded and self serving the survey was and how it's figures revealed some pretty bizarre emigmas. In short it offers a very simple question that could have saved all the trouble of concocting a whole host of loaded ones. The question is as follows

"Do you believe that Jewish and non-Jewish citizens of every country in the world, including yours, should be guaranteed fully equal rights under the law?"

Oddly enough if you were to ask that question in Israeli society ,or the illegal settlements communities ,the results would probably not be too flattering to the Israeli state itself.

Additionally in the article I will link it also asks another question albeit in a roundabout way. How much do abhorrent Israeli actions negatively impact on the Jewish people as a whole and how would that effect such surveys ?

Recall all Jews are not Zionists and not all Zionists are Jewish

For anyone interested in a pretty good debunking of the ADL approach/survey



What’s wrong with the ADL survey and how it could be improved – Mondoweiss

Click to expand...

Mondoweiss?

Der Strumer was unavailable?

You really are into only believing what you want to believe, eh?

It shows.

Incidentally, you are exhibit A for why we need Israel and Israel shouldn’t give a damn what anyone else thinks. Cause we don’t need to rely on you and people like you agreeing to take our concerns seriously or come up with excuses for why reality is different than it actually is.

So go ahead and pretend Palestinian society isn’t radically antisemetic and that the ADL and every other Jewish organization that isnt radical left can’t be trusted and that you should keep ignoring radical antisemitism. And we will keep going, knowing that people like you don’t matter nearly as much as you used to. Your radical leftist bubble is pervasively antisemetic and you dont have a clue.

CJ 2.0 said:

Mondoweiss?

Der Strumer was unavailable?

You really are into only believing what you want to believe, eh?

It shows


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Projection . You are claiming yourself to be objective when you are clearly/demonstrably not and offering up the ADL survey as " objective reality " when it clearly isn't. Everyone has their degree of subjectivity and I don't claim that the article I cited is free from it.

Sure , people should read both sides of the argument before they decide which one they feel is the more compelling. You see the difference is that I don't claim to be completely objective, I don't think anyone is. Nor do I think the author in the Mondoweiss article will be, he just offers another subjective view that appears to me a whole lot more rational and more objective than the ADL survey is. A survey you offer up as compelling objectivity.

That's the difference between us and I think my view is the more honest.

CJ 2.0 said:

Except they did as part of the Mandate. But aside from that, again, your original claim that Jerusalem is Palestinian territory is fundamentally wrong, regardless of who else also got that answer wrong.
.

Click to expand...

No they didn't give Jerusalem to the Jewish state in the UN Partition Plan. Fact. They gave Jerusalem to neither people and had it earmarked as a kind of international enclave seperate from the territorial claims of both sides.

And I never claimed ALL of Jerusalem was " Palestinian territory ". I said West Jerusalem was accepted as being part of the Jewish state that was accepted into the UN body itself. East Jerusalem , however , remains OPT since it was occupied AFTER Israel had agreed to commit to the UN Charter and GC4 which expressely prohibits the acquisition of territory through warfare.

Most scholars , HRs groups , the ICJ , ICRC etc etc all agree that East Jerusalem remains OPT you cannot just dismiss that. Even the advisor to the Israeli govt in 1967 advised the government NOT to move it's civilians into the territories occupied.

You cannot just dismiss the above and cast it as antisemitism , it's just ridiculous to.

oneworld2 said:

Projection . You are claiming yourself to be objective when you are clearly/demonstrably not and offering up the ADL survey as " objective reality " when it clearly isn't. Everyone has their degree of subjectivity and I don't claim that the article I cited is free from it.

Sure , people should read both sides of the argument before they decide which one they feel is the more compelling. You see the difference is that I don't claim to be completely objective, I don't think anyone is. Nor do I think the author in the Mondoweiss article will be, he just offers another subjective view that appears to me a whole lot more rational and more objective than the ADL survey is. A survey you offer up as compelling objectivity.

That's the difference between us and I think my view is the more honest.

Click to expand...

It definitely isn’t. You just don’t like acknowledging the reality of antisemitism because it hurts your narrative.

oneworld2 said:

No they didn't give Jerusalem to the Jewish state in the UN Partition Plan. Fact. They gave Jerusalem to neither people and had it earmarked as a kind of international enclave seperate from the territorial claims of both sides.

And I never claimed ALL of Jerusalem was " Palestinian territory ". I said West Jerusalem was accepted as being part of the Jewish state that was accepted into the UN body itself. East Jerusalem , however , remains OPT since it was occupied AFTER Israel had agreed to commit to the UN Charter and GC4 which expressely prohibits the acquisition of territory through warfare.

Most scholars , HRs groups , the ICJ , ICRC etc etc all agree that East Jerusalem remains OPT you cannot just dismiss that. Even the advisor to the Israeli govt in 1967 advised the government NOT to move it's civilians into the territories occupied.

You cannot just dismiss the above and cast it as antisemitism , it's just ridiculous to.

Click to expand...

The partition plan was not binding. The mandate was. I can dismiss terrible logic and bad arguments no matter how many people make them. That’s what people with judgment do.

Incidentally, you are the one trying to bend antisemitism here. All I did was ask you for a comparable list for other, much more egregious, occupations or other countries whose treatment of populations makes Israel look like mother theresa.

And if there are no such lists, wondering if you have an understanding as to why.

CJ 2.0 said:

It definitely isn’t. You just don’t like acknowledging the reality of antisemitism because it hurts your narrative.

Click to expand...

I believe that complete objectivity in the human condition is a myth. You believe that if people say what you want to believe and crucially what you want others to believe , it is thus objective by definition. I know people who might have similar opinions on this to me are also subjective , as I am myself.

That said I still think they and I are more objective than you and yours who misuse the accusation of racism to fend off criticism of truly racist policies that blight the lives of millions of people every day and have done for over half a century

I have no problem acknowledging the reality of antisemitism , I just fall short of support for it's misuse and abuse.

Felis Leo said:

One more reason to dissolve the organization that has become the tool for antisemites known as the United Nations. As if we needed more.

Click to expand...

Time to stop the anti-Semite BS every time there is a vote against Israel... :roll:

Israel is wandering in the desert and has lost their way. Once the David vs Goliath they are now the petty tormentor of the Palestinians. Both side have murderous blood on their hands, but that doesn't give Nutty-yahoo (isn't he under a corruption cloud and refuses to set down, yeah Israel isn't what it once was) any sort of mandate to settle the West Bank... eace

oneworld2 said:

I believe that complete objectivity in the human condition is a myth. You believe that if people say what you want to believe and crucially what you want others to believe , it is thus objective by definition. I know people who might have similar opinions on this to me are also subjective , as I am myself.

That said I still think they and I are more objective than you and yours who misuse the accusation of racism to fend off criticism of truly racist policies that blight the lives of millions of people every day and have done for over half a century

I have no problem acknowledging the reality of antisemitism , I just fall short of support for it's misuse and abuse.

Click to expand...

"complete objectivity in the human condition"? A bit word salady, no?

There is such a thing as objective reality. I'm not talking about the human condition, I'm talking about reality. And in reality there is an absolutely defined number of human beings alive, or trees in the ground, or planets in the universe, even if no one knows the answer to any of those questions. And there is, objectively, rampant antisemitism in the Arab world (and among the progressive left).

The ADL study is the most objective, comprehensive, broad based study of antisemitism around. It may not be perfect as with all surveys that inherently have margins of error, but it is obviously directionally precise. Crappy criticisms from radical anti-Israel and frequently antisemetic cesspools like Mondoweiss don't do anything but give excuses to people who do not want to accept reality but do not want to acknowledge that they are unwilling to accept reality.

And like I said, I'm not using antisemitism to fend off anything.

And I'm not the one advocating systematic cleansing of territory to give it to someone else (or else just leaving them there until they are systematically cleansed the way Jews have been everywhere else in the middle east). That would be your position. Which, objectively, remains grossly immoral in effect, if not in intent (and I'm not sure I have enough information to make a determination on intent at this point).

So let's sum up. We have a policy with respect to the blacklist specifically, and an obsessive focus on Israel more generally, that is not even remotely consistent with how other occupations or other incidences of human rights concerns are treated. We have made inquiries but have found no other examples of similar or worse situations being treated similarly, and so there must be one or more factors which are causing that. Your feedback there has been to go around shouting about antisemitism being overblown and in any event the Israelis have only themselves to blame for people hating Jews, and then getting into a sidebar discussion about whether we are allowed to have Jewish organizations do surveys on antisemitism or whether those should be dismissed out of hand on the basis that, obviously, non-radical-leftwing Jews cannot be trusted to run objective surveys. In support you published a link to mondoweiss, which is a radical left wing activist site that often engages in antisemitism itself, illustrating the bubble effect on the progressive left and the blinders you guys have to antisemitism generally.

oneworld2 said:

I believe that complete objectivity in the human condition is a myth. You believe that if people say what you want to believe and crucially what you want others to believe , it is thus objective by definition. I know people who might have similar opinions on this to me are also subjective , as I am myself.

That said I still think they and I are more objective than you and yours who misuse the accusation of racism to fend off criticism of truly racist policies that blight the lives of millions of people every day and have done for over half a century

I have no problem acknowledging the reality of antisemitism , I just fall short of support for it's misuse and abuse.

Click to expand...

But like I said, that was all just a diversion anyways. Now if we want to get into actual thinking about causality, I think it is much more than just antisemitism, although undoubtedly it has played a part in how we got here. It also relates to the Soviet reorientation away from Israel and its demagoguing of zionism, the impact of the oil embargo on elite attitudes in Europe in the early 1970s and the European elite's policy choices in response, the broad radical left's automatic oppositionalism to the United States and sympathy for regimes that are "anti-American" no matter how monstrous, the broad alignment of "non-aligned countries" during the cold war which generally lined up behind Arab oil money and were far less democratic than the west and therefore far more sympathetic to soviet influence and perspectives, a fear of China and unwillingness to stand up in the face of its horrific human rights violations (which both reduces their willingness to do something on China but increases their willingness to attack Israel because it is largely empty preening) and a host of other factors.

But it definitely includes antio-semitism as well because that is embedded in so many different elements of modern societies (as one example, the radical left, which you continue to deny even though it is obvious).

You could have gone in any of those directions to explain what is happening. But at the same time, you couldn't, because none of them align with what you want to be the reason and all of them require you to admit components of reality that you don't want to acknowledge. So we got some squawking about the unfairness of calling antisemites antisemetic, arguments about whether we can rely on Jews to assess antisemitism, saying without evidence that the companies are targeted for "profitting" because that in your mind sounds worse than just "dealing with", and preening about the moral superiority of advocating for rejection of a compromise that would work and pushing for the expulsion of half a million people to make way for others or in the "kind" alternative, just abandoning them to be slaughtered - in the name of "human rights" of course.

I feel like we have taken this about as far as it's going to go. Might still chip in for fun, but this seems like the end.

notquiteright said:

Time to stop the anti-Semite BS every time there is a vote against Israel... :roll:

Israel is wandering in the desert and has lost their way. Once the David vs Goliath they are now the petty tormentor of the Palestinians. Both side have murderous blood on their hands, but that doesn't give Nutty-yahoo (isn't he under a corruption cloud and refuses to set down, yeah Israel isn't what it once was) any sort of mandate to settle the West Bank... eace

Click to expand...

riiiight.

Shocked to see you self identify as "progressive".

:shock:

CJ 2.0 said:

The partition plan was not binding. The mandate was. I can dismiss terrible logic and bad arguments no matter how many people make them. That’s what people with judgment do.

Click to expand...

I never claimed the Partition was binding did I ? Post number ?

I said, correctly ,that the UN Partition set Jerusalem as a seperate entity in response to your claim that the UN had given it to Israel, which was the false claim, correct? ( you made this claim in post 74 )

I also never claimed that all of Jerusalem was Palestinian territory ( another claim you made in post 74)

You see you misreperesent what people are saying and then accuse them of making " bad arguments " using " terrible logic " etc etc when it is your own conduct that is the issue, as shown above.Is that what " people with judgement " do ? I would have thought they wouldn't have needed to misrepresent others in order to argue their points. No ?

oneworld2 said:

Keep bouncing that around your own echo chamber if you want but reasonable people will reject the notion that the entire world and everyone in it are either antisemites or closet antisemites. And for Jewish people who are critical of Israeli actions and/or policies can be dismissed as selfhaters. It's a slam dunk ! :roll:

Click to expand...

So you have no actual answer.

CJ 2.0 said:

Incidentally, you are the one trying to bend antisemitism here. All I did was ask you for a comparable list for other, much more egregious, occupations or other countries whose treatment of populations makes Israel look like mother theresa.

And if there are no such lists, wondering if you have an understanding as to why.

Click to expand...

I have been through this and think this BDS type approach has only once, that I recall , ever been deployed against another state for the policies it prosecuted and the rules of this forum prevent that discussion from going ahead.

That's not evasiveness , just the facts of the matter.

So I don't see Israel as the only state this type of thing has ever happened to

Apocalypse said:

So you have no actual answer.

Click to expand...

I made a number of points that completely undermined you hyperbolic claim about the UN not wanting the Jews to live in a state of their own or see them as human beings. I found your response to it a little off and didn't see what you were even getting at.

Answer the points I raised and you ignored and restate whatever it was you were trying to convey.

oneworld2 said:

I made a number of points that completely undermined you hyperbolic claim about the UN not wanting the Jews to live in a state of their own or see them as human beings. I found your response to it a little off and didn't see what you were even getting at.

Answer the points I raised and you ignored and restate whatever it was you were trying to convey.

Click to expand...

You've done no such thing.
What do the ones who voted for a Jewish state back in the 40s have to do with modern antisemites sitting at the UN table?

No answer? Good.

Apocalypse said:

So you have no actual answer.

Click to expand...

To what ? That your claim that anyone and everyone that is critical of Israeli state policies and actions hates Jews because they are Jews or out of hatred for Jewishness ? Even those who are Jewish themselves ?

The answer is I think it's pretty much a rubbish claim that is the misuse of a valuable term in the fight against AUTHENTIC racism/bigotry.

Apocalypse said:

You've done no such thing.

Click to expand...

Yes I did in post 60 here

What do the ones who voted for a Jewish state back in the 40s have to do with modern antisemites sitting at the UN table?

No answer? Good.

Click to expand...

The UN has supported the existence on the Jewish state from 1947 to the present so in that context your question makes no sense. I suppose the closest answer would be they have consistantly supported it over nearly 3/4 of a century. How can that be interpreted as antisemitism ?

oneworld2 said:

:roll:

Click to expand...

You didn't even think about what I presented.... Did you?

You do so hate facts.

oneworld2 said:

Yes I did in post 60 here



The UN has supported the existence on the Jewish state from 1947 to the present so in that context your question makes no sense. I suppose the closest answer would be they have consistantly supported it over nearly 3/4 of a century. How can that be interpreted as antisemitism ?

Click to expand...

You tried to approve and legitimize the antisemitic agenda of the UN by claiming that 72 years ago they voted for the creation of a Jewish state.
I asked what the ones who have voted 72 years ago have to do with the current antisemites sitting at the tables of that now rotten organization.
If you can't tell the relevance of such question and cannot provide an appropriate answer - what else is there to say?

Fledermaus said:

You didn't even think about what I presented.... Did you?

You do so hate facts.

Click to expand...

:roll:

Apocalypse said:

You tried to approve and legitimize the antisemitic agenda of the UN by claiming that 72 years ago they voted for the creation of a Jewish state.
I asked what the ones who have voted 72 years ago have to do with the current antisemites sitting at the tables of that now rotten organization.
If you can't tell the relevance of such question and cannot provide an appropriate answer - what else is there to say?

Click to expand...

Wrong, I completely reject the idea that the UN is antisemitic and I justify that claim by posting some of the decisions it has made wrt the state of Israel. You haven't commented once on that list have you ?

Your loaded question presumes that the UN was antisemitic 72 years ago and is just as antisemitic today. The list of decisions I referred you to , that you have chosen to completely ignore and span that whole period under discussion , rubbishes that claim and rubbished the previous hyperbolic claim they were first used for.

So you choose to ignore the information that completely undermines your claims and continue with an already answered question now claiming it was never answered ? I agree , what else is there to say other than you prefer to debate yourself in an echo chamber.

Can we all now desist from making this thread about alleged antisemitism in the UN and actually discuss the BDS type pressure that should be brought on Israel to force it to engage in good faith negotiations to end the conflict ?

oneworld2 said:

Wrong, I completely reject the idea that the UN is antisemitic and I justify that claim by posting some of the decisions it has made wrt the state of Israel. You haven't commented once on that list have you ?

Your loaded question presumes that the UN was antisemitic 72 years ago and is just as antisemitic today. The list of decisions I referred you to , that you have chosen to completely ignore and span that whole period under discussion , rubbishes that claim and rubbished the previous hyperbolic claim they were first used for.

So you choose to ignore the information that completely undermines your claims and continue with an already answered question now claiming it was never answered ? I agree , what else is there to say other than you prefer to debate yourself in an echo chamber.

Click to expand...

Your words deal with imaginary things as I haven't assumed that the UN was leading an antisemitic agenda 72 years ago, and this is what you're missing here when you keep trying to legitimize the UN antisemitism by referring to a vote taking place 72 years ago.

Apocalypse said:

Your words deal with imaginary things as I haven't assumed that the UN was leading an antisemitic agenda 72 years ago, and this is what you're missing here when you keep trying to legitimize the UN antisemitism by referring to a vote taking place 72 years ago.

Click to expand...

At the time you claim the UN was not antisemitic 13 nations out of 57 countries voted AGAINST the partition plan that was to create both an Israeli state and a Palestinian state.

Today, when you claim the UN is rife with antisemitism, there are nearly 200 countries and those that oppose the existence of the state of Israel there are ZERO.

You might want to explain to people here how that information makes your claim look anything but ridiculous?

The crime of the vast majority as far as you and others are concerned is that they support the creation of a Plaestinian state on the area occupied by Israel for over 50 odd years of the 72 you reference.

The world has grown and accepted the state of Israel, crucially including the Arab world , but that growth has also brought about the push to see the justice that would be an autonomous Palestinian state.