Why are you singling out supporters of Israel, ytwf? What about the United Kingdom or Poland? Why aren’t you upset when supporters of those nations shout you down and accuse you of bigotry? One has to wonder why you have such selective outrage. Hmmm.
[/FinnAgain impression]
clairobscur: In the *museum of tolerance * thread I did wonder if the Op had some hidden agenda because he grossly misrepresented a story.
I pointedly said you made good points, I actually praised you for your thoughtful questions. Overall almost no one “played” the antisemitism card in that thread and I do not believe any was aimed at you. I haven’t seen the other thread, but I gather it concerns the Dumb comments by the Pope?
If so, I will tell you the Muslims have every reason to be pissed about his quote.
Jim
I’m not entirely sure what clairobscur is getting at regarding pervasive “pro-antiarabism” (no links to threads or direct quotes are to be had) and I’m not sure why his feelings on this score need to be linked to the issue of anti-Semitism in threads on Israel, but I do have a comment on the latter.
While there are instances where posters get targeted for being bigots without adequate supporting evidence (the current Pit thread on the museum to be built on the grounds of a former Arab cemetery providing a limited example), this rarely comes up in the vast torrent of opinions exchanged here on the subject of the Middle East.
When it does occur, typically it is when a poster combines extreme, one-sided hostility towards Israel coupled with invocations of classic anti-Semitic themes (They Control The Media etc.). When objections are raised, we see denial or outrage on the part of some other posters who either 1) don’t recognize the problem, 2) think it’s insignificant in relation to the wider issue of Mideast justice, 3) a distraction they’re not interested in, or 4) don’t want to be exposed for what they are.
The outraged poster may be quite vehement about the unfairness of it all, even if there was nothing specifically said about anti-Semitism.
To provide a specific example, take the Juan Cole thread in GD (Juan Cole is the professor who purportedly lost out on an academic job because of his views on Israel). The specter of “a small, well-funded group” bringing down Cole was invoked. I objected to this absurd conjuring of a neocon cabal as a technique to short-circuit reasonable debate on the subject, drawing the following response from Sevastopol:
Now let’s take a look at Sevastopol in the recent GD thread about whether the American media are biased towards Israel, wherein Sevastopol has the following gem of a comment about Americans supporting Israel:
So Sevastopol claims I am being terribly unfair but then turns around and uses the similar imagery himself in another thread, even though he knows it conjures up classic stereotypical fears about Jews.
Excuse me then, if I’m not overly impressed by claims coming from some quarters about unfair accusations of anti-Semitism.
OK, I reread the thread and indeed I hastily and mistakenly attributed to you the intent of hinting at antisemitism. So, I’m guilty of the sin of second-guessing that I was denouncing. :smack:
However, soon after, ** FrantzJ ** entered into full “We Jews blahblahblah” mode. I don’t really care whether it was aimed at me, I’m just fed up with the repetitive use of this rethoric.
Regarding the other thread, I’ve no issue with people thinking that muslims have no reason to be pissed off, I’ve an issue with the OP which is solely about how bad and pathetic muslims are.
That is cool, I am pretty sure **FrantzJ ** is just a guest. I think he is both young and new to the boards. That might explain a quick trigger finger with very defensive mode.
I am off to check out the other thread, I missed it.
I also think there is some validity to your Op. The board in general is more wary of offending Jewish, Black, Asian or Hispanic people than Arab/Muslim people. I think that is true throughout most of America and possibly the English speaking portion of the world.
Jim
Interesting thread, the Op’s point is silly and suffers from the heavy application of the broad brush which I despise.
I find it interesting that the Muslims were presented the Pope’s words in much the same way I saw it in the press and were angered by it. Knowing only part of the story, I thought their anger just, even if their protest were too strong and over the top. I see from reading the thread, the Pope did not really say anything inflammatory when taken in context of his complete lecture.
Jim
clairobscur,
I agree with you that on some cases people tend to get “automatic” reactions. This happens also (but not only) in thread about Israel, Jews, Muslims or Arabs. And, I’ve seen these knee-jerk responses from both sides.
I would like to address a few specific points:
Having said that, let me add: I’ve been here about two months. I can show you places where I protested views that I considered treading Arabs en-bloc in a demeaning way. You’ve been here for 5 years. In how many places have you protected Jews or Israel when falsely accused?
I’m sorry, but there are cases when anti-Semitism expresses itself not against Jews in general, but against a specific Jew, because he is a Jew. The example I tend to use to illustrate these case is that of Alfred Dreyfus.
So, if I’ll see cases in which I think Jews are being blamed due to anti-Semitism, I will point that, at the risk of being added to your ignore list.
:: quietly sticks pinky toe into thread to test temperature ::
Nah, too hot for the moment…it’s late, and I’m tired.
But as a representative of the American Jewish agnostic, hippie-chick, Kumbayah-singing contingent of this board, would it cheer you up if I offered to make my very first visit to an operational mosque? In the name of multiculturalism, of course. 
It may get me called a self-hating Jew, but hey, that would be par for the course.
(P.S. Check your e-mail.)
I dislike the way both Jimmy K Jewboys and Mohammed X Muslimboys go at it with such unrestrained fury whenever a topic related to Israel comes up. Back off, bitches! Both sides use every trick of rhetoric, including all the dirty ones, to “win” their argument, which is kind of a joke, since the tactics employed ensure that both sides lose. That is, the more impassioned types get cranked up and turn out 2,000 word posts (by which I mean, “very long” posts, my point isn’t negated if you find that no posts go over 1,999 words – just the sort of things you guys do, too.) So people like me, who don’t have the white-hot emotional investment in the issues that some Dopers do, are rolling their eyes and dropping out of the thread like flies while you go on about what happened on the third day of the Six Day War and how it affects the Treaty of Shrub-Niggurath.
Do you think that’s a win for you? No it is not. Mohammed X Muslimboy is never gonna convince Jimmy K Jewboy of anything, and vice versa, they’re way too dug into their positions. The only hope either has of 'winning" the argument is to keep people who are in the middle interested and persuade them. Mostly lurkers I’d imagine. But occasionally posters who don’t have much emotional investment in the issues, like me.
So keep it brief and try to play nice, or you’ll bore the socks off of everyone, which I believe is the default loser position for almost anyone.
Take my word for it, they are as interesting as any church/synagogue/temple/whatever. Even less, because the ones around here lack any art whatsoever to distract you from the tedious discussion. You’re missing nothing. The Ba’hai’s are sorta Muslim. Go up to the Ba’hai Temple and enjoy it instead.
I’ve been to the Ba’hai Temple about half a billion times - it’s a 10-minute bike ride from the house I grew up in, not to mention 2 blocks from my ex-boyfriend’s house. I’m not proposing visiting a mosque around here, thanks, but a fuller explanation would be an even more ridiculous hijack.
(Plus, most mainsteam Muslims would take exception to the idea that Ba’hais are Muslims.)
Let’s face it, Jews like me can no longer even say the word antisemitism without being accused of trying to steer blame away from Israel. I swear, I’ve heard or seen several conversations like this:
Person A: "When the Palestinians fight the Jews, it’s justified because they are weak, while the Israelis have all of the weapons. Also, Israel oppresses the Palestinians, but the Palestinians, along with the Arab world, don’t do anything wrong with regards to Israel. Their hatred towards Israel is not racial or religious, but only about the suffering of Palestinians. The Israelis have conspired to make sure that they hold power, and it is a shame that nations like Iran don’t have nuclear weapons, so they can be on an even foot with Israel. In fact, I don’t even think that Israel has a right to exist.
Person B: “What an anti-Semite! Your opinion is obviously biased.”
Person A: “JUST BECAUSE I’M ANTI-ISRAEL DOESN’T MAKE ME ANTI-SEMITIC BLAH BLAH BLAH…”
“You don’t have to be anti-Semitic to be anti-Israel” is the newest play in the anti-Israel playbook.
The fact that the original poster is ignoring is that just because anti-Semitism is not the same thing as anti-Israelism does not mean that they are not often related. Just because one is against gay marriage does not mean that one is anti-homosexual, but it does point towards it, and often goes along with it. The same is true of anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism.
To those who are biased in favor of the Arabs, it is easy to make statements that distort the middle east situation against the Israelis, and then back them up with “I’m not anti-Semitic.” But here’s the deal: if you are against the existence of Israel, or you go so far as to suggest that terrorists are freedom fighters, or you believe that Iran has a right to use nuclear weapons on Israel (if you believe Iran should have nukes, you believe Israel should be nuked), then you are the person who is pro-segregation but claims to not be anti-Black. You are the politician who claims to be pro-environment, while voting for bills that allow logging in national forests. The vast majority of Holocaust-deniers claim to not be anti-Semitic. For those with a decent bullshit-detector, it is easy to see what is really going on.
As for point number two, I am not familiar with all of the anti-Muslim and anti-Arab statements made on this board. I do have friends and family members who are more anti-Arab than me, and I disagree with many of their deragatory comments. Calls to drop bombs on Muslims for no good reason are prejudiced.
However, some of the statements that you criticize are not legitimate. For example, if I said that the existence of Jews in France was a threat to French society, I would be wrong. If I said that about Muslims, I would be right. There are a variety of conflicts going on in France with regard to Muslims, many of whom do not want to recognize any law other than Islamic law (ie French law). With extremely high birth rates and an unwillingness to recognize French law over Islamic law, and along with that an unwillingness to integrate into French society, they do pose a threat.
Is that racist? I don’t think so. I think it is a broad, but generally accurate assessment of Islam in France.
So, for 1, if you are going to take the allegation of anti-Semitism as a sign that you have won, then fine, I’ll call you an anti-Semite so that you can feel overjoyed by beating me (though I don’t believe that you are one). I believe that anti-Semitism is a hatred or bias against Jews based on race or religion, and that is not what you and most other people on this board represent. However, just because one is not an anti-Semite does not prevent individual comments from being anti-Semitic in nature. And most of all, the denial of anti-Semitism is not a legitimate defense of biased criticism of Israel. If you make biased, strongly anti-Israel comments, you are doing something very wrong, and blurbing “I’m not an anti-Semite, just anti-Israel” does not make your biased comments correct.
As for 2, yes, prejudice against Arabs and Muslims is wrong. However, a statement that is accurate (not biased) about Islam is not Islamophobic if backed up properly with evidence.
Joey
Yes, actually, it is. Several of the statements you have made above are entirely wrong. Muslims are not a threat to france. Muslims who do not want to recognize any law but Sharia law are. This is a number less than all muslims in france.
It is possible to be anti-Israel but not anti-semetic. I know of certain Orthodox rabbis who believe Israel should not exist until the Messiah founds it, for example, and this country is a perversion. Will you call them anti-semites? Nor is a decision that Iran, being, say, a sovereign nation, has a right to self government, and the ability to exit treaties entered into, is a call for Israel to be nuked.
Any statement saying that all persons of a class behave in a certain manner are biased, and probably wrong. Even this one. Think before you attack.
I’m sick and tired of all this antisemitism too.
Can’t we all just stick to hating Jews?
The word “antisemite” has become completely stupid.
If “antisemitic” means “disagreeing with the policy or actions of some person who has some kind of jewish heritage” then call me an antisemite. And if that’s what it means (its certainly how it’s come to be used) then what’s the big deal about being one?
-FrL-
This is so not a valid analogy. The only thing “objectionable” about gay marriage is the gayness of the particpants, so it does, in fact, mean that one is anti-homosexual, even if you have elaborately constructed “political” reasons for being so. The objections to Israeli/Arab actions has nothing to do with their beliefs, but with their actions. To parallel this with the anti-gay-marriage agenda is absolutely wrong.
clairobscur, I agree to a degree with what you’re saying, but I also feel like you miss the point. The issue isn’t anti-antisemitism. The issue is that in threads where accusations of anti-semitism become a major theme (or anti-arabism, for that matter), it’s usually because of OPs with limited scope of information and passionate opinion.
If OPs took more responsibility for gaining a bit of perspective, and for not throwing accusations left and right against their target of choice, I am 100% sure that what you’re complaining about would disappear.
The ‘Museum of Tolerance’ thread is a perfect example, IMHO, of an OP that just wanted to express outrage at a group (Israelis, Jews, the W Center, or whomever), that they already were pre-disposed to be angry at. An irrational and ill-formed OP isn’t owed much of a reasoned response (particularly in the Pit). I’d say that an OP wants a conversation about an issue, he or she has a duty to look critically at his or her source(s), and present them honestly and in good faith.
Yes, knee-jerkers are obnoxious, but honestly I find them to exist much more virulantly in poorly-written OPs, than in nasty responses to good OPs.
Ignoring the irritated with Israel != antisemitism thing (though I am when it appears), I must say that I am amazed at the free pass givent to certain single-issue posters, who constantly highlight Muslim crimes, or constantly pick apart the Koran or the Hadiths, with almost no at all.
Particularly with regard to the latter - seriously, despite the disgusting actions of many adherents of Islam, if you pick apart any religious texts you’re likely to unearth some dirt. I suspect if similar intellectual energy were devoted to deconstructing the Rig Veda to denigrate the beliefs of devotees of Kali, there’d be enough material to fill several dozen five-page GD threads.
AND, if a poster were so keen to do this to the Torah or the Bible on such a regular and indefatigable basis as some here, the accusations of bigotry would resound from the hills. Yet apart from me and perhaps a couple of others, constant anti-Islamic spouting is largely met with a resounding silence.
I have very little respect for religion in general, but I’m sure I come over as some Islamophile, though I have little respect for it either - but I’m tired of seeing such obvious and hypocritical prejudice go largely unquestioned.
Can we attribute this mangling of the English language to a “wardrobe malfunction”?
Case in point. I predict tumbleweed following that outburst.