Well, to be fair, I think he was just calling the Israelis “baby killers”, albeit baby killers motivated by their fanatic Judaism.
Actually, your post is proof that even when people say outrageously anti-semitic things, like telling Jews that they’d behave much better if they just all followed Christ, making an issue about 2000+ years of Jewish behavior instead of Israel’s political actions (“Zionist terrorists” circa 50 BCE, really?) , and using the traditional anti-Semitic canard about “the Chosen People”, people will leap to its defense if it’s tangential to Israel.
Then they’ll claim that it’s impossible to criticize Israel without being labelled an anti-semite. (Tell me newcomer, can you please cite all the times I’ve been called an anti-semite when I’ve criticized Israel on this board? How about just one cite, eh? No? How about DSeid? How about Jackmanni? How about Malthus? How about Captain Amazing? How about. Ibn? No? Not even one? Funny, that…) Sometimes they’ll heap another bit of nonsense on the pile and allege that now we can’t accurately talk about anti-Semitism because we’ve someone “devalued” it by all this fictional criticism-of-Israel-is-anti-Semitism talk.
If they’re really, really into nonsense and can’t cogently support their position, they’ll also claim that its the Jews’ fault that people are anti Semitic anyways. Or Israel’s fault. Or whatever. Reminds me of one poster who once claimed that it wasn’t anti-Semitic to say that the Jews were behind every major war of the 20th century and that they use groups like Rotary Clubs as secret fronts for a global Jewish conspiracy, since that was said by Hamas “in the context of anti-Zionism.”
The only bit of bullshit more absurd than the claim that everybody who criticizes Israel is called an anti-Semite is the claim that nobody who criticizes Israel does so out of anti-Semitism. But what is clear is that some people know that their argument is so shockingly weak, that they preemptively have to hop up on the cross and bemoan their cruel, cruel fate.
-“I disagree with this policy of Israel.”
-“Well, on that claim, you’re wrong because you’ve ignored these facts and this contextual issue and…”
-“Don’t you call me an anti-Semite!”
-“Wait, what? Sure, sometimes Israel’s critics are anti-Semites, like the ones who rant about how “the Chosen People” is some sort of ‘Jewish Supremacism’ and…”
-“Stop calling me an anti-Semite!”
-“Okay… this is getting odd. I haven’t…”
-“I AM NOT AN ANTI-SEMITE, YOU SHUT UP!!!”
You’ll find, when discussions involve, let’s just say informed and forthright discussion, Ibn is quite critical about Israel on a number of points. Unfortunately due to the nature of many discussions here, people who are interested in discussing the facts in an accurate manner will perforce spend an undue amount of time and energy pointing out fiction and/or bullshit. Sometimes it’s just the utter absurdities which get pointed out, like Dick’s enthusiastic support for racist, genocidal groups.
Added to that there’s no requirement that Muslims hate Israel in any case, and your question as to why a Muslim might defend not just Israel but Jews is, well, odd. Why wouldn’t a Muslim person object to bigotry and racism in all of its forms if he was a good person and objected to that kind of filth on general principle?
No, it is not antisemitic to say Jews worship an insatiable sadist. It is a fact. (And conversion to Christianity/Islam improved His character not at all.)
At the very least such a comment shows extreme hostility towards Jews.
This is both a personal belief and a hijack. If you want to go on about this, open a new thread. Regardless of your personal beliefs, the statements quoted by Captain Amazing are clearly antisemitic.
[ /Moderating ]
If it’s that clear, you should be able to provide an example or two. Here’s a hint: You’ll much more easily find the anti-semitism card played by the other person than the one you attribute it to in your imagined conversation here. I can even remind you of the name of a poster to use in your search. :dubious:
You honestly don’t grok? For serious? Newcomer claimed that it was regular that anybody simply criticizing Israel would be accused of anti-Semitism.
Can you clarify, exactly, what’s confusing you about how that’s used as a preemptive dodge and how it’s hopping up on the cross?
Can you, perhaps, address the fact that it’s patently ridiculous and plenty of people have criticized Israel, including but not limited to Dopers who I listed by name, and not one of them has ever to my knowledge been accused of anti-Semitism?
I suppose I could point to the fact that in virtually ever GD thread on the subject, someone is bound to bring up the nonsense about how nobody, or almost nobody, or whatever, can ever criticize Israel without being labelled an anti-Semite. And in virtually no GD thread ever, has anybody been accused of anti-Semitism for not liking Israeli policies. But if you don’t grok the essential point, I’m not sure how elaborating on it will clarify.
Can you please point out the source of your non-comprehension?
“Hop up on the cross” is perhaps not the most apt figure of speech here, you know. 
Actually, it’s just about perfect.
My issue is this: given that the statements by Mr. Gaarder are pretty obviously anti-Semitic to unbiased eyes, were they perceived as such by the majority of Norwegians, or as a perfectly reasonable critique of Israel?
The former case would go some way to addressing the topic of this thread.
Getting an answer to that might be quite difficult, since it’s not likely that there will have been a major poll to get reactions to a single op-ed piece. Some people came out in support (with predictable “ZOMG nobody can criticize Israel without being called an anti-semite!!!oneone11!!!” stuff) but I’m unaware of any deeper research.
There doesn’t really seem to be enough information out there, from what I can gather, to support or gainsay the OP’s main implication. Certainly Norway is lopsided in its view of the I/P conflict, but then again, so are most European nations.
I’d like to see a cite for this.
I already provided you with a cite.
I don’t really have any problem with the article. I don’t see how it’s antisemitic. The writer obviously isn’t a fan of israel and would like to see it end the occupation, stop slaughtering civilians and return to 1948 borders while the rest of the world, as evidenced by UN resolutions, woul;d like Israel to end the occupation, stop slaughtering civilians and return to 1967 borders. So really he only has a disagreement about what borders israel should return to.
I think this is a perfect example of overreaction by israel to legitimate criticism of their horrible regime.
What, exactly, is the difference between the 1948 borders and the 1967 borders? Do you even have the slightest idea what you’re talking about?
The article is very obviously anti-Semitic. To cite but a single instance, claiming that the Jewish concept of being “the chosen people” is “a crime against humanity” and “racism” is something that only a willfully ignorant Jew-hater could agree with, and it has everything to do with Judaism and nothing whatsoever to do with Israel as a nation.
This is a perfect example of people being willfully blind to actual anti-Semitism, simply because this particular Jew hater is also “acceptably” anti-Israeli.
Do you actually bother to read the threads you’re commenting on or do you just ignore most of the posts?
I provided a link in post 14 and we spent several posts discussing it.
Anyway, don’t you agree that claiming that it’s anti-Semitic to claim that French Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the government of France?
The only thing I really have against Jews is the fruits they would sooner disown – Christianity and Islam. Judaism by itself falls under the “Mostly Harmless” category.
Nobody ever understands the concept of “chosen people.” It doesn’t mean that the Jews are “better” than everyone else. It means that they HAVE MORE RESPONSIBILITIES than everyone else. It’s WORK following the strictures of the Jewish religion. Judaism is not about dominating other people, controlling the non-Jewish nations, etc. It has never been about that. Over the years, Christians and Muslims alike have accused the Jews of doing what in reality THEY have been doing - forcibly converting, conquering, and generally pushing their religion on others. The Jews just want to be left the fuck alone with their own insular group. They have no desire to screw the other religious groups because they’re the “chosen” people. That’s not what the concept of chosen people means.
Either you didn’t read the cite you provided or you’re being intellectually dishonest.
Nowhere in the Huffpo article you linked to does Dershowitz give a definition of anti-Semitism that you claim he gave.
So either quote the sentences in the article where Dershowitz defines anti-Semitism the way you claim he does or admit you made a false statement.