No prob. These things can often be complicated because everyone seems to be speaking a different language - in that the terms commonly used mean different things to different people.
I’d rather you, you know, use your own words.
Ah, here we go. I assume the article you refer to is the same PDF as above. I also note that your wording is (perhaps intentionally) vague. Is it your belief that all supporters of the BDS movement are either anti-Semites or “useful idiots”? Or is there perhaps another reason one might support the BDS movement?
My comment was based on your summary of the article - that it “analyzed” the BDS movement to be anti-Semitic. I couched it as a hypothetical since I was leaving open the possibility you might be unfairly summarizing the article, or that I might be misunderstanding your summary. But since the debate is with you, and not an random author who presumably isn’t a member of the boards here, I am more interested in your position than his. So, again, in short, no mind was slammed shut, but rather I was stating that if your summary was accurate, and my understanding of your summary was accurate, then the article unfortunately nullifies any credibility the Wiesenthal center might have had on the BDS movement. And if those conditions aren’t met - if I misunderstood your summary, or if your summary was incorrect - then I’m making no statement about the Wiesenthal Center’s credibility at all.
71% Latino vote for Obama. Pretty massive, I would say.
No. 71% of those who voted voted for Obama, but that doesn’t make them leftist. Some surely, but not all. It just makes them NOT wanting to vote for Romney.
No, it is not. Seriously, do you read posts or just skim them?
Yes, either anti-Semites or “progressive” idiot ignoramuses who learned the very little they know about the area in question from anti-Semitic propaganda sites.
Voting for a leftist candidate is an act of identification with the left.
I voted for Obama and I don’t identify with the left. There are many reasons to vote for certain candidates, and that doesn’t even touch on whether Obama represents “the left” or not.
Obama’s not a leftist candidate.
This doesn’t hold water, since there may very well be other groups that identify more often with the right that have much higher rates of anti-semitism – for example (as possibilities, not certainties), white racists, anti-immigrants, paleo-conservatives, Christian dominionists, end-of-the-world folks, etc. I don’t know if this is true, but the fact that two groups that lean left have higher levels of anti-Semitic beliefs doesn’t mean that there aren’t groups that lean right with such beliefs.
Pfffft. If you want to claim you are “just asking questions” go ahead. I’m not sure why you think that is a better position, but go ahead!
And that’s just the disconnect with reality that Terr stands by. There’s only two parties to vote for. Democrats are left wing, Republicans are right wing. So everyone who votes is therefore right wing or left wing. Latinos are thus massively left wing. Even idiot Jews are left wing, though presumably not overwhelmingly anti-Semitic.
Sigh. I read your posts. You referred to a Wiesenthal PDF about 100 times, and then posted one other opinion piece once. And I had to guess which one “the article” referred to. Apparently, I guessed wrong.
So, basically, with the exception of useful idiots, you are basically confirming that the answer to the question in the OP, which has been called a strawman by multiple other posters, is that it actually is your opinion that support of BDS is inherently anti-Semitic. Great. Of course, also: wrong. And for the reasons that I brought up all the way back in post #11. Here is a completely non-anti-Semitic chain of reasoning that could cause one to support BDS:
- Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories is wrong
- The US is a strong supporter of Israel
- The US has a high degree of leverage over Israel, due to economic intertwining, military support, and political support
- US support for Israel is seen as US support for Palestinian occupation
- It is important to do something to encourage Israel to end the occupation
- Ergo: BDS
Now, I think you could find some flaws in that chain of reasoning. I personally don’t support BDS, though I would like to see my government pressure Israel’s to end the occupation. For one thing, I think that in the absence of political pressure from the United States, BDS isn’t going to effect the ends its supporters want. But nonetheless, one could follow that chain of reasoning and end up at BDS, and - here’s the key - not be anti-Semitic.
So, is it your opinion that any attempt ever to clarify someone’s position is actually an insidious attempt to put words in their mouth? I’m not sure how I could have been much more clear that that was what I was doing. Sheesh…
Of course, what’s funny is that Terr pretty much confirmed that that was his position…
No.
Good. Care to explain why my post struck you as putting words in Terr’s mouth and not clarifying his position?
Can confirm, John Mace is not a leftist. “Extreme centrist” might be best.
Like most Americans, I admire the courage and “pluck” of Israel’s resistance to violent suppression of their God-given rights. How well that compares to the bloody minded and stubborn intransigence of Palestinians and their shabby, threadbare appeals to Islam.
Huh?
Is Israel the more educated, advanced, and civilized of the two main antagonists? Yes. To my mind, that means that the responsibility to be the more humane is theirs. Thus, my admiration for Israel is at the core of my criticism. I expect more, and am sadly and consistently disappointed.
Is the resistance of Hamas courage, or fanaticism? How does it compare to the Irgun of 1948? Do we admire the Poles for their cavalry charge against an armored Wermacht or condemn the senseless and futile bloodshed?
In every violent struggle, there is a last blow delivered, but not answered. Often, it is because one of the antagonists is too weak and bloodied, they would retaliate if they could, but cannot. Or, more rarely, one side refrains in the interests of peace and humanity. Who better but the more civilized, more educated, and massively more powerful? If not Israel, who? If not now, when?
Or shall Israel follow the ghastly example of European Americans and their treatment of indigenous American peoples? Grind them down to dust and then throw them a couple of pathetic reservations and demand that they accept bygones be bygone? “You lost, tough shit, get over it”.
I admire Israel more or less generally, I admire the moral courage of its peace movement more than any other modern political example. I hope they will have their way, if God shall cease to avert His eyes…
Alas.
I think the notion is to stress through irony that Israeli and Palestinian nationalistic actions are in fact equivalent.