Was: Israel is at War; Now: Scoopers diagnose your anti-Semitism

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Brandeis acknowledged they cannot stop hate speech, so you're correct. Then they did what I wanted anyway: found a way of not banning hate speech but silencing the hate talk anyway.

Harvard could stop paying for the 33 student organizations that signed the letter blaming Israel on October 8, less than 24 hours after the attack and before Israel even started to respond.

I saw what Brandeis did. I think it was a mistake. It may feel good now, but when that student org successfully sues them for hundreds of thousands of dollars it's going to feel really sh*tty knowing that a university with rich history of educating and graduating Jewish students is funding a group that espouses hate against the Jewish people. You've recently expressed admiration for FIRE, they are condemning the decision as illegal: https://www.thefire.org/news/free-speech-promises-be-damned-brandeis-bans-students-justice-palestine. Most reactions I've seen from those in the legal world have criticized the decision.

All universities COULD choose to violate the first amendment and punish students for protected free speech.  But doing so is short sighted. Sure you stop the immediate hate speech but eventually a judge will reverse any decision you make and you end up funding a hate group. You temporarily win the battle before eventually losing the battle and the war.

So, are you advocating for the funding of antisemitic hate groups? I'm not.

[4everwarriors]

I know this issue is important to you, and I respect that because it's important to me, too.

You've pushed back on Tlaib - and so have I. You've also pushed back here, going with the Joseph McCarthy routine by (falsely) labeling anyone who doesn't pass your purity test an anti-Semite.

But ...

When will you start pushing back on MTG, Tucker and the 91-felony Criminal Defendant? Or doesn't their anti-Semitism count because they're on your team?

Appreciate your honest question and I'll respond honestly as well. Both MTG and Carlson leave a lot to be desired with regard to Christian/Judea relations. I tend to view them as pawns in the political chess game. In other words, they are far down the ladder in importance. On the other hand, the Democratic Party which used to be the party of choice for Jews, now has become a haven of ill advised political moves and down right hatred toward the Jewish people. In fact it is embarrassing and unheard of that democrats such as Schumer, Sanders, Mayorkas, et al are Jewish themselves. Organizations such as J Street are a disgrace as well.
As for Trump, I do not believe he is antisemitic. I watch what people do, not so much of what they say. As you know, his daughter has converted to Judaism, he has Jewish grandchildren, is one of the largest gentile donors to Israel, and kept his campaign promise of moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. And, the list go on and on. As you know, all things considered, he is not my preferred candidate. I feel the country needs a younger voice. Yet, unless he's in jail, it seems likely that Trump will be the Republican nominee. At that point, he gets my support.
I would encourage you to view his speech given at the recent RJC Leadership Conference. It can be found, along with the other Republican candidate speeches, on the C-Span website, hey?

[Heisenberg]

1944 warfare =/= 2023 warfare
Israel vs Hamas =/= World War II

We can do this all night.

I agree with this. But you're assuming this will always not be equal.

The reason this thread is now 110 pages and why this is such an important worldwide story is that there is a real fear that these relationships will become equal.

This is the fear.

September 1939 warfare = 2023 warfare

[Heisenberg]

I saw what Brandeis did. I think it was a mistake. It may feel good now, but when that student org successfully sues them for hundreds of thousands of dollars it's going to feel really sh*tty knowing that a university with rich history of educating and graduating Jewish students is funding a group that espouses hate against the Jewish people. You've recently expressed admiration for FIRE, they are condemning the decision as illegal: https://www.thefire.org/news/free-speech-promises-be-damned-brandeis-bans-students-justice-palestine. Most reactions I've seen from those in the legal world have criticized the decision.

All universities COULD choose to violate the first amendment and punish students for protected free speech.  But doing so is short sighted. Sure you stop the immediate hate speech but eventually a judge will reverse any decision you make and you end up funding a hate group. You temporarily win the battle before eventually losing the battle and the war.

So, are you advocating for the funding of antisemitic hate groups? I'm not.

I never expressed admiration for FIRE. I referenced their low Harvard rating for free speech, but do not confuse that for admiration.

As I've said, I'm on the fence about the First Amendment issues discussed with you. So, I am not going to argue hard with you.

Universities do not have to fund every student organization. They can deny Free Palestine organizations for the same reason they will deny KKK or Proud Boy organizations.

I'm conflicted because I find this speech hateful and disgusting. I know I'm supposed to support their right to say hateful things. But I see it as a call for violence and death, and that is where I personally draw the line.

If they sue, I will watch with great interest to see how they are resolved.

[Heisenberg]

Speaking of the hateful and disgusting speech above calling for violence and death ... I'm not the only one who feels this way. Those that it is directed at are rapidly moving to protect themselves.

November 8, 2023
Jews Who Never Wanted to Own Guns Are Now Buying Them in Florida
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/jews-who-never-wanted-to-own-guns-are-now-buying-them-in-florida-1.1995780#:~:text=(Bloomberg)%20%2D%2D%20Vicky%20Furer%20never,youngest%20of%20whom%20is%2011.

Florida is home to almost 740,000 Jewish people, one of the largest concentrations outside Israel. It's also one of the states where it's easiest to acquire a gun. FBI criminal background checks — a proxy for gun purchases, which aren't tracked in the US — had been falling in Florida since March, but that reversed last month.

The FBI handled almost 124,000 checks in Florida in October, up 30% from September and nearly four times the nationwide increase of 8%. Background checks in the state were up 12% from a year earlier.

Since the Oct. 7 Hamas assault, a number of Jews in Florida who spoke with Bloomberg News said they'd opted to arm themselves despite reservations about gun ownership.

While there is no reliable record of gun purchases by members of religious groups, Magen Am USA, a nonprofit that provides security services for Jews, said it has received 1,000 calls from around the US for firearms training, armed guards for schools, and advice on gun purchases since the attack, more than in all of 2022.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I never expressed admiration for FIRE. I referenced their low Harvard rating for free speech, but do not confuse that for admiration.

As I've said, I'm on the fence about the First Amendment issues discussed with you. So, I am not going to argue hard with you.

Universities do not have to fund every student organization. They can deny Free Palestine organizations for the same reason they will deny KKK or Proud Boy organizations.

I'm conflicted because I find this speech hateful and disgusting. I know I'm supposed to support their right to say hateful things. But I see it as a call for violence and death, and that is where I personally draw the line.

If they sue, I will watch with great interest to see how they are resolved.

Admiration was probably the wrong word. Respect for their viewpoint in this arena is probably more accurate.  If not,  I apologize.

Universities do have to fund kkk and proud boy orgs that meet all the requirements for a student org (most require a significant number of registered students which eliminates most attempts at KKK type orgs but allows for things like turning point).
Universities don't have to fund every organization. But they do have to make all funding decisions in a viewpoint nuetral manner.

That requierment was established in a supreme court case that actually involved UW Madison. Brandeis' president made it explicitly clear that the reason they are defunding this org is because they don't agree with their speech. They will get sued, they will lose (settle), and they will end up directly funding antisemites as a result. It was a short sighted decision.

[Uncle Rico]

Appreciate your honest question and I'll respond honestly as well. Both MTG and Carlson leave a lot to be desired with regard to Christian/Judea relations. I tend to view them as pawns in the political chess game. In other words, they are far down the ladder in importance. On the other hand, the Democratic Party which used to be the party of choice for Jews, now has become a haven of ill advised political moves and down right hatred toward the Jewish people. In fact it is embarrassing and unheard of that democrats such as Schumer, Sanders, Mayorkas, et al are Jewish themselves. Organizations such as J Street are a disgrace as well.
As for Trump, I do not believe he is antisemitic. I watch what people do, not so much of what they say. As you know, his daughter has converted to Judaism, he has Jewish grandchildren, is one of the largest gentile donors to Israel, and kept his campaign promise of moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. And, the list go on and on. As you know, all things considered, he is not my preferred candidate. I feel the country needs a younger voice. Yet, unless he's in jail, it seems likely that Trump will be the Republican nominee. At that point, he gets my support.
I would encourage you to view his speech given at the recent RJC Leadership Conference. It can be found, along with the other Republican candidate speeches, on the C-Span website, hey?

Ah, pawns in a political game that leave a lot to be desired.  That's a good excuse.  I like it.  I'll have to remember that one.

I dunno, a gentile calling certain Jewish people embarrassing Jews because of their political affiliation seems problematic to me but why do I know, I'm anti-Semitic for not wanting to send troops to a war in the Middle East

[Pakuni]

Ah, pawns in a political game that leave a lot to be desired.  That's a good excuse.  I like it.  I'll have to remember that one.

I dunno, a gentile calling certain Jewish people embarrassing Jews because of their political affiliation seems problematic to me but why do I know, I'm anti-Semitic for not wanting to send troops to a war in the Middle East

No one knows what's best for the Jewish community like a gentile dentist from the Milwaukee suburbs.

Anyhow, look at all these embarrassing Jews.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-finds-us-jews-overwhelmingly-back-biden-over-trump-in-2024-rematch/

[Hards Alumni]

No one knows what's best for the Jewish community like a gentile dentist from the Milwaukee suburbs.

Anyhow, look at all these embarrassing Jews.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-finds-us-jews-overwhelmingly-back-biden-over-trump-in-2024-rematch/

huh, almost like any given demographic isn't a monolith!

[The Sultan]

Ah, pawns in a political game that leave a lot to be desired.  That's a good excuse.  I like it.  I'll have to remember that one.

I dunno, a gentile calling certain Jewish people embarrassing Jews because of their political affiliation seems problematic to me but why do I know, I'm anti-Semitic for not wanting to send troops to a war in the Middle East

C'mon... white suburbanites already know what's best for the inner-city residents of Milwaukee. Of course they also know what's best for the Jews too.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Appreciate your honest question and I'll respond honestly as well. Both MTG and Carlson leave a lot to be desired with regard to Christian/Judea relations. I tend to view them as pawns in the political chess game. In other words, they are far down the ladder in importance. On the other hand, the Democratic Party which used to be the party of choice for Jews, now has become a haven of ill advised political moves and down right hatred toward the Jewish people. In fact it is embarrassing and unheard of that democrats such as Schumer, Sanders, Mayorkas, et al are Jewish themselves. Organizations such as J Street are a disgrace as well.
As for Trump, I do not believe he is antisemitic. I watch what people do, not so much of what they say. As you know, his daughter has converted to Judaism, he has Jewish grandchildren, is one of the largest gentile donors to Israel, and kept his campaign promise of moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. And, the list go on and on. As you know, all things considered, he is not my preferred candidate. I feel the country needs a younger voice. Yet, unless he's in jail, it seems likely that Trump will be the Republican nominee. At that point, he gets my support.
I would encourage you to view his speech given at the recent RJC Leadership Conference. It can be found, along with the other Republican candidate speeches, on the C-Span website, hey?

Amazing. Simply amazing dissembling and dishonesty.

The guy who drew 3.5M viewers a night and one of the loudest, most prominent politicians don't really count because they are small fish, just pawns. Scoopers failing the purity test are clearly antisemites, but these two? No need to condemn them, they're nobodies!

The orange fellow dining with Nick Fuentes? And calling literal nazis "very fine people"? He gets a pass, his daughter married a Jew!

I'd call it intellectual dishonesty, but there would have to be some level of intellect first. But as I said, this sort of hypocrisy is just part of the operating system now.

Give me a shout when you have a bunch of folks on this side marching around chanting, "Jews will not replace us" and a D President that praises nazis.

[MU82]

Appreciate your honest question and I'll respond honestly as well. Both MTG and Carlson leave a lot to be desired with regard to Christian/Judea relations. I tend to view them as pawns in the political chess game. In other words, they are far down the ladder in importance. On the other hand, the Democratic Party which used to be the party of choice for Jews, now has become a haven of ill advised political moves and down right hatred toward the Jewish people. In fact it is embarrassing and unheard of that democrats such as Schumer, Sanders, Mayorkas, et al are Jewish themselves. Organizations such as J Street are a disgrace as well.
As for Trump, I do not believe he is antisemitic. I watch what people do, not so much of what they say. As you know, his daughter has converted to Judaism, he has Jewish grandchildren, is one of the largest gentile donors to Israel, and kept his campaign promise of moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. And, the list go on and on. As you know, all things considered, he is not my preferred candidate. I feel the country needs a younger voice. Yet, unless he's in jail, it seems likely that Trump will be the Republican nominee. At that point, he gets my support.
I would encourage you to view his speech given at the recent RJC Leadership Conference. It can be found, along with the other Republican candidate speeches, on the C-Span website, hey?

Thanks for the answer, Doc.

You've twisted yourself into quite the pretzel to not condemn people who actually are quite high up on the food chain. For example, Tucker Carlson has far more power and influence than most politicians, and you know it. Hell, text messages were unearthed showing how much Tucker hates your favorite president ... but even though your favorite president famously holds grudges, he groveled at the feet of Tucker because he knows he needs the influential Carlson on his side.

And you're just plain wrong about the 91-felony Criminal Defendant. If you accept support from anti-Semites - which he has done over and over again - and if you solicit support from anti-Semites - which he has done over and over again - sorry, but you are an anti-Semite.

It would be very easy for your guy to call out MTG. "Hey, my daughter is Jewish and I'm a strong supporter of both Israel and Jews everywhere. Knock off the Jewish Space Laser crapola and your other anti-Semitic tropes. I'd rather have no support from you than the support of an anti-Semite." THAT would go a long way toward proving he's not anti-Semitic.

Instead, he's honored to have her support, he constantly praises her publicly, and he might even consider her as a running mate. Sorry, but if someone's a white supremacist and you accept that person as a cohort, you're probably a white supremacist, too.

If he really supported all Jews - not just the State of Israel when it's politically expedient to do so - he'd tell the neo-Nazis, Proud Boys and white supremacists who worship him: "I would rather lose every election than accept your support. You are the worst scum on the planet, and if I'm elected president again, I will do everything in my power to marginalize you and eliminate your influence. I don't want or need your support; vote for somebody else. You make me sick."

Instead, although he has had numerous opportunities to strongly condemn those people and groups, and to forcefully separate himself from them, he instead has gladly accepted their support. He has told Jew-haters to "stand by," he has said some torch-carrying neo-Nazis were "very fine people," he recently dined with two raging anti-Semites, and he even more recently praised Hezbollah's leaders. Him pretending not to even know who David Duke is? That's precious ... and you apparently fell for it.

Ivanka converted? So what? Many people who have gay kids and grandkids still dislike or even hate gay people; many white people who have black SILs or DILs are still bigoted against black people. Ivanka converting means nothing when it comes to her father's prejudices.

You say it matters what people do and not what they say. First, I'll disagree with that on its merit. When the President of the United States talks, it means something. (And you sure believe it means something when the current president talks.) That's doubly true when it involves important, controversial or divisive topics.

But OK, for the sake of this discussion, let's say I accept that a person's words on a subject don't really matter.

Why then have you labeled some of our fellow Scoopers anti-Semites merely because they don't agree with you about some issues surrounding this Israel-Hamas war? You don't really know any of them. You don't know what's in their hearts. You don't know whether they have Jewish relatives or support Jewish causes. You don't like a few sentences they've said on a social media platform, so in your eyes - boom! - they are Jew-haters? That's both pathetic and incredibly hypocritcal.

It's pretty sad that you'll call out a Scooper you don't know but you refuse to acknowledge that the former president, whom we all know very well, has said and done a LOT of things that you'd quickly label as anti-Semitic if he wasn't the captain of your team.

If Biden broke bread with Nick Fuentes, constantly praised Tlaib and called Hezbollah "very smart," you'd be shrugging your shoulders and saying words don't matter, hey?

[MuggsyB]

We bombed an empty warehouse?? 

[MU82]

The following is from liberal blogger Josh Marshall, who founded Talking Points Memo.

You can agree or disagree with his politics, this isn't about him. It's just his perspective on the "generation gap" in Americans' attitudes toward the Israel-Hamas war. FWIW, he was born in 1969.

"Younger Americans are much less instinctively sympathetic to Israel and are more sympathetic to the Palestinians. This is a basic generational fact about American politics and culture. There many reasons for this. The Holocaust ended almost 80 years ago. The post-1967 occupation has dragged on for 56 years old. For a generation of Americans their impressions of the conflict are not shaped by epic conventional wars, the terrorist campaigns of the 70s and 80s or even the mass casualty terror attacks of the Second Intifada. They are rather of repeated retaliatory bombing campaigns in Gaza and of a long-serving Israeli Prime Minister publicly disrespecting a black, Democratic President on his home turf, doing so in connivance with that President's domestic opponents. Over the last decade and a half and especially during the Trump years Benjamin Netanyahu more or less openly acted as a foreign auxiliary of the US Republican party. That had vast consequences and consequences many in the US and Israel saw and warned about at the time."

[MuggsyB]

The following is from liberal blogger Josh Marshall, who founded Talking Points Memo.

You can agree or disagree with his politics, this isn't about him. It's just his perspective on the "generation gap" in Americans' attitudes toward the Israel-Hamas war. FWIW, he was born in 1969.

"Younger Americans are much less instinctively sympathetic to Israel and are more sympathetic to the Palestinians. This is a basic generational fact about American politics and culture. There many reasons for this. The Holocaust ended almost 80 years ago. The post-1967 occupation has dragged on for 56 years old. For a generation of Americans their impressions of the conflict are not shaped by epic conventional wars, the terrorist campaigns of the 70s and 80s or even the mass casualty terror attacks of the Second Intifada. They are rather of repeated retaliatory bombing campaigns in Gaza and of a long-serving Israeli Prime Minister publicly disrespecting a black, Democratic President on his home turf, doing so in connivance with that President's domestic opponents. Over the last decade and a half and especially during the Trump years Benjamin Netanyahu more or less openly acted as a foreign auxiliary of the US Republican party. That had vast consequences and consequences many in the US and Israel saw and warned about at the time."

Yes, they're more sympathetic towards Palestinians.  This was evidenced last night in LA when they "protested" the showing of the IDF video of the Hamas massacres on Oct. 7th at the Museum of Tolerance.  The film viewers were attacked on the street. 

[Pakuni]

Yes, they're more sympathetic towards Palestinians.  This was evidenced last night in LA when they "protested" the showing of the IDF video of the Hamas massacres on Oct. 7th at the Museum of Tolerance.  The film viewers were attacked on the street.

This is false. There were protests and counter protests across the street from the theater and those people got into a fight.

[MuggsyB]

This is false. There were protests and counter protests across the street from the theater and those people got into a fight.

Why would they protest the film being shown?

[Pakuni]

Why would they protest the film being shown?

I don't know. Why don't you try to find out?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Why would they protest the film being shown?

The LA Times interviewed some of the protesters. According to those interviews they believed that showing the film was an attempt to encourage more retaliation against innocent Palestinians. Whether you buy that or find it reasonable is up to you. Personally,  I think it was percieved as a pro-Israel/anti-Palestine event so they showed up to voice their opinion. And the counter protesters showed up to voice their opinion to the protestors opinion. Which is how this should work....up until the violence. I'm glad no one was seriously harmed and those who engaged in violence were arrested.

[MUBurrow]

The following is from liberal blogger Josh Marshall, who founded Talking Points Memo.

You can agree or disagree with his politics, this isn't about him. It's just his perspective on the "generation gap" in Americans' attitudes toward the Israel-Hamas war. FWIW, he was born in 1969.

"Younger Americans are much less instinctively sympathetic to Israel and are more sympathetic to the Palestinians. This is a basic generational fact about American politics and culture. There many reasons for this. The Holocaust ended almost 80 years ago. The post-1967 occupation has dragged on for 56 years old. For a generation of Americans their impressions of the conflict are not shaped by epic conventional wars, the terrorist campaigns of the 70s and 80s or even the mass casualty terror attacks of the Second Intifada. They are rather of repeated retaliatory bombing campaigns in Gaza and of a long-serving Israeli Prime Minister publicly disrespecting a black, Democratic President on his home turf, doing so in connivance with that President's domestic opponents. Over the last decade and a half and especially during the Trump years Benjamin Netanyahu more or less openly acted as a foreign auxiliary of the US Republican party. That had vast consequences and consequences many in the US and Israel saw and warned about at the time."

The conclusion is probably right here, but the attemped explanation is tortured and politically-contrived.  Young peoples' inclination toward Palestinian sympathy doesn't have anything to do with percevied disrespect from Netanyahu toward Obama.  It is about America having been militarily engaged in unwinnable, asymmetric warfare in the Middle East for their whole lives.  That generation is trying to unpack the relationship between the collateral damage of those wars and creating more adherents of the philosophies we were there to destroy.  To them, America's alliance with Israel and the Israeli response to October 7 is just another dimension of that.  This is partly the fallout of nonsensical neocon international policy from the early aughts, and partly academia having lost the plot on how to contextualize the importance of supporting Western democratic and human rights values.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

FWIW, according to the LA Times , it was the pro-Israel counterprotesters that crossed over to the pro-Palestine protesters side. The article didn't say which side threw the first punch.

[Hards Alumni]

I don't know. Why don't you try to find out?

Because he has no media literacy?

[Hards Alumni]

The conclusion is probably right here, but the attemped explanation is tortured and politically-contrived.  Young peoples' inclination toward Palestinian sympathy doesn't have anything to do with percevied disrespect from Netanyahu toward Obama.  It is about America having been militarily engaged in unwinnable, asymmetric warfare in the Middle East for their whole lives.  That generation is trying to unpack the relationship between the collateral damage of those wars and creating more adherents of the philosophies we were there to destroy.  To them, America's alliance with Israel and the Israeli response to October 7 is just another dimension of that.  This is partly the fallout of nonsensical neocon international policy from the early aughts, and partly academia having lost the plot on how to contextualize the importance of supporting Western democratic and human rights values.

+1.  I had a similar response typed, but you did a much better job.

It's a "we spent our youth doing it your way, and this is more of the same... and it just perpetuates a cycle of violence"

[MuggsyB]

The LA Times interviewed some of the protesters. According to those interviews they believed that showing the film was an attempt to encourage more retaliation against innocent Palestinians. Whether you buy that or find it reasonable is up to you. Personally,  I think it was percieved as a pro-Israel/anti-Palestine event so they showed up to voice their opinion. And the counter protesters showed up to voice their opinion to the protestors opinion. Which is how this should work....up until the violence. I'm glad no one was seriously harmed and those who engaged in violence were arrested.

Most of these people don't either believe basic facts or want others to see the truth.  There are still 240 hostages in Gaza tunnels.  We barely even talk about them anymore.  Hamas is using innocent Palestinians as shields.  Why aren't they protesting what Hamas has done to Palestinians? 

[jesmu84]

The conclusion is probably right here, but the attemped explanation is tortured and politically-contrived.  Young peoples' inclination toward Palestinian sympathy doesn't have anything to do with percevied disrespect from Netanyahu toward Obama.  It is about America having been militarily engaged in unwinnable, asymmetric warfare in the Middle East for their whole lives.  That generation is trying to unpack the relationship between the collateral damage of those wars and creating more adherents of the philosophies we were there to destroy.  To them, America's alliance with Israel and the Israeli response to October 7 is just another dimension of that.  This is partly the fallout of nonsensical neocon international policy from the early aughts, and partly academia having lost the plot on how to contextualize the importance of supporting Western democratic and human rights values.

Well said.