Huge resources have been devoted to tracking down people, mostly anonymous and with little reach, over speech that authorities interpreted as supporting Hamas, the letter notes. By late November, 269 investigations had been opened and 86 indictments filed.
“It is quite amazing the number of criminal investigations, when it comes to Palestinian citizens of Israel, most of them completely anonymous, many of them almost with no audience,” Sfard said. “The gap between that and the freedom and impunity for those who advocate all kinds of things – ethnic cleansing, killing civilians, bombarding civilian areas, and even genocide – doesn’t square up, and that’s something for the authorities to explain.”
This right here. Don’t let anyone tell you Israel is not an apartheid state with separate sets of rules based on who you are.
The chanting, I think, calling for intifada, global revolution, [is] very disturbing,” Magill said during questioning. “I believe at minimum that is hateful speech that has been and should be condemned.
Intifada means “resistance.” Every occupied people has a right to resist. Except, apparently, Palestinians.
… grilled Gay on Harvard’s Middle East Studies courses, which she claimed included “false accusations that Israel is a racist, settler colonialist, apartheid state
Well, it is. No amount of trying to conflate support for human rights with antisemitism is going to change that.
If this is what they mean by “hate” nobody should be surprised that lots of people aren’t buying it.
I, personally, believe that we all will come to a comfortable consensus moving forward
This is a somewhat uncomfortable ellipsis for me. Can you be more specific about the emerging consensus? Last time I asked this question it went ignored.
Where are these discussions happening? On the beehaw Lemmy or elsewhere?
I only saw one thread alluding to this posted by a beehaw admin on Lemmy.ml.
Hrm, so… There is a chat bot installed in Line that monitors all incoming messages and inserts itself when it it’s triggered by something said in a private conversation?
As much as I want disinformation fought I’m extremely wary of this approach.
My position is that it is not a good definition, and that it has been selected because it provides cover for this "mis-"use. I make no claim to know anything about you nor did I mention Netanyahu.
Yes, because that organization published a definition of antisemitism that effectively makes it almost off limits to criticize the actions of the Israeli state. And that definition is being codified into policy or even law in many cases. Even the author of this definition has objected to the way it’s being used.