Antisemitism by accident?, The propagation of a slur Options

[gomi]

I recently came across Sue Blackwell (T-H-L-K-D), a short biography of a relatively unremarkable British academic. However, she has operated a website that supports (gasp) human rights for Palestinians. As a result, she has been accused (without any further evidence) of being antisemitic. That accusation (originally added to the article in 2005 by an anon IP), and her subsequent denial, represent the only two "reliable sources" in the biography, the only other citation being to a diatribe that the academic co-authored and hosts herself.

This is a persistent problem on Wikipedia: if you want to attack a (semi-)prominent person, then accuse them of antisemitism, get it printed somewhere, at which point the accusation becomes sourced, along with the denial, if any, despite the merits of the accusation. Am I the only one who sees this as a Yellow badge (T-H-L-K-D) in reverse? It is part and parcel of the outlandish position some take that any criticism of the actions of the government of Israel is evidence of a hatred of the Jewish religion.

[Wikifan]

Birm source is odd, links to trial sites. Meh.

This is the best I could find:

http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?id=775_0_1_0_M

The notion of a boycott has gone from a phenomenon involving a few extreme individuals to something approaching legitimacy. It is slowly being allowed to become mainstream," he said. "Anti-Israeli campaigners lament the fact that they are labelled anti-Semitic and make a distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. However, anti-Zionism denies an entire people the right to define themselves as a nation. They attack Israel not for what it does but for what it is."

reliable souce?

Anyways, if Black inadvertently lend her "credibility" at a British university to an antisemitic website then that's her fault. The real problem in Britain is that it seems to be more impolite to accuse someone of antisemitism than to actually be antisemitic. What is hilarious is that the whole-sale boycott of Israel academics is a huge blow to European-type boycotts of Israel because some of the most hard-line Israel critics are Israeli academics.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

However, anti-Zionism denies an entire people the right to define themselves as a nation.

There is no other religious or ethnic group that "defines itself as a nation." At least not nowadays.

[Wikifan]

However, anti-Zionism denies an entire people the right to define themselves as a nation.

There is no other religious or ethnic group that "defines itself as a nation." At least not nowadays.

Yeah, the Jewish people are a "nation." And yes, historically many religions have described themselves as nations and dimensions of Islam call for a unified nation of Muslims.

Read a book man.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

And yes, historically many religions have described themselves as nations and dimensions of Islam call for a unified nation of Muslims.

Read a book man.

So, in order to avoid denying them their sacred rights, should we then take everyone who professes to be Muslim and settle them in whatever lands they may have occupied at one time or another, evicting other peoples as necessary?

[Wikifan]

And yes, historically many religions have described themselves as nations and dimensions of Islam call for a unified nation of Muslims.

Read a book man.

So, in order to avoid denying them their sacred rights, should we then take everyone who professes to be Muslim and settle them in whatever lands they may have occupied at one time or another, evicting other peoples as necessary?

it seems the muslim and arab world has already done that in the last 14 centuries. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)