Why? You were responding to a post earlier in the thread about the ghetto-isation. That's what the point was.

Presumably, in that case, you should be the one to provide facts that they are NOT?

Here (for clarity):

The UK government is holding workshops specifically for UK citizens in Switzerland to give information about Brexit. You are represented whether you like it or not.

Again:
That's not representation. That is Consular Assistance. Proactive Consular assistance, granted, but Consular Assistance nonetheless.

The Vienna Convention allows for protection of an immigrant by the immigrant's consulate, but that does not actually mean that immigrant is represented in the government of his home state.

Loz, this is a silly place to plant your flag and stand by it. Lets just move on.

Allow me to explain to you this works:
1. Person A makes a claim (Israeli puts Palestinians in Ghettos, Israel treats Palesitnians like the Nazis treat the jews).
2. Person A is challanged by person B.
3. Person A provieds proof or retracts.

You support person's A claim, so you are welcome to provide facts.

You want to move on because you're talking shit. Go and see what worth a Gabian passport is during a natural disaster. The bottom line is that you have the right to vote in UK elections. This means you may vote for a political party who represents your views on policy both at home and abroad. You are represented.

Hmm... I think that Person A's claim was based on an opinion borne from observation and understanding of the situation, no?

It's a fact that I agree with his observation.

Laying bare the hypocrisy of the Israel PM whilst he hectors Corbyn on anti-semitism is well within scope

This is a man who associates with neo Nazis across Europe e.g. not just Orban, but also Austrian Freedom Party leader Heinz-Christian Strache (Nb Former PM Ehud Barak once described the FPÖ leader as a “representative of evil”).

And fearful of enraging a petulant Trump, he refused to join the rest of the civilised word in condemning Trump's outrageous equivalence between the alt-left and neo Nazi groups in Charlottesville.

Of course there is a strategy here, whitewash the sins of the past as long as they're focused on Muslims and demonstrate support for Israel. However history tends to show that fascist groups almost never restrict their hate to just one minority, and once they've finished with the Muslims its back to anti Semitism.

His opinion and yours are not based on facts. Kindly provide them or retract. Don't be like Corbyn.

Actually, i didnt say i wanted to move on. I advised that you should, because this is a daft argument to make. But...

Well done, you're wrong again. voting rights =/= representation.

During a natural disaster, The UK passport isnt going to magically lead to you being saved and the Gabian being left to his own devices. Yes, you may well get some assistance from the consulate in the country but this is, and i cannot believe i have to say this a third time Consular Assistance. Any foreign aid, even if provided by the UK government will not be used exclusively for UK citizens. They wont pull you out of the mudslide while leaving behind your gabian best friend.

You have the right to vote in the UK elections as long as you haven't left too long ago, and you are still a UK citizen (ie, havent adopted another passport). Even then, you will not find an MP who represents you, he or she will represent the people in his or her actual constituency.

I could vote for Mark Smith MP or Jane Doe MP, but neither will give two hoots about what i want. hence, they will not be representing me in the HoC. This is the same trade that all expats make, when they see the $$$ to move to CH.

So nobody is allowed to have an opinion if they can't provide you with the links and factual information?

It's a FORUM for discussion not a PhD submission.

I'm just finding it hilarious that the knives are out for Corbyn and Corbyn alone but apparently all the current and active Nazi sympathisers are all just fine and happily dismissed because, well, Corbyn eh?

Not defending any of it, just pointing out the enormous hypocritical elephant in the room.

You are allowed to have an opinion. When you can't base it on facts I'm allowed to call it what it is : an antisemitic opinion.

You realise that you are cheapening and trivialising the term "anti-semitism", don't you?

Tossing it about as an insult or punctuation or wherever there is a post you don't agree with or don't understand is probably quite offensive to the Jewish religion and anyone who has dealt with such adversity at any point in their life.

But hey, when you're trying to win an argument at any cost...

Keep it classy.

I provided clear definition (which the Labour party finally adopted).
According to the definition your post was clearly antisemitic.

How so?

If you want to flirt with defamation, you probably have to back it up.

The definition states that :"Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."
Is antisemitic.

Hey Castro.

There are people on EF who post this sort of stuff all the time. But I always took you to be somebody who reflected more and struggled despite all the adversity to raise the level of discussion rather than drag it down a bit more.

Orban criticiszing Soros does not make him an anti-semite any more than criticizing Corbyn makes anybody anti-Welsh. That's just a cheap comparison and doesn't fly. Orban recently won a heavily fought election campaign in which it was the opposition that was playing the anti-semitic card. Their leader (who has since stepped down) did in his younger days regularly call for the abolition of Israel and talked down antisemitic violence while glorifying Fascist leaders. But all is forgiven because he visited a synagogue and did a photo op with a guy in a kippah and mumbled something about it being normal that people say things like that when they're young. Netanyahu is smart enough to see that, and supports the leaders who can keep dangerous people like that down. Yes, Orban did once let something slip that praised a WW2-era character who flirted with Fascism (but who later changed sides and actually got locked away by the Nazis for the rest of the war), but that was a highly complex figure who did a lot of other stuff besides and is mostly remembered for the other stuff he did. Anyway, Orban later corrected his remarks. I'm sure that if Corbyn were to retract a single off-the-cuff remark you wouldn't tolerate people saying a retraction doesn't count. So shall we apply the same rules across the board?

Nobody is trying to whitewash the past. But there are people who are actively trying to whitewash the present and are now telling the world that it is such a shame the antisemites didn't win.

You may not like it but "ghetto" is not propietarily a Jewish thing.

This is s Swiss forum. The IHRA working definition, which obviously makes it a work in progress and subject to change, is the framed portion only, and it's not clear if even that has been adopted by Switzerland. What you quote is not part of the working definition and has no legal relevance.

Antisemitism, like all forms of racism, denigrates the "other" (Jews in this case) to uplift the speaker's. AFAIA this is pertinent and conditio sine qua non to any and all forms of racism.

Kindly show where and how I denigrate Israel, or Jews collectively.


ETA:
The "examples" in what apparently is thought to be the IHRA working definition are not part of the working definiton. As Pashosh so clearly demonstrates, their placement is misleading (who knows, perhaps the misleading was even intentional). As such Corbyn was, and would still be, well positioned when he advised against accepting the last two examples in the bullet list as relevant for Labour.

Thank you for the detailed answer.

The graffiti compared Gaza to the Warsaw Ghetto. according to the IHRA definition this is antisemitic.

Antisemitism doesn't only denigrate Jews to elevate the antisemite - sometimes it makes the Jews masters of world conspiracy or brutal occupiers similar to the Nazis (which is what you said in one of your posts).

In this case it's unique - no matter what the jews do, they will be evil in the eyes of the antisemite. If they are weak they should be despised and if they are strong then should be feared and opposed.

Jeremy Corbyn and many of his supporters are, according to the IHRA definition, antisemites - hence their reluctance to adapt the definition.

But not to worry- Antisemitism doesn't seem to cost him votes, British voters have other things on their minds. he may well be the next PM.

AFAIK, comparing anything to the Holocaust is not a good way to start a discussion with somebody from Israel (or of Jewish believe) - it can only go downhill from there.


Trying to come up with clever wordings and "interpretations" to weasel around this is not going to be helpful.

I understand your feelings, but do you think Israel can get rid of that wall (I mean West Bank barrier of course) some time....soon? Is it really necessary? I don't know if you realise the effect it has on people who visit Israel, particularly on those who went to Israel before and after the wall. I think it makes people a little less sympathetic... just saying.