Jewish Leaders Push Back On ‘Warmonger’ Accusation

[enhanced_deficit]

There has been increasing anti-semitic views in online comments online towards John Kerry, AIPAC and Israel lobby lately.

Jewish Leaders Push Back On ‘Warmonger’ Accusation
‘We have a dog in this fight,’ they say in supporting Obama on Syria strike

09/11/13
Stewart Ain
Staff Writer

http://www.thejewishweek.com/sites/default/files/images/2013/09/01right_0.preview.jpg (http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/international-news/jewish-leaders-push-back-warmonger-accusation)


With President Barack Obama calling Russia’s proposal to collect and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons a “potential breakthrough,” many in the organized Jewish community are concerned their support for military force against Syria will be seen as leading the charge to war.

As Chemi Shalev, a leading columnist for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, wrote Tuesday, “Israel and its supporters and lobbyists are in danger of being stranded and depicted as frustrated warmongers.
“Israel will also be unhappy with [Syrian President Bashar] Assad suddenly being cast as a legitimate interlocutor rather than an ostracized dictator, with the ‘constructive’ role that Tehran might suddenly play in defusing the Syrian crisis and with the risk that Russian success in Syria may lead it to seek a greater role in other peacemaking endeavors as well,” he added.
But Jewish leaders here defended their support of Obama, with Rabbi Gerald Skolnik, president of the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly, saying: “We are a people with a right to have an interest; we have a dog in this fight. I don’t think the response of the Jewish community has been heavy-handed or that we pushed the president to do anymore than he is inclined to do.”
David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee, said his organization is supporting the president because “we believe it is in America’s national security interests. This is the one and only reason. We want to be certain that a country like Syria cannot use chemical weapons against others with impunity.”
Harris pointed out that such support “could mean a greater risk for Israel in the short term.”

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/international-news/jewish-leaders-push-back-warmonger-accusation

[AngryCanadian]

There has been increasing anti-semitic views in online comments online towards John Kerry, AIPAC and Israel lobby lately.
Not just AIPAC but other Israeli's lobbies as well.

[enhanced_deficit]

Not just AIPAC but other Israeli's lobbies as well.

You are right.

There are various groups. This was ADL's Foxman:

“It has become conventional wisdom that the roller coaster of American decision-making on the Syria issue has dealt a significant, if not mortal blow, to American credibility and leadership in the world,” says Foxman.

----

Conservative Jewish and Pro-Israel groups have shown remarkable unanimity on the subject of a strike. The Republican Jewish Coalition issued an action alert (http://www.rjchq.org/2013/09/action-alert-syria-use-of-force-resolution/) this week in support of the use of force resolution. So has AIPAC, the main pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States. "AIPAC urges Congress to grant the President the authority he has requested to protect America’s national security interests and dissuade the Syrian regime's further use of unconventional weapons," the group said in a statement (http://www.aipac.org/en/news-hub?id=%7B1F8ECED7-E27D-47D7-9015-4F606E787E97%7D#) issued Tuesday afternoon. "Simply put, barbarism on a mass scale must not be given a free pass .... That is why America must act."
The lobbying group also issued an action alert (http://www.capwiz.com/aipac/issues/alert/?alertid=62906416&type=CO), urging supporters to write letters to members of the House and Senate calling on them to "grant the President the authority he has requested to protect America’s national security interests and dissuade Damascus from further chemical weapons use." And it is preparing to launch an unusual effort to lobby members of Congress (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/03/aipac-in-full-court-press-on-syria.html) on behalf of the Syria resolution -- something it did not do for either the war in Iraq or Afghanista

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/syria-and-rand-pauls-israel-problem/279323/


Holiday security levels run the gamut at Manhattan synagogues (http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-News/Holiday-security-levels-run-the-gamut-at-Manhattan-synagogues-325487)

09/07/2013 23:20
And almost every year, there’s another Middle East threat to be concerned about.
In July 2012, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand announced a renewal of $3 million in grants from the US Department of Homeland Security for houses of worship; 42 Jewish organizations and one Catholic church received up to $75,000 each, in part due to rising tensions with Iran at the time.

[dillo]

anti-semitic means not willing to sacrafice everything for a foreign country of people that don't give a shit about you

[HOLLYWOOD]

LOL! Where's General Wesley Clark telling "U.S." the gameplan for Israel via proxy of special interest like AIPAC, RJC, ZOA...

All you need to know what all these wars are about:
The Republican Jewish Coalition issued an action alert (http://www.rjchq.org/2013/09/action-alert-syria-use-of-force-resolution/) this week in support of the use of force

[Philhelm]

anti-semitic means not willing to sacrafice everything for a foreign country of people that don't give a shit about you

Apparently. I'm so damned tired of race always being thrown out there like some sort of trump card.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

The Jews are the only ones who are anti-semetic. Semetic can mean anyone of arab descent, and they want to kill other arabs. Jews ARE arabs.

[JustinTime]

So let me get this straight. They want war, but they aren't warmongers? We just hate them over their religion... yeah that's it.

[muh_roads]

Sorry to go a bit off the rails but I am sick of Jew this and Israel that. AIPAC can screw off. It's funny how we must all silence ourselves and listen whenever someone Jewish feels the need to throw their Judaism in your face. SNL isn't funny any more because everything is so PC.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ayctCub8FE

[Contumacious]

The Jews are the only ones who are anti-semetic. Semetic can mean anyone of arab descent, and they want to kill other arabs. Jews ARE arabs.

Incorrect.

Some Jews, the natives of Palestine , are Arabs. But most Jews came from Russia and Central Europe, ie, Germany.

Insofar as many Americans also have Arabic origin they are also semitic.

While most Americans are not semites , most citizens of Israel are NOT semites either. So the anti-semitic aspersion is used fraudulently.

.

[BlackTerrel]

The Jews are the only ones who are anti-semetic. Semetic can mean anyone of arab descent, and they want to kill other arabs. Jews ARE arabs.

True. They are the only ones who want to kill others. Horrible people.

[Ender]

Incorrect.

Some Jews, the natives of Palestine , are Arabs. But most Jews came from Russia and Central Europe, ie, Germany.

Insofar as many Americans also have Arabic origin they are also semitic.

While most Americans are not semites , most citizens of Israel are NOT semites either. So the anti-semitic aspersion is used fraudulently.

.

Yep.

[enhanced_deficit]

Clarification.
I was paraphrasing and in hurry didn't properly explain the comment preceding the news article in OP. Criticism of actions/policies/record such as advocating/supporting wars bloodshed is not "anti-semitism" as is sometimes invoked dishnoestly. Usually logical fallacies are made by Zionists, many Jews out there who oppose elective wars.

In related news:

Pro-Israel and Jewish groups strongly back military strike against Syria

By Matea Gold and Holly Yeager,September 03, 2013

Many of the United States’ most influential pro-Israel and Jewish groups on Tuesday backed the Obama administration’s call for military action in Syria, putting strong momentum behind the effort to persuade reluctant lawmakers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-says-he-is-confident-of-congressional-backing-for-strike-on-syria/2013/09/03/aeee7e60-149e-11e3-a100-66fa8fd9a50c_story.html) to authorize a strike against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
The stances mark a new phase in the debate over how to respond to Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians, setting in motion a robust lobbying effort on Capitol Hill — powered in part by the memory of the Holocaust and how the Nazis gassed Jews.
After a period of conspicuous silence on the issue, major groups such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations called for bipartisan consensus Tuesday around the use of force.


“Those who perpetuate such acts of wanton murder must know that they cannot do so with impunity,” the conference, which represents 52 national Jewish agencies, said in a statement. “Those who possess or seek weapons of mass destruction, particularly Iran and Hezbollah, must see that there is accountability.”

In its own strongly worded statement, AIPAC said that not taking action would weaken the United States and its ability to prevent the use of unconventional weapons.
“Simply put, barbarism on a mass scale must not be given a free pass,” the group said.
The statements came after days of intense discussions among activists about whether to play a role in the Syria debate. Some remain worried that a military strike is being cast as a move to protect Israel’s interests rather than an action to defend U.S. credibility.
“There is a desire to not make this about Israel,” said one pro-Israel advocate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the politics of the situation. “When the administration argues to members of Congress that we should do this for Israel’s sake, that has caused deep discomfort in the Jewish community, regardless of where they stand. Israel didn’t ask the U.S. to do this.”
But some prominent Jewish leaders said a moral imperative, rooted in the experience of the Holocaust, demanded a strong response.
Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, participated in a call organized by the Conference of Presidents on Tuesday and said there was a clear consensus to step forward.
“To see innocent people being gassed invokes that special historical memory and sensitivity,” he said. “And when the president says it is in the national security interests of our country to stand up against such heinous violations of international norms, I think both things play very strongly in the psyche of the Jewish community.”


The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a leading Jewish human rights organization, explicitly invoked the Holocaust in a letter to lawmakers Tuesday, (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/simon-wiesenthal-center-calls-for-action-against-syria/2013/09/03/fcbab2ce-14cd-11e3-b220-2c950c7f3263_blog.html) noting that U.S. and British officials did not respond when they were alerted in 1942 that the Nazis planned to use gas to kill Jews.

“This isn’t a Jewish issue; this is a humanitarian issue,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the center’s founder and dean.

Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, an international association of conservative rabbis, said she expects that many rabbis will address the Syrian massacre in their sermons on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, which begins Wednesday evening.
“For the Jewish community to see people being gassed by their own leaders is something that is a horror to us, and to which we are pledged should never happen again,” she said.
The U.S. response carries significant implications for Israel. Many Israel supporters worry that a reluctance to punish Syria for its alleged use of chemical weapons could weaken the U.S. ability to contain Iran’s nuclear program. The expansion of Syria’s civil war also has heightened Israeli concerns about the direct impact of the conflict, analysts said.
“As the Syrian crisis has grown in scale, it’s become more important to Israel — with the Assad regime moving closer to Iran, the archenemy of Israel, and the rise of jihadi groups also bent on Syria’s destruction, which have been popping up in areas adjacent to Israel,” said Andrew Tabler, a senior fellow in the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
AIPAC is one of the strongest levers of influence on Capitol Hill, with ties to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. In August, the American Israel Educational Foundation, AIPAC’s charitable affiliate, sponsored two trips of House members to Israel — one for 37 Democrats and the other for 26 Republicans.
On Tuesday, the group organized a conference call with top rabbinical allies to provide information about how to discuss the issue with their congregants, and sent a letter to its members asking for their help in persuading lawmakers to back Obama’s request to use force.


http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-03/politics/41726305_1_israel-s-military-strike-syria

Some of arguments do seem hypocritical:

Wiesenthal Center Urges President Obama To Block UN Gaza Investigation


“US would never permit foreigners to investigate BP disaster”
June 16, 2010

The SWC is urging President Obama to fully back Israel's investigation of the Gaza Flotilla incident and to signal the UN it won't back another kangaroo court against the Jewish state.

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=5711859&ct=8443511 (http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=5711859&ct=8443511#.UjVOvHfyt_w)


SWC's Syria invasion Stance:
(not the Freedom acronym (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?427800-Freedom-Acronyms-OFC&p=5226304&viewfull=1#post5226304) SWC)

SWC Urges President Obama to take immediate action to destroy or remove all WMD stockpiles in Syria

SWC Urges President Obama to take immediate action to destroy or remove all WMD stockpiles in Syria
August 22, 2013

"1,300 bodies have obliterated the Red Line"
The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a leading JewishHuman Rights NGO is urging the United States to take immediate steps to destroy or remove all WMD stockpiles in Syria:
"Like all civilized people, the Simon Wiesenthal Center is horrified by the gassing of innocent civilians in Syria, reportedly by the regime of Bashir Assad", said Rabbis Marvin Hier and Abraham Cooper, founder and dean and associate dean of the human rights group.
"We call on President Obama to take action he previously alluded to when he cautioned that the use of such WMDs would constitute crossing the 'red line'. The bodies of 1,300 people have obliterated that line.
“We urge the US, preferably with its NATO allies, and if possible, with Russian cooperation--but alone if necessary--to take immediate and muscular steps to destroy or remove all WMD stockpiles in Syria, " they concluded.
http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nlnet/content.aspx?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=8776547&ct=13251425


From the archives:

FAMED NAZI HUNTER SIMON WIESENTHAL'S STATEMENT ON IMPENDING IRAQ WAR (http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/lookup.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=4441519&msource=63)

The Simon Wiesenthal Center today issued the following statement on behalf of famed Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal:


"As a survivor of the Nazi Holocaust who lost 89 members of my family, I have experienced firsthand the horrors of war and bloodshed. I know that in any conflict many innocent lives will be lost. But history has taught us that the consequences of ignoring evil and terror pose an even greater risk for mankind.

The world has confronted Saddam before, but for twelve years he has refused to listen. President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Prime Minister Jose Mara Aznar of Spain, do not seek to conquer Iraq but rather to confront a dictator who has used weapons of mass destruction and committed genocide against his own people.

I have spent a lifetime pursuing the perpetrators of evil, not for revenge, but in search of justice and in order to protect future generations from the horrors that I have lived through.
My experience has taught me that you cannot wait indefinitely on dictators. Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933, but for six years the world did not act. Had he been taken seriously then, the lives of innocent millions may have been spared.
We must remember that freedom is not a gift from heaven, we must fight for it every day."

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=4441475&ct=5851565#.UjVCKHfyt_w

[erowe1]

anti-semitic means not willing to sacrafice everything for a foreign country of people that don't give a shit about you

The problem with Israel isn't the people. It's the regime. Same as here and everywhere else.

[erowe1]

the anti-semitic aspersion is used fraudulently

No it isn't.

Anti-semitic doesn't mean anti-Arab. It means anti-Jew.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antisemitic?s=t

a person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews.

[Occam's Banana]

‘We have a dog in this fight,’ they say in supporting Obama on Syria strike

One could interpret this as saying, "Obama is our dog."

Only, that would be incorrect. Obama, Kerry, et al. are not dogs. They are jackals ...

[Ender]

No it isn't.

Anti-semitic doesn't mean anti-Arab. It means anti-Jew.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antisemitic?s=t

Full Definition of SEMITE
1
a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs
b : a descendant of these peoples
2
: a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language

Anti-semitic has become a popular phrase for hatred of Jews but it is NOT the original meaning.

[DFF]

There has been increasing anti-semitic views in online comments online towards John Kerry, AIPAC and Israel lobby lately

Gee, I wonder why? :rolleyes:

To the ADL, SPLC, AIPAC, the Simon Wiesenthal center, and the world Jewish Congress, it's really simple:

Don't start no shit, and there won't be shit.

Bitchez.

[erowe1]

Full Definition of SEMITE
1
a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs
b : a descendant of these peoples
2
: a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language

Anti-semitic has become a popular phrase for hatred of Jews but it is NOT the original meaning.

Which are we talking about, the definition of "semite" or "anti-Semite"? Because antisemitic does mean anti-Jew, and it always has meant that.

[enhanced_deficit]

Which are we talking about, the definition of "semite" or "anti-Semite"? Because antisemitic does mean anti-Jew, and it always has meant that.

That may have been the case before large scale oppression against another semitic race group (Palestinians) started; in recent decades there has been a lot more anti-semitism towards Palestinians in various western demographics.
If a subset of a group had monopolzied a diction defined term for its sole use as if there were no other semitic people in the world, maybe for next 50 years Palestinians could take turn and be allowed to monopolize the term for their sole use. But according to diction, all semitic people can invoke term anti-semitism when racist motives are involved.

[erowe1]

That may have been the case before large scale oppression against another semitic race group (Palestinians) started; in recent decades there has been a lot more anti-semitism towards Palestinians in various western demographics.

The word "antisemitism" specifically means prejudice against Jews, not prejudice against Arabs or anyone else. Like it or not, that's just what the word means.

[enhanced_deficit]

The word "antisemitism" specifically means prejudice against Jews, not prejudice against Arabs or anyone else. Like it or not, that's just what the word means.

If there is a disagreement between you and Webster when it comes to meanings of words, I think I'll go with Webster :)

There can be cultural meanings of words and they can vary from time to time/place to place and evolve according to norms and needs of a time. At one point, N-word had "always been ok" to use in America and then that changed as equal rights concept took roots. I would say no subset of a group has superior rights over use of dictionary defined trem for the group and all have equal rights . Furthermore, all people are equal and no race is more chosen than any other whether it be awarding linguistic or land rights.

[erowe1]

If there is a disagreement between you and Webster when it comes to meanings of words, I think I'll go with Webster :)


Good idea. Here's Webster:

an·ti–Sem·i·tism noun \ˌan-tē-ˈse-mə-ˌti-zəm, ˌan-ˌtī-\
: hatred of Jewish people

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antisemitic

I'm pretty sure every other dictionary will say something very similar. It means hatred of Jews, not hatred of Arabs.

And I don't think this meaning has changed over the years. For as long as "antisemitic" has been a word (since the late 19th century), that is what it has meant. For this history of its usage, see the Oxford English Dictionary.

[pcosmar]

The word "antisemitism" specifically means prejudice against Jews, not prejudice against Arabs or anyone else. Like it or not, that's just what the word means.

What is a "jew"?

Is it religion? Is it Race? Family line?
is it anyone who claims to be? Who decides who is and who isn't?

I don't buy into racism.. There is only one race on this planet.
Now family lines,, there are three main lines, from the three sons of Noah. Shem (Semite), Ham, and Japheth.

As far as religion,,, well there is much debate,, but Zionism was invented by people that were atheist,,and rejected Judaism.

Many Orthodox Jews reject Zionism and the State of Israel.

The made up definition ("antisemitism") is manufactured for propaganda purposes,, and is of no actual value,, and serves only one purpose.

[enhanced_deficit]

Good idea. Here's Webster:


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antisemitic

I'm pretty sure every other dictionary will say something very similar. It means hatred of Jews, not hatred of Arabs.

And I don't think this meaning has changed over the years. For as long as "antisemitic" has been a word (since the late 19th century), that is what it has meant. For this history of its usage, see the Oxford English Dictionary.

Maybe you missed this right below on same Webster page:

anti-Semitism

noun (Concise Encyclopedia)

Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious group or “race.” Although the term anti-Semitism has wide currency, it is regarded by some as a misnomer, implying discrimination against all Semites, including Arabs and other
---


BTW, do you agree Palestinians are Semites?

Let's say Palestinians/Arabs are not allowed to use term anti-semitism to describe racial prejudice towards them, what other term is in Western dictionaries for bias against them?

[erowe1]

Maybe you missed this right below on same Webster page:

anti-Semitism

noun (Concise Encyclopedia)

Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious group or “race.” Although the term anti-Semitism has wide currency, it is regarded by some as a misnomer, implying discrimination against all Semites, including Arabs and other
---


BTW, do you agree Palestinians are Semites?

Let's say Palestinians/Arabs are not allowed to use term anti-semitism to describe racial prejudice towards them, what other term is in Western dictionaries for bias against them?

Your own quote shows that that is not the definition, but only what "some" think. These "some" are people like you and others in this thread.

But will you go with them? Or Webster? In your previous comment, I gathered it was Webster. Is that no longer the case?

Frankly, those people who say that it's a misnomer may be right. Maybe it is a misnomer. But that doesn't change what it is. Whether it's a misnomer or not, "antisemitism" means "hatred of Jews," not "hatred of all Semites."

[pcosmar]

I prefer Anti-Zionist.

I am not antisemitic. I do not hate Jews. I hate Zionists.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FromOthers/Anti_zionist_protesters.jpg


You can call me whatever propaganda slur you like. :p

[enhanced_deficit]

Good idea. Here's Webster:


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antisemitic

I'm pretty sure every other dictionary will say something very similar. It means hatred of Jews, not hatred of Arabs.

And I don't think this meaning has changed over the years. For as long as "antisemitic" has been a word (since the late 19th century), that is what it has meant. For this history of its usage, see the Oxford English Dictionary.

You did not answer the Q though, are Palestnians semites?


I was referring to this meaning:

Sem·ite

noun \ˈse-ˌmīt, especially British ˈsē-ˌmīt\ : a member of a group of people originally of southwestern Asia that includes Jews and Arabs

Full Definition of SEMITE

1
a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs
b : a descendant of these peoples

Now you look up meaning of anti and there is no more mystrery.

If dictionaries did not update meanings, they will be charged with racial bias and discrimination in near future.
All pages of dictionaries may not have been updated as they should have been after 9/11 and Iraq invasion.

[Ender]

Your own quote shows that that is not the definition, but only what "some" think. These "some" are people like you and others in this thread.

But will you go with them? Or Webster? In your previous comment, I gathered it was Webster. Is that no longer the case?

Frankly, those people who say that it's a misnomer may be right. Maybe it is a misnomer. But that doesn't change what it is. Whether it's a misnomer or not, "antisemitism" means "hatred of Jews," not "hatred of all Semites."

And who is the deciding factor on Webster? God?

Semitic people are: peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs and their decendents.

Anti definition is: opposed to something, such as a group, policy, proposal, or practice.

So the CORRECT definition of antisemitic is to be against or opposed to peoples of southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs.

Using the term against strictly against Jews is 20th century pop culture.

[erowe1]

You did not answer the Q though, are Palestnians semites?

I don't believe races objectively exist. But sure, they can be classified as Semites.

That has nothing to do with the meaning of "antisemitism" though.

[erowe1]

And who is the deciding factor on Webster? God?

Go ahead and check any other dictionary you want. Dictionaries give the definitions that are based on actual usage of the word in actual living languages. They don't bend to what someone says this or that word really ought to mean.

Language is not math. You can't just put word parts together and say, "here's what this word REALLY means." It means what it means, regardless of the parts it's made of.

[pcosmar]

This goes here,

"Anti-semitic, its a trick we always use it"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0kWAqZxJVE

Ya can't make this shit up..

[erowe1]

This goes here,

"Anti-semitic, its a trick we always use it"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0kWAqZxJVE

Ya can't make this shit up..

I'm not saying the charge is warranted or should always be taken seriously.

I'm just talking about the meaning of a word. This claim that we're seeing here about "antisemitism" meaning something other than 'anti-Jew" comes up again and again. We should try to be correct in our word usage solely for he sake of clear communication if nothing else.

[pcosmar]

I'm just talking about the meaning of a word.

No. You are talking about the common misuse of the word.

Words have meanings. and this is a common misuse of the meanings of the word.

Others have been trying to correct this error.. To show the proper meanings of words.

[erowe1]

No. You are talking about the common misuse of the word.

Words have meanings. and this is a common misuse of the meanings of the word.

Others have been trying to correct this error.. To show the proper meanings of words.

I'm not sure which use you consider a misuse. But you can check any dictionary you want for the actual definition.

If there are people out there who are trying to change the meaning of "antisemitism" to "hatred of Arabs, Jews, or any other Semites," then so far they have not been successful at bringing about the change in the language that they're after. The word doesn't mean that. It is not used by people with that meaning. It never has been used that way going as far back into its existence in the English language as you want. It never has meant that.

[pcosmar]

I'm not sure which use you consider a misuse. But you can check any dictionary you want for the actual definition.

If there are people out there who are trying to change the meaning of "antisemitism" to "hatred of Arabs, Jews, or any other Semites," then so far they have not been successful at bringing about the change in the language that they're after. The word doesn't mean that. It is not used by people with that meaning. It never has been used that way going as far back into its existence in the English language as you want. It never has meant that.

Dictionary is wrong.. It was very likely added to the dictionary by the very people that wish to misuse the meaning.

It has at it's root the word "Semite". A word that has a meaning,, (descendant of Shem)

Anti=against or opposed to

the definition that it means "Jew" is manufactured with out any meaning or basis.

The word "Jew" cannot even be defined. it could be someone of the tribe of Judah,, or of the Judaic religion (regardless of origin) or anyone whose ancestors ever claimed to be "Jews". (most European "Jews") who are not Semitic at all.

In other words,, that use of antisemitic,, is meaningless and incorrect,, hence wrong.

[erowe1]

Dictionary is wrong.. It was very likely added to the dictionary by the very people that wish to misuse the meaning.

It has at it's root the word "Semite". A word that has a meaning,, (descendant of Shem)

Anti=against or opposed to

the definition that it means "Jew" is manufactured with out any meaning or basis.

The word "Jew" cannot even be defined. it could be someone of the tribe of Judah,, or of the Judaic religion (regardless of origin) or anyone whose ancestors ever claimed to be "Jews". (most European "Jews") who are not Semitic at all.

In other words,, that use of antisemitic,, is meaningless and incorrect,, hence wrong.

How do you know that's the meaning of Semite? From a dictionary?

The word "Jew" can be defined just as easily as the word "Semite." There's not a person in the world who can trace their lineage to Shem. And the word "Jew" can be and is often used in all the ways you said it can't.

Here's a test you can do to see if all English dictionaries are wrong about the meaning of "antisemitism." Do a google search of the word, and go through a hundred or so occurrences of its actual usage in the language and see what people mean by it. That's the way definitions of words work. They don't just conform to some rule someone has about what they think a word ought to mean based on its parts.

[Ender]

I'm not sure which use you consider a misuse. But you can check any dictionary you want for the actual definition.

If there are people out there who are trying to change the meaning of "antisemitism" to "hatred of Arabs, Jews, or any other Semites," then so far they have not been successful at bringing about the change in the language that they're after. The word doesn't mean that. It is not used by people with that meaning. It never has been used that way going as far back into its existence in the English language as you want. It never has meant that.

People are not trying to "change" the word- it is obvious what the word really means.

In our pop culture, the word, anti-semitism, has been given an exclusive slant and meaning by a German:




The credit for this turn, if credit is the right word, is generally given to the obscure writer Wilhelm Marr, whose pamphlet “The Victory of Jewdom Over Germandom Viewed from a Non-confessional Standpoint,” published in 1873, was the first to insist that, as he put it in a later work: “There must be no question here of parading religious prejudices when it is a question of race and when the difference lies in the ‘blood’.” Borrowing from the fashionable theories of the French racist Count Joseph Arthur de Gobineau, Marr contrasted Jews not with Christians but with Germans, insisting that the two were distinct races. The Jews, he declared, had gained the upper hand in the racial struggle, and were virtually running the country; no wonder, then, that honest German artisans and small businessmen were suffering. Marr went on to invent the word ‘antisemitism’ and, in 1879, to found the League of Antisemites, the world’s first organization with this word in its title. It was dedicated, as he said, to reducing the Jewish influence on German life.

(The irony of all this is that Marr’s “second wife, who was Jewish, supported him financially until her death in 1874 . . . “)

– from Richard J. Evans’ massive (and fascinating) The Coming of the Third Reich

Marr believed that the German Jews were a different race that had invaded and taken over Germany. This Semitic race was to be hated and thrown out.

It is true that when most people say the word "anti-semitism" they mean hatred of Jews. However to declare that this is the true meaning of the word is like saying that anti-americanism is only about prejudice and hatred of American Indians. Or anti-hispanic is just about Mexicans.

[erowe1]

People are not trying to "change" the word- it is obvious what the word really means.

I agree that it's obvious. Just check any dictionary.

People who say all the dictionaries are all wrong are trying to change the meaning.

[pcosmar]

From a dictionary?



http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/twerk

[erowe1]

http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/twerk

OK? Is that not the right definition?

[pcosmar]

People who say all the dictionaries are all wrong are trying to change the meaning.

Ender posted the origin of it,, just above your post.

And it was an origin without substance,, created by an obvious racist and without even the slightest understanding of the people he hated.
The vast majority of European "Jews" were not of Semitic origin.

just another example of the stupidity of racism.

[pcosmar]

OK? Is that not the right definition?

only proof that a "definition" can be created as easily as a word can be created.

[erowe1]

Ender posted the origin of it,, just above your post.

And it was an origin without substance,, created by an obvious racist and without even the slightest understanding of the people he hated.
The vast majority of European "Jews" were not of Semitic origin.

just another example of the stupidity of racism.

But none of that matters. The word means what it means, regardless of what its origin is or what parts it's made of. The definition people intend when they use the word is what the word's definition is. Even if it's a misnomer, that doesn't change its definition.

In order for every English dictionary to be wrong about that, it would have to be the case that the way the word is actually used in English is different than what those dictionaries say. But it isn't. The way the word "antisemitic" is used, and the way it has always been used for as long as the word has existed, is exactly what all the dictionaries say.

[erowe1]

only proof that a "definition" can be created as easily as a word can be created.

Of course. That's what definitions are. They are the meanings that real people intend when they use words.

[pcosmar]

Of course. That's what definitions are. They are the meanings that real people intend when they use words.

A nice distraction and Thread Derail,,

but what does it have to do with Zionist Warmongers pushing for more war?

[erowe1]

A nice distraction and Thread Derail,,

but what does it have to do with Zionist Warmongers pushing for more war?

Notice the derailment happened at post #7.

All I did was correct the error. The only reason the discussion continued beyond that is that some people stubbornly kept trying to cling to the wrong definition of the word that I pointed out.

Unfortunately, I predict this isn't the last of this. Someone in the near future will make the same false assertion that was made in post #7, and I will correct them again, and again there will be people trying to argue with the dictionary.

[dillo]

Words can have an original meaning and an understood meaning. ****** literally came from negro which literally means black, now the word is considered a slur because of the history of its use. Even though the definition of the word is black, theres a big difference between calling someone black and a ******. Jews basically hijacked the term semite for themselves and its been used that way for roughly 100 years.

[DFF]

Jews basically hijacked the term semite for themselves and its been used that way for roughly 100 years

Correct.

I remember in a hit-piece interview by Joy Behr with Helen Thomas, when Behr asked her if she was "anti-semetic"?

Thomas replied "How could I be? I'm Lebanese."

It was a nice and 1 moment.

[erowe1]

Correct.

I remember in a hit-piece interview by Joy Behr with Helen Thomas, when Behr asked her if she was "anti-semetic"?

Thomas replied "How could I be? I'm Lebanese."

It was a nice and 1 moment.

Apparently Helen Thomas didn't know what the word "antisemitic" meant.

[ClydeCoulter]

Apparently Helen Thomas didn't know what the word "antisemitic" meant.

Apparently she knew what the word Semitic meant, though :)

[enhanced_deficit]

I don't believe races objectively exist. But sure, they can be classified as Semites.

That has nothing to do with the meaning of "antisemitism" though.

Palestinians CAN BE or ARE Semites?
Jews CAN BE or ARE Semites?

So you don't believe Jewish race exists? If so, you oppose Israeli Law of Return based on bloodline connection?

In your view, Webster definitin below is correct or incorrect? It doesn't stipulate that Arabs and Jews CAN BE Semites but says they ARE semites.

Sem·ite
noun \ˈse-ˌmīt, especially British ˈsē-ˌmīt\ : a member of a group of people originally of southwestern Asia that includes Jews and Arabs
Full Definition of SEMITE
1
a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs
b : a descendant of these peoples

[BlackTerrel]

Your own quote shows that that is not the definition, but only what "some" think. These "some" are people like you and others in this thread.

But will you go with them? Or Webster? In your previous comment, I gathered it was Webster. Is that no longer the case?

Frankly, those people who say that it's a misnomer may be right. Maybe it is a misnomer. But that doesn't change what it is. Whether it's a misnomer or not, "antisemitism" means "hatred of Jews," not "hatred of all Semites."

When someone replies "I'm not anti-semitic I love Arabs" it's pretty clear their views.

If someone accused me of being anti-white and I responded that I loved marshmallows - I'd probably be accused of avoiding the questions because I'm actually anti-white.

Is it really that hard to simply say one isn't anti-semitic? I've been accused of being anti-white more than once on this forum and I've never tried to obfuscate and start debating what white is and declaring my love for marshmallows and paper.

[BlackTerrel]

You did not answer the Q though, are Palestnians semites?

Are Russians Asian?

Why so much arguing about a definition when everyone knows what it means.

If you described a particular person as Asian no one would think you were describing a Russian.

Debating meaning of words just seems like people who don't want to admit the obvious.

[ClydeCoulter]

It's okay guys, people hi-jack words all the time, just let it go and we can change the dictionary later, learn double speak and the like. Why keep trying to set any kind of record straight when no body gives a shit? Let's try making our own double speak, everyone else does, in order to obfuscate and promote an agenda.

example: anti-liberty = hateful toward anarchists, promote totalitarianism, against the people.

/sarc