ADL Says Palestinian Scarf Equals SWASTIKA

Post Reply New Topic

Is this enough to say the ADL have jumped the shark and no longer possess credibility?

ONE PERSON in the ADL may have jumped the shark.  ADL may still retain its credibility.

Maybe not?

This is just one incident that's part of a broader pattern. ADL regularly conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism with the overall goal of using the historical suffering of Jews to invalidate criticism of Israeli actions and policies. It's crybullying on a grand scale.

He's the CEO of ADL, right? Time to fire him, then maybe?
What he's saying is insane.

What he actually says is "if you wouldn't tolerate someone wearing a Swastika saying "death to the Zionists" then you shouldn't tolerate it from someone" and cuts out.

And... yeah, we shouldn't tolerate anyone saying "death to the Zionists". That isn't "criticism of Israel", that's calling for people to die based on their political ideology. It doesn't matter what symbols you're wearing, if it quacks like a Nazi...

Hope it goes without saying that Israel's actions in the past few months have been disproportionate and often illegal - criticise away. But when a Palestinian supporter calls for "death to the Zionists" they're not saying "ceasefire now" or "end arms sales to Israel", they're saying "Israeli Jews should die".

For the record and the fairness of the discussion not all Israeli Jews are Zionists.

Hamas disagree. They explicitly want to wipe out Israeli Jews. There is no "sanewashing" them, they are actually as bad as it's possible to be. And they're not the outliers - frankly it's the opposite, the activists who support Israel but want it to be more inclusive and less violent are outnumbered at every rally by people who just want Jews gone.

I agree with you there. I am still hopeful that a 2-state solution can be done, and we still need people to know that the war is with Hamas, not with ordinary Palestinians.

However, I would have also preferred surgical strikes that would have produced less collateral damage.

And we ultimately need to find non-war solutions to stop the militants at the source: Iran.

Frankly, I don't care what Hamas thinks. That doesn't make every Israeli Jew a Zionist.

Fake news. And pure projection; Zionism is a genocidal ideology, predicated on the displacement and murder of indigenous Palestinian peoples (that is to say, Palestinian Arabs).

[edit]: Hamas are not anti-Jewish, they are anti-Zionist. Their charter (updated 2017) clarifies this. And just because I know someone is going to ask for a source, here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Hamas_charter

Last edited by Barchan on 08 Apr 2024, 12:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

No, the war is with ordinary Palestinians. A war that kills 10,000 civilians is a war against civilians, it was never about "stopping Hamas." This is genocide. They're targeting journalists. They're targeting medical workers. They're targeting social media influencers. This genocidal war has actually killed relatively few Hamas members (an organization who are far fewer in number than the IDF would like you to believe). This is genocide. What is it going to take for you people to realize that this is a mother f*****g genocide?

But the point is that when Hamas chant "death to the Zionists" they don't mean "death to everyone who thinks Israel should be majority Jewish, and that aggression is an appropriate way of pursuing that goal", they mean "death to the Jews".


Whether "Zionism" is genocidal depends upon one's definition. The definition of supporting a Jewish state in the Middle East? Not genocidal. The definition that drives the leaders of said state to launch an intense military campaign leading to the deaths of thousands of civilians, indiscriminate killing, mass settlement of Palestinian territoy, deprivation of rights of Palestinians in occupied territory, etc.? That's genocidal. But the two are not the same thing.

While the 2017 Hamas charter waters down some of the language from the earlier, explicitly antisemitic charters, the 2017 charter was passed by Khaled Mashal, who retired immediately afterwards. The new leadership group, led by Ismail Haniyeh, is more militant (as shown by their attacks last October), and believe Palestine has the right to all the territory between the River Jordan and the sea. That's explicitly colonialist. They also explicitly say that Palestine is for Arab Muslims, even though most of the population of the area is Jewish - that's explicitly antisemitic.

Hamas wish to colonise Israel and exterminate the people living there. For example, Ghazi Hamad said that they would repeat the slaughtering of civilians "until Israel is annihilated".

It's impossible to credibly deny that Hamas is an antisemitic organisation. That's why they keep slaughtering Jews. Oh, sure, they're fine with the idea of Jews existing in Europe or North America, but they don't want Jews living in Israel. They want to colonise Israel for themselves, and they want to kill the Jews living there. Every anti-racist and anti-colonialist is morally obliged to oppose Hamas with the same ferocity which we oppose the ongoing slaughter of Gazan citizens by the IDF.

That said, it would theoretically be possible for an organisation to support a multiethnic, multicultural liberal democracy in the region, perhaps federalised, that would neither seek to exterminate the Jewish population nor oppress the Muslim and Christian populations. But that's not Hamas! They don't preach tolerance and harmony (and in fairness neither do Israel), they simply want to change who has the bigger guns.

I'm sorry but if you find yourself having to nit-pick over the technical definition of genocide, then I have to say that doesn't inspire very much confidence in your arguments. Zionism is, by definition, predicated on the displacement of indigenous Palestinian people (i.e., Palestinian Arabs). It's genocide. Everyone who studies this stuff for a living agrees that it's a genocide. And anti-Israeli violence is not colonialism, it is anti-colonialism. Calling Palestinians the colonizers is pure DARVO.

Came here to say basically this. Also,


Well, apparently it's not that impossible, since Barchan just denied it. And I'm denying it. An Iraqi-American Arab and an American-American Jew just denied it so I'm not sure what your definition of "credible" is, here. (also Arabs and Jews are both Semites, helloooo? what the hell is going on in this thread?)

ADL has lost credibility long ago if it ever had any. Their position has always been that any criticism of Israel is antisemitic. They are essentially a hate group.

Yupp. We shouldn't see it as "off-brand" or "out of left field" that their CEO would take this position; this has always been their endgame, to normalize anti-Arab racism and to manufacture consent for violent colonialism, conquest, genocide.