We all know it.
Modern-day anti-Semitism hides behind the term anti-Zionism.
Which is why it is good to have a judge rule it so.
‘At his hearing, Can insisted he was not an anti-Semite, and was merely opposed to the policies of the State of Israel. But Judge Sastry was having none of it. Die Welt quoted her as clarifying that “‘Zionist’ is the language of anti-Semites, the code for ‘Jew.’”’
That much is good about the ruling.
The rest – not so much.
While it is good to have it confirmed that anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism in the language of the new fascists, it is sad to see yet another person criminalized for speech.
I would much rather the anti-Semites/anti-Zionists spewed their hate for all to hear than have these cockroaches hide under rocks…
February 15, 2015 at 15:48
This ruling is beneath contempt.
It is based on the blatant fiction that all Jews are Zionists.
If this idiot of a judge cannot tell the difference between a political view (anti-Zionism) and a racial prejudice (anti-Semitism), then he has no business presiding over a court of law.
This is a politically-motivated ruling designed to make it illegal to criticize Israel.
You cannot in good faith support this ruling and also oppose politically-motivated rulings designed to make it illegal to criticize Islam.
February 15, 2015 at 19:59
I must disagree with you most vociferously.
In the core meaning of the words, I would agree with you.
However, that is not how the word ‘Zionist’ is being used by the Cultural Marxists and Progressives. In their usual sliminess, they have stolen a word, substituted one meaning for another and then hid behind the legitimite criticism of a national government into an abashed villifying of anything and everything anti-Jewish.
When shopowners have their storefronts smashed, simply because they are Jewish, the aggressor’s cry of ‘anti-Zionism’ reveals the true meaning in which this word is currently being used by progressives.
This ruling simply unmasks the pretense and says that the progressives will no longer get away with their lingustic subversion and real violence, no matter what they try to call it.
February 16, 2015 at 03:38
So… what do you call an anti-Zionist who judges all people, Jewish or not, on the rectitude of their conduct?
February 16, 2015 at 13:01
this is not about what I call them but about what Cultural Marxists hide behind.
February 16, 2015 at 19:34
Yes, you’re right, and that’s just my point.
We must not let them redefine words!
When they call themselves liberals, we must say no! You are not a liberal! Liberals are individualists, but you are a collectivist!
And when they call themselves anti-Zionists, we must say no! You are not an anti-Zionist! Anti-Zionists oppose Zionists whether they are Jews or not, but you oppose Jews whether they are Zionists or not.
But this judge has done the exact opposite of that.
His ruling supports the cultural Marxist agenda by accepting their redefinition of the word, anti-Zionist.
And that is why his ruling is beneath contempt.