Jews Use State Department to “Define Anti-Semitism” for EU


Wildly broad “definition” would include criticism of Israel; “definition” is first step toward criminalization; being pushed by Israel’s “Foreign Ministry antisemitism czar” Ambassador Gideon Behar (pictured)

EDITOR’S NOTE: In America, the purpose of the state has become an evil mirror image of the purpose of the state in healthy countries like the Old America and National Socialist Germany. Whereas, in those former nations, the state supported the survival of its founding race, which was also its ruling race, and fought against any who would harm it; in 2015 America the state protects only Jews and those who hate the White race, and actively persecutes those who defend Whites, who have been rendered essentially powerless.

It is interesting that this article (from a rabidly Jewish supremacist newspaper) quotes an unnamed “senior State Department official” as openly saying what National Vanguard readers (and all Gentile figureheads in politics and media) have known all along: “…the State official lauded U.S. officials, clergy and community leaders for continuing to ensure that the price of antisemitism in public remains high. He noted that while the U.S. does not have laws prohibiting hate speech on the books, this system of shaming has ensured society-based punishment for antisemites.”

* * *

THE U.S. is urging the European Union to adopt a working definition of antisemitism, similar to the one used by the State Department, a senior State official said in a conference call with Jerusalem U on Monday.

Defining antisemitism is “an important tool” for combating the rising antisemitic trend in Europe, where — the official, who was not speaking on the record, warned — several smaller Jewish communities, which have existed for 500 to 2,400 years, are on the verge of extinction.

The State Department definition of antisemitism includes certain attitudes toward Israel. In what are commonly referred to as the “3 Ds,” a phrase coined by Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky, the definition says that demonization, delegitmization and holding Israel to a double standard all constitute antisemitism.

The senior official noted that Europe needed to make a distinction between legitimate criticism of Israel and when criticism may function as antisemitism.

The E.U.’s Agency for Fundamental Rights put a working definition of antisemitism on its website in 2005, but deleted it a few years ago, with certain E.U. members claiming it was never official anyway; the State Department still includes that working definition on its website.

Similarly, Israel’s Foreign Ministry antisemitism czar, Ambassador Gideon Behar, told The Algemeiner on Monday that Israel also wanted to see the E.U. adopt a working definition.

Additionally, the State official lauded U.S. officials, clergy and community leaders for continuing to ensure that the price of antisemitism in public remains high. He noted that while the U.S. does not have laws prohibiting hate speech on the books, this system of shaming has ensured society-based punishment for antisemites. Part of this, he explained, comes from the awareness of what antisemitism is, which is bolstered by the U.S.’s working definition.

Interestingly, although the State definition is applicable in the U.S., the official noted his agency could do little to guarantee that states and public agencies also adopt the definition. For example, the University of California has struggled this year to pass a resolution condemning antisemitism, because some activists and interested parties want the U.C.s to take the State Department line in distinguishing certain criticisms of Israel as antisemitism, whereas others argue that including Israel in any definition of antisemitism is tantamount to stifling political debate.

* * *

Source: The Algemeiner

Previous post

Florida: Review Board Considers Special Grand Jury to Indict Leaders of Washington Regime

Next post

What Is Religious Freedom?

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments
12 September, 2017 2:10 pm

hmm why do we allow these people to monopolize the language? Anti-semite? Why even use that aspersion casting word of our enemies when something akin to “Culturally aware,” “historic victim of jewish terrorism” historic victim of jewish terrorism”or “victim of jewish slander” is far more accurate?

12 September, 2017 11:46 pm

I might say something so that “this system of shaming” with “society-based punishment”, is directed towards me. And I’m not even an “antisemite”. Then I will shame “this system”.