The phrase "anti-Semitism" had undergone an interesting transformation over the past few years. Once upon a time it was employed to highlight the anti-Jewish rhetoric of far-rigthtists like James Buchanan, the folks at the Nation Vanguard, Jean-Marie Le Pen or the Iranian mullahs. Then it was used to illustrate the duplicity of far-leftist organizations or periodicals such as Canada's AdBusters magazine, which mask Jew-hatred under the mantle of "social justice."
It's also been rightly used to condemn those who demonize Israel and denounce it without even a semblance of context or objectivity. We can knowingly roll our eyes at folks like the late Edward Said because they wore their Jew-hatred on their sleeve and no one save their far-left acolytes took their mealy-mouthed denials too terribly seriously.
Now, however, the phrase has been co-opted by those whose who accuse Israel or Jews of X, Y or Z rather than by the ones actually being attacked. "What," they say. "Can't I accuse your Nazi, Apartheid state of genocide while lauding those who violently seek its destruction? See, what I mean, no one can criticize Israel of anything without the Zionists trying to shut them up with false claims of anti-Semitism."
The needs to be confronted for the sham it is. Natan Sharansky has pretty solid test for gauging whether an accusation is just or anti-Semitic, read it here. http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-sharansky-f04.htm.
Essentially, it states that demonization, double standards, delegitimization are the hallmarks of anti-Semitic diatribes. This means that holding Israel 100% accountable for anything that goes wrong and giving Palestinians a carte blanche to commit heinous acts of terrorism—either by glossing over them or excusing them entirely—is in fact anti-Semitism. Questioning the policy of the settlements in the West Bank, however, is: not.
But back to my original point. These days it too many Israel's haters (which is what they are, many unabashadly so) wall us into silence by employing the "anyone who criticizes Israel is automatically labeled an anti-Semite" canard as a shield to cover their malice. We, as defenders of Jewish state must not allow ourselves to be intimidated by these churlish tactics. We must call a spade a spade.
Case in point: Stephen Lowe the Bishop of Hulme.
Recently, the Church of England, noble souls that they are, decided to review its investments in the Caterpillar Bulldozer manufacturer because Israel uses it's machines to destroy the homes of terrorists. It did not take into account the terrorist acts that prompt bulldozer usage nor the lives such actions may take. And besides, the fine, progressive English clergy-folk insist it's not a "boycott" or anything, just a possible disinvestment. Whew!
By the way, I don't know how many Chinese, Saudi or Jordanian companies the Church of England currently invests in—though I'd love to see a list—but it's fair to say that they won't disinvest from a single one of them. Why? Because it's so much easier to ask the rank and file to disinvest or boycott (THIS IS NOT A BOYCOTT!!! Right.) Caterpiller, when most Britons have little to do with the company, but it's much harder to ask those same moral Anglicans to eschew nice, handy and inexpensive Chinese goods. It's even too hard to ask to ask them not to fill up at Exxon Mobile—considering they're so many of them and well, they are so happily convenient. Sigh.
Anyway, the British Chef Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks wrote a lengthy article deriding the decision. The ADL also spoke up against it as did a few other Jewish groups. They felt it was devise, unproductive and could legitimize more anti-Semitic attacks like the sort that has swept lovely Albion in recent years. Note, not a single one of these originations referred to the Church of England itself as anti-Semitic. It just isn't in there.
Now, look at what good Mr. Lowe says about the criticism:
"I found the reaction to the debate in which I sat in the General Synod a little bit over the top.
"I do find it difficult that if you criticise anything to do with the Israeli government policy towards the Palestinians one is accused of anti-Semitism.
"I think that's actually wrong."
No one said that, your holiness. Mr. Lowe is trying to make it appear as if some angry Zionist hand is trying shut him up and stifle his freedom of thougt. Please. You were not accused of being an anti-Semite, Mr. Lowe and your ridiculous assertion that anyone with the temerity to question your so-called "legitimate criticism" is automatically accusing you of such speaks for worse for you than any "legit criticism" ever could.
