Former Israeli Minister of Education says calling critics "anti-Semitic" is a trick they always use.

[Speculate]

ok, I would rather argue that the woman is wrong in her case.
So how do you know to distinguish a valid criticism from hate speech?

Easy:

Valid criticism usually has some kind of humanitarian element to it.

Example: Israel are nothing more than murdering pigs for the occupation of the West Bank, denying Palestinians basic human rights, and destroying settlements that have existed long before Israel did, thus the inhabitants have more right to the land than any jew. Let alone the slaughter of innocent children.

That's a valid criticism.

Hate speech does not have any validity and is just an attack with out reason. Example: I'm going to kill any Palestinian because I hate Arabs.

Or:

Individually, Israelis lack the social skills to be allowed in to civilised society, and as a country, they should be barred from the United Nations given their inability to co-exist peacefully with their neighbours. They are no better than some IS scum bag. Ooops. My mistake. That was actually valid criticism. I understand why you had to ask the question - it can be difficult can't it?

 

[Tsing Tao]

Easy:

Valid criticism usually has some kind of humanitarian element to it.

Example: Israel are nothing more than murdering pigs for the occupation of the West Bank, denying Palestinians basic human rights, and destroying settlements that have existed long before Israel did, thus the inhabitants have more right to the land than any jew. Let alone the slaughter of innocent children.

That's a valid criticism.

Hate speech does not have any validity and is just an attack with out reason. Example: I'm going to kill any Palestinian because I hate Arabs.

Or:

Individually, Israelis lack the social skills to be allowed in to civilised society, and as a country, they should be barred from the United Nations given their inability to co-exist peacefully with their neighbours. They are no better than some IS scum bag. Ooops. My mistake. That was actually valid criticism. I understand why you had to ask the question - it can be difficult can't it?

Pretty much all of that is inflammatory, and with no intent to discuss any topic at all. I don't know that I'd call all of it Hate Speech (as there is a very legal definition for that), but it's certainly not conducive to any rational discussion.

 

[gkishot]

Easy:

Valid criticism usually has some kind of humanitarian element to it.

Example: Israel are nothing more than murdering pigs for the occupation of the West Bank, denying Palestinians basic human rights, and destroying settlements that have existed long before Israel did, thus the inhabitants have more right to the land than any jew. Let alone the slaughter of innocent children.

That's a valid criticism.

Hate speech does not have any validity and is just an attack with out reason. Example: I'm going to kill any Palestinian because I hate Arabs.

Or:

Individually, Israelis lack the social skills to be allowed in to civilised society, and as a country, they should be barred from the United Nations given their inability to co-exist peacefully with their neighbours. They are no better than some IS scum bag. Ooops. My mistake. That was actually valid criticism. I understand why you had to ask the question - it can be difficult can't it?

Islam is ideology of jihad and subjugation disguised as a religion. Its motto is 'convert or die'. Its goal is global conquest. Terrorism and harassment are its tools since the time of Muhammed. This is a valid criticism. How many non-muslims live in the ME?

 

[Speculate]

Pretty much all of that is inflammatory, and with no intent to discuss any topic at all. I don't know that I'd call all of it Hate Speech (as there is a very legal definition for that), but it's certainly not conducive to any rational discussion.

Just baiting the Baitor.

 

[gkishot]

So go back to my two examples. If we are talking about the rate of violent crimes of African Americans and it's possible correlation to the amount of single parent families in the African American community, and you call me a racist for suggesting this might be a variable, you think that you're using a valid debate tactic in this labeling?

I won't call you a racist unless I can rationalize it. As for the OP there is plenty of evidence of selective bias and visceral hatred of the Palestinian Jews by the so called "critics". It's on a case by case basis. No generalization as you attempt to do is possible.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Islam is ideology of jihad and subjugation disguised as a religion. Its motto is 'convert or die'. Its goal is global conquest. Terrorism and harassment are its tools since the time of Muhammed. This is a valid criticism. How many non-muslims live in the ME?

Did I say there wasn't valid criticism in that statement?

 

[Tsing Tao]

I won't call you a racist unless I can rationalize it. As for the OP there is plenty of evidence of selective bias and visceral hatred of the Palestinian Jews by the so called "critics". It's on a case by case basis. No generalization as you attempt to do is possible.

What generalization am I attempting to do? What I said was that constant use of a label - especially in situations where it is not warranted, reduces the power that label has, until eventually the person doing the labeling is marginalized. So in the end, the effort is self-defeating.

 

[gkishot]

Did I say there wasn't valid criticism in that statement?

It wasn't reply to your post.

 

[gkishot]

What generalization am I attempting to do? What I said was that constant use of a label - especially in situations where it is not warranted, reduces the power that label has, until eventually the person doing the labeling is marginalized. So in the end, the effort is self-defeating.

In same cases the accusation is correct, in some it's not warranted. You say it's always incorrect. I say it's on a case by case basis.

 

[Tsing Tao]

In same cases the accusation is correct, in some it's not warranted. You say it's always incorrect. I say it's on a case by case basis.

Please show me the post where I said it was always incorrect.