Trending Topics:

Towards a definition of anti-Palestinian racism

on 38 Comments

Last month Phillip Weiss and Donald Johnson wrote in a post that a standard for anti-Palestinianism would be helpful to

“… get people to start to realize the sheer ugliness of how false charges of antisemitism are used to support a racist cause.  But that’s not going to happen if people only play defense.”

This triggered me to think about a definition of anti-Palestinian racism and how it can be used by activists for Palestinian rights.

The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism jumps to mind as a model for a definition, but, apart from using examples, that seems ill-advised to me. The IHRA definition is deliberately vague, and meant to frame legitimate criticism as racism. The definition we are looking for doesn’t need that because Zionist racism is real and there are many good examples. Our definition should be clear, and the accompanying examples should be indisputable.

One should think of the goals that such a definition can serve, and gear the examples to serve these goals. Examples should make people realize that Zionism’s privileges for Jews are racist, and they should legitimize the three demands of BDS, but most importantly, they should make clear that the only real solution to the conflict is full equality of Jews and Palestinians. As Peter Cohen recently wrote:

“If the traditional framing of the Palestinian struggle as a conflict between peoples for control of the land is replaced by that of a struggle of people for equality and basic human and civil rights, it will be a vision that will be difficult indeed to oppose.”

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Advantages of demanding full equality are that it has very high legitimacy, that it can serve as an umbrella for the three demands of BDS, and that it is non-negotiable, its either full equality or no solution. The latter is important because we want to avoid a “solution” like the Oslo Accords, that were based on compromising on Palestinian rights, and ended up in extending unequal colonial relations indefinitely. When BDS puts enough pressure on Israel, Israel might seduce and pressure the PA to something similar. Therefore the pressure on Israel should not focus on compromising on Palestinian rights, but on agreeing to full equality of Jews and Palestinians. Full equality should be the touchstone of any solution. The examples should make this clear by pointing out Zionist racism and Israel’s apartheid regime, both of which or best solved by full equality.

A definition of anti-Palestinian racism will undoubtedly come under Zionist attack and will be denounced as anti-Semitic. This puts certain demands on the definition. First, it should be as clear and concise as possible. Second, the examples should be as indisputable as possible, and it would be unwise to include more examples than necessary for the goals. Third, the definition and examples should be accompanied by explanations and clarifications, which explain and legitimate the examples, which if necessary explain that an example is not anti-Semitic, and which put forward the arguments that Zionists have to refute in order to disprove an example. We all know Zionist creativity when it comes to false accusations of anti-Semitism, and we should anticipate it.

Below is the proposed definition, with accompanying examples and explanations.

“Anti-Palestinian racism is hatred of or discrimination of Palestinians as Palestinians or Palestinians as a group.”

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  1. denying the Palestinian right of self determination in historic Palestine, while at the same time supporting the Jewish right of self-determination in historic Palestine
  2. denying Palestinian refugees of the 1948 Nakba their “right of return” to what is now Israel while at the same time granting Jews from anywhere in the world a “right of return” to Israel
  3. subjecting Palestinians to oppressive military law, denying them basic human and civil rights, while subjecting Jews in the same territory to normal civil law
  4. denying a (possible, future) Palestinian state equal rights and equal sovereignty to any other state
  5. denying Palestinian citizens equal rights to other citizens of the same state, e.g. by dozens of discriminatory laws, discriminatory policies for land or residency, discriminatory housing and development plans, ethnic profiling, or discriminatory budget assignments
  6. imposing an apartheid regime on the Palestinian people or part of it
  7. demonizing or dehumanizing Palestinians by making hostile generalizations that are not based on facts, e.g. by framing Palestinians in general as terrorists, as backward, as less human, or as a demographic problem
  8. denying the existence of the Palestinian people
  9. denying the large scale ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in and since 1948
  10. false anti-Palestinian accusations of anti-Semitism, e.g. by framing criticism of Israel ‘s treatment of Palestinians or activism for freedom, justice and equality for Palestinians as anti-Semitism without contextual evidence of anti-Semitism

Explanations and clarifications:

The definition follows the model of “anti-X racism is hatred of X as X”, with X indicating the victim group. Since Zionism’s anti-Palestinian racism is not primarily informed by hatred but rather by Zionism’s privileging Jews as a group over Palestinians as a group the definition reflects this by including “discrimination of” and “as a group”.

The examples are not geared to illustrate the boundary between what constitutes racism and what not, but geared to be indisputable examples of anti-Palestinian racism. The examples are also not an exhaustive list, because many more examples exist.

Although the examples are not meant as indisputable examples of racism that Zionist-Israel is guilty of, Israel is or has been to a large extend guilty of all of them. As they are fixed in law, Israel is indisputably guilty of examples 2, 3 and 5, which correspond to the three demands of the BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions). BDS demands freedom and justice for Palestinians, and wants to replace racism and apartheid with full equality for Jews and Palestinians.

Example 1 refers to the source of Zionism’s anti-Palestinian racism, the idea that Palestine belongs to the Jewish people and not to the Palestinian people and that Jews have a higher right to live there. This idea legitimated the colonization of Palestine by European settlers, and taking it from the indigenous population. In 2018 this central Zionist tenet was codified in a Basic Law, the “Nation State Law”.

The way the example is formulated avoids calling support of “one democratic state” (i.e. denying both peoples’ right of self-determination) racist, because it is not racist but based on full equality.

Example 2 refers to the Palestinian refugees of the Nakba who were (or are descendants of) citizens of Mandate Palestine, and as such have a right to be citizens of its legal successor, Israel. It also refers to the openly racist Israeli “Law of Return” and “Citizenship Law” that do grant the right to be citizens of Israel to Jews from all over the world (who don’t have the Mandate-citizenship-connection to the land) but deny it to Palestinian refugees. The reason for this discrimination is clearly racist: whether a person’s ethnicity is Jewish or not.

Some Zionists call the insistence on the Palestinian “right of return” anti-Semitic because it would jeopardize Israel’s Jewish majority and thus deny the Jewish people’s right to self-determination. This is false since 1) the Palestinian “right of return” simply exists and has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, 2) a possible Jewish minority is ultimately caused, not by Palestinian refugees, but by Zionism’s choice to establish a Jewish state in a land already populated by Palestinians, and 3) in case of a massive refugee return, Israel has possibilities to maintain a Jewish majority, e.g. by ceding (quite logically) parts of its territory with a Palestinian majority to the Palestinians.

Example 3 refers to the racist Israeli practice in the OPT except occupied East Jerusalem.

Example 4 refers to the goal of the “Peace Process”, a “Two State Solution”, and the remarks by several Israeli prime ministers that the resulting Palestinian state will have limited sovereignty, will be “less than a state”, or that Israel will retain “security control” over it. A non-racist solution requires equality, so also equality between the Jewish and the Palestinian state.

Example 5 refers to the institutionalized discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel, both by dozens of Israeli laws [1] and by practice.

Israel is a Zionist state with Jewish privileges and discrimination of Palestinians as the norm, and such a state has a fundamental racism problem. In normal democracies full equality of all citizens is the norm, and there are laws that prohibit discrimination based on race or ethnicity. Israel can shed its fundamental racism problem by making full equality the norm [2], and still remain a Jewish state, i.e. a state with a Jewish majority.

Example 6 refers to Israel having established an apartheid regime that, according to Richard Falk and Virginia Tilley, dominates the Palestinian people as a whole[3]. It also refers to the situation in the OPT, in which, except for genocide, every illustrative “inhuman act” listed in the Apartheid Convention is routinely and systematically practiced by Israel [3].

Example 7 refers to common anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian racism in Israeli society, e.g. in Israeli school books [4].

Example 8 refers to the idea that Palestinian Arabs or Palestinians are actually Arabs who can live anywhere in the Arab world, but do not belong in Palestine, which belongs to the Jewish people. This idea legitimated the colonization of Palestine by European settlers, and taking it from the indigenous population. While perhaps the Palestinian nation did not exist in the 19th century, it certainly exists since 1948.

Example 9 refers to the Palestinian Nakba of 1948, the ethnic cleansing of over 700,000 Palestinians. While it is still disputed whether expulsions by Israeli military actions constituted a systematic and purposeful expulsion policy, it is undisputed that Zionist military attacks and expulsions were the major cause of flight[5], and it is undisputed that in and since 1948 successive Israeli governments engaged in (the completing act of) ethnic cleansing by preventing the return of refugees. It is also undisputed that Zionism had and has a strong motive for ethnically cleansing Palestinians: creating and maintaining a Jewish state[6], and that David Ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders saw “nothing immoral” in what they called “compulsory transfer” [7].

Example 10 follows the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and it’s possible examples, which states that whether criticism of Israel is anti-Semitism or not depends on the ”overall context”, i.e. on whether there is an anti-Semitic context or not. Zionists often ignore the conditionality of the IHRA examples.


[1] according to human rights NGO Adalah over 65 Israeli laws discriminate directly or indirectly against Palestinian citizens in Israel and/or Palestinian residents of the OPT,, accessed 2 Oct. 2018

[2] a law for full equality, “Basic Law: A Country of All Its Citizens”, was proposed by Balad, but rejected by the Knesset Presidium in 2018,, accessed 2 Oct. 2018

[3] Richard Falk, Virginia Tilley, “Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People and the Question of Apartheid”, ESCWA, United Nations, Beirut, 2017, e.g., accessed 2 Oct. 2018

[4] according to prof. Nurit Peled-Elhanan the examples mentioned are common in Israeli school books, “Palestine in Israeli School Books: Ideology and Propaganda in Education”, I.B. Tauris, 2013

[5] e.g. Benny Morris, “Righteous victims – A History of the Zionist-Arab conflict, 1881 – 2001″, Vintage Books, 2001, p. 257

[6] e.g. according to Benny Morris “… transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism – because it sought to transform a land which was ‘Arab’ into a ‘Jewish’ state and a Jewish state could not have arisen without a major displacement of Arab population; …”, “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited”, Cambridge University Press, 2004, p. 60.

[7] Benny Morris, “Righteous victims …”, p. 144.

Jaap C. Bosma

Jaap C. Bosma is a Dutch chemical engineer and author of "Plan Dalet in the Context of the Contradictions of Zionism" Holy Land Studies, Volume 9 Issue 2, Nov 2010.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

38 Responses

  1. pabelmont on October 16, 2018, 11:33 am

    Great work!

    I do feel, though, that a bit more could be done about anti-Palestine activities taking place outside Israel, e.g., all the anti-BDS work going on in the USA, all the anti-Palestine activism taking place on university campuses in the USA. Perhaps also in the UK, and elsewhere.

    Is it anti-Palestinian racism, e.g., if someone discriminates against a non-Palestinian in the USA because that person is trying to be a pro-Palestinian spokesman? Might it be anti-Palestinian racism if a government (of a country which has no Palestinian residents or citizens) votes at the UN against a pro-Palestine resolution?

    • JaapBo on October 17, 2018, 3:44 am

      [Is it anti-Palestinian racism, e.g., if someone discriminates against a non-Palestinian in the USA because that person is trying to be a pro-Palestinian spokesman?]
      According to example 10 a false (anti-Palestinian) allegation of anti-Semitism directed at a non-Palestinian, like e.g. Jeremy Corbyn, is still anti-Palestinian racism.

      • pabelmont on October 17, 2018, 8:59 am

        Thanks, JaapBo. What about an anti-BDS governmental (or university) action which fails to offer anti-semitism as a justification? (Maybe a different justification: “BDS injures America’s ally Israel.”)

      • JaapBo on October 17, 2018, 9:40 am

        Pabelmont [What about an anti-BDS governmental (or university) action which fails to offer anti-semitism as a justification? (Maybe a different justification: “BDS injures America’s ally Israel.”)]

        Interesting question that I hadn’t thought about: Is being against BDS always anti-Palestinian racism?

        If being against BDS includes supporting example 2, 3 or 5 it is.

        If being against BDS, but only because one doesn’t agree with the method of Boycott etc. (so being for Palestinian rights, freedom and full equality) then it could be not-racism. But this seems rare to me. I think few people fully support the Palestinian right of return, but oppose the method of boycott.

      • JaapBo on October 18, 2018, 7:47 am


        Thinking about it a bit more. It’s typical liberal Zionists who argue for dialogue instead of BDS. That, in itself, is certainly not racist, so then one shouldn’t argue that it is.

        But there are good arguments against dialogue:
        – It’s already been tried 70+ years, counting from count Bernadotte who searched for a good solution for refugee return, but was murdered for it. In 70 years of “dialogue” there has been no progress on this issue.
        – Apartheid in South Africa wasn’t ended by dialogue, but by boycott.

    • Misterioso on October 17, 2018, 9:42 am

      @pabelmont, et al

      The Guardian, Oct. 11/18

      “My grandfather Nelson Mandela fought apartheid. I see the parallels with Israel,”
      Nkosi Zwelivelile, African National Congress MP and grandson of Nelson Mandela

      “It took an international effort to end institutionalised racism in my country – now it must happen again, for Palestinian people.

      “My grandfather, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, would have turned 100 this year. The world is marking the centenary of his birth and celebrating his leadership in the struggle to end apartheid in South Africa. But while my country has long been free from racist minority rule, the world is not yet free of the crime of apartheid.

      “Like Madiba and Desmond Tutu before me, I see the eerie similarities between Israel’s racial laws and policies towards Palestinians, and the architecture of apartheid in South Africa. We South Africans know apartheid when we see it. In fact, many recognise that, in some respects, Israel’s regime of oppression is even worse.

      “Apartheid is defined in international law as an ‘institutionalised regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other.’ It is about unequal racial power relations upheld by unjust laws that are intended to deny oppressed groups their rights.

      “Even before Israel passed its ‘nation state law’ (stipulating that only Jews have the right of self-determination in the country) it was easy to see, for anyone willing to look, that the country’s government was committing the crime of apartheid. Its segregation wall, discriminatory admissions committees, ID-card systems, roads built for settlers which are not accessible to Palestinians, and the bantustan-like fragmentation of the West Bank gave the game away.

      “The nation state law made that reality undeniable. Apartheid is the context for a litany of state crimes. Take most recently, for example, Israel’s decision to demolish the Palestinian Bedouin village of Khan al-Ahmar and evict its residents. The aim of this ethnic cleansing is to make way for illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land.

      “Yet despite seven decades of apartheid, ongoing theft of Palestinian land, military occupation and massacres of unarmed protesters in Gaza – rightly called the ‘Palestinian Sharpeville’, after the mass killing in Transvaal in 1960 – each new generation of Palestinians continues the liberation struggle.

      “Young Ahed Tamimi turned 17 in prison this year, illegally incarcerated for confronting occupying soldiers in her backyard. But just as my grandfather spent 27 years in prison only to become a global icon of freedom, Ahed has become a powerful symbol of Palestinians’ resolute determination to resist. She and her family represent the courageous spirit of Palestinians everywhere who stand defiant in the face of immense brutality. I salute their bravery.

      “Although Ahed is now free, thousands of Palestinians – including hundreds of children – still languish in apartheid Israel’s jails. In this Nelson Mandela centennial celebration year, we should recall his avowal that ‘our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinian people’ and work relentlessly to demand that all Palestinians – whether living in exile, as citizens of Israel or in the occupied territories – are accorded their inalienable human rights.

      “For we South Africans also know that effective resistance to apartheid requires international solidarity. Just as allies around the world were vital in our struggle for freedom, the spirit of internationalism lives on in the non-violent boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement supporting the Palestinian liberation struggle.”

  2. CitizenC on October 16, 2018, 12:12 pm

    Perhaps “anti-Palestinian racism” expresses, most fundamentally, the anti-gentilism of Zionism, which in turn, in the view of Israel Shahak and others, secularizes the anti-gentilism of traditional Judaism. Perhaps we simply need to deal with Jewish racism, Zionism. From the outset it proclaimed the racialist fiction of “the Jewish people”, against liberalism and integration with the modern world. The fundamental opposition of Zionism is not Jew vs indigene in Palestine, but Jew vs gentile everywhere.

    The Jewish establishment’s horror of “assimilation” is Zionism. So is “progressive Jewish” politics, in its adamant opposition to the Israel Lobby critique, and accusation of anti-Semitism against proponents; its equivocation over “anti-occupation” BDS; and its refusal to acknowledge that Zionism is a form of racism, as Rabbi Elmer Berger stated in his writings, and in the UNGA resolution 3379 that he helped draft.

    We need to restore the canonical terms of the modern world, in which people of Jewish background are a religious minority, or secular citizens, period. There is no distinction between “Jew” and “Zionist”, in secular terms. Zionism proclaimed the “secular Jew”, which is nonsense, as Shlomo Sand argued, the same as racialist anti-Semitism. Zionism, from genocidal Israel, to the supremacism of the US Jewish establishment, to the equivocal, voelkisch idealism of “progressive Jews”, is a reaction against the modern world, a return to the ghetto, as Shahak and Berger argued.

    Recovering liberal foundations, and opposing the world-wide scourge of Jewish racism in those terms, as an urgent matter for all, is how you “play offense”

    This case has the potential to get people to start to realize the sheer ugliness of how false charges of antisemitism are used to support a racist cause. But that’s not going to happen if people only play defense.

    • Keith on October 16, 2018, 7:48 pm

      CITIZENC- “Zionism, from genocidal Israel, to the supremacism of the US Jewish establishment, to the equivocal, voelkisch idealism of “progressive Jews”, is a reaction against the modern world, a return to the ghetto, as Shahak and Berger argued.”

      I agree that Zionism began as a reaction to modernity and assimilation, an attempt to resurrect Jewish tribalism in secular form. Nonetheless, American Jewish Zionism has evolved into a power-seeking kinship network with support for Israel as the ideological unifier. Far from being a reaction against the modern world, it is a means to exploit kinship solidarity as an essential component of power-seeking within the modern world. A spectacularly successful technique, I might add. Zionism’s success has resulted in the ongoing merger of Zionism and Judaism, with Zionism becoming more Judaic and Judaism adopting the Zionist definition of Jewishness.

      “Just as the Judaic tradition had formerly told Jews what it meant to be Jewish – had supplied them with a considerable definition of their identity – so does Zionism in the modern age. Jews who lost hold of the mythic structure of the past were given a grasp on a new myth, one composed of the structural remnants of the old one.” (p176, “Stranger at Home: “The Holocaust”, Zionism, and American Judaism,” Jacob Neusner)

  3. pabelmont on October 17, 2018, 9:03 am

    A small step from “kinship” to “kingship” in Israel and in large measure in the USA and UK.

  4. genesto on October 17, 2018, 12:06 pm

    Very good work, JaapBo. But, I think this can be expressed much more simply. Some years ago, I posted an explanation of how Zionism is racist in my local paper, then the Oakland Tribune, that went something like this. Zionism says that non Jews, particularly Palestinians, are either too inferior a people, or too dangerous, to share power in Israel. That, ipso facto, is a racist position. I seemed to have touched a nerve with that post, since I got several pieces of hate mail following it.

  5. Ossinev on October 17, 2018, 2:31 pm

    I believe that the IHRA / Labour Left “infested with Anti – Semitism ” farce in the UK should prompt a thorough review of the UK`s anti – discrimination legislation leading to the embracing and adoption of clear definitions of racism and discrimination in the UK. Perhaps this is something that a Corbyn led government will prioritise given the disgusting discrimination which Corbyn and other members of his party have been subjected to at the hands of Israel First Zionists from within their own party and from outside. The so called IHRA definition itself self evidently discriminatory since it singles out “Anti- Semitism” ( which legally would have to be defined as Anti-Judaism ) as being unique and in need of a unique treatment over , above and separate to all other forms of racism or discrimination simply because of the Holocaust. The world has moved on and current and future generations should not be burdened with intrinsic guilt for a whole range of historical Western European genocides including the Nazi genocide for which they have zero responsibility.

  6. DaBakr on October 17, 2018, 2:54 pm

    Typical mondoweiss hypocrites. It would be astounding of mw printed 1/100 of the vile things Arab leaders say about jews, Israel’s, etc. Of course they usually say it in Arabic press so nobody here gives two shits. Also, no matter what photo you pick to portray Shaked you can’t make her look unattractive. That must suck for you.

    I mean really…. How many Muslims call Jews apes? She was referring to mothers who raise their children to attack and kill their enemies. Snake is hardly a big insult. Snakes are pretty darn cool.

    • annie on October 17, 2018, 3:24 pm

      not unsimiliar to jewish mothers who “raise their children to attack and kill” one presumes? snakes are cool eh, what do you think about termites. a bridge too far?

      • eljay on October 17, 2018, 3:39 pm

        || annie: not unsimiliar to jewish mothers who “raise their children to attack and kill” one presumes? … ||

        I wonder if Elor Azaria’s mother was caught off guard when Ms. Shaked publicly called her a snake and threatened to expel her from the country and destroy her home.

      • annie on October 17, 2018, 4:07 pm

        what about all the villages used to train israeli soldiers on night raids, bursting into the houses and dragging the kids away to drop them off at settlements and torture them. a little kid, watching that happen to his older brother, is it the parents raising them to attack, or the occupation? it’s the occupation that’s the slithering deadly snake. it should have its head removed (the snake=occupation). remove the regime and bulldoze its prisons holding and torturing political prisoners.

      • DaBakr on October 18, 2018, 7:05 pm


        While I doubt you’d say so I assume you are somewhat sympathetic to what Farrakhan, murderer of Malcolm X had to say. Or has said in the past.

    • gamal on October 17, 2018, 5:07 pm

      “How many Muslims call Jews apes?”

      none that have read and studied the whole of al Maidah i would guess, i’ve never heard it…that of course could be me deploying taqiyya in service of the cause of islam, all you have to do is read al maidah, and al araf somewhere, you’ll want a good tafsir or two too and some commentaries, enjoy.

      • DaBakr on October 18, 2018, 7:24 pm


        You are either the most naive or most ignorant if you are claiming you haven’t heard some (surely many extremists, but not all) the claims that Jews are descended from apes and how they should be killed when hiding behind rocks or bushes. I’m not saying it’s the mainstay of a traditional islamic education but it’s hardly a secret. Obviously, is impossible to judge the bible on the same grounds because Islam didn’t exist except in Ishmaels future progeny. We also know that the Qur’an it is written that Jerusalem and that land is for the Jews. (Of course that was before the whole modern I/p notion that Mohammed journey to heaven from the ‘furthest’ mosque was absolutely al-aqsa when there is ample scholarship it was any number of mosques that the Arabs built after they colonized the middle east.

        What Farrakhan and Obama’s former preacher have said of Jews and Judaism(and naturally Zionism) is no less disgusting but does not have the excuse of being written over a1000 years ago in very different times. I south’s say (to @annie especially) if anybody deserves to be called a snake it’s Farrakhan. Shaked was wrong and could have conveyed the meaning without the slur.

      • Mooser on October 18, 2018, 7:46 pm

        “You are either the most naive or most ignorant if you are claiming you haven’t heard some (surely many extremists, but not all) the claims that Jews are descended from apes”

        The preachings of Sheikh Al-Char-Darwin out to be outlawed! Having apes in your family tree is just an ad hominid insult!

      • gamal on October 18, 2018, 7:56 pm

        “Jews are descended from apes”

        yes and that goes for us all, not only Jews.

        As to the eschatological hadith you are referring to your claims are as idiotic as they free of any knowledge and yes I have never ever heard anti-semitism from a Muslim or in a Muslim or Arab environment (except from Saudis but it doesn’t really count), as to ignorant and naive i wouldn’t have thought so but not for me to say is it, others can judge if they so wish

    • oldgeezer on October 17, 2018, 10:30 pm


      I’ll agree she makes for a pretty picture 99 times out of a hundred.

      She is also living proof that you can’t judge a book by it’s cover as the person behind that face is devoid of humanity. Foul, evil.

      • Maghlawatan on October 17, 2018, 11:24 pm

        Shaked is a banshee

      • DaBakr on October 18, 2018, 7:37 pm


        She has a family. She is a mother. Just like the millions of arab citizens of Israel but like the 1000s of Arabs in the territories that may or may not wish her personal harm.

      • pjdude on October 21, 2018, 4:23 pm

        @danakr so your compalint is what you cant stand her being treated the way you and other zionists want to treat others? so the problem is you want a different standard for jews. i thought double standards for jews was anti semitism. Why are you being anti semitic?

      • YoniFalic on February 10, 2019, 12:28 pm

        Julius Streicher was a father but like Ayelet Shaked a completely vile criminal genocide propagandist. The Nuremberg IMT hanged him even though he never personally harmed or ordered someone to harm another human being.

  7. Ossinev on October 17, 2018, 5:12 pm

    “no matter what photo you pick to portray Shaked you can’t make her look unattractive”
    Sounds as if you have got the you know what`s for Frau Shaked. I hope you realise that she is married and is raising two little “snakes” of her own probably concentrating on their anti – untermenshcen education.

    Perhaps you just have a thing for evil domineering women ?

    • DaBakr on October 18, 2018, 7:44 pm


      In politics, everything counts. Looks especially. I’ll give you a perfect example:

      Imagine Sheldon Adelson if he looked like Cary Grant. Maybe the same story but it sure would be presented in a whole different light. Even MW commenters would be bereft at not being able to slaver at how exactly he embodies the European stereotypes of thick lipped ugly and monstrous looking manipulators. (Not that he cares with his bundle).

      As for who or what gives me the hots, I’m a weird looking jazz bass/vincentgogh type with an incredibly hot firecracker so I can afford to keep those things private. But sure, shaked is incredibly attractive smart and accomplished. Bibi, when he was working his UN gig was also called handsome. Kennedy? Reagan? (What happened wth trump?). Shaked is going to come into her peak during the time when macho ex generals arent the main political contenders. I’m sure her husband is a happy man

      • Mooser on October 18, 2018, 8:06 pm

        “with an incredibly hot firecracker”

        Got a short fuse, always ready to go off?

      • DaBakr on October 19, 2018, 12:10 am


        Absolutely. Sometimes.

      • Mooser on October 19, 2018, 1:10 pm

        “Absolutely. Sometimes.”

        Oh well, can’t do much about it now.

  8. Paranam Kid on October 18, 2018, 9:20 am

    Jaap, an excellent piece. Apart from the publication here, have you considered going further with it?
    My gripe is that the EU has an enormous amount of muscle which it could use very effectively against the ZioNazi entity, but has NOT done so. Your definition, examples, and explanations could be persuasive enough to have them look at this and start doing more that just rapping the ZioNazi entity on the fingers like a naughty boy.
    Veel succes toegewenst ;-))

    • JaapBo on October 19, 2018, 2:48 am

      Thx Paranam Kid,

      As a start I would like the BDS organisation to consider this, and endorse a definition along these lines. After that maybe the PA could push it at the UN or it can be pushed at any suitable platform. The more disccussion it generates, the better, because it’s an opportunity to point at the facts.

      In my view the EU will not be swayed by this definition, but grassroots people will be. That’s why its important that it gains legitimacy by endorsements and gets spread around.

      I don’t like you calling Israel the ZioNazi entity because Nazism was worse than Zionism, and you only disqualify your own case with it. The facts will convince people, not demonisations.

      • Paranam Kid on October 19, 2018, 1:15 pm

        @JaapBo: thanks for your reply, I appreciate the time you took to answer. I agree with most of what you said.

        Regarding my designation of ZioNazi entity for Israel, let me tell you that there are numerous prominent people, Jews and Israelis alike, who have used the comparison. Some examples:

        Hebrew University Professor, Dr. Ofer Cassif –

        Hebrew University Professor Daniel Blatman –

        Journalist Tony Greenstein –

        Professor of history at the University of Montreal Yakov Rabkin –

        I agree that demonisation does not work, on the other hand it is also important to call a spade a spade. Every passing day I feel more disgusted towards the country and its leaders, and feel incapable of calling it anything else than the ZioNazi entity because it is on a par with Nazism. No, Israel does not use gas chambers to exterminate the Palestinians, but they exercise genocide nevertheless – Professor of history Ilan Pappé calls it an incremental genocide, I have seen the appropriate term “Slowocaust” coined by someone.

        As long as people refuse to equate Zionism in its current form exercised by the current government with Nazism, Israel will continue to act with impunity for a long, long time to come.

        Conclusion: I will continue using the term ZioNazi entity, and those supporting it ZioNazis. That does NOT include all Jews.

        Once more, I wish you lots of success with bringing your definition of anti-Palestinian racism to the table.

      • JaapBo on October 21, 2018, 4:12 pm

        @Paranam Kid:
        Why not call it ZioApartheid? That stings Zionists more than ZioNazi! They are afraid of the Apartheid-comparison because it is a justified comparison. That’s also why they fear BDS, because BDS was the method used to defeat Apartheid South Africa, it implicitly accuses Israel of apartheid

  9. Donald on October 18, 2018, 9:52 pm

    I think this is a great idea. In fact, it might even be a necessary idea. Right now, with the IHRA definition in place, anyone who is too honest about Israel and its treatment of Palestinians is an antisemite.

    Probably the best way to fight this is to write a Palestinian version of the IHRA definition, except it would have to be scrupulously honest and would by necessity have to point out the anti- Palestinian nature of some of the IHRA examples.

  10. CHUCKMAN on October 21, 2018, 4:49 pm

    “There is no such thing as a Palestinian” has been a sickening refrain from Gold Meir to Newt Gingrich speaking under the influence of almost $20 million in campaign contributions from Sheldon Adelson.

    I can’t imagine a clearer form of prejudice and ugly hatred.

  11. JaapBo on February 10, 2019, 7:27 am

    In retrospect, one important example might be added. This refers to the demands for Palestinians who want to join the so called peace process (actually it is more an extortion process), who should commit to non-violence and recognise Israel, while Israel is not asked to commit to non-violence or recognizing Palestinian rights.
    e.g.”Holding Palestinians to higher standards than Israel as conditions for peace talks”
    Explaination: “this refers to the conditions the Quartet requires from Palestinians for peace negotiations: “[they] must be committed to nonviolence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations” ( At the same time the Quartet does not require Israel to cease all violence against Palestinians (e.g. by transferring all territory beyond the green line to UN peace keepers) or to recognize Palestinian rights like the right of return of Nakba-refugees. The so called peace process is actually an extortion process in which Palestinians first have to recognize Israeli rights and then have to “negotiate” about how much of their own rights they are allowed to retain.”

  12. YoniFalic on February 10, 2019, 12:21 pm

    Ayelet Shaked is at least as vile and criminal as Julius Streicher.

Leave a Reply