Any attempt to answer the second part of the question?



Now you're conflating your personal opinion ("according to me") with "we". Is that the royal 'we', perchance?

We can take a post on the basis of what is written – and not on the basis of what we believe may be written at some point in the future. You chose the latter.



No. I am attempting to show you that that you decided that you could 'predict' how the thread would go – not had gone at that stage, but would go – and therefore could step in to deflect the thread from the OP and, in effect, rubbish it from that point.

It was you who decided, based on telepathy, presumably, that you could simply trash the subject of the thread without actually dealing with said subject of the thread.



No. You didn't. You didn't say "if" at all.

You said:

"Oh good another chance for you [DG, presumably] to prattle on in support of terrorists and how brave they are.

And another chance for people to say anti-semitic things and then complain that you ‘cant say anything these days without being accused of being anti-semitic’".

No 'ifs' there at all..

Remarkably, you've illustrated precisely what the OP raised.

For which, congratulations and thank you.

Not in all cases, no. And probably clumsy phraseology on my part. But you get the drift. The point made on the program was that genuine criticism of Israel is often misrepresented as anti-Semitism, but there are also occasions when genuine anti-Semitism is disguised as criticism of Israel.

Oh indeed.

Netanyahu is a lying, murdering 2@ who is deliberately encouraging deeper and deeper encroachment by Israeli settlements across the West Bank, outside the internationally recognised borders of the state of Israel, and protecting them with Israeli troops.
The two state solution is a dead duck and Israel will continue to occupy more and more and eventually annexe the West Bank into the state of Israel, all the way to the Jordan.
Palestinians will then have the choice of emigration to Egypt or Jordan or remain in an apartheid state where, for example, Israelis have freedom of movement but Palestinians do not (as in the occupied West Bank right now).

That is a statement critical of the Zionist state, it is not a criticism of Jews per se.

Nonetheless, I have heard many Israeli voices on R4 stating that, as Zionism is a fundamental of their Judaism, therefore criticism of Zionism is anti-semitic.

With my pedant/semanticist head on I have to point out that the use of the word 'chance' in the context of the sentences above implies uncertainty.

Now I'm outta here.

I agree with that statement. I hope no-one thinks I'm anti-semitic because of that because I'm not.

Really? I listen to a fair amount of R4 and haven't heard that at all. And the guests on last night's Beyond Belief were at some pains to separate Jewishness in general from Israel and/or Zionism.

In any case it would be somewhat ironic for Jews living outside Israel to claim that Zionism is fundamental to their faith. If it were that fundamental they'd have returned to Israel as requested.

I have Jewish friends in the process of trying, and it seems to be far from easy.

On the topic, wether the cartoon was anti-semetic or anti-zionist I don't really care, it was in very poor taste.

The question of taste – particularly in terms of a political cartoon – is an interesting one.

But what do you think was factually inaccurate about the cartoon – anything?

I don't know, because like you I am not actually in posession of the facts of the situation in Israel/Palestine, I just get jaundiced opinion pieces from all sides.