Thread by @LaraFriedmanDC

Another quick thread re State Dept plan to label human rights orgs “antisemitic”:

Key thing to understand is that such labeling is a feature, not a bug, of efforts to promoting definition of antisemitism that focuses NOT on hatred/threats to Jews, but on criticism of Israel.

1/

This re-definition is at the core of the IHRA definition of antisemitism’s “contemporary examples.”

And make no mistake: these examples - which conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism - are the ONLY parts of the IHRA that backers of this effort are interested in.

2/

So rather than focus on real lethal antisemitism surging around the world, the massive effort focuses on promoting this definition, so that today they can say, “hey, it’s not us labeling them antisemitic, it’s this definition that everyone accepts, and who can argue with that” 3/

So you get things like today’s FB post from Zachor Legal - one of the very active lawfare orgs long working to quash activism and criticism challenging Israel policy.

facebook.com/ZachorLegalIns…

4/

Zachor: "This comes down to the definition of antisemitism. The organizations that are mentioned here...recoil from antisemitism claims, and if they are using the definition of antisemitism narrowly, as hate directed at Jews, then they may well be correct…"

5/

Zachor: "However, IHRA...has become the international de facto standard for defining antisemitism, adopted by many countries and organizations throughout the world…”

6/

Zachor: “...What is key in the IHRA definition is its accuracy for modern antisemitism, which includes not only hatred towards Jews, but in specific cases, hatred and delegitimization towards Israel…”

7/

Zachor: "The US state department has adopted the IHRA definition, and the organizations mentioned here are regularly in violation. They judge Israel with a double-standard, holding it to a completely different standard than any other country…”

8/

Zachor: "This includes claims that these NPOs support BDS and the UN Blacklist of companies operating in the disputed territories of Israel. Antisemites don’t like to be labeled as antisemites. Good for the US State Department for taking this stand.”

9/

People/orgs with clear bad intent promoted this approach.

People/orgs, out of ignorance, bad faith, or cowardice, jumped on the bandwagon, despite free speech champions warning them what was at stake.

And here we are.

And be warned: yesterday’s news was just the start.

/end

JNS/Jonathan Tobin on why US is targeting human rights NGOs: “it’s because their activities & advocacy have been consistent with the widely accepted definition of anti-Semitism that has been promulgated by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance...”

“—precepts that have been officially endorsed by the government of the United States that rightly labels delegitimizing, demonizing and applying double standards to Israel, the one Jewish state on the planet, as acts of Jew-hatred.”

jns.org/opinion/time-t…

As I noted earlier: demonizing those who criticize Israel - including human rights orgs - as antisemites, is a feature, not a bug, of this definition.