FinnAgain - I think you've done a great job here, of confirming peoples' shifting suspicions about Israel and many Israeli sympathisers.
I do have to thank you and others of your kind for serving as an object lesson.
Of course, the claim you just made is the very essence of every form of prejudice and absolute groupthink stupidity. "I saw a person from a group who did X, Y and Z, and now I'm generalizing to the group!"
But of course people won't mind, because it's the 'proper' target.
Just like you've all been going bonkers over correct accusations of misbehavior (rather than the misbehavior itself, which you couldn't care less about), as long as that misbehavior directed at the 'right' target.
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what would be said if, for instance, someone looked at Ivan, a blatant anti-Semite, and said "Ah-hah! Now you've shown us what Palestinians and anti-Israeli people are
really about." We have people complaining about accusations of anti-Semitism that don't even
exist.
But you feel fine (and draw down not one word of challenge from your fellow travelers) for using the same exact logic. As long as it's against the 'right' sort of target.
I couldn't have pointed out the dynamic quite so clearly without such wonderful object lessons.
OR it is possible to call someone an anti-semite without using the word anti-semite.
You invented it and can't back it up. Not only have I never said you're an anti-Semite, but I've never said anything equivalent to it. Ever. Not once. You'd quote it if I had rather than inventing a quote that has nothing to do with anything I've ever said, anywhere, at all.
I'm not going to dig for examples but you have said things sorta liek this:
"You criticize Israel for doing crappy shit but you don't criticize Hamas when they do even worse things, why is that? Is it because Israel is full of Jews?"
No, you are making that up, I've never said anything of the sort. Along with the earlier questions I asked you, ask yourself why it is that you can voice patently untrue things like your claims about me calling you an anti-Semite, which never actually happened... but if I do things like point out that the OP used a deliberately inaccurate and inflammatory claim to draw attention to the thread, that's a grave sin.
Again, ask yourself why that is. I've been savagely nibbled on for pointing out the facts about what people have said. You've been ignored for inventing things about me. If I was (ever so calmly) inventing negative things to ascribe to the anti-Israel crowd, to you think that'd go over any better than when I address the
actual, factual, accurate things about the anti-Israel crowd?
I think you were one of the first people to point out that the commando raid on the maru (while stupid for all sorts of reasons) wasn't actually illegal. This changed the direction of the conversation. Every time someone called it illegal someone just reposted your link. If instead of doing that, you had simply ranted about bigotry, noone would have listened to a thing you said.
1. That was GD, this is the Pit. I'm allowed to vent frustration with the non-stop tactics of the board's small coterie of hardcore anti-Israel posters. That some folks have decided to nibble fiercely on my ankles about it doesn't really bother me.
2. No, it didn't really change the direction of the conversation, as people were continually claiming that it was illegal, that it wasn't allowed in international waters, that it was piracy, etc, etc, etc.
Which is the point: some who're part of the anti-Israel crowd will reliably traffic in error and fiction if it bolsters their narrative, and most of their fellow travelers won't call out others as long as they too are advancing an anti-Israel narrative (e.g. Jimmy Carter). And that, in fact, they'll swarm angrily if someone does call them out.
or 
.