Posted by Lou Pilder on August 16, 2006, at 8:59:29
There are definitions of antisemitism given by the EUMC and would like to have dialog here to bring the ,what is called the 3-objection rule into focus here which will also bring into focus the 3- consecutive- post rule.
The EUMC has defined antisemitism in a group, like we have here, as it is antisemitic when Jews, or a single Jewish person in the group is being blamed for real or imagined wrongdoings. This is also defined as scapegoating in other definitions by other entities.
Another aspect of their definition is that Jews, or a single Jewish person in the group, is being demonized or called evil or bad. There could also be in the group demonizing or sterotypical allegations about a Jewish person or their motives. There is also the use of ex-post facto against a Jewish person while the others in the group are not subject to ex-post facto. There is also ad hoc allowed toward a jewish person, while that would be considered "flaming" if it was done to others in the group that were not Jewish.
In the what is called the 3- complaint- rule, and I do not consider a request to Dr. Hsiung to ask about his thinking to be a complaint, I feel terribly uncomfotable being in a group when I am threatened by the leader with expulsion if I ask him about what his thinking is about his rules.
But the issue here is if that rule and also the 3 consecutive post rule is antisemitic.
I will proceed to show you more so that you can make you oen decision.
I am not permitted her toshow posts concernoing this subject. If you would like for posts that could go to your understanding about this so that you can make your own decision, you can email me at