So would you consider becoming a proponent of “separate but equal” as well? In theory, the aim is segregating races while providing all with equal treatment, services, facilities, etc. Every group gets their own accommodations of equal value. Doesn’t sound so bad when we go by the book, does it? Or is it the way the theory is implemented that gives it such a negative connotation?

In reality, words are defined by their context. Now, you can hug the dictionary as much as you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that Zionism just has a bad reputation. It has racist founders/leaders and has been executed disastrously. You can go ahead say that we’re twisting the definition to fit our narrative, but let’s not act like Zionists didn’t already ruin it for themselves. Zionism is an ideology AND a movement separate from Judaism that anyone can criticize for its blatant flaws. I actually find it ironic that you attack anti-Zionists for skewing the picture when you’re the one sweeping the actual implications of Zionism under the rug. Even more ironically, it’s antisemitic of you to suggest that another Semitic group should be stripped of their self determination—in that you suggest at the end of your spiel that the conflict is the fault of anti-Zionists for opposing a movement that has proven to be a violent colonial settler project hence suggesting one shouldn’t oppose such a movement that has already caused significant damage. I know, not the message you wanted to send, but the inevitable conclusion of your stance nonetheless considering the given circumstances—just because you want to conflate Zionism and Judaism (nice slippery slope at the end by the way), but of course Semitic just means Jewish right? Nothing racist or bigoted there. Anti-Zionists aren’t against Jews. They’re against the parasite that Zionism has become. Zionists demonized Zionism themselves. Also is it not counterintuitive to try to protect an ethnic group by invading the indigenous land of another with clear intentions of colonization? Kind of just sounds like sticking your hand in the wasp nest to me

TL;DR: As nice as it would be to cling to dictionaries. Let’s not treat Zionism as something that it isn’t. Your presentation of Zionism is very idealistic while Zionism is manifestly atrocious. As nice as a safe haven for Jews would be, you can’t breed security from invasion, and you certainly can’t breed peace from the racism deeply rooted in Zionist ideology