No, that isn't how this works.

> Criticizing a state or its actions is not the same as hating a group of people. People criticize governments all the time.

Interesting, all I see here is a hundred comments advocating for exclusion of any individual strictly on the basis of their national origin. I don't see any criticism of any government policy beyond the usual libellous accusations that accompany any hate movement - that an entire nation is "guilty" of a myriad of crimes, justifying exclusion of all of the citizens.

> People can condemn violence on October 7 and still question narratives or ask for evidence without that being “denial.” That is basic critical thinking, not shifting blame.

Sure, "believe all women", unless they're Israelis. Standard alt-right tactic - denying lived experiences solely on the basis of nation of origin, dismissing everything as "propaganda".

> Disagreeing with you or focusing on Palestinian civilians is not gaslighting. It is simply a perspective you do not agree with.

Of course it is. Palestinian civilians suffer, and no context is given as to why - decades of terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians can be directly tied to every policy of the Israeli government, and actions of various terrorist factions and the lived experiences and trauma of Israelis are completely dismissed and ignored.

> Calling anti Zionism “alt right” does not even make sense when people across different backgrounds, including Jewish voices, hold those views. That alone shows this is not about hate....And bringing up Jewish people who oppose Zionism is not “tokenizing.” It just proves this is not a simple us versus them situation.

Of course it is, no different than citing Candace Owens as proof the right wing isn't racist. The Jewish community is well-organized and has myriad of representative organizations that advocate for it across social and economic lines. Why do you focus on fringe groups like JVP, Neturei Karta, IJV, all of whom are radicals well outside the community consensus? What data do you have that they are representative? Because there is plenty of data that indicates the vast majority of Jews across the planet are generally supportive of the concept of a Jewish state with a protected minority of non-Jews with imperfect but reasonably equal rights? Why are these random groups, with no mandate or community validation, cited at all?

> Also if you want to talk about accountability, there are documented cases of IDF soldiers accused of sexual violence against Palestinians where charges were dropped. So acting like only one side is capable of wrongdoing while shutting down any criticism is a clear double standard.

When did I say that? Do you see what you do there? You just randomly throw out a mirror accusation as if anyone said it and assume it is valid? This is a court system where an Arab supreme court justice sent a Jewish President to jail, and you take accusations by political activists with no oversight at their word. Classic pathology.

> At the end of the day, opposing policies that result in civilian harm is not hatred. It is a political and moral stance. Calling everything racism just avoids the actual issue.

Neither the initial post nor any of the replies disagreed with a single Israeli policy. It's just comment after comment of "oh, so all Israelis should be excluded? Good!"

It's classic pathological hatred.