That example of antisemitism was drawn up nine years ago. "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."Weirdly enough, I was watching the Who Do You Think You Are? episode with Ruby Wax today. Her parents left Vienna after the Germans invaded.
It seems her father was arrested as part of a strategy to "encourage" Austrian Jews to leave the country. He was freed after a few months of unpleasant captivity as long as he signed a document that he would leave Austria as soon as possible. Not surprisingly, he did along with 100,000 others iirc.
The remaining Viennese Jews were restricted in what they could eat, when and where they could obtain food and couldn't access their bank accounts. They were attacked in the streets when trying to get food. Many starved.
Eventually they were shipped out to ghettos where many died due to the awful conditions. Interestingly, it wasn't described as died from malnutrition or ill-health, but as murder as part of a genocide.
Now, I don't want to draw any comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy in Palestine with that of the Nazis in Austria, because that would be anti-Semitism as defined by the IHRA. But it did strike me how cleverly worded that definition was.
I dare say a lot of public bodies and others that adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism AND the examples would hesitate now about several of the examples.
Even the incident above of using water pistols against Jews, under the IHRA principles, would only be antisemitism if they were squirting water only at Jews.
It should be obvious what constitutes antisemitism but it’s been devalued not just by what Israel has become but because too many have used accusations of antisemitism to protect Israeli policies.