Seems pretty dishonest if you ask me. There’s enough real anti-Semitism around without going after people like this.

It seems to me that you have taken a well-meaning article and found, as you are fond of doing, some implication in which you find offense. Except this time you’ve based your case on a bit of a mistranslation.

If you used the correct translation, you would see that it implies that using correct definitions would “help” or “allow” in avoiding a decline of anti-Zionism into anti-Semitism, not stop such a decline. So the writer doesn’t believe using the correct definitions will “stop” anti-Semitism, he believes it will help to prevent it, because he doesn’t want stupid people who wish to criticize Israel to think this means they must therefore criticize Jews and become anti-Semites, or to believe that if they criticize Israel they must be criticizing the Jewish people.

Apparently you’d like to go after him for this. Maybe because you don’t accept any distinction - I don’t know. Or maybe you just have to much time on your hands.

If you’re going to be in the business of micro-analyzing people’s words in search of things you don’t like, you’d better get the words right, don’t you think?

And I still don’t know what your reply is supposed to mean. Apparently I’m unable to parse your words sufficiently well to have a clue what you’re trying to say.

The original Spanish DOES NOT insert the additional verb “stop” into the sentence. In fact it uses the verb of the previous phrase to extend to the second phrase.

Regardless of that, I think Frank Furedi’s description applies here:

“(You) interpret what are in fact confused and ambiguous references …as expressions of anti-Semitism.

“Consequently, the charge that a certain statement is ‘anti-Semitic’ should not be accepted at face value. Statements and acts need to be analysed and interpreted in the context in which they were made or carried out. It is particularly important to resist the temptation to characterise speech or behaviour as anti-Semitic by second-guessing its real meaning. An objective assessment demands analysis of what was actually said, rather than speculation about its ‘true’ or ‘hidden’ meaning. Just as we already have the irrational concept of ‘unwitting racism’ in the UK, we may soon end up with charges of ‘unwitting anti-Semitism’ being made against those individuals judged by other people’s interpretive wits to be anti-Semitic.”

This is what it’s all about, devaluing the Shoah.

Catalunyans need to read up its own history:

There were anti-Jewish pogroms in Catalonia and other areas of Spain in 1391 which forced Jews to convert or to go into exile. There is a reason why Spain had been Judenrein for many centuries.

As to their cancelling the Holocaust Day ceremonies, they were just politically inspired. Their cancellations speak volumes about their real attitudes towards Jews.