Jim's Post was from 2011. The IHRA "definition" (nicked from a defunct and discarded definition from the EUMC in 2005) wasn't adopted until 2016. It may interest you to know that the original EUMC definition was drawn up by a panel consisting almost exclusively of representatives of pro-Israel lobby groups, one of the reasons it was quietly dropped (never adopted, in fact) by the EU as it was politically toxic. Over the years here I've done this to death several times, so if you don't believe me look it up.

Apropos of criticising the behaviour of the Israeli regime, my view is that equating it with that of the Nazis is made without regard for outcome. In other words, don't do it. Repressive regimes will always show attributes similar to what went on in Nazi Germany, but pointing to them in Israel's case isn't constructive however appropriate you think the comparison is. Aspects of the apartheid regimes in South Africa were definitely similar to what the Nazis got up to and aspects of the Israeli regime's behaviour towards Gazans are definitely comparable to apartheid. You don't get a free pass just by calling yourself a Jewish state. And if you're talking just about Israel you're not obliged to mention similar bad behaviour by other countries at the same time. You might have done that last week or be about to do it next week when you're talking about those countries. Maybe we do need a definition. Sorry, but that definition stinks.