http://reportsfromgaza.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/hafrada-is-for-hebrew-what-apartheid-was-for-afrikaans/

It is important to note that it is not enough to boycott settlement products or businesses that do business in the settlements. The boycott must target ordinary folk in Israel. They are the supporters and enablers of the settlements and the mass-slaughter in Gaza. Just read the zionist press and take a look at Israeli poll results.

I wrote:

"Okay, so Klein raises a number of good points. But it is not nearly as extensive an article as I was hoping for. She does not mention universities. Israeli universities are the main centers for researching the best methods and planning the genocidal campaign against the Palestinian people. She should also have pointed out that for the boycott to work, it is not nearly enough to boycott businesses or industries functioning in the so-called “occupied territories” (the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) as the British government falsely claimed it was preparing to implement (at the same time as it was upgrading economic and trade ties with Israel!) ; the boycott must extend beyond, hit every industry in Israel, even those that have nothing to do with apartheid. Klein’s suggestion of picking and choosing which factories and firms to boycott and which to spare, makes the application of the boycott a practical impossibility — and a moot point. After all, firms whose owners are actually supportive of apartheid and vote for apartheid-supporting parties and leaders (all politicians standing elections in Israel are in favor of apartheid), could always engage in the kind of double-speak that has kept Israeli apartheid going for the past 60 years, claiming they are not supporters of apartheid. By Klein’s logic, the firms would have to be spared sanctions. Doesn’t work. The Israeli economy must be brought to the verge of collapse if need be, should Israelis maintain their stubborn adherence to apartheid. ONLY a divestment and sanctions campaign of this nature can force zionists to abandon their genocidal policies — although it is also possible that it would not bring about the desired effects, necessitating a military campaign to put an end to the existential threat to the entire region posed by Israel and zionist genocidal frenzy."

Don't get me wrong – she's done excellent work. But, like Chomsky and so many others, it doesn't go far enough, and it's very hard to understand how such otherwise intelligent people so often miss what's so obvious to us ordinary "laypeople".

And again, it makes one wonder…

It's the most effective (especially if as you say domestic firms profiting from Israel are included), but I would also like to see some pressure for:

(a) downgrading of diplomatic ties, even expulsion of consulate and embassy staff;

(b) a balancing of the situation where people or institutions may send funds to Israeli settlers freely but those who do the same to Hamas are prosecuted;

(c) a formal examination of the antidemocratic means by which Lobby organisations co-opt politicians (whole parties, really) and pressure journalists to toe the line;

(d) a commitment from government to use the policing and intelligence resources (surveillance, particularly) of the state to monitor current and review past actions of Israeli partisans deemed inimical to American interests, just as they do with Islamists, or indeed anyone with a foreign axe to grind;

(e) prominent people, particularly Jews who have expressed a sometimes rather ugly solidarity with Israel (let's say Jon Voigt and John Malkovich for starters) to make a clear statement as to what they think of Israel's actions;

(f) a genuinely fair and thorough public inquiry into the USS Liberty tragedy;

(g) a high-level effort to increase public awareness of the Nakba, including mandatory inclusion, alongside the Holocaust, in approved curricula, and

(h) a public effort to lift the number of Arabs/Muslims in government, particularly with regard to foreign policy.

One other thing would be to challenge the EAA and TRA amendments which function as 'antiboycott' laws in the US, which may prevent BDS action from fulfiling it's promise.

But perhaps the very best thing Mr Obama could do on his first day at work would be to acknowledge the dreadful bias of the US approach to the conflict over decades, apologise for it, and promise to do all he can to rectify it.

Such a statement would need to include a message to American Jews that the interests of Israel will not be ignored but will from here on take their rightful place in US governance as subsidiary to the interests of the US as a whole. Israel will be supported, but murderous behaviour which sullies America's good name in the world will not.