People are talking excitedly about a big new paper on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign, coming out of the "Global Forum on Anti-Semitism,"a conference organized by the Israeli government. The paper is evidently authored by Israel lobbyists Mitchell Bard and Gil Troy, here it is:
I say excitedly because the authors admit they can’t defend their position in the west– settlement and occupation are indefensible. Well for now, anyway! Maybe not after the next big war?
In the current climate, Israel advocates are always going to lose a fight over settlements and occupation, or at best get mired in stalemate. BDS shifts the terrain, making the battle one over Israel’s right to exist, over the legitimacy of Zionism, over the anti-Semitic tropes shaping the anti-Israel movement, and the rank anti-Semitism behind the disproportionate, obsessive focus on Israel.
So they need to smear the messenger with wild mischaracterizations of BDS: that it is connected to Islamists, and that the campaign is well funded, and that it is linked to 9/11. Why not Saddam Hussein?
BDS is also part of the broader Islamist strategy to undermine the West. Especially in North America, activists need to understand how positions they are taking are aiding the same people who support shooting up Fort Hood, trying to down commercial jets on Christmas, and succeeded in killing nearly three thousand people on September 11, 2001.
These people are in total denial that the boycott movement is a growing grassroots effort in response to Israeli intransigence and international compliance with same.
{ 110 comments }
It’s just the latest spin-off from the world illustrated by The Transparent Cabal, and it is just as transparent. My my, what chumps these Israel Firsters think the US masses are–and why not? Didn’t Goebbels have good reason to believe in his free Volk radio broadcasts?
“My my, what chumps these Israel Firsters think the US masses are–and why not?”
My first thoughts exactly, too.
thanks for mentioning Sniegoski’s fact-rich research, The Transparent Cabal
I first read what might be Sniegoski’s first draft of that book on his website: http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/snieg_conc1.htm
Great book and a well written account- given the documentation and quotes involved. Opened my eyes to the real root causes of the Iraq invasion, since the media explanation was very weak. You could not find a review of his book on mainstream press back then.
In reality BDS is a way to insure Israel’s survival, to make it a part of the world, not an isolated fortress state. A Brooklyn Jewish friend of mine named Marvin – a pretty tough guy by the way — once said to me out of the blue: “Israel just can’t admit it made a mistake.” Meaning you just can’t take someone else’s land and pretend it is all right.
The sad part is, you’ve nailed it exactly. South Africa saw the peaceable end to its apartheid only after the success of boycotts against the white government and captains of industry there. It was only after boycotts made Western support — as aptly represented by Jack Abramoff and the IFF — unprofitable that they dropped support for South Africa faster than John McCain ditched his first wife. And (I believe) only because of that, outright civil war was avoided.
That’s exactly right Larry and the complete opposite of Witty’s theory that BDS would isolate Israel.
Is it any wonder he has avoided posting to this thread?
The problem is that many Jewish Zionists believe that the collective Jewish identity can’t survive without an enemy, so there is no motivation to preserve Jewish bodies if the Jewish soul will perish. Even the nuttiest Afrikaner knew that his white identity could survive majority rule, if not his/her supremacist prerogative. An even more profound revolution of the mind is necessary in this case than that of racist South Africa.
I know, I know, I post this link a lot, but I am continuously amazed at how completely Gabriel Ash summed up Israeli-supporter’s hasbara in four phrases:
http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-to-make-case-for-israel-and-win.html
Dammit Mooser! Where were you when Emma was around? :)
Gosh darn it Chaos! I’ve posted that link so many times you would think (wouldn’t you) that somebody else might come up with it.
Anyway, I saw where Emma was going from her first post, and I just let her talk herself out, like she will ever come back! She shot her wad in that thread, and can’t go any further without explicitly revealing her stance. I doubt we will see her again, the fact that she didn’t know how common and irritating her type of equivication-cum-Hasbara would be to the posters here showed me a lot.
Yeah, I’ve overcome my inertia and finally bookmarked it. :)
Yeah, I had the same thought. Emma tried and tried, like the little engine that could–but Emma was in way over her head. One day, at least until Google and YouTube have totally gone hasbara blinkers, and the US congress has put teeth
in its hardly veiled attempt to coral the internet in the name of US children and
US security, Emma will be seen by many more as carrying hasbara freight in a child’s book that is less than golden.
she has forged the identify of a leftist exactly the same way the zionists assisnated the Hamas guy in Dubai! they are so good in doing this.
I agree about Emma – as I posted in that thread. However, as some of us realized (see Shmuel and Donald’s comments) the Emma poster represents a new line of attack, one specifically designed for left-leaning/liberal blogs. I’ve seen her like pop up at DK and openleft as well as greenwald (all of which I monitor – just for kicks – woe is me). It’s a more sophisticated version of the troll we saw before – the new design taking the form of wolf in sheep clothing as you guys say.
The question really is – what are they hoping to accomplish with this gambit? most commenters on most left-leaning/pro human rights/liberal blogs are quite knowledgeable and have facts at their finger tips. Almost none stand to be convinced by some hashed-over neocon ploys – the’ve 9for the most part) been through the tomfriedmanian disingenuous subterfuge operations. They know what the drum beat about Iran is all about – and/or what has really felled HCR (hint: it’s not the lack of ‘votes” but something more invertebrate).
My first hypothsis is that it’s simply a new kind of attempt at deflecting the conversation and/or egging people to make comments that would show their “true” stripes (eg Hamas ’supporters”, gevalt!). Which can then be used to cast aspersions on the blog in an attempt to get a clamp-down on moderation. Something like this was done to the Guardian, especially the Cif comments section that’s gone from great to pathetic over the past year. With most of the best commenters moving on to greener pasteurs where the censurship is not as iron handed. Similar attempts cowed the talkback sections of haaretz and ynet (mostly the right wingers remain now).
My second guess is more disturbing. I think Emma was deployed as a scout. There’s going to be an all-out battle launched to evicerate the blogoshere from the lively discourse seen as ‘anti_Israel”. The people who mounted the idiotic hit in Dubai will not stop at niceties of internet freedom or information exchange. It would be useful perhaps to start guessing – if you were them, and you know what they are capable of, and you live in a bubble (ie assuming immunity and no need for accountability) – what would be your next step and how would you carry it out?
So unfortunately I take little comfort from the prompt disappearance of Emma – since she seemed to be a tool, not a person. Somewhere out there, the responses that greeted her are being analysed and “improvements” are planned – maybe to determine how well the hamas/hezbollah angles work. I dread to see the next model(s).
Thanks i like! good analysis.
As far as I’m concerned Emma = Mya. Only difference is, Mya sort of has a sense of which lines she can’t cross.
Launching Emma is a way to determine how much is known by uncontrolled people about the real history of the Arab-Israeli conflict–the next step beyond pure Academia, the internet exchange
of information. Emma simultaneously seeks to divert the key issues into a small detail, relative to the general problem.
I think you’re spot on Danaa,
But I don’t dread it at all. We knew this would come when Israel announced it would target what they perceived as a movement to delegitimize Israel. The lenghts that they are going to smacks of desperation and panick, and as they alwways do, they will overplay their hand.
Mondoweiss has become a pertty high profile and influiential blog and it’s no surprise that it will become a target. There might well be more sohisticated and refined efforts to drive a wedge between the participants, or even estrange this blog, but Emma has done us a great service in that reagrd. Forewarned is forearmed as they say, and new members will be sruitinized all the more.
Rest assured, not matter how honed and sophisticated the subversion becomes, it will always be exposed because like scum, their true agenda will always rise to the surface sooner or later.
Shingo, the reason for my dread is simple: in this world money talk (maybe there’s another world where it doesn’t, but it ain’t this one). You – and all the other good commenters here – may have the strengths of their knowledge of facts and clarity of their conviction. But we must not underestimate the power of wealth and power or the willingness of those who have it to suppress challenges from any who represent a threat. The internet is a major threat to all the great, and not so great powers. For example, I believed in the Bilderberg conspiracy (which maybe I do – not saying…) they the main topic they are discussing is that – what to do about a medium that allows free flow of information.
Sending better models to troll the nets is one thing. I agree that alone is far from scary – given the brain power and clarity around here. But what happens when these tools prove insufficiently effective? look at what is happening in Canada or to the Guardian and BBC. We may believe in the rule of law, but the law can, unfortunately, be bought. And there are other means besides law – there’s information to be found and there are carrots to be handed out. Ever thought what would be Phil’s response if he got a job offer of a lifetime?
I am just musing, BTW….
Danaa,
Both of your hypotheses are completely in line with the document Phil and Adam have so graciously brought to our attention:
Driving a Wedge between Soft Critics and Hard Delegitimizers
BDS Draws a Line in the Sand – Either testing or recruiting progressives.
Critics of Israeli policy can in fact be particularly useful in this fight … invite left-wing critics of Israel who nevertheless believe in Israel’s existence to stand up for Israel on this defining issue.
Israeli critics of Israeli policy need to understand that in an age of instant communication, what they say “within the family,” echoes throughout the world … But ALL Israelis should watch their language, understanding that false Nazi/Apartheid/Racism analogies feed Israel’s harshest enemies, who wish to wipe out the state.
We need a creative, edgy, systematic outreach to pro-Israel bloggers, who are willing to target BDSers and delegitimizers, exposing their tactics, ridiculing them as necessary, and, as much as possible putting them on the defensive.
Good post citizen. The problem for Israel and co is the Internet on genral. It doesn’t matter what Youtube and Google do, most the Internet gas become a propagandists worst nightmare.
Most of Israel’s mythology is based on events that were poorly reported or re-written by Israeli propagandists , bur the fact is that Israel could notpull off the propaganda coupof 1967 in this day and age. Gouys like Tom Friedman have even tried to portray the 2006 war as a victory for Israel, butno kne is buying it. Even Israeli supporters have given up trying to pretend that Hamas started the war un 2008 (Witty being the exception) because it’s futile.
The Hasbara machine simply has no way of dealing with Internet and efforts at censorship will not only fail, but compound their problems.
to target BDSers and delegitimizers, exposing their tactics, ridiculing them as necessary, and, as much as possible putting them on the defensive.
In short, to engage in ad hominem argument, attacking persons (ridicule) who hold opposing views but avoid dealing with the facts. This is typical of the entire hasbara movement – it is hollow inside, without substance.
“Launching Emma is a way to determine how much is known by uncontrolled people about the real history of the Arab-Israeli conflict–the next step beyond pure Academia, the internet exchange
of information.”
Well Citizen, if she was a measuring instrument, I did not even release a 10th of what could be used to countermand what she was proposing. They have no idea what they are about to get into, and that is good.
Not to mention: Circulate information on Muslims acting contrary to Islam. If the people of countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia knew their “pious” leaders were really alcoholics, gamblers and perverts, they might hasten regime change.
It works (and has been used) on Jewish and even Israeli “enemies” as well. Tried and true sleaze. Good thing their cause is so just.
Dana,
If money and powerwere the only factors play, this debate would have been over a long time ago. I read a wonderful excerpt from Finkelstein’s new book about Gaza yesterday that surprised me. He pointed out that, in spite of the
MAM uniformly parroting the Israeli version of events, all polls unanimously show a major shift away from Israel. What is most surprising, is that the biggest shifts are among the Jewish community.
This shift has been consistent and ongoing since 2002 and rest assured, it is irreversible. I do agree that we need to be vigillant, because the Israeli Hasbra juggernaut will most certainly be intensifying it’s efforts to degrees we have never seen, but these will only serve to compound their efforts.
Yes, money talks, but there are some things even money cannot buy.
Shmuel – thanks for bringing up the words of the pamphlet (was it a document?) itself. It really gives a perfect backdrop to the Emma program. Though, I must say, given the speed with which the sub-routines were made transparent, perhaps the programming language is not up to the task?
it’s funny though that throughout said document there’s this underlying assumption that there exists an identifiable group of “left wing critics’ of israel, who are somehow sitting on a virtual fence surrounding the tribal mishpacha, and they can be talked into getting off the fence – and back into the circle of wagons – just by using a few scary words about ‘delegitimization”. If only the straying lambs could be shown the errors of their ways!
Goes to show just how hermetically sealed the bubble of israel has become. The “study” authors obviously don’t realize that once someone has taken a step towards BDS, there are probably not too many cries of “moser” or threats of ex-communication (Spinoza style) that can bring them back into the “fold”. It is also astounding that said authors did not find it necessary to turn a similarly critical eye towards Israel’s own behavior. Apparently, a country with “leaders” who feel it is perfectly appropriate to insult a vice president of their only true friend, does not recognize the principle of action and reaction. Maybe instead of moralists, psychologists, sociologists and human rights activists we should send them a few good Physics teachers?
Yes, I know the reaction is not always instantaneous, but time delays can be handled with a bit more advanced Physics. Piece of cake, really….
Supposing for the sake of argument that Emma was a hasbarist, I think the way to handle people is to concede their legitimate points and then go after the points which aren’t so legitimate. In her case, concede that Hezbollah was indiscriminate in its fire and agree that they committed war crimes, and then reiterate that Israel’s crimes were on a far greater scale, and Israel’s occupation of south Lebanon is what gave rise to Hezbollah in the first place.
I don’t think it’s a good idea for people to assume they can “see through” people like Emma. You all have your suspicions and that’s fine, but suspicion isn’t proof. There are probably plenty of people who hold Emma’s views or views similar to hers who aren’t, you know, conscious provocateurs engaged in some organized plot. If you want to see this website discredited, one way to do it is to react with visceral hostility to people like Emma and have several people all acting like they know she’s a plant–maybe she was, but you don’t know it and many casual visitors to that thread might see it the way I did–and if the casual visitor is saturated with mainstream views on the I/P conflict they’d be tempted to dismiss the whole website as a hangout site for paranoid people with crazy ideas about Israel.
There are also occasional comments here which really do smack of genuine anti-semitism. There was that guy Phil banned who was a classic old-fashioned conservative Christian anti-semite–the guy who thought America was just great until the Jews took over. Those of us who are either anti-Zionist or anti-mainstream Zionist (I like Judah Magnes, from what little I’ve read about him) are automatically going to be tarred with the brush of anti-semitism, but it just makes things worse when the real thing appears here. There are also the occasional commenters who quote Robert Faurisson as an authority–that’s exactly the kind of commenter that the hasbarist types will latch onto as typical of this website. It’s a lie, but it would be a lie based on a few commenters who really do pop up here and say stupid or disgusting things.
” There are probably plenty of people who hold Emma’s views or views similar to hers who aren’t, you know, conscious provocateurs…”
Like me, for example. Taken at face value, I agreed with the bulk of what she said. Though it could be I’m a Manchurian candidate or something, brainwashed while held prisoner by crazed settler sympathizers who inculcated an unholy mixture of Finkelstein and HRW propaganda into my neural system, until a code word is uttered in my presence. Witty probably holds the key, but perhaps he’s forgotten it, and that’s why he keeps spouting gibberish and cliches, desperately trying to unlock the secret in my subconscious which will destroy this website once and for all.
This would explain a lot, actually.
We did that. Look at the first response I ever made to her here is exactly that. Look at her responses that followed — she rebuffed it. My stance toward her changed when it became obvious that her goal was purely subversive — she focused like a laser on tying Hezbollah’s rockets to Finkelstein, and to us. She brought nothing else to the table, even after a dozen or so posts by her.
You make a good case Donald and I admire your ability to distance yourself from the subject matter to temper you passions and objectivity. I do not have that quality, at least not when it comes to this topic. It is too incendiary for me to be polite about it.
In the case of Emma, it wasn’t a matter of someone proposing an alternative point of view. Contributors like WJ present opposing views, but does so from what appears to be an honest position, and he is respected for that, even if his arguments are met with occasional hostility.
Emma was being clearly disingenuous and evasive. Having traded blows with more than my share of Israeli propagandists, I can smell the tell tale signs that someone isn’t Kosher. You may see it as a flaw or paranoia, but if someone holds a genuine empathy for the Palestinians, I fail to see how they can obsess about Hezbollah’s indiscriminate firing of rockets when Israel was perpetrating the same crime by higher order of magnitude.
I have similar discussion with right wing Islamophobes who cry crocodile tears over women’s rights in Afghanistan, while glossing over the fact we’re butchering 20 civilians at a time, or worse still, arguing that bombing is justified because of the way women are treated. No one can possibly object to the plight of women, but these priorities do take a back seat in the context of a civil war.
Last but not least, Emma’s line of argument was entirely consistent with the text book Hasbara techniques:
a) insisting that she supported the Palestinians, but that the Palestinians mode of resistance was the problem, something that Witty does a lot.
b) that the Palestinians and Hamas were two entirely different entities (even though they elected Hams to represent them). Witty does this a lot too.
agreeing that Israel were not blameless, but insisting that the discussion remain focused on Hebollah, not Israel.
You might believe she was frightened off by the hostile reception she was given, but she didn’t strike me as a wallflower and at least a few defended her position, so she can’t have believed she was alone.
There may very well be people who hold Emma’s views, though they tend to be either poorly informed about the subject or largely disinterested in the topic. Emma was none of these. Furthermore, Mondoweiss is not a blog that soccer moms are going to accidentally come across, so I fail to see why we should waste time with false pleasantries trying to make people feel welcome.
Anti-semitism shouldn’t be tolerated under any circumstance, and as you’ve pointed out, Phill has rightly banned such commentators, though there is no guard against anti Semites coming to this blog. We’re abundantly aware that the presence of such individuals is not only repugnant, but damaging to the blog’s credibility.
” I admire your ability to distance yourself from the subject matter to temper you passions and objectivity.”
I mostly lack that with RW, actually. Endless streams of BS take their toll.
As for politeness, I think it should be maintained until the person has clearly demonstrated bad faith or racism or some other severe moral failing. Not that I always adhere to this. As for bad faith, that’s a judgment call–one thread with one person fighting off several isn’t good enough evidence for bad faith, IMO. People aren’t at their best in those situations. You guys might be right about her for all I know, but there wasn’t enough evidence and an outsider looking at this would think this was a typical blog situation where the newcomer with a different viewpoint gets mobbed. I’ve been at the receiving end in such situations and the psychology involved is interesting–people get angry and become invested in the idea that you are as bad a person as possible. And the person on the receiving end will sometimes try to dig in. It’s not a good way to understand a person.
Now many of us including me are pretty rude to RW, who gets mobbed, but having read him for quite a while here and elsewhere there’s not much mystery about where he is coming from. I ‘m pretty sure I could give an accurate and dispassionate account of his views. And one can also have the straightforward sort of racist who one can dismiss after reading him (or her) in about five seconds. But most people deserve more of a hearing.
Anyway, since Emma doesn’t appear to be coming back it’s not that important about her in particular–I just didn’t think the blog crew was at its best in how she was handled.
Donald, I have to agree with most here regarding Emma the poseur, including myself. But it so happens that there was something really disingenuous about this poster, as others pointed out, especially the focus on a one side, refusing to budge left or right. This kind of single-mindedness is not typical of other commenters here, who tend to be willing to travel on several roads – sometimes all at once. Then, once out of ammunition on this one topic she chose – hezbollah’s supposed “war crimes’ (no more egregious than any other partisan or revolutionary group, really), Emma disappears.
Now you Donald, are plenty credible though you may disagree with say, my “taking hezbollah off the hook”. But you do know nuance because as you admit, if it’s about crimes, then magnitudes matter. What singled Emma out as a plant is hardly one issue raised or another. It’s the single-mindedness of her posts. No matter what anyone pointed out the answer never wavered – even as she claimed to agree about israeli violations or palestinian rights.
Emma had the look and feel of a plant. G
That’s a good summation Danaa,
The single mindedness you refer to reminds me of a podcast of a debate I heard between neocon Patrick Clawson and George Galloway a few years back. The topic was Iran’s alleged nuclear program. Clawson, an unapologetic Israeli propagandist displayed the same rigidity and single mindedness that we witnessed from Emma. When Galloway brought up the fact that Israel had hundreds of nukes, and why should Israel be allowed to have them and not Iran, Clawson simply ignored the question and asked Galloway if he was for or against nuclear disarmament, and if her was, then he surely must be opposed to Iran having nukes.
It was an incredible display of evasion and dihonesty.
Chaos,
I noticed in your exchande with Emma that she mentioned having seem a house in Haifa that had been hit by a Katusha rocket, yet that seemed to be the only point of her outrage. No mention of the nombonh of the building in Qana or the attack on the UN building, or the fact that Israeli planes bombed civilian vehicles carrying passengers that had abandoned their homes and fled as per Israel’s instructions, let alone the 1 million cluster bombs that Israel dropped over the three days prior to the ceasefire.
No. She’d seen one house in Israel bombed and that told her the whole story.
No. She’d seen one house in Israel bombed and that told her the whole story.
In and of itself, that’s a normal position we’ve seen many times, and her relatively radical criticism of Israel is certainly bread and butter around here. What made me suspicious is the juxtaposition of the two. I agree with Donald that we must seem a bit whacko to some of the lurkers in our handling of this, but I disagree that there are plenty of people who hold such views, sympathies and nuances. It’s the mix – also factoring in tone and sense of identification – that just didn’t seem right. All that talk about “grey areas” for example, didn’t fit with her unequivocal condemnation of Israel on many points. Anti-Zionists don’t talk that way, and those who do will rarely take anti-Zionist positions (a little like the juice-seller in the Jaffa video: “it’s really complicated”). It’s ok not to be an a-Z here, but it’s not ok to be dishonest, and that’s what I suspect Emma was being, for whatever motives.
Shingo pointed out that she “didn’t seem like a wallflower”. My feeling exactly. She wrote like a blog-forum pro, yet explained her longstanding lurking as a result of her “not being one for online chats” (or something to that effect). Her disappearance might very well be the result of the hostility she encountered and the subsequent speculation regarding her honesty and motives, but that would be incongruous with the patience and perseverence she showed, and her “it’s late – goodnight” exit. I would have expected her to give up sooner, or to tell us all to fuck off.
Wow! What a discussion! Covered it like I do a bagle with cream cheese, pretty damned adequately! But if I may, there’s one point you might have not considered. Emma was simply shocked, shocked I tell you that there were actually people who would disagree with what she thought of as common knowledge and conventional wisdom.
I see that all the time in my discussions on Israel- any deviation from the script of Exodus (with small allowances for Zionist intransigence because Jews have suffered so much) is met with disbelief and a kind of condescending sneer, just as Emma was shocked that nice people like we seem to be can have any truck with Hezbollah.
If she was a “plant”, she’s about as common a plant as there is.
Shmuel, that’s what I mean by weak evidence. There are rare people who can put up with abuse and keep a fairly calm tone. In a twisted way RW does this, though in his case I don’t find it admirable for various reasons. Other people can pull it off.
The viewing of a house destroyed by Hezbollah rockets would naturally make her more sensitive to that aspect of it, and more allergic to anything that sounded too pro-Hezbollah. As for grey areas, I talk like that, or have in the past. I’ve finally lost almost all patience with Israel–for the most part, they deserve the same respect a defender of apartheid should have received. My attitude used to be that blame for the conflict should be split 70 percent Israeli, 30 percent Palestinian. Nowadays I’d go more 90/10 or maybe even higher. Maybe Emma is where I was until fairly recently. But when it comes to the killing of civilians, yeah, both sides do it, even if Israel does it much more and so in that sense there is a gray area. So Emma very much sounded like me for the most part, or the uneasiness I feel about “lining up” with one side of a conflict to the extent that one can’t condemn atrocities on both sides (without equating the scale or provocations involved). In her case she might be an Israeli or American Jew who really does agree with most of the criticism made here of Israel, but who also wants to persuade her cohorts and so doesn’t want to be linked in any way with support for people who shoot rockets indiscriminately. Which is reasonable.
There were one or two false notes in her posts, or so it seemed to me, but that’s not conclusive of anything. The fact that she hasn’t come back is the most suspicious aspect of her to me, given her patience, but again not conclusive.
Which is all I think I’ll say on this. Bad enough some of us (including me) talk about RW all the time.
I think we actually need to speak urgently to the old champions of the African American civil rights movement. This racist crap is exactly the sort of thing they had to cope with. No need for us to reinvent the wheel, and besides, we’d probably make some new friends to boot.
It’s time for African Americans to start paying forward and oppose Israeli racism.
Good luck with that; check out the stance of the Black Caucus in Congress on the I-P issue and the US role in it.
I know, I know, but there are new members now.
And how many members of the Black Caucus in Congress had anything to do with the Civil Right movement? Not to be crass, but there it is.
Time to remind them, then.
lol. yeah. and here is my rep getting endorsed by the local Jewish community here. (Sheila jackson lee) http://tinyurl.com/yevfgmw
I suggest you check the executive editor of The Black Commentator, Bill Fletcher out. He is already deeply in involved in Palestinian liberation.
Reverend Jeremiah Wright, too, but we all know who threw him under which bus.
It never fails to shock me that so many Israel supporters equate Israel’s disgusting racist, apartheid laws and practices with the nation of Israel itself.
To criticize racism is to delegitimize Israel? Wow.
I think the sad part, Judy, is the supporters of Israel are making that last statement undeniably true by their own actions and admissions.
Judy, you can’t criticise Israel, or Israelis like you can other people, see, cause while you may have some standards for egalitarianism, democracy, civil rights and humaneness which can be used to criticise most of the world, Israelis have, or had (Mya says they fell off some) “Judaic values”, so you wouldn’t understand.
And we all know, as our representativies continually tells us in Washington DC,
that Uncle Sam and Uncle Ira hold the same values. They are like two lovers in the trench, do ask, do tell. Problem is, it’s not really a trench, a last ditch, but rather
a launching pad for WW3, coming up soon to save us from the second dip of the
Great Recession and from the Sheik of Arabi.
When Israel repudiates racism, it will be a beginning of Israel’s legitimization.
“It never fails to shock me that so many Israel supporters equate Israel’s disgusting racist, apartheid laws and practices with the nation of Israel itself.”
And why not? Would Israel be possible without those things? Has Israel ever been without those things? Those are the things which make Israel.
If they lost those things, would the place be worth having?
The state of Israel’s declaration of its independent existence states that “it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel.” This characterization of core values is the fountain from which the state’s peculiar version of equal rights for its citizens springs. The state’s core values are not based on the Enlightenment’s concept of natural law as envisioned by the US Declaration of Indepenence, later codified in the US Constitution–many newly formed states around the world basically have copied the US formula, inscribing the natural right of all citizens to the equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Take your pick as to which prophets of Israel are the final word for all the citizens of Israel.
“envisaged by the prophets of Israel.”
Now there’s an objective standard which could never, ever be self serving! Good for them! What high standards they set for themselves.
Government by imaginery visionary.
Another dumb and self-denial rant from Israel Hasbara Committee. It was Muslim Spain which provided the necessary scietific and an cutural model for the West to come out of its Dark Age. Even an anti-Arab Jewish Orientalist, Bernard Lewis, has admitted that fact by calling Islamic Spain as “the Golden Age” of the Jews.
Jewish communities had and still living in several Muslim countries in peace. No Muslim has boycotted them. How could they – because two of the Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh)wives were Jewish widows.
It was in the West where Jewish communities were expeled from almost every country and not from Muslim countries in the past. Majority of Muslims don’t accept that being anti-Zionist means anti-Jew or anti-West. However, with their experience they do know that the West is controlled by the Zionist Jews and their Zionist Christian collaborators.
Europe’s Muslim factor scares Zionists
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/08/01/europes-muslim-factor-scares-zionists/
” because two of the Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh)wives were Jewish widows.”
Gosh, I’ll have to start calling him St. Prophet Muhammad ! I wonder what his evening at home were like?
lol…………..
ONE was Jewish. The other was Christian? Rehmat?
by the way, I don’t get your joke?
And his evenings at home were like this: he helped his wives with the chores.
“And his evenings at home were like this: he helped his wives with the chores.”
Just goes to show how little distance there is between the religions! Exactly what I do! I wash the dishes, and my wife cleans and loads the pistol she shot her first husband with. When she’s done with that, she works on her knitting. She’s knitting me a shroud! What a helpmeet, huh?
will be interrested to hear Witty on this post!!!
We already have. These are pretty much the same goddamn things that come out of his mouth, except with less verbose chaff.
Why Muslims don’t sue these guys for Islamophobia?
What would be the legal basis for the lawsuit?
Hatred incitement against Muslims. This is how it works in Europe, if you critize Israel you get 1000000000000000000000 of lawsuits for anti-semitism and hatred incitement against Jews. They destroy your life.
Nonetheless, the EU Parliament managed to vote in favor of the Goldstone report by a healthy margin.
postsherd you made my day, this is a very good news!!!!!!!!! because i heard this morning they might avoid this resolution as Israel threatened EU if they vote it. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOD NEWSSSS!!!!!!!!!!
Please give us some more information on this EU vote. Thanks. Also, how did the US regime respond to it?
Citzen this is HArretz article http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1155507.html
I heard in the radio this morning that Israel threatened the EU to expel it from the peace negotiations (whats a joke). And the Jewish European lobby made so many efforts to avoid this resolution.
They were lobbying hard, definitely, and as of yesterday the resolution appeared to be in danger.
And I wouldn’t doubt that the antics of Eli Yishai may have had something to do with the vote.
It reminds me of the calls in the Knesset that Israel protest Obama’s calls to end settlements, by using the money the US gives Israel to buy weapon from non US arms manufacturers.
Of course, even if Israel do follow through with this threat, they will still demand their massive welfare cheques fron Europe. These people are deranged.
that’s pretty gutsy of EU leaders to cross Israel, particularly after the warning shot Mossad fired in Dubai.
Yes, it was. The US MSM seems to have ignored the final EU vote in favor of the Goldstone Report.
This kind of information never go through, even in the European controlled MSM. BTW guys a lot of Emma and Witties attack the tallbacks in the majority of the French press comments sections, it seems that its a global attack.
Of course, aparisian. It’s a well funded, well oiled machine. Ever notice how every time you link to a Zionist-aligned site on the internet, it’s just pasted with ads goading Jews to donate money to various things to “save” Israel?
Its strange but they use all the same methods, they comment in middle east article, and Islam related issues. Here are some of the repeated and hasbara they propagate:
About the settlements they keep repeating:
- Why Israel should justify its urban policy, why Arabs or US should interfere its decisions to build or not residential areas, its like if Italy or belguim tell France whether they should build or not residential areas, this is motivated by the anti-semi
i will give you an example: A commentator called “Un mot de vérité ” in English that means “Word of truth”, he appears only when ‘Lemonde’ publish an article about Israel. There are some of his comments that you can translate in google translation:
” Faut-il plaindre les souffrances d’un agresseur qui a subi une défaite dans son agression inhumaine d’une population civile ? La société arabo-palestinienne s’est lancée en 2000-2007 dans une guerre d’attentats-suicides en réponse à la générosité volontaire israélienne des accords d’Oslo (1993), de celui de Wye Plantation en 1995 entre Nétanyahou et Arafat, du traité de paix proposé par le premier-ministre israélien en 2000 avec un partage de Jérusalem. Le jihad et la paix sont-ils compatibles ?”
or
” C’est un parti pris en faveur de la Ligue arabe d’Obama. Une cynique propagande que de parler de “colonialisme” là où la frontière de 1967 n’est qu’une ligne d’armistice suite à l’agression arabe en 1948. L’antique quartier juif de la veille ville de Jérusalem(-Est) a été vidé de sa population : sa restauration après 1967 est donc aussi une “colonisation” ? Cet absurde même Mahmoud Abbas ne dira pas. Pourquoi alors le quartier Ramat Shlomo ? Parce qu’il faut étouffer le Jérusalem israélien ? “
Why not Saddam Hussein?
He’s dead. But, why can’t they keep him alive like they do Osama Bin Laden is beyond me.
If they’d wanted him alive, they shouldn’a hanged him.
Its not BDS that “shifts the terrain to Israel’s right to exist” but Hasbara. Did BDS attack and eliminate the right of S Africa to exist? No. It just attacked the right of the apartheid S African regime to exist. Richard Witty would argue “Israel as Israel ” is being attacked.
Israel’s very existence. Truth is, BDS attacks the right of rascist and occupying Israel
to continue, much the same as the Freedom Riders in the Jim Crow USA and the White Rose in Nazi Germany attacked there & then the right of their respective then current regimes to exist. This is an inflated version of the intentional mistranslation of the (essentially technically powerless) Iranian president’s verbiage that one day the Zionist regime of Israel will vanish from the face of the earth; in context, in the same way the USSR collapsed under its own terrible weight.
12- citizenship 2.0.
How about extending citizenship to the Palestinians, Israel ? How come it’s just the land that’s of interest?
As far as I know, Israel does not have citizen ship as we conceive it. There are no individuals, only members of a hadge-podge of group definition, and your legal and economic status is first of all determined by your group status.
Frankly, Israel could have slaves, and very graciously extend “citizenship” to those slaves. And they would be citizen slaves, with all the rights and privileges slaves should have.
I believe Shmuel can tell us if this is, or is not a pretty good definition of Israel citizenship standards.
For the Palestinians to be given Israeli citizenship would be like sending tem an invitation to dinner at which the Israelis were going to serve Palestinians.
Before “citizenship” in Israel means anything, there would have to be a democratic basis to Israel which makes that citizenship worth having.
There are various issues here.
The first is the fact that there is no such thing as Israeli nationality. In Israel, “Jewish” the nationality. “Arab” is a nationality. An Israeli nationality would mean that every person is equal before the law and all citizens have civil rights, those which are not dependent on ancestry, religion or blood line.
The second issue is the question of citizenship. Citizenship is granted to anyone born in Israel within the borders of 1948. If a person is born to Jewish parents in the occupied territories, then that person is an Israeli citizen. Palesitnains born in the occupied territories are not Israeli citizens, but in the areas controlled by the Israeli military, they are given ID cards (Orange in color, unlike the Blue ones Israelis carry).
The third issue is the right of return and family reunification laws. If a Palestinian from Israel marries a Palestinian from the occupied territories, the Palestinian from the occupied territories shall not be granted citizenship according to a recent Supreme Court ruling.
The fourth issue, is that of collective vs. individual rights. While Israel recognizes the Jewish people as a collective with inherent rights, both inside and outside the state (and around the world), the Palestinian Arab minority inside Israel does not enjoy collective rights as a minority group. Thus, the Palestinian citizens of Israel merely have individual rights.
No, no Avi, they just misplaced their moral compass temporary like, and can’t get no good Judaic values! Hey, you know how it is. They’ll be sure to find it any day know, so just be patient til they do.
“In Israel, “Jewish” the nationality. “Arab” is a nationality. ”
Then Mizrahi Jews must have dual nationality, since they are Arab Jews! What about the Baha’is? Is Baha’i a nationality? Is Druze?
And what about all the dubious immigrant workers whose children are to be thrown out for not being kosher? They will have “citizenship”, but will they have any “nationality”?
Seriously, what do they mean by “nation” and “nationality”?
“For the Palestinians to be given Israeli citizenship would be like sending tem an invitation to dinner at which the Israelis were going to serve Palestinians.”
That’s pretty much the way it is now, isn’t it?
But the big questions are whether the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians would get freedom of movement throughout Israel, and be able to vote in elections.
The hasbaradim can devote all of their energy for the next year to this and as soon as Israel drops its next bomb on Gaza or Lebanon it’s straight back to the drawing board.
I like “hasbaradim”…. has a nice ring to it. beats “hasbaranicks’ which I’ve been using. may be even “hasbaredim” for the plural form? almost rhyms with “haredim”
“hasbaradnikim” has a nice ring to it.
Hasbaratchniks is the only way to go.
You win, Mooser. But we can still mix and match, right? maybe someone should put forth a dictionary…..I’m too busy working on my zionism one. Currently struggling with proper definition of meta-zionist. The mega was easy, and the ultra/uber will be smooth sailing.
I believe it is imperative that we dissect the framework of this argument of delegitimization of Israel, which is the accusation. All of us know we are not trying to dismantle Israel, however, what we are trying to do is stop the murderous Zionist process of colonization, and apply justice and reparations in either or both return and kind for the Palestinians. It is in their interest to call forward all that is “good,” or normal about Israel and to say nothing regarding this damnable process which reeks of racism (or the use of such) in order to ramp up a process of slow genocide, ethnic cleansing.
They do not want a bifurcation of their colonial process from the identity of Israel, either willingly or by force from external forces (or both). Therefore, if they do not want to give up this process they undo themselves – they are literally screaming, in a Freudian sense, “we are not legitimate, and we have no intention of becoming legitimate.” It is a childish defense, just like when we were children and were disciplined, we tried to play on “you don’t love me anymore” guilt aspect, it is a diversion from the real issue – and not wanting to cease the unacceptable behavior. Unfortunately we are not dealing with childish issues here, but issues of life and death for a innocent and mostly defenseless Palestinian population, and those of surrounding nations for that matter.
My only addendum is that I no longer see a difference between Israel and the occupation, apartheid and racism. Although in all fairness, as long as they stop shooting civilians, bombing hospitals and schools, razing farms, making Jews-only gated communities, and finally let all those people they ethnically cleansed come home and give them citizenship and a vote in their own legitimate homeland, then yeah, as far as I’m concerned, the name “Israel” can stay.
” I believe it is imperative that we dissect the framework of this argument of delegitimization of Israel, which is the accusation. ”
VR, that is falling right into the trap set by the Israel lobby, which, in its agenda against the BDS movement, has made it clear that it seeks to put the advocates of BDS on “the defensive.”
And how exactly they plan to put people on the defensive can be surmised by anyone familiar with the tactics of the Israel lobby.
The BDS movement is the most effective pressure, in fact the only pressure, that can be applied by anyone hoping to make significant input into this conflict. The Western leadership is happily in bed with the Israelis, pledging their undying support. Any dissenter is hammered down by the lobby and slandered for being critical of Israel. It is apparent to any conscientous and informed observer of this conflict that any change must come from a grassroots movement. This is because the efforts of the Israel lobby (primarily an American Jewish effort) had not set its sight on quelling youth activism (focusing instead on the Congress and the media) which is why they are worried that the Palestinian narrative may penetrate the mainstream discussion of this conflict through an avenue they neglected to monitor.
“VR, that is falling right into the trap set by the Israel lobby, which, in its agenda against the BDS movement, has made it clear that it seeks to put the advocates of BDS on “the defensive.”
With all due respects to VR, that’s a good point sherbrsi. I don’t think it’s wise to put to much stake in this matter, for it risks legitimizing and empowering the campaign by the Israel lobby. These attacks will, like the ones that have come and gone, run out of steam because the Hasbrats will make the same mistake and use them gratuitously and aimlessly.
We’ve survived the anti semtisim attack, to the point where the term has become devoid of all meaning (at least outside the Beltway).
We’ve survived the non sequitirs about Israel’s right to exist and Israel’s destruction.
We’ve survived the non sequitirs about the right of Jewish to a homeland.
If you ask me, the anti deligitimization camopaing will become derailed before it even starts.
Well Shingo, with all due respect, these fabricated obstacles which are tossed out by the supporters of Israel, lobby, hasbara tweeks etc. do eventually run out of steam. However, by the time they run of of steam (how long has antisemitism gone on?) you will have a completely ethnically cleansed Palestinian population, and how much damage has been done to the Palestinian people by the fear of the accusation of antisemitism which has gone on for decades? It is best, secondly, to undo them because for the uninitiated they become stumbling blocks (some may say to the faint of heart, whatever) – just knock them out of the way effectively when they first pop up. However, lets develop the “antisemitism” charge confounded with criticizing Isarel – first it was isolated charges, than it became the common call, than it was taken up by legislatures, than it appeared in quasi-governmental agencies, and now it has an office in the White House – it really went away by ignoring it, didn’t it? It was not until recently that it was addressed in public major arena until Sullivan went after it – finally. Has it disappeared after allowing it to have full rein? No. Neither will this accusation.
Also, look carefully at the further argument by our buddy sherbrisi – “This is because the efforts of the Israel lobby (primarily an American Jewish effort) had not set its sight on quelling youth activism (focusing instead on the Congress and the media)…” Really? I have been on campuses all over the USA, and this is one of the main targets of assault, and it is heating up for further nonsense. But our friend says the Lobby is not busy trying to quell youth activism – where do you live?
No, face it head on – neuter it factually and forcefully, stop it while it is young, or you will have another mess like the “antisemitism” boogieman on your hands. Got it?
VR,
The antisemitism charge did indeed serve the lobby for a great deal of time, but not only did it run out of steam, it’s flagrant over use and misuse has poisoned the well (from the lobby’s perspective) for subsequent methods of attack. The lobby (for want of a better word) is proving to be a one trick pony and simply replacing one straw man with another, though they seem to be struggling to find a label that had anywhere near potency of the antisemitism charge.
Again, have a read of this excerpt of Finkelstein’s book for evidence of the futility of the lobby’s efforts:
http://www.counterpunch.org/finkelstein03032010.html
As for sherbrisi’s theory about the lobby’s efforts (or otherwise) at quelling youth activism, I am not fussed, as he’s probably mistaken. I haven’t spent sufficient time on campuses to know one way or another, but one thing is clear from Fink’s analysis – the lobby’s efforts are failing miserably one way or another.
All I’m saying is, trust in yourself and other on this forum to weed these people out, because they are their own worst enemy. Even those that slip under the radar will bring themselves undone soon enough, because they can’t help themselves. If sherbrisi is one fo them, then we’ll know soon enough.
VR, I am convinced that when it comes down to it, we are on the same page. As I have stated before, I am not in disagreement with the content of your original post. On the contrary, I think it is an intelligent, well-informed and balanced message.
Now I do believe that you are perceiving what I see as flaws in your position as regards to a personal attack. What I question is the stance that you are promoting, and that of giving any sort of analysis to the attacks of the anti-BDS camp. As I have demonstrated before, and as is clear in the message of this published document in question, there is NO theoritical basis for this initiative of the Israel lobby which seeks to undermine and defame, rather than to debate and inform. I have sufficient evidence to believe that you can handle the charges brought on by the lobby while still conveying your point, but I do believe that if the BDS movement adopted it as a strategy, of first legitimizing its aims and position by dispelling these baseless charges, then it is headed for disaster, for they would be playing right into the hands of those who seek to undermine this movement.
I’m also not as optimistic that the anti-semite charge has lost all its potency. On the contrary, it’s still the preferred term of silencing the BDS and critics of Israel, as evidenced by its usage in liberal publications and Western politicians. I feel that Chomsky had the most accurate assessment of it when he said that it’s a charge that no matter how much you defend yourself against, you simply cannot win. So when these attacks are being used baselessly and in the manner of a logical fallacy, why even indulge in such arguments?
OK folks, what you have just witnessed is called “bad-jacketing” by sherbrsi (?), when an effective argument is proposed, try to discredit someone who hits a bulls-eye and decimates these fallacious arguments which are used so BDS can move full steam ahead. He also tries to imply that I am not an advocate of BDS, or that I am a novice to the ways of the Israeli lobby.
Really, it is good for you to see this, because this is the methodology they use – hell, even the FBI and other clandestine agencies used it, why not…lol They always do it after they have briefly acted like they are part of the group.
OK folks, what you have just witnessed is called “bad-jacketing” by sherbrsi (?), when an effective argument is proposed, try to discredit someone who hits a bulls-eye and decimates these fallacious arguments which are used so BDS can move full steam ahead.
VR, you are misinterpreting my words. Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear enough, but there is nothing in my post which even remotely suggests that I am trying to discredit you or your argument. If I did not make my position sufficiently clear, then I will state it here: I am in full agreement with the deduction and rationale behind your post. What I take objection to is the focus you attribute to the arguments of the anti-BDS camp, or the so-called “dissection of their framework,” because not only is that not required (the document in question here transparently makes it clear that the theoritical framework of the anti-BDS movement is based on the Hasbara line of adhominem and slandering attacks) but also because the argument in question becomes derailed to the point of the BDS advocates having to defend themselves against the straw men which the Israel lobby puts up, namely those of accusing BDS supporters with charges of “anti-semitism” and “denying the right of Israel to exist.” Please read the document again. I am all for constructive discussion, but that is explicitly the idea this anti-BDS movement rejects. It’s stated aim is to “name and shame,” and by entertaining any charges of villification pushed forward by their lobbyists, you are (like I previously stated) falling into their trap of diverting attention from the conflict into examining, what the Israel lobby (and recently Richard Cohen what stated) would have you believe, the “racist motivations” behind your support of the BDS movement.
VR,
As someone who suspected Emma immediately, I’m inclined to agree with sherbrsi’s point. I don’t think we need to resort to collectively adopting a stratergy on how to deal with these attacks or efforts to undermine us. We’re all well informed and more than capable of thinking on our feet, should the need arise.
If anything, we need to be emboldened and fearless.
At least that’s what I interpret sherbrsi’s argument to mean.
We are out of sync here, why don’t you read my 8:38 comment and than respond. These things do not go away by ignoring them, otherwise the entire exercise of this post is moot. In other words, than why post the position of the “global forum” in the first place? Bad bad Mr. Weiss and Horowtiz..hehe You are falling into a trap by posting this, don’t you know that? Naughty naughty – everyone, quick! Refuse to discuss this matter…hehe
There are both major and minor forms of arguments, some deal with particulars to come to a whole and others start with a whole – there is both deductive and inductive anaylsis. You can either plow through and entire argument point by point (and in this case you would become mired after a period of time), or you cut it off at the feet.
“…because the argument in question becomes derailed to the point of the BDS advocates having to defend themselves against the straw men which the Israel lobby puts up, namely those of accusing BDS supporters with charges of “anti-semitism” and “denying the right of Israel to exist.””
There is no derailing in my argument, nor did I go into all of the fallacious points of the anti-BDS movement – I stopped it at the get go. There is no point by point argument taking place, period.
“…and by entertaining any charges of villification pushed forward by their lobbyists, you are (like I previously stated) falling into their trap of diverting attention from the conflict…”
Where in my argument was there diversion from the conflict? Please (as you said), read what I stated again – here, let me post it for you again with emphasis, you tell me where the conflict was absent –
“I believe it is imperative that we dissect the framework of this argument of delegitimization of Israel, which is the accusation. All of us know we are not trying to dismantle Israel, however, what we are trying to do is STOP THE MURDEROUS ZIONIST PROCESS OF COLONIZATION, and apply justice and reparations in either or both return and kind for the PALESTINIANS. It is in their interest to call forward all that is “good,” or normal about Israel and to say nothing regarding this DAMNABLE PROCESS WHICH REEKS OF RACISM (or the use of such) in order to ramp up a PROCESS OF SLOW GENOCIDE, ETHNIC CLEANSING.
They do not want a bifurcation of their COLONIAL PROCESS from the identity of Israel, either willingly or by force from external forces (or both). Therefore, if they do not want to give up this process they undo themselves – they are literally screaming, in a Freudian sense, “we are not legitimate, and we have no intention of becoming legitimate.” It is a childish defense, just like when we were children and were disciplined, we tried to play on “you don’t love me anymore” guilt aspect, it is a diversion from the real issue – and not wanting to cease the unacceptable behavior. Unfortunately we are not dealing with childish issues here, but ISSUES OF LIFE AND DEATH FOR A INNOCENT AND MOSTLY DEFENSELESS PALESTINIAN POPULATION, and those of surrounding nations for that matter. ”
Where did we lose the conflict? The answer is the conflict was not lost at all. Did we open a door for an endless chain of fallacious arguments? No. That is because I am not arguing inductively with an endless evidential framework (although there is endless evidence), I am arguing pre-supposition – two totally different forms. It is not necessary to knock down an endless set of straw dummies, I am moving from a completely different apologetic framework. Now, if that is too complicated, I can explain in greater detail.
Lets use some derivative examples, what I am saying is like below, using all of the “global forums” fallacious arguments as if in a court of law with irrefutable evidence against him –
A man tells me that he is a good fellow, he cares for his family, and is a good breadwinner. However, on Saturday night he goes out and becomes a serial killer. What shall we do extol his virtues and dismiss his crimes?
He deflects and says – “you have failed to distinguish my acts from who I am.” Should we let him go free?
He presses further – “how come you come after me and are not hotly pursuing other serial killers?” Should he be set free?
He retorts – “you are just after me because you are a bigot and a racist.” Does this remove his guilt?
He continues – “you are just trying to remove my humanity.” Does he get a get out of jail free card?
He pleads – “just buy some of my Kosher hot dogs so I can continue doing what I am doing without penalty.” Do you reach in your pocket?
He condemns – “well judge, I know you are not perfect, you cheated on your wife.” Should the judge admit guilt and turn the defendant loose?
Such is the argument I present, the rest falls like so many cards that were put together to build a house.
Good news. In spite of Israel Lobby pressure, EU votes to endorse the Goldstone report 335-287.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1155507.html
“If the American people understood that the top officials of their own government had orchestrated the destruction of the World Trade Center and murder of thousands of Americans in pusuit of a criminal agenda, they would certainly rise up in rebellion and turn their nation’s policies 180 degree away from that criminal agenda,” Kevin Barrett PhD in his book Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie.
“Truth Jihad” – Book Review
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/truth-jihad-book-review/
Don’t count on it, Rehmat. By and large, American people are sheep. Just look at the Iraq war. That was exposed as a complete and utter lie, front to back.
Did the American people rise up? Gee, I didn’t see them doing much more than crossing the streets in front of me with proverbial blinders on when myself and a (sadly) small gathering of actually concerned citizens were out protesting for impeachment of Bush and an end to the war.
And incidentally, what we did to Fallujah is absolutely horrific. The results are still being felt today.
If you don’t know exactly what I’m talking about, then google: fallujah “birth defects”
If you have the emotional fortitude, do an image search of the same.
“The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.[2]” Goebbels, 12 January 1941.
It is good to see that the Israel lobby sticks to tried and true ways.
One of the things I find interesting about this document is its understanding that BDS is different, and requires new alliances. They’ve even “recruited” Uri Avnery for God’s sake! We’re talking about people (the Global Forum on Anti-Semitism) who generally view all critcism of Israel as illegitimate, demonising, anti-Semitic, etc. and Uri Avnery as absolutely beyond the pale. They are not afraid of the direct results of BDS (although it’s a good boogeyman for scaring Israeli leftists), but of the moral damage to Israel’s basic narrative and standing. The damage that a few respected organisations and/or countries adhering to BDS could inflict – even if Israel’s main trading partners were to continue as before – would be immense, both externally and, more importantly, internally, among Israelis and Jews around the world.
Yes, Shmuel, it is, and will remain much harder to do BDS effectively on Israel; Israel is not anywhere near as insular as apartheid S Africa was, and, except for a tiny fringe of neoNazis, had no diaspora to speak off. Israel depends on its narrative, which separates creed from deed, but BDS brings world attention to Israel’s deeds, even if
it has been largely ineffective in curtailing Israel’s economy amd foreign financing.
Comments on this entry are closed.