I had the privilege of attending the boycott debate in London with Eleanor Kilroy, which she wrote about here. I only wanted to add a few more points:
For those of you who haven’t seen Omar Barghouti debate or speak, he is an unnaturally gifted communicator. He made the case for BDS with overwhelming moral force in an understated way. And he remained unperturbed for the duration of the debate – despite some of the howlers unleashed by the other side.
Eleanor pointed out that the Zionists’ most potent talking point (rather, the one they seem to think is potent) was, “Why Israel when other countries are also behaving badly?” Jonathan Freedland in particular seemed to think that our focus ought to be on Syria under Assad or Sri Lanka’s mass murder of civilians instead. Significantly, he made this point after insisting that he was a liberal who supported the boycott of Apartheid South Africa.
I had a question lined up for Freedland: Was the international community wrong to boycott Apartheid South Africa because Hafez Al Assad was in control of Syria at the time?
No, of course not.
Overall, the night was uplifting. The case for BDS is very strong and the audience’s tremendous support for the motion was a reflection of that. But Freedland depressed me a little with his performance. I spent the night watching a young, cosmopolitan, privileged Jewish man with liberal leanings twist and writhe under the heavy weight of petty half-truths and wispy contradictions.
In service of what? Aren’t “liberal Zionists” ever going to grow tired of their forced contortionism? What will it take to pierce their ugly self-deception? Will they ever grow embarrassed of play-acting either liberal or Zionist?
PS. The highlight of the night came for me when Freedman suffered an apoplectic fit. The reason? Omar explained that the BDS call would remain in effect until Israel implemented UN Resolution 194.
Can one be an American Zionist Rabbi? link to forward.com
Hahahaha he dared mention Resolution 194, the ultimate freak-out resolution for zionists!
From Wikipedia:
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 [1] was passed on December 11, 1948, near the end of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The resolution expresses appreciation for the efforts of UN Envoy Folke Bernadotte after his assassination by members of the Zionist Lehi group, or Stern Gang, headed by Yitzhak Shamir. Resolution 194 deals with the situation in the region after Israel expelled the majority of the palestinian population from areas which it conquered. The resolution called on Israel to allow the return of the Palestinian refugees, and defined the role of the U.N. United Nations Conciliation Commission as an organization to facilitate peace in the region.
The resolution was adopted by a majority of 35 countries from among the 58 members of the United Nations at that time; however all six Arab countries then represented at the UN voted against it (Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen, all were parties to the conflict in question). Israel was not admitted to the UN yet.[1] However, it should be mentioned that General Assembly resolutions are recommendations and not binding international law.
The resolution consists of 15 articles, the most quoted of which are:
Article 7: protection and free access to the Holy Places
Article 8: demilitarization and UN control over Jerusalem
Article 9: free access to Jerusalem
Article 11: calls for the return of refugees
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Loved your witty logic Ahmed LOL! Jonathan Freedland and all that North London zio literati brigade (Martin Amis, Salman Rushdie, etc.) – well I hope history never forgives them their support of the fascist Apartheid state of israel and dumps all their psuedo-intellectual and arrogant literatures in a giant bucket of mucky water.
I reckon all trees have this nightmare of waking up one day as pages on their books.
You are really stone deaf about this. Very few Jews are going to agree that making an example of just Israel by BDS is fair or just. Since South Africa, which country has been BDSed? Not one comes to mind. You are trying to make things black and white, which they rarely are. You could have made the same argument that it was ok that the UN voted that Zionism is like racism. Of course, no other ideology or national movement was ever subjected to such criticism by the UN, but is that a reason not to single out the Jewish national movement? Zionism is far from perfect. But clearly what the UN did stinks.
Is it ok that 48% of the resolutions of the UN HRC condemn Israel? According to you yes. Why not condemn Israel for its “crimes” even if there are worse? What is wrong with that you say? But of course something is very wrong here. It means that the UNHRC is more interested in condemning Israel than upholding human rights.
And the same goes to the BDS movement. If it only targets Israel this is a clear indication that the motives of the people that do this are not pure. If BDS is such a great tool against human rights abusers, why isn’t it also being used against other human rights abusers? No, you don’t have to find a solution for AIDS to be against Israel. But it is fair to ask, if you think you have such a great tool, why are using it just against Israel? Something really stinks and don’t expect Jews not to notice.
You are really stone deaf about this. Very few Jews are going to agree that making an example of just Israel by BDS is fair or just…Something really stinks and don’t expect Jews not to notice.
i suppose it is quite natural for you to oppose a boycott against israel. but what i am wondering is why you think it makes a difference citizens and supporters of israel think it is ‘fair’ or not? you don’t need the country you are boycotting or their supporters to think it is fair. it is quite natural you wouldn’t like it. in fact, perfectly normal. we’re also completely used to being called anti semites for opposing israel. perhaps that’s one of the pr advantages for ethnic nationals. they can always claim it is targeting their ethnicity instead of the policies of their nation. anyway, i’m not stone deaf. i hear you. i just don’t agree nor do i really think it matters to me what zionists think wrt bds. it won’t stop because you don’t like it or you think it is unfair. let’s put it this way, if all of israel embraced the boycott but clung to the occupation, that is something i wouldn’t understand.
frankly, i think it is you who are stone deaf. the boycott is not about what jews think, it is about what palestinians and their global supports think. it is about apartheid and human rights. the fact many jews agree or disagree with the boycott won’t make or break it. look on your bright side (not mine), israel has just criminalized israeli jews from supporting the boycott, so you won’t have to concern yourself with them expressing themselves anymore/not.
anyway, we hear you eee, and we hear Jonathan Freedland
“Why Israel when other countries are also behaving badly?”
if you weren’t stone deaf i would try to explain it to you again. but there is always tomorrow.
Annie,
First of all the bill passed does not criminalize BDS. It makes BDS a target for civil action only.
Sorry Annie, but if you write that the boycott is “not about what jews think, it is about what palestinians and their global supports think” you are stone deaf. When Jews in Israel start BDSing Arabs in Israel and the WB in retaliation what would you think if I told that this BDS is not about what Arabs think but about what Jews and their worldwide supporters think?
You cannot explain your position because there is nothing to explain. It is an unreasonable position. I understand your position very well: We are going to use any method we can to get at Israel even if this method is never used against any other country in the world, some of which are much worse offenders than Israel.
When Jews in Israel start BDSing Arabs in Israel and the WB in retaliation
bds? you mean instead of using them for target practice, kidnapping their children, stealing their land and burning their olive groves. bds would be a relief. beside the US is already threatening to sanction palestine if they go to the UN.
what would you think if I told that this BDS is not about what Arabs think but about what Jews and their worldwide supporters think?
let me clue you in on something mr stone deaf. we already live in a society where is not about what Arabs think but about what Jews and their worldwide supporters think.or maybe you missed the congress licking bibi feet. this is non violent push back. you don’t like it? bummer.
“bds? you mean instead of using them for target practice, kidnapping their children and burning their olive groves.”
No, I mean that Jews stop any trade or cultural interaction with Arab Israeli or Palestinian businesses.
“let me clue you in one something mr stone deaf. we already live in a society where is not about what Arabs think but about what Jews and their worldwide supporters think. this is called pushing back. you don’t like it? bummer.”
I thought we were trying to forge an historical compromise, but it seems you want a confrontation. Very well, we accept the challenge. Let’s each side not care about what the other side thinks and see where it leads us. BDS is a weapon both sides can use. I am not saying this as a threat. Palestinians used violence and it hurt them. You will certainly try BDS but you will find again in the end that it will hurt the Palestinians much more than help. There is only one peaceful solution, reaching an agreement by negotiations.
fine, i am all for reaching an agreement by negotiations. bds is not preventing that. i’m not recalling south africa demanding the boycott stop before negotiations. did they? did the boycott prevent them from ending apartheid?
I thought we were trying to forge an historical compromise
really? where have you been? did you read the palestine papers. palestine has no partner for peace. when israel offers anything resembling historic compromise let me know.
Annie,
Violence was also not preventing negotiations was it? BDS will have the same effect.
try harder eee.
What the hell are you babbling about?
Your country has expelled peace activists. Your country has imprisoned peace activists, under the crimes of INCITEMENT.
You, nor your country give a damn about what form of resistance, Palestinians undertake. You just want them to lay down and get RUN OVER by Zionism.
They won’t. They might be weak, but they have heart, and in spite of the desperation and on-going tragedy of their existence such as it is – they won’t break.
LOL! Isn’t the Occupation a form of boycott? Israel boycotts Gaza from having a seaport an airport and being able to trade with the outside world, so why shouldn’t the rest of the world boycott Israel for its criminality? What if a businessman from Gaza or the West Bank wants to export to Israel? He cannot do it, and hasn’t been able to do it since 1967! Why Because of a BOYCOTT stupid!
“You could have made the same argument that it was ok that the UN voted that Zionism is like racism.”
What else would you call an ideology that defines ownership of the state not by place of birth, language, religion or culture but by descent? If Zionism isn’t racism, the term has no meaning.
BDS is a movement that is initiated by Palestinian civil society. Why the hell should Palestinians living under occupation think about any other BDS-type movements other than the one that is designed to relieve their own suffering and oppression?
Are you THAT stupid eee? SERIOUSLY?
Why should people under occupation have to satisfy your idiotic, cynical, cry for balance? You don’t give a damn about balance. It’s just a rhetorical tactic to delegitimize ANY criticism or tactic to combat Israeli oppression.
And it does NOT MATTER whether you and or other rabid Zionists think BDS is fair. We can ENDLESSLY talk about opinions, but what should be DEBATED is the facts and reality.
And that is where your arguments, and those of the people whom you speak – are JUDGED. On their own merit.
Not on the simple fact that people might disagree. Who gives a damn? If they disagree for cynical reasons, then WHO CARES?
Palestinians and their supporters aren’t going to wait for racists, bigots, political opportunists, hypocrites, PEP progressives, fundamentalist Jews and Christians, etc.etc. to get on board.
Did you suffer any holes in your head while serving ni the IDF eee?
Ever heard of Iraq and Iran?
he’s a force to be reckoned with alright! i’m a huge fan, huge.
Omar Barghouti may be a very gifted communicator but he is not a force to be reckoned with because he only communicates well with Westerners. He has almost no support in the Palestinian street. You don’t believe me? Just wait and see how many votes he gets in the next elections.
he’s not politician eee. i do not think he has ever run for public office. perhaps you are thinking of another barghouti. if you have any evidence he is not popular ‘on the street’ by all means produce it.
No, he hasn’t run for office because he has no support. He is neither the “brain” behind any party, like Rush Limbaugh is. That is my whole point. The proof is in getting elected, or having people that support your ideas getting elected. If your point is that he hasn’t tried yet, let’s wait patiently for the next election and you will see I am right. To the best of my knowledge he has no influence on any Palestinian politician with significant support. Please correct me if I am wrong.
well gee, if he’s ineffective why do you think the knesset is making such a big deal out of this silly bds stuff.
Can’t you see why? The right in Israel is using this to score points against the left, just like Karl Rove put gay marriage on the ballot in many states in 2004 to energize the Republican base. Do you think Karl Rove is really afraid of gay marriage? The Likud is putting Kadima and Labor in a position where they seem to support hurting Israel if they are against the law. They score an easy political victory and marginalize the left more.
so let me guess, you think palestinians and the rest of us should drop the boycott and play nice (israelicious, yeah!) and then the left in israel will rise and we can all get down to peacefully negotiating two states.
surprise me!
Annie,
I know by now that nothing will stop you from going for BDS, like nothing could stop certain factions of the Palestinians from using violence. Your and their argument is the same, you both believe nothing else will work. But that is a bad argument as using violence by the Palestinians proved. And you will see the same result with BDS. All it will do is make reaching an agreement take longer and make the Palestinians suffer more. BDS will backfire just like violence did. But of course, until you finally see the results, you will not believe that.
But that is a bad argument as using violence by the Palestinians proved. And you will see the same result with BDS.
violent resistance won’t work, non violent resistance won’t work, i get your message eee. nothing in your argument addresses what israel can do and they are the ones with money and power. so why aren’t you addressing that? because we’re waiting til jews feel safe? is that what we’re really waiting for. i just read an interesting comment over at the forward, i though i would share it with you.
delaying this is a tactic. blaming it on palestinians is a tactic. there are powerful forces in israel who do not want a compromise, they want it all. maybe you should be over discussing this on some orthodox site. why aren’t you anyway? you think we’re more easily moved? we have nothing, go talk to the people who have the power eee. maybe they will listen to you. quit wasting your time trying to stop bds, it will take us years to do the kind of damage the US congress just decided to do to palestine. i didn’t hear you complaining about that. squeezing the palestinians? no problem , they are already under occupation. but protecting israel from the big bad bds? you’re all over that.
were are completely used to being blamed for everything and that will never change.
Annie,
And BDS is a delay tactic also. Aren’t you thinking: Let’s weaken Israel by BDS and then negotiate?
And as for what Israel can do, it can’t do more than the Clinton parameters, and you know that.
no, it is not delay. it is the fastest way they know how to achieve their goals. go back and read the palestine papers eee. they negotiated, israel wouldn’t.
“All it will do is make reaching an agreement take longer and make the Palestinians suffer more”
Make them suffer more? What are you going to do to make them suffer more? Kill all of them all at once instead of a dozen at a time?
Everyone has already accepted that Israel will never ‘agree’ to anything…no point in talking to them.
Annie,
Israel negotiated, the Palestinians were just not happy with what Israelis said. That is what the papers show.
link please
eee- here is some of what israel is doing.. for this the bds movement will help some of the folks in israel wake up to the bullshit they are indirectly or directly responsible for…
“The destruction of these wells means the destruction of the only source of income of hundreds of Palestinian families who depend on agriculture.”
israel is on a pathway of descent into a state of fascism..
The proof is in getting elected, or having people that support your ideas getting elected.
Let’s see the Palestinians want to end the occupation that began in 1967; establish their own independent state with its capital in Jerusalem; and let the refugees exercise their individual right of return in accordance with international law and resolution 194.
That’s like kissing babies. No Palestinian politician ever ran for election without those things in his or her party platform. Haaretz reports that the majority of Palestinians want Fayyad to remain as Prime Minister of the caretaker government to reduce the chance of international sanctions and boycotts against Palestinians. Fayyad has implemented a boycott against the settlements and he’s just as determined to see the refugees exercise their right of return as Barghouti.
The JCPA/Dore Gold have published a compendium on Fayyad’s position on RoR and other issues that many people on both sides of the issue should probably read: Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s Position On The Right Of Return: A Commitment To Arafat’s Legacy. We all know that Arafat turned down a “generous offer” that didn’t include East Jerusalem and required him to (somehow) waive the individual entitlement of other Palestinians to the RoR. So here is Fayyad’s position:
Fayyad concedes that his loyalty is to the ideological legacy of Arafat, who never gave up demanding the return of Palestinian refugees to the territory of Israel. In an address before students in Nablus on July 30, 2009, Fayyad said:
Loyalty to the eternal President Yasser Arafat, and his renewing memory within us all, finds expression in rallying around the national program….This is our obligation to President Abu Amar and all the shahid-martyrs….This is our obligation to our people and our refugees and our expellees to persevere in steadfastly maintaining national rights as they are recognized by international legitimacy without the derogation of any one of them, and in a manner that will guarantee the end of the occupation and the discovery of a just solution to the refugee problem in accordance with Resolution 194…
To remove any doubt, Fayyad said in an interview to Al-Arabiya television on January 2, 2008, in response to the question: Did the Palestinian Authority forgo the right of return at the Annapolis Conference? “By no means, in no way whatsoever; it is impossible in any way whatsoever.”
Fayyad’s position supporting the demand for the return of Palestinian refugees already appeared in an address he delivered upon assuming the office of prime minister in 2007 when he presented his objectives for the coming years:
One should work for the end of the occupation and the establishment of an independent state, with its capital in noble Jerusalem, on all the Palestinian territories conquered in 1967, relying on the principles and conditions that were set in the Declaration of Independence from 1988, finding a just and agreed-upon solution to the problem of the Palestinian refugees on the basis of Resolution 194, the aspiration to put an end to settlement and the separation fence, and removing all the material and political obstacles that constitute an impediment to obtaining these objectives.
The issue of the right of return again appears in a report of the Fayyad government summing up the first quarter of the government’s second year (June 16, 2008-September 16, 2008). In the framework of surveying the government’s achievements it is written, “The Information Ministry works to present the daily suffering of our Palestinian people as a result of the actions of the occupation authorities and to transmit the Palestinian narrative to all the media outlets and also operates to inform people of Palestinian rights and first and foremost the right of return, self-determination, and the establishment of a Palestinian state whose capital is noble Jerusalem, alongside buttressing the legitimacy of the national authority.”
Fayyad’s plan to establish a Palestinian state that was published in August 2009 clarifies in an unambiguous manner that the realization of Palestinian “justice” on the refugee issue is a substantive condition for peace and, by inference, for regional stability and security. “Despite the fact that the refugee issue will be discussed in the negotiations on the permanent agreement, the Palestinians, of course, will not accept any diplomatic agreement that will not be based on justice and an agreed upon solution to the main issue in accordance with international decisions including UN General Assembly Resolution 194.”
In another speech that he delivered at the Kalandia refugee camp north of Jerusalem, Fayyad made it clear that “a lasting peace will not be established without finding a solution to the refugee problem in accordance with the legitimate international decisions and especially Resolution 194.” At another occasion, Fayyad said: “The refugee problem is the heart of the Palestinian problem and the solution of the problem and the implementation of a just peace constitutes the heart of the PLO national program and the diplomatic struggle the PLO is waging in the name of all members of the Palestinian people in the homeland and in the diaspora countries on the way to realizing all the legitimate rights embodied in the return, liberty, and self-determination of an independent Palestinian state within all the 1967 borders.”
At an event in Ramallah marking 61 years since the nakba (May 14, 2009), Fayyad said: “The time that has passed does not cancel our right to return and our people persevere in their struggle until they realize their freedom to return.” A similar message formed the foundation of Fayyad’s address to mark Nakba Day in 2008: “We say that the commitment to the suffering of the refugees and their rights as it pertains to us means reinforcing the steadfast stance and holding on tight against expulsion and uprooting…and this means continuing the struggle to end the occupation, realizing independence, and guaranteeing a just solution to the refugee problem reached in accordance with legitimacy and international law and the Arab Peace Initiative.” — end
If the JCPA doesn’t like his position on those topics, then its probably wildly popular with the Palestinian public (and me).
Aw, eee, you can do better than that, can’t you? You need to do more here to knock off Annie and spread your POV, more beyond telling Annie neither violent nor non-violent protest are acceptable to you as means to wake up Israel.
And you need to also do more than tell her, why do you single out Israel? Everybody knows that’s a standard hasbara diversionary tactic.
Further, eee, you don’t address any of the details the Palestine Papers show.
So, here, maybe these talking points will help you, Annie, and all the MW readers here understand where you are coming from: link to jpost.com
Hostage,
When I say the right of return is the biggest obstacle why there is no agreement, you jump and say that Abbas and Fayyad were willing to compromise on this based on the Palestinian papers. Now you say, they are not. So what is the party line?
If you demand the return to within Israel proper, do you really think there can be a solution? Even Uri Avnery is against this.
This is why eee is good to have around:
The right in Israel is using this to score points against the left,
As a student of politics his comment here has the ring of truth. We can add this explanation to the right’s effort to demonize the Israeli supreme court. However, since the left in Israel has supported the WB colonization movement as vigorously as the right then what difference does it make? I for one would like to see the right become so triumphant that they succeed in driving the left out of Israel entirely. Then the religious right wing Jews can drive out the secular. That scenario has a pleasant ring to it — it would be as if Zionism has an automatic erase function built in.
eee,
Six million Jews were killed in the holocaust. I’m Jewish. I’m entitled to do anything I want to others without incurring the consequences.
When you start whistling a different tune, feel free to pm me. Hey, this comment software doesn’t have a pm feature. Oh well.
you jump and say that Abbas and Fayyad were willing to compromise on this based on the Palestinian papers. Now you say, they are not. So what is the party line?
I turned on the bold attribute to highlight the party line in the post above. No matter what happens in the permanent settlement between the governments, it is the refugees themselves who have an individual right of return. It is doubtful that third-parties can waive those rights on their behalf, notwithstanding the usual boilerplate, fine print, and downright devious attempts to do just that, e.g. Chagos Islanders v UK (ECtHR). Uri Avnery has no apparent legal standing or connection to these cases, unless you count his participation as a member of the Irgun.
What has participating in negotiations proved?
Longer than what eee? Longer than 44 years?
In your dreams eee. BDS is gaining popular support and international participation. Violence alienated support.
Your anxiety and desperation is pretty obvious.
Even Martin Indyk admits that the feeling safe meme is just BDS. The safer Isrelis feel, the more belligerent they become.
“There is no question that Israel is taking a tangible risk,” he
replied. “But all these years, the US has been strengthening you
precisely for this purpose—so that you can take the risk of making
peace. How exactly can the Palestinians destroy you? The real
existential danger is that you will not succeed in parting from them.”
link to israelpolicyforum.org
It hasn’t yet done the Clinton parameters, and you know that.
No eee, the Papers show that palestine offered to meet every one of Israel’s demands and Israel still said no.
The Papers also showed that the US was only pressuring the Palestinians and insiting they give up on holding the Israelis to any agreements the Israeli’s have made, including the Road Map.
The Papers show that negotiating with Israel is a farce and show exactly why it is Israel refuses to “negotiate” with anyone but the US in the room.
thanks for the link, and everything else.
Elections? Eee what are you talking about? Omar Barghouti is a student at Tel Aviv University. He is working towards his (second) Masters degree in Philosophy. (His first MA was in Electrical Engineering.) He is an independent cultural analyst, researcher, and human rights activist, not a politician. As far as I know he has no plans to run for elected office.
So how exactly does he plan to affect change if he does not plan to run himself or influence a political party?
(How can Omar be pushing BDS while studying a Tel-Aviv U? That just doesn’t make sense. Why isn’t he boycotting Israeli institutions?)
Why are Zionists so ungodly stupid? How many times do we have to explain to them that it’s possible to support BDS and still interact with Jews?
interact? there are jews i love. how does that fit into this picture? it’s not like we all don’t share the world together.
Black and white. Up and down. Left and right. Their view is just stuck in 2 way logic. Either are you with us ( 100 %) or not (0%). They cant see any other alternative.
And it is possible to love your children and beat them.
And I am sure the people who perform honor killings love the people they kill.
Yes, and it is possible to be a settler and love Palestnians.
I guess many things are possible, they just sound a little contrived.
An Israeli would know all about that, I suppose.
Whew!
There goes that whole “ideas and words can change the world” thing.
So how exactly does he plan to affect change
He doesn’t need to plan to effect change – he already has made a massive impact through BDS.
And I think I got it wrong – he has completed that degree from TAU already.
I can’t help but notice that “eee” keeps on claiming that his view is representative of all kinds Jews and Israelis. I wonder what keeps all of them from writing in to Mondoweiss to support his contentions?
I would be interested, in a sort of way, to hear from Zionists who are not of Jewish background. Though I suppose it might be rather like a visit to the dentist.
We do that all the time here with Witty, though Witty is not a young man, but he most certianly twists and writhes under the heavy weight of petty half-truths and wispy contradictions, and outright lies.