‘Hath not a Palestinian eyes?’: Protesters disrupt Habima performance at Globe

the policing of tonight’s performance was at least as disruptive as the mostly silent protests themselves, and I have never been in a theatrical situation where I have felt more intimidated, watched and surrounded by hate. And for the most part, that wasn’t coming from the protesters.

The heavy-handedness of the policing, and the gentle mockery which served to bind together an audience in derision of the Palestinian protesters, came across to me as a gesture of control and display of power. (Review of ‘The Merchant of Venice’ at Shakespeare’s Globe)

The airport-style security measures at Shakespeare’s Globe in London for yesterday’s performance by Israel’s National Theatre, Habima, were unprecedented: full security gates were in place, including metal detectors, and ticketholders were subjected to bag searches and pat-downs. Despite this, at least 15 Palestinian solidarity campaigners succeeded in staging their own performance, unfurling a banner and Palestinian flags inside the theatre, and staging a mute protest against illegal colonisation and Israeli apartheid. Outside the theatre, a protest (and counter-protest) was held in the lead up to the performance:

Pro Pal protest Globe 28 May
Palestine solidarity protest outside the Globe Theatre, 28 May
Pro Israel protest Globe 28 May
Pro-Israel protest outside the Globe Theatre, 28 May

The Independent reports that ’The prompt removal of the protesters was perhaps more distracting than the gesture.’

There was one electrifying intervention during the trial scene when a booming voice from the yard asked: “Hath not a Palestinian eyes?” – an act of telling appropriation that for a couple of vertiginous seconds threatened to throw the production off-balance.

The famous line from The Merchant of Venice spoken by Shylock was voiced by British actor, John Graham Davies, before he was removed by hired security personnel.

Australian campaigner, Kim, interviewed several of those who were manhandled out – sometimes carried by their hands and feet – by heavy-handed security, and who pleaded that no violence be used:

Some activists silently unfurled banners with the slogan “Israeli apartheid leave the stage”, two activists unfurled a flag and when this was taken from them remained standing silently for an hour in their seats with their hands raised displaying the peace sign. Others silently stood for more than an hour with their mouths taped over.

Inside Globe banner
Inside the Globe protesters unfurl banner (Azvsas)

One demonstrator had her glasses broken by security, and pro-Israel audience members shouted abuse at the protesters, as can be seen in the video above. Some physically attacked the demonstrators, including an Israel apologist who kneed in the back a young, female protester.

London’s Evening Standard quotes Florence Hartley, 24, one of the demonstrators, who said: “It was a silent protest. But once the security staff moved in I was knocked to the floor and they had to drag me out. Some of the audience were shouting ‘scum’ at us.”

One of the protesters was arrested on suspicion of assault on a security guard and remains in police custody, Scotland Yard said. This is the moment he is dragged out of the theatre ‘pit’:


As Tony Greenstein writes in a post describing his own experience inside the theatre,

Given the assaults by the security goons on other protestors, the fact that one protestor has been detained on suspicion of attacking a goon is ludicrous.

The Press Association report includes some excellent quotes that contribute to breaking the silence on Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people:

Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, co-ordinator with the Boycott Israel Network, said:

“This campaign is not an attack on individual artists, we are not censoring the content of their work nor are we concerned about their ethnicity or the language they speak. As with South African sport in the apartheid era, this is about refusing to allow culture to be used to whitewash oppression.”

Protester Zoe Mars said: “We tried non-violently to convey the message that culture may not be used to give a civilised gloss to a state that perpetrates human rights abuses.”

There will be another performance by Habima at The Globe tonight. Please continue to follow my updates on @BWISPalestineand our YouTube channel Art4Palestine

Posted in BDS, Israel/Palestine | Tagged , , ,

{ 117 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Fredblogs says:

    What a bunch of jerks. There’s a time and a place for protests and the middle of a play is neither the time nor the place. At that point, you aren’t exercising your own right to free speech, you are disrupting someone else’s right to free speech. They should have arrested the lot of them and charged them to the full extent of the law.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      And, on schedule, Fredo is defending the israelis. paint me not suprised.

      • Fredblogs says:

        I’m not defending the Israelis, I am attacking the protesters. There’s a difference.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          No there isn’t. Not in this context.

        • Talkback says:

          “I’m not defending the Israelis, I am attacking the protesters. ”

          Ah! You’re imitating Israelis now. The next step after defending them.

        • Give it up, Fredo. You just don’t get it, and you are not really interested, other than making stupid comments.

        • talknic says:

          Fredblogs May 29, 2012 at 11:32 am

          “I’m not defending the Israelis, I am attacking the protesters. There’s a difference”

          Oh OK. I’ll keep it in mind. So when a person attacks Israeli Government policies, are they defending Hamas or terrorism? Are they antisemitic? Are they Anti-Israel? Pro-Palestinian?

          When a person points out there is are only accusations against the Iranian nuclear industry, but no evidence warranting an attack on Iran, are they defending the Iranian regime?

        • Cliff says:

          No you are defending the Israelis and Zionism by attacking the protestors. You are commenting on a blog about the Israel-Palestine conflict, not a blog about dogs, close-up with a wide-angle lens.

          See the difference on context?

          Oh and there is your entire persona here at MW to base our accusations on. That is more context.

          It’s like when randomZioBot#183738 chastised the pro-Palestinians protestors for ‘sound-checking’ (a kind of protest tactic) a speech by famed Islamophobe (and supposed ‘ex-Muslim’) Something Darwish (I forgot her first name; maybe, she was Wafa Sultan…I lose track with these people since they’re all so similar).

          Anyways, the ZioBot did what you’re doing – chastising the protesters.

          Protest is SUPPOSED to be disruptive. No one ever cares about the bad guy getting interrupted at his speech at the Ivy league school who invited him to speak about ‘peace and conflict resolution’ even though this same bad guy is responsible for the deaths of millions of Vietnamese.

          I mean, sure – ask him a devastating question. That is tactically more effective. But we aren’t outraged over tactics. You aren’t for sure.

          You are making a moral judgement on these protestors as if they are in the wrong for protesting Habima.

          It’s simple Fred and it comes down to our difference in politics.

          You are pro-colonialism because you’re a Jewish nationalist and rabid Zionist ideologue (safely tucked in, at your home, in America) and we are anti-imperialists and anti-colonialists.

          So we can overlook the superficial here, i.e., that a play got disrupted – and realize the profundity of the action. To disrupt the normalization of Israeli culture (especially components of which are intrinsically tied to the settlement enterprise) in the West.

          It’s not a difficult concept to grasp but I suspect you play dumb (intellectual dishonesty) to instigate and derail the discussion.

          Unfortunate for you though. What you’ve actually allowed us to do is elucidate the motivations and justifications for such a protest.

          So I guess we should be thanking you for your intentionally disruption/dishonesty/feigned outrage, Fredfails.

    • Sumud says:

      No rest for the wicked Fredblogs.

      BDS until apartheid is no more. Israel uses cultural activities to promote itself as a normal nation, when it is anything but that.

      You know what you can do with your “time and place for protests” schtick, right? The Israeli machine kills, steals, intimidates and terrorises with no regard to such niceties as “time and place”.

      • eljay says:

        Disrupting a play = bad.

        Employing terrorism and ethnic cleansing to create a supremacist state, and maintaining that state by means of a 60+ years, ON-GOING and OFFENSIVE (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder = good.

        Leave it to hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists to get fraudulently (Fredulently?) incensed over relatively trivial matters.

      • Newclench says:

        Sumud, here I was thinking that Israel uses cultural activities to promote itself as something other than a ‘normal’ nation. Which is it?

        • newclench “here I was thinking that Israel uses cultural activities to promote itself as something other than a ‘normal’ nation”

          you’d be wrong. the overriding theme is ‘share our values’, they promote themselves as being normal. that’s what anti normalization is all about. not letting israel get away with promoting itself as normal because it is an anti democratic apartheid oppressive state.

        • Sumud says:

          Newclench don’t be an arse.

          You know exactly what I meant.

    • Mooser says:

      “What a bunch of jerks. There’s a time and a place for protests and the middle of a play is neither the time nor the place”

      What a bunch of jerks. There’s a time and a place for terrorist bombings and the middle of a civilian hotel, the King David, is neither the time nor the place.

      • Fredblogs says:

        Sorry, Mooser, but you have been misinformed as to the nature of the King David hotel. It was British Military Intelligence HQ. As such, it was not a civilian target.

        • andrew r says:

          Can Khalid Sheikh Mohammed use that as a defense in his trial wrt the Pentagon?

        • American says:

          You are so stupid Fred….but you know what your lies do?…they make us post the facts…which the lurkers here see and get educated on.
          The King David Hotel was operating as hotel with guest and diners and civilains coming and going…only a part was rented for the British headquarters. 91 people were killed.

          link to britains-smallwars.com

          link to britishforcesinpalestine.org
          Bombing of the King David Hotel, 12.37, 22nd July 1946

          “The centre of the hotel and the south-east corner of the Secretariat remained standing. The six storeys and twenty-eight offices in the south-west corner of the hotel had become a three-storey pile of twisted iron, cracked cement, red stone blocks and corpses.” By Blood and Fire, Thurston Clarke

          The King David Hotel, Jerusalem, was an important social centre for those who could afford it. One wing was used by the Government Secretariat and the British Army and in addition to troops and Civil Servants, many Palestinian civilians worked there. The rest of the hotel operated normally with bar, restaurant, lobby, and visitors coming and going. A bomb in the street, which turned out to be only diversionary, caused some alarm but then everyone just went back to what they had been doing. Such events were commonplace. The main explosion was caused by explosives packed into milk churns brought into the basement of the hotel by terrorists dressed as Palestinian Arabs. A British officer (Capt Alexander D Mackintosh who later died) and a policeman who became suspicious were immediately shot. The alarm was raised and some of the terrorists were shot and wounded but managed to get away and were hidden by the local Jewish population — voluntarily or by ‘persuasion’.

          The TNT exploded 6 minutes early and was devastating: the Secretariat wing collapsed as one floor fell on another. Many people were killed immediately but a great many more were trapped and injured.

          “The suction ripped off clothes, tore rings from fingers and watches from wrists. It sucked the windowpanes out of nearby buildings, spewing shards of glass into the street. Automobiles rolled over, small trees were uprooted, and cypresses and palms bent backward as if battered by hurricane winds. Ivan Phillips’s driver was blown onto the metal spears of the YMCA’s ornamental gate.” By Blood and Fire, Thurston Clarke.

          The reporter, Barbara Board, had a lucky escape and wrote in the Daily Mirror:

          “I owe my life and the fact that I am able to write the story of the bloodiest terrorist outrage, to the cool courage of a British military policeman. When a great charge of dynamite blew up the Palestine Government Secretariat in the King David Hotel a few moments ago, I was walking through the hotel entrance.

          As the thunderous boom roared out, the five-storey building collapsed like a pack of cards with 200 British, Arabs and Jews inside, one military policeman on guard at the entrance threw me on to the ground and shielded me with his body.

          The black mushroom of smoke and dust rolled away over our heads and, tumbling out of the building came a macabre, ghostly procession of British officers, wives and waiters, streaming with blood, their hair and clothes covered in white dust. I went to the top floor of the building and I saw Sir John Shaw, officer administering the Palestine Government, covered in blast and dust, and General Officer Commanding Lieutenant General Sir Evelyn Barker together breaking down a doorway in an effort to rescue trapped people.”

          The bombers claim that warnings were given but terrorist warnings are usually worthless and false warnings of bombs and hoaxes were common occurrences. Terrorists often want a building to be evacuated so that people are killed by another bomb planted outside. Many were killed in Julian’s Way which is where even more people would have been in an evacuation and so making the death toll much higher.

          Maj Gen Dare Wilson describes the difficult rescue and recovery:

          “By 1600 hours they were hard at work in the rubble. The task was a race against time, and not until all hope of saving further lives had been abandoned, days later, did they relax their efforts. Day and night the rescue operations went on with the Sappers working like men possessed, for deep in the wreckage could occasionally be heard sounds which encouraged them to fresh exertions. At 2200 that night the Squadron was formed into three shifts, and for the next three days each shift worked 16 hours on and 8 hours off. Even so, some men refused to rest until, on the point of exhaustion, they were ordered to fall out. It is recorded that one Sapper drove his bulldozer for thirty hours without leaving the wheel, which is remarkable.” Cordon and Search

          The last survivor was under the debris for 71 hours before rescue.

          Casualties: 91 dead (28 British, 41 Arabs, 17 Jews, 2 Armenians, 1 Russian, 1 Greek and 1 Egyptian) and many more wounded.

          There were many acts of bravery at the scene including that of Police Sergeant ‘Blackie’ Smith who was awarded the George Cross:

          “…heard shouts from a pile of concrete slabs near the remains of the canteen. Smith was in his forties but he had boxed professionally and his arms were strong. He jumped into an opening and began burrowing. Within a few minutes he had dug a tunnel that almost reached the victims. Suddenly, the tunnel collapsed. He crawled out unharmed. A rescue worked rubbed his back with liniment and he re-entered the tunnel… Half an hour later Smith emerged again. Two wounded men crawled after him.” By Blood and Fire, Thurston Clarke.

          Photo: Edwina Payton, courtesy of her sister, Margaret.

          And that of Edwina Payton (later Mailey), Chief Clerk, ATS, who though uninjured after the explosion instead of leaving the burning building went upstairs to search for her Palestinian Arab secretary. Finding her badly injured, Edwina put her service jacket around her and went for help, not finding any she returned to find her friend dead.

          The horror of the aftermath was grim. July in Jerusalem is very hot so the bodies soon began to decompose and Reg Baker, a despatch rider, vividly remembers the smell two miles away.

          LiveLeak short clip: King David Hotel bombing.

          Colonial Film of aftermath (with commentary)

          Brief Pathé film of the burial of victims.

          ——————————————————————————–

          The 2004 BBC programme Empire Warriors, The Jewish War focuses mostly on the King David Hotel bombing and gives a surprising amount of time to the bombers and their excuses. On the LiveLeak site it is advertised as being about Jewish guerillas rather than British soldiers. Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

          In February 2012, as part of the BBC series, Empire, Jeremy Paxman talked to one of the King David Hotel bombers. Reg Baker, RAOC, who was in Palestine at the time was incensed by the nature and tone of the interview and wrote to the BBC and Paxman. No replies to date (April).

          In July 2006 Netanyahu and former Irgun gang members attended a 60th anniversary celebration of this outrage and continue to claim that it was all the fault of the British and not the fault of the bombers.’

        • mig says:

          Fredb:

          It was British Military Intelligence HQ. As such, it was not a civilian target.

          Jewish National Council denounced the bombing of the King David. The Jewish Agency expressed “their feelings of horror at the base and unparalleled act perpetrated today by a gang of criminals”, despite the fact that the Irgun was acting in response to the Jewish Resistance Movement, an organisation governed by the Jewish Agency. According to The Jerusalem Post, “[a]lthough the Hagana had sanctioned the King David bombing, world-wide condemnation caused the organization to distance itself from the attack.” David Ben-Gurion deemed Irgun “the enemy of the Jewish people” after the attack. Hatsofeh, a Jewish newspaper in Palestine, went as far as to label the Irgun perpetrators “fascists”.

          O tempora, O mores !

        • RE: “Sorry, Mooser, but you have been misinformed as to the nature of the King David hotel. It was British Military Intelligence HQ.” ~ Fredblogs

          HASBARIST CREED: “Sticks and stones may break our bones, but facts will never sway us.” (This creed also works for Neocons, Team B, Republicans, Fox News, Fundies, etc.)

          FROM WIKIPEDIA [King David Hotel bombing]:

          . . . The Irgun, considered to be terrorists by Mi5,[6] planted a bomb in the basement of the main building of the hotel, under the wing which housed the Mandate Secretariat and a few offices of the British military headquarters. . .
          . . . Irgun committed the attack in response to Operation Agatha, known within Israel then and now as “Black Saturday”.[7] British troops had searched the Jewish Agency on June 29 and confiscated large quantities of documents about the group’s operations and links with violent groups. The intelligence information was taken to the King David Hotel building in Jerusalem.[8] . . .
          . . . 91 people were killed, most of them being staff of the hotel or Secretariat: 21 were first-rank government officials; 49 were second-rank clerks, typists and messengers, junior members of the Secretariat, employees of the hotel and canteen workers; 13 were soldiers; 3 policemen; and 5 were members of the public. By nationality, there were 41 Arabs, 28 British citizens, 17 Palestinian Jews, 2 Armenians, 1 Russian, 1 Greek and 1 Egyptian. 46 people were injured.[3][4] Some of the deaths and injuries occurred in the road outside the hotel and in adjacent buildings. No identifiable traces were found of thirteen of those killed.[3] One of the dead was Yulius Jacobs, an Irgun sympathizer.[13] . . .
          . . . The Jewish political leadership publicly condemned the attack. The Jewish Agency expressed “their feelings of horror at the base and unparalleled act perpetrated today by a gang of criminals”, despite the fact that the Irgun was acting in response to the Jewish Resistance Movement, an organisation governed by the Jewish Agency.[16] The Jewish National Council denounced the bombing.[8] According to The Jerusalem Post, “[a]lthough the Hagana had sanctioned the King David bombing, world-wide condemnation caused the organization to distance itself from the attack.”[7] David Ben-Gurion deemed Irgun “the enemy of the Jewish people” after the attack. Hatsofeh, a Jewish newspaper in Palestine, went as far as to label the Irgun perpetrators “fascists”.[23] . . .
          . . . The bombing has appeared in literature about the practice and history of terrorism. It has been called one of the most lethal terrorist attacks of the 20th century.[27] . . .
          . . . In July 2006, the Menachem Begin Heritage Center organized a conference to mark the 60th anniversary of the bombing. The conference was attended by past and future Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun.[30] A plaque commemorating the bombing was unveiled . . .

          SOURCE – link to en.wikipedia.org

        • P.S. FROM WIKIPEDIA [British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument)]:

          (excerpts) The British Mandate for Palestine, officially simply the Mandate for Palestine, was a legal commission for the administration of Palestine, the draft of which was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, amended via the 16 September 1922 Transjordan memorandum[1][2] and which came into effect on 29 September 1923[1] following the ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne.[3][4] The mandate ended at midnight on 14 May 1948. [The King David Hotel was bombed by the Irgun in 1946. - J.L.D.]
          The document was based on the principles contained in Article 22 of the draft Covenant of the League of Nations and the San Remo Resolution of 25 April 1920 by the principal Allied and associated powers after the First World War.[1] The mandate formalised British rule in the southern part of Ottoman Syria from 1923–1948. . .
          . . . The United States was not a member of the League of Nations, and consequently was not required to officially state its position on the legality of the Palestinian Mandate. However, the US government accepted the de facto, if not de jure, status of the mandates and entered into individual treaties with the mandatory power to secure legal rights for its citizens and to protect property rights and business interests in the mandates. In the case of Palestine, on 3 December 1924, it entered into a bilateral treaty with Britain in the Palestine Mandate Convention, in which the United States “consents to the administration” (Article 1) and which dealt with eight issues of concern to the United States.[85][86] . . .

          SOURCE – link to en.wikipedia.org

        • Mooser says:

          “It was British Military Intelligence HQ. As such, it was not a civilian target.”

          One of the side effects of the Ziocaine Syndrome is irony-poor blood.

          Okay, chump, it wasn’t a “civilian target”, I guess instead of terrorism, it comes under the ‘biting the hand which feeds you’ tenet of Zionism. Want to remind me again why the Zionist terrorists had to go to war with the authors and administrators of the Balfour Declaration? Or was it just a thoughtful demonstration to encourage British-Jewish amity back in Merrie Olde?

        • Oh, so the use of terrorism is justified then. Thanks for that observation.

        • tree says:

          Can Khalid Sheikh Mohammed use that as a defense in his trial wrt the Pentagon?

          Why stop at the Pentagon? The 25th floor of the World Trade Center was shared by the Department of Defense and the CIA. That makes the WTC a military target in Fred’s book.

        • talknic says:

          Fredblogs May 29, 2012 at 2:26 pm

          “.. the King David hotel. It was British Military Intelligence HQ. As such, it was not a civilian target”

          A) The bombs were placed under the restaurant. The restaurant was not staffed by military. (BTW 19(?) Jewish folk were killed)

          B) There was allegedly a warning, yes? Let’s presume this is true for a moment. 1) If it was only a military target, why be stupid enough to warn them? 2) But no one evacuated the building ………… so they let the bomb off anyway!

          As usual with the Israeli narrative, it simply never adds up. Somewhere there is always a gaping big hole in all the Hasbara.

        • pabelmont says:

          Not a civilian target — of an attack by the armed forces of a recognized STATE? A military attack, then, in which case may we ask [a] what state was attacking and [b] was the attack aggressive (and therefore illegal under Nuremberg principles)? Well, no, Irgun was not a state. So, terrorist, then?

    • FreddyV says:

      Erm, forgive me if I’m wrong here Fred, but performing a play isn’t ‘free speech’. It’s a performance and there is nothing to defend on that score. I’m not a theatre goer, but I’m sure they put on a wonderful performance.

      The issue is that the Habima Theatre Company perform in illegal settlements and receive funding from the Israeli government. They are in effect a P.R. outfit for apartheid. That is repugnant. The protesters had a right to appear and announce their disdain and appear to have done so peacefully and non violently.

      I’m actually more than annoyed that The Globe didn’t listen to the many artists and performers who protested these performances and I’m appalled at the heavy handedness of the security and authorities.

      • Fredblogs says:

        Of course performing a play is an exercise of free speech.

        People go to listen to what the players say, not to listen to some egomaniacal protester who just has to have his say at the expense of everyone who actually wants to listen to the play.

        The protesters had the right to protest outside, or in a way that didn’t disrupt anyone else’s enjoyment of the play. They didn’t have the right to stand up and block someone’s view of the play. That crossed the line.

        As for the heavy handedness of security, they got rid of the most disruptive jerks and even left some standing on their chairs blocking other people’s views alone. In America, security would probably have tasered them all.

        • not sure what the laws are in the UK. as i recall, in the US, representative of foreign governments are not afforded free speech in public places. not sure if this applies in this circumstance.

          so are you just shooting from the hip when you say Of course performing a play is an exercise of free speech. or did you read it somewhere?

          can the government of china send performers to this country and demand a platform on the pretense of free speech?

        • Fredblogs says:

          Anyone, including foreigners have the right of free speech in America. What are they teaching you kids in schools these days? As long as you either own the venue or have permission from those who do, or are doing it in a public venue within the bounds of content neutral rules.

          The government of China can certainly rent out a hall in America and put on whatever works they want. Including propaganda.

          For that matter, if a town allows street performers (you can ban such things with content neutral rules), the Chinese government performers could put on a performance on a street corner.

          You can stand on a street corner and speak whether you are an American citizen or not. When you disrupt others’ rights to speak, that’s where it gets dicey.

          Just about any type of expressive conduct falls into the definitions of free speech. Including wearing t-shirts, wearing armbands, and yes, putting on a play.

          If you own the venue (or have permission from the owners) you have to go pretty far out of bounds for anyone else to have the right to disrupt your performance. Obscenity isn’t protected, but this play wasn’t obscene.

          The rules are different in the UK, more things are unprotected, but putting on a play in your own venue is still pretty solidly protected from intervention by the government. So your protesters were infringing someone else’s right to speak.

        • FreddyV says:

          @Fred:

          I’m sorry, but a play is a play. Free speech is an expression of opinion, which doesn’t necessarily sit well with all of those who hear it, but one has the right to express ones views. Habima were not expressing views. They were performing and were probably paid to do it. The protest wasn’t against the performance or the quality of it (which if it wasn’t very good, the audience would have every right to express their right of free speech by booing, or conversely cheering if the performance was good), it was against what the Theatre Company represents, which is a cultural whitewash of the Israeli occupation and human rights violations.

          Yes, they can object outside. Or they can go buy a ticket, sit or stand inside and peacefully and non violently protest. That is free speech and that is what they chose to do.

          Personally, I think hope the performers take this experience home with them and ask themselves why people in other countries find their government’s policies objectionable enough to make a stand and protest against their performances.

          But lets face it, that won’t happen. They’ve all been so brainwashed with Hasbara, they’ll just think we’re all anti Semitic Islamic sympathisers.

        • weindeb says:

          “People go to listen to what the players say, not to listen to some egomaniacal protester who just has to have his say at the expense of everyone who actually wants to listen to the play.” But the purpose of a protest is neither to sustain a status quo nor to provide comfort for those within hearing and seeing range of said protest. You seem to miss the point, deliberately I presume. What’s you take on BDS, and I mean full, complete, and potentially effective BDS?

        • eljay says:

          >> Anyone, including foreigners have the right of free speech in America. … You can stand on a street corner and speak whether you are an American citizen or not.

          Meanwhile, in Israel: “We may not be as good as the best but, hey, at least we’re not as bad as the worst!” (TM)

          Reach for the bottom, boys, reach for the bottom!

        • Fredblogs says:

          @weindeb
          Legitimate boycotting? That is an expression of free speech. Disrupting a performance, not legitimate. Refusing to buy Israeli products? Legitimate protest against a target that you are foolish to be protesting unless you are also boycotting every country with worse records than Israel. Vandalizing products, not legitimate. Standing outside a store with a sign, legit, blocking people from entering or leaving the store? Illegitimate.

          Sanctions, I’m against them. Divestment, if you want to, that is your right, but again, foolish.

          As for whether BDS is potentially effective, I think it is too fuzzy to be effective. An effective boycott focuses on one thing or a small number of things, BDS is all over the map about what it is trying to ban. Some people want to stop the expansion of settlements, some want to get rid of them entirely, some want Israel to hand itself over to the Palestinians through right of return. Then too, an effective boycott is one in which the consequences of giving in are less than the consequences of not giving in. The consequences of not expanding the settlements are small, BDS focused on that issue alone has a shot. The consequences of RoR are the end of Israel and potentially the expulsion of the Jews and/or a civil war. BDS is not going to get the Israelis to go along with that.

        • Anyone, including foreigners have the right of free speech in America.

          not everyone. some have to register (and there is probably a fee). Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) requires “public disclosure by persons engaging in propaganda activities and other activities for or on behalf of foreign governments, foreign political parties, and other foreign principals.”

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “but this play wasn’t obscene.”

          Israelis prancing about — doing Merchant of Venice no less — pretending they are part of a normal country and not a pariah… that is obscene.

          “So your protesters were infringing someone else’s right to speak.”

          So what? When the israeli oppressors respect all the rights fo the Palestinians under their control, then maybe I might give a damn if someone interrupts their little propaganda show.

        • Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) requires “public disclosure by persons engaging in propaganda activities and other activities for or on behalf of foreign governments, foreign political parties, and other foreign principals.”

          Which is why we have been failing since the 60′s to have AIPAC register as a foreign agent, when they clearly are the epitome of a foreign agent.

        • Fredblogs says:

          Which is content neutral and doesn’t restrict what they can say.

          “DOES THE ACT LIMIT AN AGENT’S LOBBYING AND PUBLISHING INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS (PROPAGANDA) FOR A FOREIGN PRINCIPAL?

          No, the Act requires only registration.”

          Also, for this particular case:

          “Persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or solely of a religious, scholastic, academic, scientific or fine arts nature are exempt.”

          link to fara.gov

        • MarkF says:

          “In America, security would probably have tasered them all.”

          Gotcha kinda hot and flustered, needin’ a cig just thinkin’ about it, eh?

          C’mon man, that’s a good thing?

        • don’t yell at me. No, the Act requires only registration it’s still not ‘free’, in the sense foreign agents cannot come to this country representing a foreign government and have your free speech protected without a process. free means free.

          they are dumping tons of money to fight the ‘deligitimazation’ all over this country, college campuses etc. these are not individuals, this is the gov. and they are not doing it for purely commercial nature or solely of a religious, scholastic, academic, scientific or fine arts nature.

          i’m done discussing this with you.

        • weindeb says:

          Never, Fredblogs, may you be accused of brevity, but of chop-logic thou art a master. “Disrupting a performance, not legitimate.” Here legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder, or the heart, if one considers it morally legitimate; apparently you don’t. Apartheid über alles, and all that, you might say. Ever heard of civil disobedience? It’s might not be very civil, but it’s done for a reason.

          “Refusing to buy Israeli products? Legitimate protest against a target that you are foolish to be protesting unless you are also boycotting every country with worse records than Israel.” That really makes sense; namely, do not even consider boycotting a state in contravention of international law, and a racist one at that, unless it can be shown that its record of abuses is worse than…etc. Instead of BDS, then, would you prefer military action?

        • Rania says:

          Fredblogs, you are such an authoritarian dimwit. The whole point of civil disobedience is to be DISOBEDIENT. You protest DESPITE the rules, not within the rules. You speak whenever and wherever the hell you want. If you are arrested, it is all the better. You suffer the consequences in support of your cause. That is what civil disobedience is all about.

          You say: The rules are different in the UK, more things are unprotected, but putting on a play in your own venue is still pretty solidly protected from intervention by the government. So your protesters were infringing someone else’s right to speak.

          Yes, protected from intervention BY THE GOVERNMENT. The government did not stop Habima from doing or saying anything, as far as I can tell. The right to freedom of speech does not give an individual a cause of action against another individual for the act of interruption. It limits the government’s ability to suppress content-based speech. The actors’ rights to free speech were in no way violated by anyone.

        • What rubbish. They had the right to do what they saw fit. If you don’t like it, tough, but it is not for you to tell UK people what they can do in a public place. given the Israeli style goon security they deserve some plaudits. BTW the Palestinian performance was outstanding and cheered to the rafters by the public who knew what a miracle it was that they were allowed out by their Israeli gatekeepers. And they had a humorous account of the humiliation Israeli officials heaped on them as they left. Dignity, humanity and artistry – something entirely lacking from the Israeli theatre squad, who are unable to handle criticism and automatically resort to abuse and threats.

        • Fredblogs says:

          First Amendment applies to every form of expression in the US. Books, Magazines, Newspapers, music, movies, plays. I suggest you read up on it. Oh, and I’m not yelling, that small snip was cut and pasted from the website of the government agency responsible for administering it. They put it in all caps. Free means say what you want. They get to say whatever they want to say. They can’t blast it over loudspeakers at 3AM in a residential neighborhood either (content neutral restrictions apply). Still free speech. And the performing company doing Shakespeare (if they were doing it in America) wouldn’t have to register because they are purely of a fine arts nature.

        • Fredblogs says:

          I don’t smoke. Bad habit.

        • eljay says:

          >> Legitimate boycotting? That is an expression of free speech. Disrupting a performance, not legitimate. Refusing to buy Israeli products? Legitimate protest … Vandalizing products, not legitimate. Standing outside a store with a sign, legit, blocking people from entering or leaving the store? Illegitimate.

          A 60+ years, ON-GOING and OFFENSIVE (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder intended to prolong the existence of an oppressive, expansionist, colonialist and supremacist state? Shhh!!! Let’s not talk about that!

          Fredulent is about as hateful and immoral as they come. He’s eee with a longer name, but with the same small mind, heart and sense of human decency.

        • Samuel T says:

          Freddy V,

          Freedom of speech is a right of an individual and or a group that does not override another individual’s civil liberties. Law coincides with parallel laws. This was a private gathering, not a place for a public protest. Put aside your political views and think, just a little bit. Heckling in a theatre. Disrupting a performance. It is a common practice at venues to lock entrance doors prior to the start of a theatrical or musical production so as not to interrupt the performance.

          If someone wants to protest “the content of the theatrical production.” they should do so outside not by disrupting someone else’s civil liberties. It’s immature, pointless and classless to use these tactics and expect a positive outcome.

        • talknic says:

          Fredblogs May 29, 2012 at 11:37 am

          “…some egomaniacal protester ..”

          = someone with enough of a conscience & morals to stand up for and voice what they believe.

          “They didn’t have the right to stand up and block someone’s view of the play. That crossed the line”

          64 years of ILLEGALLY dispossessing non-Jews. 64 years of occupation. Illegally acquiring territory by war, illegal annexation, illegal settlements doesn’t cross any lines? A play by a company supported by the state that has perpetuated these atrocities is more important?

          “In America, security would probably have tasered them all”

          Speculation of what might have happened is sooooooooo cute

        • FreddyV says:

          Fredblogs says:
          May 29, 2012 at 5:23 pm

          ‘I don’t smoke. Bad habit.’

          But you do have a habit of trying to blow smoke up people’s arses….

          Sorry. Couldn’t resist.

        • FreddyV says:

          @Samuel T:

          ‘It’s immature, pointless and classless to use these tactics and expect a positive outcome.’

          Sorry for those who may have had their evening disrupted, but I suppose that’s nothing compared to 64 years of Israeli oppression.

          Immature? I’d actually say it’s very mature to stand up and commit an act of civil disobedience as a means of non violent protest.

          Pointless? No, there was a point. It’s about awareness. It made the papers. Point made.

          Classless? Compared to Israel’s behaviour? Don’t even go there. Protesting isn’t about class. It’s about standing up and making uncomfortable truths known. Kudos to those who did and were prepared to accept the consequences.

          Positive outcome? Yes. Awareness. I hope some of the Habima performers take a long hard look at themselves and realise that the world isn’t looking too kindly at their country’s record of human rights abuses and behavour and that by being part of their theatre company, they’re not only complicit, but also active participants in their government’s propaganda.

          But from the words immature, pointless and most ridiculously classless I get the impression that you have absolutely no idea about the plight of the Palestinian people, or are willfully ignorant and more concerned about a bunch of theatre goers having their evenings disrupted.

        • Shmuel says:

          But from the words immature, pointless and most ridiculously classless I get the impression that you have absolutely no idea about the plight of the Palestinian people, or are willfully ignorant and more concerned about a bunch of theatre goers having their evenings disrupted.

          Exactly. It also smacks of the condescension of power (see e.g. Golda’s famous quip about the Black Panthers not being “nice”, or any number of remarks by British colonial officers – the “white man’s burden” and all that). The natives and the lower classes really have no sense of propriety and decorum. Interrupting Shakespeare! How uncivilised. Harumph.

        • Fredblogs says:

          64 years of dispossessing people who were a subset of the people that have been trying for 64 years to destroy their country and exterminate them does not cross the line. Taking land from people that sent armies to destroy them does not cross the line.

          Illegal (under Israeli law) settlements do cross the line. However, regardless of your cause, you don’t have the right to come into a private venue and disrupt a play. The Israeli supporters feel just as passionately as you do, should they be allowed to go around disrupting performances of a play about Rachel Corrie?

        • eljay says:

          >> The Israeli supporters feel just as passionately as you do, should they be allowed to go around disrupting performances of a play about Rachel Corrie?

          Leave it to a hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist to equate a protest by Zio-supremacists against a peaceful human-rights activist killed by their state with a protest by human-rights activists against an oppressive, expansionist, colonialist and supremacist state.

        • Fredblogs says:

          The way you feel about Israel is the way some Israeli supporters feel about Palestinians, their terrorists, and the people who support their terrorists. I sympathize with Rachel Corrie’s family about losing their daughter, but I think it was her own fault that she’s dead. If it is legitimate for your side to disrupt plays by our side, then it is just as legitimate for our side to disrupt plays by your side.

          What really bothers me about Palestinian supporters is that they have no conception that other people feel just as passionately about Israel as they feel about the Palestinians.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “What really bothers me about Palestinian supporters is that they have no conception that other people feel just as passionately about Israel as they feel about the Palestinians.”

          BFD. You feel passionate love for Israel. Great. And people felt passionate love for Nazi Germany. And communist Russia. And on and on.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “64 years of dispossessing people who were a subset of the people that have been trying for 64 years to destroy their country and exterminate them does not cross the line. Taking land from people that sent armies to destroy them does not cross the line.”

          And here is about as clear an example of the rabid anti-Arab bigotry and grotesque racism at the heart of zionism as you’re going to find. Fredo excuses the oppression of one set of people for no other reason then they are of the same ethnic group as other people who, in the past, he claims committed an offense. (Putting aside for a moment the horseshit “extermination” nonsense.) Pure racism, at the core of zionism, as Fredo demonstrates yet again.

          Zionism = Racism

          “Illegal (under Israeli law) settlements do cross the line.”

          And yet another example. To Fredo, the offense isn’t the theft of another’s property, it’s the failure to abide by the law mandated by the so-called jewish state.

        • Cliff says:

          Freddy, we don’t need advice on civil disobedience, protest tactics, implementation and promotion of BDS from a stormtrooper, ok?

          Do you think Leatherface is a good confidant or someone who will saw off your face?

          Thanks but no thanks. We know how much you care about Palestinian solidarity though, and after all it’s the thought that counts.

        • Mooser says:

          And over on another thread, good ‘ol Hophmi is tells us “the history of the Palestinians is suicide bombing”.

        • Fredblogs says:

          @Woody Tanaka
          Not because they were the same race as the attacking armies, because they were allies of the attacking armies.

    • seafoid says:

      Fred

      Culture is the soft underbelly of Zionism and where the action will be for the foreseeable .

      Israelis and the rest of the bots can pretend all is well but the world is getting the message- Zionism is apartheid.

      link to irishtimes.com

      • Sir, – Gerard Donovan (May 26th) truly scrapes the bottom of the barrel in his attempts to undermine Raymond Deane, accusing him of “intimidation” – without producing any credible evidence – and suggesting that he’s unworthy of Aosdána membership (Opinion, May 26th).
      It really isn’t good enough to attack the messenger rather than deal with the message itself, that Israel’s conduct is unacceptable.
      I congratulate Dr Deane and the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign on their cultural boycott campaign. It is one that very effectively pressures Israel, raises the price of its occupation and gives all of us the opportunity to support Palestinians in a struggle that demands nothing more than the chance to live a normal life unhindered by military occupation. – Yours, etc,
      LORRAINE COURTNEY, Townsend Street, Dublin 2.

      A chara, – In response to Gerard Donovan (Opinion, May 26th) I wish to respond to misleading assertions he made regarding 1, The Aosdána resolution of 2007 and 2, my open letter to the Israeli embassy, published in Indymedia ( link to indymedia.ie article/ 81745).
      1. In consequence of my visit to Israel in 2006, I approached Raymond Deane to second the following resolution before the Aosdána assembly: “Mindful of the 4th of August 2006 call from Palestinian filmmakers, artists and cultural workers to end all cooperation with state-sponsored Israeli cultural events and institutions, Aosdána wishes to encourage Irish artists and cultural institutions to reflect deeply before engaging in such cooperation, always bearing in mind the undeniable courage of those Israeli artists, writers and intellectuals who oppose their own government’s illegal policies towards the Palestinians.” 2. I wrote an open letter to the Israeli ambassador in response to an article in the Irish Independent, March 29th, 2007. The article from the Israeli embassy stated that the Aosdána decision was fundamentally wrong, based on misunderstanding and misinformation.
      I wrote him a detailed letter of my experiences on my visit to Israel and the West Bank. I ended the letter as follows: “If you really believe I have been misinformed and am misleading others, why do you not invite every single woman and every women’s group I met in Israel and the West Bank, let them tell you what they said to me. Are you implying because we are women we have no minds of our own and cannot see what we look at and what we experience? The Israeli ambassador did not respond to my letter. – Is mise,

      MARGARETTA D’ARCY, Member of Aosdána, St Brigid’s Place Lower, Galway.

      Sir, – Gerard Donovan’s article (Opinion, May 26th) is a very long and extraordinarily abusive attack on people who politely asked him to accede to a Palestinian request not to perform in Israel. Taken on its own, its publication constitutes a serious error of judgment.
      Moreover, it comes as the culmination of a month of some of the most biased and misleading reporting of any story I have ever seen in The Irish Times.
      In article after article, the Palestinian origins of and international support for the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel have been ignored, and Irish activists have been accused, without a shred of objective evidence, of “venom”, “threats”, “pressure” and “intimidation” of artists, simply for drawing their attention to the campaign.

      Decent people can differ on boycotting Israel. But only a few people in this country have been truly served by your newspaper’s sustained vilification of those on one side of the debate, and they work in the Israeli embassy. It is not too late for The Irish Times to review carefully how it has been drawn into producing such a trivialised, personalised and deeply partisan version of a serious international issue, and to start from scratch to report it properly. – Yours, etc,
      HARRY BROWNE, School of Media, Dublin Institute of Technology, Aungier Street, Dublin 2.

      Sir, – Last February the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign addressed the following letter to the novelist Gerard Donovan: “Dear Gerard Donovan – I am pasting below an appeal from PACBI (Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel link to pacbi.org) to all writers planning to participate in the International Writers’ Festival to be held in Jerusalem next May.
      “There is nothing that I can add to this eloquent appeal, save to stress (this is often misunderstood, sometimes deliberately) that the call for a cultural boycott of apartheid Israel is not directed against individual artists but against the Israeli state, which is deemed to be whitewashed by the participation of international artists in events subsidised by that state.
      “Let me also draw your attention to the pledge signed, to date, by 216 Irish artists ( link to ipsc.ie) who refuse to perform, exhibit, read, etc. in the state of Israel until that state abides by international law and international humanitarian law and ends its criminal practices against the Palestinian people. Yours sincerely – Dr Raymond Deane”.
      I fail to see how an appeal to conscience can be construed by Gerard Donovan as “intimidation”, “threat” and an “unjust attack” from which Article 40 of the Constitution guarantees him protection (Opinion, May 26th). – Yours, etc,
      MARTIN O’QUIGLEY, Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Chairperson, Dame Street, Dublin 2.

      Sir, – As an Irish writer, I believe that writers and artists have a duty to confront injustice wherever it may arise. In some quarters this notion must seem quaint.
      The destruction of the Palestinian people by Israel needs no reiteration here.
      Over 200 Irish musicians and writers have signed up to a cultural boycott of Israel.
      I support this boycott without reservation. The boycott is working, as witness the increasingly frantic attempts by a well-oiled Israeli propaganda machine to undermine it. The Palestinians do not possess a similar sophisticated campaign through which to impress upon the world their utter hopelessness and despair.
      The courage and humanity of Irish men and women engaged in the arts and literature has helped to lend them a voice.
      Of this they should be justly proud.
      – Yours, etc,
      FRED JOHNSTON, Circular Road, Galway.

      • Woody Tanaka says:

        “Culture is the soft underbelly of Zionism and where the action will be for the foreseeable .”

        Exactly right. No Israeli, at any time, should ever be permitted, for even a moment, to pretend that his country is a normal state, untill the Palestinians are free.

    • Danaa says:

      Habima should have not been allowed to put on their show at all. They represent a barbaric country that practices apartheid, is guilty of expuulsion and murder of countless civilians whose only crime was they were natives resisting marauders. Habima actors and producers are complicit in crimes against humanity. And the audience that shouted scum are sympathizers with apartheid as is Fredblogs here.

      sad day for England to permit such travesty into the Globe. Disgusting.

      • Woody Tanaka says:

        “Habima should have not been allowed to put on their show at all.”

        Agreed, agreed.

      • seafoid says:

        Shakespeare was writing stuff for the Globe while England was ethnically cleansing Ireland, Danaa.

        It’s great to see the level of progressive activism in London today though. The Proms last year had a similar scene. Ultimately any Zionist Israeli who travels abroad should be ready to get an earful.

        • Danaa says:

          seafoid, right you are about England and ireland. But, we are all supposed to learn something from the past and improve, no? even if it took the English a few hundred years….assuming the learning was good.

          And the Globe has become something of a symbol since the good old days. It’s a cultural symbol for civilizations to learn the lessons of the past. The country Habima represents does nothing of the sort – it is more a retreat to the bad old days – unfortunately dragging the rest of the civilized world with it.

          The fact is – they were allowed to perform – in the Globe of all places – a slap in the face of the lessons of history and the insights on civilization’s follies that Shakespeare did so much to illuminate.

        • G. Seauton says:

          “Shakespeare was writing stuff for the Globe while England was ethnically cleansing Ireland.”

          Well, not exactly. England did engage in ethnic cleansing in Ireland, but this didn’t begin in any real way before Cromwell. Shakespeare died in 1616, and Cromwell was born in 1599. Cromwell was barely 17 when Shakespeare died. Cromwell led the invasion of Ireland in 1649.

          Of course, there had been conflict between England and Ireland for centuries, and England had tried unsuccessfully to conquer Ireland more or less since the thirteenth century. However, Cromwell was the one who managed to subdue Ireland and really brought serious suffering to that country.

        • seafoid says:

          The Plantation of Ulster started in 1609. It was very like the plantation of Palestine. The Protestants got the plains and the Irish Catholics were forced into the mountains.
          Israel has all the best land of Palestine. The West Bank is mostly mountain.

    • RE: “Sorry, Mooser, but you have been misinformed as to
      the nature of the King David hotel. It was British Military Intelligence HQ.” ~ Fredblogs

      SEE: Can Jewish Liberals Transcend the Wiesel Doctrine?
      Countering the Israel Lobby’s Dominance
      , by Alan Nasser, Counterpunch, 5/29/12

      • “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivitiess become irrelevant.” ~ Elie Wiesel, From the “Kingdom of Memory: Reminiscences”

      • “My loyalty to my people, to our people, and to Israel comes first and prevents me from saying anything critical of Israel outside Israel… As a Jew I see my role as a melitz yosher, a defender of Israel: I defend even her mistakes… I must identify with whatever Israel does – even with her errors.” ~ Elie Wiesel, “Against Silence”

      . . . Bienart sees that as an American Jew he bears a special responsibility to act on the words, hypocritically penned by Elie Wiesel, cited at the head of this article: “We must always take sides…. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere.” I say he’s right.

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – link to counterpunch.org

    • talknic says:

      Fredblogs May 29, 2012 at 10:27 am

      “There’s a time and a place for protests and the middle of a play is neither the time nor the place.”

      Where?

      “At that point, you aren’t exercising your own right to free speech, you are disrupting someone else’s right to free speech”

      ?? Silent protest disrupts?

      ” They should have arrested the lot of them and charged them to the full extent of the law”

      Uh huh. These are based on the Law … UNSC Resolution 252 (1968) UNSC Resolution 267 (1969), UNSC Resolution 271 (1969), UNSC Resolution 298 (1971), UNSC Resolution 465 (1980), UNSC Resolution 476 (1980), UNSC Resolution 1860 (2009) …. Oh, and Israel’s annexation of the Golan was also condemned by the UNSC Res 497

      You have advocated collective punishment for innocent Palestinians in the past. Supporting the ILLEGAL actions of successive Israeli Governments isn’t aiding and abetting?

      • Samuel T says:

        try, just try to stay on point without spewing information that is not remotely connected to this event. This was theatre. This was disrupting the peace. There are times and places for lawful assembly and demonstrating for personal rights while disregarding other peoples personal rights is arrogant and pointless.

        The usual banter follows and sides are drawn, ridiculous. It was a private function. Are you going to stand up at a relatives wedding reception and start ranting about Israel and Palestine? Would that be appropriate?

        This form of protest is not a methodology of gaining people’s respect, it’s a demonstration of being disrespectful and abusing another person’s civil liberties. Flip the equation, make it a Palestinian theatre production, It still would not be an appropriate place to demonstrate.

        • talknic says:

          Samuel T May 30, 2012 at 3:00 am

          “..information that is not remotely connected to this event”

          This event IS connected, what do you think the protestors were protesting, Shakespeare?

          ” There are times and places for lawful assembly and demonstrating for personal rights while disregarding other peoples personal rights is arrogant and pointless”

          Uh? They weren’t demonstrating for their personal rights. Meanwhile dispossessing non-Jews, illegal acquisition of their territory, illegal annexation, illegal settlements is not “disregarding other peoples personal rights”? AMAZING!!!

          “It was a private function.”

          Tickets were sold to…. the public

          “Are you going to stand up at a relatives wedding reception and start ranting about Israel and Palestine? Would that be appropriate?”

          That would be a private function. BTW who was “ranting “?

          This form of protest is not a methodology of gaining people’s respect, it’s a demonstration of being disrespectful and abusing another person’s civil liberties”

          The Palestinians under occupation for 64 years, dispossessed et al is not being disrespectful and abusing another person’s civil liberties? AMAZING!!!

          “Flip the equation, make it a Palestinian theatre production, It still would not be an appropriate place to demonstrate”

          Nice try at ‘flipping’ there, you missed out on some key factors. “make it a Palestinian theatre” company who perform in illegally acquired Israeli territories, ILLEGALLY annexed Israeli territories and Israeli territories ILLEGALLY settled. Then it’s flipped

          Say, can you name such a company … thx … I’ll wait ……………………………………………………………

          BTW what they be demonstrating against?

        • Shmuel says:

          Flip the equation, make it a Palestinian theatre production

          If you really want to “flip the equation” – i.e. transfer the protest to circumstances that evoke other sensibilities – how about Bolshoi 1974 or Springbok 1981?

          The bottom line in most of these arguments is usually whether you accept the rationale behind the protest or not. If the crimes being protested against are perceived as serious enough, all arguments of form and class and maturity and legitimacy tend to disappear.

          Is it an effective strategy? That’s for those who actually support the goals of the protest to discuss.

      • Fredblogs says:

        “Where?” Outside, without blocking the entrance. Standing up on your chair blocking other peoples’ view disrupts. Shouting “hath not…” disrupts.
        The security council resolutions are irrelevant to whether it is legal to disrupt a play.

  2. Woody Tanaka says:

    The fact that Israelis performed Merchant of Venice demonstrates that they are a society without a sense of irony.

    • Citizen says:

      HeY, I WAS taught as an American, that Jews excelled in irony.

    • seafoid says:

      You have to belong to a certain cult to understand that universal themes of justice do not apply to the Palestinians.
      It is very hard to get this message across to all the decent people who live in Galut.

    • The fact that Israelis performed Merchant of Venice demonstrates that they are a society without a sense of irony.

      Astute observation! I missed that until I recalled Shylock!

  3. MTd2 says:

    I wonder what kind of idea does this protest bring to the mind of most Israelis? Don’t most they think anti – zionism = anti – semitism?

  4. seafoid says:

    “There was one electrifying intervention during the trial scene when a booming voice from the yard asked: “Hath not a Palestinian eyes?” – an act of telling appropriation that for a couple of vertiginous seconds threatened to throw the production off-balance”.

    That must have been magnificent. The creativity of this latest wave of anti zionism is wonderful.

    • Samuel T says:

      seafoid,

      A Heckler is not magnificent. What was the point of protest at a theatrical production? Are the Palestinians against Art? Drama?

      This wasn’t creative. This is the kind of crap I did when I was in School, in junior high school. Immature and disruptive. Creative? Where is the creativity?
      Civil disobedience should have a correlation to the law that is unjust. Viewing a theatrical production is not unjust but disrupting it is.

      • talknic says:

        Samuel T May 30, 2012 at 3:06 am

        ” What was the point of protest at a theatrical production? Are the Palestinians against Art? Drama?”

        LOL… You’re either a complete moron or deliberately playing the stupid card

        “Where is the creativity?”

        Getting it in the news link to google.com.au

      • seafoid says:

        I was at the Proms once in London and the orchestra opened with “Also Sprach Zarathustra” That was what was on the programme. And when the music started da da DA DA the auditorium realised that it was also the theme tune to “2001 a space odyssey”

        And it was spellbinding

        And then someone right at the top of the Albert Hall sent down a paper plane

        And it was magnificent as well as creative

  5. realzionist says:

    There was a Zionist Federation counter demo.

    For the truth about the alliance between the British Zionist Federation and the neo-facist English Defence League, click here:

    link to hoffmanchronicled.wordpress.com

  6. Isn’t the stock Israeli answer that there is no such thing as a “Palestinian” and therefore no eyes for him or her to have?

    Ipse dixit.

  7. hophmi says:

    Just like pro-Palestinian protesters. They have nothing positive to say or do. They just knock what the Israelis do.

    It’s all negativity with them. Let them bring a Palestinian acting troupe to perform at the Globe rather than complaining about an Israeli company. That would do a lot more for the cause than ruining everybody else’s evening. This kind of activism will satisfy only those in the BDS cult.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “They have nothing positive to say or do. ”

      Baloney. Standing up and saying to a symbol of evil, like Habima: “we refuse to let you pretend that your country is a normal one and that your people are not criminals for the crimes against the Palestinian people and that you, yourselves, are not partly responsible for it” is a very, very positive thing to say. Every israeli who does not support the Palestinian cause should be harrassed until they drop, wherever they can be found.

      “Let them bring a Palestinian acting troupe to perform at the Globe rather than complaining about an Israeli company.”

      No doubt if they tried, the israelis will arrest half of them on no charges and torture them for months, and the fifth-columnist israeli-firsters will pull their strings behind the scene to get the venue closed to the Palestinians.

    • Let them bring a Palestinian acting troupe to perform at the Globe rather than complaining about an Israeli company.

      You *do* know that their students with scholarships cannot even travel back and forth to obtain an education, don’t you? I’ll bet a Palestinian theater group would love to be represented. As I remember (thanks to MW no doubt), the IDF targeted and destroyed a theater used for Palestinian stage productions. Seems as if those people just can’t buy a break.

      I wonder why that is? Who benefits from keeping a whole group so brutally subdued?

    • seafoid says:

      Juliano Mer Khamis was killed by Israel for introducing poor Palestinians to the world of theatre.

    • RE: “Just like pro-Palestinian protesters. They have
      nothing positive to say or do. They just knock what the Israelis do. It’s all negativity with them. Let them bring a Palestinian acting troupe to perform at the Globe rather than complaining about an Israeli company.” ~ hopmi

      SUBMITTED: “Just like pro-Jewish protesters. They have nothing positive to say or do. They just knock what the Nazis do. It’s all negativity with them. Let them bring a Jewish acting troupe to perform at the Globe rather than complaining about a Nazi
      company. . .”
      ~ hypothetical Nazi supporter in 1938

      P.S. Will you please explain in a reasonably intelligent manner how BDS is a cult?*
      CULT – link to en.wikipedia.org
      * P.P.S. “Sticks and stones may break our bones, but facts will never sway us!” ~ Hasbarist Creed

      • RE: “This kind of activism will satisfy only those in the BDS cult.” ~ hopmi
        AND RE: “Will you [hopmi] please explain in a reasonably intelligent manner how BDS is a cult?” ~ me (above)

        FOR EXAMPLE, SEE: Terrorists? Us?, by Owen Bennett-Jones, London Review of Books, Vol. 34 No. 11, June 7, 2012

        (excerpt). . . The MEK started to use cultlike methods – isolating members from friends and relatives and managing the flow of information that reached them – after 1989, the year its charismatic husband and wife leadership team, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, launched Operation Eternal Light. After Saddam’s failure to topple the regime in Iran, this was intended to be the big push that would finally win control of the country. Success, Rajavi told his fighters, was inevitable because the Iranian people, both civilians and military, would switch sides and join them on the march to Tehran. It would, he said, be a walkover. In the event the Iranian counter attack was ferocious. More than a thousand MEK fighters were killed and many others wounded. It lost around a third of its personnel.
        Rajavi had to come up with an explanation for the defeat. His unorthodox solution was to tell his fighters they had lost because they had been distracted by love and sex. He commanded members to divorce, become celibate and live in communal, single-sex accommodation, just like soldiers in a regular army. Filled with ideas of self-sacrifice and martyrdom, they did as they were told. (The celibacy rule is to this day so tightly enforced that there are separate times for men and women to use Camp Ashraf’s petrol station.) Members were urged to transfer their passions from their former spouses to their leaders, the Rajavis. Aware that people were becoming sexually frustrated, meetings were organised where members were obliged to confess their sexual fantasies in public. If you did confess to something, other members spat at you. Friendships were also discouraged at Camp Ashraf, and so were children. From the mid-1980s, citing safety concerns, the leadership ordered that several hundred children living in the camp be moved to pro-MEK foster families in Europe and Canada. Some parents have not seen their children for more than twenty years.
        These practices, along with frequent indoctrination sessions and the banning of news of the outside world (members were not allowed phones), helped the leadership
        to assert control.
        But MEK members outside Iraq also displayed remarkable devotion to the cause. When in 2003 the French authorities detained Maryam Rajavi on terrorism charges (she was later released) ten MEK members around the world set themselves on fire in protest; two of them died. The MEK of course denies being a cult, though many outsiders – senior US military officers, FBI agents, journalists and analysts for the largely Pentagon-funded Rand Corporation – have been to Camp Ashraf and come away believing that it is. One senior State Department official (now retired), sent to Iraq to interview thousands of MEK members after the invasion, concluded that the organisation was a cult; that the weirdly child-free Camp Ashraf was ‘a human tragedy’; that members were ‘misused and misled’ by the leadership; and that many had been tricked into joining.
        The MEK has used various recruitment methods. The organisation’s elite joined in Iran before the revolution. Others are former Iranian conscripts captured during the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam’s regime offered them a bargain: if they joined the MEK they could move from POW camps to the more comfortable confines of Camp Ashraf.
        Some members were recruited on US university campuses and promised jobs, money, new passports and the chance to fight the mullahs. Others were simply deceived.
        One Iran-based MEK activist was told on a visit to Camp Ashraf that his wife and child had died so he might as well stay. It was ten years before he got hold of a phone; the first thing he did was call home: his family were still alive. Some former MEK members say that on arrival in Iraq they were whisked past immigration control and their passports deliberately left unstamped. If later on they said they wanted to leave Camp Ashraf they were told they would be arrested for entering the country illegally. I have heard hours of such testimony from former members. The MEK insists that all the people who tell such stories are Iranian agents. It also denies misleading families. The tears of parents, spouses and children seemed real enough to me. . .

        ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to lrb.co.uk

    • Avi_G. says:

      Just like pro-Palestinian protesters. They have nothing positive to say or do. They just knock what the Israelis do.

      hophmi is apparently dipping his toes in the waters of Stand up Comedy. Not bad for a start.

      I agree, by the way. What’s with all that negativity? Why can’t those activists — for once, at least — praise the massive ghetto system Israel has built for the Palestinians?

      link to images.travelpod.com

      • Danaa says:

        Avi_G – where have you been? how could you leave us all by our lonesome lost in the dark woods? look at all our lovely new ziobots! almost as good as some of the old ones (now mercifully departed to greener pastures).

        There are really not so many of us out there, and every voice counts – wherever and however they choose to let it fly.

    • A Palestinian production did perform at the Globe and were wildly successful because of the audience’s sympathy with their plight, and the knowledge of what a miracle it was they were allowed out, in the face of obstructive, interfering and downright vile behaviour of israeli officials. It was further revealed what humiliations they suffered at the airport as israelis tried to make their lives miserable, which they signally failed to do. They were a symbol of hope and dignity against the apartheid they suffer, and were cheered to the rafters for that reason. Compare the insufferable arrogance of the Israeli troupe and their supporters.

  8. RE: “…pro-Israel audience members shouted abuse at the protesters, as can be seen in the video above. Some physically attacked the demonstrators, including an Israel apologist who kneed in the back a young, female protester.” ~ Eleanor Kilroy

    REMINDS ME OF:
    Video: Pro-Israel Activist Knocks Camera Out of Hands of Alison Weir (VIDEO, 02:36) – link to youtube.com
    Stand With Us’ Assault on the Jewish Peace Movement
    link to richardsilverstein.com
    The Pogromists at Stand With Uslink to richardsilverstein.com
    ‘AIPAC activists beat me’link to ynetnews.com
    Activist files suit against Netanyahu supporters who attacked her in Capitollink to mondoweiss.net
    JudeoFascists Attack Home of Progressive Rabbi Michael Lernerlink to blogs.alternet.org

    • ALSO SEE – Jewish Values vs. Israeli Policies: Why five young Jews disrupted PM Netanyahu in New Orleans, by Rae Abileah, Mondoweiss, 11/09/12

    (excerpt)…And finally, after Netanyahu summarized the two “greatest threats” to Israel – a nuclear Iran and “delegitimizers”– I stood up and unfurled a pink banner that read, “The settlements betray Jewish values” and in Hebrew: “Justice, justice you shall pursue,” a verse from Deuteronomy. The crowd had grown increasingly hostile with each disruption, and I was instantly attacked from all sides. A man in the row in front of me pulled the El Al seat cover off his chair and tried to gag me with it. Another man came up from the side and grabbed me by the throat. I fell into a pile of chairs until two female sheriffs buoyed me up and hustled me out of the room. The police later confided that they were trying to protect me from the angry mob and get me out of there in one piece.
    The JTA reported: “Jeff Shapiro from San Antonio grabbed her from behind and put her in a choke hold, dragging her backwards towards the floor. When asked later if he had ever put a woman in a chokehold, he replied, ‘Not really. No. I really did not know what was going to happen, I wanted to keep her in check. I was trying to help.’” Jeff Shapiro, according to an Internet search is the president of the synagogue brotherhood and a 7th grade teacher at Temple Beth-El, and is the chair of the Federation’s San Antonio Association for Jewish Education. . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to mondoweiss.net

  9. Avi_G. says:

    Those who shouted “Scum!” were most likely British Jews.

    It seems that Israel’s Apartheid supporters are not limited to the ‘uncivilized’ mobs in the streets of Tel-Aviv.

    Shakespeare must be turning in his grave at the irony of the abuse of power and the insidious influence.

  10. Roland says:

    Meanwhile, I recommend the brilliant Israeli film Avanti Popolo. It takes place in the 1956 Sinai War; an Israeli unit captures Egyptian reservists, one of whom is an actor in his civilian life. The Egyptian actor’s performance of Shylock’s speech, while both groups are cut off from their armies and the Israelis are debating whether to kill their prisoners, is electrifying. Ariel Sharon hated the film.

  11. MHughes976 says:

    If the protesters had had the opportunity to recite a Palestinian version of Shylock’s speech in full, would they have included the final line, with its justification of revenge?

  12. ToivoS says:

    These are politically interesting demonstrations. I would find it very difficult to participate since one needs to be callused against social scorn, not my strength. Also the immediate reaction of the audience is one of extreme hostility to the demonstrators. It is hard to imagine that any of the pro-Israeli people were persuaded, indeed their reaction is likely to be hardened in their support for Israel. So what is the upside?

    Obviously, it will help publicize the plight of the Palestinians through the various news outlets. Simple general public education along the lines that any news about this demonstration is better than no news.

    Also I believe it will help the debate inside the Jewish community. Many of these people in the audience probably did not even think of Palestinians before but now they are. Also inside their families, anger will likely emerge where more skeptical members question their more fanatical relatives. This is a polarization which many think is bad. But it is better to have everyone debating the Palestinian issue in a divided community rather than all pretending that no such problem exists. Finally, as significant factions become more closely aligned with right wing fanatical Zionism it should awake many of their apathetic gentile neighbors as to fundamental nature of Zionism.

    In short, this has the potential to be a very successful type of direct action. Though positive elements may take some time come to fruition.

  13. I think enough attention has been paid to Fredbloggs. No doubt his hasbara trainer will be explaining to him where he went wrong.

    Of course the King David Hotel bombing was an act of terrorism, but of course even it was as nothing compared to Tantura, Lod, Duweimah, Deir Yassin and many other acts of butchery that were committed during 1948-9.

    Being Jewish I make no apology for being consistent in my opposition to racism. I began political campaigning against the Springbok Rugby Tour when the Fredblogss of that era said sport and politics didn’t mix. Well we proved them wrong then and we will do so again.

    Equally performing a play written some 500 years ago is not an act of free speech and if it is then interjecting with comments as to the context is equally an act of free speech. Freddie may not like it but that’s how it is.

    Free speech in Israel can get you administrative detention – on security grounds of course – and part of that freedom is not even knowing or seeing the evidence.

    As someone who has now participated in 4 such demonstrations against the Jerusalem Quartet (twice), Habima and the IPO is this. Would it have been right to disrupt the performances of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra and its conductor Wilhelm Furtwangler in the 1930′s. They were technically brilliant performers (Habima were pretty mediocre in fact) but they represented the normalisation of Nazism. People did indeed support the boycott of Nazi Germany (the Zionists didn’t but that’s another story) or would it have been affront to Freddie’s morals?

    And would he unreservedly condemn similar demonstrations against Soviet culture, including the Bolshoi Ballet in the 1970′s and 1980′s over Soviety Jewry? I can’t remember many Zionist denunciations at the time.

    It is irrelevant whether the US has free speech. With the latest adornment to the Patriot Act this is a very arguable proposition since the military now has the power to detain civilians indefinitely and habeus corpus and free speech are inextricably linked.

    Of course Fred reaches for the last weapon in the arsenal. Why not China etc. Leave aside that BDS is most effective against settler colonial states where there is a whole society of settlers complicit in the oppression of another people, so where the state is merely repressive against its own BDS is rarely called for because it is ineffective, the fact is that Israel maintains sanctions and siege against Gaza and of course Iran is a prime object of such.

    By entertaining the settlers of Ariel and signing a contract to represent Israel culturally as its ambassadors Habima has established itself as Israel’s cultural propaganda arm. I am proud to have taken part in the demonstration and have nothing to regret.

    I just hope I would have done so in the 1930′s against another racist regime (a time when extermination was not talked about or considered likely). No doubt may apologists for Nazi culture would have salivated at the protesters being tasered if they had developed such enlightened methods of control at that time.

    • Excellent post! I completely agree.

    • weindeb says:

      Your post, tony, is short, sweet, and downright brilliant. I say this not in spite of my being a Jew, but because I am, one naive enough to believe that, yes, once upon a time Judaism, at least Judaism sans Zionism, meant, seems to me, an ethical commitment second to none.

      • MHughes976 says:

        Well, I think that the right to speak implies a right to hear and that in normal circumstances an audience in a theatre has a right to hear the message of the performance. There is a right to free speech in that you should not be punished or coerced merely for the content of what you say, but there can’t be a right to say anything in any circumstances whatever – ‘Fire’ in a crowded cinema and all that. (I accept that that example is a bit facile, but it’s not to be ignored completely.) So normally disruption of a theatrical performance would be wrong and if were meant to end rather than briefly interrupt the performance it would breach the right to hear, thus the right to speak.
        It could be justified in this case only if you thought that there is such a serious crisis caused by British indifference to Palestinian suffering that the normal rules have to be set aside, with appropriate deep regret. I think, being ashamed of my dear country in this matter, that there probably is a crisis of that magnitude.

  14. Blake says:

    There were like 5 people supporting stolen land.

  15. I wonder what Juliano Mer-Khamis would have thought about this protest?

    • Shmuel says:

      I wonder what Juliano Mer-Khamis would have thought about this protest?

      No need to wonder. He was a strong supporter of the cultural boycott of Israel. From an appeal he signed:

      We, the undersigned Palestinian filmmakers and artists, appeal to all artists and filmmakers of good conscience around the world to cancel all exhibitions and other cultural events that are scheduled to occur in Israel, to mobilize immediately and not allow the continuation of the Israeli offensive to breed complacency. Like the boycott of South African art institutions during apartheid, cultural workers must speak out against the current Israeli war crimes and atrocities. We call upon the International community to join us in the boycott of Israeli film festivals, Israeli public venues, and Israeli institutions supported by the government, and to end all cooperation with these cultural and artistic institutions that to date have refused to take a stand against the Occupation, the root cause for this colonial conflict.

      link to pacbi.org

      • bintbiba says:

        I knew Juliano Mar Khamis by renown only; I grieved for his murder as I would for a dear friend!

        “mar” in the colloquial Arabic means “saint” . So appropriate.!

  16. kma says:

    it’s funny to see the zio-counter-demo with British and Israeli flags. they ALWAYS do that in the US with American and Israeli flags. when hundreds of thousands of us demo’ed in SF in 2003 against the invasion of Iraq, the handful of zio-counter-demo looked pathetic, but there they were with the two kinds of flags.
    so, they do this in every country? what a funny scrapbook it would make. patriotism-washing. I’m trying to picture them in Bahrain, a handful of pro-regime nutjobs waving Bahraini and Israeli flags. fools.