BDS activists: Alicia Keys ‘stand on the side of justice and cancel your gig in Tel Aviv’

Alicia Keys alicia keys 432006 1280 1024
Alicia Keys (photo: Free Wallpapers)

Multi Grammy award-winning artist Alicia Keys has booked a gig in Tel Aviv as part of her ‘Set the World On Fire’ tour on our Independence Day, 4th of July.

The US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI) has asked Keys to “Cancel Apartheid Israel Show“:
 

Joined with the global movement for a cultural boycott of Israel by musicians, we all ask Alicia Keys to stand on the side of justice and cancel her gig in Tel Aviv, Israel.

Alicia Keys is scheduled to play to a segregated audience in Israel on July 4, 2013 at Nokia Arena in Tel Aviv. Other bands will open for her, but have not been announced yet.

Considering the history of our own country how she could support Apartheid? Maybe these celebrities are so wrapped up in their own world they don’t read the news. She’s young, she’s talented, how could she be so clueless? I just do not get it.

You’re on the wrong side of history with this choice Alicia. Rethink.

About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani
Posted in Activism, BDS, Israel/Palestine

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

  1. OlegR says:

    Maybe cause the apartheid is just in your heads Annie…

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “Maybe cause the apartheid is just in your heads Annie…”

      Oleg’s statement is the moral equivalent of Holocaust denial.

    • Sumud says:

      Sure OlegR – everyone is just imagining it…

      Carter, Mandela, both Ehuds and every person with a barely-functioning brain can recognise that Israel clearly privileges jews over every other constituent, and in the West Bank literally jews vs non-jews are handled by completely different legal systems: apartheid, by definition.

      You lack courage Oleg; own your bigotry. You just make yourself look ridiculous by pretending Israel is not an apartheid state.

    • Cliff says:

      Why isn’t OlegR banned by now?

      Saying there is no occupation, no colonialism, no apartheid should be a bannable offense.

    • Blownaway says:

      When even Israelis like Olmert Barak and now Alon Lial recognize its apartheid …who are you to say its not?

  2. Kathleen says:

    One would think she would get it. But the fact that she booked in Tel Aviv clearly says she does not. The pressure on Stevie Wonder worked..

  3. Sumud says:

    Depeche Mode are booked to play Israel in April I think.

  4. hophmi says:

    “segregated audience”

    What the hell are you talking about? You make this shit up as you go along. Do you think the audience would be more diverse if she performed in Ramallah?

    • sardelapasti says:

      “Diverse” is not the opposite of segregated by illegal military force, you racist punk.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “What the hell are you talking about?”

      Do you think that those people who live in the part of Palestine to the east of the Green line will be permitted to mingle with those who live in the part of Palestine to the west of the Green line??? Segregation.

      • mondonut says:

        Woody Tanaka says: Do you think that those people who live in the part of Palestine to the east of the Green line will be permitted to mingle with those who live in the part of Palestine to the west of the Green line??? Segregation.
        =============================================
        Palestine to the west of the Green Line? So there is no such thing as the State of Israel? So anyone who self identifies as a Palestinian, including those born elsewhere who have never set foot in Israel, are all entitled to free access between the river and the sea? And anything less is segregation?

        • israel is inside palestine. until there is some kind of settlement it’s still all considered part of palestine.

        • mondonut says:

          Annie Robbins says: israel is inside palestine. until there is some kind of settlement it’s still all considered part of palestine.
          ===========================================
          So until there is a settlement, you and Woody cannot imagine why anyone who identifies as a Palestinian should be denied free access to Israel? And anything less is segregation? Seriously?

        • mondonut says:

          Annie Robbins says: yes, seriously
          ===================================
          Well that explains a lot.

          So when Israel, as is its sovereign right, decides who is allowed within Israel – you are shocked and bewildered when non-citizen Palestinians are denied entry. You just cannot imagine why Palestinians are not allowed to roam throughout “Palestine”. Why, it must be segregation! That’s it!

        • Words have meaning. Twisting their meaning is twisted.
          Segregation means that those who live in Israel are not allowed to go to the Keyes concert if they are not Jews. This is a lie.

        • Cliff says:

          Segregation means segregated towns which exist in Israel.

          Segregation means Israeli Jews not wanting to rent or sell property to Arabs.

          Segregation means the JNF and it’s corrupt and racist policies.

          Wondering Jew and the other resident hasbarists – you are quibbling over semantics to whitewash the institutional racism in your apartheid State’s society.

          This is how your country works. It relies on superficial truths regarding Israel. So promoting Israel as a democracy. Technically Israel is a democracy.

          But just as Wondering Jew says, ‘words have meaning’ – and you Zionists use words dishonestly and devoid of context.

          That’s why there’s no mileage to Israeli propaganda as soon as someone educates themselves on the conflict.

          That is what Palestinian solidarity activists are doing.

          Segregation is an apt way to describe the situation.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “So there is no such thing as the State of Israel?”

          There is such a political construct called “state of israel” among the thieves and offspring of thieves who stole the land of Palestine from it’s rightful owners. What there is no is a Land of Israel. But it’s all Palestine.

          “So anyone who self identifies as a Palestinian, including those born elsewhere who have never set foot in Israel, are all entitled to free access between the river and the sea? And anything less is segregation?”

          Yes. The zionist thieves gained have no moral right to exclude Palestinians from Palestine. They have no more moral right than a thief or squatter: none.

    • Cliff says:

      Diversity isn’t the issue you troll.

      Palestinians aren’t immigrants.

      It’s like looking at Norway and saying Norway is racist because they don’t have a equal amount of Chinese people as they do ethnic Norwegians.

      Palestine was Palestinian with a Jewish minority. The Jewish minority expelled the Palestinian minority and created a Jewish majority.

      Israel is segregated because of the conflict between that Jewish majority and the Arab minority. And in the occupied territories the same conflict exists.

    • Go visit the segregation wall, the segregation housing and towns, the segregation police and the segregation roads. Then tell us about segregation.

    • kalithea says:

      Israeli Jews have ALL their rights and Palestinians have ZEERO rights because they are living under the longest brutal military occupation in modern history and Palestinian children have been subjected to decades of abuse under the Israeli regime! Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed, their homes demolished and their land taken over by foreign immigrants – THIS IS A WAR CRIME.

      So what are YOU blabbering about??? You’re the one that makes up sh*t every day here to cover the crimes of Zionism!

  5. seafoid says:

    George Galloway refuses to debate with Isghaeli

    link to guardian.co.uk

  6. amigo says:

    Oleg your honesty is conspicuous by it’s lts lack of presense.

  7. sardelapasti says:

    “She’s young, she’s talented, how could she be so clueless?”
    $$$$

    • Marco says:

      Alicia Keys is well connected with powerful Zionists and has been her entire career.

      At the same time, she’s come under fire for controversial political statements, such as suggesting that gangsta rap was promoted by the music industry and U.S. government to destroy the black community. For all we know, she may be doing penance by going to Israel to make up for pointing the proverbial finger at big media executives.

    • Cliff says:

      Didn’t some of these pop stars take money from Qaddafi?

      They aren’t educated or intelligent. They are entertainers. They get paid to entertain. The few of them who are political are no more ‘enlightened’ than any regular Joe.

      In fact, considering the social networks they exist in, whether it’s the music or movie industry – is it any surprise that they aren’t vocally anti-colonialist?

      Being daring in our culture, is for Lena Dunham to talk about her sand-fillled foopa.

      • yrn says:

        They aren’t educated or intelligent. They are entertainers. They get paid to entertain.

        You gave the answer :
        That’s what stupid about your BDS……..

  8. ckg says:

    In 2008 Alisha Keys told Blender magazine that she has read “several Black Panther autobiographies”. It would be nice if Angela Davis, who supports BDS, gets in touch with her.

    • i have a lot of hope she will reverse her decision. there’s a lot of time between now and july.

      also, unlike elton john she’s young. doesshe really want her support of apartheid following her around for the rest of her career? people do not forget things like this and the wind is on our backs, not israel’s. i predict she’ll flip.

  9. yrn says:

    Here we go again with your childish games…..
    right now she is the devil, been named and condemned…….
    and then if she is going to change her mind, as its her issue, she will be your Mother Teresa……..
    How pathetic.
    BTW, the list of international performers who are coming to Israel is increasing all the time, there is not even a week without an international artist.

  10. sardelapasti says:

    George Galloway is teaching everyone how boycott is done.

    For often clueless boobies in the for-profit “cultural exchange” department, in my personal opinion one should not implore and lobby them.

    Just send them a detailed, well-referenced brochure first.
    If they collaborate anyway, mount as large as possible a campaign to boycott them *here and especially in Europe*. Cut down even a little percentage on their ticket sales and downloads, give them a reputation that there is always a loud and embarrassingly conscience-challenging demonstration at their door, and I’ll be pickled if they remain, as a group, so enthusiastic about playing in Ishgha[e]l again.

    • jon s says:

      Galloway is teaching how racism is done.

      • Cliff says:

        Jews are not a race.

        Israelis are not a race.

        Galloway is refusing to debate an Israeli. He identifies the Israeli correctly – as an ambassador of Zionism.

        In other words, he refuses to debate an ambassador for Zionism because he refuses to normalize Zionism.

        Stop lying jon s.

      • eljay says:

        >> Galloway is teaching how racism is done.

        Zio-supremacists, their ideology and their supremacist state are teaching how supremacism and terrorism and ethnic cleansing and oppression and colonialism and torture and destruction and murder are done.

      • sardelapasti says:

        You are the racist crawler, now officially: Is “Israeli” a f&^%* race, now? Citizenship goes with boycotts. Personally I think the Editors would also be well advised to boycott any exchange with Israelian citizens, too.

      • jon s.- It’s not racism. But it is acting like an idiot, a prima donna and a princess. Galloway agreed to a debate without strings and then after he got to speak and the Israeli started speaking he stood up and left. If he had asked beforehand, “Is it an Israeli?” and then had been told and then refused to speak to him, this would have been normal boycott, but to agree to a debate without strings and then to leave after you’ve been given your ten minutes, when your opponent starts speaking, just shows that Galloway is a showman and an idiot and a prima donna. He shows people that anti Israel people are spoiled children and not normal, just showmen and silly princesses. (This may or may not be true, but judging from him, that’s what that group of people seems to be.)

        • yonah, it was my understanding galloway had not spoken yet. not that it changes his actions, but i think he left before engagement on the subject.

        • Annie- The debate, hosted at Christ Church, Oxford saw Galloway argue for the motion “Israel should withdraw immediately from the West Bank”. After the MP had spoken for ten minutes, Galloway’s opponent, a third year PPE student named Eylon Aslan-Levy at Brasenose College, began a speech in which he used the word “we” to refer to Israelis.
          link to varsity.co.uk

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “Galloway agreed to a debate without strings”

          Did he?? He claimed he was misled. If it is his position not to debate with israelis and that policy was breached here.

          And a good policy it is. Engaging spokespeople for evil as if they are normal people does nothing but benefit the evil-doers. One does not debate with a rapist on whether he should be permitted to continue to rape; one bashes his head in with a brick.

        • woody, imho, if galloway is practicing a policy of no normalization (not engaging with israelis with the exception of activities to end the occupation) it is his responsibility to inquire as to whom the participants are before committing to a debate, not the people who issued the invitation. he made a commitment to participate in an event and then he backed out at the time of the event, leaving the organizers no time to find a replacement. that’s irresponsible. how was anyone to know this was his policy? his assistants, or whoever does his scheduling, should know of his personal restrictions before he books events. he has no one to blame but himself for this ‘misunderstanding’ or whatever one calls it. and if he blew it in his ‘research’ then he should have gone ahead and engaged in the debate regardless of the nationality of the challenger, because it was no ones fault but his own.

        • sardelapasti says:

          Annie – Boycott is the naturally expected situation. Anyone breaking it should be expected to let it be known. In fact, I would ask anyone on this board to declare it if they are citizens of the Zionist entity.

        • sard, i recommend this statement from BDS national committee (BNC) issued directly after the galloway incident, this comes straight from the top:

          link to bdsmovement.net

          Statements
          BDS Movement Position on Boycott of Individuals
          Posted on February 21, 2013 by Palestinian BDS National Committee

          The Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), the largest coalition of Palestinian unions, mass organisations, refugee networks and NGOs that leads and and sets the guidelines for the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, supports all principled action in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for freedom, justice and equality that is in line with universal human rights and international law.

          In its 2005 BDS Call, Palestinian civil society has called for a boycott of Israel, its complicit institutions, international corporations that sustain its occupation, colonization and apartheid, and official representatives of the state of Israel and its complicit institutions. BDS does not call for a boycott of individuals because she or he happens to be Israeli or because they express certain views. Of course, any individual is free to decide who they do and do not engage with.

          The global BDS movement has consistently adopted a rights-based approach and an anti-racist platform that rejects all forms of racism, including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.

          These guidelines and the fact that BDS has been initiated and is led by Palestinian civil society are major reasons behind the rapid growth and success that the BDS movement has enjoyed around the world.

          the bds campaign does not target individuals although it has repeatedly been accused of doing so. critics of BDS are continually misrepresenting the movements stance on boycotting israeli individuals. only when an individual is funded by the state or working in that capacity as representing a state funded institution would bds standards apply.

          however, note “Of course, any individual is free to decide who they do and do not engage with.” for me, this speaks to the issue of normalization, a call by palestinian activist against normalization for palestinians. that is not part of the official BDSmovement. again, non normalization means not partaking in activities with israelis unless it is for the purpose of working together to end the occupation. i do not think this statement was made by BDS in defense of galloway. i think it is made because a palestinian, or anyone may choose to decide to not engage (or boycott engagement ) with israelis based on their policy of normalization.

          but i do not know if even barghouti would refuse to engage in a debate with a stand w/us rep.

        • seafoid says:

          annie

          did you watch the video? the Israeli started off by saying “we tried peace and it didn’t work”. He was most likely to give the settler view and the same tired canards we all know and love . I wouldn’t debate Dimadok in public. I wouldn’t give him/her the oxygen of publicity. The bot in Oxford was probably going to bring up Peters and say the palestinians are an invented people etc.

          It is interesting that he was the best the Israeli side could come up with.

        • Dan Crowther says:

          Gorgeous George is the man and was right to do what he did.

        • yes i did watch the video.

          the Israeli started off by saying “we tried peace and it didn’t work”. He was most likely to give the settler view and the same tired canards we all know and love . I wouldn’t debate Dimadok in public.

          it should be entirely expected that anyone agreeing to a debate with someone representing the israeli/zionist view would say something like that. unlike you, galloway did agree to debate. the fact that the student was israeli instead of a british zionist wouldn’t necessarily make his views any different than a non israeli zionist. the time for galloway to figure out he wasn’t going to debate should have been prior to the debate. personally, i would be excited to hear an advocate of bds debate a stand w/us rep. i’d hope a swu rep would get creamed. if i made the effort to attend a debate like that and the bds rep walked out after it was revealed the swu person was israeli, i’d be bummed.

          i watched a panel at a british university w/ben white representing one side and pro israel advocates on the other. it was exciting to hear how he creamed their arguments with really important facts, stuff i do not have on the tip of my tongue, tho i may know a rebuttal in theory. but dates, years, sources, the kinds of debates we have here (albeit we have the access to google searches and links during our debates, which are not afforded to people in live time unless they have a team who can send notes) not sure if i could pull that off. that’s why debates can be so exciting.

          and also, regardless of how ‘tired canards’ are, once they are debunked people say (live) and resort to the strangest tactics to win their argument. often really racist views come to the surface. it’s great getting that stuff on camera.

          i am not advocating people engage as opposed to not normalizing at all. but galloway is an elected official who accepted a speaking engagement. he should not be blaming anyone for his acceptance of that invitation nor expecting everyone to ‘know’ his restrictions.

          it is as if one were a vegetarian on moral grounds who is invited to a dinner party. the time to inform the host of your dietary restrictions is at the time of the invite, not to walk away in disgust on arrival seeing there’s dairy in the sauce. that’s just rude behavior, especially if you are the guest of honor and people accepted their invites on the anticipation you would be there.

        • eljay says:

          >> link to varsity.co.uk

          Galloway … interrupted the student to say: “You said ‘we’. Are you an Israeli?” When Aslan-Levy responded that he was an Israeli citizen, Galloway stood up and made to leave the room.

          “I don’t debate with Israelis”, Galloway said. “I have been misled, sorry. I don’t recognise Israel and I don’t debate with Israelis”. In a statement on Wednesday [he] explained: “I refused this evening to debate with an Israeli, a supporter of the apartheid state of Israel. The reason is simple; no recognition, no normalisation. Just boycott, divestment and sanctions, until the apartheid state is defeated.”

          Hmmm…he recognizes Israel enough to admit it exists, to refer to it as apartheid state and to want to apply BDS against it. But not enough to engage an Israeli citizen in a debate about the illegal and immoral nature of his supremacist state. Lame.

          This open letter addresses the issue of his being misled:

          Dear Mr Galloway,

          It has not escaped my attention that, since discourteously walking out on an event I had spent much time and effort organising, you have been claiming repeatedly that I had “misled” and “deceived” you. I was not intending on replying until I saw you once again attempt to, in my opinion, slander me on Press TV.

          In that broadcast you claimed, “… I was deceived; I was not told by the Iraqi, Muslim organiser of the event, that I would be debating against a 20-year old Israeli…”. But let’s look at the facts. Fortunately, all my correspondences with your secretary are saved in my inbox so we can refer to this record while scrutinising your allegation. Here is what I told your secretary about your opponent:

          “I can confirm that the venue for the debate will be the Blue Boar Lecture Theatre in Christ Church. Mr Galloway’s opponent will be a student called Eylon Aslan-Levy. He is a final-year undergraduate at Brasenose College, reading philosophy, politics and economics. He has debated internationally for Oxford, including in Ireland, Serbia and Israel, and was the winner of the Mediterranean Universities Debating Championship in Istanbul in 2012. He delivered a paper speech in the Oxford Union debate on the Middle East in 2011.”

          Note, this was the only time Eylon was mentioned, in the entire thread, either by your secretary or I. It is strange that someone who takes such a hard-line view on debating Israelis should omit to ask whether or not his Jewish, pro-Israeli opponent, who has debated in Israel, is in fact Israeli. Your secretary did not go on to ask me about Eylon’s nationality – indeed I did not know until the debate that Eylon is an Israeli – and even had I known Eylon’s nationality, I was not aware of your staunch (and damaging) stance of boycotting Israeli individuals.

          As the organiser, am I to know about every one of your views? Should I let you know if your opponent is a vegetarian in case you have a policy of not debating vegetarians? Am I misleading you if I do not tell you your opponent’s shoe size? Think hard about the absurdity of your position. In none of the previous debates I had organised did it even occur to me to inform the debaters of their opponents’ nationalities. This particular debate was no different.

          Please know that I had been looking forward to seeing you put forward the case for Palestine and the Palestinian people. Instead I was left humiliated in front of a room full of people who had waited an hour and a half for your arrival, only to be subsequently accused of being deceptive and misleading. Does that seem fair to you Mr. Galloway?

          Yours sincerely,

          Mahmood (the Iraqi Muslim)

          Lame, Mr. Galloway. Very lame.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          Well, I completely disagree, annie.

          First, he was in the UK, so there was no expectation that the person standing up for the aparthied state would be one of the criminals, themselves, as opposed to one of their lackey fools with a UK passport.

          Second, I believe that the organizer has the obligation to bring to the attention of the invitee all of the information necessary for the invitee to make an informed decision. Galloway’s position regarding the israeli state is not new, is well known, and any person who is inviting him should know that “the opponant is one of the perpetrators of the crimes you oppose” would be a very relevant consideration to him. Even if they did not know of his specific policy, they still have, in my opinion, the obligation to tell him that they mean for him to debate with an israeli. If they failed to do that, then they only have themselves to blame.

          Third, he said he was “misled” (if I remember correctly.) That suggest to me that there may have been some affirmative statement said to him that was relevant to this point. If that is the case, then we don’t merely have a case of the organizer not saying enough, but of saying something that was not correct.

          Fourth, I think that a refusal to engage in defenders of this evil system is the proper way to go. They should be shunned. I would not blame Galloway for not engaging with a Confederate citizen who was defending that system in 1862; a Soviet Communist who was defending that system in 1951; a South African during aparthied who was defending that system in 1986. Why would blame him for refusing to engage with someone who is defending as system as evil as any of these today? Appearing on stage with someone suggests a certain level of respect for them as people; that is misguided. Anyone who supports that evil system is utterly contemptable, morally deficient and should be treated likewise. If anything, Galloway was too nice.

        • eljay, re the organizers letter: Should I let you know if your opponent is a vegetarian in case you have a policy of not debating vegetarians?

          ha! i had not seen this letter when i wrote my analogy. (comment above yours)

        • woody: I think that a refusal to engage in defenders of this evil system is the proper way to go. They should be shunned. I would not blame Galloway for not engaging with a…..

          you’re not making much sense here. obviously if galloway agreed to the debate he must have known he would be debating someone who was one of the defenders of this evil system. no one forced him to agree to a debate with a defender of the system. his sudden objection was not over the opponents ideology, but over his nationality. and it’s the most prestigious university in the world, jammed packed with internationals, so the expectation the opponent would be british because the university is in the UK is foolish.

        • seafoid says:

          I think he was right, Woody. He turned it into a story. Israel is closer to apartheid South Africa now than it was this time last year. We have to ostracise “apartheidim”. I remember the single “Sun city” in 1985 and the progressive Western European attitude to apartheid SA at that time . No justifying arguments were accepted.

          Israel has to go through that process too. Zionism beyond the pale.

          “He was arrested, tortured for many months and killed in jail.
          This song is for all the people in jail in South Africa.”
          and doesn’t this sound familiar?

          “Our government tells us we’re doing all we can
          Constructive engagement is ronald reagan’s plan
          Meanwhile people are dying and giving up hope
          Well this quiet diplomacy ain’t nothing but a joke”

          If Israelis don’t like all the attention, DILLIGAS. Judaism can clear up the mess.

        • eljay says:

          >> obviously if galloway agreed to the debate he must have known he would be debating someone who was one of the defenders of this evil system.

          I agree. It’s not much of an I-P debate if both debaters are pro-Palestinian. And if one of the debaters is to be pro-Israel, it should not matter whether he’s an American Zionist or a young Israeli studying in the U.K.

          >> ha! i had not seen this letter when i wrote my analogy. (comment above yours)

          Your analogy is spot on. :-)

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “obviously if galloway agreed to the debate he must have known he would be debating someone who was one of the defenders of this evil system”

          But that does not mean that he knew he would be doing that debate against an israeli. The point is that the organizer should have fully informed him of the situation and permitted him to make a fully informed decision, and clearly they did not.

          “his sudden objection was not over the opponents ideology, but over his nationality.”

          Yes, and he has his reasons for that position (ones I believe are correct.)

          “and it’s the most prestigious university in the world, jammed packed with internationals, so the expectation the opponent would be british because the university is in the UK is foolish.”

          That was a little bit of a joke. Actually, the fact that the univeristy is jammed packed with internationals reinforces my point. The organizers should have known that someone of Galloway’s stature would not be interested in participating in a discussion whereby one of the perpetrators was permitted to attempt to defend the indefensible, while that person’s victims still suffered in the occupation and therefore had a specific obligation to ensure that this information was clearly before Galloway.

        • He turned it into a story.

          i can agree with that. i would like to stipulate i am in full support of artists backing out of their commitment to perform in israel on the grounds of support for bds. i very much hope alicia keys backs out at a very dramatic moment , timed for maximun attention and coverage. that i would support.

        • jon s says:

          Yonah,
          The term “racism” is often used referring to discrimination, persecution and hatred directed at nationalities, religions and ethnic groups, not only towards races.
          Jews are not a race, yet Anti-Semitism is considered a form of racism.

        • sardelapasti says:

          Annie,

          The BNC is not convincing.

          That’s why I do not use their abbreviations.

          What will hurt the Zionists most is to be shunned as illegal citizens of an illegal state. It is the end of cultural and academic relations and even of individual relations over the borders. And, above all, the insistence in refusing any normalization.

          In general terms, the BDS movement is somewhat useful but I don’t see why something geared to “liberal Zionists” and people who recognize the result of the 47 aggression as a given should be directing what others do.

          PS Citizens of the Shitty State are welcome, of course, if deserters or otherwise working against the state.

  11. kalithea says:

    Alicia, Alicia call Reverend Desmond Tutu and have a little chat. And for God’s sakes don’t go entertain war criminals and racists. You don’t need the that kind of money or that gig.

  12. jon s says:

    “Segregated audience”? Implying Alabama in the 1950s ? South Africa under apartheid?
    Hopefully Ms.Keys will turn out to be intelligent enough to recognize a blatant lie and brave enough to withstand the threats. See you in TelAviv.

    And Happy Purim to all those who celebrate!!

    • Cliff says:

      No threats were made.

      Hopefully Ms Keys will see that dishonest Zionist trolls characterize the BDS movement as a threat because they feel threatened by the BDS movement.

      Hopefully Ms Keys will not play for apartheid Israel.

      Israel should be completely shunned because it is a racist, apartheid, colonial settler State that exists on the ruins of Historic Palestine and only exists a JEWISH State because of the NON-Jewish majority who were terrorized and raped and murdered.

      Hopefully Ms Keys will see jon s for the monster that he is and for the monster he represents – Zionism.

      • jon s says:

        Cliff,
        There are threats right here on this thread.
        So now I’m a monster. Why is it that you need to resort to personal verbal abuse? You call me a monster, I’ll call you a monster back, great discussion of the issue.

        • sardelapasti says:

          Jon S – “So now I’m a monster.”
          You are active trying to represent and justify a monster. That makes you one. Period. There is no “abuse” anywhere.
          Also, you are trying this, with your severely restricted means, substandard reasoning powers and lack of general and historical knowledge, on a discussion site where people adamantly opposed to all that you represent are discussing how to best beat the monster that you represent. What does that make you?

        • Bumblebye says:

          Haven’t Israeli pols described BDS as “economic warfare”? Which makes the hope of ms keys revisiting her plans into a threat. jon s is merely taking his cue from his political leaders, like a good soldier (reservist, right?).
          I keep waiting for them to refer to their racist “demographic threat” (Palestinian population growth) as “demographic warfare”. Wouldn’t that put a whole new spin on ye olde ‘make love, not war’!

        • Cliff says:

          jon s,

          You are a liar. No one is threatening or issuing threats toward Ms Keys.

          And yes you are a monster.

    • if it was a ‘blatant lie’ you wouldn’t have to use the Implying crutch. it’s segregated because there is one government ruling over 2 peoples. one under military rule the other not. those under military rule will not be able to attend the concert less than 10 miles away. so yes, it is segregated.

      • jon s says:

        The text is clear :
        “Alicia Keys is scheduled to play to a segregated audience”
        The audience won’t be segregated, so it’s a lie.

        • jon, for your edification: the word segregation link to en.wikipedia.org

        • The audience will not be segregated inside the auditorium, but of course they will be segregated in their ability to attend the concert. Simples. Or have you never heard of the Israeli apartheid controls on Palestinian movement?

        • Simples.

          yes well, applying common sense would prevent jon from being able to accuse people of lying. it’s not enough merely to justify actions or argue wrt framing, this power of the the ‘implication crutch’ is to accuse ones ideological opponent of saying what you want them to say, as opposed to what they mean, and then argue against that theory instead of the one being expressed (strawman crutch). and then the lying accusation (ad hominem crutch) is applied.

          not that complicated. silly point scoring tactics.

        • jon s says:

          This is the relevant Webster definition of “segregation”:

          a: the separation or isolation of a race, class, or ethnic group by enforced or voluntary residence in a restricted area, by barriers to social intercourse, by separate educational facilities, or by other discriminatory means.

          Once again: Ms Keys will not be performing to ” a segregated audience” . Therefore the statement is a lie.

        • jon s says:

          Ms Keys can perform in Ramallah, in which case Israelis would be limited in their ability to attend.
          And if she performs in Chicago people all over the world who don’t hold US visas are similarly limited.

        • lol, and the WB is not a ‘restricted area’? you don’t say. seriously jon get a grip.

        • A totally false comparison. As Omar Barghouti said, playing Tel Aviv is the same as playing Sun City was in apartheid S Africa. I suppose you think there wasn’t segregation their either.

        • Djinn says:

          Jon, do you think the descendants of Native Americans who left the area (for whatever reason) will be prevented from returning to Chicago by massive concrete walls and a very well tooled army with itchy trigger fingers?

        • seafoid says:

          Poor Jon s is on fire.
          He’s got his head in the hasbara cloud
          And he’s not coming down.

          link to youtube.com

        • jon s says:

          Where did I say that ?
          For the fourth time: the performance will not be for “a segregated audience”.

  13. Cliff says:

    ‘Jews control Hollywood’ is a stereotype but all stereotypes came from somewhere.

    Zionist Jews like to make antisemitism seem like it came out of a vacuum. That animosity towards Jews (between other ethnic-religious groups) was wholly irrational.

    Yet, when we talk about ethnic conflicts in the ME, no one makes the lame pronunciation that Kurds hate Turks because of anti-Turkism. Or vice versa or whatever else.

    There are no certainties in life but there are probabilities.

    Hollywood is an institution. And Jewish people dominate that institution.

    That is not the same as saying all Jews blah blah. Or that Hollywood is a Jewish institution.

    When Noam Chomsky proposed his propaganda model he was met with the same idiotic simple-minded rebuttals.

    They all lack substance just like the antisemitism slander.

    In fact, Zionist Jews who abuse the antisemitism slander do not back it up. Their sense of entitlement is so nauseatingly excessive that they think it’s legitimacy is implied.

    It is not.

    Antisemitism as exploited by Zionist Jews is illegitimate.

    The real antisemitism that exists is ignored as well.

    Ben Stein has written that Hollywood is controlled by Jews. Stein is a arch-Ziobot.

    The truth is that Hollywood is a complex institution and it’s simplistic to say ‘the Joos’ control it.

    But that simplistic meme is exactly how Zionist Jews imply their political opponents view Hollywood.

    Hollywood is like the mainstream press. It has pressures and orthodoxies and sometimes there are exceptions to the rule(s).

    You can observe patterns in an institution and from patterns arrive at conclusions. But even then, your conclusion must be tempered with the fact that things may change.

    Hollywood is not run by anyone. But it is most certainly subjected to the same institutional pressures as the mainstream American press.

    Jewish identity. The Holocaust. The politics of antisemitism. Arab and Muslim identity. Being pro-war in a certain way. Being anti-war in a certain way. When it’s ok to make a joke about something. When it isn’t. Who you lend your support for by playing a particular role or taking up a particular directing job or whatever else.

    These are pressures. Real or imagined, the result is the same – a set of NORMS that people more or less adhere to to stay ‘relevant’ within the Hollywood system.

    Only the mindless zombie Zionist trolls in real life and on-line here at Mondoweiss suggest otherwise.

    You are a backwards, immoral, buffoon IL1948.

    • hophmi says:

      “Jewish identity. The Holocaust. The politics of antisemitism. Arab and Muslim identity. Being pro-war in a certain way. Being anti-war in a certain way. When it’s ok to make a joke about something. When it isn’t. Who you lend your support for by playing a particular role or taking up a particular directing job or whatever else.

      These are pressures. Real or imagined, the result is the same – a set of NORMS that people more or less adhere to to stay ‘relevant’ within the Hollywood system.”

      Thanks, Pat Buchanan.

      • hophmi, you cut off his proceeding sentence (“Hollywood is not run by anyone. But it is most certainly subjected to the same institutional pressures as the mainstream American press.”)

        i am curious what you think about the mini stink being made in the israeli press over macfarlane’s interchange with Wahlberg?

        link to mondoweiss.net

        might that criticism be an example of ‘pressures to set norms that people more or less are supposed to adhere to to stay ‘relevant’ within the Hollywood system’?

  14. amigo says:

    Don,t ban him.I use his diatribe to demonstrate to doubters just what Israel is reaaly like.

    Keep posting Oleg.You are an invaluable asset to the Palestinian cause.

  15. American says:

    Maybe this will go thru.

    link to israelnationalnews.com

    Students at Britain’s prestigious Oxford University will vote this week on a highly controversial motion to boycott Israel.

    The Oxford University Student’s Union (OUSU) is set to meet Wednesday to decide on a motion to join the international boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement “in protest of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its hindrance of attempts to create a Palestinian state,” The Guardian reported

    • Bumblebye says:

      Grauni has that too – I linked it somewhere day or so ago:
      link to guardian.co.uk

      “Both the proposer and the seconder of the motion have received threatening emails: the seconder has withdrawn his support and the proposer has requested that her name not be publicised.”

  16. hophmi says:

    Nothing helps the Zionist cause so much as buffoons like George Galloway, marginal blowhard racists who embarrass themselves on a regular basis.

    You guys will always support wildly unpopular buffoons like these, and you will always wonder why you can never move society in your direction.