Trending Topics:

For ‘NYT’, boycott supporters might as well be aliens

Israel/Palestine
on 48 Comments

ASA logo tiff (1) copyThe New York Times letters’ page today features four writers responding to the American Studies Association’s 66 percent vote for academic boycott of Israel. And, surprise– three of the letters are highly critical, including the first and longest two, from officials at the American Jewish Committee and Anti-Defamation League.

Two letters scoff at the idea that Israel should be singled out for boycott when other international malefactors are not targeted. Two letters all but accuse the boycotters of being anti-Semitic–

The vote by the American Studies Association to boycott Israeli universities casts a long shadow on this academic community… Only Israel, which happens to be the one truly democratic state in the Middle East… Why the choice of Israel? (David Harris, AJC)

“Serious and thoughtful people are advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent.”(Michael Salberg, ADL, quoting Lawrence Summers)

The Times has still not quoted the actual boycott voters, as we did in our original post, statements from profs about why they were taking this step. If you read those statements, you will see that the voters wanted a way to engage the American and Israeli publics and show them that they are supporting apartheid and Jim Crow policies that have long been highly-objectionable in our country, but which the US government and our leading institutions vigorously support. What other tool is there but boycott when civil society is being ignored? The voters also see the Israeli situation in the context of colonialism– with the US as the imperial supporter. That makes it different from human rights violations by states with which we have no “special relationship.”

The failure by the Times to represent these views leaves readers with the impression that boycotters are an ignorant and alien mob, not thoughtful people concerned about human rights violations that our government and leading institutions support. And that’s a journalistic disservice.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

48 Responses

  1. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    December 18, 2013, 9:57 am

    “when other international malefactors are not targeted”.

    Hmm, is this progress? Pro-Israel writers admit that Israel is an “international malefactor”? And did these same people make the same argument against boycott of SA way back when?

    • JeffB
      JeffB
      December 18, 2013, 11:07 am

      @Pabelmont —

      And did these same people make the same argument against boycott of SA way back when?

      The arguments against the SA boycott were:

      1) Cold war based: The SA govt was pro-USA the ANC was pro-Soviet.
      2) Fear of the human catastrophe that a sudden shift would induce.
      3) Resource based. There were some important products from SA that the USA made use of. For example Reagan and Congress had ordered an upgrade of our nuclear forces which required lots of tritium. While the USA could produce all the tritium it needed many of our facilities were unsafe so their were environmental concerns with losing this supply.

      The BDS movement hasn’t gotten popular enough to have people weigh in on (3) type issues yet. (1) and (2) have their obvious analogies today.

  2. Bill in Maryland
    Bill in Maryland
    December 18, 2013, 10:00 am

    Regarding the well-worn “Why is Israel singled out?” argument, Mondoweiss contributor Joel Doerfler discussed this last year in a post entitled “Why Israel is ‘singled out’”.

    • just
      just
      December 18, 2013, 11:00 am

      A superior article. Thanks for bringing it back, Bill.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 18, 2013, 1:18 pm

      @ Bill in Maryland

      “”Indeed, if the U.S. has historically “singled out” Israel, it has been for special protection, assistance, and cover for its daily crimes against the Palestinians. Whether we look at U.S. military assistance to Israel (amounting to $8.2 million a day in fiscal year 2011, more than 18% of the entire Israeli defense budget),or at private American tax-deductible gifts to illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (including to some of the most violent, fascistic and dangerous crackpots in the region), America and Americans have played the role of Israel’s pre-eminent arsenal, financier, diplomatic supporter, and propagandist. To suggest, under such circumstances, that Israel is being “singled out” by its American critics can only be considered a sick joke.”

      Israel is singled out by Americans as a human rights violator of the first order, and a danger to America, not to mention a bum drain, because the (bankrupt) US government has singled Israel out for special huge funding and consistent diplomatic protection at the UN.

      Please bookmark this article Bill resurrected from the MW archives for whenever the Israeli propagandists bring this hasbara talking point up here on MW.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        December 18, 2013, 1:25 pm

        There’s a logical and practical symmetry to the US “special relationship” with Israel, and the, therefore, specially focused special criticism of said relationship. Israel is singled out for its rogue conduct by Americans because Americans give more taxpayer dollars to Israel than any to any other country. And they do it with no strings attached, just another sign of the special relationship, along with the fact Israel gets its free money early in the year, and sans interests–instead, the US pays interest to both, e.g., China, and Israel.

  3. Talkback
    Talkback
    December 18, 2013, 11:14 am

    Yeah, why do these Hasbara clowns only support Israel’s Apartheid and atrocities? Are they Gentile haters?

  4. MHughes976
    MHughes976
    December 18, 2013, 11:15 am

    Thanks for the reminder of Doerfler’s fine argument, Bill. If someone says ‘Here is an oppressive regime; I must do something to oppose it’ the only valid reply ‘It’s not oppressive; even in the respects you mention, it acts with no serious injustice’, which is a point that none of the NYT letter writers bring themselves to make, though one says, without argument to back this up, that the ASA objection to Israeli behaviour is too simple and one-sided. This still avoids saying that there is no valid objection at all, or even that there is no objection strong enough to justify some opposing action. And if you cannot deny that something is wrong you cannot reject any suggestion of doing something about it, can you? Not in any logic. Nothing changes at this point if other things are wrong too. If someone has done something right that person deserves some praise: nothing changes at this point if other things have been done right too.
    The other points made are that the ASA members lack courage, which seems obviously false given the angry reaction of some powerful people, and that the boycotters risk losing the benefit of Israeli ideas and inventions. This latter point is true – boycotts always damage the boycotters to a certain extent and always run the risk of self-righteousness, so are not to be undertaken lightly. I have always disliked taking part in boycotts but sometimes there seems to be no alternative.
    Summers’ admission that intelligent and thoughtful people have brought themselves to this point is the one weighty thing he says.
    That the NYT gives a look in to Anne Selden Annab, writing against their consensus, is encouraging. Once the pro-Palestinian viewpoint enters the mainstream a constructive conversation, entirely free of anti-Semitism, can begin.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 18, 2013, 1:45 pm

      @MHugehes976
      Yep.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        December 18, 2013, 3:05 pm

        Thanks, Citizen – perhaps Anne Annab, having got a pro-Palestinian letter published in the NYT, an achievement to be much admired, would like to join us in Mondoweiss. Maybe someone knows her.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        December 18, 2013, 3:14 pm

        perhaps Anne Annab, having got a pro-Palestinian letter published in the NYT, an achievement to be much admired, would like to join us in Mondoweiss. Maybe someone knows her.

        This is her blog: http://anniesnewletters.blogspot.it/

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        December 18, 2013, 3:32 pm

        Thanks, Shmuel, there’s much interesting stuff there.

      • James North
        James North
        December 18, 2013, 4:05 pm

        Shmuel: What would happen to a Jewish Israeli, living in Israel, who publicly endorsed this latest boycott measure?
        (By the way, holiday greetings to you and your family!)

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        December 18, 2013, 5:05 pm

        Thanks for the good wishes, James. The same to you and your family.

        I’m not sure where the appeal against the anti-boycott law stands at the moment (the government was supposed to respond to the High Court by March 2013), but assuming that the law is still in force, the possible consequences of endorsing a boycott such as this are liability for damages if a suit is filed (and a possible penalty of tens of thousands of shekels even without proof of damage), as well as the denial of certain government benefits and access to public tenders.

        I believe that the final version of the bill (the one enacted into law) does not distinguish between Israelis and non-Israelis but, obviously, those who live in and/or have assets in Israel are more vulnerable, and some of the benefits that may be denied as a result of calling for or adhering to a boycott may only be granted to Israeli citizens in the first place.

        The law is still waiting for its first test case (and the state attorney has conceded that the law is “constitutionally problematic”).

      • James North
        James North
        December 18, 2013, 5:44 pm

        Shmuel: In other words, Israelis who support the academic boycott might bite their tongues to avoid the legal, time-consuming and financial consequences of speaking out? Do you know such people?

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        December 19, 2013, 2:47 am

        In other words, Israelis who support the academic boycott might bite their tongues to avoid the legal, time-consuming and financial consequences of speaking out? Do you know such people?

        I think there are very few Israelis who support the academic boycott (as opposed to the settlement boycott, for example) in the first place, and those who do so are extremely committed and tend to take risks of all sorts. There was considerable apprehension when the law first passed, but the High Court freeze, the state attorney’s own doubts about the law and especially the fact that no suits have actually been brought – even against advocates of the settlement boycott – have allayed some of the fears. If there is a “successful” test case, that might very well change. It’s also hard to tell how the Israeli government will act if and when BDS gains any significant momentum.

        For the moment, the only case of self-censorship that I know of is the decision of Gush Shalom to take down its list of settlement goods (a very useful resource for the settlement boycott).

  5. John Douglas
    John Douglas
    December 18, 2013, 11:16 am

    There’s Larry Summers again with his phony, anti-Semitism “in effect if not in intent.” As I wrote earlier, is a journalist who uncovers Roman Catholic priest abuse guilty of anti-Catholicism, “in effect if not in intent?” The fact is there is no anti-Semitism “in effect”, it’s an incoherent idea and Summers knows it..

    • Ron Edwards
      Ron Edwards
      December 18, 2013, 12:26 pm

      Yes indeed. The entire intent/effect argument needs to be junked, as it’s an excuse for pure smoke-blowing. If you demonstrate that what you advocate is practical, they shout, “But it’s anti-Semitic (or anti-Israel or whatever) in intent !” If you demonstrably cannot be called anti-Jewish, they shout, “But it’s anti-Semitic in effect!” This is an inexhaustible defense, requiring only tap-dancing among the moments of the discussion and assigning oneself the status of mind-reader.

      If this sounds really familiar, that’s because it’s the Dersh’s single trick, endlessly revisited: claiming anyone he wants to immunize from justice cannot be held to account on the basis of intent, which of course cannot be divined; and anyone he wants to defame can be said to “smack of” or “remind him of” past injustices against Jewish people, which is to say, he alone possesses such power of divination.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        December 18, 2013, 1:50 pm

        Dersh’s trick pony works every time–how do we deal with this trick in the real world, where careers are at stake, not to mention America’s future?

      • Ron Edwards
        Ron Edwards
        December 18, 2013, 10:54 pm

        As a witness to and frustrated opponent of the events at DePaul University in 2007-2008, I’m inclined toward utter exposure of the Dersh’s perfidy. A nice start would be to get a complete, third-party verified statement of the results of Harvard’s internal investigation of the accusations regarding plagiarism. To my knowledge, the only person who has ever said this investigation exonerated Dershowitz is the Dersh himself – everyone else has been resolutely silent (links are welcome from those who know more). As an academic, I know what this probably means, with “probably” indicating 99.999+%.

        On a more general level, I have found that the “intent” tap-dance can be scuttled simply by calling it out early – the minute it begins. Once a person has dragged you into the vortex of judging policy issues by intentions, they can flummox nearly anyone, and for the exceptions, they can suck people forever into the event horizon of debating what one can and cannot know (Richard Helms’ go-to trick toward Congressional investigation, back in the 70s, the reptile).

        Call it out by stating what I briefly referenced above: that we are talking about policy. No one needs debate the intentions of policies – only their effects, and of those, only their verifiable and justifiably-anticipated effects, not made-up projections and fears. Such effects rely on talking about history as it really happened, not as a ping-pong match where their job is to bat anything back no matter how absurdly.

        If the issue does seem to be about individual motivation, as in, my own, then another thing I do is ask, really bluntly and as a requirement for further discussion, whether the person genuinely fears that I – me – not anyone else – want to kill them and their families, or hate them so badly that I want someone to kill them as soon as possible. It should become clear to them that if they do harbor that fear, then there’s no point in me talking to them, and if they don’t, then we can talk without that bugaboo lurking around waiting to be invoked.

        Not that any of this is easy.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 19, 2013, 9:46 am

        @Ron —

        If the issue does seem to be about individual motivation, as in, my own, then another thing I do is ask, really bluntly and as a requirement for further discussion, whether the person genuinely fears that I – me – not anyone else – want to kill them and their families, or hate them so badly that I want someone to kill them as soon as possible. It should become clear to them that if they do harbor that fear, then there’s no point in me talking to them, and if they don’t, then we can talk without that bugaboo lurking around waiting to be invoked.

        Year after year the army core of engineers rates the status of repair on bridges and dams all over the United States. Because of a long term decrease in infrastructure spending over the last few decades year after year after year those ratings on average are falling, and falling rapidly. Over the last 5 years we’ve seen a noticeable upsurge in bridge and dam failures. I’ll assume that roughly 0% of the people voting against infrastructure spending are willing to bomb infrastructure. I’d assume that roughly 100% of the people voting against infrastructure spending would be thrilled if magic gremlins decided to do all the needed repairs.

        What difference does that make to the fact that the inevitable results of their policies are more dam and bridge failures? I have no problem saying they are voting for dam and bridge failures even without believing they actually support any particular failure.

      • Ron Edwards
        Ron Edwards
        December 19, 2013, 10:07 am

        Your usual obfuscation – quite the saboteur of logic, you are.

        1. Your point applies perfectly to a conversation in which policy (effect) is genuinely being addressed. Which is to say, you are agreeing with me.

        2. The paragraph you quoted concerns the specific case when a person – an individual I’m talking with – seems genuinely concerned with personal, individual intentions in that conversation. It has nothing to do with the policy issue, which is part of my overall point, but when – rarely – I do want to address that, then this is how.

        Confounding the two things is central to hasbara, which is why you have done your level best to bring up my words about one of them and answer it according to the other – precisely the behavior I’m showing people how to avoid. Plus showing them how to call it out instantly when someone starts in with it, for which you have conveniently provided an example.

        You’ve also displayed, again, a tactic which I hope MW readers are recognizing as such: being *so* thoughtful, constructive, sweetly-toned about anything non-Palestine/Israel – so nice you’re concerned about bridges in the U.S.! Such a reasonable fellow! Which is especially hilarious given your other tactic, not in evidence here, but at least three times by my count, literally threatening global peace with your threats of what happens if the allegedly bad-ass IDF gets off its leash (i.e. cossetting by the U.S.).

        This is the hasbara A-team, everyone. Mondoweiss has clearly arrived, which is nice to know, but don’t let JeffB getcha with these tricks. Collectively, we’re good with the hophmis, Miriams, and Obsidians, but that’s peanuts – gotta step it up here now, with JeffB probably just the vanguard of smooth-talking neutral-Anglo-named PEPs.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 19, 2013, 11:18 am

        @Ron —

        I don’t know you but if you are associated with academia, likely no one thinks you personally intend to kill them during the conversation. That’s not what’s meant. That’s not what is ever meant. So if you are twisting your imaginary interlocker then you are doing what you are accusing me of.

        Though I will admit that I did feel personally threatened that way during an anti-Israel demonstration in the mid 90s where I did think it could turn immediately violent.

        As for the the paragraph after paragraph of what a bad person I am… that doesn’t really address the issue. I don’t get checks from Israel. I just disagree with you.

      • Ron Edwards
        Ron Edwards
        December 19, 2013, 1:21 pm

        Without the reply feature at this level, I’m responding one level up – hope it works. This is in response to the “I don’t know you” post from JeffB.

        I know some things about your posts, Jeff. (1) Your posts are Islamophobic, to the extent of raw hate speech. (2) They promulgate the “world’s best most professional military” myth regarding the IDF, who are in actuality a vulgar and ineffective rabble. (3) They skillfully twist issues under discussion to an extent which indicates much experience, e.g. your imputation that I think you receive checks from Israel, a statement I have never made nor implied. Nor have I said a word about you as a person – which you’ve introduced to play the victim while I win this argument.

        Further, and also in the twisting-issues category, the dialogues I am referring to, in which I apply the “do you think I genuinely hate you” logic, are not the academic ones. My specialized academic dialogues concern zoological evolution. My experience in professional academia, dealing with administrations and policy, is the foundation for my current conclusions about the Dershowitz investigation – for which, I stress again, real evidence is being firewalled. In the dialogues I’m talking about here, I am referring to non-academic, personal discussions with people I know, in a non-combative situation, who may be apprehensive that anyone stating political issues the way I do must also, secretly or unknowingly or in any other way, hate them due to a feature of their cultural identity.

        That apprehension has been heightened through indoctrination, identity politics, and misinformation among many people I know personally – to the extent that it’s ready and present to manifest, as far as I can tell, without the person even expecting it to be so intense. Getting it out into the open, available for inspection, at the outset of a discussion, does wonders for the quality of the conversation afterwards.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 18, 2013, 1:46 pm

      Of course he does.

    • MHughes976
      MHughes976
      December 18, 2013, 3:21 pm

      Some journalists in the situation John suggests might run into the objection or fear that their work will produce an excessive reaction against Catholics. That fear might not be irrational but the reply should be ‘If you’re afraid that knowledge of the real situation will prompt overreaction, don’t disguise the real situation for as long as you can but change it as soon as you can’. The wrong thing is to let the discussion be sidetracked into whether the investigating journalist is a self-hating Catholic or whether Thomas Aquinas was a brilliant logician or Gothic cathedrals beautiful architecture (which many are), however important these topics are in their own right.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        December 19, 2013, 9:03 pm

        “‘If you’re afraid that knowledge of the real situation will prompt overreaction, don’t disguise the real situation for as long as you can but change it as soon as you can’.”

        This is one of the many points you make that should be repeated often and loudly.

  6. ToivoS
    ToivoS
    December 18, 2013, 4:46 pm

    I found this article by Ramzy Baroud interesting.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/18/permanent-address-for-palestinian-solidarity/

    He is making the case that the BDS movement has made significant progress in the last three years. It helps explain the hysterical reaction of the pro-Israel forces to the ASA action. Israel is getting seriously worried that BDS is going to grow and might soon begin to exert direct economic pressure.

  7. W.Jones
    W.Jones
    December 18, 2013, 8:55 pm

    It’s dictatorial when a major media outlook just presents one side on a subject so one sidedly when it is about a broad academic group. Did the NYT does this to the Protestant churches who wrote positively about BDS?

  8. RudyM
    RudyM
    December 18, 2013, 11:23 pm

    From the libertarian wing, Justin Raimondo comes out in favor of boycotting Israel (after writing in opposition to it fairly recently). Reading Goliath helped change his mind.

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/12/17/boycott-israel-2/

  9. OlegR
    OlegR
    December 19, 2013, 8:14 am

    Speaking of boycotts i think the Gazans are about to get a boycott of their own form Australia no less.

    “Footage has emerged of Australian cattle, including some shipped from WA, being mistreated in Gaza, prompting calls from Labor for exporters to be suspended until the inquiry is over.
    Federal Labor is calling for the export licences of some livestock companies to be suspended while investigations are carried out into an apparently shocking case of animal cruelty in the Middle East.
    Footage has emerged apparently showing Australian cattle being tortured in Gaza.
    The footage, filmed by civilians during the Festival of Sacrifice in October, shows tagged bulls and cows being kicked, stabbed and shot while being dragged – with legs bound – through streets and makeshift slaughterhouses as crowds cheer.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.563151

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/gaza-cattle-torture-prompts-calls-to-ban-live-animal-exports-20131212-2z87t.html

    http://youtu.be/Yr71dAYCFd8

    Btw don’t censor it’s not like this is something you will be able to just ignore.

    • Cliff
      Cliff
      December 19, 2013, 9:12 am

      Read it and weep, ignoramus:

      Charges filed against Adom Adom slaughterhouse workers
      Indictment for animal cruelty filed against employees of Tnuva’s Adom Adom slaughterhouse in Beit She’an. Agricultural Ministry, Haifa District Prosecutor’s Office file charges against manager of slaughterhouse line, his deputy, two contract employees, for injury, abuse of animals, using stun guns, beatings, violence

      In December 2012, an undercover investigation by the expose television show Kolbotek used a hidden camera to capture instances of extreme violence against cows and sheep at the slaughterhouse of Adom Adom, owned by Tnuva Beef in Beit She’an

      http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4435300,00.html

      Israeli slaughterhouse employees indicted in abuse case
      Four employees at Tnuva’s abbatoir were charged with a number of instances of causing animals injury; slaughterhouse responds: We condemn acts of abuse.

      The manager allegedly provided workers with an electric cattle prod to move the cows faster on the way to their slaughter. The workers used the cattle prod “without an appropriate purpose and in a manner that caused the calves pain and suffering,” states the indictment. The workers shocked the calves to move them by prodding them on sensitive parts of their bodies such as the stomach, testicles, chest, neck, head and face, states the indictment.

      http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.549920

      @Animal torture incident in Israel

      As an Israeli, why didn’t you ever bring this story up when it first appeared?

      Shouldn’t you, as an Israeli, be concerned more with Israeli animal torture rather than Gazan animal torture?

      Also, the animals tortured by the Israelis were also from Australia.

      Now, why don’t you tell us if Australia boycotted Israel as a result. LOL

      @Animal torture incident in Gaza

      Horrible. Why would anyone censor this OlegR?

      You’re implying that the Palestinian people, collectively as a nation, did this to those animals and thus are not human beings and thus Zionism is fantastic and the apartheid, colonization, etc. should continue. Oh and also that the Nakba was justified.

      Did you really think you were going to get away with point-scoring using this story?

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 9:40 am

        So this sort of makes you feel a whole lot better, right Cliff?

        In the Adom Adom case
        the footage caused a major outrage in Israel and a calls for boycott of their products (which a lot of people implement at least around me).
        The employees (Israeli Palestinians in a a lot of cases btw not that it should matter) were fired for mistreating animals and indited in some cases.
        Also Adom Adom is now under threat of having their kashrut revoked
        by the Chief Rabbinate which would bancrupt them over night since they would lose most of their customers.

        How about you try and deal with it instead of trying to turn it around
        and attack me or Israel because such cases are not tolerated here.

      • talknic
        talknic
        December 19, 2013, 12:37 pm

        @ OlegR “So this sort of makes you feel a whole lot better, right Cliff?”

        Why would it? Animals are still being mistreated and IN A PROPER FACILITY

        “The employees (Israeli Palestinians in a a lot of cases btw not that it should matter)..”

        Evidence being ?

    • talknic
      talknic
      December 19, 2013, 9:15 am

      A) Australia doesn’t export to Gaza.

      cattle in the videos were identified as Australian through their ear tags “which are of a type, size and shape that is unique to Australian exporters to Israel http://www.theland.com.au/news/agriculture/cattle/beef/aa-reveals-gaza-cruelty/2681484.aspx?storypage=0

      B) Are there any slaughter houses still standing in Gaza after Israel’s invasions? and;

      C) If there are, does Israel allow the importation of stun guns or any other form of humane slaughter equipment into Gaza?

    • Cliff
      Cliff
      December 19, 2013, 9:28 am

      Here’s another body slam for OlegR:

      PETA Reveals Extreme Cruelty at Kosher Slaughterhouses

      Kosher slaughter is intended to minimize animals’ suffering. But undercover PETA investigations have revealed that Agriprocessors, the world’s largest glatt kosher slaughterhouse, has been ignoring both the Jewish commitment to compassion and federal law—and animals endure prolonged suffering and nightmarish deaths as a result.

      Read more: http://www.peta.org/features/agriprocessors/#ixzz2nvmYyvbi

      I wonder if Australia would have boycotted America and the Rubashkin family because of their disgusting animal cruelty, had the beef come from Australia (maybe it did, didn’t even read the story! the title’s good enough LOL)

      There are likely tons of more examples, OlegR. I think you should quietly slither away. This isn’t going to pan out for you as you initially thought when you feverishly compiled your longest comment to date (LOL).

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 10:03 am

        /PETA Reveals Extreme Cruelty at Kosher Slaughterhouses/

        Are we talking about Israel or the Jewish religious practices now
        because i think you are a little confused here.

        But keep on digging Cliff i am sure you can eventually find some way to show how Israel is the worst animal abuser on the planet.
        As long as you feel good about yourself.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        December 19, 2013, 12:21 pm

        @OlegR

        You said:

        Are we talking about Israel or the Jewish religious practices now
        because i think you are a little confused here.

        We’re talking about animal abuse in kosher slaughterhouses.

        Like I said, I am bringing this up only because you brought up the Gaza animal abuse incident.

        You are projecting your own hatred of Palestinians and your Nakba-denial onto me.

        I am not implying anything about Israel when I comment on these animal abuse stories. I am simply bringing them up as a COUNTER to your point-scoring rhetoric.

        You made a sarcastic comment about how Gaza may be ‘boycotted’ over the animal abuse. A boycott against the boycotters, in your head.

        My comments now about these ISRAELI animal abuse scandals (and the Orthodox Jewish one in America) is to prove that the Gazan incident is not unique and the same argument can be made against Israel.

        How can you sit there and accuse ME of ‘digging’ stuff up when you’re the one who initiated this entire thing by MOCKINGLY referring to the possible boycott of Gaza due to animal abuse?

        I showed that Israel was not boycotted by Australia even though Israeli businesses were found to torture animals.

        How do you dress yourself? You are really dumb, Oleg.

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 6:10 pm

        / I am simply bringing them up as a COUNTER to your point-scoring rhetoric./

        How does animal abuses in Israel which do happen like in any food industry are a COUNTER to what Haaretz wrote about ?
        Does it make them ok ? Are they comparable in brutality ?
        /My comments now about these ISRAELI animal abuse scandals (and the Orthodox Jewish one in America) is to prove that the Gazan incident is not unique/
        Why did you bring Israeli and Orthodox Jews as a counter and not say Norwegian animal abuses (or some other abuses)

        /You made a sarcastic comment about how Gaza may be ‘boycotted’ over the animal abuse. /
        It appears that there is a strong sentiment in Australia that was triggered by these images i didn’t made it up you should learn to read the link i have provided.

        And Cliffy cut off the ad hominems they really don’t strengthen anything you say.And don’t lie.
        I am no more a Nakba denier then you are a pig f$%^er.

        Learn something from eljay he had a normal decent human response to the topic at hand.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        December 19, 2013, 7:50 pm

        @OlegR

        How does animal abuses in Israel which do happen like in any food industry are a COUNTER to what Haaretz wrote about ?
        Does it make them ok ? Are they comparable in brutality ?

        No, you clown. I brought it up because you said ‘MAYBE GAZA WILL BE BOYCOTTED NOW’.

        My POINT is that you’re USING the story to DEMONIZE the Palestinians.

        Like you actually give a shit about animal abuse.

        When did you ever comment on Israeli abuses of Palestinian HUMAN BEINGS?

        And yes, I brought up the Rubashkin family because AMERICA did not get boycotted as a result of some company’s scandal.

        Neither did Israel.

        But when it happened in Gaza, you were happy to say maybe the Australians will boycott.

        Understand now, ignoramus?

        Two can play at that game, because I know you don’t give a damn about the story. It’s just a way for you to FINALLY make a comment that’s longer than a single sentence.

        And I showed you Israel doing the same thing.

        WHY DID YOU mention that most of the Israeli perpetrators were ARAB?

        Why don’t you back that up.

      • talknic
        talknic
        December 20, 2013, 4:48 pm

        Cliff “Why don’t you back that up.”

        In all likelihood OlegR simply can’t

        Boycotting Palestinians in impoverished circumstances is OK, but boycotting Israel for its illegal behaviour is not … tells us a lot about the sick OlegRs in the world.

  10. eljay
    eljay
    December 19, 2013, 9:08 am

    >> Footage has emerged apparently showing Australian cattle being tortured in Gaza.

    That is f*cking barbaric. >:-(

    I call for all perpetrators to be held accountable for their actions, regardless of injustices committed in or by Saudi Arabia, Mali or the supremacist “Jewish State”.

    • talknic
      talknic
      December 19, 2013, 9:42 am

      It is an impoverished situation, under occupation, where I very much doubt the Occupying Power allows stun guns or any other forms of slaughter equipment into the territory they covet.

      A bullet to the head would be more humane, however not in keeping with Halal.

      In Australia beasts being slaughtered a la Halal and Kosher are first stunned. Australia should be lobbying the Israeli Government to ensure such equipment is made available to the people of Gaza.

      • eljay
        eljay
        December 19, 2013, 10:09 am

        >> It is an impoverished situation, under occupation, where I very much doubt the Occupying Power allows stun guns or any other forms of slaughter equipment into the territory they covet.

        As I understood it, the article is about animal torture, not improper slaughtering techniques. The latter is bad enough; the former is simply barbaric.

      • talknic
        talknic
        December 19, 2013, 12:32 pm

        @ eljay Not having the facilities for proper slaughter can result in torturous methods unfortunately.

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 5:43 pm

        And cheering crowds apparently.

      • talknic
        talknic
        December 20, 2013, 5:22 pm

        OlegR “And cheering crowds apparently”

Leave a Reply