RE: "BDS is annoying, but will amount to nothing of note. If you study,BDS had very little to do,either time change in SA. But don’t let facts get in the way" ~ His Royal Omnipotence, Gene Shae
● FROM WIKIPEDIA [Constructive engagement]:
[EXCERPT] Constructive engagement was the name given to the policy of the Reagan Administration towards the apartheid regime in South Africa in the early 1980s. It was promoted as an alternative to the economic sanctions and divestment from South Africa demanded by the UN General Assembly and the international anti-apartheid movement.
The Reagan Administration vetoed legislation from the United States Congress and blocked attempts by the United Nations to impose sanctions and to isolate South Africa. Instead, advocates of constructive engagement sought to use incentives as a means of encouraging South Africa gradually to move away from apartheid. The policy, echoed by the British government of Margaret Thatcher, came under criticism as South African government repression of the black population and anti-apartheid activism intensified. . . SOURCE - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_engagement
● MAGGIE THATCHER'S OPPOSITION TO USING SANCTIONS AGAINST APARTHEID-ERA SOUTH AFRICA :
. . . While Thatcher maintained throughout her political career that she "loathe[d] apartheid and everything connected with it," she . . . refused, alongside Ronald Reagan, to back sanctions against the Apartheid regime in South Africa. "In my view, isolation will lead only to an increasingly negative and intransigent attitude in the part of white South African," she said in December 1977 [I wonder if this also applies to today's Iranians?!?! - J.L.D.] . . . SOURCE - http://mondoweiss.net/2013/04/supposed-democracy-dictator.html
* ● FROM foreignaffairs.com: "South Africa: Why Constructive Engagement Failed", By Sanford J. Ungar and Peter Vale, Winter 1985/86
• Article Summary
Ronald Reagan's imposition of limited economic sanctions against the South African regime in September was a tacit admission that his policy of "constructive engagement"--encouraging change in the apartheid system through a quiet dialogue with that country's white minority leaders--had failed. Having been offered many carrots by the United States over a period of four-and-a-half years as incentives to institute meaningful reforms, the South African authorities had simply made a carrot stew and eaten it. Under the combined pressures of the seemingly cataclysmic events in South Africa since September 1984 and the dramatic surge of anti-apartheid protest and political activism in the United States, the Reagan Administration was finally embarrassed into brandishing some small sticks as an element of American policy.
[We're sorry, but Foreign Affairs does not have the copyright to display this article online.] SOURCE - http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/40525/sanford-j-ungar-and-peter-vale/south-africa-why-constructive-engagement-failed
RE: "It was as if Israeli spokesperson Mark Regev had implanted a diabolical endless loop in her head." ~ Lynne Lopez-Salzedo
MY COMMENT: That poor woman! ! !
RE: “I wouldn’t go as far as genocide,” he [the overweight man who's family are settlers in the West Bank] said. “Almost, but not quite.” And he smiled. I wondered what ‘almost genocide’ might look like.What exactly did he have in mind? ~ Lynne Lopez-Salzedo
MY COMMENT: I thought last night as I watched the 2005 film "Beyond the Gates", and I heard the Hutus refer to the Tutsis as "cockroaches" (something that Israeli's have called Palestinians), that I could easily see something like this happeneing in Israel/Palestine (i.e., a far, right-wing coup in Israel followed by acute episodes of "ethnic cleansing").
AN EXCELLENT FILM: Beyond the Gates, 2005 UR 112 minutes
Average of 95110 ratings: 3.6 stars out of 5 / Our best guess for you: 4.4 stars / My rating: 5.0
As bloody genocide erupts in Rwanda in April 1994, a weathered Catholic priest (John Hurt) and a fresh-faced British schoolteacher (Hugh Dancy) are forced to decide whether to flee with their lives or tempt fate by staying behind. With thousands of Tutsis being slaughtered all around them, the choice seems easy, but thinking selfishly is anything but simple in this harrowing, well-crafted drama from director Michael Caton-Jones.
Netflix format: DVD
Netflix listing - http://dvd.netflix.com/Movie/Beyond-the-Gates/70048302
Internet Movie Database (Rating: 7.7/10) - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420901/
Beyond the Gates (trailer) [VIDEO, 02:14] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abfq51dChdM
P.S. URI AVNERY ON THE SORRY STATE OF THE ISRAELI MEDIA/PRESS, AND HOW THE ISRAELIS HAVE BEEN "BRAINWASHED":
“Israel’s Weird Elections”, by Uri Avnery, Counterpunch, 1/04/13:
[EXCERPTS] . . . The Israeli media are already to a large extent neutralized, a creeping process not unsimilar to what the Germans used to call Gleichschaltung. [SEE: Gleichschaltung @ Wikipedia - J.L.D. ]
All three TV channels are more or less bankrupt and dependent on government handouts. Their editors are practically government appointees. The printed press is also teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, except the largest “news” paper, which belongs to Sheldon Adelson and is a Netanyahu propaganda sheet, distributed gratis. [Naftali] Bennett repeats the ridiculous assertion that almost all journalists are left-wingers (meaning traitors.) He promises to put an end to this intolerable situation. . .
. . . In the coming four years, the official annexation of the West Bank to Israel may become a fact. . .
. . . If the government continues on its present course, this will lead to certain disaster – the entire country between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River will become one unit under Israeli rule. This Greater Israel will contain an Arab majority and a shrinking Jewish minority, turning it inevitably into an apartheid state, plagued by a permanent civil war and shunned by the world.
If pressure from without and within eventually compels the government to grant civil rights to the Arab majority, the country will turn into an Arab state. 134 years of Zionist endeavor will come to naught, a repetition of the Crusaders’ kingdom.
This is so obvious, so inevitable, that one needs an iron will not to think about it. It seems that all major parties in these elections have this will. Speaking about peace, they believe, is poison. Giving back the West Bank and East Jerusalem for peace? God forbid even thinking about it.
The weird fact is that this week two respected polls – independent of each other – came to the same conclusion: the great majority of Israeli voters favors the “two-state solution”, the creation of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders and the partition of Jerusalem. This majority includes the majority of Likud voters, and even about half of Bennett’s adherents.
How come? The explanation lies in the next question: How many voters believe that this solution is possible? The answer: almost nobody. Over dozens of years, Israelis have been brainwashed into believing that “the Arabs” don’t want peace. If they say they do, they are lying.
If peace is impossible, why think about it? Why even mention it in the election campaign? Why not go back 44 years to Golda Meir’s days and pretend that the Palestinians don’t exist? (“There is no such thing as a Palestinian people…It is not as though there was a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away. They did not exist.” – Golda Meir, June 13, 1969) . . . ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/04/israels-weird-elections/