EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Boycott Movement Targets Israel
When does a citizen-led boycott of a state become morally justified?
That question is raised by an expanding academic, cultural and economic boycott of Israel. The movement joins churches, unions, professional societies and other groups based in the United States, Canada, Europe and South Africa. It has elicited dramatic reactions from Israel's supporters. U.S. labor leaders have condemned British unions, representing millions of workers, for supporting the Israel boycott. American academics have been frantically gathering signatures against the boycott, and have mounted a prominent advertising campaign in American newspapers - unwittingly elevating the controversy further in the public eye.
Israel's defenders have protested that Israel is not the worst human-rights offender in the world, and singling it out is hypocrisy, or even anti-Semitism. Rhetorically, this shifts focus from Israel's human rights record to the imagined motives of its critics.
But "the worst first" has never been the rule for whom to boycott. Had it been, the Pol Pot regime, not apartheid South Africa, would have been targeted in the past. It was not - Cambodia's ties to the West were insufficient to make any embargo effective. Boycotting North Korea today would be similarly futile. Should every other quest for justice be put on hold as a result?
In contrast, the boycott of South Africa had grip. The opprobrium suffered by white South Africans unquestionably helped persuade them to yield to the just demands of the black majority. Israel, too, assiduously guards its public image. A dense web of economic and cultural relations also ties it to the West. That - and its irrefutably documented human-rights violations - render it ripe for boycott.
What state actions should trigger a boycott? Expelling or intimidating into flight a country's majority population, then denying them internationally recognized rights to return to their homes? Israel has done that.
Seizing, without compensation, the properties of hundreds of thousands of refugees? Israel has done that.
Systematically torturing detainees, many held without trial? Israel has done that.
Assassinating its opponents, including those living in territories it occupies? Israel has done that.
Demolishing thousands of homes belonging to one national group, and settling its own people in another nation's land? Israel has done that. No country with such a record, whether first or 50th worst in the world, can credibly protest a boycott.
Apartheid South Africa provides another useful standard. How does Israel's behavior toward Palestinians compare to former South Africa's treatment of blacks? It is similar or worse, say a number of South Africans, including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, U.N. special rapporteur in the occupied territories John Dugard, and African National Congress member and government minister Ronnie Kasrils. The latter observed recently that apartheid South Africa never used fighter jets to attack ANC activists, and judged Israel's violent control of Palestinians as "10 times worse." Dual laws for Jewish settlers and Palestinians, segregated roads and housing, and restrictions on Palestinians' freedom of movement strongly recall apartheid South Africa. If boycotting apartheid South Africa was appropriate, it is equally fair to boycott Israel on a similar record.
Israel has been singled out, but not as its defenders complain. Instead, Israel has been enveloped in a cocoon of impunity. Our government has vetoed 41 U.N. Security Council resolutions condemning Israeli actions - half of the total U.S. vetoes since the birth of the United Nations - thus enabling Israel's continuing abuses. The Bush administration has announced an increase in military aid to Israel to $30 billion for the coming decade.
Other military occupations and human-rights abusers have faced considerably rougher treatment. Just recall Iraq's 1990 takeover of Kuwait. Perhaps the United Nations should have long ago issued Israel the ultimatum it gave Iraq - and enforced it. Israel's occupation of Arab lands has now exceeded 40 years.
Iran, Sudan and Syria have all been targeted for federal and state-level sanctions. Even the City of Beverly Hills is contemplating Iran divestment actions, following the lead of Los Angeles, which approved Iran divestment legislation in June. Yet the Islamic Republic of Iran has never attacked its neighbors nor occupied their territories. It is merely suspected of aspiring to the same nuclear weapons Israel already possesses.
Politicians worldwide, and American ones especially, have failed us. Our leaders, from the executive branch to Congress, have dithered, or cheered Israel on, as it devoured the land base for a Palestinian state. Their collective irresponsibility dooms both Palestinians and Israelis to a future of strife and insecurity, and undermines our global stature. If politicians cannot lead the way, then citizens must. That is why boycotting Israel has become both necessary and justified.
George Bisharat is a professor of law at Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, and writes frequently on law and politics in the Middle East.
© San Fransisco Chronicle
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
59 Comments so far
Show Allforextrader - "Vets are you suggesting that if one criticizes sweet dear little Israel, then we are all a bunch of anti-Semitic boors? Spare me the emotional blackmail."
- No, you can criticize Israel all you want, as long as it is done in context, and that you judge everyone under the same rules and standards.
If you however give one set of rule to the Jewish state, and another set of rules for everyone else - by boycotting only Israel, while ignoring all other 191 UN members, some of them committed much worse crimes - than it a very clear case of double-standard.
One should wonder where that double standard come from.
Statistical research done in Yale university in August 2006 suggest that 57% of these Hippocrates are singling out only the Jewish due to anti-semitic sentiment. If you are one of the 43% who do that for other reasons, then I apologize.
forextrader -"Israel, America's little monster, is a terrorist apartheid state that belongs in the garbage disposal of history."
- Well, maybe after all you are part of the 57% majority. Obviously you think Jew is the only nation that has no right for self determination.
thomas - "Israel is the land of Jews, therefore criticism of Israel is expressing hatred for Jews.
Get a life, brownshirt. Israel is a secular state and just as fair game for criticism as any other such state."
If Israel would have been criticized under the same rules as everyone else - then I would agree with you.
If someone would have said: "I don't agree with occupation, therefore I'll boycott USA and UK (For occupying Iraq), Canada (For Occupying Afghanistan), China (For Tibet), Turkey (for Cyprus), Morocco (for Spanish Sahara), and Israel (For the W. Bank) etc..." - Then I would have said : You know what, I may not agree with your methods, but at lease you are not Hippocratic.
But this is not the case, is it? The calls here ignores all the big problems, genocides, occupations and human right violation all around the globe. The calls in the article chose to focus ONLY on the Jewish state, while letting all other off the hook.
The question is: WHY such double standard?
There are 192 UN Members.
Some of them committed atrocities, Human right violations, Occupation, and killing of innocent civilians at a far greater extent than Israel. USA and China to name a few.
Some countries committed crimes at similar level.
Some countries committed crimes to a lesser extent.
Does the Hippocratic boycotter suggest to boycott US product? or Chinese product? Or oil from Sudan, Iran, Russia? We all know the answer to that question.
Out of the list of 192 countries, the double-standard boycotter will give you only one name worthy of a boycott.
How can such double standard be explained?
thomas , funny that you mentioned "brownshirt" Surprisingly, I do remember another case of a similar boycott. It happened during the 1930s. in Nazi Germany. Jewish businesses were boycott for the same reason as israel is.
Now thomas, who is the "brownshirt"?
It's about time! Sanctions against South Africa helped end apartheid there and Israel is even worse than it's old Boer ally.
While we're at it, the US should be boycotted and sanctioned as well.
We need to boycott and expose the source of the problem which is AIPAC. More Americans need to know what AIPAC is and what it stands for and the fact that AIPAC and its like minded lobbies are pushing for war with Iran right now. There are many good Israelis like Ilane Pape and Amira Haas who stand up to the right-wingers in the US and Israel and they stand for justice for the Palestinians and peace with Israel's neighbors. The lobby is the source of the problem though we need to recognize that and stop it if we are for peace and justice in the Middle East.
I try to avoid Israeli produce like the plague as a silent individual boycotter. There are times during the year here in the Netherlands when some types of produce seem to come only from our 'friends' in Israel and the choice is hard (for avocado's for example). But if more would join me (I know one other person) we would really send out a strong message to an injustice by an illegal occupation that has been going on way too long.
The comparison with apartheid South Africa is a good one. In addition to the facts stated by Bisharat in this excellent piece, we should remember that Israel and apartheid South Africa worked together on the development of nuclear weapons.
Also, officials from apartheid South Africa helped Israel to develop an ID system similar to the notorious "pass" system of apartheid South Africa -- and many other apartheid practices.
Also, there were close connections between Israelis and the South African mineral extraction and military industries, which both plundered and wasted massive amounts of South African wealth.
A boycott is certainly called for. The fact that Israel has proven so sensitive to the minor boycott sanctions that have already been employed demonstrates that boycotts and the publicity surrounding them can be effective nonviolent tactics for progressive change -- when usefully employed.
All these things are present, to a far worse degree, to another country with ties to the West- Zimbabwe. Yet there are no calls for boycott. I believe that these boycotts ARE politically motivated, and not from some desire to help the Palestinians. Otherwise we would have heard a lot more from these folks when Kuwait expelled 300,000 palestinians after the gulf war and confiscated their property. I don't recall even a whisper of complaint.
Dichterfreund - "the state of Israel exists only by U.N. mandate"
Not true.
The UN decision for the partition of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state, was a non-binding UN general assembly decision. (UN resolution 181)
That non-binding decision was rejected by the Arab league, who had decided instead to go on a war of annihilation against the Jews of Palestine.
The UN didn't sent even a single soldier to enforce resolution 181.
So you see, except for some moral support, the UN did not create nor gave any mandate for the creation of the state of Israel.
Hallman is here to divert attention away from the Isreali problem. Israel is one of the worst human right violator in the world today. They are not a democracy as many love to believe. They are an apartheid regime.
Most elected officials are owned by multi-billionaires and corporations, thereby negating the value of your vote. The only real vote 99% of us cast today is the vote we cast in the marketplace (ie how and where we spend our money).
A boycott may be most effective vote you ever cast!
I will agree with you there andersdl. One thing you are free to do in this country is choose where you want to spend your money. I do the same.
I think this is a superb, long overdue idea. I've been boycotting Israel for as long as I can remember. I was too young at the time though to actively boycott South Africa. I for one never buy Israeli produce or anything from Israel due to their historical and current treatment of the Palestinians. Not to mention their hawkish lobbying groups pressuring MY country to "stay the course" in Iraq and to bomb Iran, more than justifying my resentment toward Israel and the Likudniks in particular.
Certainly, subsidies to Israel may help neutralize the "damage" caused by a boycott. But it isn't so much the economic impact but the symbolic nature of a boycott that may help to isolate it further as a pariah state.
Let them truly reconsider their place in the world, and cut out the "anti-Semitic" labeling nonsense(some of the most anti-Israel people I know are Jewish). Israel and her apologists always talk about how "democratic" and "western" they are. Let them prove it. Hopefully due to boycotts and isolation it eventually registers that they have one of the most despised regimes in the western world. Unlike the other rogue regimes of the Middle East and the world, I believe they have a greater capacity for change, and boycotts could help them move in the right direction.
Should Israel live up to UN resolutions, I will gladly feast on some Israeli dates to celebrate.
Ask the Middle East's only "Democracy" where the right to all that land Israel is stealing at an accelerated rate comes from and most will answer, "God has given us this land."
Ask the Middle East's only "Democracy" for a copy of their Constitution and you'll be told that it doesn't exist.
Add these two facts together and one can only come to the logical conclusion that Israel is NOT a Democracy, but a Theocracy.
And a damned mean one at that. The Israeli Theocracy is goose-stepping all over the rights of the indigenous Palestinians, that is, when they're not busy shooting Palestinian kids in the head.
Or, using American made and supplied F-16's to bomb, napalm and strafe the hell out of any living thing in Occupied Palestine.
Or using bulldozers to demolish Palestinian homes.
Or making Palestinians "disappear" in the middle of the night, some to never be seen again.
Or furthering tightening the Gaza Blockade, that is denying water, fuel, food and medicine to Palestinians.
Or violating last year's Lebanon cease-fire.
Or threatening to launch yet another war of aggression, this time against Syria.
Or corrupting American politics with its multitude of wealthy lobbies, like AIPAC.
Or spying on America.
Yes, with a friend like Israel in the Middle East, who needs enemies?
"Israel and her apologists always talk about how "democratic" and "western" they are. Let them prove it. "
Invading someone else's habitation & calling it "settling", pretending that the inhabitants weren't really there but landless, confining them & reducing them to a remnant -- I think they've already proven their kinship with our "democratic, western" country . . .
Dichterfreund, I'm sure America's First People would agree with you.
I'll bet that they have never forgiven Colombus.
Dichterfreund,
LOL What you say is true, but Israel is still at war with the Palestinians, and the Likudniks want the U.S to fight wars on Israel's behalf. Here in the U.S, the the Native genocide and the illegal European immigrant versus Natives conflict is largely a thing of the past, with a very ugly legacy that still haunts us and may have even inspired some of Hitler's actions. There are still some problems, but over the centuries there has been so much intermixing that it is almost impossible to find "pure" Native Americans these days, and so many white-Americans now have Amerindian ancestors.
"What you say is true, but Israel is still at war with the Palestinians, and the Likudniks want the U.S to fight wars on Israel's behalf."
Netanyahu just won the Likud primary, the equivalent of Tancredo or Giuliani as the Repug nominee.
"Here in the U.S, the the Native genocide and the illegal European immigrant versus Natives conflict is largely a thing of the past, with a very ugly legacy that still haunts us and may have even inspired some of Hitler's actions."
AIM is about as distant now as the Native resistance was at the start of the 20th century. But the two imperial myths which demonized the resisters & justified their removal are conditioned on each other -- the original divine genocide of the holy books inspired the prophets of the new chosen people of North America, which now fuels the murderous apocalyptic appetites that serve as the ideological justification for the current outworkings of capital.
When we talk about Palestinians losing land and property in 1948, why do we forget that even more Jews lost land and property in Arab countries at the same time?
Jordan occupied the West Bank from 1948 to 1967 -- apparently nobody is complaining about that. Israel wouldn't be occupying the West Bank now if Jordan hadn't attacked in 1967 and lost. The Arabs were unhappy then with the 1967 border, something they now want reinstated.
If a boycott of Israel isn't politically motivated, then why don't we advocate a boycott of Chinese products? China has occupied Tibet since 1950 and killed over one million of its inhabitants. We certainly have an economic connection with the Chinese that would give us some clout.
Some organizations chose to boycott only the Jewish state, while ignoring USA, Sudan, UK and many other countries who violate human right sometimes by a factor of 1000 (one thousand) when compared to Israel.
The fact is that out of the 192 UN members, these so called "unbiased" organization and individual target only the Jewish state.
These is only one explanation for that kind of extremely clear double standard. And it is defined by the EUMC's (European Monitoring Centure on Racism and Xenophobia) definition of anti-Semitism.
http://eumc.europa.eu/eumc/material/pub/AS/AS-WorkingDefinition-draft.pdf
"Applying double standard by demanding of it (Israel) a behavior not expected or demanded by any other democratic country."
To counter that form of racism, I plan to boycott all these clearly racist organizations. And increase my purchasing of Israeli products.
why do we allow dual citizenship, dual nationality passport holders to hold political office in the USA?
banks, the boycott of Israel is not only politically motivated, you can safely say, that by large (57% of the times) it is motivated by racism.
Edward Kaplan and Charles Small of Yale University conducted a study based on a survey of 5,000 people: 500 citizens in each of 10 European countries. Their report, published in August 2006, concluded that anti-Israel sentiment reliably predicted the probability that an individual was an anti-Semite, with the likelihood of measured anti-Semitism increasing with the extent of anti-Israel sentiment observed. The authors write that, based on their analysis, "when an individual's criticism of Israel becomes sufficiently severe, it does become reasonable to ask whether such criticism is a mask for underlying anti-Semitism."
So all the commenter here - who joined the lynch against Israel have to ask themselves the following question:
Do I boycotte only the Jewish state, and ignore all other, much more severe cases, because I'm anti-Semite? (I think only Jews should be punish for human right violation, no matter how small they are in comparason to other human right violators) Or is there a different reason for my double-standard?
All states have to be judged equally.
"Israel is not the worst human rights offender in the world" is like posing the question: who was the worst mass murderer--Charles Manson or Ted Bundy?
Sanctions against Israel's criminal regime are long overdue. Let's get moving!!
To "vets":
Your asinine argumant is straight from the ADL (Abe's Defamation League) playbook: Israel is the land of Jews, therefore criticism of Israel is expressing hatred for Jews.
Get a life, brownshirt. Israel is a secular state and just as fair game for criticism as any other such state.
"All states have to be judged equally."
In the 1970s, Zionism was formally condemned as a form of racism. The only logical conclusion was that the UN was intrinsically anti-semitic (tho' the declaration has since been rescinded), even though the state of Israel exists only by U.N. mandate.
Israel is granted a status far outweighing the population of Israel, or of US Jews, not because "Jews are in control", but because (a) the need of the US ruling class to dissociate itself FROM its ties to the Nazis & its own, inescapably racist ideology and (b) the use of an ideology of victimhood to justify vicarious domination of an oil-rich region. "Subjugate the people of the Middle East & South Asia" is not a good sell; "we have to defend Israel against the new Hitlers" is the constant slogan. But it's an empty slogan, and the people who sell it really mean "The only good Ay-rab is a dead Ay-rab."
Foxman/Dershowitz agitprop, the sort that cost Norman Finkelstein tenure, is racist exceptionalism under the aegis of opposition to anti-semitism.
Israel is a blot on the collective conscience of Mankind. For those of you who tend to compare Israeli Apartheid to other murdering Dictators and their banana republics, let me tell you this, oppression is 10X worse when perpetrated by a foreigner in your own country.
Imagine a guy a with Hoosier accent and one with a Russian accent ordering a fifth generation Palestinian to stand in line at a check point to go to his ancestral village. Boycott is all good and dandy but, what I'd really like to see is my Government cutting these Genocidal maniacs off of my tax dollars.
If they must Kill undefended Palestinians Civilians for sport (as macabre as this is)let 'em go ahead, but please fund your own shit! Boycotting them is nothing more than symbolic but it is a start.
There are many bad reasons to pick on Israel but only one good one: the Palestinians have no state. I don't mean the lack of a Palestinian state, but any state at all. So far as I know, Egypt has disclaimed Gaza and Jordan the West Bank, so they can be neither Egyptians nor Jordanians. They cannot become Israelis. Israel will not let them have their own state (and neither did Jordan and Egypt before 1967). They have no embassies to represent their interests abroad and no sovereign territory to call home, either collectively or individually. So the goal of a boycott would be to force Israel to give the Palestinians citizenship in Israel or to recognize Gaza and the West Bank as independent Arab Palestine. But you might want to wait until the Palestinians take a break from shooting each other.
Meanwhile, what about a boycott of Saudi Arabia, which spends our petrodollars on the worldwide propagation of Islam and Islamic militancy?
Vets are you suggesting that if one criticizes sweet dear little Israel, then we are all a bunch of anti-Semitic boors? Spare me the emotional blackmail. Israel, America's little monster, is a terrorist apartheid state that belongs in the garbage disposal of history.
Israel supporters now using internet technology to advance Pro-Israel viewpoints in chatrooms:
http://tinyurl.com/2b9rlz
They must be getting pretty desperate to resort to this!!!
Dcbeltway,
It is deeper than that. At GIYUS.org (give Israel your united support) these Israeli shills can down load a program that alerts them to any Israel/Palestinian related articles and respond by bombarding the comment section with pro-occupation b.s.. Let me tell you, these "Israel right or wrong " crowd are some of the nastiest posters around who day in and day out try to defend the indefensible.
As a Black person who has witnessed first hand the horror and destructive nature of discrimination, i couldn't possible be an anti-Semite or anti any group. I have nothing but admiration and respect for the industrious people of Judaism, but Israeli policies towards the Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular reek of a la Boer apartheid and decent people the world over shouldn't stand for it....let a lone support.
Interesting find dcbeltway...
LOL how clever "cut & paste for Israel", they truly are becoming more technologically sophisticated. Now I understand why the Zionists descend like a flock of vultures upon every anti-Israel article or message board. I still do not get it, and probably never will, but why do I as an American have to support an apartheid state founded by a group of terrorist ethnic-cleansers in 1948? Now they are recruiting Christian evangelicals? It's just so hilarious seeing them work together, as the conservative evangelical Christian Zionists and Jews normally despise one another. For the most part, it seems like a bad idea to recruit the Christians to do their dirty-work, I've seen these evangelicals online and their posts seem like the products of deeply disturbed, unintelligent minds(what do you expect when you get Christian-American hicks to shill for Israel?). At least the Jewish Zionist propagandists are far more reasonable and smarter.
If pro-Palestinian or especially pro-Hamas people online employed the same tactics, that would be considered a form of "internet-terror", you watch!
Jaalle exactly!
It's about time. Israels is a racist and genocidal country. I never, ever buy anything from Israel.
But you know what? No one ever talks about the other Israeli occupied territory, which is the US Congress.
Citizen1;
How right you are. The entire leadership of the U. S. Congress is full of sops for Zionism, both parties. They go to the annual AIPAC convention to perform acts of contrition to their masters and beg for more funds to continue in office to support more of OUR tax dollars going to Israel. It is past high time to call for an end to ALL U. S. government support (military and financial) to the Zionist fascist state of Israel. We support genocide against the Palestinian people every bit as wrong as what white European settlers did to native Americans.
Maybe by cutting off Israel's sources of funding and arms their neighbors will finally have a chance to drive all of them into the sea where they belong.
We should boycott Saudi Arabia (support Citgo instead?), Turkey, Israel and other countries in the middle east. There are several good reasons to focus on Israel as one of the more egregious serial violators of international law (worse than pre-war Iraq, worse than Iran in terms of the number of UN resolutions that it refuses to honor). First, as an American, I feel obliged to counter-act the influence of my own government, which gives 5 000 000 000 $ per year to this rogue state, runs interference for it at the UN, and sponsors the "peace" process (i.e., the stalemate-while-Israel-grabs-more-territory-kills-more-people-steals-more-water process). No other country gets more support from Uncle Sam. Egypt is a distant second.
Second, while other rogue states enjoy a reputation as rogue states and suffer the consequences, e.g., North Korea, Israel has not. My government already has a policy of boycotting North Korea and of various prohibitions against China. This would also be a reason to boycott Turkey (large recipient of US aid; ongoing oppression of Kurds similar in nature to Israeli oppression of Palestinians).
Third, the boycott will be more effective against Israel than against some other countries that might be targetted. China could respond to a boycott by redirecting exports, though it would hurt for many years. Boycotting North Korea ends up hurting its already starving citizens. Boycotting Saudi Oil would be good, because that would hurt the Saudi royalty. Boycotting Israel produce is targetting ill-gotten gains, shaming those who should be ashamed that they make a living off the lands of displaced people, using their stolen water. We should put stickers on Israeli fruit that says "grown by an Israeli on land of dispossessed Arabs" or "proceeds from this sale fund the further dispossession of the Palestinians". The boycott also will work because Israel is divided internally. If no one in Israel had a conscience, and all were united by nationalism, then a boycott would not turn the people against government policies. But in Israel, a large chunk of the people already oppose any further advance of the Zionist project of taking land from Arabs and giving it to Jews. An anglo-american boycott would be the last straw. The world was for us, they will say, and now our actions have turned even our best friends against us.
Boycott the entire capitalist, militarist, imperialist US/UK/Israel axis of evil.
Ultimately we need hard data showing the public why/how each entity (state, corporation, etc) may be boycotted, or exchange/association withheld.
Rachel Corrie would likely support such a boycott, -just so she felt she didn't die in vain, courtesy of the IDF bulldozer...
Likewise, I believe Mr Uri Avnery, (lifelong, a brilliant Jewish campaigner for Palestinian rights) would also support any measure which highlighted the many wrongs the Israeli government gets up to, such as:
"...First there was Brian Avery, a 24-year-old US citizen shot in the face on April 5. Then Tom Hurndall, a British ISM activist shot in the head and left brain dead on April 11.
Next was James Miller, the British cameraman shot dead while wearing a vest that said "TV". In all of these cases, eyewitnesses say the shooters were Israeli soldiers."
There's more at:
http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?id=A831_0_1_0_M
And yes, there are MANY governments who need taking to task; I equally deplore ALL those fiendish leaders who perpetrate atrocities, - no matter which, no matter where.
We have to change the world as best we can, applying the most *achievable* methods when and where we can. This is often done in 'bite-sized pieces' as we do not have the consummate power that governments have stolen from us.
If such financial boycotts save even ONE human life, - surely that is worth doing?
We could best apply ourselves to the needed tasks, not out of *hatred* for any one particular state, but out of LOVE for all those who are oppressed.
In the 1980s, a friend of mine, a historian, compiled data about - then - Apartheid South Africa and its racist laws and Israel and its laws concerning the occupied territories. the result was pretty shattering: The parallels were overwhelming.
Still, I don't think that a boycott would make a difference. South Africa didn't have a large diaspora, for starters. So these parallels aren"t conclusive.
And secondly, I'd rather NOT use anything that is reminiscent of any tactics the Nazis used against the Jews in the 1930s - one of their first measures was to call for a boycott of Jewish shops and merchandise, after all.
To pressure US lawmakers to stop the unconditional support of Israel - which enables this country do whatever it wants whenever it wants, which is why it is so beloved by its neighbours - would be a much better step IMO. They just have to learn to behave like decent neighbours and not consider themselves some kind of master race amid Untermenschen.
Politicians are just pragmatic turncoats. If they are afraid of losing their cushy little jobs, they'll change their tactics, outlooks and friends faster than you can count to ten.
Greg Bacon: "Ask the Middle East's only "Democracy" where the right to all that land Israel is stealing at an accelerated rate comes from and most will answer, "God has given us this land.""
- False. Show me one main stream Israeli politician that said or believe so. Your so called "fact" just show how little you know.
Greg Bacon: "Ask the Middle East's only "Democracy" for a copy of their Constitution and you'll be told that it doesn't exist."
- So?
Greg Bacon: "Add these two facts together and one can only come to the logical conclusion that Israel is NOT a Democracy, but a Theocracy."
- Not true, The First "fact" is a myth. The send fact is true, but the existence of constitution has nothing to do with Democracy.
Just in case you don't really know what Democracy is: - Here is the dictionary definition:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Democracy
You can search for the word constitution all you want. you will not find it there.
Bisharat points out that Iran "is merely suspected of aspiring to the same nuclear weapons Israel already possesses" but neglects to ask what the UN would do if Iran offered to cut a deal wherein they agreed to accept the same limits on atomic weapons, with the same inspection standards as Israel.
American Jews control american foriegn policy to Israel's advantage. These policies do not reflect the values of the vast majority of Americans and this is the cause of the resentment. Of course, the control of information about the situation prevents most people from finding out the truth, or gaining a more balanced picture of ME.
Vets:
I don't think you're out of line for questioning an apparent double standard, but anti-Semitism isn't the only conclusion.
I'm upset that I'm a citizen of a country that cooperates with Israel's abuses and I don't like being connected with human rights abuses this way.
I think that's why some of us are more angry about Israel than about China.
Vets, your position boils down to leaving Israel alone as it's misdeads are no worse than some other states. The article is an attempt to break down positions like yours. Have you read it?
"Rhetorically, this shifts focus from Israel's human rights record to the imagined motives of its critics."
The 1st/2nd paragraphs outlines good reasons for sanctioning Israel while apparently 'ignoring' equally abusive regimes.
I don't think the the article makes a very good case for ignoring more egregious human rights violations in other countries to concentrate on Israel. If the reason, as he puts it, is that other countries don't have the same ties to the West and therefor wouldn't be affected by protests and boycotts- there are still worse abusers that DO deal with the west. He disengenuously mentions Pol Pot's Cambodia as an example of a genocidal regime that was not boycotted or protested. What he fails to mention is that any effective reaction to Pol Pot was vigorously fought by that great hero of the left -Noam Chomsky and others.
To say that the U.S. has engendered hatred in the Middle East by, in part, supporting repressive regimes- Then to say that these regimes do not deserve to be protested and boycotted along side of Israel is the height of hypocracy.
Vets: Israel receives the lion share of US foreign aid and it has an undue influence of US foreign policy. These factors prioritize its influence.
UN-common-dreams
You gave three hart breaking examples of cases where Israeli soldiers killed without justification (A crime no doubt). For you, this is enough to justify punishing all 7.2 million Israelis.
On the other hand Sudan, for the past 17 years had 2,300,000 similar stories. However, due to poor media coverage, I'm unable to tell all these personal stories one by one.
I would say that if you judge everyone by the same standards, you should boycott Sudan, long before you would even conceder Boycotting Israel.
You should Boycott Russia, that flattened Grozony and killed 50,000 civilians before even conceder Boycotting Israel.
You should conceder boycotting USA, who is responsible for 1,000,000 dead in Iraq,
If every victim had equal right, if every state would have been judged by the same standard - Half the world should have been Boycotted before Israel.
Picking on Israel alone (Though far from innocent) is not 100% to be opinioned from anti-Semitism, but there is a good chance for that. In any case is double-standard any way you look at it.
Samski - "The article is an attempt to break down positions like yours. Have you read it?"
Hi Samski,
If you have a class full of nutty kids, and the teacher always pick and punish only one kid. And not the most problematic one. And that Kid happend to be the only Jewish kid in class. - Then I would say that the problem is with the teacher.
As for the article - Yes I read the article. I happens not to agree with its conclution.
Vets: there you go again with that, "You don't support Israel, you are anti-Semitic" canard. It's shopworn. Give it a rest. Besides, you are the real anti-Semite. Palestinians and Arabs are Semites.
mcbuh - "I don't think you're out of line for questioning an apparent double standard, but anti-Semitism isn't the only conclusion."
- First of all, this is not "apparent" double standard. It is loud and clear double standard.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/double%20standard
- Second of all, I didn't say all the people who Boycott only Israel while ignoring all other 191 UN members are anti-Semites. Statistically, only 57% of them are racists. There are other explanation for the other 43%. It could be greed, ignorance, social pressure, conformism or maybe some other reasons.
Vern - "Israel receives the lion share of US foreign aid and it has an undue influence of US foreign policy. These factors prioritize its influence."
First of all, the lion share of US foreign aid goes to Iraq, and not to Israel ($18 Billions vs. $3 Billions)
Second of all, Can you explain why don't you boycotte US proucts?
forextrader - "Vets: there you go again with that, "You don't support Israel, you are anti-Semitic" canard. It's shopworn. Give it a rest. Besides, you are the real anti-Semite. Palestinians and Arabs are Semites."
1. As I said before, any one can criticize Israel. But it would be nice to do that in context, and stick to reality. I can give you Noam Chomski as an example for someone who critisize Israel in context.
2. I know that Palestinians and Arabs are Semites. Where exactly did you hear me suggesting to Boycott the Palestinians?
You on the other hand hailed the boycotters of Israel.
Unlike you, I think all people are equal (Semites and not semites), and should be equally judged without descrimination.