The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama

by Guest Sat Jan 30, 2016 11:56 am

President Obama made a change in policy this week that has added weight to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement against Israel.

Moving forward, goods produced in the Occupied West Bank and sent for sale in the U.S can no longer be marked ‘Made in Israel’. They must state their place of origin as the ‘West Bank’. This will mean that, for the first time, Americans will be able to boycott Israeli goods produced in the West Bank. This option was not possible before the change, as consumers would have no idea whether the product was made in Tel Aviv or Ramallah. The clarification makes actions against Israeli companies that are occupying the West Bank much easier to target.

The law itself has existed since the Clinton administration, but is rarely, if ever, enforced. As Forward notes:

According to an April 1995 U.S. Customs and Border Protection notification, products made in the West Bank or Gaza “shall be marked as ‘West Bank,’ ‘Gaza,’ or ‘Gaza Strip’… and shall not contain the words ‘Israel,’ ‘Made in Israel,’ ‘Occupied Territories-Israel’ or words of similar meaning.” Moreover, it states, “Failure to mark an article in accordance with the requirements…shall result in the levy of a duty of 10 percent” of the product’s value.

However, the Obama administration has issued a memo stating that from now on, this rule is not optional for Israel. Now it’s mandatory.

Why the change? Obama has been notably opposed to the boycott movement since its inception.

One contributing factor may be that US-Israel bonds are at their weakest after a number of mendacious moves by Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu.

First, Netanyahu had Israeli security services spy on private nuclear deal talks between the US and Iran, and sold the secrets to Republican lawmakers in Washington.

Then, Netanyahu worked out a deal to deliver a speech in the U.S congress, just two weeks before the Israeli elections, in which he railed against Obama’s deal with Iran. A foreign leader, undermining the foreign policy of America’s president, from the floor of its own Congress, was unprecedented.

Aside from these huge spats, the Israeli leadership have thwarted all attempts at bringing a just and peaceful solution to the Occupation of Palestine. Most notably, ordering the expansion of the illegal settlement program on the very days the John Kerry and Joe Biden flew in for peace talks. This total intransigence has meant that the situation for Palestinians is now markedly worse than at any time in the history of the conflict.

The West Bank has been broken up into a series of open-air prisons, around which Israel has built its giant Apartheid Wall. The wall is higher and longer than the Berlin wall, and cuts across the West Bank, shutting off city, town and village from one another. The wall is controlled by Israel, meaning Palestinians are imprisoned in their own towns. Unable to travel to work, or see friends or family members cut off by the wall.

Meanwhile Gaza on the west coast is penned in by a wall of its own, again controlled by Israel. In the last decade, Israel has launched no fewer than five large-scale military offensives against those living in Gaza. The Summer of 2014 saw Israel launch a 51-day air, ground and sea assault on the Gaza Strip, Israeli forces killed 2,104 Palestinians, of whom 1,462 have been identified as civilians, including 495 children. They destroyed the homes of more than 108,000 people and over 10,000 people (a third of them children) were left with life-altering injuries. I was reporting on the ground from Gaza during this period and what I saw amounted to nothing short of a massacre.
If the world community is uncomfortable with Palestinians using the rudimentary armed response to these aggressions with which they are equipped – home-made rockets, or suicide attacks – then it is imperative that they support non-violent resistance such as the Palestinian-led, global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS Movement).

The BDS Movement seeks to put economic and diplomatic pressure on Israel’s apartheid state in a similar way to that applied against South Africa’s apartheid state in the 1980s – only with aims to be more systematic and specific than its predecessor. It is starting to have a tangible impact that is being felt within Israel.

Individual performers like Lauryn Hill, over 100 UK artists including film legends Ken Loach and Mike Leigh, and Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters have announced and supported a cultural boycott of Israel.
The economic boycott by the BDS Movement has cost Veolia, a company which profits from illegal Israeli settlements, billions of dollars of lost contracts across Europe, the US and Kuwait.
Divestment pressure to have companies and organization withdraw from Israel has also had huge success. Most recently with telecom giant Orange looking to pull out of the state. They were preceded by the Bill Gates Foundation, and the entire U.S. Presbyterian Church.

In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared war against the BDS Movement. Last year, Strategic Affairs and Information Minister Gilad Erdan’s office was given the task of fighting BDS, and awarded 10 additional ministers and an NIS100 million ($26.4m) budget increase to fulfil its mission. The propaganda efforts seem focused on branding all external BDS Movement support as “anti-Semitic,” while deeming internal critics as “the enemy within.”

Israel’s greatest threat is not the BDS movement, Obama or the Palestinians. The greatest threat to Israel is Zionism, and the rising fascism promoted by this ideology; an ideology which says Jewish people alone have the right to live in freedom, peace and dignity in a land which has been a melting pot of several religions and ethnicities for thousands of years.

In order to preserve itself as a Jewish state, Israel must import Jews and exile non-Jews – and such conditions make democracy impossible. This is what anti-Zionist Israelis know in their hearts, and why they support the Palestinian-led BDS Movement despite such opposition at home – because they’re consciences will not permit them to do otherwise.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/01/29/the-boycott-of-israel-just-got-a-major-helping-hand-from-president-obama/

by eddie Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:10 pm

Sorry sass, in a sentence please, how does buying Israeli products fund the murder of Palestinians?

by Raggamuffin Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:46 pm

Moving forward, goods produced in the Occupied West Bank and sent for sale in the U.S can no longer be marked ‘Made in Israel’. They must state their place of origin as the ‘West Bank’. This will mean that, for the first time, Americans will be able to boycott Israeli goods produced in the West Bank.

How will they know that the goods were made by Israelis and not Palestinians?

by Ben Reilly Sat Jan 30, 2016 11:25 pm

eddie wrote:Sorry sass, in a sentence please, how does buying Israeli products fund the murder of Palestinians?

Doesn't Israel tax its companies and workers and use those taxes to fund about 70 percent of its military?

by Fuzzy Zack Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:01 am

Gilad Erdan - isn't that the idiot who wants to ban the Internet for because it's too antisemitic?

Lol!

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:17 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:Sorry sass, in a sentence please, how does buying Israeli products fund the murder of Palestinians?

Doesn't Israel tax its companies and workers and use those taxes to fund about 70 percent of its military?

Well its got one side a group that has never come to the arranged peace processes like with the Oslo accord in Hamas, and they have a charter to wipe all of Israeli and the Jews. The head of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah has stated before:

If they (Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide. (Daily Star, Oct. 23, 2002)

If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli. (New Yorker, Oct. 14, 2002)

ISIS to the north of them, facing enemies on multiple fronts, which is an nightmare strategically to defend against. Luckily there is some natural defense barriers but its a tall order to defend

To then now a unrestricted Iran, who even Kerry admits that now because of lifting the sanctions, more money will be able to get to these many terrorist groups at war with Israzel

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/

So what you should in fact be asking Ben, is what price limit is there on military spending when you have groups molded and defenders of the the Final solution. Where these people are sitting right on their door step?

So its really of no surprise that Israel spares no expense buying and researching the most advanced and best defensive and offensive capabilities.

What nobody ever asks is why Hamas has no defense capabilities where they build tunnels to attack Israel, but build no bomb shelters, command people to die after being warned by Israel. That is not a group in any way seeking peace. Its on a constant offensive war footing

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:27 am

I think this is also very apt to place on this thread also as those who back the hypocritical BDS

Men and women, some whose clothes were still marked with gray ash, walked dazedly toward Union Square. Many did not know what to do or where to go. So they kept on walking. They knew the country was under attack, but they did not know how bad it was or what might still be heading for them. Behind them lay a changed city and thousands of American dead. Ahead was the bronze statue of George Washington, facing into the devastation and raising his hand to lead his men forward in victory. Around its base, with the destruction of the World Trade Center as their backdrop, leftists had set up shop, coloring anti-war posters even while rescue workers were risking their lives at Ground Zero.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/the-lefts-manufactured-Muslim-crisis.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+FromNyToIsraelSultanRevealsTheStoriesBehindTheNews+(from+NY+to+Israel+Sultan+Reveals+The+Stories+Behind+the+News)

Interesting article even though its by someone of the fringes of the far right and his views also in some cases aid the terrorists. His views that we are at war with Islam and that we should be at war with the left, further aids the terrorists and further divides the west.
His views on importing Islamic terrorism being important could be said of the Irish with importing Irish immigrants, where some were in fact IRA. In fact he makes many poor points but is 100% right in regards to the attitude, tactics and excuses the left uses when we have an Islamic terrorist attack in the west. That he is spot on and there are now numerous examples I will list below to what they left use poorly and what I have been guilty of two in the past myself. In fact some of the left place Anyi-Musllim bigotry, way out of proportion to what is actually suffered by many other groups. Some people defend as I once wrongly did the actual religion Islam, by showing double standards. My intentions were for the good to prevent anti-Muslim bigotry growing, of which it has grown and this is down the rise of Islamic extremism spreading, though its just a resurgence from other periods in the past, all the way back to Muhammad. With even more blame solely center on the left created such poor reasons and excuses, they have tried through very disingenuous tactics to lower the appalling acts of the Taliban and Saddam and the Baathist party to that of a lesser criminal status.

Which is a fine place to start from.
The first absolutely most absurd argument made by the left is in regards to colonialism, which if truth be told there was next to hardly any European colonies after the First World Wat. Whilst I certainly back the motion to reimburse nations that have suffered under colonial rule and that we should look back and learn from past mistakes and see what effect they have today. There is absolutely no reason though why nearly a hundred years after the end of WW1, that this should be a reason to resent and hate the West.
Either within Islam there is great emphasis on revenge until based on a subject point of view they obtain this revenge by a means comparable to where actually many Arabs benefited from the newly found independence with the creation of so many new Nations, which were formed from minority peoples within a former larger Empire. So if they are pissed at that and some of the treaties from 101 years ago like the Sykes-Picot agreement and you hear the reasons that the left come out with this as to how they perceive it’s a mess. You will just cringe at how fundamentally the left think the British and French should have formed separate smaller nations based only Apartheid lines religiously and ethnically.

For example they claim that the creation of Iraq, with its Sunni, Shia and Kurd groups was a huge Western mistake?

Come again?
You are saying it was wrong to put groups of people whether religiously different or ethnicity as a contributing factor to what basically transpired to the Iraq insurgency. Even though this did actually happen at the end of British rule where people say the opposite an d that the Indian continent should not have been partitioned. You see how the lefties continually conflict, when invented excuses for wrongs done? Sorry it is this kind of inane drivel that would with such methodology blame the current levels of racism, due the North going to war, where if they had no defeated the south, then the US could have segregated into numerous nations based on ethnicity and religion. Now either the professor who claims this (John J. Mearsheimer )is saying Arabs are inherently racist and prejudice and unable to live with people of different faiths and ethnicity? Or is it actually centuries of murder, violence and hate between the two sects and that Islam does not allow for variances of the doctrine, based on both believing they are right. I mean that has to be the most poorest apologetic illogical claim to make. Where everything that is fundamentally important to the real causes of the later sectarian violence in Iraq. Not only is he saying we should not place different sects of Muslims within the same nation, but also that we should never liberate a nation, whether the reason to go to war was right or not. Should then never happen and that people should then remain under oppression. Its this barbaric illogical bull that the left invent to do anything appease or deflect away any blame to where the real cause and blame is, and that is centuries of hate between two Islamic sects, both who supported and armed the insurgents in Iraq. Of course most people when liberated, they will look to start a new, but this was denied to them, by again a preference over Islam and its control over lands, which I will go into later on. Not only that, how far can you then go back to lay the blame that then the Arabs should have then never aggressively expanded into the whole of the Middle East. See how absurd a reason you cam make when using regressive methodology

So as much as I agree the intentions to invade Iraq were wrong ( I agree that we should have supported the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan) but its aim was to remove a butcher, who had murdered and sent to their deaths hundreds of thousands through crushing uprisings, wars, ethnic cleansing etc. In that aspect the aim was achieved . What you can also say is that the American intelligence service was naïve to think Saudi and Iran would not then try to muscle in and gain control of Iraq. They are at fault for not seeing that coming, but have zero responsibility for an orchestrated insurgency, with two intended aims. To remove US and allied forces from what is claimed is Muslim lands and regional superiority for either Islamic sect. This all deaths not from direct fire from allied forces can only be attributed to the backers and insurgents themselves who caused mass destruction and death. Now this leads me to just about the worst reasoning the left have ever come out with and there has been a few reports on the number of fatalities that links the invasion as at fault for these invented and inflated Iraq civilians dead , so claimed to have been attributed solely to Iraq Invasion. Its disingenuous, its actual intent is even worse, to make out the west were far worse by an invented casualty level that then exceeds the numbers of murders and deaths by Saddam and the Taliban together. We have many numbers anywhere from 100,000 to 1 million all of which actually cannot be attributed to the invasion. It can only be attributed to those who led the insurgency. Even without the invasion of Iraq, we would have still seen the Arab springs and where with an Iraq with saddam still in power but greatly further weakened would struggle as Assad has to stem the popular uprising. In fact you would have seen two civil wars in tandem and again both Saudi and Iran would have again been controlling the insurgencies. I mean think about that though, the intent of the report is to enlarge a an unfounded monster status, which the Taliban and Saddam have , of which is irrefutable by the evidence of their crimes. To collate the most poorest and weakest methods, where their estimates instead of gaining support ended up being ridiculed by many experts and academics. The only reason to over inflate deaths is simple. Make out Bush to be the far bigger monster and the west by proxy, further endorsing the naratives of hate against the West.. Now Bush is about the biggest dick going, but to even compare a war of liberation to the cruel acts carried out by the Baathist Party and the Taliban, is nothing short of the worst dishonesty going. Not only that such reports are music to the extremists ears, they have now ammunition to back their stance to make all in the west guilty of a heinous crime, of imagined genocide to the Iraq people. The link below shows how minimal the fatalities was caused directly by the allies. But hey the left will create any bullshit to deflect away any association to Islam. This like I said further aids the narrative of hate against the west and is based on backing the Islamic grievance which is invalid, unless they the methodology to defat and remove a tyrant, is wrong, would then have to render every geographical claim to the lands presently occupied by the many Arab Muslims.

http://markhumphrys.com/iraq.dead.html

The next biggest joke is on when a terrorist attack happens. The bodies are still warn from the shootings in California for example and the left flood the media, before even the media has any data on the event to give. With fabricated claims to named Far right or White Supremacist as to being behind the attacks, where the evidence is never credible by posted on social medias. This has to be the poorest pre-emptive strike to ever use, as you are ignoring that 96-98% of terrorist attacks with high casualty ratios are vastly Islamic terrorism. Which would give most people hesitation before boldly posting up hearsay and incorrect claims to the suspects. Again why is this done? In the hope it is for once a Far right terrorist attack, so I am sure 99 times out of 100 they will get it right, but it is worse than that. It is done again as if to make all the worlds Islamic terrorism comparable to the levels of other political, sectarian and religious terrorism. They are attempting to down play the severity of the attack. What is also even more absurd is the reasons and excuses to these attacks, some of which I have mentioned above. This though is why more than anything Islam is a flawed ideology, that it allows people to fundamentally ignore countless Muslims, Christians, etc being murdered in terrorist attacks and be completely inactive to this. Showing how again the narratives steer clear of any Islamic blame, again invented claims, like 9/11 was a set up, carried out by Mossad, the CIA created ISIS. Yes they invent aloud of bullshit to defend and excuses solely in order to deflect away from the real problem that stems from within Islam again. This problem is found within all the Abrahamic faiths, a religious prejudice and discrimination. Where Muslims view other Muslims and brothers and sisters, yet those not Muslim, are rendered thus inferior. This is also clearly true when it comes to Muslims butchering Muslims, as we see no concerted armed groups formed to defend against these so called extremist group abusers of Islam. We instead see only an outrage vocally more so at some unintended air strike that sadly cost lives./ That is played up to being intentional, claims to women being raped and babies being targeted to be murdered etc. All narratives based all the inventions and lies around another core lie, claiming the west wants to destroy Islam.; As seen the real baby killers and rapist are in fact Muslim terrorists, but they are ignored, being the fact they are viewed even if committing these crimes the lesser evil by simply being Muslim. That is so screwed up, where a belief system forgoes far worse crimes committed, ignoring them, but going off unintentional crimes, where many Muslims themselves fuel these fabricated lies. all in order to defkect away from the actual problems that do stem from within Islam and all because there is very little in variations on beliefs in islam between extremists and non-extremists

It also plays into the Muslim narratives that constantly blame the west and fail at every turn to look within Islam itself to see the core root problem to how ISIS are easily able to recruit people to their cause. As the Islam they follow does not condemn terrorism if it the victims are judged to be guilty of a supposed grievous crime . Where many Muslim scholars also will not condemn terrorism if they view those targeted as condemned for an imagined crime they create. It is not any interpretation over whether terrorism is allowed within Islam. There is nothing that condemns terrorism, where in fact the hadiths endorse what would be considered to terrorist acts by attacking and pillaging trade caravans. That then is not the issue in Islam. Now they may condemn a terrorist act, but they do this, those who oppose and disagree with ISIS. Notice I said disagree. When they view those attacked as innocents. Starting to see the flaw here yet anyone? So where the Paris attacked happened, many Islamic religious leaders and scholars condemned the attack and even wrote a letter , where it did not evern reasoned over terrorist acts, but on how they reason whether someone is guilty or innocent, so this is what they said and wrote to ISIS on this very point.

Second, your use of the word jihad is incorrect and offensive: jihad al-Saghrir is, as you know, war against oppression. The Qur’an and the Prophet are clear on its rules: it is to be used only against those who would force Muslims from their faith or drive you from your home; it is limited to combatants, and forbidden against innocents; the Prophet himself commanded that civilians be protected from war; and you are commanded by the Prophet to seek peace at every opportunity.

So we now begin to see where the problem is and it is fundamentally to do with Islam.
The above does allow armed conflict when suffering under an oppression, forced from their homes, or their faith attacked. Now all 3 points are used by Muslims in a massive majority that cast the Israeli civilian population as being guilty of all the above. So in fact , they have judged the Israel people off yet more lies. This is why you see then condemn the Paris attack, many Muslims and scholars, but you will hear a wisper when it comes to Israel, because they view the Jihad as valid to kill. It then goes off and conflicts badly, based on some very lacking in unreliable sources to what deeds was done by Muhammad. In fact it was the first caliphate that degreed to spare women and children, but Muhammad in some of the other hadiths turns a blind eye to the killing of women and children. Not only that the scholars further conflict when they fail to see that where in countries if they convict and then execute women and children for crimes based on myths, that have no evidence to show any such deity exists. Then the view as to whether women and children are innocent in Islam, is based on whether or not they have been viewed or judged to have committed a mythical religious criminal act. Their own laws renders the claim they have stated to ISIS as redundant, because as seen they execute innocent women and children for in many cases invented religious bullshit crimes.. So when you start to look at the root causes of all these problems they fundamentally stem from within Islam itself, where the biggest problem is that there is no central authority figure to rule one way or the other. Hence why those who say they follow the true Islam, is based off faith in the documents you read being divinely past on . The documents in a historicity sense are unreliable to say the least and Christianity even though far older has far more older fragments of text and nearer to the time of Christ , than Islam has for a single hadith, as they come centuries later and the Quran could even be older than Muhammad which would then render his message as plagiarism. So when Muslims and the left and I have been guilty of in the past also arguing off what is the true Islam, nobody can prove that they do, they can only reason off how they view and interpret the Islamic documents

My last point is this and what I find appalling and is shown countless times within many debates that Israeli civilians are murdered and you never hear a single condemnation from the usual suspects and why? They believe the attacks have justification. Wrong, they do not have any justification and if we look truly to as claimed by the Islamic scholars on Jihad in their letter ikt is the Palestinians, in 1947, who transgressed and attacked and had been doing so for decades murdering Jews before the creation of Israel in 1948. To then have many Arab nations attack Israel. It was not Israel being the aggressor, thus many people fled their homes because of the conflicts and it is for the above sole reason that no other group in history exploits Palestinian refugees than the Palestinian Authorities and Arab nations. Just so they can justify murdering Israeli civilians and then even worse, which further backs up how they view all Israel as judged guilty. Is that they then glorify the terrorists who attempted murder or those who succeeded as murder civilian’s as martyrs. That shows again how terrorism is not taboo in Islam, only its wrong to kill innocent women and children, even though that conflicts when they deemed women and children guilty of a crime punishable by death.

So why is it then that these same scholars have not written to Hamas and the PLO to point out its wrong to murder innocent women and children

The answer and the biggest problem of all, that they view even the extremists as Muslims and brothers and sisters, no matter how badly they stray off the path, as to them their place as a Muslim is higher than a non-Muslims. It is this religious Apartheid that is the root cause to all the problems within Islam today. Where when these same scholars and religious leaders should be issuing a criminal judgement in absenteeism convicting the terrorist groups of Blasphemy by involving the name of Allah when they kill innocents and issuing countless fatwahs condemning again in absenteeism and judging all members of ISIS as apostates, but only a few progressive Muslim leaders wiil. Which further proves that not only is the vast majority of the problems from bullshit endorsed appeasement by lefties that then back the terrorist arguments of hate, but it’s a web of lies to deflect away from the problematic ideology and verses of Islam, that fundamentally drives the extremist reasoning. Where the religious leaders should be fully separating the extremists from Islam altogether they fundamentally still view them as Muslim, no matter as seen ho grevious their crimes

Here is a link parts of the letter

https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2015/11/an-open-letter-to-caliph-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi

Its time we started to be vocal and call a spade a spade in regards to Islam, where for far to long many on the left have done everything possible to deny the and deflect away the real reasons and root cause problems with Islamic terrorism

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:31 am

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:34 am

[size=40]SJP Exposes Its Own Hypocrisy[/size]

Actor Michael Douglas is currently on a tour of US college campuses with Natan Sharansky, the Chair of the Jewish Agency, to discuss “Judaism, Israel, and current-day anti-Semitism.” Students at their first stop, Brown University, were nice enough to oblige them by providing a first-class example of the problem they went to discuss.

Brown Students for Justice in Palestine’sstatement calling for a protest of the talk gives extraordinary insight into exactly how deceitful and hypocritical this group is. Some highlights:

The Jewish Agency for Israel will be funding the lecture as part of a massive push made by the Israeli government to conflate pro-Palestinian activism with anti-Semitism. . . . It is immoral to smear social justice activists with claims of anti-Semitism, and this is a strategic tactic used to delegitimize BDS and turn attention away from Israel’s apartheid regime. . . .
Natan Sharansky is well-known in Israel for campaigning against the rights of African refugees. He has been relentless in refusing to allow them to settle in Israel, saying to the Times of Israel, “we cannot automatically give everybody the status of a refugee and treat them as political refugees because really there could then be millions of these.” It has also been discovered that he stole aid funds pledged to African refugee settlement and put the money towards the Jewish Fund for Israel. It is a disgrace that such a bigot with an ugly track record of anti-Palestinian, anti-African racism is being lauded on this campus.
This is an affront to academic freedom: Brown students should not be exposed to propaganda campaigns executed by state powers, especially colonial state powers.

In one breath, they claim it is “immoral” to call the BDS movement — which demonizes Israel, delegitimizes Israel, and holds Israel to an impossible double standard — anti-Semitic. In the very next breath, they call the head of the Jewish Agency a racist. (You can read more about Sharansky, a “hero of the Soviet Refusenik movement, and an inspiration to the freedom movements in Eastern Europe,” in this write-up at Legal Insurrection.)

Even more absurd, however, is the claim that exposing other Brown students to a point of view with which SJP disagrees is an “affront to academic freedom.” To borrow an overused cliche, I just don’t think “academic freedom” means what SJP thinks it means. The BDS movement thrives on lies that well-meaning but under-informed students accept as fact. Truth is the biggest threat for them. That is why they disrupt events and attempt to drown out speakers. That is why Michael Douglas and Natan Sharansky scare them so.

An article about the event quoted Sharansky:

The moment you move to a logical debate, they have nothing to say. . . . They are only shouting . . . . Behind it there is a desire to destroy Israel. It is not about human rights. The question is, how to destroy Israel.

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:50 pm

The apartheid myth

Despite the slanderous propaganda against Israel, the Palestinians not only have a parliament, but also higher education institutions, a police force, security forces, a justice system and prisons. Is this apartheid? Thanks to Israeli rule, they're number 1 among university graduates in the Arab world. Is this oppression?

A Kabbalat Shabbat was supposed to take place at the Chicago LGBTQ conference last Friday, but it was canceled by the organizers, and after being hit with criticism from the Anti-Defamation League, the cancelation was canceled. Except that when the Kabbalat Shabbat began, hundreds of hooligans from the forces of progress barged in. It happened, among other reasons, due to the participation of a representative from the Jerusalem Open House for Pride and Tolerance, Sarah Kala-Meir. The cries of "apartheid" were joined with, as always, the leading slogan: "From Jordan to the sea, Palestine will be free."

The useful idiots, gays and lesbians donning keffiyehs, have never seemed more pathetic. After all, each and every one of them would have been thrown off a tall building, like a bag of potatoes, in nearly every single one of Israel's neighboring countries. But their problem is with Israel.

What causes this madness?

The question is, what the hell is the source of this madness, which comes from the fringes and spreads. like a cancer to the middle. To understand that, we need to look at the hooligans' reasoning. The familiar tune. We have to think back at Haaretz’s front page headline in October of 2012, which declared that "Most Israelis support the apartheid regime in the country." This wasn't just any article. It was the main headline on the front page. It made waves in the world in a matter of hours.

There was no need to wait so long, however, to know this was a lie. The story's headline was based on a poll conducted by a left-wing NGO. The poll itself actually showed the situation was quite the opposite, but damn the facts. Who needs those when propaganda is involved? Two or three days have passed, and the paper itself printed a small, tiny clarification, on page 5, which was unable and likely didn't really intend to fix the damage. After all, the damage was the main thing, and it was already caused. Gideon Levy, who wrote the story as well as an analysis on the topic, did admit he was wrong. But using a typical kind of manipulation, he explained he actually wasn't wrong.

A campaign against peace

Over three years have gone by since. The paper has continued pushing the apartheid lie, and in recent months, the propaganda is only increasing. More and more articles provide fuel to the incitement fire. It's not that there are no injustices, and it's not that these injustices shouldn't be brought to light. But none of this has anything to do with an apartheid regime. It's not that anyone is confused; someone is intentionally working to confuse and leave the wrong impression.

This campaign has a clear declared goal: To turn Israel into South Africa, in order to encourage "pressure from outside."

The link between this campaign and the BDS movement can no longer be hidden. The stage this paper gives to the supporters of sanctions, and its support of Roger Waters, one of the prominent faces of the BDS movement, are milestones in the fight. And considering the fact that this newspaper, the very same stage, publishes a lot of articles against the idea of a "Jewish state" - well, even if they deny it a thousand and one times, it's clear where the wind blows. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - it's a duck.

Palestinian intransigence

Controlling the Palestinians is, one must admit, a great problem. A peace agreement or separation is in Israel's interests. We can and we should criticize the current government for not doing enough to create separation. We can and we should criticize the injustices committed, and such injustices exist. But this situation has nothing to do with apartheid.

Since 1967 and to this very day, the Palestinians have been rejecting the two-state solution at every turn. When Arafat went to Washington to give the Palestinian response to the Clinton Parameters, he met with Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi's ambassador to the US, who urged Arafat to say yes. "If you say no, it would not be a tragedy - it would be a crime." Arafat went to the White House and committed a crime. This was also Abbas' response to Olmert's initiative in 2008. And Abbas had the same response to Barack Obama and John Kerry who presented him with a draft on March 17, 2014.

This is what's behind the continued Israeli control of the West Bank. Israel has already left the Gaza Strip. Many at the time hoped the Palestinian leadership would take advantage of this historic opportunity to do something for the Palestinian people: More factories, more education, more welfare, and more prosperity. But they chose the opposite path: The industry of death and terrorism.

Discrimination is not apartheid

Israeli Arabs are citizens. They vote for the Knesset, they hold some of the top positions at hospitals, they serve as judges, and more. The equality is not yet complete; we still need to fight for it. There's discrimination here and there, and we need to fight that too. Discrimination is not apartheid. Second and third generation Muslims in Europe are far from the level of achievements and equality of Israeli Arabs.

The Arabs in the territories are an entirely different story. Most of them live under Palestinian rule, which was formed as part of the Oslo Accords. They all vote for the Palestinian Authority. They have their own parliament and their own government. The Israeli control continues mostly because the Palestinian leadership has repeatedly rejected any proposal for an accord based on the idea of two states for two peoples. And there's concern that as soon as Israel leaves the West Bank, the exact same thing that happened in the Gaza Strip will happen there.

It doesn't mean the Israeli government is innocent of injustices. These injustices should be criticized, just like the settlement enterprise should be criticized. But the claim that this is an apartheid regime is plain miserable demagogy. The Palestinians not only have a parliament, but also independent higher education institutions, a police force, security forces, a justice system and prisons. Is this apartheid? Thanks to Israeli control, the Palestinians went from zero higher education institutions to being first among university graduates in the Arab world. Is this apartheid? Is this oppression?

But Haaretz insists, over and over again, on nurturing the myth of apartheid. One of the publicists of that paper once wrote that "Israel does not need gas chambers to exterminate the Palestinians. It is doing so by raising the rate of infant mortality." The truth is the complete opposite of that. The infant mortality rates have dropped dramatically. But his hand did not shake as he was writing this blood libel for an important publication in Europe. This used to be a position held by a negligible minority. Today it is the predominant stance of the newspaper, which nurtures this blood libel.

Anti-Semitism because of lies about Israel

The anti-Semitism survey released last week revealed the fact that 40 percent of Europeans have anti-Semitic views. Those who say that it's "because of Israel" are right. Of course. When Israel is presented as an apartheid state, a benighted state, and a state that commits non-stop crimes - anti-Semitism grows. So you need to be more accurate - it's not because of what Israel does, it's because of the lies against Israel. And no, it's not because of a specific policy or the current government, which should be criticized. After all, the anti-Israel campaign was in full swing even when Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni led the country.

The apartheid campaign achieves results. It doesn't promote peace or reconciliation, it creates the opposite results. It raises the rate of anti-Semitism, encourages the hooligans that support the BDS movement, bolsters Palestinian intransigence, and makes the chances of peace smaller and smaller still.

A democratic state does not silence those who spread libels. All that can be done is to expose them in order to fight their destructive results.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4759526,00.html

by Major Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:30 pm

Too much C&P to absorb after my roast lamb dinner

by Original Quill Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:36 pm

Stormee wrote:Too much C&P to absorb after my roast lamb dinner

Roast lamb? Ymmm....with Roasted Potatoes, Fennel & Radishes with Lemon Brown Butter Sauce, Greek-Style Braised Green Beans, Asparagus Ribbon Salad and Parker House Rolls? Mint jelly and Greek olives and pickled watermelon rind in an assortment tray.

A dry white Kourtaki Retsina...what could be better?

by Ben Reilly Sun Jan 31, 2016 6:58 pm

Didge wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:Sorry sass, in a sentence please, how does buying Israeli products fund the murder of Palestinians?

Doesn't Israel tax its companies and workers and use those taxes to fund about 70 percent of its military?

Well its got one side a group that has never come to the arranged peace processes like with the Oslo accord in Hamas, and they have a charter to wipe all of Israeli and the Jews. The head of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah has stated before:

If they (Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide. (Daily Star, Oct. 23, 2002)

If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli. (New Yorker, Oct. 14, 2002)

ISIS to the north of them, facing enemies on multiple fronts, which is an nightmare strategically to defend against. Luckily there is some natural defense barriers but its a tall order to defend

To then now a unrestricted Iran, who even Kerry admits that now because of lifting the sanctions, more money will be able to get to these many terrorist groups at war with Israzel

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/

So what you should in fact be asking Ben, is what price limit is there on military spending when you have groups molded and defenders of the the Final solution. Where these people are sitting right on their door step?

So its really of no surprise that Israel spares no expense buying and researching the most advanced and best defensive and offensive capabilities.

What nobody ever asks is why Hamas has no defense capabilities where they build tunnels to attack Israel, but build no bomb shelters, command people to die after being warned by Israel. That is not a group in any way seeking peace. Its on a constant offensive war footing

I was merely answering eddie's question!

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 9:45 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Didge wrote:

Well its got one side a group that has never come to the arranged peace processes like with the Oslo accord in Hamas, and they have a charter to wipe all of Israeli and the Jews. The head of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah has stated before:

If they (Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide. (Daily Star, Oct. 23, 2002)

If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli. (New Yorker, Oct. 14, 2002)

ISIS to the north of them, facing enemies on multiple fronts, which is an nightmare strategically to defend against. Luckily there is some natural defense barriers but its a tall order to defend

To then now a unrestricted Iran, who even Kerry admits that now because of lifting the sanctions, more money will be able to get to these many terrorist groups at war with Israzel

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/

So what you should in fact be asking Ben, is what price limit is there on military spending when you have groups molded and defenders of the the Final solution. Where these people are sitting right on their door step?

So its really of no surprise that Israel spares no expense buying and researching the most advanced and best defensive and offensive capabilities.

What nobody ever asks is why Hamas has no defense capabilities where they build tunnels to attack Israel, but build no bomb shelters, command people to die after being warned by Israel. That is not a group in any way seeking peace. Its on a constant offensive war footing

I was merely answering eddie's question!

No problem Ben, I just merely filled in the many blank spaces you left in your reply to Eddie.

by Guest Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:46 pm

eddie wrote:Sorry sass, in a sentence please, how does buying Israeli products fund the murder of Palestinians?

I'll let them tell you in their own words, and it's far too complicated to say in a sentence, some things are.

The global movement for a campaign of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel until it complies with international law and Palestinian rights was initiated by Palestinian civil society in 2005, and is coordinated by the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), established in 2007. BDS is a strategy that allows people of conscience to play an effective role in the Palestinian struggle for justice.

For decades, Israel has denied Palestinians their fundamental rights of freedom, equality, and self-determination through ethnic cleansing, colonization, racial discrimination, and military occupation. Despite abundant condemnation of Israeli policies by the UN, other international bodies, and preeminent human rights organisations, the world community has failed to hold Israel accountable and enforce compliance with basic principles of law. Israel’s crimes have continued with impunity.

In view of this continued failure, Palestinian civil society called for a global citizens’ response. On July 9 2005, a year after the International Court of Justice’s historic advisory opinion on the illegality of Israel’s Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), a clear majority of Palestinian civil society called upon their counterparts and people of conscience all over the world to launch broad boycotts, implement divestment initiatives, and to demand sanctions against Israel, until Palestinian rights are recognised in full compliance with international law.

The campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) is shaped by a rights-based approach and highlights the three broad sections of the Palestinian people: the refugees, those under military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Palestinians in Israel. The call urges various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law by:

    Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;
    Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
    Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194.

The BDS call was endorsed by over 170 Palestinian political parties, organizations, trade unions and movements. The signatories represent the refugees, Palestinians in the OPT, and Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Boycotts target products and companies (Israeli and international) that profit from the violation of Palestinian rights, as well as Israeli sporting, cultural and academic institutions. Anyone can boycott Israeli goods, simply by making sure that they don’t buy produce made in Israel or by Israeli companies. Campaigners and groups call on consumers not to buy Israeli goods and on businesses not to buy or sell them.

Israeli cultural and academic institutions directly contribute to maintaining, defending or whitewashing the oppression of Palestinians, as Israel deliberately tries to boost its image internationally through academic and cultural collaborations. As part of the boycott, academics, artists and consumers are campaigning against such collaboration and ‘rebranding’. A growing number of artists have refused to exhibit or play in Israel.

Divestment means targeting corporations complicit in the violation of Palestinian rights and ensuring that the likes of university investment portfolios and pension funds are not used to finance such companies. These efforts raise awareness about the reality of Israel’s policies and encourage companies to use their economic influence to pressure Israel to end its systematic denial of Palestinian rights.

Sanctions are an essential part of demonstrating disapproval for a country’s actions. Israel’s membership of various diplomatic and economic forums provides both an unmerited veneer of respectability and material support for its crimes. By calling for sanctions against Israel, campaigners educate society about violations of international law and seek to end the complicity of other nations in these violations.

- See more at: http://bdsmovement.net/bdsintro#sthash.FN0nqARD.dpuf

It's using the same tactic as was used to stop apartheid in S. Africa.

PS As Didge is sitting there as a guest he'll probably come rushing back foaming at the mouth again, which is why I still have him on ignore, only so much bullshit can be tolerated.

Lol - Bingo, I must be psychic Sleep

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:13 am

Right jut going to point out the fundamental lies in the BDS claims above

So lets start with this paragraph

For decades, Israel has denied Palestinians their fundamental rights of freedom, equality, and self-determination through ethnic cleansing, colonization, racial discrimination, and military occupation. Despite abundant condemnation of Israeli policies by the UN, other international bodies, and preeminent human rights organisations, the world community has failed to hold Israel accountable and enforce compliance with basic principles of law. Israel’s crimes have continued with impunity.

First sentence i sheer gibberish.
It was the Palestinians on hearing the partition plan had been approved, initiated a civil war attacking Jews, killing them. That is denying the Jewish people self determination, where if they had accepted the partition, they would have had self determination, of which they do today have self determination and all thanks to Israel. Now many Palestinians fled the conflict, and where they were defeated., they ended up not under Israeli occupation but Jordanian and Egyptian occupation, neither of which formed an independent Palestinian nation. Later Israel occupied Gaza and the west bank through a preemptive strike. Then with the agreement of the Oslo accord, the Palestinians were provided with self determination, by being able hold elections to then form their own governments. Where it has been Hamas and Fatah who deny self determination to the Palestinians as they have not since held any elections. The laws of Israel do not govern the west bank or Gaza, these are governed by Fatah and Hamas.
So claiming they deny self determination is completely false, where it is the Palestinian leaderships that deny this.

The charge of equality is very poor when under Hamas and Fatah their citizens have far less rights that Israeli Arabs and to make such an assertion is insulting the very principles of equality. The only real hinderence to Palestinians is check points, all due to countless terrorist attacks. They by their continued aggression with no attempt to make peace. Where in fact Palestinians can even have permits to work in Israel. The charge of racial discrimination is absurd and invented a Arabs and Blacks have far more rights in Israel than in any Arab nation. To then the most derisive terminology, colonizers. Where fundamentally many of those who migrated to Israel were fleeing from persecution. Even today through fear in France Jews are leaving to seek protection in the one place in the world they know they will have som. To define people as colonizers is about as appalling as the regressive s can get, when many of the Palestinians descendants also migrated to the area. Let alone the Palestinians do not want to have a single Jew to reside in the new Palestine state. Now that is ethnic ceasing and apartheid, as this would make all israeli Jews and Arabs as well, who have migrated to settlements, leave them if the 1967 borders was enforced. I mean yeah israel has ethnically cleansed Gaza of israeli Jews and yet after withdrawing, they were still attacked

So its easy to expose the lies and yet this racist organisation ignores many other countries in the region that deny self determination, lack equality etc hence why this statement is so apt

This campaign has a clear declared goal: To turn Israel into South Africa, in order to encourage "pressure from outside."

by Raggamuffin Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:19 am

If people want to boycott goods made in Israel or by Israelis, that's entirely up to them. I don't think there should be any judgmental attitudes towards those who don't though.

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:21 am

Raggamuffin wrote:If people want to boycott goods made in Israel or by Israelis, that's entirely up to them. I don't think there should be any judgmental attitudes towards those who don't though.

Up to everyone to make up their own minds. It worked for S.Africa and it's better than guns.

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:29 am

sassy wrote:
eddie wrote:Sorry sass, in a sentence please, how does buying Israeli products fund the murder of Palestinians?

I'll let them tell you in their own words, and it's far too complicated to say in a sentence, some things are.

The global movement for a campaign of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel until it complies with international law and Palestinian rights was initiated by Palestinian civil society in 2005, and is coordinated by the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), established in 2007. BDS is a strategy that allows people of conscience to play an effective role in the Palestinian struggle for justice.

For decades, Israel has denied Palestinians their fundamental rights of freedom, equality, and self-determination through ethnic cleansing, colonization, racial discrimination, and military occupation. Despite abundant condemnation of Israeli policies by the UN, other international bodies, and preeminent human rights organisations, the world community has failed to hold Israel accountable and enforce compliance with basic principles of law. Israel’s crimes have continued with impunity.

In view of this continued failure, Palestinian civil society called for a global citizens’ response. On July 9 2005, a year after the International Court of Justice’s historic advisory opinion on the illegality of Israel’s Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), a clear majority of Palestinian civil society called upon their counterparts and people of conscience all over the world to launch broad boycotts, implement divestment initiatives, and to demand sanctions against Israel, until Palestinian rights are recognised in full compliance with international law.

The campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) is shaped by a rights-based approach and highlights the three broad sections of the Palestinian people: the refugees, those under military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Palestinians in Israel. The call urges various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law by:

    Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;
    Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
    Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194.

The BDS call was endorsed by over 170 Palestinian political parties, organizations, trade unions and movements. The signatories represent the refugees, Palestinians in the OPT, and Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Boycotts target products and companies (Israeli and international) that profit from the violation of Palestinian rights, as well as Israeli sporting, cultural and academic institutions. Anyone can boycott Israeli goods, simply by making sure that they don’t buy produce made in Israel or by Israeli companies. Campaigners and groups call on consumers not to buy Israeli goods and on businesses not to buy or sell them.

Israeli cultural and academic institutions directly contribute to maintaining, defending or whitewashing the oppression of Palestinians, as Israel deliberately tries to boost its image internationally through academic and cultural collaborations. As part of the boycott, academics, artists and consumers are campaigning against such collaboration and ‘rebranding’. A growing number of artists have refused to exhibit or play in Israel.

Divestment means targeting corporations complicit in the violation of Palestinian rights and ensuring that the likes of university investment portfolios and pension funds are not used to finance such companies. These efforts raise awareness about the reality of Israel’s policies and encourage companies to use their economic influence to pressure Israel to end its systematic denial of Palestinian rights.

Sanctions are an essential part of demonstrating disapproval for a country’s actions. Israel’s membership of various diplomatic and economic forums provides both an unmerited veneer of respectability and material support for its crimes. By calling for sanctions against Israel, campaigners educate society about violations of international law and seek to end the complicity of other nations in these violations.

- See more at: http://bdsmovement.net/bdsintro#sthash.FN0nqARD.dpuf

It's using the same tactic as was used to stop apartheid in S. Africa.

PS As Didge is sitting there as a guest he'll probably come rushing back foaming at the mouth again, which is why I still have him on ignore, only so much bullshit can be tolerated.

Lol - Bingo, I must be psychic

obsess

past tense: obsessed; past participle: obsessed
preoccupy or fill the mind of (someone) continually and to a troubling extent.

Best contradiction yet ha ha

For someone who has me on ignore, sassy does a remarkable job of continually talking about me Laughing

What you really hate sassy is that i am exposing your lies, where you want your lies that seek to discriminate a nation, making your whole reasoning not only a sham, but the worst contradiction ever.
By advocating boycotting, you are then guilty of discrimination yourself, which by definition, makes the main aim of the BDS a complete contradiction, as well as an utter sham. This action to discriminate, then goes against the very charges they accuse Israel of, which even worse is trying to champion discrimination as justified, which fundamentally conflicts with equality.
So the BDS# cannot in any shape or form claim to stand for freedoms, self determination, equality etc, as they want to deny the Israeli people these very things. By this point alone and the fact it only targets israel with this contradictory discrimination, fundamentally proves the organisation is racist and actually instead champions prejudice and discrimination. They do not call for the boycott of many lack equality, self determination, freedom of rights, and in fact abuse human frights, further proves not only how racist this group is.

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:42 am

Here is an example of why clearly money talks and why groups claiming to champion human rights, is nothing more than shambolic. I mean how can a group who defends human rights, vote against a resolution that defends human rights. I am really beginning to wonder if and how much influence the Gulf states seem to have, because I am at a loss as to why such a group would vote against a resolution on antisemitism.

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Amnesty%2Bant

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Amnesty%2Bant

This pretty much says it all:

Amnesty International has rejected a motion to tackle the rise in antisemitic attacks in Britain at its annual conference.

The motion was table by Amnesty member Andrew Thorpe-Apps in March who said it was defeated at the International AGM on Sunday by 468 votes to 461.

Mr Trope Apps said: “It was the only resolution to be defeated during the whole conference.”

In March the charity confirmed the resolution calling for the group to “campaign against antisemitism in the UK and lobby the government to tackle the rise in attacks” had been accepted for discussion at the conference.

A spokesperson for Amnesty said: “We can confirm this resolution has been tabled and will be debated at the AGM.”

Mr Thorpe-Apps said he put forward the motion because “I recently joined and I believe passionately about human rights.

“I was aware that the organisation has been outwardly pro-Palestine in the past but it hasn’t stood up for the Jewish population and I think it would be good if they did that.

“I’m not Jewish myself but I’ve been appalled by what I’ve seen in the press facing the Jewish community and an organisation like Amnesty should really add their voice to that as they do with other human rights issues.”

Here is the text of the resolution that was defeated:

This AGM CALLS On AIUK to:
• Campaign against anti-Semitism in the UK.
• Lobby the UK Government to do more to tackle the rise in anti-Semitic attacks in Britain, whether physical or verbal, online or in person. The UK Government should monitor anti-semitism closely and periodically review the security of Britain’s Jewish population.

Proposer background notes:
It has been 70 years since the liberation of Auschwitz. Yet, even in 2015, European Jews are facing intolerance and abuse from anti-Semites.

There are now Jewish schools in the UK where the children are prepared for a potential terrorist attack, and there are Downing Street-style car bomb barriers to shield school buildings.

This year witnessed the murder of four Jews following the appalling Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris. In February a Jewish man was shot outside Copenhagen’s main synagogue following an attack at a free speech debate.

On 9th February, the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into AntiSemitism report was launched at Lambeth Palace. The report found that there was a 221% increase in hate crimes directed at Jews during the 2014 conflict between Israel and Gaza, when compared with the same period in 2013.

The Community Security Trust, which monitors anti-Semitic abuse and attacks, recorded 314 incidents in July 2014, the highest ever monthly total and more than the preceding six months combined. A quarter of these incidents took place on social media, and one third used Holocaust-related language or imagery.

The All-Party Parliamentary report recommends that:
• An independent council of non-Jewish figures is established to highlight trends in anti-Semitism, and make suggestions to the police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
• The UK Government fund more research into antiSemitism, report the findings to Parliament at least once per session about its work combating hate crime, and work with the CPS, police, and social-media companies to make online anti-Semitic abuse easier to report and stop.

I assume that the voting was by secret ballot, which means that while Amnesty publicly says that it is against antisemitism, in reality most members actually have no problem with attacks against Jews.

Which indicates that Amnesty's bias against Israel isn't a result of Israeli actions, but a result of the Jew-hatred among Amnesty's membership, a hate that they hide behind the false mantra of human rights.

Even more troubling is the fact that there are so few Amnesty members condemning this. The only tweets from the conference itself about this issue seem to have all come from Matt Provost:

Difficult to understand why #amnestyagm appear to believe Jewish people don't have human rights as no substantive arguments made
— Matt Provost (@m2provost) April 19, 2015

One would think that at least some of the 461 "human rights activists" who voted in favor would be publicly upset at Amnesty's obvious double standards, or how it has been taken over by Jew-haters. (Really, how else would you characterize people who vote against condemning Jew-hatred except that they support it?) If Amnesty really cared about human rights, this event would evince some soul-searching among its leadership.

Yet we are hearing practically nothing, even though the conference ended two days ago.

Amnesty claims to be for universal human rights - but Jews who are being attacked are apparently not human enough for these self-righteous hypocrites.

Amnesty International has zero credibility as a human rights group.

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:55 am

LGBT community wakes up to the BDS evil among it.

Columnist Jonathan Capehart at The Washington Post has a rather extraordinary column on the “anti-pinkwashing” near-riot at the Creating Change conference in Chicago on Friday night, January 22.
The column is extraordinary in that it reflects a growing realization even in the mainstream media that the thin line between rabid anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism has been crossed in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.
We covered the situation in our post, Jewish Voice for Peace helps disrupt Israeli LGBTQ group Sabbath event, which has video and images, and explains the tactic:

The pinkwashing charge is essential for BDS on U.S. college campuses because BDS has trouble squaring its support for regimes (including Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, not to mention most Arab countries) which abuse and persecute gays with BDS’s attempt to co-opt the progressive movement.
Hence, the pinkwashing claim that Israel’s promotion of its gay-friendly policies is actually a greater evil than the abuse heaped on gays in areas controlled by Israel’s enemies.

If you want to get a sense of how threatening the anti-Israel crowd was, view this video from a group that appears to support the protest. Imagine yourself in the conference room with hundreds of people screaming just outside the doors and trying to push their way past security. Also note the chants of “mic check” — a phrase made famous during the Occupy Wall Street protests:

Algemeiner magazine has a first-hand account:

“There were about 200 protesters outside the room. They blockaded the room, three of them entered the room, took over the stage, and the people from Jerusalem Open House were not allowed to speak,” explained Adrian Shanker, Executive Director of the Allentown, Pennsylvania-based, Bradbury-Sullivan LGBT Community Center. “They [Kala-Meir and Canning] were escorted out of the room so they would be safe, and we were all asked to leave through the service entrance for our safety.” …
“When you have Jewish people in a room blockaded by a lot of angry people yelling at them from outside, accusing them of being racists and blocking the exits so they can’t leave, it creates an unsafe environment for Jews, as our cultural history has shown over time,” said Mr. Shanker.

(added) Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum also wrote in Haaretz about what she witnessed:

On Friday January 22nd, after a peaceful Shabbat service, the JOH reception was due to begin, when about 200 protestors appeared, threatening and chanting and acting aggressively and calling for the eradication of Israel…
I’m a veteran of a number of very passionate and fierce protest actions. However, the mob-like feeling of the crowd was frightening and profoundly disturbing.
The hotel security locked the main door at a certain point to try and prevent more protesters from getting into the room, at which point protesters started pushing at a partition wall, to get in through the side, chanting “Shut it down! Shut it down!” I actually stood against the wall trying to prevent it being broken down….
For the Israelis, this situation triggered their memory of the stabber who attacked people in the Jerusalem Gay Pride march this past year. With the shouting getting louder, the partition wall being pushed, and the protesters aggressively approaching and taking the stage, it felt like things were spiraling out of control, and I escorted the Israelis out of the room through a side door.

Capehart writes, This show of anti-Semitism at an LGBT conference should bring change:

Reporting on the demonstrations paints a chaotic scene of provocation, invective and reaction, as do the videos. One video in particular was especially disturbing because of what was being chanted:
“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!”
[size]
Those words are alarming because Palestine can’t get “from the river to the sea” without wiping the Jewish state off the map.
What happened in Chicago was so disturbing that an extraordinary group of 41 national and grass-roots LGBT leaders have signed a letter to Task Force executive director Rea Carey expressing their deep concern. The idea for the two-page missive came from Roberta Kaplan, the attorney who successfully argued the marriage-equality case before the Supreme Court, and Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum, leader of the nation’s largest LGBT synagogue, who was at the conference and witnessed the demonstrations. They were joined by a host of Jewish and non-Jewish LGBT signatories, including Dana Beyer, Barney Frank, Vincent Jones, Andrea Shorter,Christine Quinn, the Rev. Neil G. Cazares-Thomas, Edie Windsor and Evan Wolfson.[/size]

The Open Letter to which Capehart was referrring is Letter to the LGBTQ Task Force:

…. More than one hundred protesters succeeded in physically intimidating and ultimately shutting down a reception organized by AWB featuring Israeli speakers from JOH. It has been reported — and videos taken contemporaneously confirm — that the protesters chanted slogans like “Palestine will be free from the river to the sea,” which necessarily suggests that the State of Israel should no longer exist. Another protester shouted, “We are going to challenge these Zionist racist motherfuckers.” There were also reports of altercations between the protesters and the reception guests. Witnesses saw a man get into a scuffle with the protesters and have his yarmulke knocked off his head. In a separate incident, there is a report of an individual who was called “kike.” ….
The targeted organizations’ reception was disrupted and shut down by protesters (including people not attending the conference) with such hostility and aggression that speakers and attendees at the event were justifiably terrified and felt physically threatened. We are united in our belief that what transpired at CC16 was dangerous, deeply disturbing, and given the use of epithets like “kike,” clearly anti-Semitic….
Given the concentrated and organized hostility that is so often displayed against Jewish and Israeli LGBTQ groups, and the stark rise in global anti-Semitism, it is even more important that we as a community promote civil and respectful debate. It is intellectually, politically and morally dishonest to claim that in the name of freedom, liberation, or some other progressive ideal, there is a right to target and exclude Jewish/Israeli groups, to foment physical intimidation and harassment, and to encourage anti-Semitism….

The National LGBTQ Task Force, which organized the conference, issued a statement National LGBTQ Task Force Condemns Anti-Semitism, which reads in part:
The following statement is being released by Rea Carey, National LGBTQ Task Force Executive Director, at the close of this year’s Creating Change Conference in Chicago, Illinois.
“I want to make this crystal clear: the National LGBTQ Task Force wholeheartedly condemns anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic statements made at any Task Force event including our Creating Change Conference. It is unacceptable. Hate speech of any kind is unacceptable whether it’s directed at Jewish or Muslim people. Let me also be clear regarding a reception planned and hosted by the group A Wider Bridge with guests from Jerusalem Open House that happened after the annual Shabbat service and a protest of that reception. We are deeply concerned about how the events of the evening unfolded — and have already initiated a review of our conference practices….
Michael Lucas at OUT magazine wrote, The Creating Change Protest Was Pure Anti-Semitism:
It could have been a scene from the early days of Nazi Germany: a raucous mob surrounding a gathering of Jews, chanting vicious slogans, screaming epithets, all the while their faces distorted by a hatred that is as irrational as it is stunning.
But this was not 1930s Berlin; it was the Hilton Chicago hotel just last week. Perhaps the so-called “progressive” liberal Jews and Israelis at the LGBT rights conference there thought that their prior public criticism of Israel would protect themselves from attack—a kind of verbal “Iron Dome” similar to Israel’s ingenious missile defense system.
They were sadly mistaken. The 200 thugs who showed up Friday at a Jewish reception were not interested in dialogue. They comprised an enraged gang filled with Jew-hatred, bent on intimidating and silencing LGBT Jews who have any connection to the state of Israel. And the sponsor of the “Creating Change Conference,” the National LGBTQ Task Force, knew full well the potential for violence, and did absolutely nothing to safeguard the lives of more than 100 participants at the reception….
As wild-eyed as they were ignorant, those in the horde cheered in support of one leader of the attack who yelled “We’re going to challenge these Zionist racist motherfuckers!”
They blocked those who wanted to attend the reception from entering, and held prisoner those already inside the conference room. Several entered the room and commandeered the stage.
Despite that, A Wider Bridge’s director of programs, Tyler Gregory, courageously tried to speak about the links between Israel’s LGBT community and those around the world. As can be seen near the end of this video, however, he was shouted down by the hysterical screaming of an anti-Israel hater….
It must be pointed out here that while criticism of Israeli government policies can be legitimate, the extreme left has crossed the line into anti-Semitism, a term from the 1800s that simply means hatred of Jews. The imbeciles yelling in the hallway of that Chicago hotel did not care that the leftist Jerusalem Open House works to protect Palestinian gays, because they don’t really care about the Palestinians. Their entire obsession is with the only Jewish country in the world, Israel, and their desire to see the Jewish state and its inhabitants destroyed.
Mark Segal, who was in attendance, recounted the experience, Calling out insensitive, anti-Semitic protest at Creating Change 2016:
I was at Creating Change to speak about my just-published memoir, which speaks of my numerous arrests and nickel rides fighting for social justice. In many of the cities on my book tour, a young LGBT person asks, “What can we do today to create activism?” So I appreciate many in that crowd at the protest who were there wanting to do something. Unfortunately, they weren’t given the facts. They were misled into what became an ugly anti-Semitic rally….
Many of us would gladly protest Israeli treatment of Palestinians — I myself support a Palestinian state, the so-called “two-state solution” — but that is different than supporting the Palestinian government that wants you put to death if you’re LGBT and live on the Gaza Strip. But trapping Jews in a room yelling what is as close to a death slogan as there is … Does that conjure something? Look up “Kristallnacht.” Insensitive at the very least.
It’s great to see this generation wanting to protest injustice, but they need to understand the issues and the lessons of our early fight for equality. Fight first for our community’s rights, since if we do not, nobody else will. LGBT Palestinians can’t speak out in their homeland, and your protests only embolden those who keep them from speaking out.
The Task Force acknowledged its mishandling of the situation and said it will work to prevent future incidents. While they may have been unprepared, protest organizers are the ones who need to apologize — not just to those in that room who were forced to leave through a back door for safety, but to the entire LGBT community for their insensitivity and for supporting those who support our oppression.
The term these individuals use is “pinkwashing.” From this time on, pinkwashing equals self-hating anti-Semites.
None of this is happenstance.
Physical intimidation is the key to recent BDS activity, with speakers being shouted down and disrupted. The twisted doctrine of “Intersectionality” of which anti-pinkwashing is one version, makes Israel — and Israel alone — the common link among unrelated wrongs and problems in the world. Intersectionality has become the intellectual foundation of the movement.
That the LBGT community is waking up to what BDS really is, is not surprising. It’s sad that is took an incident like this to make it happen.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/01/lgbt-community-wakes-up-to-the-bds-evil-among-it/

Glad to see many people are waking up to the vile racism of the BDS.
I mean as seen they lay the most unfounded claims onto Israel where nations that surround them fundamentally deny human rights, equality,m self determination etc of which to them are ignored, proving that the BDS movement has nothing to do with defending human rights at all.

Its about trying to abuse human rights, through racist discrmination

by eddie Mon Feb 01, 2016 5:03 pm

So after trying to absorb some of what's been said on here, didge....are you saying Obama is wrong to back this?

by Ben Reilly Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:14 pm

I wonder how many people are against labeling goods from Israel, but support labeling meat halal?

by Victorismyhero Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:03 pm

certainly not me

EVERYTHING, and I mean everything put up for sale via "normal retail" routes should be properly and adequately labeled as to origin

consumer choice..........

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:09 pm

eddie wrote:So after trying to absorb some of what's been said on here, didge....are you saying Obama is wrong to back this?

Wrong?
Balance would a good word her
Level playing field also.
Happy if this is how they want to label goods, but the same should apply with Cyprus, Tibet, Western Sahara etc

My other points are on the BDS, that does not campaign against any other country, only Israel
As seen above the group is a contradiction and fundamentally racist

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:29 pm

After years of dormancy, Columbia SJP, pairing up with Jewish Voices for PalestinianHegemony (which they call “Jewish Voices for Peace,” or JVP) is set to launch its BDS Campaign, ApartheidDivest.

When i told my friend in Tel Aviv about this, he cleverly pointed out, “this name makes it look like they’re divesting from the Palestinian Authority.”

Yeah, the Palestinian Authority. The real apartheid. You know, the place that won’t let even let Israeli Jews visit, and where selling or renting land to Jews is punishable by death.

It utterly baffles me that a group of Jews could support a group that believes in stabbing other Jews in the name of “resistance.”

My campus is littered with posters. positively LITTERED. Every bulletin board, every pole, every nook and cranny. This is clearly a heavily funded and highly organized operation.

Their “demands” are as follows:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;
2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194.

It looks nice, at a glance. The usual activist buzzwords, “end apartheid,” “international law,” “take down the wall,” are present.

These demands do not appear to support the dismantling of the Jewish state and its replacement with an Arab state, so I can see how naive Jews can get duped, even Jews who support Israel or a two-state solution. However, it is without a doubt that ApartheidDivest got their way, there would be no Israel. Let’s address their demands one by one.

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall.

a. In 2008, Ehud Olmert offered exactly that to get them to leave us alone. It was rejectedby Mahmoud Abbas. They want all or nothing.

The Palestinians don’t want a two state solution unless it is a segue into taking over the Jewish ancestral homeland and turning it into Arab land.

Before 1967, there were no “settlements” or “occupation” and we were attacked and libeled just the same.

Before 1967 we didn’t even have Jerusalem, they did, and they still attacked us. So it’s not about Jerusalem or al Aqsa either.

It’s about Arab colonizers wanting us to know our place as second-class dhimmis under a supremacist Arab rule.

b. The wall was only built in 2007 in response to terrorist attacks, as our only means of protection. Removal of the wall would give terrorists unfettered access to us, effectively weakening and maybe even ending the state of Israel.

The fact that people think the Wall and the Settlements are what the Palestinians are complaining about is a sign of their severe historical myopia. The “Wall” only came up in 2007, while the “Settlements” only happened 1995 under Oslo, which is legal under international law. The “Occupation” has only been in place since 1967. The Palestinians have been fighting us since 1948. So clearly the “wall,” the “settlements,” and the “occupation” are red herrings.

2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality

Done. Next?

Okay, a little technicality here.

By law, their equality is recognized. With two exceptions:

1) Arabs don’t have to do army service, giving them a huge advantage, a two to three-year head-start in life.

2) Jews have the right of return because it is our indigenous ancestral homeland while Arabs do not because it is not their ancestral homeland, and they have 27 other Arab countries, and a few dozen more Muslim countries, that are culturally identical or similar. The only reasons their Arab brethren aren’t letting Palestinian Arabs into their homeland is to use them as pawns against the Jews. They see the Jewish state as a blemish on their colonial empire.

The Arabs who did not leave in 1948 stayed and became Israeli Arabs, most of whom are peaceful, productive, and valued members of Israeli society.

3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194.

The Right of Return for Palestinians WILL mean the end of the State of Israel as the only sanctuary for persecuted Jews and therefore an end to Jewish self determination on our ancestral homeland.

The “right of return” is misleading. It sounds really nice, but the truth is that Israel did not “steal” land. The other side may say that 7% was owned by Jewish landowners who bought land before the Ottomans made it illegal to sell land to Jews in 1906 to discourage us from returning home, but that does not include the land bought by Keren Kayemet (aka JNF) which now belongs to the Israeli Government and forms a much larger chunk. It doesn’t include land in the uninhabitable desert that was owned by no one. And it doesn’t include the land that belonged to Arabs and either still belongs to Arabs or was bought by Jews since 1948.

Moreover, some important facts:

1) Jews have inhabited the land continuously for almost 4000 years. The only independent state on the land has been a Jewish one, the Kingdom of Judea.

2) The vast majority of Arabs (aka “Palestinians” a term coined by the British that used to refer to Jews living there until 1948 and only became used to describe Levantine Arabs in the 1960’s when they commenced the campaign to delegitimize Israel with ideas when they realized it wasn’t going to work militarily) migrated to the land of Israel in the 19th and 20th century, to follow the prosperity that Jewish farmers fleeing persecution brought to the land with new technology. These Muslims were encouraged to come by the Islamic Ottoman Empire, the colonial power that had taken over that land. The Ottomans did not want Jews to take their land back, they wanted enough Ottoman-supporters to offset the threat to their power in that region.

3) A small minority of Arabs were descended from those who came to the Levant during the 7th century Arab conquest. Yes, they are the descendants of colonialists, just like the Europeans who colonized America.

4) In 1948, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a Nazi and good friend and comrade of Adolf Hitler during WWII, instructed the Arabs in Israel to leave, in order to make way for the massacre by six Arab armies that was soon to take place. They were certain they would beat the Jews, most of whom were still reeling from the holocaust and relied on a makeshift army and old weapons. They told these Arabs that in a couple days, after the Arabs slay the Jews, they will be able to come home. This never happened, and the Arabs did not choose to come home and live under the rule of others. Their pride couldn’t take it.

5) Due to a higher birthrate, as well as a lack of constant genocidal attempts to remove them, there are far more Arabs who meet the criteria for the right of Return (and of course, proponents of the right of return desire to replace the Jewish state with an Arab one and would therefore loosen the already very loose criteria) than there are Jews in Israel. Thus, by democracy, Israel will no longer be a Jewish state. If opinion polls are any indication, Israel (which would certainly be renamed Palestine by that point, a name that means “invaders”) will no longer be a safe space for Jews. This means there would be no more Jewish self determination on our ancestral indigenous homeland. Therefore, the Palestinian “right of return” is a violation of indigenous rights.

The right of return will mean the end of Israel. Period. Although this list might not appear threatening to those who want a two state solution, keep in mind that the list is essentially supporting the dismantling of the Jewish state. There is a pervasive naivety among students, a trust in the Palestinian Authority, who have not shown us that they care about protecting Jewish lives, that is deeply misplaced.

As for violating international law? Here is an in-depth explanation of why this is not the case.

The BDS movement is not pro-Palestinian. It is anti-Semitic, targeting and singling out the only Jewish state in the world for a boycott. It makes Jewish and Israeli students feel unsafe and targeted on campus, and creates a climate of hate and incitement against Jews around the world.

The poster above and the post below are one and the same. Both rely on lies and libels against the Jewish People.

We must not let history repeat itself.

BDS Columbia: We have Students Supporting Israel. We have Aryeh. They will not relent, they will not back down. They will continue to defend our homeland against your campaign of lies, deceit, and vendetta. They will stop at nothing.

We are Israel, and we’ve survived much worse.

http://www.israellycool.com/2016/02/01/columbia-bds-youre-messing-with-the-wrong-woman/

by veya_victaous Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:10 pm

eddie wrote:So after trying to absorb some of what's been said on here, didge....are you saying Obama is wrong to back this?

He is saying 2 wrongs make everything Israel does right Rolling Eyes

He beleives that the world should ignore the evil commited by Israel because there is evil commtied in other places too.
Since we cannot do anything about tibet (we are not strong enough to force China) we should help fund Israeli Apathied so it is Equal to other cases of oppersion.
lets level the playign field, why shouldn't a 2 bit religous state that is a puppet to the west in the middle east be allowed to commit the same level of crimes and Oppression as the second most powerful military in the world Suspect

Really He just hate Islams so much that any enemey of Islam is a friend of His Rolling Eyes

by Guest Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:36 pm

Didge wrote:
eddie wrote:So after trying to absorb some of what's been said on here, didge....are you saying Obama is wrong to back this?

Wrong?
Balance would a good word here
Level playing field also.
Happy if this is how they want to label goods, but the same should apply with Cyprus, Tibet, Western Sahara etc

My other points are on the BDS, that does not campaign against any other country, only Israel
As seen above the group is a contradiction and fundamentally racist

Hi Eddie

Just wanted to clear up some porkies pies made by Veya

So many lies in one day that Veya has made unfounded accusations about me
Which means he is emoyionally crompremised and hates I am ignoring him
Which now because he has lied again, which is all some of the left seem capable of, as they cannot debate the points they instead seek to deligitimize a poster, as if that some how defears the points

It never does
For the record again, I have no objection to honest critcism of Israel. I have constantly stated I am against the settlements, and where justified condemn.
It very evident to most here I am highly critical of all the Abrahamic faiths, where to me all 3 are poo guides, as they are based on many prejudices, which any real libeal minded person would agree that they are prejudiced, that has a religious racism.

Now I have also stated it is wrong to condemn a whole nation and then to discriminate against them. Individuals should be targeted but is blatant racism to target a whole country with discrminating measure is a sham. So as there is far worse countries than Israel and that it by far within the Middle East has far more equality, self dertermination, freedom of though and speech, the only place in the Middle East that has laws protecting the rights of homosexuals etc. Yo how an organisation ignores all other nations, where as seen, many are far worse. That its simply racism governing such a movement. It does not champion, freedom, equality, human rights, because if it did, it would advocate many nations to be boycotted. Its fundementally insulting the many people who suffer human rights abuses, as they do in Iran, Syria,, Saudi etc. Their rights are of a lesser importance than the hate and discrmination promoted by the BDS at Israel

By advocating boycotting, the BDS are then guilty of discrimination ,, which by definition, makes the main aim of the BDS a complete contradiction, as well as an utter sham. This action to discriminate, then goes against the very charges they accuse Israel of, which even worse is trying to champion discrimination as justified, which fundamentally conflicts with equality.

If people want to reason why individuals should have boycotts, that is up for reasoning and maybe valid, but to claim Israel, who I admit is not perfect is comparable to SA Apartheiud, is disgusting on every level, where we see again how the intent is to sow the seeds of hate against Israel, by deligitimizing. If this was many Far Right groups targeting a single Muslim country the left would be the first to condemn such a practice

Any, now that Veya has lied so many times yet again today.
I have extended his time being ignored until the end of March

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:02 am

veya_victaous wrote:
eddie wrote:So after trying to absorb some of what's been said on here, didge....are you saying Obama is wrong to back this?

He is saying 2 wrongs make everything Israel does right

He beleives that the world should ignore the evil commited by Israel because there is evil commtied in other places too.
Since we cannot do anything about tibet (we are not strong enough to force China) we should help fund Israeli Apathied so it is Equal to other cases of oppersion.
lets level the playign field, why shouldn't a 2 bit religous state that is a puppet to the west in the middle east be allowed to commit the same level of crimes and Oppression as the second most powerful military in the world

Really He just hate Islams so much that any enemey of Islam is a friend of His

Plus 1000000!!

Spot on

by veya_victaous Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:25 am

I love that he cant stop reading my posts. Laughing

But to summarise the last post by didge
it is wrong to discriminate unless they are Palestinians, then they are all terrorists.
Anyone that says mean things about Israel or expects it to act like a humane society and not a war monger is Anti-Semitic, Veya is awesome and much smarter than didge.
Boycotting Israel is not justified to make a point, but Bombing Palestine to try a make a point is fully justified. Stop Discriminating against the Israel’s right to defend itself, it is only murdering countless civilians because it is "doing to others before they can do to it" as the Inspiration for their government and defenders Said.

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Quote-Hermann-Goering-shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later-and-158326

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Quote-Hermann-Goering-shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later-and-158326

And the Motto of the Zionists across the world
The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Quote-Hermann-Goering-education-is-dangerous-every-educated-person-158322

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Quote-Hermann-Goering-education-is-dangerous-every-educated-person-158322

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Hermann-goerings-quotes-1

I dont even care, I am just testing his ability to ignore Twisted Evil

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:27 am

Didge wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
Didge wrote:

Well its got one side a group that has never come to the arranged peace processes like with the Oslo accord in Hamas, and they have a charter to wipe all of Israeli and the Jews. The head of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah has stated before:

If they (Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide. (Daily Star, Oct. 23, 2002)

If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli. (New Yorker, Oct. 14, 2002)

ISIS to the north of them, facing enemies on multiple fronts, which is an nightmare strategically to defend against. Luckily there is some natural defense barriers but its a tall order to defend

To then now a unrestricted Iran, who even Kerry admits that now because of lifting the sanctions, more money will be able to get to these many terrorist groups at war with Israzel

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/

So what you should in fact be asking Ben, is what price limit is there on military spending when you have groups molded and defenders of the the Final solution. Where these people are sitting right on their door step?

So its really of no surprise that Israel spares no expense buying and researching the most advanced and best defensive and offensive capabilities.

What nobody ever asks is why Hamas has no defense capabilities where they build tunnels to attack Israel, but build no bomb shelters, command people to die after being warned by Israel. That is not a group in any way seeking peace. Its on a constant offensive war footing

I was merely answering eddie's question!

No problem Ben, I just merely filled in the many blank spaces you left in your reply to Eddie.

And I'll just fill in a few of the blanks that you left out.

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Zionis10

The Israeli’s have rejected peace offers 3 times turning down all of them. And two Israeli Prime Ministers lost their job by indicating that they were close to a deal. The follow on governments rejected the peace talks and called them off. And Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was shot dead for signing the Oslo Accords a process that Netanyahu has never seriously accepted

Political Hamas have never used the ancient Hamas Charter in any official publications and none of them had anything to do with it. Not so the Israeli government Likud Charter

The 'Peace & Security' chapter of the 1999 Likud Party platform rejects a Palestinian state.
"The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs

Your guy Daniel Greenwood is part of the Islamophobia network that is funded with millions of dollars distributed to Islamophobes like Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz and down to Greenwood and a few others. Greenwood was previously caught out posting fake images and stories particularly the one about the Muslim child brides. His latest rant is against Obama again who in the wake of Trump’s attacks on Muslims decided to visit a Mosque in Baltimore. He was out the traps like a shot attempting to link the Mosque he is visiting with terrorism with unverified data and tenuous links.

Read more about people propagating Islamophobia just like you are here...

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/religion/report/2015/02/11/106394/fear-inc-2-0/

The Elder of Ziyon is described by the Jewish Agency as a watchdog for Zionism and besides the blogger writes the stuff anonymously and you don’t like that.

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:31 am

Lie number 4,356 for today
For all other posters
It is wrong to also discrminate against Palestinians.

I am an advocate of equality, which means all should have equality, no matter their beliefs, ethnicity, sexuality, gender etc
So again for everyone else, if you single out a nation and only that nation for boycotting, you are backing discrmination, as based on equality, you would have to target all nations that abused human rights.
Just also seen some invented history where now Israel does not target military facilities that are targeted at Israel,, but is only retaliating to make a point. That says it all why some people are away with the faries

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:34 am

lol I see Irn is using revionist history also

Palestinian spokesmen from PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas on down have expressed their frustration with the Oslo peace process, charging that it failed and is dead, thanks to alleged Israeli intransigence, and that therefore they have no choice but to go to the United Nations to seek full membership and therefore statehood.

It should be noted at the outset that for the Palestinians to unilaterally declare statehood, or even to take the issue to the United Nations, would be a grave violation of the PLO's signed agreements with Israel, which explicitly barred such unilateral actions and appeals to outside parties. All of these agreements were also witnessed by outside parties including the United States, Russia, Norway, the EU, etc. If any of these countries now go along with material violations of agreements that they witnessed, that would raise serious questions about the worth of such agreements and the worth of such witnessing.

As for Palestinian frustration, they may indeed be frustrated with more than 18 years of on-again, off-again negotiations, but the question is with whom should they be frustrated – Israel, or their own leaders? For the fact is, just as the legendary Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once said about relations between the Arabs and Israel, "The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity," and there have been many statehood opportunities that Palestinian leaders have wilfully missed.

Why do the Palestinians refuse a negotiated peace? Because a negotiated peace means the end of the conflict, or at least promising to end the conflict and accept Israel. But the Palestinian leadership wants a state so that they can continue the conflict from a stronger position. In particular, they want a state and they want to keep pressing in every way for the "right of return" to Israel.

Israel would not agree to that in negotiations, which is why Palestinians want a state without negotiations, and without having to make any compromises.

In accord with this, at least three times the Palestinians have refused statehood when it was offered to them, most recently just a few years ago. Here are the details:

1. In 2008, after extensive talks, then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and presented a comprehensive peace plan. Olmert's plan would have annexed the major Israeli settlements to Israel and in return given equivalent Israeli territory to the Palestinians, and would have divided Jerusalem.

Numerous settlements including Ofra, Elon Moreh, Beit El and Kiryat Arba would have been evacuated, and Hebron would have been abandoned. Tens of thousands of settlers would have been uprooted. Olmert even says preliminary agreement had been reached with Abbas on refugees and the Palestinian claim to a "right of return."

Olmert recounted much of this in an interview with Greg Sheridan in the Australian newspaper:

From the end of 2006 until the end of 2008 I think I met with Abu Mazen more often than any Israeli leader has ever met any Arab leader. I met him more than 35 times. They were intense, serious negotiations.
On the 16th of September, 2008, I presented him (Abbas) with a comprehensive plan. It was based on the following principles.
One, there would be a territorial solution to the conflict on the basis of the 1967 borders with minor modifications on both sides. Israel will claim part of the West Bank where there have been demographic changes over the last 40 years...
And four, there were security issues. [Olmert says he showed Abbas a map, which embodied all these plans. Abbas wanted to take the map away. Olmert agreed, so long as they both signed the map. It was, from Olmert's point of view, a final offer, not a basis for future negotiation. But Abbas could not commit. Instead, he said he would come with experts the next day.]
He (Abbas) promised me the next day his adviser would come. But the next day Saeb Erekat rang my adviser and said we forgot we are going to Amman today, let's make it next week. I never saw him again. (Nov. 28, 2009)

And this is not just a self-serving claim by Olmert – Abbas, in an interview with Jackson Diehl of the Washington Post, confirmed the outlines of the Olmert offer and that he turned it down:

In our meeting Wednesday, Abbas acknowledged that Olmert had shown him a map proposing a Palestinian state on 97 percent of the West Bank -- though he complained that the Israeli leader refused to give him a copy of the plan. He confirmed that Olmert "accepted the principle" of the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees -- something no previous Israeli prime minister had done -- and offered to resettle thousands in Israel. In all, Olmert's peace offer was more generous to the Palestinians than either that of Bush or Bill Clinton; it's almost impossible to imagine Obama, or any Israeli government, going further.
Abbas turned it down. "The gaps were wide," he said. (May 29, 2009)

Ha'aretz published Olmert's map, showing a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza with a free passage route to connect them. The map, which also showed the Israeli territory that would have been swapped with the Palestinians in return for annexing some Israeli settlements to Israel, is reproduced below:

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Olmertmap_r

2. In the summer of 2000 US President Bill Clinton hosted intense peace talks at Camp David between Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat and Israeli leader Ehud Barak, culminating in a comprehensive peace plan known as the Clinton Parameters, which was similar to the later Olmert Plan, though not quite as extensive.

Despite the vast concessions the plan required of Israel, Prime Minister Barak accepted President Clinton's proposal, while Arafat refused, returned home, and launched a new terror campaign against Israeli civilians (the Second Intifada).

Despite the violence, Prime Minister Barak continued to negotiate to the end of his term, culminating in an Israeli proposal at Taba which extended the Clinton proposal. Barak offered the Palestinians all of Gaza and most of the West Bank, no Israeli control over the border with Jordan or the adjacent Jordan Valley, a small Israeli annexation around three settlement blocs balanced by an equivalent area of Israeli territory that would have been ceded to the Palestinians. As chief US negotiator Ambassador Dennis Ross put it in a FoxNews interview:

... the Palestinians would have in the West Bank an area that was contiguous. Those who say there were cantons, completely untrue. It was contiguous... And to connect Gaza with the West Bank, there would have been an elevated highway, an elevated railroad, to ensure that there would be not just safe passage for the Palestinians, but free passage. (Fox News, April 21, 2002)

According to Ambassador Ross, Palestinian negotiators working for Arafat wanted him to accept the Clinton Parameters, but he refused. In response to Brit Hume’s question as to why Arafat turned these deals down, Ross said:

Because fundamentally I do not believe he can end the conflict. We had one critical clause in this agreement, and that clause was, this is the end of the conflict.

Arafat's whole life has been governed by struggle and a cause. Everything he has done as leader of the Palestinians is to always leave his options open, never close a door. He was being asked here, you've got to close the door. For him to end the conflict is to end himself.

Here's the Taba map proposed by Israel, which was once again turned down by Arafat:

The Boycott Of Israel Just Got A Major Helping Hand – From President Obama Taba-map-2000

3. UN Resolution 181, the Partition Resolution, passed in November 1947, called for the creation of a Jewish state and an Arab state in the land which at that point was controlled by the British-run Palestine Mandate. All the Arab countries opposed the resolution, voted against it, and promised to go to war to prevent its implementation. Representing the Palestinians, the Arab Higher Committee also opposed the plan and threatened war, while the Jewish Agency, representing the Jewish inhabitants of the Palestine Mandate, supported the plan.

The Arabs and the Palestinians were true to their word and did launch a war against the Jews of Palestine, violating both Resolution 181 and the UN Charter. Much to the surprise of the Arab side, the Jews were able to survive the initial onslaughts and eventually win the war.

The fundamental fact remains that had the Arabs and the Palestinians accepted the Partition Resolution and not violated the UN Charter by attacking Israel, there would be a 63-year-old Palestinian state today next to Israel, and there would not have been a single Palestinian refugee.

Just as today, it seems that even in 1948 the Arab side was more concerned with opposing and attacking the Jewish state than with creating a Palestinian state.

Besides the above statehood opportunities, there were other notable opportunities that were missed too, such as the 1978 Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, which provided for Palestinian autonomy in the territories of the West Bank and Gaza. Egyptian President Anwar Sadat begged the PLO and Yasir Arafat to accept what he had negotiated with Israel, and to engage in talks with Israel. President Carter also called on moderate Palestinians to come forward and join the Cairo conference. Unfortunately Arafat refused and did everything he could to undermine Sadat and the Camp David Accords, with PLO gunmen even murdering West Bank Palestinians who supported Sadat's approach.

While the Palestinian people have much to be frustrated about, the object of their frustration should be not Israel, but their own leaders, who have thrown away opportunity after opportunity to establish the Palestinian state they claim to desire above all else.

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:39 am

Are all these statements I posted wrong then? You missed a lot didn't you Laughing

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:41 am

Odd, as here is whay I said
ol I see Irn is using revionist history also

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:45 am

Didge wrote:Odd, as here is whay I said
ol I see Irn is using revionist history also

I'll ask you again. Are all these statements I posted wrong then?

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:46 am

Irn Bru wrote:
Didge wrote:Odd, as here is whay I said
ol I see Irn is using revionist history also

I'll ask you again. Are all these statements I posted wrong then?

And you have already had my answer

Its revisionist history

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:54 am

Didge wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:
Didge wrote:Odd, as here is whay I said
ol I see Irn is using revionist history also

I'll ask you again. Are all these statements I posted wrong then?

And you have already had my answer

Its revisionist history

This was your answer...

Odd, as here is whay I said
ol I see Irn is using revionist history also

So you're claiming that all these statements are lies then?

Correct?

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:58 am

Like i said its revionist history

It seem you have no idea what that is, here let me hekp you

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 1:01 am

Didge wrote:Like i said its revionist history

It seem you have no idea what that is, here let me hekp you

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism

No Didge. These statements are correct and are accompainied by citations to prove their accuraracy.

If you can't accept that then you are no more than a propogator of Israeli propaganda.

Job Done

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 1:05 am

Irn Bru wrote:
Didge wrote:Like i said its revionist history

It seem you have no idea what that is, here let me hekp you

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism

No Didge. These statements are correct and are accompainied by citations to prove their accuraracy.

If you can't accept that then you are no more than a propogator of Israeli propaganda.

Job Done

Which shows how poorly you understand history

Revisionist history is just different stance or views to events

Both will claim their history is right

That is what you failed to grasp and is funny you went comepletly off the wrong tangent.

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 1:09 am

Didge wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:
Didge wrote:Like i said its revionist history

It seem you have no idea what that is, here let me hekp you

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism

No Didge. These statements are correct and are accompainied by citations to prove their accuraracy.

If you can't accept that then you are no more than a propogator of Israeli propaganda.

Job Done

Which shows how poorly you understand history

Revisionist history is just different stance or views to events

Both will claim their history is right

That is what you failed to grasp and is funny you went comepletly off the wrong tangent.

I understand history alright and a whole lot more. And I can understand when someone just can't accept reality when it's placed right in front of them - that's you.

You've had a free run on here over the last few days posting away with blatant propaganda.

Just accept the statements are true and correct and I'll let you go at that.

Fair enough?

by Guest Tue Feb 02, 2016 1:13 am

I take them as nothing more than revisionist history

So best you learn to undeestand that

lol Free run?

To be honest debating with you Irn is like I say not even a challenge any more, you are always to driven by your emotions

Have a good evening

night

by Irn Bru Tue Feb 02, 2016 1:15 am

Didge wrote:I take them as nothing more than revisionist history

So best you learn to undeestand that

lol Free run?

To be honest debating with you Irn is like I say not even a challenge any more, you are always to driven by your emotions

Have a good evening

night

Yes, I can see you're emotions are running high right enough Laughing

Cya in around ten minutes....possibly?

by Raggamuffin Tue Feb 02, 2016 9:03 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:I wonder how many people are against labeling goods from Israel, but support labeling meat halal?

Do you mean people generally or on this forum? Do you have any reason to wonder such a thing?

by Sponsored content