How the American Studies Association shot itself and the BDS movement in the foot
Greetings from Boston, where I am working for the next week or so.
The US House and Senate passed and sent to President Obama on Wednesday Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) which constitute by far the most effective way of combating BDS: They
bar trade agreements with countries that boycott Israel. That's you, Europe!
Congressman Peter Roskam (R-IL), who has been instrumental in anti-BDS legislation, issued the following statement today:
Today, Congressman Peter Roskam (IL-06), co-chair of the
House Republican Israel Caucus, released the following statement after
House and Senate passage of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) legislation,
which includes bipartisan language Roskam authored to combat the
Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. These
provisions, which were originally introduced as Roskam’s H.R. 825, the
U.S.-Israel Trade and Commercial Enhancement Act, were unanimously
adopted into the House and Senate versions of TPA in April.
“Today, for the first time in nearly four decades, Congress sent
legislation to the President’s desk to combat efforts to isolate and
delegitimize the State of Israel. The recent wave of boycotts
originating in Europe, including French telecom company Orange’s
decision this month to sever ties with Israel, demands a robust response
from the United States. This is that response. The bipartisan TPA
provisions I authored are simple: if you want free trade with the United
States, you can’t boycott Israel. After today, discouraging economic
warfare against Israel will be central to our free trade negotiations
with the European Union. Congress will not be complicit in the
marginalization of our ally Israel by watching these attacks from the
sidelines. Instead, we have decided to fight back against the BDS
movement and ensure the continued strength of the U.S.-Israel
relationship.”
Those trade provisions, however, did not just happen.
The Jerusalem Post
accurately traces the passage today of trade legislation with strong
anti-boycott language directly to the ASA boycott (emphasis added):
“Four decades have passed since Congress last agreed on a
law pushing back against boycotts of Israel worldwide. That streak was
broken by the Senate Wednesday, at a moment perhaps prescient, as
European capitals consider new measures to highlight and punish Israel’s
continued “occupation” of the West Bank….
TPA, which passed through the Senate and landed on the president’s
desk, includes roughly 150 trade negotiating objectives – requirements
of the president, as mandated by Congress, to raise specific US
priorities in its negotiations.
One of those objectives is to push back against efforts within the EU
to sponsor the growing Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement
against Israel….
The process began
with a December 2013 op-ed in Politico Magazine written by Michael Oren,
then Israel’s ambassador to the United States, which challenged
Congress to respond to the American Studies Association’s decision to
boycott Israel – by no means the first protest of its kind, but an early sign of what was to come from similar organizations based in Europe.
A letter of support circulated around Capitol Hill, signatures were
collected, and a bill was ultimately passed reinforcing Congress’s
commitment to academic freedom. But the concern lay in the tactic.
What if measures taken by ASA were used by other organizations
against Israel as a form of economic warfare? Several congressmen,
including Roskam, made note that the first free trade agreement signed
by the US was with Israel. They sought a legislative solution with
teeth: a bill that would establish any future trade pact with foreign
nations boycotting Israel as being in direct contravention of the
existing US-Israel Free Trade Agreement.
That’s right folks, the ASA boycott may not have hurt Israel much,
but it led directly to the trade legislation which has dealt a damaging
blow to the BDS movement.
For more on the ASA's pivotal role in this legislation,
read the whole thing.
Labels: American Studies Association, BDS, boycott divest sanction, boycott Israel, epic fail, free trade
Shame upon shame
The Virginia State Bar Association is
looking worse by the hour. The bar's putrid leadership has apparently hijacked the entire organization without seeking anyone else's opinion (Hat Tip:
Leah P).
Let me make five general points:
1) I’m proud to say that many, inside the State Bar and beyond,
reacted with vigor to the timing and content of the announcement.
Several petitions have been organized, to rescind the cancellation (I
think it’s too late for that), to obtain the resignation of the VSB
president, or at least to elicit a full apology. B’Nai Brith
International, among many other groups, has condemned the State Bar for its action. Even the Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates has chimed in.
Most importantly, many individual VSB members have written to the Bar
to express their outrage; several have been kind enough to send me
copies of their letters. Here’s an excellent example, from Jonathan
Schraub, an attorney in McLean whom I did not have the honor of knowing
before this episode brought us together. Mr. Schraub’s letter will be
published in the next issue of the Virginia Lawyers’ Weekly and thereby brought to the attention of every member of our state Bar:
AN OPEN LETTER TO VIRGINIA STATE BAR PRESIDENT KEVIN E. MARTINGAYLE
Re: Your decision to cancel the mid-year meeting in Israel
Dear President Martingayle
Along with many others I was shocked, outraged and deeply disappointed to receive your blast e-mail late Friday evening
announcing a previously undisclosed intention by the leadership of the
VSB to cancel the planned, mid-year meeting in Jerusalem, Israel. The
substance of the decision, the secretive manner in which it was arrived
at and the cavalier manner in which it was announced all merit
condemnation and call into question your continued ability to serve as
President of the Bar.
According to your email, the decision to cancel
the planned trip was based on “objections” by “certain members of the
Virginia State Bar and other individuals.” Neither the Bar members nor
the “certain other individuals”, presumably not Bar members, are
identified. Indeed, this entire decision is cloaked in a veil of secrecy
and opacity unbecoming of the Bar. Had you provided any measure of
disclosure regarding your decision, you would have advised VSB members
that the decision was based on a petition that, at last report, had 33
signatures. (The Virginia State Bar has over 50,000 members). The
petition, although citing reports form the US State Department regarding
border security measures in Israel, reaches inflammatory conclusions
regarding discrimination based on citations to such marginal, committed
anti-Israeli sources as the website “Electronic Intifada”.
Choosing to announce it late on a Friday evening and
without any prior hint that the matter was even being considered and
without any input from VSB members, speaks loudly to the underlying
discomfort that VSB leadership must have (and should have) felt at
adopting this position. What exactly was the influence that the 33
signatories to the petition had over the VSB leadership – not to mention
the “others” who presumably are not even constituents of the VSB? The
VSB is an arm of the Virginia Supreme Court and the Virginia
Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has a state sponsored commission to
promote the expansion of Virginia/Israeli ties (i.e., The Virginia
Israel Advisory Board). What exactly was the mandate that the VSB felt
it was under to unilaterally sever the ties of the Virginia mandatory
bar association with the State of Israel and announce it as a fait
accompli? Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate, if the issue was to
be considered at all, to publicly announce it, and put in place a method
for debating and ultimately voting to secure the clear sense of the
membership of the VSB? Instead, the decision was made in secret, with
no disclosure in the letter announcing the decision as to what the
thought process (if any) had been, who had been involved and what
competing arguments (if any) were considered. Nothing. Just an
intentionally vague communique that reeked of secrecy, politics and fear
of full disclosure and debate.
Many of us are left to wonder if this decision is
intended as a deliberate endorsement of the “Boycott, Divestment, and
Sanctions” (BDS) movement targeting the state of Israel. Certain
elements—the complete lack of transparency or open deliberation, the
late Friday afternoon announcement, and the reliance on
unabashed organs of the BDS movement like “Electronic Intifada”—point in
that direction. The BDS campaign is biased, unapologetically one-sided,
naïve at best and, other than the reckless participation by an
established group such as the VSB, historically viewed as marginal,
unsuccessful and for many who promote it, anti-Semitism in a thinly
disguised, modern costume.
If endorsing the BDS campaign was your intention, then the VSB
has elected to join hands with a truly radical movement whose openly
declared ambition is the end of the state of Israel. We know that the
BDS movement has no concern for promoting any objective, fairly applied
standard of concern over “unacceptable” practices to any state or
country other than Israel and the question is always, “why is that the
case?” Sadly, history tells us that the concern is not over
humanitarian or moral issues at all but is thinly disguised anti-Jewish,
anti-Semitic and anti- Israel propaganda. And with respect to the BDS
movement in particular, there is no need to rely on historical
inference. From a resolution urging expulsion of all Jewish students at a
South African university, to the removal of all Israeli academics from a
journal in the UK, to efforts to block the appointment of a Jewish
student to a university government position in California, to
accusations that Jewish organizations were funded by money supposedly
embezzled from failing financial firms, the BDS movement has been
implicated in naked anti-Semitism on too many occasions across too long a
period for there to remain any doubt about its character. In each of
the above situations BDS defenders rushed to complain that it was only
being accused of anti-Semitism because they were “critical of Israel.”
This is nonsense. Being part of an organization like the VSB which as
you state is “an agency that strives for maximum inclusion and equality”
means having at least a minimal understanding that deciding to stand
shoulder-to-shoulder with a movement that the global Jewish community
has long warned stands as amongst the primary purveyors of anti-Semitic
hatred, is a serious, indeed defining, step for the VSB. Did you give
any thought as to whether the BDS position fairly reflects the views and
beliefs of your membership? Or were you simply pandering to the 33
members and “others” who for whatever reason had your ear?
Your letter references “unacceptable discriminatory policies and
practices pertaining to border security” in Israel. These “policies and
practices”, according to your letter, “affect travelers to the nation”
Is it really your contention (and now that of the VSB) that meetings are
not held on a regular basis in Israel by hundreds of groups – including
the ABA and academic groups with Arab participants? What did you do to
determine whether the proposed VSB meeting would, in fact, have faced
any “discrimination” with regard to access by any and all participants?
With whom did you speak before reaching your conclusion that there is in
fact “unacceptable discriminatory practices”? To whom and in what
manner is it “unacceptable”? While there is no question but that Israel
has strict policies and procedures regarding access to the country, is
it really your position (and now the position of the VSB) that such
measures are so obviously unnecessary to protect legitimate security
concerns such that they can be dismissed as a mere pretext for
discrimination? Do you similarly demand that all policies and procedures
and laws and social mores of each state in the United States and each
country overseas in which the VSB holds meetings or sponsors trips be
vetted for “objectionable” content? Or is it just Israel? Israel
remains the most vibrant democracy in the Middle East. The Arab-Israeli
political party coalition now occupies the third largest voting bloc in
the Knesset. While that society is not perfect and many of us do not
agree with the policies of the present Israeli administration (and feel
free to say so), anyone who maintains a modicum of objectivity and is
not fronting for an ideologically anti-Israel position, will recognize
that Israeli policies are borne of the real politick faced by that
country. If they are more stringent and focused than those of
Switzerland or Sweden or Canada, it is because the reality of life is
different in Israel than in most other places.
This, of course, raises the other possibility—that the
endorsement was unintentional, and that you did not realize what this
decision would mean in the context of placing the VSB imprimatur on a
global movement seeking to isolate and dismantle the world’s sole Jewish
state. This possibility, too, does not inspire confidence. Had you
simply raised this issue publicly with the Virginia Bar, deliberated
openly rather than issue a back-office decree, these concerns would have
raised and the Bar could have avoided this catastrophe altogether. To
be blunt, this is why transparency matters—so one does not blunder into
controversies that could easily be avoided, so that genuine problems can
be resolved in a manner attentive to the concerns of all the relevant
stakeholders, and so that when the decision is finally made everybody
can feel that their voice was heard and their views fairly considered.
That did not occur here, by all appearances because you knew that your
decision would be met with justified outrage.
By adopting this position, the VSB has jumped with both feet into
the most extreme edges of the political spectrum on the
Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Either it intended this result, or it
didn’t. Neither possibility has anything positive to say about VSB
leadership. And regardless of what your intentions were, the VSB, by
aligning itself with the BDS movement which seeks to isolate Israel –
and only Israel - has instead succeeded in isolating itself. Although
it did not have the courage to debate the issue before deciding, the
position it has taken is far removed from the mainstream of public
opinion in this country and, without any doubt that of the Commonwealth
of Virginia and the rank and file VSB members.
It is beyond sad that, if allowed to stand, this will be the
legacy of the VSB – and of the Martingayle administration in
particular. It is outrageous form the point of view that the VSB is a
mandatory membership organization. As a practicing attorney, I am
obligated to be a member. I am obligated to pay dues to support the
policies and programs administered by you and your administration. But
I, along with many others I am sure, will now do all we can to distance
ourselves from the VSB and to cease any and all participation in VSB
programs. It is simply no longer an association that merits the support
of its members.
Shame on you President Martingayle and on the very small clique
of radical supporters with whom you have chosen to throw your lot and
reputation – and by coerced reference, the lot and reputation of the
VSB.
Read the whole thing. (Yes, that's just point 1).
Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, boycott Israel, Electronic Intifada, lawyers, Virginia
Jewish Community Federation of Richmond (Virginia) blasts State Bar Association for boycotting Israel
The Jewish Community Federation of Richmond (Virginia) has issued a powerful response to the State's Bar Association's decision to cancel a trip to Israel, essentially abiding by the diktat of the European-Arab-Muslim Boycott-Divest-Sanction movement.
I am embedding the response below:
Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, boycott Israel, lawyers, Virginia
Virginia State Bar boycotting Israel
I've been way too busy with work to post very much. But this morning, I awoke to an email from one of my law colleagues that was a bit surprising.
One of my law firms is having a meeting in May, part of which is scheduled to take place in Virginia. This morning, I had an email from one of my colleagues attaching a link to
this article from the Times of Israel reporting that the State Bar Association of Virginia has canceled a November seminar in Israel, claiming that 'many' of its members will not be allowed in because... wait for it... they are Arabs or Muslims.
In a letter sent late Friday night, Kevin Martingayle, president of the Virginia State Bar, wrote, “Upon review of US State Department advisories and other research, and after consultation with our leaders, it has been determined that there is enough legitimate concern to warrant cancellation of the Israel trip and exploration of alternative locations.”
Martingayle told the Washington Times that the trip was canceled due to concerns that “many of its members” would not be let in to Israel.
The concerns appear to stem from a change.org petition by the Concerned Members of the Virginia State Bar, which said, “It is without question that Israel employs discriminatory entry and exit policies for US citizens, particularly against visiting Arab- and Muslim-Americans.”
The petition also said, “As members of the VSB, we have taken an oath to uphold our profession’s highest ideals. At the core of these ideals is the belief that no person or group should be subjected to differential treatment on the basis of their immutable characteristics. The location of this year’s Seminar, however, strikes at the heart of our profession’s ideals.”
The petition was closed after the decision to cancel the trip. It had 39 signatures.
Writing in his group blog in the Washington Post, the Volokh Conspiracy's David Bernstein has
a few reactions.
(1) The American Bar Association has recently held meetings in Israel, for example here and here [update: along with hundreds of international conferences that are held in Israel every year, including, for example, a conference on Arabic literature with Muslim attendees from abroad.] Virginia has a state agency called the Virginia Israel Advisory Board “that
proactively serves as the bridge and facilitator between Israeli
companies and the Commonwealth of Virginia.” The idea that either the
state bar as an attorney organization or as a state agency has some
obligation to avoid Israel is nonsense. Surely Martingayle and
colleagues can’t be so naive and out-of-touch to think that the concerns
raised are not part of the broader divestment, sanctions, and boycott
movement meant to delegitimize Israel.
(2)
If the Virginia State Bar is in effect boycotting Israel, I, and I
suspect many others, will henceforth be boycotting the State Bar, in my
case beyond what is necessary to assist my students, which is my
professional obligation. I would hope that no Virginia attorneys who are
supporters of Israel will attend whatever alternative venue the State
Bar settles on.
(3) As near as I can tell, the only public discussion of all this before Martingayle’s letter was a petition circulated three days ago by anonymous “Concerned Members of the Virginia State Bar”
that, as of this writing, has received a grand total of thirty-four
signatures. It’s hard to imagine that the Martingayle and colleagues
canceled a planned event that already had a hotel booked, a CLE program, and even optional tours set up based on those objections. Who are the “other individuals” mentioned by Martingayle who objected?
(4) Relatedly, as a state agency, the Virginia State Bar is subject to FOIA.
If no enterprising journalist is already FOIAing the relevant
correspondence that led to this decision, I’m sure somebody else will
be.
UPDATE: The email Martingayle sent
out is timestamped 9:59 pm on March 27. Yet somehow the virulently
anti-Israel “Electronic Intifada” managed to have a copy of the letter
on its Facebook page and
website more than two hours earlier. Inquiring minds want to know who
had a copy of this letter before it was sent out to bar members at
large, and why. [Comments below suggest that while I and several others I
know received the 9:59 time stamp, other members of the bar received
the same message time-stamped earlier. If so, mystery solved.]
Hmmm.
Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, boycott Israel, lawyers, Virginia
Attention BDS'ers
We'll have a
collection box at your next BDS meeting.
Labels: BDS, boycott Israel, Israeli high tech
#BDS_Fail: Threats to boycott Israel are nothing but a bluff
I guess that those videos about what boycotting Israel would really mean are being taken seriously. Reuters reports that threats to boycott Israel if there is no deal with the 'Palestinians' are
nothing but bluff.
"The boycott is being used like a bogeyman, a
scary story you tell a child at night," said Jonathan Medved, CEO of
OurCrowd, a crowdfunding platform looking to provide venture capital to
Israeli companies.
"The truth is
that Israel is a world leader in water technology, next-generation
agriculture, cybersecurity, healthcare innovation and start-ups. What
sane person is going to walk away from that?" he said, speaking by
telephone during a visit to South Africa to seek out potential partners.
BDS is a failure everywhere. Yes, even in the EU.
EU diplomats say business with firms operating
in the settlements, such as skincare company Ahava, represent less than
1 percent of all Israeli-EU trade, which last year totaled $36.7
billion, up from $20.9 billion a decade earlier.
The
European Union matters because it is Israel's largest trading partner
and it is the only place where murmurings of sanctions have so far been
raised outside the Arab world, where only Egypt and Jordan have formal
ties with Israel.
However, Europe
is not united on how to deal with Israel and has not yet even agreed to
introduce EU-wide labeling to make clear if goods come from settlements,
much less anything more radical along the lines suggested by Lapid.
"There
is no EU boycott," the president of the European parliament, Martin
Schultz, said this month during a visit to Jerusalem during which he
questioned whether the 28-nation bloc would want to penalize Israel if
the U.S.-backed talks failed.
EU governments say it is up to each firm to decide its own investment strategy.
While a handful of states, including Britain,
Germany and the Netherlands, discourage links with the settlements,
there are no consequences for ignoring that steer, beyond the "potential
reputational implications" a British Foreign Office agency warns of on
its website.
Schultz said he was
"not convinced about economic pressure", and also cast doubt on the need
for clear labeling of settlement goods that would allow consumers to
chose.
"Does it carry such a large weight that it could really change something?" he asked reporters.
...
However, divestment moves by the likes of Danske Bank appear to be the exception rather than the norm.
Germany's
biggest lender Deutsche Bank AG denied reports last week that it was
set to boycott Israeli banks, while the giant Dutch pension fund ABP
announced this month that after a review, it saw no need to cut ties
with Israeli banks.
All the while,
foreign firms continue to pour into Israel. According to the latest
Bank of Israel data, direct investment was $10.51 billion in the first
nine months of 2013, up from $9.5 billion for the whole of 2012. Exports
to Europe rose 6.3 percent last year.
And as those videos keep pointing out, you can't really boycott Israel, even if you want to.
Global
brands such as Google, Cisco, Microsoft, Twitter, Apple, AOL and
Facebook have all invested in Israel, so, like it or not, users of
computers, smartphones and apps could well be supporting Israeli
engineering.
"All the talk about
boycotts has not so far caused any damage to our economy," Uriel Lynn,
president of the Israeli Chambers of Commerce, told Reuters.
"Israel
has gone through much harsher boycotts in the past. For example, we did
not have commercial relations with China for years, and for a time we
could only buy crude oil from Mexico and Egypt. So we can definitely
withstand boycotts."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Labels: BDS, boycott Israel, Buycott Israel, European anti-Semitism
If you can't respond, smear
Shavua tov, a good week to everyone from Boston.
I've talked many times about my college alma mater, Bir Zeit on the Hudson. But I haven't talked much about the place that turned me into a political conservative - uber Leftist New York University. I went to law school at NYU from 1980-84 (I was JD/MBA - hence the extra year), and during the 1980 Presidential campaign - in which I backed Ronald Reagan against the Jew-hating Jimmy Carter - I became a political conservative because of the complete tone-deafness of NYU's 'liberal' atmosphere to anything that wasn't the party line.
The driving forces behind the American Studies Association's
boycott of Israel are apparently all at NYU. Richard Behar tried reasoning with them.
This was the response he got.
Five hours after my piece appeared online I received an email from
that person. It was not what I expected. Here it is, in its entirety.
“Curtis Marez does not teach at UC Davis,” Prof. Duggan’s email
began, in a reference to the outgoing ASA president. “Our conference,”
she continued, “was not held in San Diego.”
When I read this, I was mortified. Stupid, piddling errors like these
don’t belong in an article. But I had already made the corrections long
before her email. (In the first case, the link to the college
where Marez teaches was correct, but not his school’s name. In the
second matter, I had incorrectly placed the conference in the city where
Marez, the boycott resolution’s spokesperson, works and lives.)
OK. What else did I get wrong? The rest of the email said as follows:
“I could go on. But the number of errors in your obsessive screed are so numerous…. [ellipses in original].”
Wait a minute. Two minor errors, fixed hours before her email, she
points out to me, but there were “numerous” other errors that she can’t
bring herself to articulate? What were those errors?
Was my article an “obsessive screed?” I suppose that’s a value
judgment, though I feel it’s a little harsh. But as I continued to read
the email, that was a compliment compared to what came next:
“Do you realize that you sound, well, unbalanced? Which is a shame
because I hear you wrote some really great pieces about Scientology! I
hope you can take xanax and relax a bit?”
When you can’t refute the facts, smear and insult, I guess. (I responded
in kind, for which I immediately apologized. There was no reciprocity.)
Read the whole thing. Some academic discussion....
Labels: academic boycott, American Studies Association, boycott Israel
Lieberman joins Kerry defenders, most Israelis disagree
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman can't even get his picture taken with US Secretary of State John FN Kerry, but on Friday he
rushed to Kerry's defense... on orders from Prime Minister Netanyahu?
Amid criticism from the Israeli Right about US diplomacy in the region,
Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman proclaimed US Secretary of State John
Kerry as "a true friend of Israel," warning that it was not wise to
damage relations with allies.
...
While Liberman said he supported Kerry's efforts to reach a two-state
solution, he said he was not willing to pay any price for achieving
such a deal and Israel's security concerns must be addressed.
The foreign minister said he agreed that land and population swaps should be part of a peace deal.
There's a reason that praise was a bit lukewarm: Most Israeli Jews disagree. In fact,
more than two thirds believe that recent criticism of Kerry is justified.
Seventy percent of Israeli Jews do not believe the US can be relied upon
to maintain key Israeli interests and security requirements in the
American- brokered agreement being drafted with the Palestinians, a
Geocartography Institute poll taken this week found.
When the pollsters asked respondents whether they trusted the US under
President Barack Obama to maintain Israel’s interests in a deal, 23%
said definitely no, 25% said no, 22% said not completely, 17% said yes,
8% said definitely yes and 5% had no opinion.
Asked whether they agreed with recent criticism of US Secretary of State
John Kerry by top Israeli officials, 67% said yes and only 32% said
no.
But among the respondents who answered affirmatively, 13% said Israeli
officials should be careful not to criticize the US publicly.
The poll - which only polled Jewish Israelis - showed that Israeli Jews are concerned about the possibility of a boycott, but they're not buying into Kerry's 'peace deal.'
Labels: Avigdor Lieberman, Binyamin Netanyahu, boycott Israel, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Naftali Bennett
Wow! Abe Foxman blasts Kerry
Abe Foxman, the Chairman of the Anti-Defamation League and a symbol of mainstream American Jewish leadership has blasted US Secretary of State John FN Kerry for his
threats against Israel.
The full text reads:
Dear Mr. Secretary:
We are writing to
you at this moment with great respect for the exemplary and devoted
efforts you are putting in to try to move peace forward between the
Israelis and the Palestinians.
We have all witnessed
the suffering and loss on all sides as the conflict continues year
after year, decade after decade. We welcome your perseverance and
optimism in trying to accomplish something that has eluded others time
and again.
It is with this perspective in mind that
we regretfully read of your comments this past weekend in Munich. In
speaking about the price Israel will pay if the peace talks break down
and Israel is blamed, you may have thought you were merely describing
reality. But as the key player in the process, the impact of your
comments was to create a reality of its own.
Describing
the potential for expanded boycotts of Israel makes it more, not less,
likely that the talks will not succeed; makes it more, not less, likely
that Israel will be blamed if the talks fail; and more, not less, likely
that boycotts will ensue. Your comments, irrespective of your
intentions, will inevitably be seen by Palestinians and anti-Israel
activists as an incentive not to reach an agreement; as an indicator
that if things fall apart, Israel will be blamed; and as legitimizing
boycott activity.
What is particularly troubling
about your comments is the absence of similar tough talk about the
consequences for Palestinians should the talks fail. We make this
comment not in search of some theoretical balance. Rather, its absence
suggests a historical amnesia about why there has been no peace and no
solution all these years. Israel always must be willing to compromise
for peace and at different times it is not unreasonable to ask Israel to
do more.
But the core of the conflict was and
remains Palestinian unwillingness to accept Israel's legitimacy and
permanence as a Jewish state. That is why the Palestinians rejected the
1947 partition, that is why they rejected recognizing Israel after the
1967 war, and that is why Israeli offers at Camp David in 2000 and
Annapolis in 2008 were rejected or allowed to go unanswered. It is
Palestinians who must hear the message that not only has their
rejectionism been the major obstacle to peace, but it has also been the
main source of their suffering and misery over the years. It is time for
them to make the qualitative leap toward peace and acceptance of the
legitimacy of the Jewish state.
It is encouraging
that reportedly in the talks you are raising these matters with the
Palestinians. Your comments in Munich, however, threaten to undo all
this by ignoring the historic compulsion of the Palestinians to look for
ever new reasons and incentives to reject the Jewish state. Concerns of
the kind you expressed therefore would have been better left unsaid or
at most discussed in private conversations with Israeli representatives.
We
wish you continued success in moving this process forward. We urge you
to understand, however, that those who are most against peace are the
ones who will benefit the most from the unintended encouragement in the
comments you expressed in Munich.
Abraham D. Foxman, ADL National Director.
By the way, there is only one Israeli politician who is defending Kerry. Can you guess who she is?
Read the whole thing. This is a serious setback for the Obama administration. It's likely to make even the Democratic party suck-ups among American Jewry wonder what's going on.
Labels: Abe Foxman, ADL, boycott Israel, John Kerry
Lazy Susan blasts Israel for not placing its trust in Kerry
Greetings from.... Here are some hints because you will all never believe where I am now. It's a bit more than a four-hour flight from Israel. There's snow on the runways, but it seems like it's just for show, because it's 32 Fahrenheit 0 Celsius outside. Oh yeah - and although it's broad daylight now in Israel, the sun doesn't rise here for nearly two hours. You all think about that....
US National Security Adviser
Susan Rice has
blasted Israel for not placing its trust in US Secretary of State and Assad buddy John FN Kerry.
In a series of posts on her Twitter accounts, Rice said, “Personal
attacks in Israel directed at Sec Kerry totally unfounded and
unacceptable.”
“John Kerry’s record of support for Israel’s security and prosperity
rock solid,” she wrote, adding, “POTUS and Sec Kerry remain committed to
negotiations that can secure Israeli and Palestinian futures.”
Her last tweet read, “U.S. Govt [sic] has been clear and consistent that we reject efforts to boycott or delegitimize Israel.”
Rice’s comments are the latest in a series of American replies to
Israeli officials who criticized Kerry for his threats at the Munich
Security Conference this weekend, and come just hours after State
Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters that Kerry was “frustrated” by suggestions that he’s anti-Israel.
This isn't the first time Rice has
piled onto a Kerry attack on Israel.
Meanwhile, Martin Indyk will meet with '
moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen on Tuesday in
Ramallah.
Let's sum it up this way: Friends don't
orchestrate boycotts aimed at friends. John FN Kerry is no friend of Israel. And all the protests in the world from Washington won't make him one, let alone fool the people of Israel into thinking he is one. It's amateur hour in Washington.
Labels: boycott Israel, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Palestinian state RIGHT NOW syndrome, Susan Rice
Kerry: 'Nice looking country you got there'
Dry Bones does it again.
Labels: BDS, boycott Israel, humor, John Kerry, Middle East peace process
State Department denies he meant to threaten Israel
The US State Department is denying that US Secretary of State John FN Kerry
meant to threaten Israel with all those little jabs about boycotts.
[State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki on Twitter:] "Secretary Kerry has a proud record of over 3 decades of staunch
support for Israel's security and well-being, including staunch
opposition to boycotts," Psaki insisted. "Just last year, while briefing
Foreign Ministers at the EU conference in Vilinius on peacemaking
efforts, he urged them to refrain from these measures."
"At the Munich Security Conference yesterday, he spoke forcefully in
defense of Israel's interests as he consistently has throughout his
public life," Psaki continued. "In response to the question about the
peace process he described well known and previously stated facts about
stakes for both sides if the process fails. Secretary Kerry's only
reference to a boycott was a description undertaken by others that he
has always opposed."
"Secretary Kerry has always expected opposition and difficult
moments in the process and expects all parties to accurately portray his
record and statements."
Kerry always supported Israel. Except when he supported
Code Pink going to
Gaza or when he supported that great reformer (Hillary Clinton's word)
Bashar al-Assad. But hey - some of his best friends are Jewish so what does it matter?
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, BDS, boycott Israel, Code Pink, Gaza, John Kerry, Syria
Danish Bank boycotting Israeli bank, Swedish bank on its way to doing the same
A Danish bank is boycotting Bank HaPoalim because its mortgage branch lends money for construction in Judea and Samaria, and a Swedish bank has asked for '
clarifications' from Bank Leumi and Mizrachi Tefahot regarding the same issue.
Sweden’s Nordea Bank and Denmark’s Danske Bank have both taken steps
against Israeli banks involved in construction in the settlements,
Walla reported on Saturday.
Danske bank, the largest in Denmark, recently said on its website
that it was boycotting Bank Hapoalim for “legal and ethical” reasons.
And Nordea Bank, the largest in Scandinavia, has asked for
clarifications from Bank Leumi and Mizrahi- Tefahot Bank regarding their
activities beyond the Green Line.
The ministerial meeting to
discuss the boycotts was canceled last week, because of tension between
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Economy Minister Naftali
Bennett.
Kudos to US Secretary of State John FN Kerry for
orchestrating the boycott.
But the truth is that something much more significant happened in New York last week. This is from the first link.
Over the weekend, Bennett – citing a New York State legislative
initiative – said that it was “possible to boycott the boycotters.” His
remark came in a conversation with New York State Sen. Jeffrey Klein,
who sponsored a bill that would suspend funding to educational
institutions that fund groups that boycott Israel.
The
legislation passed the chamber by a 56-4 vote, and would ban state
funding to colleges that fund organizations boycotting “countries that
host higher education institutions chartered by the Board of Regents of
the University of the State of New York.”
The bill was in response to the American Studies Association’s recent boycott of Israeli universities.
Bennett
told Klein, who represents parts of Bronx and Westchester counties,
that this legislation was an “expression of moral clarity and moral
courage at a time when most of the world is silent in the face of
actions taken against Israel.”
A similar bill introduced in the
State Assembly last month by Speaker Sheldon Silver has 48 sponsors
among the chamber’s 150 members.
If it passes there, it will go to Gov. Andrew Cuomo for his signature before becoming a New York State law.
I think that we ought to make sure that those who boycott us do so completely.
Let's go to the videotape (which is desperately in need of updating - this is from 2008!).
Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, boycott Israel, Denmark, European anti-Semitism, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Swedish anti-Semitism
Report: Kerry orchestrating European boycott threats
Israel's Army Radio is reporting that US Secretary of State John FN
Kerry is behind European threats to boycott Israel over Judea and Samaria. According to the reports, Kerry is keeping the boycott threats in check while 'negotiations' continue, but will activate them in the (inevitable) event that the 'negotiations' fail.
The EU published its guidelines last July, boycotting Israeli companies operating over the 1949 Armistice lines.
At the moment, Kerry is making sure the threats stay in check, but as
soon as the peace talks fail he intends to open the floodgates and spur
on full-blown international boycotts on Israel, reports Galei Tzahal (IDF Radio).
Palestinian Authority (PA) officials reported last September that Kerry was putting pressure on the EU to delay boycotts
so as to give him an opportunity to push Israel into peace talks. That
report also appears to support the new revelations regarding Kerry's
manipulation of anti-Israel boycotts.
Defense Secretary Moshe Ya'alon said Tuesday that Israel was trying to extend the peace talks beyond the determined 9 months.
What a mamzer.
Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, boycott Israel, European anti-Semitism, John Kerry, Middle East peace process
WaPo editorial slams American Studies Association Israel boycott
We definitely live in interesting times. The Washington Post publishes an editorial in Monday's editions in which they
slam the American Studies Association for its boycott of Israel.
The most difficult thing to swallow about the resolution is how utterly
narrow-minded it seems. Was the resolution written on a computer
manufactured in China, one of the most repressive regimes on the planet?
Did its authors pause to consider China’s incarceration of writers and
scholars who dare to think and speak out for freedom, or the ethnic
groups in China persecuted for refusing to heel to the Beijing masters?
Did they give any thought to what’s happened lately to freedom in
Russia, won at enormous cost in a Cold War that lasted more than four
decades? Does it disturb the scholars that in today’s Russia, members of
a girl band
performing a protest against the Kremlin could be thrown into a cold
and miserable prison for two years, or that civil society organizations
are being systematically shuttered?
Have the scholars overlooked the cries for help from Cuban dissidents
bravely standing up to the Castro brothers, demanding freedoms — and
suffering beatings and arrest almost every week? Do they condone the
decision of a judge in Saudi Arabia who has just sentenced a political activist to 300 lashes and four years in prison for calling for a constitutional monarchy?
To focus a resolution on Israel and ignore these injustices is puzzling
at best. It is also fundamentally wrong. For all of its difficulties,
including the wrenching, long conflict with the Palestinians, Israel has
become a lively and durable democracy. There is more freedom to speak
one’s mind and criticize the government in front of the Knesset than
will be found in either Tiananmen Square or Red Square today — and far
more in Israeli universities than in academia elsewhere in the Middle
East.
Indeed.
Labels: academic boycott, BDS, boycott Israel, liberal academia, Washington Post
Hogwarts joins academic boycott of Israel
Hogwarts, the school of witchcraft and wizardry made famous by Harry Potter, has decided to
boycott Israel.
Scotland’s famed Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry yesterday
announced that it was backing the global academic boycott of Israel and
pulling out of a number of cooperative initiatives it had with the
country.
In a statement from the headmistress’ office, Minerva McGonagall said
the new resolution was “in solidarity with sorcerers, scholars and
students of magic deprived of their academic freedom in the Occupied
Territories”, citing “Israel’s violation of international law and UN
resolutions and its impact on young Palestinian witches and wizards”.
The new directive will see Hogwarts cancel summer student exchange
programmes it has in place with several Israeli magical institutes, and
withdraw from a Quidditch tournament arranged by the Israeli Tourism
Ministry due to be held at Eilat by the Red Sea next Spring. The school
will also terminate with immediate effect a research partnership it has
with Ariel University looking into the development of
dishwasher-friendly wands.
Read the whole thing.
Yes, of course it's satire.
Labels: BDS, boycott Israel, humor
Boycott Israel!
Here's a new rap song (yes, I can now post songs again) by Ari Lesser for those of you who want to boycott Israel.
Let's go to the videotape.
Labels: BDS, boycott Israel
#Tomorrow13 #BDSfail Hawking trip cancellation a hoax
In a previous post, I reported that physicist
Stephen Hawking is boycotting Israel by withdrawing from the President's Conference. That made me wonder whether Hawking would at least be morally consistent and extend his boycott to the company with the most advanced breakthrough for ALS, the disease from which he suffers. You see,
that company is Israeli too.
Although
this was not the main aim of the test, some of the 12 patients in the
phase 1/2 trial with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), the
muscle-wasting disease, as well as three further patients provided with
the experimental treatment, also showed highly unusual signs of
improvement, the company said.
Professor Dimitrios Karussis of the Neurology Department at Hadassah
Medical Center, Jerusalem, and principal investigator of the trial,
said: “We cannot ignore some possible promising indications of clinical
efficacy observed in single patients, such as a tendency towards
improvement in some of the major ALS Functional Rating Scale variables.”
The trial was conducted at Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem, and
the results have been reported to the Israeli Ministry of Health.
Read the whole thing.
In case you're wondering, according to this biography, Professor
Dimitrios Karussis holds Greek citizenship only. We must have been real racists to let him into the country.
/sarc
But the truth is that Professor Hawking is not boycotting Israel. He canceled his trip for health reasons and the BDS'ers jumped all over it using al-Guardian and the Beeb as
willing tools for their hoax.
The Guardian, which broke the story late last night, claimed that
Hawking was due to boycott Israel after receiving an erroneous statement
from the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine (BRICUP),
apparently with Hawking's approval.
The statement said that the move was "his independent decision to
respect the boycott, based upon his knowledge of Palestine, and on the
unanimous advice of his own academic contacts there".
However, a Cambridge university spokesperson has confirmed to The
Commentator that there was a "misunderstanding" this past weekend, and
that Prof. Hawking had pulled out of the conference for medical reasons.
Responding to an e-mail including an open letter to Prof. Hawking,
shared nearly 2000 times, a University spokesman said: "Professor
Hawking will not be attending the conference in Israel in June for
health reasons - his doctors have advised against him flying."
When asked for further information, the spokesperson confirmed that the
BRICUP organisation had "assumed" Hawking's position on the matter, and
that it was fundamentally untrue.
The Commentator was unable to reach BRICUP via telephone for comment....
Pretty nasty for BRICUP and its fellow travelers to use a man's illness to create a hoax, isn't it? And pretty irresponsible of al-Guardian and the Beeb to publish a story like that without - apparently - at least contacting Hawking's spokesman, isn't it? But then this fits pretty consistently with a pattern of #BDSfail, doesn't it?
Labels: BDS, biotech, boycott Israel, epic fail, President's Conference
'Palestinian' children dying for boycott of Israel to end
'Palestinian' children are dying for the 'Palestinian Authority's boycott of Israel to end. Literally. More details
here.
Labels: boycott Israel, Palestinian Authority
