A Call to Battle

In general, it’s the battles you don’t have to fight to win that are the most productive.

For example, the reason we’ve not seen any serious consideration of divestment by colleges or cities over the last ten years is that the leaders of schools and municipalities have taken a measure of BDS activists over the last decade and know enough to not be snookered by them.

Similarly, the reason no divestment bill has gotten past the gate at university student unions is that such bills only tend to get passed in the dead of night which means Israel’s supporters need only make sure the light of day continues to shine on student government activities to ensure BDS activists don’t get the chance to hijack the university for their own gain.

But there come times when a fight is necessary, and two such fights loom on the horizon over the next six months.

A big one (which I’ll be getting into over the next few weeks) will take place at the Methodist and Presbyterian Churches which meet every two years in national conventions to let Israel-bashers within the denomination run amok (whoops! I mean to discuss vital issues of church policy).  Despite being rejected by members in 2006, 2008 and 2010, and despite promises to those members that the Israel obsession would stop, BDS marches on regardless of what it means for the church (or for peace in the Middle East).

But before those battles (which will be taking place in April and June), we face something closer to the grassroots at the Park Slope Food Co-opin New York.  Yes, after years of letters to the editor, appeals to the co-op’s board, and other maneuvering, a vote on whether or not to hold a referendum on a co-op boycott of Israel goods is set for March 27th.

Now keep in mind that this vote is not taking place because local BDSers convinced anyone of anything.  Rather, they pushed for an Israel boycott referenda (similar to failed boycott appeals at places like Davis and Sacramento California), and when told that such a referenda would sicken and appall huge numbers of members they said, in effect, “So what?”  And since the rules of most co-ops are rather loose, presuming as they do that members will act in good faith and not try to manipulate the organization for their own ends (at the expense of other members), the only way to close out a matter the BDSers will continue to push (regardless of the cost to others) was to let a vote on the referenda go forward.

Apparently, the usual meeting place for co-op votes (a synagogue, ironically) will not be big enough to hold the vote so the co-op is looking for a venue that will hold the 1000+ members likely to attend the March 27thgathering.  And, as luck will have it, anti-BDS forces at Park Slope are organized, have able leadership who are doing the spadework necessary to wage a grassroots political campaign (including communication and get-out-the-vote advocacy).

As an alumni of several similar campaigns, I envy the local boycott-fighters’ chance to watch their own hard work and resoluteness hand BDS yet another defeat.  At the same time, I don’t envy them the effort they have to put into getting this squalid little propaganda campaign masquerading as a human rights movement out of their food co-op’s bloodstream.

In addition to the work involved (energy that could be put to more productive use improving the co-op or fighting for actual peace in the Middle East), these types of campaigns always end in meetings like the huge gathering that will take place in March.  In the run-up to such a meeting, a phenomena I refer to as “The Circus” will descend upon Park Slope where every pro- and anti-Israel individual and organization within a thousand mile radius will try to have their say on the matter while neighbors who once waved and smiled at each other, instead accusing one another of racism, anti-Semitism and indifference to human rights.

And at the meeting itself, both sides will take their assigned roles, with disciplined BDSers never wavering in their message of Palestinian suffering and Israeli villainy, with Israel’s supporters more fragmented in their messaging, but no less firm in their resolve.  Park Slopians can look forward to a number of anti-Israel harangues that start with “As a Jew…” deploring the Jewish state and insisting (with tears in their eyes) that a boycott is the organization’s only moral choice.

Needless to say, attempts to prick the conscience of the BDSers over issues such as terrorist murders of Israelis or Arab deaths at the hands of Hamas or Assad will fall on deaf ears since the BDSers are indifferent to Israeli life and even Palestinian lives are only measured in terms of their usefulness to “the movement”.  But arguments directed over the boycotters heads to the general membership can be as effective in Park Slope as they have been everywhere else.

And that message is: why the hell should a group of single-issue partisans be allowed to speak on behalf of the thousands of members of an institution that BDS had no role in building?  After all, the boycotters are free as individuals to not buy all the Israeli products they like.  And they’re even free to start their own co-op and build into its charter the refusal to ever let an Israeli orange or seltzer dispenser stain their shelves.

Ah, but that’s not what they want, is it?  They want to be able to claim that their minority opinion represents the will of thousands of members of a respected organization, and thus give their propaganda message unearned weight.

On March 27th, the first real BDS battle of the year will be fought.  Israel’s friends didn’t want it.  Leaders and members of the Park Slope Food Co-op didn’t want it.  But the boycotters insisted on it.  And while they may get their jollies railing about Israeli in front of an audience of over a thousand (and video tape the whole thing for their YouTube channel and Facebook pages), our friends on the ground should never waver in their commitment to get the job done, add Park Slope to the long list of progressive institutions that have rejected the boycotter’s blandishments, and announce to the world the real message that we all hope comes out of New York this March: that BDS Loses Again!

27 thoughts on “A Call to Battle”

  1. Jon, your name has been invoked on the PalestineFrdmProject tweeter feed (about the Olympia Food Co-op BDS boycott that is on trial in the Thurston County court as I post this):http://twitter.com/#!/palfreedom

    “Phan Nguyen @Phan_N

    Irony is that Jon Haber has gone on record claiming that Oly Food Co-op boycott process was followed correctly. #righttoboycott”

    1. That writer combines a weird obsession with me and this blog with (1) an inability to tell the truth under any circumstance; and (2) a tendency to declare all who oppose “the movement” to be bald-face liars. Which makes the Twitter echo-chamber the perfect home for him.

    1. If you assume (as I do) that it is Zionism – the liberation movement for the Jewish people – which is the equivalent of the American Civil Rights movement, then the period between the start of the Zionist movement at the end of the 19th century and the foundation of the Jewish state in 1948 is the equivalent of the five decades of trials and tribulations suffered by African Americans between the start of the Civil Rights movement in the 50s and the election of our first black President in 2008.

      During this period, both civil rights movements suffered many defeats, but ultimately ended up with victory, in spite of ongoing confrontation with the forces of reaction and bigotry (white racists in the case of Dr. King, and anti-Israel bigots and BDS advocates in the case of Israel).

      Now I know this answer to your question flies in the face of your own self-characterization as the inheritors of the Civil Rights and anti-Apartheid legacy. But I cannot be held responsible if BDS – the inheritor of the Apartheid, not anti-Apartheid, tradition – has managed to delude itself about its true nature.

    2. Zionism would be the equivalent of the Civil Rights Movement if Dr. King had called for the creation of a “Black America” where African Americans were afforded superior privileges while all other racial groups were segregated into bantustans or expelled altogether. Of course, after decades of slavery, oppression, and discrimination, he could have argued, as you argue, for the creation of a separate “homeland” for an historically oppressed group of people, but he didn't.

      Dr. King preached equality among all Americans regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity. He preached integration and co-existence. The Zionist movement is one of ethno-religious superiority that has led to separation and expulsion. It is the antithesis of the values enshrined under the Civil Rights Movement. You, my friend, is the one who has deluded himself.

    3. Of course Zionism never called for the exclusion of anybody else or the expulsion of anybody. It's Arab actions that lead to separation and expulsion. Every Jew, every Jew, living in areas that came under Arab control in 1948 were killed or expelled. Every synagogue but one was destroyed, Jews were forbidden to pray at the Western Wall, and gravestones from the Mount of Olives were used to build Army latrines. The Arab general who oversaw all this said he did it intentional to keep Jews from ever coming back to Jerusalem. That's ethno-religious superiority at work.

      This expulsion started even before there was a state of Israel. Arab violence in the 1920 forced Jews to flee areas where they had lived for centuries. In 1929, every Jew, every Jew in Hevron was killed or expelled. The town's commercial market was built on the site of what was a synagogue. In 1938, Jaffo's Arabs rioted, and burned out 6,000 Jews, leaving them homeless. That's ethno-religious superiority at work.

      It was the Arabs who denied and still are denying Jews have any rights. If the Arabs hadn't chosen to go to war in 1948, nobody would have been expelled and everybody could have just gotten on with their lives.

      The Arabs have never accepted Jewish rights and BDS continues that pattern. The goal is to take rights from Jews, not give them to Palestinians.

      As Dr. King said, the region will know peace when Israel knows security. You should listen to Dr. King. You are working to destroy Israel's security. You are working against peace.

    4. My original reply regarding Zionism as a potential inheritor of the US Civil Rights Movement was a response to your original question which seemed to imply that a decade of defeat for the forces of BDS should be compared to the length of time it took for the Civil Rights Movement to achieve success, a question which requires me to take as granted that BDS deserves this comparison. I was simply demonstrating that anyone can play this game and “prove” that their own political preferences should be associated with positive influences (such as the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King).

      Personally, I believe each “movement” must be judged on its own history and merits. But if you insist on assigning the King legacy either negatively or positively to the Jewish or and Palestinian nationalist movements, you need to take into account that each and every accusation you hurl at Israel (legalized racial and religious superiority, expulsion and repression of minorities, battling against peaceful co-existence) are actually descriptions of the Palestinians, their allies and allied “movements” such as BDS.

      You are free to ignore the fact that the Palestinian “movement” allied itself with the Nazis during WWII, the Communists during the Cold War, Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War and danced in the streets after the 9/11 attacks, just as you are free to ignore the expulsion of a million Jews from the Middle East for the crime of being Jews (while all the while waiting that the Palestinian refugee issue is the moral lodestone of the world). You are free to ignore the racial and religious supremacy inherent in national organization with names such as The Arab League or Islamic Conference (where the nation of “Palestine” already takes pride of place). But these choices only wipe these facts from your mind – not from existence.

  2. If the Civil Rights movement had involved the genocide and displacement of every white person and the creation of a true apartheid state for those whites that somehow manage to remain — as BDS supports (sometimes explicitly but always, always implicitly) when it comes to the Jews of Israel — it would never have proven victorious.

    1. Please provide a quote from someone within BDS movement explicitly calling for genocide or apartheid. I assume that since you wrote that BDS advocates support it “sometimes explicitly” you'll have a number of quotes at your disposal. Thanks.

    2. Don't even need quotes Anon. One of the first groups you see listed as calling for BDS is the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine. When I went to the BDS Web page, this group was listed first. It includes Hamas and the PFLP among others.

      Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel through violent Jihad and the eventual murder of all Jews everywhere in the world by Muslims.

      But actions speak louder than words. Just this spring Hamas fired a lazer-guided antitank weapon at an Israeli school bus, killing a 16-year-old boy. PFLP members stabbed five members of the Fogel family to death, including a 3-month-old baby. These are your coalition partners.

      The call to BDS also includes several state-sanctioned Syrian groups. Your Syrian coalition partners are no doubt out on the streets killing innocent people even as we type away.

      Comparing BDS to the civil rights movement is an insult to people like Dr. King. He was a true friend of ISrael by the way.

    3. So I'll take your response to mean that you can't provide a single quote.

      Regardless, your logic makes no sense. Your argument is that the entire BDS movement is discredited because of Hamas' endorsement? I guess the other 170+ organizations that signed the call for BDS don't matter? A small historical note: An internationally recognized South-African terrorist organization, QIBLA, supported the BDS call against Apartheid South Africa and was heavily involved in the anti-Apartheid movement – not to mention that the ANC itself was labeled a terrorist organization throughout most of the anti-apartheid effort. Did these organizations' endorsements discredit the boycott against South Africa? I hope that you would at least recognize the worth of BDS within the South African context. Maybe you'll figure out that QIBLA's endorsement didn't matter, and it certainly didn't weaken the moral imperative to uphold the boycott.

      Again, you guys never base your arguments on logic or fact. Your points are seriously getting more and more hilarious as time goes on, with Jon far at the forefront of this circus.

    4. So your whole argument is it's just fine to have a genocidal terrorist group as a coalition partner. You can't even bother to say unless Hamas and PFLP change their goals and methods, we can't work with you. Nope, don't need quotes. Your response says it all. The goal is to kill Jews plain and simple.

    5. Oh, and lets be honest, Hamas isn't some minor faction, it is the dominate Palestinian faction. If BDS succeeds, it's Hamas that will be running the show in Palestine. Even you know what that means for the Jews. You just don't care. But it doesn't matter because Israel isn't going anywhere.

    6. No one in the International Solidarity Movement is “working with” Hamas. That's not what BDS is about. It's never been what BDS is about. Yes, Hamas sucks. I personally despise them, and so do the people with whom I campaign. They do a tremendous disservice to the Palestinians and Israelis alike. But, a) whether or not Hamas decides to endorse BDS is their decision, not ours and b) the BDS movement is completely non-violent. We should be happy that the Palestinians have found a non-violent means of resistance – something that will hopefully substitute to the heinous crimes you listed earlier.

    7. Oh come on. You don't work with Hamas — that's the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.

      Here are some nice pics of one of 2008 Gaza flotilla participants not working with Hamas.


      Here's a nice Dutch story about the Hamas non-involvement with last year's flotilla.


      Here's a nice pic of someone from one of George Galloway's aid flotillas posing with a Syrian Social Nationalist Party flag. It's okay because the SSNPers are Social Nationalist and the Nazis were National Socialist. It's a big difference just like the flag, the SSNP flag has a spinning swastika, the Nazi flag had a stationary swastika. So it's okay, clearly aren't working with neo-Nazis.


      Dude, you are right.. you don't work with Hamas, you work for Hamas. Thanks for the late-night laugh. Better than Letterman or Leno.

    8. Before there's any attempt to say “no, that's not ISM, that's the Free Gaza Movement”, Paul Larudee who is featured in the pics in the first link is also the Northern California head of ISM. Larudee likens himself to Dr Martin Luther King, which would also be a gut-buster if it didn't desecrate the memory and accomplishments of a true advocate of nonviolence like Dr King (who was also a strong supporter of Israel).

  3. yes, those 170+ organizations (aside from Hamas) represent what, about 500 people? Even Finkelstein blew your cover on that one– they're all 1 or 2 people sitting in an office in Ramallah funded by the PA or by foreign NGOs.

    let's look at the BDS movement's own demands– one of them is the fictional “right” of return for generations of descendants of refugees from the failed Palestinian attempt to strangle the Jewish state just prior to and after its birth. Never mind that such a right doesn't actually exist anywhere in international law. Let's just look at what would happen if it were carried out:

    against the express wishes of the people of the state of Israel, millions of hostile individuals would be given the right to enter and become citizens. They would change Israel from being the nation-state of the Jewish people to being another Arab state, though with a substantial Jewish minority.
    That's the goal of BDS– the elimination of Jewish statehood. Nasser said “If the Arabs return to Israel, Israel will cease to exist”, and PA officials have said it throughout the years: “the demand for the return of the Palestinian refugees is tantamount to the destruction of Israel.” (1999, Asad Abd-Al Rahman, PA Minister for Refugee Affairs)

    Answer one question, Anon– do you support peace between a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab state of Palestine? And if you do, then suggest that to Omar Barghouti and the other BDS cru leaders. Of course, we already know what THEY have to say about it:

    1. Last time I checked, the two governing parties of the Palestinian people, Hamas and Fatah, were represented on the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine, a body that has endorsed the call. So theoretically, representatives of all four million Palestinians living in the OPT have endorsed the call.

      Onto your point of the right of return: I think it's obvious that no one expects all of the refugees to return to Israel/Palestine. Most studies I'm familiar with have estimated that a couple hundred thousand Palestinians would be willing to return, not “millions”.

      Secondly, I don't see the validity in any state that is founded on a system of racial, religious, or ethnic superiority. I disapprove of Arab countries like Saudi Arabia where religion and state are one in the same. I disapproved of Apartheid South Africa where the white race was codified as superior. And yes, I fail to see how the sustenance of what you call a “Jewish” state can run concurrently with equal rights for Palestinians living within Israel, in the OPT, or in diaspora. Having said that, I genuinely believe that the Palestinians and the Israelis can live together, in one secular state, where equal rights for both groups are guaranteed. It would be a homeland for both the Jews and the Palestinians, and would follow the post-apartheid South African reconciliation effort in scope and method.

      Realize that many of the same arguments used against the one state solution were also used against the one state solution in South Africa. Many claimed that the white South Africans would be overwhelmed by “millions of hostile individuals” and eliminated. What we saw was quite the opposite. I don't believe that I, or any other reasoned person, would support a resolution to the conflict that didn't protect the rights of both the Palestinians and the Israelis, equally.

      I ask you: I'm sure you disapprove of White states. I'm very sure you disapprove of Muslim states. So why can we not hold Israel to the same expectations of secular and equal governance?

      Again though, these are just my personal views. The BDS movement does not take a stance on the one or two state solution.

    2. Yeah, the ANC never called for the murder of all whites. Hamas, well they call for the murder of all Jews. Hamas and Fatah call for the expulsion of all Jews from Israel, or all Jews whose families didn't arrive before 1917. So it's the Palestinians saying they won't accept Jews.

      And anyway, how can a Palestinian state run concurrently with equal rights for Jews living within Palestine? How can anybody but Germans have equal rights in Germany — so we will have to do away with Germany, and france, and Spain and on and on…

      Of course Palestinians have equal rights in Israel just as they have equal rights in Germany. You seem to confuse discrimination, which exists in Israel and Germany and France and Spain and everywhere else in the world with “apartheid.”

      As far as the BDS movement taking no stance on one state or two, that's the movement's biggest joke of all. In fact. there's no leader in the BDS movement who calls for a two-state solution.

      In fact, if you look at Ali Abunimah, he argues there's no such thing as the Jewish people, a racist position, and that Jews have no national rights in Palestine. They can only live in in Palestine. They will have equal rights with allowances for local customs. Well, local custom are that Jews are third-class citizens forbidden to hold certain positions, forced to pay special taxes, etc. Just look at Egypt's Copts to see what equal rights look like. Just look at the position of Jews in the past — kept from the Temple Mount, kept from the Tomb of the Patriarchs, subject to pogroms.

      I'm Saphardi so don't give the Jews and Arabs used to get along BS. You might buy it, and you might be able to fool some people, but most Sephardi/Mizrahi know your full of it and when you say stupid things like that, it tells us all we need to know about you.

      Abunimah is already telling you what the Palestinian state will look like. You just don't want to see. Yep, BDS — lead by racist, works with genocidal terrorist groups. Your comments say it all. Dead Jews is the BDS goal.

    3. Your Germany/France/Spain analogy does not apply. A more apropos analogy would be one to the Native Americans and European colonizers. The situation in the West Bank and Gaza is comparable to the funneling of Native Americans into “reserves” and the denial of their basic rights. While we are still very far from ensuring equal rights and reparations for the descendants of those initial Native Americans, we no longer force them into separate territories or deny them the right to vote in our elections, and so on. If Israel took those steps, I would be relatively happy (though obviously the US isn't the standard here).

      I'm familiar with Abunimah's work. Please provide me with a quote of when he says that “there's no such thing as the Jewish people” or Jews will have to pay special taxes and be third class citizens. If such a quote is genuine, I'll be happy to reassess my opinion of him.

    4. another failed attempt to paint Israel as a “colonial” state. Which foreign governments were the Jews returning to the land of Israel representing: Russia? Poland? Austria? Whose flag were they planting and which governments supported their efforts? None, of course.

      I support the basic rights of the Palestinian people to their own national self-determination. What it will take to bring that about is a Palestinian leadership that openly agrees to living in peace and mutual recognition with the Jewish state. Up until now, they have refused to agree to that, dancing around the point rhetorically with statements such as acknowledging the existence of Israel but refusing to abandon the “right of return”– just as you danced around the question I asked and refused to answer it. Tell me , Anon, what are the “rights” of the Palestinians– do you think that includes the “right” of return? And what are the rights of the Jewish nation– do they have the same right to national self-determination as the Palestinian people? Yes or no will suffice.

  4. No, the Jews are much more like the American Indians than the Palestinians. We are the original inhabitants of Israel. We have a 3,000 year connection to the land that predates the Arabs. Europeans in the Americas have no previous connection. So Europeans had to appropriate American Indian culture in the same way Arabs have had to appropriate Jewish history.

    The fact is you can't draw a straight line from any pre-Arab group to today's Palestinians although they try mighty hard. I don't really care and I think the Palestinians deserve their own country even though by your very definition a Palestinian state will discriminate against all non-Palestinians.

    The last phase of colonization is to exterminate the native people and assume their identity. That's where the Arabs were before Jews started coming home. (Of course there were always Jews in historic Israel. They were treated like crap though.) So when Jews tried to reassert some form of national rights in our historic homeland, the Arabs did everything possible to keep that from happening. The Jews originally proposed something like the bi-national state you now support. The Arabs rejected that. Jews were a threat to the identity Arabs had made for themselves.

    The Palestinian leader was a Nazi and in 1948 he tried to finish what the Nazis started. Arafat called al-Huseine, the Nazi, his mentor by the way. The Palestinians wound up in the West Bank and Gaza because they didn't accept Jews or Jewish rights and tried to wipe out the Jews. They lost and the real indigenous people won for a change.

    Instead of them making peace with the Jews, the Arabs continued to try to kill Jews. They kept losing. When they are ready to make a peace that respects Jewish political rights, the all the Palestinians will have their rights.

    The Palestinians in Israel already have the right to vote and aren't forced to live in separate enclaves. In fact, Palestinians in Israel serve as police officers and in the military and as doctors and lawyers. So you should be happy with Israel now. You should pressure the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to sign a peace deal with Israel so they can have their own country and their own self determination. The Palestinians have walked away from two Israeli peace offers in the last 10 years without even negotiating. And unfortunately, in negotiations last month in Jordan, the Palestinians wouldn't even sit in the same room as the Israelis at first.

    I'll have to dig up the Abunimah stuff, but honestly, with somebody like you I'm not sure it's worth the effort. You lay the BS on pretty thick, especially that BDS doesn't work with Hamas and that it doesn't have the elimination of Israel as a goal. Even old Norman F. doesn't buy that last one.

    Abunimah never said overtly Jews would be third-class citizens, but that's local custom. Local custom is Muslims on top, Jews on the bottom. That's the brilliance of that simple phrase, everybody knows what it means while people like you can still deny that meaning. There's actually a term for it — dog whistling. Sounds to me like you have it down. The only thing is it doesn't work someplace like this blog where people know the facts.

    1. This is a laughable account of history – hardly worth a response. You really need to read more. There are just so many factual inaccuracies. Denying the historical connection that the Palestinians have with Palestine is the moral equivalent of denying the historical connection that the Jews have with Palestine. It's simply false.

      “Reasserting some form of national rights in [your] historic homeland” is one thing. Expelling and oppressing several million Palestinians over several decades in order to do so is another. There is simply no justification for that, and there never will be.

      You equate the 1940s Palestinians to Nazis as if you can't believe that a group of people would resist an invasion of immigrants whose primary goal was to establish an ethno-religious state. It's crazy that you people continually bring up the fact that the Palestinians refused to accept the initial “peace deal”, which would have forced them to sacrifice a large fraction of their land in the process. It's like if millions of Canadians invaded America, expelling Americans from their land, and then said that same year “Accept that we have conquered your land, and don't fight back.” Would you expect Americans to concede?

      This is the third time in 24 hours on this site that I've asked for someone to provide me with a quote to support their allegations against a person or group of people involved in pro-Palestinian activism. No one has provided me with one as of yet. Still waiting…

    2. Here's a pic for you. The guy with the funny hat is Haj Amin al-Huseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He was the Palestinian leader from the 1920s onward. He later headed the Arab League. As I said, Yasser Arafat called the Mufti his political mentor. It's possible the two were related. See if you can guess the German guy sitting next to him. There are several dozen to maybe a hundred pic of the Mufti with various Nazis available. And BTW, he visited the death camps, so he knew what was happening.


      Tablet Magazine had a good piece on recently discovered material from German archives about the Mufti a year or so ago. Go look it up. Read a book yourself. Quit bugging us to do your research for you.

      For all your complaining that nobody has shown you any facts here, you haven't shown any either. You just keep repeating the idea the the Jews intended to set up an exclusive ethno-religious state. Of course you can only give a bunch of made up or out of context quotes from somebody like Pappe.

      Maybe you can find some quotes from Arab sources about their goals in 1948. Oops, you can't because no Arab state has ever opened its archives. I wonder why?

      Any history you read on Israel is incomplete because the Arabs are keeping their side hidden. You aren't even honest enough to admit this just like you aren't honest enough to admit the BDS goal is to destroy Israel or that Hamas is your coalition partner. Waiting for you to explain the flotilla pics of the people with Hamas and the pic of the person with the SSNP flag. Seems Palestinians and their supporters have a history with Nazis.

      Same old BDS BS. Could have this conversation with myself.

  5. How's this quote from the Mufti:
    'Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.” Look it up in Wikipedia, the references are there.

    By the way, what made it “their” land when the Jews bought up land legally according to the laws of the Ottoman empire (including from some of the prominent Arab families in the area) and much of the land was officially state land belonging to the Ottomans (and then to the subsequent sovereign, the British)?

  6. Anonymous BDSer.

    In addition to all the facts and quotes provided by others (which BDSers run away from like vampires from sunlight), I can do little better than to refer you to Norman Finklestein who said: “Do you think you're being clever? Do you think you are fooling anyone? That no one can figure out what the results of BDS' three demands will be?” You are fooling no one. But, you are welcome to keep banging the table and insist that we (not you) are the racists and that we (not you) are the liars. Just know that your every dodge reveals the weakness of your cause and who is the racist and the liar (hint: it ain't us, it's you).

    There is a reason that BDS has been as spectacularly successful as the Hindenburg and the Titanic — all three are fatally flawed from the get go.

    Norman F. was also right when he said you are a member of a cult — a cult composed of the ignorant, the naive, and the jew-haters (I wonder which category you fall into?).

    The best part of course is your self-delusion — do you really see yourself as the heir to the civil rights movement and luminaries like Dr. MLK. That is hilarious (and so, so sad!). You should be embarrased at the level of your delusion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.