Boycotting the boycotters: Haaretz
While the international boycott against apartheid South Africa is credited with leading to the regime’s downfall, here it is considered irrelevant and unworthy of comparison.
By Gideon Levy
Most people here are appalled at the notion that anybody beyond Israel’s borders would think to boycott their country, products or universities. Boycotts, after all, are viewed in Israel as illegitimate. Anyone who calls for such a step is perceived as an anti-Semite and Israel-hater who is undermining the state’s very right to exist. In Israel itself, those who call for a boycott are branded as traitors and heretics. The notion that a boycott, limited as it may be, is likely to convince Israel to change its ways – and for its own benefit – is not tolerated here.
Even an obvious, logical step – like the Palestinian Authority’s boycott of products made in the settlements – is viewed by hypocritical Israeli eyes as provocative. Moreover, while the international boycott against apartheid South Africa is credited with leading to the regime’s downfall, here it is considered irrelevant and unworthy of comparison.
It would be possible to identify with these intolerant reactions were it not for the fact that Israel itself is one of the world’s prolific boycotters. Not only does it boycott, it preaches to others, at times even forces others, to follow in tow. Israel has imposed a cultural, academic, political, economic and military boycott on the territories. At the same time, almost no one here utters a dissenting word questioning the legitimacy of these boycotts. Yet the thought of boycotting the boycotter? Now that’s inconceivable.
The most brutal, naked boycott is, of course, the siege on Gaza and the boycott of Hamas. At Israel’s behest, nearly all Western countries signed onto the boycott with inexplicable alacrity. This is not just a siege that has left Gaza in a state of shortage for three years. Nor is it just a complete (and foolish ) boycott of Hamas, save for the discussions over abducted soldier Gilad Shalit. It’s a series of cultural, academic, humanitarian and economic boycotts. Israel threatens nearly every diplomat who seeks to enter Gaza to see firsthand the unbearable sights.
In addition, Israel bars entry to anyone who wishes to lend humanitarian aid. We should note that the boycott isn’t just against Hamas, but against all Gaza, everyone who lives there. The convoy of ships that will soon sail from Europe to try to break the siege will carry thousands of tons of construction material, prefab houses and medicine. Israel has announced that it plans to stop the vessels. A boycott is a boycott.
Doctors, professors, artists, jurists, intellectuals, economists, engineers – none of them are permitted to enter Gaza. This is a complete boycott that bears the tag “Made in Israel.” Those who speak about immoral and ineffective boycotts do so without batting an eye when it comes to Gaza.
Israel is also urging the world to boycott Iran. But it’s not just Gaza and Iran that are at issue here, because entry into Israel and the West Bank is being affected by the recent frenzy of boycotts. Anyone who is suspected of supporting the Palestinians or expressing concern for their lot is boycotted and expelled. This group includes a clown who came to organize a conference; a peace activist who was due to appear at a symposium; and scientists, artists and intellectuals who arouse suspicions that they back the Palestinian cause. This is a cultural and academic boycott on all counts, the type of boycott that we reject when it is used against us.
Yet the anti-boycott country’s list of boycotted parties does not end there. Even a Jewish-American organization like J Street, which defines itself as pro-Israel, has felt the long arm of the Israeli boycott. It is permissible to boycott J Street because it champions peace, but we can’t tolerate a boycott of products made in settlements that were built on usurped land. Denying a visiting professor entry into Gaza for an appearance at a university does not qualify as a boycott, but cutting off ties with Israeli institutions that provide fast-track degree programs for army officers and interrogators in the Shin Bet security service – people who are often viewed around the world as complicit in war crimes – is viewed as verboten.
Yes, an Israeli who lives in Israel will have a hard time preaching to others about the virtues of a boycott when that person does not boycott his or her own country or university. But it is his right to believe that a boycott could compel his government to end the occupation. As long as the Israelis don’t pay any price, there won’t be a change.
This is a legitimate, moral position. It is no less legitimate or moral than those who claim that a boycott is an immoral, ineffective tool while exercising that same option against others. So you oppose a boycott against Israel? Then let’s first do away with all the boycotts we have imposed ourselves.
EDITOR: Denied Entry into Israel?
Chomsky was denied entry into the Occupied Territories by the IOF at the bridge. It is a pity that Haaretz cannot tell the difference between Israel and the OPT, where the meeting Chomsky was invited to took place. It is alsoa pity that Chomsky is still a supporter of Israel and an opponent of the One-State solution. Maybe this experience may change his mind?
Noam Chomsky denied entry into Israel: Haaretz
Left-wing American linguist, who was scheduled to speak at Bir Zeit University, given no reason by Israeli inspectors at Allenby Bridge.
Left-wing American linguist Professor Noam Chomsky was denied entry into Israel on Sunday, for reasons that were not immediately clear.
Chomsky, who was scheduled to deliver a lecture at Bir Zeit University near Jerusalem, told the Right to Enter activist group by telephone that inspectors had stamped the words “denied entry” onto his passport when he tried to cross from Jordan over Allenby Bridge.
When he asked an Israeli inspector why he had not received permission, he was told that an explanation would be sent in writing to the American embassy.
Chomsky arrived at the Allenby Bridge at around 1:30 in the afternoon and was taken for questioning, before being released back to Amman at 4:30 P.M.
Chomsky is a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is considered among the foremost academics in the world. He identifies with the radical left and is often critical of both Israeli and American policies.
Court rejects Anat Kamm’s plea to ‘get some air’: Haaretz
Former soldier facing spying charges for leaking army documents sought to ease terms of her house arrest.
A Tel Aviv court on Sunday rejected a plea by Anat Kamm, a former soldier arrested for leaking secret military documents to the press, to ease the terms of her house arrest.
Kamm had sought permission to leave the house for up to two hours each day to “get some fresh air”.
But a judge ruled that the order for house arrest was not subject to appeal, as Kamm’s circumstances had not altered since her detention.
In mid-April a court ruled to toughen the terms of Kamm’s arrest, ordering her to remain under supervision of one of four nominated family members at all times.
In late April police raided Kamm’s rented apartment in Tel Aviv after unauthorized family members visited her there.
Kamm faces trial on espionage charges after giving Uri Blau, a Haaretz correspondent, classifeid miltary papers detailing an allegedly illegal assassinations policy operated by the IDF against Palestinian militants.
Robert Fisk: Dubai police hunt Briton over murder of Hamas official: The Independent
Exclusive: IoS shown evidence that suspect in Mabhouh killing had genuine British passport
Within 48 hours of becoming Foreign Secretary, William Hague faces a political crisis over the Middle East. The emirate of Dubai has named a British citizen as a 19th suspect of the killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, the Hamas official murdered in the emirate four months ago, apparently by a group that included holders of forged British passports. According to a source in the United Arab Emirates, the suspect arrived in Dubai under his own name and carrying a genuine British passport.
The document, the details of which are known by The Independent on Sunday but which we have decided not to publish, shows that he holds a real British passport dated 24 October 2007, valid for 11 years, and was born in 1948. It is believed that his father was a Jewish Palestinian who migrated to the UK just after the Second World War. Dubai police have informed Interpol of the name and passport number of the suspect. The man is believed to be hiding in Western Europe.
According to Dubai sources, the British man was identified parking a rental car close to the hotel where Mr Mabhouh was murdered and can be seen parking his car on a videotape that is in the possession of UEA authorities; a copy of the tape has been given to the British police. According to the UEA, the suspect has recently visited both Canada and France.
Mr Mabhouh was smothered to death in his hotel room and the Emirates have named 33 suspects. Investigations revealed that up to 12 of them had used forged British passports. Other suspects used similar counterfeit or stolen Irish, Australian, French and German passports.
Those involved are widely believed to be members of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service. British, Irish and French governments have asked Israeli ambassadors to explain the use of their national passports in the killing.
The involvement of a genuine British suspect will not improve diplomatic relations between London and Tel Aviv. The former foreign secretary David Miliband condemned the counterfeiting of British passports as “intolerable” and demanded reassurances from Israel that it would not be repeated. Britain also ordered an Israeli diplomat to leave the UK in March after an investigation by the Serious and Organised Crime Agency showed that there were “compelling reasons” why Israel was believed to be behind the misuse of the passports. The inquiry determined that the documents were cloned when British citizens passed through airports on their way into Israel, with officials taking them away for “checks” that lasted around 20 minutes. Britain’s decision was attacked by angry Israeli MPs who described it as the action of “anti-semitic dogs”.
The diplomat asked to leave the UK was understood to be an intelligence officer who was known to the UK authorities and worked as official liaison with Britain’s MI6. There was no suggestion the officer was personally involved in the passports affair.
Israel has never admitted any role in February’s Dubai assassination of Mr Mabhouh, who was described as a key figure in smuggling Iranian weapons into the Gaza Strip on behalf of Hamas. It has abstained from signing any material that might be construed as a confession.
EDITOR: How many Mossad Agents Does It Take To Murder One Palestinian?
Answer: At least 33, but the number is rising… Say, this is not very efficient, is it?
Son of Jewish Briton named as latest suspect in Dubai murder: Haaretz
Dubai police have now identified 33 people suspected of killing Hamas operative, most of them named through forged passports.
The latest suspect in the assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh is a British citizen with a valid passport, according to the Independent, unlike many of the others who were found to have entered the United Arab Emirates using forged identies.
According to the Independent, the 62-year-old suspect is the son a Jew who lived in Palestine until the outbreak of World War II, when he moved to Britain.
The Dubai police have transferred the suspect’s name and passport information to the Interpol agency, said the Independent. The suspect, who is believed to be hiding now in western Africa, was identified by surveillance as having parked a car outside the hotel where Mabhouh was killed.
Dubai police have so far identified another 32 suspects in the murder. Five were identified just a little more than a week ago, as having traveled to the U.A.E with Australian, British and French passports
The Dubai authorities have described al-Mabhouh’s assassination as a mix of clockwork precision and spy novel flare. They have accused Israel’s Mossad spy agency of being behind the killing of al-Mabhouh.
The Dubai police previously released names of 27 suspects who traveled to Dubai on fake identities and forged European and Australian passports. The police also compiled a detailed flow chart-style diagram on the suspects’ alleged roles in the slaying.
At least 15 of the suspected killers share names with Israeli citizens, further fueling suspicions the Mossad was behind the hit. Israel has maintained a policy of ambiguity on the killing, neither confirming nor denying involvement.
EDITOR: The real face of Israeli academia
Uriel Reichman has long pretended to be a liberal, while supporting right wing policies and issues. It is good to se him exposed here, calling the main human rights orgaisation in Israel a ‘fifth column’. Spoken like a Nazi. Those are the people who fight against the BDS, and against Palestine as well as against human rights.
Students: IDC head called B’Tselem a ‘fifth column’: Haaretz
B’Tselem: We welcome the statement made by Professor Reichman, which indicates that although he doesn’t support the organization, he supports the organization’s right to make its positions known.
By Asaf Shtull-Trauring
The president of the Interdisciplinary Center, Uriel Reichman, described the human rights watchdog B’Tselem as a “fifth column” and said that inviting its representatives to speak at the college was “disgraceful,” students who spoke to the president told Haaretz. Reichman denies ever making the statements.
On April 15, the private college based in Herzliya held a “Democracy Day,” during which they invited 40 organizations to set up stalls near the campus cafeteria. However, only the groups B’Tselem, the Movement for Quality Government, Im Tirtzu and the National Left responded.
During the event, one student apparently approached Reichman to protest the presence of B’Tselem on campus. Another student, who witnessed the conversation, said Reichman responded by saying he hadn’t been consulted about inviting B’Tselem, that he found it disgraceful and that the organization was a fifth column.
“Some of the students were angry and protested the presence of B’Tselem at the IDC,” Omri Akunis, one of the event organizers, told Haaretz. He added that he did not think the college would allow the organization to participate in the event next year.
Reichman told Haaretz that he never made the comments. “It’s nonsense,” he said. “B’Tselem was invited to the campus. A student approached me to say he thought that they shouldn’t be there, that they’re a hostile element, a fifth column and so on. I told him that you can’t drive out someone who was invited.
“The same student then sent a letter, which the deputy president for student affairs replied to,” Reichman continued. “She explained to him that the group had been invited by students, but that we do not identify with the organization. In other words, she wrote that the fact the organization was invited by students does not mean we endorse it. I’m not a supporter or admirer of B’Tselem, but I certainly told that young man that we’re not going to kick out any organization we have invited. We’re not going to gag anyone.”
The college spokesman told Haaretz that “Reichman is working under the assumption that his students are truthful, and he doesn’t recall ever making such a statement. He does not agree with B’Tselem’s methods, but he nevertheless maintains and will continue to maintain full pluralism and freedom of speech.”
B’Tselem issued the followed comment on the matter: “We welcome the statement made by Professor Reichman, which indicates that although he doesn’t support the organization, he supports the organization’s right to make its positions known. Defending the right to express an opinion even when one doesn’t agree with it is the very essence of freedom of speech. B’Tselem will continue stating its positions and encouraging public discussion in Israel of human rights in the Occupied Territories.”