Is Israel an apartheid state? Of course it is. It is a home for the Jews, and all non-Jews are inferior.

http://icahdusa.org/2010/03/is-israel-an-apartheid-state/

Do the local indigenous Palestinians suffer daily humiliation at the hands of Settlers and occupiers of their land? Of course they do. The evidence is clear for all to see.

Should a Local Council exercise boycotts etc? Of course it should and so should every individual of conscience who opposes social injustice. I personally do not buy Kleenex tissues, Uncle Toby, L'Oreal, Nestle, Body Shop, Kit Kat, or Revlon products and I would not want my Local Council to buy a Caterpiller machine.

Why don't we criticise Libya, Sierra Leone, North Korea, Southern Sudan, Iran, Cuba, Somalia and Russia with human rights records that are worse than Israel’s? Why does Israel want to compare itself with these countries?

The BDS movement as it grows will be an important contributor in bringing Israel into the modern world and changing attitudes that will be important in bringing peace and security to Israel/Palestine.

Stan1,

You betray your myopia when you clearly enunciate the problem as a social justice issue, and then neglect to address why Israel is the sole target, when you readily acknowledge there are far greater abusers of human rights. Surely its a reasonable assessment for others to assume that you are only interested in human rights if there being abused by Israeli's.

Your awkward sidestep around this issue “Why does Israel want to compare itself with these countries” is the key. It’s simply not a real answer, its a red herring. Firstly, you’ve just agreed that Israel’s record is better than all the countries you’ve listed. I could add at least another dozen.

So why are you supporting a boycott against a country that you’re happy to admit is not even close to being the worlds worst? Especially so, when there is no BDS against any of the countries you have identified.

Why should we support such a narrow campaign that clearly doesn’t stack up based upon any critical analysis which defines social justice as the main motivator?

The one Israel policy, that the BDS proponents favour, would lead to the ethnic cleansing of the Jews in Israel. Even Bob Brown rejects such an extremist position. And if Bob Brown thinks its extreme, that does leave the BDS a long way out there on the fringes.

PaulL

Our lives are full of choices every day. Should we choose to make a donation to the Animal Welfare League or the Children's Oncology Unit?
What would be the basis for that decision?

I can choose to boycott Israeli goods if I consider that this action will contribute to the improvement of conditions in Israel/Palestine even though Israel does not have the distinction of being the world's worst offender - just a very brutal one.

A one-Israel policy, a country in which Jews and Arabs coexist, does not mean that the ethnic cleansing practiced by Israel will be replaced by ethnic cleansing by Palestinians. The world is watching. With modern communications technology it is no longer possible for slick lobbying, PR and hasbara to hide brutality in Israel now or in the future.

PaulL,

I support a one Israel policy but I didn't know the organisers of the BDS movement do. Is that right? It would be great if they did.

If you want to read about ethnic cleansing you should go back and read through some of David Singer's posts here on OLO. He not only wants to cleanse Greater Isreal of all Palestinians but denies they even exist. Do you understand what he's suggesting? Not just that he wants to wipe them off the map but to deny that they ever existed at all. He is a truely frightening character.

But as far as I'm aware the BDS movement does not have nuclear weapons. Israel does.

It makes your statement, 'The one Israel policy, that the BDS proponents favour, would lead to the ethnic cleansing of the Jews in Israel' sound shrill, hyperbolic and empty.

Stan,

If the goal is to reduce the total of human suffering, then a BDS against Israel is not cost effective by ANY measure. I think the public has every reason to feel that a BDS against Israel is motivated by political ideology, not social justice.

Your excuse for this focus on Israel is CHOICE. You choose to attack Israel not because it is the worst, but because you CHOOSE to make your contribution there. And why would that be? We’ve already established that its not because you want to ameliorate the most human suffering you can.

Your analogy with the choice between animal welfare, and childrens health, is a hollow one. You initially claimed that the attacks on Israel were founded upon the issue of social justice. A more realistic’ analogy would be a choice between supporting ‘feed the children’, and supporting ‘build a new gymnasium’ for the kids at your local school. Both could be considered worthy goals, but in my mind, you cannot be serious about alleviating hardship if you do not think about how much good can be achieved with a given set of resources.

you say " A one-Israel policy, a country in which Jews and Arabs coexist, does not mean that the ethnic cleansing practiced by Israel will be replaced by ethnic cleansing by Palestinians. The world is watching."

This is arrant nonsense. One need only look to Zimbabwe, where white farmers have been systematically attacked and forced out. Mugabe has very succesfully spread out this cleansing so that opposition never reached a critical mass. Worse, the world watched whilst the Hutus massacred the Tutsis in Rwanda. You just have to look at the things that HAMAS officials have to say on the matter to get an inkling of what may happen.

"Palestine is Islamic, and not an Islamic emirate, from the river to the sea, that unites the Palestinians. Jews have no right in it, with the exception of those who lived on the land of Palestine before World War I."

(Hamas official Halil Al-Hayya, Al-Hayat newspaper, November 11, 2010)

cont'

cont'

"This is Islam, that was ahead of its time .. but our nation was tested by the cancerous lump, that is the Jews, in the heart of the Arab nation... America is wallowing [in blood] today in Iraq and Afghanistan, America is defeated and Israel is defeated, and was defeated in Lebanon and Palestine... Make us victorious over the community of infidels... Allah, take the Jews and their allies, Allah, take the Americans and their allies... ALLAH, ANNIHILATE THEM COMPLETELY AND DO NOT LEAVE ANYONE OF THEM." http://www.adl.org/main_israel/hamas_own_words.htm

"... We will not rest until we liberate all our land, all our Palestine. We do not distinguish between what was occupied in the 1940s and what was occupied in the 1960s. Our Jihad continues, and we still have a long way to go. WE WILL CONTINUE UNTIL THE VERY LAST USURPER IS DRIVEN OUT OF OUR LAND." http://www.adl.org/MAIN_ISRAEL/main_israel/hamas_own_words.htm

(my capitals)

There'sno Islamic country today where non-muslims enjoy the full protection that muslims enjoy. And if Islamic states which haven't experienced a 50 year war can’t manage equal protection under the law, it's simply naive, or worse, to pretend that a pluralist, liberal society can be formed from the ashes.

A two state solution is the only one which stands a chance. Israel will never accept that it should be subsumed within the old mandate of Palestine. Firstly, there is no basis in law, to do so. Secondly, Israel will never agree. Thirdly, the results of such a change would undoubtedly cause more suffering, which puts the lie to the claim that the BDS is motivated by human suffering.

Frankly, the arguments used by BDS proponents that Israel should be annexed to a new Palestine, could be used to suggest that Australia should be annexed to Indonesia. Or, for that matter, for the end of all nation states.

Dane,

Actually mate, you happily volunteered the opinion that a one Israel policy would lead to significant forced jewish migration. Or do you not remember what you just said?

You would be happy to know that HAMAS fully agrees with you.