Boycott Israel

The petition said the Institute holding the exhibition "would betray its intellectual mission by adopting this normalizing approach - one of the worst forms of coercive use. and immoral art as a political tool to legitimize colonialism and oppression ”

On Sunday, the president of the Arab World Institute and former French Minister of Culture, Jack Lang, insulted the BDS open letter and its signatories, saying that the petition was "laughable."

"It's a reaction that seeks to divert this exhibition from its deep meaning, which has nothing to do with this or that political debate," said Lang, in a radio interview. He noted that out of 300 objects being exhibited, only about four came from Israel.

"It is a trivial and somewhat unfortunate matter, especially since I myself contributed to highlighting the Palestinian culture as no other person or institution has ever done,” the IMA president added. "It saddens me to note that people, some of quality, writers and philosophers, let themselves get carried away, a bit like sheep, signing a text whose veracity they have not even checked", he added.

Jack Lang is pretty much telling the BDSers that they are idiots. Then he added that their boycott is meaningless: "The exhibition is a hit and gets an enthusiastic response, and every day the crowd is considerable."

(full article online)

 
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: At what cost.
※→ P F Tinmore, el at,


BTW: This is a bit off-topic.

(THE REST OF THE STORY)

"This contract with Elbit Systems UK not only delivers the very latest in battlefield technology to our frontline soldiers, but also invests in the British defence industry, sustaining more than 500 jobs across the UK."

(COMMENT)

The impact and cost inflicted by these advocates.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
 
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: AntiSemetic Activities promoted by BDS
※→ el at,

(COMMENT)

Yes, I agree to disagree. But you have to admit, she is a fast talker, even if she expressed many of the points from an invalid perspective. She should be an auctioneer.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
 
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: AntiSemetic Activities promoted by BDS
※→ el at,

(COMMENT)

Yes, I agree to disagree. But you have to admit, she is a fast talker, even if she expressed many of the points from an invalid perspective. She should be an auctioneer.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
Auctioneer? That works but I was thinking more along the lines of a carny yelling at passersby to get in line for attractions like the bearded lady or two-headed man.
 
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: AntiSemetic Activities promoted by BDS
※→ el at,

(COMMENT)

Yes, I agree to disagree. But you have to admit, she is a fast talker, even if she expressed many of the points from an invalid perspective. She should be an auctioneer.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
So, what do you disagree with? I thought she was on point.
 
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: AntiSemetic Activities promoted by BDS
※→ P F tinmore, el at,

PREFACE: This action is not about restricting Free Speech (First Amendment Rights). It attempts to make the official position clear and to protect US Commercial Activities from "Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS Movement) targeting Israel, including efforts to target United States companies that are engaged in commercial activities that are legal under United States law, and all efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel..."

So, what do you disagree with? I thought she was on point.
(COMMENT)

HR 246 (July 23, 2019) DOES NOT attempt to delegitimize a peoples certain political speech. It makes it plain that the US is not about to allow anti-Semitic racial ideology to take root → in any effort to isolate Israeli commerce and trade from US markets that is otherwise legal.

HR 246 is not an effort to
delegitimize a certain political speech that opposes a certain political speech that criticizes Israel. But it does:

◈ Make it clear that the US favors a two-state solution, which the BDS movement opposes.​
◈ It encourages the Palestinians to OPEN negotiations in favor of the right of the Jewish people in the matter of self-determination.​
◈ Makes it clear that the US promotes the idea of a Jewish State which the BDS movement openly opposes a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.​
There are pro-BDS Movement people in this discussion group. It does not forbid criticism of Israel. Pro-BDS activists have the right to hold opinions without interference; as long as, it does not infringe on Israeli Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) and:​
◈ Does not restrict Israel's right to protect national security, public order, public health, morals, or other rights and freedoms.​
◈ Does not take the form of advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.​

And while I specifically condemn people who expound on the idea that the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip may ignore the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and commit offenses that are solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel) establishing effective territorial control,→ I realize all too well that the Arab Palestinians have taken the path of hostility, violence, and hatred that forms a consistent pattern of criminal behaviors and barbarism that (unfortunately) sets the societal standard by which the Arab Palestinian society operates. Any culture which has adopted a policy, wherein "Armed Struggle" is the first option of a people to exercise in the "Right of Self-Determination" simply has not reached a stage (understanding the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States) that the people themselves need to achieve to be self-governing. The key features in the development of nations in the 21st Century will be the:

◈ The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,​
◈ The principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered,​

However, the concept does not include an immediate jump to Armed Struggle as the only way to liberate Palestine. Civilized people use Armed Struggle ONLY as a means of last resort.
.
1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
 
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: AntiSemetic Activities promoted by BDS
※→ P F tinmore, el at,

PREFACE: This action is not about restricting Free Speech (First Amendment Rights). It attempts to make the official position clear and to protect US Commercial Activities from "Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS Movement) targeting Israel, including efforts to target United States companies that are engaged in commercial activities that are legal under United States law, and all efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel..."


(COMMENT)

HR 246 (July 23, 2019) DOES NOT attempt to delegitimize a peoples certain political speech. It makes it plain that the US is not about to allow anti-Semitic racial ideology to take root → in any effort to isolate Israeli commerce and trade from US markets that is otherwise legal.

HR 246 is not an effort to
delegitimize a certain political speech that opposes a certain political speech that criticizes Israel. But it does:

◈ Make it clear that the US favors a two-state solution, which the BDS movement opposes.​
◈ It encourages the Palestinians to OPEN negotiations in favor of the right of the Jewish people in the matter of self-determination.​
◈ Makes it clear that the US promotes the idea of a Jewish State which the BDS movement openly opposes a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.​
There are pro-BDS Movement people in this discussion group. It does not forbid criticism of Israel. Pro-BDS activists have the right to hold opinions without interference; as long as, it does not infringe on Israeli Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) and:​
◈ Does not restrict Israel's right to protect national security, public order, public health, morals, or other rights and freedoms.​
◈ Does not take the form of advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.​

And while I specifically condemn people who expound on the idea that the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip may ignore the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and commit offenses that are solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel) establishing effective territorial control,→ I realize all too well that the Arab Palestinians have taken the path of hostility, violence, and hatred that forms a consistent pattern of criminal behaviors and barbarism that (unfortunately) sets the societal standard by which the Arab Palestinian society operates. Any culture which has adopted a policy, wherein "Armed Struggle" is the first option of a people to exercise in the "Right of Self-Determination" simply has not reached a stage (understanding the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States) that the people themselves need to achieve to be self-governing. The key features in the development of nations in the 21st Century will be the:

◈ The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,​
◈ The principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered,​

However, the concept does not include an immediate jump to Armed Struggle as the only way to liberate Palestine. Civilized people use Armed Struggle ONLY as a means of last resort.
.
1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
Holy word salad, Batman. I don't know where to start.
◈ The principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered,
Like the ICC, ICJ, or BDS.

However, the concept does not include an immediate jump to Armed Struggle as the only way to liberate Palestine. Civilized people use Armed Struggle ONLY as a means of last resort.
So, let's put BDS first.

BTW, several anti BDS laws have bit the dust in the courts as unconstitutional.

Krystal and Saagar: Abby Martin WINS Anti-BDS Lawsuit Against Georgia​


 
Last edited:
RE: Boycott Israel
SUBTOPIC: AntiSemetic Activities promoted by BDS
※→ P F tinmore, el at,


Word Salad Defined.png


Holy word salad, Batman. I don't know where to start.
(COMMENT)

I think you are misusing this terminology.

◈ There is nothing confusing here.​
◈ There is nothing unintelligible here.​
◈ There is no random string of words.​

It might be interesting to hear how you apply schizophrenia to me.

Like the ICC, ICJ, or BDS.
(COMMENT)

I think the issue is a domestic matter (
outside the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court or the International Court of Justice), (secure the Blessings of Liberty: Preamble to the US Constitution) when it comes to Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS Movement) interfering with free commerce.

✪ Article 1, Section 8, Constitution of the United States
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII.
So, let's put BDS first.
BTW, several anti BDS laws have bit the dust in the courts as unconstitutional.
(COMMENT)

Yes, I've seen that. I've not seen a law that limits the impact of the BDS Movement relative to commerce. The commerce clause outlines three separate and distinct powers granted to "Congress." And HR 246 gives the reasoning for the Congressional Intervention. And the BDS Movement (
a foreign lead movement) may not alter US Foreign Policy pertaining to restrictions that work to "end international support for Israel's oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law." Nor may this foreign lead Movement define what pressures may be brought to bear against the State of Israel as an advertised policy of the United States.

So, pull your head out of your ass and get with the program. (
Assuming you are an American.) We are (collectively) the United State of America. Congress, representing the will of the people, establishes the law of the land. Not the foreign lead movement which supports armed struggle punishable under the Geneva Convention.

OK, I'm off the soapbox.
1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
 

Forum List

Back
Top