Boycott Israel


This is what the Palestinians think about women's rights:

-----------

"Reputation is Everything": Honor Killing Among the Palestinians, by James Emery


In the Palestinian communities of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Israel, and Jordan, women are executed in their homes, in open fields, and occasionally in public, sometimes before crowds of cheering onlookers. Honor killings account for virtually all of the murders of Palestinian women in these areas....

Among Palestinians, all sexual encounters, including rape and incest, are blamed on the woman. Men are presumed innocent; the woman must have tempted him into raping her or enticed him into having an affair...

In some areas, a Palestinian woman is required to have a male relative accompany her whenever she leaves the home. Unfortunately, her male "guardian" -- father, brother, uncle, or cousin -- may be a sexual predator who rapes her. Should she become pregnant, he will publicly condemn her for dishonoring the family after killing both her and their unborn child.

A sixteen-year-old Palestinian girl became pregnant after being raped by her younger brother. Once her condition became known, her family encouraged her older brother to kill her to remove the blemish from their honor. Her brothers, the rapist and the murderer, were exonerated. The girl was blamed. "She made a mistake," said one of her male cousins. "She had to pay for it."

"Reputation is Everything": Honor Killing Among the Palestinians

-----------

Feminists in the West who take the sides of the Palestinians against Israel are delusional. I am confident they would rather live in Israel than in any Arab country in the world.
 
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts documenting BDS fails – stories of Israeli success that are rarely covered by British media outlets.


(full article online)




 
What boycott?


E0D80708-AFE2-4BBB-808F-235977F8B82F.jpeg
 
 
The BDS-supporting, Israel-hating Middle East Studies Association (MESA), which since 2019 has been headquartered at the Washington, D.C., campus of the George Washington University (GW), needs a new home. It just got the boot.

In a very low-key, 33-word statement, Executive Director of Media Relations & University Spokesperson Josh Grossman verified what my sources have been telling me since May. He wrote in an email that: “GW and MESA agreed to enter into a four-year partnership that has run its course, and we are now parting ways amicably. The agreement will expire by the end of the calendar year.”

Like a Hollywood agent’s somber press release on behalf of his divorcing clients, this confirmation of GW’s “conscious uncoupling” from MESA is very different from the way it heralded their union.

From this August 22, 2019, press release announcing the new arrangement, few would deduce that the relationship was a temporary one: “The Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA), one of the leading professional organizations for scholars and students of the Middle East, has signed a memo of understanding with the George Washington University to establish its headquarters at the Institute for Middle East Studies (IMES) in GW’s Elliott School of International Affairs.”

An equally enthusiastic article in the GW Hatchet on September 2, 2019, gushed that, “GW will provide a new home for [MESA’s] executive functions, elevating the University’s profile.” It quoted MESA’s president-elect, who said, “We are grateful for GWU for giving us the space and resources to establish our headquarters.”

The GW press release quoted IMES interim director Dr. William Youmans, who lavished praise on his new partner, claiming it is, “impossible to overstate how foundational MESA has been to the rise of the field of Middle East studies.” He called it, “a perfect match that should produce new opportunities for growth.” It turns out he was wrong.

Dr. Youmans should have known that the MESA of today is a sad remnant of the professional organization that it was at its founding in 1966. By the 1980s, as Martin Kramer wrote in “Ivory Towers on Sand” (2001), MESA had transformed the field of Middle East studies, and soon it, “rejected the idea of objective standards, disguised the vice of politicization as the virtue of commitment, and replaced proficiency with ideology.”

So what led to the separation?

MESA declined to answer my questions about its break up with GW, but the timing points to its vote in March 2022, “endorsing the Palestinian call for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions of Israel” as the cause.

The MESA BDS resolution accuses Israel of “systematic violations of the human rights of Palestinians living under Israeli direct or indirect control,” and calls for“an academic boycott of Israeli institutions for their complicity in Israel’s violations of human rights and international law through their provision of direct assistance to the military and intelligence establishments.”

To Holocaust survivors, the resolution of collective guilt and punishment smacked of the same boycott resolutions the Nazis instituted against German Jews. It is also factually incorrect and illogical.

First, it is widely known that Israeli universities do not provide assistance to the military as institutions. Second, some Israeli universities actually commemorate “Nakba Day,” hardly evidence of their complicity in suppressing Palestinian rights. Third, a boycott against ALL Israeli universities for their alleged “complicity” would not only affect Israelis, as nearly one in five of all students at Israeli universities are Palestinian. Finally, while MESA professed its undying loyalty to “academic freedom” around the world, its collective boycott of Israeli universities stands out as a stinging illustration of its antisemitic DNA.

After the vote, the “perfect match” between GW and MESA was on the rocks. The university immediately pushed back, asserting that it, “does not support divestment, academic boycotts, or other actions called for by BDS.” It added that, “the recent vote by the independent Middle East Studies Association (MESA) is not a statement of GW’s position as an institution.” For good measure, it threw in that MESA “is not a GW organization.”

MESA’s timing was terrible. Just four months after it moved its headquarters to the GW campus, Donald Trump signed an Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism. Before that, the BDS movement was a loathsome form of antisemitism disguised in academic garb as anti-Zionism. It was an embarrassment, but not a legal liability, for any campus that supported it. But the executive order extended Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to antisemitic acts, rendering the BDS movement something dangerous for an institution that receives money from the federal government.

GW is just the latest school to sever ties with MESA. As Kramer wrote recently, “MESA has been abandoned by many of the most established Middle East centers in the country,” including many, “that have quietly gone missing since the end of last year [2022].” They include:

  • Columbia University, Middle East Institute
  • Georgetown University, Center for Contemporary Arab Studies
  • Georgetown University, Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies
  • Harvard University, Center for Middle Eastern Studies
  • New York University, Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies
  • North Carolina Consortium for Middle East Studies (Duke University, Middle East Studies Center + University of North Carolina, Center for Middle East and Islamic Studies)
  • University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Near Eastern Studies
  • University of Chicago, Center for Middle Eastern Studies
It’s not that these centers have suddenly seen the light and are appalled at MESA’s vote. Many of them employ Israel-hating, BDS-supporting faculty. Dropping MESA was more of about self-preservation than morals.


(full article online)



 
From BNN:

The Iraqi Fencing & Modern Pentathlon Federation recently decided to withdraw its team from the FIE Fencing World Championships in Milan due to a potential confrontation with Israeli players.

This is not the first time the Iraqi team has made such a decision. The team also withdrew from individual races in a previous World Fencing Championship held in Istanbul for the same reason.

Azhar Ali, the director of the Federation’s media, stated that the team’s withdrawal only applies to confrontations with Israel, and that the Iraqi players would continue to participate in other competitions. Ali also emphasized that the Iraqi Federation would not face any penalties due to the withdrawal, as it is in compliance with international regulations.

That last sentence does not seem to be true.

The official FIE regulations state:


t.113 Refusing to fence an opponent
1 No fencer (individual or team) from an FIE member national federation may take part in an official competition if he refuses to fence against any other fencer whatsoever (individual or team) correctly entered in the event. Should this rule be broken, the penalties specified for offences of the 4th group will be applied (cf. t.158-162, t.169, t.170).
Offenses of the 4th group means a black card.
2 The FIE shall consider whether there are grounds, and to what extent, for taking sanctions against the national federation to which the disqualified competitor belongs (cf. FIE Statutes 1.2.4 and Rules Article t.170).

Any black card awarded at a competition of the FIE or at a competition organized by any Confederation which has subscribed to the FIE disciplinary code shall be reported within 10 days to the President of the FIE, for him to assess whether the severity of the offence committed warrants the sending of the report made by the FIE supervisor or by the Directoire Technique to the president of the Legal Commission, requesting him to establish a Disciplinary Tribunal to determine if penalties in addition to those imposed at the competition should be imposed.

Given that the Iraqi team did the same thing in Istanbul a couple of months ago, if the FIE has any concern for the sport, it should expel any team that has clearly stated that they refuse to participate in these competitions against legal competitors.


 
In early August, the government of Quebec announced it was opening a special office dedicated to Israel, based out of Canada’s embassy in the Jewish State. Quebec’s office, the 35th of its kind in the world, would be the first in the Middle East.

The office, which will be based out of Canada’s embassy in the Jewish state, will focus on the fields of research and innovation (R & D), and strengthening the bilateral relationship between Canada’s largest French-speaking province and Israel.

While Quebec’s government announced that the new outreach effort would be primarily focused on the areas of research and development, it also acknowledged the large and growing Francophone population in Israel, and the possibility of deepening ties with that demographic in Israel. From culture to economics and history, Quebec-Israel ties are undoubtedly set to grow to new levels.

Sharing the news on Twitter, Quebec’s International Relations Minister Martine Biron wrote that “Israel’s dynamic economy offers business opportunities” for the province.

The benefits to Quebec, and indeed to all of Canada, are substantial.

With Quebec’s office in Israel, the province will be doing more than making a public vote of confidence in Israel; it will be making a positive investment in Quebec’s economy, and not for the first time.

(full article online)


 

Forum List

Back
Top