RE:
BDS activity against Israel will be defined as anti-Semitism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
As Professor Chomsky says, the BDS Movement is a "tactic." The BDS Movement has nothing to do with the principles behind which the Palestinians are helped. The objective of the BDS Movement is to inflict economic damage to Israel and a platform by which the spread irresponsible charges and complex accusations about the
(Israeli - Palestinian) conflict in such a manner by sketching the Arab Palestinian angelic like a victim and painting the Israelis as a demonic and sinister entity creeping across the territorial landscape dispensing cruel and unjust treatment
(as if the Arab Palestinians have never given Israel just cause for the for Article 43 HR action).
Nor does the BDS Movement support the principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among States. There is absolutely no attempt by the political opponents to try and pursue in good faith negotiations for the settlement of their international disputes.
What do you mean by that?
(COMMENT)
"Good faith is fair and open dealing in human interactions. This is often thought to require sincere, honest intentions or belief, regardless of the outcome of an action."
(Wikipedia)
The BDS Movement supports accusatory actions technically untrue. It suggests that the Physical Security Barriers between Israel and the West Bank - or - Israel and the Gaza Strip are a form of "apartheid." The BDS Movement could allege that the barrier separates through conflict two cultures → the Arab and the Israeli
(albeit one more Middle Eastern and one more western); BUT! the barrier does not represent a separation between "races" or "religions." The BDS Movement uses this false accusation
(like "Apartheid) to draw out the sympathy of the audience. But by advancing the idea that territorial separations are the same as "apartheid" only diminishes the validity of such a program when the audience learns that the accusation is used in an improper fashion
(children using words they don't understand).
"The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts ... committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
It is an example of misinformation to invoke a negative emotion.
One more sub-point. The "Wall" - the physical security barrier is nothing more than the actualization of the right to sovereign territorial integrity.
On the second level, the BDS Movement is NOT an "advocacy" program for the Arab Palestinians. Nothing it does advocates the direct help of the (so-called) Arab Palestinian Victims. In fact, the BDS Movement may in some cases, actually wound the Arab Palestinians. The Company "Sodastream" laid-off 500 Arab Palestinian employees.
(Lost Employment Opportunities!)
Was the BDS Movement helpful in the cause of the Arab Palestinian people?
(RHETORICAL) Did it help Ala al-Qabbani when he lost his job when Sodastream pulled-out of the West Bank?
(RHETORICAL)
Finally, the BDS Movement claims to be an advocate, but supports "unrealistic" demands. The (so-called) "Right of Return" (RoR) is an example. The RoR is merely a masked demand for the destruction of the "Jewish National Home" (JNH) which is what the Arab-Israeli conflict is all about. The Arab Palestinian has not been able to destroy Israel from the outside
The manner and type of presentation of most BDS Activities are immediately to impress the audience that Israel is the principal cause of all problems facing the Arab Palestinians.
What problems do they have that are not related to Israel?
(COMMENT)
This is an "unreal" orbital question affected by the proximity of Israel. Most of the
(Arab - Israeli) disputes are "related" to Israel. Even if I move to stipulate that ALL the problems experienced by the Arab Palestinian are "related to" Israel, that does not mean that Israel is the proximate cause of the troubles.
The BDS Movement, as it relates to the manner and type of presentation, wants to amplify the problems; not make outline solutions to the problem
(how do we get from where we are to where we want to be). And where is the preverbal → "where we want to be?"
(RHETORICAL)
The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history,
that they will never submit or yield to any power
going to Palestine to enforce partition.
The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
Most Respectfully,
R