BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics

Subject: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jun 07 - 05:55 PM

Apologies for posting a column, but it says it all in little more than a nutshell and is not readily available via link, as one has to pay money for the access. It's by Thomas Friedman of the New York Times concerning the proposed boycott of Israel by British academics.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Title: A Boycott Built On Bias
Author: THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Date: June 17, 2007


Two weeks ago I took part in commencement for this year's doctoral
candidates at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The ceremony was held in the amphitheater on Mount Scopus, which faces out onto the Dead Sea and the Mountains of Moab. The setting sun framed the graduate students in a reddish-orange glow against a spectacular biblical backdrop.

Before I describe the ceremony, though, I have to note that it
coincided with the news that Britain's University and College Union had called on its members to consider a boycott of Israeli universities, accusing them of being complicit in Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories. Anyway, as the Hebrew U. doctoral candidates each had their names called out and rose to receive their diplomas from the university's leadership, I followed along in the program. The Israeli names rolled by: "Moshe Nahmany, Irit Nowik, Yuval Ofir. But then every so often I heard an Arab name, like Nuha Hijazi or Rifat Azam or Taleb Mokari.

Since the program listed everyone's degrees and advisers, I looked
them up. Rifat got his doctorate in law. His thesis was about
"International Taxation of Electronic Commerce." His adviser was "Prof. D. Gliksberg." Nuha got her doctorate in biochemistry. Her adviser was "Prof. R. Gabizon." Taleb had an asterisk by his name. So I looked at the bottom of the page. It said: "Summa Cum Laude." His chemistry thesis was about "Semiconductor-Metal Interfaces," and his adviser was "Prof. U. Banin."

These were Israeli Arab doctoral students -- many of them women and
one of whom accepted her degree wearing a tight veil over her head.
Funny -- she could receive her degree wearing a veil from the Hebrew
University, but could not do so in France, where the veil is banned in public schools. Arab families cheered unabashedly when their sons and daughters received their Hebrew U. Ph.D. diplomas, just like the Jewish parents.

How crazy is this, I thought. Israel's premier university is giving
Ph.D.'s to Arab students, two of whom were from East Jerusalem -- i.e. the occupied territories -- supervised by Jewish Israeli professors, all while some far-left British academics are calling for a boycott of Israeli universities.

I tell this story to underscore the obvious : that the reality here
is so much more morally complex than the outside meddlers present it.
Have no doubt, I have long opposed Israel's post-1967 settlements. They have squandered billions and degraded the Israeli Army by making it an army of occupation to protect the settlers and their roads. And that web of settlements and roads has carved up the West Bank in an ugly and brutal manner -- much uglier than Israel's friends abroad ever admit. Indeed, their silence, particularly American Jewish leaders, enabled the settlement lunacy.

But you'd have to be a blind, deaf and dumb visitor to Israel today
not to see that the vast majority of Israelis recognize this historic
mistake, and they not only approved Ariel Sharon's unilateral uprooting of Israeli settlements in Gaza to help remedy it, but elected Ehud Olmert precisely to do the same in the West Bank. The fact that it is not happening now is hardly Israel's fault alone. The Palestinians are in turmoil.

So to single out Israeli universities alone for a punitive boycott is rank anti-Semitism. Let's see, Syria is being investigated by the
United Nations for murdering Lebanon's former prime minister, Rafik Hariri. Syrian agents are suspected of killing the finest freedom-loving Lebanese journalists, Gibran Tueni and Samir Kassir. But none of that moves the far left to call for a boycott of Syrian universities. Why? Sudan is engaged in genocide in Darfur. Why no boycott of Sudan? Why?

If the far-left academics driving this boycott actually cared about
Palestinians they would call on every British university to accept 20
Palestinian students on full scholarships to help them with what they
need most -- building the skills to run a modern state and economy. And they would call on every British university to dispatch visiting
professors to every Palestinian university to help upgrade their academic offerings. And they would challenge every Israeli university that already offers Ph.D.'s to Israeli Arabs to do even more. And they would challenge every Arab university the same way.

That's what people who actually care about Palestinians would do. But just singling out Israeli universities for a boycott, in the face of all the other madness in the Middle East -- that's what anti-Semites would do.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Jun 07 - 06:16 PM

Well, as you say, "the reality of the situation is far more complex" than people with a chip on their shoulders would ever be prepared to admit...or even realize.

That's the trouble with having a chip on one's shoulder about anything. One no longer thinks, one simply reacts and vents anger.

This is true of many anti-Israel people, and it is true of many pro-Israel people. It's what poisons every political discussion on this forum and turns it into a pointless hate-fest.

"If the far-left academics driving this boycott actually cared about
Palestinians......."

Yeah. ;-) And if we were all totally fair and wise and unprejudiced...

Look, I'll tell you what they really CARE about: their own frikkin' righteous OPINION and their grand presumption that they are RIGHT, dead right, and always right about everything, and anyone who doesn't see it their way is wrong, dead wrong...and probably stupid and bigotted to boot. That, essentially, is the one thing that most people really care about, when you get right down to it. Their own opinion. They are constantly defending their own identity against all comers, and it makes them less than completely objective.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Jun 07 - 09:44 AM

That is pretty incomprehensible, even for you, LH! It seems you are trying to say that because people disagree they are both wrong, so I'm going to take the side of whoever buys me a beer, first (although come to think of it that's not the worst way to judge).

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Jun 07 - 10:00 AM

Oh, I dunno-sounds pretty good for LH. Consider the alternatives: what would Spaw have said?!

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: EBarnacle
Date: 21 Jun 07 - 06:36 PM

As one with relatives in this struggle, I am thoroughly upset by any assumption that Israel is always wrong or that the Palestinians are always wrong.

There is plenty of responsibility to go around. Note that I say responsibility, not blame. We got here through a liberal dispersion of blame from both sides. There has to be a willingness to listen to the other side.

The violents [not merely militants but irreconcilable bomb throwers] have taken over Gaza. The West Bank governing body and Israel seem to be entering a period of discussion. Let's hope it takes root and grows.

As an active member of the governing body of an academic union, I am quite aware that possession of a PhD does not make anyone allwise. We have our share of conspiracy theorists, militants and loonies. There are often off the wall and able to drag many others along because it is politically correct to do something instead of learning more about the situation. I believe that that is what is occurring here.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Jun 07 - 08:01 PM

I don't know enough about the academic ban to be sure either way, and it doesn't affect me since I'm not an academic.

But so far as Israeli fruit and so forth in supermarkets, I regard them in the same way I used to regard South African goods.   And, as with South African goods, I look forward in hope to a day when I'll feel able to buy them.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jun 07 - 08:52 PM

"That is pretty incomprehensible, even for you, LH!"

Oh yeah? Yeah, robomatic? Whaddya mean "even for you"? Huh? You implyin' that I am normally incomprehensible? Hooooweee...I am goin' into a slow burn here...I am gonna send Chongo over to straighten you out, buster!

;-)

I am simply saying that most people who get into political arguments are so caught up in their own damn ego and its endless struggle for supremacy that it gets in the way of them being anything even near fair and objective. They can only see evil on the other side of the issue from them and they can only see good on their side. And that ruins most political discussions from the getgo. We would all be better off doing something more constructive with our time, like gardening or painting the house or bathing the dog.

So, I think I'll go do something constructive like that right now. See ya. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 08:21 AM

to single out Israeli universities alone for a punitive boycott is rank anti-Semitism.

I agree.

McGrath, I am curious which other countries you boycott too when shopping.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: C. Ham
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 09:14 AM

Perhaps McGrath's boycott should start with Great Britain and France. The Indians of North America are still paying the price for the British and French conquests of their lands, the murder of countless ancestors, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: redsnapper
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 09:51 AM

I am (semi-)academic (more on the research side) and cannot see what can be gained by such a boycott.

RS

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 10:19 AM

One has to wonder why he boycotted South African products...


In Israel, Moslems can go to Israeli universities.

In Arab countries, Jews cannot go to universities at all ( nor can they live there).

Obviously, there is a need to boycott the Israeli universities...
And demand that thos Jews go to the back of the bus, use seperate rest rooms and water fountains, and stay in there appointed place.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 12:02 PM

People criticising the South African boycott would always object to picking out that one country when there were plenty of human rights abuses in other countries.   

Basically it came down to feeling that there was a country with close links to us, which has some historical democratic credentials and aspirations, but which was engaged in policies of sustained repression of a large section of its population, on the basis of ethnicity.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 01:15 PM

I'm still boycotting Liechtenstein. I can't abide their policy on truffles.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 04:28 PM

Andorra here. I detest their military policies.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: robomatic
Date: 23 Jun 07 - 01:34 PM

LH: Thanks for your good natured and literate answer. I agree with your sentiment about people, including English academics, having preconceived notions and then sticking to them regardless of additional information or a balanced factual view. What kind of irked me was that my laboriously copied Friedman article indeed gave a more balanced view, 'cause Friedman gave an example of people with Arabic names in close high level academic work with people with Israeli names, presumably indicating examples of Arab/ Jewish cooperation in Israeli academia. Friedman was making a point and an argument that Israel at some level was practising tolerance and the proposed English academic ban was a pursuit of intolerance in the form of anti-semitism.

So I kind of thought you made your first comment without reading my initial post.

For the most part I like to read your posts LH, although I don't always agree with everything in them.

I pretty much always agree with Chongo. Apparently he's a friend of yours. Well, there's no accounting for taste, and if Chongo finds his way here I can come up with a banana or three and a place to hang his head...

As for boycotts I have actually kind of boycotted Matanuska Maid. They were an Alaskan outfit that handled locally produced milk products, which was a reason to seek them out, even though they were quite a bit more expensive than milk barged up from the lower 48. But the news came out that Mat Maid was supplementing their product with lower 48 milk making them a partial re-seller. But what broke the camel's back for me was when they started selling Matanuska Maid orange juice! To explain what that means in painful detail, there ain't no Alaskan oranges! So at some point they decided they could market their label, and I declined to agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jun 07 - 01:55 PM

Heh! That's a pretty weird story about Matanuska Maid, robomatic.

Yeah, Chongo is a real diamond in the rough. He's from what they call the old school.

Friedman's article is well-balanced, and he makes a bunch of quite useful points, as you say. What he interprets as "anti-semitism" may indeed be anti-semitism...or it may be "anti-Israeli" political sentiment, which I don't think is quite the same thing as anti-semitism exactly. Once people decide they don't like the policies of any given nation-state, they tend to see something bad about almost everything it does. This doesn't necessarily mean that they see something bad about the ordinary people OF that nation-state. For example, one might detest the government of the USA...but not carry hatred toward Americans as individual people. One might detest the social policies of Saudi Arabia...but not denigrate Saudis as individuals just because they are Saudis. One might be opposed to Cuba, because of its government, but would this mean one hated all Cubans?

Could a Cuban brand criticism of Cuban government policies as "anti-Cuban" (in the same sense that is carried by the term "anti-semitic")?

No, I don't think so.

So are the left wing people Friedman is referring to anti-semites? Well, I think some of them probably are, and some on the other hand are probably simply anti-Israeli government policy, but not anti-semitic in what that word implies. In other words, they don't hate all Jews simply on the basis of their cultural identity.

You see, it's pretty scary for any non-Jew who radically disagrees with any Israeli government policy to say so in public...since he will probably be accused of anti-semitism for having done so. Someone who radically disagrees with a Russian, American, Cuban, Korean, Chinese, or Iranian policy doesn't have to fear being labelled in quite that same way. There is no other term I know of that carries the automatic condemnatory stigma in today's society that "anti-semitic" does...except for these two: "sexist" and "racist".

They have all become words used as weapons to intimidate other people into silence. That's emotional blackmail.

Be that as it may, yes, I think Friedman's article is good and he has made some excellent points.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 07:33 AM

LH,

In general, I agree with your analysis. HOWEVER, one additional point to consider is when someone/a group object to the policies of the Israeli government, yet are silent or approving of equivilent or far worse policies by other nations in the same conflict. THAT is what is labeled, correctly or not, as "anti-semitism".

For example, the claim that Moslems in Israel are treated as second-class citizens, when the Arab nations ( Jordan and Saudi Arabia) have prohibited Jews from even being citizens. And THAT predates the formation of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 07:56 AM

To continue:

Should Moslems be treated differently in Israel than others? NO.

But to make that a reason for action, while taking the stand that whatever the Arab Moslem nations do should not be critisized is unreasonable.

Another case: Israel is accused of "murder" when it attacks the launchers of Palestinian rockets, and the bomb-making factories, yet there is silence on the internationally illegal area bombardment of Israel by the Palestinians. Israel is stated NOT to have the right to defend itself, and critisized for all civilian causualties caused by the Palestinians' use of schools and homes for war-making production ( prohibited by the Geneva Conventions), while all actions of the Moslems are claimed (by the same critics of Israeli policy) to be in self defense, including the deliberate (and illegal, by the Geneva Conventions) targeting of children and innocents.

Should the Israelis work to NOT kill innocents? YES. But I have seen few examples that could even be claimed to be deliberate. while the number of Palestinian attacks upon non-combatants is far too great to ignore. Yet, it seems to be, consistantly.

THAT isd what is ( correctly or incorrectly) is labeled "anti-semitic".

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: C. Ham
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 10:10 AM

Could a Cuban brand criticism of Cuban government policies as "anti-Cuban" (in the same sense that is carried by the term "anti-semitic")?

No, I don't think so.

Criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism when Israel is held to a higher standard than other countries or is continually singled out for constant criticism while other countries which may be far worse are ignored.

Simply criticizing an Israeli government policy does not make anyone an anti-Semite. Continually misrepresenting what Israel does, does.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 10:24 AM

From what limited understanding I have of the Middle-east, this is what I'm hearing.
The Ohmert government is waiting to nuke Iran. They want complicity in this from the US.

There seems to be a desperate reaction to this which would motivate boycotts. This pattern of Israeli hegenomy is reflected in dealing with Palestinians.

Also, the fact that Finklestein was denied tenure at DePaul University for speaking out against Israeli policy could have fueled this boycott as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 11:10 AM

when Israel is held to a higher standard than other countries

Is Israel really "held to a higher standard" than would be expected of other parliamentary democracies, such as the UK or France or Germany, or the UK or Australia?

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: C. Ham
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 03:08 PM

From what limited understanding I have of the Middle-east, this is what I'm hearing.
The Ohmert government is waiting to nuke Iran. They want complicity in this from the US.

There seems to be a desperate reaction to this which would motivate boycotts. This pattern of Israeli hegenomy is reflected in dealing with Palestinians.

Also, the fact that Finklestein was denied tenure at DePaul University for speaking out against Israeli policy could have fueled this boycott as well.

If you think Israel is LOOKING to nuke Iran, or anyone else for that matter, your understanding of the Middle East is not "limited," is absolutely ZERO. That last thing Israel has any desire for is a nuclear confrontation.

As for Finkelstein, maybe he was denied tenure because DePaul, a University of the Catholic Church, didn't think he merited tenure. Your implication that Israel controls a Catholic institution in the USA is, in fact, ANTI-SEMITISM.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 03:34 PM

No, C.Ham - it is, if anything, anti-Israel. Israel is not Judaism, and vice versa. Equating the two, or implying that they should be equated, is what precipitates the idea that objecting to the policies of the one is the same as opposing the belief system(s) of the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 04:31 PM

So, is it that you feel that Arabs are so uncivilized as to not be expected to obey international law?

Those heathen savages that have to be treated like children, again?

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 04:33 PM

C.Ham and BB - Yes, I follow your line of reasoning. It all becomes very subjective. People whose loyalties instinctively lie with Israel will tend to feel that Israel is being unfairly "held to a higher standard" than other nations. People whose instinctive loyalties don't lie with Israel will tend to feel that Israel receives preferential treatment (from the USA and various other powers), as compared to other nations. Both sets of people will get aggravated with the other, and the debate will go on... ;-)

That's life, I guess. The only point I wish to make is that being opposed to some Israeli policy is not necessarily the same thing as "anti-semitism", since one would have to hate ALL Jews just because they ARE Jews to be anti-semitic. I am quite certain that many of the people who disagree with recent Zionist philosophy (as it applies in the Middle East) do not hate Jews in general or even dislike Jews or even have any significant opinion about Jews in general. They may very well like Jews in general, but not like the Israeli government very much at all.

If so, they are not anti-semitic.

But as I said, it's all very subjective...and we will never sort it out in such a way as to satisfy everyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 07:03 PM

But equally, beardedbruce it could be said "So, is it that you feel that Israelis are so uncivilized as to not be expected to obey international law?"

There is a lot of injustice in the world, and many countries where governments are responsible for disgraceful things. Is it right to say that we should never criticise any one government without in the same breath breath listing all the others? Never protest about one injustice unless at the same time we bring in all the others?

Focussing attention on one thing inevitably means setting aside, for the time being, attention to other things. That is what focussing consists of.

I do not think that there are many critics of Israel who are not pretty contemptuous of Saudi Arabia's record in relation to human rights, for example.

There is a focus on Israel, that is true - but I think that is based largely on a feeling that Israel is a country where human rights are officially and vocally seen as important. That carries a consequence that outsiders who value human rights feel entitled to be strongly critical when these are set aside, including the right to life.

It seems reasonable to apply to Israel the same standards we would apply to our own countries. Standards which our own countries sometime fail to adhere to, and are quite rightly criticised for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 08:44 PM

Actually, LH, IMHO "Paedophile" and "Pornography" are both used as labels with great stigma, possibly as much as "sexist" "racist" and "fascist" - or even "liberal" or "socialist". And "terrorist", which is institutionally applied to non-white organisations and withheld from white organisations. This abuse of labels perhaps merits another thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 09:13 PM

Well, said, McGrath.

Richard Bridge - You are so right! It does merit a thread all its own.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: GUEST,Dax
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 09:28 PM

I find it very difficult to understand the Arab perspective regarding Israel as well, and as Arab tries to murder Arab in Palestine the innocent Palestinian refugees try to enter Israel for safety. The crisis is too critical to be taken lightly, but I see it as a paradox.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jun 07 - 10:10 PM

Oh, there are plenty of paradoxes in wartime. And you're right, this is another one. They are all too common.

It is always a different matter dealing with paramilitary militias, as opposed to uniformed national armies. It's bloody dangerous. It's harder to determine who is who...both for the people doing the shooting and for those who simply get caught in the crossfire. It is extremely hard to govern or maintain order. It is hard to determine who is even giving the orders.

You know, the Arabs have done a great deal of infighting with each down through history, so this is not something new.

It's kind of comparable to the North American Indians in that respect, when they were fighting the American military tooth and nail...as well as each other. Jews are an embattled minority squeezed into a very small region of the Middle East, and they also have benefit of a highly modernized society, and a highly educated, westernized public. That means that they, being surrounded, and seeing themselves that way, will act as one unified and well-organized group in their own defence. The Arabs are very disunited and have a much less developed and modernized society. That naturally results in fragmented and divided behaviour on their part. The same thing is happening in Iraq, only there it's probably even worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 07:57 AM

"There is a lot of injustice in the world, and many countries where governments are responsible for disgraceful things. Is it right to say that we should never criticise any one government without in the same breath breath listing all the others? Never protest about one injustice unless at the same time we bring in all the others?

Focussing attention on one thing inevitably means setting aside, for the time being, attention to other things. That is what focussing consists of. "



Have I asked you to consider ALL the others? NO! I have stated that to "focus" on Israel, while setting aside ALL attention to the other side IN THE SAME CONFLICT is showing a bias.

And again, you have stated that Israel is being held to a different standard than you hold the other side IN THE SAME CONFLICT to.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: goatfell
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 08:44 AM

a song written by Bobby Darin

Come and sing a simple song of freedom
      Sing it like you've never sung before
      Let it fill the air
      Tell the people everywhere
      We, the people here, don't want a war.

      Hey, there, mister black man, can you hear me?
      I don't want your diamonds or your game
      I just want to be someone known to you as me
      And I will bet my life you want the same.

      Come and sing a simple song of freedom
      Sing it like you've never sung before
      Let it fill the air
      Tell the people everywhere
      We, the people here, don't want a war.

      Seven hundred million are ya list'nin'?
      Most of what you read is made of lies
      But, speakin' one to one ain't it everybody's sun
      To wake to in the mornin' when we rise?

      Come and sing a simple song of freedom
      Sing it like you've never sung before
      Let it fill the air
      Tell the people everywhere
      We, the people here, don't want a war.

      Brother Solzhenitsyn, are you busy?
      If not, won't you drop this friend a line
      Tell me if the man who is plowin' up your land
      Has got the war machine upon his mind?

      Come and sing a simple song of freedom
      Sing it like you've never sung before
      Let it fill the air
      Tell the people everywhere
      We, the people here, don't want a war.

      Now, no doubt some folks enjoy doin' battle
      Like presidents, prime ministers and kings
      So, let's all build them shelves
      Where they can fight among themselves
      Leave the people be who love to sing.

      Come and sing a simple song of freedom
      Sing it like you've never sung before
      Let it fill the air
      Tell the people everywhere
      We, the people here, don't want a war.

      I say … let it fill the air …
      Tellin' people everywhere …
      We, the people here, don't want a war.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 09:43 AM

The suggested boycott has not yet been put to referendum and most academics I know (myself included) are horrified that we should think of boycotting anyone. I certainly don't feel it's my place to do so. No matter what the good intentions may be, it leaves a very nasty taste in my mouth.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 11:00 AM

the Arabs have done a great deal of infighting with each down through history

But not a patch compared to what we have done to each other in Europe.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 11:21 AM

It seems to me that it is pretty common for critics of Israel to express dismay and horror at such things as suicide bombings, and attacks directed at civilians. And that is of course right.

However the death toll from these terrible things is far lower than the numbers killed by Israel. It's an awful process of reprisal followed by counter-reprisal followed by yet another counter-reprisal... As is always the case in these situations where a self-sustaining cycle of violence has been allowed to develop, each side will start counting at a different atrocity carried out by the other side, which will be identified by the other side as being a reprisal to an earlier atrocity.

But what is beyond question in this horrible exchange is the fact that the innocent victims have overwhelmingly been Arabs - together with occasional outsiders such as Tom Hurndell or Rachel Corrie. That reflects the far greater firepower on one side.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 05:19 PM

As you say, it is all a matter of how you count, and starting from when. Perhaps it is true "that the innocent victims have overwhelmingly been Arabs", although this is subject to a great deal of discussion; it is a regretable fact that the Palestinian fighters often do not clear residents out of private homes before they use them as sniper posts or rocket-launching sites, thus subjecting them to retaliatory fire. Perhaps the category of "innocent victims" should be expanded to include the five Spanish peacekeepers killed by a car bomb in Lebanon over the weekend?

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 06:03 PM

"this is subject to a great deal of discussion" There is no question but that the overwhelming majority of innocent victims have been Arabs killed by the IDF or by settler militias.

How far these deaths can be justified as "collateral damage" in the course of legitimate military actions is another matter. In a considerable proportion of these cases it would be very hard indeed to make that argument stand up.

The same is true when it comes to victims of actions carried out by Israel's opponents.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: GUEST,dax
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 06:29 PM

To beg the question:
"If the Arabs left Israel in peace would there be any need for retaliation by the Jewish state?"

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 06:46 PM

If all of us left each other in peace and left each other's property alone, there would be no need for anyone to retaliate against anyone, would there?

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: GUEST,dax
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 07:23 PM

amen to that!

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 07:26 PM

A good start to that might be to stop building illegal settlements all over occupied territories.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: GUEST,dax
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 07:49 PM

My understanding, perhaps mistaken, is that the illegal settlements are being abandoned, and no new ones are being built. If this is incorrect then I agree with you McGrath!

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jun 07 - 08:01 PM

The trouble is, all the settlements on the West Bank are illegal under international law.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: C. Ham
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 08:55 AM

A BETRAYAL OF THE TEACHING PROFESSION

Ernest J. Weinrib
National Post, June 8, 2007

For the last six weeks, I have been teaching legal philosophy at the Centre for Advanced Legal Studies at the University of Tel Aviv. My Israeli students were bright, engaged and wonderfully argumentative. I also had amazing conversations with my teaching colleagues as we tested our latest ideas on one another in vigorous but friendly conversations.   It was a typical university experience. What mattered was ideas, not citizenship.

I, a Canadian, interacted not only with Israeli students and teachers but with visitors from other countries. Some of the students told me they hoped to study law at the University of Toronto through an exchange program or as graduate students… University life is no longer local. It has become international. This has made it more vital than it ever was.

Teaching law in Israel is unique in one respect. Legal issues that may be abstract elsewhere have a concrete immediacy there. Everyone is aware of the extraordinary challenges that the country's security situation poses for the rule of law. Israeli professors have diverse views about these challenges. They express these views with great independence of mind.

Toward the end of my stay, the union that represents British university teachers announced that it would encourage a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. The boycott proposal is based on the absurd notion that Israeli academics are collectively complicit in government policies of which the British professors disapprove. The boycott proposal made me wonder whether the British university teachers understand what university teaching is.

Teaching is a sublime expression of our common humanity and of our dignity as thinking beings. Its importance attests to the role that thought plays in our lives, in our personalities, in our identities and in our relationships. It is a peaceful activity that connects us with others through a shared commitment to the free discussion of ideas. In teaching we transcend space, time and difference. What matters to us as teachers is the quality of ideas, not their country of origin. We are partisans, not of particular political causes, but of the very activity of thinking. This activity is inclusive of all who can contribute to it.

A boycott excludes participants for reasons that have nothing to do with the value of their contributions. Of course, it injures those who are excluded. But it inflicts even greater injury on those who exclude, because it shows that they are not to be taken seriously as university teachers. But the greatest injury is suffered by the university community at large, because it undermines international confidence in academic integrity. This sense of integrity is the community's lifeblood.

Israeli academics are as diverse and as independent of government as any in the world. The contributions that Israeli universities have made to international academic life are astonishing, especially given the country's size and the embattled conditions of its existence. The four Nobel prizes won in the last five years by Israeli-trained academics are ample evidence.

The proposal by the British university teachers of a boycott against Israeli university teachers is a betrayal of the ideals of teaching. The boycott elevates division over harmony, exclusion over co-operation, ideology over ideas and discrimination over dialogue.

I hope that faculty associations in Canada and elsewhere register their outrage to our British colleagues. The boycott proposal is a disgrace to British university teachers and an embarrassment to university teachers everywhere. Our common vocation as university teachers requires us to repudiate this perversion of the activity to which we have devoted our lives.

(Ernest J. Weinrib is the Cecil A. Wright Professor of Law at the University of Toronto.)

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: GUEST,Professor Of Law
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:05 AM

Fighting Islamic terrorism is often described as an information battle. If the West could just open up a dialog with the Islamic world, all would be well. It's not that simple. Moslems, in general, have a well developed sense of victimization by the West. A recent example was a plea, by the head of an organization representing Spanish Moslems, that Spain should offer Spanish citizenship the descendents of 300,000 Moslems expelled from Spain in 1609. Some Spaniards countered with a call for the Moslem world to pay reparations for the destruction inflicted on Spain by centuries of invasions and attempts to conquer the entire peninsula. This was met by incomprehension by Moslems, who believe it is their religious duty to bring their religion to the rest of the world, by force if necessary (or, in the current world, if possible.) There is a comprehension gap here, that is not being closed quickly enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:21 AM

"How far these deaths can be justified as "collateral damage" in the course of legitimate military actions is another matter. In a considerable proportion of these cases it would be very hard indeed to make that argument stand up.

The same is true when it comes to victims of actions carried out by Israel's opponents. "


There is a difference between the DELIBERATE targeting of innocents ( children and civilians) and the deaths of innocents while targeting military targets ( bomb-makers and rocket launchers). Israel launching a missile at the launch site of a rocket that hits Israel is NOT the same as the launching of that rocket to hit civilian areas.

I have NEVER stated that the attacks on Israeli MILITARY targets were terrorism, or should be protested. Nor should the Israeli attacks upon the individuals who are waging war and directly attacking Israel.

BUT, Israel attacking a house where rockets were fired from, or being made, is NOT the same as Palestinian rockets hitting a school, or a suicide bomber selecting a children's party to destroy.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 10:06 AM

The term "collateral damage", BTW, is never used by the military to refer to civilian deaths. The term refers to unplanned and generally unexpected physical damage, such as the blocking of a road by debris from a destroyed building.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 04:09 PM

No doubt many of the non-combatants killed by the IDF were killed in the ways bearded bruce indicated there. That was why I used the phrase "a considerable proportion of these cases" to refer to those which did not.

I typed "Palestine girl shot" into Google, and this was the first story that came up in a long long list - a BBC report about a 10m year old shot by border police - Palestinian girl dies of injuries

Here is a paragraph from that story: "The Israeli human rights group B'Tselem has said that last year 660 Palestinians were killed by Israeli security forces. In the same period 23 Israeli civilians were killed by Palestinians."

No one should deny that atrocities have been carried out by opponents of Israel. But no one should close their eyes to some of the things that have been done in the name of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 04:18 PM

from that article...


"Palestinians say she was with two other girls in the village when an Israeli border police vehicle drove past.

Stones were thrown in the direction of the police, who responded with tear-gas and stun-grenades. The girl was hit in the head.

The border police have launched an investigation.

Regret

An Israeli border police spokeswoman said that they had used "crowd control means against stone throwers" protesting against the construction of Israel's controversial barrier.

"The border police expresses its regret over the death of the girl and hopes the circumstances of the incident are quickly revealed." "

Subject: RE: BS: Proposed Israel boycott by academics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 04:49 PM

"Regret"...

Here is another expression of regret at the killing of that little girl, Abir Aramin, that carries a bit more weight. It was made by a lady called Nurit Peled, who is an Israeli, and the mother of a girl who was killed by a Palestinian who blew himself up:

"It is the occupation that kills our children. We mourn the death of Abir Aramin, as we mourn every dead child in sadness and anger, the girl who was shot by an Israeli soldier who will remain unpunished, while the father of Abir was in prison for nine years for being in the Palestinian resistance.

I just signed the register of condolences for the familiy of Abir and ask other people to do the same."

From this page

And as I said, that story about Abir Aramin was just a random one, the first that came up from a Google search for "Palestine girl shot".