The Case Against Frances Black’s Boycott Bill.

[roc_]

Do you see the picture of the Arab leader circled in the photo below, taken when Dublin's lord Mayor (also circled) attended the conference in Ramallah recently?



It is the figure who inspires the Palestinian so called "resistance" movement, Arafat's uncle, the notorious Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin Husseini.

Now, I want people to focus on something this leader said a few weeks before his death in 2001. He said:

"... One must draw a distinction between the strategic aspirations of the Palestinian people, who would not surrender one grain of Palestinian soil, and their political striving, based on the balance of power and the nature of the current international system … Our eyes will continue to be focused on the strategic goal — a Palestine from the River to the Sea — and nothing that we take today can make us forget this supreme truth..."

So, the question I have is - does the Palestinian "resistance" movement, encompassing the boycott movement as well as the terrorist organisations on the ground, and their sponsors in the middle east and Europe, actually perceive their "political striving" in the above terms?

Ok, people on here may be familiar with my own critical views on the boycott movement, spearheaded today by BDS. - I look highly critically to such statements made by BDS as "... What we want is not actual economic divestment from Israel. Everyone knows that the U.S. will never pull investments out of Israel like that. Instead, we are looking to shift the dialogue to whether or not to divest from Israel, without extraneous discussion of the basics. We hope that in 10, 20 years the public will just take for granted the premises that Israel is an Apartheid state, and then we can move from there...”

Also, it is very clear to me that BDS have a long-term vision of Israel's elimination. - Norman Finkelstein puts this very succinctly in this interview - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iggdO7C70P8

You know, everything I have seen coming from this boycott movement (example) corroborates the opinion that BDS seek to indoctrinate and imbue people with an abiding hatred of Israel and its people, so as to fortify them for attacks on Israel and her people by Hamas, Hizbollah, the PA, and other terrorist entities.

That worries me as an Irishman.

Note that what the Mufti said in the quote above merely corroborates the official stated PLO strategy that " ... [we] should seize whatever territory Israel is prepared or compelled to cede to them and use it as a springboard for further territorial gains until achieving the "complete liberation of Palestine..." (Source).

People on here may protest that that document is from 1974. But is not the Mufti corroborating it above in 2001? And Arafat in 1993 also corroborated it saying in Arabic to his own people, right during the signing of the Oslo accord:

"... Do not forget that our Palestine National Council accepted the decision in 1974. It called for the establishment of a national authority on any part of Palestinian land that is liberated or from which the Israelis withdrew. This is the fruit of your struggle, your sacrifices, and your jihad … This is the moment of return, the moment of gaining a foothold on the first liberated Palestinian land … Long live Palestine, liberated and Arab..." (Source)

Now, in highlighting the above, my intention is not to be overly partisan. - It is to question the assumptions that are apparently held by our representatives who are pushing this bill through. - What if they are wrong assumptions, and we are unwittingly helping to reinforce a strategy which can only lead to more war and suffering?

Do we need some serious perspective here? For example, that Israeli settlements cover only about 2% of the area of the West Bank. Or that 80 percent of the recent expansion has been in the existing settlement blocs everyone knows Israel would retain in any conceivable peace agreement. Or that many settlements in the West Bank like Gush Etzion and Hebron have had Jewish communities sometimes for thousands of years.

(I made a thread on here questioning the assumption that the settlements were central to this conflict, before).

Why does none of the above never enter any of the debate? Why does the fact of all of these discussion points never, ever entering the debate actually receive a bloody standing ovation?

[roc_]

I also think we should take a quick look at the Palestinian (non radical) perspective. I.e. The ordinary people who are genuinely working towards peace. These are the kinds of things they say:

"... As a Palestinian dedicated to working for peace and reconciliation between my people and our Israeli neighbors, I do not believe that the BDS advocates are helping our cause. On the contrary, they are just creating more hatred, enmity, and polarization.

Whereas the movement's spokespeople live in comfortable circumstances abroad, boycotts will result in increased economic hardships for actual Palestinians.

There is no connection between the tactics and objectives of the BDS movement and the on-the-ground realities of the Middle East. Israelis continue to come to the West Bank to do business, and most Palestinians continue to buy Israeli goods. Indeed, if you ask Palestinians what they want, they'll tell you they want jobs, secure education, and health. .."

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/...se-against-bds

"... I don’t know who essentially is pushing the Palestinians towards this story of an economic boycott of Israel; to the best of my knowledge, the Palestinians aren’t the ones setting the economic boycott of Israel in motion on their own and the Palestinian Authority (PA) is trying to rest on its momentum and not to lead it. The BDS (Boycott, Sanctions, and Divestment) movement is at the forefront leading the boycott, and as such it is hurting Palestinians a lot more than it is hurting Israel. To be sure, there are interested Palestinian parties, like Mustafa Barghouti, who ran from one dictatorial regime to become deputy under the auspices of the BDS movement and acts on its behalf to exacerbate and aggravate the boycott of Israel. To my mind, Barghouti can attain good results from his perspective with great ease in Norway, for example, but he would not even dare to enter refugee camps and suggest to the people living there that they launch a boycott against Israel.

Palestinian workers today are building homes in the settlements. They’re proud to build for Jews, and there’s no one to help find them alternative work.

Abu Mazen, head of the PA, hasn’t a clue about whom to target with this particular boycott. How can one impose a boycott on settlement products as long as one’s fellow citizens and nationals are the ones building the very same settlements? ..."

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/08/...t-the-boycott/

Etc.

[roc_]

And sure no one's probably interested, or will scorn it, but here is some of the Israeli's perspective:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...64407?mode=amp

“It hurts me that they are acting this way,” he said.

Mr Cohen, who employs 70 Palestinians in his factory, said Wednesday’s vote would first and foremost hurt the Palestinian workforce. About 7,000 of the 10,000 workers in Barkan are Palestinian.

“Ireland is certainly not a major market for Israel or for companies manufacturing in the West Bank,” said Dan Catarivas of the Manufacturers’ Association.

“Our policy is not to mix business and politics. It’s a pity that Ireland is mixing the two.”

Moshe Lavran, who owns three three factories in Barkan – making plastics, electronics and aluminium products – reacted angrily to the Senate vote.

“We can manage happily without Ireland. Every time the Irish use their mobile phones or computers they are using Israeli technology so let’s see them boycotting anything Israeli,” he said.

David Simha, president of the Israeli-Palestinian Chamber of Commerce, said Ireland was making a big mistake.

“The Palestinians need jobs to improve their economy and if the West Bank factories have no orders they will be forced to fire their Palestinian workers. Who gains from this? It doesn’t make sense.”

However, few products manufactured in the West Bank are exported to Ireland, so the practical effect of a boycott would be negligible.

Israel’s main fear is that the Irish move will encourage the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement and prompt other countries to follow suit.

[Dame_Enda]

First of all as Frances Black said on "The Week in Politics", this is not BDS. This only applies to the settlements, not to Israels 1967 borders.

If this was the 17th century I would support a boycott movement against the Plantation of Ulster.

[roc_]

First of all as Frances Black said on "The Week in Politics", this is not BDS. This only applies to the settlements, not to Israels 1967 borders.

It's a boycott. BDS are spearheading the boycott movement. Whether an individual initiative is targeting Israel proper, or just the settlements, or whatever. They coordinate all strategies and approaches related to boycott, or divestment or sanction.

[PBP voter]

Heard it all before.


This is up there with the Dunnes stores workers bycotting apartheid.

It's totally justified.

[Levellers]

"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more".... Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time - August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000


"The Palestinians" would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls." " Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

[PBP voter]

boycott
Origin
from the name of Captain Charles C. Boycott (1832–97), an Irish land agent so treated in 1880, in an attempt instigated by the Irish Land League to get rents reduced.

Irish people invented it.

[roc_]

First of all as Frances Black said on "The Week in Politics", this is not BDS. This only applies to the settlements, not to Israels 1967 borders.

And the settlements are an issue inevitably bound up with the location of a final boundary ensuing discussion as per resolution 242. The 1949 armistice line is certainly a factor driving how many have designated the Israeli settlements as 'illegal'.

[wombat]

Israel’s main fear is that the Irish move will encourage the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement and prompt other countries to follow suit.[/INDENT]

I doubt Germany or the U.S. will follow the lead of the Irish Seanad - don't blame me, I voted to abolish the trough.