The UK Government, BDS and the Jews

February 18, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

The British government has issued new directives aimed at preventing public entities, universities and student unions from boycotting Israeli products. The new rules authorize the British government to take legal action against organizations that impose such boycotts.

Even as a supporter of every form of resistance to Israel and Zionism and a supporter of the BDS principle, I am thrilled by these new draconian measures, as I am always delighted when Jewish power manifests its true face. There is a problem though. BDS has never taken on Jewish power. BDS is in itself a manifestation of Jewish power.

The BDS movement was compromised from its onset. BDS changedits goal statement in an effort to appease its Jewish supporters and Zionist funders.* Many commentators now see that BDS has been reduced to an internal Jewish exchange that benefits Israel and Zionism. Instead of debating ‘Israel’s right to exist,’ the argument has been changed into various Jews arguing about the ‘right to BDS.’ This is a very clever move on Netanyahu/Mondoweiss’ part.

BDS, originally intended to mount economic and political pressure on Israel and its supporters, achieved the opposite. It united the Jews, both Zionists and the so called ‘anti,’ in a debate on BDS.

The new British anti BDS bill is a spectacle of Jewish power, both Zionist and ‘anti.’ BDS is now an internal Jewish debate. Read today’s Middle East Monitor report on the dissent to the new directive. The Palestinians are not even mentioned. Instead we learn about the good BDS Jews.  “Amongst those who have objected to the plans were British Jews from various organisations who defended the BDS movement as “a weapon of moral persuasion, deploying a tactic frequently used by powerless people in their opposition to racism, slavery and oppression.”

As if the opposition to the British Government wasn’t Jewish enough, the Middle East Monitor drops a few Jewish names to add texture to this chicken soup:

“Signed by Jacqueline Rose of the Independent Jewish Voices, Michael Kalmanovitz of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network and Julia Bard of the Jewish Socialists’ Group, the letter further states how the only form of anti-Semitism the government is leaning toward is the belief “that all Jews outside Israel uncritically support Israel’s actions.”

I pray for the Palestinians that one day soon they will manage to reclaim their own struggle from its dominance by a league of oppressors.

 

In case you seek a “Kosher stamp of approval”, Naomi @JBIG is happy to give you one

 

* When the call for Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions of Israeli goods was established in 2005 in Ramallah its first demand was for Israel to:

“End[ing] its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantl[ing] the Wall” (http://www.bdsmovement.net/call)

This call didn’t leave room for interpretation. Back in 2005, the BDS movement disputed the legitimacy of the Jewish State.

But in 2010, its primary goal was changed significantly, it now reads:

“Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall” (http://www.bdsmovement.net/bdsintro).

There is no public record of the process that led to this change. And as if to prove its deceptive nature, the change appears only in English and has never been integrated into any of the official BDS publications in Arabic. It is likely that most Palestinians are not aware of the change made on their behalf by people who claim to be their ‘grass root’ representatives. Further study suggests that the change in the BDS goal statement that de-facto legitimizes the Jewish State took place at the time the BDS became popular amongst Jewish activists and accepted funds from liberal Zionist George Soros’s Open Society Institute. You can read more about BDS, Soros money promoting BDS campaign here:

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/israelpalestine-and-the-queer-international-a-book-review-by.html

 

Advertisements

Jewish Solidarity Spin: How Jews Undermine the Palestinian Cause

Keynote at University Temple United Methodist Church in Seattle, WA May 16, 2015

Bill Alford has managed to produce a sharp and fast edit of my recent talk (28 minutes). JVP attempted to block my American tour. They did the same to Alison Weir (I will publish JVP’s call to excommunicate Weir very  soon, it was leaked to me by three different JVP chapter leaders) . But the one thing JVP didn’t do is produce an answer to the issues raised in these talks. They better move fast because I do not have any plans to retire and I have much more to say.

https://archive.org/embed/scm-465569-jewishsolidarityspinhowjewsun

Mazal Tov To Ludwig Watzal and The ‘Call For BDS’

May 20, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

 By Gilad Atzmon

It is encouraging to read that Ludwig Watzal, my prime detractor in Germany, has now fully embraced my criticism of Jewish liberals and the Jewish Left. Watzal now admits that the BDS Movement has been hijacked by Liberal Zionists.

Just a few years ago, Watzal labelled me a racist and an ‘anti-Semite’ for suggesting in “The Wandering Who” that the Jewish Left operates as a controlled opposition apparatus.

Watzal’s review of The Wandering Whocomplained that: “The book is very well written, which make its harmful and racist theses more dangerous.” His review also said, Atzmon’s “hatred is directed not only against the Zionists, but above all against Jewish Left, left anti-Zionists and those who oppose the Israeli government policy as Jews.”

But Watzal’s views appear to have evolved.

In an article published yesterday by MWCNEWS, one of my favourite dissident outlets, Watzal succumbs to my reasoning.  Watzal quotes me verbatim in his new article “Is The BDS Movement Hijacked By Liberal Zionists?”, but for some reason Watzal forgot to attribute my words to me. Sadly, integrity still hasn’t made it into Left culture, but we should not give hope, we shall give our allies on the left as much time as they need to catch up.

The following is a segment from my talk last week at the LA Levantine Cultural Centre:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J87Y139jlV0&t=27m43s

Since 2012 I’ve been voicing criticism of the change that was introduced into the BDS goal statement by Omar Barghouti in a clandestine manner and behind the backs of the Palestinian people.

And here is Ludwig Watzal from yesterday’s article:

“The BDS movement was launched in 2005 with sound goals. The first was “ending the occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall.” The phrase “all Arab lands” included also the territory of the State of Israel. This was interpreted by Zionist forces as delegitimizing the State of Israel. In 2010, that goal was secretly changed to the following: “Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall.” This change took place only in the English, but not in the Arabic version.

BDS and its main protagonists are financially supported by Georges Soros. He supports so-called progressive liberal causes and is considered a philanthropist and a liberal Zionist.”

It is crucial to understand that both BDS leader Omar Barghouti and BDS advocate Electronic Abunimah have been confronted numerous times and asked to explain publicly the treacherous change inserted into the BDS goal statement. Both Barghouti and Abunimah have repeatedly avoided the question and have refused to address the matter.

I would like to use this opportunity to congratulate Ludwig Watzal for his courageous step in favour of the truth. Truth and Justice are the road to peace.

http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/51690-bds-movement-hijacked.html#sthash.yLhIpCWY.dpuf

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

RESPONDING TO PAUL LARUDEE; IS BDS “SOFT ZIONIST?”

By Charles E. Carlson

Print

April 7, 2014

Mr. Omar Barghouti, Co -Founder, BDS Movement.

Dear Mr. Barghouti

I am adding my voice to Paul Larudee’s March 23,  open letter to you.  We have not met, I hope we do.   I am informed that you were a co-founder of an organization, BDS Movement in Palestine which has morphed  into a world wide network of individuals and organizations now referred to as the “BDS movement,” and that you do not  run the day to day project of that network.

To review what Mr. Laradee has already said, someone in BDS, The Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions movement has materially diluted the founding purposes agreed upon by yourself and 172 organizations in 2005.   The BDS Movement original “Call” urges various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law by: “(1) ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the barrier Wall,” but this language has now been changed, apparently without notifying those of us who participate in the present, BDS movement.

The new  language is very different, as Mr Larudee pointed out: the  Call urges various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law by: “Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall.”  Mr. Larudee  calls these words, now found on the BDS website, “Soft Zionism:”  I agree.

This new BDS’s statement of purpose is prominent on its website as “What is BDS.”   It seems to effectively legitimizes confiscation of Palestinian lands taken prior to the “June 1967 war.” Therefore it abandons any Palestinians driven off his property or in exile between 1947 and  June 1967.

Is BDS compromised, Larudee asks?   I have personally observed several instances where this BDS change of purpose is already undercutting American church organizations that are finally beginning to see the cause of the Philistines as a responsibility.

One example is the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA).  In January, a unit inside the PCUSA,  The Palestine Mission Network became the first major church organization to present a comprehensive explanation of Zionism and Christian Zionism,  Zionism Unsettled, A Congregational Study Guide.  This manual  correctly defend the rights of all Palestinians right back to 1947. It tells the story of Nakba, and Israel’s ethnic cleansing of 500 villages, with no punches pulled.

Understandably, Israel and the Anti Defamation League are attacking the PCUSA.  The Presbyterian statement is now stronger and more truthful than BDS’s position.  The Anti Defamation League demand that the PCUSA general convention force its Palestine Mission Network to retract and stop selling Zionism Unsettled, A Congregational Study Guide.  I fear that BDS is confusing churches that are finally waking up to their Christian responsibilities!

Another example of the damage of BDS “Zionism soft” is found in a new article by Marjorie Cohn, Jewish Voices for Peace,  who wrote in, Israel’s War Against ‘BDS’ Movement.  Cohn quotes BDS original founding principles line and verse in defense of it.  Obviously Ms. Cohn and Jewish Voice for Peace do not know BDS has abandon this principal.

Many  BDS movement projects  seem to consume more human energy than can be gained.  It seems to have money to fund projects that do little financially to damage Israel, except very indirectly.  Israel’s most vulnerable side, its need for constant flow of external funds, is rarely spoken of.  “Divestment” is always indirect, where at best the financial damage will not materially limit Israel’s ability to carry on occupation.  In addition, I have noticed in my brief association with BDS movement that it has ignored possible new project that might impair Israel’s ability to occupy Palestine.  This seems to limit “Divestment” to a publicity game.  I will detail examples in a paper to follow after I have your response.

Paul Larudee asked, “is BDS headed in a different direction than its origins would indicate? Is it no longer a Palestinian movement, but rather a “soft” Zionist movement?”  I am concerned that two weeks after Paul Larudee’s open letter, the altered statement of purpose is still on the BDS website.

With Utmost Concern For The Philistines,

Charles E. Carlson,

Founder We Hold These Truths and Project Strait Gate (whtt.org)

Writer: Christian Zionism, the Tragedy and The Turning

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

IS THE BDS DEMOCRATIC?

Please Sign the Palestinian Declaration Here

Is the BDS Democratic?

Open letter to Omar Barghouti, Co-founder, PACBI

by Paul Larudee / March 23rd, 2014

Dear Omar, Let me start by saying that you have done a lot for BDS and that BDS has done a lot for the Palestinian cause.  It is perhaps for this reason that we should all be concerned with potential corruption of the movement, and you most of all.  I refer to changes of wording, changes of direction and changes of priority within the movement. The change of wording is the infamous four words “occupied in June, 1967″ inserted into the first of three objectives in the mission statement portion of the 2005 BDS Call signed by 173 Palestinian organizations, such that the statement now demands of Israel: “Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall…” (added phrase in italics) I understand your argument that this phrase only clarifies the meaning of the original statement, and that it changes the meaning not at all.  Even so, who gave you the right to make the change without consulting and getting the approval of the signatories to the original call?  Why was it inserted without even telling anyone, such that no one but you even knows when it was done?  If it is so uncontroversial, why not get it approved?
Why is the phrase needed, anyway?  You argue that it results in no change of meaning.  Why, then, is it not superfluous?  Since it is a bone of contention, just remove it and be done with it.I also understand that the offending phrase occurs only in the ”Introducing the BDS Movement” section of the website and that the original wording is preserved elsewhere.  However, this is at best misleading and at worst disingenuous.  The “Introducing the BDS Movement” section reproduces the three demands from the 2005 Call completely verbatim, except for the added four words, and then proceeds to make the claim that this wording is endorsed by the signatories of the 2005 BDS Call. This is deceptive and even fraudulent and must be corrected.  The altered wording has even been mistakenly quoted by Max Blumenthal in his book Goliath as being the wording of the original BDS Call.  Your misrepresentation has led directly to his error. However, the wording is not merely a technical problem.  The wording is apparently important to you.  But why?  Could it be that the wording was needed in order to satisfy individuals or groups or interests that demanded this wording?  Was it meant as an assurance that BDS would not demand the return of all lands stolen from Palestinians but only those lands that were stolen outside the Green Line? If this is the case, it would explain why many “soft” Zionists, who want to maintain a Jewish state but give back the West Bank, now participate in BDS, but only against institutions that support the Israeli presence in the West Bank. In fact, that is the current priority of the movement, with little or no Boycott, Divestment or Sanctions aimed at institutions that deny equal rights to Palestinian citizens of Israel or the Right of Return to Palestinians in the shatat (“diaspora”). Is this a coincidence or is BDS headed in a different direction than its origins would indicate?  Is it no longer a Palestinian movement, but rather a “soft” Zionist movement? Obviously, people join movements for different reasons, and if Zionists want to boycott organizations that do business with Israel – even if only in the West Bank – their contribution is welcome. However, it is quite another matter to effectively turn over the reins of the movement to them or to accommodate them by changing the wording of the mission statement.  A Palestinian movement that welcomes Zionists that have limited objectives is quite different from a Zionist movement that wants to limit its mission but accepts Palestinians that have wider goals. Is that what is going on?  Perhaps not.  Perhaps my concerns are exaggerated.  But in that case, please dispel all doubt by removing the four words. Paul Larudee

Whose side is Abbas on really?

BDS Activists Infuriated by Abbas Rejection of Boycotts of Israel

http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/12/13/bds-activists-infuriated-by-abbas-rejection-of-boycotts-of-israel/

JNS.org A statement by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas rejecting a boycott of Israel has infuriated Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) leaders.

“No, we do not support the boycott of Israel,” Abbas told South African reporters Dec. 9, The Star reported. “But we ask everyone to boycott the products of the settlements. Because the settlements are in our territories. It is illegal,” Abbas added.

Abbas’s comments conflict “with the Palestinian national consensus that has strongl

y supported BDS against Israel since 2005,” BDS movement co-founder Omar Barghouti told Electronic Intifada.

Barghouti said Abbas does not speak for the Palestinian people.

“There is no Palestinian political party, trade union, NGO network or mass organization that does not strongly support BDS,” he said. “Any Palestinian official who lacks a democratic mandate and any real public support, therefore, cannot claim to speak on behalf of the Palestinian people when it comes to deciding our strategies of resistance to Israel’s regime of occupation, colonization and apartheid.”

ROGER WATERS TELLS THE TRUTH AGAINST ALL ODDS

MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2013 AT 1:21PM GILAD ATZMON

Introduction by Gilad Atzmon:

The Jewish hate-site  algemeiner.com latest target is veteran rocker Roger Waters.  His crime? He has told the truth about Jewish power and has compared Israel with Nazi Germany. Specifically, in a recent interview Waters dared to refer to the mighty Jewish Lobby and its impact silencing opposition to the Jewish State.
It goes without saying that the Israelis and their tribal operators are not happy with Waters exercising his freedom to think and to speak but I have a feeling that BDS movement, now totally dominated by liberal Zionists and funded by George Soros’ Open Society, is also slightly embarrassed by Waters’ frankness.
In the last few years, BDS Movement has invested a lot of energy concealing the truth regarding the Jewish State and curtailing any criticism of it. So, I ask myself, will Ali Abunimah, Joseph Massad and  Omar Barghouti, once again bow to Jewish pressure and call for the disavowal of the Pink Floyd hero? Will Abunimah advise Waters that whenever he wants to say the J word, he should instead say ‘Zionist’. Let’s hope not.
Yet, one question remains: How is it possible that a rocker and a jazz artist are exploring those truths that prominent Palestinian activists are not even brave enough to contemplate? I guess that as long as activism is in a state of utter paralysis, the search for beauty is the only true liberation.
End

Algemeiner.com: Days After Defending Star of David Pig, Roger Waters Laments ‘Power’ of ‘Jewish Lobby,’ Compares Israeli Policy to Nazis

Just days after defending his use of an inflatable pig emblazoned with a Star of David as a concert prop, rock star Roger Waters lamented the “power” of “the Jewish lobby,” and compared Israeli government policy to that of the Nazis, in an interview with CounterPunch magazine.
In the interview conducted by anti-Israel activist, Frank Barat, the former Pink Floyd bassist was frank about his opinions on Jews and Israel.
Asked why he was the only high profile celebrity to have joined the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, Waters explained that it was because people fear “the Jewish lobby.”
“This has been a very hard sell particularly where I live in the United States of America,” he said. “The Jewish lobby is extraordinary powerful here and particularly in the industry that I work in, the music industry and in rock’n roll as they say. I promise you, naming no names, I’ve spoken to people who are terrified that if they stand shoulder to shoulder with me they are going to get f*****.”
Accusing Israel of all manner of heinous crimes, Waters went on to draw parallels between Israeli policy and Nazi genocide.
“The situation in Israel/Palestine, with the occupation, the ethnic cleansing and the systematic racist apartheid Israeli regime is unacceptable,” he said.
Referring to Israel’s “right wing rabbinate,” Waters said “they believe that everybody that is not a Jew is only on earth to serve them and they believe that the Indigenous people of the region that they kicked off the land in 1948 and have continued to kick off the land ever since are sub-human. The parallels with what went on in the 30’s in Germany are so crushingly obvious that it doesn’t surprise me that the movement that both you and I are involved in is growing every day.”
Waters also described Israel’s concern over Iran’s nuclear program as a “diversionary tactic,” and claimed that Israel has never desired to make peace with the Arabs. “They’ve always had the Ben Gurion agenda of kicking all the Arabs out of the country and becoming greater Israel,” he said.
Waters said that he had been invited to preform in Israel by a top Israeli promoter, and admitted to having sent a letter to pop icon, Cindy Lauper, requesting that she cancel an upcoming performance in Israel.
“You know that Shuki Weiss (preeminent Israeli promoter) was offering me a hundred thousand people at hundred dollars a ticket a few months ago to come and play in Tel Aviv! ‘Hang on, that’s 10 million dollars’, how could they offer it to me?! And I thought Shuki are you f****** deaf or just dumb?! I am part of the BDS movement, I’m not going anywhere in Israel, for any money, all I would be doing would be legitimizing the policies of the government,” he said.
In July this year, Waters caused a stir when it was revealed that an inflatable pig released as a concert prop at his performances featured a Star of David. At the time, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Jewish human rights group, described Waters as “an open hater of Jews.”
Responding to his latest remarks, Rabbi Cooper again described Waters as a “bigot.”
“We raised the alarm when Waters put a Star of David on a pig during his European tour. Now with this interview he confirms his status as one of the most virulent haters of the Jewish state. Apartheid, racist, murderers compared to Nazis,” Cooper said in an email to The Algemeiner.
“The Wiesenthal Center calls on his peers in the entertainment world to condemn him and to show through their continued visits to Israel that they share our contempt for this bigot,” he added.
Last week, following the conclusion of his three-year world tour for “The Wall,” Waters addressed the criticism he had faced over the use of the Star of David pig at his concerts.
“I worry about it every day. It’s a huge concern to me that I would be considered to be a bully,” Waters said about the accusations.
“Since then, because of the complaints from some of the Jewish community, we’ve added a crucifix and star-crescent,” he added.
In August, Waters’ active promotion of the anti-Israel boycott promoted a sharp response from Israeli supermodel Bar Refaeli whose image was being used in his concert performances.
“Roger Waters, you should remove my picture from videos at your concerts. If you’re going to boycott, then go all the way,” she tweeted.
According to the United States Department of State, “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis,” is considered anti-Semitic.
%d bloggers like this: