Academic boycott against Israel

[GiladS]

U.K. union backs calls for boycott of Israel academehttp://www.haaretz.com/hasen/images/0.gif
By Assaf Uni (assafu@haaretz.co.il), Haaretz Correspondent

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/images/0.gifBritain's University and College Union (UCU) voted on Wednesday to promote a boycott of Israeli academic institutions, protesting Israel's policy on the Palestinians. Jewish and Israeli officials in the U.K. and Israel reacted with outrage to the motion which, for the most part, is a rhetorical move.

The motion was approved by a 158 to 99 vote, and called for freezing European funding for Israeli academic institutions, while condemning "Israeli academia's cooperation with the occupation."

In addition, the UCU decided to bring the question of whether to boycott Israel up for discussion by all the union's members, numbering about 120,000. The discussions are scheduled to take place over the next 12 months. The motion encouraged union members to "consider the moral implications of conducting ties with Israeli academic institutions."

The vote was preceded by a heated discussion in which Israel was repeatedly referred to as an apartheid state, engaging in crimes against humanity in the occupied territories. The union representatives adopted two separate resolutions promoting an academic boycott against Israel. They said the situation in the territories did not allow spectators to stand idly by.

In addition, the union congress pledged to advertise the Palestinians' request for a boycott against Israel in all the union's offices, and to arrange for academics from the Palestinian Authority to attend delegations to the U.K. The union's representatives also decided to establish direct contact with Palestinian workers' organizations.

The union will also act toward halting academic cooperation with Israel, which is currently conducted through the European Union. The motion called for freezing all EU funding for Israeli academic institutions until Israel will "comply with the United Nation's resolutions."

Ronnie Fraser, who heads the British group Academic Friends of Israel, said that "the vote proved that nothing has changed within the ranks of the U.K.'s academic unions. This is another boycott."

In 2005, Fraser acted to overturn another boycott against Israel, which had been approved by the Association of University Teachers (AUT.) That decision was overturned a month after it was passed. In 2006, the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE) also moved to boycott Israel, but its decision became invalid shortly thereafter when NATFHE and AUT merged to form the UCU.

UCU's general secretary, Sally Hunt, also opposes the motion. "I do not believe a boycott is supported by the majority of UCU members, nor do I believe that members see it is a priority for the union," she said. "Now, the union's branches will consult their members to form a stance on the boycott. Any decision to actually impose a boycott will have to overcome serious stipulations."

Israel's ambassador to Britain, Zvi Hefetz, responded by saying that the resolution was offensive to Britain's Jewish community. "Its slanted phrasing reeks of ignorance," he added. Adrian Fronda, a senior mathematics lecturer who had joined the union solely to vote against the boycott, was less diplomatic. "I came here to oppose the prevalent anti-Semitism we see all around us here," he said.

Education Minister Yuli Tamir condemned the British union's decision, saying she would address the British education minister on the matter.

The chairman of the Committee of University Heads, Professor Moshe Kaveh, called on British scientists to continue conducting joint projects with Israeli scientists. Tamara Traubmann contributed reporting.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/images/0.gif

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/864754.html


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Research foundation blocks new grants for Britons

UK academic boycott of Israel prompts US-based Goldhirsh foundation to cancel plans to open grant application process for British research institutions. Immigration Minister Ze'ev Boim announces intention to propose counter-boycott

Hagit Klaiman

An American research foundation announced on Thursday that following the decision of the British University and College Union (UCU) to consider launching an academic boycott of Israel it has cancelled its plans to open a grant application process for UK researchers.

The $150 million Goldhirsh foundation supports scientists around the world in the quest for a cure for brain cancer funds research.

In a letter to British academic institutions, foundation leader Elizabeth Goldhirsh writes: " As a director of a $150 million foundation that supports scientists around the world in the quest for a cure for brain cancer, I am profoundly disappointed in your union's decision to boycott Israel today.

"This action represents a severe setback for academic freedom and open discourse. Moreover, the decision to single out and demonize Israel above and beyond all other countries - remaining silent over Russia's brutal occupation in Chechnya, for example, or China's ongoing oppression of Tibet - is, at best, troubling. At worst, it points to a far more sinister and tragic motivation.

"Equally disturbing is to do so at a time when Israel's civilians are facing near-daily missile attacks from Gaza and her partner for negotiations is an organization that dispatches suicide bombers and refuses to recognize the Jewish State's right to exist.

"Given this decision, I am deeply saddened to say that while my foundation had been considering opening up our scientific grant process to British researchers we will no longer be able to do so. I urge you to work against this boycott and restore learning's highest ideal of fairness free of prejudice to British academia."

'Freezing Jewish donations to UK institutions'
Meanwhile Immigrant Absorption Minister Ze'ev Boim has suggested that Jewish donors supporting academic institutions in the United Kingdom freeze their donations following the boycott proposal.

Boim, who is currently in London, said he plans to discuss the issue with leaders of the Jewish community in Britain and with Israeli representatives who have held talks on the issue with British higher education officials.

"The UCU's decision is extremely serious. It compels the Israeli government to reconsider its actions. Likewise world Jewry must also consider its steps against this futile boycott. I intend to propose a counter-boycott against British acadmic institutions during the cabinet meeting on Sunday," said Boim.

Bill Rammell, Britain's higher education minister, said he was disappointed the union had passed a motion ''which encourages its members to consider boycotting Israeli academics.''

''I profoundly believe this does nothing to promote the Middle East peace process,'' he said.

It was further reported on Thursday that UNISON, the biggest trade union in Britain, is considering renewing its economic boycott of Israel as an act of protest against last summer’s Second Lebanon War and the IDF strikes in Gaza.

In 2002 the organization, which represents some 1.6 million workers, prohibited the purchase of Israeli goods and investments in the Jewish state. The sanctions were lifted following Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2005.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3407111,00.html

[kamaz]

I wonder why this UK union didnt boycott Sudanese colleges, or Chinese, or Russian. WHy Israeli??

[Nano]

Academic boycott? Maybe some Israeli members can enlighten me do your college professors make/execute national policy outside their field of specialization? It is naive to believe peace can be shoved down the throats of the Middle East. Both sides need to want peace absolutely not just segments of one side or the other, both. Peace in the Middle East is as attainable today as time travel is today.

[Taekwondo]

Must be the left-wing cuckoos again.

For some reason they've turned their gears to full anti-jewish attitude again.

[Ivan le Fou]

I wonder why this UK union didnt boycott Sudanese colleges, or Chinese, or Russian. WHy Israeli??

Because, you know, all Palestinians are poor and innocents civilians and try to resist the military and bloody occupation of a blood thirsty nation.

:roll:

Well, in fact I don't know, but that's the way many young leftists french think.

[Snoshi]

Because, you know, all Palestinians are poor and innocents civilians and try to resist the military and bloody occupation of a blood thirsty nation.

:roll:

Well, in fact I don't know, but that's the way many young leftists french think.

That's how most leftist think together with their Arab friends.

[~Berdan]

I've read Arab students approach to lift that British ban,sence those "intellectuals" have no idea that good percentage of Israeli students are Arabic.
Good job,instead of lifting the curtain of hate,those British intellectual actually build more walls of hate.

[JJC]

Eli E. Hertz | May 31, 2007
Writing this letter is a good way for me to discuss your horrible denial of facts and the disrespect that you bestow on your parents, grandparents and your British people's history.
Did you know that your government was the leading force among the fifty-one member countries - the entire League of Nations - that unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:
"Recognition Has Been Given to the Historical Connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to the Grounds for Reconstructing their National Home in that Country."
Did you know that your country's hero Sir Winston Churchill had that to say about Jewish "Occupation" of Palestine:
"When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride."
My friend - the British world of academia: It is not "The Occupation" Arabs reject; they reject the right of Israel to exist as a legitimate, secure, Jewish political entity, and you choose to collaborate with this call to genocide.
Palestinian Arabs have underscored their rejectionism with wave after wave of terrorism at every juncture - that is, before the 1967 Six-Day War and even prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, and this too is being ignored by you.
If we talk academically, you would be most interested in how your people described Jewish academic's achievement in a visit to Jewish Palestine in 1937:
"The Daniel Sieff Research Institute [today part of the Weitzman Institute of Science] at Rehovot is equipped with the most delicate modern instruments; the experiments conducted there are watched by chemists all over the world: yet from its windows can be seen the hills inhabited by a backward peasantry [Palestinian Arabs] who regard it only as the demonstration of a power they hate and fear and who would like, no doubt, when their blood is up, to destroy it."
You should ask yourself: What kind of a society do you support? - A society that consciously and purposely sacrifices its own youth for political gain and tactical advantage. Today the overwhelming majority of Palestinian Arabs nurture a blind hatred of Israel. They created a cultural milieu of vengeance, violence and death - preparing their children to be sacrifices in a death cult - your silence is noticed.
I suggest you tell your Palestinian friends to invest in Biotech, not bombs. Build computer chips, not Kasam rockets. Teach medicine, not hate. Look to the future, not the past. Stop blaming Americans and Jews for all their problems, and take responsibility for their own actions.
My British academic: Do you fully comprehend what you are doing? If you are indeed aware that the path you have embarked on leads to hate and destruction, and if you have freely chosen to walk in that direction, then you and your Arab friends are truly beyond hope.
Before you continue to dishonor your own history, think it over.
Eli E. Hertz, New York.


Someone sent me this and I like what the person had to say....

[IvanIII]

I wonder why this UK union didnt boycott Sudanese colleges, or Chinese, or Russian. WHy Israeli??

Becuz no one likes Isreal accept US :bash:

[IDF_TANKER]

Becuz no one likes Isreal accept US :bash:
No one likes Israel because it accepts US? Why..?

[IvanIII]

No one likes Israel because it accepts US? Why..?

spelling misstake , i meen exept USp-)

[Player]

spelling misstake , i meen exept USp-)

So you don't like us too? :(

[Schizo]

spelling misstake , i meen exept USp-)

But I like you, you don't like me? :-(

[IDF_TANKER]

IvanIII doesn't like us..?!! *breaking into tears* But why, wh-a-ha-a-a-y?!!!!

[SOG]

wow. what unbeleivable ****. just goes to show you how even the most utterly educated cream of the crop self righteous citizens can be so full of ****. kamaz brings up a good point. they arent biased, they are insanely racist.

[Elemental666]

Came here as fast as I can after hearing that someone doesn't like us :-(. Had to see it to believe it.

[Moledet]

What? Who doesn't like us? We're pretty.

[IDF_TANKER]

Came here as fast as I can after hearing that someone doesn't like us :-(. Had to see it to believe it.

Yeah... you heard right... IvanIII doesn't like us *wiping the tears* I still can't believe this...:-(:-(

[Schizo]

Yeah... you heard right... IvanIII doesn't like us *wiping the tears* I still can't believe this...:-(:-(

Zionist tears! rofl

Ohhh, cry me a river!

[kamaz]

these UK jerkoffs are full of sht. There are at least 10 other conflicts around the world where more people die in a month, than any palestinian or israeli in a year, where theres real oppression, real occupation, and where media doesnt go in and report, simply because its too dangerous, and there is no freedom of information.

why dont they boycott sudan institutions for real genocide, real racism, by arabs against africans. ??

why dont they boycott Sri Lankan colleges based on the percieved 'injustice' and 'occupation' and 'oppression' by the government against tamils. WHy not boycott China over its treatment of Tibetans?

oh I know why.. its easy to pick on Israel and portray it as a monster. Its easy to sit in your comfortable Sheraton in Tel Aviv and type away your column for the next day, tales of 'injustice' and oppression of people that fire rockets and breed walking suicide bombers.

stupid idiots dont even realize that they are hurting arabs more than jews with this racist, thats right, RACIST boycott.

[Weasel]

Ask a Ninja, Question 69 "Why nobody likes Zionists?". :)

[Taekwondo]

Well, you Israelis should just remember to quote Lenin in this case: "The intelligentsiya isn't the brains of the nation, it's its ****."

Funny how so many academics still reel to the left and put well known quotes like these in the memory hole!

[Ordie]

I find it ironic that they show contempt towards Israel, when an English BBC reporter is missing in Gaza being held by Palestinian militants.

[IvanIII]

Hey don't try to funny about this p-)
Its a fact Isreal is the most hated country in the world:bash:

There was a major poll about his a year ago or so and even Iran where more popular than Israel.

[Ordie]

Hey don't try to funny about this p-)
Its a fact Isreal is the most hated country in the world:bash:

There was a major poll about his a year ago or so and even Iran where more popular than Israel.

Well it hasn't hurt thier business.

It's probably one of the most thriving economies in the region.

Not bad for a country with limited natural resources.

[SOG]

who would have thought dealing with sane, rational people goes far in business? well there is the saudis but thats a very mixed bag.

[Rittmester]

I have been wondering about this Israel vs Palestine logic...

Why don't Israel just finally annex its conquered areas, like everybody did in the old days? The border with the new wall has some crazy curves. You are well unpopular anyway, but the UN won't do **** with its US veto. Then you give the arabs normal citizenship, and there will be nice and quiet in about 10 years.. Right..? In the same time, the world will forget all sins.

Cant see why everything has to be such a fuzz down there, such a noisy neighbourhood. ;)

Look, I can see why Israel have to be tough, and I'm not pointing any fingers, a conflict has good arguments on both sides anyway. Still, the real Israeli doctrine is very poorly visible in European media. We just dont get the logic. Is the objective an Israel with as little arab population as possible, but still with as much land as possible?

Its nearly impossible the get a fair comment from an Israeli on this subject, cause there is always someone who's being defencive thats being interviewed, saying "we defend ourselves against terrorists". Well, thats obvious, but I wonder about the underlying, bigger picture. The Americans say "we fight for the freedom of Iraq", still, thats not the one reason for the war there.

Get my blurry question lads? Any got the strategic overview? (and for those with minor brains: this is not a provoking posting, its an honest question from one that wonders, and yes I may not know everything about this, that is the reason for me asking, and no I'm not stupid, and now I hope I've isolated my question from being answered by morons. -No offence to you others (there are simply so many morons here that fills the threads with bs that leads the subject astray:)

[GrimReaper]

Israel, with all it's problems is a democracy. What happen in/after those 10 years? When Arab citizens will become either close to a political majority, or the majority itself? What happens is that with a systematic removal/changes in laws and the legal system, Israel ceases to exist as a national home for Jews, and soon after will become another part of Greater Arabia/Syria/Palestine etc' after the Jewish citizens either run or are driven out.

[Ordie]

I have been wondering about this Israel vs Palestine logic...

Why don't Israel just finally annex its conquered areas, like everybody did in the old days? The border with the new wall has some crazy curves. You are well unpopular anyway, but the UN won't do **** with its US veto. Then you give the arabs normal citizenship, and there will be nice and quiet in about 10 years.. Right..? In the same time, the world will forget all sins.:)

That kinda happened between 1967 until Jordan gave up soveriegnty of the West Bank.

Israel took pains to eliminate whatever evidence of the former West Bank Jordanian border. Even on Israeli maps there were no West Bank boundaries. The Palestinians in the West Bank were considered de facto Jordanian Citizens with Jordanian Passports. The local civil service including teachers were subsidized by the Jordanians. Travel to and from Jordan was not restricted on the premise that the West Bank was recognized as Jordanian territory in Jordan. The Israelis on the otherhand recognized the West Bank as an integral part of Israel, but did not recognize its inhabitants as Israeli citizens. (with execption of Jerusalem residents).

Travel between the West Bank and Israel was very fluid. For example, no checkpoints between Bethlehem and Jerusalem. Teddy Kolleck, the Mayor of Jerusalem was generally respected by the non Jewish population for his fairness and filling potholes equally. He was seen as the exception rather than the norm. The building of Jewish settlements, summary arrests without reason, and lack of civil rights added towards the fustrations.

In sum, the West Bank Palestinians felt neglected by both Israel and Jordan in resolving grivences. The problem was that of political disenfranchisement with no representation in Amman and Jerusalem.

Had the Israelis extended its Jerusalem policy towards the entire West Bank with tacit approval of the Jordanians, we may have a different reality today.

[Mr. Nielsen]

Why don't Israel just finally annex its conquered areas, like everybody did in the old days?It kind of went out of favour after mr. Hitlers big conquer and annex tour of 1939-1941. Since then the inadmissibility of aquiring terrotiry by force have been the big hype.



Is the objective an Israel with as little arab population as possible, but still with as much land as possible?You got that one right.:) A greater Israel without those troublesome arabs you can't allow to get power through democracy because then Israel will not be a state primarily for the jews, but a state for both the jews and the arabs (and for some Israelis the assume it would be a state without jews at all).



Its nearly impossible the get a fair comment from an Israeli on this subject, cause there is always someone who's being defencive thats being interviewed, saying "we defend ourselves against terrorists".
That true also. But then again everyone has a tedency to quickly go into the trenches, not just the israelis.

[Mr. Nielsen]

Travel between the West Bank and Israel was very fluid.That's actually quite interesting that until the palestinian uprisings there was no way to know when you were inside Israel proper and when you were in the occupied territories.

Which is kind of weird since If it was me living in an area of so much turmoil I would have build a huge fence on the border half a century ago. Which the Israelis have not done because they desired the palestinian land beyond the international border. They would of course have preferred to make the fence at Jordan river, but then a whole lot of arabs would be on the israeli side of the river. But still it's volatile times, and them nasty arabs could sneak into Israel and make trouble. So why not make the fence halfway into the occupied territories, avoiding the worst arab population centers? No wouldn't do, because they still want all of the occupied territories. Kind of wanting to have the cake and eat it too.

Which is why the wall (illegal wall according to the world court in Hague) only was made after quite a lot of suicide bombs, and that is why the illegal settlers throw a tantrum because now they feel they can't have all of the palestinians territory.

[kamaz]

if israel absorbs all the palestinians, 2 things will happen.

1. it ceases to be a jewish state, with jewish majority (kinda the whole point for the country, to be a protector of jews after thousands of years of anti semitism and pogroms)

2. there will be a huge civil similar to bosnia. the arabs will want full control and will impose islamic law including the religious tax that non muslim must pay to live under their 'protection'.

anyone who thinks that the solution to this conflict is a 'one state' formula needs to look at past history to see the bloody results of this big idea.

there are 26 arab countries, there is only 1 jewish one. its not too much to ask and to insist on keeping the country jewish.

[kamaz]

Which is why the wall (illegal wall according to the world court in Hague) only was made after quite a lot of suicide bombs, and that is why the illegal settlers throw a tantrum because now they feel they can't have all of the palestinians territory.



uh hum. illegal settlers and illegal wall. yup. let me ask you something. how legal are suicide bombings??

[Mr. Nielsen]

uh hum. illegal settlers and illegal wall. yup. let me ask you something. how legal are suicide bombings??Legal if they blow up a bunch of israeli conscripts. Illegal if they blow of a bus full of civilians.

[kamaz]

Legal if they blow up a bunch of israeli conscripts. Illegal if they blow of a bus full of civilians.


is the wall still 'illegal' if it stops illegal murder?

[Mr. Nielsen]

if israel absorbs all the palestinians, 2 things will happen.

1. it ceases to be a jewish state, with jewish majority (kinda the whole point for the country, to be a protector of jews after thousands of years of anti semitism and pogroms)



2. there will be a huge civil similar to bosnia.
a) extremist arabs will want full control and will impose islamic law including the religious tax that non muslim must pay to live under their 'protection'.
b) extremist jews will want full control etc...


3. it could work out like in south africa, where the whites still haven't been driven out by the blacks.

Though I still find a two state solution to be better. Israel returns to the 1967 borders. Israel is allowed access to the west wall of the temple. Palestinian refugees are generously compensated (/most likely by us :roll:)and settled in either East Jerusalem, the West Bank or Gaza (or some other country). The UN administrates the palestinians areas (like in kosovo) until democratic institutions have been build up from the ground. An international (read NATO) force keeps the israelis and palestinians apart while this goes on.

[Snoshi]

Nielsin it sounds so good... But why should we do it? Will Palestinians stop with their terror if we return to 67 borders? Please, HAMAS wants full destruction of Israel and you keep talking about returning to 67 borders. Thousands of soldiers payed their life's to fight in war and you want us to give everything back like nothing happened? Not bloody likely.

The return to 67 borders will not happen i a long time, so stop whining

[Rittmester]

Thank you guys. Decent answers that was.

So the main problem is the great number of Palesitinans, and thereby their potential influence by voting in their own favor, as a more united group than Israelis in general? I say that is a legimate consern, as the lack of a democratic political culture takes a long time to develop.

Hmm.. But by being a bit harsh, by.. lets say, shooting teens throwing stones (started with that), we have a big fuzz. Then the group bond together, fighting the other group. -Making it easier to govern the area (stratecially speaking) really, by using crude laws of war/conflict (not putting in luxurious rights). You also get the legitimacy to confiscate land for security reasons etc.

Now, I'm not saying its really wrong, its got legitimate reasons. I just like putting the pieces together to more clearly see the whole picture. Noen of the parties can call themselves Mother Theresa's diciples anyway, just as none are really evil in general.

Then we have the usual bunch of extremists being the bringers of petrol to the fire, making it all worse for the greater populations.

So, do you believe the violence has motives on both sides? The government of Israel might draw more benefits from termoil than from peaceful negotiations. The armed Palestinians surely use weapons as a playing card, by making the opinion in Israel war tired and softer on the agreements demands.

I believe both parties are drawing their benefits from using a wide spectre of playing cards here. Its easier to get a greater prize by playing a high game than by just compromizing down the road.

[Mr. Nielsen]

is the wall still 'illegal' if it stops illegal murder?It would be perfect legal if it was build on israeli territory.

But you can read why the international court of justice found the wall (and why it is a wall and not a fence:)) in their advisory opion, which is here:http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf

[JJC]

I blame the Israeli public and the Israeli government for the way you are being treated. I haven't seen much fuss from the Israeli government everytime such boycotts were attempted before.

Israel needs to stand up and start boycotting BBC, Rueters, Guardian. Israelis know why I mention them. For decades these news outlets have been shaping the minds of people around the world and that's why you see polls in Europe that show Israel as the problem of the world.

During the second Intifada Israeli officials boycotted CNN for its Al Jazeera style reporting, so why not do that to papers like Guardian who in the past have questioned Israel's right to exist, the same paper that justifed Palestinian use of suicide bombings etc.... How much more damage can a network like BBC do if it is boycotted?

I say let the British academics turn to Syria, Saudi Arabia, or Palestian universtities, I'm sure they will help develope new medical treatments and advocate the same liberal progressive thinking.

[Ordie]

2. there will be a huge civil similar to bosnia. the arabs will want full control and will impose islamic law including the religious tax that non muslim must pay to live under their 'protection'.


Note: not all Arabs are Muslims. Especially within the Palestinian community. Moreover, the Christian Churches in the Holy Land hold a considerable amount of real estate and local and internatinal influence. Tourism and hosting of Christian pilgrims is a major revenue and jobs generator for all communities including Muslims, Jews and Armenians. Any taxes imposed would had deteremental impact in terms of keeping the Holy Sites accessibe to pilgrims and tourists alike.

Back in the late 70's early 80's there were plans to extend the Jewish Quarter into the Armenian Quarter of Jerusalem. In response, all Christian Holy Sites within Jerusalem were locked up. Pressure from tour agents, souvenier vendors, and hotels forced the government to give up its plan.

[Mr. Nielsen]

Nielsin it sounds so good... But why should we do it?Yes why should you do it? Very few Israelis are getting killed these days. People in Israel (apart from those in Sderot) are living good. The economy is good. Israeli politicians are welcomed in most of the world. So why on earth should you be making peace and return to your internationally recognized border?

Without the political, social and economic boycot of south africa, why on earth should the five million whites give up ruling over the thirty-five million blacks?

Unfortunately I think you are right. There are not going to be peace anytime soon.

[Ordie]

Thank you guys. Decent answers that was.

So, do you believe the violence has motives on both sides? The government of Israel might draw more benefits from termoil than from peaceful negotiations. The armed Palestinians surely use weapons as a playing card, by making the opinion in Israel war tired and softer on the agreements demands.

I believe both parties are drawing their benefits from using a wide spectre of playing cards here. Its easier to get a greater prize by playing a high game than by just compromizing down the road.

Extemist on both sides needs conflict to justify its existance. Extemist by all accounts are more interested in the means than the final outcome.

For example, what is Hamas economic policy? What is Hamas going to do about a broken water main? What is Hamas position on the environment? or its health policy? How will they address the issue of the imporation of subsidized Italian Olive Oil competing with unsubsidized local farmers in the World Trade Origanization? What about public transporation? etc....

Its always easier to destroy than to build.

Picking up an AK-47 and shooting Israelis is easy and instant gratification, but at the end of the day, your family is still hungry, your house is overcrowded, and you still have no job. What else to do? make more babies. Compunding the problems.

[Mr. Nielsen]

For example, what is Hamas economic policy? What is Hamas going to do about a broken water main? What is Hamas position on the environment? or its health policy? How will they address the issue of the imporation of subsidized Italian Olive Oil competing with unsubsidized local farmers in the World Trade Origanization? What about public transporation? etc....Then again, those issues you deal with when you have a state. As long as they live under the israeli occupation I don't think you can blame them for dealing with that ahead of the environment.

[Ordie]

Then again, those issues you deal with when you have a state. As long as they live under the israeli occupation I don't think you can blame them for dealing with that ahead of the environment.

The PA is a self governing state.
But they choose to fight among themselves rather than build a civil society and fill potholes.

[tanks_alot]

Though I still find a two state solution to be better. Israel returns to the 1967 borders. Israel is allowed access to the west wall of the temple. Palestinian refugees are generously compensated (/most likely by us :roll:)and settled in either East Jerusalem, the West Bank or Gaza (or some other country). The UN administrates the palestinians areas (like in kosovo) until democratic institutions have been build up from the ground. An international (read NATO) force keeps the israelis and palestinians apart while this goes on.

That's the only possible solution to this conflict (the details of such a deal will probably vary, but thats what you have negotiations for).
fact is that the greater majority of Israelis see a Palestinian state is a fact, whether they like it or not, the only things that really prevent it from happening are the Palestinians that as usual manage to shoot themselvs in the foot, time after time.

Oslo has blown up in our face, causing an unprecedented wave of terror attacks in Israel. you would think that the Palestinians would have seen the Gaza pullout as a beginning of a change but the fact is that as a society that is built on violence and full of foreign influences with different agendas than a Palestinian state, they simply viewd it as a sign of weakness by Israel and pushed the use of terror even more, while electing a terror group as a goverment.

Israel is fighting a very low intensity war with the Palestinians, so are we supposed to just hand over the west bank while we are still in war, just to please the west for five minutes before the IDF will be forced to take over it again because of a new wave of terror attacks?

the people that run things for the Palestinians now, do not serve the Palestinian interests, so who are we supposed to sign a peace deal with? the Fatah? the Hamas? the Islamic Jihad? there are dozens of different groups with different agendas and signing a deal with one group doesn't mean all the rest of the groups will respect that deal.

so for now, there is simply no solution for this conflict and it will continue until some sort of Palestinian Ghandi will rise and change the political reality in the PA.
and until than all of the boycotts in the world aren't going to change anything but cause Israelis to dig in even further into their positions while causing the Palestinians to belive that right now they are on the right path.

now if there were boycotts on China, Saudi Arabia, the UK, US, Sudan, Russia and etc' besides Israel than maybe that was a different matter, however Israel which is really the lesser evil from among this group gets boycotts, so what are we supposed to think....?
not to mention the really false logic of boycotting the free thinking academies, which is in fact an oxymoron.
or having a journalists union that is supposed to deliver facts objectively, place a ban on goods of one side of a conflict that they report.

[Mu-Meson]

What is Hamas going to do about a broken water main?

I'm guessing they'd do much the same as they did with the sewage pipes that they got from Israel for a sewer system. Turn 'em into Kassams, fire them at Israel, and when a literal lake of sh1t spills over them 'coz the didn't build the sewers, blame Israel.

[Moledet]

Yes why should you do it? Very few Israelis are getting killed these days. People in Israel (apart from those in Sderot) are living good. The economy is good. Israeli politicians are welcomed in most of the world. So why on earth should you be making peace and return to your internationally recognized border?

Without the political, social and economic boycot of south africa, why on earth should the five million whites give up ruling over the thirty-five million blacks?

Unfortunately I think you are right. There are not going to be peace anytime soon.
It is not an international border, never was and never will be. It's a cease fire line drawn between Israel and Jordan and that's what it is, what it was and what it will always be.
And there's nothing to compare to SA, Israel doesn't hold a racist ideology, we simply wish to have our own state to protect our kind because the world have done a terrible job in doing just that.

[SOG]

okay so say israel coughs up land, moves wall etc etc, then who's going to stop iran, saudis, syria and formerly iraq from continuing there war of proxy against israel? so far what ive heard is a solution for boundries, not unreasonable enemies. do you think the surrounding countries hate israel because of a minor border dispute? hardly. moving the wall would settle legalities and nothing more. it would not empower the palestinian or lebanon people to any sustainable standard of linving in which to desist their attacks in any way shape or form.

[kamaz]

its just funny to me that arabs and all the european pundits keep going with this same mantra, "israel, give up more of your land that you won in a war"

while the only concession, the only thing the palestinians have been asked to do is stop killing people, and they havent been able to even stop, in fact they elected a terror group as their leaders whose only agenda is to kill jews and take over the land.

this is a sick circus.

[Viejo Golanchik]

its just funny to me that arabs and all the european pundits keep going with this same mantra, "israel, give up more of your land that you won in a war"

while the only concession, the only thing the palestinians have been asked to do is stop killing people, and they havent been able to even stop, in fact they elected a terror group as their leaders whose only agenda is to kill jews and take over the land.

this is a sick circus.

This is raw antisemitism. The real sick circus is that the world doesnt get tired of trying to wipe us from the earth. And this is no moaning nor whinning, but a fact. So if the world wants us, the jewish people go quietly into the fire, it never will happen again.

The boycott is evil, racial punishment in the tradition of the Nazi regime.

VG

[Dasein]

its just funny to me that arabs and all the european pundits keep going with this same mantra, "israel, give up more of your land that you won in a war"

Under the regime of the UN, warfare cannot be used as a means of altering national borders. Thus, Israel cannot win land in a war, as such claims are illegitimate.

[Ordie]

Bottom line is that the PLO have used up the sympathy of Arab countries, the Israeli Left, the Soviets, the Americans and Europeans. There is no one left to cry and whine. Especially since 9/11.

Barak and Sharon called the Palestinian bluff on Jerusalem and Gaza. Many will cry about the wall but it works and the Israeli left, moderate and doves are in agreement. Gaza is no longer Israel's responsibility. The violence there is fatricide. And no one really cares.

Many Palestinians are of the mind that it is better to live in an Israeli hell, than a paradise promised by Arafat.

[Nano]

Ordie you're pretty much right on spot, but I also think much of the world has no sympathy for either side of the conflict given the history. The world is bent on creating some false peace in the Middle East that will crack when one side gains an upper/equal hand. There won't be any real peace until both sides especially the Palestinians learn to get along the hard way and that is full blown total war where both sides are drowning in their own blood. Europe is perhaps the most recent example of how this has worked itself out. Both sides simply have to grow sick and tired of being slaughtered and perhaps then they will decide that being bent on killing the other is not such a good idea.

[~Berdan]

Ordie you're pretty much right on spot, but I also think much of the world has no sympathy for either side of the conflict given the history. The world is bent on creating some false peace in the Middle East that will crack when one side gains an upper/equal hand. There won't be any real peace until both sides especially the Palestinians learn to get along the hard way and that is full blown total war where both sides are drowning in their own blood. Europe is perhaps the most recent example of how this has worked itself out. Both sides simply have to grow sick and tired of being slaughtered and perhaps then they will decide that being bent on killing the other is not such a good idea.

Europe is populated with people who have healthy view on the world(thought when i read this mr. nielsen crap,i have second thoughts),after spending good chunk of previous century fighting.
ME is populated with people who came from Europe and have a healthy view on the world(that is,after everybody reminded them they ain't so welcome in their countries),and from other side by people who got their mindset stuck after Abbaseyun Xalifat era(that was back then when people wiped their arses with their hands,and then smell it).Hard to talk when you are transmitting on different wavelength...

[Amethystfretchen]

Report: Jews behind campaign to boycott Israel

Jewish Chronicle investigation reveals Jewish, Israeli academics justify their activity as part of struggle for Palestinian rights, ending Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories
Hagit Klaiman

LONDON – Many of the key players in the escalating British campaign to boycott Israel are Jewish or Israeli, the Jewish Chronicle revealed in an investigation published Thursday.

According to the investigation, the Jewish academics justify their stance as part of the struggle for Palestinian rights and ending Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories.

The report stated that a high proportion of the academics were deeply involved in UCU, the University and College Union, which last month sparked an international outcry by voting to facilitate a boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

Anti-boycott figures suggest that the campaign has been fuelled by a well-organized mix of far-left activists and Islamic organizations, the JC reported. In reality, the main proponents are a loosely knit collection of academics and trade unionists linked to groups such as the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Jews for the Boycotting of Israeli Goods, and Bricup, the British Committee for Universities of Palestine.

Israeli Haim Bresheeth, professor of media and culture at the University of East London, seconded the UCU motion, which called for consideration of the morality of ties with Israeli academia and for discussions on boycotting.

Prof Bresheeth told the JC that a boycott was not an easy decision. “I am Jewish and an Israeli, and I don’t wish harm on either side. But how long can this occupation go on?”

Characterizing opposition to a boycott as insincere, he added, “What we are asking for is not violent. It is civil action against a military occupation.”

According to the JC, Bricup has a large number of Jewish supporters, among them husband and wife Hilary and Steven Rose. Hilary, a professor of social policy at Bradford University, is Bricup’s co-convenor alongside Prof Jonathan Rosenhead.

Her husband, an Open University biology professor, is the organization’s secretary. They have been active in the boycott movement since 2002.

In an online article, Steven Rose wrote, “It really isn’t good enough to attack the messenger as anti-Semitic or a self-hating Jew rather than deal with the message that Israel’s conduct is unacceptable.”

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0%2C7340%2CL-3413292%2C00.html
.................