Israel-Premier Tech cycling team confronted by pro-Palestine group at Tour of Britain, with more protests planned this week

"Kauft nicht bei Juden."

Sigh ... everyone should probably head over to the definitions of antisemitism at this point (of course - people don't agree on those either) - and for diversion also take in an appreciation of the current main boycott movement (complicated).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_definition_of_antisemitism

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Declaration_on_Antisemitism

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycott,_Divestment_and_Sanctions

Still, props to us all - hopeful or clear-thinking types who think almost 80 years of conflict (latest incarnation) can be fixed in a forum.

john_smith wrote:

"Kauft nicht bei Juden."

Yeah, but I think that the Nazis were boycotting Jewish businesses for a slightly different reason.

brooksby wrote:

john_smith wrote:

"Kauft nicht bei Juden."

Yeah, but I think that the Nazis were boycotting Jewish businesses for a slightly different reason.

Nope. Same reason. 

ErnieC wrote:

brooksby wrote:

john_smith wrote:

"Kauft nicht bei Juden."

Yeah, but I think that the Nazis were boycotting Jewish businesses for a slightly different reason.

Nope. Same reason. 

It really wasn't.

Checking boycott supporters I think it's fairer (but more boring, pleasing nobody) to say it really wasn't for *many* of the modern folks, but some have more ... mixed motivations.

chrisonabike wrote:

Checking boycott supporters I think it's fairer (but more boring, pleasing nobody) to say it really wasn't for *many* of the modern folks, but some have more ... mixed motivations.

I can't disagree.

But explicit antisemitism (pick on the Jews just because they are Jews, even if their Govt's behaviour was truly saintly) was not the original motivation behind BDS, as I understand it.

(EDIT) I'm pulling out of this thread now, because my personal knowledge isn't in-depth enough to get out of any tangled holes that are developing… 

Last para, top comment, time to join you.

They don't have an Israeli flag on their kit or cars. They are apparently funded by a private individual who I presume has no involvement in deciding what happens in Gaza.

I disagree that all citizens of a country are responsible for their governments actions. after all, not all Gazans are responsible for Hamas's actions.

 Also, drop the use of white supremacy. Famously, white supremacy and Jews don't mix well.

Israel is a supremacist country. It has laws that specifically discriminate against the population according to their ethnicity.  (I.e Nation State Law) A Jewish person born and raised in New York has more rights in Israel that a Christian Palestinian born in Jerusalem and whose ancestry dates back decades in Palestine. 

I agree that it is a supremacist country. But it is the white supremacist label that it massively wrong.

incidentally, most Israeli Jews are mizrahi not Ashkenazi- so from populations stripped of citizenship by Middle Eastern and North African countries and made into refugees, rather than from European Jewish emigration/refugee populations.

a number of Middle Eastern countries ban Jews from becoming citizens.

the little onion wrote:

incidentally, most Israeli Jews are mizrahi not Ashkenazi- so from populations stripped of citizenship by Middle Eastern and North African countries and made into refugees, rather than from European Jewish emigration/refugee populations.

a number of Middle Eastern countries ban Jews from becoming citizens.

Note that the Mizrahi migration to Israel occurred _after_ the Nakba. The expulsion of Jews by other muslim states happened as a reaction to the violent displacement and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs (and the murder of many thousands of them).

Paul J wrote:

the little onion wrote:

incidentally, most Israeli Jews are mizrahi not Ashkenazi- so from populations stripped of citizenship by Middle Eastern and North African countries and made into refugees, rather than from European Jewish emigration/refugee populations.

a number of Middle Eastern countries ban Jews from becoming citizens.

Note that the Mizrahi migration to Israel occurred _after_ the Nakba. The expulsion of Jews by other muslim states happened as a reaction to the violent displacement and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs (and the murder of many thousands of them).

A) one ethnic cleansing doesn't justify another.

B) that's bollocks, frankly. There were expulsions of Jews from across the middle east for centuries before 1948. Jews had to pay special taxes/protection money just to live in most of the Arab world before 1948.

C) there were strict regulations on movement of Jews to the land currently known as Israel both under British Mandate and the Ottomon Empire, which didn't apply to other groups. So they were only able to escape to what-is-now-Israel in large numbers after it was created.

I simply don't understand why people want to deny suffering of BOTH Jews and Arabs, as if there is a zero sum game, where only one group's suffering counts.

the little onion wrote:

 

A) one ethnic cleansing doesn't justify another.

B) that's bollocks, frankly. There were expulsions of Jews from across the middle east for centuries before 1948. Jews had to pay special taxes/protection money just to live in most of the Arab world before 1948.

C) there were strict regulations on movement of Jews to the land currently known as Israel both under British Mandate and the Ottomon Empire, which didn't apply to other groups. So they were only able to escape to what-is-now-Israel in large numbers after it was created.

I simply don't understand why people want to deny suffering of BOTH Jews and Arabs, as if there is a zero sum game, where only one group's suffering counts.

 

Fully agree with you on A.

B is not bollocks. The movement/displacement of Mizrahi jews to Palestine / Israel occurred overwhelmingly from 1948 onward. E.g., see "The Forced Migration of Jews from Arab Countries", Ada Aharoni. And your C contradicts your claim in B, giving a reason why displacement /could not/ occur pre-48, so you are actually well aware of this.

On your last, unlettered point, I fully agree with you. We should not deny the suffering of any group. We should alleviate all /ongoing/ suffering, regardless of the group.

I think we are largely in agreement. My point is that the vast majority of Jewish refugees from Arab/Middle eastern/North African countries arrived IN ISRAEL after 1948. But things were far from rosy for Jews in the middle east prior to 1948,  and there were plenty of movement/expulsions before then. We can't pretend that all Arab anti-semitism is down to the creation of Israel. 

Incidentally, a lot of jewish refugees from Arab countries moved to other places, e.g. France, rather than Israel.

the little onion wrote:

I disagree that all citizens of a country are responsible for their governments actions. after all, not all Gazans are responsible for Hamas's actions.

It is worth noting here that Israel is currently ramping up its military activities in the West Bank - above the regular oppression over the decades. Destroying roads, water infrastructure, communications, mosques, etc - starting in Jenin. Netanyahu / Mileikowsky recently showed a map of Israel on TV with the entire West Bank (and Golan Heights) included (far from the first time - he did same at the UN a decade or so ago). He and his government ministers openly talk about settling all of the West Bank. Herzog (the president) recently made a speech about how settlement was core to Israel and should be continued (i.e., of the West Bank and Golan).

There is no Hamas (of significant control) in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority, which has limited control over Area A land, has been completely acquiescent with Israel for nearly 2 decades now. Yet, Illegal state-backed settlement continues, and West Bank Palestinians continue to see their infrastructure regularly attacked/destroyed by the Israeli military; their children abducted illegally by the Israeli military; Israeli settlers steal land, armed with Israeli state weapons and with the direct backing of Israeli military; etc.

You can't blame Hamas for what Israel is doing in the West Bank.

Israel's presence in the West Bank is undeniably illegal under international law - reiterated in numerous UN resolutions and authoritatively recently by the ICJ. Israeli state support of settlement activity, along with the destruction of Palestinian civil infrastructure, constitutes ethnic cleansing - a crime against humanity.

Israel has no right to self-defence in the West Bank, under international law.

Israeli political and military leadership *will* face consequences for this, one day. As may lower level members of the military for specific war crimes they commit.

In no other country though is the right to citizenship based on one's ethnicity. Palestinians displaced in 1948 as a result of the creation of the state of 'Israel' have never been able to return to their homes because of their ethnicity. Israel has constructed an apartheid system unlike any other we have seen incl in S Africa. This is unique. There are many unjust and brutal regimes but none that compares with Israel. Palestinians are the world's biggest and longest standing refugee population - a problem the British created when they abandoned their Mandate to protect Palestine in 1947 and left Palestinians to their fate. We have a responsibility to right those historic wrongs.

Crazyhorse wrote:

In no other country though is the right to citizenship based on one's ethnicity. 

I mean, I don't mean to sound like a defender of Israel's discriminatory policies. But that fact just isn't true. Certainly not in the middle east, where there are PLENTY of other countries that explicitly or implicitly limit citizenship to ethnic and religious groups.

the little onion wrote:

Crazyhorse wrote:

In no other country though is the right to citizenship based on one's ethnicity. 

I mean, I don't mean to sound like a defender of Israel's discriminatory policies. But that fact just isn't true. Certainly not in the middle east, where there are PLENTY of other countries that explicitly or implicitly limit citizenship to ethnic and religious groups.

A concept these protestors conveniently overlook when it comes to ~the Jews~ I mean Israel. Pretty much every Gulf state defines citizenship by very tightly defined constraints based on tribe, and religion. 

At the end of the Second World War ethnic Germans were allowed to emigrate 'home' to Germany from countries they had lived for generations. Their right to citizenship was and is based on their ethnicity. It was the biggest mass migration of a people in the history of mankind. Indian Muslims founded an entire nation state, Pakistan, created exclusively for Muslims, at the expense of any other religious group living there. No one seems to care about this though. Only the Jews, eh?
Jews have no other homeland than Israel. In every other country they have been an often despised minority. Arabs in Gaza and the occupied territories can (and do) move a few miles north or east to live among other Arabs who speak the same language and share the same culture. Like moving from Leeds to York. It doesn't make it right, but let's not conflate the issue.

darrenleroy wrote:

Arabs in Gaza and the occupied territories can (and do) move a few miles north or east to live among other Arabs who speak the same language and share the same culture. Like moving from Leeds to York.

So, you and your family may have been farming the same land for centuries. A foreign country invades that land in contravention of international law and starts to build settlements on and around your land, again in contravention of international law and in the face of the condemnation of the United Nations. Often the invaders will burn your crops, kill your livestock and bulldoze your houses, backed by their army who are quick to open fire with live weapons at any sign of protest. No problem, just give up your home, your living and your land and move to another country where you will almost certainly have to live in a refugee camp in appalling conditions with no hope of improvement and no redress for everything you've lost. Stop making a fuss, it's just like moving from Leeds to York.

Ron Barron started and funds IPT. His purpose is specifically to improve the image of Israel abroad.

But he isn't actually a representative of the government? It isn't actually the Israeli government's money that funds the team? So it isn't exactly clear how they are responsible for sportswashing the government policies?

Whilst I abhor the actions of the Israeli government, there is an uncomfortable aspect to this story, in which anything with funding from an Israeli citizen becomes somehow complicit with that policy. It's as wrong as for example, holding INEOS as a team responsible for UK government policies.

for actual government funded sportswashing, look elsewhere in the peleton

the little onion wrote:

Whilst I abhor the actions of the Israeli government, there is an uncomfortable aspect to this story, in which anything with funding from an Israeli citizen becomes somehow complicit with that policy. It's as wrong as for example, holding INEOS as a team responsible for UK government policies.

 

for actual government funded sportswashing, look elsewhere in the peleton

Thank you. More than enough government funded sportswashing going on that conveniently gets ignored. 

the little onion wrote:

Whilst I abhor the actions of the Israeli government, there is an uncomfortable aspect to this story, in which anything with funding from an Israeli citizen becomes somehow complicit with that policy. It's as wrong as for example, holding INEOS as a team responsible for UK government policies.

The Israeli populace overwhelmingly supports the genocide though.