Image by Zoriah via Flickr
9
US Campaign National Organizers' Conference a success--and in the media spotlight!
We're still sorting through everything that we need to do to follow-up from the conference. We'll have a detailed conference report available within the next few days. In the meantime, though, we've been getting a lot of media coverage of our boycott, divestment, and sanctions work, especially after member groups in good standing voted to adopt the principle of academic and cultural boycott into the BDS work of the US Campaign. Since 2005, the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation has endorsed the Palestinian civil society call for BDS, and we've placed our BDS work in an anti-apartheid framework since 2006. We've worked to pressure Caterpillar and Motorola to end their corporate complicity in Israeli occupation and apartheid. Now, as a coalition, we have agreed to expand our BDS work into the realm of academic and cultural boycotts, as well as boycotts of Israeli goods such as Ahava beauty products.
Check out US Campaign Steering Committee member Phyllis Bennis, Palestinian lawyer Diana Buttu (who was one of the featured speakers of the US Campaign's 2008 anti-apartheid speaking tour), and Israeli academic Neve Gordon, whose recent LA Times op-ed has helped raised the profile of the BDS movement in the mainstream U.S. press, discussing BDS on Laura Flanders' GRITtv. :
In addition to the discussion of boycott and divestment, Bennis discusses reactions to the Goldstone report on the Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip. This episode of GRITtv also features Hasan Kwame Jeffries, who discusses struggle against the U.S. form of apartheid from Reconstruction to today. The interview with Jeffries is a powerful reminder that the struggle against racism and oppression is long-term work--work that must continue if justice is to be possible.
The National Conference also got coverage in The Electronic Intifada, where Nada Elia, an organizer with the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, discusses the importance of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation endorsing cultural and academic boycott. Check out the full article here.
And the Jewish Daily Forward put forward its own analysis of the BDS movement, including this important quote from American Jewish Committee spokesman Ben Cohen:
"[It]'s clear to me that this discourse of boycott is being increasingly legitimized, and it would appear that some companies are responsive to it."It is exactly the increasing presence of boycott and divestment in the mainstream discourse about U.S. policy toward Israel/Palestine that leads US Campaign conference speaker Omar Barghouti to proclaim, "Our South African moment has arrived."
We'll be getting you more information about the decisions that were made at our National Conference in the next few days. Keep your eyes on this blog and our website!
US Campaign National Conference speaker Omar Barghouti on BDS
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Naomi Klein discusses the Toronto Film Festival on Democracy Now
"A protest at the Toronto International Film Festival has taken center stage after a group of artists and writers signed a letter of protest against the festival’s decision to spotlight the city of Tel Aviv. Activists say the TIFF spotlight plays into Israel’s attempt to improve its global image in the wake of the assault on the Gaza Strip and the ongoing occupation of Palestinian land. Over 1,500 people have signed the letter, called “The Toronto Declaration: No Celebration of Occupation,” including Jane Fonda, Viggo Mortensen, Danny Glover and Harry Belafonte. We speak with journalist and author Naomi Klein, who helped draft the letter."
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Headin' to Chicago
We won't have time to blog or send updates during the conference, but keep an eye on the blog, website, Twitter, and Facebook for post-conference updates. Next week, we'll be coming back to DC, and our members will head back to their home communities--and the work of changing U.S. policy begins anew!
Hope to see you in Chicago!
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
New BDS resources from US Campaign member group Interfaith Peace Initative
Check out the updated survey of Global Actions against Israeli occupation, including boycott and divestment actions taken by unions, faith communities, and human rights organizations, by clicking here.
And click here for a comprehensive list of companies that directly profit from the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.
Get involved with boycott, divestment, and sanctions by clicking here.
Nadia Hijab: Settling for...Settlements
"The Arabs have a saying for someone who’s not getting anywhere: “He’s managed to explain, after considerable strain, that water is water.” And so it is with US envoy George Mitchell: After considerable effort he’s apparently settled for a settlement freeze that involves more settlements."How to respond to the continuing unwillingness of the United States to cut military aid to Israel even when U.S. demands for an end to settlements go totally unheeded? Hijab argues that Palestinian civil society provides the answer:
"The other hopeful trend remains the work of the Palestinian civil society, whose boycott call against Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights bears new fruit almost every day. Most recently Jane Fonda, Naomi Klein, Alice Walker, Danny Glover joined over 50 artists to protest the Toronto International Film Festival spotlight on the city of Tel Aviv. They are not against showing Israeli films but rather are against the staging of "a propaganda campaign on behalf of … an apartheid regime.” And then there is the Norwegian pension fund decision to divest from the Israeli company Elbit Systems for its involvement in construction on occupied Palestinian land. "We do not wish to fund companies that so directly contribute to violations of international humanitarian law," explained Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen."Check out Nadia Hijab's full article here.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
8th Annual National Organizers' Conference is Almost Here!
Check out our website for updates on our Saturday night fundraiser, proposals that will be discussed at the National Conference, and more.
Hope to see you in Chicago!
Another "Your Tax Dollars at Work" Moment: Free Gaza Movement reports that Israeli Navy incinerates Gaza fishing boat
U.S. military aid and arms transfers to Israel include warships and ammunition. To learn more about the details of U.S. arms transfers to Israel, check out the Capitol Hill briefing we did on the subject by clicking here.
Meanwhile, check out these two items from today's headlines on Democracy Now, first on settlements:
"Israel has announced plans to build 455 more housing units in the West Bank, defying demands from the Obama administration for a freeze on settlement construction. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said President Obama regrets Israel’s decision. Gibbs said, “the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued settlement expansion and we urge that it stop.""And then on the United States' role in the global arms trade:
"A new study has revealed the United States is quickly expanding its role as the world’s largest weapons supplier. In 2008, the US signed weapons agreements worth nearly $38 billion. That’s ten times as much as Italy, the world’s second largest arms dealer. The US is now responsible for 68 percent of all business in the global arms bazaar."Help us end the madness. Take action to oppose military aid to Israel by clicking here.
"Activate Our Networks"
A little while back we linked to an interview with US Campaign National Organizer Katherine Fuchs in WireTap Magazine. Here's what Fuchs had to say about Congressional advocacy in that piece [emphasis added]:
Not to scare you all or anything, but "our networks" means YOU! The discourse on Israel/Palestine--whether it's in the media, among consumers, in corporate boardrooms, or on Capitol Hill--won't change without your dedicated work. We need people working in every district, every state, every municipality, on every campus, everywhere."When I meet with a sympathetic staffer or member of Congress, they often want to help and find ways of doing so short of cutting military aid because they are afraid that they would catch hell from their constituents. It's much more depressing to hear this come from the mouth of someone who clearly wants to do more than it is to be shut out by someone whose last campaign was funded by the Israel lobby and whose mind was made up before I stepped into their office. Every time I hear that the constituents back home wouldn't stand for sanctioning Israel's bad behavior I am motivated to activate our networks in that district to show the member of Congress that their constituents really do believe in standing up for human rights law."
Get activated by clicking here.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Detroit-based hip hop artist Invincible reps BDS, US Campaign
The video is directed by Iqaa The Olivetone and features Suhell Nafar from the Palestinian hip hop group Dam and Abeer (aka Sabrina Da Witch). It also features a background appearance from the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation's fancy banner, right around minute 4:00 (try not to be bowled over with excitement). The video also includes testimonies from Palestinians and others who share their own experiences of displacement and loss of identity.
Here's Invincible explaining what the song covers: "This song was inspired by and has been in the works since a conversation with my mom (or ima in Hebrew) 5 years ago, when I asked her if she missed "back home",(which she calls Israel) and she responded profoundly- "I miss people not places". I realized what a privilege it was to not miss a place and land that so many Palestinians have been displaced from.
The song takes the listener on a journey through a haunted "birthright" tour where the buried Palestinian significance of each location comes to light. Along the route i expose the process of historic and continued colonization as being even deeper than land seizure and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, but one that is invested in erasing the Arabic language, culture, and memory.
One of my main aims is to destroy the myth of a "Jewish birthright" to a land Palestinians are denied the Right of Return to."
Check it out:
Like that one? Here's another video from Invincible, this time spreading the word about boycott, divestment, and sanctions:
Watch. Listen. Then get involved!
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Lev Leviev's Financial Follies
This week news broke that Russian-Israeli tycoon Lev Leviev's Africa-Israel Company is unable to repay billions of dollars of debt. While Leviev's loss is primarily pinned on falling real estate prices in the United States, there are some indications that that Africa-Israel's difficulty finding additional capitol is due to the boycott & divestment (BDS) campaign that has been targeting Leviev for two years.Leviev made his fortune in diamonds and real estate, and both of these endeavors have been boycott and divestment targets. Leviev's diamond enterprises have been criticized for human rights abuses in Angola. Leviev's real estate ventures include gentrification in Brooklyn, NY and Jewish-only settlements such as Ma'ale Adumim, Har Homa, Adam, Matityahu East, and Modi'in Ilit in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Ma'ale Adumim is a huge settlement block that makes travel between the Northern and Southern portions of the Palestinian West Bank nearly impossible for Palestinians (it's quite easy if you're allowed to drive on Israeli-only bypass roads). Modi'in and Matityahu East are the settlements that prompted Israel to build a wall confiscating 60% of the village of Bi'lin's land.
It is these settlement projects that pushed BlackRock, a British investment bank, to divest of holdings in Africa-Israel. A week after the BlackRock news broke, Leviev announced that Africa-Israel could not raise the capitol to repay its debts. While Africa-Israel isn't the only company taking a beating due to speculation in the American real estate market, it is the only one that's been targeted for by a BDS campaign, which can make a big difference when seeking new investors. It seems that being the center of controversy over human rights violations makes it difficult to get additional loans - or even to keep current investors.
The following Democracy Now! clip features an interview with two proponents of the Leviev boycott.
This blog post has been edited slightly to add clarity that was lacking in the original version.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Naomi Klein and Israeli publisher Yael Lerer talk BDS with Cecilie Surasky of Jewish Voice for Peace
Lerer, whose Andalus publishing company focuses on translating Arabic literature into Hebrew, explains why Israelis should support boycott:
"Twenty years ago I could never have imagined this semi-apartheid situation. I care about the future in this place. I care about my fellow Israelis. I have a huge family here and many, many friends. I know many people who don't have any other passports, and who don't have any other options. I think that the solution for this place, the only possible future, is living together. Unfortunately, at this stage, I don't see how this future can be achieved without international pressure. And I think that boycott is a nonviolent tool that has already shown us that it can work. So I'm asking: please boycott me."
Klein, who recently organized a book tour to promote the Hebrew translation of her book The Shock Doctrine that was in accordance with the Palestinian civil society call for BDS, argues that BDS is an effective tool for changing public opinion and policy in the United States:"I also believe this movement could be a game-changer in the United States. Let's remember that a huge part of the success of the anti-apartheid struggle in the eighties was due to popular education....The Palestinian BDS call could play that kind of movement-building role today, giving people something concrete they can organize around in their schools and communities.... Whether he recognizes it or not, Obama needs the Palestinian struggle to be a popular, grassroots issue like the South African struggle was....[The] only hope of not just having him hold to this tentative position but actually improving this position is if there’s a popular movement that is very clear in its demands for Israel abide by international law on all fronts, and that's exactly what BDS is."Check out the full article here; and find out how you can get involved in BDS by clicking here.
Yet another "Your Tax Dollars At Work" moment
IOF willfully kill a Palestinian child in al-Jalazoun refugee camp, north of Ramallah
Posted on: September 1, 2009 | ShareThis | Print
1 September 2009
The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) strongly condemns the willful killing of a 15-year-old Palestinian child by Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF). The attack occurred yesterday, 31 August 2009, near the entrance of al-Jalazoun refugee camp, north of Ramallah.
According to investigations conduced by PCHR, at approximately 21:30 on Monday, 31 August 2009, IOF troops stationed at a military observation tower inside “Beit Eil” settlement, north of Ramallah, opened fire at five Palestinian children who were near al-Jalazon UNRWA School, located near the southeastern entrance of al-Jalazoun refugee camp. One of the children, 15-year-old Mohammed Riad Nayef ‘Elayan, was wounded by three bullets to the chest. An ambulance from Sheikh Zayed Hospital in Ramallah attempted to reach the area. However, the ambulance was stopped by at least 30 soldiers who prevented the medical crew from attending to the wounded child. Meanwhile, dozens of Palestinian civilians gathered on the spot and attempted to help the wounded child, but Israeli soldiers fired tear gas canisters at the crowd. The ambulance driver, Usama Hassan Ibrahim al-Najjar, 37, was hit by a tear gas canister to the left leg. ‘Ali Ahmed Mohammed Nakhla, 29, also sustained similar injuries.
Mohammed was left bleeding for approximately an hour. At approximately 22:30, IOF transferred the child to Beit Eil settlement where he was evacuated by a helicopter to Hadasa ‘Ein Karem Hospital in West Jerusalem. In the early morning, Israeli sources declared that the child had succumbed to his wounds. IOF have continued to hold the child’s body. IOF arrested the four children who were with ‘Elayan and kept them detained in Beit Eil settlement untill 03:00 on Tuesday, 1 September 2009. One of the released children informed PCHR that the children were walking normally in the street where the attack took place and that they suddenly found themselves under Israeli gunfire. The boy said that when Israeli soldiers saw the wounded child falling onto the ground, they rushed to the scene and arrested his companions. The soldiers left the boy bleeding without offering him any medical aid.
PCHR strongly condemns the murder of a child by IOF, and:
1. Reiterates condemnation of this latest crime, which is part of a series of crimes committed by IOF in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT).
2. Calls upon the international community to promptly and urgently take action in order to stop such crimes, and renews its call for the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to fulfill their obligations and provide protection to Palestinian civilians in the OPT.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Israeli journalist Gideon Levy on Israeli reactions to boycott
"The timing of the mini-maelstrom over an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times by Neve Gordon, who teaches politics and government at Be'er Sheva's Ben-Gurion University, calling for a boycott of Israel, was somewhat grotesque. Hardly have the throats dried of those calling for his dismissal, for his citizenship to be revoked, for his expulsion and, if all else fails, his stoning, when another petition has surfaced on the Internet, this one calling for a boycott of Ikea. A bad article on the back page of a Swedish tabloid is enough to produce a call here for a consumer boycott to which thousands sign their names. Turkey has barely recovered from the boycott that our package tourers imposed on it because its prime minister had the gall to attack our president, and already we are cruising toward our next boycott target. It's our right."Levy also reflects on the historical development of boycott as an effective tool of civil resistance:
"Since the time of the ban imposed in the Jewish community by Rabbeinu Gershom at the turn of the first millennium, which applies to offenses of considerably less severity than mistreating 3.5 million people - namely, marrying more than one woman, divorcing a woman without her consent and reading private correspondence without the owner's consent - the boycott has been a just and appropriate civil weapon. And since the boycott of the apartheid regime in South Africa, the boycott has also been an effective weapon."Click here to read the full article.
Boycotts, divestment, and sanctions are appropriate and effective responses to human rights abuses and violations of international law. What's more, they are actions in which we can all participate. Click here to find out how.
( Past perversions of Ahmadinejad's speeches left suspicions.
Quotes from President Ahmadinejad of Iran
I thought a more sympathetic view interesting. )
Mohammad of Vancouver on Ahmadinejad’s speech
http://mondoweiss.net/2009/04/the-history-of-imperialism-and-colonialism-that-takes-nine-paragraphs-of-ahmadinejads-speech-and-you-emphasize-the-quantity-2.html
The other day we ran a repudiation of Ahmadinejad's speech in Geneva by Bruce Wolman. As a Jew, I took comfort in that; but this site is not about comfort. We aim to be a place where dialogue occurs across national, ethnic and religious lines in a new world. Today we run a vigorous defense of Ahmadinejad by Mohammad of Vancouver, our Iranian-Canadian correspondent.
The history of imperialism and colonialism that takes up nine paragraphs of Ahmadinejad's speech–and Bruce emphasizes quantity– is a very relevant historical grounding of the problem of racism in post-colonial and neo-colonial times. I do not need to tell you how historically-rooted in colonialism are the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the tortures at Abu Ghareib.
Racism involves all the things Ahmadinejad talks about. As any theorist of critical race theory would tell you, it is about imperialism, colonialism, the late capitalist economy, globalization, transnational spheres of hegemony; and yes Palestine is still a colonized land and we all stand in solidarity on this.
Bruce, I understand your frustration. Denial of the Holocaust is "bad." Mentioning of the word Holocaust is often followed by an obsessive search and research into deciding whether it was denied, questioned, undermined, etc. And I acknowledge, references to the Holocaust in Ahmadinejad's speeches in the past and at the Durban 2 Conference on Racism have not been free of tension. Let's leave aside the old debate on the act of denial of the Holocaust and the meaning of it and stick to the very exact concern of: how did Ahmadinejad used the term Holocaust in this speech.
For all of you who do not speak Farsi, I have to emphasize, even when Ahmadinejad seems to be demeaning the memory of Holocaust, even when he seems to be belittling the memory of millions of lost Jewish lives, he does so with ambiguity. Compare that to the direct, offensive and aggressive rhetoric of Bush (axis of Evil, threat of military action), Olmert and Lieberman (constantly referring to Iran as Nazi Germany, threat of military action) and the use of nuclear bombs and the specific threat of the annihilation of Iran as a nation in defense of Israel (Hilary Clinton). And Bruce, do you criticize Israeli leaders for comparing the the nation of Iran to Nazi Germany?
There are a lot of criticisms of Israel in this blog and elsewhere, and people are all so busy tracking Israel’s actual crimes that they don’t get to get offended by Israel’s words. In that category, Israel gets to run free in a sea of smear, libel and unfair comments about everyone. From Norman Finklestein to Richard Falk, from Mearsheimer to Ahmadinejad, everyone is an anti Semite bent on the destruction of Jewish people. When was the last time anyone took offense at these outrageous statements? Why do we tolerate Israel’s not so ambiguous distortion of truth, but can’t even take our time to fact check our own work when we take offence against Ahmadinejad?
In the past, Ahmadijead has had two strategic goals for questioning the Holocaust. The first one is to show to Iranians and Muslims the limits of freedom in the West. He invokes Holocaust to show to his primary audience, Muslims throughout the world, that the west is not fully free, therefore why should Muslims adapt to limitless Western-style freedoms? This strategy is a challenge, not to Jews or the memory of Holocaust, but to the seculars within the Islamic world who constantly contrast Islam with the limitless and ideal freedoms in the West.
Another reason for using Holocaust is to challenge the West’s, and Israel’s, monopoly on contemporary history. By questioning Holocaust, not only does he challenge the West’s hold on the notion of history, he also challenges the central role of World War 2 and its consequence as the implicit pretext injustice, racism and war crimes today. He positions himself against all those Arab leaders in the past or today who have never questioned the legitimizing narrative of the World War 2 as a basis for the creation of Israel, and comes out as a historical hero.
I personally use this argument constantly, that Israel is abusing and has abused the memory of the Holocaust. This idea was the exact same idea that Ahmadinejad used when using the term Holocaust in his speech. This shows that he actually toned down the questioning of the Holocaust and only talked about the abuse of Holocaust by Zionists. How could this mild insult put him in a spot equal to Netanyahu?
As to the facts, we have one copy of the videotape version of the live speech in Farsi, an English translation provided by the Iranian delegation, a Persian text of the speech from the Iranian news agency, and a BBC PDF file with the letterhead symbol of Islamic Republic of Iran (Allah) accompanied by a rather sentimental font indicating that it is either an official fax from Iranian officials that was not intended for delivery (it says on the file "please check against delivery") and that has possibly leaked out, or is a fake. "The most controversial and frequented reported line, a clear denial of the Holocaust," as Bruce has argued comes from this last version (and not the link he has provided as evidence). The word Holocaust is accompanied by two "clearly" or "seemingly" (take your pick) problematic adjectives: "ambiguous and dubious."
According to Bruce, and not the article he links to as evidence, there was a meeting with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who supposedly talks Ahmadinejad out of using "problematic" adjective and the speech changes to the one that we have on the video. And the speech that we know of through the video is not a denial of Holocaust speech.
Even if, Bruce is right and that Ahmadinejad has dropped the two "problematic" adjectives prior to his speech, I still have a hard time accepting Bruce's main thesis that this guy is a warmonger sitting close to the Zionists of them all Mr. Netanyahu. Ahmadinejad did not deny the Holocaust in his speech. Even if he had intended to accompany the "question" of the Holocaust with adjectives of "dubious and ambiguous" he did not do so. The mere fact that he has not done so is a sign–and it is a very important signifier that is misread here by Bruce. It is not Ahmadinejad who denied the Holocaust, it is your assumption that he must be a denier that is making him into one and putting his name beside that of Netanyahu.
We look for hate in fear/hope of finding it, and fighting it. Yet, how this hate is articulated determines its badness. The word Holocaust out of Ahmadinejad's speech, the Holocaust that he is not denying, is not the same Holocaust of World War II in which undeniably six million Jews, homosexual, gypsies, communists, mentally and physically challenged people were executed in gas chambers. As I tried to describe earlier, Ahmadinejad's Holocaust is the Holocaust of western rhetorical strategy.
This is not so different from what anti-Zionists in the west and historians like Finkelstein have been saying, that Israel’s Holocaust is not the same as the Holocaust of 6 million Jews, because Israel has for a long time used Holocaust as a rhetorical device to advance its positions. If Ahmadinejad also uses a Holocaust rhetoric to question the basis of the Zionist system in Israel and the legitimacy of the Western hold on current events based on their monopoly of the history of the World War 2. And Israel uses a Holocaust rhetoric to legitimize racism, land grabbing, occupation and war crimes.
In one simple word, Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust is a signifier of him as a radical leader and it stands for his transgression of international political norms, the ones that the world hegemonies are imposing on him, his people and the people of the "southern" countries. His actions are partly anti colonial in our neocolonial times. His speech is indicative of his concerns for those people who have been denied their international rights by the powerful nations of the "North."
The Holocaust rhetorical strategy brings him into limelight, where he can address the material concerns of Iranians, Palestinians, and the rest of the "South." The badness of the articulation of this rhetorical strategy is much different from that of the neo-Nazis who use the frank and unambiguous denial of the Holocaust in order to redeem themselves from the burden of the actual crimes of Hitler done in the past. If their rhetoric intends to erase history, Ahmadinejad’s seek to reorient it and re-contextualize it in relation to the Palestine and the Muslim Middle East.
At least the fair thing Bruce can do is toconcentrate on the content of the actual speech. At that level Ahmadinejad's speech deserves to be hailed as a courageous challenge to European Powers and USA, which have found comfort in their defense of Zionism, for their continued racist policies towards the Muslim world and the south. Elsewhere in Ahmadinejad's speech he articulates the course of action for anti racists; and this is not the elimination of the Jewish state, but curbing the excess of Zionist power. Why aren't we seeing an opening in this very claim? Why look for anti-Semitism in a speech that starts with praise for Moses and ends with stressing the need to work with Every country, we assume Israel included, to solve the problems of racism? Who are we really mad at here? Doesn't our reluctance to accept Ahmadinejd stem from our disappointment at ourselves for our historical failure in providing any alternative to the dominant Zionist discourse on Holocaust?
Aren’t we upset that while we were sleeping, the people and the leaders of the south are developing rhetoric and skills to corner Israel and the western colonial governments and their flawed sense of morality?
Related Posts
- Mohammad of Vancouver on Ahmadinejad’s speech
- Mohammad of Vancouver on the anti-Ahmadinejad bloc
- Mohammad of Vancouver on the anti-Ahmadinejad bloc
- Two great points about Durban II and the Ahmadinejad speech
- The Iranian revolution has succeeded in many ways–Mohammad of Vancouver
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=476d551d-2e56-49c8-8548-adbfd9e48e89)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment