This piece is co-written with Max Blumenthal
The day after the American pop star Macy Gray announced controversial plans to perform in Tel Aviv in March, we sat down for a drink at Pua, a bar nestled in the heart of one of Jaffa’s most gentrified neighborhoods. When the waitress, a sociable 20-something resident of the city’s burgeoning young Jewish community informed us of a new brand of beer the restaurant was carrying, we wondered based on rumors we had heard if it was brewed in a settlement in the Golan Heights. The waitress, who was clearly offended, vehemently denied that it was “a settlement beer.” She reassured us that the owner of the restaurant was “a real Tel Aviv type guy,” and as such, “would not carry such a product.”
We were confused. “What exactly is a Tel Aviv type guy?” we asked her. When she returned to our table with two European beers, we asked for more information about the owner and a conversation began. She informed us that the owner of the bar ‘just keeps to himself and his friends in Tel Aviv’. She told us that he was not interested in politics and just wanted to live his life. We asked about her ideas on politics and the occupation. “I am a photographer. I used to go to Bil’in but it is violent.” She continued, “Now I just spend time with my friends and try to be a good person. I can’t take trying to change anything anymore.”
When asked for her opinion on BDS, her response was short and quick: “You can’t fight evil with evil.” She insisted that every boycott in history was wrong. We pressed her gently on the issue of boycotts (what about MLK’s Montgomery Bus Boycott, or the boycott of apartheid South Africa?) but it was clear that she was unwilling to go deep into the issue. She knew about the Occupation, the settlements, the racism that was rising like a tidal wave all around her, but she had deliberately cloistered herself inside a quaint European-style bar and Tel Aviv’s cosmopolitan lifestyle. Perhaps she could have contributed to the fight for a real democracy in Israel and justice for Palestinians living under occupation, but she had surrendered to the culture of apathy sanctioned by an entitled elite.
We began to understand the power of the cultural boycott in disrupting the apathy that pervades middle class, urban Israeli society. Apathy allows Israelis to live in comfort behind iron walls while remaining immune to the occupation and innoculated from its horrors. The culture of apathy allows them to watch the news and let out a groan of concern without thinking seriously about political engagement. In the case of the waitress at Pua, her apathy enabled her to witness the brutal military repression of legitimate political protest in the West Bank, only to return home to Tel Aviv and ignore her culpability.
The cultural boycott forces Israelis to deal with Israel’s behavior towards Palestinians by targeting them where it counts most: in the heart of their affluent comfort zones. The extreme right of Lieberman and the settlement movement must be confronted and exposed, but they are only the most extreme representation of an official ideology of racism towards Palestinians and the Arab world. They have grown and metastisized through fervent political activity, charisma and demagogy, while the “Good Israel” of Tel Aviv sits by impassively, and even cynically, watching the waves roll in while their society goes over the brink. It is the culture of apathy that supplies oil to the Occupation Machine.
Many Ashkenazi citizens of Israel have a second passport, allowing them to travel to and receive benefits from Western countries. They have developed an easy escape valve from the oppressive and violent manifestations of Jewish nationalism. Meanwhile, Palestinians live under a matrix of control devised inside US and European-funded Israeli universities and high tech research centers. An elaborate network of walls, electrified fences, biometric scanning devices, predator drones and collaborator networks ensures that each aspect of their lives is dominated by the Occupation. Because Palestinian residents of Jerusalem are forbidden from living where they choose with West Bank spouses, even their love lives are occupied. How would our waitress at Pua react if her life was subject to such crushing limitations?
We have often heard the argument that Macy Gray and other artists thinking about boycotting should perform in Tel Aviv and Ramallah. This commonly held idea not only reinforces concepts of segregation between Jews and Palestinians, it misses the point of the Palestinian boycott call entirely. The cultural boycott is designed to undermine the normalization of Israeli society. Palestinians do not necessarily want to see rock shows in Ramallah, they want to bring an end to the occupation. The 170 Palestinian civil society organizations who crafted the BDS call concluded that the most realistic non-violent means for ending the occupation was to force Israelis to live with the full responsibility of their actions. This was one of the ideas behind the boycott of Apartheid South Africa and one of the reasons why organizations like the South African Artists Against Apartheid now work to achieve the same goals in Israel.
My colleague and peer, Noam Shiezaf, published a thoughtful piece on this site arguing that Macy Gray should request that a certain number of tickets be sold to Palestinians in the West Bank for her Tel Aviv performance. The Palestinians would buy the tickets and then Israel would refuse their entrance to Tel Aviv. This would then provide a suitable subtext for Macy Gray to cancel her show.
The idea is clever but raises an important question: why would Macy Gray need to create a subtext to cancel? Doesn’t the longest military occupation in history provide a suitable enough reason to boycott? Furthermore, Israel would be able to correctly point out that Palestinians from the West Bank, by and large, are not allowed to enter Tel Aviv due to the sovereign laws of entry and exit to the State of Israel. Thus, the stunt would accomplish little more than reinforcing the notion that a militarized and radicalized Israeli society is perfectly kosher. And by circumventing the substance of the Palestinian BDS call, it allows critics to paint the cultural boycott as a form of collective punishment.
Too much of the commentary about BDS addresses the movement in a vacuum. The fact is, BDS is an integral part of Palestinian non-violent tactics. Quite simply, BDS is the globalization of Palestinian non-violent action against Israel’s occupation. So why do certain Jewish organizations from the United States and Israeli liberal Zionists lend rhetorical support to the joint nonviolent struggle in Sheikh Jarrah and elsewhere, while demonizing the call for BDS as borderline anti-Semitic and beyond the pale of reasonable people? Would the leaders of these organizations sit with the Palestinian families forcibly evicted from their homes in Sheikh Jarrah and tell them that their tactics are illegitimate?
It is easy to wash your hands of moral responsibility by participating in noble but ultimately doomed battles against the Occupation Machine. Confronting your own personal responsibility in allowing the crisis to reach such a terrible juncture is much harder, if not impossible, for too many. Perhaps the hardest step for the left-wing of the Jewish Establishment is ceding control of the debate while Palestinians assume the lead in their own struggle for freedom.
If the international community and especially the American Jewish community is unwilling to allow Palestinians a global form of nonviolent resistance against Israel’s occupation, what is left for the Palestinians to do? If violence is out of the question – it is certainly a terrible option for everyone — should Palestinians simply allow the Occupation to sweep them away like dust?
This is the question posed by the Palestinian national poet Mahmoud Darwish in his famous poem, “The Earth Presses Against Us.” “Where should we go after the last border? Where should birds fly after the last sky?” he asked. BDS may not be a panacea, but it at least ensures that for the Palestinians a horizon darkened by occupation can be extended until a just solution comes into view.
February 7, 2011
12:59 pm
Sorry to enter so late into this debate. I hope I’m not repeating things that have already been considered (if so, just ignore).
I’m very happy you raised – Dana and Blumenthal – the important question of whether one should support the BDS. Nevertheless I do not think that your way of presetting the issue is always particularly felicitous. For instance, I don’t see the point in complaining about demonstrators in SJ or their supporters that appose the BDS nor do I find anything particularly troubling with someone (a waiter) who consideres the protest in Bil’in too violent or dangerous. It would be better, I think, for activists to welcome and encourage the sympathetic discouraged rather than condemning them for their dispare or inability to act.
I have no doubt that the BDS might be effective in dismantling the horrible occupation regime. (What you need, though, is a reason to think that it is the best way to reach this crucially important end.) My question is whether it won’t take a lot more with it. I can see how a boycott of products from the settlements might be somewhat effective and how it will stop when there are no more products of this sort. I don’t know, and I wonder if anyone has a better answer than I do to the question of whether there is any way of insuring that an effective delegitimizing boycott that brings down the occupation wont bring Israel/PA down (or up) into a Lebanon-like state of all out civil war. Understandably, It is hard to expect Palestinians will come to the jews’ rescue – if I were them I wouden’t. The question, then, is simply this: where will an effective boycott end? (Here the diference with South Africa might be important.)
I expect you think, like me, that (very sadly) Israel has lost its legitimacy to exist given its 40+ years occupation and 60+ years of inequality for its arab citizens. Yet the way to regain this legitimacy might depend on a transformation of the Israeli public in the direction of a true democracy not by way of ending its existence (an end that may very well spell dome for jews and arabs alike). This brings me back to your presentation. Clearly, understandably, but hopefully not justifiably, you have given up on jewish Israelis. I’m well on the way of agreeing with you but I’m still holding out (and hoping that Fayyad will save us from ourselves).
February 7, 2011
1:14 pm
Rachel,
I think I’ve been listening. If you think BDS is a legitimate way of fighting the occupation, don’t complain that you yourself get “boycotted”.
February 7, 2011
1:39 pm
I am gratified that many readers here have concluded that the zionist entity has lost its legitimacy. Lets use our momentum not only to reverse the theft of 1967, but that of 1948 as well
February 7, 2011
1:44 pm
Majid,
We are having a nice discussion here where, strangely, everyone is keeping a certain level of respect for one and other. Please try to do so as well. If you would like to pose a question about 48 versus 67 politics, please feel free. However, statements like the last one do not help anything. Please think about this and then decide if you would like to join the debate.
Best
Joseph
February 7, 2011
2:15 pm
Joseph,
Have you given up on finding common ground?
BDS is a “you are either with us, or against us” mantra.
What ever happened to “live and let live”?
February 7, 2011
2:31 pm
You might be interested in reading this piece from a few days ago about how BDS manifests itself in Britain
http://www.thejc.com/bedouin-arabs/44724/anti-israel-protesters-clash-israels-top-bedouin-diplomat
February 7, 2011
2:47 pm
LG,
As I said in a previous comment, best to analyze BDS from the source. I am curious though, where does this article mention BDS? How do you know that this is a manifestation of BDS? I am an Israeli Jew living in Israel. Because I support BDS does that mean I am ‘anti-Israel”? Does anything that has the label “anti-Israel” have a connection with BDS? I support BDS because I want my society to change and I think it has the power to do so. That to me is pro Israel,pro Palestinian, pro peace and anti occupation. You have been commenting about how you want all the facts and information about BDS and then you post a link to an article that makes no connection to BDS and write that it is a manifestation of the call in Britain. It is an emotional issue and perhaps because of that emotion there is something very powerful and yes scary. Best to still to the actual BDS call and not let our minds run away.
Best
Joseph
February 7, 2011
2:57 pm
It’s wonderful to read such a thoughtful piece and sincere comments. I want to try to respond to some of the latter. To put my own comment in context, I am not Jewish or Israeli or Muslim or Palestinian. So I am keenly sensitive to the charges of hypocrisy that one of the commenters made earlier. In a sense, the occupation is not ‘my’ fight. And so BDS makes me uneasy insofar as it asks me to take a personal and political stand against the occupation by doing my part to make everyday, average Israelis uncomfortable, even if their own connection to the occupation is merely the tenuous one of apathy. I am uncomfortable with the idea of attacking average Israelis’ comfort zone for a few reason. First, my own government may be doing things that are just as bad, or worse. Second, there are worse things going on elsewhere in the world. I’m not saying that BDS is only for Israelis and Palestinians, just that for everyone else, there is a certain freedom to choose the “cause” you want to get involved in, and thus there seems to be a kind of responsibility to try to pick a cause where the suffering is particularly acute and abysmal. Even if I decide that the occupation is “my” cause, is BDS the right way to go about it? Shouldn’t I be targeting my own government’s role (e.g. US military subsidies) rather than trying to make Israelis anxious? And yet — and this modest point is actually all that I wanted to say — BDS has another kind of appeal for people in my position. This might sound trite, but the comparison that comes to mind is that of people who want to eat food that does not poison the environment, endanger workers, and cause needless animal suffering in the production process; or of people who want to wear clothes that are not made by exploited child workers; people who want, in short, to be responsible consumers. I think BDS has a future because it appeals to people who don’t want Israel to disappear and who don’t necessarily think that Palestinians are the most oppressed people on earth. It appeals to people who don’t want to give their own money to companies that are effectively making money off of an occupation that physically and mentally hurts Palestinian men, women and children every hour. For me, BDS is not a political statement, and it is not about taking an action against Israel. It is about trying to be responsible in a global economy, by trying to prevent my own actions from perpetuating a system that causes pain and oppression. I should do the same regarding oppression in Tibet, in the US, in Brazil, and anywhere else. If the BDS movement and NGOs like “Who Profits” give me the information that enables me to act on this moral impulse when it comes to Israel/OPT, I am not being anti-Israel (or anti-Israelis) by acting on that information, I am simply not turning a blind eye.
February 7, 2011
3:02 pm
The people who organise these protests are the same people who support BDS, which is particularly strong in Scotland and has made several attempts to disrupt performances by the Jerusalem String Quartet. One of their performances at the Wigmore Hall in London, which was being recorded for the BBC, had to be called off because of shouting from BDS members in the audiences (lots online about this).
I am sure you are not anti-Israel, but then you are an Israeli Jew living there. Here in Britain the prevailing discourse is Zionism is Racism and Israel is an apartheid state. I hear very little now from the BDS people I meet about ending the occupation.
February 7, 2011
3:08 pm
This is a very interesting piece and exchange.
“The culture of apathy which surrounds much of life in Israel is exactly what allows to the occupation to continue”, this is a painful true, but a true indeed. Anyway, until now I dont have a final opinion about the boycott, I am still thinking, but i have some thoughts about the comments.
Yes, to be from a country that occupy another one and support only a boycott to israel is “selective activism”, If someone support a boycott against “X”, he has to support the boycott to the others “X”. Only to be coherent. I think now about the english people for example, to call a boycott on Israel when they are in the Malvinas Islands (sorry if this place is not so famous for the general public, but they still use the colonial name, they are there since almost two hundreed years ago), Gibraltar, Ireland, etc, is very funny and sad too. I am big fan of elvis costello but you have to be coherent.
second, to call the words of Uri Avnery ridiculuous is a little bit too much. Maybe he thinks different, but please remember, he wrote books like “Israel without zionists” before a lot of us discover the occupation of palestine, and before 1967 too. And now he is a very old man, but he´s in the front line too. I want to see a lot of us at his age, where we going to be at 80?
PD: One question, why people dont sign his comments?. Is like to shoot a bullet and dont show the face.
regards.
February 7, 2011
3:51 pm
The supporters of BDS towards Israel are hypocritical.
I would suggest the following countries should receive the BDS treatment:
1. Lebanon for its comparatively worse treatment of Palestinians
2. Saudi Arabia for gender apartheid
3. Syria for the Hama Massacre and repression
and the list is long…..
Singling out Israel is fun for some. However if there are far worse perpetrators of human rights abuses in the area, I would suggest focusing on them.
Unfortunately, many radical Jews find their identity in the shape of some misguided organizations that have nothing to do with human rights or justice.
February 7, 2011
7:10 pm
I think that Michael W. has made my point for me. You can boycott me and everyone else who is part of this rapidly growing movement, you can say that you don’t like our tactics, but it won’t make Israel’s policies or its underlying philosophies any more popular in the world. And it won’t stop the things you claim you don’t like about Israel either. Your decision to dismiss us means that this problem will fall to the next generation of Jews to clean up. We have a moral responsibility to at least be 100% sure that we are doing everything we can to do what’s right. It is appropriate, moral and compelling to boycott Israel. An artist refusing to play there because of Israel’s policies sends a powerful message to change hearts and minds. How could you possibly view this as an affront? The irony of your reaction is that this is ultimately what will save us…
@Joseph I actually would have liked to hear more from Majid. I think that Palestinians and Arabs are willfully misinterpreted by Israelis and their Jewish supporters abroad. I wish that he had the freedom to explain what he meant when he said he wanted to reverse 48. I feel like everyone presumes he means he wants to throw Jews into the sea, when in fact he might mean something very different. How can we possibly ever come up with creative solutions for the future when we don’t have the full story of what he meant? I don’t mean any offense and I appreciate your work.
February 7, 2011
7:22 pm
@NYC Lawyer – without a doubt there is no shortage of other “worthy” BDS targets, but the topic here is Jews supporting BDS groups.
I think that there is most definitely a role for Jewish groups to criticize Israeli policy. But when that criticism evolves into actively supporting groups or policies which are “anti-Israel” (ie which negate Israel’s right to exist), things become more problematic.
Personally, I find Jewish BDS activists *outside of Israel* to be rather naive. If you care about Israel, agitate for Israel to change. Let the Palestinians struggle against Israel in whatever way they find to be most appropriate.
If I were still living in Israel, I might feel differently. And I certainly do not presume to be in a position to tell any Israeli what is the most appropriate way for them to change their society from within.
February 7, 2011
7:51 pm
Rachel,
Joseph did not ban Majid from participating, he asked him to be civil. Majid’s comments are very clear in other blogs as to how he would like the State of Israel to disappear. Some of his comments have been abhorrent and insulting.
If the BDS movement is growing, so is the anti BDS! I do not support the occupation but I find not looking into the obstacles the palestinian leaders have put against a peace accord and against simply improving the conditions their people live in, naive and dangerous. Yes, Israel is accountable but so are the palestinian leaders, and why do we never hear about that?
February 7, 2011
8:09 pm
Rachel,
You sound like a “medieval” Christian missionary. What I mean by that is that you are trying to “save” us even though all we are trying to do is live our lives. But no, “You can’t have a normal life.” Those missionaries forced the Jews to listen to their sermons.
February 7, 2011
10:32 pm
Rachel,
I am happy to have Majid join the debate but pointless name calling and babble is not going to get us anywhere. It is very difficult to monitor these comments, even more so regarding BDS. I am trying my best to keep a civil debate so that all sides can have a side and more forward in the discussion.
In terms of boycotting other countries, I think that is a separte issue and also misses the point. The reason why the boycott is important against the Israeli occupation is that IT CAN work here. As Max and I state, Israel wants to be a European country and thus has a lot to loss if the Western community attempts to hold it responsible for its actions. This is the same logic with the South African BDS movement. For example, sport is very big in South Africa and the boycott of SA teams applied a lot of pressure on the society. The same logic applies here and that is why, 1. it is so scary for Israelis and 2. why it is working.
So instead of bringing other examples of countries to boycott, lets focus on the Israeli case and talk about the other examples in their own discussions.
Someone also commented about the PA and holding them responsible. I would encourage you strongly to read the Palestine Papers and see how far the PA went for peace. See what they offered and what they did and then ask yourself why Israel refused? Seriously, it is shocking what was offered and how the police force in the West Bank moved to stop terror while Israel responded with more settlements and rejections of PA offers.
Why was Israel able to do that with such impunity? Why did the voters in Israel not push for a peace accord and how leaders accountable? This is part and parcel of the culture of apathy that Max and I are describing and we believe that the Palestinian call for BDS might be the only way to shock Israelis into action.
February 8, 2011
12:22 am
@joseph, I’m sorry but I just didn’t see him calling anyone a name. I understand what you’re trying to achieve, though, so if you thought it was best to upbraid him then fine.
@michael w. The irony of your reaction to me is that I really hope that you or any other Jew never experience antisemitism, which is why I have dedicated my life to doing this work. I am not forcing anyone to listen to anything. I am begging you to reconsider and to stop dismissing us, but ultimately, you are free to make your own choices, just like I am free not to purchase products that come from a country that is committing crimes in the name of my liberation and the name of my ancestors’ suffering. I can see that you are just reacting sensitively to the messenger, which I did once upon a time as well. But, if you care about Jewish suffering, you will do your best to end the crimes Israel is committing. I’m certain at this point that you’re just going to reply with nastiness, because this is a challenging topic. So, you are welcome to lob one last insult at me, for whatever it’s worth to you. I hope it’s emotionally satisfying, because it won’t solve Israel’s problems. BDS, however, brings Israelis and Palestinians together with people around the world who support peace and justice. I think you realize which side most reasonable people will choose.
February 8, 2011
1:55 am
Rachel,
I don’t know exactly what you support. I think that in order to stop said “crimes”, it should be done through the political process. Why boycott Osem because they weren’t able to influence the Israeli government enough to stop said “crimes”?
BDS has been the decades long effort of the Arab regimes against Jews even before the State of Israel was created. If you want to come together with Syria, we know where you stand on Israel, and it has nothing to do with “justice” or “peace”.
February 8, 2011
2:01 am
Michael,
I suggest you reread the piece and think about the arguments that we are presenting. Your comments are not connected to what we are presenting here. Also, can you back up your claim of the decades long BDS call? You are confusing facts here.
Best,
Joseph
February 8, 2011
8:05 am
Dear Joseph
I have not called anyone names. My goal in participating in this discussion is to talk about the scope of BDS. I believe that the creation of the zionist entity in 1948 was a horrible error by the UN. I think the Goldstone Report is a belated but small attempt to rectify this error. BDS offers the best way not only to reverse the zionist gains thru aggressive war in 1967. My goal is the voluntary resettlement of Jews outside of Palestine, which could be funded by Soros using the billions that he has extracted from the Muslim world thru currency speculation
February 8, 2011
8:59 am
@Majid, you are entitled to your opinion about the creation of the “zionist entity”, but why would two wrongs (throwing out yet another population) make a right? Perhaps some Israelis would prefer to “voluntarily” move to other places, but perhaps some Palestinians might also like to be able to legally settle where they are currently located?
But what does BDS have to do with any of this? Are you suggesting that Israelis should boycott their own country by moving somewhere else?
PS: Interesting choice of ‘moniker’ you have there: Mossad spy, Iranian kick-boxer, anything else?
February 8, 2011
11:12 am
Excellent article and resulting debate. But it seems that, with a very few exceptions, most respondents here are dancing around Avnery’s main point. I wasn’t asking what is BDS, what are its goals, or whether it should or should not be applied here in the Israel/Palestine context. I am working under the assumption – and the current reality – that it is indeed being applied. The main point that I brought for debate and consideration is this: BDS might not work here in the same way that it worked in South Africa. It MIGHT, as reader Michael Omer-Man was one of the few to acknowledge, in fact result in an opposite of the intended effect: ie, the hardening to the political right of the Israeli public rather than increased Israeli public pressure to end the occupation. Why are BDS proponents, including right here in this very lively debate, so reluctant to consider this possibility? It’s not unreasonable. It’s a distinct possibility, and to BDS proponents it should be considered a dangerous possibility. But ignoring it won’t make it go away… Joseph, you are among the few in this debate to have considered this option: “…an Israeli move to the right might actually help the situation of ending the occupation because the international community will no longer be presented with soft versions of Israeli understandings of the Palestinians… I do not fear an Israeli move to the right because I think that the situation must get worse and our political language/actions become more openly hostile before things will get better.” Thanks for your comments. Could you explain further how you see the international community responding to a more hardened-to-the-right Israeli public? And how do you envision the situation getting worse? What will that entail and how might it help, how will might it eventually then pull things around to an improved situation? In short: What?
February 8, 2011
12:03 pm
Mati,
The advocates of BDS here, at least some of them, want Israel to turn further right so the world can see how bad Israel is and impose a “just” solution to the conflict.
February 8, 2011
1:13 pm
Michael, nice smearing attempts, but BDS is unrelated to the Syrian government.
February 8, 2011
2:29 pm
Ofer, I think that Michael was referring to Arab League efforts to force a boycott of Israel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_League_boycott_of_Israel
February 8, 2011
2:55 pm
Zvi, I know what he was aiming at.
The BDS campaign is a grassroots campaign, not a government-sponsored campaign. Most, if not all, its Arab participants regard the Syrian regime in the same manner as they regard the Egyptian regime.
February 9, 2011
1:34 pm
The BDS campaign reflects Western gullibility, selective outrage and hypocrisy. The fact is that Israel has a FAR better (if imperfect) human rights record than the other Arab states.
Now I anticipate the usual retorts of :
“don’t change the subject”
“two wrongs don’t make a right”
Or my favorite – “you automatically call critics of Israel anti semitic and self hating” (to suggest that there aren’t overwhelming substantive arguments for Israel’s cause
If you want to single out Israel and employ punitive measures against it – Reasonable people have a right to call out your hypocrisy as a neutral and balanced observer.
Simple analogy and logic – Country X commits 100 violations but Countries Y and Z commit 10000 violations…. and then Countries Y and Z come demanding answers from Country X.
February 15, 2011
2:36 pm
Joseph, when I made a comment about why palestinian leaders are not accountable you suggested I read the Palestine Papers, which of course I already have. Putting aside ther reliability and the fact that these were leaked selectively, this is not what I meant. What I really mean is the daily life of the palestinian people, which is really difficult. There has been a lot of money from various countries (The E.U., Japan)over the years, sent to the occupied territories with the explicit purpose of improving the daily lives of the palestinian people, such as inproving roads, sewers, etc. That has not happened and there is a need for accountabilty for that. This is not divest Israel for its responsibility at all, it’s just another side of the coin. Our blogs, BDS, etc. are hopefully done with the first hope to improve the lives of the palestinian people no?
March 17, 2011
4:08 am
[...] Joseph Dana and Max Blumenthal: BDS targets the right group in Israeli society. [...]
February 28, 2012
6:39 pm
Israel is a racist state simple and plain!
Admit it or not. It is true
FREE PALESTINE