The BDS Thread (Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions)

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Schulz: 'I didn't check the data.'
From article:
It is clear that the Palestinian Authority has decided long ago to stop cooperating with Israel on water issues and instead politicize it at the expense of its people (and the entire region, by overdrilling and refusing to treat wastewater for crops and giving them scarce fresh water instead.)

This politicization is what drives bogus statistics about water, statistics that take a lot of effort to debunk.

But nearly every one has been shown to be a lie.

Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: How the PLO politicizes water as a weapon against Israel
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
From article:
It is clear that ...
I scoped out this clown's "reasoning" and "logic" - particularly with respect to the assertion that he made in one article that you copy/pasta'd that he had "shown" some journalist to be "biased" ... and that led me down an associated rabbit hole where EoZ did an "analysis" (entirely laughable ... but certainly good entertainment) in terms of the Palestinian "right of return" ... allow me to give you the abbreviated version:

This analysis was within the context of a UN document which clarified the "right of return" which applies to Palestinians.

Essentially what the document says IIRC, is that there is no general right of return to the country/land/territory - but only an individual specific right of return to one's former home (residence, abode, occupancy, etc.)

Your "genius" EoZ then extrapolates from that, that if the home no longer exists, then neither does the right ...

Of course, this would mean that Israel - the entity which caused people to be displaced as refugees in the first place - could simply destroy any such Palestinian homes in Israel proper ... and thereby cancel or void said right ...

Good luck selling that argument in an appropriate court of competent jurisdiction (ICC, ICJ, etc.) ... ;)

From what I've seen thus far EoZ is, at best, a clown with a platform.

As far as Schulz goes, he didn't make an assertion ... he was simply relaying a question he had been asked.

This of course caused a near meltdown in Knesset by the fanatical Zionist nutjobs ... and, ironically, leading the pack was Naftali Bennett ... the man, who by his own actions, seems quite intent on making sure that Israel is further isolated from the international community.

You literally couldn't make it up if you tried ...
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
With respect to the issue, this short FAQ from Israeli humanitarian NGO B'Tselem was published two days ago in response to the controversy:

Undeniable discrimination in the amount of water allocated to Israelis and Palestinians

Published:
12 Feb 2014

water_oren_ziv.jpg

Water truck at Khirbet Jenbah, South Hebron Hills. Village is not hooked up to water grid. Photo by Oren Ziv, Activestills, 3 January 2013.​


Following the Knesset debate today, B'Tselem publishes a short FAQ about inequality in the distribution of water between Palestinians and Israelis.

1. Is there discrimination in terms of the quantity of water available to Israelis and Palestinians?
Yes, there is discrimination in water allocation and Israeli citizens receive much more water than Palestinian residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Government of Israel is largely responsible for this discrimination due its water policy: First, minimal amounts of water are supplied to Palestinians and water from shared resources is unequally divided; Second, existing infrastructure with high levels of water loss is not upgraded, no infrastructure is developed for communities that are not connected to the water grid and water infrastructure projects in areas located inside the Palestinian Authority are not approved. It is important to note that the water allocation for Palestinians was determined in the Oslo Accord, but the agreement included a plan to increase the supply. This plan never materialized. In addition, demand for water has increased due to population growth over the twenty years since the Oslo Accord was signed.

2. Are there gaps in water consumption between Israelis and Palestinians? Absolutely.

According to the Israeli national water company, Mekorot, the average household water consumption in Israel is between 100 and 230 liters per person per day. The World Health Organization recommends a minimum of 100 liters per person per day. This figure relates to urban consumption which includes drinking, food preparation and hygiene, and takes into consideration urban services such as hospitals and public institutions. Israelis living in the settlements, as well as inside Israel, generally have access to as much running water as they please.

This is not the case for Palestinians.

Palestinians living in the OPT can be divided into three groups according to the amount of water available to them, which is less than the Israeli average in all three cases:

  • Palestinians in the West Bank who are connected to the water infrastructure: The average daily consumption among Palestinians connected to a running-water network is about 73 liters. There are significant gaps between the various cities (169 liters per person per day in Jericho compared to 38 in Jenin). However, even those who are connected do not necessarily have access to running water throughout the day or the year, and water is supplied intermittently, following a rotation program. In many places in the West Bank, including city centers, residents must fill tanks with water, when it is available through the network and use it when running water is not available. Communities located at the edges of the water supply network and in high areas experience the water shortage more acutely and residents must buy water from private dealers at a much higher cost than the water supplied through the grid.
  • Palestinians in the West Bank who are not connected to the water supply network: About 113,000 people living in 70 communities, 50,000 of them in Area C. These residents are not included in the calculations of the public water authority. They rely on rainwater which they store in cisterns and on water sold in tanker trucks by private dealers. In the southern West Bank, about 42 communities consume less than sixty litres per person per day and shepherding communities in the northern Jordan Valley consume only twenty. Private dealers charge between 25 and 40 NIS per cubic meter, depending on the distance between the village and the water source. The price is up to three times that of the highest tariff Israelis pay for water for household consumption. In the summer months, the monthly household expenditure on water in communities that buy water from tankers is between 1,250 and 2,000 NIS, about half of the entire monthly household expenditure.
  • Palestinians in the Gaza Strip: Average consumption in the Gaza Strip is 70-90 liters per person per day, but the quality of the water is extremely poor. Ninety percent of the water pumped in Gaza is considered un-potable according to the standards set by the World Health Organization. For full and updated information on this issue.

3. Causes for gaps in water supply to Palestinians in the West Bank compared to Israelis:


  • The amount of water supplied to the entire West Bank: According to 2011 figures, the West Bank water supply was comprised of 87 million cubic meters pumped from official Palestinian water sources and 53 million cubic meters sold to the Palestinian Authority by Mekorot. About 51 million cubic meters of the water in the public water network was used for agriculture. According to the Israeli water authority (2009), an additional 10 million cubic meters of water are pumped from unauthorized wells, but this water is used for agriculture as well as drinking. According to Palestinian water authority figures, more than 2.3 Palestinians live in the West Bank. This means that under optimal conditions, the water supply (excluding the unauthorized wells) could have allowed domestic and urban consumption of 100 liters per person per day, but this is where the second factor affecting water consumption comes into play.
  • Water loss: There is extensive water loss on the public water grid in the West Bank - about 30%, and more in some locations. Water theft is also a widespread problem. The water infrastructure in the Palestinian Authority needs upgrading, but this is not possible without significant work in Area C, where every action requires Israeli approval at the joint water committee. Such approvals are rare. Even committee-approved projects may be delayed or stopped, due to restrictions imposed by the Civil Administration.
  • The Palestinian water network is managed by dozens of local water authorities without a coordinating mechanism. The inability to develop a nationally controlled water network, with reservoirs that could supply the needs of all residents is inextricably tied to the fact that every action in Area C requires Israeli approval.
Original article at link below:

Undeniable discrimination in the amount of water allocated to Israelis and Palestinians | B'Tselem
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Regarding Israel's little open-air concentration cam ... err I mean prison - the Gaza Strip - specifically:

Over 90% of water in Gaza Strip unfit for drinking

Published: 9 Feb 20

20140204_khan_yunis_water_treatment_facility3.jpg

Elderly man fills water container at public multi-faucet sink of Khan Yunis Water Authority’s wastewater treatment plant. Photo by Muhammad Sabah, B’Tselem, 4 February 2014​

Gaza's main water source is the coastal aquifer, which is also used by Israel and Egypt. It has been continuously over-pumped for decades, even prior to Israel's occupation in 1967. At present, the Palestinian Water Authority pumps some 180 million cubic meters (mcm) a year from the aquifer in Gaza, although its replenishment rate is only 50-60 mcm a year. Over the years, this has significantly lowered the groundwater level, leading to contamination of the aquifer’s water by seawater seeping in and saline groundwater rising from deeper in the reservoir. Israel currently sells Gaza 4.2 mcm of water a year and has agreed to sell another 5 mcm of desalinated water annually, but the infrastructure work for conveying the water have yet to be completed.

Another longstanding problem in the Gaza Strip is the lack of proper wastewater treatment. Many residents are not even connected to a sewage system, and domestic waste flows into cesspits, from where it seeps into the groundwater and contaminates it. The problem has grown worse in recent years, primarily due to electricity shortages. In addition, Israel damaged wastewater-treatment facilities during Operation Cast Lead, resulting in far greater quantities of sewage going untreated. Although the facility has since been restored and new infrastructure laid in towns previously not connected to a sewage system, Gaza's wastewater-treatment facilities are far from able to meet the required amounts and standards.

Although infrastructure has since been rebuilt or added in towns previously left untreated, Gaza's wastewater-treatment facilities are far from meeting the necessary standards. Various projects to improve infrastructure are slow to progress, due both to Israel's restrictions on importing construction materials and equipment into Gaza as well as to lengthy bureaucratic processes in the international organizations funding the projects.

>The Palestinian Water Authority in Gaza has found a rise in nitrate levels in the water due to contamination, mostly caused by pesticide use in agriculture and sewage seeping into the aquifer. Every day, only some 25 percent of Gaza's wastewater – about 30,000 cubic meters – is treated and recycled for agricultural use. Some 90,000 cubic meters of untreated or partially treated wastewater flows daily into the Mediterranean, resulting in contamination, health hazards and damage to the fishing industry. Due to the increased nitrate levels, the aquifer is now high in nitrogen and chloride, rendering 90 to 95 percent of its water unfit for drinking and problematic for agricultural use. The PA’s Water Authority also found that only 14 wells (some 6.5% of all wells in Gaza) provide water that meets World Health Organization standards.

Ninety-seven percent of Gazans are connected to the public water-supply system, yet this does not ensure a steady supply of water, as the Gaza Strip suffers from shortages of water, shortages in the electricity needed to pipe water through the system, as well as from severe problems with infrastructure. Consequently, residents suffer deliberate water outages, receiving running water for only six to eight hours at a time: 25% of households on a daily basis, 40% every other day, 20% once every three days, and the remaining 15% (in Gaza City, Rafah and Jabaliya) only one day out of four.

The erratic supply of water forces residents to collect water in containers. These containers are placed on rooftops, yet power outages often mean that the pumps that are to channel the water into the containers are out of commission, forcing residents to collect water in other container, on ground level.

Wafa al-Faran, 42, a married mother of eight, lives in a-Shuja'iya neighborhood, Gaza City. She related the following testimony to B'Tselem:

The power outages really interfere with the water supply to our houses. When there's no electricity, there's very little water in the taps. We had to buy a pump so that the water would reach the containers on our roof. We have four containers of 4,000 liters altogether. When we get running water, we turn the pump on and fill up the containers. But sometimes, there's no electricity when there’s water. When that happened, we used to operate the pump with a generator, so that we wouldn't run out of water. But the generator uses a lot of fuel, which is very expensive. Now there's no fuel from Egypt and the fuel from Israel is very expensive, so we don't use the generator at all. Even at night, when we don't have power, we make do with candles and flashlights. A few months ago, my husband bought a new water container, which we put at the entrance to the house, so that we can fill it up when there's no power. We get water out of the container in buckets, because it's not connected to our plumbing.

We don't drink the water that from the pipes and don't use it for making coffee or tea or for cooking. We buy fresh water from water vendors. Sometimes, I use the fresh water to wash my daughters’ hair, and in the morning we use this water to wash our faces, because the water from the taps burns our eyes.

Average water consumption in the Gaza Strip is 70-90 liters per person, per day, while the minimum recommended by the World Health Organization is 100 liters per person, per day. Although most residents in Gaza are connected to the public water system, the water’s poor quality means they must buy water treated in governmental or private factories, or factories operated by charities.

20140204_khan_yunis_water_treatment_facility2.jpg

Khan Yunis Water Authority wastewater treatment facility. Photo by Muhammad Sabah, B’Tselem, 4 February 2014

Ibtesam Kheir a-Din, 48, a married mother of six lives in a-Sultan neighborhood, Rafah. She related the following testimony to B'Tselem:

201402_ibtisam_kheir_a_din.jpg


The water we get is salty and unfit for drinking. Sometimes it even smells bad. We use it only to clean the house and do dishes and laundry, but nothing ever feels really clean. The clothes sometimes smell bad and get stained. The water also ruins the washing machine. We've fixed the machine several times, which cost us 50 to 70 shekels [approx. 14 USD – 20USD] every time, and the technician said the problems were caused by the too many salts in the water. We don't drink the water or use it for cooking. For cooking and drinking, we buy water every day from vendors who go around the neighborhood or from shops that sell water containers. We buy 50 liters of fresh water a day, at two shekels [approx. 0.6 USD] a liter. Lately, because power outages have gone on for as long as twelve hours at time and because we don't have enough money to pay for fuel to run the generator to fill the containers, we've started buying water for dishwashing and laundry, too.​

On 1 November 2013, Gaza's power plant was shut down due to a fuel shortage, and the sewage pumping stations had to be run on generators. On 13 November, one of the stations in a-Zaytun neighborhood, Gaza City, stopped operating due to a generator malfunction, causing some 35,000 mcm of raw sewage to flood the neighborhood and leak into homes.

Fat’hi Saqer, a 67-year-old resident of the neighborhood, told B'Tselem:


fathi_saqer.jpg


I live with my wife and seven children, who are five to seventeen years old, on the ground floor of a building, about twenty meters away from the sewage pumping station. On Wednesday, 13 November 2013, at around 1 o’clock, we'd just finished eating lunch after the boys came back from school, when suddenly sewage started leaking into our house. We started taking off the floor the mattresses and rugs and clothes that got wet. Then we tried to plug up the drain holes in the house with bits of cloth so that the sewage wouldn't rise, but that didn't help. Sewage came up through the holes and filled the house. We stopped up the holes again and started hauling out the dirty water. We put bags of sand up against the front door so that the sewage wouldn't get in from there. We got completely wet: our hands, feet, our clothing. Everything stank. It took us hours to get all the water out and the floor dry. Then we washed only our hands and feet, because we didn't want to use a lot of water, in case it would cause another flooding.​

As far back as 2009, UNEP recommended that underground pumping from the coastal aquifer in the Gaza Strip cease, in order to prevent collapse of the Gaza water economy. Yet over-pumping continues, in part due to the lack of alternative water sources in Gaza. At present, no plan for a long-term solution to the Gaza water crisis is being implemented. The Palestinian Water Authority and UNEP have cautioned that the coastal aquifer has passed the point of no return in terms of rehabilitation options, so that as of 2016 it will no longer be possible to pump water from the aquifer.

To resolve the grave water crisis in the Gaza Strip, UNEP recommended that all parties to the coastal aquifer – Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the Hamas government and Egypt – act in conjunction to halt the swift rapid deterioration of the groundwater system that serves Gaza and also to work on finding other sources of potable drinking water for its residents. At the same time, and without delay, Israel must allow materials and equipment to be brought into Gaza for the purpose of restoring and developing Gaza's water and wastewater treatment systems.

• All testimonies gathered by Muhammad Sabah, B’Tselem’s field researcher in the Gaza Strip.
Original article at link below:

Over 90% of water in Gaza Strip unfit for drinking | B'Tselem
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Legal responsibilities and obligations:

International Law and the Water Crisis in the Occupied Territories

Published: 1 Jan 2014

In examining international law, it is necessary to distinguish between Israel's obligations as an occupying state to the population under its control on one hand, and the use of water sources shared by Israel and the Palestinians, which are considered international waters, on the other.

A. Administration of the water sector in occupied territory

1. Prohibition on altering legislation

Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations prohibits an occupying state from changing the legislation in effect prior to occupation. The military orders that Israel issued regarding the water resources and the supply of water in the Occupied Territories significantly changed the legal and institutional structure of the water sector. The water resources in the Occupied Territories were integrated into the legal and bureaucratic system of Israel, severely limiting the ability of Palestinians to develop those resources.

2. Illegal utilization of water resources

Article 55 of the Hague Regulations limits the right of occupying states to utilize the water sources of occupied territory. The use is limited to military needs and may not exceed past use. Use of groundwater of the Occupied Territories in the settlements does not meet these criteria and therefore breaches article 55.

3. Discrimination between Palestinians and Israeli Settlers

Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits an occupying state from discriminating between residents of occupied territory. The quantity of water supplied to the settlements is vastly larger than that which is supplied to the Palestinians. Similarly, the regularity of supply is much greater in the settlements. This discrimination is especially blatant during the summer months when the supply to Palestinians in some areas of the West Bank is reduced in order to meet the increased demand for water in the settlements receiving their water from the same pipelines.

B. Utilization of shared international water sources

Under international law, the main principle for division of shared water between states is the principle of equitable and reasonable use. This principle is based on the limited-sovereignty doctrine, which provides that, because all parts of the drainage basins of watercourses are hydrologically interdependent, states are not allowed to utilize water located in their territory as they wish, but must take into account the other states that share the resource.

This principle does not state a precise formula quantifying the rights of each state sharing an international watercourse. Rather, it lists the factors to be considered in negotiations between the states to determine the division. Article 6 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses enumerates seven of these factors:


  1. The natural features of the shared watercourse (geographic, climatic, hydrologic, and the like);
  2. The social and economic needs of the watercourse states;
  3. The population dependent on the watercourse in each watercourse state;
  4. The effects of the use of the watercourses in one watercourse state on other watercourse states;
  5. Existing and potential uses of the watercourse;
  6. Conservation, protection, and development of the water resources of the watercourse and the costs of measures taken to that effect;
  7. The availability of alternatives to a particular planned or existing use.

Taking into account the components of the principle of equitable and reasonable use, examination of the current division of water between Israel and the Palestinians leads to the conclusion that this division violates Palestinian rights and contravenes international water law.
Original article at link below:

International Law and the Water Crisis in the Occupied Territories | B'Tselem
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Not eveyone has the same sort of irrational computation on the Palestinian RoR as EoZ which I referenced above:

'Jews For Palestinian Right of Return' endorse American Studies Association boycott of Israeli academic institutions

Jews for Palestinian Right of Return on February 14, 2014

We salute the American Studies Association’s courageous endorsement of the Palestinian call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israeli academic institutions, which are leading accomplices in more than six decades of ethnic cleansing, colonization, war crimes, and apartheid.

As Jews, we refuse to remain silent as a so-called “Jewish state,” armed by the U.S. and its allies, commits these injustices with impunity in our name.

Contrary to baseless charges of “anti-Semitism,” BDS resembles the boycotts that “singled out” similarly racist regimes in Jim Crow United States and apartheid South Africa.

Applying the same standards to apartheid Israel, BDS demands nothing more — nor less — than freedom and justice throughout all of historic Palestine, by calling for:

(Article - including partial list of initial signers - continues at link below)
'Jews For Palestinian Right of Return' Endorse American Studies Association's Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Oh the irony ... :rolleyes:

OPINION/EDITORIAL

How today’s liberal Zionists echo apartheid South Africa’s defenders

Rania Khalek The Electronic Intifada 13 February 2014

“While the majority of black South African leaders are against disinvestment and boycotts, there are tiny factions that support disinvestment — namely terrorist groups such as the African National Congress,” libertarian economics professor Walter Williams wrote in a 1983 New York Times op-ed.

Williams’ claim was as absurd then as it appears in hindsight, but his sentiment was far from rare on the American and British right in the 1980s.

Yet today’s so-called progressive and liberal Zionists employ precisely the same kinds of claims to counter the growing movement, initiated by Palestinians themselves, forboycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) on Israel.

Indeed, looking back, it is clear that Israel’s liberal apologists are recycling nearly every argument once used by conservatives against the BDS movement that helped dismantle South Africa’s apartheid regime.

“Singling out”


In a 1989 op-ed for the Christian Science Monitor, University of South Africa lecturer Anne-Marie Kriek scolded the divestment movement for singling out her country’s racist government because, she wrote, “the violation of human rights is the norm rather than the exception in most of Africa’s 42 black-ruled states” (“South Africa Shouldn’t be Singled Out,” 12 October 1989).

Kriek continued, “South Africa is the only country in Sub-Saharan Africa that can feed itself. Blacks possess one of the highest living standards in all of Africa,” adding that nowhere on the continent did black Africans have it so good. So, “Why is South Africa so harshly condemned while completely different standards apply to black Africa?” she asked.

Divestment opponents in the US provided similar justifications. In 1986, for instance, Gregory Dohi, the former editor-in-chief of the Salient, Harvard University’s conservative campus publication, protested that those calling for the university to divest from companies doing business in South Africa were “selective in their morality” (“I am full of joy to realize that I never had anything to do with any divestment campaign …,” Harvard Crimson, 4 April 1986).

Divestment was wrong not only because it would “harm” black workers, Dohi claimed, but because it singled out South Africa.

Déjà vu


Where have we heard these kinds of arguments before?

(Article continues at link below)
How today's liberal Zionists echo apartheid South Africa's defenders | The Electronic Intifada
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Interesting quotes from MLK in this article. Here is one:

It was March 26, 1968 – 10 days before Dr. King’s assassination. He was the honored guest at the 68th Annual Convention of the Rabbinical Assembly for Conservative Judaism. During an interview in which Rabbi Gendler read questions submitted by the group, Dr. King was asked specifically about African-American support for Israel. The question itself is a topic for a separate article, but on to Dr. King’s answer:

I think it is necessary to say that what is basic and what is needed in the Middle East is peace. Peace for Israel is one thing. Peace for the Arab side of that world is another thing. Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all of our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous ex ample of what can be done, how desert land almost can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.

Dr. King's pro-Israel legacy: His prophetic voice still speaks, part 1 | Dumisani Washington | Ops & Blogs | The Times of Israel
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Interesting quotes from MLK in this article. Here is one:

It was March 26, 1968 – 10 days before Dr. King’s assassination.
Yeah ... wonder if they are actually real ... particularly in light of the past actions of fanatical Zionists to misattribute, alter, and just make crap up out of wholecloth with respect to MLK:

ISRAEL LOBBY WATCH
Israel’s apologists and the Martin Luther King Jr. hoax
Fadi Kiblawi and Will Youmans The Electronic Intifada 18 January 2004

In formal logic, Argumentum Ad Verecundiam refers to arguing a point with an appeal to authority. This type is categorized as a logical fallacy. Citing one seemingly authoritative source is simply not conclusive evidence, even if the authority is seen as an expert on the given subject.

For the sake of clarity, there are three degradations of this maxim enumerated in this essay. First, it is especially fallacious as proof when the quoted authority demonstrates no special knowledge on the subject. Second, when the authority who is not an expert on the given subject is also quoted out of context, the argument is even weaker. Third, the lowest violation of this formal logic principle is when an advocate uses a false rendition, or a fabricated quote, by the same authority who can claim no expertise.

This is the best framework for understanding how various exponents of Israel have used Martin Luther King Jr. to promote their cause.

Dr. King’s expertise as a non-violent civil rights leader and visionary are unparalleled in U.S. history. However, that does not make him an informed commentator on Middle Eastern affairs or on the ideological facets of Zionism. As impressive as the references to his views on Israel may seem, this is a textbook example of Argumentum Ad Verecundiam.

Finding direct and published utterances by Dr. King about the modern Middle East and Zionism is extremely rare. A cursory review of dozens of books on and by the civil rights leader turned up nothing.

Nonetheless, defenders of Israel often refer to a letter by Dr. King. This letter is reprinted in full on many web pages and in print. One example of a quotation derived from this letter is:

“… You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely ‘anti-Zionist’ … And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God’s green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews… Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so.”

Antiracism writer Tim Wise checked the citation, which claimed that it originated from a “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend” in an August, 1967 edition of Saturday Review. In an article on January, 2003, essay he declared that he found no letters from Dr. King in any of the four August, 1967 editions. The authors of this essay verified Wise’s discovery. The letter was commonly cited to also have been published in a book by Dr. King entitled, “This I Believe: Selections from the Writings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.” No such book was listed in the bibliography provided by the King Center in Atlanta, nor in the catalogs of several large public and university libraries.

Soon afterwards, CAMERA, a rabidly pro-Israeli organization, published a statement declaring that the letter was “apparently” a hoax. CAMERA explained how it gained so much currency. The “letter” came from a “reputable” book, Shared Dreams, by Rabbi Marc Shneier. Martin Luther King III authored the preface for the book, giving the impression of familial approval. Also, the Anti-Defamation League’s Michael Salberg used the same quotes in his July 31st, 2001 testimony before the U.S. House of Representative’s International Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights.

The bogus letter was further quoted by writers in prominent publications one would imagine armed with fact-checkers capable of spending the short amount of time needed to verify the primary source. Mort Zuckerman, the editor-in-chief of U.S. News & World Report quoted the letter in a column (17 September 2001). Warren Kinsella followed suit in an article for Maclean’s (20 January 2003). Commentary, which is known more for its ideological zeal than any appreciation for factual scruples, ran a piece by Natan Sharansky. He quoted the false passage as a block–some ten months after CAMERA declared it a hoax.

More recently, the Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) featured excerpts from the letter prominently on its website. Despite its name, SPME is an advocacy group seeking to bolster Israel’s image on campus–a mission it claims promotes peace in the region. Ironically, right under the false Dr. King quotation is an announcement of the formation of a task force “dealing with academic integrity with respect to fabricating and falsifying data when discussing the Middle East.”

After one of the authors of this article informed SPME’s director of the quotation’s discredited status, he replied with hostility despite the simple verifiability of the claim that the citation is incorrect. After several exchanges he replaced it with another seemingly far-fetched quote:

(Article continues at link below)
Israel's apologists and the Martin Luther King Jr. hoax | The Electronic Intifada
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
That is the major difference with regards to MLK. I don't think anyone today would be raising a flag on a victory for human rights.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Some relevant comments from the article Muffy cites:

Nomorenakba Jan 23, 2013:

I think people were still believing the Exodus myth at that time - that Israel was a land without a people for a people without a land. My understanding is that historians such as Ilan Pappe and Avi Shalaim did not have access to the military archives until the early 80's, therefore the truth of the Palestinian Nakba was largely unknown, except for the victims of course.

TobiasRiepe Jan 21, 2013:

“when people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

This quote is hearsay based on a single person's recollection of an alleged event - presented in a book with a clear political agenda.

If you want to remake MLK as a Zionist - and that is what this is actually about, innit? - better be prepared to back it up with substantial information from MLK's writings, documented speeches etc.

Basing your argument on a single uncorroborated quote wouldn't fly for a first semester history student.

BrendanHoll Jan 21, 2013:

The fact that Martin Luther King supported israel, if he did, is of no consequence. In 1967 I was a fervent supporter of Israel and continued to be until I saw the injustice that they meted out to the Palestinians. I was further influenced by the revelations of the "new historians", Benny Morris etc., whose work showed an entirely different picture than we had been told up till then. They recounted the ethnic cleansing that had been carried out by the Jews in order to achieve their state and how this was part of the policy of the Zionists to empty the Eretz Israel, as they called it, of the indigenous Arabs who had lived there for centuries. This was the Nakba, one of the greatest injustices of the 20th century, supported unequivocally by the US.

King undoubtedly was not aware of this, as he fought for justice all his life. It is a total shame what the Israelis have visited on the Palestinians. Jews should remember that the Palestinians were not the perpetrators of the Holocaust, it was the Germans.

AnOski Jan 21, 2014:

@BillPearlman @BrendanHoll @Bill -- When you add up the civilian casualties in Israel/Palestine, Palestinians have historically (and are still currently) dying at a rate of 8-10 to 1 Israeli. This, despite Israel's vastly superior military technology, etc. One side can fire rockets at random (resulting in an average of one death per year since 2000), and blow themselves up to make a point, and the other side has access to some of the most advanced military technology in the world.

Since 1987, Israeli deaths have averaged 24 per year. Palestinian deaths excluding those from the War of the Camps and Fatah-Hamas conflict (we're talking Israeli military action) average ~960 per year, mostly due to the high death tolls of the Second Intifada and early 2000s.

It's not even close. You choose to focus on what amount to the few examples of historic Israeli losses in the now ~six decade old conflict. How's about I throw out Sabra and Shatila? In that one single massacre, three times more Palestinians died than Israelis have died in Israel since 1987.

It's pathetic, in a sense. You throw out the worst atrocities committed against Israelis by Palestinians, and I can think of several individual atrocities committed by the Israeli army that are individually worse -- by
at least a factor of ten!

Etc., etc. Stolen homes, stolen farms, stolen olive trees. Dispossessed farmers forced to gaze at their ancestral lands from afar, if they're lucky enough to have a nearby hill that allows them a vantage point over the wall erected to keep them from their livelihoods.

No, Bill Pearlman. Israel makes me ashamed of my Jewish heritage. If anything, the Israeli government's and peoples' way of dealing with Arabs is akin to White treatment of Blacks in the American South prior to the Civil Rights Movement. There's no valid argument that pins MLK as a current supporter of Israel. Anyone who tries to justify such a point is either woefully ignorant, is ignoring morality for the sake of politics, or is simply racist.

There are only 22 comments to the article - and they are worth reading ... not only for the critiques and refutations of the author ... but also for the excuses and justifications the hasbarats attempt to provide ...
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
From earlier today, an article written by Amira Hass @ Israeli paper Haaretz, who opines on the screwing the Palestinians are getting and Israel's "Watergate":

The Israeli 'watergate' scandal: The facts about Palestinian water

Israel has adopted a drip-feed approach to providing the Palestinians with water instead of letting them control their own natural resource.

By Amira Hass | Feb. 16, 2014 | 7:05 PM

Rino Tzror is an interviewer who argues with rather than flatters his subjects. Yet last Thursday, he didn’t do his homework and let Justice Minister Tzipi Livni throw sand in the eyes of the public about everything regarding the flap over water with Martin Schulz, the president of the European Parliament.

Livni was invited onto his Army Radio program as a sane voice who would criticize the behavior of Economy Minister Naftali Bennett and Co. toward Schulz (Bennett’s Habayit Hayehudi party stormed out of the Knesset during a speech by Schulz when he allowed himself to wonder whether indeed Israelis were allotted four times as much water as Palestinians). “I told [the EU Parliament president], ‘You are wrong, they intentionally misled you,’” she told Tzror. “‘That is not how the water is allocated. Israel gives the Palestinians more water than what we committed to in the interim agreements.’”

The very word “gives” should have lit Tzror’s fuse. But Livni kept buttering him up in her learned tone, with her grumbles against the Palestinian position on desalinated water and the Joint Water Committee.

So here are the facts:

*
Israel doesn’t give water to the Palestinians. Rather, it sells it to them at full price.


*
The Palestinians would not have been forced to buy water from Israel if it were not an occupying power which controls their natural resource, and if it were not for the Oslo II Accords, which limit the volume of water they can produce, as well as the development and maintenance of their water infrastructure.

* This 1995 interim agreement was supposed to lead to a permanent arrangement after five years. The Palestinian negotiators deluded themselves that they would gain sovereignty and thus control over their water resources.

The Palestinians were the weak, desperate, easily tempted side and sloppy when it came to details. Therefore, in that agreement Israel imposed a scandalously uneven, humiliating and infuriating division of the water resources of the West Bank.


*
The division is based on the volume of water Palestinians produced and consumed on the eve of the deal. The Palestinians were allotted 118 million cubic meters (mcm) per year from three aquifers via drilling, agricultural wells, springs and precipitation. Pay attention, Rino Tzror: the same deal allotted Israel 483 mcm annually from the same resources (and it has also exceeded this limit in some years).


In other words, some 20 percent goes to the Palestinians living in the West Bank, and about 80 percent goes to Israelis – on both sides of the Green Line – who also enjoy resources from the rest of the country.


Why should Palestinians agree to pay for desalinated water from Israel, which constantly robs them of the water flowing under their feet?


*
The agreement’s second major scandal: Gaza’s water economy/management was condemned to be self-sufficient and made reliant on the aquifer within its borders. How can we illustrate the injustice? Let’s say the Negev residents were required to survive on aquifers in the Be’er Sheva-Arad region, without the National Water Carrier and without accounting for population growth. Overpumping in Gaza, which causes seawater and sewage to penetrate into the aquifer, has made 90 percent of the potable water undrinkable.


Can you imagine? If Israelis had peace and justice in mind, the Oslo agreement would have developed a water infrastructure linking the Strip to the rest of the country.


*
According to the deal, Israel will keep selling 27.9 mcm of water per year to the Palestinians. In its colonialist generosity, Israel agreed to recognize Palestinian future needs for an additional 80 mcm per year. It’s all detailed in the agreement with the miserly punctiliousness of a capitalist tycoon. Israel will sell some, and the Palestinians will drill for the rest, but not in the western mountain aquifer. That’s forbidden.


But today the Palestinians produce just 87 mcm in the West Bank – 21 mcm less than Oslo allotted them. The drought, Israeli limits on development and drilling new wells, and limits on movement are the main reasons. Palestinian mismanagement is secondary. So, Israel “gives” – or rather sells – about 60 mcm per year. True. That is more than the Oslo II Accords agreed for it to sell. And the devastating conclusion: Palestinian dependence on the occupier has only increased.


*
Israel retained the right of the mighty to cap infrastructure development and rehabilitation initiatives. For example, Israel has imposed on the Palestinian Authority pipes that are narrower than desired, forbids connecting communities in Area C to the water infrastructure, tarries in approving drilling, and delays replacing disintegrating pipes. Hence the 30 percent loss of water from Palestinian pipes.


*
113,000 Palestinians are not connected to the water network. Hundreds of thousands of others are cut off from a regular supply during the summer months. In Area C, Israel forbids even the digging of cisterns for collecting rainwater. And that’s called giving?


*
Instead of spending time calculating whether the average Israeli household’s per-capita consumption of water is four times or “only” three times that of Palestinian consumption, open your eyes: The settlements bathed in green, and across the road Palestinian urban neighborhoods and villages are subject to a policy of water rotation. The thick pipes of Mekorot (Israel’s national water provider) are heading to the Jordan Valley settlements, and a Palestinian tractor next to them transports a rusty tank of water from afar. In the summer, the faucets run dry in Hebron and never stop flowing in Kiryat Arba and Beit Hadassah.


All of this is intentionally misleading?
Link to original article:

The Israeli 'watergate' scandal: The facts about Palestinian water - Middle East Israel News | Haaretz
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
I wonder if the dynamics would change if they brought those (blank...can't remember the name) large machines that convert arid desert air in to water. Basically the size of a semi trailer. Our military used them in Iraq. I guess they are pretty good at the amount of gallons they produce. Not a cure-all but something to take the edge off?
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
The only problem with this is that comes from an organization that was started by a man who is such fanatical Zionist, that he probably belongs in a straightjacket and in a rubber room.

Just how deranged and paranoid is ol' "Crazy Charlie" Jacobs ?

Well, as Max Blumenthal notes, he's deranged enough to have:

"... produced a video claiming BDS will lead to worldwide Jewish genocide ..."

Powerful! Are we Living 1933 All Over Again? | Israel Video Network

BDS ... a movement which targeted at the state of Israel - not "all the Jews" - and is intended to compel Israel to stop violating international law, and stop preventing the Palestinian people - the indigenous inhabitants of the land - from exercising the their right to sovereignty and self-determination.

With all due respect for those that perished and/or suffered and in The Shoah, and for all for those that that experienced the same or similar horrors at the hands of anti-Semities down through the ages, for "Crazy Charlie" every day is 1933 and he's always in Munich ... no matter where he actually is in truth.

Here's a little backgrounder on "Crazy Charlie":

Charles Jacobs is a Boston-based writer and political activist who has founded a number of groups devoted to policing criticism of Israel and warning about the dangers of "radical Islam."

He is the co-founder and current director of Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT), an activist group well known in Boston for opposing the construction of a local Islamic center and for raising alarm about "Islamic extremism" in schools and universities. ...

Since visiting Argentina in 2009, Jacobs has put APT at the forefront of U.S. efforts to link the government of Iran to the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires that killed over 80 people. Although critics have pointed out that this claim relies solely on testimony from Iranian dissidents linked to the MEK, an anti-regime Iranian exile organization that has been tied to terrorist attacks, APT has republished in full a 675-page indictment prepared by a Jewish Argentine prosecutor accusing Iran of orchestrating the attack and the Argentinian government of covering up Iran's involvement. ...

Jacobs also directs the American Anti-Slavery Group, a nonprofit he founded in 1994 that has organized advocacy efforts, fact-finding trips, and "slave redemption" missions aimed at eradicating slavery in Sudan and Mauritania. Although the group's humanitarian work has earned some praise, some observers have accused it of misrepresenting prisoners of war as slaves and criticized it for purchasing enslaved persons with the intention of releasing them. "We welcome them for exposing the agony of our people to the world," said Manase Lomole Waya, who heads the group Humanitarian Assistance for South Sudan. "But giving the money to the slave traders only encourages the trade. It is wrong and must stop. Where does the money go? It goes to the raiders to buy more guns, raid more villages, put more shillings in their pockets. It is a vicious circle." ...

Prior to founding APT, Jacobs co-founded and directed the David Project, a confrontational "pro-Israel" advocacy group that presaged much of APT's alarmist messaging about anti-Semitism and Islamist extremism. Among its many campaigns under Jacobs' leadership, the David Project railed against critics of Israel on college campuses and opposed the broadcast of Arab news programs on a cable access channel in suburban Boston. The group's confrontational approach earned it many critics even within the Jewish community, with Leonard Fein, founder of the National Jewish Coalition for Literacy, once calling it "an ongoing disservice to the Jewish community. Where bridges might be built, it prefers confrontation; where sober analysis is called for, it opts for polemic; worst of all, wherever there is reason for hope, it insists on fear."

After Jacobs' departure from the David Project in 2008, its leadership attempted to take the group's rhetoric in a more mainstream direction, which prompted Jacobs to pen an angry letter to the Jewish Telegraph Agency in protest. "It was precisely the failure of Jewish mainstream organizations on America's campuses that inspired the David Project's birth," he wrote, calling them "feckless" outfits that "shy away from debating or … discussing the Middle East conflict." ... [rlent: Crazy Charlie's big problem is that he really doesn't want an open debate - he wants a controlled debate with him and others of his ilk as the "gatekeepers" of what is permissible for discussion]

Jacobs sketched out this critique in a May 2013 essay he wrote in praise of Pamela Geller, the virulently anti-Islamic blogger who organized much of the opposition to the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque" in New York. [rlent: Geller is a deranged lunatic hate-monger]

Jacobs' experience also includes serving as a speaker for the now-defunct neoconservative public relations firm Benador Associates, as a board member of the hawkish Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and as the deputy director of the Boston chapter of CAMERA, another "pro-Israel" media watchdog group. ...
Full profile:

Charles Jacobs - Profile - Right Web - Institute for Policy Studies
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Fixed it for ya:

CAMERA strikes out again.
Maybe we need to take a little look at exactly who/what CAMERA is, and what they are all about.

From SourceWatch:

CAMERA
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) is a powerful Boston-based lobby group that tries to curb criticism of Israelin U.S. media.

Founded by Charles Jacobs in the wake of Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, CAMERA claims to be "a media-monitoring, research and membership organization devoted to promoting accurate and balanced coverage of Israel and the Middle East". According to its website, it "systematically monitors, documents, reviews and archives Middle East coverage" and its staffers "directly contact reporters, editors, producers and publishers concerning distorted or inaccurate coverage, offering factual information to refute errors."

According to its Executive Director, what sets it apart from other media watch-dog groups is its "sizable paying, activist membership."

CAMERA is widely regarded as a pro-Israeli lobby group that as put by Journalist and author Robert I. Friedman - "CAMERA, the A.D.L., AIPAC and the rest of the lobby don't want fairness, but bias in their favor. And they are prepared to use McCarthyite tactics, as well as the power and money of pro-Israel PACs, to get whatever Israel wants."

Wikipedia campaign

In April 2008, the website Electronic Intifada published emails sent to a group of CAMERA members organized to impact the online encyclopedia Wikipedia's coverage of Israel and Palestine issues. Electronic Intifada claimed that in the emails, CAMERA Senior Research Analyst Gilead Ini stressed the effort should be secret, and counseled members to avoid "picking a user name that marks you as pro-Israel, or that lets people know your real name." Wikipedia, too, tells users: "You should strongly consider choosing a username that is not connected to you." He also instructed members to "always log in" under their user names, so that Wikipedia would not "record your computer's IP address." While directing CAMERA members to certain articles on Israel and Palestine, Ini cautioned that new Wikipedia users should "avoid editing Israel-related articles for a short period of time," so as not to develop reputations as "one-topic editors."

Ini has also publicly called on people to edit Wikipedia, suggesting that "is that if more fair-minded people participate in the Wikipedia experiment, the problems can be minimized." Ini asserted in the Jewish Exponent that the initiative was meant to "offset" problems with Wikipedia's articles. "Convinced that directing more well-intentioned individuals to participate in the Wikipedia experiment could help offset the site’s problems," he wrote, "we sent a notice to our members calling for volunteers to learn about and edit Wikipedia’s often-skewed entries about the Middle East." He charged Electronic Intifada with "disingenuously spinning [an online discussion forum] as a nefarious plot" in a letter to Harper's Magazine, and added that "CAMERA repeatedly urged all who read the forum to follow Wikipedia's guidelines, and continues to urge all who visit our website to work toward improving the flawed Wikipedia experiment."

A long-time Wikipedia editor, "Zeq," joined the group and suggested that some CAMERA members "stay away from any Israel realted [sic] articles," until building up enough support to become nominated as administrators, who help resolve controversies. "We will go to war after we have build [sic] our army," Zeq wrote. After the emails were published, Zeq was banned from editing Wikipedia for one year, for -- in the words of one Wikipedian -- "recruit[ing] meatpuppets from off-wiki to push POV," a point of view. CAMERA responded by "temporarily or permanently" ending its Wikipedia email group, "in hopes that members' personal contact information will not be made public."

In a May 7, 2002, full-page ad in the New York Times, CAMERA criticized the media for their lack of understanding of the Israel-Palestine conflict. Palestinian violence was attributed not to the occupation or alleged atrocities of the occupying army, but instead to the "hate education" in Palestinian society.

[rlent: Yeah ... it couldn't possibly be the occupation or any alleged atrocities ... it just must be that "hate education" ... because we all know that people just absolutely adore being occupied by a foreign power, having atrocities committed against them, being dispossessed and ethnically cleansed, and having their right to sovereignty and self-determination denied ... :rolleyes:]

In 2005 CAMERA on Campus played a prominent role in the campaign to publicize perceived abuses by the Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures (MEALAC) department at Columbia University, and even ran interviews with one of the chief crusaders, Prof. Alan Dershowitz of Harvard, who himself was busy fending off accusations of plagiarizing Joan Peter's 1984 hoax From Time Immemorial, and trying to suppress Norman Finkelstein's book in which the charge has been thoroughly documented.
Full article at SourceWatch:

CAMERA - SourceWatch

Dirty, surreptitious, and under-handed tactics by a bunch of meatpuppets ...

No wonder you love 'em so much Mutt ... their tactics sound like they are right up your alley ... ;)
 
Top