Stephen Hawking boycotts major Israel conference

[charlou]

UK author, Iain Banks, has written about why he, himself, has been participating in the cultural boycott of Israel ..

http://m.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/apr/ ... ott-israel

[pErvinalia]

Anti-Semite.

[JimC]

Or those who know what hypocrisy Israel deals in when it expropriates Palestinians to make room for their settlements, in contradiction with previous agreements, and then feigns to wonder why the Palestinians hate them and won't lay down their arms...

Didn't we go through all this before on another thread?

Let me ask again -- please provide proof of the "expropriation" of Palestinians. People taking this position can never support that argument.

This is not about what Israel is doing now, anyway. The Arabs have NEVER wanted Israel to be there. The Arabs were perfectly happy to have the League of Nations, the British and French Mandates, etc., carve out Syria, Transjordan, and Iraq, etc., and make them "Muslim countries." That was all fine. But, let them carve out Lebanon as a primarily Christian country, and let them carve out Israel as a Jewish country, and what do the Arab Muslims so? Wage war against the Christian Arabs in Lebanon and drive them out (which they largely succeeded in doing, and yet the people who rail against Israel say not one word about the driving out of Christians from Lebanon).

The Israel-scoffers ask what gives Israel the right to exist as a Jewish state, but not a single word is uttered descrying Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. being "Muslim" countries.

The original state of Israel was formed in the late 1940s by drawing a border around the mostly Jewish areas. The residents there agreed to it. The ones in Transjordan and Syria and Egypt and the Muslims in Lebanon did not agree to it. So, they promptly invaded and attacked the new country, trying to drive out the Jews. The Arabs lost. In losing, the Israelis pushed the Transjordanians back to the Jordan River. The Jordan River, obviously, has a West Bank and an East Bank. Transjordan later gave up its claim to the West Bank, and settled on its border being the Jordan River, and renamed itself Jordan instead of "Trans-"Jordan.

So, we were left with Israel which was formed in like 1947 under international law. And, then an area of land taken by Israel in a war that it won after being attacked (but Israel did not annex it), and the people in that stateless land never agreed to any borders that did not also include Israel. Since then, there were a couple more wars initiated by Arabs. And, Israel can't get a break from being attacked by Arab Muslim forces.

What do you expect them to do?

For many of us, its not about arguing about the right of Israel to exist, or to defend itself against terrorism or rocket attacks, or to support islamic terrorists. It's about criticising the actions of the current conservative Israeli government, in it support to the settler program and its appalling treatment of arab citizens of its own country, as well as the way it bows to pressure from rigidly orthodox rabbis.

[cronus]

Israel is a classic case of the cycle of abuse in action. It is easy to see from the outside what's going on and do the tut-tut-tut and stuff. Actually intervene, even by boycott, and suddenly you are drawn into the maelstrom of the situation and solutions don't appear that simple anymore.

[Hermit]

UK author, Iain Banks, has written about why he, himself, has been participating in the cultural boycott of Israel ..

http://m.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/apr/ ... ott-israel

That is quite a cogent article.

My attitude regarding the Israeli nation is this: Between 66 and 135 CE the Romans drove "The Chosen People" out of the "God-given" "Promised Land". During the last 1300 years of the Jewish diaspora the land was populated by people under Muslim rule. Unsurprisingly, these people were not particularly pleased when the UNO decided to give it back to the people who had been driven out of it almost two millennia earlier.

My commiserations go with the Palestinians, but that does not mean I support their efforts to reimpose their culture and governmental modus operandi on the only area in the middle east that is run with at least a semblance of democracy. Despite the "Arab Spring", Israel's neighbouring countries are profoundly undemocratic and theocratic.

Israel, on the other hand, is not exactly a white knight either. Its treatment of the Palestinians within its borders is much like South Africa's erstwhile apartheid, and its regard for Palestinians generally as Untermenschen particularly ironic. My reading of Iain Banks' article is that this is the reason he is prohibiting the sale of his works in Israel. It is also worth nothing that while Banks supports the boycott of Israel, he' does not view its neighbouring Muslim regimes through pink lenses. For instance, he describes Saudi Arabia as a "barbaric excuse for a country."

[charlou]

Aye ..democracy trumps theocracy and dictatorship.. Difficult to argue against that.

[En_Route]

UK author, Iain Banks, has written about why he, himself, has been participating in the cultural boycott of Israel ..

http://m.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/apr/ ... ott-israel

That is quite a cogent article.

My attitude regarding the Israeli nation is this: Between 66 and 135 CE the Romans drove "The Chosen People" out of the "God-given" "Promised Land". During the last 1300 years of the Jewish diaspora the land was populated by people under Muslim rule. Unsurprisingly, these people were not particularly pleased when the UNO decided to give it back to the people who had been driven out of it almost two millennia earlier.

My commiserations go with the Palestinians, but that does not mean I support their efforts to reimpose their culture and governmental modus operandi on the only area in the middle east that is run with at least a semblance of democracy. Despite the "Arab Spring", Israel's neighbouring countries are profoundly undemocratic and theocratic.

Israel, on the other hand, is not exactly a white knight either. Its treatment of the Palestinians within its borders is much like South Africa's erstwhile apartheid, and its regard for Palestinians generally as Untermenschen particularly ironic. My reading of Iain Banks' article is that this is the reason he is prohibiting the sale of his works in Israel. It is also worth nothing that while Banks supports the boycott of Israel, he' does not view its neighbouring Muslim regimes through pink lenses. For instance, he describes Saudi Arabia as a "barbaric excuse for a country."

I wonder if he also boycotts the US, which after all bankrolls Israel and enables its delinquencies.

[JimC]

Aye ..democracy trumps theocracy and dictatorship.. Difficult to argue against that.

What worries me is that it seems that a majority (quite possibly a narrow one) of Israeli citizens are comfortable with the anti-arab prejudice and support for the ultra-Zionist settler program demonstrated by their government. Give the fact that the current government has been voted in, this seems like a reasonable assumption. I'm sure that much of this is fear-driven (which is understandable, given the constant acts of terrorist violence against Israelis), and I'm also aware that a substantial minority of Israelis oppose their government, and want dialogue with the Palestinians and a peace settlement, and are prepared to compromise to get it.

So, a process that is democratic to a fair degree cannot seem to break the current bloody stalemate, which to me seems to have no end in sight...

[Svartalf]

What bothers me is that the majority of Israeli citizens seem unconcerned by the fact the black hats are taking over and running roughshod on the rights of everybody who doesn't subscribe to their brand of totalitarianism.

[Hermit]

UK author, Iain Banks, has written about why he, himself, has been participating in the cultural boycott of Israel ..

http://m.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/apr/ ... ott-israel

That is quite a cogent article.

My attitude regarding the Israeli nation is this: Between 66 and 135 CE the Romans drove "The Chosen People" out of the "God-given" "Promised Land". During the last 1300 years of the Jewish diaspora the land was populated by people under Muslim rule. Unsurprisingly, these people were not particularly pleased when the UNO decided to give it back to the people who had been driven out of it almost two millennia earlier.

My commiserations go with the Palestinians, but that does not mean I support their efforts to reimpose their culture and governmental modus operandi on the only area in the middle east that is run with at least a semblance of democracy. Despite the "Arab Spring", Israel's neighbouring countries are profoundly undemocratic and theocratic.

Israel, on the other hand, is not exactly a white knight either. Its treatment of the Palestinians within its borders is much like South Africa's erstwhile apartheid, and its regard for Palestinians generally as Untermenschen particularly ironic. My reading of Iain Banks' article is that this is the reason he is prohibiting the sale of his works in Israel. It is also worth nothing that while Banks supports the boycott of Israel, he' does not view its neighbouring Muslim regimes through pink lenses. For instance, he describes Saudi Arabia as a "barbaric excuse for a country."

I wonder if he also boycotts the US, which after all bankrolls Israel and enables its delinquencies.

Interesting question, so I did a bit of googling. It turns out that the US government does not bankroll Israel at all, though it sells weapons to it to the tune of one to two billion dollars each year. These sales come with a rider. The weapons are meant to be used for defensive purposes only. Thus, when allegations were made that Israel had used cluster bombs for offensive purposes during the 1982 Lebanon War, the United States suspended shipments of cluster bombs to Israel.

I have no qualms at all that not just the US, but many other nations sell arms to Israel to help preventing it from being pushed into the sea by its theocratic muslim neighbours, but I do object to its treatment of millions of Palestinians living within its borders. It wouldn't surprise me if this is Iain Banks' attitude as well.

[pErvinalia]

The main expression of Congressional support for Israel has been foreign aid.[1] Since 1985, it has provided nearly $3 billion in grants annually to Israel, with Israel being the largest annual recipient of American aid from 1976 to 2004 and the largest cumulative recipient of aid since World War II.[2] Congress has monitored the aid issue closely along with other issues in bilateral relations, and its concerns have affected Administrations' policies.[1] Almost all U.S. aid to Israel is now in the form of military assistance, while in the past it also received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted in Israel receiving benefits not available to other countries.[2]
.....
Since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of U.S. foreign aid. In the past, a portion was dedicated to economic assistance, but all economic aid to Israel ended in 2007 due to Israel's growing economy.[54][55] Currently, Israel receives $3 billion in U.S. assistance through U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF).[56] Seventy-four percent of these funds must be spent on the acquisition of U.S. defense equipment, services, and training.[57] Thus, United States military aid to Israel is seen as a subsidy for U.S. industries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2 ... _relations

[Hermit]

The main expression of Congressional support for Israel has been foreign aid.[1] Since 1985, it has provided nearly $3 billion in grants annually to Israel, with Israel being the largest annual recipient of American aid from 1976 to 2004 and the largest cumulative recipient of aid since World War II.[2] Congress has monitored the aid issue closely along with other issues in bilateral relations, and its concerns have affected Administrations' policies.[1] Almost all U.S. aid to Israel is now in the form of military assistance, while in the past it also received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted in Israel receiving benefits not available to other countries.[2]
.....
Since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of U.S. foreign aid. In the past, a portion was dedicated to economic assistance, but all economic aid to Israel ended in 2007 due to Israel's growing economy.[54][55] Currently, Israel receives $3 billion in U.S. assistance through U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF).[56] Seventy-four percent of these funds must be spent on the acquisition of U.S. defense equipment, services, and training.[57] Thus, United States military aid to Israel is seen as a subsidy for U.S. industries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2 ... _relations

Care to read the link to the Wikipedia excerpt you have copypasted? The "aid" consists of FMS and FMS. Those acronyms stand for Foreign Military Sales and Foreign Military Financing respectively. In other words, Israel pays for the weapons it receives. It's assistance or aid of sorts, I suppose, but it's not bankrolling, let alone a donation.

[Svartalf]

Well, what money the US gummint doesn't give is amply supplemented by what the Jewish American comunity sends...

[Hermit]

Well, what money the US gummint doesn't give is amply supplemented by what the Jewish American comunity sends...

2+ billion dollars per year? I doubt it.

[pErvinalia]

The main expression of Congressional support for Israel has been foreign aid.[1] Since 1985, it has provided nearly $3 billion in grants annually to Israel, with Israel being the largest annual recipient of American aid from 1976 to 2004 and the largest cumulative recipient of aid since World War II.[2] Congress has monitored the aid issue closely along with other issues in bilateral relations, and its concerns have affected Administrations' policies.[1] Almost all U.S. aid to Israel is now in the form of military assistance, while in the past it also received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted in Israel receiving benefits not available to other countries.[2]
.....
Since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of U.S. foreign aid. In the past, a portion was dedicated to economic assistance, but all economic aid to Israel ended in 2007 due to Israel's growing economy.[54][55] Currently, Israel receives $3 billion in U.S. assistance through U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF).[56] Seventy-four percent of these funds must be spent on the acquisition of U.S. defense equipment, services, and training.[57] Thus, United States military aid to Israel is seen as a subsidy for U.S. industries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2 ... _relations

Care to read the link to the Wikipedia excerpt you have copypasted? The "aid" consists of FMS and FMS. Those acronyms stand for Foreign Military Sales and Foreign Military Financing respectively. In other words, Israel pays for the weapons it receives. It's assistance or aid of sorts, I suppose, but it's not bankrolling, let alone a donation.

It pays for it with American money. The article is quite clear. Where are you getting your information from?