It's good to talk.


By richmillett
November 25, 2010
Share

There is, currently, a concerted campaign by War On Want, a British charity, to force BT to disconnect from its alliance with Bezeq, Israel’s largest telecommunications group.

According to a War On Want email “Thousands of you have already complained to BT over its complicity in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people. Thank you.”

The War On Want website is more like a War On Israel one, which is fine if that is how they wish to spend their donor’s money but, as I have documented in the past, one of the biggest donors to War On Want is BBC’s Comic Relief (see the 2009 accounts).

One of War On Want’s favourite stunts is to invade British and American supermarkets, dump all Israeli produce into trolleys and run away when the police arrive.

The WOW website states: “War on Want supports the call from Palestinian civil society to build a global movement of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel until it complies with international law and meets the following three demands: an end to the Occupation; the right of return for Palestinian refugees; and equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel itself.”

I agree with the last requirement but the rest of this statement is simply a call for the total destruction of Israel.

Fortunately, the man at the helm of BT can see right through WOW’s campaign.

The WOW email states that “War on Want have yet to receive a formal response from BT, but supporters who have taken our e-action have received the following response.”

On Behalf Of michael.prescott@bt.com
Sent: 15 November 2010 17:43
To: Emma Stanforth
Subject: Hang up on the Occupation

Dear Emma
Many thanks for your email to Ian Livingston, who has asked me to respond.

BT has indeed admitted Bezeq International to the BT Alliance. We do not see an issue in dealing with what is, in effect, the national telecoms company for Israel.

We are not alone in this. I gather that PalTel, the Palestine Telecommunications Company, also has dealings with Bezeq. Their website carried an announcement on March 21 2010, detailing an arrangement enabling customers who use their prepaid phone cards to have direct access to the fixed line network of Bezeq International.

BT delivers services in 170 countries worldwide. Communication can be vital in helping to resolve conflict and disagreement. In that spirit, while respecting the strong views that you express, we feel unable to pursue the course of action you suggest.

Yours sincerely,
Michael Prescott
Group Director of Communications
BT Group

So although the Palestinians don’t wish to boycott Bezeq War On Want does, which reveals WOW’s true motive.

Unsurprisingly, War on Want doesn’t like seeing their hypocrisy exposed and, for once, their agenda hitting a brick wall.

More sinisterly, in the email to supporters War On Want says “Its time to communicate to BT through a medium they understand”.

War On Want’s motto is “Fighting Global Poverty”.

It should concentrate on that instead of wasting donations on puerile anti-Israel stunts.

If not then Comic Relief and the Charity Commissioners should really be hanging up on War On Want instead.

http://richardmillett.wordpress.com/2010/11/25/its-good-to-talk-so-recon...

COMMENTS

jose (not verified)

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 18:13

Rate this:

0 points

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/war_on_want_wages_war_on_israel_updat...

On the same subject (or abject), three years ago.


mattpryor

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 18:22

Rate this:

0 points

What a disgraceful misuse of charitable donations, while people are actually starving around the world.

It breaks my heart.


jandrsimonson (not verified)

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 18:50

Rate this:

0 points

I can see how the right of return might appear to some to be problematical but ....the call for the end of the occupation is nothing less then the call for the destruction of The State of Israel ? How so ? Do you see the occupation as a forever kind of thing Rich ?


mattpryor

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 18:59

Rate this:

0 points

Jandrsimonson: Define the occupation.

BDSers claim it is Israel's presence in the West Bank.

Palestinian radicals claim it is Israel's presence FULL STOP.

Which is it?

And considering the BDS movement works on behalf of Palestinian "civil society" who do you believe?


jandrsimonson (not verified)

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 19:13

Rate this:

0 points

It isen't about who is beleived you perfectly well know what is meant by the occupation. I am asking how the ending of it entails the destruction of Israel.


jandrsimonson (not verified)

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 19:20

Rate this:

0 points

Obviously there are among those that call for the ending of it some that might also be inclined to call for the destruction of Israel but that doesn't tell me how ending of it entails the destruction of Israel. Israel existed before the occupation why is it that the ending of it necessarily entails the destruction of Israel ?


Yoni1

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 19:30

Rate this:

0 points

I have sent an email to BT, congratulating them on telling these scum to sling their hook.

I phd WoW and told them they are antisemitic scum (look at their website). And that they'll lose a lot of donations. I have emailed everyone in my contact list, encouraging them to do the same. And to demand the Charity Commission remove their status for conducting political and antisemitic propaganda.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 19:32

Rate this:

0 points

"I can see how the right of return might appear to some to be problematical"

Almost funny. Silly comment, but almost funny.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 19:33

Rate this:

0 points

jandrsimonson, with all due respect, it isent? I know that (mis)spelling from somewhere.


Watchful Iris (not verified)

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 20:20

Rate this:

0 points

Maybe you went to the same primary school?


jandrsimonson (not verified)

Thu, 11/25/2010 - 20:31

Rate this:

0 points

Yes and we walked there and back barefoot in the snow with me carrying his books


jose (not verified)

Fri, 11/26/2010 - 07:41

Rate this:

0 points

There is a double discourse called Taqiyya, of religious Shi'ite origin but now used by all Muslim politician as a political propaganda weapon.
In the discourse version for the West, the ambiguity on "occupation" remains, pretending not so clearly that it is related to the so-called "1967 borders" (which are no borders and are not of 1967 but 1949), and a clear rejection of the Jewish State, as shown by Abbas. They recognise "Israel", but not as a Jewish State, ie they hope it becomes a new Lebanon before overtaking it.
The other discourse version is for the internal masses: no peace, no negociation, no Israel. It shows in the newspapers and schoolbooks (see PMW for examples), the videos (see NEMRI for examples) and in the political declarations in Arabic of the 'Palestinian' political leaders (HAMAS, Fatah, whatever).
"Occupation" is just a bad word for Israel's right to protect itself from terrorist attacks. The fact is that since the 'Palestinian' police are now able to resist HAMAS in Judea Samaria, lots of checkpoints have been removed, security of main cities are now in the hands of the PA (the "A" sector). The process will continue as long as the PA is able to control their extremists.
Defining precise borders will be the remaining task for the negociators... Once the 'Palestinians' will stop acting as divas.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

RICHMILLETT ON TWITTER

    LATEST COMMENTS