By Jonathan Hoffman
July 14, 2011
Millis of couirse fails to print my response, but then why would he - since when has he ever been interested in balance and factual accuracy?
For those who are interested in balance and factual accuracy, here is my response to Joel Weiner:
I wonder if you are aware that the anti-boycott law passed by the Knesset makes a boycott move a civil offence and not a criminal one. It does not make boycott attempts illegal so does not “cut down on the people’s right to protest”. It simply brings the private cost to the boycotter closer to the public cost of his/her boycott – good economics in other words. It says to the would–be boycotter “you are free to boycott but your action may no longer be costless to you.” What’s wrong with that Joel?
As for “helping their campaign to portray Israel as a totalitarian state” – as you well know the Israel-haters will do this regardless of reality. They want nothing less than the extinction of Israel as a Jewish state – if you don’t believe me come to the Ahava counter-demo on Saturday and listen to them chant “From the River to the Sea Palestine will be Free”. Or look at the PSC’s logo. If you think that withdrawal from the settlements will satisfy the haters I assure you it won’t – what credit do they give Israel for withdrawing from Gaza?
If you don’t like my IRA analogy then look at the US anti-boycott laws cited above by “Shirl”. In 1977, the United States Congress passed laws making it illegal for US companies and individuals to cooperate with the Arab boycott against Israel and authorising the imposition of not only civil but also criminal penalties against U.S. violators.
Do keep making Israel’s case Joel but be really careful not to ‘follow the herd’ of the bleeding heart average communal UK leftist who does not think or get his/her facts right before s/he reacts.