Stop the JNF - EXPOSED!

"Stop the JNF South Africa" is part of the South African BDS movement. My response to a recent post in the Mail & Guardian

Text in original post:  

“The temptation is to speak in muffled tones about an issue such as the right of the people of Palestine… yet we would be less than human if we did so”

 – Nelson R. Mandela

As Jews, with our own painful history of oppression, we are compelled to speak out against human rights violations committed by Israel In our name, against the Palestinian people.

We note that the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) and South African Zionist Federation (SAZF) recent met with the presidency We also note with great concern that the SAJBD’s and SAZF’s assertation that they represent and speak on behalf of all Jewish South Africans.

We also note with great concern that the SAJBD’s and SAZF’s assertation that they represent and speak on behalf of all Jewish South Africans We also note with great concern that the SAJBD’s and SAZF’s assertation that they represent and speak on behalf of all Jewish South Africans.

The Jewish community is neither homogeneous nor monolithic. There is a growing number of Jews, in SA and around the world who are organising to form alternative spaces and who unconditionally oppose Israeli policies and practices that shamefully privilege Jews over the indigenous Palestinian people.

In this vein, we support the non-violent campaign of applying Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel until it abides by … international law and respects basic human rights.

We are encouraged that SA is joining those countries that are taking a clear stance against Israel’s violations of international law…and its acts of violence against the Palestinan people. We also welcome and support our Department of Trade and Industry’s initiative to prevent the false labeling of Israeli settlement products.

We hope that the ANC and the SA government goes further and completely bans Israeli settlement products. Israeli settlements are in clear violation of international law and seriously undermine any chance of negotiations and a just peace.

Such positions as those recently taken by our government against Israeli violence and violations of international law, in fact, serve to affirm a proud Jewish tradition of respect for justice and human rights; regardless of race, religion or creed. Such positions connect us to our fellow humanity.

We humbly – and sadly – acknowledge that our voices may not be the dominant ones in our community, but neither were Dietrich Bonnhoefer’s in Nazi Germany nor Beyers Naude’s, Antjie Krog’s, Braam Fischer’s and Joe Slovo’s in Apartheid South Africa.

Our individual consciences, our Jewish tradition and our painful history compel us to declare to the SAJBD, SAZF and to the Israeli government that we will continue to speak out and take a stand for justice and human rights. Taking such a stand is in the very interests of being Jewish. For when we proclaim “Never Again”, we should mean “Never Again”, unconditionally, and to any human being – including the Palestinians.

My response: 

Text in response post: 

"It is crystal clear to me that if the Arabs put down a draft resolution blaming Israel for the recent earthquake in Iran it would probably have majority, the US would veto it and Britain and France would abstain" - Amos Oz

As Jews with our painful history of oppression, we are compelled to reject the rape of Jewish history and tradition by "Stop the JNF"; the movement's rhetoric is a perversion of intellect.

We note that Jewish history and tradition encourages debate, pluralism and free speech; in fact a large percentage of our teachings are based on civil debate and dissent. We also note that nowhere in our Jewish history is the indiscriminate employment of anti-Semitic elements endorsed or encouraged to bring about or work for change within any society or culture. 

Let us be clear, the Jewish people, its representatives and recently the State of Israel, have always provided platforms for respectable debate and discourse. While the quest for change is admirable when fuelled by pure motives and convictions, the quest becomes repugnant when deceit and fraudulence are enlisted to justify bias, bigotry and immorality.

We are encouraged that Israel is a bastion of democracy, free speech and human rights. We are encouraged by the respect shown for Israel’s justice system by many nations and statesmen, despite the deafening silence of apologists whose illegitimate call for the delegitimization and destruction of Israel overshadow acute human disasters elsewhere in the world. 

We humbly - and sadly – acknowledge that the "Stop the JNF" movement has no call for Israel's rights, rewrites a twisted history and willingly adopts every morsel of baseless hate, presented by people committed to tyranny and terror. We sadly acknowledge the movement's preference to "spit in the well" and alienation from the SAZF and SABD in favour of violence under the banner of human rights. Sadly the turncoat history lesson was missed by all the absent signatories.

Our individual consciences, our Jewish tradition and painful history compel us to fight for universal justice, and specifically for our Jewish and national rights to self-determination. 'Never again' is part of our painful history, and we will speak up against those whoring it with hollow calls on the bandwagon of false protest alongside the wolves. 'Never again' will we let those who are too weak to work for change from within dictate to us; not as 'Jews from other spaces'; not from the arena of disinformation; not from behind the screen of digital anonymity; and not through activism which finds legitimacy in targeting Jewish businesses in South Africa. 

The list of signatories is available on request. 

Britain Supports Terrorism

Palestinian Media watch (PMW) published a summary of a presentation given by PMW's Itamar Marcus on the report which shows that British taxpayer monies are funding terrorism. See the full report below.

In short:

Report: UK money pays terrorists' salariesUK Minister of State for International Development Alan Duncan wrote a letter to MP Robert Halfon in which he rejected PMW's earlier findings that exposed the Palestinian Authority's payment of salaries to terrorists with UK money, claiming that the PA only pays "social assistance programmes to provide welfare payments" to families of prisoners. In response, Palestinian Media Watch prepared and presented in UK parliament a second report that reiterates and verifies our original findings, and rejects Duncan's categorization of the PA payments as "social assistance."

Executive Summary:

1. The Palestinian Authority is currently paying salaries totaling approximately 17,500,000 shekels (£2,798,825) each month to all Palestinian terrorists in Israeli prisons, including mass murderers.
2. The word used in the PA law is Ratib - salary; the law never mentions "social assistance" or "welfare."
3. The amount of the salary rises based on number of years in prison, an amount related to the severity of the terror crime and not family need.
4. Unmarried terrorists receive the same basic salary as those who are married and have children.
5. A separate small stipend is given to married prisoners with children. The average prisoner salary is over 3,000 shekels (£480) a month and can reach as high as 12,000 (almost £2,000) a month for those in prison more than 30 years. The additional stipend for a married prisoner is 300 shekels (£48) and a mere 50 shekels (£8) per child.
6. The terrorist prisoner is the only one who can appoint an "authorized agent" to handle his money when he is in prison. He is not obligated to give it to his wife, children, or parents.
7. All of these points and more citations in the report refute Minister Duncan's assertion that the money is "social assistance" for families.
8. As long as the UK continues funding the PA's general budget, it will be a participant in the payment of these high monthly salaries to terrorist murderers.

Conclusion:
The fact that the PA uses its general budget to reward terrorists with high monthly salaries should be a matter of very serious concern for Britain and for all donor countries to the PA. 

------------------------------------

PMW Special Report

Palestinian Media Watch’s response to letter by

Minister of State Alan Duncan to MP Robert Halfon,

rejecting PMW’s report that exposed

Palestinian Authority’s payment of salaries to terrorists

with UK money

By Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

Introduction:

On May 20, 2011, Palestinian Media Watch published a report entitled:

“PA to pay salaries to all terrorists in Israeli prisons:

Financial aid from many donor countries

goes directly to PA budget from which salaries are paid”

The report exposed new Palestinian Authority legislation that went into effect in April 2011 retroactive to Jan 1, 2011, which raised salaries for all Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons for terror-related crimes. Recipients include all terrorists in prison, including those sentenced to dozens of life sentences for planning and directing suicide bombings. According to the clear language of the PA law, according to PA economic reports on government salaries, and according to the PA tax authorities, the monthly payments to prisoners, which range from 2,400 shekels to 12,000 shekels, are salaries no different than salaries received by civil servants. They are paid from the PA’s general budget and withholding taxes are paid as is the case with all other PA salaries. The PA’s general budget, which pays terrorists salaries, is funded by numerous donor countries, including the UK.

Shortly after the release of PMW’s report, MP Robert Halfon questioned the UK’s policy regarding funding of the PA in light of these findings. Minister of State Alan Duncan responded with a letter rejecting PMW's findings:

“I am writing to you further to your comments in the Jewish News regarding claims that British taxpayers are funding the families of Palestinian suicide bombers and prisoners in Israeli jails. If these claims were true, this would be a matter of very serious concern for me and the Department. However, I am pleased to reassure you that we have investigated the matter fully and can confirm that the allegations in Palestinian Media Watch's report are both inaccurate and misleading.”

It is not clear how the Minister’s office “investigated the matter fully,” but unfortunately, the information the minister presented in his letter is wrong. The Minister’s main argument was that the payments were not salaries to terrorists but “social assistance programmes to provide welfare payments” to the terrorists’ families. He wrote: “I hope you will also agree that dependent spouses or children should not be held responsible for the crimes of family members, or forced to live in poverty as a consequence.”

The Minister’s letter does not cite any sources to back up this information. Furthermore, those who conducted the research for the Minister did not bother to contact PMW - a serious omission, considering that it was PMW’s report that was under discussion.

This present PMW report documents that the general statements made by the Minister of State in his letter without any sources of documentation that contradict PMW’s findings, are wrong.

This report verifies PMW’s original findings:

1- The Palestinian Authority is currently paying salaries totaling approximately £2,798,825 each month to all Palestinian terrorists in Israeli prisons, including mass murderers.

2- As long as the UK continues funding the PA’s general budget, it will be a participant in the payment of the salaries of terrorist murderers.

This report quotes the relevant arguments made by Minister Duncan in his letter to MP Halfon, followed by PMW’s refutation of each point, with full quotes of the proof texts from Palestinian Authority sources. The minister’s full letter follows at the end.

Minister Duncan to MP Halfon (1):

“The PA operates two social assistance programmes to provide welfare payments to households who have lost their main breadwinner, either through imprisonment or where they have been killed or wounded as a result of the wider conflict… It is true that in some cases, payments will go to families of those who have committed the sort of crime that we utterly condemn. But I hope it is clear from the information I have set out above that the schemes are not intended in any way to reward or encourage such crimes. I hope you will also agree that dependent spouses or children should not be held responsible for the crimes of family members, or forced to live in poverty as a consequence.”

PMW’s refutation:

The following are the PA sources showing that what PMW documented was in fact salaries to terrorists, and not welfare payments to support women and children:

1. The payments PMW documented are defined by the Palestinian Authority in the PA law “Government resolution # 23 of 2010” as “salaries” for prisoners. Nowhere in the PA law does the word “social assistance” or “welfare payments” appear. On the other hand the word “salary” appears repeatedly:

“Government resolution # 23 of 2010 concerning the amendment on payment of a monthly salary to the prisoner: Every prisoner will be granted a monthly salary… on condition that he does not receive a salary from a [different] governmental [body]... The salary will be paid to the prisoner from the date of his arrest... The minimum salary for a prisoner…” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 15, 2011]

2. The salary payments are not related to social welfare, but are determined according to the severity of the crime as expressed by length of time in prison. The longer the time in prison, the higher the salary:

“The minimum salary for a prisoner, to be paid to him from the beginning of his detention and for up to 3 years, is 1,400 shekels. Prisoners who have been imprisoned between 3 and 5 years will receive 2,000 shekels. Those imprisoned between 5 and 10 years will receive 4,000 shekels. Those imprisoned between 10 and 15 years will receive 6,000 shekels. Those imprisoned between 15 and 20 years will receive 7,000 shekels. Those imprisoned between 20 and 25 years will receive 8,000 shekels. Those imprisoned between 25 and 30 years will receive 10,000 shekels. Those who have been imprisoned 30 years or more will receive 12,000 shekels.” [Government resolution # 23 of 2010, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 15, 2011]

3. The Minister’s assertion that these payments are “welfare payments to households who have lost their main breadwinner... dependent spouses or children should not be held responsible for the crimes of family members” is wrong and appears nowhere in the law. Moreover, the standard payment system cited above is not related to the family status of the terrorist prisoner. Married prisoners with children receive a separate “supplement” for their wives and children, far smaller than the salaries that reach up to 12,000 shekels a month:

“A supplement of 300 shekels will be added to the salary of every married prisoner, as well as a supplement for children up to the age of 18 in the amount of 50 shekels."                       [emphasis added, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 15, 2011]

The core salary is not related to family status.

4. Nearly two thirds of the prisoners are unmarried, have no children, and yet they still receive a full monthly salary:

“The Ministry of Prisoners’ Affairs in Ramallah said… that there are 2,805 married [prisoners], representing 37.4% percent of the total number. There are 4,695 unmarried prisoners, representing 62.6%.” [Al-Quds, Jan. 3, 2010]

Thus, nearly two thirds of the money that the British minister was informed is “welfare payment” for wives and children is actually going to thousands of single terrorists without families.

5. Another confirmation that the PA views payments to prisoners as government salaries in the full sense of the word is that the prisoners pay withholding taxes, as do all salaried workers:

Headline: “Prisoners and their families praise [PA] government decision to raise salaries, [Minister of Prisoners’ Affairs] Karake: Withholding tax applies to every citizen who receives income from the PA”

“A meeting was held between the Ministry of Prisoners’ Affairs and the Ministry of Finance… several issues on this subject [of finances] were clarified: The [withholding] tax applies to every citizen who receives income from PA coffers; it is within the framework of the Income Tax Act; and begins with salaries over 2,400 shekels per month. The beginning rate is 5% for salaries over that amount (2,400 shekels). The tax rate is graduated, reaching at most only 10% of prisoners’ salaries. The Minister of Prisoners’ Affairs said that the prisoners in the [Israeli] prisons and their families are subject to the [withholding tax] law, and [added that] the salary raise this year had been welcomed with great satisfaction among the prisoners and their families.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 19, 2011]

Evidently, in practice, the terrorist prisoners receive salaries in the full sense of the word.

6. The following official PA economic document provides further proof that the PA pays salaries to prisoners. The document discusses in detail what portion of the PA budget went to paying salaries in May 2011:

“An official document, a copy of which reached Life and the Market (supplement to the official PA daily), reveals that the cost of salaries [in the PA budget] is much higher than people think… The sum of monthly salaries for May 2011 totaled 727,287,824 shekels (i.e., £123,393,581), paid from the treasury of the [Palestinian] National Authority… The document shows that the largest portion of the salaries’ expense - more than 40% - was paid to civil servants… As for the prisoners, they receive approximately 2.5% of the cost of salaries [for May], in the form of salaries and [additional] payments, totaling 17,678,247 shekels (i.e., £3,000,000).”

[Life and the Market, supplement to Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 19, 2011]

Significantly. this PA government report did not deal at all with social welfare payment. It only discussed government salaries, and it included payments to prisoners.

Minister Duncan to MP Halfon (2):

“Contrary to media reporting, the payments [to prisoners and to families of people killed] are not more generous than standard PA civil service or military salaries.”

PMW’s refutation:

When PMW reported that the salaries of prisoners were higher than the salaries of PA civil servants and military salaries, PMW cited an official PA document which explicitly states that:

“An official document [analyzing salaries showed]…

The average salary for a civil servant in the Palestinian Authority is 2882 shekels…

The average salary for members of the PA military personnel is 2704 shekels…

The average prisoner salary is 3129 shekels.”

[Life and the Market, supplement to Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 19, 2011]

Note also that Minister Duncan in his letter did not use the word “salary” to refer to prisoners’ payments, even though the PA only uses the word “salary.”

Minister Duncan to MP Halfon (3):

“In the case of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, they receive a minimal allowance to cover the cost of food and clothes. This scheme operates at the request of the Israeli authorities and is designed to reimburse them for the costs of providing prisoners with food and clothing. It is not in any sense a "salary' to prisoners, nor a "reward" for having committed crimes against Israel.”

PMW’s comment:

Here Minister Duncan cited correct information but it is not at all related to the salaries allotted to terrorists documented by PMW. The PA gives two payments to the prisoners. First, the main payment is a salary granted to prisoners for their participation in acts of terror against Israel, as documented above. Second, the PA pays prisoners monthly canteen money, as recently explained by the Minister of Prisoners’ Affairs:

“[Minister of Prisoners’ Affairs] Karake said that the [Palestinian] government pays salaries to the prisoners in prison, in an amount averaging 17,500,000 shekels (i.e., approximately: £2,798,825) per month, as well as millions of shekels in canteen money each month, for prisoners in prison.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July 8, 2012]

The fact that the prisoners receive canteen money directly in prison is not at all related to the salary payments that the PMW documented, which is currently approximately £2,798,825 per month.

Minister Duncan to MP Halfon (4):

“It is true that in some cases, payments will go to families of those who have committed the sort of crime that we utterly condemn. But I hope it is clear from the information I have set out above that the schemes are not intended in any way to reward or encourage such crimes.”

PMW’s response:

The following PA TV interview by phone with a released prisoner, who called the TV studio to complain about the PA, is a striking indicator that the terrorists themselves understand that they are receiving a PA salary specifically because of, or as a reward for, their terror attacks. Iyad Abu Khaizaran, a member of the Islamic Jihad terror organization, was given a life sentence in 1991 for stabbing a 76-year-old Israeli man, Shlomo Yahya, to death in a suburb of Tel Aviv. He was released from prison, when Israel in 2011 agreed to release 1,027 Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who had been held hostage by Hamas for more than 5 years. The released terrorist called the PA TV talk show to complain that while he and other prisoners all received full salaries in prison, since his release he had only received half a salary. The terrorist explained the reason he and other released prisoners should receive a full salary: “We killed Jews. I personally killed Jews. I killed settlers and I injured soldiers… The PA that presents itself as responsible for the nation must be faithful to everyone.” The PA’s payment of salaries is not seen by the terrorist themselves as a welfare issue at all, but as a way for the government to be “faithful” to him and his friends for their killing of Jews.

The following is the transcript:

PA TV host: “With us is Iyad Abu Khaizaran. Good evening.”

Iyad (on phone): “Hello. Since the day we were released from prison, we were given [only] half a salary... We killed Jews. I personally killed Jews. I killed settlers and I injured soldiers. My house was destroyed. I have 11 bullets in my body. I served 22 years in Israeli prisons. The PA that presents itself as responsible for the nation must be faithful to everyone.”

Host: “You, like the other [prisoners], did you receive salaries in the prisons?”

Iyad: “Yes. After about the year 2000, [the salaries] were organized.”

Host: “In other words, from 2000, I mean, all the organizations, without exception, whether it was Fatah, or Hamas, supporters of Abbas or not supporters of Abbas, they [all] received salaries or not?...”

Iyad: “Yes, yes they did.” [PA TV, March 29, 2012]

This interview is very significant. It shows not only that the letter of PA law defines the payments as salaries but that the terrorists themselves understand it as a salary. Moreover, contradicting Minister Duncan’s assertion in his letter to MP Halfon, the terrorists themselves see their salaries as a reward for their terror activities, in this case the murder of a 76 years old man.

Conclusions:

1. The PA under PA law pays salaries to all Palestinian terrorist prisoners in Israeli prisons.

2. Prisoners’ salaries are not social welfare payments to support wives and children, but salaries granted to prisoners because they are imprisoned for activities against Israel, including terror and murder.

3. The Arabic language of the written PA law uses the word that means “salary”. Nowhere in the entire law do the words “social assistance” or “welfare” appear.

4. The monthly salary amount is based first and foremost on the number of years the terrorist has been in prison. The salary goes up based on years in prison – for single and married prisoners alike – not based on family status.

5. The salary for prisoners goes up to 12,000 shekels a month for those who have served the longest time in prison. Stipends are a mere 300 shekels a month for wives and 50 shekels per child. 62% of the terrorists in Israeli prisons are single and receive full PA salaries.

6. A prisoner serving more than 30 years receives a monthly salary of 12,000 shekels, approximately three times the average teacher’s salary, even if he has no wife and children. It is the fact that they were imprisoned for terror offenses that gives them a salary.

7. Withholding taxes are paid from the higher salaries as with all PA government salaries.

8. The average salary of prisoners is higher than the salaries for PA civil servants and military personnel.

9. The salaries of the PA terrorist in Israeli prisons are paid form the PA’s general budget.

10.The yearly UK money given to the PA general budget helps pay salaries to terrorist murderers in prison.

Minister Duncan wrote:

“I hope this information will reassure you that the Palestinian Authority is not operating any programme which financially rewards those who commit acts of terrorism and no UK aid is being used for this purpose.”

In fact, this PMW report shows the opposite: The PA spends 17 million shekels (i.e., £2,798,825) monthly in 2012 to pay salaries to terrorist prisoners of all the terror organizations. These payments are in recognition of their acts of terror. UK aid to the general budget of the PA is also being used for this purpose.

Minister Duncan:

“… regarding claims that British taxpayers are funding the families of Palestinian suicide bombers and prisoners in Israeli jails. If these claims were true, this would be a matter of very serious concern for me and the Department. However, I am pleased to reassure you that we have investigated the matter fully and can confirm that the allegations in Palestinian Media Watch's report are both inaccurate and misleading.”

This report documents that PMW’s original report is both accurate and true.

The fact that the PA uses its general budget to reward terrorists with salaries should be a matter of very serious concern for all donor countries to the PA.

A Recipe for Peace

Click the image to watch: 

Heidi-Jane Esakov - letter

Open letter Ms. Esakov following her letter to Chief Rabbi Goldstein

Ms. Esakov,

I am writing as a fellow Jew, South African and Israeli after reading your letter to Chief Rabbi Goldstein  - “Do not speak in my name”⁺  (21/08/2012).

While some of the content is factually wrong (see below), unsupported and seems simply thrown in to serve biased sentiments and obsessive agenda, the logic which fans the content and arguments is twisted and places stumbling blocks before the blind. If this is your intention, you needn’t read the rest of this letter.

Relying on your statement - “as a researcher who focuses on Palestine-Israel, it is my duty to step back from my anger and engage intellectually and honestly”, I would expect intellectual engagement and intellectual honesty too. Furthermore, I am glad to see that you are “committed to justice for Palestinians and Jewish Israelis….and prefer not to personalize the debate but rather “remain[s] rooted in intellectual engagement”. I commit to upholding the same moral duty and commitment. I would thus like to clarify that each and every statement, historic fact and/or comment can and will be supported by credible links and other informative reliable resources.   

After your short introduction, in which you state that you will “ensure that the personal is not lost to the political” and “remain rooted in intellectual engagement”, you accuse Goldstein personally, of abusing his office and “unapologetically becoming a propagandist for Israeli crimes”. I did some research and cannot find the likes. The only reference I found attributed to Goldstein, regarding the Goldstone report, is a statement regarding  commission member Chinkin’s article and statements about "Israel's bombardment of Gaza is not self-defense – it's a war crime"¹ before even having researched anything. As a researcher yourself, you know that assumptions and presumptions preceding any findings are the antithesis of research, fact-finding and reporting.

You brought up the point of a “blind-spot” in your first paragraph. Unfortunately, as a researcher, you seem to have one yourself.

“Remember that even when it became painfully apparent, and the United Nations displayed evidence, that Israel had committed crimes against humanity and war crimes during the 2008-09 Israeli war on Gaza, leaving about 1,400 civilians dead, including hundreds of children, and having destroyed places of education and worship, you used your religious office to defend and condone the indefensible, unapologetically becoming a propagandist for Israeli crimes. “

Lots of water has passed under the bridge since the Goldstone report, including Goldstone’s remorse.² You seem to lack some researched information and owe an explanation to your readers to fall in line with your “commit[ment] to justice for Palestinians and Jewish Israelis”, unless leading readers astray is part of your agenda.

You insinuate that Israel purposely “destroyed places of education and worship”, “during the war on Gaza”. Israel has no, and had no policy to destroy places of worship or education, nor did it proclaim war on Gaza. Had the mighty Israeli military machine wanted to destroy all places of worship and education it quite easily could have. Israel did not go to war on Gaza either. Israel initiated an operation against Hamas and splinter group terrorists to stop indiscriminate rocket fire at civilian targets. Despite being a legitimate legal and immediate right, under any law system, Israel initiated the operation after thousands of rockets were launched at civilian targets and countless negotiation attempts to stop it, including a ceasefire intentionally broken by Hamas. Hamas terrorists and their splinter groups were the only targets. British Colonel, Richard Kemp testifies to this^3,4 and testified at the UN too⁵.

It is common knowledge, almost 4 years after Operation Cast Lead, that the number of civilian casualties is not 1,400 as you falsely wrote and missed in your research^{6, 7}.  Even the Goldstone report did not invent such a number, rewrite this as history or distort facts so blatantly. 

Presenting a simplified snapshot of event or situation is considered poor journalism in the field of journalism and is totally unacceptable in research. There are countless anti-Israel hate sites and speakers whom, for now, I would like to believe that you do not want to be associated with. Actually, some research shows that you took part in an anti-Israel hate fest alongside Friedman, Kasrils, Said, Basam, Mohammed, Abdullah et al.  

  

You continue and claim that Mr. Ebrahim is correct in saying that visiting Israel gives legitimacy to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land. When asked if travelling to China gives legitimacy to China’s occupation of Tibet, Mr. Ebrahim said that “We do not recognize the occupation of Tibet”⁸. Is it correct to assume that Mr. Ebrahim has singled out Israel as the worst perpetrator of human rights violations? Please bear in mind, Darfur, Rwanda, Tibet, Syria amongst others. Mr. Ebrahim might like see what Mr. Kenneth Moshoe, a fellow Member of Parliament has to say about the “Apartheid Israel” he constantly refers to⁹.

I was going to break down every point you made in your letter but shall suffice with the above, pending your reply. The more I research your “moral duties” and “commitment to justice for Palestinians and Jewish Israelis” the more doubts I have to your real intentions and suspect foreign elements in your commitment to intellectual discourse and “research”. I hold this view after not finding any mention of anything concerning Israeli or Jewish interests or concerns. Not one. Nor do I find any mention of one step that the Palestinians need to undertake in order to bring about peace. Not one. Instead I am witness to pure Anti-Israel bias at best, and blatant lies as second.

This leads me, and the wary reader, to conclude that you are not a “researcher who focuses on Palestine-Israel” but someone who has jumped onto the anti-Israel bandwagon with popular misleading banners. Your target audience might be the unwary and ignorant reader, but only you and I live with that knowledge, meanwhile. Ironic that you write “Palestine-Israel” and not “Israel-Palestine” – Palestine first, yet the focus is on Israel, another subtle hint.

+ Letter: http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/letters/2012/08/21/letter-do-not-speak-in-my-name

¹ Chinkin: http://www.alandershowitz.com/goldstone.pdf

² Goldstone:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html

  ³ Kemp: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WssrKJ3Iqcw

⁴ Kemp: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fko9F1EAU2g&feature=related

⁵ Kemp: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX6vyT8RzMo

⁶ Casualties: http://elderofziyon.blogspot.co.il/2010/11/so-how-many-were-killed-in-operation.html

⁷ Casualties: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-admits-600-700-of-its-men-were-killed-in-cast-lead-1.323776

⁸ Tibet: http://ewn.co.za/2012/08/15/Ebrahim-defends-his-comments

⁹ Kenneth Moshoe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se5xTh8uwyo

The Wits SRC unanimously votes to boycott Israel - a letter

A letter to the president of the University of the Witwatersrand's Student Representative Council after an unanimous decision to adopt a call to culturally and academically boycott Israel.

To:      Mr. Tebogo Thotela

           President of the Wits Student Representative Council (SRC)

Dear Mr. President,

I attentively listened to your statement¹ explaining the reasons and decision-making process for the unanimous decision subsequently passed by your council to boycott Israel.

As a South African who grew up during the Apartheid era in South Africa, and as an Israeli living in Israel, I would like to request, with your kind permission, a few clarifications regarding some of your statements and the decision taken by your council.

You clearly state that the SRC "got a presentation from the PSC [Palestinian Student Council] around the situation going on in Israel/Palestine". As a result the SRC decided "to take deliberations, discuss, debate and do [your] own research" on the issue. After having apparently done this, the council resolved to "call for a total cultural and academic boycott of Israel".

As President of a Council, which by definition represents all students regardless of race, color, creed and religion, I am sure that transparency and disclosure are values upheld by the SRC. In light of this, I would like to request some information on the deliberations, debate and research undertaken by your council in reaching the abovementioned call. Specifically I would like to know what research was undertaken and who opposed the resolution and the final decision. Since debate, by definition, is a discussion in which opposing arguments are put forward, I am sure you can provide some information and light on the opposing arguments.

Pending your reply, I would not like to assume that very few arguments from the opposing point-of-view were debated. This would certainly not fall in line with categorical policies of the SRC and the prestige of the university whose students you represent.

Unfortunately you may have drawn an incorrect parallel between Apartheid South Africa and Israel based on the information presented, or lack thereof. The times are different, the histories, the peoples, the cultures and circumstances have absolutely no similarity whatsoever, unless one relies on cheap unfounded anti-Israel rhetoric and disinformation published by certain groups. As your own South African government official Mr. Kenneth Meshoe says², "the claim that Israel is an Apartheid State minimize the pain of those who suffered under Apartheid" and expose ignorance by claiming doing so.

You also mention that you "feel that it is your duty to stand up to Apartheid even if it is miles away". I would also like to ask why Israel was singled out as the most urgent issue to address. In many countries surrounding Israel we see many types of Apartheid; gender Apartheid; religious Apartheid; sexual preference Apartheid, yet the SRC has chosen to single out Israel, a sovereign democratic country in which women, Christians, Moslems, gays and all other minority groups enjoy equal rights.  How so? Regretfully, I intuitively suspect that certain groups are cynically exploiting the pains of Apartheid to further their cause by turning the SRC into a propaganda tool since a cultural and academic boycott of Israel is so counterproductive to the interests of South Africa as explained by a fellow South African Maurice Ostroff in his article in The Times of Israel³.

I would like to believe that the SRC's one month of research and debate was undertaken in good faith while adhering to the moral ethics and standards which the university holds in the highest esteem.

I await your reply and thank you in advance for the attention that this matter deserves.

Laurence Seeff

Israel

¹ 

²  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se5xTh8uwyo                

³ http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/counterproductive-politics/