You are here

Middle East

World Chess Federation Requires Hijab At Iran Tournament -- Fallaci Tossing Chador At Khomeini's Feet Is Just a Memory

Daled Amos - Thu, 13/10/2016 - 03:32
The big news in Chess last month was the decision by FIDE (Federation Internationale des Echecs), which resulted in headlines that Female Chess Players Forced to Wear Hijab as Governing Body Awards World Championship to Iran:
The world's top female chess players have reacted with horror after being told they must compete at next year's world championship wearing a hijab.

Within hours of Iran being revealed as its host country, the prestigious event was plunged into crisis as it emerged players taking part face arrest if they don't cover up.
A hijab is a veil covering the head and chest.

Iranian woman wearing a hijab.
Source: Wikipeda
In response, the US women's champion, Nazi Paikidze (pronounced “nah-ZEE.”), responded by saying she will boycott the tournament, both because of what she sees as sexual discrimination as well as because of the travel warning issued by the US State Department, advising against travelling to Iran because US citizens risk being unjustly imprisoned or kidnapped because of their nationality.

Nazi Paikidze, the US women's champion
Credit: Zuma Press, Inc. / Alamy. Source: The Telegraph
Putting aside the Iranian proclivity for taking hostages, the issue of FIDE putting women in a position where they have no choice about wearing the hijab in a fundamentalist Islamic state should remind us of an outspoken woman who took the opposite approach.

Oriana Fallaci, an Italian journalist, author, and political interviewer, was famous for her interviews with world leaders during the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's. She was also well known for being outspoken. Among those she interviewed was Ayatollah Khomeini, in 1979.

Oriana Fallaci. Source: Wikipedia
For the internview, Fallaci was told she would have to  wear a chador, an open cloak worn by many women in Iran, during the interview,

Which she did.

Oriana Fallaci, wearing the chador.
Source: Wikipedia
For a while.

During her interview with Ayatollah Khomeini, Fallaci called him a "tyrant," removed the chador, and threw it to the ground:
OF: I still have to ask you a lot of things. About the "chador", for example, which I was obliged to wear to come and interview you, and which you impose on Iranian women.... I am not only referring to the dress but to what it represents, I mean the apartheid Iranian women have been forced into after the revolution. They cannot study at the university with men, they cannot work with men, they cannot swim in the sea or in a swimming-pool with men. They have to do everything separately, wearing their "chador". By the way, how can you swim wearing a "chador"?

AK: None of this concerns you, our customs do not concern you. If you don't like the Islamic dress you are not obliged to wear it, since it is for young women and respectable ladies.

OF: This is very kind of you, Imam, since you tell me that, I'm going to immediately rid myself of this stupid medieval rag. There!The argument whether FIDE requiring women to wear a hijab is an issue of discrimination or a question of respect for a different culture continues -- though Paikidze's protest is gaining support. In fact, as of this past Monday, the petition Paikidze is circulating has exceeded its goal of 15,000 signatures.

The petition notes that in its handbook, The World Chess Federation explicitly states that it:
rejects discriminatory treatment for national, political, racial, social or religious reasons or on account of gender.No matter how you view the issue, the difference in attitude between Fallaci and FIDE is striking, especially given Iran's poor human rights record.


-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and and and .
Categories: Middle East

We Do Not Speak Their Name! Why Can't The Media Identify Terrorists As Palestinians?

Daled Amos - Mon, 10/10/2016 - 05:37
In the media coverage of Sunday's Palestinian terrorist attack, we are reminded yet again that the Palestinians are They Who Must Not Be Named:


Two people dead after drive-by shooting at Jerusalem tram stop https://t.co/XW7yF7IfK8— The Guardian (@guardian) October 9, 2016




Jerusalem shooting leaves at least four injured https://t.co/EGRgXPP4qJ— The Independent (@Independent) October 9, 2016

But its not only the media that cannot bring themselves to identify who murdered a 60 year old woman and a police officer who was recently married.

The EU condemned what happened, but other than identifying that it happened in Jerusalem, they could not bring themselves to say that it was not just a terrorist attack, but a Palestinian terrorist attack.

@EUinIsrael Appreciate the condemnation. But why not mention whom it was carried out by? Was member of Palestinian Hamas ICYMI.— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) October 9, 2016

Even Dan Shapiro, the US Ambassador to Israel, could not tell you who the terrorist was -- in fact, unlike in the other tweets above, Shapiro did not even make it clear that the attack happened in Jerusalem.


Absolutely no justification 4 the taking of innocent lives. We also condemn the statements glorifying this reprehensible & cowardly attack.— Dan Shapiro (@AmbShapiro) October 9, 2016Also, like The Independent, Shapiro refers to the victims of the terrorist as being "killed" instead of being "murdered". The word "kill" is generic and just refers to causing a death. On the other hand, Wikipedia defines "murder" as "the unlawful killing of another human being without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought." But to be fair, the media doesn't refer to terrorism in general as murder either. Is it because of the value judgement implicit in the word?

What are they afraid of?

Now, we know that back during the 1970's Switzerland 'made secret deal with PLO' after bomb attacks, but surely these days the general whitewashing of Palestinian terrorist attacks by the media, Europe and even the United States is not because of fear.

And the same ones who are so squeamish about mentioning Palestinians when they carry out acts of terrorism, have no trouble mentioning Palestinians in their equally strong condemnation of Israel for the act of building houses.

Maybe the problem is not so much an issue of how they feel about the Palestinian Arabs than of how they feel about Israel, whom many seem to think should just roll over and give the Arabs whatever they want -- as if that will solve most (if not all) of the world's problems.

In Harry Potter and The Sorceror's Stone, Dumbledore advises: “Call him Voldemort, Harry. Always use the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself.”

Even assuming that it is not fear preventing the identification of the terrorists as Palestinians, the failure to use the proper name for Palestinian terrorism only increases the acceptance of Palestinian -- and by extension -- other forms of Islamist terrorism as well.

Dumbledore - A word to the wise

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and and and .
Categories: Middle East

Iran May Enjoy Holocaust Cartoons, But Here Is One Cartoon They Were Skittish About

Daled Amos - Fri, 07/10/2016 - 13:59
At least that is how Iran felt 10 years ago, back in 2006.

Reuters reported at the time that Iran demands apology for German soccer cartoon:
The Iranian embassy in Germany has demanded a written apology from a Berlin newspaper that printed a cartoon of Iranian soccer players dressed as suicide bombers and threatened legal action if none is forthcoming.

The sketch, published on Friday by Der Tagesspiegel, shows four moustachioed soccer players wearing Iran shirts with explosives strapped to their chests next to four German soldiers in a soccer stadium.

A caption above read: "Why the German army should definitely be used during the soccer World Cup!", referring to a debate in Germany about whether to use troops to help with security during the month-long tournament which begins June 9.
Iranian soccer players wearing suicide belts in cartoon by Der Tagesspiegel
Ten years later, would the Iranian government still demand an apology?

Maybe.

In that same year, Iran demanded an apology from Hollywood for the film 300 because of the negative way they were characterized in comparison with the Greeks.

Then in 2008, Iran wasn't too crazy about the movie The Wrestler either -- on account of the scene below (starts 3:35) where "The Ayatollah" starts choking the main character with an Iranian flag, who then pulls the flagpole away, breaks it over his knee and tosses it into the crowd.



When Iran has its yearly cartoon contest mocking the Holocaust, Iran likes to claim that actually they are doing it in the spirit of free speech and debate. The movies may not fall into that category, but the issues raised by the cartoon about the threat of Islamist terrorist attacks were important in 2006.

And they are even more important today.
And Iran is still in the middle of it.

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and and and .
Categories: Middle East

Terrorism? Obama And The Media Want You To Beware Lone Wolf Bathtubs

Daled Amos - Mon, 26/09/2016 - 16:03
Earlier this month, The Economist encouraged us to be Learning to live with it -- apparently with the threat not only of lone wolf terrorists, but of lone wolf bathtubs as well:
Barack Obama was correct when he said earlier this year that the danger of drowning in a bathtub is greater than that of being killed by terrorists. Baths are a one-in-a-million risk. Even if the terrorism deaths in San Bernardino and Orlando were doubled to give an annual death toll, the risk would still be about one in 2.5m. Yet the president was lambasted for his otherworldly complacency.Well, far be it that we should be complacent about either of these dangers, but when The Economist -- and Obama -- make this comparison, are they really pushing an apples to apples comparison?


First of all, are there any lone wolf bathtubs that the rest of us don't know about, plotting on drowning people?

On the other hand, contrary to arbitrary, random bathtub drownings, there are Islamist terrorist groups that, if not actually planning specific targets, are encouraging attacks in areas most likely to spread terror in furtherance of a specific goal.

Comparing the numbers for bathtub accidents and terror attacks is just not an apples to apples comparison.

Also, in a bathtub, you are responsible for your own safety - if you are lackadaisical about it, you have only yourself to blame.

However, Islamist terrorism is something we rely on the government to prevent - if they seem lackadaisical about identifying threats, will the government take responsibility when random luck does not stop the terrorists?

Maybe this is the dangerous bathtub Obama and the media had in mind?
Source: Liberty First News
Of course, comparing bathtubs and terrorists is not something new that The Economist picked up on.

Back in January, The Washington Free Beacon had an article on New York Times: Bathtubs More Dangerous Than Terrorism
Americans who fear they might die while taking a bath are more rational than Americans who fear a terrorist attack, according to the New York Times.

“Americans are more likely to die in a car crash, drown in a bathtub or be struck by lightning than be killed by a terrorist,” wrote the Times’ Peter Baker on Monday. “The Islamic State does not pose an existential threat to the United States.”Which threat is less under our control, and causing more fear?
Source: Washington Free PressAgain, what actually makes this claim about rational fear true is that car crashes, drowning in bathtubs or being struck by lightning are either to a large degree under a person's own control or are random acts of nature. Preventing terrorist attacks is something out of the individual's control. Instead it is something the government claims to be working to prevent -- and when we read about the Obama administration playing down the threat or avoiding addressing it by name, is it any wonder people are afraid?

In the New York Times article, Peter Baker writes that Obama admitted at the beginning of the year that he did not see ISIS -- which uses proxies to carry out terrorist attacks in other countries  -- as a threat to the US. As we approach the end of the year, how have events borne out Obama's assurance?

In The Great Bathtub Hoax of H. L. Mencken, you can read about a hoax fabricated by H. L. Mencken back in 1917 about the history of the bathtub in the US and its danger, a hoax that was perpetrated in other newspapers:

One of many newspaper features perpetuating Mencken's hoax.According to Mencken, the article, which he called “a tissue of somewhat heavy absurdities, all of them deliberate and most of them obvious,” had no other purpose than “to have some harmless fun in war days,” although there are those who think maybe the old codger had a bit more in mind.

Wendy McElroy, in The Bathtub, Mencken, and War, notes: “Through his hoax, Mencken demonstrated to himself and to selected friends that the American public would believe any absurdity, as long as it appealed to their imagination or emotions.”Would even a cynic like Mencken have thought to make the comparison between bathtubs and terrorists that both government and media is trying to foist on Americans today?

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!


Technorati Tag: and and .
Categories: Middle East

What Do You Get The Palestinian Arab Who Has Everything?

Daled Amos - Fri, 16/09/2016 - 15:57
The answer, of course, is a necklace.

But no, not just any necklace -- you can get them this necklace, available on Palestine-Shirts.com:


Obviously, this is a very special necklace, as the site itself points out:

One Palestinian mil, made on the year 1927, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1942 depends on what we have in the stock.
Now You can show your friends and tell them that we had a Palestinian currency for the state of Palestine, before the Israeli occupation 1948 to Palestine. Palestinian currency in your hands. Palestine 1-Mil Necklace.Palestinian currency?
Palestinian state?

Take a closer look:


Below the name "Palestine" in Arabic and in English, there is the word Palestine in...Hebrew, followed by the abbreviation in Hebrew for Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel.

The fact of the matter is, the name "Palestine" before 1948 had no association with Palestinian Arabs, let alone with any kind of Arab state.

So when Time Magazine had an article in 1937 about The Palestine Symphony Orchestra -- its members were Jews:
As a full Palestine moon rode one evening last week over Tel Aviv, exclusively Jewish city, the Hebrew Sabbath ended and thousands of Jews began to move toward the Levant Fair Grounds. There they packed the Italian Pavilion to capacity to hear great Arturo Toscanini lead Palestine's first civic orchestra through its first performance. Sir Arthur Grenfell Wauchope, the British High Commissioner, brought with him a party of notables. Open-shirted German immigrants gathered in rowboats on the adjacent Yarkon River. A few Arab fishermen paddled quietly toward shore, listened respectfully outside the pavilion walls which are still pitted by Arab bullets.

...Huberman, a Polish Jew, was impressed by the attendance and enthusiasm of natives & exiles who came to hear his violin concerts. He determined to build for them an orchestra at Tel Aviv, their brave new cultural capital, and resigned his Vienna teaching post to do so. Already in Palestine, or easily available all over Europe, were scores of refugee Jewish musicians.

...The Palestine Symphony Orchestra now numbers 72. Germans make up about half the number, the rest are Poles and Russians. Six are natives of Palestine which has several competent music schools but welcomes the new orchestra as its only permanent symphony. So many first-desk musicians are playing in it that critics expect the Palestine Symphony to rank soon among the first four orchestras in the world. [emphasis added]Another example of the Jewish side of Palestine before 1948 is the soccer team they had -- a team that today's Palestinian Football Association still tries to take credit for as being Arab:
British Mandate of Palestine Official Games 1934-1948

Until the establishment of the state of Israel, on 14/5/1948, its national team played 5 international games under the name of British Mandate of Palestine. These games are recognized by IFA and FIFA as official games.
Note that also the (current) Palestinian FA recognizes these games as their 5 first internationals. However the national anthem that was played before the games was the Jewish one (later Israel national anthem) and all the players of British Mandate of Palestine in these games were Jewish, so this decision of the Palestinian FA looks little strange...Elder of Ziyon has a post that includes Jewish-Palestinian stamps, tourist posters, trade fairs and a Jewish-Palestine exhibit at the 1939 World's Fair in New York.

So what this necklace handily illustrates is that there was no Palestinian currency and no Palestinian state before 1948. Throughout history, the closest the Palestinian Arabs have ever gotten to either of these is today, with the control of the "West Bank" by the Palestinian Authority.


Hat tip: Seth Frantzman on Twitter
Hat tip: Elder of Ziyon

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and .
Categories: Middle East

Is Abbas' Tantrum The Result of the Success of Netanyau's Latest Strategy?

Daled Amos - Mon, 12/09/2016 - 15:07
Last week it was Mahmoud Abbas against the world as Abbas decries pressure from the US, Russia and the Arab world:
“Our relations with everyone must be good, but no one will dictate to us any position or idea...Therefore, let us think as Palestinians. I will think about Palestine, not Washington or Moscow”President Abbas speaks to Israeli journalists in Ramallah, January 21, 2016.
 of Israel (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)What is going on here?


It turns out that while Abbas has repeatedly resisted US pressure to make peace with Israel,  and has refused to modify his position on Israel as a Jewish state, there may be something different about the kind of pressure Abbas claims to be feeling now.

You may have noticed that the Saudi Arabian press has been coming out with articles favorable to Jews and Israel -- decrying Antisemitism and suggesting that the Arab world can learn from the successes of the Jewish state. Even granted that a great deal of this change in attitude is the threat of Iran, the fact remains that common interests and not affection form the basis for the relations of any two countries.

Saudi Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Anwar Eshki (center with striped tie)
with Israeli Knesset members (Image: Haaretz.com, July 23, 2016)
This goes beyond the Saudis. In an article about Israel's new friends, Bloomberg's Eli Lake notes there other countries in the Middle East with improved ties with Israel. Recently, Turkey normalized its ties with the Jewish state. Dore Gold, the director general of Israel's Foreign Ministry told Lake about the negotiations he has conducted with the Gulf monarchies and that he believes "his diplomacy with the Arab states resembles the dynamics that created the predecessor of the European Union after the end of World War II."

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, president of Turkey 
It is no wonder that The New York Times' concern about Israel's new diplomatic initiatives go beyond just the question of Can Israel and the Arab States Be Friends? While it agrees that improved relations between Israel on the one hand and Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states on the other mean "better relations among these neighbors could put the chaotic Middle East on a more positive course. They could also leave the Palestinians in the dust, a worrisome prospect."

Abbas likely feels the same.

Meanwhile, outside of the Middle East, Israel has steadily improved its relations with both China and Russia. For example, Israel has bombed targets in Syria despite Russian missile-defense system there, an indication of a degree of coordination and common interests between the two countries that goes beyond what the Obama Administration has been able to accomplish.

And of course Russia is trying to arrange their own peace summit with direct talks between Abbas and Netanyahu.

One can begin to understand the new kind of pressure that Abbas may be feeling as the neighborhood is warming up to Israel.

That neighborhood extends to Africa, where Abbas has apparently drawn the line and has decided to fight back. Back in July, The Jerusalem Post reported on Israel, Palestinian Authority in African diplomatic battle:
Israel is continuing to make inroads into Africa, as Chad – which has suddenly found itself on the front lines in the battle against Islamic extremists – is expected to be the next majority-Muslim African state to reestablish ties with Jerusalem, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

Guinea and Israel announced the reestablishment of ties on Wednesday, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – who visited four East African countries earlier this month – said that another African country would soon follow suit.

...But while African countries seem to be warming up to Israel, Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki announced this week that the PA and Sudan were coordinating to “restrain Israeli movements” in Africa.Foreign Ministry Director-General Dore Gold (left) meets with the president of Chad,
Idriss Déby (right), in the presidential palace in the city of Fada, July 14, 2016.
(Courtesy Foreign Ministry) Credit: Times of Israel
Diplomacy between Israel and Africa should not come as a surprise. Back in 1959, Golda Meir described the common interests behind her push as foreign minister for improved ties with Africa as stemming from "the drive toward universal self-determination and international justice which lies at the heart of my socialist Zionist values...we share with the African peoples a memory of centuries-long suffering" [Yehuda Avner, The Prime Ministers, p.104-105]

Today, the African countries who seek better ties with Israel have more pragmatic interests in common with Israel:
  • African countries want to benefit from Israel's expertise on how to fight radical Islamist terrorism, especially tapping into counter-terrorist training and accessing Israel's intelligence and technology.

  • Israel's established security ties with Egypt and Jordan, along with the improving relations with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, means African countries no longer have to fear Arab pressure against developing ties with Israel.
Meanwhile, Reuters reports that Japan, Israel upgrade relations as Arab oil influence wanes, though Japan is also interested in Israeli technology.

Whether Europe with take a hint from Africa and Japan and dial down their antagonism towards Israel may be another story.

The bottom line is that the way Israel is perceived by its neighbors is beginning to change. Even in the best of times, Arab countries that claimed to support the Palestinian Arabs failed to follow up on the millions they pledged to the the Palestinian Authority. This new development of improving relations between Israel and put the lie to the claim that Israel is isolated. It serves as a counter to Abbas' recent successes in the UN and Europe towards recognition of a Palestinian state while avoiding his obligations to negotiate with Israel as laid out in the Oslo Accords.

Now with Russia pushing the idea of direct talks between Abbas and Netanyahu it is no wonder Abbas is feeling cranky

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and and and .
Categories: Middle East

Why Is It The New State Anti-BDS Laws Don't Violate The First Amendment Right of Free Speech?

Daled Amos - Tue, 06/09/2016 - 15:02
The BDS Movement has demonstrate over and again its dedication to free speech -- its own free speech -- to the extent of protesting against pro-Israel speakers and events, with the goal of hindering or preventing those speakers and events.

And depriving them of their free speech.

For example, here is a video of anti-Israel members of the Palestine Solidarity Committee at the University of Texas at Austin last November during an event held by the Israeli Studies Department:






Sometimes, instead of waiting for the invited speakers to arrive, these BDS groups bully their way to have the speakers uninvited.

Legal Insurrection recently had a piece about an Israeli filmmaker disinvited at Syracuse U: “BDS faction on campus will make matters very unpleasant”, when Israeli filmmaker Shimon Dotan was coming to Syracuse University next March to screen his film "The Settlers" -- a film that is critical of Israel.

Shimon Dotan. Credit: Legal Insurrection
Prof. M. Gail Hamner, who initially invited Dotan, wrote him a letter dis-inviting him, writing in part:
I now am embarrassed to share that my SU colleagues, on hearing about my attempt to secure your presentation, have warned me that the BDS faction on campus will make matters very unpleasant for you and for me if you come. In particular my film colleague in English who granted me affiliated faculty in the film and screen studies program and who supported my proposal to the Humanities Council for this conference told me point blank that if I have not myself seen your film and cannot myself vouch for it to the Council, I will lose credibility with a number of film and Women/Gender studies colleagues. Sadly, I have not had the chance to see your film and can only vouch for it through my friend and through published reviews. [emphasis added]Clearly, a significant reason for Hamner backing down is the pressure of the BDS group and the "unpleasantness" that group will cause.

Over the few years, about a dozen states have passed legislation banning government employed contractors from supporting boycotts against Israel -- and other states are also considering such bill as well.

Back in June, New York Governor Cuomo went a step further, signing an executive order ensuring that no state agency or authority promotes boycotts of Israel and New Jersey recently did the same.

In response, those supporting BDS are crying foul and claim that their first amendment rights to free speech are being infringed upon.

Marc A. Greendorfer addresses this issue directly, writing in the Cardozo Law Review about The Inapplicability of First Amendment Protections to BDS Movement Boycotts.

He compares the issue of anti-Israel boycotts with the case of the Longshoremen who in 1970 took the US government's partial boycott of the USSR, following its invasion of Afghanistan -- and decided on their own to expand it.

In his paper, Greendorfer concludes:
Congress and various states have made it clear that foreign boycotts of Israel cannot be tolerated. Enforcement of these laws clearly supersedes any First Amendment rights that may be claimed in connection with participation in the BDS Movement. As the Longshoremen court noted, the prohibition on boycotts does not leave individuals with no voice to express opinions about foreign affairs. However, engaging in activities like the promotion of foreign boycotts that interfere with government policy and the free functioning of commercial markets is not protected by the First Amendment.

Regulation of BDS Movement boycotts in the United States has ample precedent, with the Longshoremen case being most analogous.

Moreover, regulation of these boycotts is necessary to preserve the federal government’s exclusive power over the conduct of foreign affairs and to protect the integrity and efficient functioning of American commercial markets.There are 3 parts to his rebuttal to boycotters who claim their freedom of speech is being interfered with by this new state legislation:
  • The legislation in question addresses their actions, not their right to express their opinions
  • First Amendment rights are not protected when they are used to interfere with commercial markets
  • First Amendment rights do not entitle boycotts which impinge upon the federal government's power to conduct foreign affairs
Eugene Kontorovich, a Northwestern University Law Professor who has advised lawmakers on drafting anti-BDS bills, explains why boycotts are not an issue of free speech:
He distinguished between biased speech and activity. The new legislation “is not about the viewpoints a company holds. This is about discriminatory activity. A company can hang a banner saying ‘long live Palestine, out with Israel,’ and if it’s not actually engaging in discriminatory conduct” by boycotting Israel, then it’s fine, he said. “None of these statutes prohibit any speech by anyone,” said Kontorovich. “But when a state deems certain conduct discriminatory, even if it’s not illegal, they can say they don’t want to contract with it.”Eugene Kontorovich. Source: Twitter Page
In another article, Boycotting Israel isn’t free speech, Kontorovich goes deeper in explaining the limitations of protected free speech. He notes that:
  • The First Amendment protects speech, not conduct. Thus in Rumsfeld vs. FAIR, The Supreme Court held that the government can deny federal funding to universities that boycott military recruiters. The fact that the boycott was based on political considerations, did not automatically make it protected speech -- and the US Government could take action against the conduct.

  • In the same way, the act of boycotting Israel does not in and of itself express any political viewpoint. When a company boycotts Israel, it may be doing so for any of a number of reasons: to prevent further harassment from the BDS movement, to curry favor with Arab states or because of anti-Semitism. Without the company explaining its actions, those actions have no message -- and that is why a refusal to do business does not constitute speech.

  • In fact, bans on boycotts against Israel already exist. Federal law bans participation in certain kinds of boycotts of Israel — those sponsored by foreign countries — and no one questions the constitutionality of those bans.

  • The state anti-boycott bills do not actually criminalize or prohibit any conduct, let alone speech. The First Amendment allows states to place conditions on companies that want to do business with them. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that conditioning government money on compliance with anti-discrimination policies does not violate the First Amendment.
Not that the fact of law will have much impact on the BDS Movement. We still read about anti-Israel groups, especially on college campuses, who have no problem disrupting pro-Israel events and denying speakers their right to free speech. It is unlikely such groups will recognize the legal limitations to their efforts to boycott Israel. But in the meantime, it is long overdue for college and university administrations to take the steps necessary to protect the rights of those being bullied and harassed by anti-Israel haters.

But that is a separate topic for another time.


-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and and and .
Categories: Middle East

Debunking A Palestinian Hoax: The True Story of Waseem Shalouf

Daled Amos - Mon, 05/09/2016 - 16:40
Here is am image that made the rounds on Twitter earlier this year:

أصيب في العدوان الصهيوني
الطفل الغزاوي "وسيم (٧ سنوات).. ابتسامة "الإرادة" تتجاوز "الإعاقة" (صورة)#غزة pic.twitter.com/l6EUJyemlR— برق (@barq_news) February 28, 2016
The translation (via Google Translate) reads:
Wounded in the Zionist aggression
Child Ghazzawi "handsome (7 years) .. smile" will "exceed" disability "(picture)


This week, the image has resurfaced, this time on Google Plus:



It may very well be that the person who posted this was taken in by this hoax.

When you look in the lower right hand corner, you can see that the photo comes from The PCRF - The Palestinian Children's Relief Fund. But the story they are telling is much different form the one making the rounds.

Here is how The PCRF is describing Waseem Shalouf on Twitter:
Waseem was @PCRF_Washington's first kid from #Gaza. He'd never walked in his life and left with new legs to walk on. pic.twitter.com/5nccJoy1zL— The PCRF (@ThePCRF) August 12, 2016

It turns out that Waseem has a congenital deformity, something he was born with and actually has nothing to do with Israel. The Palestinian Children's Relief Fund is making no secret of this, and even posted about this on YouTube:



So it turns out that this really is a story with a happy ending all the way around.

Too bad that there are those who want to exploit Waseem's story to attack Israel.

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks!

Technorati Tag: and and and .
Categories: Middle East

Pages