"Britannia declares war on Judea" Britse journalisten eisen boycot Israel!!

[bosstraat5]

Artikel uit de International Herald Tribune

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/16/news/boycott.php

LONDON: Britain's biggest journalists' union, The National Union of Journalists, has criticized Israel's "military adventures" and has voted narrowly in favor of a boycott of Israeli goods. The vote followed calls by some British academics last year to ostracize their Israeli counterparts.
At the annual delegates meeting of the journalists' union last Friday, a vote calling for "a boycott of Israeli goods similar to those boycotts in the struggles against apartheid in South Africa" was approved 66 to 54.
The delegates also urged Britain and the United Nations to impose sanctions on Israel.
The union has about 40,000 members, represented at the annual meeting by about 150 delegates from more than 60 branches.
The ballot did not, however, make calls for a boycott of contacts with Israeli journalists similar to previous academic efforts to ostracize Israeli university teachers.
The call for a boycott was initially part of a broader condemnation of what the union called Israel's "slaughter of civilians" in Gaza and "savage pre-planned attack" last year on Lebanon, but the boycott was voted on separately. The condemnation of Israeli military action in Gaza and Lebanon was approved by a wider margin.
In the debate leading to the vote, some delegates argued that a call for a boycott would not help British journalists do their job in Israel. Others argued that it was not the job of a journalists' union to get so involved in such issues.
The timing of the ballot was particularly delicate because a BBC journalist, Alan Johnston, has been held for more than a month in Gaza, making the boycott call seem one-sided. A Palestinian group claimed Sunday to have killed Johnston but the BBC said it was treating the report as a rumor.
"We had a whole separate section of the conference" devoted to Johnston's plight, said Jeremy Dear, the union's general secretary.
According to the union's Web site, www.nuj.org.uk, the delegates voted unanimously to "keep up the urgent global campaign for Alan's release" and criticized the Palestinian authorities for failing "to carry out their promises to do all they can to free Alan."
Dear said there had been "some feedback," primarily from unidentified e-mail correspondents in the United States, saying Johnston "should be put in a concentration camp" or tried for hate crimes.
He said those who supported a boycott had argued that while the union represented journalists, it still had a duty to uphold things "that are in our constitution" concerning human rights.
On the union's conference blog, however, a critic of the vote, identified as Olivia Lang, said, "It is not going to make life easier for journalists anywhere in the world" to be seen to be taking sides. "We need to strive to maintain our objectivity when reporting," she wrote.
The vote stirred little immediate comment in Britain, however. Jonathan Freedland, a columnist for The Guardian and The Evening Standard, who said he is a member of the National Union of Journalists, took issue in a telephone interview with the union's decision, saying it made no distinction between Israel itself and Israeli settlements in occupied territories. "This punishes Israel proper along with settlers as if the two were the same," he said.
Moreover, he said, "as a tactic, it strikes a raw nerve in the Jewish psyche.""You won't win over the Jewish diaspora" with such boycott calls, he said. Last year, the largest British association of university teachers voted to encourage individual academics in Britain to sever professional contact with their counterparts in Israel. That vote echoed an appeal one year earlier by a smaller association, which first demanded a boycott of two Israeli universities and then withdrew the call under pressure from some of its members. The two associations later merged and the policy lapsed, said Trevor Phillips, a spokesman for the combined association. It will be discussed again next month, he said.The New York Times

***



www.iamthewitness.com

[john bell hood]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door bosstraat5

Artikel uit de International Herald Tribune

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/16/news/boycott.php

LONDON: Britain's biggest journalists' union, The National Union of Journalists, has criticized Israel's "military adventures" and has voted narrowly in favor of a boycott of Israeli goods. The vote followed calls by some British academics last year to ostracize their Israeli counterparts.
At the annual delegates meeting of the journalists' union last Friday, a vote calling for "a boycott of Israeli goods similar to those boycotts in the struggles against apartheid in South Africa" was approved 66 to 54.
The delegates also urged Britain and the United Nations to impose sanctions on Israel.
The union has about 40,000 members, represented at the annual meeting by about 150 delegates from more than 60 branches.
The ballot did not, however, make calls for a boycott of contacts with Israeli journalists similar to previous academic efforts to ostracize Israeli university teachers.
The call for a boycott was initially part of a broader condemnation of what the union called Israel's "slaughter of civilians" in Gaza and "savage pre-planned attack" last year on Lebanon, but the boycott was voted on separately. The condemnation of Israeli military action in Gaza and Lebanon was approved by a wider margin.
In the debate leading to the vote, some delegates argued that a call for a boycott would not help British journalists do their job in Israel. Others argued that it was not the job of a journalists' union to get so involved in such issues.
The timing of the ballot was particularly delicate because a BBC journalist, Alan Johnston, has been held for more than a month in Gaza, making the boycott call seem one-sided. A Palestinian group claimed Sunday to have killed Johnston but the BBC said it was treating the report as a rumor.
"We had a whole separate section of the conference" devoted to Johnston's plight, said Jeremy Dear, the union's general secretary.
According to the union's Web site, www.nuj.org.uk, the delegates voted unanimously to "keep up the urgent global campaign for Alan's release" and criticized the Palestinian authorities for failing "to carry out their promises to do all they can to free Alan."
Dear said there had been "some feedback," primarily from unidentified e-mail correspondents in the United States, saying Johnston "should be put in a concentration camp" or tried for hate crimes.
He said those who supported a boycott had argued that while the union represented journalists, it still had a duty to uphold things "that are in our constitution" concerning human rights.
On the union's conference blog, however, a critic of the vote, identified as Olivia Lang, said, "It is not going to make life easier for journalists anywhere in the world" to be seen to be taking sides. "We need to strive to maintain our objectivity when reporting," she wrote.
The vote stirred little immediate comment in Britain, however. Jonathan Freedland, a columnist for The Guardian and The Evening Standard, who said he is a member of the National Union of Journalists, took issue in a telephone interview with the union's decision, saying it made no distinction between Israel itself and Israeli settlements in occupied territories. "This punishes Israel proper along with settlers as if the two were the same," he said.
Moreover, he said, "as a tactic, it strikes a raw nerve in the Jewish psyche.""You won't win over the Jewish diaspora" with such boycott calls, he said. Last year, the largest British association of university teachers voted to encourage individual academics in Britain to sever professional contact with their counterparts in Israel. That vote echoed an appeal one year earlier by a smaller association, which first demanded a boycott of two Israeli universities and then withdrew the call under pressure from some of its members. The two associations later merged and the policy lapsed, said Trevor Phillips, a spokesman for the combined association. It will be discussed again next month, he said.The New York Times

***



www.iamthewitness.com

Zeer eenzijdige kijk op de wereld.Waarom geen andere staten boycotten?Israël zal er zijn slaap niet over verliezen.

[ministe van agitatie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door john bell hood

Waarom geen andere staten boycotten?

Er zijn geen andere koloniale staten meer.

[john bell hood]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door ministe van agitatie

Er zijn geen andere koloniale staten meer.

Wat een grap.Bekijk de wereld eens goed.

[Brandaan]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door ministe van agitatie

Er zijn geen andere koloniale staten meer.

Rusland, China, Indonesie, Sudan. Allemaal landen waar de belangrijkste etnische groep de gebieden van minderheidsgroepen koloniseert.

[Sinistra]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door bosstraat5

Artikel uit de International Herald Tribune

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/16/news/boycott.php

Die Hoernalisten zijn ongetwijfeld zo gefascineerd door Mein Kampf dat ze ook de daad bij het woord voegen. Ach Europeanen en Jodenhaat, ze zullen het nooit leren...

[bosstraat5]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

JPost.com » Education » Article
May. 25, 2007 12:47 | Updated May. 25, 2007 15:15


Nobel laureate stands up to boycott call



Boycotting Israel indicates a moral blindness for which it is hard to find any explanation other than anti-Semitism, Nobel laureate Prof. Steven Weinberg wrote in a letter explaining his reason for withdrawing from a July physics conference at London's Imperial College, the Guardian reported.



Weinberg said he perceived "a widespread anti-Israel and anti-Semitic current in British opinion."

Weinberg's announcement, which he said was triggered by a call from the National Union of Journalists to boycott Israeli products,comes a few days ahead of a planned vote on two separate motions for academic boycott by the University and College Union, the largest professional association for lecturers and researchers in British higher education.

# Amnesty's moral blindness

This was not the first time Weinberg has taken a strong stance against moves to boycott Israel. In 2005, the UK Association of University Teachers and Natfhe, two British lecturers' unions, passed a boycott motion, prompting Weinberg to cancel his participation in a conference at the University of Durham.

The 2005 motion was later reversed following a storm of international protest.

Last week, a delegation of senior Israeli academics concluded meetings with their British counterparts and with parliamentarians and journalists in an effort to persuade academics and members of the UCU to reject the boycott proposal.

The Israelis' trip was organized by the Fair Play Campaign Group (FPCG,) part of the Board of Deputies of British Jews' campaign to combat initiatives to boycott Israel, together with the International Advisory Board for Academic Freedom (IAB,) set up by Bar-Ilan University in 2005 to respond to calls for boycotts of Israeli academics.

[longhorn]

En eisen ze ook een boycott van Palestijnse produkten gezien er 1 van hun collega's toch al een tijdje ontvoerd is en er door de Abbas-Hamas-regering blijkbaar weinig aan gedaan wordt?

[garfield]

de journalisten zijn weliswaar wel niet te vinden als het gaat over de Westelijke Sahara.

[jh24]

Dit gaat wel erg ver. Waar zijn die journalisten mee bezig? Het is hun taak om de waarheid aan het licht te brengen waar ook te wereld. Niet om op te roepen tot een boycot. Journalisten moeten onpartijdig zijn en blijven ongeacht welke situatie dan ook. Zij begeven zich nu op een terrein wat niet hun vakgebied is.

[Sinistra]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door bosstraat5

Artikel uit de International Herald Tribune

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/16/news/boycott.php

LONDON: Britain's biggest journalists' union, The National Union of Journalists, has criticized Israel's "military adventures" and has voted narrowly in favor of a boycott of Israeli goods. The vote followed calls by some British academics last year to ostracize their Israeli counterparts.
At the annual delegates meeting of the journalists' union last Friday, a vote calling for "a boycott of Israeli goods similar to those boycotts in the struggles against apartheid in South Africa" was approved 66 to 54.
The delegates also urged Britain and the United Nations to impose sanctions on Israel.
The union has about 40,000 members, represented at the annual meeting by about 150 delegates from more than 60 branches.
The ballot did not, however, make calls for a boycott of contacts with Israeli journalists similar to previous academic efforts to ostracize Israeli university teachers.
The call for a boycott was initially part of a broader condemnation of what the union called Israel's "slaughter of civilians" in Gaza and "savage pre-planned attack" last year on Lebanon, but the boycott was voted on separately. The condemnation of Israeli military action in Gaza and Lebanon was approved by a wider margin.
In the debate leading to the vote, some delegates argued that a call for a boycott would not help British journalists do their job in Israel. Others argued that it was not the job of a journalists' union to get so involved in such issues.
The timing of the ballot was particularly delicate because a BBC journalist, Alan Johnston, has been held for more than a month in Gaza, making the boycott call seem one-sided. A Palestinian group claimed Sunday to have killed Johnston but the BBC said it was treating the report as a rumor.
"We had a whole separate section of the conference" devoted to Johnston's plight, said Jeremy Dear, the union's general secretary.
According to the union's Web site, www.nuj.org.uk, the delegates voted unanimously to "keep up the urgent global campaign for Alan's release" and criticized the Palestinian authorities for failing "to carry out their promises to do all they can to free Alan."
Dear said there had been "some feedback," primarily from unidentified e-mail correspondents in the United States, saying Johnston "should be put in a concentration camp" or tried for hate crimes.
He said those who supported a boycott had argued that while the union represented journalists, it still had a duty to uphold things "that are in our constitution" concerning human rights.
On the union's conference blog, however, a critic of the vote, identified as Olivia Lang, said, "It is not going to make life easier for journalists anywhere in the world" to be seen to be taking sides. "We need to strive to maintain our objectivity when reporting," she wrote.
The vote stirred little immediate comment in Britain, however. Jonathan Freedland, a columnist for The Guardian and The Evening Standard, who said he is a member of the National Union of Journalists, took issue in a telephone interview with the union's decision, saying it made no distinction between Israel itself and Israeli settlements in occupied territories. "This punishes Israel proper along with settlers as if the two were the same," he said.
Moreover, he said, "as a tactic, it strikes a raw nerve in the Jewish psyche.""You won't win over the Jewish diaspora" with such boycott calls, he said. Last year, the largest British association of university teachers voted to encourage individual academics in Britain to sever professional contact with their counterparts in Israel. That vote echoed an appeal one year earlier by a smaller association, which first demanded a boycott of two Israeli universities and then withdrew the call under pressure from some of its members. The two associations later merged and the policy lapsed, said Trevor Phillips, a spokesman for the combined association. It will be discussed again next month, he said.The New York Times

***



www.iamthewitness.com

Het is al langer geweten dat sommigen journalisten zich aangetrokken voelen tot het nazi gedachtegoed. In feite zijn de zogenaamde "antizionisten" slechts een kleine kern lawaaimakers die niet veel voorstellen maar het gevaar schuilt er in dat politici en sommigen journalisten hun antisemitisch gedachtegoed overnemen. Men zou strengere straffen moeten eisen en de repressie moeten opvoeren omdat stelletje ongeregeld nu eens voorgoed de mond te snoeren.

[alharb]

Ik heb deze boycott reeds vermeld in deze topic.

Dit toont nog maar eens aan hoe objectief de journalistiek is tegenwoordig. De main stream pers kiest openlijk partij in conflicten, dit is totaal onaanvaardbaar.

[bosstraat5]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sinistra

Het is al langer geweten dat sommigen journalisten zich aangetrokken voelen tot het nazi gedachtegoed. In feite zijn de zogenaamde "antizionisten" slechts een kleine kern lawaaimakers die niet veel voorstellen maar het gevaar schuilt er in dat politici en sommigen journalisten hun antisemitisch gedachtegoed overnemen. Men zou strengere straffen moeten eisen en de repressie moeten opvoeren omdat stelletje ongeregeld nu eens voorgoed de mond te snoeren.

Het is al langer geweten dat sommigen journalisten zich aangetrokken voelen tot het zionistisch gedachtegoed. In feite zijn de zogenaamde "zionisten" slechts een kleine kern lawaaimakers die niet veel voorstellen maar het gevaar schuilt er in dat politici en sommige forumleden hun racistisch anti-Goy gedachtegoed moeten overnemen. Men zou strengere straffen moeten eisen en de repressie moeten opvoeren omdat stelletje ongeregeld nu eens voorgoed de mond te snoeren.


“I was also taught to believe that all non-Jews are anti-Semitic by nature. And, since I didn't see very many non-Jews until 1961 when I was 28, and since young people tend to believe what they are taught, I continued to believe this after 1956, with some reservations. Upon arriving in the United States I rapidly came to the conclusion that the second point was also a big lie. Therefore, to this very day, my basic opposition to Zionism runs much deeper than a reaction to what Zionism is doing to Palestinians or to Arabs. I would have opposed Zionism even if the Jewish state had been founded on an uninhabited island emerging from nowhere in the ocean because I think that their basic premises about Jews and about the whole human race are simply incorrect.”

-Israel Shahak, relentless critic of the State of Israel, was professor of Chemistry at Hebrew University and Chairperson of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights. He emigrated to Israel after surviving the seige of the Warsaw ghetto and Nazi concentration camps.

[slegie]

Het probleem Israël is er gekomen dankzij Engeland en de VS voornamelijk.

Het zwarte schaap van WO 2 is nu de grote boze wolf geworden en dit kan niemand nog ontkennen.
Maar niemand mag kritiek hebben op Israël of de joden in het algemeen of je word direct uitgemaakt voor anti-semitist of jodenhater of neo-nazi of wat dan ook.

kijk het is vrij simpel.
De holocaust van WO 2 was erg en mag NOOIT vergeten worden maar men moet deze gebeurtenis niet uitmelken voor politieke machtspelletjes en koloniale ambities.(en niet te vergeten dat er nog dagelijks genocides worden gepleegddie nooit worden bestraft of in het nieuws komen) Israël is al lang niet meer het zwakke onschuldige schaapje in het midden-oosten. integendeel het is 1 van de directe oorzaak van het huidige moslim terrorisme.
Dus ik vind dat anti semitisme en zo meer dikke bullshit in vele gevallen.
kritiek hebben op een beleid is geen anti semitisme hé
En daar gaat het eigenlijk allemaal om. kritiek op het beleid van israël en niet kritiek op het feit van jood te zijn.
veel mensen snappen blijkbaar het verschil niet.

[Sinistra]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door bosstraat5

Het is al langer geweten dat sommigen journalisten zich aangetrokken voelen tot het zionistisch gedachtegoed. In feite zijn de zogenaamde "zionisten" slechts een kleine kern lawaaimakers die niet veel voorstellen maar het gevaar schuilt er in dat politici en sommige forumleden hun racistisch anti-Goy gedachtegoed moeten overnemen. Men zou strengere straffen moeten eisen en de repressie moeten opvoeren omdat stelletje ongeregeld nu eens voorgoed de mond te snoeren.

Bosstraat, heb je soms inspiratie gevonden bij jouw idool??

[Sinistra]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door slegie

Dus ik vind dat anti semitisme en zo meer dikke bullshit in vele gevallen.
kritiek hebben op een beleid is geen anti semitisme hé
En daar gaat het eigenlijk allemaal om. kritiek op het beleid van israël en niet kritiek op het feit van jood te zijn.
veel mensen snappen blijkbaar het verschil niet.

De meeste tegenstanders van de staat Israel behoren wel tot die strekking van mensen die het niet hoog ophebben met het Joodse volk. Anti-zionisme is gewoon een "propere term" om antisemitisme te verbergen. Zowel Antizionisten als antisemieten gebruiken dezelfde vooroordelen en haatpropaganda.

[slegie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sinistra

De meeste tegenstanders van de staat Israel behoren wel tot die strekking van mensen die het niet hoog ophebben met het Joodse volk. Anti-zionisme is gewoon een "propere term" om antisemitisme te verbergen. Zowel Antizionisten als antisemieten gebruiken dezelfde vooroordelen en haatpropaganda.

En de joden gebruiken altijd hetzelfde exuus om iemand te bestempelen als anti-semitist.
Maar mij niet gelaten zenne, israël doet maar rustig verder maar ze moeten niet verwonderd zijn als ze in een nabije toekomst weer een holocaust meemaken door het huidige criminele beleid van Israël en de VS

[willem1940NLD]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sinistra

Bosstraat, heb je soms inspiratie gevonden bij jouw idool??

Is dat op die foto bij zijn linkerhand een fietsstuur?

[willem1940NLD]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sinistra

De meeste tegenstanders van de staat Israel behoren wel tot die strekking van mensen die het niet hoog ophebben met het Joodse volk. Anti-zionisme is gewoon een "propere term" om antisemitisme te verbergen. Zowel Antizionisten als antisemieten gebruiken dezelfde vooroordelen en haatpropaganda.

Er bestaan ook antisemitelers; die hebben een hekel aan jodelen.

[bosstraat5]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sinistra

De meeste tegenstanders van de staat Israel behoren wel tot die strekking van mensen die het niet hoog ophebben met het Joodse volk. Anti-zionisme is gewoon een "propere term" om antisemitisme te verbergen. Zowel Antizionisten als antisemieten gebruiken dezelfde vooroordelen en haatpropaganda.

Members and front organizations must continually embarrass, discredit and degrade our critics....

When obstructionists become too irritating, label them as fascist or Nazi or anti-Semitic....

Constantly associate those who oppose us with those names that already have a bad smell. The association will, after enough repetition, become "fact" in the public mind.

-- Communist Party Directive of 1943 (1956 Report of the House Committee on Un-American Activities)

"I don't care what you do -- as I said, few have the guts to speak out. We would all have better understanding between each other -- Jews and gentiles -- if we spoke out more openly. Your people don't have guts. We establish your thinking -- we even place within you a 'guilt complex' making you afraid to criticize Jewry openly."