Friday, July 27, 2012

BDS Damage Control (Part 6)

Yes, you are reading that headline correctly. The Huffington Post has finally thrown all pretense of objectivity to the winds and published the sixth article defending BDS after what has now been two weeks since the Presbyterian Church gave them the heave-ho. This is contrast to the one article arguing against BDS published before the vote was taken. Is there now any doubt that the Huffington Post is in favor of boycotting Israel until it is destroyed, just like the BDS movement wants?

So after having exhausted all the usual suspects like Code Pink, Jewish Voice for Peace and of course Robert "Flotilla" Naiman, they recruited yet another brand new anti-Israel blogger named Sam Bahour. Mr. Bahour works with the Palestine Telecommunications Company and the PLAZA Shopping Center and recently completed a full term as a Board of Trustees member at Birzeit University. He's also a refugee scraping out a living under the cruel Israeli occupation and lives on the dole of UNRWA...I assume.


So anyway this article by Mr. Bahour is about why you should boycott Israel, because no one on the Huffington Post has ever heard of such an idea. And in fact Mr. Bahour thinks that you should not only boycott Israel, you should also not give him and his people any money either even if that means someone other than him is forced into poverty because of it. Yes, really. We also get some of his life story:
"Soon after the Palestinians and Israelis signed their first-ever agreement, the Oslo Accords, in 1993, I relocated with my family from the comfort zone of Youngstown, Ohio, my hometown, to the birthplace of my father in Al-Bireh, a Palestinian city 10 miles north of Jerusalem in the occupied West Bank."
Personally I thought it was a little strange that he would subject himself to the "slow genocide" and move to the "war zone" that is the West Bank but hey, I'm not going to tell him how to live his life.
"Before departing to the Holy Land, I read the Oslo Accords carefully, very carefully. I walked into the Middle East's powder keg knowing very well that the five-year "interim" agreement that the parties had signed on the White House lawn did not end Israel's prolonged military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip."
Yeah, maybe you should have read the PLO Charter and watched some Arab television as well. It's not like Arafat wasn't radicalizing his people for years before the Second Intifada started or anything. Oops.

Anyway rather than comment on what actually happened and all the fighting that resulted from it, he instead returns to the classic argument of "blame Israel for everything." That's right, he's going to simply skip over the intervening twenty years as if they never happened.
"Over the years, not only has Israel prohibited the emergence of a new Palestinian economy -- it structurally and systematically has made certain that even the buds of such a productive economy would never see the light of day."
Yes of course, the evil Israelis who can be blamed for everything. In reality, no one has done more for the Palestinian economy than Israel. It isn't something that polemicists like Mr. Bahour want us to hear, but there are numerous examples. But who would expect an advocate of BDS to actually tell the truth? Having blamed Israel for the fact that the PA's economy is not sustainable, we finally get to the heat of the matter that is the Presbyterian Church. And this is where Mr. Bahour explains why you shouldn't help the Palestinians, even after he just told us that their economy is suffering:
"What troubles me is that during the debate, the Israel lobby's tactic of "positive investment" was heavily pushed. Through extreme pressure on the church's General Assembly commissioners, a case was successfully made to "invest in Palestine" rather than to divest from American companies profiting from the violent Israeli military occupation of Palestinians. Those pushing "positive investment" and those voting for it seem unaware that for six years the Presbyterians have backed investment. The reality is that they have not been able to find safe investments since they're jeopardized by heavy-handed Israeli enforcement of the occupation which severely threatens profit-making."
Uh huh. Sure. How very convenient that "positive investment" just happens to not work, and even more conveniently, you can also blame "the occupation" for it as well. He declares that it's not enough to help the Palestinians you also have to "hold Israel accountable." I guess the Palestinians don't need to be help accountable for anything that they do, including refusing to make peace.
"In a perfected Orwellian move, pro-Israeli lobbyists publicly promote investment in Palestine, but simultaneously turn a blind eye to the systematic Israeli polices strangling the Palestinian economy. Investment in Palestine -- without divestment from the Israeli occupation -- only continues to underwrite the status quo of military occupation. For investment to be successful, occupation must be dismantled and control passed to Palestinians."
Unfortunately you still have yet to prove what "policies" are "strangling" the Palestinian economy. Finger pointing isn't proof and whining isn't evidence, not even on the Huffington Post. And of course, there's one way to dismantle the occupation. Are you ready to hear it?


I guess that isn't considered "pro-Palestinian" point of view though.

1 comment:

  1. If you want to get a sense of what kind of fantasist chickenhawk genocide-masturbating cheerleader this loser truly is, read this piece from him in 2001:
    http://www.mediamonitors.net/sambahour2.html.
    And this is the kind of person often referred to as "moderate". Enough said.

    ReplyDelete

Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.