UKC

Climb Magazine January issue is encouraging climbing tourism to Israel. This is in clear breach of the international sporting boycott of Isreali apartheid. Here is my message to the editorial team I sent today.

Dave

Re:The Promised Land

I cannot belive you are running this nonsense - the 'focal point of conflict between Chritianity and Islam' what on earth is he talking about? when the conflict is about a colonial struggle between the occupiers and the occupied i.e. one of the worlds biggest army's is engaged in an illegal military occupation of a largely defenceless people and having done so for the last 60 years and not about something that was 'lost in ancient times'.

Far more serious than Stuart's wikipedia research and his unaffected simplicity however is your editorial decision to run an article that encouages climber tourism to Israel - what a gift to the Israeli Ministry of Tourism who will be only too pleased to give the impression that normal life can carry on whilst they bomb the shit out of the Palestinain people with impunity.

Dave wake up man! there is an an international Boycott, Divestment and Santion movement in progress; comparable to the anti-apartheid movement calling on the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories, stopping the settlement expansion, the right of return and just solution based on international law. The Israel/Palestine conflict will never be solved with misleading articles like these in the western media.

There is also a sporting boycott in place which if you are not aware of it here are just a few links:

https://jews4big.wordpress.com/category/football/

http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/european-footballers-again...

http://www.boycottisraelnetwork.net/?page_id=258

The Climb magazine editorial team should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

Wishing you a happier new year than this dreadful start

Simon

In reply to Simon Cardy:

If Boycott could climb he'd be better than Ondra...

In reply to Simon Cardy:

Buy the new Collins Bartholomew atlas and you'll struggle to find it.

In reply to Simon Cardy:


Damn right. I would call for a boycott of Climb magazine in response to this outrage. When the Palestinian people haven't got the opportunity or the right to get out and climb in their own country and that every day for them is a struggle not to be murdered by a brutal tyrannical occupying regime, it is a disgrace to encourage westerners to go there and enjoy themselves.

In reply to Simon Cardy:



You might help your case if were less disingenuous about the nature of the "sporting boycott" of Israel. It is something being promoted by some pressure groups. It is not, at this stage, comparable to the anti South African apartheid campaign which was sanctioned at an early stage by the UN and then by the IOC, the Commonwealth and other major international organisations and governments. To describe something as "in breach" of something being promoted by some but having little or no institutional or governmental legitimacy is misleading.

In reply to Simon Cardy:
Is it not important for people to visit a place to see for themselves what's going on?

Personally I would steer clear as it doesn't strike me as a safe place to visit and it's sport climbing anyway, yawn...

Wadi Rum over the border in Jordan is a more interesting place to climb from what I've heard. Interestingly, Israeli climbers on a BMC international meet told me that the Jordanian locals have no issues with Israeli climbers (or vice versa). If only the rest of the Middle East could get along with each other...

In reply to Simon Cardy:


If there was a clear international sporting boycott of Israel this might be the case, but what boycott? Wikipedia can only list a number of cases of individual athletes (mainly from Muslim majority countries) refusing to compete against Israelis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycotts_of_Israel_in_sports but how else is Israel boycotted in sport? Genuinely interested because I haven't heard of examples. Your links are calls for a boycott but I don't think FIFA for example, or the IOC, have taken any steps towards boycotting Israel.


The crusades I presumed.


They spell his name "Stewart" in the article, but I don't know him so have no idea whether his simplicity is affected or not - but did you read the article beyond the first paragraph? The bits about the wall cutting Palestinians off from their farm lands? Or the illegal settlements in West Bank dumping their sewage through the security barriers into the West Bank? Perhaps the author didn't know anything about Middle East politics before going on the trip but by going and seeing they seem to have got a pretty fair view of realities of land seizures, the separation barrier and various other injustices Palestinians face due to the occupation.

Climbing magazines and websites "promote" tourism to all sorts of countries with dubious human rights records - I remember reading an article on recently developed climbing in Syria about five years ago now! China, Russia, various Gulf monarchies etc etc D'ya reckon there should be no articles on countries that don't have a human rights record equal to or better than ours?

In reply to TobyA:


And in light of America's (and most likely our) actions with their enhanced interrogations should the trips out to Yosemite be cancelled?

In reply to fire_munki:

The Norwegians are pretty nice - and I'd happily spend the rest of my life taking holidays there so I'm covered! But seriously - its an interesting point. Pro-Israel-types often argue the country is singled out for criticism that other countries don't face. Of course there are counter arguments to that and just because - for instance - Turkey has a horrendous human rights record with regard to its Kurdish citizens - it doesn't mean that Israel isn't illegally occupying the West Bank. But in this case, I think its an interesting question; why does an article on Israel get a letter to the editor; while every month in Climb in the Mountain Info section there are reports about climbers visiting Tibet where the feelings of most Tibetans about the Chinese presence is well known. I think generally climbers have a pretty poor history of not letting the politics of the countries they want to climb in bother them unduly!

In reply to TobyA:

Come on Toby, you know the Norwegians are filthy warmongers too - and pretty jingoistic to boot.
http://www.newsinenglish.no/2011/04/20/norway-bombing-the-most/

I think Adam Ondra should be ashamed of climbing in this terrorist state.

In reply to Simon Cardy:


Well as special concession to you, your compulsory climbing holiday to Israel is now cancelled - we are sending you to Syria instead. Just carry 10 copies of the Guardian and 5 of Socialist Worker Today to let the ISIS fighters know how pure and high-minded you are and you will be fine. There is only a very slight risk that their idea of morality and obvious goodness will differ somewhat from yours, after all, it is obvious that you are just RIGHT!


Wishing you a return from planet self-admiring pompous cant to the muddy realities of planet Earth with its intractable conflicts, shades of grey and ancient clashes of interests where neither side has a monopoly on virtue or rightness. Or possibly not, seeing as no-one will be greatly inconvenienced if you stay there.

In reply to Misha:

No, much better to see things in simple terms of "black hats, white hats", primary colours are always SO much more dramatic and comfortable for the simple minded.


Presumably a lot safer than anywhere else in that area (with the possible exception of Jordan as you say, but who knows how long that can survive?).

In reply to Simon4:

Yeah right, the Guardian and the Socialist Worker are both SWP fronts. Coming out with nonsense like this you sound as mad as the trots instigating this bogus boycott.

In reply to TobyA:

I think there are a number of reasons:

1) As a functioning democracy Israel is regarded is more likely to be influenced by public opprobrium and pressure than authoritarian states like China.

2) Israel's crimes can be easily classified as "racist" and that, currently, is considered much worse than other nasty crimes. Of course, so could Turkey's actions against the kurds, but it is not the basis on which the Turkish state was established.

3) Israel is supported by the Great Satan and thus becomes a sort of whipping boy for the anti capitalist, anti (Western) " imperialist left.

In reply to Simon Cardy:

Very well said Simon. The issue is not whether there is an established sporting boycott, which are always partial anyhow, but that there ought to be one (and a much wider boycott than just sport and tourism).

In reply to Simon Cardy:

So your response to a country that is accused of oppressing people is to ......... Oppress the Israeli people ?? Boycotting sport will only punish Israeli people not the government! The handouts they receive from the US will dwarf any potential revenue made from sports! Your plan to punish the Israeli government needs more work!!

In reply to TobyA:


So Israel is just a place with a "dubious human rights record", and that's it? Really Toby you get worse and worse. Maybe you should declare your own personal interests on this subject for new readers who are not used to your long term pro-Israeli propaganda record on UKC?

As for Climb magazine I agree with the OP they should be ashamed of themselves for supporting in even the slightest way such a revolting regime.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


I wondered how long you'd take to arrive Brucey! Happy New Year. I wasn't sure if you read Rocktalk as well Off-belay. Have you actually read the article in Climb?

Oh, and my own "personal interests" - errr... I write articles for Climb magazine? So I guess I'm sympathetic to the fact that Dave and Ian are editors of climbing magazine, not a journal on mid-East politics. The rest, as ever, is your fevered imagination old bean!

In reply to TobyA:

So your writing articles for Climbing Magazine explains you years old devotion to supporting Israel? Some might believe you I suppose.

In reply to TobyA:

Think this is dead on re: climbers moral compasses suddenly going missing when they decide they want to climb a particular mountain or go on holiday somewhere sunny!

I'd also fully agree with the Turkey human rights point, add in the Armenian genocide of 1915 and it doesn't make for pretty reading. I don't read Climb, but it does amaze me that there aren't letters to the editor about Tibet pieces.

The key thing about Israel for me is that the rest of the world blindly ignores its human rights abuses and racist policies. This isn't the case with Turkey and China, to pick two out of thin air. The trouble is Israel presents itself as 'the only democracy in the Middle East' and when a country elevates itself above all others in its region, to me it is natural that it comes under scrutiny as a result. Problem is democracies shouldn't be racist at the level of government, hence the protest.

The point about the boycott is really interesting though, because the Palestine movement has really picked up after Gaza over the summer. Although the Palestine movement isn't close to anti-apartheid yet, it does seem to have become more visible to me.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

So you didn't answer - have you actually read the article Bruce? Or are you condemning the magazine based on what you presume it says?

In reply to TobyA:


As usual you pick up on an irrelevant point and try to pretend it's important... do you really imagine I'm the sort of person who reads a climbing magazine? I've been past that for decades but what is important here is any magazine which encourages people to visit or have anything to do with such a disgusting regime as Israel is to be condemned, just as when you tried to encourage me to visit Israel you deserved condemning. It probably won't change much on the individual level just as my boycott of Israel for the past 40 or more years hasn't, individually, but individuals can add up as they did for South Africa.

More important is the cowardly way Britain abstained in the recent Security Council vote whereas other European countries didn't, one more positive vote would have swung the balance and forced the Obama to use his veto... no big deal you may say but once again it shows the world where people really stand and at a time where the world is growing more receptive to the Palestinian causes every day. Every little bit adds up, your little bit in favour of the disgusting racist state that is Israel and my little bit against. Everyone at least is showing where they stand.

In reply to Simon Cardy:

It's a matter I'm personally quite conflicted about. I was also left feeling deeply uneasy about the article and the whole concept of climbing there. Not going to be top of my list of venues in the current circumstances.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Well you would realise if you had actually read it that a number of the crags written about are actually in the West Bank (perhaps more accurately the article should be called Climbing in Israel AND Palestine), they just accessed them from Israel or via the roads to the illegal settlements in the West Bank. The author also writes about many of the injustices that are apparent when you actually go there, meet Palestinians and see the realities of the wall. But never mind, why bother reading something before condemning and dismissing it.

In reply to TobyA:

As Toby says the article is pretty clear that there are injustices. I also agree that given this discussion is about a specific article in a climbing magazine, it would be helpful if people actually read this article instead of making generalised comments.

By the way, I am not condoning Israel's actions in any way. Nor am I condoning the actions of Hamas and their like. I just think people should try to live together peacefully and both sides should make concessions to achieve that, naïve as that may sound. They managed to do it in Northern Ireland - there are still tensions but the violence has largely ended. May be one day we will see it in the Middle East...

Is it helpful to boycott Israel by not running articles about it and discouraging people from visiting the place? Or is it more helpful to tell people about what there is out there (both the climbing and the injustices) and then some people might actually go there and make up their own mind for themselves? I think the latter. The same applies to places like Nepal.

If you're going to boycott countries, why stop with Israel? Why not boycott every country with a shaky human rights record, authoritarian regime or corrupt government? Plus the US, given that they're the cause of half of all evils. You will find yourself restricted to Europe (outside the former USSR, well the Baltic states are ok but there's no climbing there) and a handful of other countries round the world. Canada would be ok I guess but most of South America, Africa and Asia would be out. Australia and New Zealand, don't know, they really mistreated the native population in the past. Where do you draw the line?

In reply to lardy nick: If you want to boycott Israel totally then throw your PC and your mobile away - they both rely on technology developed in Israel. Also there are various medical advances that you might want to ignore if you become ill in various ways.

Boycotts are not the answer, look at the stupid boycott of Sodastream, one of the most enlightened employers in the area who integrated Israeli and Palestinian workers, treated them equally etc.

The only eventual answer that will lead to peace is dialogue between the affected parties. Boycotts will not help that.

In reply to Bruce Hooker: Can you actually say "Israel" without using the adjectives "disgusting" and "racist", it really is quite tiresome and shows how biased you are and unable to look at all sides of the situation out there and its history.

In reply to Misha:

How can you live peacefully with people that have murdered your ancestors, still are murdering your countrymen and have stolen your land? Really what you say is beyond naive... it is aiding and abetting mass murder.

In reply to Michael Hood:


Clearly many people, like yourself, are totally unaware of the reality of Palestine and the bit which is called Israel so it is important to keep on reminding them. It may seem futile to you because you don't want to see this reality. You may find it "tiresome" but what about the Palestinian people, don't you think they find it a little more than tiresome to be occupied by outsiders, mistreated and murdered constantly? Open your eyes a little.

In reply to Michael Hood:
I think you're misunderstanding the role boycotts have played in numerous struggles against oppression, and what they are. Would you have supported the struggle against apartheid in S Africa, or just said "Oh they need to get along with each other."

There is also a fundamental and massive difference between the ridiculous suggestion of throwing away computers or refusing medical treatment that has been tangentially connected to Israel in the past, and refusing to use or endorse products that they see the benefits to now financially, politically, or culturally.

In reply to JayPee630:



Do you think that the Israeli economy is based on tourism and oranges?

In reply to Mike Highbury:
No, and I never said it was. There are numerous ways boycotts can be enacted, and some of the most powerful effects are not directly financial, but cultural in drawing attention to the issue. Did the boycott of South African rugby teams actually cost the SA regime anything? No, probably not. But the PR issue involved in the boycotts did massively.

In reply to JayPee630:


Ok, I understand, I'm allowed to use my iPad for work but not to watch Homeland.

In reply to Mike Highbury:
Thanks, that was a useful, well thought through and mature contribution to a debate concerning persecution and death. Maybe you should go and read something about this issue?

In reply to JayPee630:


Gosh, you're quite fragile, aren't you?

Or maybe your position is full of poorly thought through contradictions, are you really a young Peter Hain? It wasn't all not playing Sun City; for very good reasons that boycott collapsed in on itself a very long time before the politics of white South Africa changed.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Priceless, Bruce. Utterly priceless. I laughed so hard, I think a bit of wee came out. So, just to be clear, your contributions to this are - as always - going to be:

1. A world view you copied from your Big Bumper Book of World Politics for Pre-teens
2. Ham-fisted misrepresentation of other people's *actual* statements, to make them simple enough for you to (still fail to) rebut
3. The asinine insistence that only *you* understand the topic at hand, despite being, as someone put it, 'as thick as mince'.

Do carry on, it's hilarious to watch.

Martin
(apparent agent of the Moroccan regime)

In reply to Simon Cardy:

Great job Simon.

Many years ago the UK climbing mag On The Edge ran the first part of a two part article promoting climbing in South Africa. This was at a time South Africa had a full apartheid government and the ANC were calling for an international tourism boycott. I wrote to On The Edge to raise the issue and complain about the article. Their response to my letter was to get quotes from South African climbers and other groups who wanted people to travel there despite the boycott published in the magazine. I think they were trying to save face, justify what they'd done. No one wants to look stupid or feel like they've done something wrong. Anyway needless to say my position was very well supported by much of the climbing community and On The Edge never published the second part of the article on South Africa.

Hopefully the same will happen again with this issue, though the Israeli propaganda machine runs far deeper and is much more extensive than South Africa's ever was. Many people are, at best confused about the situation there. Recently a Guardian journalist (Nafeez Ahmed) lost his job after writing a critical piece about Israel on his Guardian blog. Apparently it was one of the most popular blog posts on the Guardian site. So if that's what happens at The Guardian everywhere else is likely to be far worse. You may not get as much support as I did about South Africa, even though the situation there is at least as bad as Apartheid South Africa.

All the best and thanks for raising the issue. I'm more than a little surprised that no one at Climb magazine was aware of tourism boycott.

In reply to Bruce Hooker: Do you always preface Hamas with "The murderous, terrorist organisation" because that prefix is just as apposite. If you don't then surely you are being biased.

As for the situation there, there are 3 "there"s:
1. Gaza
2. The West Bank
3. Israel as per pre 67 borders.
and the situation is very different in each of these. To which one these do your "arguments" apply.

Also, have you been there (any of the 3)? Have you seen the reality? If you're relying on what is in the media then a lot of your views will be wrong.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Well said though to be fair its probably more down to ignorance more than anything else. As culpable, if not more so, is the author of piece who really should have known better IMO.

In reply to JayPee630: Most of the actions of the Israeli government have very little to do with world opinion. There may be a little influence from the US but not much. Their actions are much more to do with local (i.e. Israeli voters) opinion, and the wide range of opinions and support in the Israeli public is probably one of the reasons that no real progress has been made towards peace.

For example: settlements in the West Bank - this is kept going to placate the right, but not too fast/much to keep the left on board.

What you or I or supposed international law (very dubious as there is no agreed jurisdiction or courts and no actual case that has been tried) believes is totally incidental in terms of Israeli policy. I doubt any kind of boycott would change that.

In reply to stp: But pieces that are about other places with appalling human rights records are ok? A bit of hypocrisy I think.

I think I should e-mail Alan and complain about the Dawn Wall coverage, USA has an appalling HR record, still executes people, you're way more likely to get the death penalty if you're black and they're one of the few counties that execute minors. Revolting regime.

In reply to stp: Recently a Guardian journalist (Nafeez Ahmed) lost his job after writing a critical piece about Israel on his Guardian blog.

This is misinformed, I don't know whether from ignorance or whether you were being deliberately obtuse - see below that I've just cut from the Guardian's website.

A Guardian News & Media spokesperson said: “Nafeez Ahmed is a freelance journalist who self-published blog posts on our environment blogging network for just over a year as a regular contributor. He has never been on the staff of the Guardian. His Guardian blog - Earth Insight - was about the link between the environment and geopolitics, but we took the decision to end the blog when a number of his posts on a range of subjects strayed too far from this brief. For the record, Jonathan Freedland played absolutely no part in this decision, as he has already confirmed.

“Any suggestion of censorship is unfounded: all of Nafeez Ahmed’s blog posts remain on our website to this day. He is welcome to continue to pitch story ideas to us in the normal way."

In reply to stp:


What tourism boycott? I'm sure there are plenty of people who choose not to go to Israel for a holiday because of political beliefs but I've not heard of any organised attempts at boycotting it for tourism, unlike - say - the much argued about and controversial academic boycott. Considering most people going to Palestine, including my friends who have volunteered for the international solidarity observers mission, travel through Israel it seems it would be damaging for Palestinian tourism economy too. Can you even get into the West Bank from Jordan? I had a feeling tourists going that way had to travel on the closed (to most Palestinians) roads directly through to Jerusalem.

In reply to Michael Hood:


Then why do they spend so much telling the world how great they are and what a wonderful place Israel is?

Look at their sponsorship of American politicians and then tell me they don't care about what the world thinks of them.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Whilst that's true you're missing the point. The people of the region are calling out for people to boycott tourism there. There is nothing similar, no campaign, no boycott in the US.

It's not about human rights directly. It's about respecting and supporting the victims of these abuses by doing what they ask.

In reply to Michael Hood:


Well you seem to assuming this editorial defence of their treatment of Mr Ahmed is the truth, the whole truth and noting but the truth. My assumption would be: well of course they would say that wouldn't they.

In reply to stp: You may well be right. I would think what the G has put is the truth but whether it's the whole truth is of course not possible to determine from what they say - only one side of the story. I've given my source - what's yours?

In reply to Michael Hood:

Palestine is an entity, more or less occupied by a force of outside invaders. The Palestinian people are an entity, some still living in Palestine in pretty atrocious conditions, many in exile, again often in bad conditions. There will only be a solution when the whole of Palestine is returned to it's people and all given the right to return. Most probably most of the invaders will leave, that's something for the Palestinian people alone to decide when they have regained their country, all of it, and recovered their political power. It's quite simple really.

In reply to krikoman:


British and French politicians too... so many are happy to jump on the gravy train... Something else that is disgusting.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Might be nice if people minded their own bloody business.
The Romans were not very nice to the ancestors of some of us , not were the Normans.
I am assuming that France and Italy are also boycotted.
The white American's were a touch unkind to the natives as well.
Like I said, stop interfering and using a position of influence to do your dirty work for you.

In reply to mattsccm:

Congratulations for the most incoherent and nonsensical comment on it all so far.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Perhaps some/most politicians are jumping on the gravy train, but perhaps they have a different, more realistic world view than Bruce and think it actually is in their country's best interest to support a middle eastern democracy.

In reply to atrendall & mattsccm :


But it's only a democracy if you are Jewish, which means it's no democracy at all. Like all colonies the colonials have no right to be there... You'll have to leave one day, why not do it now and reduce the bloodshed?

In reply to Bruce Hooker: Where do you get your rubbish from.

There's never been a Palestinian state - unless you count Jordan. A large area of the middle east (including what is now Israel) has only been called Palestine (or Palestinia) in Roman and British Mandate times.

So what is this Palestine entity that you speak of as if it's fact? And who exactly are the Palestinian people you call an entity?

As far as I can work out, what is now referred to as the Palestinian people, are the Arabs who either used to live in Israel proper (up to 1948 and now don't) or now live in the West Bank or Gaza and all their descendants. Until the 1st world war allies removed the Ottoman Empire in the early 1900s they had no more nationality than Syrians, Iraqis etc. They were (merely) the Arabs who happened to live in that area.

So the current Palestinian people is basically a recent political entity rather than a nationality. So when you say things like "recovered their political power" it is meaningless because there never was any Palestinian political power.

Please note that I'm not saying that the Palestinian people (recent political entity) shouldn't have a right of self-determination, and there's no doubt that a lot of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank are basically deprived of many things that we would consider atrocious, etc.

However you really should get your history correct, take the bile out of your invective and present rational arguments rather than incorrect drivel.

In reply to Bruce Hooker: But it's only a democracy if you are Jewish,

Where do you get this rubbish? All the citizens of Israel (pre 1967 borders + golan heights) including Muslim Arabs and Christians have the vote in Israel. There are Arab MKs and a couple of years ago the acting president of Israel was a Druze Arab. There are also Arabs in the Judiciary.

If you're talking about the Israeli control of the West Bank, then that's a totally different subject.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Yes but every time the Palestinian freedom fighters / terrorists (depending on perspective) kill a few too many Israelis in retaliation it just kicks off again big time, like it did last summer. Hamas etc know perfectly well that this would happen and that it would just lead to more innocent Palestinian civilians being killed but they don't care about their own people. They just want to wage war against the Israelis - a war they will never win. So the cycle goes on... Violence is not the answer - on both sides.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


You know that's not true, because you know that there are Arab Israelis as MPs in the Knesset and all Israeli citizens get to vote regardless of their religion. Being a democracy does not stop states from doing things wrong to other states/peoples around them, it's a description of a political system not really a normative case. This is clearly the case with the Israeli which is both a democracy within its own borders and to its own citizens, and an occupying power to the Palestinians.

In reply to Misha:

>it just kicks off again big time

Truly extraordinary language here. What's this 'it' you refer to?

Some kind of automatic, zombie air force or something?

>like it did last summer.

Terrifying. Reduced to a re-run of Chubby Checker.

'... Heeee, and round and round and up and down we go again!

And then:
Twist again,
Like we did last summer,
Come on, let's twist again,
Like we did last year!

Who's that, flyin up there?
Is it a bird? Noooooo
Is it a plane? Noooooooo
Is it the twister? YEAAAAAAAHH!

Twist again, like we did last summer,
Come on, Let's twist again,
Like we did last year!!'

In reply to Michael Hood:


But is it? Given that most Israeli maps and many Israelis regard the West Bank and Gaza as part of Israel so the corollary must be that the inhabitants of those areas be regarded as Israei citizens with a right to vote and to be in all ways treated equally to Israelis in other parts of Israel.

But they are not.

In reply to Postmanpat:



Not what? Have you been listening to talk radio?

In reply to Postmanpat:


They do? I must say I look at... errr... international maps (for the want of a better term) where I don't think any I've seen show the WB and Gaza as part of Israel, but are you saying that maps in Israel do? I have somewhere a tourist map of Israel which definitely doesn't - so which maps do? Considering that Israel evacuated all it settlers from Gaza nearly a decade ago and clearly DON'T want it to be anything but walled off and nothing to do with them, mentioning Gaza seems doubly odd. With regard to the West Bank, Israel's concessions through Oslo to setting up the PA were designed to resist what you are suggesting - the one state solution - as they know obviously if the inhabitants of the WB all got to vote in a single greater-Israel, the country would be Arab majority. Israel's policy is clearly to remain an occupying power militarily (i.e. controlling the Jordan valley) but pushing the main areas where Palestinians actually live into a shriveled quasi state meaning they can say- "nowt to do with us, they vote in their own elections". That is why unlike the annexed Golan Height, Israel will not formally annex the West Bank (and also why the settlements are illegal, because settling under military occupation is illegal under international law).

Anyway - back to climbing magazines and their ethical responsibilities...!

To quote wiki (occasionally useful as a starting point) there are many different boycotts of Israel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycotts_of_Israel

Interestingly, Noam Chomsky has recently argued that boycotts may not be of use..
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/02/bds-boycott-campaign-israel-no...

This was a thoughtful response by another academic : https://www.opendemocracy.net/martin-shaw/boycotting-israel-situation-has-c...

I wonder: isn't 'freedom' so often quoted as a valued thing by climbers?

In reply to Simon Cardy:
The boycott and divestment calls are motivated by a sincere desire for justice.
No other country has so often flouted the consunsus of our United Nations.

In reply to TobyA:

Well, here's one http://www.iaf.org.il/2450-en/IAF.aspx

and here appears to be another

http://www.giltravel.com/israel-tours/resources/map-of-israel/

It's clearly by no mean universal . Depends who is producing the map and for which audience.
You're probably familiar with Miko Peled (The General's Son"). It's basically his argument.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Michael, why on earth would I want to refrain from benefiting from medical advances that owe to Israeli endeavors? The purpose of a boycott is not to pretend that Israel doesn't exist but to apply pressure to the Israeli government. So its perfectly coherent to adopt a selective boycott in the same way that countries impose selective economic sanctions. Of course, whether a few climbers visit the place is neither here not there with regards to Israel's economy, but boycotts alter peoples perceptions and incrementally these changes in public opinion could lead to foreign policy changes from the UK and other European nations. This is a prospect that terrifies the Israelis, which is why they are so vociferous in their condemnation of these types of actions -such as the academic boycott proposed a few years back by the Association of University Teachers and the EU's guidance that products from settlements in the occupied territories must be labelled as such. If the EU, as Israel's largest trading partner, were to impose widespread trade sanctions then Israel's economy would very quickly go the same way as Greece's. At this point a majority of Israelis might decide that it was in their best interest for their government to successfully negotiate a two state solution.
This wouldn't be dissimilar to the approach the West is taking in negotiating with Iran over its nuclear programme. It's a fantasy to believe that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be ended by dialogue between the two parties when their negotiating positions are so unequal and the Israeli people, while supportive of the principle of a two state solution, are overwhelming opposed to the detail of any settlement that could be accepted by the Palestinians.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

No, see my reply to Toby.

If Israel accepts, which in practice it does, mass Israeli settlements in the West Bank, it presumably regards the land as a part of Israel?

In reply to TobyA:
Her's another map, this time from the tourist authority, which appears to acknowledge Gaza as in some way separate but not the West Bank.

http://www.goisrael.com/Tourism_Eng/Tourist%20Information/Discover%20Israel...

and here is an "administrative map" which acknowledges only an "armistice demarcation line" around the West Bank (and Gaza)and keeps the international border along the River Jordan (and Egypt).

http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/israel_map2.htm

One survey found that 76% of maps in Israeli school text books failed to distinguish the Palestinian territories from Israel..

In reply to TobyA:


I don't think you need to be a Pro-Israel-type to acknowledge the huge variance with which Israel is being treated, do you?

There are arguments for exceptionalism of course but they don't explain the wider phenomenon.

Just as every individual shopper may feel that they have a perfectly good case for exceptionalism when they are queuing at the Primark sale, for needing to save £1 off a £3 t-shirt, their pleas don't affect the overall understanding of the consumerist impulse.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
I don't quite understand what you're trying to satirise or why. What I meant is the cycle of violence kicks off again. It doesn't do anyone any favours and both sides are to blame. In the long term, the only solution is mutual concessions and getting everyone to the negotiating table. A military solution won't work for either side: Israel is too strong militarily to be seriously challenged by anyone in the region and at the same time there are too many willing volunteers for Hamas etc for Israel to wipe them out once and for all. On the whole, as the stronger party, Israel should make more concessions but all parties must renounce violence and be prepared to negotiate. Unfortunately there are hardliners on both sides who will resist any such attempts, united in their hatred of each other... Anyway, this is off topic really. My original point was simply that I think it's better for people to go there to see it for themselves than to boycott the place.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


So you'll be in favour of repatriation of immigrants generally then...

In reply to Simon Cardy:

Troll points = 10/10

In reply to stp:


See "No True Scotsman" under logical fallacies.

In reply to Misha:

I put his bizarre intervention down to a 'senior moment'.

In reply to Michael Hood:


Of course its impossible to look directly at the Guardian's true motives directly.

But if you look at the last post on his blog it was critical of Israel. It was also about energy which is part of what the blog was meant to be about, along with the environment and economics so it doesn't look like it would be outside his remit. Finally his blog was "was by far the most popular on the [Guardian] environment site, garnering around 3 million unique views". It seems very strange to me that the Guardian would axe it when it was doing so well even if it was slightly off topic. And if that was really the concern then the obvious thing to do would be to either extend its remit or remind him of that, not axe the whole thing.

A friend also told me yesterday that the Guardian does have some links to Israel though didn't go into detail about what those were.

In reply to stp:

You should have pressed further, I'd be genuinely grateful to understand what these are and how they differ from any other news organisation.

In reply to Misha:

God, that takes me back.

Unless you're Kate Adie or something, it's bollocks of course.
Whether its reprehensible or just tickety-boo (I'm not getting drawn into that debate) I would prefer people to be honest with themselves (and, ideally, everyone else). They're not going "to see it for themselves", they're going on holiday for a nice little jolly.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


To be fair he's not the only lunatic on this thread.

In reply to Mike Highbury:
Too true but I shall refrain from naming candidates though.

In reply to Misha:


This reminds me of a great quote from Christopher Hitchens:

"The local leaderships that are generated by the troubles in such places [as Lebanon, Gaza, Cyprus, NI and several other 'hot spots'], do not want there to be a solution. A solution would mean that they were no longer deferred to by visiting UN or American mediators, no longer invited to ritzy high-profile international conferences, no longer treated with deference by the mass media, and no longer able to make a second living by smuggling and protection-racketeering. The power of this parasitic class was what protracted the fighting in Northern Ireland for years and years after it had become obvious to all that nobody (except the racketeers) could 'win'. And when it was over, far to many of the racketeers became profiteers of the 'peace process' as well."

In reply to TobyA:
>
Well, you're virtually agreeing with the Peled view. The status of the West Bank, and of the Palestinians in it, is a charade which enables Israel to create an apartheid system by denying the Palestinians the rights of Israeli citizens, whilst in reality being able to control their lives and settle their land whenever the fancy takes them.

In reply to atrendall:


So you think it's OK that nearly 100% of Conservative politicians are members of the friends of Israel?

I can see what Israel gets out of this relationship, but what do we and more to the point what do the politicians themselves get out out it?

In reply to deepsoup:



Not necessarily, the Troops Out movement were desperate to get Brits over to see NI, organised coaches n everything, so that people could see the militarisation for themselves.

I think with Israel as well, because the hugest (by a long way) part of it's tourism is religious/archeological/historic, (which involves travel between territories) the attitudes of visitors can be quite shaken, the CofE Synod's support for the Palestinians is one example.

In reply to krikoman:



What are you implying? Why can it not be simply that they support Israel's right to exist and want to express that view?

In reply to Michael Hood:


Without the rather unpleasant "merely", which says a lot about you BTW, that is quite right, I'm not saying anything different. The whole area had been part of the Ottoman Empire for centuries but with the fall of this empire, helped by Arab armies fighting on the British side during WW1, they were promised their independence. The British mandate was just that, not a colony, with the view of self determination for "the people living there", who were mostly Arabs, mostly Muslim. There were a few Jewish people, mostly concentrated in a few places, about 5% before the zionist invasion started.

But the Britisn copped out, wavering between various pressures and finally throwing in the towel when Jewish military force took over in 48. Even then had a vote been taken Israel would never have existed as Jews only made about 1/3 of the population, but they had the military force and a will driven by the ghastly events of WW2. For the same reasons no one felt able to stop the take over - even the Soviet Union who saw Israel as a weapon against reactionary sheiks.

So yes, the Palestinians are "merely the Arabs who happened to be there", although there were also non-Arab minorities, like the few thousand Jews, etc. but who were there before the zionist colonisation.

The rest of your post seems to be standard zionist propaganda, it's what's taught in Israel's schools so you can't be blamed, I suppose, but you could find out the truth if you really wanted to... here's suggestion, it's written by Jewish people too, not by Arabs who "merely" wanted to express themselves:

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/downloads/truth

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

I think you are focusing too much on history and not enough on the state of play on the ground today. The fact is that Israel is a successful and technically advanced democratic state surrounded by a sea of economic failure, despotism and religiously motivated terrorism. Nobody in their right mind in the EU or US is going to economically destabilize a militarily powerful western ally in the region with ISIL next door and dreaming of extending an Islamic Caliphate to the Mediterranean and Hamas acting as a proxy for Iran.

In reply to Misha:


So the person who takes something from another person is to be put on the same level as the victim? A funny kind of logic!

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

Yes, of course. For those who don't want to return to where they came from because of anti-semitism then another host country would be proposed - the obvious one is the USA, although Australia would be a a good second choice, they are not short of room. Sufficient financial aid would also be provided.

PS. In the case of Palestine where it is a colonial situation IMO, it is more invasion than immigration as the local people were never given a choice.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Whenever BH posts this, which is many and often, I'm reminded of the time that Uri Avnery joined the forum at Dror's invitation.

BH was found to be more ideological than truthful.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:



So the elimination of some populations is ok?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


We know where we stand now.
I thought you were heading into UKIP terrain. I didn't realise it was more Hitler/Stalin.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


Surely Bruce's history is very relevant to that though? I wonder how much of this success is down to all the aid that Israel has received down the years from the West, not to mention the money that has been returned to Israel from immigrants during this time.

In reply to wynaptomos:


So what are you suggesting? That all foreign aid should be stopped forthwith, Clare Short style? I'm sure that the PA will be delighted.

In reply to Postmanpat:


I'm implying that they've been bought, and that when parliamentary rules changed so that they had to declare funding and that outside governments / individuals couldn't donate to political parties, they, "The Conservative Friends of Israel" set up an English limited company so they could still give money to our scum filled rulers.

It's even worse in the US, which perpetuates the cyclical funding of Israeli arms and bought politicians.

If some organisation if giving you presents and money and you think they are not going to want anything in return you either bent or too stupid to be an MP.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

I don't believe the UK gives aid to Israel. Sells arms yes.

In reply to deepsoup:

Clearly on holiday but as part of that people will see what it's like. Which the author did, hence the comments about the various injustices.

In reply to krikoman:


Yep, it's not a healthy state of affairs, although I think it's more complicated than simply "You give us money and we'll support you". More of a conspiracy of silence if anything, and not exclusive to the Conservatives.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya: The UK buys far more arms (or components/technologies for arms) from Israel than it sells to Israel. Where do you think some of our drones come from?

In reply to Bruce Hooker: I thought quite a bit about the "merely" which is why I put it in brackets. Any"unpleasant" connotations were not intended although it doesn't surprise me that you took it that way. I just didn't want to go into explaining that Arab demarcation used to be on "tribal"/family/regional lines with vast areas of no-mans land (desert) and no fixed boundaries as per western civilization's country borders.

The British and the French have a lot to answer for the way they divided up the middle east with a large map and a ruler.

In reply to Michael Hood:


There wasn't much of a ruler used to be fair, it might have been better if there had been. Over 50% of the land designated to the smaller population which included the best arable land and access to water. doesn't quite seem fair, but at the time everyone was tired of war and it washed their hands of "the Jewish problem" in Europe.

It's just as bad now though, because no one is taking the lead in actually striving for peace. The US have the financial power but not the will, we and most of Europe tag along with what the US say.

You only have to look at the recent UN vote to recognise Palestine and the reaction of Israel to countries that voted "against" then.

Then there's the ICC why should Israel be so against the Palestinians joining the ICC, if Israel is so intent that it works within the law and that the Palestinians don't then why would it matter?

In reply to krikoman:


You're mixing things up, I was talking about the straight lines that created Syria, Iraq, Trans-Jordan etc which was post WW1. What you're talking about (unless I've miss-understood you) is the pre 67 Borders of Israel - these were the cease fire lines from the war in 1948-9, no designation of land, just where the fighting "stopped".


You're right there. Nobody trusts anybody else and everyone's afraid to make any concessions, partly for fear of looking weak.

In reply to Simon Cardy:

Shall we not boycott climbing tourism to China who continue with various human right abuses? Should we not boycott tourism to Russia for their two wars against neighbouring states? Should we not boycott tourism to Gaza where you will be hanged for being gay and for waging a war against neighbouring civilians?

Just because you don't like a particular state don't go spouting your rubbish here. Israel isn't perfect but neither is the other side of the war

In reply to Mike Highbury:



I remember it too, and his contribution was very interesting, you don't seem to have understood him very well, to say the least! Have you even read "Truth against Truth" yet? Doesn't sound as if you have.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:



For colonial situations the colonialists have all left, except those who were willing to stay in the country where the original population had got their land back... Algeria, Vietnam, Mozambique etc etc, what is your objection to Palestine being the same?

If you look at the way the Israeli Jews have massacred and driven out the population of Palestine, and set up concentration camps like Gaza I'd say they were acting quite like Stalin or Hitler in many ways... ironical when you think about it.

In reply to Postmanpat:


Quite true, many Labour MPs are in a similar "Friends of Israel". To those who say it has no effect just look at the recent UN Security Council vote, Britain abstained despite the Parliamentary vote a little while ago. It made the difference and avoided Obama being forced to use his veto and showing him up (yet again) for what he is., an enemy of the Palestinian people.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Just taken a look at your website, Bruce. Some interesting stuff.....

"...The danger that those that call themselves Islamists, whether this corresponds or not to the “true” Islamic tradition, what ever that may be, is just as real and just as serious as the menace posed by the Nazis."

Maybe that's one of the reasons so many Conservative MPS are pro Israel. Israel, as a western looking democracy, with advanced industries and sciences and a decent economy may not be perfect but it is a shining example of a country that works in a region of instability.

Then again, as your site says.......This site contains many half-baked platitudes

In reply to atrendall:
Try reading this, it's from Uri Averny's column on the site I often link to, Gush Shalom:

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1412954246/

I just happened upon it this evening, the comparison between zionism and the crusaders is interesting. It also demonstrates what I see as the limitation of the Israeli Peace Movement, it imagines that Israel has a right to exist.

NB. Before I am slagged off I said Israel, the existing racist state, not the people themselves, I obviously think they have as much right to exist as you or I... it's a pity Israelis (Jewish ones) don't have the same feelings about Palestinians.

PS. As for why many politicians of whatever colour, in Europe and the USA support Israel the answer is much more down to earth, there have been numerous documentaries about it, it's simply a question of cash and or votes.

In reply to Simon Cardy:

I too was shocked by this naive and ignorant article, which has no concept of how little freedom Palestinians have to walk, let alone climb in their own land. When I visited Hebron, the Palestinian guide pointed to the beautiful hills and said that if anyone attempted to walk there and have a picnic they would be shot at by Settlers. In other areas, olive trees are regularly chain-sawed with impunity. Wells are not allowed to be dug. And now in the news today, taxes collected by Israelis on behalf of the Palestinian are being withheld, and the Americans are being asked to stop aid to the Palestinian Authority, because they have the temerity to apply for membership of the International Criminal Court.
You cannot climb in a moral and political vacuum.

In reply to Simon Cardy:

You are emulating King Canute.

I have not read the article, but please get a sense of history - boycotts and sanctions never work. Not for South Africa, Cuba, not for Russia, not for Iran .. .. .. ..
Far better to engage with (presumably your) perceived enemies.
Jaw jaw better than war war.
Persuasion works, and we always end up talking to terrorists and Nazi states.
Watch what happens re: Isil and Taliban.
DC

In reply to Dave Cumberland:

"..get a sense of history......."
We don't always end up talking to Nazi states.... the classic example is the destruction of the third reich when the allies held out for unconditional surrender. No namby pamby half measures just unconditional surrender. Can't see ISIL responding to talks since they are so far off the scale of human civilisation.

In reply to Dave Cumberland:

Hilarious historical blindness there, if anything your examples show how armed struggle and war do work as much as talking! Do you really think it was just talking that changed the processes in South Africa for example? And what's happening now with IS seems to be quite a lot of bombs and not much talking.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

But when do you accept colonists have, rightly or wrongly, become people of the land.
You would move the Jews in Israel to America or Australia. Quite amusing you should suggest those places as the majority of people living there need to be repatriated to their original countries with the land being returned to the Aborigines/Indians. We'll need to get most of the occupants of the UK back to where they come from; the Celts should have their land back.
As for your situation, don't you live in France. I'm pretty sure we could find a few French people who would like see you gone...

In reply to Michael Hood:


Actually it is rather complex and not huge in either direction, so far as I can tell, but my point was that direct financial aid from the UK isn't going toward propping up the Israeli state as some have suggested (not yourself).

In reply to Simon Cardy:

"This is in clear breach of the international sporting boycott of Isreali apartheid"

In case you haven't gathered by now, this "international sporting boycott" exists entirely in your own head.

It has as much legal or moral force, though much less rational justification and usefulness, as an international boycott of you spouting pompous rubbish and imagining that you have the right to dictate morality to everyone else, or commercial policy to a climbing magazine that you neither own nor have any stake in.

Do you think that people are going to stop climbing in Pakistan, Tibet, Morocco or a whole variety of places with repressive regimes and dubious treatment of minorities because of your warped and very highly selective moral indignation? Or do you still peddle the ludicrous, left-wing comfort zone, fallacy, that Israel, the one place in the Middle East where comparative religious and political freedom prevails (albeit with the inevitable faults and limitations), is uniquely evil? When a massively brutal internecine, muslim against muslim according to sect civil war prevails in Syria right next door, and something pretty similar in Lebanon?

I wasn't really thinking of going on a climbing trip to Israel, but I might consider it now. Does anybody know what the climbing is like there? Probably too many unclimbed 4000m peaks in the Alps in reality (unclimbed by me that is, I doubt there are many first ascents of 4000m peaks left).

In reply to Simon Cardy:
Again and again, why do people try to point out how bad it is somewhere else?

It might be bad elsewhere, ISIS, Syria, China, etc., but that doesn't make Israel a shining beacon of love.

If they were so innocent why are they making threats over Palestine going the ICC?

Why are America now threatening to withhold aid to Palestine if they join the ICC?

In a country where there is so little to hope for, what is going to happen when there's no money around?

If ever you need to look for a reason for the likes of ISIS look to Palestine; an oppressed people who have nothing to live for and the cause of this oppression backed to the hilt by the Americans and us.

It's sickening the lengths our governments go to, to support this regime.

If Israel have nothing to hide then who gives a f*ck if Palestine join the ICC, the UN or any other organisation.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:




Once again the standard israeliprop. The difference is that the colonisation of Palestine by Jewish settlers took place recently when such things were no longer considered acceptable and, above all, against the wishes of the existing population - against the clear assurances given in the Balfour declaration and, more recently, all UN declarations on colonialism. Basically colonialism is no longer on.

Concerning my own situation in France I did not bulldoze any houses or villages to build my own house, nor slaughter any French people nor even drive any of the inhabitants off to Belgium to come here. See the difference?

In reply to krikoman:

It is bad elsewhere so that's why people keep mentioning it. Let's say it again though; Israel is not perfect (what country is?) but it is a western style democracy, it's relatively stable, economically OK and a complete contrast to the general middle east instability.

Just ask yourself would you rather live there or be persecuted/killed for being gay, have your head brutally cut off for propaganda on the internet, be buried alive for your religious views or be sold as a sex slave.

It's sickening the lengths people go to denounce Israel and yet Islamic fundamentalism is just something bad elsewhere and if it isn't stopped in its tracks it will be coming soon to a street near you. So bury your head in the sand all you like and continue to denounce Israel, the USA, UK but be thankful that someone is prepared to stand up against the forces of a perverted form of Islam.

In reply to atrendall:


In Gaza?

In reply to Mike Highbury:


Not necessarily but some proportionality would be good - the US seems to send massively more aid to Israel than anyone else. Some conditions imposed on that would also be good - for example, stop building illegal settlements in the West Bank.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

No. You've chosen to make out that your opinion of yourself as a good guy makes it all fine. Rather like an Israeli yourself on that one.
You seem to have forgotten your original comment in response to:

"So you'll be in favour of repatriation of immigrants generally then..." to which you replied:

"Yes, of course." Which actually makes you a Nazi.

Incidentally the last time I got involved in one of these Israel related forum I was getting slagged off for being a typical left wing bleeding heart due to my support for the Palestinians.
So once again you have a knack for being as wrong as you can be.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:



Well no, it doesn't, the nazis were defined by quite a few more factors than that, and BTW Hitler was an immigrant to Germany himself. I was referring to colonists in Palestine, the zionists who have taken Palestine over about a century and a bit, driven out, killed and squeezed into open air concentration camps like Gaza the original Arab population.

If we apply the standard practice to them as has been applied to other colonists since "the wind of change" then they should leave. There are some Jews who descend from Jews who were living in Palestine before zionism, a few tens of thousands, they have as much right to stay on as any other local people. Hamas itself accepts this in its texts. In reality once they had lost their privileges and with the offer of a safe home in a prosperous country many would leave of their own accord, some might want to remain in the new Palestine and I imagine there would be a fair bit of negotiation. The important thing is for the rights and wrongs of the situation to be recognized and translated into the appropriate measures.

In reply to atrendall:


Straight out of the EDL handbook that one, well done.

I'm obviously wasting my time trying to point out that what's happening in Palestine might just be a contributing factor for ISIS and the rest of the loonies. Also, it still doesn't negate the human rights issues in Palestine perpetrated by Israel. Like I said just because worse things are happening elsewhere doesn't mean they don't count.

What if someone was punching you face in, in the street and when you asked for help someone said, "I'd love to, but look what's happening in Syria" doesn't help anyone much does it?

In reply to krikoman:

I find it curious that people refer to what is happening in Palestine as "human rights" problems. I'd say that killing a couple of thousand people of which most non-combatants and many children from time to time goes a little beyond that.

In reply to krikoman:

What if there are two people in the street and one of them is being punched in the face and the other is being stabbed? It doesn't help the person being stabbed if you go to the assistance of the person being punched.
I love analogies, they're like going to a pub with lots of beers but they're all terrible.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:
It depends how far back in history you go. If you go back about 2,000 years, present day Israel/Palestine is where Jews lived. They were ruled by the Romans. Then in the early middle ages the Arabs conquered the area. You could say that they were the colonisers at that point! Then the crusaders came along and tried to 'take it back' for the Christians, ultimately having to withdraw. After that the area was ruled by the Ottoman Empire under it got disbanded following WWI. Meanwhile a lot of Jewish people migrated to Europe (Western and Eastern), occasionally getting expelled from some countries in the middle ages. Following WWI and the Holocaust, some of them went to the area (or returned, depending on your perspective) to establish modern day Israel. That is where their ancestors lived. Depending on your perspective, you could argue that there were or were not justified in colonising / reclaiming the area. If you argue that they were colonising it and this was outrageous, what about the Arabs conquering the area in the early middle ages?

Either way, this was 70 years ago, so the vast majority of the people living in Israel now were born there. That's where they were born so surely that is their home? Saying to them 'go back where you came from' is like saying that to second or third generation immigrants living in the UK. And they don't even have 'a country of their own' to go back to!

I'm not saying that what Israel is doing is right, there is too much oppression and brutality, but I do think that denying Israel the right to exist and expecting most of its population to go somewhere else is ridiculous.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Exactly my point!!!
If you are being punched in the face it doesn't really matter what's happening elsewhere you're still being punched in the face!!

So pointing out what's happening elsewhere doesn't help does it?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Totally agree, I was trying to take the emotive language out of it to make my point.

There are two things that usually happen when someone starts talking about Palestine:
1) You're accused of being anti-Semitic.
2) People say, "Well yes, BUT look what ISIS (replace with any awful situation) are doing. Why don't you complain about them?"

While the first one seems to be loosing some steam, in the light of world opinion and the slaughter in Gaza, the second one keeps being tossed around as if it can condone anything the Israeli government sees fit to perpetrate on the people in the region.

It's interesting the reaction of Israel and the US to Palestine wanting to join the ICC, logically one would think that both countries would welcome the idea as once in Palestinians would be subject to the same laws as Israel and the US. The ICC is a two way street as it were. Instead there have been threats of retribution and the US are talking about stopping all aid to Palestine!!! It does make you wonder why it would be a bad thing for them to join. I can't see a bad reason for them not being in that particular club, unless you've done something wrong that is!

In reply to Misha:


And yet this is what happened to all colonists who had occupied other countries in the 19th century, ie. far longer than the zionists. When Algeria and so on gained their independence French settlers left, that is what decolonization is about. In the case of Palestine it is even clearer as when most of the Jewish colonisers/settlers arrive the notion of colonization was already a thing of the past in most of the world, so your "arguments", again the same old zionist ones, don't hold.


This is very debatable, most descended from converts to Judaism many centuries ago outside Palestine so their only relation to Palestine is that their religion is the same as that of some of the people who lived in Palestine for a few centuries 2000 years ago. The real descendants of the inhabitants of the area now called Palestine 2000 years ago are the present day Palestinian Arabs. This is the opinion of Uri Averny mentioned above, it was even the opinion of Ben Gurion in his youth. There is an interesting book on the subject called "The Myth of the Jewish People" written by a professor at Tel Aviv University called Shlomo Sand:
http://www.amazon.com/Invention-Jewish-People-Shlomo-Sand/dp/1844676234
The basis of zionism, the dispersion of the Jewish people in Roman times is just a myth.
Judaism in Roman times, like another Jewish sect, christianity, was very much an evangelising one, most people who are Jewish today probably descended from these converts... So if you want base your arguments on this sort of thing then once again it's the Palestinians who trump the Israeli Jews*.

I don't think we can go back 2000 years though, the indigenous people of Palestine are those who lived there before the zionist invasion and who had lived in harmony - you can hardly pretend that the arrival of Jewish settlers over the last century has brought harmony to Palestine, nor the whole Middle East for that matter.

*I precise Israeli Jews as, of course, there are may Israeli Arabs who are Palestinians who ended up there after the various wars of conquest.

In reply to krikoman:

Ah, but if I was being stabbed and you were busy helping the person being punched that isn't much comfort to me.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


I'm possibly being unfair, as you wouldn't be the only contributor to this thread guilty of this, but when you say "interesting", do you mean "challenged some of my preconceptions and caused me to think about the issues from a different perspective", or do you in fact mean "confirmed all of my preconceived prejudices"?

As for the "ancestors" debate, most of the angles on this are total nonsense. Firstly, go back far enough and we are all immigrants to somewhere - at some point you have to draw the line and rationalize it. Secondly, mathematically speaking most arguments along these lines are being incredibly selective about their ancestors. Caucasian Europeans probably have as much right to the land now known as Israel as either the current occupants or the Palestinian Arabs if we are quantifying this by the number of our ancestors who lived there. ( See various published research on statistical genealogy etc ).

In reply to Bruce Hooker:



OK: you think the Israelis should leave. They don't agree, there are 8 million of them and they have nuclear weapons and by far the most competent military in the region and are vital strategic partners of the United States. So it doesn't really matter what you think: they are going nowhere.

In reply to Bruce Hooker: stop ,,,,,,

Has nobody else noticed the wooden spoon that started this thread has not replied to any of your comments !?
,,,,,,,, carry on

In reply to Colza:




This is a ukc staple foodstuff. Do you want professional interwebbers to die of malnutrition?

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

8 million of whom 6 million are Jewish. Add up the 2 million Palestinians in Israel with the 4 1/2 million more in Gaza and the West Bank, so 6 1/2 million, already more or less 50/50 with a slight advantage to non-Jewish. But then there are several millions in exile giving about 11 million Palestinians - double the Israeli Jewish. So atom bombs don't help much if ever a democratic system were set up in Palestine and Palestinians had re same "right to return" as Jews throughout the world "enjoy". Add to this they are surrounded by hundreds of millions Muslims who very often support the Palestinian cause....

At the start of zionism many Jews opposed it, throughout the world, and pointed out the danger it would entail for the Jewish people, it looks like they should have been listened to a little more. I don't think it's too late find a solution which is a little better than previous "final" ones, but being cocky and saying "we're stronger than you, piss off!" is going nowhere, every Palestinian child blown to bits is counted and held against those who do it, and those who support them... we'll get payback day sometime.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


But that still doesn't help does it?

The argument that other stuff is happening elsewhere doesn't negate the other thing.

And let's not forget that we're not talking about punches in the face, we're talking about people being killed.

You seem to believe that its a numbers game, isn't one innocent death enough for you to care about?

It shouldn't be an either or, we should all care about every killing and we should do something to help.

My argument, which you are choosing to ignore, was pointing out that something else is happening elsewhere shouldn't make a difference.

In reply to krikoman:



Wasting your time, because it's bollocks to a great extent. Jihadists groups like IS might dismiss everyone they don't like as Jewish spies and the like but they have taken no interest in actually challenging Israel in any way. Hamas which can actually claim some legitimacy as a (not "the" though) voice of the Palestinian people was until about a year and half ago still quite close to the Assad regime - a regime that did sponsor military/terrorist (delete as you see fit) resistance to Israel. Yet Assad is the main enemy of IS currently. When people say "Israel/Palestine" causes jihadism, or even contributes to it, it is actually very hard to find evidence of this when you really study the history, ideology and development of the jihadi-salafi movement.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Ditto I'm sure every Israeli child/adult/civilian/soldier is counted and held against those that do it and Israel is strong and has a big stick as well as horrific memories of what happens to the Jews if they aren't in a position to look after themselves.

In reply to Colza:




So what? The subject's interesting.

In reply to krikoman:




You need to get your facts a bit more in order; neither Israel nor the US are member of the ICC. Israel knows the PA will bring war crime charges against it once it joins, it doesn't want to have to officially ignore those charges so it doesn't want it to join. Oddly, chasing a smaller quasi-state around the world bullying or bribing other countries to stop that quasi-state from joining international organisations, is taken straight out of China's playbook in regard to Taiwan.

In reply to planetmarshall:


The former as I had never challenged the idea of the Romans dispersing the Jews throughout the world in reply to yet another rebellion. So many people took this as their starting point to justify zionism that I had never imagined they were all lying... it seems they were, or repeating the lies of others.

When I first saw this title I thought it was another revisionist bit of anti-semitic propaganda until I saw who the author was and read it. It seems that many people did know it all along, Ben Gurion for example who in his idealistic youth thought that it would be possible to go to Palestine and work with people who he thought were descendants of the same people as he was, to build a new land for all. He hadn't counted on the possibility that those people were so unreasonable as to not want their land to be taken over by newcomers. Once the fighting had started he dropped the theory.

In reply to TobyA:


Now I wonder why that is then? I thought they were splendid democracies, a shining light to the world.

In reply to krikoman:

1) You're accused of being anti-Semitic.

Actually, unless I've missed it or some posts have been deleted, I've not seen anything anti-Semitic (as opposed to anti-Zionist or anti-Israel). Although I strongly disagree with Bruce and his views, his language is pretty careful to avoid this.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:
The history is certainly complicated and you can probably twist it any way you like, depending on your perspective and objectives. As has been said above, realistically Israel isn't going anywhere and a peaceful solution needs to be found within that context. This will involve Israel making significant concessions but equally the militants / freedom fighters need to lay down their arms and accept the reality that they won't be able to get rid of Israel and should instead work together towards a peaceful settlement. May be one day we will see this...

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Humm , suppose that's one word to describe a bunch of nutters shooting rockets at each other regardless of women , children or anyone else !

In reply to Simon Cardy:
derka derka alla ghad
mr slippy fist likes this

In reply to Michael Hood:



I did say this has largely faded away now because they realised it wasn't working. In fact I'm pretty sure it worked against them in a lot of areas. During the summer there was a lot of this about when a lot of people were speaking out against the bombing of Gaza. I think people realised that simply speaking out would have them branded as anti-Semitic and it lost it's potency. People had kept quite for long enough and decided, "f*ck this what you're doing is wrong, whether you're Jewish or not I'm going to speak up against this."

People know what they are, and someone telling you differently doesn't change things, a lot of people, and a lot of Jews came out against what was happening, so how can it be true that all these Jew are anti-Semitic too. It just didn't work.

In reply to krikoman: Actually during the summer during the Gaza war there was a large increase in antisemitism, language that basically says "the Israelis" or "the Israeli government" is not anti-semitic, language that basically says "the Jews" is likely to be anti-semitic. Language like "Hitler was right" and "you should all be gassed" - which happened quite a lot in the summer - is definitely anti-semitic.

In reply to TobyA:


I didn't say the US or Israel were members of the ICC.
I'm aware they aren't members and they keep good company, the seven countries that voted against the treaty, in 1998, were China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen, a fine bunch of candidates.

What I said was the Palestinians would be subjected to the same laws they are trying to prosecute Israel for. Since Israel is always accusing the Palestinians of war crimes then they too could be prosecuted. If they sign up they can't expect to have it only one way can they?

And again if Israel have done nothing wrong then what have they to fear. But blockading Gaza might be a problem for them and collective punishment might be hard to justify, along with a few other things, so it might just be that instead.

The fact that America are threatening to remove their aid package to Palestine should they proceed with membership only goes to prove that American politicians are in the pockets of Israel.

What possible difference could it make to the US whether Palestine is a member?

Thankfully the tide is starting to turn in America and it might not be too long before the people demand some responsibility from their politicians, who knows?

In reply to stp:


Is Abbas still against the boycott and the BDS movement?

He famously came out against a tourism boycott when he was in South Africa for Mandela's funeral.

Who are the 'they' of which you speak? Last year Ramallah PA police arrested 4 BDS guys when they disrupted a performance by an Indian dance troop, who had also performed in Israel.

Fatah leaders support a boycott of goods from the OT but have also said they regard the BDS movement as a barrier to peace.

In reply to krikoman:

The US has criticised Israel for withholding the tax receipts to the PA quite vocally, but the threat to withhold their own aid to the PA comes from the Congress, not from administration; just more conscious undermining of the presidency by the GOP unfortunately.

In reply to atrendall:


This argument that things are worse elsewhere is irrelevant. Not even an Israeli government spokesman would have the gall to come out with such spurious nonsense. If the French government were to corral all it's black, muslim and jewish citizens into Normandy and deprive them of their vote would you 1) shrug your shoulders, think that things are worse in China/Russia/Saudi Arabia and carry on hopping on the channel ferry for your annual climbing holiday in Chamonix or Verdon; or 2) be appalled that a supposedly liberal western democracy could act in such an appalling fashion and resolve to stop eating Camembert?

The argument that Israel is a beacon of stability is equally risible. Yes it may be internally stable, but is certainly not a stabilising influence on the wider region. In the past half century it has been involved in numerous armed conflicts with its neighbors (some of which it initiated) including invading Lebanon - an action that drew in the US in. (Rightly) it has not used its military capacity to intervene in Syria or in Kuwait during the first gulf war. Indeed Saddam Hussain fired missiles at Tel Aviv in an attempt to draw Israel in and create a much wider conflagration. So yes Israel has a lot of economic and military clout but it is largely impotent in terms of projecting that power for wider regional benefits beyond its own security. If there was a revolution in Saudi Arabia, are you expecting Israel to use its military assets to secure the oil fields in the east of the country?

In reply to TobyA:

Are you saying that Israel hold no sway over the politics of the US?

In reply to TobyA:


I wasn't saying it causes jihadism, I was saying it's all grist to the terrorists mill

Any inbalance in how people are treated can be used to reinforce the thought that the West are trying to crush Islam and that they should fight against it.

Plus young men with no future and nothing to lose being offered a chance to fight their oppressor, it's no wonder. If you think no one cares about what your suffering, why not make people care about what you do?

Here's an easy example of the double standards at play when it comes to Palestine / Israel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcUTMX10Pt4&feature=youtu.be

In reply to Colza:


I don't think it's possible to define the Palestinians as a "bunch of nutters". They have been driven to extremist operations from time to time but far less deadly than those of their oppressors. If you read any of the many accounts written by Palestinians who have lived through the period, from when Palestine was under the British mandate through to the present day it's hard to see them as nutters - they went from living in a fairly poor land, with already the menace of foreign settlers taking their land but still a sort of modus vivendi until 1948 when it all went crazy, they were driven from their villages, often by their previous Jewish neighbours who they had been on good terms with and then from war to war they found themselves locked in a concentration camp called Gaza, or exiled, or in the West bank surrounded by walls an armed fanatics supported by a huge modern army. The main feeling I get is one of being puzzled, what had they done to end up like this with no land and in constant danger.

Is resisting this being a "nutter"? What would you do?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

I'd hope most of us on UKC wouldn't be shooting rockets at civilians if placed in a similar position, however angry we got with the oppression. Such violent actions may be seen as justified by some but not by me and they certainly don't help develop peace in the area..

If we want boycotts lets start at the most despotic countries first shall we. Israel are a long way down any list in my view.

This whole thread is based on pretending a call for a boycott, mainly from some factions on the left is somehow the same as a real boycott (as was the case with SA).

In reply to Offwidth:

If you'd seen your family murdered, as thousands of Palestinians have, and lived in a zone of permanent rubble with no hope of an improvement wouldn't you fight back? Especially when this was being done by a bunch of foreign invaders in your own country. It's so easy to criticize from the comfort of your armchair... when did you ever get anywhere near to suffering even 1/1000 of what every Palestinian has to suffer?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Even I, in my comfortable western life, have had relatives and firends killed in wars and I have good friends affected by wars right now and deaths of people I cared about by other non war related nasty causes that shouldn't happen but do. I'm not belittling the suffering of the Palestinians but they do seem to me to get more than their fair share of concern from some quarters and I never thought and hope I never will think terror justified terror in response.

In reply to krikoman:



For all the Europeans, South Asians, North Africans etc etc going to fight in Syria - how is Assad "their oppressor"? Assad's regime was pretty repugnant in many ways, but his secret police didn't stretch to Portsmouth for example. And were the cartoonists killed in Paris today "oppressors"? It's all much more complicated than that.


There is of course lots more to both the US and EU policy position on Hamas AND the Holy Land Foundation case than Martin says in your clips - in fact her description is so facile I'm sure she can't actually be serious. But then double standards being discussed on RT is so fitting - it is the home of double standards after all!

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Thanks for your version of Palestine history but I already know it , bunch of nutters shooting at each other !
I suppose Israel was over the moon when 5 surrounding countries tried to invade , kill and destroy them ?

In reply to Offwidth:


So when you and your whole country is being terrorised, murdered, bombed and burnt what are you supposed to do, roll over on your stomach and invite a bayonet up your arse? You really are incredible, I've never been in anything like the situation of the Palestinian people, all 11 million of them, but I hope I would have the courage to defend myself and my family - you'd just let your kids and wife be killed before committing Hari Kiri, would you?

Even the UN charter allows a people to defend itself.... lucky for us our parents didn't think like that in WW1, and lucky for those Jews who did manage to escape continental Europe. Using you system they would have wiped out too.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

You really do get into hyperbolic rubbish. Not all Palestinians are being terrorised, etc. and certainly not 11 million, most of whom aren't even in the conflict zone.

Unfortunately, any reasonable points you make get lost in the vitriol.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Do what? My grandparents were proud to fight for Germany in WW1.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

Should have been WW2, of course.

In reply to Michael Hood:

You are clearly not aware of the situation of Palestinians. Gaza is a concentration camp, bombarded regularly from time to time, the West Bank is little better, as for the refugee camps do you think they are like Buntins? There are none so blind as they who will not see.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Yes, I was suggesting that you post: rant, rant, bang.

(I've a lovely story of someone my father knew who wanted to return and fight for his beloved Germany. Not the brightest. I've a sense that some on here might feel a resonance.)

In reply to Michael Hood:


There's 1,8 million in Gaza that are being denied their human rights, it's not a bad start is it?

How many do you want there to be, before you speak out?

In reply to Mike Highbury:

During WW2 the Stern gang tried to make contact with nazi Germany offering their services against the British in return for some services or other... I don't know if they got a reply. Nice people.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Yes, we all know that and soon after the group went all pro-Soviet.

Either you are being a bit of a f*cker or have missed the point entirely; only you know which.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

I realise what your problem is now, I looked at your profile, you were educated in Israel, you've had all these myths banged into you until you actually believe them.

In reply to stp:
Normalising the Israeli occupation has not been this publication's finest moment. I'd like to think it was probably a mistake but clearly not one they learnt from the magazines previous owners as you note. I have now had a reply which thanked me for the email adding 'The concerns you raise have been noted' (I read this a good sign as it was more than you got from OTE at least). As a destination piece 'The Promised Land' is a nauseating read from start to finish - from the name of the article, to the hyperbole, to the historical factual and geographical inaccuracies. As a peice of climbing 'destination' journalism that purported to be about climbing in Israel; two out of the three areas described - Giva Beyamin and Ein Fara - turn out to be in Palestine: about which only one post in this thread pointed this out. I don't blame the author who, lets face it, failed to find any good climbing in Israel on any scale. We can now go and climb in South Africa with a clearer conscious thanks to your efforts in helping ending apartheid there. That cannot be said for anyone thinking of taking up the author's invitation by travelling to the new apartheid state.

In reply to Simon Cardy:

I think it's a bit rich of you to drop your original post, ignore criticisms of it or fail to support your point of view and then pop up 11 days later to add a postscript. Opinionated troublemaker.

In reply to Mark Sheridan:


Maybe he was busy

In reply to Mark Sheridan:

Proves he wasn't a troll though, doesn't it?

In reply to Simon Cardy:

If it makes you happier then Israel is way, way down on my list of places I would like to go climbing. I think I would struggle to empathise with a lot of the people living there if their opinion polls and behaviour to their neighbours is anything to go by. And I have no desire to have my head kicked in by a load of tanned IDF people.

Maybe 'The Promised Land' was an ironic title? 'Cos as a sun rock destination Israel is really pretty crap.