UK Academic Boycott of Israel is unlawful

[nino_savatte]

mmm... He represents a section of Western society with quite similar ideas and views. Ignoring them doesn't miraculously make them go away or provides for solutions.

salaam.

true and posters like him will only get banned if they spend weeks winding people up and even then, most of the time, they aren't banned. I reckon this one will be around for a while,

 

[ViolentPanda]

You think the repression of women and homosexuals funny, that exploding on tube trains and buses is something to be laughed at ?

You think it's only Muslims that repress women and homosexuals, or set bombs?

because if you do you're either intellectually-challenged, brain-damaged or a surplus to the requirements of humanity. Perhaps even all three.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I was assuming he was a troll attempting to provoke a reaction, which is why I suggested ignoring him.

Maybe he actually is a real moonbat. Who knows?

Perhaps he has a very small penis and is attempting to compensate by acting 'ard?

 

[WildBillHiccock]

That must be the most ill-informed (not to mention bigoted) comment that I've heard in fucking ages.

Which part of my post is untrue ?

 

[nino_savatte]

Which part of my post is untrue ?

All of it. Perhaps you missed the meeting where other religious fanatics were being discussed - particularly those from Xtian sects in the US.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Which part of my post is untrue ?

Which part of it is supported by evidence that proves that the problems you mentioned are confined only to Muslims?

 

[WildBillHiccock]

Which part of it is supported by evidence that proves that the problems you mentioned are confined only to Muslims?

I've not said it's just confined to muslims and thats obvious, I merely pointed out my personal boycott and the reasons for it.

Nineo sivette seems to think that islam doesn't oppress homosexuals and women and it wasn't muslims that exploded on the tube/bus.

 

[Poi E]

I've not said it's just confined to muslims and thats obvious, I merely pointed out my personal boycott and the reasons for it.

Nineo sivette seems to think that islam doesn't oppress homosexuals and women and it wasn't muslims that exploded on the tube/bus.

A bit different boycotting those who participate in the institutions of a state you disapprove of, and wholesale boycotting of a religious group. But you probably can't see that. By the way, how can you tell which shops are muslim in the uk?

 

[WildBillHiccock]

By the way, how can you tell which shops are muslim in the uk?

Wow nearly didn't spot the loaded question

 

[ViolentPanda]

I've not said it's just confined to muslims and thats obvious, I merely pointed out my personal boycott and the reasons for it.

In other words you confined your opprobrium about this sort of repression to a specific set of religious practitioners, rather than to the entirety of people who carried out such repressive practices.
See, I dislike people who attack homosexuals and/or repress women, I dislike all people who do that, regardless of their faith, regardless of their gender, regardless of their skin-colour, they're all cunts.
You, you've chosen to single out one group.

Nineo sivette seems to think that islam doesn't oppress homosexuals and women and it wasn't muslims that exploded on the tube/bus.

Try as I might, I can't see where he said that. Are you sure you're not, you know, exaggerating?

 

[nino_savatte]

I've not said it's just confined to muslims and thats obvious, I merely pointed out my personal boycott and the reasons for it.

Nineo sivette seems to think that islam doesn't oppress homosexuals and women and it wasn't muslims that exploded on the tube/bus.

You've been on these boards before, haven't you? You see, deliberately misspelling my user name is a dead giveaway. I'm watching you.

 

[nino_savatte]

Wow nearly didn't spot the loaded question

Well, WildBill...or should I call you by your real name? What is so loaded about the question?

 

[WildBillHiccock]

What is so loaded about the question?

It's as loaded as your question above.

 

[nino_savatte]

It's as loaded as your question above.

There's nothing "loaded" about it, dimwit.

 

[nino_savatte]

Well, WildBillArsecough?

 

[Brainaddict]

Same here, I boycott, as far as possible anything that comes from an islamic country and do not frequent any shops run by muslims in protest at islamic terror, their beastial treatment of homosexuals and their oppression of women.

I know people kick up a fuss if you refer to this kind of thing as 'racism' because islam isn't a race. However this is exactly the same kind of bigotry as racism and I think it ought to be treated in the same way.

Post duly reported.

 

[editor]

Same here, I boycott, as far as possible anything that comes from an islamic country and do not frequent any shops run by muslims in protest at islamic terror, their beastial treatment of homosexuals and their oppression of women.

You are the returning banned poster, BlitzBuggy.

From our FAQ:

4. Banning/Temp bans If a user is banned they have two choices:
1. Apologise profusely to the moderators in the hope of being reinstated.
2. Bugger off forever.

Banned posters trying to sneak back in will be re-banned immediately and permanently. Persistent attempts will result in a mail to their ISP.

Goodbye.

 

[nino_savatte]

Looks like I was right (again).

 

[invisibleplanet]

do you have to support the occpation to work in a university there?

No, but if you do oppose the occupation, support the refuseniks, or offer a narrative which reveals past wrongdoings (e.g. new historians/post zionists etc), or criticise aspects of government or social policy, then your name is put on the Israeli Academic Monitor, and 'pro-Israel advocates' in USA/Israel are encouraged to campaign to have your tenure denied.

The opponents of the British boycott have not yet spoken out against the treatment of these Academics in Israel, and we should ask ourselves 'Why?'.

And then there is the case of the Palestinian student who has been, within the last 7 days, refused exit by Israel from Gaza to continue his studies in the UK. His right to education has been denied, and he is one of hundreds of Palestinians stuents who are being denied leave from Gaza to take up their studies. In the past, Israeli Universities and Staff have taken up those students' plight in attempt to persuade the Israeli authorities to release them so that they may study in Israeli Universities or abroad, but in Britain, the opponents of the proposed Academic Boycott have not once challenged Israeli denial of Palestinian students' rights to education, either on an individual basis, or as a collective group.

One either supports Academic freedom for all, else one is accused of being selective and using such a cause for political gain. Which is it to be? I hope the former, and I hope those who mobilised to support Academic Freedom will apply their pressure to bear upon those instances I've mentioned above - and beyond.

 

[dazed]

Isn't it rather misleading to suggest that the Israeli Academic Monitor is in some way an official organisation affiliated to the universities. Anyway, using that as an excuse for an academic boycott, on that basis, you would have to call for a ban on American academics seeing as the IAM is based on the US's very own Campus Watch.

On what basis would it be right to ostracise Israeli academics who by your own admission have protested against abuses of students rights, and not dole out the same treatment to British and American academics who you say have kept silent?

I presume you also supported calls for an academic boycott of Iran after the imprisonment of Dr Haleh Esfandiari or any of the other academics that have been illegally detained there?

Personally I find the idea of banning academics as abhorrent as burning books.

 

[Wolveryeti]

Why not, um... I dunno - actually find out which academics hold distasteful apartheid views instead of resorting to such a blunt instrument.

Israel's collective punishment of Palestinians is a major pillar of the justification put forward by the proponents of the boycott.

Can anyone see the irony?

 

[Das Uberdog]

It's no more ironic than the idea of "retribution" as a general term.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Israel's collective punishment of Palestinians is a major pillar of the justification put forward by the proponents of the boycott.

Can anyone see the irony?

Yes, but I also find it a bit much that people are quibbling about the legality of the boycott when the boycott is a valid attempt to draw attention to the also-illegal-and-considerably-more-severe-than-a-boycott occupation.

Can't make an omelete without cracking eggs etc.

 

[dazed]

Then as I said earlier we should be talking about boycotting the US, the UK, China and dozens of other countries. Academia is the last place you should start with boycotts. It's very dangerous.

 

[david dissadent]

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=academic+boycott+burma&hl=en&safe=off

 

[dazed]

Do you have a point there?

 

[invisibleplanet]

Isn't it rather misleading to suggest that the Israeli Academic Monitor is in some way an official organisation affiliated to the universities. Anyway, using that as an excuse for an academic boycott, on that basis, you would have to call for a ban on American academics seeing as the IAM is based on the US's very own Campus Watch.

On what basis would it be right to ostracise Israeli academics who by your own admission have protested against abuses of students rights, and not dole out the same treatment to British and American academics who you say have kept silent?

I presume you also supported calls for an academic boycott of Iran after the imprisonment of Dr Haleh Esfandiari or any of the other academics that have been illegally detained there?

I recommend you spend more time reading the posts, and less time making presumptions. For starters, may I recommend taking a university course in rhetoric and sophistry?

 

[dazed]

An ad hominem argument, the last refuge of those without a valid position or the ability to form an opinion, well done.

 

[invisibleplanet]

An ad hominem argument, the last refuge of those without a valid position or the ability to form an opinion, well done.

In your response to my original post, you wrongfully and misleadingly portrayed my opinion as:

1) suggesting that IAM was an official organisation linked to Israeli Universities
2) using the existence of the IAM as an excuse to boycott Israeli Universities.
3) implying that I have suggested it would be ok to ostracise Israeli academics whilst suggesting that British/American academics have kept silent on the persecution of pro-peace/anti-occupation Israeli Academics that I mentioned

You make other presumptions as to my stance - the method you used to deliver those presumptions was sophism.

Your entire reply to my original post was an ad-hominem - it deserved a terse response.

Please re-read my original post, and then if you want to discuss the issues surrounding academic boycotts with me, then do so without the presumptions and misleading statements as to my position. Thankyou.

This reply is more than you deserve, considering your responses made personally to me.

 

[ViolentPanda]

An ad hominem argument, the last refuge of those without a valid position or the ability to form an opinion, well done.

No dear, it's an argument to which there has been an ad hominem request added.
What can I say except "not so well done"?