Lucky enough not to fall on (botched) International Burn a Quran Day, this year’s Eid al-Adha for some was observed on November 16th and other ardent moon-sighting observers November 17th, marking the end of Hajj and commemorating the willing sacrifice of Prophet Abraham. In addition to the staple Boston Globe photojournalist essay, here is a round-up of some auditory-tantalizing Hajj Stories:

1. Two South Africans Cycle to Hajj in Al Jazeera, Arab News, “Capetown to Mecca” by Cyclelicious.
2. Over 13,500 Chinese for this Haj

3. No room for terrorism in Islam: Haj sermon by Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al Sheikh of Saudi Arabia

Merry Eid y’all!

*The picture selected from the BG photoshoot was done so because it closely resembled my favorite photo from BG’s Eid ul-Fitr series, which is below:

Watch the video.

Professor John Dugard made a strong case for applying the international convention on Apartheid to Israel.

COSATU House, 3 February 2009

In a historic development for South Africa, South African dock workers have announced their determination not to offload a ship from Israel that is scheduled to dock in Durban on Sunday, 8 February 2009. This follows the decision by COSATU to strengthen the campaign in South Africa for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Apartheid Israel.

The pledge by SATAWU members in Durban reflects the commitment by South African workers to refuse to support oppression and exploitation across the globe. Last year, Durban dock workers had refused to offload a shipment of arms that had arrived from China and was destined for Zimbabwe to prop up the Mugabe regime and to intensify the repression against the Zimbabwean people. Now, says SATAWU’s General Secretary Randall Howard, the union’s members are committing themselves to not handling Israeli goods.

SATAWU’s action on Sunday will be part of a proud history of worker resistance against apartheid. In 1963, just four years after the Anti-Apartheid Movement was formed, Danish dock workers refused to offload a ship with South African goods. When the ship docked in Sweden, Swedish workers followed suit. Dock workers in Liverpool and, later, in the San Francisco Bay Area also refused to offload South African goods. South Africans, and the South African working class in particular, will remain forever grateful to those workers who determinedly opposed apartheid and decided that they would support the anti-apartheid struggle with their actions.

Last week, Western Australian members of the Maritime Union of Australia resolved to support the campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel, and have called for a boycott of all Israeli vessels and all vessels bearing goods arriving from or going to Israel.

This is the legacy and the tradition that South African dock workers have inherited, and it is a legacy they are determined to honour, by ensuring that South African ports of entry will not be used as transit points for goods bound for or emanating from certain dictatorial and oppressive states such as Zimbabwe, Swaziland and Israel.

COSATU, the Palestine Solidarity Committee, the Young Communist League and a range of other organisations salute the principled position taken by these workers. We also take this opportunity to salute the millions of workers all over the world who have openly condemned and taken decisive steps to isolate apartheid Israel, a step that should send shockwaves to its arrogant patrons in the United States who foot the bill for Israel’s killing machine. We call on other workers and unions to follow suit and to do all that is necessary to ensure that they boycott all goods to and from Israel until Palestine is free.

We also welcome statements by various South African Jews of conscience who have dissociated themselves from the genocide in Gaza. We call on all South Africans to ensure that none of our family members are allowed to join the Israeli Occupation Forces’ killing machine.

In celebration of the actions of SATAWU members with regard to the ship from Israel, and in pursuance of the campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel, and our call on the South African government to sever diplomatic and trade relations with Israel, this coalition of organisations has declared a week of action beginning on Friday, 6 February 2009. The actions will be organised under the theme: FREE PALESTINE! ISOLATE APARTHEID ISRAEL! Activities that have already been confirmed for this week will include:

* Friday, 6 February: A protest outside the offices of the South African Zionist Federation and the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, 2 Elray Street, Raedene, off Louis Botha Avenue. Both these organisations unquestioningly supported the recent Israeli attacks against Gaza, and supported the massacre of civilians and the attacks on schools, mosques, ambulances, and UN refugee centres. Protestors will be addressed by, among others, SATAWU General Secretary Randall Howard, and ex-Minister Ronnie Kasrils. Protest starts at 14:00.

* Friday, 6 February: A picket outside parliament in Cape Town. COSATU members and solidarity activists will be joined by a number of members of parliament. Picket starts at 09:30.

* Friday, 6 February: A mass rally in Actonville, Benoni, at the Buzme Adab Hall. The rally will be addressed by, among others, COSATU General Secretary Zwelinzima Vavi, PSC spokesperson Salim Vally, South African Council of Churches General Secretary Eddie Makue, and ex-Minister Ronnie Kasrils. Rally starts at 19:30.

* Sunday, 8 February: A protest at the Durban Harbour Mouth, off Victoria Embankment. Protestors will be addressed by, among others, COSATU President Sdumo Dlamini. Protest starts at 10:00.

* Sunday 8 February: A mass rally in Cape Town at Vygieskraal Rugby Stadium. The rally will be addressed by, among others, COSATU General Secretary Zwelinzima Vavi, and Allan Boesak. Rally starts at 14:30.

For more information, call:

Patrick Craven – 082 821 7456

Melissa Hoole – 073 906 0017

Bongani Masuku – 079 499 6419

Na’eem Jeenah – 084 574 2674

To watch videos of their talks, click

Buttu presented an analysis of Israel’s facts on the ground using maps.

Rev. Makue, a South African who heads the South African Council of Churches, shared his own analysis and stories.

There are other possibilities though. Livni may also have been aiming the sentiment at Hamas, which is “controlling Gaza by weapons, training and money,” apparently from Iran. (Of course not because they won the last election fair and square– democracy anyone?) Or she was giving it to all the Gulf people who would rather excuse themselves to go barf than see formal ties, or worse, sit in a room with Israeli government officials.

The following is an internal discussion on the significance of the Qatari and Omani reception of Livni. As Chaim protested, “Why do you D-bags host these conversations on this listserv, take it to the blog!”

MHMD: Hey what do you guys make of this? Well, there really isn’t much to make of it, I’m not surprised-but is there anything left to say about the Qataris and Omanis meeting so openly with Livni?

Emily: I had an argument with a friend recently. He’s from Bahrain and was thinking of coming to Jordan, and I suggested that we meet there. I also said oh maybe I’ll bring my friend along from Shefa Amr! She’s never been to Jordan!

At which point he seriously took the conversation off the record and was like “wait… she’s… israeli?” He didn’t want to hang out with her in Jordan (a Muslim Arab Palestinian citizen of Israel) because of her Israeli passport. He was like, there’s a boycott. I have to stick to my principles.

I think I spent a half an hour typing like a madwoman about all of the violations against Palestinians in Israel even though they are “Israeli.” And furthermore pulled up the call for boycott and sanctions and sent him the actual text of it- ‘institutional boycott’ etc etc.

Anyway I’d like to post about this and the context of Livni’s visit. I thought Qatar was like the rest of the Gulf states in that people with Israeli passports can’t travel there? Or is it the one exception or something?

MHMD: Well, Qatar’s always been the most openly friendly Gulf state with Israel-if I recall correctly they were the first to allow an Israeli Trade Office to open there. As far as I know, the ban on Israeli passport holders in the gulf is one bigass myth-Israelis travel freely to the UAE and Qatar, and I’m sure they do to Bahrain and Oman too. The Omani FM said one of the purposes of his meeting with Livni was to discuss the reopening of the Israeli Trade Office in Muscat.

Furthermore, I recently saw a news report on MBC quoting several Israeli and US studies that reveal there are up to 220 Israeli companies active in Iraq now. The Arab boycott is just one big joke.

Chaim: Why do you D-bags host these conversations on this listserv, take it to the blog! And use my title: LIVNI LAVIDA LOCA… I just wanna see it in print cause I’m so proud of it Or do a round-table burn… KABOBfest hasn’t done one of those in a great long while.

Emily: Maybe it can be on what constitutes a violation of the boycott: Qatar and the gulf countries giving Israeli businessmen free reign when there’s a boycott going on, or me working for a Palestinian org that is actually an Israeli org inside of Israel, or just talking to Palestinian citizens of Israel (as many regular gulfi people seem to think- I have more examples)

Is my working in Israel a violation of the boycott of Israel for all people of conscience?

Does the boycott include the exclusion of Palestinian people with Israeli passports otherwise known as Arab ISRAELIS?

I’m pretty sure we all agree that Qatar talking to Livni is hypocrisy… or do we?

MHMD: Livni accuses MP Tibi of trying to sabotage two-state solution That should be useful too.

Nimr: I strongly disagree, actually. I hate it when US pundits blast Obama for saying he would meet with the leaders of Iran, Hammas, Venezuela, N. Korea or whoever (well, I actually think there should be “high level” conversations first. Meeting the pres. should be the carrot for substantive talks). I feel I would be the hypocrite to criticize Qatar for talking with Livni.

I see no harm with welcoming and meeting with Livni. It’s not like they are going to let Israel bury nuclear waste there (see: Mauritania). For the record, I think the academic boycott is dumb and counterproductive too. Heck, I think the travel restrictions in general are silly as well. If any Americans are going to boycott Israel, you better be ready to get your ass boycotted 300x over by the rest of the world too.

Also, let’s be clear. As Mohammed pointed out, the rules about travel prohibitions are not universally followed. UAE “unofficially” lets all kinds of people who visit Israel and/or are Israeli citizens come there for business (lots of diamond, tech and finance). That might be open for criticism. Alternately, Yemen allows their own Jewish citizens to visit Israel for family and/or religious reasons, they just do it super on the DL. I applaud that. Syria might not have suffered the loss of its Jewish population if they could have come and gone as they pleased.

Lastly, to put the visit in context, Qatar is very much trying to position themselves as players on the international stage. This kinda thing is probably more about them posturing as players than caring so much about Israel, Palestine or the peace process.

The boycotts and restrictions ultimately do much more to hurt “us”, financially, culturally, symbolically and politically than them.

My 2 cents

Emily: So are you against boycott, academic institutional etc? What about monetary divestment campaigns? I really don’t think any boycott, academic or institutional, would cause much actual harm to the boycotting organization itself unless it depends on funds from Zionist orgs or people.

That’s a really good point about Syria and Yemen. It’s stupid to not let people travel. It’s just dumb.

I think that boycott is in fact a decent tool to get Israeli organizations and institutions to take notice of what is happening. I’m here and I don’t see people really having to notice much in their everyday lives. Life goes on as usual while 10 minutes away people are under occupation. I think that for many educated people who want to be part of the global community (Tel Aviv University, for example), if they got responses when they tried to make a conference saying people won’t participate because of the occupation, it would make them have to notice. I’ve heard Pappe stand on a podium, spread his arms, and say “please! boycott me!”

But the way it happens, it is carried out all wrong. people are not allowed to travel. That is stupid. Businessmen instead make a ton of valuable connections over everyone else’s heads, and don’
t feel a thing even though there’s a ‘boycott’.

Fadi: I think isolation will work. I think boycott, whether academic, cultural, or economic, advances such isolation. Whether doing away with a certain type of boycott (such as academic) will harm the mission of isolating Israel, I don’t know. Maybe the academic boycott is not necessary. Maybe it is. I think the reward (saving Palestinian – and Israeli – lives) is worth the risk. I think isolation will work. I understand the arguments against its practicality, or that it harms civilian infrastructure. I’m fairly certain that refusing to publish papers by Israeli academics, or cutting off grants or joint research (much of it on military and arms research) is not going to starve Israelis to death. I think isolation will work, this has been empirically established (for example, South
Africa). Those willing to argue against boycott of Israel, I think, must also argue against the boycott of Apartheid South Africa. If you’re not willing to do that, then there’s a double standard being applied.

Nimr: I would be interested to see any empirical data on isolation working as a strategy. Most of the data I have seen shows, 1) isolating other countries rarely works and 2) the connection between isolating S. Africa and the end of apartheid is anecdotal, and most probably part of a matrix of many other factors (which may or may not exist in Palestine).

Andrew Mack and Asif Khan have analyzed UN sanctions and their conclusion is that results have been mixed at best. They point out that sanctions work well as a tool of policy, but not as a policy. Look at the disaster of isolating Iraq under sanctions, Cuba, Hammas, Burma, Iran etc. Attempts to isolate them failed, and tended to strengthen the targeted elements, not weaken them. Also, it is almost impossible to isolate any country, this didn’t even work with S. Africa (otherwise DeBeers would not be facing anti-trust issues in the USA). Israel and others kept strong relations with apartheid S. Africa.

This is further complicated by the particular governmental structure of Israel where small fanatical parties have disproportionate influence (domestically and in the USA). Attempts to isolate Israel will only strengthen their power and influence, as it will prove their narrative. (which would lead to more death and land appropriation)

I think the more apt analogy for Israel is the United States, not S. Africa. Like I said if we expect people to start boycotting Israel, culturally, politically, economically and/or academically, we must be prepared to suffer the same treatment in spades. As an American, I feel that the actions of my gov’t do not represent my values. In spite of that lots of people die directly and indirectly from my gov’t's actions. The same could be said of countless Israelis.

It gets complicated really quickly too. The US allowed black S. Africans to come to the US to attend college for instance. Should we not allow Arab-Palestinians? If we do, should we not allow progressive Israelis? If we do….

I think the divestment campaign makes sense, but only so long as this is on an org by org, individual by individual basis and not gov’t policy. I am all for not collaborating with Israel on any research that has military focus and/or biased scholarship (i.e. propaganda), but a sweeping boycott is counterproductive. Some of the best most critical scholarship of Israeli policy comes from Israel.

Specific targeted sanctions (high tech, weapons, etc) are vital parts of foreign policy, but isolating countries/groups seems to have a fairly dismal track record.

Will: I saw this research a long time ago… I think they also argued that if it does not work at the stage of threats, it won’t work. Also, democracies are much more responsive to the threats of isolation, theoretically. Hard empirical analysis would be hard to do because the sample size is probably pretty damn small.

We can assume sanctions against Israel would work if the whole world stood behind them. So we should ask, how realistic is this, on what basis, and would do the prospects of good relations with the Arab world mean?

I would not say Qatar is hypocritical, since they have not exactly been touting anything but a soft position, anyways. I do not think the Arab boycott has truly existed since Egypt got off board in the late 1970s. So asking if it is legitimate is hypothetical. If it existed, it would be, though.

In principle, I am against normalizing Israel until it has clearly defined borders, a clear demarcation of its polity, and lives up to its obligations under international law — in the context of a just and viable solution with the Palestinians. Until then, recognizing Israel without its recognition of the Palestinians is one-sided and
legitimizing criminality.

I do not see how accomodationism could bring about peace. Eretz Yisrael is a non-negotiable ideological strain, first, and the settlements are internalized in the Israeli public’s worldview. Accommodation means accepting these fundamentals, which strike at the heart of Palestinian rights.

Emily: What about the fact that Palestinian civil society has called for boycott/divestment/sanctions? I for one think that we should be listening to what they are saying, and doing our best to implement where we can, for the mere fact that they are the ones calling for it. This probably does not translate to the govenrnmental level, at least not at this juncture. However there are many areas where resolutions can be passed and where choices not to participate/invite/invest can be made and publicized.

That said, I am working in Israel. Does this violate what I’m saying above?

Fadi: That’s right, I think sanctioning dictatorships (eg. Iraq, Cuba) or populations that were never in a position of prosperity to revert to (HAMAS) is clearly different from boycotting governments that are accountable to a people that are benefactors of a system that oppresses others. The Apartheid regime in South Africa, like that in Israel, does have a population that it is accountable to. I’m not sure why you would bring up Iraq or Cuba, I think we can agree that their dictators don’t care about their constituents and are not accountable to their constituents – so there’s a good chance isolation will not work there. Despite your opposition to boycotting Apartheid South Africa, you can’t dismiss the isolation of South Africa that led whites there to realize that “ok, we can no longer benefit from Apartheid, let’s choose a new path.” If we can agree on isolating Israel as a means to liberate Palestinians, then we can discuss the
details (such as travel restrictions on Palestinian citizens of Israel).

But i do think that Qatar and other Arab states are hypocritical. If there are no official policies on boycott in a certain Arab state, I do think these dictators do frequently evoke the Palestinian cause, and express support for Palestinians, to their people. They do not support the Palestinian people, they exploit the Palestinian people. The regimes care about filling their pockets and insulating themselves (e.g.., by strengthening themselves politically in the global arena);
engaging in economic deals with Israel is not something done out of necessity – or at least a morally pure necessity (maybe they think they need to do it in order to retain their authoritarian rule). I would not see them as hypocrites if they normalized relations with Israel while not pretending to be strong supporters of the Palestinian struggle.

Maybe some disagree, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the U.S. policy of sanctioning HAMAS and punishing the civilian population will lead to some shift in the next election, if there ever is one. That is, I wouldn’t be surprised if that policy w
orks. It’s a disgusting policy, and it’s a much different situation, and certainly isolating Israel will not lead to a humanitarian crisis such as that which exists in Gaza (and existed in Gaza before Hamas, before Fatah, before the PLO) or that which existed under Iraq’s dictatorship during the sanctions.

CLICK HERE FOR:

Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel

Palestine BDS Campaign

Divestment Support Committee

BBC featured part of the video on its website and had a picture of it with the caption:
The alleged victims vomited after being made to eat fouled food.

What wording, “alleged”! Why not write, “The alleged victims allegedly vomited after allegedly being made to eat allegedly fouled alleged food”?

As South African professor, Sean Jacobs wrote on the Guardian’s blog, the BBC has been mighty gentle on this one:

If the BBC’s tone is anything to go by, get ready for some apologetic reporting.

The BBC used scare quotes to describe the incident. As a friend reminded me, why, in reporting an appalling recent incidence of abuse of blacks by whites in South Africa, did the BBC opt to use quotes? The headline reads “Outcry in SA over ‘racist’ video”. So which is it – is it racist? Or is it merely “racist”?

This incident brought about widespread outrage in South Africa. It was widely cast as a racist prank.

Some, especially those unfamiliar with the historical context of systematic racial degradation in South Africa (i.e. BBC?), may not see this as more than a harmless college prank.

I highly doubt it was meant to be harmless (as safiyyah points out in the comments section, the video showed a “prankster” saying “That is what we think of integration”) as the BBC allows.

For the sake of argument, let us assume it was. In such a case, there is a bigger problem with the education system and the entire reconciliation process. No matter their intentions, they should know this act is loaded with meaning, as whites in South Africa interacting with blacks. Historical amnesia when it comes to oppression — as exhibited by too many white South Africans — is a luxury of the privileged.

If they did not understand the weight of their actions, then they are not learning about what is needed for true reconciliation — a remembrance of the past. As Jacobs’ piece explores, the “post” in post-Apartheid South Africa is a weak qualifier. The country still suffers from segregation and a vast income and quality of life disparity.

Does this mean that every time a white person does something wrong to a black person it is racist? No, but that white person carries a historical burden and needs to understand how his or her actions will be seen in light of that rich historical context.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGWFnsqLPVE]
Farid Esack, a visiting professor at Harvard Divinity School, is the author of Qur’an, Liberation and Pluralism: An Islamic Perspective of Interreligious Solidarity against Oppression and On Being a Muslim: Finding a Religious Path in the World Today.

A former national commissioner on gender equality appointed by President Nelson Mandela, Esack was active in the struggle against apartheid in the United Democratic Front and the Call of Islam. His current major field of research and activism is the response of Islam to AIDS; he founded Positive Muslims, an organization working with Muslims who are HIV positive in South Africa.

[tarboush tip: Leo Africanus and Monthly Review]

Here Tutu plans the mass killing of Jews with Hitler in Berlin, 1939. This probably explains why Israel publicly supported white supremacy and South African Apartheid until its demise

This picture was taken in 1999 (as you can see from the length of bin Laden’s beard, the camera’s date setting of 1996 is obviously incorrect). According to Mort Klein of the Zionist Organization of America, here Tutu and bin Laden are planning 9-11 in one of Saddam’s bunkers (turns out Saddam was sheltering him all along). Can you believe this guy was almost allowed to speak at one of our Universities! (photo credit: Will “free speach” Youmans – ya, he was there too)

Tutu with Saddam: for years Tutu was mistaken for Donald Rumsfeld in this photo; turns out that was just a photoshop job by the America/God-hating liberal media

(Tarboush Tip: Nadeem the resident photoshop expert)

And more than four decades later, the IOC stands in far lower moral grounds: It seems uncritical of next years host’s, China, human rights record, and continues to allow an apartheid regime, Israel, to partake in the games. Humans lack of perspective and inability to learn from history is mind-boggling.

South Africa has been barred from taking part in the 18th Olympic Games in Tokyo over its refusal to condemn apartheid.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced the decision in Lausanne, Switzerland, after South Africa failed to meet an ultimatum to comply with its demands by 16 August.

The IOC originally withdrew South Africa’s invitation to Japan during the winter games in Innsbruck, Austria.

It said the decision could be overturned only if South Africa renounced racial discrimination in sport and opposed the ban in its own country on competition between white and black athletes.

Read more at BBC.com