Posted October 21, 2002

Boycott

Regarding "Looking Behind Ha'aretz's Liberal Image":

Ran HaCohen calls Israelis who boycott Arab businesses "racist." Would he say the same of those who have demanded a boycott of Israeli-made goods? Would he say the same of those in the Israeli radical left who boycott everything produced by the Jews of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan?

~ Elisha Svetitsky

Ran HaCohen replies:

Good questions. Boycott in itself is morally neutral. The crucial question is: do you boycott someone for his mere existence (or "race") -- or because of certain actions which he can, and indeed should, stop doing.

When Germans boycotted Jews, it was simply because they existed, not for anything they were doing. All that Jews could do to escape the boycott was perish or flee. This is racism. The same holds for boycotting Israeli Arabs: it expresses a racist desire to eliminate them.

On the other hand, when Americans boycotted German goods in Hitler's time, it was not just because of their German-ness, but because of the persecution of Jews. If Nazi Germany had stopped the persecution, the boycott would have stopped. This was a morally good and legitimate boycott. The same holds for boycotting settlements' products: if the settlers move back to Israel, their boycotting will stop. They are not targeted because of their race or existence, but because of their illegal and immoral actions.

As for a boycott of Israeli goods: if its aim is to make Israel change its murderous policy and stop occupation and colonisation, it is quite legitimate, precisely like the international boycott on Apartheid South Africa was. If, however, the idea is to boycott Jews or Israelis as such, independent of Israel's policy, it's racist and deplorable.

Fog

Regarding BW's letter of October 17:

I doubt that the CIA and the Bushies are either stupid or blind. They deliberately create fog to confuse us.

The purpose of all this is hard to fathom, unless you assume the worst -- that they really do want to control the whole world for a very small group of people, and kill off billions of us to reduce competition.

I suppose that for the sake of the planet, that might be a good strategy -- provided they can do it without resorting to nuclear weapons. Even they would not be able to profit from that, even if, as rumored, they have underground cities.

~ Tom Duncan, Astoria, Oregon

Time and Education

Regarding "The Future of East-West Rapprochement," by Sascha Matuszak:

I would like to share my personal opinion of your East-West Rapprochement.

I think it's very hopeful. Long-term speaking, I look forward to mutually-beneficial relations across the Pacific Ocean between China and US. Especially after the unification of China and Taiwan. After all, the two nations are separated by the big Pacific Ocean. The silly stereotypes problems can and will be solved as time goes by, by the two peoples' understanding each other through exchanges. Time and education are the key and I am optimistic. The two cultures are different and in my opinion can complement and enrich each other.

Short-term speaking, if US will stay out of sensitive Chinese issues such as China-Taiwan tension, etc., then it will minimize the negative Chinese feelings caused by US and her policies. Chinese will be open to the world and be fair, but people have to know she has a bottom line about her sovereignty. Regardless of which leader and/or what government is in charge. I think and hope peaceful unification of China and Taiwan will arrive soon. Just check out the approximately one million Taiwanese now living and working in mainland China.

~ CC

Anything for War

Regarding "The Sniper," by Justin Raimondo:

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I saw Justin's article on whether Al-Qaeda is involved in the DC shootings. Oddly enough, a serious article appears the next day asking the same question in the mainstream press. The chickenhawks will stop at nothing to blame anything and everything on Al-Qaeda and Iraq for their own convenience.

I don't want to sound like a skeptic but I am still waiting for Mullah Omar and Osama Bin Laden to ride in on a motorcycle some Monday night on the WWF's Raw Is War telecast. Maybe the chickenhawks can raise money for their BS news releases by selling commemorative T-shirts for the event!

~ PJC, Jersey Shore

Two Sides

Regarding "The Sniper," by Justin Raimondo:

I read and enjoy your columns as often as I come across them. This one bothered me a bit though. I am a recently retired 30 year law enforcement officer. Regarding the Beltway sniper(s), I, too, am leaning towards the terrorist theory for many of the reasons you attributed as no reason. I learned a very long time ago that there are always two sides to every story or theory and it is to the investigators' advantage if he/she waits until all facts are in before pulling out of the lean. "Play your hunches, keep your mind open and your mouth closed," almost always worked for me. But don't be surprised if this turns out to be a terrorist sponsored activity. Anyway, keep up the great writing.

~ John S.

Another 'Working Assumption'

Regarding "The Sniper," by Justin Raimondo:

Regarding Justin's commentary, October 16, there are a number of working assumptions as to who or what the Washington sniper is. I have heard a somewhat believable premise that seems as logical as any.

The ease with which the perpetuator escapes apprehension implies some sort of an organization. But what organization? A terror group? Possibly. But in the context of a few weeks prior to an election, the activities have a chance of being political.

For example, might the antigun forces in the USA be desperate enough to sacrifice a few random citizen deaths in order to score against candidates who express pro-gun sentiments? I shan't bore you with details related to, "Remember the Maine,""Avenge the Lusitania," and "Remember Pearl Harbor," as you may have suspicions that US citizens have previously been sacrificed in the name of national interests. Similarly, the fear generated by the recent shooting incidents could play out big time in coming elections, particularly if some poor fool is paraded before the public as the deranged killer. Such a dupe wouldn't be the first person who has been framed.

So, you might ask, what is the object? In the first place, what is the object of those who want to ban privately owned guns? Banning privately owned guns can't be related to citizen safety in light of documented statistics that areas which have "right to carry" laws are safer than areas which are restrictive. One might suspect that a very real object is that of a totalitarian state which needs to disarm its own citizens for the safety of said state. Further, there presently are many close elections where a private gun ownership advocate faces an anti-private ownership advocate. What better way to throw some weight behind the anti private ownership advocate? -- Who, not incidentally, will usually turn out to support further government controls.

Elections have gotten to be extremely important because control of the only super power in the world is akin to controlling the world. Election fraud, such as registering possibly thousands of "graveyard markers" like is being investigated in South Dakota or bringing in out-of-state people like the Minnesota project of the DSA emphasize that democracy as practiced in the USA is ultimately fraudulent. It is obvious that expenditures of billions of dollars (not to mentions numerous lives) could be easily justified by unscrupulous politicians. You know, as the intellectually bankrupt say, "the ends justify the means"!

It may be politically correct to blame recent deaths on some terrorist group. Chances are that such contains some truth. But then a question remains, from where do these guys (and gals) hail? -- And what are their politics?

~ B. Wood

Bush It!

Never have I seen so much Bush It in my life! Here are some examples of blatant Bush It:

• Saddam will attack America with weapons of mass destruction
• The U.S. will "liberate" the Iraqi people
• By invading Iraq and getting rid of Saddam, the U.S. will bring peace to Israel
• Sharon is a man of peace
• "I have looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes and seen a clean soul" (or something equally asinine)
• Saddam has "crawfished"
• "The Bush Doctrine"

Me thinks Mr. Bush underestimates the intelligence of the American public. We are calling Bush It! Yes, Mr. Bush, there ought to be limits to freedom, limits to your freedom for you to bomb who ever you please whenever you want to! Can we dispose of the Bush It in '04, or will the election be suspended because of wars on several fronts?

Yeah baby, by '04 our troops may be deployed in at least 4 wars at once (that pesky North Korean bunch is at it again!). Better plan ahead America, this emperor has grandiose designs!

~ Rick O.