Time after time Philip Klein has
demonstrated he has a knack to tackle subjects too big for him to grasp; and
time after time, he demonstrated how a Jew that dares to go into a debate against
someone superior, gets crushed like a featherweight that goes against a
heavyweight.
This time Philip Klein went after Ilhan
Omar who was making a point based on principles that go to the heart of the
American Constitution. Unfortunately, her presentation fell on the head of
Philip Klein like a book of Shakespeare's work falls on the head of a monkey.
See for yourself by reading Klein's piece that came under the title: “Ilhan
Omar lies about BDS to explain why she supports sanctions on Israel but not
Iran,” published on January 9, 2020 in the Washington Examiner.
Like the title of his article makes clear,
Klein does not understand why Ilhan Omar is doing what he thinks she is doing.
That is, he thinks she is treating Iran and Israel differently because one is
Muslim, the other is Jewish. To expand on his point, he quoted Omar as saying:
“The BDS movement is a movement that is driven by the people. The sanctions on
Iran are sanctions that are being placed to create maximum pressure by a
government. That's very different”.
To respond to Ilhan Omar's explanation,
Philip Klein said the following: “While it's true that the 'B' aspect of the
BDS movement involves private boycotts of Israel, the 'S' refers to the
ultimate goal of the movement: getting governments to slap sanctions on
Israel”.
To prove his point Klein went on to quote
the website of the Palestinian BDS National Committee that says the following:
“One reason that Israel is able to commit crimes against Palestinians is
because governments fail to meet their legal obligations to hold it to account
and provide Israel with political and material support”.
As can be seen, there is nothing in this
part on the Palestinian argument that says a superpower like America or anyone
else ought to apply maximum pressure on Israel by threatening the world
businesses and their governments with serious consequences if they do not cut
their ties with Israel –– which is what America has done with regard to Iran.
That's one big difference between the two situations.
And then, Philip Klein went on to quote
two more parts of the Palestinian argument that went as follows: First part:
“Sanctions were the final blow to the apartheid regime in South Africa and the
BDS movement calls for sanctions against Israel.” Second part: “The BDS
movement calls for governments to meet their legal obligations not to be
complicit in Israeli crimes and not to provide aid or assistance that help
Israel maintain its regime of settler colonialism and apartheid”.
Let’s begin by looking at the second part
of the statement. The Palestinians are telling the governments that supply
Israel with training, weapons and what have you, they are being made
accomplices in the crimes that Israel commits by maintaining a regime of
settler colonialism and apartheid. This is illegal, say the Palestinians, and
the guilty governments (who need not be identified because they know who they
are) should change course to be on the right side of the law. In fact, this is
something that's done all the time around the globe with respect to everyone
that breaks the law. There is nothing in what the Palestinians have done which
singles out Israel because it is Jewish or whatever.
We now look at the first part of that
statement. It is the opinion of the Palestinians that sanctions were the final
blow to the apartheid regime in South Africa. Well, this may or may not be
true; I don't know. I let future historians make that determination. But if
there is a contribution I can make to history; it is the following:
At the height of the tug-of-war between
those who wanted to apply sanctions against South Africa, and those who did
not, the Governor General of Canada at the time, made the mistake of her life.
She said something to the effect that sooner or later the Blacks in South
Africa will be put in their place. And that's what so galvanized the people of
Canada, the Governor General was denied reappointment. To put it in
undiplomatic terms, she was fired.
Even though our Canadian system of
governance, is based on providing peace, social tranquility and “good
government,” which means it relies on a top-down approach to governing, we
followed the American system in this one case by adopting the bottom-up
approach to governance; the one that lives by the motto: “government of the
people, for the people, by the people”.
This is what escapes Philip Klein who does
not realize that the State Governments in America that compel their people to
buy Israeli products they don’t want, are violating the Constitution. And
because the Jews that instigated this travesty are getting away with it in
America, they think they can get away with it elsewhere. And so, they put
pressure on Washington to blackmail the world into buying the Israeli products
that the people would not buy on their own.
Thus, it can be seen that the BDS movement
is not coercing anyone to do what they don't want. The BDS movement makes its
point and lets the people decide. When enough people have decided, they
exercise the bottom-up method of telling the government what to do. This is
what happened in Canada with respect to South Africa, and what is happening the
world over with respect to Israel despite the American blackmail.