BDS

Contrary to suggestion by Indy’s Alistair Dawber, Jon Bon Jovi does NOT support BDS


A story in The Independent written by their Jerusalem correspondent Alistair Dawber on the recent cancellation of a previously scheduled performance in Israel by Eric Burdon (frontman for the rock band The Animals) due, according to his manager, to death threats Burdon was receiving from BDS activists, included this passage:

The issue of artists giving performances in Israel is controversial. In recent years, Jon Bon Jovi and the South African band Ladysmith Black Mambazo have cancelled concerts in support of the BDS – or Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions – movement.

So, it is true that the popular American rocker Jon Bon Jovi cancelled concerts in Israel due to BDS?

Well, as Aussie Dave at the blog Israellycool reported recently, back in 2010 Bon Jovi indicated the band was going to be performing in Israel as part of their 2011 world tour, an announcement which garnered the attention of BDS activists, who had of course urged him to cancel.  Later, for reasons which were never made clear, the tentatively scheduled performance was cancelled, and the BDS crowd claimed victory.

However, Aussie Dave posted a video of Bon Jovi being interviewed on the BBC earlier this year, prior to a live performance on BBC Radio, which includes a comment that contradicts claims of the boycott proponents.  We’ve cut the longer video down to the 20 seconds relevant to the question at hand.

Listen carefully to the answer Bon Jovi gives to the BBC’s Jo Whiley:

So, unprompted, Bon Jovi clearly stated his desire to perform in the Jewish state.

What this means, other than a BDS Fail of course, is that the Indy reporter (who will soon become the paper’s foreign editor) should try fact checking instead of relying on the routinely inaccurate claims of BDS activists.  

42 replies »

  1. “The issue of artists giving performances in Israel is controversial.”
    We might ask whom this is an “issue” for. Who considers it considers this controversial?

    • Exactly. Maybe someone should point out to Alistair that if he doesn’t want to be labeled in a certain way (Israel basher / anti-Semite / tool / Terror Apologist) then he should clean up his writing so that his biases aren’t so transparent.

  2. It is clear that Jovi did not go to Israel in 2011. He clearly indicated he wants to go to Israel. However, it is not clear whether that will be after Israel agrees to abide by International Laws and ends the Apartheid laws and policies?

    • Dear ‘Jane’, another day another name, it may not be clear to you but when you live in the fog generated by your feeble attempts to denigrate Israel that is not a surprise.

    • I hesitate to engage with you “Jane” because you are clearly NOT open to reason, but I have to ask you …

      On what basis do you suggest that Jon Bon Jovi has any demands at all with regard to Israeli policy? Show me the evidence that he has.

      If you can’t, then please withdraw your pathetic piece of slander.

  3. Gerald better go on a refresher course – not doing a good job you are losing your cool

    • There are many reasons why the Palestinians don’t have a state. The fact that their most vocal supporters are bigots, narcissists, and really aren’t too smart, is one of the bigger ones.

  4. Nazisse Jane/Catherine/Samantha aka NS-
    Ismail/Alan/Deborah/Jim/Jason/Dirk/Nick/Natzie/Rob, amended by Gerald with Dopey/Grumpy/Sneezy/Sleazy/Tosser/Dorothy/Straw Man/Dick Head/Drek is a multiple personality, if anything at all close to a personality.

  5. Fritz join Gerald on the refresher course and after that you might be able to convince people to go and perform in Israel before it dismantles its Apartheid state. Until than what can I suggest but. It really does not help shouting Nazis at the top of your voice.

    • Last time I looked, Israel was not an apartheid state.

      Or did Jerusalem pass a flurry of race laws last night?
      Jews-only beaches and benches, and a separate parliament for non-Jews?

  6. I hope this refresher course will also deal with realities – in which Pretzel you can join them – but in the meantime the following paragraph from wikipedia will assist in your education –

    As you keep saying racism has to be seen from the perspective of the victim not the perpetrator

    Many Arab citizens feel that the state, as well as society at large, not only actively limits them to second-class citizenship, but treats them as enemies, impacting their perception of the de jure versus de facto quality of their citizenship.[163] The joint document The Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel, asserts: “Defining the Israeli State as a Jewish State and exploiting democracy in the service of its Jewishness excludes us, and creates tension between us and the nature and essence of the State.” The document explains that by definition the “Jewish State” concept is based on ethnically preferential treatment towards Jews enshrined in immigration (the Law of Return) and land policy (the Jewish National Fund), and calls for the establishment of minority rights protections enforced by an independent anti-discrimination commission.[164]

    • If you want to make a case for Israeli Arabs, the fact that they identify as Palestinians, almost entirely demand special treatment from the state that they refuse to work with or for as citizens, and generally serve as a documented Fifth Column needs to be part of your honest overview. Not too surprised you didn’t include this as it ruins the victimization part of your argument.

  7. I think that course does deal with what second class citizenship translates to – Apartheid means separate ie two classes – check out it better still quick book yourself on that course.

    In the meantime read the following

    Yousef Munayyer, an Israeli citizen and the executive director of The Jerusalem Fund, wrote that Palestinians only have varying degrees of limited rights in Israel. Although Palestinians make up about 20 percent of Israel’s population, less than 7 percent is allocated to Palestinian citizens. He describes 1.5 million as second-class citizens while four million more are not citizens at all. He points out that a Jew from any country can move to Israel but a Palestinian refugee, with a valid claim to property in Israel, cannot. Munayyer also described the difficulties he and his wife faced when visiting the country.[167]

  8. I took your advice kouf and this is another message I got – Mind you it is very well known the discriminatory nature of the Israeli state – but nevertheless here is the affirmation

    A 2004 report by Mossawa, an advocacy center for Palestinian-Arab citizens of Israel, states that since the events of October 2000, 16 Arabs had been killed by security forces, bringing the total to 29 victims of “institutional violence” in four years.[165] Ahmed Sa’adi, in his article on The Concept of Protest and its Representation by the Or Commission, states that since 1948 the only protestors to be killed by the police have been Arabs.[166]

    • Jane, do you need a refresher course on the apartheid practices of Saudi Arabia, or the extra judicial terror in Iran?

      Here’s a report by… Oh fuck it, I can’t be bothered to cut and paste some bullshit ad infinitum like some retarded evangelist preaching their superior morality.

  9. alexa you probably did not know that States that are Apartheid in nature apply a policy of collective punishment – so if somebody from a particular ethnic background commits a crime all members of that ethnic group are liable to be punished. Another feature of Apartheid but illegal in international law as you know. If you did not, quickly register for that refresher course.

  10. Alexa Are you saying collective punishment is not illegal in international law? I think you will find you are wrong. It is illegal to punish whole communities for the crimes individual commit. 16 Arabs were killed because 1 Palestinian threw a stone that killed an Israeli. I thinking the killing of an Israeli was a crime and the person committing it needed to face the courts and pay for his crime. It was not proper however to punish the community for the crime of an individual.

    • “16 Arabs were killed because 1 Palestinian threw a stone that killed an Israeli”. again another lie. Better go back and study a bit more about the 2000 events. I am stiil waiting for those aparthide laws.

  11. Alexa – I have given you several examples – Here is another set – You really need to go on that refresher course point blank denial of reality that is Apartheid is just not working

    The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents. Although the Jewish majority’s awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation.
    The Or Commission report also states that activities by Islamic organizations may be using religious pretenses to further political aims. The commission describes such actions as a factor in ‘inflaming’ the Muslim population in Israel against the authorities, and cites the al-Sarafand mosque episode, with Muslims’ attempts to restore the mosque and Jewish attempts to stop them, as an example of the ‘shifting of dynamics’ of the relationship between Muslims and the Israeli authorities.
    According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done “little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country’s Arab citizens”.

    • Discrimination is not aparthide. Or else Europ states as well as the US will be consider an aparthide states. Yet again you fail to show us LAWS of aparthide in Israel . You accused Israel of having aprthide laws. Why can;t you provide them? maybe becasue there are none?

  12. But ‘Jane’, and all the rest of your imaginary friends, the 2012 report Executive Summary says this;
    “Impunity was not a problem. The government took steps to prosecute and punish officials who committed abuses in the country regardless of rank or seniority.”

    Those two sentences completely destroy your spurious allegation of Israel being an Apartheid state.
    Now you can go on repeating ad nauseam the phrase ‘Apartheid state’ but you repeating it does not mean it is correct. What it does mean is that either you do not understand the meaning of the phrase you are repeating and are just repeating it like an incontinent parrot, or you do understand the meaning of the phrase and know that you are lying when you accuse Israel of being an ‘Apartheid state’.

    So ‘Jane’, and all of your imaginary friends, which is it are you
    a) repeating a phrase like an incontinent parrot and ignorant of its meaning?
    or b) a liar?

  13. Nazisse Jane/Catherine/Samantha aka NS-
    Ismail/Alan/Deborah/Jim/Jason/Dirk/Nick/Natzie/Rob, amended by Gerald with Dopey/Grumpy/Sneezy/Sleazy/Tosser/Dorothy/Straw Man/Dick Head/Drek is a multiple non-personality,.

  14. According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done “little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country’s Arab citizens”.

    These are no friends of mine and nothing imaginary about the US State Department unless everything other than the Apartheid State of Israel is imaginary

    Gerald why don’t you just go on that refresher course, come back and than try and sanitize the Apartheid State of Israel.

    • ‘Jane’, and all of your imaginary friends, the two sentences I quoted, as is clearly indicated in my post, are from the 2012 U.S. State Department report. So your remark about the U.S. State Department not being imaginary is even more ridiculous than your usual poor standards.

      Rather than repeat another of your stock phrases for the day about ‘refresher courses’ why don’t you go on a course for literacy then you will be able to read and understand the English language follow this with a numeracy course then you will be able to understand that 2012 is eight (8) years after 2004.

      Now ‘Jane’ and all of your imaginary friends, back to my question. Is it a) or b)?

  15. At the pain of repeating myself for the umpteen time this is the view of the US State Department
    According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done “little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country’s Arab citizens”.

    the Israeli government had done “little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country’s Arab citizens”. which bit of this sentence do you think denies Israel discriminates against its Palestinian citizens and that discrimination is institutionalized within the state ie Israel is a racist and apartheid state.

    Please do not keep repeating the same denials. It does not help. .

    It

    • Thank you ‘Jane’, and all your imaginary friends, for answering the question I put to you.
      It is clearly a)

    • Jane: “At the pain of repeating myself for the umpteen time ..”

      Don’t be so modest Jane, its what you do best, and what you enjoy doing, it’s your evangelical mission that gives you your sense of purpose in life – and best of all cifwatch allows you to prance around like a peacock on heat, parading your snobbery and moral superiority over the incorrigible and irredeemable yids. Honestly Jane, where else do you get to feel this good about yourself?

    • Accurately refuting your whining, fact-starved and context-free complaints is not “repeating the same denials”. It does qualify as “providing different accurate rebuttals”. If you had any intelligence at all you could do the same thing, but you don’t, so you won’t.

  16. Too funny… I saw the name “Jane Mathews” in the Recent Comments list and immediately knew, even without seeing a single comment, that it was the latest incarnation of our troll of many nicks.

  17. Nazisse Jane/Catherine/Samantha aka NS-
    Ismail/Alan/Deborah/Jim/Jason/Dirk/Nick/Natzie/Rob, amended by Gerald with Dopey/Grumpy/Sneezy/Sleazy/Tosser/Dorothy/Straw Man/Dick Head/Drek is a multiple non-personality, but dumb as bread in whatever incarnation.
    🙂