A New Twist on Racism in Sport

[Sahar]

I understand what you're saying, but I have trouble calling innocents "enemies" just because they were born in enemy territory. I don't think the U.S. hold the cricket players from Afghanistan responsible for what Al-Qaeda is responsible for. I see a huge difference between the governments of a nation and sportsmen and the population at-large.

I am not speaking about an enemy territory, I am speaking about an enemy who occupy the territory and ethnically cleanse its people. I am not talking about governments but I am talking about occupation and ethnic replacement that I don't consider it a legitimate state or nation.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am not speaking about an enemy territory, I am speaking about an enemy who occupy the territory and ethnically cleanse its people. I am not talking about governments but I am talking about occupation and ethnic replacement that I don't consider it a legitimate state or nation.

Exactly what territory has Yossi Benayoun occupied? Which people has Yossi Benayoun ethnically cleansed?

 

[beenie]

I am not speaking about an enemy territory, I am speaking about an enemy who occupy the territory and ethnically cleanse its people. I am not talking about governments but I am talking about occupation and ethnic replacement that I don't consider it a legitimate state or nation.

You're putting the burden of an occupation on a soccer player...that's where I'm having my issue with your position.

 

[Sahar]

Exactly what territory has Yossi Benayoun occupied? Which people has Yossi Benayoun ethnically cleansed?

He agrees to belong to an occupying entity, to protect it and to get benefit from it.
If he doesn't then I am accepting a stance like this:

In the US, the Neturei Karta are led by Moshe Ber Beck of Monsey, New York. Beck writes in his book קומי צאי מתוך ההפכה (the title taken from Shabbos liturgy means "Arise! Leave from the midst of the turmoil") that it is forbidden to live in or even visit Israel. He writes that it's forbidden to benefit from the Zionist State, even from mundane services such as street lighting and that any support of the State is forbidden, including paying sale taxes. Consequently, he concludes that it's forbidden to visit Israel, and one must allow himself to be killed rather than violate the prohibition. He emigrated from Israel in 1973, no longer wishing to live there

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

He agrees to belong to an occupying entity, to protect it and to get benefit from it.

He does?

I assume you've seen a copy of the agreement he signed that reads to this effect, right?

If he doesn't then I am accepting a stance like this:

That stance is insane. It's your right to take it, but I don't think it's reasonable.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Just to reiterate, since I think it's important... this is the stance you're endorsing:

Beck writes in his book קומי צאי מתוך ההפכה (the title taken from Shabbos liturgy means "Arise! Leave from the midst of the turmoil") that it is forbidden to live in or even visit Israel. He writes that it's forbidden to benefit from the Zionist State, even from mundane services such as street lighting and that any support of the State is forbidden, including paying sale taxes. Consequently, he concludes that it's forbidden to visit Israel, and one must allow himself to be killed rather than violate the prohibition.

IOW, if a person who happens to find themselves in Israel (by being born there, for instance) doesn't remove himself from Israel and everything associated with it, or doesn't die in the attempt, then he is responsible for any and all undesirable acts ever committed by the Israeli government.

Do I understand you correctly?

 

[Flankerl]

If he doesn't then I am accepting a stance like this:

Not always cool to support people who advocate the murder of people. But hey if you want to do that its ok.

He also was born in the Negev which is probably also occupied.

 

[Sahar]

He does?
I assume you've seen a copy of the agreement he signed that reads to this effect, right?

His Israeli passport is enough.

That stance is insane. It's your right to take it, but I don't think it's reasonable.

Good then it means you got my position.

 

[Sahar]

Just to reiterate, since I think it's important... this is the stance you're endorsing:



IOW, if a person who happens to find themselves in Israel (by being born there, for instance) doesn't remove himself from Israel and everything associated with it, or doesn't die in the attempt, then he is responsible for any and all undesirable acts committed by the Israeli government.

Do I understand you correctly?

It's not just about what the Israeli government does. It's about what Israel as an entity represents.

There is a huge difference between building an entity on certain ideologies and policies that are unethical and unjust and OTOH an incidental policy/action (or even a regime) for any given nation, that is unethical. The first has to do with the existence of such entity and if we must recognize its legitimacy or not and the latter doesn't deal with the question of the legitimacy of the nation's existence.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

His Israeli passport is enough.

I wasn't aware that an oath anything like you described was a requirement of an Israeli passport.

Good then it means you got my position.

I was hoping that I didn't.


BTW... a bit of a tangent, but still related:

You say that you don't agree with the right of existence of Israel. Effectively, this implies that you also don't agree with the right of anyone to have "Israeli" as their nationality.

Now... the UN Declaration of Human Rights states that every person has the right to a nationality (and rights that go along with this, like the right to re-entry into one's nation). If people born in Israel don't have the right to "Israeli" as their nationality, what nationality do they have a right to? Palestinian?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's not just about what the Israeli government does. It's about what Israel as an entity represents.

Was that a yes?

Edit: your position basically implies that every single living person in Israel (edit: or every single person who ever had anything to do with Israel unless they left or died trying at the very first moment they were able) is themselves a guilty oppressor. This is a very extreme stance, so I don't want to falsely assume that it belongs to you unless it actually does. Does it?

 

[Flankerl]

His Israeli passport is enough.

And there are people who ask themselve why there is no peace in that region.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Was that a yes?

Edit: your position basically implies that every single living person in Israel (edit: or every single person who ever had anything to do with Israel unless they left or died trying at the very first moment they were able) is themselves a guilty oppressor. This is a very extreme stance, so I don't want to falsely assume that it belongs to you unless it actually does. Does it?

To build on this...

It's well-known that the United States has given money and equipment to Israel over the years. Quite a bit of it, in fact. Does your condemnation extend to America? Are its residents and taxpayers (e.g. ssainhu, just to think of one participant here who - IIRC - lives in the US) oppressors as well?

Edit: I don't believe that Canada has made the same sorts of transfers to Israel, but we participate in NATO and NORAD with the US. This helps reduce America's defense costs by spreading them around other countries (including Canada), which frees up money that the US government can use to help Israel. As a Canadian, am I an oppressor, too?

 

[Bismillah]

Playing a sport with an Israeli team or player means recognition of Israel and normalization of our relations with her. I know that there are Arab players who quitted the game because their opponents were Israelis.

Emphasis mine. This is the most important part and I believe something that is a valid use of the Israeli Culture Boycott. This all hinges however on just exactly who the player is representing. If it were an Israeli team then the match shouldn't have been played and it would have been just fine in my eyes.

However, this player was only incidentally born in Israel, spent the majority of his upbringing in Morocco, didn't serve in the IDF, and is a player for Chelsea. Obviously then, his actions aren't representative of Israel they are of Chelsea. Booing this man is unfair and hinges on the unlucky chance of being born in a particular place. The entire episode then started with trying to draw unfair and irrelevent associations and antisemitism amongst the crowd.

 

[Acim]

From the outside in, the perception of 'normal relations with Israel' in the region appears to be, 'only antagonistic.' That is the norm in I would say my entire lifetime. And if it were only Israel in the region that was experience this antagonism, I might see sense, but it seems like it is a bit spread around. Especially recently with governments being overthrown from within own borders.

So, I dunno, maybe, just maybe, the underlying problem with Israel could start in your own backyard first? Perhaps you could demonstrate to world (and own self) another version of 'normalized relations'?

 

[Flankerl]

spent the majority of his upbringing in Morocco

Where did you get this information? After all his family left Morocco before he was born.