1d ago

Berlin declares BDS Movement unconstitutional: 'Aimed at Israel’s destruction'

www.israelnationalnews.com

The Office for the Protection of the Constitution in Berlin announced Tuesday that the BDS movement has been classified as “unconstitutional.”
The head of the office, Michael Fischer, explained that the movement’s status in Berlin’s antisemitic and anti-Israel landscape has significantly strengthened over the past year.
Fischer clarified that BDS’s ideology is based on “explicit denial of Israel’s right to exist.” According to him, BDS activity goes beyond boycotting cultural events or Israeli economic products. “The goal is to make the existence of Israel impossible in the international context. It is aimed at its destruction,” Fischer stated.

Europe @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Mikal101 @sh.itjust.works

18h ago

Berlin declares BDS Movement unconstitutional: 'Aimed at Israel’s destruction'

www.israelnationalnews.com /news/408682

Europe @lemmy.ml

IndustryStandard @lemmy.world

1d ago

Berlin declares BDS Movement unconstitutional: 'Aimed at Israel’s destruction'

www.israelnationalnews.com /news/408682

29 comments

Irrespective of everything else, the very beginning of the article is already wrong and sensationalist: The Verfassungschutz doesn't outlaw stuff, they have no power to do so. What them classifying things means is that they have an easier time justifying covert information gathering, inserting moles etc.
They have no executive powers whatsoever, all they're doing is collecting information and writing reports.
...also, the report doesn't mention anything about "unconstitutional". Here it is, 2024 one, page 30, BDS is listed under "Extremist organisations with near-east relation".

Keep on pressuring. Anti genocide is not anti semitic. Remove the politicians who are pro genocide. Do not repeat 1940
- there are anti-semetic people among the anti-genocide people, I don't know enough about BDS in Germany to say but we should be careful to allow anti-semetic thinking (both from the islamic side as the neo-nazi side) to get a foot in de door through the anti-genocide protests. totally agree with you on everything you say though, don't get me wrong.
  
  I agree in principle, and personally challenge antisemitic thinking where I recognize it, but I don’t think it’s possible to completely inoculate a protest movement (let alone an armed struggle on site) against the criminal actions of what is a de jure Jewish state from negative sentiment towards Jews. It is asking the impossible. Oppressed people and their allies will hate their oppressors and that hate will spill over to cover an entire ethnic or religious group. Until some form of justice and peace can be restored. In every case we should be against the targeting of civilians.
  
  You are right on that.
- BDS Berlin is the kind of group argueing that "I hate Jews" is not anti semtic. They also openly want to destroy the state of Israel and have connections with terrorist groups.
  
  Just from the polemic style and tagesspiegel it was clear that it must have been from Sebastian Leber.
  Am Alexanderplatz forderten sie mehrfach den Boykott israelischer Waren. Klingt für viele nach „Deutsche! Wehrt euch! Kauft nicht bei Juden!“
  He equates Israel with all Jews, which has antisemitic connotations.
  Sie wollten bloß die israelische Apartheid abschaffen.
  Äh, Apartheid?
  He thinks that calling Israel an Apartheid state would be antisemitic. That aged like milk.
  Zu seinen Kernforderungen gehört, dass alle palästinensischen Flüchtlinge nach Israel zurückkehren dürfen, dazu deren Kinder, Enkel und Urenkel. Ein solches Rückkehrrecht wäre weltweit einmalig. Israels Juden wären fortan in der Minderheit. Ob dieser Staat dann noch Israel heißen könne, müsse die neue Mehrheit entscheiden, sagt Deeg. Als Europäer solle man sich da nicht einmischen.
  He claims that a right of return for forcefully displaced people would be "globally unique". In fact it is an "inalienable right" by the UN resolution 3236. Also he then says that this would put Jews into a minority in Israel. He then suggests that this would be an existential threat to Israel. However he does not bother to consider what this means about the kind of state Israel is.
  Die führenden Köpfe sagen ganz offen, dass sie keine zwei Staaten, also Israel neben Palästina, dulden werden. Dass der Judenstaat verschwinden muss und es dann nur noch einen Staat Palästina gibt.
  "The leading heads" he claims, without noting who exactly that is supposed to be. This is in stark contrast to all the people he names by full name in the article. Also calling Israel "Judenstaat" - "The state of the Jews" rings racist/antisemitic. A more neutral formulation would be "jüdischer Staat" - "Jewish state".
  Wenn die BDS-Mitglieder Israel einen „Apartheidstaat“ nennen, meinen sie nicht etwa Menschenrechtsverletzungen im Westjordanland. Sie glauben, dass der Staat auch die 20 Prozent seiner eigenen Bürger, die arabischstämmig sind, als Menschen zweiter Klasse behandle.
  He claims that Palestinian Israelis would not be discriminated against in Israel, despite that being well reported.
  I will provide an excerpt from Amnesty International
  Palestinian citizens of Israel, who comprise about 19% of the population, face many forms of institutionalized discrimination. In 2018, discrimination against Palestinians was crystallized in a constitutional law which, for the first time, enshrined Israel exclusively as the “nation state of the Jewish people”. The law also promotes the building of Jewish settlements and downgrades Arabic’s status as an official language.
  The report documents how Palestinians are effectively blocked from leasing on 80% of Israel’s state land, as a result of racist land seizures and a web of discriminatory laws on land allocation, planning and zoning.
  The situation in the Negev/Naqab region of southern Israel is a prime example of how Israel’s planning and building policies intentionally exclude Palestinians. Since 1948 Israeli authorities have adopted various policies to “Judaize” the Negev/Naqab, including designating large areas as nature reserves or military firing zones, and setting targets for increasing the Jewish population. This has had devastating consequences for the tens of thousands of Palestinian Bedouins who live in the region.
  Thirty-five Bedouin villages, home to about 68,000 people, are currently “unrecognized” by Israel, which means they are cut off from the national electricity and water supply and targeted for repeated demolitions. As the villages have no official status, their residents also face restrictions on political participation and are excluded from the healthcare and education systems. These conditions have coerced many into leaving their homes and villages, in what amounts to forcible transfer.
  Leber wents on to equate these people with terrorists by claiming:
  In den allermeisten Gesetzen werden Religion oder Ethnie gar nicht erwähnt, sie gelten für jeden Staatsbürger gleichermaßen. Zum Beispiel die Sicherheitsgesetze, die Terroranschläge verhindern sollen. Israelgegner argumentieren nun, solche Anschläge würden statistisch gesehen häufiger von Nichtjuden als von Juden verübt - deshalb seien Maßnahmen dagegen rassistisch.
  "Most laws dont mention religion or ethnicity, they apply to everyone equally. For example security laws to prevent terror attacks. Enemies of Israel argue these would be committed more often by non Jews than Jews, which is why the measure would be racist."
  Again he provides no information who those "enemies of Israel" are supposed to be that made these claims according to Leber.
  So assuming what Leber quotes in individuals to be true, there would be some things to legitimately criticise. However Leber is known to polemizise and violate journalistic standards, including disrespecting his source. He claimed a different Berlin newspaper had altered an interview with Roger Waters to make him look better. In the process he leaked confidential communications. https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/mensch-metropole/roger-waters-so-verzerrt-der-tagesspiegel-die-wahrheit-li.2200289
  Otherwise he is busy bringing hot takes on social media to generate outrage. He is presented as an expert on the left, antisemitism and Israel. His "non fiction books" as an author are books like "33 Men report from heart-wreaking rebuffs, embarassing losses and reciprocated feelings", "Partying for advanced learners" and "Ernie vs. Bert and 99 other duels."
  Leber is a clown, who realized that with polemics around Israel/Palestine he can get attention while enjoying the backing of the political mainstream. His "journalism" remains lackluster and anything he writes needs to be taken not with a big grain of salt, but with a bag of salt.
  
  In that case it's a no no. But at the same time, Germany has been going after people who are just pro Palestine.

For all those english speaking people here: The "Office for the protection of the constitution in Berlin" is the Landesverfassungsschutz Berlin. First of all: Nothing is really happening here, BDS is not banned. The Verfassungsschutz (as problematic as he is) is just reporting on groups who have anticonstitutional goals.
You can download the report here:
https://www.berlin.de/sen/inneres/verfassungsschutz/publikationen/verfassungsschutzberichte/
This is the part on BDS:
Translation:
The aim of the “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions” (BDS) campaign is to “end the occupation” of “all Arab lands” by Israel “Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands”)40, i.e. ultimately the abolition of the Israeli state. The binding ideological leitmotif of the network behind the BDS campaign is thus the negation of Israel's right to exist. The instrument of the comprehensive boycott aims to inflict considerable damage on the state and the population that is equated with it. For one of the conceptual masterminds of the BDS campaign, the duo-listic contrast between the Israeli “oppressive regime” on the one hand and “almost the entire Palestinian population” on the other is at the heart of the Middle East conflict, whereby Israel is unilaterally assigned the role of being solely responsible for the conflict.41 At its core, the BDS campaign aims to demonize and delegitimize Israel. Hostility towards Israel is a key element of the Berlin BDS network. Its supporters and supporters reject Israel's right to exist. On the internet, for example, some of them called for an “intifada” or the “annihilation of the Zionists” .42 For years, they have been involved in individual boycott campaigns, such as against , a sporting goods manufacturer accused of collaborating with of the Israeli soccer league.43 Finally, Berlin BDS supporters justified and/or glorified the terrorist attack by HAMAS on October 7, 2023.44 In official statements, the attack was described as a “liberation struggle against settler colonialism” or welcomed as an escape from the “open-air prison” Gaza.45 They were also an integral part of the anti-Israel scene, which was responsible for a large number of anti-Israel events. They initiated and organized these events in alliances with left-wing extremist and Islamist groups, such as the VPNK. Signs with stereotypical anti-Jewish imagery were repeatedly displayed at these events. Speakers from the BDS campaign denied the brutal dimension of the terror of 7 October 2023. At a demonstration on 2 March under the slogan “Solidarity with Palestine” , a BDS speaker also openly explained that the slogan “From the river to the sea [...]” undoubtedly meant the ‘abolition’ of the “colonial project” of Israel.
- In the following, I use the Jerusalem definition of Antisemitism: "Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish)."
  The aim of the “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions” (BDS) campaign is to “end the occupation” of “all Arab lands” by Israel “Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands”) 40, i.e. ultimately the abolition of the Israeli state.
  A good faith and strictly textual reading of these aims could just be understood to mean the occupation of the 1967 territories, a perfectly legitimate political goal. The ultimate abolition of the Israeli state is a bad faith interpretation. But also, even if it were an actual political goal, it's not antisemitic. In a bi- or pluri-national democratic, free, and equal successor state to the current state of Israel that is not Jewish supremacist, Jews and Israelis can live perfectly safe, fulfilled and free lives, with full and equal rights with citizens of other religions, just like they do in many Western countries and like other ethnic groups (e.g. the Québécois, the Waloons, or the Catalonians) do in other countries. If the authors of this text cannot imagine this to be feasible, that is just a failure of their own moral ambition, and potentially also an internalized bias and racism against Arabs and Muslims, imagining them incapable of being co-equal citizens of democratic liberal republics.
  The binding ideological leitmotif of the network behind the BDS campaign is thus the negation of Israel’s right to exist.
  States don't have the right to exist. Greece, Germany, Canada, the Soviet Union, or the Byzantine Empire don't have the right to exist. The people living in states have the right to live and the right to self-determination, and so obviously do Israeli and Jewish people. But states are social constructs that don't have inalienable rights. See above how the goal of a bi- or pluri-national democratic liberal successor state can guarantee these rights to all people, including of course to Jews and Israelis.
  The instrument of the comprehensive boycott aims to inflict considerable damage on the state and the population that is equated with it.
  It's a non-violent and non-coercive campaign. It tries to convince people to apply economic pressure. It does not compel anyone to do anything. Boycotts are legitimate non-violent pressure tactics. In this particular case, the BDS campaign has been specifically a call from Palestinian Civil Society, as a way for people to peacefully apply pressure to Israel to end their oppression. It's not antisemitic, because it does not target Jews as such, it targets Israeli institutions and corporations to try to influence their behaviour, a perfectly legitimate political objective. It also does not single out Israel, since it is specifically a project initiated by a population that Israel oppresses. It would be absurd to claim that Tibetan calls to apply pressure to China «single out China». It's specifically the issue that affects them.
  For one of the conceptual masterminds of the BDS campaign, the duo-listic contrast between the Israeli “oppressive regime” on the one hand and “almost the entire Palestinian population” on the other is at the heart of the Middle East conflict, whereby Israel is unilaterally assigned the role of being solely responsible for the conflict.41
  The language of "conceptual masterminds" reveals extreme bias. Multiple reputable human rights organizations have documented the oppressive regime inflicted on the occupied Palestinian population. Pointing this out is not antisemitic. Furthermore, assigning the sole responsibility for the conflict to Israel is not in itself antisemitic. It is a political assessment about the actions of a polity that has nothing to do with the Jewish character of the polity.
  At its core, the BDS campaign aims to demonize and delegitimize Israel. Hostility towards Israel is a key element of the Berlin BDS network.
  That again is an extremely bad faith interpretation of the campaign's intents and is by no means an objective assessment. Hostility towards Israel is not antisemitic, in this context because it is not driven by its Jewish character but by its actions and its impact on the lives of the oppressed people that this campaign is seeking to give voice to. A good faith interpretation of the group's aim would be that if Israel were to cease its oppressive policies and adopt a policy of Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations towards the Palestinians, the hostility would gradually disappear.
  Its supporters and supporters reject Israel’s right to exist.
  See my previous point.
  On the internet, for example, some of them called for an “intifada” or the “annihilation of the Zionists” .42
  An intifada is a violent resistance movement. According to international law, that Germany ostensibly accepts, Palestinians as an occupied people have the right to armed resistance against occupation, within the confines of international law. And of course, antisemitism has nothing to do with violent resistance against occupation. The "annihilation of the Zionists" line is of course problematic. But it is given out of context, and as seen above, this institution seems to be taking the worst bad faith interpretations of the positions of the group. I therefore reserve final judgement, as some contexts might make this line more specific (such as for example if by "Zionists" they mean active duty soldiers, engaged in battle). That said, I would also caution that mean things that some people with questionable links to the organization say online is not serious grounds for condemning an entire organization.
  For years, they have been involved in individual boycott campaigns, such as against , a sporting goods manufacturer accused of collaborating with of the Israeli soccer league.
  This follows from their mandate. This is a non-violent pressure tactic aimed at changing behaviour, not at violence. See also previous comments.
  Finally, Berlin BDS supporters justified and/or glorified the terrorist attack by HAMAS on October 7, 2023.44 In official statements, the attack was described as a “liberation struggle against settler colonialism” or welcomed as an escape from the “open-air prison” Gaza.45
  Let us unpack this. Calling Israeli domination settler colonialism is not antisemitism. Calling Gaza an open air prison is not antisemitism. Calling something a "liberation struggle" in and of itself is not necessarily justification or glorification, if read in good faith it can be just an accurate description of an event. The October 7 2023 attacks by Hamas involved hideous atrocities and crimes against innocent people. Two things can be true: those are hideous crimes against humanity that should be persecuted to the fullest extent under international law AND they are a (very very dark, criminal, and disgusting) page in a long struggle for liberation. Such contradictions are not unknown to history. Nat Turner's Rebellion was part of the wider anti-slavery liberation struggle, even if it involved hideous atrocities and crimes. The fall of Tripolitsa involved hideous crimes by the Greeks against the Ottoman civilian population, and was at the same time part of the Greek liberation struggle. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hideous crimes against humanity, and at the same time part of the global antifascist struggle. Identifying this deplorable acts as parts of a larger liberation struggle does not take away anything from their absolute horror.
  But, regardless, it is intellectually dishonest to characterize the (hideous) October 7th attack specifically as "antisemitic". The criminal perpetrators were not motivated by hatred of jews as being jews, but by hatred of Israelis as being occupiers. I.e., not hatred for what they are but what they do. Obviously it was blind hatred directed at innocent people who didn't "do" anything of course, and as I've mentioned multiple times a hideous crimes against humanity. But it is good to be careful about what we call antisemitic.
  They were also an integral part of the anti-Israel scene, which was responsible for a large number of anti-Israel events.
  Being anti-Israel is not being antisemitic in itself, especially since this is a group motivated by opposition to Israeli policy, employing a non-violent, non-coercive tactic to change Israeli policy.
  They initiated and organized these events in alliances with left-wing extremist and Islamist groups, such as the VPNK.
  I don't know what the VPNK is, and search does not bring anything up. Still, left-wing and islamist is not the same as antisemitic.
  Signs with stereotypical anti-Jewish imagery were repeatedly displayed at these events.
  That is of course deplorable. Given however the bad faith misinterpratations I have seen in the rest of the text, I would like to see specifically what they are talking about. Greta Thunberg was accused of promoting antisemitic imagery for example, and it was ridiculous.
  Speakers from the BDS campaign denied the brutal dimension of the terror of 7 October 2023.
  That is of course deplorable. But callousness itself is not antisemitic.
  At a demonstration on 2 March under the slogan “Solidarity with Palestine” , a BDS speaker also openly explained that the slogan “From the river to the sea […]” undoubtedly meant the ‘abolition’ of the “colonial project” of Israel.___
  As explained above, this is not an antisemitic political goal, to the degree that what is envisioned is a bi- or pluri-national democratic, free, and equal successor state to the current state of Israel that is not Jewish supremacist, and where Jews and Israelis can live perfectly safe, fulfilled and free lives.
  
  I don’t know what the VPNK is, and search does not bring anything up. Still, left-wing and islamist is not the same as antisemitic.
  It's in the report, "Vereinigtes Palästinensisches Nationalkomitee", "United Palestinian National Committee" it's a joint org of Hamas and PFLP in Berlin. A union of Islamists and Tankies, how charming.
  
  In a bi- or pluri-national democratic, free, and equal successor state to the current state of Israel that is not Jewish supremacist, Jews and Israelis can live perfectly safe, fulfilled and free lives, with full and equal rights with citizens of other religions, just like they do in many Western countries and like other ethnic groups
  Zionists reject this on its face and claim a pluralist society of Arabs, Christians, Persians, Africans, and Jews living together would constitute a defacto genocide of "pure" Jewish culture and heritage.
  That's the nut of the conflict. When you have a population that has bought into the lie that it's "We have to genocide them before they can genocide us", you don't have any diplomatic room for a pluralist society.
  We're seeing the same shit happening in South Africa, what with Trump pumping up the hysteria around anti-white racism. These are ethnic nationalists. They refuse to believe that an egalitarian society can peacefully exist. Ethnic cohorts must be at conflict with one another, and we will either see this expressed through neighboring homogeneous states at war or as egalitarian states plagued by crime and civil strife.
  So we've got a US government that is attempting to purge itself of "illegal" non-white residents. We've got a South African state that Trump is demanding self-segregate in order to appease ethnic-European landlords. And we've got an Israeli state that is trying to wipe Arabs off their corner of the map.
  
  As melchior has posted below: BDS Berlin is actually arguing that shouting "I hate Jews" and "Jews are shit" is not antisemitic. BDS Berlin supporters attacked politicians. Stolpersteine (monuments for holocaust victims) were graffitied with "BDS". They've attacked critics violently. So whatever you are writing or whatever you think about BDS worldwide, those guys and girls from BDS Berlin are violent antisemitic idiots. People like them are fueling the hate in the middle east and not aiming for peace

According to the Jerusalem Post:
The intelligence document cited examples of BDS that were widely condemned as antisemitic by German politicians and experts in the field of antisemitism. One of the outbreaks of BDS-animated antisemitism outlined was the storming of an Israel event at Humboldt University. At least three highly aggressive pro-BDS activists lashed out at Israeli survivor of the Holocaust Deborah Weinstein and MK Aliza Lavie (Yesh Atid) who participated at the event titled: Life in Israel – Terror, Bias and the Chances for Peace.
Context:
Among the audience were at least three BDS activists: Stavit Sinai (an Israeli Jewish university lecturer), Ronnie Barkan (an Israeli Jewish math teacher) and Majed Abusalama (a Gaza Palestinian born in the Jabalia refugee camp, shot in a leg by an Israeli soldier during a nonviolent protest[8]). According to Michael Spaney from DIG, "several minutes" or "about 10 minutes" into Aliza Lavie's lecture, one of the activists started shouting at her before being removed from the hall, and then two others started speaking and/or shouting against Lavie and against Israel before being removed too. The activists were accusing Israel of apartheid and accusing Israel, and Aliza Lavie specifically, of war crimes in Gaza. Lavie said the activists told her "the blood of the Gaza Strip is on your hands" and called the politician a "child murderer" (a reference to the 2014 bombardment and airstrikes in Gaza). Lavie and her group reportedly left the hall through a back exit to avoid a group of about 20 protesters at the main entrance.[4][5][9] Describing the way the activists were removed from the hall by DIG members, Michael Spaney from DIG said they were "nicely maneuvered out" of the hall (though they were "lashing out"), while the BDS activists said Stavit Sinai was punched in the face.[1][2] Ronnie Barkan said that a video shown to the judge during the trial showed the moment Sinai was punched.[3]
So basically, actions by 2 ISRAELI JEWS (and an actual victimized Palestinian) are used as evidence of antisemitism.
Yet another case of German bureaucrats lecturing Jewish people about what is and what isn't antisemitism. Picking good and bad Jews, which is of course ...antisemitism.
Reminds me of this quote:
There is, as the Israeli-born architect and academic Eyal Weizman has acidly put it, a certain irony in “being lectured [on how to be properly Jewish] by the children and grandchildren of the perpetrators who murdered our families and who now dare to tell us that we are antisemitic”.
Shame on German institutions for their betrayal of both anti-zionist Jews and of course of Palestinians, victims of countless crimes against humanity that Germany turns a blind eye to. Shame, shame, shame.
- The head of the German Israeli Society DIG - Volker Beck demanded in an interview in January 2024 as the head of the DIG that aid to Gaza should be weaponized to press free hostages.
  https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/video249532622/Gaza-Streifen-Muessen-die-Lieferung-von-Hilfsguetern-staerker-mit-der-Befreiung-von-Geiseln-verbinden.html
  "Müssen die Lieferung von Hilfsgütern stärker mit der Befreiung von Geiseln verbinden"
  The DIG recently sparked controversy as a restaurant catering at one of their events serving a drink "Watermelon meets Zion" with watermelon "shredded, pureéd and hacked". The poster shows a lion with an Israeli flag and watermelons with faces in the background.
  The DIG said it felt sorry and can see why people felt offended although the poster would be "obvious satire".
  
  I don't see how that's relevant.

Criticising Berlin for forbidding hatred against jews is a new height of stupidity.
Israel exists, just accept that
- The account I'm responding to is a 3h old troll sock puppet. Don't feed the troll.
- In the US, many laws have been passed, and more proposed, to punish entities who boycott Israel. Entities being individuals, corporations, cities & towns, etc.
  And you know what I say to that as an American? I will boycott whoever the fuck I please, whenever I please, for any reason or none at all as I see fit. And if corporations are people too, my friend, then they have the right as well to self-determine who they'll buy from and who they won't. And while we're at it, so do municipalities, and private clubs, any other collection of people singular or plural.
  I find such craven obeisance in service of Israel to be personally offensive, and any American who pays attention to how Israel actually behaves with their own two eyes is likely to come to the same conclusion if they are confronted with the issue and think about it for five seconds.
  Anyway, that may be a factor behind loud support of boycotting Israel from random American leftoids.
- BDS of South African apartheid set a precedent that shook white nationalists to their bones.
  We're watching the modern western liberal consensus on free markets collapse under the weight of a few Palestinian activists saying "Sell your soda stream stock to oppose genocide". Now it's going to be illegal to divest from Israeli private business because... Israel exists? Because ethno-nationalism is a natural right?
  The fascist project of national ethnic purity seems to be as alive in Berlin today as it was 70 years ago.

Berlin just going full fash. How 1930s of them.

29 comments