Memo to The Harvard Crimson: You Can Either Support BDS or You Can Oppose Anti-Semitism But Not Both

On Friday, The Harvard Crimson published an editorial in support of the BDS Movement which seeks to eliminate the State of Israel.

There are two things which stand out about the editorial.

First, the praise lavished upon Harvard College Palestine Solidarity Committee is such that one might conclude that a member or members of the Harvard College Palestine Solidarity Committee had a hand in writing the editorial. 

Second, is the notion one can support BDS while opposing anti-Semitism. It is on this second point I wish to concentrate the balance of my thoughts:

In the wake of accusations suggesting otherwise, we feel the need to assert that support for Palestinian liberation is not antisemitic. We unambiguously oppose and condemn antisemitism in every and all forms, including those times when it shows up on the fringes of otherwise worthwhile movements. Jewish people — like every people, including Palestinians — deserve nothing but life, peace, and security.

What incredible nonsense.

You can either support BDS or you can oppose anti-Semitism. You cannot do both. For BDS is inherently anti-Semitic. Its aim and objective to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth by its demands that Israel end "its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands" and for allowing the right of return of all Palestinian refugees. 

Those who support the Palestinian cause often use the phrase Palestine "from the river to the sea". This means all of Israel up to including the very establishment of Israel through the 1947 UN Partition Plan which established a Jewish and Arab state, a partition accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. 

We also must consider that Palestinian refugees are different from every other class of refugee in the entire world and even have their own separate UN agency (UNRWA - UN Relief Works Agency). UNRWA defines Palestinian refugees as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict" along with their descendants. In other words, one could be born and raised in the United States and be elected to Congress and still call oneself a Palestinian refugee. Kind of like Rashida Tlaib.

In order for BDS' objectives to met it would involve the displacement of nearly 7 million Jews. I can assure you that most of those 7 million Jews aren't about to roll over and play dead. Thus the only way to accomplish BDS' aims and objectives is the systematic murder of Jews. This is an inherently anti-Semitic project.

If BDS truly opposes anti-Semitism then why did the movement see fit to have Matisyahu kicked out of a music festival in Spain a few years back? Matisyahu is not Israeli and has never lived in Israel. In view of these fact, the only possible objection that BDS activists could have to Matisyahu's presence is that he is Jewish. 

In supporting BDS, The Harvard Crimson's claims of opposing anti-Semitism in all its forms have no credibility. If kicking 7 million Jews out of Israel isn't anti-Semitic then what is?