Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another


MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Admits His BDS Mistake

Once again, The Scroll gets results

Print Email

An update on our post earlier today by Yair Rosenberg, which clarified one important aspect of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS)-Brooklyn College kerfuffle: namely that the BDS movement, while opposing the Israeli presence in the West Bank and calling for equal rights from Arabs in Israel, also wishes for the Jewish state to no longer exist. As Rosenberg wrote:

This radical goal goes completely unmentioned by both Hayes and the Times, giving their audiences the false impression that the BDS movement merely seeks a non-violent way to end Israeli occupation and implement a two-state solution. But in fact, BDS’s own materials and proponents oppose the very existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish state, and demand the return of 5 million Palestinians to the country, which would effectively abrogate its Jewish character.

Through a colloquy on Twitter, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes responded to Rosenberg’s charges, admitting that he should have been clearer about the aims of the BDS movement:

Christopher Hayes ‏@chrislhayeswell, I think there’s a distinction between a tactic (BDS) and its aims, but shoulda said spkrs are antizionists

Hayes later said that Rosenberg (and Scroll Editor Emeritus Marc Tracy, who also jumped in) were right. Huzzah!

Now if we can just get the New York Times to admit they screwed the pooch a bit.

Earlier: NY Times, MSNBC Whitewash BDS

Print Email

Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180

Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

David Sher says:

Glad you are pointing this stuff out. BDS should just remove the D and then we would all know what it is.

Kudos to Chris Hayes. I’m impressed.

    Habbgun says:

    How so? This is just on Twitter and the bastard hedged.
    “Christopher Hayes ‏@chrislhayes: well, I think there’s a distinction between a tactic (BDS) and its aims, but shoulda said spkrs are antizionists”
    What a dip(manure substitute) this jerk is. Basically these antizionists found the best weapon available to them given the circumstances, got plenty of publicity, no pushback and then these so-called journalists shrug it off. And 9/11 was just a tactic to I suppose.

      I would say that even the term ‘antizionist’ has become a euphemism, as though it were simply another ideology, rather a designation for those opposed to the existence of a state for Jews, even in the midst of a region wholly dedicated to a different established religion. The term anti-Israel would be preferable perhaps.

The return is negotiable.

    Its true, in the declaration – which ACCENTS equal rights and respect for the 67 borders – which Israeli is not abiding by ———- it also declares for the ability of the dispossessed Palestinian arabs to be able to go back to their homeland.

    I think its important to note that the article and Hayes is wrong if they interpret this as strictly an action to destroy the state of Israel.

    Each declaration, historically, by the Palestinians ALWAYS has the request of the ‘return’….they can’t remove that. However, since Taba’s negotiatiors, we have known that the way to peace lies in a negotiable resolution to the refugee problem. And the Palestinans and Israeli negotiators know this is the easiet to resolve. There would be some sort of payoff with a small amount, perhaps, allowed to return to Israel. So….really, this is an attempt to negate the BDS movement by declaring it anti-semitic…..which i don’t believe is true. Altho there may very well be those who dislike Zionism in the movement.

      Habbgun says:

      Nice try. Palestinian terror continued and in fact increased after autonomy was granted. Autonomy was a lie this it was supposed to have been legal autonomy and not a move to statehood. Actually it was a move to statehood by the Israeli leadership and the Palestinians. If the Palestinians had chosen to live peacefully nothing would have stopped legal emigration into their own nation. They wanted instead all of Israel.
      We do have an historic opportunity however. The Arab Spring is erasing the boundaries set up by colonial Europe. The Palestinians came be easily and safely integrated into a Pan-Arab Middle East. In fact expulsion not negotiation is the humane solution.
      Anyone against the integration of Palestinians into a Pan-Arab Middle East is clearly on the side of European colonialists. Please desist such racism.

        So……are you saying that the Palestinian arabs should be integrated into other areas of the mideast giving up their land? And that it would be racist to reject this ethnic cleansing you propose?

          Habbgun says:

          Absolutely. This is Jewish land. The Arab lands are vast and should be fruitful and certainly have a better chance once the divide and conquer European boundaries are removed. Why you are against it I don’t know. Force of habit in believing the once European societies set boundary they are of a higher order than what the rest of humanity conceives?

          Mr. Habbgun… are lumping the Palestinian arabs in with the rest of the mideast/arab community. What i consider wrong is you not permitting them the designation of a separate people. These people, have lived there for centuries and can trace their ancestry.

          It is one thing if there was a proposal to ‘cleanse’ the W. Bank/Gaza that the ‘Pal. arabs’ agreed upon. But, after 100yrs of fighting – we can see they have not. They, rightly consider this land their own. But … let me say…. that the IRON WALL has been breached. And that they have agreed thru various proposals, (Genevia Inititative, Saudi Initiative) to divide up the land along the 67 borders with E. Jerusalem as their capitol. And that is what is going to happen. I think that your and others intransigence to this is only prolonging the agony of both the Jews and arabs.

          Lets face it. It will take a generation (or more) to remove the trauma from both parties hostility – especially the trauma from the childen! Why not begin with the inevitable compromise of land that is fair. Which is the Saudi Initiative. Since Barak – there have been an ever increasing amount of settlements on arab land in the W. Bank – and those settlements are the problem/hindrance to peace.

          I am not going to say that there will never be arabs that attempt to eternally fight for their ‘homeland’…..but then again, there will also be an ever-increasing (as the conservative right wing is growing in Israel) group of Israelis that will fight for Eretz Israel…….they killed Rabin and they are as extremists as the arab extremists.

          What we require is the international community to come in and designate those borders. I think that your proposal for ethncially cleansing the area of arabs is horrifying, defeatist and not cost-effective. Especially if one has the long term interests of Israel at heart – which is what we do both share……

          Habbgun says:

          You are wrong and your intolerance and use of so-called international authority will destroy many lives and not just in the Middle East. Many countries will be splitting up due to corruption and mismanagement of the political classes. Secession will free many and the UN is an oligarchical tool that can most likely squash secessionist movements in the name of peace keeping.
          The Palestinians do not exist as a people. They did not have a formal country at any point and not even well before the Jews had Israel. will fact Jews were ethnically cleansed by these same people right up till the 1920’s. They also effectively ethnically cleansed Christian Lebanese in Lebanon so they actually have a country which they stole in the way that they accuse the Jews of stealing theirs. Nice job in ignoring that. I wouldn’t want to shake up your Euro biases.

          By the way your desire to see these people get a homeland that will have to be supported through taxation and foreign aid further burdening the overtaxed masses in countries throughout the world speaks only of your central government loving viewpoint. Freedom for all means a Zionist future and a Pan-Arabist future. Not a European led worsening of individual freedoms in favor of a statist solution. A freedom hating solution that the liberal Jew has so unfortunately embraced and been at the forefront.

      Too cute by half my friend, the only thing missing from these assholes are the swastikas

        Habbgun says:

        Godwin’s law applies. By the way the Nazis were Leftist and I certainly am not.

          Habbgun says:

          You will definitely want to read Hayek’s Road to Serfdom. His explanation of fascism’s socialist roots is overwhelming,
          Also a good reference is Leszek Kolakowski – Main Currents of Marxism. Both Fascism and Communism come from main German philosophical ideas. National socialism and international communism most differ in the means not the goals nor the complaints.
          Fascism is Leftist.

        Habbgun says:

        Please disregard the comment below…missed who you were replying to. Thought is was me but you were replying to Karpf. My bad.


Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Admits His BDS Mistake

Once again, The Scroll gets results

More on Tablet:

Wolf Blitzer Explores His Jewish Roots

By David Meir Grossman — CNN host visits Yad Vashem and Auschwitz for the network’s ‘Roots’ series