"I was criticising the Israeli government, not the Jewish people. Together with many Jews, I disagree with Israeli policies towards the Palestinians and believe Israel's hard-line stance is jeopardising the long-term future and security of the Jewish people." - Peter Tatchell
Nice one align yourself with self-hating Jews so of course you cannot be accused being an anti-Semite and therefore boycotting Israel is OK.
So after praising Israel for being the most open society in the Middle East he then states that its attempts to defend its citizens is hard-line - that is a moral inversion of the worst kind. Being a free society of course is not enough for the Tatchells of this world they also want us to commit self immolation to prove how free we are.
I suppose the fact that the Hamas Charter calls for the destruction of Israel or the fact that Hamas is a fascist homophobic anti-Semitic terrorist organisation or that both Fatah and Hamas refuse to recognise Israel as a Jewish State or the fact that despite any mealy mouthed op-ed in the New York Times by Abu Mazen to the contrary both Hamas and Fatah believe in armed resistance a euphemism for terrorism is not a hard line stance. Does he also believe the offers by Barak in 2000 or Olmert in 2008 both of which were rejected without discussion were also hard-line? Why does he believe that it is Israel's fault that there is no peace?
Does he not realise that the only reason there is no peace in the Middle East is because the Arabs refuse to countenance a sovereign Jewish presence in Israel and that any Arab leader who does is a dead man walking - period.
Unfortunately just another "humanitarian" who has not got a clue.