Pursuant to the "academic boycott" of Israel, an Irish scholar has refused to answer a question regarding the American Hispanic community sent to him by an Israeli university student, taught by a prominent left-wing (Meretz) politician, Amnon Rubinstein. The academic also has refused to answer Prof. Rubinstein's question regarding who imposed the boycott and what conditions will cause it to end.
What do you think the likely outcome of this move will be (check all that apply)?
a) Professor Rubinstein redoubles his efforts to bring about a just peace, because prior to the boycott he had become suffused with apathy;
b) Professor Rubinstein's student, who didn't realize until now that the occupation is a bad thing, swears to become an advocate on behalf of a just, two-state solution, just like his teacher Professor Rubinstein (with all the respect that accorded him!);
c) Professor Rubinstein's student decides that international hostility to Israelis bears little to no relationship to their individual perspectives, and is more amenable to right-wing views advocating ignoring world opinion;
d) Professor Rubinstein diverts attention away from being a domestic progressive voice in Israel, instead working to attack the boycotters for their blanket hostility to his country and its citizens;
e) Professor Rubinstein ignores the professor in question and goes about his business like nothing happened (save penning this column).
I vote for "c" and "e", though "c" and "d" also seems plausible. Both "a" and "b" seem supremely unlikely. But it was never really about them, was it?