Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind.(Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)
We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948) With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last.(Friends of Israel Initiative)
Showing posts with label Campus Anti-Zionism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Campus Anti-Zionism. Show all posts
At Rennes, in Brittany, a city whose name all familiar with the infamous Dreyfus Affair will recognise, university students prove their crass immaturity and fascistic left credentials by disrupting a talk by Israel's ambasssador to France, Madame Aliza Bin-Noun.
Screaming the usual malicious canards, and citing the despicable one-sided report just released by the loathsome Richard Falk and his accomplice Virginia Tilley, they belie the very liberty, equality and fraternity that underpins the Republic, and the very democratic principles they accuse Israel of lacking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDXGafdmlzo
May their own futures not be blighted, ces enfants, by the Islamic menace that endangers the viability of long-term Jewish existence in La Belle Pays ...
Born into a Christian family in Lebanon, Professor Ghassan Hage of Melbourne, whom we've met before on this blog in connection with his petition against Israel of a few years ago, co-written with Sydney academic John Docker, and his on-going pro-BDS stance, is highly critical of white colonial settlement in countries such as Australia, which appears to inform his attitude to Israel.
Sometimes his indictment of white colonial settlement can appear so harsh as to give the impression, rightly or wrongly, of reverse racism.
See, for instance, this poetic contribution of his on social media:
Born in Haifa in 1944, Associate Professor Ronit Lentin of Dublin is one of a number of Israel-hating academics from Eretz/Medinat Israel resident in Britain and Ireland. Her name appears here as one of the endorsers of "The One State Declaration" of 2007 authored by Ilan Pappe and others, which if implemented would end Israel's existence, and her anti-Israel activism is well-known.
Ghassan Hage's poem (what she calls his 'elegaic J'Accuse') has inspired her to write one of her own, adapted from "white colonial Australia to Palestine," as she puts it:
We stole the lands of another people but that's not who we are we are better than this. We expelled 800,000 of the owners of the land, renamed their villages and settled our own people in them but that's not who we are we are better than this. We uprooted their trees and planted European conifers to cover the ruins of their depopulated villages, which they are not allowed to settle but that's not who we are we are better than this. We massacred whole villages, tortured their men, raped their women and beat their children but that's not who we are we are better than this. We bombed their cities, demolished their homes and built concrete walls to separate them from each other but that's not who we are we are better than this. We installed hundreds of checkpoints preventing the owners of the land from getting to hospital to give birth or get treatment but that's not who we are we are better than this. We started war after war outside the non-declared borders of our state, leaving hundred of thousands homeless, claiming self defence but that's not who we are we are better than this. We put the owners of the land under military government, enlisted them as collaborators and informers, and controlled their movement and freedom of expression but that's not who we are we are better than this. We put thousands of the owners of the land in prison and hundreds in administrative detention without trial but that's not who we are we are better than this. We build our settlements on their lands while preventing them from tilling their fields and picking their olives but that's not who we are we are better than this. We allowed our illegal settlers to beat their children on their way to school and to take over their homes but that's not who we are we are better than this. We kept thousands of citizens in 'unrecognised villages' without electricity, water, roads or schools but that's not who we are we are better than this. We extra-judicially execute the owners of the land, arrest their children in dawn raids and try them in military courts but that's not who we are we are better than this. We lock up asylum seekers whose cases we don't process in concentration camps away from our towns, into some of which they cannot enter but that's not who we are we are better than this. We deny the owners of the land the memory of their catastrophe but that's not who we are we are better than this. You see we are Holocaust survivors, and their land had been promised to us by our god and those doubting our right to expropriate, kill, settle, imprison, shoot, bomb, torture are antisemites.
As infrequently happens, a great article in Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz that actually supports Israel rather than denigrating it.
This one is by a freshman at Ivy League institution Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, who observes:
'.... Anti-Israel circles understand that their cause isn’t even on the radar of the average college student. By hitching their wagon to issues with greater popular appeal, pro-Palestinian activists seek to expand their tent and build a coalition larger than the handful of students fanatic enough to spend their college years slandering Israel.
Ironically, this disturbing phenomenon is hardest not on conservative-leaning Jewish students, but on left-wing Jewish activists who don’t support BDS. Social justice work is increasingly seen as a “package,” and one cannot be for racial justice, gender equality or humanitarianism without also swearing allegiance to the cult of Israel-despisers.
Left-wing Jews hew to the same social vision as the progressive community – but Israel and BDS are thorns for those who still believe in Zionism....
This discomfort is particularly dangerous because left-leaning young Jews are a weak link in the American-Jewish community’s relationship with Israel. As any exit poll can tell you, American-Jews do not, on the whole, vote based on Israel. American Jews vote for candidates who share their liberal social values. Thus, liberalism trumps pro-Israelism for most secular Jews. What will be when liberal Jewish students are forced to choose between their allegiance to Israel and their commitment to social justice? What will happen when not supporting BDS is seen as a fatal tribal weakness? The answer should frighten anybody concerned with the future of the Diaspora’s relationship with Israel.'
Of course, the true miracle will come when the leftist Israel-haters, including "feminists" like the ones in the image above, cast off their blinkers and castigate the countries that really do curtail human rights, including the human rights of that half of humanity considered inferior and treated as little higher than animals in certain cultures and countries.
Supporting brave true feminists such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali would be a welcome first step.
(For a loathsome pro-BDS "feminist" article, by an ex-pat Israeli no less, see here)
Ayaan Hirsi Ali telling last year why she supports Israel (a powerful argument from her):
Some time ago I mentioned that in October the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies at the University of Exeter, in the Devon cathedral city which takes its name from the River Exe, will be hosting a one-sided Israel-bashing conference consisting of Professor Ilan Pappe and like-minded academics.
Now, an official statement emanating from the Jewish Leadership Council declares that an acceptable and praiseworthy compromise has been reached that sets the template for future such events:
'The Jewish Leadership Council (JLC), Board of Deputies, Union of Jewish Students (UJS) and The University of Exeter can today announce a new approach to the debating of issues on campus pertaining to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, whilst upholding the principles of academic freedom and freedom of speech.
In the lead-up to the academic conference on ‘Settler Colonialism in Palestine & Workshop on the Naqab Bedouin’ the University and the JLC have worked together to adopt a plan which, it is hoped, will form the basis of an approach for future similar conferences.
In a constructive engagement, the JLC raised the issue that the call for papers and conference timing could give the appearance of a lack of opportunity to submit opposing views on the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The University understands this concern, and has worked with its academics to address it, while keeping at its heart the principles of academic freedom and freedom of enquiry.
Therefore, on this occasion:
The JLC has been invited to nominate two academics to attend and participate in the conference in its current form which is scheduled for the beginning of October.
An academic event will be held later in the year and co-hosted by the University of Exeter and the JLC, which will provide an opportunity for further academic debate, ensuring that many topics are covered from a range of speakers on both sides of the debate. The JLC and the University will jointly agree the title, format and content.
The principles of academic freedom and open enquiry are fundamental. Those principles do not prevent academic conferences looking to offer as wide a range of academic evidence and argument as possible within the range of study and to actively seek out views which might counter perception of underlying bias.
Working with Universities UK, the University of Exeter and the JLC have benefitted from a constructive dialogue and this experience may benefit other universities to engage at the outset of any future conferences on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.'
The JLC's statement quotes many appreciative sentiments on the part of relevant campus organisations, including Jewish ones. Also quoted is David Brown, CEO, Union of Jewish Students (UJS), who asserts:
"UJS are encouraged by the steps taken by the University of Exeter to secure the welfare of all their students whilst ensuring academic freedom. Academic freedom also requires that any students do not feel threatened or have their learning impinged due to their religious, ethnic or national identity. We are proud of the Exeter J-Soc and Exeter Friends of Israel Society for the determined and pragmatic way they have worked with their Guild and University leadership. We hope that Vice Chancellors and Students’ Unions across the UK will emulate this sensitive response to the needs and concerns of their students."
But some prominent pro-Israel activists are not placated. One, for instance, comments on the above site, below the line:
'This is not an academic conference. It is an Israel hatefest. The phrase “Israel’s exceptionality” is deeply antisemitic. It means “Because of Holocaust guilt, Israel is exceptional – it is allowed to break laws with impunity”.
This event – financed with public money – should not be happening at a University. That is what the JLC should have aimed to achieve. Being ‘allowed’ to nominate two academics simply gives the hatefest a seal of approval.
“This approach should form a good model for future discussions on conferences which may cause controversy”
No it should not. It is unacceptable for Israel hatefest events to take place at Universities. Giving the event a seal of approval in this way makes it no better – worse in truth.'
Another argues:
"You cannot have a debate when one side sets the title for the conference and the terms of the debate. The October conference inverts the true nature of the struggle of the indigenous Jewish people against Arab and Muslim ethnic cleansing, colonialism and imperialism. The debate’s premise is founded on a lie. You cannot have dialogue when one side wants you dead and the argument is simply over the manner of the death – emasculation of Israel’s right to self-defence, diplomatic isolation and condemnation in the court of world opinion or demographic strangulation. The October conference is simply one more weapon in this Palestinian/Islamist war, under cover of academic respectablility. None of this must be allowed to go ahead and the Jewish establishment must not be party to it."
Another, Professor Denis MacEoin, observes, inter alia (read his entire comment here):
"The JLC compromise does not solve, but rather exacerbates the problem. Given the overall tenor of the conference and its clear bias, I would not feel confident in exposing myself to its atmosphere and a likely tirade against whatever views I might express, even though I am qualified to do so... A properly managed academic conference should not display such an exorbitant degree of pre-judgmental bias or a clearly one-sided panel of papers and individuals....The JLC approach is ultimately self-defeating. It is a mistake to argue that a non-academic body representing a single viewpoint can, in effect, appoint someone to take part in an academic conference. As a precedent, this will allow bodies like the Muslim Council of Britain and other Islamic bodies to appoint pious Muslims with degrees of vague relevance or none to take part in this or later conferences.... It is a dangerous direction to take and the JLC, regardless of its motives, should be made aware of the long-term threat it poses. It will undermine balanced academic work on this topic. Moreover, simply by taking part we are endorsing the conference, which should be halted on academic grounds for its one-sided approach. Read the description of the conference, the title, and the proposed papers and ask why on earth should we go along with an anti-Zionist and, by more than implication, anti-Semitic event by dressing it up as ‘open to all views’, something it clearly is not."
"The Jewish students have been sold out, Israel has been sold out, Jewish Academics have been sold out, Israeli activists have been sold out and many in the community have been sold out, probably so one Jewish group can score a few publicity points. Who knows and who cares, it doesn’t make this action any less wrong. I am no extremist, and this agreement shows clearly these groups do not have enough of a fundamental grasp of the situation to be able to make decisions, and they most certainly do not have the authority to speak in my name. They have just made everything a whole lot worse. I know that historians will one day look back in astonishment at the treatment Israel is currently being given within academic institutions in the West, just as historically we always retroactively analyse anti-Semitism in any time period; and now in addition, historians will once again analyse how the Jewish leadership simply put its head in the sand as the world around them began to burn. Anti-Zionism / anti-Semitism, there is no negotiation and no white flag. It was, is, and always will be unacceptable, however it wishes to dress itself up."
"There is a well-funded and powerful cottage industry of NGOs, journalists, academics and activists who are crystal clear about their unabashed anti-Israel ideology. The goal of their openly declared war is to damage Israel’s standing in the court of world opinion and to bring about its collapse."
That's the opening paragraph of a typically hard-hitting article written for his regular op-ed column in Australian Jewish News last month by Dr Dvir Abramovich, a prominent Jewish Studies academic at the University of Melbourne, who's also chair of the local B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation Commission.
Later in the article Abramovich justifiably declared:
'Billions of people are manipulated by a tsunami of malicious op-eds, dishonest news items, scurrilous caricatures and disparaging articles that are awash with crude fabrications. Too many adopt the skewed narrative, lock, stock and barrel....
Which brings us to Breaking The Silence (BtS) a radical Israeli NGO, with a budget of nearly four million shekels. Bankrolled mainly by European countries, and foreign entities, it is made up of former Israeli soldiers who are paid to collect anonymous testimonies and evidences of “crimes” so as to prove that Israel is guilty of “intimidation, instilling of fear, and indiscriminate punishment of the Palestinian population.”
In 2009, BtS accepted 75,000 shekels from Oxfam on the condition that it will interview as many soldiers as possible who will confirm the IDF’s “immoral actions”.
Last week, BtS published a new report relating to Operation Protective Edge which accuses the IDF of “indiscriminate fire on civilian targets” and “deliberate mass destruction”.
It has been reported that The Arab Human Rights Fund, which has links to Global jihad and the PFLP, provided BtS with US$300,000 to craft the report. Now Hamas is calling for Israeli “war criminals” to be brought to trial in the International Criminal Court.
Here are some BtS quotes, “Israeli self-defence measures are pretexts for ‘terrorising’ Palestinians”, and “We are the oppressors … we are creating the terror against us basically”. Got it? It’s the fault of terrorist Israel.
Unsurprisingly, reports from BtS (produced in English only for overseas consumption) which depict the IDF as dehumanising, unethical and as the worst serial violator around, are splashed across the international headlines, chipping away at Israel’s image.
BtS is a convenient pipeline, a weapon in the hands of Israel’s assorted haters. By its own admission, BtS is not a “normal human rights organisation”, or as Haaretz correspondent Amos Harel noted, “They have a clear political agenda, which is no longer really covered under the term ‘human rights organisation’.”
BtS deliberately withholds context, and uses misleading headlines and hearsay. There’s no description of the complex situation of fighting armed terrorists hiding in houses, or that the IDF sends leaflets to warn civilians, or that Hamas fired rockets from schools and hospitals, dug tunnels to launch mega-attacks, and used children as human shields.
The infamous Goldstone Report, referenced and thanked a BtS report 27 times, since it aided Goldstone to reach his discredited findings that the IDF “repeatedly opened fire on civilians who were not taking part in the hostilities and who posed no threat to them.”
The distorted accusations contained in BtS reports are impossible to verify because the group refuses to hand over their documents, or disclose the identity of those making the complaints, or provide the date or military unit detailed in their accounts, thereby preventing the IDF from investigating the “allegations”.
As part of its propaganda warfare, BtS does global speaking tours, helping to fan the flames of rabid anti-Zionism, and denying Israel the legitimate right to protect its citizens from murder.
For the real story, as told by Israeli soldiers, go to the Facebook page #my_truth.'
The following week, under the title "Breaking my Silence," a squalid defence of BtS appeared in the same paper. It was written by a Tel Aviv-based former student of Dr Abramovich, a young woman named Kate Rosenberg who in Melbourne attended a Jewish day school and Habonim Dror. Inter alia, she fumed:
"Dr Abramovich's words smack of a frightening growing trend in Israel which likens democratic values to being anti-Israel or to suggest that believing in the human rights of African refugees or Palestinians to [sic] being anti-Jewish."
In the current issue of the paper, a leftist in supporting her and BtS shows his naivety in the face of current reality in commending their work "in trying to bring Israel closer to the ideals of the 1948 Declaration of Independence." But then, as another correspondent notes, BtS
"disqualifies itself from acting as an agent for change ... because its work is infested with an ideology that insists, in the face of overwhelming evidence, that only Israel and the occupation are blocking peace, not Palestinian extremism.
Hence, BtS is always quick to defend the rights of Palestinians, but never supports the right of Israel to defend itself from rocket and terror attack....
By highlighting and often inflating out of all proportion a few unfortunate incidents of the sort which are inevitable in any large-scale conflict, BtS sets out to delegitimise the entire IDF and its matters of fighting as inherently immoral in order to further its explicitly political ends...."
That the IDF behaved with commendable restraint in Gaza during Operation Protective Edge has been confirmed by such respected observers as Martin Dempsey (chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff), Michael Shmitt and John Merriam (US military law experts), Colonel Richard Kemp (former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan), and Australian general Jim Molan. The fact that the ratio of civilians to combatants killed was 1:1 (compared to the norm of 3:1 in similar conflicts) underlines that.
In a splendid refutation of Kate Rosenberg's "grossly simplistic, Israel-bashing" piece, Dvir Abramovich writes inter alia:
"Rosenberg knows very well that BtS, which has close to zero electoral and public support in Israel, sends its "star recruits" to tour campuses around the world, unafraid unafraid to spread their animus-filled venom about the IDF. There, they are free to brainwash impressionable students and to contribute to the chilling festival of demonisation....
Campuses have become hotbeds of anti-Semitism [I do wish the Aussie Jewish press would adopt the "antisemitism" spelling - D.A.] and anti-Zionism, and BtS adds dangerous fuel to the spreading fire of intimidation and hostility directed at Jewish students.
Irresponsibly, Rosenberg recycles the libellous Goldstone slander that the IDF indiscriminately fires on highly populated areas in Gaza....
The same soldiers who stand guard at night and risk their lives to ensure that Rosenberg can sleep comfortably, safe and sound, in her bed, are depicted as part of a vicious, murderous military machine....
BtS hurts Israel, empowers the BDS gang, and gives credence to those who want to put Israel on a list, as a recent UN draft report recommended, alongside ISIS, al-Quaeda, the Taliban, Syria and Sudan as an entity that systematically harms children....
Rosenberg speaks of the value of Achvat Amim. Perhaps it's time to show a little solidarity towards her own country. After all, what is the Jewish value of vilifying one's own nation to the delight of its enemies? ...."
Norwich is the cathedral city in England's East Anglia region which has the dubious honour of being remembered in the history books as having been the scene, in the twelfth century, of the first blood libel of medieval times.
In the late twentieth century one of Britain's several "new universities" was established in Norwich, the University of East Anglia.
The students of this pleasantly situated seat of learning have evidently swallowed the blood libels in modern dress that run rampant against the little State of Israel, for their union has voted in favour of BDS.
Scroll down to the final item here to read the motion and its supporting documentation in all their Israel-demonising crap.
Or if that'll prove too much like contemplating used toilet tissue, read the synopsis provided below.
'The University of East Anglia's student body has endorsed the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, in a motion passed last Thursday.
Meeting for the final time this academic year, the Council of the Union of UEA students passed the motion "in support of international law and human rights in Palestine" with 41 in favour and 15 against, with 11 abstentions.
The motion commits the SU to severing ties with companies that "facilitate Israel's human rights abuses, military capacity, or settlement expansion", as well as to opposing any university contract with complicit companies.
The SU also resolved to lobby the university "to adopt an academic boycott of Israeli universities" and provide scholarships for Palestinian students.
The motion describes Israel as "an apartheid state" and mentions specific crimes and abuses including illegal settlements, atrocities in Gaza, and "systematic" discrimination in both the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) and inside Israel's pre-1967 lines.
Israel's "expansion" in the oPt is described as "a settler-colonial project, predicated on the ethnic cleansing and expulsion of its indigenous people."
Proposed by a member of the campus Amnesty International group [Alex Bustos] and seconded by the Ethnic Minorities Officer [Hussam Hussein], the motion notes recent pro-BDS resolutions at NUS National Executive Council, NUS Women's Conference, NUS Postgraduate Conference and NUS Black Students Conference.
In addition, it was recalled that students have voted for boycotts of Israel on campuses across the UK, including "Kent, Goldsmiths, Birkbeck, Kingston, Swansea, Exeter, Brunel, the University of Strathclyde, Edinburgh, Dundee, Essex, Sussex and SOAS."
The case for BDS, according to the motion, is based on "Israel's multitude of human rights and international law violations" and its lack of accountability. The motion affirms Palestinian students' right to education unhindered by discrimination, and the necessity of international solidarity from students in response to the BDS campaign.
The motion asserts that "global boycotts are a non-violent, legitimate and effective tactic", that "all other methods of pressuring Israel and the ending of the occupation have failed," and that members of an academic community "have a responsibility to ensure that ethical considerations and social justice are at the heart of research and academia."
The Union Council rejected a proposed amendment which would have removed BDS from the motion. Procedural motions to delay the vote were also voted down.'
Ironic that Amnesty International has declined to single out antisemitism specifically for condemnation, yet one of its campus reps on the UEA campus has no hesitation in singling out Israel, and Israel alone, for Boycott, Divestment and Sanction.
The rather squalid all-day event that's going to take place in the Staff Common Room of the Law Faculty at the University of New South Wales campus in the Sydney suburb of Randwick on 24 April was excitedly touched on about a fortnight ago in a video (I wouldn't bother, if I were you) by a veteran Aussie Israel-basher of Jewish birth, Vivienne Porzsolt (of "Jews Against The Occupation", one of those would-fit-into-a-telephone-booth outfits).
With former NSW parliamentarian (Greens, need you ask!) and publisher Sylvia Hale (the Hale half of Hale and Iremonger), Ms Porzsolt went on the Flotilla in 2010 and had a nice little adventure.
In the video mentioned above she sits alongside Peter Slezak, another Israel-bashing "as-a-Jew", who's going to be a speaker at the Randwick hate-fest.
The keynote speaker will be the notorious Israel-bashing Ha'aretz journalist Amira Hass, who's currently already in Australia working her mischief magic among the we-hate-Israel set. (Sorry, folks, this dinner to meet her in Sydney is all booked out!)
Opening the event will be legal eagle Hal Wootten (born 1922, so they'd better provide him with a comfy chair), founder of the UNSW law school.
Spreading Hass among the usual suspects
Regarding the UNSW hate fest (admission free), we learn:
“The symposium Law, Rights and Resistance in Occupied Palestine is
organised by postgraduate students, with support from a group of
academic staff members at the University of New South Wales (UNSW). This
event will examine and discuss the extent to which contemporary public
international legal frameworks including international humanitarian law,
international human rights law and international criminal law, allow or
disallow forms of resistance to occupied rule in Palestine. As well as a
legal focus, it will feature theoretical, post-colonial, historical,
political and anthropological perspectives on the notion of
‘resistance’. We believe an interdisciplinary approach is necessary in
order to accentuate and engage with the diverse forms of resistance that
take place in Palestine as a consequence of the nature and character of
the occupation.
Some of the specific concerns that will be addressed include:
Whether there is a legal right, as opposed to a mere moral right to
resist occupied rule under international law and, if so, under what
conditions it can be exercised.
What characterises the right to resist? What forms can it take? What are the boundaries of resistance?
What are some manifestations of daily forms of resistance and civil disobedience from occupied Palestine?
How has Palestinian resistance to occupation evolved over time?
What is the role of academia, particularly scholars in international law, in perpetuating or resisting the occupation?
We warmly welcome scholars, students and the general public to attend
this important event..."
Although not an overt Israel-delegitimising event like the now-cancelled University of Southampton Law School conference, this is still an odiously one-sided, unbalanced event that lacks the differences of opinion one expects at an academic symposium.
It is simply and blatantly an exercise in propaganda
'One university staff member told -the antipodean news service] J-Wire: “This one-sided anti-Israel bash dressed up an academic symposium is very concerning”.'
The University of Sussex is a seat of learning founded as the forerunner of several "new universities" in the 1960s. It managed to poach famous scholars from other universities and to say it was "flavour of the month" is to make an understatement.
Then, it seemed, anyone who was anyone wanted to go there, perhaps even in preference to Oxbridge, and certainly as a consolation for failing to gain admittance to either Oxford or Cambridge.
It was notoriously difficult to even secure an interview for admission, owing to the vast numbers of applicants.
Its initial intake of undergraduates included the famous "Jay Twins", daughters of the Labour Cabinet minister Douglas Jay, and that enhanced the publicity surrounding it.
It was once known (rightly or wrongly) for the numbers of Jews on campus as both academics and students.
And for the number of trendy lefties in its ranks.
It is now, according to a recent Jewish student there writing in Ha'aretzlast year:
'a famously anti-Israel campus ... [T]he atmosphere is definitely very anti-Israel'.
Now, this campus near Brighton has joined the ranks of the BDSers.
Consequent upon a vote taken last week, its students' union is pledged to eschew all Israeli products, cultural and academic institutions, to lobbying the university to avoid cooperation with Israeli companies, and to abandon all investments in Israel.
Update Breaking News:
To the signatories of the Zionist Federation's petition on Change.org:
Southampton Uni's Kangaroo Court Cancelled?
ZF UK
31 Mar 2015 — After weeks of pressure, this morning the organisers of Southampton University's anti-Israel conference released an astounding statement:
"It is with extreme astonishment and sadness that we have to inform you that the University of Southampton has told us earlier yesterday (Monday 30 March 2015) that it intends to withdraw its permission to hold the academic conference on International Law and the State of Israel."
As of yet, Southampton University have not released an statement on the matter, with the conference still officially being under review. If the event is cancelled, it will be a huge victory for all the thousands who have campaigned against this bigoted event.
But we're not finished yet. Over 6000 people have signed this petition, agreeing that it's not right or fair for Israel to be singled out in this way. It's not right or fair for the Jewish state to be found guilty of the "crime" of existing. And it's certainly not right or fair for extremists like Richard Falk, who peddle conspiracy theories and antisemitism, to welcome on campus.
That's why we're asking you for what we hope will be one last push, to show Southampton University how many people agree that this anti-Israel kangaroo court shouldn't go ahead.
So please, let's make sure this is the last time we ask: Share this petition!
As reported by the London Jewish News, a newspaper with a commendable habit of stealing a march on the long-established "organ of Anglo-Jewry" the Jewish Chronicle (which as we saw could not be bothered to report the 9/11 link that downed Stephen Sizer, even though they were tipped off about it by yours truly shortly after it appeared on 20 January), an Israel-bashing conference is due to take place from 17-19 April, organised by the Law School at the University of Southampton.
The conference is entitled "International Law and the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism".
'This
conference will be the first of its kind and constitutes a
ground-breaking historical event on the road towards justice and
enduring peace in historic Palestine. It is unique because it concerns
the legitimacy in International Law of the Jewish state of Israel.
Rather than focusing on Israeli actions in the 1967 Occupied
Territories, the conference will focus on exploring themes of
Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism; all of which are posed by
Israel’s very nature.
The conference aims to explore the relatedness of the suffering and
injustice in Palestine to the foundation and protection of a state of
such nature and asks what role International Law should play in the
situation. It will take place over a whole weekend and will involve
leading thinkers: scholars from law, politics, philosophy, theology,
anthropology, cultural studies history and other connected disciplines
Key
speakers and various panels will diagnose the legal position with
regard to the nature of Israel thus enabling a much needed platform for
scholarly debate and disagreement.'
'Tory peer Lord Leigh said: “It is very disappointing that a distinguished university like Southampton has organised this conference. They have never held a conference questioning the right of existence of any other country.”....
Despite opposition from Jewish community leaders – several of whom have lodged protests with the university’s vice-chancellor – organisers have pressed ahead with the convention on 17-19 April, saying they hope it will “serve as a platform for scholarly debates rather than positing an activist aim”.
Jewish Leadership Council chief executive Simon Johnson ...said: “We are gravely concerned about this unbalanced, delegitimising conference, which will have a detrimental impact on cohesiveness. We have asked the vice-chancellor to reconsider.”
He added: “It’s a fine line between academic freedom, which we all cherish, and delegitimisation and discrimination. This conference seems to hover around that line.”' [Emphasis added]
"It is time that Zionists are asked to finally account for their support to the illegal occupation of Palestine since 1967. This resolution rightly targets only Israel given the humongous
influence that Jewish scholars have in the decision making process of
Academia in general."
Whereas Israel has denied academics of Palestinian ethnicity entry into the West Bank;
Whereas these restrictions violate international conventions on an occupying power’s obligation to protect the right to education;
Whereas the United States Department of State acknowledges on its Web site that Israel restricts the movements of American citizens of Palestinian descent;
Whereas the denials have disrupted instruction, research, and planning at Palestinian universities;
Whereas the denials have restricted the academic freedom of scholars and teachers who are United States citizens;
Be it resolved that the MLA urge the United States Department of State to contest Israel’s denials of entry to the West Bank by United States academics who have been invited to teach, confer, or do research at Palestinian universities.
'Last January, the organization became the subject of major controversy after the group’s Delegate Assembly considered a resolution condemning Israel and calling on the U.S. State Department to “contest Israel’s denials of entry to the West Bank by U.S. academics who have been invited to teach, confer, or do research at Palestinian universities.”
The resolution did not, however, call for an academic boycott of Israel, a move which has been pushed by some activists and endorsed by the American Studies Association last December.
Supporters of the resolution said it would bring needed attention to alleged abuses of academic freedom by the Israeli government. Opponents argued the resolution was singling out Israel while ignoring far more severe abuses in other countries.
The resolution passed the Delegate Assembly 60 to 53, but to be officially approved it had to be endorsed by at least 10 percent of the MLA’s membership in a vote.
In the vote among the MLA’s entire membership, which ended Sunday, the anti-Israel crowd triumphed 1,560 to 1,063. However, at least 2,390 “yes” votes were needed to reach the 10 percent threshold. Nearly 90 percent of the MLA’s member decided this debate was one worth sitting out....'
Remember my recent post here regarding the adoption of a BDS motion by the King's College London Students' Union (KCLSU)?
As reported in the campus newspaper, KCLSU's Trustee Board has since decided that it won't override the motion, and that consequently
"the
motion will be published within the KCLSU Welfare and Community Zone
alongside other issues on which our members have, by majority, voted."
The same source reports that the Trustee Board also decided that
''we will not use KCLSU resources
to implement the ‘Resolves’ section of the motion or otherwise promote
the BDS movement through the union."
It quotes KCLSU President and Chair of the Trustee Board Sebastiaan
Debrouwere thus:
"[The Board] decided that the motion as democratically
approved by Student General Meeting should stand as a record of the
majority view expressed on the issue, but that we should not act on the
resolves, given the laws that govern us as a charity and our wider
objectives as a charity..."
Cold comfort for Jewish and other pro-Israel students on a campus where for all too many anti-Israel activity seems to have become a way of life:
"As an alumnus of KCL, I wrote to the Chancellor a few months ago, expressing concern about the College - during my time there, extremist groups like Hizb-ut Tahrir set up stalls at the entrance and acted in an intimidating way, and the Jewish Society's noticeboard was routinely vandalised and defaced with anti-Semitic graffiti, including Holocaust denial. The College also has the dubious "honour" of educating a British suicide bomber, who attempted to blow up Mike's Bar in Tel Aviv (his accomplice was unfortunately successful).
The Chancellor's representative assured me that the atmosphere was now completely different and there was no problem at all.
They then invited Richard Falk, the anti-Semite at the UN, to give a speech. This time the Chancellor gave me a list of Falk's credentials, and defended the invitation.
I see nothing has changed. The College authorities, whilst not directly responsible for the shameful vote, stoke the fire and then act all surprised when it the fire spreads.
I urge Jewish students, and right minded decent young people, to avoid most London colleges - indeed, most UK campuses, and study somewhere else. The atmosphere is thoroughly toxic."
So writes a commenter named Adam on my recent post here.
Oxford student Jonathan Hunter (if the name if familiar, it's probably because of this incident) reflected thus on KCL's invitation to Falk:
".....This man has repeatedly violated principles at the forefront of King’s College’s own external speakers policy; especially in regard to the incitement of religious hatred. And his talk wasn’t even educational; it was filled with garbage. A moral equivocation between U.S. military action during the Second World War and Nazi genocide. A defence of what he even termed ‘inconsistency’ in singling out Israel and the U.S. for human rights abuses. After the talk, when I approached him for clarification on some his views, he basically denied outright that he was a 9/11 truther; despite being a signatory to an organisation called 9/11 Truth.
So why on earth did King’s College invite this clown? Why should King’s grant legitimacy to this complete and utter nut? And more bizarrely, how can this be a compulsory session for students?....
In essence, it boils down to that obsession with Israel which permeates nearly every academic institution. A pathological infatuation which latches onto any crank so long as he has something bad to say about Israel. It doesn’t matter if it’s a Holocaust denier like Israel Shamir – the House of Lords will warmly receive him. Nobody cares if it’s someone as offensive as George Galloway – the Oxford Union will still invite him. Who gives a damn if they’re an apologist for suicide bombers? Azzam Tamimi continues to hop from campus to campus spouting hatred...."
The toxic atmosphere which Adam cites is, of course, apparent on many campuses in the Western world, especially during the excrescence known as "Israel Apartheid Week" (see, for example, the outbreak of antisemitic daubings at Adelaide University recently (more here) and the outrageous goings-on at Vassar, as described here.
British blogger Edgar Davidson has many interesting insights on Israel Apartheid Week here. In that must-read post, dated 18th March, he notes, inter alia:
'A number of my friends' children have just experienced their first 'Israel Apartheid' week on campus ... and this has raised the question of how best to respond.... You should expose the person who says that as the liar and insane psychopath that they are.
The long-term objective of the ‘Israel is an apartheid state’ lie is similarly nothing less than the destruction of the Jewish state and its 6 million Jewish inhabitants. Just look at the people who are behind the lie....
I am not talking about the thousands of naive, easily influenced (and
sometimes well-meaning) university students who have fallen for the lie .... I am talking about those who started the lie and those who
actively promote it.'
He goes on to say:
'For the historical record the apartheid lie was actually invented by the KGB in communist Russia as part of the Cold War – after the total defeat of the Arab armies with their Soviet equipment in 1967. The KGB produced all the propaganda material in the late 1960s and 1970s that was then used by radical leftists throughout the Western world. Since the fall of the Soviet Union the apartheid lie has been driven by a hard core of anti-Semites, leftist revolutionaries and Islamists – the latter of whom come from Arab countries which practice real apartheid (those same Arab countries provide much of the funding now for the propaganda which is still based on the Soviet material). The liars’ agenda is the destruction of the State of Israel. Despite belonging to organisations with names like the ‘Palestine Solidarity Campaign’ or 'Students for Justice for Palestinians' they have no interest in the welfare of the Palestinians; this is proven by their total lack of concern for the genuinely appalling plight of Palestinians in Syria (where they are being starved and murdered) and Lebanon (where for over 65 years they have been denied rights of citizenship and are banned from most professions). Read here about the kind of Western student organisations who promote Israel Apartheid week....'
The first source linked to by Davidson in the paragraph above is an article by the splendidly pro-Israel Professor Alan Johnson, who is associated with BICOM. Johnson writes:
'....The smear originated in "anti-Zionist" campaigns that were waged without let up by the Communist states during the Cold War. Seeking Arab allies, these campaigns frequently descended into antisemitism, the word "Zionist" understood by all as a fig-leaf for "Jew". Many ideas that have since spread around the world, especially amongst "progressives", began here: Zionism equals racism, Zionism equals imperialism. Israel is the USA's "watchdog" in the Middle East, Zionism is complicit with, or even promotes, antisemitism, and, of course, Zionism equals South African apartheid....
The smear got a huge boost in 1975 when a coalition between the Soviet Bloc, the authoritarian Arab states, and the so-called "Non-Aligned Movement" used its built-in majority at the UN General Assembly to pass Resolution 3379, which equated Zionism with racism. (The UN rescinded the resolution in 1991.)
The third key moment in the growth of the Apartheid Smear came in 2001 with the failure of the Camp David peace talks. This gave the smear an opening which was seized by tightly-organised, politically motivated and well-resourced group of NGOs and anti-Israel activists who hijacked the UN’s World Conference against Racism, Racial Intolerance and Xenophobia in Durban, South Africa to launch a global campaign against Israel as a "racist, apartheid state" and Israel itself as a "crime against humanity".
South Africa’s then Deputy Foreign Minister, Aziz Pahad, was appalled: "I wish to make it unequivocally clear that the SA government recognises that … [the Durban Conference] was hijacked and used by some with an anti-Israel agenda to turn into an antisemitic event."
The event was marked by hate speech. Pamphlets were circulated filled with grotesque caricatures of hook-nosed Jews depicted as Nazis, spearing Palestinian children, dripping blood from their fangs, with missiles bulging from their eyes or with pots of money nearby. In a Palestinian-led march with thousands of participants, a placard was held aloft that read ‘Hitler Should Have Finished the Job.’ Nearby, someone was selling the most notorious of anti-Jewish tracts, ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, a forgery which purports to be the minutes of a world Jewish Conspiracy, and which has been called a ‘warrant for genocide’....
Davidson, in his post, continues:
The Arabs who promote the Apartheid lie are simply projecting the Apartheid that is rampant in their in their own countries and minds. The Apartheid states are all Arab and Muslim: not a single practising Jew lives in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority areas (where Jews cannot even travel without facing likely murder), Jordan and Saudi Arabia (where in both countries it is illegal to be a citizen if you are a Jew). There are just 2 remaining Jews in Iraq (where there were 300,000 as recently as 1952), 3 in Syria, 40 in Lebanon and 30 in Egypt, and less than 3000 Jews live in all of the other Arab countries combined. Yet, less than 60 years ago those Arab countries had thriving communities of Jews totally over 1,000,000. They have all been driven out. But while every University student knows about the ‘plight of the Palestinians’ none know about the plight of Jews forcibly driven from Arab lands.
The most curiously misunderstood thing about the 'Israel Apartheid' lie is that the only people in Israel who are actually subject to legal restrictions because of their religion are the Jews. For example:
while Muslims are free to pray at any of their holy sites anywhere in Israel, Jews are banned from stepping foot on their holiest site (Temple Mount) and can only enter others (such as Rachel's tomb) at great risk under army escort. Israeli police are not even allowed to intervene when Arabs stone Jews from the Temple Mount.
only Jews (and Druze) are legally forced to give up 3 years of their life (and then one month per year until retirement) to go in the army. Muslims have no obligation at all for any type of national service despite having full (and indeed disproportionately large) access to all national benefits.
because all terrorism in Israel is committed by Arabs against Jews, only Jewish-owned buildings and businesses are forced to maintain costly security guards, barriers, and checks on each person entering.
....
No Jew can freely walk into any Muslim neighbourhood in Israel without endangering their lives. In contrast any Muslim can enter any Jewish neighbourhood without any fear at all.
Any plans for new construction in Jewish neighbourhoods result in condemnation by the ‘international community’. Meanwhile completely illegal construction by Muslims anywhere goes unchallenged both by the ‘international community’ and by Israel lawmakers themselves..
As Davidson observes,
'[T]here is a wealth of
unimpeachable, easily accessible material that exposes every single
facet of the Israel Apartheid lie (see, e.g. here, here, here, here and here)...'
And here's an excellent interview with Rabbi Marc Golub of Shalom TV, in which a Jewish, pro-Israel academic at Stanford University, Charles Small, exposes the BDS Movement for the hypocritical, antisemitic movement it is. Rabbi Golub had asked a pro-BDS academic at Stanford to appear with Small, but the anti-Israel academic had refused, insisting on being interviewed alone; Small pulls no punches in his interpretation of this refusal. The interview, which took place earlier this year, is well worth listening to: it is very insightful and instructive:
It was reported in yesterday's Higher Education pages of The Australian newspaper that Israeli political scientist Professor Dan Avnon, who has just taken up a Sir Zelman Cowen scholarship at Sydney University’s Institute for Democracy and Human Rights, has scathingly criticised the Centre's head, BDSer Professor Jake Lynch, who had earlier attempted to deny a fellowship to Avnon on the grounds of his Israeli nationality.
In the course of an exclusive interview with the newspaper, Avnon said
'he believed Professor Lynch deserves a “red card” for refusing to sponsor him because the Sydney academic supported the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel. “The fact that academics at the University of Sydney have rallied to my cause doesn’t diminish the severity of Lynch’s attempt to boycott me as a Jewish Israeli academic,” Professor Avnon said....
He said Professor Lynch deserved to be sanctioned for boycotting him,
describing it as against the principles of academic freedom and
exchange, and ignoring the work he had done to try to achieve a degree
of understanding between young Jews and Arabs.'
Avnon noted the
'warm welcome by Sydney University academics appalled at Professor Lynch’s actions, along with ordinary Australians who had written emails of support.
“The Australians have been a light unto the nations,” Professor Avnon said, using the classical expression from the Book of Isaiah....'
The full report (entitled, if you're googling, "Boycotted Israeli embraced by other fellows") is behind a paywall here
BDS advocate Jake Lynch, Associate Professor of Peace Journalism and Director of the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney, is a member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace, Development and Environment, and the chief advisor for TRANSCEND Media Service-TMS. In an online article on the latter's site he's writtena detailed article about the lawsuit he's facing from ShuratHaDin and the background to the case:
"The right of academics in Australia to join the boycott of Israel is under threat from Shurat HaDin, an Israeli law centre that has filed suit against me in the Federal Court, under anti-discrimination laws. The ‘Originating application starting a representative proceeding’ accuses me of ‘acts which involve distinction, exclusion, restriction and preference based on the Israeli national and ethnic origin’ and ‘based on the Jewish race’ of ‘goods, services, persons and organisations’.
The court paper is notable, however, for its sparsity in the use of specifics, about what I actually have said and done. I chaired a public meeting at the University of Sydney in 2009, in response to ‘Operation Cast Lead’, the attack on Gaza months earlier. ... Julia Gillard, then Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister ... characterised the attack as no more than ‘Israel exercising its right to defend itself’, and weeks later led a high-level political and business deputation to Tel Aviv.
Australian diplomacy was positioning itself on the extreme pro-Israeli fringe of world political opinion. In November 2010, by which time Gillard had toppled Rudd and taken his job, Australia was one of just seven countries to oppose a motion at the UN General Assembly, condemning ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem. So, the public meeting at the University was dominated by discussion about what we, the public, could do, to compensate for the dangerous posturing coming out of Canberra....
.....We are gearing up for a vigorous contest in court, and keeping up the pressure to push back political interference with decisions on research funding. A legal victory will present a great opportunity to spread the boycott campaign among Australian academics. My hunch is that there is a large potential constituency, silenced up to now by fear. Our job is to dispel that fear." [Emphasis added]
Meanwhile (how sweet it is!) read about some spectacular BDS own goals here
I've mentioned before that I attended a Quaker liberal arts college in the United States, and admire the historic record of the Society of Friends in the promotion of gender and racial equality as much as I regard their pacifism as naively dangerous and deplore their contemporary slide into a foolish politically left mindset that in effect gives aid and succour to the enemies of the West.
Alas, the Quakers have again demonstrated their capacity for malice and mischief with the American Friends Service Committee due to hold (28 July-1 August) a "Summer BDS Institute for Student Leaders" in upstate New York in which college students will be given intensive training in holding campus boycotts against Israel. This vile initiative is supported by Jewish Voices for Peace,founded in California in 1996, which as the ADL has pointed out,
'is the largest and most influential Jewish anti-Zionist group in the United States....
In the past few years, JVP has become a leader in the American anti-Israel movement and has assumed a particularly visible role in the renewed Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel.... Although JVP focuses on boycott and divestment campaigns that specifically target Israeli settlements and the "occupation," the group notes that it supports more radical BDS campaigns that call for a complete economic, academic and cultural boycott of Israel....
JVP, like other prominent Jewish anti-Zionist individuals and groups, uses its Jewish identity to shield the anti-Israel movement from allegations of anti-Semitism and provide it with a greater degree of legitimacy and credibility. JVP even recognizes its role as such, noting on its Web site that it is "inspired by Jewish tradition" and that the group's Jewish nature gives it a "particular legitimacy in voicing an alternative view of American and Israeli actions and policies" and the ability to distinguish "between real anti-Semitism and the cynical manipulation of that issue."...'
The AFSC website explains that this "fun in a summer camp-like environment" is intended for "All campus activists currently running or hoping to launch BDS campaigns on their campus" and will include:
"Extensive campaign development coaching Grassroots organizing skill building Media & Messaging trainings Anti-oppression analysis workshops Nonviolent direct action planning Historical overview of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Relationship building with activists on campuses nationwide Strategy sessions with BDS movement leaders Two tracks for existing and new campaigns"
Moreover, "Meal and other accomodations will be made for those observing Ramadan."
As noted in the Washington Free Beacon:
'An AFSC official said the number of attendees for this year is not yet finalized and said the 2013 program will focus on “call[ing] attention to what is happening in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories while supporting a just and lasting peace that benefits both Palestinians and Israelis.”....
The AFSC’s Michael Merryman-Lotze, who helped organize the summer program, objected to the argument that the BDS campaign is anti-Semitic.
“We see nothing inherently anti-Semitic in the use of these proven nonviolent tactics nor in the BDS movement as a whole,” said Merryman-Lotze. “Are BDS opponents next going to argue that these same tactics were anti-White in the Jim Crow south and apartheid era South Africa?”
Merryman-Lotze also disputed claims from critics that the campaign has been ineffective.
“Why, if BDS is ineffective and largely a failure, have the Israeli government and groups like the ADL, the Wiesenthal Center, and AIPAC invested millions of dollars in developing campaigns to counter minimally funded grassroots BDS activism?” said Merryman-Lotze. “If our efforts are ineffective, why write a story about our planned training program? The answer is that BDS is effective and successful.”...'
"Shurat HaDin's American office has been investigating whether the camp violates federal and NYS anti-boycott laws and whether a legal proceeding can be brought against the organizers and participants."
