The Post The Forward Pulled

The following article was pulled from the Jewish Daily Forward.  Here's the link: http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/347815/an-israeli-politician-smeared-students-for-justice-in-palestine-and-the-med/

Here's the link to Google cache.  The cache doesn't hold for long so here's the article in full:

 NewsBreaking News

An Israeli Politician Smeared Students for Justice in Palestine — and the Media Fell for It

Laura E. Adkins

On Aug 15, an Israeli lawmaker accused the pro-Palestinian campus group Students for Justice in Palestine of compiling lists of Jewish students and their dorm room addresses.

Addressing the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, member of Knesset Anat Berko said that SJP is “collecting information on where Jews live at New York University among others,” reported The Times of Israel. Berko later reiterated her claims on Israel Radio, adding that the Israeli advocacy organization Reservists On Duty had told her “about the marking out of Jewish dorms, of rooms of Jewish students (on campus), for example at New York University and other campuses.”

However, Reservists on Duty denied informing Berko’s original inflammatory statement. “To be honest,” Social Media Coordinator Ofir Ohayon told the Forward on Aug 17, we don’t really know for sure that SJP did compile lists of Jewish students. Although we did talked [sic] with Anat Berko yesterday she didn’t mentioned such thing. What we do know is about the eviction notice incidents, we’ve talked with various students from Florida Atlantic University, UCONN, NYU and Vassar who received this eviction notice.”

While The Times of Israel’s original live blog entry and follow up article have been shared over 4,000 times on Facebook alone, officials from the Zionist Organization of America and Stand With Us, two large national groups that work to combat anti-Semitism on college campuses, told the Forward on Aug 16 they had no knowledge of this sort of activity taking place.

Rabbi Yehuda Sarna, the Executive Director of the Bronfman Center for Jewish Student Life at NYU, told the Forward on Aug 17 that MK Berko was “well intentioned, but mistaken.”

“We have many problems with Israel discourse at NYU,” he acknowledged, “but they tend to be localized. We have problems with the Graduate Student Union and certain departments in the humanities and social sciences, but the stalking of Jewish students on campus is thankfully not a problem.”

National Students for Justice in Palestine, an informal, volunteer-run network composed of current students and recent graduates of Students for Justice in Palestine, told the Forward that they “have never heard of such cases,” but added that “all SJP chapters on campuses across the country are autonomously run. However, as a national organization, NSJP is firmly against all forms of bigotry, including anti-Semitism.”

According to Lahav Harkov, Senior Knesset reporter and analyst for The Jerusalem Post, Berko’s comments were related to the 2014 incident (Full disclosure: written by this reporter in 2014 for The Times of Israel) in which NYU SJP members slipped thousands of mock eviction notices protesting Israeli home demolitions into student rooms inside two dormitories, one of which contained a Sabbath elevator (which operates on a special automatic mode during the Jewish Sabbath to facilitate the strict observance of Jewish law).

Following NYU SJP’s 2014 actions, NYU spokesperson John Beckman said that a “flyer titled ‘eviction notice’ anonymously slipped under doors at night is not an invitation to thoughtful, open discussion; it is disappointingly inconsistent with standards we expect to prevail in a scholarly community.”

Beckman also noted that “it is unclear why the flyering took place in this particular dorm; we don’t believe there is perception of this dorm as having an a high percentage of Jewish students (the presence of a Sabbath elevator is the result of a stairway that empties to the street and cannot be entered through the lobby behind the security desk, not because of a disproportionate presence of Jewish students in the building). However, were it to be the case that the flyering was done there because it was perceived be a dorm with a higher proportion of Jewish students, that would be troubling, dismaying and a matter of deep concern for our community.”

On Aug 17, The Times of Israel spoke with MK Berko’s aide and updated their story with her comments: “An aide to Berko said Wednesday that anti-Israel groups collect information on where Jewish students live, and that there had been ‘several incidents’ in which ‘eviction notices’ were placed in dormitories where Jewish students live — not necessarily Jewish-only residences, she said, but residences where ‘there are mezuzas’ and it is clear that Jews live there.”

Oren Segal, Director of the Anti Defamation League’s Center on Extremism, told the Forward on Aug 16 that “According to our research, there is no evidence pointing to Students for Justice in Palestine compiling specific lists of Jewish students. However, we have long expressed our concerns over SJP’s campus efforts, which have resulted in troubling tensions between students and have fostered a hostile atmosphere for pro-Israel and Jewish students.”

According to the ADL’s 2015 audit, 10% of anti-Semitic incidents reported nationally took place on college and university campuses. 90 incidents were reported on 60 college campuses in 2015, up from 47 incidents on 43 campuses in 2014.

Major Jewish organizations have been ramping up efforts to highlight anti-Semitism on college campuses, primarily focusing their efforts on Students for Justice in Palestine, which the Zionist Organization of America calls a “hate group.”

The New York University chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine was not available for comment.

This piece has been updated with further reportage and additional information.

Laura is the Forward’s Contributing Network Editor. Contact her at adkins@forward.com or on Twitter @Laura_E_Adkins.

Sorry about the haphazard layout. I was in a rush.

The uncontroversial speech of Malia Bouattia

This is Malia Bouattia's speech that the Zios are so het up about.  Actually I think it's very good.  It simply makes the very important point that BDS in the solidarity movement and armed resistance by Palestinians aren't mutually exclusive.  The Zios are being particularly hypocritical because they denounce BDS, armed struggle and even criticism of Israel, Zionism or Zionists all as being or causing antisemitism.

But anyway here's the upload with a hat-tip to Harry's Place who I got it from:

Ms Lauryn Hill regrets...

So Ms Lauryn Hill has cancelled a second engagement on her tour. The first was Nigeria and the second is Israel. Here's how she announced the Nigeria cancellation.

Ms. Hill has released a statement regarding her scheduled performance in Nigeria. Got to: http://t.co/FtDBsbpcTC

— Ms. Lauryn Hill (@MsLaurynHill) May 1, 2015

And following the link we see this:

Hello Lagos, Nigeria! We are disappointed to report that we will not be performing at tonight’s concert. From our end, we did everything we were supposed to do, including waiting at the airport for many hours, ready to fly out and share the evening with you. Unfortunately, after much effort, the promoter was not able to get all of our travel arrangements taken care of. This prevented us from being able to fly into Nigeria in time to make the concert. We were all very excited to come, and very disappointed that we couldn’t make this one. HOWEVER, we are working to reschedule our appearance ASAP. From what we’ve been told, the promoter intends to honor all tickets sold. Our best to and for Lagos. Love and Blessings!

Well we see that after scrolling down the home page.  The link to that section and its "notes" is actually here.

So now the tweet about Israel:

See that?  Nope?  That's because there is no tweet about the cancellation of her planned Israel gig.

Ok, so let's see the website:

Dear Friends and Fans in Israel,
When deciding to play the region, my intention was to perform in both Tel Aviv and Ramallah. Setting up a performance in the Palestinian Territory, at the same time as our show in Israel, proved to be a challenge. I’ve wanted very much to bring our live performance to this part of the world, but also to be a presence supporting justice and peace. It is very important to me that my presence or message not be misconstrued, or a source of alienation to either my Israeli or my Palestinian fans. For this reason, we have decided to cancel the upcoming performance in Israel, and seek a different strategy to bring my music to ALL of my fans in the region. May healing, equanimity, and the openness necessary for lasting resolution and reconciliation come to this region and its people.
Respectfully,
Ms. Lauryn Hill

I don't want to be the party pooper here because I know many people are excited by this but her statement could have been written by John Kerry.  She doesn't mention Palestine, the occupation, zionism, racism, war, segregation, apartheid, refugees, Gaza or ethnic cleansing.  It's just some vacuous statement about her Israeli and Palestinian fans.  Oh, but it's headed as an address to her Friends and Fans in "Israel".  I guess career imperatives prevent her from even lying about having Palestinian friends let alone actually having them.

To be clear this cancellation is some kind of success for BDS but we need these celebs to openly refuse to perform for Israel because it is a pariah state, an illegitimate entity, not because performing for such an entity might be misconstrued by some friend or fan.

Zionists on a conference banning roll

This is looking grim.  It appears Zionists have got another conference banned in France.  This time they only had to say it was bad for Israel (which the authorities equated with Jews) rather than pull some health and safety stunt as with the University of Southampton.  Here's the Jewish Telegraphic Agency:

The city of Toulouse banned an event organized by far-left activists promoting a boycott of Israel.

The canceled event was a lecture by Farid Esack, a South African university lecturer and activist, titled “Apartheid, from South Africa to Israel.” He was scheduled to speak at a municipal event hall on March 31 at an event organized by the New Anticapitalist Party, a movement established in 2009.

“In light of the context, I can not permit a public gathering that risks encouraging discrimination of Jewish people and commercial products associated with the Jewish faith and the State of Israel,” Toulouse Mayor Jean-Luc Moudenc said in a statement on March 31.

In 2012, an Islamist killed four Jews at a Jewish school in the city.

It's not actually clear which context the mayor is referring to here.  It seems to be the JTA that linked the event to the killing of four Jewish children three years ago.  That's a pretty disgusting juxtaposition given the non-violent nature of BDS and I'm not aware that the mayor has said that Palestinians should pay the price for the murder of Jewish children in France.

But then when we read on we see that the issue isn't about context but content:

In recent years, French courts have convicted several anti-Israel activists for inciting racial discrimination. Under the 2002 Lellouche Law, restrictions on discrimination based on race and faith are extended to nationality. France is among the few European countries that have such laws.

So boycotting any state is illegal in France.  Does France never impose sanctions on states?  Maybe not but see what the article then goes on to say about Southampton.

Earlier this week, Britain’s Southampton University withdrew permission for the International Law and the State of Israel Conference to take place on its campus. Pro-Israel activists pressured the university to cancel because they said the event questioned Israel’s right to exist, which they found offensive.

Clearly the Board of Deputies didn't brief the JTA on their "two lines of attack" on the Southampton conference.

Opposing Zionism from the West Bank to the South Bank

Press report from the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network:

No Israeli Funding of the Arts

Southbank, London, 5 November 2014.  A lively and colourful 50 person-strong protest outside the BFI (British Film Institute) condemned the BFI for hosting an Israeli-sponsored film festival only weeks after Israel committed mass-murder, killing 2100 people, including over 500 children during its 51-day assault of Gaza.

Called by a new initiative, No Israeli Funding of the Arts (NIFA) [1], protestors from all walks of life, including Muslim, Jewish and Israeli, chanted and spoke out against the UK Jewish Film Festival (UKJFF) because it had insisted on accepting Israeli funding – in the midst of Israel’s war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of murder, extermination and persecution and incitement to genocide [2] – even when offered alternative funding.

Protestors spoke out against the presence of Secretary of State for Culture, Sajid Javid, at this opening gala of the UKJFF – he had slandered opponents of Israeli funding of the film festival by implying they were guilty of antisemitism.  The tiny Zionist counter-protest used the same slur.

Protests against the film festival at the Tricycle last year called for it to reject Israeli funding, and this summer the Tricycle made its courageous decision to reject the tainted funding. Last night’s protest publicised that over 500 artists and theatre practitioners had publicly defended the Tricycle from the false accusation of antisemitism when it had offered to replace Israeli funding so that the film festival could take place there.

Public protest had already closed down an Israeli-funded theatre company at the Edinburgh Fringe.  Besides the Tricycle, the Bristol Encounters Film Festival and artists from Sao Paulo Art Biennial had all rejected Israeli Embassy funding in this last period.

There will be further protests against the Israeli-funded film festival.

---

[1] See No Israeli Funding of the Arts letter to all the cinemas hosting the UKJFF here.

[2] Russell Tribunal on Palestine

DEMAND “NO” TO ISRAELI SPONSORED FILM FESTIVAL

From the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network
 

Protest the Israeli-funded UK Jewish Film Festival (UKJFF) taking place between 6-23 November in cinemas in Glasgow, Leeds, London, Manchester and Nottingham. NO ISRAELI FUNDING OF THE ARTS DEMAND “NO” TO ISRAELI SPONSORED FILM FESTIVAL Protest @ BFI Southbank Thursday, 6 November 6.45-8pm Belvedere Road, South Bank, London SE1 8XT Tubes: Waterloo (South Bank exit), Embankment and Charing Cross bring your banners, placards, megaphones & chants! The Israeli Embassy is a sponsor of the UK Jewish Film Festival (UKJFF).  Only a few weeks ago the Israeli state again slaughtered the people of Gaza: over 2100 killed, over 500 were children.
Destroyed flats, Gaza City	We welcomed that the Tricycle took a stand against the festival’s funding by the Israeli Embassy during Israel’s 51-day assault on Gaza.  Over 500 artists and theatre practitioners publicly defended the Tricycle. Disgracefully, the BFI Southbank is helping to re-brand Israel – it’s hosting the opening gala night of the festival.  Secretary of State for Culture, Sajid Javid – who slandered the Tricycle by implying antisemitism – said he would attend.  The Israeli ambassador is also expected.
Israel’s apologists attacked the Tricycle to try to distract the public from Gaza while children were killed in their homes as they slept, with their parents as they fled, in UN shelters where they were told they would be safe, in hospitals, in mosques, while playing football: by bloodied tanks, F16s, drones, bunker busters, sea-to-land missiles, remote-controlled machine guns . . . The Russell Tribunal on Palestine (Sept 2014) found that Israel committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of murder, extermination and persecution and incitement to genocide. Join our BDS protest against collaboration with mass-murderers Facebook  Event facebook Email: NoIsraeliFundingOfTheArts@gmail.com Public protest closed down an Israeli-funded theatre company at the Edinburgh Fringe.  The Tricycle, the Bristol Encounters Film Festival, artists from Sao Paulo Art Biennial all rejected Israeli Embassy funding. See our No Israeli Funding of the Arts (NIFA) letter to all the cinemas here. Contact your the cinemas by phone, email, website, leaflet or street protest, and let them know what you think of them hosting an Israeli-funded event. Call or write to the local press or call-in radio. (All cinema contact details are here.)

The Guardian, The Tricycle and Jews in Britain against Genocide

The Tricycle Theatre is coming under enormous pressure from Zionists over the UK Jewish Film Festival's decision to withdraw rather than reject funding from the Israeli embassy.

Jews in Britain against Genocide have written to express their thanks but first here's a reminder of the Tricycle Theatre's statement on the whole affair:

Now the letter to Tricycle:

Dear Indhu Rubasingham,

We write to thank you for refusing to accept Israeli sponsorship of the Jewish Film Festival.   

We particularly appreciate that you distinguish between Jews in Britain and the Israeli State. We could not be further apart from the Israeli state.  The insistence of the organisers of the UK Jewish Film Festival on including sponsorship from the Israeli Embassy, even when you generously offered an alternative, has made their priorities clear: not Jewish people or Jewish film but the hijacking of Jewish culture to disguise Israeli policies and particularly its bloodied image.  Its murder and maiming of Palestinians and others in the Middle East has been going on for many decades.  But its recent unrestrained, sadistic attack on Gaza has reinforced its genocidal intentions against the Palestinians.  

We are particularly appalled as Jews that our suffering as a people is the occasion and the excuse for the genocide of others.  We are aware of the suffering of others, which is why we have said, unlike Zionists: Never again – for anyone.  Including of course Tamils in Sri Lanka, about which you would be familiar.

Those of us said who were part of the demonstration in front of the Tricycle last November against Israeli sponsorship of the JFF, which was led by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, welcome this decision of the Tricycle to respect the multi-racial nature of the community of which it is part, by refusing blood money from apartheid Israel.

We are a group of Jews in Britain including from Israel and are appalled that you have been subjected to false accusations of anti-Semitism. Zionism cynically uses the sufferings of Jews to silence critics of the Israeli genocide of Palestinians. This is an abhorrent attempt to intimidate a local theatre for refusing to be enlisted to serve the Israeli State, in order to camouflage its most recent assault on hospitals, UN schools in which thousands were sheltering, children, and civilians of all ages. 

We take this opportunity to share with you a few examples of how Israel harnesses culture as a propaganda tool.

1) Israeli artists who receive government sponsorship are contractually obligated to promote the state as a condition of their sponsorship, which includes Israeli films that are promoted as being critical; but while they might show some criticism their overall message is to present Israel as a democracy and camouflage its apartheid. 

“If they receive funding by the state, Israeli artists who play internationally are expected to be political ambassadors and must sign contracts which declare their cooperation with state marketing aims. The standard Israeli sponsorship contract states:”

“The service provider (i.e. artists) undertakes to act faithfully, responsibly and tirelessly to provide the Ministry with the highest professional services. The service provider is aware that the purpose of ordering services from him is to promote the policy interests of the State of Israel via culture and art, including contributing to creating a positive image for Israel.” Source: http://www.haaretz.com/putting-out-a-contract-on-art-1.250388

2) In 2005, Nissim Ben-Sheetrit of Israel’s Foreign Ministry emphasised:

“We are seeing culture as a hasbara (i.e. propaganda) tool of the first rank, and I do not differentiate between hasbara and culture" 

Source: http://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/about-face-1.170267?trailingPath=2.169%2C2.225%2C2.239%2C

3) In 2008 the Israeli Foreign Office identified London as one of the hubs it targeted for “Brand Israel”. It stated: "The Jewish community has to be part of it for it to succeed. It's very important for us to convey the message to them that a better image for Israel and a better performance of that image is part and parcel with Israel's national security.”  "But it's mainly it's an attempt to change the mindset of people when it comes to Israel” “”That doesn't mean conducting an advertising campaign, but the execution of a program that will support the brand identity… it could include organizing film festivals” “… the hope-for result is a change in peoples' perception of Israel”

Source: http://www.jpost.com/International/Israels-rebranding-efforts-to-focus-on-Toronto

In short, any event accepting sponsorship from the Israeli Embassy or from any other Israeli state bodies is legitimising the Israeli apartheid, ethnic cleansing and its genocidal attacks on the Palestinians, including the Gaza Strip that Israel turned into a concentration camp.

We value the Tricycle and as your loyal supporters, your audience, we ask that you will not renew your association with Israel, as long as it violates international law, and until the 3 conditions set out in the Palestinian call for boycott demanding Israel meets its obligation and comply with international law (seehttp://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1801).

Yours, 
Jews in Britain Against Genocide

The Zionists are pulling out all the stops with this one and with the war on Gaza in general. The first Guardian report I saw on this was fairly straight forward and factual but then Jonathan Freedland seems to have taken over with this editorial listing the Tricycle affair together with attacks on synagogues in Europe and some absurd fashionista or cultural commentator, Hadley Freeman, doing pretty much the same as Freedland, though unlike Freedland, writing in her own name rather than in the name of The Guardian.

It should be noted here that for all the false allegations of antisemitism being thrown around, the only antisemitic thing I have seen said during the whole affair was this: 

"Jewish culture... is of course intrinsically connected to the state of Israel".

And who said it?  Why the spokesperson for the "apolitical" UK Jewish Film Festival.

Anyway, while this has been going on, an advert by Zionists justifying the slaughter of children by Israel was rejected by The Times newspaper presumably for being too racist even for them.  Remember The Times is owned by the very pro-Israel, born-again Christian, Rupert Murdoch. Well it turns out that one of the more disgusting manifestations of hasbara, the advert, isn't too racist for The Guardian, where their sheer lack of principle was announced by Roy Greenslade.

But, of course, it isn't mere opportunism.  As the facts of Israel's genocidal campaign speak loudly for themselves, Israel needs more propaganda cover than ever.  We've seen the establishment wobbling over this.  Longstanding friends of Israel have been distancing themselves.  Opponents of BDS are becoming supporters.  Latino states have severed relations with Israel.  Hasbara is urgent.  Freedland is always on hand to provide that whether by talking Israel up, pointing people in other directions (whataboutery) or smearing Israel's critics.  But why does the whole of The Guardian have to fall into line.  What has Freedland got that people of integrity haven't got?  Or are the latter just too few or too weak at The Guardian.

Pushed or Pulled? Israel Embassy Funded Film Festival not to be Hosted by Tricycle Theatre

Little bit confusing this but hang in there.

For the past 8 years the Tricycle Theatre has been hosting a so-called Jewish Film Festival (UKJFF).  BDS activists have been trying to persuade the theatre not to host UKJFF on account of it being funded by the Israeli Embassy in London.  Well now, because of Israel's assault on Gaza, the theatre will not be hosting the festival.

Now this has been a very recent decision but there's already some fog about what happened.  The Jewish Chronicle wouldn't normally be the go to site for the facts of any case but theirs was the first site I saw the news on.  Here's their headline:

Tricycle Theatre refuses to host UK Jewish Film Festival over Israeli sponsorship

 So what do they say happened?

A major London theatre has refused to host the UK Jewish Film Festival because it is sponsored by the Israeli embassy.

The Tricycle Theatre was scheduled to be the main venue for the UKJFF in November, with 26 films due to be screened there as well as six gala events.

But in a statement issued on Tuesday, UKJFF executive director Judy Ironside said: “The Tricycle told us that they cannot be associated with a festival which in turn is associated with the UK’s Israel embassy”.

The embassy is a long-standing sponsor of the festival, whose programme includes Jewish-themed films from around the world.

Mrs Ironside described the decision by the theatre, which has hosted the UKJFF for the past eight years, as a “great surprise”.

She said: “That the Tricycle Theatre have shown themselves unwilling to work with what is clearly an apolitical cultural festival is tremendously disappointing.

 Ok, so they are saying that out of the blue the theatre has cancelled the event on account of its Israeli embassy funding.  In spite of the funding the director, Judy Ironside, claims the event is apolitical.  Now I can see how some people might argue that an event is apolitical even it is funded by an embassy.

But the Tricycle Theatre isn't happy with the coverage so it has issued a statement of its own:

The Tricycle has always welcomed the Festival and wants it to go ahead. We have proudly hosted the UK Jewish Film Festival for many years. However, given the situation in Israel and Gaza, we do not believe that the festival should accept funding from any party to the current conflict.  For that reason, we asked the UK Jewish Film Festival to reconsider its sponsorship by the Israeli Embassy.  We also offered to replace that funding with money from our own resources. The Tricycle serves many communities and celebrates different cultures and through difficult, emotional times must aim for a place of political neutrality. 

We regret that, following discussions, the chair of the UKJFF told us that he wished to withdraw the festival from the Tricycle.  

To be clear, at this moment, the Tricycle would not accept sponsorship from any government agency involved in the conflict. We hope to find a way to work with the UK Jewish Film Festival to allow the festival to go ahead at the Tricycle as it has done so successfully for the past 8 years.’

 So the UK Jewish Film Festival has withdrawn itself from the Tricycle because the Festival insists on being funded by the Israeli embassy even though the Tricycle offered to replace the funding.

Now its bad enough that the Festival wants to implicate all Jews in Israel's sheer criminality but to claim that the festival is apolitical is utterly bogus.

Anyway, lots of good has come out of this, not least the media coverage.  There are reports in the following mainstream newspapers/websites (in no particular order):

The Daily Mail

Yahoo News

The Guardian

The Daily Telegraph

There are bound to be more.  They're just the ones I've seen.

So, the Tricycle has certainly taken the principled stand in not hosting the Israeli embassy funded UK Jewish Film Festival but if the latter wasn't so nakedly political it could have been very different.  In fact if they didn't want this political confrontation with Tricycle they could have suspended Israeli embassy funding, taken the dough from Tricycle, and then carried on Zionist business as usual when emotions over the Gaza slaughter had calmed down.  Or maybe the Zionists know that their attack on Gaza has done lasting damage to public perceptions of Israel and that Israeli government involvement with any cultural event is a political kiss of death.

Letters for BDS and a slap on the wrist for Chomsky

These letters are in today's Guardian:

It is now 10 years since the international court of justice ruled that the wall built by Israel in the occupied West Bank contravenes international law and must be removed. Israel is marking this anniversary with renewed attacks on Gaza which continue to punish the Palestinians for resisting the illegal occupation of their land (Israel turns screw on Hamas as 300 targets are hit in a single night, 11 July). The apartheid wall is still there, making any kind of normal life for Palestinians an impossibility, as well as stealing their land. It is 47 years since Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, thus extending the process (begun in 1948) of ethnically cleansing the indigenous population and then installing settlers.

All this is illegal under international law, which has been flouted by Israel, aided by the complicity of western governments. The media too, especially the BBC, must bear some responsibility with its grotesquely biased reporting which, as Owen Jones notes (9 July), portrays Israel as an innocent victim, exempt from any norms of behaviour. Our government will not hold Israel accountable, so we have a responsibility to do so, especially through the civil society campaign of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS).

Miriam Margolyes, Mike Marqusee, Alexei Sayle, Ahdaf Soueif, Prof Haim Bresheeth, Prof Jonathan Rosenhead, Prof Moshe Machover, Prof Nira Yuval-Davies, Seymour Alexander, Rica Bird, Elizabeth Carola, Mike Cushman, Judit Druks, Nancy Elan, Mark Elf, Deborah Fink, Sylvia Finzi, Kenneth Fryde, Claire Glasman, Tony Greenstein, Abe Hayeem, Rosamine Hayeem, Selma James, Riva Joffe, Michael Kalmanovitz, Adah Kay, Leah Levane, Les Levidow, Mica Nava, Diane Neslen, Susan Pashkoff, Roland Rance, Leon Rosselson, Maureen Rothstein, Michael Sackin, Ian Saville, Miriam Scharf, Sam Weinstein, Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, Devra Wiseman, Ben Young
Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods (J-BIG)

• Debate about strategy is vital for good politics. We welcome Noam Chomsky's admonitions as a stimulus to the debate and education which the Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions movement has enabled globally. Aside from the errors of fact in Chomsky's Nation article reported on by Ian Black (Israeli sanctions campaign: Chomsky's boycott warning, 2 July), the timing of his intervention is unfortunate since the BDS movement has now reached even American campuses, occasioned Israeli cabinet deliberations as to how to counter it, and caused reputational damage to corporations working with Israeli firms in occupied Palestine.

Chomsky also ignores that BDS is fully backed by Palestinian civil society and a growing number of Israelis. In this difficult period for progressive politics and international solidarity, the BDS movement builds across the globe. In its stead Chomsky proposes nothing.

Hilary Rose Professor emeritus of social policy, Bradford, Martha Mundy Professor emeritus in anthropology, LSE, Steven Rose Professor emeritus of neuroscience, Open University, Sami Ramadani London Metropolitan University

I ought to add that whilst the first letter was organised via Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods (J-BIG) not all of the signatories are members.

Leaflet drop at Neil Young Hyde Park Gig July 12, 2014

From International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network:

Neil Young -- Tell us Why You Would Play for Apartheid Israel

Leafleting protest, Marble Arch gig entrance, Hyde Park, Sat 12 July, 1-5pm For YOU to play Israel is to abandon both your anti-war stance and the Palestinian "people of the earth".  They have appealed directly to you to honour the cultural boycott and cancel your 17 July concert in Tel Aviv. See Neil's speech contrasted with film of indigenous Palestinian people under attack from Israeli soldiers and warplanes. Gaza is burning and children are being incinerated by F16s of the Israeli military. Tell Neil Young not to side with the bombers! Read the Gaza Union of Agricultural Work Committees letter to Neil Young; Nasser Abu Said, a Gaza farmer’s, heartbreaking letter to Neil Young; and the Open Letter from Gaza to Neil Young by Palestinian students and youth. NEIL YOUNG - Cancel your date with apartheid!

So what did happen to King's College London Students's Union's vote for BDS?

I'm asking because I don't know what's happened here.

Last week the Jewish Chronicle reported this:

Kings College London's student union votes for Israel boycott

Pretty clear, huh?

Let's see a chunk of the article, by Charlotte Oliver:

Students at Kings College London passed a controversial anti-Israel motion this week, despite strong opposition from Jews on campus.

The motion, which was passed by the student union, called for the university to boycott Israel and “raise awareness of the country’s apartheid policies”.

It also urged Kings to affiliate with the Palestine Boycott Divestment and Sanctions National Committee.

Clearer still, yes?

Well now, in Friday's print edition there's an article headed, Students made to back down on Israel boyott [sic].  In all the excitement they typoed the word, "boycott".

The article, which I can't find on line, is by Marcus Dysch and gives some useful information like the vote was 348 for a boycott, 252 against but that "while the motion would stand as a record of the majority's view, it would not be acted on."[my emphasis]

It says that the "union president and chairman of trustees, Sebastiaan Debrouwere said there had been lengthy deliberation of the "legal implications"".  It went on, "He described the week since the vote as "testing and challenging"...

Now it starts getting weird.  He said, "I'm confident we can come together and get through these times as a stronger union".

Don't you think that's weird.  The union took a vote and a democratic decision was made and union bureaucrats have decided not to implement the decision.  How does that make the union stronger?

I suppose it's not weird at all that Israel advocates are described as "delighted" and one of them, from StandwithUs UK, said that it was a "double victory for Israel on campus" before going on to say, "students rose en masse for the first time in a long while to counter anti-Israel activities".

So what happened here?  Should I think the unthinkable and assume that this guy was telling the truth and that there was some emergency debate and the original democratic decision was democratically overturned or do I assume that what was democratically decided was bureaucratically undecided?

Frankly, I just don't know what to make of it and Marcus Dysch is the last person I'd want to ask for clarification.

UPDATE:  Whilst looking for info on this I see that it's been all over the twittersphere for a week.  You can find stuff by searching on twitter.com for @kclsu  boycott or @kclsu BDS.  The only shock now is that zionists are actually proud that they could overturn a democratic decision by purely bureaucratic means.  Students need to keep a much closer eye on their "representatives".

I also found the KCLSU statement about the whole shabby business here.

Robert Fine, BDS and the right of reply

I have written about this Robert Fine character before here.  He's a sociology professor at Warwick University in the UK. 

He had a piece in the European Sociological Association newsletter some time ago where he flagrantly misrepresented the EUMC working definition of antisemitism and likened its opponents to the racists who opposed the Race Relations Act back in the 1960s and 70s.

I was particularly angry and perplexed about how so dishonest an operator could get his dishonesty published without caveat or counter-argument.  Now, thanks to Ben White, I know.

See Middle East Monitor where Ben is writing about how Robert Fine was recently humiliated in a debate on BDS when his anti-BDS argument presumably contributed to the fact that the votes for and against BDS moved from 53-27 to 68-23.  Not only is Ben pointing up Fine's defeat, he is also pointing out how the Israel advocacy crowd are promoting Fine's argument in the absence of counter-argument:

This is not the first time that Fine has embarrassed himself with a disingenuous anti-boycott argument. In the Winter 2012 issue of the European Sociologist, the newsletter of the European Sociological Association (ESA), Fine repeated the same misrepresentations and omissions.

When I approached the editors about contributing a response piece, the offer was welcomed with open arms. My finalised, editor-approved piece was sent to Fine to give him the opportunity to comment -and then, silence. Months later, the editor informed me that "the editorial committee have chosen not to publish your contribution as it does not meet the standards accepted by our organisation". The co-chair of the ESA's Committee for Publications? Robert Fine.

So that's how he avoids counter-argument.  He co-chairs or advisorily edits the sites and publications that publish his disingenuous hasbara.

Or maybe not.  His losing argument has been posted in two parts to the Sociology@Warwick blog. (Part II here).  There is a comment space beneath the posts and I have tried posting one beneath each part thus:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Here’s Jonathan Rosenhead’s argument in favour of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against the State of Israel:
http://www.bricup.org.uk/news/RosenheadLeeds.html
Here is Ben White’s corrective to Robert Fine’s argument:
http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/debate/10722-losing-the-debate-boycott-opponents-rely-on-legal-threats-
Here’s something by me on Robert Fine’s approach to these matters:
http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/academics-for-israel-robert-fine-and.html

 Fine's piece on Sociology@Warwick was actually posted by,  alexttsmith or Alexander Smith, who tweets here, https://twitter.com/AlexTTSmith. Robert Fine appears to neither blog nor tweet. Mr Smith's tweets are protected but I have tried tweeting him to get him to approve my links to some counter-argument against Fine's stuff:

.@AlexTTSmith Please approve comments here http://t.co/MAwSAUdgmB & here http://t.co/RdhUgqbzpz Robert Fine's argument seems to be protected
— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 5, 2014

Let's see how it goes.  I ought to say, I don't even know if Mr Smith is the moderator but given Fine seems only to post in places where he can't be argued against I don't hold out much hope for even links to counter-argument to appear where he has chosen his own stuff to appear.

UPDATE (10:42 6 April 2014):  Sociology@Warwick  has now approved the comments linking to criticisms of Robert Fine's two parter.  I wonder if the European Sociological Association newsletter will ever do the same.  Anyway, many thanks to whoever tweets at @SocioWarwick.

Zionists play Whack-a-Mole; but the moles keep digging

This just in from Mike Cushman of BRICUP:

Recent weeks have seen an outbreak of BDS activity on North American campuses. Each student action has met a virulent reaction from Israel’s defenders; each Zionist reaction prompts further action elsewhere.

The current round started on 24 February at Northeastern University in Boston when Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) repeated a tactic used on other campuses and posted mock eviction notices under students’ doors. These notices:

 

bring Israel’s campaign of demolition and eviction to the attention of all students. It is frequently, and falsely, alleged that Jewish students are targeted for these notices in an act of antisemitic intimidation. No evidence of this has ever been produced and as the aim is to spread information such a tactic would be counter-productive. Such claims were dismissed by the authorities at Rutgers and Florida Atlantic Universities.

The administration at Northeastern responded brutally. They suspended the SJP chapter and involved the police and threatened the only women of colour in the group that distributed the leaflets with expulsion-level charges. The threat of expulsion was rescinded following a nationwide outcry. University president Joseph Aoun recently protested, on spurious free speech grounds, against the American Studies Association decision (see Newsletter 72) to adopt BDS; he obviously sees free speech on his own campus as less vital. 

This was followed on 1 March by a 798 to 585 vote by students at Windsor University, Ontario, to support BDS. University President, Alan Wildeman, immediately tried to undermine the validity of this well supported vote making claims of irregularity without providing evidence. On 12 March he announced he had hired a lawyer to carry out an “investigation” of the BDS referendum.

Worse was to follow when Richard Spencer, an alumnus and major donor posted: “I am reasonably certain that the majority, if not all, of this small percentage of the student body are of the Muslim faith, which promotes violence and hatred toward the Jews in the middle east.” Wildeman has very correctly distanced himself from these comments. However, it provokes a question about the due diligence the University conducts before accepting donations if it had been pleased to accept funds from someone prone to making such racist statements.

Despite these attacks the students at Windsor remain committed to putting their BDS policies into effect.

Next the focus moved to Barnard College in New York, an affiliate of the prestigious Columbia University. On 10 March Barnard/Columbia SJP kicked off Israel Apartheid Week by hanging a banner of a map of Palestine  outside Barnard Hall where groups conventionally post banners promoting their events. The campus former Hillel president wrote “The banner features a map of Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, without any internal borders, colored uniformly green. That is to say, C-SJP's banner, brazenly displayed on the front door of Barnard College, entirely erases the Jewish State from the map. While I hesitate to use the term too loosely, I am at a loss as to how to categorize this display as anything less than anti-Semitic.” These claims are strange, not only because Israel frequently produces maps without borders, although they tend to colour the territory blue. More weird are Hillel protests against a map that does not detail Israel’s land grabs.

Barnard’s administration swung into prompt action on receiving these pleas and tore down the banner. An action that accords with their support for Zionist Birthright trips to Israel and tolerance of regular events on campus supporting and celebrating the Occupation.

These repressive measures have fallen foul of deep US attachment to free speech and the first Amendment and even some staunch supporters of Israel have denounced such censorship.

Hillel, the organisation that seeks to organise and support Jewish students has itself become an arena of contest. Many Jewish students are arguing that Hillel should represent all of them and not make support dependent on a commitment to Israel’s policies. National Hillel has been operating a policy of sanctioning any campus group that attempts to host any speaker critical of current Israeli policy, regardless of their attitude to the continuance of the state as a Jewish entity. Harvard Hillel even banned Avraham Burg, the former speaker of Israel’s Knesset. In reaction campus Hillel groups are declaring themselves to be Open Hillels and not subject to a rigid Zionist dogma.

On 18 March students at Loyola, a Jesuit University in Chicago, agreed to divest from companies complicit in aiding the Israeli Occupation of Palestine. They identified Caterpillar, General Electric, Hewlitt-Packard, G4S, Raytheon, Elbit Systems, SodaStream, and Veolia. The vote at the student senate was passed nem con with 26 votes in favour and 2 abstentions; it followed a year long campaign by Loyola SJP and a petition signed by over 800 students. It is just a year since students at San Diego State University, UC Irvine and UC Riverside passed similar resolutions. 

The senate revisited the issue on 24 March and confirmed their earlier decision, albeit by a smaller margin. Despite this the President of the Student Association unilaterally vetoed the resolution the following day. The spotlight moves back to the Senate who can override the veto with a two-thirds majority.

On the same day students at the University of Michigan started an indefinite occupation in protest at the student government’s refusal to hold a vote on divestment. Their campaign led by SAFE, Students Allied for Freedom and Equality ,forced the student government to convene a meeting on 18 March to hold a debate and a vote. Hundreds attended but the debate was cut short and a motion to indefinitely delay a decision was passed by 25 votes to 15 but it is significant that opponents did not have the confidence to try and vote BDS down outright.  Despite this setback the campaigners are sure they have ignited a debate about Palestine at Ann Arbor and increased knowledge about Israel’s actions enormously. The campus newspaper The Michigan Daily printed an editorial supporting SAFE’s campaign for the University to be more active in investigating the ethical status of their investments. They intend to bring the motion back and are confident of winning UM students to BDS. 

Meanwhile Vassar has been convulsed by a row over a study trip to Israel and the settlements to investigate water supply organised as part of the International Studies programme. On 6 February Vassar SJP picketed a meeting of the class, some of the students in the class claimed they felt intimidated and a meeting was held on 3 March to allow both sides to express their concerns. SJP argued the case about why the trip was discriminatory and how it embedded US support for Israel. Philip Weiss has written a detailed and nuanced account of the meeting and the events leading up to it and the wider significance of the turmoil at Vassar for the development of the campaign for Palestinian rights on US campuses.

On 19 March students at Arizona State University joined the campaign, again a motion moved by ASU Divest from Caterpillar Inc was postponed but it will be raised again on 1 April.

On 26 March McMaster University Student Union in Hamilton, Ontario passed a BDS resolution but at a well-attended but inquorate General Assembly meeting – opponents of BDS left the meeting to make it inquorate rather than staying to register tier opposition. 27 years ago McMaster students were among the first to support South African BDS.

This article is correct at the time of writing but this is a fast changing situation which we will try to track on the BRICUP website and is well reported at Electronic Intifada and Mondoweiss and on twitter.[with Jews sans frontieres bringing up the rear]

Mike Cushman

28 March 2014 

I got this from Mike Cushman early yesterday and as Mike said there could be changes on the way, in fact it's fair to say, in light of the above, Change is gonna come.  Hey, that's a good idea for a song: