tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post8163711089768714322..comments2023-10-01T17:13:19.402+01:00Comments on BOYCOTTED BRITISH ACADEMIC: The Hydra of British AcademiaBoycotted British Academichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05336249818541398673noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-28495499690263509052008-08-24T21:04:00.000+01:002008-08-24T21:04:00.000+01:00All six Jewish staff members, including my wife an...All six Jewish staff members, including my wife and I, were bullied out of our positions. There are NO Jews left in my former department. <BR/> <BR/>UCU took NO ACTION to support me in pursuing a Tribunal claim.<BR/><BR/>We were threatened with and eventually subjected to deportation from the UK because we lost our work permits.<BR/><BR/>Before being sacked, and knowing that I would lose my work permit, I sought help from UCU, and they refused, saying that they'd not help until AFTER I was dismissed, at which point it would be too late to stay in the UK to fight back. <BR/><BR/>So I hired my own lawyers, then UCU refused to help on the grounds that I had sought outside legal advice.<BR/><BR/>Then when I briefly resigned my membership from UCU following the pro-Boycott vote around June 2006, they refused me further assistance, though I had withdrawn my resignation, never having stopped paying dues, after a few days on the word of the Gen. Sec., who promised that the boycott would not be honored when NATFHE and AUT merged. <BR/><BR/>This time, their reason for not providing assistance was that there was a "gap" in my membership around the time of my dismissal. Could it be that the REAL reason was that I publicly and LOUDLY resigned in protest of the anti-Semitic boycott vote and they decided that I 'needed to be punished?'<BR/><BR/>The most recent postings on the UCU Activists list and distribution of hateful Nazi propanda from David Duke, with whom I'm VERY familiar, since I come from the US are the LAST STRAW!. A friend who was a student at LSU with Duke in the 70s told me that he (Duke) used to turn up in FULL Nazi regalia on campus!<BR/><BR/>I believe the ONLY option remaining is a major class action LAWSUIT against UCU.<BR/><BR/>I suggest we organize NOW to make it happen before it is too late.<BR/><BR/>Anyone interested in pursuing this can send e-mail to me at:-<BR/><BR/>blowthewhistle@sirpeterscott.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-30379772910676944622008-06-29T16:25:00.000+01:002008-06-29T16:25:00.000+01:00It's a bit of a pain to scroll past all of Mr. Ano...It's a bit of a pain to scroll past all of Mr. Anonymous' attempts above, to turn your blog into a pro-Palestinian propaganda platform.<BR/><BR/>I suggest you delete those long Israel-bashing propaganda posts. They're off-topic in any case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-52226708563516315492008-06-27T15:21:00.000+01:002008-06-27T15:21:00.000+01:00I think it was an evil plot in the first place to ...I think it was an evil plot in the first place to put us in the middle of the Muslim world and use us as an unofficial offshoot for the interests of the west.And I think that the only way out of this situation is the one state solution, and making an apology to the Palestinians. Only once they are regulated as citizens and get all of the rights they deserve in a democratic, secular state, than the world will have nothing to hate us for. We can't live in cities we know are built on the ruins of Palestinian villages and truly say 'this is our land'... well, history had it's own rout - and we have to face the fact that a lot of what's now called 'Israel', was inhabited by a population that was expelled in brutal ways by our army, and today they live in inhuman conditions - at least partially in our fault and in our knowing....<BR/>Non dare call it <A HREF="http://conspil.com/about" REL="nofollow">Conspiracy</A>....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-77790538512468187932008-05-22T00:50:00.000+01:002008-05-22T00:50:00.000+01:00Isn't anonymous brave reproducing other peoples wr...Isn't anonymous brave reproducing other peoples writing without identifying him/herself.<BR/><BR/>I think in my university we call it plagiarism, in this case it is at least breach of copyright.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous could at least have the courage to name themselves.<BR/><BR/>I will call myself, for the time being<BR/><BR/>'Name withheld until anonymous fesses up'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-61772090109430261942008-05-20T09:44:00.000+01:002008-05-20T09:44:00.000+01:00University and College UnionEgmont House, 25-31 Ta...University and College Union<BR/><BR/>Egmont House, 25-31 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9UT, Tel 020 7670 9700<BR/><BR/>Topic<BR/> <BR/>UCU Congress, 28-30 May 2008: First report of the Congress Business Committee including motions submitted<BR/><BR/>Motions submitted for debate at the annual meeting of UCU Congress and Sector Conferences to be held 28-30 May 2008 in Manchester<BR/><BR/>ORIGINAL TEXT OF COMPOSITED MOTIONS<BR/><BR/>Composite motion SFC10 and compositing amendments SFC10A.1, SFC10A.2 and SFC10A.3<BR/><BR/>K Palestine National Executive Committee<BR/><BR/>Conference notes the<BR/><BR/>· continuation of illegal settlement, killing of civilians and the impossibility of civil life, including education;<BR/><BR/>· humanitarian catastrophe imposed on Gaza by Israel and the EU;<BR/><BR/>· apparent complicity of the Israeli academy;<BR/><BR/>affirms that<BR/><BR/>· criticism of Israel or Israeli policy are not, as such, anti-semitic;<BR/><BR/>· pursuit and dissemination of knowledge are not uniquely immune from their moral and political consequences;<BR/><BR/>resolves that<BR/><BR/>· UCU widely disseminate the personal testimonies of UCU and PFUUPE delegations to Palestine and the UK, respectively;<BR/><BR/>· the testimonies will be used to promote a wide discussion by colleagues of the appropriateness of continued educational links with Israeli academic institutions;<BR/><BR/>· UCU facilitate twinning arrangements and other direct solidarity with Palestinian institutions;<BR/><BR/>· Ariel College, an explicitly colonising institution in the West Bank, be investigated under the formal Greylisting Procedure.<BR/><BR/>L Palestine and the Occupation University of Brighton – Grand Parade<BR/><BR/>Conference notes the<BR/>• continuation of illegal settlement, extrajudicial assassinations, indiscriminate killing of civilians and the impossibility of civil life, including education;<BR/>• humanitarian catastrophe imposed on Gaza by Israel and the EU;<BR/>• apparent complicity of most of the Israeli academy;<BR/><BR/>affirms that<BR/>• criticism of Israel or Israeli policy are not, as such, anti-semitic;<BR/>• pursuit and dissemination of knowledge are not uniquely immune from their moral and political consequences;<BR/>resolves that<BR/>• UCU widely disseminate the personal testimonies of UCU and PFUUPE delegations to Palestine and the UK, respectively;<BR/>• the testimonies will be used to promote a wide discussion by colleagues of the appropriateness of continued educational links with Israeli academic institutions;<BR/>• UCU facilitate twinning arrangements and other direct solidarity with Palestinian institutions;<BR/>• Ariel College, an explicitly colonising institution in the West Bank, be investigated under the formal Greylisting Procedure.<BR/><BR/>M Palestine and the Occupation University of Brighton – Eastbourne <BR/><BR/>Conference notes<BR/><BR/>continuance of illegal settlements, and impossibility of civil life, including education;<BR/>humanitarian catastrophe imposed on Gaza by Israel and the EU;<BR/>continued occupation complicity of most of the Israeli academy;<BR/>legal attempts to prevent UCU from debating a boycott of Israeli academic institutions;<BR/><BR/>affirms that criticism of Israel is not, eo ipso, anti-semitic;<BR/>a boycott of all Israeli academic institutions at this time is unlikely to maximize and unify international solidarity;<BR/>pursuit and dissemination of knowledge are not uniquely immune from their moral and political consequences<BR/><BR/>resolves that<BR/><BR/>colleagues be asked to consider the moral and political implications of educational links with Israeli institutions, and to discuss the occupation with individuals and institutions concerned;<BR/>twinning arrangements with Palestinian colleges be encouraged;<BR/>Ariel College, an explicitly colonising institution in the West Bank, be investigated under the formal Greylisting Procedure;<BR/>personal tour testimonies of UCU and PFUUPE be disseminated widely.<BR/><BR/>N Palestine and the Occupation University of East London Docklands <BR/><BR/>Congress notes:<BR/>- continuation of illegal settlement, and the impossibility of civil life, including education;<BR/>- humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza;<BR/>- complicity of most of the Israeli academy;<BR/>- legal attempts to prevent UCU debating boycott of Israeli academic institutions, and legal advice that such debates are lawful.<BR/><BR/>Congress affirms that:<BR/>- criticisms of Israel are not, as such, anti-semitic;<BR/>- pursuit and dissemination of knowledge are not uniquely immune from their moral and political consequences.<BR/><BR/>Congress resolves that:<BR/>- colleagues are asked to consider the moral and political implications of educational links with Israeli institutions, and to discuss the occupation with their Israeli collaborators;<BR/>- twinning arrangements with Palestinian colleges should be encouraged;<BR/>- Ariel College and similar institutions in the Occupied Territories are illegal, and will be investigated under UCU’s Greylisting Procedure;<BR/>- testimonies of UCU and PFUUPE delegations to Palestine and Britain will be disseminated to members.<BR/><BR/>http://www.ucu.org.uk/circ/html/ucu94.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-76991831866290989092008-05-18T12:04:00.000+01:002008-05-18T12:04:00.000+01:00Sean and Jenna are asked to say that there has bee...Sean and Jenna are asked to say that there has been no anti-semitism in the UCU "boycott campaign". I cannot speak for either Sean or Jenna, but as <BR/>someone who has taken part in and observed the debate on UCU' s policy towards Israeli institutions at all levels of the union, including reading the endless arguments on this site between a small number of people who are <BR/>never going to agree with each other, I can honestly say that I have not seen or heard any statements from anyone who has expressed criticism of <BR/>Israeli policies and practices which a reasonable person could possibly construe as antisemitic. I accept that I may have missed some contributions!<BR/><BR/>For the record, I remain unsure about the desirability of UCU pusuing support for a boycott of Israeli institutions for a variety of reasons, but do not believe that if such a policy were to be adopted it would constitute antisemitism. If some people believe otherwise, so be it.<BR/><BR/>Having refrained from joining in the debate for so long, I am already beginning to wish I hadn't, but I believe that someone who hasn't already spent hours (where do these people find all these hours?) in the debate, but <BR/>has spent a lifetime in opposing racism of all kinds, is obliged to say something simple and straightforward.<BR/><BR/>I shall not respond to any responses to this posting since I do not wish to prolong what is already by now a fruitless debate.<BR/><BR/>PaulAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-58531621682122359412008-05-18T12:02:00.000+01:002008-05-18T12:02:00.000+01:00It is the case that criticism of Israel is not nec...It is the case that criticism of Israel is not necessarily <BR/>anti-semitic. This does not entail that every criticism of Israel is <BR/>not anti-semitic. This is a matter of modal logic. (There is also a <BR/>political question, which is that Israel is not a single entity but a <BR/>state with citizens, laws, political parties and so forth; and <BR/>therefore were it to be claimed that criticism of Israel were <BR/>automatically anti-semitic, then all political discourse within and <BR/>without Israel would have to cease.)<BR/><BR/>But your email raises a useful question, which I would characterise thus:<BR/><BR/>>> Given that racism is pervasive, and none of us are immune from <BR/>its effects, how can we challenge it?<BR/><BR/>Some have argued that the answer is education, but<BR/>(a) who educates the educators?<BR/>(b) what do we do about external forces, e.g. press stories or <BR/>politicians legitimating racist discourse?<BR/>(c) how do we address the social roots of resentments expressed in <BR/>racist language (e.g. housing, low pay, etc.)?<BR/><BR/>Here I want to argue that the question of common experience and <BR/>collective struggle is crucial to solving this. People are not <BR/>passive recipients of racist ideas. They can reject them because they <BR/>aspire to a collective humanity. You got a sense of that on the Love <BR/>Music Hate Racism carnival.<BR/><BR/>The experience of anti-racist struggles in the 1970s was that people would march against the National Front because they had a common cause (opposition to a resurgent nazi movement) while simultaneously having all sorts of misconceptions about "other" people. However, in the process of opposing the NF, those people themselves learned to work with and defend (and even marry...) people who were different from them, had different music, culture, etc.<BR/><BR/>A similar process has happened over the last five years with the <BR/>anti-war movement and opposition to Islamophobia. Racism against <BR/>Muslims in the west has a different historical root from European <BR/>anti-semitism, being primarily a racism of immigration and empire. <BR/>But that does not mean that they are so different. Racism renews <BR/>itself, that is, people accept racist ideas because they are actively promoted. In the words of South Pacific, "It has to be taught". Hence modern anti-semitism can wax or wane, just as can modern anti-Muslim prejudice.<BR/><BR/>My point is that trade unions (including educational trade unions) are not merely collections of educators and educatees. They are organisations of workers with an experience of people working <BR/>alongside each other, and a history of collective struggle.<BR/><BR/>Therefore the primary responsibility of the trade union is to collectively organise active opposition to racism and fascism, <BR/>involving as many members as possible in expressing their opposition to the nazis, and as collectively as possible, i.e. big events with a broad base that bring people together to oppose the nazis. I gave some examples in a previous email.<BR/><BR/>One such event has been called. I note that LMHR and UAF have called <BR/>a national demonstration on 21 June and we need to build it.<BR/><BR/>Sean WallisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-15347988730703584562008-05-18T12:01:00.000+01:002008-05-18T12:01:00.000+01:00Good aim and so "we" do. But if we're talking abou...Good aim and so "we" do. But if we're talking about addressing racism this is indeed a "blunt" approach. One problem with it is that it is underplays the diversity NATFHE, AUT and UCU have always upheld. Racism itself discriminates and we cannot fight it by insisting that everybody is fundamentally similar. We are not merely a morass of trade unionists and we have to be cognisant of different types of racism in order to understand how to deal with them. This is why I persist in raising this matter. I appreciate Marion's response. <BR/><BR/>In her last, Jenna seems to reject Sean's worldview and instead espouses the other extreme - a hierarchy of discrimination. Why, as Marion points out, can't we oppose different forms of racism where we find them? Incidentally, Jenna's use of Islamophobia as a smokescreen to divert from antisemitism is a familiar UCU line <BR/>(http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=840). UCU's own documentation gives the impression that as an organisation we expect to focus our anti-racist activity outwards at our workplaces, and are not in the habit of applying it reflexively. <BR/><BR/>It is good that the SWP plans to move its party-wide focus to the BNP this year instead of Israel but in some ways, Sean, I'm afraid you <BR/>haven't been blunt enough. I'm saying that the boycott campaign <BR/>contributes to an antisemitic climate - there's nothing "silly navel gazing" about that. Unless you're saying that there hasn't been any antisemitism in this UCU boycott campaign. <BR/><BR/>Could I maybe press Sean and Jenna on this - are you saying that there <BR/>hasn't been any antisemitism in the UCU boycott campaign? And if there <BR/>has, what, specifically, is UCU's, and pro-boycotters' responsibility to reverse its ill effects? <BR/><BR/>Lastly, I am behind the push to oppose Islamophobia on campus. <BR/>Islamophobia can be expressed in subtle ways and I expect I'll need <BR/>guidance from experts, reports and explanations of its different <BR/>manifestations. Anti-racism is often not intuitive. Sophisticated or ignorant racism insists that it is other things - a concern for <BR/>security, for example.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-87616622877131496912008-05-18T11:58:00.000+01:002008-05-18T11:58:00.000+01:00I completely agree that we should discuss any form...I completely agree that we should discuss any form of racism. Perhaps it would be the right time to ask if UCU is doing anything to combat the anti-Islamic trends that are quite present in the society nowadays. The following link is just one example of how far it can get: http://www.islamawareness.net/Islamophobia/ip_uk.html <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, to be a Muslim nowadays quite often means being associated with 'terrorism' and 'terrorists' and things that are evil. Due to that unfortunate and undeserved branding and stereotyping Muslims are quite often being pushed into social exclusion which they do not either need or want. As we should all be working towards inclusion of all groups I believe that we should combat the stereotypes and help and support everyone to successfuly integrate into society.<BR/><BR/>Therefore, I would ask UCU if they are doing anything (and what) to stop anti-Islam? <BR/><BR/><BR/>It would be really helpful if we could have some points of action on combatting anti-Islamic tendencies in the society and stereotyping of Muslims. can anyone from the Union shed some light on what's being done to combat that trend?<BR/><BR/>JENNA DELICHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-77224008048420865942008-05-18T11:57:00.000+01:002008-05-18T11:57:00.000+01:00Sean,I cannot see the contradiction between fighti...Sean,<BR/><BR/>I cannot see the contradiction between fighting the BNP and discussing a report on anti-semitism in universities or what UCU should be doing at a <BR/>collective level to fight antisemitism, any more than I would see a contradiction between, for instance, discussing anti-Black racism, discrimination against disabled people or sexiism and what UCU should be doing about them and fighting the BNP. I agree with you that trade unions should be taking a leading role in stopping prejudice and discrimination of all kinds. However, I presume you are not suggesting that UCU should disband the Equality Committee and the Equality Unit, stop all its other work on equality issues and just fight the BNP. We need to both fight the BNP and carry on with the excellent work of the Equality Unit on equality issues.<BR/><BR/>MarionAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-29815989753933291152008-05-18T11:56:00.000+01:002008-05-18T11:56:00.000+01:00"A progress report one year after the government's..."A progress report one year after the government's response to the <BR/>All-Party Inquiry into Antisemitism suggests the Department for <BR/>Innovation, Universities and Science has failed to do enough to tackle antisemitism on campus." <BR/><BR/>http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=1887 <BR/>http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=1886 <BR/>http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,2279832,00.html <BR/><BR/>From the report (p12): <BR/><BR/>"Antisemitic discourse is also hard to identify because the boundaries of acceptable discourse have become blurred to the point that individuals and organisations are not aware when these boundaries have been crossed, and because the language used is more subtle particularly in the contentious <BR/>area of the dividing line between antisemitism and criticism of Israel or Zionism." <BR/><BR/>I'd be interested to know what measures UCU is taking to equip itself to identify and oppose antisemitic discourse.<BR/><BR/>I am sorry to be so blunt but...<BR/><BR/>There *is* a charnel house of anti-Jewish filth in British society. There is a political organisation whose leader says that (quote) 'the Holocaust is a mere detail of history'.<BR/><BR/>It is the British "National" Party.<BR/><BR/>Since the 1990s the BNP has sought to present itself as a respectable <BR/>political party, contesting seats in elections, downplaying the sieg <BR/>heiling, razor blades under posters, firebombing violence that they have a long history of. Those of us with a long memory (and the scars to prove it) can't forget.<BR/><BR/>I believe that we need to unite as many people as possible in <BR/>opposition to the nazi menace. I don't believe that the House of <BR/>Lords is the vehicle for stopping anti-semitism, anti-islam, or <BR/>anti-asylum seeker racism. I do believe that trade unions have the <BR/>social weight and the collective responsibility to do so.<BR/><BR/>Can we please stop this silly navel gazing and face up to the world <BR/>around us? Our members are black and white, Jewish and Muslim and <BR/>Christian and Buddist and atheist and... oh, for goodness sake. We <BR/>are human beings and we need to treat ourselves as such.<BR/><BR/>Sean WallisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-70793259087955682202008-05-18T11:54:00.000+01:002008-05-18T11:54:00.000+01:00I could not agree more with these comments. To rea...I could not agree more with these comments. To read a lot of invective about which side is right and which is wrong in the Middle East is not central to my view of the work of UCU. In my opinion, both sides in the <BR/>terrible situation in the Middle East are enacting violent activities against civilian individuals, and both sides are wrong in what they are <BR/>doing, and much of what they are thinking. In my non-UCU part of life, I can take some small actions on this, but I will not see it as a priority for UCU at this stage. In the meantime, since I believe I have heard most of the arguments many times, I now automatically delete messages from those <BR/>whose names I recognise. I hope those UCU members like me do similarly until we have more messages on cour union matters.<BR/><BR/>JohnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-64414678497993936012008-05-18T11:53:00.000+01:002008-05-18T11:53:00.000+01:00Please, can we get back to Trade Union matters?Sub...Please, can we get back to Trade Union matters?Subscribers to the activists list would be forgiven for thinking that Israel and Palestine totally dominate union affairs. However, it is only the activists list where a VERY SMALL number of passionate contributors results in that question totally dominating discussion. I have estimated before that in the last couple of months the top 7 posters on each "side" of the debate accounted for 68% of I/P posts and 45% of total posts. I serve on both the National Executive Committee and the Strategy & Finance Committee and I can assure you that we spend the vast majority of our time on what Joseph B calls "basic trade unionism". We try to give international issues (including Israel, Palestine, Zimbabwe and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan) the proportionate amount of time they deserve.<BR/><BR/>NeilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-8717599387865788782008-05-18T11:52:00.000+01:002008-05-18T11:52:00.000+01:00Right.Forgive the odd shouting, but sometimes it i...Right.<BR/><BR/>Forgive the odd shouting, but sometimes it is the ONLY WAY.<BR/><BR/>I am sick to death of all this RUBBISH!!<BR/><BR/>When we have 100% UCU membership among those eligible, when V-Cs and College principals are quaking in their boots at the thought of UCU, indeed when all education is under public democratic and workers control, then maybe we can <BR/>have this list devoted to invective about Palestine/Israel. In the meantime, could we please get back to some BASIC trade unionism??<BR/><BR/>Let us suppose that there is, eventually, a vote over a boycott and a vote for a boycott. Fair enough, I will abide by it. BUT - do you think the UCU <BR/>members who politely pushed their way past me on the picket line will abide by it? Or, if UCU can say "right, comrade, you're out of the union because you broke the boycott", that any member involved will be terrified, or quaking in their boots, pleading to be re-admitted? Or, like one of my <BR/>members, who is none too keen on Hamas, would they not just resign? He won't ever come back, he tells me. And thus, make what is already a pretty weak industrial union even weaker?<BR/><BR/>I've been a member of NATFHE for a long time, stood on picket lines in the icy cold, tried to persuade people who are very reluctant, that it would be "a good idea" to join. It would be great if we had a closed shop, and real industrial militancy, but we don't. If we're going to build industrial <BR/>militancy, it will have to be done slowly and carefully. Sorry, but the Israel/Palestine issue/boycott doesn't recruit members. NOT ONE member will join because of it. (No doubt someone will protest, "I only joined to promote a boycott", but it would be strange if that were the case.)<BR/><BR/>I don't want to read invective amongst people who should be friends, indeed my friends, and who probably agree over many issues. CAN THIS PLEASE JUST STOP?? NOW!!<BR/><BR/>Back to the marking - yes, it is preferable to spend a weekend with exam scripts rather than reading this list!!<BR/><BR/>Thank you for reading<BR/><BR/>Joseph BAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-73250910555521871722008-05-11T12:50:00.000+01:002008-05-11T12:50:00.000+01:00October 08, 2007University College Union Activists...October 08, 2007<BR/><BR/>University College Union Activists' List - What Was Said<BR/><BR/>This article was put together from text and quotations supplied by a UCU Whistleblower and is a reposting of a comment in a previous thread.<BR/><BR/>Here is a selection of the arguments which were posted by UCU members on the UCU Activists List during the campaign to implement a boycott of Israeli academics.<BR/><BR/>Membership of the list is open to anyone who pays their subscription fees to UCU and at the time of writing there are more than 700 people who subscribe to this list. The issues discussed on this list include those one would expect of any trade union, namely pay and working conditions. However, since late May of this year when delegates at the first UCU conference voted to ‘encourage members to consider the moral implications of existing and proposed links with Israeli academic institutions’ one issue has dominated the activists’ list: the legitimacy of boycotting academics who work in Israel.<BR/><BR/>Those most affected by this motion are of course Jews and in an attempt to silence charges of racism delegates at the UCU congress came up with a formula – ‘Israel’s 40-year occupation’ means that ‘passivity or neutrality is unacceptable and criticism of Israel cannot be construed as anti-Semitic’. What happened on the list shows that this statement was at best misconceived and at worst disingenuous.<BR/><BR/>There were many times when criticism of Israel crossed red lines, when the tone and content of debate became unacceptable. For those sensitive to the ways in which Jew-hatred creeps into language this was a worrying, indeed ominous development. The State of Israel was demonized as a unique evil on the planet, its Jewish inhabitants characterized as brutal, militaristic racists, its supporters condemned as blood-thirsty Zionists who ruthlessly exploited every opportunity to smear the boycott camp with accusations of anti-Semitism. This tells us much about the boycotters’ self-image. Oblivious to the genuine fears of their opponents they presented themselves as bravely withstanding the power of the Zionist lobby, sole occupants of the moral high ground. A few even drew attention to their Jewish roots and tragic family history (relatives murdered during the holocaust) to give their words greater weight; as if one’s own identity can be used as an excuse to say things with impunity.<BR/><BR/>And all the time the majority of the activists’ list sat on their hands in silence.<BR/><BR/>Historical parallels are often drawn. Among the most disturbing is the suggestion that Jews today face dangers comparable to those in the early 1930s. There are of course many differences between then and now. But there are also lessons to be learned from the past. One of them is that the Nazis never made clear their true intentions towards the Jews until it was too late. The architects of the ‘Final Solution’ – and it was a genocide that only a remnant of European Jewry survived – went to great lengths to hide their aims. Of course the boycotters have no such aspirations. Indeed, no one is suggesting that they do. But their words and actions have given cause for celebration to Jew haters everywhere.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, many boycotters do indeed seek the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. This is clear from what a couple have incautiously stated as well as from the significant silences during the debate. Despite repeated and polite requests to explain the aims of the boycott and the conditions under which it would end, only one person provided a substantial response – and that was cryptic; ‘Supporters of the boycott have many varied imaginings of what the final settlement will look like – if we are mature we will realise that that the nature of the final outcome will surprise us all’.<BR/><BR/>Promoting analogies between the Nazis’ treatment of the Jews and the policies of various Israeli governments towards the Palestinians, paying lip-service when asked to condemn examples of Jew hatred in the Arab world and beyond, several advocates of boycott succeeded only in showing themselves in their true colours. That is racist, if not by intent then certainly in effect. This, it must be said, was the most disturbing aspect of the debate.<BR/><BR/>Individuals who pride themselves on membership of a Union that considers itself at the forefront in the fight against racism, sexism and homophobia, are prepared to make one exception when it comes to defending human rights: Israeli Jews.<BR/><BR/>The volume of correspondence generated by the proposed boycott was enormous. More than 190,000 words were written (about a 500 page document). Some of the contributors fell into two camps: ‘pro-boycotters’ and ‘anti-boycotters’. In between were a large number of people who tended not express an opinion. Among them were members of several groups; the 'apathetic', who didn't care about this issue; the 'silent', who were against the boycott but were afraid to speak out; and the ‘middle group’ who entered the fray periodically, usually out of frustration because they believed the boycott question was diverting attention from ‘bread and butter’ union issues.<BR/><BR/>What follows are extracts from this debate. Not being a member of the Union the UCU Whistleblower was entrusted with the task of editing the material and introducing it to a wider public. Apparently the moderator of the activists’ list has declared that anyone who blows the whistle, who makes public some of the stupid, ignorant and inaccurate statements that have been made on this forum, will be excluded from further ‘debate’. I use the word loosely and with some irony. Academics are supposed to be calm, rational and intelligent, willing to listen to different points of view. This, however, conveys the opposite impression. Taken by themselves some of the quotations may appear innocuous. But imagine yourself in the place of one of the handful of activists who for four months stood up every day, sometimes hour by hour, to an unrelenting tide of menacing assumptions and in one case even the threat of legal action. What a deeply unpleasant if valuable experience it must have been for all those who had the courage to confront such threatening behaviour within the Union.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I) On equating Nazi treatment of Jews with Israeli treatment of Palestinians:<BR/><BR/>‘Ethnic Cleansing of Israeli territory in 1948-9 caused the Palestinian refugee problem’<BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 13 July)<BR/><BR/>‘... the definition adopted in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by the UN in 1948. This lists several acts, falling short of total extermination (most of them apply very clearly to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians).’<BR/>(John Porter, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘The pro-boycott 'camp' is not totally immune to genocide involved in Holocaust ... We are also appalled to see the sort of treatment that Israelis meted out on Palestinians given the past experience of Jewish oppression.’<BR/>(Shirley Franklin, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘I personally see disturbing parallels between the plight of Palestinians in Gaza and for example, the Warsaw ghetto’<BR/>(Ruth Aylett, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘Of course Gaza isn't an exact replica of the Warsaw ghetto, but the analogy is valid; there are many parallels.’<BR/>(John Porter, 31 August)<BR/><BR/>‘I feel that the Warsaw Ghetto/Gaza discussion is interesting, as there are some striking similarities between the situations, but also, even more striking differences, of course. The most disturbing fact for me, is the involvement of the grandsons of survivors from the camps and ghettoes in what takes place in Gaza and elsewhere’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 31 August)<BR/><BR/>‘we should all take great care of not looking away when terrible things happen to the Palestinians, even if (and especially if...) the perpetrators are descendants or Holocaust survivors!’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 1 September)<BR/><BR/>‘the conditions in the Aida camp square with the conditions of the Warsaw ghetto’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 22 September)<BR/><BR/>‘I am not trying to say that Israeli action in Gaza is the same as Nazi action in Warsaw or Lodz pre 42; what I am pointing to is that the process of degradation, immiseration and dehumanisation, the denial of the normal dignities of human life, in Gaza bring to life the shades and shadows of the Ghettos that we thought we had left behind in 1945’<BR/>(Mike Cushman, 23 September)<BR/><BR/><BR/>II) Questioning the legitimacy of the State of Israel <BR/><BR/>‘I have a big problem with this 'right to exist' business. The Israeli state and some of its supporters seem to have elevated this 'principle' to one of absolute status, but closer examination renders the idea preposterous’<BR/>(Andy Scally, 28 June)<BR/><BR/>‘On its current record, then, Israel has no right to exist and it's people must be conquered, partially expelled and brutalised by Occupation’<BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 21 September)<BR/><BR/>‘the idea of countries having rights, for example in the often used phrase of "Israel's right to exist", is something I disagree with ... Israel has no right to exist’<BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 23 September)<BR/><BR/>‘I do not support the state of Israel’s so-called right to exist – that is, I don’t believe it has one. I do not support a Jewish state’s so-called right to exist – I don’t believe it has one’<BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 25 September)<BR/><BR/><BR/>III) Zionism as racism / imperialism<BR/><BR/>‘I believe Zionism to be the fundamental cause of war and suffering in the Near East. Colonial settlement is not unfamiliar, most if not all Imperial colonial projects involve the subjugation of indigenous people’<BR/>(Ben Jones, 18 July)<BR/><BR/>‘Zionism most commonly used meaning refers to Israeli imperialism and a Jewish state between the Jordan and the Med’ <BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 19 July)<BR/><BR/>‘I think that the association of zionism with imperialism is pretty common and well-established enough to be a perfectly valid usage of that word’ <BR/>(Hamish Cunningham, 27 July)<BR/><BR/>‘The problem for me is indeed the racist nature of the Zionist enterprise, which persists to this very day’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 2 September)<BR/><BR/><BR/>IV) Israel as a European colonial outpost<BR/><BR/>‘Israel is currently acting as the last of the European settler states’ <BR/>(Ruth Aylett, 6 July)<BR/><BR/>‘a partnership between the two regimes [Israel, South Africa] exporting techniques to implement racist colonial policies’ <BR/>(Ben Jones, 16 July)<BR/><BR/>‘proposals would target the world's only Jewish state; it would but not because it is Jewish but because it is colonialist’ <BR/>(Bob Waugh, 7 August)<BR/><BR/>‘many proponents of the boycott are motivated by the same sense of history that motivated anti-colonial struggles and that they see Israel as a colonial power in the Middle East’ <BR/>(Bob Waugh, 7 August)<BR/><BR/>‘My charge against Israeli academic institutions is that they have failed to live up to producing really useful knowledge and further aided the Israeli state to colonise and occupy Palestine’ <BR/>(George Shire, 24 August)<BR/><BR/><BR/>V) On equating Israel with South Africa under apartheid<BR/><BR/>‘The parallels between apartheid South Africa and Israel's are now widely acknowledged, Israel is a state that practices apartheid’ <BR/>(Ben Jones, 13 July)<BR/><BR/>‘It is appropriate to demonstrate, as Ronnie Kasrils has, that Israel's oppression of the Palestinians is even greater than that of Black South Africans under apartheid’ <BR/>(Ben Jones, 13 July)<BR/><BR/>‘The close connection between Israel and the former South African regime is still memorable’ <BR/>(Ben Jones, 16 July)<BR/><BR/>‘The Apartheid Wall’ <BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 30 July)<BR/><BR/>‘I hope that there are elements in the Israeli TU movement that understand and wish to change fundamentally the arrangements that create an apartheid-like state in Palestine/Israel’ <BR/>(Mike Cushman, 4 August)<BR/><BR/>‘All this stuff about "singling out" Israel reminds me of the responses made by supporters of South Africa as to them being singled out and that there were worse regimes than them in Africa’ <BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 15 August)<BR/><BR/>‘The argument that bad - or worse - conduct takes place elsewhere was one used by apologists for the South African system’ <BR/>(Philip Marfleet, 23 August)<BR/><BR/>‘To live in [a] kind of racist South Africa’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 26 September)<BR/><BR/><BR/>VI) Israel as a militaristic, undemocratic country<BR/><BR/>‘The whole Israeli education system - from nursery to university - is embedded in the Israeli obsession with war as some sort of 'defence' against who knows what ...’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 19 September)<BR/><BR/>‘Israel is an ethno-theocracy, called by some 'Jewish Democracy' ... it is a democracy for Jews only.’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 2 September)<BR/><BR/><BR/>VII) The influence of a Zionist lobby<BR/><BR/>‘On what basis was a possible boycott of Israeli universities deemed illegal? ... My gut feeling is that the national leadership was looking for an exit strategy in the face of relentless external pressure’<BR/>(Ron Mendel 28 September)<BR/><BR/>‘It is all about scoring points for Israel and not looking at the situation out there. It is racist right down to its core. It is the aim of those supporting Palestinian academics to expose this rotten Zionist. Why is that so difficult to understand?’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 2 October)<BR/><BR/>‘Issues of Palestine are now determining tenure issues in the States. Can we expect the Zionist lobby to go the same way here ... Bread and butter issues cannot be neatly compartmentalised so that we have separate arrangements for what is "safe" (and does not threaten Zionism) and "not safe" (in what actively opposes Zionism).’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 4 October)<BR/><BR/><BR/>VIII) Accusations that charges of anti-Semitism (Jew hatred) and trivialization of the holocaust are being deliberately used by anti-boycotters to stifle debate<BR/><BR/>‘accusations of "anti-Semitism" might be from a) thinking Israel is right and therefore the only possible explanation for opposition is "anti-Semitism". Or they might be b) an attempt to silence criticism.’ <BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 4 July)<BR/><BR/>‘A worldwide anti-Semitic conspiracy, if you like. And this is basically the foundation behind the endless accusations of anti-Semitism that you encounter’ <BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 5 July)<BR/><BR/>‘Why should Israel’s legacy of horror and trauma be exploited to deprive the Palestinians – a people who are/where absolutely dissociable from what had been an entirely European complicity – their homeland or their right to return. Just how long can the history of anti-Semitism and the holocaust be used as a fence to exempt Israel from arguments and sanctions against it for its behaviour towards Palestinians?’ (George Shire, 6 July)<BR/><BR/>‘according to some of the postings [of anti-boycotters] that is what they seem to be saying: any criticism of Israel is inherently anti-semitic; ergo no criticism of Israel is possible’ <BR/>(Muir Houston, 13 July)<BR/><BR/>‘it may not be said that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic, but in practice this is what it amounts to’ <BR/>(Stephen Flaherty, 13 July)<BR/><BR/>‘If we keep coming back to anti-Semitism it avoids the issue of how Israel is oppressing Palestinians’ <BR/>(Shirley Franklin, 17 July)<BR/><BR/>‘An attempted genocide in the 1930s and 40s does not in my view make the state that resulted from it immune to normal criticism’ <BR/>(Ruth Aylett, 23 August)<BR/><BR/>‘Those in favour of debate are doing much to highlight the hypocrisy around the allegations of 'anti-semitism'’<BR/>(Ben Jones, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘I can only see it as an attempt to show that Palestinians are anti Jewish (as Semites themselves they can surely not be called anti Semitic) and to smear their supporters, by association, with the charge of anti Semitism’<BR/>(John Porter, 28 August)<BR/><BR/>‘The harking back to the memories of the Holocaust as a warm cover for everything is a mistake, I believe.’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 1 September)<BR/><BR/>‘[Canadian academics have started to move towards a boycott position] and so have a tiny group in Germany – the Germans have been held back with a historical guilt that has really crippled debate.’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 23 September)<BR/><BR/>‘the same old tactics are [being] employed. Israel claims to be a Jewish state THEREFORE anyone who criticises Israel is anti-Jewish’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 1 October)<BR/><BR/>‘Everything put forward in good faith gets distorted by XXXX and his team and it is obscene. It is not just about different plays on words, it is a whole campaign of denial that started in 1948’<BR/>(Keith Hammond, 2 October)<BR/><BR/><BR/>IX) Claims that pro-boycotters are being smeared<BR/><BR/>‘it seems that I'm being associated with Nazi practices. I'm not surprised – but the allusion is odious’ <BR/>(Philip Marfleet, 17 July)<BR/><BR/>‘This hue and cry over a word [genocide] is just another attempt by some anti-boycotters to tar their opponents with the brush of anti-Semitism.’ <BR/>(John Porter, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘The logic ... appears to be ... that anyone who supports the Palestinian right to self determination, or opposes Israel's brutal and illegal occupation of their country, must be anti-Semitic.’ <BR/>(John Porter, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘I’m placed in a gallery of rogues and racists. This is heavyweight abuse ... I suggest that there is definite intent: to dissuade colleagues from speaking their minds about the occupation and its impacts.’<BR/>(Philip Marfleet, 24 August)<BR/><BR/>‘Many of us on the left have been labelled 'antisemites' when we have criticised Israel ... I think such tactics just expose the crudity and violence which typify Israel's history in the last few decades’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 20 September)<BR/><BR/>‘The opponents of the boycott have managed to use this tone against most of us others, and to label us as 'racists' and anti-semites' amongst other terms’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 1 October)<BR/><BR/>‘The dear members of Engage are invited to report all of us who refuse to be silenced and throttled, as they obviously consider us of the same ilk of BNP. They make me gasp.’<BR/>(Haim Bresheeth, 2 October)<BR/><BR/><BR/> David T adds:<BR/><BR/> I don't think that fanatics should be dissuaded from expressing their views clearly. Indeed, if they did not, we wouldn't know what there views were.<BR/><BR/> I was equivocal about the sacking of the racist academic, Frank Ellis: but I think I should have been supportive of him. Similarly, I would oppose the sacking of any of these academics.<BR/><BR/> However, I do think that their views deserve a wider audience.<BR/><BR/> As a footnote, here's the explanation of the 'UCU left' as to why they voted to end the boycott 'discussion':<BR/><BR/> As has now become public knowledge through a letter to the Guardian, UCU’s QC is recognised as a leading expert on equality and human rights legislation. It would have been highly irresponsible for us to ignore such authoritative and unusually robust advice and thereby place union funds in jeopardy. We do not doubt that well-funded groups are ready to engage in legal action against the Union, but even before that stage was reached, the Trustees made it clear that they would feel obliged to fulfil their legal duty to ensure that union funds were only spent on lawful purposes. <BR/><BR/>"Well funded groups" = "Rich jews"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-10547967595645077792008-05-10T10:36:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:36:00.000+01:00Time for one of my universally popular interventio...Time for one of my universally popular interventions..... <BR/><BR/>I have received a number of complaints off list from members about the tone, conduct and yes the volume too of contributions on the Israel/Palestine debate. <BR/><BR/>Its not for me to proscribe what we talk about but let me say once more: <BR/><BR/>1. Be civil even to those with whom you disagree. (Civil means being polite and respectful).<BR/> <BR/>2. Take circular or extended arguments off list <BR/><BR/>3. Don't publish messages posted on here elsewhere <BR/><BR/>Contrary to popular opinion I do not sit around waiting for the next message to come in before carefully examining it. I and colleagues do have a day job too so as has been said many times before I rely on all of you to treat each other with respect. <BR/><BR/>I'm very loath to remove posting rights from any member but, given the clear unhappiness that many members have communicated to me off list about the current situation I most certainly will if members breach any of above. <BR/><BR/>Please bear this message in mind in future posts. <BR/><BR/>Matt WaddupAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-63495589052286359272008-05-10T10:35:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:35:00.000+01:00This focus on anti-semitism is about the framing o...This focus on anti-semitism is about the framing of the issue in Israeli terms and the presentation of Palestinian concerns as <BR/>being of secondary importance. <BR/><BR/>In fact, anti-semitism is not that important for a very good reason. It would be absolutely astounding if Palestinians were not anti-semitic - there is a war going on and the result of war is to create all the emotions and experiences that lead to prejudice.<BR/>Northern Ireland is a good example of this - the religious divide is wider today than it was in the 1970s according to reports. <BR/>The only way to diminish anti-semitism in Arab world is to find a just settlement in which Palestinians are not made to pay for the huge historic injustice to the Jewish people. <BR/><BR/>In our own cultures, the insistence of pro-Israel supporters that any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic may well be having a counter-intuitive effect. History is used in our culture to legitimate ideas and practices. Things that have been around a long<BR/>time are seen as more worthy and important. (I don't agree with this).<BR/><BR/>Only this morning I read an article in yesterday's Independent in which Johan hari commented that he had been accused of anti-semitism<BR/>because he had reported on a settlement that was piping raw sewage onto Palestinian land making it unusable. He was accused <BR/>of repeating a biblical accusation that Jews poisoned wells. As I read I thought how few people in modern society would ever have heard that Biblical accusation and how well his accusers were doing to publicise it.<BR/><BR/>Accusations of anti-semitism won't work. There is no defence for Israel except justice for the Palestinian people. <BR/><BR/>Hera CookAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-39365966575810581692008-05-10T10:34:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:34:00.000+01:00Sorry, but none of those definitions are mine (bot...Sorry, but none of those definitions are mine (both of them are properly referenced, and the long one is the UN definition).<BR/><BR/>BTW- You missed Israel from the list.<BR/><BR/>Another point: you said 'spanning' the existence of Israel. So, the difference between Israel and those countries is that those countries existed, whereas Israel was created on such actions. And whereas none of us condone any kind of murderous actions towards any people, the issue here is on the way one country has been created, and the right to those who had been driven out of their homes and homeland to return to what was rightfully and legal theirs being denied. And the actions of the Israeli government keep continuing.<BR/><BR/>As to the Palestinians and their struggle, I am sure you yourself would not be prepared to give up the right to return to what was rightfully yours if anyone came and took it. OR WOULD YOU?<BR/>I am sure you would not.None of us would. So, I don't think that one could call the struggle of those who have been expelled from their land and properties to return there a genocidal act.<BR/><BR/>May I mention again that there are Jews on this list who are opposing the Israeli politics much in the same way as I or many of us have been. But it appears when I ask you or any of those sharing your views to explain that you keep avoiding it. WHY? <BR/><BR/>Thanks for mentioning Serbia though. I know only too well what they did, and that they created their territory within my country following ethnic cleansing and genocide with refugees and displaced people created through such horror being denied the right to return to what's rightfully and legally theirs. So, there's a big resemblance between my country and what has been happening to the Palestinians. In effect, I can say that I have been through a historically comparable experience).<BR/> <BR/>So, would you be prepared to claim that it was OK what Serbia did to us (ethnic cleansing, concentration camps, imprisonments, killing of civilians, bombing places, and the rest of the horror that the world has witnessed taking place there) to create their territory? <BR/><BR/>JENNA DELICHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-17807496986152864962008-05-10T10:33:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:33:00.000+01:00You are obviously (and fortunately unsuccessfully)...You are obviously (and fortunately unsuccessfully) trying to make us all delusional and ignorant. So, you are clearly trying to parade any criticism against the Israeli genocidal politics as 'racism' and anti-Semitism' (as it said in the article in the Independent of yesterday that some members put the link for yesterday. I'd strongly recommend that you read daily press.).<BR/><BR/>I am not going to stoop that low to offend you like you did me, and will let other to be the judge of what you wrote/did.<BR/><BR/>Your email is full of hate and is very much directed at me for openly criticising the genocidal and murderous politics of the Israeli government as the hate mail was directed towards Haim Bresheeth for feeling ashamed of it and going public about it!<BR/><BR/>Genocide in Palestine is not a lie, but it seems that I'll have to take this opportunity to teach the definition of genocide (who is now the ignorant one?):<BR/><BR/>'Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.' (Wikipedia)<BR/><BR/>and another one:<BR/><BR/>"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." (UN Convention on Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2).<BR/><BR/>Please read it carefully to make sure that you don't misss the word 'any' in the definition above. And the Israeli government has been doing MOST of it see above in bold). So, if you were by any chance (which is highly unlikely) to convince us that what's happening to Palestinians isn't quite happening to them, what would you call then the actions of the Israeli government which drove Palestinians from their homes and homeland? An act of mercy?<BR/><BR/>I KNOW the Employment Law, and that's exactly why I have kept saying that the focus from criticising the genocidal and murderous politics of Israeli government should not be shifted to racism or anti-Semitism as you have been trying to do. Criticiisng one politics and its actions has nothing to do with being against one nation. <BR/><BR/>If that was true than we would not have a multi-party system and democracy, and would see whoever criticised the party in power as being against us, meaning discriminating against us (i.e. being 'racist'). <BR/><BR/>But you do not seem to be open to different views when it comes to the issue of criticising the Israeli government.<BR/><BR/>Let me quote the definition of racism:<BR/><BR/>'Racism, by its perhaps simplest definition, is prejudice and discrimination based on race. One with racist beliefs might hate certain groups of people according to their race (i.e., bigotry).' (Wikipeia)<BR/><BR/>A great number of Jews are opposing the actions of the Israeli government. So, are they discriminating against themselves? Clearly not. Opposing actions of a government has nothing to do with racism.<BR/><BR/>No Iraqi (apart from those that were part of the state establishment) has ever seen opposing the government of Iraq at the time of Saddam as an act of racism. And they had sanctions imposed on them for what their government was doing, and yet didn't see the sanctions as an act of racism although those were denying them basics for life. <BR/><BR/>So, what you keep trying to do is use incorrect names ( 'racism' and 'anti-Semitism) for the criticism against the murderous and genocidal politics of Israeli government ' to shut up anyone who is trying to criticse the actions of the Israeli government. It is the actions that we have been criticising. If you cared to read the posts carefully you would have picked up Haim Bresheeth's and Shirley Franklin's posts in the past days. They ARE JEWS as well. So, based on you trying so hard to shut me up (as well as anyone else who has so far criticised Israel) you would probably be saying to them what hate mails to Haim were saying, or what Shirley was saying the likes of you would think of her (as a self-hater or denier). If you claim to be 'all-knowing' how come then that there are your fellow-Jews who think the same way I and a great number of other people do? Are they also 'racist' and 'anti-Semitists' for saying exactly the same things that I and a lot of others have been saying? Answer that question if you can.<BR/><BR/>You obviously do not like me for calling things their real name, but I have to whether you would wish to accept it or not. Yu obviously find it difficult to accept any criticism against the Israeli government and to think outside the 'box'. <BR/><BR/>Someone seeing murders and genocide a cause for celebration is saying enough for itself.<BR/><BR/>"One can only feel sorry for you for trying so hard"<BR/><BR/>You were reading my thoughts as that's exactly what I was going to say about you.<BR/><BR/>JENNA DELICHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-29804964614342787612008-05-10T10:31:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:31:00.000+01:00"The situation is not hypothetical; it is precisel..."The situation is not hypothetical; it is precisely what did happen to <BR/>the Jewish people. Following which, for 2000 years, we have been kicked <BR/>about from pillar to post, refugees every generation, being murdered <BR/>every generation, until such time as the Jewish people were in a very <BR/>fortunate position to be able to re-establish the Jewish state in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people."<BR/><BR/>As far as I am aware the story of the 'Promised Land' did not come with a manual to destroy another nation to create that land.<BR/>Besides, if the entire mankind kept going back 2000 years into history and each of us tried to return to where we were in the past 2000 years in a peaceful manner the world today look completely different. But chances are that, if it happened the world would end up at a massive war. <BR/><BR/>"The great tragedy of the situation is that it is also the homeland of another national group - <BR/>the Palestinians - who are as much deserving of justice as the Jewish people."<BR/><BR/>What you are saying is exactly what I said: The Palestinians have had to pay the price for your sufferings.<BR/><BR/>"What is particularly unfortunate about the position you take is that to only accept the narrative of one nation and to utterly ignore, indeed demonize, the narrative of another - an approach, incidentally, that you and others on this group share with the far right and settler movement in Israel (who utterly refuse to accept the Palestinian narrative) - is that the only thing that can result from it is further conflict, <BR/>violence and bloodshed."<BR/><BR/>It is not the approach or the 'narrative' of the Palestinians. It is the facts that we are working with. With means of communications nowadays we are able to see things 'live' as they are unfolding. And we know what we have been seeing on a regular basis on TV, reading, in the newspapers, hearing on the news etc.<BR/><BR/>What one's seeing is far more convincing that any 'narrative', and that's why I share the views of most of the world.<BR/><BR/>The only reason why the bloodshed is continuing is that the Palestinians are being denied return to their homes. Would you sit and watch me occupying your property and telling you that you can never return, and to make sure that you never even think of it I'll shoot at you on a daily basis. <BR/><BR/>Let's disarm Israel to bring it to stop the bloodshed and het it at an even keel with Palestinians to give peace a real chance.<BR/><BR/>"I really do suggest that you take some time out to read extensively on Jewish history, come to understand the position and narrative of the Jewish people."<BR/><BR/>I am speechless at someone wanting us in the 21st century to go back 2000 years into history to understand why the Palestinians have been chosen to pay the price for the sufferings of the Jewish people. If that is so shall we tell American Indians to do the same? And do the same with Latin America and the rest of the world? Are you proposing a major shift in world population? Should we then all start re-examining our 'narratives' and going back even 500 years? <BR/><BR/>Finally, there are the likes of Shirley Franklin and Haim Brasheeth, and the London Rabbin that I mentioned in one of my previous emails (who called for boycott of all Israeli products and shops in England in protest to the politics of the Israeli government). I find those people strong in their resolve not to be placed in the same 'box' with the genocidal Israeli government. What would you say to the fact that there is a great number of Jews who do not share your views, and refuse to be associate with the genocidal politics of the Israeli government?<BR/><BR/>"and then find a way to allow your clearly passionate activism to be channeled positively for justice and peace for all."<BR/><BR/>Passionate? I can see that the only thing that I am always passionate about is 'justice' and, as I see what the rest of the world has been witnessing for such a long time, I am on the side of the justice. Sorry for those who are failing to see it.<BR/><BR/>JENNA DELICHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-73498908868690522572008-05-10T10:29:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:29:00.000+01:00'Important to point out that Israelis have plenty ...'Important to point out that Israelis have plenty to celebrate today. Particularly those who remember being chucked out of their countries or had attempts made on their lives or the lives of their families because they were Jewish.'<BR/><BR/>Chucked out of their countries?! Is that why Palestinians were made to pay the price for what happened to you or ay other people (if they suffered)? Is that why the were 'cucked out' of their homes and homeland,and have had their basic human rights denied ever since it all started?<BR/><BR/>I would be srriously concerned to know that there are those who truly believe that the genocide commited on Palestinians to chuck them out of their country is a cause worth celebrating?! <BR/><BR/>If it was my country that did it I would be walking around with my head down, and protesting loudly against its government and its genocidal politics, trying to distance myself from it as much as possible. I would feel very much like Haim Bresheeth does. And he is a Jew as well.<BR/><BR/>And before you answer to any of the above perhaps you could go back to my little hypothetical scenario of before and think what if someone came here to your property, chucked you out, built a hotel and brought all their relatives from all over the world to live there, and then started celebrating such an achievement? What about 'Do not do to others what you do not want to be done unto you' principle of Judeism?<BR/><BR/>JENNA DELICHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-30605977188880276912008-05-10T10:28:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:28:00.000+01:00I am not being disingenuous. I asked for a public ...I am not being disingenuous. I asked for a public dissociation to try and deter 'ucuwhistleblower' from future scurrilous and threatening breaches. <BR/><BR/>I told you that while I appreciated your action in getting the posting<BR/>removed from Harry's Place and noted you distaste for the HP site, I thought this was only half the job but you told me you thought you had done sufficient.<BR/><BR/>In the light of that I re-posted when the issue became live again. I<BR/>also again made clear my opposition to DH's continued exclusion<BR/><BR/>Mike CushmanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-61515568845683291312008-05-10T10:27:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:27:00.000+01:00I believe that all people should abide by the list...I believe that all people should abide by the list rules but I have<BR/>twice asked a question about a serious and malicious breach of the rules (see below)to which I have received no response. Until I see a reply on the list I will take no complaints by boycott opponants about this issue seriously.<BR/><BR/>I will add that I do not think that, in normal circumstances, extended exclusion is appropriate, including in David Hirsch's case.<BR/><BR/>Mike CushmanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-85295411962772058622008-05-10T10:26:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:26:00.000+01:00For some time now, David Hirsh has been banned fro...For some time now, David Hirsh has been banned from this list for a breach of confidentiality. But in a recent email to the list, Sue Blackwell quite openly copied her whole email to Deborah Fink. The email in question quoted <BR/>extensively from a previous message to the list from Ronnie. It also <BR/>mentioned the contents of further emails from Malcolm and Philip. <BR/>Deborah Fink is not, so far as I know, a member of the UCU.<BR/><BR/>Here is what Matt Waddup has told us about confidentiality: 'This list is a private discussion forum hosted by UCU for the exclusive use of UCU members. No material from this list may be reproduced without the express permission of the original poster.'<BR/><BR/>So it looks as if Sue's email is a breach of confidentiality, unless she got specific permission for her publicising of their emails from Ronnie, Malcolm and Philip. David Hirsh has been excluded from the <BR/>list for a breach of confidentiality. Does this mean that Sue must now be excluded from the list for her breach of confidentiality? If it doesn't <BR/>mean that, will David now be readmitted?<BR/><BR/>Myself, I'm not in favour of Sue being excluded from the list. But I'm definitely in favour of the rules being applied consistently, and no doubt everyone else is too. I'm sure it is not the case, and none of us would want anybody to think, that anti-boycotters are being treated more harshly<BR/>than pro-boycotters or than those who repeatedly post vilifying and <BR/>demonizing rhetoric about Israel and about those members of the union who believe that Israelis shouldn't be excluded from the global academic community.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8155767247110659836.post-28084201939942066422008-05-10T10:24:00.000+01:002008-05-10T10:24:00.000+01:00Ann writes: "I want the right to be critical of th...Ann writes: "I want the right to be critical of the acts of both Israel and Palestine if such acts deny these basic human rights." <BR/><BR/>This implies that posters on this list are denying this "right to be critical". This needs to be backed by evidence. Opposition to the boycott cannot be construed as "denying the right to be critical". I am not aware that anyone on this list has denied the "right to be critical of the acts of both Israel and Palestine". <BR/><BR/>As an aside, neither "Israel", nor "Palestine" act. The Israeli government acts, Israeli and Palestinian trade unions act, the Palestinian authority act, Hamas acts, etc. This is a complex conflict with many actors which have different agendas. Part of the impossibility of an articulate discussion on this list comes from the inability to recognize and engage with such complexity. <BR/><BR/>Ann writes: "I don't want to spend more time doing this than all of the other things that matter to us and our members put together. I am horrified that we might spend the next year tearing ourselves apart as we have done this year." <BR/><BR/>I entirely agree, and, I am sure, a very large majority of members and activists, would agree too. <BR/><BR/>Ann continues: "I am equally horrified that wanting to defend such important values could be characterised as Anti-Semitism or any other form of religious or racial discrimination." <BR/><BR/>Here, again, it seems to me that this is a response to an accusation which has not been made. Nobody has ever claimed, to the best of my knowledge, that defending "such important values" [presumably, this refers to "solidarity on questions of education and trade unionism" referred to earlier in Ann's email] is, or could be characterized as, antisemitic. In the contrary, I am sure that we all agree that the defence of such values is important. <BR/><BR/>It is self-evident that a boycott of Israeli academics (or academics working at Israeli institutions) would be discriminatory. Whether such discrimination is justified by some higher imperative is, I suppose, what the debate should be about. <BR/><BR/>Ann continues: "Nevertheless we should be aware that Anti-Semitism is real phenomenon and we need to be be careful not to whip these issues up in a way that can feed Anti-Semitic sentiment." <BR/><BR/>This is certainly an important issue, not only because a number of members will feel that they will have to leave the Union if they perceive that its actions feed antisemitism. <BR/><BR/>Is it possible to campaign for the exclusion of Israeli academics, and only Israeli academics, of the cultural and academic life of humanity, but, politely, and without feeding antisemitic sentiments? <BR/><BR/>The evidence, including the exemples of discrimination mentioned by Mira in a recent email and including the numerous exemples of antisemitism in the larger boycott campaign, indicates that this is not possible. More to the point, this does not seem to worry the advocates of a boycott. <BR/><BR/>Ann continues: "Now it is time to stop using these daft arguments and concentrate on the centre of the issue which is which acts <BR/>are we talking about, do they affect the human rights I have outlined, is any action that is proposed within UCU procedures and proportionate, and how could we manage to do what is right without being pilloried by the world's press?" <BR/><BR/>Agreed. The discussion should, for example, take into account all the other forms of actions which are available to the Union and its members, and evaluate the benefits and costs of these. Given that this debate is in its xxx re-edition, I would think that all the arguments have been placed on the table already. <BR/><BR/>I'd like to recommend in particular, the excellent article by Martha Nussbaum where she discusses the costs/benefits of various forms of action. <BR/>http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=860 <BR/><BR/>If the press concludes that our actions feed antisemitism, then the UCU will be "pilloried". And rightly so.<BR/><BR/>On the use of anti-semitism as a tactic to supress the critical approach Ann desires see Johann Hari's article in today's Independnent<BR/><BR/>The loathsome smearing of Israel's critics<BR/><BR/>http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-har<BR/>i-the-loathsome-smearing-of-israels-critics-822751.html<BR/><BR/>Mike CushmanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com