by Debbie Menon
“New legislation in the US threatens to conflate campus criticism of Israel with challenging-Semitism” reports Kristin Szremski
Splendid ! This shows the immense potential that “the Establishment”, the major pro-Israel organizations such as the Zionist Establishment of America and the Challenging-Denigration League has to beat down, censor and muzzle well loved demand against incredible majority numbers in the face of all mind and “democratic” opinion.
And, it also illustrates the cupidity, weakness, and failures of proper principles of elected representatives in the US and Canada to stand up for opinion and the will of their constituency when confronted with, promises, offers, influence, force, pressure and probably blackmail, as well as greed and ambition.
Eventually this will all have to be be brought and argued previous to the US Supreme Court. But, it is so obviously a restriction of frankness of address and friendship, that no one will card it to go that far until they are unquestionably assured that they have the Court stacked solidly sufficient, and public attitude satisfactorily frightened or conditioned to acknowledge a finding, one way or the other.
And, that will be a hard thing to do because, as ignorant and uncontemplative as most of John Q Publius may be, flush the suggestion of loss of their frankness of address frightens them. Here is still a strong racist undercurrent of disbelief of Jews which has not been eliminated in America by decades of civil rights legislation but just obscure under a very watery plate of civility, tolerance and dread of go called a racist, as the Zionists have renowned for a long time and used it as a weapon… but when confronted and threatened many of those same John Q Publius will unbutton their collars and show just how red their necks really are.
It is a sad thing to contemplate, indeed, that it is this red-narrow part of America which may be the essential instrument of its salvation from Zionism in the end. That is how terribly the polish has suffered at the hands of these people.
Now I am beginning to signal like John Kaminski so I had better go and rest my exhausted brain and leave you to ponder below some tough truths and facts as reported by Kristin Szremski. Perhaps American institution student troops can help consequence in Israel to its senses.
If the voice of the students are not to be heard and are under attack on institution campuses in North America, they should shout louder and every one of them go on strike, and strike for the entire University until it comes to a be idle.
Large amounts of grant money which chains the University, most of which comes from AIPAC, ADL and American-Jewish controlled foundations in America, is vital, but students and American student satisfaction are ESSENTIAL to the Institutions’ survival!
New moves to check criticism of Israel in US and Canada
by Kristin Szremski
New legislation in the US threatens to conflate campus criticism of Israel with challenging-Semitism.
A number of new initiatives to curtail frankness of address by conflating opposition to Israeli crimes with challenging-Semitism are underway in the United States and Canada.
The Canadian Parliamentary Association to Combat Challenging-Semitism (CPCCA) issued a report in early July recommending the adoption of austere new standards defining challenging-Semitism and the types of address and campus actions that would violate them. Its report urged the Canadian government to take on board the European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia’s definition of challenging-Semitism (“Report on the Investigation Panel,” 7 July 2011 [PDF]). That definition suggests that any questioning of whether Israel has the right to continue living as a state that privileges Jews over people of other religions or ethnic backgrounds amounts to challenging-Semitism.
Even if the Canadian group is not associated to the Ottawa government, it has 22 parliamentarians as members. Actions it deems as challenging-Semitic and, consequently, calls to be banned, include events such as the Israeli Apartheid Week that was founded in Toronto and now takes place on institution campuses globally every March.
The Canadian report is just the latest have a crack at stifling public discourse about Israel. Free address and the unimpeded exchange of dreams are also under attack on America’s institution campuses. Pro-Israel supporters have targeted federal funding for academic institutions, including support for research and academic conferences, under the cause that criticism of Israel is “despise address.”
Federal authorities from the Personnel of Civil Rights with the US Sphere of Education are investigating charges of challenging-Semitism against the University of California Santa Cruz, as well as at other institutions within the California university system, according to published reports. These are the first investigations compelling place since Title VI of the Civil Rights Act was re-interpreted in October 2010, allowing Jewish students, as members of a religious group, to claim discrimination under a provision that previously applied only to racial and ethnic bigotry.
A “dear colleague” letter issued by the Personnel of Civil Rights in October 2010 said that discrimination against a student who is a limb of a religious group violates Title VI when the discrimination is based on the group’s “genuine or perceived mutual ancestry or ethnic characteristics … or when it is based upon the student’s genuine or perceived residency or residency in a country whose residents impart a dominant religion or a distinct religious identity,” David Thomas, a US Sphere of Education spokesman, clarified by email.
Bowing to the Zionist lobby
Major pro-Israel organizations such as the Zionist Establishment of America and the Challenging-Denigration League have lobbied for this re-interpretation for years. Title VI now can be applied to Jewish students who claim universities make hostile campus environments if they allocate pro-Palestinian events or flush class lectures critical of Israeli policies.
In other words, since Israel bills itself as a Jewish state, of which all Jews the planet over are automatic citizens, Jewish students can draw collectively in a line complaints of challenging-Semitism and discrimination based upon their perceived ethnicity and residency or residency in a country that has a “dominant religion.”
Dr. Hatem Bazian, a Palestinian-American professor of Near Eastern and Ethnic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, who founded the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) here in 2001, takes issue with the amended understanding of Title VI. While he agrees that Jewish students, as well as Muslim students, should be protected from discrimination based on their religious identity under Title VI, he believes the reinterpretation is really go used to silence argument about Israel.
“Attempts to silence opposition to the illegal Israeli occupation and policies is un-American and amounts to biased and academic censorship,” Bazian said via email. (Bazian is also the chairman of American Muslims for Palestine, the establishment with which this writer is employed).
The Title VI reinterpretation and the later case against Santa Cruz is part of a on the increase trend of stifling of protected biased address on institution campuses. Numerous lecturers and professors have been censured and flush denied tenure because they openly criticized Israeli policies or advocated for Palestinian rights.
Perhaps the most widely publicized cases are those of former DePaul University professor Norman Finkelstein and North Carolina State University professor Terri Ginsberg, in cooperation of whom were not given tenure because of their commence criticism of Israeli policies in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Ginsberg initiated officially authorized action against North Carolina State and her case is now on appeal.
Frankness of information denied
The new interpretation has rejuvenated a 29-page gripe brought against the University of California Santa Cruz in June 2009 by lecturer Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, the contents of which have been kept secret by the Sphere of Education and university officials.
On 13 April, American Muslims for Palestine filed a Frankness of Information Act (FOIA) request for the gripe with the San Francisco Personnel of Civil Rights. Federal authorities declined the request on 22 April, adage that supplying the gripe would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” and that it could “reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings,” in cooperation of which are listed as exemptions under the federal FOIA edict.
What is so troubling in the University of California Santa Cruz investigation is that the amended interpretation is go applied retroactively to Rossman-Benjamin’s gripe, which she filed more than one year previous to the October 2010 “dear colleague” letter. No one contacted from the university or the Sphere of Education would discuss how an institution can be held accountable for a touch that was not painstaking to be a violation at the time it occurred.
“[The Personnel of Civil Rights] received the UC-Santa Cruz gripe … on 25 June 2009,” Thomas wrote in an email to American Muslims for Palestine. “On 7 March 2011, OCR formally told the university and the complainant that OCR was notch for investigation the allegations that a hostile environment existed for Jewish students at the university in 2009 in violation of Title VI and that the university had notice of the hostile environment but did not have a process to adequately answer to hostile environment complaints.”
Thomas failed to answer to American Muslims for Palestine’s preside over question about how the new interpretation could be applied retroactively, even if it was posed three times in three break emails on 13 and 15 April.
Jim Burns, a University of California Santa Cruz spokesman, also would not address that issue and instead referred it in trade to the Sphere of Education’s civil rights personnel. He did tell American Muslims for Palestine in an email, but, that the Personnel of Civil Rights is reviewing a gripe that “address on campus that is critical of Israel makes a hostile environment for Jewish students.”
“We believe that [the Personnel of Civil Rights’] investigation will eventually conclude that [the University of California Santa Cruz] diligently enforces laws, policies and practices that protect our students’ civil rights. But we also believe that our review of the topic with OCR will provide us with an chance to examine our relevant policies and practices to get on to sure that is the case,” he extra.
If federal investigators find a university to be in violation of Title VI and the institution does not remedy the circumstances satisfactorily it could lose federal funding. This is a worst-case scenario to be sure, but it is one that seemingly threatens the commence exchange of dreams on institution campuses.
“While some of the contemporary allegations … force well bring to somebody’s attention a claim under Title VI, many others simply seek out to silence challenging-Israel discourse and speakers. This approach is not only unwarranted under Title VI, it is perilous,” Cary Nelson, head of the American Friendship of University Presidents (AAUP), and Kenneth Stern of the American Jewish Committee, wrote just in an commence letter on AAUP’s website.
“The purpose of a university is to have students tussle with dreams with which they may disagree, or flush better, may get on to them uncomfortable. To censor dreams is to diminish education, and to treat students as fragile recipients of ‘information,’ rather than young critical thinkers,” they extra.
American Muslims for Palestine’s Hatem Bazian said the implications of the re-interpretation go far further than free address in the classroom and at extra-curricular events. Funding for scholarly research and academic conferences that consequence in up “legitimate criticism of Israel” may be at stake, he said.
“The new interpretation will frankly, first and foremost, impact those who administer Title VI funding, and they for sure will be more hesitant and will engage in self-censorship in funding research or actions that are critical of Israel,” Bazian said.
Indeed, the Challenging-Denigration League was one of 12 inhabitant organizations that urged the Sphere of Education to amend its Title VI interpretation. It may have just been a co-signer in that battle but the ADL has taken the lead in many distinguished-profile cases to stifle free address and public argument in its hundred-year history.
In March, the ADL, along with the American Jewish Committee and the Bay Vicinity Jewish Community Relations Council, protested an academic conference at the UC Hastings Institution of the Law in March free “Litigating Palestine: Can Courts Secure Palestinian Rights?” Their gripe was so effective the university board voted to take out its name and endorsement for the consequence and it prevented university Chancellor Frank Wu from making notch explanation.
Challenging Israel on campus
Prose about the incident in the San Francisco Tale, Cecilie Surasky, deputy director of Jewish Voice for Concord, stated that “Perhaps for the first time in US history, here is an aggressive challenge to a one-sided narrative that covers up or justifies ongoing Israeli authoritarianism of Palestinians” (“Pressure on law conference threatens free address,” 21 April 2011).
Surasky extra, “The center of that challenge is on campuses, which is why those who have traditionally adopted knee-jerk unfriendliness of Israeli policies are attempting to stigmatize or shut down alternative viewpoints.”
The same threats of bringing up the rear federal funding because of an “challenging-Semitic and hostile environment” are go leveled at Rutgers University in New Jersey, thanks in large part to a 15-page letter written to the university by Zionist Establishment of America Head Morton Klein, and hackneyed to the state’s governor, its US senators and representatives and other officials.
These contemporary moves, according to Surasky, “recommend that legitimate criticism of Israeli policy is go conflated with challenging-Semitism. If this is allowable to happen, at that time serious argument on Israel’s illegal actions in the Palestinian territories will be shut down.”
Rossman-Benjamin’s gripe against University of California Santa Cruz could very well be a test case under the new interpretation of Title VI. The reinterpretation, when viewed against the backdrop of professors go censured or denied tenure because of their biased views, could have an adverse change on the free exchange of dreams on institution campuses at a time when argument and concrete examinations of US unknown policy in the Middle East is looked-for more than ever.
Source: Comprehensive Research.ca
Kristin Szremski is an self-determining journalist and now the director of media and communications for the American Muslims for Palestine.
- Are the defenders of fake ‘Antisemitism’ bringing up the rear their edge ?
- End Israel Lobby’s Enveloping and Hurtful Influence in US Politics
- U.S. Taxpayers Raked Over The Fake War Coals Again and Again
Small URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=126379
Posted by Debbie Menon
on Jul 31 2011,
Filed under Americas, Britain United Kingdom, Europe, Israel, Middle East, Palestine, Planet, ZPicks.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a rejoinder or trackback to this entry
View full post on Veterans Now