Thread: Israel's PR war on U.S. campuses
05-18-2005, 04:06 PM #1
Israel's PR war on U.S. campuses
A European graduate of Columbia University, was struck by how fanatically pro-Israel Columbia was.
'After being at Columbia for a while it occurred to me that international organisations and the UN, on the one hand and Columbia and New York, on the other, functioned in parallel universes. At international forums and assemblies, which I followed for my studies, Israeli repression was condemned, and countless resolutions requesting Israel to abide by international law were blocked by the U.S. At Columbia, arguments were concocted to defend Israel.
By fall 2000 at the beginning of the second intifada, fanatical supporters of Israel sought to violently repress anybody defending the Palestinians. Students belonging to the Middle Eastern group at the Law School were practically spat upon, their tables overturned - occurrences that in Europe would be inconceivable.
On the other hand, maybe due to international condemnation of Israeli policies, a debate was finally opening up on campus. Because they no longer dominate one hundred percent of public discussion, fanatical supporters of Israel on campus now claim that their voices are "stifled" and that they are "unwelcome" and "silenced."
When Dr Mustafa Barghouti came to Columbia to give a talk in November 2003, two Hillel fanatics began to harass him during the Q&A session, and heaping ridicule on his presentation.
When Barghouti mentioned the 4,000 Palestinians killed, one of the Hillel fanatics laughed. No such vulgarity was on display every time Benjamin Netanyahu came to the Business School to give a talk during the previous years.
Then there's the "stifling" of dissenting voices by fanatical Zionist professors at the Law School. Some of them seem to spend all of their waking hours concocting legal alibis in defense of Mother Israel, much like Communist Party hacks did for Mother Russia in the 1930s.
For example, at the height of the Israeli incursions of 2002, Professor George Fletcher put forth the long discredited notion that UN Resolution 242 "did not compel Israel to leave all territories."
This masterful piece was published in the New York Times as some kind of intellectual breakthrough. Never mind that 242 emphasizes "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." Other law school professors are avid proponents of Israel exceptionalism - that is, human rights protections like the prohibition on torture must be afforded to everyone except victims of Israeli policy.
In one same class the (foreign-born) professor's uncontroversial assertion that "Palestinians are oppressed" was met by the fanatics' outrage. The professor, no doubt fearing reprisals, did not dwell on the issue and barely defended himself while the "silenced" students angrily protested. That European students came to the professor's rescue and initiated a debate after class would seem to suggest that it is not Israel's supporters students but its critics who are "silenced" and "stifled.." The European students were then accused by their pro-Israeli counterparts of being - surprise, surprise - "anti-Semites."
And, truly the anti-Semitic oppression weighs heavily at the Law School, where only a handful of Arab and Muslim students gain admission while more than half of the accepted candidates in the S.J.D program every single year are Israelis, a country of 6 million people in a world with 6 billion inhabitants.
The truth is that Columbia has been a refuge for Zealots for Zion. It is precisely when the ideological walls protecting this haven began to crumble that they started shouting about "silenced" and "stifled" voices and anti-Semitism. In the U.S. the hope is that by whipping up enough hysteria they can still win here.
The attack on professors who criticise Israel and its policies also comes at a time when even the Israeli government has realized that the public relations battle has been lost. The Israeli government has thus repeatedly denounced the "inability of pro-Israel students to respond to the challenges on American campuses" as a reason behind the current failure. And it is with this understanding that several Israeli Ministries have been involved in an active campaign to "promote pro-Israel activism on American campuses."
The Israeli Ministry for Jerusalem and Diaspora Affairs, under the guidance of Natan Sharansky has been an instrumental player. Sharansky decided to take the matter into his own hands. The Ministry celebrated "back to campus advocacy weekends" for foreign students enrolled in summer courses at Israeli universities, where participants from institutions all over Israel were happily recruited for a financially sponsored weekend near the beach.
The students were welcome with the following statements: "lately pro-Palestinian students at U.S campuses have been very successful and some of you have not been active enough and could not confront them probably because you did have the right arguments. This weekend is designed to give you the tools to fight". And then students had to sign up for conferences where those tools were provided and discussed, and CD, CD-Roms and DVDs were distributed with statements like "settlements are not illegal under international law" or "Jerusalem is the undivided capital of the state of Israel" or "why do we have a claim to the whole land" as just some illustrative examples. Students were also told to confront "anti-Israeli" professors by all means.
That Sharansky, the erstwhile defender of Human Rights in the Soviet Union has now become, in Uri Avnery's words, "an uncompromising activist against the human (and any other) rights of the Palestinians in the occupied territories" is most intriguing.
Countless organizations and internet sites have been created to support Israel's cause on U.S. campuses and media, and still, Israel's image does not improve. That must be the real cause of concern for that who claim to have been "silenced" and that is why they are resorting to outside guidance. Mitchell Bard, executive director of the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise maintained as early as June 2003 that "the prevalence of outspoken anti-Israeli professors remains the most insidious danger to Israel's standing on the campus."
The smear campaign against Columbia professors who dare to criticize Mother Israel in the midst of a pro-Zionism campus is nothing new and is part of a well-orchestrated campaign stemming from a feeling of impotence. And since the students are not going to change, the target of pro-Israel students and all those considerable outside organizations providing support to them should be the professors who offer dissenting views.
That Columbia succumbed to outside pressure from a well-organized financially powerful pro-Israel group indicates that the freedom of academic institutions in the US is subordinated to financial and economic interests.'
05-18-2005, 05:35 PM #2
Did you write this too monkey boy?
05-18-2005, 08:56 PM #3
That is total crap...Seems moral equivalence is causing more confusion for some.. especially college kids
just look at Horowitz's work www.frontpagemagazine.com
Last edited by jasper1968; 05-18-2005 at 08:58 PM.
05-18-2005, 09:08 PM #4
Singern.......why don't you just move to Israel??......and take all the spies with you
05-19-2005, 03:00 AM #5Originally Posted by Badgerman
05-19-2005, 07:29 AM #6Originally Posted by Badgerman
How about you move back to your native Iran and take the Hezbola terrorist with you. Hairy virgins await you.
05-19-2005, 01:39 PM #7
I've been hiding under YOUR sister's dress......after she did the photo shoot for my avatar......
05-19-2005, 01:51 PM #8Originally Posted by Badgerman
05-19-2005, 02:21 PM #9
Actually I believe it
I attended Concordia University and it was hell between Jews and Palestinians
05-19-2005, 02:39 PM #10Originally Posted by Badgerman
Last edited by singern; 05-19-2005 at 02:48 PM.
05-19-2005, 03:39 PM #11Originally Posted by singern
You're probably an only child.......one look and your mother said "no more"
05-19-2005, 04:24 PM #12Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2003
A very interesting piece. I can't say that I believe all, or any, of it. However, none-the-less, it's interesting.
05-19-2005, 06:24 PM #13Originally Posted by Badgerman
Ouch, how hurtful, I better complain to a mod...
05-24-2005, 10:05 AM #14Originally Posted by singern
05-24-2005, 01:08 PM #15
Singern complained to me that Badgerman wants to match him with his fat and ugly sister
05-24-2005, 01:10 PM #16Originally Posted by 3Vandoo
05-24-2005, 05:05 PM #17Originally Posted by singern
thats explain the same IP between him and his sister and the same type of grammar!
05-25-2005, 07:51 AM #18Originally Posted by 3Vandoo
We have all suspected this for some time, the only question is:
Is Bagerman a girl posting as a guy, or is it a Gay-man posting as a feminist ???
Last edited by singern; 05-25-2005 at 09:01 AM.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)