RSS
The Hypocrisy of ‘Progressive’ Anti-Zionists on My Campus
On the morning of February 19, I had the displeasure of waking up to more than 100 messages from the University of East Anglia (UEA) Jewish Society detailing how the university’s campus had been completely vandalized, including on the main sign at the school’s entrance.
Throughout campus, students found spray painted antisemitic phrases such as “Zionism = Colonialism,” “Judaism opposes Zionism,” “End Aparthied,” and “Bank with Barclays finances genocide of Palestinians,” to share a few. This was done the night before a prospectus day, which was clearly a message to all potential UEA students and their families, warning of social alienation and potentially violence to anyone who disagreed.
Every single one of the “claims” listed above is completely false.
Zionism is a core belief of the overwhelming majority of Jews; it started out as an indigenous Land-Back movement, and had nothing to do with colonialism. There is no Israeli apartheid, as has been firmly documented.
When it comes to the current war, the IDF has gone out of its way to save as many innocent Gazans as possible while waging a war against a genocidal terror group. Furthermore, approximately 20% of the Israeli population is Arab and over 19% of the population are Muslim with full rights and safeties.
But aside from the graffiti’s brazenly dishonest antisemitism, the tokenizing of anti-Zionist Jews to legitimize these aggressive acts should be beyond the pale for a community that considers itself an “accepting” society. And yet, this is exactly what UEA’s Palestine Solidarity Society (Palsoc) thought was appropriate after the display of antisemitism was condemned by university leaders.
Thankfully, our school’s Vice Chancellor quickly condemned the vandalism as antisemitic and had it removed immediately (the least he could do, mind you). Unfortunately as of this writing, no consequences have been handed down to the perpetrators, who have still yet to be identified.This, coupled with Palsoc’s angry response to the Vice Chancellor that essentially doubled down on the graffiti’s antisemitism, shows that incidents like these will keep happening, leaving Jewish UEA students scared and vulnerable.
So what did Palsoc say, you ask? It would take up too much time refuting every distortion and lie used to justify the newest chapter of UEA hosted antisemitism, so here’s the gist:
After falsely claiming Israel is committing a genocide, the statement says that, “The Vice Chancellor has contributed to a repressive atmosphere in which those who wish to speak out against the unfolding genocide in Gaza are afraid do so,” and “[the letter shows] that calling out Israel’s genocide against their people will be treated as tantamount to a crime.” For a group worried about being targeted for their political views and that acknowledges how “anonymous graffiti can be perceived as intimidating,” it seems odd that the rest of Palsoc’s message attempts to defend such a blatant attack on the community.
The most appalling bit of nonsense in their response claimed that the vandals and their statements were not antisemitic because some Jews agree with them. It’s the classic, “I can’t be bigoted, some of my best friends are Jews,” response. It’s as if Palsoc believes it can justify its position by defending the right for some Jews to incite violence against other Jews.
Unfortunately, many student groups supported the Palsoc statement.
The point of all these cultural or religious societies is supposed to be educating people about their cultures, and defending their members against injustice. However, when Palsoc completely negates all the work that the community has done for social justice by defending what amounted to be a flood of anonymous threats targeting another marginalized group, there is little else to do other than question their motives.
It is an awful shame to see so many societies get behind such a hateful and targeted statement, which has made Jews like me feel so isolated and despised. For Palsoc to then claim that they are striving for coexistence and peace is just pure gaslighting.
Billy Alexander is a student at the University of East Anglia, who has been advocating for a change in narrative on campus about Middle Eastern politics, especially the misinformation about Israel.
The post The Hypocrisy of ‘Progressive’ Anti-Zionists on My Campus first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Wikipedia’s Serious Problem: Bias Against Israel
An aerial view shows the bodies of victims of an attack following a mass infiltration by Hamas gunmen from the Gaza Strip lying on the ground in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, in southern Israel, Oct. 10, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ilan Rosenberg
The report that Wikipedia’s volunteer editors are labeling the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as an unreliable source of information on certain topics — including antisemitism related to Israel and Zionism — is a much more serious problem than an attack on a particular institution. Instead, it speaks to how much the bias against Israel and the indifference to antisemitism has spread to other organizations and informational platforms in this country.
There are those in the Jewish community who go so far as to claim that any criticism of Israel is really a cover for antisemitism. This is absurd. Israel is a country like any other, and its policies are subject to criticism, and even condemnation, as we see taking place within the country itself. Serious people, including those at ADL, reject outright the idea that Israel is beyond criticism, and that when criticism of Israel appears, it is a manifestation of antisemitism.
On the other hand, equally absurd — but much more dangerous because it is accepted in certain mainstream institutions — is the notion that any form of criticism of Israel can never be classified as antisemitism. This is a dangerous and misinformed idea, which underlies the spread of hate that we have witnessed since October 7. The most extreme manifestation of this was the rationalization or outright denial of the barbaric Hamas massacre of October 7. This attack — the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust — was supposedly framed in terms of legitimate resistance to Israeli policies. In other words, nothing Israel could do to defend itself is defensible.
While the distortion embodied in these justifications for the murder of 1,200 Israelis, the rape of scores of women, the taking of more than 200 hostages is so obvious, it wasn’t the most perilous form. Even a person with hostile views toward the Jewish State could see through the immorality of justifying one of the worst acts of terrorism since 9/11.
Far more dangerous, because of its respectability, is the concept that no criticism of Israel can ever be antisemitism. This is often expressed with phrases like, “we don’t hate Jews, we hate Zionism.” And those sources — such as the ADL — which identify areas where hostility toward Israel can be a form of antisemitism and a generator of antisemitic incidents, are treated as biased and unreliable by Wikipedia and other groups and publications.
In fact, the manifestations of anti-Israel activity and the explosion of anti-Jewish behavior in a multitude of areas of society cannot be separated from classical antisemitism.
Jews were demonized for centuries — from being accused as “Christ killers,” to charges of blood libels and murders of children for ritual purposes, to sinister conspiracy theories as embodied in the fraudulent Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion document, which accuses Jewish leaders of plotting to take over the world.
All of this deeply embedded hatred culminated in the Holocaust, the Nazis’ systematic murder of two-thirds of the Jews of Europe.
After the horrors of the Nazi extermination of the Jewish people, outright Jew-hatred was stigmatized — but millennia of prejudice against the Jewish people did not suddenly disappear. Over time, it transformed itself into something more legitimate: hatred of the only Jewish state in the world.
To those who cared, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., it was obvious that delegitimizing the Jewish State was merely a post-Holocaust form of antisemitism.
While these ideas existed for decades, it was October 7 that gave them new life. Beyond the rationalization of the Hamas terrorism itself, the anti-Israel protests on campuses were characterized by classic demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish State and its Jewish supporters.
Denial of the fundamental right of the Jewish state to exist — as embodied in the popular protest phrase, “From the river to the sea” — is along the historic lines of delegitimizing Jews through conspiracy theories.
Demonization of the Jewish State through denying what Hamas did, or justifying or labeling Israel’s struggle to defend itself after the worst day since the Holocaust as genocide — or accusing Israel of deliberately targeting children, in the spirit of blood libel charges — are only some of the ways in which expressions have not been mere criticism of Israel.
And the effect of all this — the attacks on Jews on campuses and elsewhere — was highly predictable. Hate speech, whether from the right, the left, or Islamist, inevitably leads to hate incidents.
In deeming ADL reporting as “unreliable,” this subset of Wikipedia’s editors has ignored all these forms of antisemitism that have emerged over the last eight months. For us, we will continue to do our work, always recognizing the distinction between free speech and criticism of Israeli policies and the demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state, which fits into the pattern of historic antisemitism.
It is important that leaders in society make clear that they know what’s going on here — that it’s exactly this kind of thinking that has produced the opportunity for antisemitism to openly raise its ugly head in a way that we haven’t seen for decades. If people don’t confront the reality, this hatred — legitimized by mainstream sources — will spread and create even greater dangers for American Jews and American society.
The first step in standing up against this spreading support for hate is to express support for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, which articulates when legitimate criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism.
Ken Jacobson is Associate National Director of ADL.
The post Wikipedia’s Serious Problem: Bias Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Members of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party Say Jews Cannot Live in Israel
People hold Fatah flags during a protest in support of the people of Gaza, as the conflict between Israel and Hamas continues, in Hebron, in the West Bank, Oct. 27, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Mussa Qawasma
Whoever thinks the current war is an isolated conflict in the Gaza Strip — think again. The war is being cheered by members of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas’ political party, Fatah, as leading to a “return to Acre, Jaffa, and Haifa.”
In other words, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
One Fatah member stated recently what Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) has documented for decades — that the conflict with Israel is not over land, but much more. It is “existential, not just a conflict over borders.”
Fatah Revolutionary Council member Muhammad Al-Lahham: “This is my opinion as [a member of] Fatah: That my conflict against this occupation [i.e., Israel] is an existential conflict, not just a conflict over borders. It’s either me or him on this land.”
[Al-Arabiya TV (Saudi Arabia), Facebook page, June 15, 2024]
Another top member and official of Fatah, Nablus Branch Secretary Muhammad Hamdan, said that Palestinians dying in the war in Gaza serve as “fuel” for the Palestinian “return,” and taking over of all of Israel. As he put it, Israel is “transient”:
Fatah Nablus Branch Secretary Muhammad Hamdan: “We say to the entire world that this blood that is being shed will be the fuel for our return to Acre, Jaffa, and Haifa, and certainly the Israeli occupation is transient and indeed the State of Palestine will be established, whether the occupation [i.e., Israel] and this world want it or not. All this national and mass activity emphasizes that we are returning, whether the occupation wants it or not.”
[Official PA TV, May 15, 2024]
The Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Education showed a map and worded it as explicitly as possible on its Facebook page: “Palestine — the entire land is ours, from the [Mediterranean] Sea to the [Jordan] River”
Facebook, PA Ministry of Education, Nov. 16, 2021
This echoes many similar statements before it by other top Fatah and PA officials, such as Fatah Revolutionary Council Secretary Majed Al-Fatiani, who said that all the “transients” who came to “Palestine” must return “to where they came from,” and that only the Palestinians will have “sovereignty” over the land:
Fatah Revolutionary Council Secretary Majed Al-Fatiani: “There will be no sovereignty over this land except for the Palestinians … even if there is a foreign and transient case as the transients who came in the history of Palestine and returned to where they came from… [The Israelis] must understand that Palestine between the [Mediterranean] Sea and the [Jordan] River – every Palestinian man and woman has a right to it, and we will pursue them to take this right … Every year a generation arises among us that says: My home is in Jaffa, my home is in Tantura, my home is in the Upper Galilee, in Al-Bassa, in Lod, my home is in Ramle, Umm Al-Rashrash [i.e., Eilat; all the places are in Israel], and everywhere.”
[Fatah-run Awdah TV, Special Coverage, May 29, 2022]
The idea of Israel as a colonial “implant” and “a temporary ruler” is expressed in the following video, which was broadcast by official PA TV hundreds of times for almost a decade. It shows the rise and defeat of different rulers in “Palestine” over time. It ends with Israel’s defeat and the arrival of a “new” Muslim conqueror, Saladin, who defeated the Crusaders, thus representing the coming Muslim savior who will “liberate Palestine” from Jewish-Israeli rule:
The author is a senior analyst at Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article was originally published.
The post Members of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party Say Jews Cannot Live in Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Did Jamaal Bowman Primary Bring AOC & Nick Fuentes Together?
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on March 21, 2024. Photo: Craig Hudson/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Far-right white supremacist Nick Fuentes recently found common ground with progressive New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), taunting her with their political and ideological “similarities.” And the Internet caught fire.
What started as Ocasio-Cortez’s distaste for “big money” election spending ended with an exchange that Fuentes created to match her with anti-Israel rhetoric.
While it is evident that both Fuentes and Ocasio-Cortez are clearly anti-Israel, one accepted definition of antisemitism would also indicate that their rhetoric and their actions in turn make them both antisemitic.
AOC is more America First than 99% of Republicans. https://t.co/VDgdMZr4N6
— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) June 19, 2024
No matter how hard she tries, AOC cannot separate herself from being associated with Jew-haters. Her standpoint appears to be mainly made of ignorance, angelic naïveté, and her alliance with two of the most antisemitic Congresswomen, Ilan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).
Now, Fuentes has managed to rile her up in one tweet and expose their similarities. Fuentes, of course, is an open antisemite and white supremacist.
You are a white supremacist and I want nothing to do with you nor the world you imagine. I believe in a multiracial democracy, one of economic rights, civil liberties, and that affirms the working class and the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people.
These are not small differences.…
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 20, 2024
But that is exactly the point, polar-opposites of the spectrum are supposedly adversaries in their values. Yet extremes on either side are like a horseshoe spectrum — they meet at the bottom where the ends almost touch.
As for the “most expensive primary” that AOC criticized, Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) suffered a resounding defeat. He also did so in a way that singled out the Jewish community. And despite critics’ claims, the results also proved what HonestReporting wrote: this primary race was about more than “the Benjamins.”
A beloved county-executive and more moderate Democrat, George Latimer won 58.6% of the vote, and his voters were motivated by many issues. However, The New York Times put out a disturbing headline, later changing it amid criticism.
Actually, @nytimes, there was far more to it than “the Benjamins,” as we made clear the day before Bowman’s defeat. https://t.co/rhyGHVDv94 https://t.co/sTdLl8aWNT
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 26, 2024
Hmmm seems @nytimes thought better of their headline placing the blame for Bowman’s loss on the Jews, oops I mean “pro-Israel money.” https://t.co/k5PvLFrvwi pic.twitter.com/DB4sc2YVGy
— Dr. Laura Shaw Frank (@shawfrank) June 26, 2024
Of course, the Jewish people will be blamed for this “upset.” And not just by AOC.
Many allies of Fuentes and KKK leader David Duke also blamed the result on Jews. One former UFC fighter took to X to blame “Israel” for meddling in elections. He made the mistake of retweeting a post referencing Jewish people.
Once again, we often see that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Did Jamaal Bowman Primary Bring AOC & Nick Fuentes Together? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.