The world has witnessed a disturbing surge in antisemitic, violent protests that contrast sharply with the peaceful demonstrations in support of Israel. The juxtaposition of these demonstrations has stirred controversy and raises important questions about the so-called line between antisemitism and anti-Zionism — a line that is increasingly blurred in these troubling times.
Anti-Zionism is not merely a disagreement with Israeli policies, but an insidious form of prejudice that extends beyond geopolitical boundaries. While it is crucial to acknowledge that criticism of Israeli policies is not inherently antisemitic, there are members of various protests who have not been criticizing, but rather demonizing, the Jewish State. They are not voicing peaceful expressions of discontent or legitimate criticism; instead, they are promoting hatred and calls for violence. Large groups of protestors have called for the destruction of Israel; they also promote violence against Jews, and share antisemitic imagery.
These protestors profess anti-Zionism while practicing antisemitism; advocate for a ceasefire while remaining silent on hostage release; declare support for Palestinians without condemning Hamas; and express a desire for peace while resorting to violence.
These violent protestors are using what should be peaceful demonstrations as a cover for expressing deep-seated hatred, which is a tactic that mirrors the reprehensible strategies employed by Hamas. Just as Hamas members embed themselves in civilian populations to make Israel’s attempts at finding them more difficult (while putting innocent civilians at risk), these vicious protestors do the same, manipulating public perception by using seemingly peaceful demonstrations to mask their underlying agenda.
Not all demonstrators necessarily harbor antisemitic sentiments. Some may be misinformed, misguided, or are critical for a legitimate reason. However, even if they do not espouse antisemitism, their culpability lies in their neglect and disregard for the issue at hand. Standing by while their peers propagate inflammatory rhetoric, tear down signs of innocent hostages, and brandish flags of designated terrorist organizations like Hamas and ISIS, renders them complicit by association.
It also highlights an inherent ignorance of the situation in Israel. The ongoing conflict is not a war against the Palestinian people, but rather a response to neutralize the Hamas terror organization. While it is true that innocent Palestinians are being caught in the crossfire, both Israel and the US have offered considerable proof that Hamas is to blame for those deaths, hiding among civilians, misfiring rockets within Gaza, denying humanitarian aid, and committing further atrocities that force Israel to remove the terror group. By openly supporting Hamas at these rallies, these protesters are not actually supporting Palestinians, but rather their Hamas oppressors, and doing so with antisemitic rhetoric and vitriol.
By contrast, pro-Israel demonstrations, exemplified by the peaceful gathering in Washington, D.C., that took place on November 14, with over 290,000 in attendance, by and large advocate for hope, for shared values with the US, and a nuanced understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
These rallies focus on supporting the right of Israel to exist and defend itself against external threats, particularly from entities like Hamas, providing a counter-narrative to the violent demonstrations.
The stark contrast between the two types of protests underscores the importance of distinguishing between criticism of policies and the promotion of hatred. While violent protesters may try to hide behind the veil of anti-Zionism, now more than ever, the world must realize, that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.
Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” This statement resonates profoundly in the current context, urging us to confront antisemitism, hatred, and terror head-on.
Asher Stern, Head of Operations, International Legal Forum — an Israel-based global network of lawyers and activists around the world, standing up for Israel, and combating antisemitism in the international legal arena — holds a BA in Government, Strategy, and Diplomacy from the IDC, and an MA in International Relations from the Hebrew University.
The post The Thin Line Between Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism: Unraveling the Protests first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
South Dakota Passes Bill Adopting IHRA Definition of Antisemitism
South Dakota’s state Senate passed on Thursday a bill requiring law enforcement agencies to refer to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism when investigating anti-Jewish hate crimes.
South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) already adopted the definition, which has been embraced by lawmakers across the political spectrum, via executive order in 2021. This latest measure, HB 1076, aims to further integrate the IHRA’s guidance into law and includes the organization’s examples of antisemitism. It now awaits a vote by the state House of Representatives.
“As antisemitism continues to rise across America, having a clear and standardized definition enables a more unified stance against this hatred,” the Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), said in a statement. “We appreciate Governor Kristi Noem for making this legislation a policy goal of hers, strengthening the use of the IHRA Working Definition in South Dakota through legislation, following the December 2021 adoption via executive proclamation.”
CAM called on lawmakers in the lower house to follow the Senate’s lead and implored “other states to join the fight against antisemitism by adopting the IHRA definition, ensuring the safety and well-being of their Jewish residents.”
First adopted in 2005 by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism states that “antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews,” and includes a list of illustrative examples ranging from Holocaust denial to the rejection of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination. The definition is used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and the United Nations.
Widely regard as the world’s leading definition of antisemitism, it was adopted by 97 governmental and nonprofit organizations in 2023, according to a report Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) Antisemitism Research Center issued in January.
Earlier this month, Georgia became the latest US state to pass legislation applying IHRA’s guidance to state law. 33 US States have as well, including Virginia, Texas, New York, and Florida.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post South Dakota Passes Bill Adopting IHRA Definition of Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Columbia University Sued for Allowing Antisemitic Violence and Discrimination
Columbia University allowed for antisemitism to explode on campus endangering the welfare of Jewish students and faculty, StandWithUs Center for Legal Justice and Students Against Antisemitism (SAA) alleges in a lawsuit announced on Wednesday.
Filed in the US District Court of Southern New York, the complaint recounts dozens of reported antisemitic incidents that occurred after Oct. 7 which the university allegedly failed to respond to adequately because of anti-Jewish, as well as anti-Zionist, bias.
“Columbia refuses to enforce its policies or protect Jewish and Israeli members of the campus community,” Yael Lerman, director of SWU Center for Legal Justice said on Wednesday in a press release. “Columbia has created a pervasively hostile campus environment in which antisemitic activists act with impunity, knowing that there will be no real repercussions for their violations of campus policies.”
“We decline to comment on pending litigation,” Columbia University spokesperson and vice president for communications told The Algemeiner on Friday.
The plaintiffs in the case accuse Columbia University of violating their contract, to which it is bound upon receiving payment for their tuition, and contravening Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. They are seeking damages as well as injunctive relief.
“F— the Jews,” “Death to Jews, “Jews will not defeat us,” and “From water to water, Palestine will be Arab,” students chanted on campus grounds after the tragedy, violating the school’s code of conduct and never facing consequences, the complaint says. Faculty engaged in similar behavior. On Oct. 8, professor Joseph Massad published in Electronic Intifada an essay cheering Hamas’ atrocities, which included slaughtering children and raping women, as “awesome” and describing men who paraglided into a music festival to kill young people as “the air force of the Palestinian resistance.”
300 faculty signed a letter proclaiming “unwavering solidarity” with Massad, and in the following days, Students for Justice in Palestine defended Hamas’ actions as “rooted in international law.” In response, Columbia University president Minouche Shafik, opting not to address their rhetoric directly, issued a statement mentioning “violence that is affecting so many people” but not, the complaint noted, explicitly condemning Hamas, terrorism, and antisemitism. Nine days later, Shafik rejected an invitation to participate in a viewing of footage of the Oct. 7 attacks captured by CCTV cameras.
The complaint goes on to allege that after bullying Jewish students and rubbing their noses in the carnage Hamas wrought on their people, pro-Hamas students were still unsatisfied and resulted to violence. They beat up five Jewish students in Columbia’s Butler Library. Another attacked a Jewish students with a stick, lacerating his head and breaking his finger, after being asked to return missing persons posters she had stolen.
More request to the university went unanswered and administrators told Jewish students they could not guarantee their safety while Students for Justice in Palestine held demonstrations. The school’s powerlessness to prevent anti-Jewish violence was cited as the reason why Students Supporting Israel (SSI), a recognized school club, was denied permission to hold an event on self-defense. Events with “buzzwords” such as “Israel” and “Palestine” were forbidden, administrators allegedly said, but SJP continued to host events whole no one explained the inconsistency.
Virulent antisemitism at Columbia University on the heels of Oct. 7 was not a one-off occurance, the complaint alleges, retracing in over 100 pages 20 years of alleged anti-Jewish hatred at the school.
“Students at Columbia are enduring unprecedented levels of antisemitic and anti-Israel hate while coping with the trauma of Hamas’ October 7th massacre,” SWU CEO Roz Rothstein said in Wednesday’s press release. “We will ensure that Columbia University is held accountable for their gross failure to protect their Jewish and Israeli students.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Columbia University Sued for Allowing Antisemitic Violence and Discrimination first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
University of California-Los Angeles Student Government Passes BDS Resolution
The University of California-Los Angeles student government on Tuesday passed a resolution endorsing the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, as well as false accusation that Israel is committing a genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.
“The Israeli government has carried out a genocidal bombing campaign and ground invasion against Palestinians in Gaza — intentionally targeting hospitals universities, schools, shelters, churches, mosques, homes, neighborhoods, refugee camps, ambulances, medical personnel, [United Nations] workers, journalists and more,” the resolution, passed 10-3 by the UCLA Undergraduate Student Association Council (USAC), says, not mentioning that UN personnel in Gaza assisted Hamas’ massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7.
It continued, “Let it be resolved that the Undergraduate Student Association of UCLA formally call upon the UC Regents to withdraw investments in securities, endowments mutual funds, and other monetary instruments….providing material assistance to the commission or maintenance of flagrant violations of international law.
The days leading up to the vote were fraught, The Daily Bruin, the university’s official student newspaper reported on Wednesday.
“Non-UCLA students” sent USAC council members emails imploring them to vote for or against the resolution and USAC Cultural Affairs Commissioner and sponsor of the resolution, Alicia Verdugo, was accused of antisemitism and deserving of impeachment. The UCLA Graduate Student Association and University of California-Davis’ student government had just endorsed BDS the previous week, prompting fervent anticipation for the outcome of Tuesday’s USAC session.
Before voting took place, members of the council ordered a secret ballot, withholding from their constituents a record of where they stood on an issue of monumental importance to the campus culture. According to The Daily Bruin, they expressed “concerns” about “privacy” and “security.” Some members intimated how they would vote, however. During a question and answer period, one student who co-sponsored the resolution, accused a Jewish student of being “classist” and using “coded” language because she argued that the council had advanced the resolution without fully appreciating the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the history of antisemitism.
“As a Guatemalan, …my country went through genocide,” he snapped at the young woman, The Daily Bruin’s reporting documented. “My family died in the Guatemalan Mayan genocide. I understand. I very well know what genocide looks like.”
Other council members voiced their support by co-sponsoring the resolution, which was co-authored by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), a group that has held unauthorized demonstrations and terrorized Jewish students across the country.
Responding to USAC’s decision, Jewish students told the paper that they find the campaign for BDS and the attempts of pro-Palestinian students to defend Hamas’ atrocities myopic and offensive.
“How can anyone dare to contextualize since Oct. 7 without acknowledging that the Jewish people are victims of such a cataclysmic attack?” Mikayla Weinhouse said. “BDS intentionally aims to divide a community. Its supporters paint a complex and century-old conflict in the Middle East as a simplistic narrative that inspires hate rather than advocates for a solution.”
University of California-Los Angeles denounced the resolution for transgressing school policy and the spirit of academic freedom.
“The University of California and UCLA, which, like all nine other UC campuses, has consistently opposed calls for a boycott against and divestment from Israel,” the school said in a statement. “We stand firm in our conviction that a boycott of this sort poses a direct and serious threat to the academic freedom of our students and faculty and to the unfettered exchange of ideas and perspectives on this campus.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post University of California-Los Angeles Student Government Passes BDS Resolution first appeared on Algemeiner.com.