Foxman gained privileged access to UC school administrators in pressing ‘anti-Semitism’ case against Jewish critic of Israel

by Philip Weiss on May 2, 2009 · 33 comments

I'm running to Washington today, to cover the AIPAC policy conference, but wanted to publish some info I picked up about the case of William I. Robinson, the sociology prof at UC/Santa Barbara who is being investigated for alleged anti-Semitism for passing along to students a widely-distributed email comparing Israeli behavior in Gaza with the Nazis along with his observation that Gaza was the Palestinians' Warsaw ghetto.
–Note that Haaretz says that Robinson is Jewish. Huh.
–The best source of info in the case, including the original Robinson email and two students' letters from February that precipitated the university's investigation, is the school's new Committee to Defend Academic Freedom website. Jeb Sprague, a student who is on the committee, tells me that the Anti-Defamation League letter to Robinson in early February, complaining of his behavior, preceded the students' letters.
The Committee also posts a report on a meeting in March between school administrators and faculty and Abe Foxman, the head of the ADL, at which Foxman urged the investigation of Robinson.
"The administration has refused to meet with students who oppose the investigation," Sprague says. "But they meet with the head of a huge powerful organization that flies out from the East Coast. How does he get this access and the students don't get access?"
20 students had a sitin at the administration over this issue earlier this week. They say the investigation of Robinson violates university bylaws. What about the anti-Semitism charge?
"It's completely bogus," Sprague says. "They're conflating a critique of state violence used in one of the most densely populated civilian areas with racism. Can professors of international affaris not make historical comparisons?"

Related posts:

  1. Discrimination against those with heterodox ideas on Israel fosters anti-Semitism
  2. The transformation of ‘anti-Semitism’
  3. Anti-anti-semitism and the myths of my Jewish identity
  4. Foxman links criticism of Gaza with Holocaust
  5. Mark Cohen to reprise his important lecture on Muslim anti-Semitism

{ 33 comments }

1 ... May 2, 2009 at 12:48 pm

i think it is a fair comparison… universities are supposed to be about the exchange of ideas, some more controversial then others… too bad some in the jewish community would like to try to shut that down… reminds me a bit of what has happened to the comment section here!

2 LeaNder May 2, 2009 at 2:31 pm

reminds me a bit of what has happened to the comment section here!

Nothing much it seems? The two camps have jointly decided to leave us kvetching all on our own.

William I. Robinson: Another self-hating Jew. How about founding a club?

Gone again.

Could it really be people are having software troubles? Strange. See OT (?) and LD's comments, next article.

3 Jacobwolfen May 2, 2009 at 4:18 pm

"'Can professors of international affaris(sic) not make historical comparisons?'" Of course they can, but only if they are accurate. Robinson's was not. In fact, it was dishonest. Now Can professors of international affairs not lie? One would hope, but it appears not in this case.

4 Sand May 2, 2009 at 4:39 pm

Slightly OT: Talking about pre-AIPAC conference details: AIPAC Speakers: From: http://arisfreedomswitch.blogspot.com/2009/05/aip... Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa AIPAC's New Shining Star & a real die-hard Clintonite. James Woolsey, ex-CIA Chief (and noted neocon) Robert Satloff, Washington Institute for Near East Policy Director (Dennis Ross' former group) Maj. Gen. Ido Nechustan, commander of the Israeli Air Force Rep. Shelley Berkeley (D-NV) Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) Newt Gingrich Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) Rep. Mike Pence (R-PA) Shimon Peres, Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister Senator John Kerry (D-MA) Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL) Republican Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA)

5 Sand May 2, 2009 at 4:39 pm

I had to split my post. Studio chiefs lining up early behind Antonio Villaraigosa The Los Angeles mayor hopes early fundraising scares off potential challengers. http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-cause2...

6 Jacobsheeple May 2, 2009 at 5:12 pm

Yeah, only if they are accurate–remember when the head of Egypt was Hitler? Then the head of Iraq? And now the President of Iran, if not all Iran? I hear now its J-Street… taking over from Pat B, I guess.

7 MRW May 2, 2009 at 5:17 pm

The usual suspects, But what is the commander of the Israeli Air Force doing there while AIPAC is STILL NOT REGISTERED as a foreign agent?

8 Anthony May 2, 2009 at 5:23 pm

I cant wait for the reports of your policy conference Phil! Apparently Joe Biden will be there too!!!

9 Sand May 2, 2009 at 5:25 pm

Going through some of my files… this is a blast from the past… wow! how times have changed. Guess with Obama, Hillary, Ross and Emanual et. al now in power — Israel has given the US the go… JCPA Delegates Spurn Israel Demands Fearing Jews may become focus of confrontation with Iran, leaders at plenum defer call for tougher action. James D. Besser – Washington Correspondent 03/02/2007 "…Delegates to this week’s Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) plenum in Washington defied the Israeli government when they refused to adopt a last-minute resolution calling for tougher action against Iran and for its leaders to be indicted for inciting genocide. At an annual convention once dominated by fierce behind-the-scenes politicking over controversial resolutions, the Iran resolution, proposed by the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston, provided the only real drama…"

10 MRW May 2, 2009 at 5:26 pm

Pulse Media just posted Tony Judt's excellent 2006 essay on Israel: The country that wouldn’t grow up http://pulsemedia.org/2009/05/02/israel-61-the-co... I've been trying to put into words what we get hear so often on this site from the hasbara crowd and which Sprague is attempting to answer about the anti-semitism charge. Judt does it:.

When Israel breaks international law in the occupied territories, when Israel publicly humiliates the subject populations whose land it has seized – but then responds to its critics with loud cries of “anti-Semitism” – it is in effect saying that these acts are not Israeli acts, they are Jewish acts: The occupation is not an Israeli occupation, it is a Jewish occupation, and if you don’t like these things it is because you don’t like Jews. In many parts of the world this is in danger of becoming a self-fulfilling assertion: Israel’s reckless behavior and insistent identification of all criticism with anti-Semitism is now the leading source of anti-Jewish sentiment in Western Europe and much of Asia. But the traditional corollary – if anti-Jewish feeling is linked to dislike of Israel then right-thinking people should rush to Israel’s defense – no longer applies. Instead, the ironies of the Zionist dream have come full circle: For tens of millions of people in the world today, Israel is indeed the state of all the Jews. And thus, reasonably enough, many observers believe that one way to take the sting out of rising anti-Semitism in the suburbs of Paris or the streets of Jakarta would be for Israel to give the Palestinians back their land.

11 Sand May 2, 2009 at 5:35 pm

No, this is normal as far as I can tell. For example for the AIPAC Policy Conference in 2006 they had: TOWN HALL MEETING – Defending Israel in Today's World: A Conversation With One of Israel's Top Negotiators and Strategic Thinkers Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Amos Gilad Director of Policy and Political Military Bureau, Ministry of Defense, Israel TOWN HALL MEETING – Strategic Assessment: A Conversation With the IDF's Former Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya'alon Visiting Military Fellow, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy; Former Chief of Staff, Israel Defense Forces

12 Sand May 2, 2009 at 5:37 pm

Why is "AIPAC is STILL NOT REGISTERED as a foreign agent" Yes, something we would all like to know, to find out who actually funds this organization.

13 Rabbi Hiltop May 2, 2009 at 5:40 pm

If Israel is not for itself, who will be for Israel? If Israel is only for itself, what is Israel? If not now, when? Answers: Uncle Sam. A rogue state. So long as the American public is not given the truth.

14 Jaffr May 2, 2009 at 5:55 pm

Yeah, Tony V. must be planning a run for Governor. . .

15 8th A May 2, 2009 at 5:56 pm

Considering there were Israeli agents in on US torture at the prime level, and at the policy level, how is it that the US MSM never mentioned where ShrubCo & Chaney especially, got the notion US principles allowed torture? http://www.forward.com/articles/105258/

16 MRW May 2, 2009 at 6:30 pm

calling for tougher action against Iran and for its leaders to be indicted for inciting genocide. Hunh? Are these people insane? What fucking genocide? [We can all swear now that Dad's out of town.]

17 MRW May 2, 2009 at 6:40 pm

Not only that, but the types of torture we adopted were exact descriptions of the kinds of torture that the Israeli court apparently banned in 1999. I’m not talking about waterboarding, but the means of sleep deprivation, tying people up, and all the rest of it. There was a prison in Israel somewhere — I’m too whatever to look it up — that begins with a ‘K’. It housed Palestinian prisoners and the torture that went on there was staggering. The photos of the small barbaric cages where people were kept, with the blood on the walls, and bare filthy floors, were horrific. This was really nasty stuff. The descriptions of the kinds of torture performed there matched what we are now objecting to form our military. The Forward article you reference alludes to this.

18 Sand May 2, 2009 at 6:50 pm

I like getting links like this… Thanks… Judt's been calling for a one state solution for ages now… he's persistent — god how many times has that guy's talks been shut down by the lobby.

19 MRW May 2, 2009 at 7:11 pm

All right, I found the name: the Ketziot Detention Center in the Negev desert. That was the one I was referring to. Israel.indymedia.org reports here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44664-2... What the Israeli torturers left behind Robert Fisk http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44664-2... Prison Tactics A Longtime Dilemma For Israel Nation Faced Issues Similar to Abu Ghraib http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44664-2... With the standard Israeli explanation, “Maybe the United States is beginning to discover what Israel has had to deal with for a long time."

20 dalybean May 2, 2009 at 8:12 pm

Is there an Israeli court decision or another authoritative document describing the torture techniques that were used in Israel? Also, is torture still allowed in Israel with a necessity defense or is there a court decision banning torture altogether? Is the US not the only country on the hook for torture? Is Israel in jeopardy too?

21 MRW May 2, 2009 at 8:33 pm

My understanding is the necessity defense is allowed. From The Forward link that 8th A gave above:

The Israeli court actually “never said ‘never’ to torture,” wrote the executive director of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Hagai El-Ad, in an April 26 Huffington Post article titled “Torture: The Truly Painful Lessons From Israel.” The court had stated that torture was flatly illegal and that no official, high or low, was entitled to authorize its use. The court also said, however, that interrogators who felt obliged to use harsh tactics in emergency situations could bring up a “defense of necessity” after the fact when facing criminal charges. Soon enough, El-Ad wrote, “necessity became routine.”

22 MRW May 2, 2009 at 8:38 pm

A google search will show up the official doc but whether it's in English is another matter. Papers referenced it. Israel was always on the hook for its torture. Like everything else it does, it made a big show of stopping — and making sure shills like Judith Miller now intones on Fox that Israel banned torture in 1999 — then just went right on doing what it always does: torture. Ditto settlements. Ditto Gaza ceasefire. Ditto the 'peace process'.

23 David. May 2, 2009 at 8:48 pm

BTW, it was at Ketziot where Jeffrey Goldberg served his time in the IDF.

24 romm May 2, 2009 at 10:12 pm

Phil you claim that any professor can promote his extreme opinions to his students in a public univercity regardless if his opinions are " Politically correct". According to this logic some other professor can email his students parts of Mein Campf or racist publications. Is it OK to promote a Holocoust denial in the name of a free speach? What is the differense between a free speach and a clever propaganda? Phil if you read this please anwer my question.

25 jim byers May 3, 2009 at 12:05 am

So what is the BFD with Holocaust denial? Why is it a crime? Who is hurt, outside of someone's feelings?

26 MRW May 3, 2009 at 1:03 am

I agree with Jim Byers. What is the BFD? If the Holocaust is true, why do you feel the need to censor those who say it's not or whatever it is they say? They're not entitled? Under our laws? Why not? As for Mein Kampf, it's the hottest marketing manual in India right now. Flying off the newsstands…reported last week. Dont believe me? Google it.

27 MRW May 3, 2009 at 1:12 am

Indian business students snap up copies of Mein Kampf Sales of Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler's autobiography and apologia for his anti-semitism, are soaring in India where business students regard the dictator as a management guru. http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2009/04/... APRIL 23, 2009

28 Duscany May 3, 2009 at 1:13 am

Free speech includes the right to be wrong. We can't allow agents of a foreign power to get American professors fired because those agents think the professors got their facts wrong. When I was in college many years ago one of the school's most esteemed professors gave the freshman orientation speech. He said that if we in the freshman class weren't confused and angry in two months over what we heard in the classroom then he and his fellow professors weren't doing their jobs right. Nowadays if a professor took that same attitude, he'd be fired for hurting students' feelings or denying them an equal educational opportunity. Sometimes you can't open up a person's mind unless you shock him with the truth. And some times, as in the case of the two Santa Barbara students who wrote letters, he won't like it. If a student doesn't want to learn anything new or disturbing he ought not to go to college in the first place.

29 Duscany May 3, 2009 at 1:17 am

I think it is to establish the principle in this country (as is the case in much of Europe) that some things are so awful you aren't allowed to say them. And if you do you lose your job or go to jail.

30 MRW May 3, 2009 at 1:51 am

Something is screwing up the comments. This comment was in reply to Dalybean.

31 data May 3, 2009 at 1:52 pm

Similarly to some significant degree, was the identification of early communism with the heavy disproportion of Jew leadership in that movement which scared the heck out of the West.

32 blackie May 3, 2009 at 1:59 pm

They can also use Hasbara talking points policy in their corporate mission statements and business mandate explanations. Good case study, no?

33 rykart May 3, 2009 at 7:15 pm

In the United States, a racist, violent murderer writes a book bragging about his exploits and becomes a hero and presidential candidate. Furthermore, the criminal gang he belonged to are still in business, spreading horror, suffering and death all over the world. The German Nazis lost the war. The American Nazis won. The rest is lies.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post: Rosen/Weissman case may go away, but the issue of influence won’t

Next post: Fact: Jews are a minority in Israel/Palestine. Isn’t this a recipe for apartheid?