Despite many assaults, past and present, the First Amendment of the United States constitution broadly guarantees freedom of speech. But it is threatened by a slanderous campaign to discredit or silence American critics of the Israeli government. The Israel lobby, guided by the Israeli government, with the help of Israeli think tanks, is organizing this effort. In fact, Malcolm Hoenlein, the Executive Vice Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, has publicly announced this campaign for the 2013-14 school year.
A key component of this attack on freedom of speech is the “new anti-Semitism,” the claim that criticism of Israel is based on hatred of Jews. But the real purpose of the new anti-Semitism is to discredit and silence Israel’s critics in the U.S. and elsewhere, even though comparable criticisms are common place in Israel, especially in such renown newspapers as Ha’aretz, the “New York Times of Israel. “
A recent victim of this smear is Sadia Saifuddin, the University of California student recently appointed without any opposing votes as the first Muslim student representative to the University of California Board of Regents. Even though Ms. Saifuddin is clearly qualified, with a great resume, Israel lobby stalwarts StandwithUs, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and David Horowitz attacked her nomination. Why? Not because Saifuddin was unqualified. It is because she has opposed the Israeli government’s occupation of the territories it conquered in 1967, including the resulting dispossession of Palestinian property and violation of Palestinian human rights guaranteed through international law. For these reasons she cosponsored a divestment resolution at the UC Berkeley Student Senate, and the AIPAC types — using the template of the new anti-Semitism — then claimed she was unfit to be a UC Regent because she threatened UC Jewish students
Indeed, Jewish students and faculty were once victims of real anti-Semitism on American campuses from the early 20th Century through the early 1970s in the form of admission quotas, glass ceilings on high academic and administrative positions, and discriminatory practices by fraternities and sororities. But these types of anti-Semitic social discrimination were successfully fought and have been absent from American college campuses for over 40 years. In fact, Jewish organizations, such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) no longer measure anti-Semitic discrimination in the United States. This is why the ADL’s annual count of anti-Semitic incidents is restricted to verbal harassment, assaults, and property crimes, none of which have the slightest connection to Sadia Saifuddin.
With hardly any real anti-Semitism in sight, the Israel lobby concocted a new form of anti-Semitism: criticism of the Israeli government’s policies and practices. They argue that any criticism of Israel is really a call for the destruction of the state, the alleged secret agenda of the country’s critics. Nonsense! And the Israel lobby knows this is nonsense because nearly all American critics of Israel are driven by opposition to a nominally Western country that – on one hand – “shares our values,” while – on the other hand – has maintained a 46-year military occupation over four million people in conquered territories, depriving them of human, civil, and economic rights. Furthermore, in blatant violation of the 1949 4th Geneva Convention, Israel continues to construct illegal towns, cities, and factories in these areas. These segregated “settlements”, including their access highways, are limited to Jewish Israelis. Furthermore, these settlers are subject to Israeli civilian law, not the Israeli military law imposed on their immediate Palestinian neighbors.
Another case of the new anti-Semitism targeting speech on California campuses is California State Assembly Resolution HR-35. HR-35 characterizes any criticism of Israel as “cloaked” anti-Semitism. Carlos Villarreal, director of the San Francisco chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, called this resolution irresponsible and dangerous because it fails to distinguish between legitimate support for the Palestinian people and real anti-Semitism (i.e., verbal harassment and physical attacks on Jewish individuals and institutions). This is why the ADL does not include these campus political events in its annual list of anti-Semitic activity in the United States.
HR-35 did not become California law, but it has had the effect of encouraging university administrators to enact restrictions on campus political events critical of the Israeli government. Under an HR-35 inspired campus policy, some political speech would be silenced. Any person or group that stood up against an obvious human rights abuse, like Israel’s 2008-09 assault on Gaza with banned phosphorus bombs, could be charged with anti-Semitism. These bogus charges could ruin someone’s reputation and bring sanctions against university-affiliated student organizations. Most individuals and campus groups would, therefore, remain silent. After all, who wants to be identified and then punished as a bigot?
The intent of HR-35 is to undermine free speech when that speech entails criticism of Israel.
So what happens next? California is about to witness a major effort by the Israel lobby, financially supported and directed by the government of Israel, to discredit campus groups that work for the end of Israel’s direct and indirect occupation of the land it conquered in 1967. As active members of LA Jews for Peace, we strongly oppose this misuse of charges of anti-Semitism, and stand with those, Jewish and non-Jewish, who criticize the practices of the Israeli government and the support of those practices by the United States government. Attempts to muzzle groups for political speech should be stopped in the bud.
Jeff Warner and Dick Platkin are Jewish peace activists in southern California and leaders of LA Jews for Peace. They have organized many demonstrations against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory in general and the siege of Gaza in particular. Warner has been on humanitarian missions to Gaza. He is a retired research geologist and now works on environmental and climate change issues. Platkin is a retired city planner and now works to stop “mansionization” of residential neighborhoods.
“Even though Ms. Saifuddin is clearly qualified, with a great resume, Israel lobby stalwarts StandwithUs, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and David Horowitz attacked her nomination. Why?”
Because these are all islamophobes, as they have proved themselves to be several times. Any Muslim candidate would be opposed by them.
Jews were never victims of anti-Semitism on campuses in the 70’s, 60’s, or probably the 50’s either. Just a ridiculous statement. In fact, there were no real quotas affecting Jewish students during these years– there were attempts at lots of elite universities to make them more nationally focused universities, by taking students from the other 40 states of the union, not huddled around the Northeast corridor. That is, there was positive discrimination for kids from the states that people in the Northeast have always hated (Alabama, Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, etc), and as a result, many Jews living in the Northeast complained that this was pro-Christian discrimination or anti-Jewish discrimination in the same way that whites currently complain about affirmative action.
There was and is only one true religious discrimination that has gone on at this country’s elite universities and that is anti-Catholic discrimination, and Jewish professors and students as well as Protestant profs and students have done their part to stoke the flames against Catholicism and Catholics from the late 19th century to the present. More recently there is a fervent anti-Muslim fervor among lots of atheists and Jewish profs at elite universities– the same type of people that are anti-Catholic are often equally anti-Muslim.
A chilling example of Israel’s manipulation of a foreign country’s laws to stifle truth and free speech. Big Brother incarnate. They have no shame, no respect for democracy or diversity, and a gangster-like presumption that they can run US internal laws and policies to suit themselves and suppress any dissent. What US legislator can look the US public in the eye and not be utterly humiliated at the occupation of their own country by anti-democratic snatch squads sent from Israel?
”Attempts to muzzle groups for political speech should be stopped in the bud. ”
Only way to stop it is to ignore the Zio orgs intimation and keep on trucking.
And some lawsuits against the individuals and orgs who try to slander activist as
a-semites.
I would love to see a really good case on this get all the way to the US Supreme court and challenge the Zio, and the US government if necessary, on the correct definition of Anti-Semitism. Destroy the sloshing around about what ‘hidden’ anti semitism ‘could be’ or ‘might be’ in criticism of Israel or any other ‘real poltic’ issue.
I notice none of the zio bots here have accused any of us who have been criticizing the countries of Egypt and Saudi of being anti Arab or Muslim bigots–why should it be any different for Israel.
An important commentary. Thank you. Yet it is also possible that the greater and disingenuous use of the “Anti Semite ” card the more meaningless and it becomes as a tool to silence. And that is when the real Judeophobes come out. (Anti Semite is a strange and wrong term for Judeophobia — after all it was coined by a real Judeophobe to describe Jews as Semites. ) But they will always be among us, just as racists and ignorance will always be with us.
Another thing, can you back up this meme: Indeed, Jewish students and faculty were once victims of real anti-Semitism on American campuses from the early 20th Century through the early 1970s in the form of admission quotas, glass ceilings on high academic and administrative positions, and discriminatory practices by fraternities and sororities. with facts or data?
What schools had such quotas 40 years ago? Glass ceilings? Exactly where? For some of us who remember 40 years ago (and it seems these authors do not) that claim does not match experience. As an aside — which in itself does not matter anyway but… — there were Jews admitted to Harvard and Yale long before any Catholics were allowed.
There were cities that had Synagogues long before a Catholic Church could ever be built — i.e. Charleston.
Do we cry about anti Catholicism? Of course not as it is past or irrelevant.
Point is, beating the drum of past institutionalized Judeophobia in America — and it was just as among others –only feeds the justification of fears of a “new anti antisemitism.”