Poster questioning Zionism makes her feel ‘unsafe’, Wellesley student says

Activism
on 109 Comments

Haaretz is reporting that Jewish donors to Wellesley College are suspending donations to the school in part because of the activities of the Students for Justice for Palestine chapter at the school in the wake of the Gaza slaughter:

Wellesley Jewish alums stop donations after Hillel firings
Grads of women’s college irked by layoff of two Jewish leaders as part of so-called ‘restructuring’ move – while anti-Israel sentiments are being fanned by a pro-Palestinian group on campus.

This is sheer alarm. Whatever the school’s reasons for firing the two Hillel staffers (budgetary, it would seem), the anger over anti-Zionist statements at the school is aimed at shutting down free speech about Israel since the massive bloodshed in Gaza.

The Wellesley controversy blew up last week with a piece in Haaretz on increasing Palestinian solidarity activism at the school that gave a megaphone to a student supporter of Israel named Jordan Hannink who said some of the pro-Palestinian messaging on campus makes her feel “unsafe.” That piece was topped by Hannink’s photograph of a poster questioning Zionism that has been controversial. Reporter Debra Nussbaum Cohen:

posters bearing the images of Palestinian children who were killed or wounded during the Gaza war appeared on dining hall walls. A large poster, likewise sponsored by the new campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, went up in the student center asking, “What does Zionism mean to you?” with lots of space for people to fill in answers. Within a week people had written “genocide,” “apartheid” and “murder” on the poster at the Boston-area college.

[Wellesley] has now joined the growing number of college campuses where often-intense anti-Israel sentiment at times bleeds into anti-Semitism, in the view of some there, in the process discomfiting large numbers of Jewish and pro-Israel students.

When Hillel-affiliated students met with SJP leaders about the poster “our goal was to promote conversation,” said Jordan Hannink, a junior, in an interview. Hannink is a peace studies major who worked in Israel last summer and is writing her thesis on the subject of peace through health care….Jewish students want to discuss the Israel-Palestine conflict, she said. “But it is an issue we want to discuss respectfully and without polarizing” the community. SJP leaders “said they were uninterested in these kinds of dialogic conversations,” Hannink said.

It is certainly the case that Palestinian solidarity groups don’t go in for dialogue with Israel lobby groups; dialogue has failed to change Palestinian conditions one iota. But the Haaretz piece blurs the line between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. While the poster specifically called on students not to express anti-Semitic attitudes, Hannink ignores this fact:

Hannink sent a letter to Wellesley’s president and deans saying that the Zionism poster in the student center was offensive, but they have taken no action, she said. It remains the first thing anyone sees when entering the student center. The dining hall posters are also still in place.

“I firmly believe this college is becoming increasingly anti-Semitic,” Hannink wrote in a private email to an alumna, which was shared with Haaretz by another Wellesley graduate…

“For Jewish students being at Wellesley now is quite difficult,” Hannink said.

Here is Hannnink’s latest Facebook post, which is filled with claims about a hostile learning environment because of Palestinian solidarity: 

November 9th, I sent a letter to our campus community calling for dialogue, for nuance, and respectful disagreement. No action was taken by the administration. My question to President [H. Kim] Bottomly and the administrators I met with this week- is where was this call for respectful dialogue weeks ago, when our social contract for such was broken? Where was this reminder of our responsibility when the Jewish community first expressed concern, feelings of being targeted and unsafe on campus?…
In the Jewish community, an additional question to be posited is when does anti-Israel sentiments become anti-Semitism, or at the least, bigotry? It is a question I struggle with daily… Whenever the word “Jew” or “Jewish people” is implicated next to the “effects of Zionism,” including “genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing,” etc. this line is crossed.
However, this is not terribly important in this conversation– because the Wellesley Handbook forbids speech or symbols that create a hostile working and learning environment. Whether or not you agree that the poster is inflammatory- the thirty members of the Jewish community on campus who have voiced that it is remains reason enough to call for the administration to act.
I am severely disappointed that this is the way that Wellesley has chosen to start this conversation- as the end result has been polarizing. As a pro-Palestinian, pro-Israel, Zionist, conscientious Jew, I have been put into the pro-Israel corner, which ignores my activist work to a different end.

I’m sure arguments between Communists and anti-Communists in the 50s were vigorous on American campuses. Ideological arguments with such large real-world consequences are. But it’s hard to see why this poster should make anyone feel unsafe. Also: two years ago Norman Finkelstein said that Zionism might as well be a hairspray, Americans don’t know what it is so let’s not argue about it. I took exception then, seeing Zionism as a root cause of the conflict; and this discussion gives me support, showing that Zionism is an ideology, albeit one with a lot of meanings, that folks need to talk about.

P.S. In 2008 Hannink posted a message on Facebook accusing Obama of loyalties to another country.

 how can any one AMERICAN vote for a presidential candidiate with false loyalties? NOBAMA 2008!!!

I’m sure she was young then, but still.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

109 Responses

  1. amigo
    November 24, 2014, 4:35 pm

    “Any man who says he is an American but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one
    flage here, the American flag… Whe have room but for one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but ONE SOLE LOYALTY here, and that is the loyalty to the American People.”Hannink

    Too funny.

    “Hannink, a junior, in an interview. Hannink is a peace studies major who worked in Israel last summer and is writing her thesis on the subject of peace through health care… ”

    How about peace through Justice and equality mizz hannink.

    No wonder references to zionism make her uncomfortable.

    • just
      November 24, 2014, 5:07 pm

      I thought the same thing.

      Good grief, she’s a junior at Wellesley!!! What a baby.

      “As a pro-Palestinian, pro-Israel, Zionist, conscientious Jew, I have been put into the pro-Israel corner, which ignores my activist work to a different end.”

      she sounds, confused.

      ““What does Zionism mean to you?” with lots of space for people to fill in answers. Within a week people had written “genocide,” “apartheid” and “murder” on the poster at the Boston-area college.””

      She does not want ‘dialogue’. She wants universal acceptance and love. She can’t handle the truth.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        November 24, 2014, 5:49 pm

        ”she sounds, confused.”

        Yup. So she’s ” pro-Palestinian, pro-Israel, Zionist”? Eh? In another generation, she might have been pro-Apartheid, pro-RSA, AND pro-black.

        But when push comes to shove – or even at the slgihtest provocation such as this – these ‘liberal’ Zionists show their true colours. They want to be patted on the back for being ‘pro Palestinian’ and are so smug in their little bubble that they don’t know how to cope when that bubble dissolves.

        And yes, she is a baby. So she feels ‘uncomfortable’? Deal with it, sweetheart. Isn’t political debate supposed to make you feel uncomfortable, to challenge your preconceptions? Wouldn’t be much point otherwise, would there?

      • Annie Robbins
        November 24, 2014, 9:11 pm

        this is the ‘new’/old positioning pro israel students take on campus now, it’s their new talking pt. that they are pro palestinians. i’m not sure what think tank came up w/this line but it’s transparently stupid. reminds me of the bad mom screaming “i’m beating you cuz i love you so much”.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        November 25, 2014, 5:52 am

        Annie,

        Concern trolling is all the rage among hasbarists at the mo – Richard Silverstein had a piece about it. Oh, we’re SO sorry about all those children killed in Gaza! If only Khamas didn’t use them as human shields and fire rockets from schools, they’d be alive today. I fully support the Palestinian people freeing themselves from the oppression of Khamas.

        But with people like this young woman, I do think her ‘concern’ for Palestinians is genuine…. up to a point. She’s young and naive, and probably brainwashed by a Zionist family from birth. She probably really does think that because she worked in a clinic in Ramallah for a few months, that shows she really really cares. Of course, the reality is that her ‘concern’ for Palestinians lasts only as far as they do not threaten the Jewish supremacist state. That’s why she’s so ‘uncomfortable’ with posters like this. It forces her to question everything she’s grown up with, and to acknowledge the fact that the Israel she supports is the very antithesis of the ‘liberal values’ she also claims to believe in.

        http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/11/17/new-luntz-hasbara-handbook-u-s-tax-dollars-fund-hamas-terror-tunnels/

      • Annie Robbins
        November 25, 2014, 7:36 pm

        thanks for the link maximus

    • a blah chick
      November 24, 2014, 5:22 pm

      “Hannink, a junior, in an interview. Hannink is a peace studies major who worked in Israel last summer and is writing her thesis on the subject of peace through health care… ”

      She needs to talk to Dr Mads Gilbert about peace through health care.

      • just
        November 24, 2014, 5:35 pm

        bingo!

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        November 24, 2014, 5:53 pm

        What does that even mean? ”Peace through health care”? So she went on some juncket to some clinic in the West Bank for 2 months, and is back full of all her aery fairy ideas about ”co-operation”, ”friendships across barriers”, ‘dialogue” etc. Occupation you say? What’s that?

        She sounds like she really hasn’t got a clue.

      • Philip Munger
        November 24, 2014, 8:06 pm

        I second that “Bingo!”

      • Annie Robbins
        November 24, 2014, 9:01 pm

        i wonder if she heard the news

        IDF trainer: ‘No need to give mouth-to-mouth Palestinians’
        972mag.com/idf-trainer-no-need-to-resuscitate-palestinians/99132/

        he said he was given permission to kill people who no longer pose a threat. “They told us that the order regarding someone who stabs, ditches the knife and begins running is shoot to kill. The company commander said he doesn’t want anyone like that ‘to see a judge.

      • Steve Macklevore
        November 25, 2014, 4:22 am

        What does that even mean? ”Peace through health care”? So she went on some juncket to some clinic in the West Bank for 2 months, and is back full of all her aery fairy ideas about ”co-operation”, ”friendships across barriers”, ‘dialogue” etc. Occupation you say? What’s that? – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/questioning-zionism-wellesley#comment-725188

        I entirely agree.

      • Horizontal
        November 25, 2014, 8:40 am

        What does that even mean? ”Peace through health care”?

        Maybe means Israel keeps wounding ’em and she keeps bandaging ’em up without questioning the bigger picture.

      • just
        November 25, 2014, 10:58 am

        “Peace through health care”

        a worthy endeavor…Palestinian hospitals bombed, supplies/$ withheld, checkpoints, special permits needed/denied, crossings closed, doctors prevented from entry, medics/ambulances targeted, etc.

        otoh, Israel has universal healthcare…

        It’s going to take much more than a thesis. End the Occupation.

      • SQ Debris
        November 25, 2014, 2:27 pm

        Peace thru healthcare? Does that mean not forcing Palestinian mothers to deliver their babies in front of troops at checkpoints? That would be a nice starting point.

      • Penfold
        November 28, 2014, 2:35 am

        “What does that even mean? ”Peace through health care”? ”

        I think it is an unfortunate comment as whenever I hear it I think of astronaut John Landon’s lobotomy from Planet of the Apes.

    • bilal a
      November 25, 2014, 8:23 am

      When a dominant ethnic elite refers to ‘The Other’, non-Jews, as foreigners in their own country, this makes me feel unsafe.

      Why Jews Should Care About Ferguson, The Jewish Daily Forward

      Anti-Semitism is real, but it is no longer intrinsic to the systems of oppression that killed Michael Brown. Like it or not, then, most American Jews find ourselves on the side of privilege. We may be “off-white,” as some theorists have proposed, but we’re close enough. If we stand up for the underdog, it will be out of ethics, not self-interest.

      Yes, there are texts which speak of Jewish supremacy, of conquering everyone else, and of slavery, misogyny, and the rest. But exhortations of non-oppression of foreigners are more numerous

      Most important, I think, is Exodus 22:21: “Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt.” Note the past tense. This is a text speaking to a people no longer victimized, but now with the power to victimize others. It is a text for our time.

      I cite these texts not for their authority but for their wisdom. They were written at a time in which the Land of Israel was a multiracial society. Jews were in power (sometimes) but non-Jews — “foreigners” — were always present.

      Read more: http://forward.com/articles/204280/why-jews-should-care-about-ferguson/#ixzz3K5P4Rb6n

    • Marnie
      November 25, 2014, 8:48 am

      She felt uncomfortable. I wonder how she’d have felt with a soldier on a bus demanding to check her bags? I wonder how she’d have felt riding a train with her mates and seeing the gathering klan rally, their threats and curses and banging to get on the train and kill some A-rabs? How uncomfortable would it have been for to be dragged off into the woods, beaten, forced to drink flammable material and then set on fire? How uncomfortable to be attempting to walk down a street, be asked your religion and promptly refused passage? Please oh please Miss Hannink tell me how uncomfortable you are again?

    • Retired Catholic
      November 25, 2014, 3:53 pm

      Your feelings of personal insecurity are rooted in a deep rooted and unadmitted sense of guilt over the transparently criminal actions of the NDF, IDF and ADF. What you are afraid of is that fact that the scales are falling off the eyes of more and more Americans who look at the behavior of the Israeli government and Zionist extremists. Anti Zionism is not necessarily antisemitism, or anti Jewish sentiment, neither is genuine sympathy for the desperate state of Palestinians. You display a kind of arrogance that is offended by criticism.

      • Horizontal
        November 26, 2014, 9:50 am

        I think you got it.

  2. a blah chick
    November 24, 2014, 5:17 pm

    The problem is that people like Hanninck take Zionism for granted. They, like me, grew up with it as the normal way to think about the Middle East. Consequently I doubt she had thought about what it means or the ramifications. I’ll wager that the average anti-Zionist has thought longer and deeper about his or her beliefs than the average Zionist.

    • Horizontal
      November 24, 2014, 6:00 pm

      I’m sure you’re right about that.

      When I used to have lively discussions about the Bible with my fundy neighbors, I quickly realized I knew more about the book than they did, even though I wasn’t the Christian, they were.

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2014, 12:53 pm

        ” I quickly realized I knew more about the book than they did, even though I wasn’t the Christian, they were.”

        Well, Horizontal, if that didn’t teach you to stay away from it, nothing will.

        Do what I do, use a searchable Bible on the web when Scriptural erudition is required, otherwise, leave it where Gideon left it, “no doubt, to help with good Rocky’s revival”, as the song says.

  3. Annie Robbins
    November 24, 2014, 5:28 pm

    that’s a very smart poster by SJP. it was just last week the luntz poll mentioning zionism is not a popular word in america. people are adverse to that word:

    “‘Zionism’ is now a dirty word for American opinion elite, Frank Luntz concedes “- See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/zionism-american-concedes#sthash.pRXTFLFm.dpuf

    • Horizontal
      November 24, 2014, 6:02 pm

      You’re right. I don’t think too many Americans at least have been exposed to the word or if they have, know exactly what it’s supposed to mean.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 24, 2014, 8:03 pm

        or if they’ve been exposed to it they don’t know what it means. the mantra that the US and israel share common values has been drilled down everyones throat for so long i’d imagine the very last thing zionists want americans to know about is the zionism. ..because fundamentally, it really does not share the same value wrt nationalism as civic national states, of which the US is, supposedly anyway.

        anyway, that will probably become a lot clearer now that with the new legislation just passed yesterday. argh. not fun!

        but one might think a supporter of israel is proud of zionism. so why not have the hillel on campus give a little “this is how zionism works” workshop/weekend? you’d think they’d be proud of it. or do they think it’s a dirty word too? hmm.

        what’s next? what do you think of the word democrat? ahhh, i feel unsafe! the gop? ah, stay away you’re hurting my feelings!!

      • Horizontal
        November 25, 2014, 8:57 am

        How about the words “Nosy Reporter?” Now you’re really making me feel uncomfortable.

        So about that legislation, I assume you’re referring to this:

        New York Times

        Israeli Cabinet Approves Nationality Bill

        “There are many who are challenging Israel’s character as the national state of the Jewish people,” he said before the cabinet vote. “The Palestinians refuse to recognize this, and there is also opposition from within.”

        He [Netanyahu] added, “There are those — including those who deny our national rights — who would like to establish autonomy in the Galilee and the Negev,” referring to areas of Israel with large concentrations of Arab citizens, who make up more than 20 percent of the population.

        Wow, this guy’s timing is just brilliant.

        As far as what the Wellesley group really thinks about Zionism, that would be a very interesting discussion to sit in on behind closed doors. Does the word even come up? Or do they realize that it’s the skunk at the garden party, to be avoided at all costs? Are they getting instructions from some voice on a speakerphone?

        Is that the real reason they’re uncomfortable, because they know the word itself is actually Kryptonite?

  4. Keith
    November 24, 2014, 5:46 pm

    HANNINK- “Whether or not you agree that the poster is inflammatory- the thirty members of the Jewish community on campus who have voiced that it is remains reason enough to call for the administration to act.”

    Thirty Jews want the poster removed and it is still up? Has Abe Foxman been informed? What is the administration waiting for? A pogrom? If this ain’t anti-Semitism, the words have no meaning!

  5. Horizontal
    November 24, 2014, 5:54 pm

    The only thing I’ll say in defense of Ms. Hannik’s opinion is that having a message board up may invite more extreme and irresponsible opinions being expressed than if it were done in a face-to-face manner.

    That said, is it any wonder that bad opinions about Israel may morph into anti-Semitism? And who is to blame for the confusion between the two? Israel, of course. Netanyahu is constantly fusing the two in his public statements. If I were Ms. Hannik trying to rectify the problem, I’d start there.

    She also states: “But it is an issue we want to discuss respectfully and without polarizing the community. . .” How is this supposed to work? Discuss things in secret and then don’t talk about it? Agree to disagree? Sorry, but Israel again has put its supporters in a tight spot, and ethnic cleansing, hospital bombing & illegal occupation by their very nature are polarizing acts, conducted remorselessly. There is no way to dodge this fact.

    Zionists here want it both ways; they want to discuss their “differences” with the other side, while keeping their defense of the indefensible somehow or other beyond reproach. Again, Ms. Hannick needs to look a little closer to home for the relief she is seeking.

    Whether or not you agree that the poster is inflammatory- the thirty members of the Jewish community on campus who have voiced that it is remains reason enough to call for the administration to act.

    Reason enough?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      November 25, 2014, 5:54 am

      ”Reason enough?”

      Yeah, sounds like mob rule to me. So because x number of people say something is ‘offensive’ that means it is? You don’t have to give a reason or argue your point, just say ”I’m offended by this” and that’s enough? Well, it has been for Zionists thus far I suppose.

      • Horizontal
        November 26, 2014, 9:54 am

        Yup. They sit on a pretty lofty perch, and now the natives are restless, and they won’t even dialogue about it!!!!

        Call the Mothership! I’m losing control!!!”

  6. hophmi
    November 24, 2014, 6:41 pm

    Sorry, but how was a request from Jewish member of the Wellesley campus for dialogue a call for dialogue with Zionists? Arab students on campus have refused to continue dialogues with JEWISH students, not Zionist students.

    Indeed, since most people don’t know what Zionism is, putting up a poster like that is a way of helping people to indulge in their hateful ignorance.

    • Annie Robbins
      November 24, 2014, 7:32 pm

      helping people to indulge in their hateful ignorance.

      hophmi, do you also think that’s what frank luntz was doing when he asked about zionism in his poll? helping people to indulge in their hateful ignorance?

      if luntz’s poll had said oh, people love that word! then you wouldn’t be objecting so much now would you. but luntz is allowed to ask and these students are not? what is that all about? how come the israel project is allowed to ask americans their opinions but college kids can’t?

      zionism is a political construct. it’s not much different than putting up a poster that says “how do you feel about socialism, or communism, or ethnic nationalism or apartheid any other political construct. if zionsim has a dirty name whose fault would that be?

      Arab students on campus have refused to continue dialogues with JEWISH students

      that is a fabrication, (otherwise known as a lie). everyone knows sjp is made up of a variety of students including jewish students. whereas, i think hillel declares they are supporters of israel as a jewish state as far as i know (and it is a zionist regime is it not). you can’t just go making up your own facts so you can call something antisemitic.

      zionism is toxic and everyone knows it. you’re on the wrong team. bummer.

      • hophmi
        November 25, 2014, 8:29 am

        As usual, Annie, you’re in denial and you’re wrong.

        “Wellesley’s Community Task Force on the Middle East has been a successful weekly dialogue group for several years involving a handful of Jewish students and an equal number of Arab students. It suffered a setback last year when the dean who started it left Wellesley, and totally fell apart at its first meeting this year. The Arab-American participants, newly affiliated with SJP, said they would no longer participate. “They said this was a way for them to be condescended to and controlled,” Hannink said in the Haaretz interview.”

        That was a Jewish-Arab group, not a Zionist-Arab group. SJP divides campuses and works to make them unsafe for Jewish student organizations.

      • Horizontal
        November 25, 2014, 10:46 am

        That was a Jewish-Arab group, not a Zionist-Arab group. SJP divides campuses and works to make them unsafe for Jewish student organizations.

        From the same Haaretz story:

        “We’re trying to figure out how to respond to what’s going on” at Wellesley, said Berger. “Things that are central to our identity are being attacked, including the existence of Israel as a Jewish state.”

        Note: Rebecca Berger is a senior biology major, and the new Jewish representative on the college’s multi-faith council, which brings together students from each religious community on campus for weekly discussion.

        haaretz.com

        So here’s the Jewish member of the campus multi-faith council, sounding a whole lot like a Zionist, wouldn’t you agree? Yet I bet you anything she presents herself as a Jewish representative, not a Zionist one. Actions speak louder than labels.

        You have to remember, that the pro-Israel crowd still represents the establishment view, and to be challenged is always going to be disconcerting. I say, tough. As the group trying to break through that establishment, Palestinian supporters naturally have to use different methods, and not just talk themselves to death in a process that’s only designed to maintain Israel’s establishment position.

        Same thing happened on campus with the Vietnam War, as you’ll recall. Got quite messy sometimes, but it was something that had to happen.

        So does this.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 25, 2014, 11:52 am

        a community task force on the middle east? what tasks did they carry out? and how. from your article:

        “Jewish students want to discuss the Israel-Palestine conflict, she said. “But it is an issue we want to discuss respectfully and without polarizing” the community. SJP leaders “said they were uninterested in these kinds of dialogic conversations,” Hannink said…“They said this was a way for them to be condescended to and controlled,”

        so what does that mean? what are hillel’s rules of engagement? according to Eric Fingerhut ceo of Hillel International http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.620105 “Hillel students have ..”modeled what respectful discourse looks like.” hillel students want to be able to set the boundaries (redlines) just like reut ‘big tent’ (no discussion of apartheid and BDS which crosses the “redline”). how is that not condescending and controlling? “our Israel debate guidelines remain clear” Hillel is sponsoring and promoting “intercultural dialogues” discussion programs to “help students understand the issues”

        Our Standards for Partnership… are designed to ensure ….these commitments … to Israel. Hillel will not partner with organizations that …apply a double standard to Israel…Such viewpoints do not represent the values of Hillel International…..activists who created the “Open Hillel” campaign …calls on Hillel to eliminate its Standards of Partnership in order to provide a platform for organizations [people/individuals] that promote the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and other anti-Israel activities….Hillel International stands by its Standards of Partnership.”

        so please, do not pretend these “intercultural dialogues” promoted by hillel are not all about promoting israel (which hillel is “deeply dedicated”).

        you’ve presented no evidence “Arab students on campus have refused..dialogues with jewish students” because the very same article said those same arab students were members of sjp. and ignore the obvious, sjp is not interested in dialoguing with those students, who are dedicated to israel and whose goal it is to promote israel by hillel’s “standards” set by the international hillel overseer. so the more accurate description would be ‘Arab students on campus have refused to continue dialogues with hillel jewish students’. quit assuming hillel=jewish. open hillel, different.

        and i find it interesting the the 2 Wellesley hillel staff the students consulted were then fired by Wellesley. it sounds like there’s some information missing from the story. and i really find this really interesting and amusing:

        The college administration made the decision unilaterally, “without any input from major stakeholders,” said Miriam Berkowitz Blue, president of the Wellesley Hillel Alumni Board. Wellesley Hillel has some 2,700 alumnae on its mailing list, she said. “It calls into question the oversight of all the endowments and funding,” she said. “It’s opening things up to a lot of larger questions.” Alumnae worldwide have been discussing their concerns, she said, adding that Wellesley Hillel’s assets “are substantial.” she said.

        the college pays their salaries, they work for the college, and the college fires them without consulting hillel stakeholders who respond by allude to cutting off substantial funds to the college. sounds like a threat. hire who we want or else. hmm, that sounds familiar. is that some kind of pattern we’re seeing from some organized jewish groups? the ol power of the pocketbook. our way or the highway? boxing em in both front and back. we set the rules of engagement unilaterally and if you make any unilateral moves without consulting us or do things our way, we’ll pull substantial assets and it will be your fault. sounds controlling and condescending to me.

    • just
      November 24, 2014, 7:42 pm

      “Indeed, since most people don’t know what Zionism is, putting up a poster like that is a way of helping people to indulge in their hateful ignorance.”

      No, hophmi. They are in college~ if they didn’t know what it is, then they could take the opportunity to research it and come to their own conclusions. They could get educated. *gasp*

      • Annie Robbins
        November 24, 2014, 8:45 pm

        just, kids should have an idea of what 100% of our senators support.

      • just
        November 25, 2014, 9:29 am

        True, Annie.

        Sooner rather than later would be better for all.

      • hophmi
        November 25, 2014, 12:36 pm

        Again, the group referenced was a Jewish-Arab dialogue group. It was not a Hillel-Arab dialogue group. You are eliding that point. The Community Task Force on the Middle East included Jews and Muslims. It says nothing about Hillel. You’re the one assuming Jewish=Hillel.

        “the college pays their salaries, they work for the college, and the college fires them without consulting hillel stakeholders who respond by allude to cutting off substantial funds to the college. sounds like a threat. hire who we want or else. ”

        Or maybe people are just upset that the school fired the entire Jewish communal staff without consulting anyone, and left the students without communal leaders. I mean, I can’t imagine the Muslim students or Christian students getting upset if the school decided to fire their advisor without a second thought, and told them that there wouldn’t be a real replacement until next year.

        “we set the rules of engagement unilaterally and if you make any unilateral moves without consulting us or do things our way, we’ll pull substantial assets and it will be your fault. sounds controlling and condescending to me. ”

        How is it controlling and condescending to voice one’s concerns? Alumni have the right to give as they please. This is rich coming from a person who tells Israelis from the comfort of San Francisco, that she’ll campaign to boycott and divest from them if they don’t do what she says. Nothing more condescending than that.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 25, 2014, 8:07 pm

        Again, the group referenced was a Jewish-Arab dialogue group. It was not a Hillel-Arab dialogue group.

        right, and it’s just a coincidence hillel funds “intercultural dialogues” and this particular “intercultural dialogues” was also targeted for hillel style civility: “discuss respectfully and without polarizing” uh huh.

        and the haaretz article is all about hillel at Wellesley and it’s probably just a coincidence the person for the article is dialoguing with the reporter about a non-hillel activity? come on hops, you can do better than that.

        besides, what about this from haaretz

        The group has decided to focus on building their new chapter, and want “to prioritize public rather than private dialogue,” and divorce religion from political issues, she wrote.

        what’s wrong with that. why not open up this talk to the whole campus. what’s with making it private if one party doesn’t want to? and if sjp or any of their members are not interested in a dialogue with people who don’t share their values just respect that.

        this is not a different position from j street and other groups who refuse to debate bds. beinart doesn’t either. the decision to not participate is likely political, based on the zionist ideology of the jewish kids.

        and when the church supported divestment a big cadre of rabbis all announced they were quitting or not participating in the interfaith conference (remember, it was a big deal). it was my way or the highway, and they took the highway. so, now someone has set down their own requirements:

        Wellesley’s SJP will only engage again in dialogue if several conditions are met, she wrote: if it takes place within the framework of a public, “politically recognized” event, and if all participants agree that Israel’s “occupation and colonization of all Arab lands” should be ended, that “the [separation] wall dismantled,” that the “fundamental rights to full equality of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel” be recognized, and that the Palestinian refugee’s right of return be “respected, protected and promoted.”

    • Horizontal
      November 25, 2014, 9:17 am

      Indeed, since most people don’t know what Zionism is, putting up a poster like that is a way of helping people to indulge in their hateful ignorance.

      Sorry, Hop, you lost me there with your logic. First off, how do you know most people don’t know what Zionism is? From the answers — genocide, murder, Apartheid — at least some students seem extremely well-versed in its major goals and accomplishments.

      And for those who have never heard the term, it can begin a much-needed educational process in the US, since so much of what happens in support of Zionism, like closed-door meetings, campaign funding, and even speeches, occurs outside of the public discourse, just as the Zionists prefer:

      Haaretz.com

      N.Y. mayor at closed AIPAC gala: Part of my job is to defend Israel

      Mayor Bill de Blasio says ‘there is no greater ally on earth’ than Israel, in speech to Israel lobby that did not appear on public schedule.

      Shining a long-overdue light on Zionism’s long, dark influence on my country can only be a good thing. It’s only ignorance about its existence which has allowed it to flourish for so long.

      And, yes, I know I’m violating my own advice in responding to you, since you already know all this and it’s clear you will continue to believe what you believe. Oh well, my bad.

      • hophmi
        November 26, 2014, 2:30 pm

        “right, and it’s just a coincidence hillel funds “intercultural dialogues” and this particular “intercultural dialogues” was also targeted for hillel style civility: “discuss respectfully and without polarizing” uh huh.”

        Can you show that Hillel was the sponsor? It seems as though the college was the sponsor, not Hillel.

        Look, just be honest. If you’re opposed to intercultural dialogue between Jews and Arabs unless the people involved in the dialogue already agree on BDS or agree that Israel should not be a Jewish national home, just say it.

        “and the haaretz article is all about hillel at Wellesley and it’s probably just a coincidence the person for the article is dialoguing with the reporter about a non-hillel activity? come on hops, you can do better than that.”

        Again, do you have evidence that the dialogue group is Hillel-affiliated, or that it focuses only on Israel?

        “if sjp or any of their members are not interested in a dialogue with people who don’t share their values just respect that.”

        Wow, so if Hillel or any of their members are not interested in sponsoring speakers and organizations who don’t share their values, you call for Open Hillel. But if SJP is not interested in dialoguing with people who don’t share their values, you tell me to “just respect that.” Interesting.

        “this is not a different position from j street and other groups who refuse to debate bds. ”

        It’s untrue that J Street and other groups refuse to debate BDS. It’s not even true that J Street has a position against working with people who favor BDS. What is true is that groups like Hillel refuse to sponsor BDS events and speakers.

        “he decision to not participate is likely political, based on the zionist ideology of the jewish kids.”

        Again, any evidence of your claims is welcome.

        “and when the church supported divestment a big cadre of rabbis all announced they were quitting or not participating in the interfaith conference (remember, it was a big deal).”

        Totally different situation. First of all, this is a college campus we’re talking about. Second of all, most Jews continue to support interfaith dialogue.

        “Wellesley’s SJP will only engage again in dialogue if several conditions are me…”

        IE, Wellesley’s SJP will not engage in dialogue. Dialogue is not necessary when everybody already agrees on everything. They’d rather hate.

        “First off, how do you know most people don’t know what Zionism is?”

        Public polling data and common sense.

        “And for those who have never heard the term, it can begin a much-needed educational process in the US, since so much of what happens in support of Zionism, like closed-door meetings, campaign funding, and even speeches, occurs outside of the public discourse”

        So it’s your assertion that Zionism is not publicly discussed. That song and dance is over. There has been plenty of reportage on the matter by now.

        Like many SJP campaigns, this campaign will contribute to a hate-filled atmosphere toward the Jewish community on campus.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 26, 2014, 3:32 pm

        Again, do you have evidence that the dialogue group is Hillel-affiliated

        yeah, beginning with the title and subject matter of Haaretz’s article. it’s also common sense since hillel is sponsoring “intercultural dialogues” on campus, as evidenced by my link. do you have any proof this is not, at least in part, sponsored by hillel?

        Look, just be honest. If you’re opposed to intercultural dialogue between Jews and Arabs unless the people involved in the dialogue already agree on BDS or agree that Israel should not be a Jewish national home, just say it.

        i am opposed to intercultural dialogue where a person is forced into it or doesn’t want to participate, yes. it’s a big campus. why not find some people who want to talk to each other?

        Wow, so if Hillel or any of their members are not interested in sponsoring speakers and organizations who don’t share their values, you call for Open Hillel. But if SJP is not interested in dialoguing with people who don’t share their values, you tell me to “just respect that.” Interesting.

        no, i’d call for open hillel because, unlike sjp, hillel portends to be a campus org for jewish students, not a partisan political group. the “values” of hillel are zionist and therefore they should simply identify themselves as a zionist support org on american campuses. then it would make perfect sense for them not to host non and anti zionists groups or speakers and i would think that was a reasonable position to take. but you can’t brand yourself as merely a ‘jewish’ group on campuses when politically you take a stand. whereas, sjp is not an ethnic configuration, it is a justice based group meaning anyone who agrees with their values can join. that’s the difference. and that’s why it makes sense for them (sjp) not to dialogue with people who do not share their values.

        listen, if the college wants to sponsor interfaith and intercultural dialogues, why not reach out to groups on campus who are already intercultural and interfaith? i’m sure there are plenty of jews and arabs who would be quite willing to meet with eachother. in fact, sjp is already one of those groups, why not just support them?

      • hophmi
        November 26, 2014, 3:59 pm

        As usual, instead of responding, you just insult. Typical.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 26, 2014, 3:43 pm

        on the bright side, i didn’t accuse you of hatred.

        Wellesley’s SJP will not engage in dialogue. Dialogue is not necessary when everybody already agrees on everything. They’d rather hate.

        lol, back to your old tricks of accusing your adversaries of hatred! the first sentence here is a lie. they stated they wanted an open and public dialogue, not behind closed doors. and they made efforts to facilitate that. http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/wellesley-discussion-israelpalestine

        In our programming, we seek to open the campus to challenging and respectful public discourse. Our “What Does Zionism Mean to You” poster contains a disclaimer that reads, “Please be respectful. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and racism will not be tolerated.” In this way, we created an open discussion encompassing a variety of perspectives that reflects and represents the diversity of our community, while also being respectful. Additionally, we invited Professor Sa’ed Adel Atshan, human rights activist and professor of Peace and Justice Studies at Brown University, to speak at Wellesley on November 13. In his lecture, entitled “On Heroes and Hope: Nonviolence and Resilience in Israel/ Palestine,” Atshan spoke of various Israeli and Palestinian community leaders who are striving to create a reality where both communities, and the minorities within them, can coexist in a way that serves justice. Following the lecture, students engaged in discussion with Professor Atshan, free to ask questions on points of contention; they were met with thoughtful responses. Yet the fact that some found this lecture and discussion to be “extremely destructive” suggests a sense of unwillingness to engage with ideas that challenge one’s opinions and call for cooperation and coexistence.

        Despite attempts to foster a public discourse, our actions are deemed destructive by a handful of very vocal students and adamant supporters concerned with alleged discrimination towards the Jewish Community. Comments that portray Wellesley SJP, its programming, and anti-Israel criticisms as “menacing” threats to safety and security are anti-Arab and reinforce a racialized image of the Other, thus perpetuating cycles of hatred and violence. Additionally, this racialized language, positing WSJP as monolithically “Arab,” as opposed to the supposedly universally pro-Israeli Jewish student, must be challenged if one is to find truth in this discourse. Wellesley SJP strives to question this racialized polarization in all possible ways: in reality, our membership is composed of students from various racial, religious and nonreligious, and ethnic backgrounds, and our programming enables the expression of diverse voices from the conflict

        – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/wellesley-discussion-israelpalestine#sthash.egDzNXn4.dpuf

        that’s about as far as i got reading your long diatribe. maybe if i have time later i will get to the rest of it. i’m sure it will be just as easy to debunk the rest as it was the beginning. or maybe someone else wants to take a stab. it’s like shooting fish in a barrel, you make it way too easy because you lie and attack w/crutches instead of logic.

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2014, 6:55 pm

        “As usual, instead of responding, you just insult. Typical.f”

        Admit it, Hophmi, you have no idea how to work your browser, and some joker left it on Mondoweiss.
        Remember Hophmi, you didn’t come here to get insulted!

    • K Renner
      November 27, 2014, 6:48 am

      Look, a bad parody of everything wrong with pro-Israel types on university campuses.

      Jewish pro-Israel students are all about putting out a hell of a lot of hot air when it comes to “sincere dialogue”. It’s Jewish student organizations above anyone else who’ve tried to create this “Jews are attached to Israel and absolutely Zionist” idea.

      Time and time again, they’ve proven that it’s they who don’t want any actual dialogue with Palestinian students or really anyone who shows any level of pro-Palestinian sentiment– they’re apparently far more comfortable in throwing around inane, baseless accusations whenever the issue comes up in the context of university campuses.

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2014, 12:58 pm

        “It’s Jewish student organizations above anyone else who’ve tried to create this “Jews are attached to Israel and absolutely Zionist” idea.”

        For that they go to college?

  7. yonah fredman
    November 24, 2014, 7:42 pm

    “It is certainly the case that Palestinian solidarity groups don’t go in for dialogue with Israel lobby groups because dialogue has failed to lift the occupation one iota.” The fact that dialogue has not alleviated the occupation one iota, there is purpose in dialogue when you live in a community where your opinions are being voiced in the public square. those in the public square who utilize their right to free expression “owe” those who disagree with them some modicum of interaction. it has little to to with the results in the middle east, it has everything to do with the nature of a democracy and free speech in the public square.

    • chocopie
      November 24, 2014, 8:44 pm

      Palestinians do not “owe” Zionists a damn thing. For years, Zionists and Israel-apologists have used “dialogue” as a stalling and shushing technique to keep Palestinian solidarity groups busy spinning their wheels talking to Zionists.

      The conversation is larger now. Palestinian solidarity activists are taking their message to the larger community. Zionists are free to join in the conversation but they are no longer allowed to monopolize the time and energy of people who are trying to work towards justice.

      Justice. Palestinians want justice. They want equality between Palestinians and Jewish people throughout all of historical Palestine. It’s not even complicated.

      • yonah fredman
        November 24, 2014, 9:07 pm

        A university is a community, and the root word of community and communication is the same one. Belonging to a community dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge entails responsibilities that are not incumbent on a human at home with internet access. the university community needs/demands/ requires some kind of communication with other members of the community. let us suppose that there is a pro choice group and a pro life group on campus. they owe each other the time of day, the ability to communicate with each other about the basics of their stands. those who do not believe in dialogue are fine, if they do not belong to a community, but once you belong to a community, that aspect has demands.

      • chocopie
        November 25, 2014, 12:37 am

        Palestine justice advocates on campuses all across the US do plenty of communicating. They are loudly making their case and good for them. Zionist students want to get them off into a back room somewhere to participate in “dialogue” which is about as useful as talking to a wall. If Zionist students yearn to communicate they can come out into the open and do it, right along with everyone else. No back rooms.

      • Horizontal
        November 25, 2014, 10:03 am

        The Zionists simply want to control everything — the message, the war, the peace, the reporting, the dialogue, the campus, the battlefield, the campaign money, the donor money, the votes, the front page headlines — you name it, they want to control it.

        And it’s as simple as that.

      • seafoid
        November 25, 2014, 10:41 am

        Horizontal

        Re control- the bots can’t afford a single chink in the wall, otherwise the truth and the light might break through.

    • Giles
      November 25, 2014, 8:54 am

      Dialogue with pro Zionist Jewish people is a waste of time. Actually, it is worse. Everybody knows that giving your opinion in opposition to Israel will certainly result in any pro Israel Jewish friends you have hating you and thinking you a Jew hater. They have been subjected to a lifetime of conditioning to make them see criticism of Israel as Jew hatred. This works very well for the Zionists as virtually nobody ever says anything critical to them when they hang out there “We support Israel..” signs whenever Israel is massacring the Gazan or Lebanese or whomever. This allows them to think that they have full community support save for a minority who just hate Jews for no reason.

      • hophmi
        November 25, 2014, 12:38 pm

        “Dialogue with pro Zionist Jewish people is a waste of time.”

        I see nowhere stated that Wellesley’s Community Task Force on the Middle East was limited to Zionist Jews.

        Of course, you sound just like Israeli rightists who argue that dialogue with Hamas or Fatah Palestinians is a waste a time. And I bet it’s so easy to say as an armchair activist.

      • Giles
        November 30, 2014, 5:59 pm

        The fact remains that dialogue with a group of people who have been immersed in Zionist propaganda their entire lives is a waste of time. They need to snap out of it themselves. The good news is that the younger people seem less successfully indoctrinated.

    • Horizontal
      November 25, 2014, 9:21 am

      Any time a Zionist gives a lecture on the nature of democracy, I just gotta laugh.

      Thanks for the computer screen full of coffee, yonah.

      • yonah fredman
        November 25, 2014, 4:51 pm

        horizontal- your name is one dimensional. which indicates your inability to communicate, a word that comes before democracy.

      • just
        November 25, 2014, 5:21 pm

        What are you mumbling about now, yonah?

      • seafoid
        November 25, 2014, 5:34 pm

        Yonah

        you seem to be reverting to insults.
        Have you lost your mojo ?

      • yonah fredman
        November 25, 2014, 5:43 pm

        horizontal is engaged in an ad hominem attack. he refuses to deal with the idea of a community and communication, but instead dismisses anything i say because of some side issue (zionism). do you or do you not agree that pro choice and pro life groups on campus owe each other time to debate. i think that on a campus they owe each other that courtesy because of the (facade) nature of a campus as a community of people seeking truth.

        on the streets of nyc, pro palestinian people should expect pro israel people to show up and either yell at them or interact with them. if they choose not to interact, then the yelling at them is the logical next step.

        but horizontal refuses to deal with idealism (campus) or reality (nyc) and instead refuses to talk about the idea but rather the source of the ideas. my name calling was in reaction to that.

      • Horizontal
        November 26, 2014, 10:50 am

        Yonah ~

        Where you see one dimension, there is instead a limitless expanse.

        Your desire to control the dialogue here mirrors nicely the desire of Ms. Hannick to control what happens at Wellesley.

        Jewish students want to discuss the Israel-Palestine conflict, she said. “But it is an issue we want to discuss respectfully and without polarizing” the community. SJP leaders “said they were uninterested in these kinds of dialogic conversations.”

        Communication is fine, but we’re talking about communication only within certain, prescribed constrictions, which understandably didn’t interest the SJP, or — and here’s the part that’s sure to get your attention — hardly serves the interests of the larger community.

        Maybe you’re aiming your communication obligation paeans to the wrong group.

      • hophmi
        November 26, 2014, 2:35 pm

        “Any time a Zionist gives a lecture on the nature of democracy, I just gotta laugh.”

        A common reaction when people are nervous and have no counterarguments.

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2014, 7:05 pm

        “A common reaction when people are nervous and have no counterarguments.”

        Hophmi, here is how you work your position for maximum advantage. First, see, you let the poor bastard rattle on and on about “democracy” and how Israel ain’t it.
        Let him laugh, cause you’ll be laughing soon, Hophmi!
        And then, when he (or she) pauses for breath, you just say “Ha! Big shot, so much you know about “democracy”. Except we’re talking here about “Jewish democracy” which is different than ordinary democracy!”

        Boom! You got ’em!

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2014, 7:06 pm

        “Your desire to control the dialogue here mirrors nicely…”

        …his attempts to control the voices in his head?

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2014, 7:47 pm

        ” if they choose not to interact, then the yelling at them is the logical next step.”

        That’s not interaction, Yonah, that’s called provocation. Gosh, do you think we don’t know that?

        Yonah, if you are going to subject us to drunken logic, at least buy the drinks.

  8. Kay24
    November 24, 2014, 7:47 pm

    For what it may be worth. I guess for the Palestinians every vote counts.

    Russia ready to support Palestinian state hood

    “Russia will support a Palestinian bid for statehood in the United Nations Security Council, the Russian news service Interfax reported on Sunday.

    Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov was quoted in the report as saying that a UN statehood resolution “could serve as a starting point for the renewal of negotiations between Palestine and Israel. Considering that, Russia is prepared to support this resolution, when and if it is put to a vote,” according to the Moscow Times which carried the report.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.628321

    • just
      November 24, 2014, 8:03 pm

      good.

      thanks, Kay.

    • Horizontal
      November 25, 2014, 9:39 am

      Good for Russia, but, uh-oh, cue the low-end piano music:

      Palestinian state recognition will be a ‘grave mistake’, Netanyahu warns France.

      “Recognition of a Palestinian state by France would be a grave mistake,” Netanyahu told reporters in Jerusalem. “Do they have nothing better to do at a time of beheadings across the Middle East, including that of a French citizen?”

      Ah, you gotta love that classic misdirection: “Sure, we suck, but we haven’t cut off anyone’s head yet. At least not with a knife. Maybe with a tank round or two, or a drone. But a knife That’s just barbaric!”

      And this is just as bad: “. . . nothing better to do . . .” Like holding Israel responsible for their internationally famous bad behavior is a waste of time with no possible upside?

      Netanyahu is truly suffering from some advanced form of dementia.

      France should recognize Palestine if for no other reason than to shut this guy up.

  9. Elliot
    November 24, 2014, 8:59 pm

    Fascinating how the Israel camp is using the same language. I know from talking to a former Hillel rabbi and hearing of a recent educational presentation by a Hillel executive director that Hillel is trying a new tack on Israel. They call it “educational.” getting people to reflect on “what Israel means to you.”

    See below:

    “Too often, the discourse regarding Israel is framed in black and white, with “pro-Israel” forces responding to “anti-Israel” activity (and vice versa). Difficult facts that challenge one’s point of view are often ignored so as not to undermine one’s position. This may be an effective approach for advocacy, but not for education. This session will explore a methodology designed by the Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and grounded in the philosophy of the Talmudic sage Hillel the Elder, which Northwestern Hillel is using in its approach to engaging with Israel. Join this session for tools for moving beyond the crisis narrative in your own exploration of Israel.”

    • Horizontal
      November 25, 2014, 9:50 am

      Fascinating how the Israel camp is using the same language

      I remember when the Gaza carnage was just starting to gain traction and public opinion was swinging heavily against Israel, all the usual suspects started using the word, “heartbreaking” to describe Israeli’s butchery. Obama, the State Department, and more recently I saw a clip someone here linked to of an interview by Jon Snow with some Israel spokesperson-or-other that was from the same period and he used the word, “heartbreaking” to describe the Gazan casualties.

      So I know this isn’t a coincidence. The Republicans all did the same thing right after Obama won the election the first time. To a person, they all said that “the American people want cooperation and are sick of confrontation. That’s what this election was all about.” When actually, I thought it was about holding 8 years of Bush illegality accountable. That’s why I voted for him.

      Anyway, you can be sure that a lot of thought, time and money goes into crafting these messages, and unfortunately, those who receive them don’t ever think too much about that fact.

      • Elliot
        November 25, 2014, 1:40 pm

        Thanks, Horizontal. I think you are right on both points. The person who attended that session is a progressive on I/P. Even she was duped by it. I wonder what would happen if I crashed a session like that and told them exactly what Israel means to me…..

  10. eljay
    November 24, 2014, 9:01 pm

    >> Jordan Hannink: As a pro-Palestinian, pro-Israel, Zionist, conscientious Jew, I have been put into the pro-Israel corner, which ignores my activist work to a different end.

    You are conscientious and pro-Palestinian, but you also believe in Jewish supremacism in a supremacist “Jewish State”. Interesting. Are you also pro-life and pro-choice?

    Instead of choosing to be put into a corner, choose to stand with people who are pro-justice, -accountability and -equality.

    • Giles
      November 25, 2014, 8:56 am

      How about as a pro Israel, pro Palestinian, human being and American taxpayer, I oppose the funding of the occupation, oppression, and mass murder of the Palestinian people?

  11. bryan
    November 25, 2014, 2:25 am

    Dear Jordan.

    Our sympathies are with you dear girl. You may well-come from a family with a ghetto mindset that has indoctrinated her on the importance of Israel and the fundamental morality of the Zionist cause. Your community may have been insular and uncompromising in their loyalties. You will have experienced the major Jewish organizations speaking with a single voice in their support of Israel and Occupation. You will have been exposed to a main-stream press which gently massages your carefully cultivated illusions.

    Suddenly you enter the adult world and are thrown face to face with stark realities, with pluralism, with multiple experiences and points of view, and instead of opting for a safe course in accountancy or business studies you have accepted the challenge of the mind-expanding realm of peace studies. The shock to the system can be enormous, like jumping into an icy pool; to begin with you feel like a fish out of water; having your illusions challenged can be very uncomfortable; like discovering that Santa Claus is not real.

    But Jordan, embrace the challenges – stop professing eternal victim-hood, when you are in reality either a member of the elite or certainly a candidate member. Stop whinging for special privileges. Grow up and enjoy the experience of maturing in your knowledge of the world and of its complexities, its horrors and challenges. Soon you will find that adulthood is less comfortable that the blithe innocence of youth, but for this very reason far more satisfying.

    Yours, respectfully, Bryan

  12. mijj
    November 25, 2014, 6:27 am

    if the response to criticisms of Zionism is: “I firmly believe this college is becoming increasingly anti-Semitic” then that response aims to suggst Zionism is identical with Judaism. And so that response itself is anti-Semitic by suggesting all of Judaism is responsible for the crimes of Zionism.

    Ie. the “anti-Semitism” response to criticisms of Zionism is an attempt to use Judaism as a shield, much like a terrorist might hide behind a hostage.

    Zionism is, by its nature, anti-Semitic.

  13. amigo
    November 25, 2014, 8:58 am

    Why does she not form a group and put up her own poster stating what a wonderful liberal democracy Israel is and how Arabs are equal and serve in the Knesset and drive on the same roads as Jews and live in the Illegal settlements and etc etc.I am sure Hasbara central will be more than happy to supply all the salient points. She just needs a piece of blank paper and a marker.

    But that would remove her ability to whine and make all the usual accusations.Maybe she is feeling the same as most zios these days.The jig is up and they know it.

    Just think of all those kids out there who are far more deserving of a university education..

    • Horizontal
      November 25, 2014, 9:56 am

      What you’re proposing sounds almost . . . fair, and, yes, it would pretty much let the air out of the old victim-hood party balloon.

  14. Marnie
    November 25, 2014, 9:20 am

    Just the word zionist is starting to make me feel physically ill. Either I’m coming down with something like flu, or my entire body is reacting to the whole invader, trespasser, violater vibe I associate with zionism and zionists.

    I take it all as a sign I’m actually pretty healthy.

    • Horizontal
      November 26, 2014, 1:52 pm

      Careful, Marnie. Your description of symptoms just might make someone feel uncomfortable.

      Keep it civil, would ya?

  15. ritzl
    November 25, 2014, 9:46 am

    Dear Ms. Hannink,

    Supplication is not dialogue.

    Best regards.

    The Rest of the World

    Along those lines, maybe someone should put up a sign asking, “What does dialogue mean to you?”

    Surely Hannink would be one of the first to express. And the other responses might give her a semester’s worth of Peace Studies credit hours in real world lernin’. IFF she chose to internalize anything.

    But then that whole “loyalty” thing would suggest a severely limited capacity for self-awareness and/or the contemplation of complex concepts. So much so that I’d say someone put her up to this.

  16. seafoid
    November 25, 2014, 10:45 am

    I’m sick of Jews saying they “don’t feel safe” when anyone starts questioning Zionism .
    Palestinians don’t feel safe 24/7.

    Nobody’s going to get hurt at Wesleyan or whatever college just because people are sick of the depravity of Zionism.

    “I don’t feel safe” is just another way to say STFU

    • just
      November 25, 2014, 11:04 am

      I’m sick of it, too.

      Amazingly delicate sensibilities for adherents of this vicious ideology, wouldn’t you say?

      • seafoid
        November 25, 2014, 2:28 pm

        The second couchborne US brigade of ultra sensitive “I don’t feel safe” Jews are the paratroop backup to the Israeli sociopaths . all part of the same sick system

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMG7Fze6sgQ

        Bennet and the “I don’t feel safers” are part of the same bullshit.

      • just
        November 25, 2014, 3:04 pm

        Pimping lies.

        Amazing that they’re said/received with a straight face.

      • Horizontal
        November 26, 2014, 11:01 am

        “I’ve never been in a crowd like this. They’re nuts.”

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2014, 7:51 pm

        “I’ve never been in a crowd like this. They’re nuts.”

        Seeing the manifestations of the Ziocane Syndrome close up can be alarming. But as of yet, there is no ‘Zioloft’ in the pharmacopoeia.

    • amigo
      November 25, 2014, 11:42 am

      Thanks for reminding us of that.That poor little zionist, feeling so put upon by someone pointing out a few facts and putting her in her place.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        November 25, 2014, 12:13 pm

        I’ve seen this before but it never gets old. Did this little fool have any idea who she was dealing with? Did she really think her usual tactics – saying ”Oh I’m Jewish and I’m SO offended so you MUST stop it!” were going to work with Finkelstein? I love when the camera keeps panning back to her. She wasn’t expecting that, was she? She must be mortified that she ever opened her silly little mouth.

    • hophmi
      November 26, 2014, 2:38 pm

      As usual, you don’t give a sh*t when Jews are victims are persecution. Play this clip of Finkelstein whining outside of the cult and see what the reaction is.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 26, 2014, 3:02 pm

        could you be any more irrelevant hops. just more accusations. quit clutching on your jewish victimhood meme. for the most part it’s redundant and so last century.

        you’re like a dog with his favorite bone, let go of it.

        p.s. i’d like to remind you, that the context of your allegation “As usual, you don’t give a sh*t when Jews are victims are persecution.” there was actually NOT one example of “jewish persecution” in that video. which does not mean anti semitism doesn’t exist, it mean jews are not, for the most part, “victims of persecution” today.

        racism exists everywhere but jews are rarely persecuted for their religion or ethnicity in america today.

      • hophmi
        November 26, 2014, 3:09 pm

        “could you be any more irrelevant hops. just more accusations. quit clutching on your jewish victimhood meme. for the most part it’s redundant and so last century.”

        Another denial that antisemitism exists. From the confines of San Francisco.

      • seafoid
        November 26, 2014, 3:49 pm

        Hoppy is more like a dog with a table leg.

        Jews haven’t been persecuted for decades, Hoph.
        Unless calling out the bullshit of Zionism counts as persecution.

      • just
        November 26, 2014, 4:39 pm

        “Another denial that antisemitism exists. From the confines of San Francisco.”

        hophmi– are you deliberately dull- witted? Annie said the absolute opposite. Now, you also attempt to denigrate a great American city… from which “confines” are you writing from?

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2014, 7:12 pm

        “Hoppy is more like a dog with a table leg.”

        Hoppy running after victim-hood and antisemitism is like a three-legged dog who chases cars. He loves to chase them, but he doesn’t really know what he would do if he caught one.

      • Giles
        November 30, 2014, 6:03 pm

        When have Jews been the victim of societal or state sanctioned violence and repression in the USA hophmi? You do realize the difference between thinking you are a victim because you have been raised to believe your group is always persecuted by the other and actual victimization? I have a feeling you may think you do but you actually don’t.

  17. kma
    November 25, 2014, 6:20 pm

    the poster “what does zionism mean to you?” is brilliant. someone at Wellesley is thinking clearly!!
    so, what did Hannink write on the poster?
    isn’t that “dialogic” enough for her? the only thing “polarizing” about it is 30 raving zionists sitting on the extreme edge of a spectrum where the entire subject is the ethnic cleansing of a country (which is what “zionism” means to Palestinians) while Average Normal American students are having a hard time inching toward the center on that one… oops – let’s not talk about zionism! just keep funding it.

    maybe Hannink should write “zionism means health care” on the poster. I don’t know, though, we give health care (and lots of legal support) to our police forces here, but it isn’t helping them make better choices with all those weapons we pile on them…
    I see a pattern here…

    gosh, I love that poster idea!

    • seafoid
      November 26, 2014, 2:47 pm

      To me Zionism means mind control, cruelty, violence, insecurity, neediness and please love us.

      • Marnie
        November 26, 2014, 3:09 pm

        “Please love us”. The abuser demanding love and affection from his victim. Isn’t that the sign that the abuser thoroughly hates him/herself? And said will ultimately turn on themselves? Zionism really is a disease of outward destruction and inner decay.

  18. Dan Walsh
    November 26, 2014, 1:57 am

    Well said, Annie:

    “but one might think a supporter of israel is proud of zionism. so why not have the hillel on campus give a little “this is how zionism works” workshop/weekend? you’d think they’d be proud of it. or do they think it’s a dirty word too? hmm. ”

    Some observations on Ms. Hannink’s statement that she felt “unsafe” in the presence of a poster that sought to initiate a discussion of Zionism:

    1) Would this 1960’s era poster, published by Young Judaea, listing “Zionism” as one of the topics to be discussed make her feel “unsafe”?

    http://www.palestineposterproject.org/poster/young-judaea

    How might this poster have made Palestinians feel?

    2) If the poster had been published by AIPAC or Hillel, asking the exact same question, would that have made Ms. Hannink feel equally “unsafe”?

    3) Relative to the inane and utterly predictable comments of Hophmi and Yonah, could not Ms. Hannink have engaged in meaningful “dialogue” and “communication” by adding her own comments about Zionism in the public response area on the poster? Might she have interpreted the poster’s question as an invitation to defend Zionism? She could have waxed poetic about Zionism and turned the tide on SJP…but she did not. I wonder why, still.

    4) Relative to Luntz’s comments about Zionism being a dirty word … this is not news (except to him and his ilk). BTW, Zionism has always been a dirty word for the Palestinians. I was reminded of a story told by the late Faisal Husseini about the time just after the June War of 1967 when the it became possible for Palestinians to visit Jerusalem freely … he decided to go there and after arriving he became involved in a conversation with an Israeli who said in response to something:
    “I have always considered myself a proud Zionist”, at which point Husseini burst out laughing and the conversation came to an abrupt end.

    Hasbara Nugget Quiz: Alert hasbaristas can seize on/distort which comment in the above statement to show how “progressive” Zionism is and how it helped Palestinians visit Jerusalem and promoted “dialog” and “communicate” with Israeli Zionists?

    Zionist do not want, and have never wanted, a public discourse on Zionism. The reasons are clear: such an exchange would reveal Zionism’s ideological architecture and political psychology and run the risk of legitimating the dismantling of Zionism’s core mythologies.

    No one, not even the most rabid Zionist is “proud” to be a Zionist. It is for this reason that I evangelize the tactic of never using the word “Israel”: I always substitute “Zionism”, “Zionist state”, “Zionist occupied Palestine” or some other construct. The responses from Zionists are universally fascinating and always psychologically revealing.

    I am not aware of any other ideology in history, except perhaps that of the Confederate States of America, that takes/took umbrage at the effort to study/comprehend its history.

    • Annie Robbins
      November 26, 2014, 12:18 pm

      She could have waxed poetic about Zionism and turned the tide on SJP…but she did not. I wonder why, still.

      because it could not stand up to a decent public scrutiny, she would not be about to defend it.
      you answered your own question such an exchange would reveal Zionism’s ideological architecture and political psychology and run the risk of legitimating the dismantling of Zionism’s core mythologies.

      thanks dan.

    • just
      November 26, 2014, 12:29 pm

      A really wonderful comment, Dan. Thank you for it.

      I think that you are exactly correct when you write:

      ‘I am not aware of any other ideology in history, except perhaps that of the Confederate States of America, that takes/took umbrage at the effort to study/comprehend its history.’

    • eljay
      November 26, 2014, 12:37 pm

      >> Dan Walsh: Zionist do not want, and have never wanted, a public discourse on Zionism.

      They avoid talking about it because Zionism is, fundamentally, all about Jewish supremacism in a supremacist “Jewish State”. It has nothing to do with justice, accountability or equality.

      >> No one, not even the most rabid Zionist is “proud” to be a Zionist.

      You wouldn’t know if from the comments posted here by rabid Zio-supremacists such as eee, JeffB, NormanF, and even some of the comments posted by “liberal Zionists”.

    • Horizontal
      November 26, 2014, 1:58 pm

      I agree — great comment, although in fairness to Yonah, I’ll remind you that we should all be discussing abortion right now.

      • just
        November 26, 2014, 2:21 pm

        thanks, Horizontal… I was sipping coffee.

        lol!

  19. Jabberwocky
    November 26, 2014, 8:58 pm

    Zionism is to Judaism as Islamic State is to Islam.

Leave a Reply