Trending Topics:

Jewish press concoct threat against 200 Jewish students in Florida university

ActivismNews
on 115 Comments

Yesterday, YNet, the Times of Israel, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, and the Jewish Daily Forward published reports about the targeting of 200 Jewish university students in a guerrilla campaign instigated by “pro-Palestinian” activists at the start of Passover.

Except that the incident never happened.

Here, I trace the steps to determine how a creative performance by student activists to raise awareness of home demolitions against Palestinians turned into yet another sign that Jews were being locally targeted for persecution.

The Jewish media play a game of “telephone”

On March 30, members of the Florida Atlantic University (FAU) chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) posted 200 mock eviction notices on the doors of random FAU dorm room doors and elevators in order to highlight the Israeli policy of home demolitions.

FAU eviction

The first prominent news report of the action was published on Mondoweiss on April 4 by the university’s SJP president, Noor Fawzy. Fawzy wrote that

some 200 mock eviction notices were distributed in elevators and on the front doors of randomly-selected dorms at FAU’s three largest residential areas.

Also on April 4, the Sun Sentinel of South Florida reported on the action in an article headlined “Mock Eviction Notices from Palestinian Group Rile FAU students.” Although the article itself made no mention of Jews being specifically targeted by the fliers, an accompanying photo caption implied differently:

Member of the Alpha Epsilon Pi, a Jewish fraternity and FAU freshman Corey Bloom stands in front of Glades Park Towers where he lives on the FAU Campus in Boca Raton. Bloom and other jewish students received mock eviction notices on their dorm room doors from an FAU club called Students for Justice in Palestine.

The following day, the Jewish Journal of Florida reported on the event, under the headline “Fake ‘Eviction Notices’ Scare Jewish Students” (see Google cached version). Here, the targeting of Jews became more explicit. While the Sun Sentinel reported that eviction notices were “taped on more than 200 doors in three dorms on the Boca Raton campus,” the Jewish Journal revealed that all those doors were Jewish doors:

[Rayna] Exelbierd was one of more than 200 Jewish students in three dorms who received the fake [eviction] notice from the campus group Students for Justice in Palestine.

An accompanying photo caption reiterated the point:

Students Lena Emara, Gabi Aleksinko, Satya Singh and Matthew Schneider pose with an “eviction notice” similar to those put on the dorm room doors of more than 200 Jewish students at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton.

FAU Jewish Journal

Complaints to the Jewish Journal led to the paper correcting its coverage. The references to “200 Jewish students” were changed simply to “200 students.” Unfortunately, the Jewish Journal did not indicate that it had updated the article. The damage was done, but the extent of the damage would not materialize until April 9.

On April 9, Ynet published an article headlined “Florida: Pro-Palestinian Group ‘Evicts’ Jewish Students.” The article was based entirely on information from the Sun Sentinel article and the original uncorrected Jewish Journal article, and featured two additional errors:

  1. a quote attributed to the Sun Sentinel actually appeared in the Jewish Journal.
  2. Ynet claimed that the incident had occurred “on Friday,” implying April 6—when actually it occurred the Friday before the Sun Sentinel and Jewish Journal pieces appeared, meaning March 30.

FAU Ynet

Angry comments followed the article, such as this one:

200 JEWISH students? How did they know? It’s extremely frightening to realize that they’ve been identifying who the Jews are on campus. Jew-counting is incredibly intimidating these days, as it has been for centuries.

In less than twelve hours, the article had registered over a thousand Facebook recommendations, making it one of the most popular articles on Ynet. When the article was reprinted by John Hagee’s Christians United for Israel, it registered an additional 5,000 Facebook shares.

A few hours after the Ynet article went online, Greg Tepper in the Times of Israel published his own version of the story, using virtually the same headline as the Ynet article, “Pro-Palestinian Group ‘Evicts’ Jewish Students.” Tepper’s article provided only one new piece of information—that the eviction notices were posted “on Friday night, which was the first night of the Passover holiday,” thus contriving another Jewish connection.

Yet Tepper, as with Ynet, had gotten the dates mixed up. The first night of Passover was on April 6. Before Passover began, the SJP action had already happened on March 30, and both the Sun Sentinel and the Jewish Journal had already reported on the story.

Soon after the Times of Israel article appeared, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) published its own report, entitled “Pro-Palestinian Student Group Sends Jewish Students Fake Eviction Notices.” The JTA piece was entirely based on the uncorrected Jewish Journal article.

The Jewish Daily Forward then picked up the JTA article, renaming it “Jewish Students Get Fake Eviction Notices,” but otherwise reprinting the article word for word.

Misreporting leads to death threats

On the same day that these articles appeared, student activists at FAU began receiving hate mail and death threats. Noor Fawzy, the campus SJP president, received a death threat to her personal email, while another death threat was sent to the SJP general email address. Both threats were reported to FAU police.

I asked Fawzy if the death threats were explicit or “merely” hinted at. She told me that the death threat sent to her explicitly detailed the method in which she would be killed.

Fawzy also stated that SJP had not been contacted by any of the media outlets that published the April 9 stories. Instead, she contacted Ynet to request that they correct their misinformation, which they have not done.

I asked Fawzy if it was even possible to single out 200 Jewish dorm rooms.

We randomly selected 200 dorms and elevators. We have no way of knowing who lives where. Not even housing knows that. Who would do this [target Jewish students]? It’s just ridiculous.

Inundated with complaints, Charles L. Brown, the senior vice president for student affairs at FAU, issued a statement, claiming that the mock eviction notices had violated school policies:

The University has received a number of inquiries following the recent posting of mock eviction notices in certain FAU residence halls. The University, as an institution of higher education, prides itself on being a venue for free expression, regardless of viewpoint. However, the distribution of printed material on University property is subject to FAU policy and regulation. These policies require that printed material be distributed only at reasonable times and places and in reasonable manners. These policies are designed to ensure that the manner in which material is distributed is consistent with the educational mission of the University, its uninterrupted orderly operation, the safety of the University community, and the protection of University property and that of its students, faculty and staff.

The recent mock eviction postings did not comply with the policies of University Housing and Residential Life or the Office of Student Involvement and Leadership concerning the distribution of printed material, and therefore the postings were removed.

However, Fawzy explained to me the careful steps that the campus SJP followed before they initiated their action.

One month before the flyering, members of SJP had approached FAU’s associate director of housing with details of their plans. They even provided a draft of the eviction notice. The associate director then conferred with the director of housing before approving the initiative.

“I got confirmation by email,” Fawzy explained. “That doesn’t mean they supported it. That just means they gave us approval to do it. We were trying to be as professional as possible,” aware that any careless move would be jumped on by SJP’s critics. SJP also presented the housing office with the final mock eviction notice beforehand. “We showed them the final copy—everything.”

Housing staff suggested that SJP members remain in the dorm buildings to answer questions from students who encountered the eviction notices, which SJP agreed to do. “We were very cooperative with them. We stuck around to answer potential questions.” SJP members were even escorted by housing staff when they went to post the mock eviction notices.

Fawzy complained about the vagueness of Brown’s accusation.

We had no intention of violating the laws. [Brown] was not specific about which policies we violated. To this day I still have no idea which policies we violated.

However, to Scott Brockman, the executive director of Hillel at Broward and Palm Beach, the very fact that the notices contained the housing department stamp of approval was proof enough that the action was “a clear violation of university guidelines,” as he told the Jewish Journal.

I contacted FAU student Jackie Klein, who was quoted in the Sun Sentinel as saying that the eviction notices were a “bit intimidating.” Klein, who is a Jewish education intern with Hillel and is the president of the Jewish Student Union at FAU, confirmed to me that the mock eviction notices did not target Jewish students. Although Klein did not personally receive a notice, she said she was “affected emotionally” by the notices, under her capacity as a Jewish educator.

I know a lot of the students on campus that weren’t Jewish that had the eviction notices on their dorm rooms, and their first thought was, ‘Okay, I’m being evicted. Why?’ And when I spoke to some students that had notices on their door, they were more scared about being evicted and not [about] the content of the paper.

I asked Klein about a statement made by fellow FAU student Rayna Exelbierd in the Jewish Journal. Exelbierd, who is an Israel advocacy intern for Hillel, had stated,

We’re considering it a hate crime. The flier promotes hate; it doesn’t promote peace.

I asked Klein if that was the official Hillel position, and she stated she didn’t know anything about that.

Klein stressed that she was more focused on the educational aspects of Israel and Jewish advocacy and did not like to be directly involved in the political disputes on campus. “I’m a proud Israel supporter. Because of my involvement on campus, I automatically support Israel. I’m constantly advocating Israel, no matter what.”

Conclusion

As the make-believe story of 200 Jewish students being targeted continues to spread internationally, it is important to note that the only news outlets that have propagated this myth have been outlets that cater to Jewish audiences. It is yet again an instance of Jewish media doing a disservice to its readership by feeding into the ever-present fears of anti-Semitic resurgence.

I have at times written about the phenomenon of “Jews scaring Jews,” in which mostly Jewish reporters and commentators seek to trigger the fears of their Jewish audiences—whether for sensationalism or for manipulation. I reported on how Haaretz’s Barak Ravid, with the assistance of Israeli minister Yuli Edelstein, turned the Park Slope Food Coop BDS campaign into a story in which “hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists” protested outside a “Jewish supermarket” that carried Israeli goods such as “Bamba, Milky, and hummus.” I reported on how commentators tried to outdo one another in stacking up the most trauma-triggering adjectives to describe the Penn BDS conference. And most recently, I reported on how StandWithUs concocted a boycott campaign against a Jewish deli in Olympia, Washington.

In the present story, there are clear steps needed to resolve this matter:

  • The Jewish Journal needs to indicate that its original article on the issue has been corrected and that “200 Jewish students” were not targeted.
  • YNet, the Times of Israel, the JTA, and subsequent news outlets need to issue their own corrections for carelessly reporting on a preposterous premise.
  • The FAU administration needs to ensure the safety of all of its students, but most importantly those who are being targeted with death threats and a smear campaign—that is, the students of SJP.
  • Furthermore, the FAU administration needs to take responsibility for its own actions, defend free speech, not turn its back on its students due to external pressure, and not scapegoat SJP for violations that it did not commit.

In this story, the irresponsible actors are the adults in positions of power—whether it is the university administration that seeks to pander to external pressure and blame students for the administration’s own deficiencies, the Israel advocacy organizations that seek to capitalize on a manufactured controversy, or the Jewish media that continue to manipulate their own readership by indulging in sensationalistic stories designed to trigger Jewish fears of pending doom.

And where was the Anti-Defamation League?

I close this piece with the ADL’s own unfortunate contribution to the game. The ADL released a statement early, on April 5, before the “200 Jewish students” scare had fully materialized. Although the ADL did not accuse SJP of targeting Jewish students, its statement attempted to associate the flyering action with the evils of campus Palestine solidarity activities in general:

Title:
FAU Students Latest Target of Anti-Israel Mock Eviction Tactic

Descriptors:
…anti-Israel campus group…
…shock tactics…
… anti-Israel activity on campus…
…consistently demonized Israel…
…describing its policies…as racist and apartheid-like…
…compared Israelis to Nazis…
…criticize the “actions of the Israeli state”…
…American Muslims for Palestine…a virulently anti-Israel organization…

It was only following this laundry list of the evils of campus organizing that the ADL explained what was so wrong about the FAU SJP action in the final sentence:

As was the case at the University of Chicago and at Yale, the eviction fliers at FAU were seen by some students as disrespectful and intimidating.

April 11 update:

Sol Salbe has pointed out that in Ynet’s Hebrew version of the article, which was datelined one hour and thirty-nine minutes earlier than the English edition, there is a significant line at the end of the first paragraph that does not appear in the English version: “It is not clear if only Jewish students were sent the leaflets.”

The line indicates that someone at Ynet had expressed skepticism of the story. But the story was published anyway, under the premise that Jewish students were targeted, with a headline that suggested the same, and with the lead sentence falsely claiming that “more than 200 Jewish students” received the eviction notices.

The English version of the Ynet article is not a straight translation of the Hebrew version, as it features different quotes and details. However, both versions are based entirely on the Sun Sentinel article and the original uncorrected Jewish Journal article, with no additional investigation.

The Hebrew version also notes that the story idea came to the Ynet offices via its “Red Email” submission form. What this suggests is that someone fed Ynet the fake story. Ynet accepted the story as accurate enough to report on, despite expressing doubts, and without conducting its own research. That started the ball rolling to get other Jewish-focused media in the US and Israel to pick up the four-day-old debunked story, with none of these other media outlets expressing skepticism or doing their own investigation, and eventually leading to false charges and death threats against SJP students at FAU.

Since this story was published on Mondoweiss, JTA has issued a correction and the Jewish Journal stated that it will be noting the correction both online and in its next print edition. We are still waiting for responses from the other publications.

Phan Nguyen

Phan Nguyen lives in New York and has a Twitter account: @Phan_N

Other posts by .


Posted In:

115 Responses

  1. justicewillprevail on April 10, 2012, 3:16 pm

    If they ‘scare’ these hypersensitive Jewish souls, what do they think the real notices do to the Palestinians? I think the point is made, or are Jews allowed to be outraged and hysterical over a symbolic eviction, whilst Palestinians must accept the very real theft of their homes and possessions without demur? Perhaps the synthetic outrage and manufactured ‘threat’ to Jews should be turned to real outrage over the treatment of innocent Palestinians – then we might have some respect for these fools and propaganda addicts.

    • robinseyes on April 11, 2012, 4:14 pm

      I find this artical grossly misleading as to what took place, especially since I’m a parent of 1 of the Jewish students that had received a notice on the dorm room door.

      It’s not a make believe story. This was a deliberate act. Two-hundred students were specifically targeted for being Jewish, Fortunately or unfortuantely for the club SJP they determined which students to target by their last names. Thta is not random selection. Information provided by FAU representative. That is the only reason that some non-Jewish students received the fraudulent eviction notices. The intent was very clear to harrass, intimidate, & terrorize American Jewish students to bring awareness to their SJP cause.

      Well creating a false document that implies that FAU endorses the notice & creating phony seals based on legitimate sources is not acceptable. Commiting fraud in this country at any level in all indsutries is a crime & no one seems to be speaking to that point with the exception of Palm Beach County.

      It was communicated to me by a FAU representative that a cease & desist order has been issued by the county against the club regarding the seal that was created & that the school was going to be meeting with the SJP club & its members yesterday.

      The policies of FAU can easily be found in the student handbook. If the reporter was truely an investigative reporter he would have been able to find that out. Furthermore, why didn’t this reporter who some of you have praised, why didn’t he contact the director of Hillel at FAU? Oh, by the way the ADL had a press release yesterday on this very topic. So the information printed regarding April 5, is not 100% accurate.

      If indeed Fawzy recived a death threat, why didn’t the reporter encourage her to file a police report so there is a record of it. That would be the 1st thing I would do if I was a responsinle reporter concerned about a students safety. I further find it interesting that the reporter had no problem attemping to condem other more credible news agencies.

      This is not a free speech issue. No one from the campus ever said that there notices could not be placed in common areas where it is supposed to be posted. Not on individual dorm room doors. When you specificaly target a group with the intent of harrassing & intimidating there is a huge problem & it falls under civil rights. So if I were investigating this story I would want to know who came up with the idea for the notice? Who created the false seals for the county & the school? Why were certain directories used to identify the Jewish students by last name & not other directories. Out of the 200 notices how many that were reported to the university were Jewish & non-Jewish. Not all the students that recived a notice reported it. Finally, if this is how this group attempts to draw attention to themselves or an issue how & what will it be next time? Will it be a fake bomb? In my opinion every single student who was involved in this evil action to terrorize their fellow students should receive consequences. If it was up to me I would expell all of them & if the student was here on a visa I would see to it that they were deported.

      What is further troubling to me as a parent is that these students of the SJP don’t think they did anything wrong. Besides violating school policy, they also most likely violated the by-laws of the club that every club has on campus. Do they not think that there is a reason for these rules & that for some reason they are exempt? They are not.

      • Phan Nguyen on April 11, 2012, 6:21 pm

        robinseyes, where to begin? I am inclined to believe you are simply trolling.

        > “It’s not a make believe story. This was a deliberate act. Two-hundred students were specifically targeted for being Jewish, Fortunately or unfortuantely for the club SJP they determined which students to target by their last names. Thta is not random selection. Information provided by FAU representative.”

        You seem to know more about this than the SJP students or the Hillel students do. Please provide me with the name and title of this FAU representative.

        > “Well creating a false document that implies that FAU endorses the notice & creating phony seals based on legitimate sources is not acceptable.”

        Look at the mock eviction notice at the top of this page. Nowhere does it state that FAU endorsed the notice. The housing stamp on the bottom right corner merely indicates that housing accepts the flier as having met requirements for posting, and that was placed there by the housing department.

        > “Commiting fraud in this country at any level in all indsutries is a crime & no one seems to be speaking to that point with the exception of Palm Beach County. It was communicated to me by a FAU representative that a cease & desist order has been issued by the county against the club regarding the seal that was created & that the school was going to be meeting with the SJP club & its members yesterday.”

        If you bother to look at the mock eviction notice, you will see that next to the Palm Beach County seal is written, in bold and all caps, NOT A REAL EVICTION NOTICE. NOT AFFILIATED WITH COUNTY. This was obvious enough to the reporters at WPBF when they reported on the cease-and-desist order.

        > “The policies of FAU can easily be found in the student handbook. If the reporter was truely an investigative reporter he would have been able to find that out.”

        It is the responsibility of the FAU administration to identify which policies have been violated, which they have not yet stated. It is not my duty to find a policy on their behalf which they can then claim to have been violated. If I were to do so, then I would be putting words in the administration’s mouth. I don’t see how that would make me more professional.

        > “Furthermore, why didn’t this reporter who some of you have praised, why didn’t he contact the director of Hillel at FAU?”

        First, it was not necessary to call the Hillel office, as Hillel itself has not claimed that Jewish students were specifically targeted for the fliers.

        Regardless, I did put a call in to the Hillel office, although the office was closed at the time. Fortunately I was able to find the contact info for a Hillel intern, and she confirmed to me that the fliers were not targeting Jewish students. I write about it in the article above.

        Moreover, Scott Brockman, the executive of director of Hillel of Broward and Palm Beach, had already stated the following at 4:17 pm on April 9:

        It was not 200 Jewish students targeted. The flier was placed on 200 dorm rooms

        So will you now call the executive director of Hillel a liar?

        > “Oh, by the way the ADL had a press release yesterday on this very topic. So the information printed regarding April 5, is not 100% accurate.”

        I don’t understand what this means. Are you saying that the April 5 ADL statement is not entirely accurate, but the April 10 ADL statement (which was published after I had completed the article) is? I have read both statements. Neither one claims that Jewish students were targeted with the fliers. The April 10 statement is a rehash of portions of the April 5 statement, along with additional information chastising student Palestine activism in general. It provides absolutely no new information about the mock eviction action.

        > “If indeed Fawzy recived a death threat, why didn’t the reporter encourage her to file a police report so there is a record of it. That would be the 1st thing I would do if I was a responsinle reporter concerned about a students safety.”

        Well, as a “responsinle reporter,” my suggestion to you is that you try reading the article that you are criticizing. You will discover that I wrote that Noor Fawzy did report the death threats to the police.

        > “I further find it interesting that the reporter had no problem attemping to condem other more credible news agencies.”

        Some of these “credible news agencies” have since issued corrections and no longer claim that Jewish students were targeted. Will you believe them now, or will you now “condem” them yourself?

        > “Out of the 200 notices how many that were reported to the university were Jewish & non-Jewish.”

        I don’t know why you even bother to pose this question since you begin your comments with the assumption that “Two-hundred students were specifically targeted for being Jewish” and refuse to accept otherwise.

        > “Not all the students that recived a notice reported it.”

        Were they supposed to? A better question to ask is why much of the press did not bother to quote from non-Jewish students who received the notice, and why they even went out of their way to quote from Jewish students and Jewish non-students who did not receive the notice.

        > “If it was up to me I would expell all of them & if the student was here on a visa I would see to it that they were deported.”

        Then I’m glad it’s not up to you.

        By the way, why is it that comments against activists always devolve to a suggestion that activists are likely non-citizens who need to be deported?

      • tree on April 11, 2012, 6:54 pm

        If it was up to me I would expell all of them

        If it was up to me I would urge every parent of a student who COULDN’T READ and comprehend the meaning and point of the fake eviction notice to withdraw their child from the University and seek help for their child with remedial reading instruction. Such a child is clearly not ready for the intellectual rigors of University study.

        Read the fake notice yourself, robineyes. It’s clear enough to notice that it states it is not a real eviction notice, and is meant to “spread awareness of the plight of the Palestinian people” who are subject to real evictions from their houses by the Israeli government based solely on their ethnicity. Maybe you should get some remedial reading help as well.

      • Rusty Pipes on April 11, 2012, 8:08 pm

        This only applies to Arab international students:

        > “If it was up to me I would expell all of them & if the student was here on a visa I would see to it that they were deported.”

        Then I’m glad it’s not up to you.

        By the way, why is it that comments against activists always devolve to a suggestion that activists are likely non-citizens who need to be deported?

        International students performing alternative service for Israel by tasks such as taking notes at US schools and filing reports about “delegitimizers” aren’t getting expelled and deported. Chris Hedges even addressed some remarks to such members of his audience at one university.

      • Phan Nguyen on April 11, 2012, 9:08 pm

        Rusty Pipes, you have a point there. Hillel, in conjunction with the Jewish Agency, employs “Israel Fellows,” young Israelis who are trained and then dispatched to various US campuses to promote Israel by schmoozing with college students, setting up Israel-themed events on or around college campuses, and fighting campus-based activism.

        These “Israel Fellows” don’t actually attend the colleges or universities that they are assigned to. They’re simply there to win over college students. In fact, there’s an Israel Fellow assigned to FAU.

        Sample link 1
        Sample link 2
        Sample link 3
        Sample link 4

      • piotr on April 11, 2012, 9:38 pm

        This is a sad example that poor reading comprehension can be inherited through faulty education at home. For example, a notice “You may have already won million dollars” requires careful reading because usually it does not promise any money but encourages to make 5 journal subscriptions. It is of paramount importance to read a text fully and not pre-judge it because of the first sentence.

      • robinseyes on April 11, 2012, 10:52 pm

        Why would I be trolling? It is a serious issue when students on any campus violate school policy.

        As to where I got my information? I called the school and spoke to different key people. You could do the same thing. I idnetified myself as deeply concerned parent of one of the students that was targeted.

        I’m glad to hear that the death threat was reported to the police. It should be.

        In my opinion I don’t think anyone went out of their way at this point. Supposedly a complete investigation is being conducted by the school. Hillel, the ADL, many parents of targeted students, & concerned parents of FAU students are awaiting the official response from FAU as aresult of the investigation.

        FAU is a state school and as a taxpayer & as a parent of a student that attends FAU I have a right to believe in consequences to wrong & in appropriate actions.

        I would not call these students activitsts at all. This is suppose to be a club on FAU campus that operates according to the student hand book as well as the by laws of all the clubs. According to the FAU they have violated the polices. There are consequences to violating policies for all. It is clear you don’t think the students did anything wrong & that you don’t believe in consequences to ones actions.

        If any group has an issue that they want to make people aware of you don’t go around creating a fake/false/misrepresentative document…The copy of the notice that I recived from my child made a claim in extremely small lettering at the bottom of the page. That is only noticable to anyone who re- reads it after further examination of the document. The majority of the people who I spoke with didn’t notice it initially & that includes 2 attorneys who are professional trained to read documents. A very decptive move on the part of the SJP.

        These are American students, most of whom could care less about what goes on in israel or the ME. They went to FAU to get an education not to be harrassed by fellow students who want to create a platform by using false & misleading tactics & that is what was clearly done. I’m not commenting or replying to your comments to get involved with a political dispute. I’m here to state that this was a completely wrong action on the part of the SJP, it did take place, & this is not that way most American students create a platform or make anyone aware of an issue. There is a right way & a wrong way. Simple as that. Its called clarity.

        You bring up another issue of International Students etc… taking notes & filing reports. It doesn’t sound like any one violated policies, rules, or law in the sitation you mention. There is a difference & if you can’t see that, oh well.

      • annie on April 11, 2012, 11:00 pm

        The copy of the notice that I recived from my child made a claim in extremely small lettering at the bottom of the page.

        so you’re claiming there was a different flyer than the one in the photo? that would be a big story if it were true. prove it. send a photo of it to the site and we’ll run it. it would be breaking news.

        I called the school and spoke to different key people.

        then identify them by name. now.

        I idnetified myself as deeply concerned parent of one of the students that was targeted.

        there’s nothing you have said that establishes you to be who you say you are. this is the internet, why are you choosing to hide your identity?

        and why are you more concerned with this political action than the real terror of families who are evicted and have their homes demolished? why should we care about you?

        Why would I be trolling?

        why not? the israel project and other massively well funded zionists projects invest millions on online activism. what reason would they have to leave this issue alone? this is another PR fail for israel, why would these activist groups, or an israel online ambassador not be assigned to this issue? http://www.facebook.com/israelonline

      • annie on April 11, 2012, 11:26 pm

        I would not call these students activitsts at all.

        wake up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_Justice_in_Palestine

        Activities include educational events, film screenings, discussion forums, and demonstrations meant to promote awareness of the plight of the Palestinian people and encourage activism in solidarity with their struggle.

        it’s a student activist group.

      • Phan Nguyen on April 12, 2012, 12:03 am

        > robinseyes: “Why would I be trolling? It is a serious issue when students on any campus violate school policy.”

        If it is a serious issue, then you need to take all the information seriously. You demonstrated that you did not read my article carefully. You refer to “credible news agencies” that couldn’t (and still can’t) get the date of the event right. You tell me I should be talking to Hillel, when Hillel has already contradicted your assertions.

        Like most trolls, you have hardly acknowledged anything I have written in response to you. I have provided you with evidence. You have been unable to challenge or contradict me. At the same time, you refuse to accept that you have been mistaken in any way. You have not provided a single shred of evidence for your assertions—only hearsay from unidentified sources.

        You have not given me a reason why I should take you seriously.

        > “As to where I got my information? I called the school and spoke to different key people. You could do the same thing.”

        So you’re saying that the school adminstration knows that 200 Jewish students were targeted, even though:

        1. The students who posted the fliers deny it.

        2. The Jewish students themselves deny it.

        3. Non-Jewish students received the fliers.

        4. Housing staff accompanied the SJP students and have not made the allegations.

        5. The Hillel director, whom you previously considered an authority, has explicitly denied it.

        6. And the ONLY reported source that 200 Jewish students were targeted was the Jewish Journal, which has revised the article–twice now–to remove those references, and has stated that it will issue a correction in print. All subsequent allegations about “200 Jewish students” reference the report by the Jewish Journal and featured no original investigation.

        So despite all of that, we are now supposed to believe that you (whoever you are) have insider information that suggests otherwise, yet you refuse to identify your sources, simply referring to them as “different key people.”

        Don’t waste your time with skeptical me. I suggest you go straight to the Jewish Journal or the Sun Sentinel and give them the scoop. Or give it to Ynet. They’ll print anything.

        > “According to the FAU they have violated the polices. There are consequences to violating policies for all. It is clear you don’t think the students did anything wrong & that you don’t believe in consequences to ones actions.”

        The onus is not on me to prove the students did nothing wrong. Moreover, it is impossible for the students to defend themselves against charges that have not been announced. The onus is on the administration to state which policy or policies the students have violated. It is clear that you do not have this information, despite your access to “different key people.” Otherwise, you would have stated it by now.

        > “The copy of the notice that I recived from my child made a claim in extremely small lettering at the bottom of the page.”

        Echoing Annie’s question, are you saying that the notice depicted above is not the one that your child received? That image came straight from the ADL website.

        > “The majority of the people who I spoke with didn’t notice it initially & that includes 2 attorneys who are professional trained to read documents.”

        In this case, “initially” is a vague term. How many seconds before they did notice it? I’m sorry that your attorney friends were fooled into believing that a dorm room could be “SCHEDULED FOR DEMOLITION SHORTLY” by “NOT A REAL EVICTION NOTICE.”

        > “There is a right way & a wrong way. Simple as that. Its called clarity.”

        Yes, I highly recommend it.

      • Chu on April 12, 2012, 12:06 pm

        robinseyes: “The copy of the notice that I recived from my child made a claim in extremely small lettering at the bottom of the page. That is only noticable to anyone who re- reads it after further examination of the document. “

        I seriously doubt there is anything in small lettering, and if there was why would you not explain and leave it as a mystery if it’s important to your serious claims of anti Semitism. This is an example of back-peddling and treading down another path. Phan already destroyed your arguments. Don’t waste him time, as he’s got more important articles to publish than to counter a supposed parent with a special letter that has very small words that amount to zilch.

        But if there is a letter with small lettering at the bottom, you should send it to the police if it merits any importance.

      • Chu on April 12, 2012, 12:14 pm

        The majority of the people who I spoke with didn’t notice it [small lettering] initially & that includes 2 attorneys who are professional trained to read documents.

        If your 2 lawyers didn’t notice this small lettering why would it be important? Please tell us what the lettering actual says. I can only anticipate the next answer – You cannot because it’s an ongoing investigation.

      • hophmi on April 12, 2012, 4:12 pm

        I wonder what the Student Handbook says. My guess is that it does not allow the posting of fliers on dorm room doors for what should be fairly obvious reasons.

        But once again, Phan, you’re being disingenuous. No one concocted anything here. Apparently, the Jewish Journal misunderstood its source and other media outlets picked it up, including Ynet, who clearly mistook the Jewish Journal for the Sun Sentinel because the Journal is published by the Sentinel. These things happen. The only concocting here is the concocting you’ve done to make this look like a “Jewish media” conspiracy. It’s unfortunate that anyone gets death threats over it, but there are extremists on both sides who send crazy emails; I’ve been threatened as well.

        It is not a Jewish media conspiracy every time a Jewish media source gets a story wrong.

        “it is important to note that the only news outlets that have propagated this myth have been outlets that cater to Jewish audiences.”

        Why? The Jewish Journal was the first to make the mistake. As they reported it, it’s a story with Jewish interest, so the JTA and Ynet picked it up.

        In the last couple of days, Fox and the Sun-Sentinel have run follow-up stories, Local10 in Florida has printed a letter on the death threats from a CAIR rep.
        http://www.local10.com/news/Muslim-students-receive-death-threats-after-report-in-Jewish-Journal/-/1717324/10528412/-/dsmmnaz/-/

        Media outlets do make mistakes. It’s not a “Jewish media” conspiracy when Jewish media outlets make them, and the suggestion that it is it really a little disgusting.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 12, 2012, 5:09 pm

        “Apparently, the Jewish Journal misunderstood its source and other media outlets picked it up”

        How do you know it’s a misunderstanding and not the Journal trying to gin up a sensation by falsely claiming antisemitism when none exists?? Oh, yeah, because you think that anything that is done by a Jew or by a Jewish organization can only be 1) good by definition or 2) an innocent mistake.

        And to you attack Phan and these students who are trying to aid the suffering Palestinians?? You’re a disgrace.

      • Rusty Pipes on April 12, 2012, 5:42 pm

        Thanks! Mayhem comments below:

        I am basically just informing on how this incident at FSU is just the tip of the iceberg.This story is not an isolated event; it is symptomatic of a far bigger issue.

        Looking at the comment from a different angle: unfortunately, the distortion of SJP’s actions is not an isolated event. With dedicated hasbarists on many campuses (some volunteer, others funded in some way, like these Israel Fellows), some of them not only promote propaganda about Israel, but frame the advocacy for Palestinian human rights as hate-speech and distort the record about the activities of local SJP chapters.

      • Phan Nguyen on April 12, 2012, 5:46 pm

        I don’t like to feed the trolls, but while I’m at it…

        First, I said nothing about a “Jewish media conspiracy.” That implies that all these media sources worked together to concoct the story. I never suggested that.

        Second, the Jewish Journal did not “misunderstand its source.” Where did they get the number 200? Did they count all the fliers? No. They got the number 200 from the SJP students or from the Sun Sentinel report. Moreover, SJP had explicitly stated that they “randomly“ placed these fliers on dorm room doors and in elevators. Where did they get the idea that 200 Jewish students were targeted? Definitely not from the SJP students. Did they get that from Rayna Exelbierd, whom they referred to as “one of more than 200 Jewish students in three dorms”? How would she know?

        I do not claim that the story was concocted out of thin air. Rather, I attribute it to willful negligence—not an honest mistake. You have to be deliberately sloppy or completely incompetent to conceive such a story. You have to suspend disbelief and want to believe it’s true in order to take such a story at face value without conducting further investigation.

        How could SJP have known where “more than 200 Jewish students” lived? The Jewish Journal didn’t bother to ask.

        > “Ynet, who clearly mistook the Jewish Journal for the Sun Sentinel because the Journal is published by the Sentinel. These things happen.”

        Ynet has known for four days now that their story is false. They still have not corrected it. Ynet Hebrew expressed a hint of skepticism at the very start but did not pursue this further and otherwise reported on the story as fact. Ynet conducted absolutely no investigation. By the time the Ynet article was published, the Jewish Journal had already removed references to “200 Jewish students.” Ynet also got the date wrong. This is unprofessional through and through.

        JTA conducted no investigation and reported on the story as is. To its credit, JTA issued an immediate correction.

        The Forward reprinted the JTA article and so far has not corrected it, even though JTA has already issued a correction.

        I have sent multiple emails to the Forward and to Ynet calling on them to correct their pieces. I have received no response.

        The Times of Israel partially corrected their story, removing one false reference but still keeping their misleading headline (“Pro-Palestinian group ‘evicts’ Jewish students”) and still falsely claiming that the fliers were posted at the start of Passover. They also did not note that they had partially corrected their story.

        Two days later, after they had already removed one reference to the false story, they repeated the lie again in yet another story.

        The fact that these news sources conducted no investigation before they rehashed a completely ridiculous story that was already retracted is not an honest mistake. It is willful negligence.

        Why did only the Jewish-focused news media report on this fake story and not the general mainstream media? It’s because the former have a vested interest in the story being true. Why did they not investigate further? Because then they might discover that it wasn’t true. I’m not saying it’s a completely conscious decision. That’s why I attribute it to willful negligence. That does not make it any better.

        When I first saw this story reported by JTA, my immediate reaction was skepticism, despite the fact that I had no reason to believe that JTA was lying. Why didn’t these news sources express their own skepticism, the way good professional reporters should?

        But then again, Hophmi, I don’t expect you to digest any of what I’ve just written. You won’t acknowledge any of it. Your nature is to just change the subject and make up something else about the article to complain about.

      • hophmi on April 12, 2012, 8:36 pm

        “First, I said nothing about a “Jewish media conspiracy.” That implies that all these media sources worked together to concoct the story. I never suggested that.”

        This is your headline: “Jewish press concoct threat against 200 Jewish students in Florida university”

        There’s no evidence anyone concocted anything here. The only evidence is that one source made a mistake, and other outlets picked up the story with the same mistake in it.

        “Second, the Jewish Journal did not “misunderstand its source.” Where did they get the number 200? Did they count all the fliers? No. They got the number 200 from the SJP students or from the Sun Sentinel report. Moreover, SJP had explicitly stated that they “randomly“ placed these fliers on dorm room doors and in elevators. Where did they get the idea that 200 Jewish students were targeted? Definitely not from the SJP students. Did they get that from Rayna Exelbierd, whom they referred to as “one of more than 200 Jewish students in three dorms”? How would she know?”

        Perhaps Rayna misspoke. Who knows? My guess is that the paper didn’t make up the claim perniciously.

        “I do not claim that the story was concocted out of thin air. Rather, I attribute it to willful negligence—not an honest mistake. ”

        Based on what?

        “How could SJP have known where “more than 200 Jewish students” lived? The Jewish Journal didn’t bother to ask.”

        Who knows? Again, my guess is that it started either as a misprint or as a reporter mishearing a source or as a source misspeaking. The number 200 could be the number of students in the three dorms that were fliered or the number of fliers distributed or, more likely, from the SJP.

        This is local media. It should not be a major surprise if someone is sloppy.

        “Ynet conducted absolutely no investigation. ”

        Yes, it’s par for the course in the online world where sources copy one another, which happens all the time.

        “I have sent multiple emails to the Forward and to Ynet calling on them to correct their pieces. I have received no response.”

        If you read the Forward regularly, you know their reporting in general is not sloppy. So my guess is that they will get around to it.

        “The fact that these news sources conducted no investigation before they rehashed a completely ridiculous story that was already retracted is not an honest mistake. It is willful negligence.”

        Oh please. Do you ever read English-language Arab media sources? They reprint Holocaust denier op-eds all the time. Arab News is a prime culprit. I’m sure you don’t care as much about them.

        This is the nature of online news.

        “Why did only the Jewish-focused news media report on this fake story and not the general mainstream media?”

        Um, because the mainstream media is not a Jewish newspaper. Do Arab newspapers not report on Islamophobia?

        “It’s because the former have a vested interest in the story being true.”

        What vested interest is that, and how is it different from any other ethnic reporting? Are you asserting that if there is a bigoted statement about Irish people, the Irish News doesn’t have a “vested interest” in reporting it?

        “Why did they not investigate further?”

        Because they weren’t reporting on the story. They were copying another website’s story, which online sources do with AP copy all the time. I’m sure they would have gotten around to doing their own reporting at some point.

        “When I first saw this story reported by JTA, my immediate reaction was skepticism, despite the fact that I had no reason to believe that JTA was lying. Why didn’t these news sources express their own skepticism, the way good professional reporters should?”

        Because it was not their reportage. Isn’t it crystal clear? Yahoo News has their own reporters, as does the NY Times. Do you think they investigate every story they pull off the AP and Reuters wires?

        “But then again, Hophmi, I don’t expect you to digest any of what I’ve just written. You won’t acknowledge any of it. Your nature is to just change the subject and make up something else about the article to complain about.”

        No, I read your entire piece. It’s pure bullshit. You’re simply making a tempest out of the teacup because YOU have a vested interest in arguing that “Jewish media” make up or enjoy reporting stories on antisemitism. YOU have a vested interest in pretending that Jewish students face no trouble at all on campus. YOU have enough of a vested interest that you spent hours and hours investigating this story to prove what may amount to little more than a typo (albeit an unfortunate one) that proliferated because the story was picked up by a few outlets who copied the story rather than doing their own reporting on it.

      • Phan Nguyen on April 13, 2012, 10:30 am

        I have only myself to blame for feeding the trolls. Since I already started with robinseyes, I have ventured too far down the path of inconsequence to turn back. So here goes…

        >> “First, I said nothing about a “Jewish media conspiracy.” That implies that all these media sources worked together to concoct the story. I never suggested that.”

        > This is your headline: “Jewish press concoct threat against 200 Jewish students in Florida university.”

        Read what I wrote again: I never said “conspiracy” because that would imply that all these media sources worked together. Point out where I suggested that all these media sources worked together to concoct the story. I compared it more to a game of “telephone,” with no subsequent Jewish media outlets going back to the primary source.

        The story was concocted, but it was not a conspiracy. There’s a difference.

        > There’s no evidence anyone concocted anything here. The only evidence is that one source made a mistake, and other outlets picked up the story with the same mistake in it.

        Alleging that SJP targeted more than 200 Jewish students via a headline, a lede, and a photo caption, along with quoting people who say it’s a “hate crime,” and interviewing the ADL and Hillel for responses creates an entire impression that is hard to misconstrue. And then having other Jewish-focused media pick up the story, adding no new reporting but somehow adding extra errors into the story—after the original story has already been corrected—is inexcusable, particularly for a story that merited skepticism from the start.

        Yet you are somehow willing to excuse it all to a “typo,” as you later claim.

        > Perhaps Rayna misspoke. Who knows? My guess is that the paper didn’t make up the claim perniciously.

        Okay, so you’re challenging my report based on the following arguments:

        “Perhaps…”
        “Who knows?”
        “My guess…”

        I never claimed perniciousness, but it doesn’t change the facts. If the reporter heard anyone make that accusation, then the reporter can follow up on it, but they cannot automatically accept it as fact.

        >> “I do not claim that the story was concocted out of thin air. Rather, I attribute it to willful negligence—not an honest mistake. ”

        > Based on what?

        Um, based on everything I wrote above.

        >> “How could SJP have known where “more than 200 Jewish students” lived? The Jewish Journal didn’t bother to ask.”

        > Who knows? Again, my guess is that it started either as a misprint or as a reporter mishearing a source or as a source misspeaking.

        Again:
        “Who knows?”
        “My guess”

        Nothing you wrote above is a good excuse for any reporter: “Oops, we misheard someone saying he was going to commit a massacre, so we wrote an entire story around it. Turns out what he really said was that he was going to get his car washed. We regret the error.”

        A good reporter would explain exactly how they got the information that “more than 200 Jewish students” were targeted. Every subsequent news outlet would have to consider that before rehashing the story.

        > This is local media. It should not be a major surprise if someone is sloppy.

        “Hey, sure, I misreported. But this is local media. You surely can’t expect us to be professional, right? I only get paid enough to start rumors. Maybe when I’m in the big leagues (like Ynet), I’ll start reporting.”

        >> “Ynet conducted absolutely no investigation. ”

        > Yes, it’s par for the course in the online world where sources copy one another, which happens all the time.

        “Hey, we were only reprinting the story (and adding some extra false details of our own). Don’t blame us if our original source, The Onion, got it wrong. What? You want us to issue a correction now? Dude, we’re online!”

        >> “I have sent multiple emails to the Forward and to Ynet calling on them to correct their pieces. I have received no response.”

        > If you read the Forward regularly, you know their reporting in general is not sloppy. So my guess is that they will get around to it.

        Again with the “my guess.” JTA got around to it immediately. Other smaller news outlets that reprinted the JTA report have also issued corrections. The Forward hasn’t. A couple of weeks ago, I had a back-and-forth email conversation with a Forward editor who refused to correct a different piece that made a very serious claim of anti-Semitism that was absolutely false. The editor refused to issue a correction.

        >> “The fact that these news sources conducted no investigation before they rehashed a completely ridiculous story that was already retracted is not an honest mistake. It is willful negligence.”

        > Oh please. Do you ever read English-language Arab media sources? They reprint Holocaust denier op-eds all the time. Arab News is a prime culprit. I’m sure you don’t care as much about them.

        You’re changing the subject. Unless you are blaming this fake story on “English-language Arab media sources,” there is no point of bringing this up, regardless of whether your assertion is even true.

        > This is the nature of online news.

        “So we made up a story that lead to death threats. Give us a break. We’re online news! What, do you think we would report the truth? Pshaw! If you want the truth, read our print edition!”

        >> “Why did only the Jewish-focused news media report on this fake story and not the general mainstream media?”

        > Um, because the mainstream media is not a Jewish newspaper. Do Arab newspapers not report on Islamophobia?

        You’re getting really desperate now. You’re both changing the subject and justifying a fake report. Is it the obligation of a Jewish newspaper to reprint all fake stories about anti-Semitism?

        >> “It’s because the former have a vested interest in the story being true.”

        > What vested interest is that, and how is it different from any other ethnic reporting? Are you asserting that if there is a bigoted statement about Irish people, the Irish News doesn’t have a “vested interest” in reporting it?

        You’re losing it Hophmi. You’ve now abandoned the essential fact that the “bigoted statement” never happened. Misreporting is not an obligation of ethnic reporting.

        >> “Why did they not investigate further?”

        > Because they weren’t reporting on the story. They were copying another website’s story, which online sources do with AP copy all the time. I’m sure they would have gotten around to doing their own reporting at some point.

        In the meantime, just rewrite a fake story that had already been corrected, add a few more fake details, and publish it without care. If it turns out to be wrong, we can just blame it on another news outlet. Very professional.

        >> “When I first saw this story reported by JTA, my immediate reaction was skepticism, despite the fact that I had no reason to believe that JTA was lying. Why didn’t these news sources express their own skepticism, the way good professional reporters should?”

        > Because it was not their reportage. Isn’t it crystal clear? Yahoo News has their own reporters, as does the NY Times. Do you think they investigate every story they pull off the AP and Reuters wires?

        You’re full of contradictions now. They didn’t just “pull” the story “off the AP and Reuters wires.” They rewrote a story from another Jewish paper and included information that the originating paper had already retracted.

        Look at what you’ve written, Hophmi: You excuse local media for being naturally “sloppy.” Then you say it’s okay for bigger media to “pull” stories from these sloppy sources, when they actually rewrote the stories. Then you excuse everything for being “online news.” But then you brag that The Forward is professional. Then you justify it by saying it’s “ethnic reporting,” and so they’re obligated to print unsubstantiated (or in this case, retracted) rumors. Then you finally scream, “Look! Arabs!”

        > No, I read your entire piece. It’s pure bullshit. You’re simply making a tempest out of the teacup because YOU have a vested interest in arguing that “Jewish media” make up or enjoy reporting stories on antisemitism. YOU have a vested interest in pretending that Jewish students face no trouble at all on campus. YOU have enough of a vested interest that you spent hours and hours investigating this story to prove what may amount to little more than a typo (albeit an unfortunate one) that proliferated because the story was picked up by a few outlets who copied the story rather than doing their own reporting on it.

        You started out shooting yourself in the foot. You close by shooting yourself in the other foot.

      • robinseyes on April 13, 2012, 11:28 am

        I don’t have to prove anything, since I’m not the one who commited fraud & misrepresntation. However, being that there is currently an investigation taking place by FAU & possibly the police since a death threat has taken place, I wouldn’t want to compromise the nvestigation.

        I am an American. I was born in this country & no one has ever paid me a penny for making any statement writen or verbal.

        I also don’t appreciate anyone attempting to twist my words. Activists do not create documents that appear to have a legal or a legitimate stamp on them. Where is the discussions with this club, where are the educational events, where is the public debate…thats being claimed is an activists organization or group from what Anne states…According to a credible source, Oxford English Dictionary, Activism: the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change.

        By the way, I did attempt to find any retractions to the artical from Ynet News for example & the only notation I located was 200 students as opposed to 200 Jewish students.

        Destroy an argument…WOW! This isn’t an argument. I guess its easier to attack people verbally then to have a civilized discussion.

        I said nothing about the Hillel Director being an expert. I said to contact him directly which is a lot different from mistating my comment.

        Again, it clearly appears that no one here is willing to acknowldge that rules & police where broken & the means doesn’t justify the ends.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 13, 2012, 12:01 pm

        “I don’t have to prove anything, since I’m not the one who commited fraud & misrepresntation.”

        No one did. The flyers clearly state that they are not associated with the county and no actual eviction is happening. No fraud or misrepresentation at all. The real question is whether you, by stating that these activists did commit fraud and misrepresentation, may have committed libel or defamation…

      • Phan Nguyen on April 13, 2012, 12:14 pm

        > “I don’t have to prove anything, since I’m not the one who commited fraud & misrepresntation.”

        Don’t worry. You haven’t proven anything.

        > “However, being that there is currently an investigation taking place by FAU & possibly the police since a death threat has taken place, I wouldn’t want to compromise the nvestigation.”

        The FAU investigation has been completed. And contrary to your claim that insider FAU sources assured you that 200 Jewish students were indeed targeted, this is what it concluded:

        We can confirm that, although the postings failed to comply with University policy and should not have been distributed as they were, we have found no evidence that the postings were intended to target or intimidate individuals of any particular religion, national origin or faith. All available evidence indicates that the postings were distributed randomly, without regard to the identity of any person who may have received or viewed them. [Emphasis in the original]

        It should be noted that in this statement, the administration still does not state which policy was not complied with. Nor does it state who is responsible for the noncompliance.

        > “I am an American. I was born in this country & no one has ever paid me a penny for making any statement writen or verbal.”

        Good for you. Why waste a penny?

        > “By the way, I did attempt to find any retractions to the artical from Ynet News for example & the only notation I located was 200 students as opposed to 200 Jewish students.”

        I suggest that in your next “attempt,” try the internet. Follow the link above where it says “see Google cached version.” Then read the text in the screenshot that Ynet provided from the Jewish Journal. Then read the Jewish Journal’s correction. Then read everything else that I have written.

        > “I said nothing about the Hillel Director being an expert. I said to contact him directly which is a lot different from mistating my comment.”

        Then what is the point of contacting the Hillel director? He is not an FAU student. No flier was posted on his door. And I have already quoted him as saying, “It was not 200 Jewish students targeted,” which is the exact opposite of what you wrote. With all that in mind, what question would you want me to ask of him?

        Robinseyes—if that really is your name—in light of everything above, are you willing to concede that you were wrong when you insisted that “Two-hundred students were specifically targeted for being Jewish”? If so, then why did you lie when you claimed you had special insider information? And if not, then why should I bother humoring you any more? Why should anyone believe anything you say?

      • hophmi on April 13, 2012, 1:51 pm

        Look Phan, I’m sure you think you’re very clever, but you claimed that the “Jewish media” concocted the story through willful negligence. That’s a claim you still haven’t substantiated. Your current form of argument is to accuse people of “losing it” when they question your methods. No one’s losing it, Phan. Some people just do not take your bullshit at face value. And yes, I think it’s relevant to note that you focus on Jewish media, and not on any other ethnic media, which gives the impression that the Jewish media is somehow more prone to reporting or misreporting these kinds of stories than other ethnic media is, supporting your extreme position that rather than a mistake (albeit a bad mistake), it is willful negligence, or concocting.

        I read your report several times. You report that the Jewish Journal misreported a story that was originally on Mondoweiss and then in the Sun-Sentinel. Somehow, 200 students turned into 200 Jewish students. Your investigation does not reveal how this happened. The Jewish Journal apparently corrected the mistake the next day. Several days later, the JTA and Ynet picked up the story. Your investigation does not reveal who sent Ynet the story or who sent it to JTA. The Forward, which picks up stories of the JTA wire, also printed the story on its website as breaking news. The JTA corrected the story within a day. Ynet did not. The Forward did not. You’ve presented no case, at all, that this was anything other than the sort of par-for-the-course stuff that happens with online reporting, where one source misreports a story, and other websites pick it up without expending their own resources. Because you have a vested interest in the subject matter, you allege some kind of maliciousness, exemplified by your reporting of the email death threats SJP members received, the kind of thing that we all know is common in this conflict; I too have received death threats for things I’ve written on the net. There are extremists out there; it’s nothing new.

        You make much out of the fact that the only sources that picked up the story were Jewish media sources. Again, it’s not very surprising. The story of 200 Jewish students receiving eviction notices is obviously a story of Jewish interest. Sure, it would have been better to investigate the story first, and you know, we all applaud you for your investigation. But it shows little about Jewish media that these investigations did not take place before hand, other than that they are just as prone to other online sources to picking up misreportage from the net, and yes, sometimes rewriting it. To cast the Forward, a liberal newspaper that is often highly critical of Israel and the American Jewish establishment, as willfully negligent, is ridiculous to anyone who actually reads it on a regular basis.

        I’ll also venture one more guess for why the Forward in particular hasn’t responded to your correction request, which is that it’s Passover, and the staff is probably skeletal right now. I have seconded your request.

      • Phan Nguyen on April 13, 2012, 2:50 pm

        Hophmi: “Some people just do not take your bullshit at face value.”

        Darn!

        “…and you know, we all applaud you for your investigation.”

        Now you’re toying with my emotions.

      • hophmi on April 13, 2012, 3:16 pm

        Yes, Phan, you did a good investigation of a very small story. Your conclusions about it are mostly BS.

      • Mooser on April 13, 2012, 3:20 pm

        “I idnetified (sic) myself”

        That must be telling someone your internet ‘handle’. It’s a great malapropism, and I’m going to use it ‘idnetify’, indeed!

      • marc b. on April 13, 2012, 3:37 pm

        Because you have a vested interest in the subject matter, you allege some kind of . . . snort, snort, snort.

        but thankfully you’re here hopeee to play the objective foil to phan’s loaded agenda. how would mondoweiss get to the bottom of anything without your balanced, clear-headed perspective?

      • Mooser on April 13, 2012, 3:58 pm

        “Yes, Phan, you did a good investigation of a very small story. Your conclusions about it are mostly BS.”

        A conclusion you managed to come to after no investigation at all! Well, we can certainly see how is smarter here. Divine Zionist omniscience beats dogged investigation and close questioning, every time.

        BTW, Hophmi, whenever you comment on a Phan Nguyen article, you take on an even more condescending than usual tone. Why is that? It’s readily apparent, buddy. Of course, my sextant may not be accurate at differentiating such celestial heights as those which distinguish your condescensions from each other.

      • Rusty Pipes on April 16, 2012, 2:05 pm

        Since the members of SJP vetted their flyer with the Housing Office and not only received approval for its publication, but were accompanied by a representative of the Housing Office in its distribution, the administration will probably blame the Housing Office.

    • Woody Tanaka on April 12, 2012, 6:42 am

      Exactly right. If a little bit of political theater is so scary… what a bunch of wusses these students are. They should all be embarrassed by the fact that they’re squealing like little girls over nothing. Friggin’ cowards.

  2. russgreen on April 10, 2012, 3:53 pm

    Excellent reporting, Phan Nguyen. Excellent investigative journalism. This story is top-level work, worthy of any news outlet in the country, including the New York Times, etc. This is why I read Mondoweiss and support it financially. Thank you, Phan Nguyen. Keep up the good work.

    • Denis on April 11, 2012, 10:52 am

      Agree 100%. Phan put a lot of thought and effort into that piece. Thank you.

  3. optimax on April 10, 2012, 3:58 pm

    Having read the following article about an horrific hazing incedent, straight from the Sade playbook, at Alpha Epsilon Pi, BU, and then seeing a member of the same fraternity mentioned in this article being frightened by a mock evictions notice is synchronistic. I didn’t realize at first it is a jewish fraternity.

    http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/04/09/police-find-5-horrified-nearly-naked-bu-students-in-frat-house/

  4. Chu on April 10, 2012, 4:05 pm

    Scaring the community to be vigilant may be part of the tribal cohesiveness, but are these people really frightened by this posting on their door? Feigning the victim is ultimately scoring a win for Israel propaganda.
    This will serve as a useful example to avoid posting protest signs on doors of students, as it will be misconstrued to target certain individuals.

    It’s odd that Rayna Exelbierd, in the Jewish Journal, is considering it a hate crime. That’s a loose interpretation.
    Exelbierd said students are very concerned. “We’re taking it very seriously,” she said. “We’re considering it a hate crime. The flier promotes hate; it doesn’t promote peace. People were scared by it. People felt threatened by it.”
    http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-04-05/florida-jewish-journal/florida-jewish-journal-eviction_1_noor-fawzy-scott-brockman-campus-group

    • annie on April 10, 2012, 4:29 pm

      it was rayna’s comment that stood out for me too. she should try promoting it as a hate crime, then people can imagine the magnitude of what it’s like when it’s not a prank.

      go PHAN! another out of the ballpark report on mondoweiss

      • hophmi on April 12, 2012, 4:12 pm

        “go PHAN! another out of the ballpark report on mondoweiss”

        Do you believe it was a “Jewish media” conspiracy, Annie?

      • Cliff on April 13, 2012, 11:00 am

        Hophmi,

        Who is predominantly reporting on this story and who is perpetuating the meme of ‘200 Jewish students’ (a lie).

        It’s not a Jewish media conspiracy in the way you want to nail your political opponents as antisemites. But nevertheless. The players are almost all Jewish and the ones perpetuating the tag line are also almost all Jewish.

    • Fredblogs on April 10, 2012, 5:38 pm

      Silly statement. It’s not a crime. To be a hate crime it has to be a crime. It is a stupid prank that got out of hand, not a hate crime.

      • ToivoS on April 10, 2012, 7:27 pm

        It is a stupid prank that got out of hand,

        Not at all. It was an original act of political protest. It worked. It revealed yet again how Israel and their backers will lie and distort, it reveals the paranoia at the heart of Zionism and another over-playing of the victimization card. This is an act that had scant attention initially but now has become an international issue.

        The students now need to use this opportunity to educate the larger public about the true face of Zionism and their house demolition policies against Palestinians. I assume when they did this they were aware that opposing Israel will bring down the wrath of Zion. Too bad about the death threats but that just goes with the territory.

      • annie on April 10, 2012, 8:22 pm

        It was an original act of political protest. It worked. It revealed yet again how Israel and their backers will lie and distort, it reveals the paranoia at the heart of Zionism and another over-playing of the victimization card.

        it worked very well because the hasbrats revealed (in their exaggeration ) the sheer horror and fear of what it is like to even think you might be evicted. to even think you might targeted for eviction due to your ethnicity. something they are not but the gov they support actually does in real life. and that’s the least of it, they don’t even own those dorm rooms. it’s not like they were in fear of loosing all their life savings and having their home demolished.

        http://icahdusa.org/

        what lil hypocritical wimps those hasbrats are. this is real life for palestinians. every. single. day. inside and outside of israel. shame shame shame. yes, it really worked. great job sjp. great great job. the lie is going viral. let them eat their words.

      • Bumblebye on April 10, 2012, 9:15 pm

        Perhaps they should be advised to apply for assistance from what Fox affiliate called a “civil rights group” – the National Socialist Movement!!!
        http://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/10/headlines#9

    • Mooser on April 13, 2012, 3:24 pm

      Gee Ghu, you wouldn’t want to talk about Zionism, Jews, American Jews, and pretense, would you? Key to an awful lot, that pretense. Remember, pretense and hypocrisy are the rewards of sucess in America. We all have a God-given right to them.
      I personally would welcome a dicussion on Zionism and pretense.

  5. Empiricon on April 10, 2012, 4:47 pm

    Let me agree — just excellent reporting. Sad to say but today’s Judaism seems to be steeped in the tradition of Jews scaring Jews. A Jewish friend once told me in jest, “All Jewish holdidays are the same. We say ‘They tried to kill us…we survived…let’s eat.'” At the time, it struck me as humorous, and yes, I get the historical context, but I have since come to see the pernicious side of that mindset.

    • Denis on April 11, 2012, 10:44 am

      That’s funny. Did you see the piece Jon Stewart did on Passover vs. Easter? Very funny, too. Being an agnostic, it is really hard for comedians to target my religious beliefs.

      • Mooser on April 13, 2012, 3:25 pm

        “Being an agnostic, it is really hard for comedians to target my religious beliefs.”

        And if they did, how could you decide if it was funny or not?

  6. LeaNder on April 10, 2012, 4:57 pm

    Brilliant Phan, as always. The manipulative patters are always similar, also the accompanying hypersensitivity. The JP too, often doesn’t seem to want the facts, the story as it is, but prefers the colorful variants that better serve its larger intentions.

    Concerning your list, I hope you passed your article on to the listed institutions? No? What about the death threats; Death Threats – Florida:

    If someone has made a death threat to another person within the state of Florida, he has committed a very serious criminal offense. This criminal offense rises to the level of a second-degree felony according to Florida law. Anyone convicted of this crime can be imprisoned for up to 15 years and might have to pay a fine of $10,000 in addition to, or in lieu of, imprisonment.

    And I ask our lawyers isn’t this a case of libel too, as far as the media is concerned?

  7. Les on April 10, 2012, 5:06 pm

    How soon before NPR, the NY Times, and the Washington Post spread the lie?

  8. Rusty Pipes on April 10, 2012, 5:11 pm

    Ignorance is bliss. Hillel works closely with the Israel on Campus Coalition. Hillel chapters that affiliate with banned groups, like JVP, risk losing their funding. From the Sun Sentinel article:

    About 50 students attended a meeting on Wednesday at Hillel, FAU’s gathering place for Jewish students, to discuss a response to the fliers. Hillel has no contact with SJP because SJP supports Israeli-divestment campaigns and has chanted anti-Israel slogans at campus events, Hillel director Scott Brockman said.

    SJP is a national organization with 75 chapters that host Palestinian-awareness programs that many perceive as anti-Israel, such as boycott campaigns and annual Israeli Apartheid Weeks. The group opened its FAU chapter in the fall and has about 30 members.

    They press Palestinian issues such as the status of prisoners, water rights and civilian home destruction, chapter President Noor Fawzy said.

    “We want to raise awareness about the plight of the Palestinians,” Fawzy said. “The intent is to expose Israel’s illegal policies and give students a feel of what it’s like to live under occupation.”

    Fawzy said four students put up the fliers and remained in the dorms afterward to take questions. She said the group was thrilled with the response from other students.

    So what constitutes hate speech? A publicity stunt that has gone through proper university channels to raise awareness of facts? Misreporting/spreading lies about a student group in an inflammatory manner that contributes to the student group’s leader receiving explicit death threats?

    While this misrepresenting of facts may not be unusual for Ynet, whose stories can read like a press release from the Foreign Ministry, the story’s being picked up unquestioned by the Forward displays a lack of professionalism in what is widely considered a progressive publication.

  9. Phan Nguyen on April 10, 2012, 5:11 pm

    Thanks for the comments, everyone.

    justicewillprevail, thanks for pointing out that the hysteria surrounding this story (imaginary Jewish students targeted for mock eviction notices—can it get any more virtual?) underscores the severity of the actual home demolitions that Palestinians are subjected to.

    The JTA has now published a correction. I encourage folks to contact Ynet to demand a correction to their own article: [email protected] and [email protected]

    And also demand that the Florida Jewish Journal explicitly note that their article has been updated and corrected: [email protected]

    • hophmi on April 12, 2012, 4:16 pm

      “And also demand that the Florida Jewish Journal explicitly note that their article has been updated and corrected: [email protected]

      It already has. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/florida-jewish-journal/sfe-sfp-correction,0,1976934.story

      • Phan Nguyen on April 12, 2012, 5:51 pm

        You’re late, Hophmi. I already noted this in the April 11 update at the top. Don’t worry. I know you don’t read my articles. You just like to criticize them. They issued a second retraction as well, and they have promised to note the correction in their next print edition. All of this is no thanks to enablers like you.

        Do me a favor and email Ynet to demand that they correct their story.

  10. seafoid on April 10, 2012, 5:27 pm

    “Jew-counting is incredibly intimidating these days, as it has been for centuries.”

    http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/People/SOCIETY.htm
    Israel is home to a widely diverse population from many ethnic, religious, cultural, and social backgrounds. A new society with ancient roots, it is still coalescing and evolving today. Of its 7.8 million people, 75.5 percent are Jews

    • philweiss on April 10, 2012, 5:36 pm

      Thanks Seafoid. Appreciated.

      • hophmi on April 12, 2012, 4:22 pm

        There is little question that the Jewish Journal made an error, and that a few other outlets picked it up. That is pretty much the end of accurate part of Phan Nguyen’s story. The rest is a concoction of a nonsense about a Jewish media conspiracy to misreport the story, as if the story was misreported on purpose and the flames were fanned on purpose. There’s no evidence they were.

        The the JTA, Ynet, and the Forward picked up the story with the error is not surprising; with the error, it’s clearly a story of interest to Jewish audiences.

        Reported correctly, it’s a story of the kind of nonsense that passes for activism on college campuses and really should scare no one, except the vast majority of people who find activists dumb enough to stick unwanted fliers on their dorm room doors annoying.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 12, 2012, 5:14 pm

        “There is little question that the Jewish Journal made an error, and that a few other outlets picked it up.”

        How do you know it was an error and not a purposeful lie to gin up some fake outrage among its readers and it changed the story only when it got caught?? I’m guessing you work on the bigoted assumption that anything bad done by a Jewish organization (so long as it’s not anti-Zionist!!!) which is bad or wrong can only be an innocent mistake…

      • hophmi on April 13, 2012, 8:58 am

        Uh, no, Woody. I think it’s way more accurate to say that you work under the bigoted assumption that any mistake made by a Jewish newspaper (the Jewish Journal is not a Jewish organization) is a conspiracy to mislead.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 13, 2012, 12:26 pm

        “I think it’s way more accurate to say that you work under the bigoted assumption that any mistake made by a Jewish newspaper (the Jewish Journal is not a Jewish organization) is a conspiracy to mislead.”

        LMAO. If that is the case, hoppy, then surely you can point to the post where I actually stated that it was a “conspiracy to mislead.” (Spoiler alert: I never did.)

        You, on the other hand, specifcally said that there was “no question” that it was a mistake, that “[n]o one concocted anything here,” and that all that happened was that “the Jewish Journal misunderstood its source.”

        Mind you, you didn’t say that this is what you think or this is what you hope was the case. No. You stated as fact and proceeded to attack Phan on that basis.

        So really, hoppy, only two things are logically possible. 1) In the few hours between the time Phan posted the story and you began shooting your mouth off, you traveled to Florida, did a complete investigation of the goings-on in this newsroom and in the mind of the reporters involved and were able to establish beyond doubt that this was an innocent error.

        or

        2) You work on the bigoted assumption that anything bad done by a Jewish organization (so long as it’s not anti-Zionist!!!) which is bad or wrong can only be an innocent mistake…

        So which is it?

      • hophmi on April 13, 2012, 1:58 pm

        ” then surely you can point to the post where I actually stated that it was a “conspiracy to mislead.” (Spoiler alert: I never did.)”

        You wrote that “How do you know it was an error and not a purposeful lie to gin up some fake outrage among its readers and it changed the story only when it got caught?? ”

        Are you asserting that it was a purposeful lie by several Jewish newspapers?

        “You, on the other hand, specifcally said that there was “no question” that it was a mistake”

        I’m not making the assertion. That’s by far the most logical explanation. It’s only not the most logical explanation if your argument is that Jewish newspapers tell purposeful lies.

        ” 1) In the few hours between the time Phan posted the story and you began shooting your mouth off, you traveled to Florida, did a complete investigation of the goings-on in this newsroom and in the mind of the reporters involved and were able to establish beyond doubt that this was an innocent error.”

        I didn’t do that investigation. The problem is, Phan didn’t either. His conclusions are speculative, and he’s the one who made the original claim that Jewish media “concocted” the story.

        “2) You work on the bigoted assumption that anything bad done by a Jewish organization (so long as it’s not anti-Zionist!!!) which is bad or wrong can only be an innocent mistake…”

        Never said that.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 16, 2012, 9:56 am

        “You wrote that ‘How do you know it was an error and not a purposeful lie to gin up some fake outrage among its readers and it changed the story only when it got caught??’

        “Are you asserting that it was a purposeful lie by several Jewish newspapers?”

        No, by my clever use of the word “or” and the deployment of the question mark, I craftily suggest that there are at least two options. You chose one for no reason other than your bigotry.

        “I’m not making the assertion.”

        Yes you did, liar.

        “. That’s by far the most logical explanation.”

        Then say, “the most logical explanation is…” You didn’t do that. You said there was “no question” that it was a mistake, that “[n]o one concocted anything here,” and that all that happened was that “the Jewish Journal misunderstood its source.” And you did that with no reason to believe the true of your assertions other than because that would exonerate this presumably Jewish writer of this Jewish news outlet.

        “I didn’t do that investigation. ”

        No kidding.

        “The problem is, Phan didn’t either.”

        Yes, he did. He did quote a good investigation of this story.

        “His conclusions are speculative, and he’s the one who made the original claim that Jewish media ‘concocted’ the story.”

        Given the facts of the matter, and the fact that the falsehood spread around the world, there was either gross negligence of the highest kind (which should have gotten many people fired) or someone concocted the story.

        “Never said that.”

        You don’t need to say it; you act it. You’re as predictable as the sun rising in the east. If it benefits Jews or Israel, you’re for it, regardless of the merits. If it makes a Jew, Jews as a whole or Israel look bad, you’re initial assertion is to assert there is some innocent explanation.

      • hophmi on April 16, 2012, 10:18 am

        “You’re as predictable as the sun rising in the east. If it benefits Jews or Israel, you’re for it, regardless of the merits. If it makes a Jew, Jews as a whole or Israel look bad, you’re initial assertion is to assert there is some innocent explanation.”

        When you assert that Jewish newspaper “concocted” a story, it is YOUR job to substantiate the claim. Otherwise, you’re nothing but a conspiracy theorist. No one substantiated anything here other than that one source published a story with a mistake in it, and other outlets picked it up with the same mistake. So what we’ve established is sloppiness, nothing new.

        “Yes, he did”

        No, he didn’t. He did not establish anything other than that a mistake was made.

        “Given the facts of the matter, and the fact that the falsehood spread around the world, there was either gross negligence of the highest kind (which should have gotten many people fired) or someone concocted the story. ”

        What was it, four sources that reported the story? That’s not exactly the equivalent of spreading around the world. And no, quoting a story from another website that is usually reputable, like the Jewish Journal, without doing one’s own investigation is not going to get many people fired. It’s par for the course on the net. And no, it does not remotely prove that the story was concocted.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 16, 2012, 11:14 am

        “When you assert that Jewish newspaper ‘concocted’ a story, it is YOUR job to substantiate the claim.”

        And Phan did so, showing exactly where the change went from the honest that 200 students were distributed leaflets to the lie that 200 Jews were targeted: the Florida Jewish Journal, and how that lie spread, unchecked, around the world.

        “No one substantiated anything here other than that one source published a story with a mistake in it…” But, again, how do we know it was a mistake and not a deliberate provocation on the part of these critics of Israeli’s crimes with the taint of antisemitism? (It’s not like that isn’t a common occurrance among Zionists.) YOU assume it is a mistake. What evidence do you have that it was only a mistake? None. You just assume so, because it would exonerate this presumably Jewish writer of this Jewish news outlet.

        “He did not establish anything other than that a mistake was made. So what we’ve established is sloppiness, nothing new.”

        False. He established exactly when and where the change was made. And there has been no evidence establishing it was a mistake, so your assertion that it was has been unproved. If that is your assertion, then the burden is on you to prove it. Absent that, it is an unresolved question.

        ‘What was it, four sources that reported the story? That’s not exactly the equivalent of spreading around the world. ”

        If it is around the world, then it is around the world.

        “And no, quoting a story from another website that is usually reputable, like the Jewish Journal, without doing one’s own investigation is not going to get many people fired.”

        Perhaps it should. Because it wasn’t as if Ynet simply ran the Jewish Journal story, then it could, perhaps, be guilty of negligence for running a false story. But it didn’t. It rewrote it. It could have contacted the activists to verify the story. It didn’t and is guilty of spreading lies.

        “And no, it does not remotely prove that the story was concocted.”

        Yes, it does. There was no targeting of Jewish students. David A. Schwartz of the Jewish Journal concocted that falsehood. He may have done so negligently and not intentionally (a question that is still open), but there can be no denying that he did, in fact, concoct the falsehood in his story, complete with an alarmist headline, direct allegations and photographs of some of the wusses who were supposedly “scared.”

      • Woody Tanaka on April 16, 2012, 12:05 pm

        “not a deliberate provocation on the part of these critics of Israeli’s crimes with the taint of antisemitism? ”

        Should have read, “not a deliberate provocation to paint these critics of Israeli’s crimes with the taint of antisemitism?”

      • hophmi on April 16, 2012, 1:47 pm

        “And Phan did so, showing exactly where the change went from the honest that 200 students were distributed leaflets to the lie that 200 Jews were targeted: the Florida Jewish Journal, and how that lie spread, unchecked, around the world.”

        Yes, the Florida Jewish Journal made a mistake, and other sources picked up the mistake. They issued a correction when they were confronted with the mistake. And again, what you term “around the world” is four sources.

        “False. He established exactly when and where the change was made.”

        Yes, in the . . . Jewish Journal. That proves nothing more than that a mistake was made. We don’t know how; could have been an editor’s mistake, could have been a mistake on the part of the person interviewed for the article. What we do know is that they corrected it.

        “If it is around the world, then it is around the world.”

        If the JTA, Forward blog, Ynet, and Times of Israel are “around the world” to you, then I guess you really believe in the power of those sources.

        “Perhaps it should. Because it wasn’t as if Ynet simply ran the Jewish Journal story, then it could, perhaps, be guilty of negligence for running a false story. But it didn’t. It rewrote it. It could have contacted the activists to verify the story. It didn’t and is guilty of spreading lies. ”

        Yes, it rewrote the story. Or it simply reprinted someone’s email submission. Who knows? Phan didn’t seem interested in finding out; he seemed interested in accusing Jewish media of “concocting” the story.

        “Yes, it does.”

        No, it doesn’t. It proves that a mistake was made and that the mistake was unfortunately compounded.

        “There was no targeting of Jewish students.”

        Yes, thus the mistake.

        “David A. Schwartz of the Jewish Journal concocted that falsehood. ”

        Again, no proof of that. Do you have proof that David Schwartz purposely made up the story?

        “He may have done so negligently and not intentionally (a question that is still open), but there can be no denying that he did, in fact, concoct the falsehood in his story,”

        No, concoct means to fabricate. That implies willfulness. This is a mistake, not a concoction.

        “complete with an alarmist headline, direct allegations and photographs of some of the wusses who were supposedly “scared.””

        Yes, Woody, Jewish students who see this stuff on campus do sometimes get scared, just as, apparently, non-Jewish students do, when they see eviction notices on their doors. That’s why, usually, putting political activist stuff on someone’s dorm room door without asking them first is not OK. It’s really just like pasting a sign on someone’s house without their permission.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 16, 2012, 3:28 pm

        “Yes, the Florida Jewish Journal made a mistake, and other sources picked up the mistake.”

        You repeating “mistake” over and over again does not establish that this was a mistake, rather than a deliberate act of provocation.

        “And again, what you term ‘around the world’ is four sources.”

        It need only be one, if it is actually on the other side of the world.

        “That proves nothing more than that a mistake was made. We don’t know how; could have been an editor’s mistake, could have been a mistake on the part of the person interviewed for the article.”

        You can’t even conceive that it wasn’t a mistake. Pathetic. How do you know it wasn’t someone purposefully trying to spread disinformation about this group? Or yet again falsely paint a critic of Israel as being “antisemitic”? Or this reporter or an editor trying to gin up a story out of nothing? You can’t. But you don’t even consider that it could be anything but a mistake because that would make those people look bad, so you can’t even contemplate the possibility, so deep is your prejudice.

        “If the JTA, Forward blog, Ynet, and Times of Israel are ‘around the world’ to you, then I guess you really believe in the power of those sources. “

        If you think that these are the only places that the Jewish Journal’s lies appeared, you really don’t know how to use Google.

        “Yes, it rewrote the story. Or it simply reprinted someone’s email submission. Who knows? Phan didn’t seem interested in finding out; he seemed interested in accusing Jewish media of “concocting” the story.”

        Because it concocted the story. It took one part anti-Israel activism, one part faux hysteria, libeling those activists with “antisemitism” and ran the story without even doing the minimum necessary to see that it got the basic facts right.

        Because “students pass out flyers” is not a story. Absent the lie that Jewish students were targeted, there is literally no story here whatsoever. And isn’t it peculiar that the one fact which turns this nothing into a story is the EXACT FACT that was false.

        “It proves that a mistake was made and that the mistake was unfortunately compounded.”

        Again, you assume it was a mistake solely because to do otherwise would force you to consider that a Jewish person, Jewish organization or Jewish media did something wrong and that they libeled these activists. And you don’t have the character to do that.

        “Do you have proof that David Schwartz purposely made up the story?”

        I said repeatedly, I don’t know if it was made up, if it was a mistake, or if it was something else. YOU are the one who stated that there was “no question” that it was a mistake, that “[n]o one concocted anything here,” and that all that happened was that “the Jewish Journal misunderstood its source.” It is you who has the burden of proving that.

        “No, concoct means to fabricate. That implies willfulness.”

        No it doesn’t. Its primary meaning is simply to combine ingredients. That would work here, as the Jewish Journal story by Schwartz combined some truth and some falsehoods and concocted a story that was, in the main, a lie.

        But even its secondary meaning means to create or devise. And here, the notion that these flyers targeted Jewish students was created from whole cloth specifically for this story.

        But even accepting your need for “willfulness” — given the fact that without this supposed targeting of Jewish students, there is literally no story here, any journalist worth his salt and any news outlet worth anything would have double and triple checked this supposed fact and had it nailed before even drafting the story. Because, otherwise, there is nothing.

        And Schwartz and the Jewish Journal apparently didn’t even do that absolute minimum, or else they would have quickly learned the truth. So running the story with that lie in it is willful disregard for the truth and would be functionally no different than an intentional act.

        “Yes, Woody, Jewish students who see this stuff on campus do sometimes get scared, just as, apparently, non-Jewish students do, when they see eviction notices on their doors.”

        Then they should all stop being wusses. Because it takes all of 2 seconds to see that it is not an eviction notice.

        “That’s why, usually, putting political activist stuff on someone’s dorm room door without asking them first is not OK.”

        Thankfully the First Amendment doesn’t agree with you.

        “It’s really just like pasting a sign on someone’s house without their permission.”

        No, it’s more like tucking a political flyer into someone’s door or in their mailbox, which happens every day during every election cycle in every town in every state in the USA. It’s free speech. Maybe these students weren’t indoctrinated with the cult of being a victim, they wouldn’t be such wusses.

      • hophmi on April 16, 2012, 3:50 pm

        “You repeating “mistake” over and over again does not establish that this was a mistake, rather than a deliberate act of provocation.”

        LOL. It was a mistake.

        “You can’t even conceive that it wasn’t a mistake.”

        You can’t conceive that it was anything but a conspiracy. My explanation is way more likely than yours.

        “How do you know it wasn’t someone purposefully trying to spread disinformation about this group? Or yet again falsely paint a critic of Israel as being “antisemitic”? Or this reporter or an editor trying to gin up a story out of nothing? You can’t.”

        How do I know you don’t beat your wife?

        “But you don’t even consider that it could be anything but a mistake because that would make those people look bad, so you can’t even contemplate the possibility, so deep is your prejudice.”

        Sorry, buddy, but you’re the one with the prejudice. Most people would look at this situation and see a mistake, not a conspiracy.

        “If you think that these are the only places that the Jewish Journal’s lies appeared, you really don’t know how to use Google.”

        That’s the lion’s share of them. What other media sources picked up the incorrect version of the story? Those are the ones Phan listed.

        “Because it concocted the story. It took one part anti-Israel activism, one part faux hysteria, libeling those activists with “antisemitism” and ran the story without even doing the minimum necessary to see that it got the basic facts right.”

        We’ve established that it was sloppy.
        “I said repeatedly, I don’t know if it was made up, if it was a mistake, or if it was something else. YOU are the one who stated that there was “no question” that it was a mistake, that “[n]o one concocted anything here,””

        That’s the best explanation. I’ve seen no proof it was anything but that, and in this case, the burden is on Phan to prove that it was something other than the most obvious thing.

        “any journalist worth his salt and any news outlet worth anything would have double and triple checked this supposed fact and had it nailed before even drafting the story. Because, otherwise, there is nothing. ”

        I don’t know about that. The story has been picked up in correct form by a couple of outlets. Putting eviction notices on people’s door is the kind of thing that sometimes gets into the press.

        “And Schwartz and the Jewish Journal apparently didn’t even do that absolute minimum”

        Again, we’ve established sloppiness. Sloppiness leads to mistakes. But we’ve established nothing more than that, and thus nothing special, since sloppiness is fairly common.

        “No, it’s more like tucking a political flyer into someone’s door or in their mailbox,”

        No, it’s more like pasting the notice on someone’s door. When I was in college, if I put something on my door, it was a representation of me. Someone who pastes something on my door makes me an unwilling advertiser of their cause. That’s not cool, and you know it.

        “It’s free speech.”

        It is not free speech. You don’t have the right to deface someone else’s property. Slipping something under a door is not the same as pasting it on their door.

        “Maybe these students weren’t indoctrinated with the cult of being a victim, they wouldn’t be such wusses.”

        Non-Jewish students who complained are indoctrinated too?

      • Woody Tanaka on April 16, 2012, 5:00 pm

        “LOL. It was a mistake.”

        And, again, you repeating “mistake” over and over again does not establish that this was a mistake

        “You can’t conceive that it was anything but a conspiracy.”

        Are you stupid or can you just not read well? Because I’ve stated on a number of occasions that it may be an accident or it may be not an accident, and the question is still an open one. That, by definition, contemplates that it could be something other than a conspiracy.

        “My explanation is way more likely than yours.”

        So you think. Given the history of the pro-Israel community when it comes to libeling and slandering those who oppose the crimes of Israel as being antisemites, I disagree. But at least I’m open to all the possibilities.

        “How do I know you don’t beat your wife?”

        Really? You actually don’t know the difference between a leading question and alternative possibilities??

        “Sorry, buddy, but you’re the one with the prejudice.”

        Nope. Not even close.

        “Most people would look at this situation and see a mistake, not a conspiracy.”

        Again, mistake is one possibility. Gross negligence is another. Purposeful lie is a third. You, however, are wedded to the “innocent explanation” solely because it appeals to your bias. That is the issue.

        “That’s the lion’s share of them.”

        No, it isn’t.

        “ What other media sources picked up the incorrect version of the story?”

        Do your own research.

        “We’ve established that it was sloppy.”

        “Sloppy” is one explanation. Another is a purposeful lie. There are number of other possibilities. If you can prove that it was sloppiness and can exclude all other possibilities, do so. If you can’t, then grow a pair, be a man, and admit that you are unthinkingly bigoted.

        “That’s the best explanation.”

        Not really. An equally good explanation is that one of the pro-Israel people involved simply wished to believe the worst about this group and either purposefully or grossly negligently drafted a victimization fantasy into the story to accomplish the goal of demonizing this activist group.

        And don’t forget Greg Tepper. He asserted that this happened at Passover, when Passover occurred a week later. Hmmm, that falsehood sure would go a long way to show that this was purposefully concocted to paint this activist group as antisemetic. Interesting, isn’t it, that these two falsehoods are injected into this story, both with the same apparent goal of generating a false impression about the activists – the very facts that made the story – and no one even bothered to see if they were true.

        “I’ve seen no proof it was anything but that”

        I think the fact that because the “Jews were targeted” angle is the only thing that would make this non-story into a story, and the fact that they got it 100% wrong, is strong circumstantial evidence to the contrary.

        “and in this case, the burden is on Phan to prove that it was something other than the most obvious thing.”

        Which he did.

        “Putting eviction notices on people’s door is the kind of thing that sometimes gets into the press.”

        Then please post, say, three examples of incidents where flyers that had nothing to do with Israel were posted on a campus, that made the news.

        “Again, we’ve established sloppiness.”

        Sloppiness is misspelling someone’s name. When the entirety of the story depends on a fact and you get that fact 100% wrong, that’s more than sloppy.

        “No, it’s more like pasting the notice on someone’s door.”

        No it isn’t. Nothing was “pasted” It’s a flyer taped to a dorm door, not a billboard.

        “Someone who pastes something on my door makes me an unwilling advertiser of their cause. That’s not cool, and you know it.”

        I’m fine with it. I was fine with it when I was in college and I’m fine with it now. Taping flyers to dorm door was a normal part of college. But then again, I was not a wuss threatened by the fact that someone might have different ideas than me.

        “You don’t have the right to deface someone else’s property.”

        That is true. But it wasn’t the student’s property; it was the college’s property. And the activists got the approval of the college to do it. Says so right in the article. (Let me guess, you’ll find some reason not to believe them…)

        “Non-Jewish students who complained are indoctrinated too?”

        Indoctrinated into being wusses? Yes.

    • Rusty Pipes on April 10, 2012, 5:43 pm

      Thanks, seafoid. “Jew-counting” here has made this site unlinkable at the Garish Orange Site (and has made the GOS less interesting to visit as a consequence). “Jew-counting” in service of Brand Israel is golden.

    • straightline on April 10, 2012, 5:52 pm

      Nice one, seafoid!

  11. DICKERSON3870 on April 10, 2012, 5:50 pm

    RE: “the eviction fliers at FAU were seen by some students as disrespectful and intimidating.” ~ ADL

    MY COMMENT: Virtually any criticism of Israel will be seen by some students as “disrespectful and intimidating”. As Jackie Klein (a Jewish education intern with Hillel and president of the Jewish Student Union at FAU) put it: “I’m a proud Israel supporter. Because of my involvement on campus, I automatically support Israel. I’m constantly advocating Israel, no matter what.

    P.S. FROM SOURCEWATCH.ORG (Hasbara):

    (excerpts) Hasbara refers to the propaganda efforts to improve Israel’s image abroad, to justify its actions, and defend it in world opinion…
    Hasbara Campus Manual
    A Hasbara manual for students to use on US univesity campuses is now available online[2]. A summary of the techniques is provided…
    Propaganda is used by those who want to communicate in ways that engage the emotions and downplay rationality, in an attempt to promote a certain message.
    The manual goes on to describe seven propaganda techniques. —

    Name calling: through the careful use of words, then name calling technique links a person or an idea to a negative symbol.
    • Glittering generality: Simply put, glittering generality is name calling in reverse. Instead of trying to attach negative meanings to ideas or people, glittering generalities use positive phrases, which the audience are attached to, in order to lend positive image to things. Words such as “freedom”, “civilization”,…
    • Transfer: Transfer involves taking some of the prestige and authority of one concept and applying it to another. For example, a speaker might decide to speak in front of a United Nations flag, in an attempt to gain legitimacy for himself or his idea.
    • Testimonial: Testimonial means enlisting the support of somebody admired or famous to endorse and ideal or campaign.
    • Plain folks: The plain folks technique attempts to convince the listener that the speaker is a ‘regular guy’, who is trust-worthy because the are like ‘you or me’.
    • Fear: Stressing that ignoring the message will likely lead to war, terrorism[3]
    • Bandwagon: Suggest that the stated position is mainstream and use polls to suggest this. [4] . . .

    SOURCE – http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hasbara
    * “HASBARA HANDBOOK: Promoting Israel on Campus” (March 2002) , by the World Union of Jewish Students – http://www.scribd.com/doc/53789685/Hasbara-Handbook-Promoting-Israel-on-Campus

  12. DICKERSON3870 on April 10, 2012, 6:04 pm

    RE: “We’re considering it a hate crime. The flier promotes hate; it doesn’t promote peace.” ~ Jackie Klein, a Jewish education intern with Hillel and president of the Jewish Student Union at FAU

    AND RE:
    “…anti-Israel campus group…
    …shock tactics…
    … anti-Israel activity on campus…
    …consistently demonized Israel…
    …describing its policies…as racist and apartheid-like…
    …compared Israelis to Nazis…
    …criticize the ‘actions of the Israeli state’…
    …American Muslims for Palestine…a virulently anti-Israel organization…” ~ ADL

    FROM THE “Hasbara Handbook”, pages 22-23:

    • Name Calling
    Through the careful choice of words, the name calling technique links a person or an idea to a negative symbol. Creating negative connotations by name calling is done to try and get the audience to reject a person or idea on the basis of negative associations, without allowing a real examination of that person or idea. The most obvious example is name calling — “they are a neo-Nazi group” tends to sound pretty negative to most people. More subtly, name calling works by selecting words with subtle negative meanings for some listeners. For example, describing demonstrators as “youths” creates a different impression from calling them “children”.
    For the Israel activist, it is important to be aware of the subtly different meanings that well chosen words give. Call “demonstrations” “riots”, many Palestinian political organizations “terror organizations”, and so on. . .
    . . . Name calling is hard to counter.
    Don’t allow opponents the opportunity to engage in point scoring. Whenever “name calling” is used, think about referring to the same thing (e.g. Gilo), but with a more favorable description (e.g. “suburb”). Consider calling settlements “communities” or “villages”. Use the same names back; if somebody talks about Sharon’s “war crimes”, talk about Arafat’s war crimes and involvement in terror. . .

    SOURCE: “HASBARA HANDBOOK: Promoting Israel on Campus” (March 2002) , published by the World Union of Jewish Students – http://www.scribd.com/doc/53789685/Hasbara-Handbook-Promoting-Israel-on-Campus

  13. sjabulhawa on April 10, 2012, 8:23 pm

    QUOTE: “the eviction fliers at FAU were seen by some students as disrespectful and intimidating.” – ADL

    COUNTER QUOTE: “The eviction massacres committed by Israel were seen by their Palestinians victims as ineffable, utter terror” – Palestinian

  14. Mayhem on April 10, 2012, 10:44 pm

    Phan is an ardent polemicist and writes with the pen of the blind-sided, evasive propagandist.

    To state “the only news outlets that have propagated this myth” are the Jewish media is only echoing the fact that the general news media are fundamentally not interested in stories about Jews being intimidated. These on- going stories just aren’t new or sexy enough.  The media as well as college campuses are very willing to turn a blind-eye towards anti-semitism.  Put it in the too hard basket. It is just those damn Jews again.

    The bullying of Jewish and Zionist students has become commonplace; authorities need to understand that acquiescing to the creation of a hostile environment for Jews is not only immoral; it is a potential violation of federal law and therefore a criminal act.

    The fundamental issue is that American college campuses have become a hotbed of anti-Zionist propaganda that can sometime blur the line between inflammatory political arguments and outright Jew-hatred.

    Phan says nothing about the content of the leaflets which inculcate the idea that Israel is a brutal oppressor that deliberately murdered an American supporter of the Palestinians. These charges are a malicious distortion of the facts and are part of a hateful campaign whose purpose is to delegitimize Israel.  Israel’s critics have a right to express their opinions, but by pasting fake evictions on the doors of a dorm with a considerable Jewish population, the action raises questions about whether the intent was to intimidate Jews as well as to demonize the Jewish state.

    The actions that Phan suggests for the FAU are wrong.  The FAU administration certainly needs to ensure the safety of all of its students, but most importantly it needs to acknowledge a mistake in its judgement and to face up to its legal and moral responsibilities.

    • Sumud on April 11, 2012, 3:28 am

      The bullying of Jewish and Zionist students has become commonplace; authorities need to understand that acquiescing to the creation of a hostile environment for Jews is not only immoral; it is a potential violation of federal law and therefore a criminal act.

      What bullying? No jewish students were targeted. This action merely sought to inform other students about the reality of Israel and it’s criminal activities in the occupied Palestinian territories.

      Phan says nothing about the content of the leaflets which inculcate the idea that Israel is a brutal oppressor that deliberately murdered an American supporter of the Palestinians.

      But Israel *is* a brutal oppressor and Rachel Corrie *was* deliberately murdered. So your point is…?

      Israel’s critics have a right to express their opinions, but by pasting fake evictions on the doors of a dorm with a considerable Jewish population, the action raises questions about whether the intent was to intimidate Jews as well as to demonize the Jewish state.

      Oh please, spare us, and yourself.

      I’ll save my sympathy for the 100,000 or more Palestinian men, women and children whose houses were actually demolished by the IDF. If some zionist students find a leaflet containing that information ‘intimidating’ they should probably seek psychological help.

      Really …you expect us to be more concerned about these people than the *actual* victims of home demolitions?! Where is your humanity Mayhem?

      This just reinforces something I have said many times: if you want to bring about change for Palestine it’s extremely simple: just tell the truth, again, and again and again. No need to exaggerate, no need to fabricate, no need to embellish.

      Zionism is ugly enough in the real world that’s all you need to do.

      • eljay on April 11, 2012, 10:58 am

        >> … Israel is a brutal oppressor …

        You’re absolutely right.

      • Mayhem on April 11, 2012, 10:15 pm

        @sumud: such a well worn tactic. While the discussing some topic is going on switch to the anti-Israel propaganda line ( the cure-all when one can’t be bothered making a proper considered response).

      • annie on April 11, 2012, 10:50 pm

        mayhem, the well worn tactic is exactly what you did, switching to the Israel propaganda line because you’re incapable of responding to phan’s article. what ‘ruling’ btw. http://mondoweiss.net/2012/04/jewish-press-concoct-threat-against-200-jewish-students-in-florida-university.html/comment-page-1#comment-441911

        talk about a whine. you’re so wanting to be the victim in all of this aren’t you?

      • Sumud on April 12, 2012, 4:17 am

        ( the cure-all when one can’t be bothered making a proper considered response).

        Dear Mayhem,

        I will summarise your response as I read it. You have read a well-researched piece by Phan about fabricated news by a pro-zionist news organisation.You respond somewhat hysterically:

        ‘very willing to turn a blind-eye towards anti-semitism’
        ‘It is just those damn Jews again.’
        ‘The bullying of Jewish and Zionist students’
        ‘the creation of a hostile environment for Jews’
        ‘potential violation of federal law and therefore a criminal act.’
        ‘hotbed of anti-Zionist propaganda’
        ‘inflammatory political arguments and outright Jew-hatred.’
        ‘malicious distortion of the facts and are part of a hateful campaign ‘

        Umm, er, did you actually read Phan’s article? The threat against 200 jewish students was FABRICATED. Your response is off-the-scale ridiculous and unrelated to actual events in Florida.

        Go back to the top of the page and read the article again.

        SJP Florida conducted a smart campaign that targeted no students in particular. ‘anti-semitism’, ‘damn jews’, ‘bullying’, ‘hostile, ‘criminal’, ‘hatred’, ‘hateful’; all those scary keywords – they’re in your mind only.

        Again, go back to the top of the page and read the article again.

        If hysteria is your response to rational reasoned truth telling about Israel, you really aren’t going to like it here.

      • Mooser on April 13, 2012, 3:29 pm

        “@sumud: such a well worn tactic.”

        Telling the truth? Yes Hophmi, I can see how you would find that tiresome.

    • Chu on April 11, 2012, 10:06 am

      The bullying of Jewish and Zionist students has become commonplace; The fundamental issue is that American college campuses have become a hotbed of anti-Zionist propaganda that can sometime blur the line between inflammatory political arguments and outright Jew-hatred.

      Mayhem,

      Do you have any proof to reinforce these statements? I was unaware that bullying of Jewish students in America was commonplace and that college campuses have become a hotbed of anti-Zionist propaganda. Any links would be helpful. Thanks.

      • Mayhem on April 11, 2012, 7:32 pm

        @chu: For your reality check read http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/04/22/reality-of-campus-antisemitism/ for details and this article from an Australian newspaper http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/an-unholy-alliance/2006/09/03/1157222010013.html that shows this is a worldwide phenomenon.

      • annie on April 11, 2012, 8:46 pm

        mayhem, what ‘ruling’ are they referencing?

      • Mayhem on April 12, 2012, 9:46 am

        This article at http://www.brandeiscenter.com/images/uploads/articleuploads/civil_rights01.pdf refers to “a new federal bullying policy issued by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) on October 26, 2010”.
        I have not resorted to any propaganda – I am basically just informing on how this incident at FSU is just the tip of the iceberg.This story is not an isolated event; it is symptomatic of a far bigger issue.
        As always there is this knee jerk pushback from the usual apologists who are unwilling to face the facts and think they can trump any argument by trotting out the usual anti-Israel biases. That is what I am talking about.
        This is same tactic that was used when I posted recently at http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/one-crazed-murderer-sparks-zionist-calls-for-european-migration-to-israel.html#comment-436674, where I drew attention to an article by Rabbi Rubinger http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Opinion/Article.aspx?id=254203.
        I wrote to Rabbi Rubinger who responded by corroborating his story providing statements of his sources that he asked me to keep confidential because it would jeopardise those parties affiliated to organisations dedicated to fighting anti-semitism in France.
        Mondoweiss would be well-advised to follow similar anti-bullying guidelines so that an intimidatory, aggressive atmosphere is not permitted to pervade and defile every topic.

      • Chu on April 12, 2012, 11:42 am

        Mayhem, I am unclear why you are linking me to an Australian incident about anti-Semitism. when we were discussing the United States. Stick to the topic if you want to try to convince me or any others.

        For your second Commentary article, you should learn to read more carefully, because this is Tobin’s OPINION piece. Let me make it easy for you: (cut from Tobin’s article w/o edit)

        ————————————————————————–
        The Reality of Campus Anti-Semitism – Jonathan S. Tobin
        http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/04/22/reality-of-campus-antisemitism/

        Excerpt 1: American Association of University Professors [AAUP]
        “In a newsletter on the AAUP website, Cary Nelson (the association’s president) and Kenneth Stern of the American Jewish Committee contend that recent events on American university campuses—at Berkeley, Santa Cruz, and Rutgers in addition to Irvine—do not rise to the level of a “working definition” of anti-Semitism. Calls for redress by Jewish students and professors are nothing more, they conclude, than an unscrupulous effort to “censor anti-Israel remarks.””

        Excerpt 2: Tobin’s OPINION:
        “But Nelson and Stern are wrong both about the situation on campus. And they are wrong about the motivations of those whose activism led the U.S. Department of Education to issue its ruling.”

        ——————————————————————————–

        Notice that Kenneth Stern of the AJC was also in agreement with AAUP. Please don’t waste my time if your going to post articles that don’t even prove your own point.
        Can you at least recognize that this is Tobin’s opinion that is opposed to what the American Association of University Professors have ruled? Tobin, the editor of Commentary vs. the AAUP (supported by the AJC)? I think I will go with the majority opinion on this one.

      • annie on April 12, 2012, 12:06 pm

        The Obama Administration recently mounted a high- profile campaign against bullying in public schools, staging a White House conference on bullying prevention, featuring the President and first lady; creating a White House anti-bullying website, stopbullying.gov; and issuing new regulatory guidance ostensibly to combat this problem.1

        mayhem, there is no ‘iceburg’, as you call it. you must know this is not a ‘ruling’. i’m not interested in more of your propaganda links. tobin is a propagandist, i quite well known propagandist. his bloviations amount to nothing more than bloviations.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2012/02/commentary-covers-its-eyes-and-makes-palestinians-disappear.html

        now, he referenced a ‘ruling’ in the commentary article. please link to it from a US government site, not divert to another partisan anti semitism watchdog group that makes no mention of a ‘ruling’. thanks.

      • Mayhem on April 12, 2012, 9:14 pm

        @Chu: you want some substantiation, well here you are:
        http://www.fighthatred.com/fighting-hate/reports/970-report-finds-anti-semitism-on-american-university-campuses-and-anti-israel-indoctrination
        http://jhvonline.com/report-nearly-half-of-college-students-face-antisemitism-p12329-128.htm
        And what is this euphemistic “working definition” of anti-Semitism to which the American Association of University Professors referred?
        Anti-semites and their apologists will always find excuses for their actions.

      • Chu on April 13, 2012, 4:44 pm

        Mayhem, you’re engaging in trolling, not dialogue. I’m not going to bite at more of your b/s. That Tobin piece was small-time complaining against a significant institution.

    • dahoit on April 11, 2012, 12:39 pm

      The bullies get a taste of their own medicine,and call it terrible.
      Why are Zionists,despite their bellicosity,so soft?
      Moral midgets with cannons(nukes) so big they can’t use em,must be frustrating,neh?

  15. galfa on April 11, 2012, 2:36 am

    Lets give some moral support to the SJP at Florida Atlantic Univeristy, one of their members has received a death threat. This is an extremely serious matter. The SJP – FAU posted on their facebook “President of SJP, Noor Fawzy, has been receiving hate mail and death threats mainly motivated by a baseless lie that was spread about our latest initiative. The lie entails that SJP deliberately and exclusively targeted Jewish students. ” What a shame that the media (ynet, Times of Israel, J. Journal) chose to spin this story. The SJP at FAU’s FB is here http://www.facebook.com/sjp.fau
    What is so compelling is that their creative action using “mock eviction” notices was nothing more than a way to educate all students about the occupation. Looking at the notice, only Israel was referred to, no other religious group was mentioned. The false notion that being pro-Palestine and pro-human rights is somehow anti-Jewish appears to have created the sinister setting for death threats.

  16. Sumud on April 11, 2012, 3:06 am

    A great creative action by SJP at FAU and another great, thorough article by Phan – thanks!

    I have to laugh sometimes at how easy it appears to be to get international coverage when the issue is I/P. Some little group somewhere does some smart little something and then the zionist press goes nuts, and yet again more and more people are introduced to the reality of I/P.

    You’d think the ziobots would have realised by now what shaky ground Israel is on, how the anti-semitism card has been way over-played, and that when ordinary people learn the truth about Israel they are pretty much always disgusted. “There’s no such thing as bad publicity” does NOT apply for Israel.

  17. NickJOCW on April 11, 2012, 4:37 am

    Surely there were students who received these flyers and found the action worthy and effective, or whatever. Wouldn’t it have helped to quote some of them? By concentrating solely on the protesting Jewish response are you not in danger of helping make it seem the anti-Jewish act that it wasn’t? Just asking.

  18. Theo on April 11, 2012, 8:06 am

    “but how did they know that they are jewish?”

    I have lived and worked with jews all my life and can spot most of them immediately.
    This comes from the thousand years of intermariage between ashkenazy jews in Europe, where a jew would marry only a jew. The consequences are that in smaller communities with few members close relatives married eachother, (Einstein married his first cousine), creating very similar features among russian, polish and other eastern european jews. Eventually they migrated toward the west and later to the USA.
    This should not bother anyone as other nations have certain characterical features easily identifiable by those who have experience with them.
    However I did not know that one of my favorit actors, Paul Newman, was also jewish, not being what we assume to be the typical type.

    • LeaNder on April 11, 2012, 9:21 am

      Was bist denn du für einer?

      • Theo on April 13, 2012, 12:30 pm

        LeaNder

        Ich verstehe die frage nicht, außerdem sind wir schon auf ein Du basis?
        By the way, I have no german roots, either.

    • lysias on April 11, 2012, 11:04 am

      Timothy Snyder, Tony Judt’s coauthor of Thinking the Twentieth Century, observes at one point in the book that American Jews can recognize other American Jews, whereas Israelis cannot recognize American Jews, and neither can non-Jewish Americans. Judt responds that that means that America is the Jewish assimilationist’s dream, and it is odd that Zionism should have become so predominant here.

    • lysias on April 11, 2012, 11:06 am

      Paul Newman played an Irish-American very convincingly in The Road to Perdition. I’m Irish-American myself, and I saw no flaws in the performance.

      • optimax on April 11, 2012, 4:00 pm

        John Wayne was convincing asGhengas Khan.

      • Theo on April 13, 2012, 12:32 pm

        And Denzel Washington was just perfect as an africaner.
        I am sure you ment above Dgingis Khan.

    • on April 11, 2012, 11:27 am

      I suspect what you are actually doing is spotting certain Jewish types, and missing others. In any event, Jew-spotting has been, in various historical epochs, a useful skill–much prized by the authorities. Congratulations.

    • piotr on April 11, 2012, 10:01 pm

      I am not sure if you are serious, Theo.

      The “marriage” separation was far from perfect, so while a typical Ashkenazi looked different from his/her typical Slavic neighbor, there are plenty of blond straight-nosed Jews and vice versa. My late father looked as Jewish as one can get and yet Armenians were mistaking him for an Armenian. (There exists an “Armenoidal Race”, but many Armenians lack that very specific look.) I personally was sometimes mistaken for a highlander (Polish highlanders are partly of Romanian “Vlach” origin).

      But in USA? Jews, if they have ANY race, are Mediterranean. Hence there is no way of reliably telling Jews apart from Lebanese, Italians, Spanish, Libyans, Turks or Persians. From a picture, can one tell that Walid Jumblatt or Haneen Zoabi are not Jewish?

      • Theo on April 13, 2012, 12:26 pm

        Piotr

        Naturally such classification do not apply to everyone, but only to the majority. In eastern and central Europe the jews came from Russia and had nothing to do with the jews living in Africa and ME.
        Their forfathers were khasars, a turk folk, not semitic.

        This theory is fought by most jews, because if it is true, it would split the tribe, the majority being not semitic. In addition there goes the right of return, you cannot go back to someplace where you never been, or none of your forfathers.

        In my life I was guessed to be portugese, dutch and a few other nationalities, however I am not any of them. I did not take it to be an insult, it was just a wild guess as I could be one of them. I was never guessed to be a chinese or indian.
        What I do not understand, why would someone want to be something what he is not? All humans have the same value, regardless where we came from. Religion is a man made belief and if you are a believer than we ALL come from Adam and Eve, so we are all brothers.

    • Mooser on April 13, 2012, 3:33 pm

      “I have lived and worked with jews all my life and can spot most of them immediately.
      This comes from the thousand years of intermariage between ashkenazy jews in Europe, where a jew would marry only a jew. The consequences are that in smaller communities with few members close relatives married eachother, (Einstein married his first cousine), creating very similar features among russian, polish and other eastern european jews.”

      And of course, the genetic proof of your bigoted statements should be overwhelming, I’m sure you only forgot to direct us to it by an oversight. Why not correct that oversight now, genius.
      At the very least, can you give us the salient characteristics (physiognomic or psychological?) by which you “spot” Jews on sight?

      That is, to put it plainly, pure anti-semitism, and you should be banned for it. “I have lived and worked with jews all my life and can spot most of them immediately.”

      I wish you were here with me so I could give you a hearty “Spot this M$*%^#-F*(#!^ to your patently anti-Semitic face.

      • MHughes976 on April 13, 2012, 4:16 pm

        There are some hereditary differences in appearance within the human race, though they’re remarkably hard to define. Otherwise race is a concept with no scientific validity. There’s no objective test for being or not being Jewish. There are tests based on religion and culture but there is no authority determining which tests of religion and culture should be used.

      • Theo on April 15, 2012, 12:45 pm

        I would like to add the following:

        Here in MW we constantly attack the policies of our goverment and our military. So, based on reasoning of Mooser, we are all bigots and anti-americans whose faces should be redone!!
        What a distorted understanding of human rights.

  19. DaveS on April 11, 2012, 9:58 am

    Another piece of great investigative journalism by Phan. Is there a term forensic journalism? This is not an isolated incident. It reminds me of other cases of false anti-Semitism rumors gone viral: the crowds at U Michigan ISM conference chanting “Death to the Jews”; the crowd at a Fort Lauderdale protest against Gaza onslaught chanting “Jews go back to the ovens.” There must be gobs of other examples, but I have never seen one so carefully dissected as here. As Churchill said: “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” Not my favorite historical figure, but he got it right here, and it is even more true in the internet age.

    • MHughes976 on April 11, 2012, 12:15 pm

      The manifest Americanism ‘pants’ should raise a red flag here. I don’t think that there’s any convincing source for Churchill’s use of this phrase. There is a full text available on the net of a sermon by our great British Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon, from April 1855, saying that lie goes round the world while ‘truth is pulling its boots on’. He attributes the image to an ‘old proverb’ but no proverb with a reference to boots or other items of clothing has been found.

      • DaveS on April 11, 2012, 1:35 pm

        thanks, MH. I stand corrected. I wrote that this morning, before I had even put on my trousers. So maybe Churchill was not only a racist but a plagiarist, and is given credit for far too much. In any event, the sentiment expressed is beyond dispute. Another example: the story of Iran’s Jews having to wear a yellow star or stripe on their clothing.

      • lysias on April 11, 2012, 5:25 pm

        Churchill’s mother was American, after all.

        I’m sure my own English must contain Irishisms that I inherited from my parents of which I am totally unaware.

  20. talknic on April 11, 2012, 10:05 am

    Lying for Israel is quite popular and expected

  21. Chu on April 11, 2012, 10:15 am

    I just found this polling data at the ADL that indicates that Anti Semitism is at high levels. More than 50% of the 10 European countries polled say that Jews are more loyal to Israel than their own nation.:

    http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/adl_anti-semitism_presentation_february_2012.pdf

    • piotr on April 11, 2012, 10:18 pm

      I read that GOP opponent of Debbie Wasserman Schultz tries to run against her on a plank that she will be more loyal to Israel than Debbie, so we have “Aryan” Americans posing to be Kahanists.

      Rommey promised not to make any statements on Israel/Palestine without checking what Netanyahu wants him to say.

      Perhaps “anti-Semitism” in USA leads to 17% advantage that Obama has over Romney “whom you trust more on foreign policy”. At the moment it is his strongest point.

      • pabelmont on April 16, 2012, 12:08 pm

        piotr: Anti-Semitism, possibly, but both are tarred with pro-Israelism. How about trying “Perhaps “anti-AIPAC-ism” and “anti-war-ism” in USA leads to 17% advantage that Obama has over Romney “whom you trust more on foreign policy”” even though Obama has been a jolly warrior despite the hopes of many 4 years ago.

  22. kma on April 11, 2012, 10:25 pm

    Phan Nguyen, you are one talented writer! this piece, like your others, is INFORMATIVE, FASCINATING, and amazingly gripping – like a book you can’t put down! even the weird robineye “parent” post is a feather in your cap – it PROVES that you are not making this shit up (and what an eye-popping example of professional lies that comment is).

    the SJP action was well worth the effort, and the article rocks. I’m showing it to everyone I know from now on! what a way to hook the uninitiated…. thanks.

  23. Darcha on April 12, 2012, 9:45 am

    I had a little extra time today, so I Googled ‘FAU eviction’ and looked at the links. Posted comments on the news links that had the information wrong; noticed how many of the hasbara sites are willing to press ahead with the slander just the same. Of course, I’m not surprised.

  24. pabelmont on April 16, 2012, 12:04 pm

    And another thing: “200 JEWISH students? How did they know? It’s extremely frightening to realize that they’ve been identifying who the Jews are on campus. Jew-counting is incredibly intimidating these days, as it has been for centuries.”

    How come the Jewish students live in a Jewish-students frat (“Member of the Alpha Epsilon Pi, a Jewish fraternity”) if they do not want the Jewish students (or any of them) to be (easily) identified?

    Maybe the terrified ones forget to tell the unconcerned ones not to be obvious?

Leave a Reply