Trending Topics:

Brandeis tosses Nusseibeh off board for not condemning militant rally at his school

on 27 Comments


Al QudsTwo weeks ago Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu tweeted the above photo from Al-Quds University with the message, “This is a direct result of the wild incitement against the State of Israel. This is not the way to achieve peace.”

The photos on Nazi-like salutes stirred controversy in the U.S. too. Brandeis University has suspended its 25-year-long association with Al-Quds and has now removed Al Quds president Sari Nusseibeh from an advisory board at the school over the demonstration.

Brandeis announced the suspension after finding Al-Quds’ explanation of the incident insufficient:

Brandeis University President Frederick Lawrence announced today that Brandeis has suspended its partnership with Al-Quds University effective immediately. Brandeis will re-evaluate the relationship as future events may warrant….

The Nov. 5 demonstration on the Al-Quds campus involved demonstrators wearing black military gear, armed with fake automatic weapons, and who marched while waving flags and raising the traditional Nazi salute. The demonstration took place in the main square of the Al-Quds campus, which was surrounded by banners depicting images of “martyred” suicide bombers.

Immediately after he received reports of the demonstration, President Lawrence contacted Al-Quds President Sari Nusseibeh and requested that he issue an unequivocal condemnation of the demonstrations. President Lawrence also requested that the condemnation be published in both Arabic and English.

Last night (Nov. 17), President Nusseibeh sent an email to President Lawrence with an English translation of a statement posted in Arabic on the Al-Quds web site.

Unfortunately, the Al-Quds statement is unacceptable and inflammatory.

That original statement, said to be from Nusseibeh, does not repudiate the rally, which it describes as “a mock military display,” and includes these comments:

The university is often subjected to vilification campaigns by Jewish extremists with the purpose of discrediting its reputation as a prestigious academic institution with a unique,
humane calling: to strive to instill noble values in its students; to spread the spirit of democracy and openness toward other world cultures; and to present the genuine face of
the Palestinian people, calling for peace against the extremism and violence to which we ours elves are subjected as a people denied our rights under occupation.
These extreme elements spare no effort to exploit some rare but nonetheless damaging events or scenes which occur on the campus of Al Quds University, such as fist-fighting
between students, or some students making a mock military display. These occurrences allow some people to capitalize on events in ways that misrepresent the university as
promoting inhumane, anti-Semitic, fascist, and Nazi ideologies. Without these ideologies, there would not have been the massacre of the Jewish people in Europe; without the massacre, there would not have been the enduring Palestinian catastrophe.
As occurred recently, these opportunists are quick to describe the Palestinians as a people undeserving of freedom and independence, and as a people who must be kept under
coercive control and occupation. They cite these events as evidence justifying their efforts to muster broad Jewish and western opinion to support their position. This public
opinion, in turn, sustains the occupation, the extension of settlements and the confiscation of land, and prevents Palestinians from achieving our freedom

The news of the Nusseibeh sacking comes from the Jewish Press:

President Lawrence has decided that Brandeis University’s suspension of its partnership with Al-Quds University requires that Dr. Nusseibeh not be a member of the Board of the International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public life. As with the suspension of relations between the two universities, Brandeis will re-evaluate this issue as events may warrant.

In a move reinforcing the basis for its decision to sever ties with Al-Quds University, Brandeis University issued a statement on Thursday, Nov. 21, that Dr. Sari Nusseibeh, president of Al-Quds University, will be removed from his position on the Advisory Board of the Brandeis International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life.

Read more at:

In a move reinforcing the basis for its decision to sever ties with Al-Quds University, Brandeis University issued a statement on Thursday, Nov. 21, that Dr. Sari Nusseibeh, president of Al-Quds University, will be removed from his position on the Advisory Board of the Brandeis International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life.

Read more at:

President Lawrence has decided that Brandeis University’s suspension of its partnership with Al-Quds University requires that Dr. Nusseibeh not be a member of the Board of the International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public life. As with the suspension of relations between the two universities, Brandeis will re-evaluate this issue as events may warrant.

Read more at:

Daniel Terris of Brandeis was visiting Al-Quds this month, and the Brandeis president asked him to look into the rally. Terris seems dismayed that Brandeis would end the relationship over this incident:

we were able during our visit to have a number of in-depth conversations with many key individuals, including Al-Quds University President Sari Nusseibeh, Executive Vice President Imad Abu Kishek, and members of the committee whom they appointed to investigate the November 5 rally.

Once all of us return from our travels and have a chance to confer, we will put together a report on what we have learned. The issues on the ground at Al-Quds University are much more complex than has been reported on blogs and in the press. These issues deserve careful consideration and conversation.

What we can say at this point is that nothing that we have learned during this period has changed our conviction – built over many years of experience – that Sari Nusseibeh and the Al-Quds University leadership are genuinely committed to peace and mutual respect. President Nusseibeh’s comments following the suspension of the partnership, published in the Times of Israel, show that he is continuing his commitment to those values and to sustained dialogue even when circumstances are challenging.

In the Times of Israel, Nusseibeh goes further than his original statement:

“Needless to say, the event on the campus by this small group — trampling on Israeli flags and behaving as though sympathizing with Nazi or fascist ideology — in no way represents our university values, and we are constantly trying to prevent this kind of thing from happening.”

Asked directly whether he condemned the demonstration, Nusseibeh said “Yes.”

The questions around this case are, Why is Brandeis ending a historic relationship on the basis of one incident on campus about which there may be some ambiguity? Are other schools held to the same account as Al-Quds?

Sari Nusseibeh is the most moderate figure in the world; why is Brandeis kicking him off a board? That’s nuts.

This is evidence of the growing polarization between the occupation and its enablers in the west. The occupation has gone on 46 years; it is no wonder that Palestinians think, again, of violent resistance to occupation (as so many other peoples have violently resisted occupation). Some Al Quds students have been supportive of Hamas for this reason. The matter reminds me of the murder of Mouloud Feraoun in Algeria in 1962. He was a moderate educator, and was killed by the French right who opposed his call for independence.

Also: On my last visit, I saw an expression of support for Hitler in Ramallah. Though the rally is on its face ugly, it is not entirely clear to me what this militant group at Al-Quds was doing.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

27 Responses

  1. Pamela Olson
    Pamela Olson
    November 22, 2013, 10:59 am

    In my experience, the occasional “support for Hitler” meme isn’t some deeply ingrained or seriously thought out ideology. It’s more of a lashing out, a way to try to hurt the feelings of the people who do unimaginably horrible things to you, your family, your land, your past, and your future. (Better than throwing rocks, right?)

    It’s almost always done by hot-headed young men who’ve endured some of the worst of the horrors of occupation. It’s a middle finger that’s understood by the recipients of the message as an enduring racial hatred leading toward genocide. Very crossed wires, and sadly easy to exploit because of all the associations most Westerners have toward these symbols.

    I condemn these rallies, because they are spiteful and stupid, and it’s not helpful. But condemning them without even more forcefully condemning the many illegal and violent actions of the occupation regime (without which no one would be sending a middle finger like this in the first place) is sheer hypocrisy.

    Anyway, I’d be much more concerned about state-sponsored rabbis justifying the killing of gentile babies, personally. Has the president of Brandeis condemned that yet?

    • gamal
      November 22, 2013, 3:17 pm

      Pamela with the utmost respect I have some uncertainties,

      “It’s almost always done by hot-headed young men who’ve endured some of the worst of the horrors of occupation” I am not sure I agree, its a repudiation of servility and obsequiousness, hotheadedness rather like anomie, is a fantasy, and the explanatory framework it fits into is deeply regressive, like female hysteria.

      “It’s a middle finger” in a way, ” that’s understood by the recipients of the message as an enduring racial hatred leading toward genocide” however self serving that is? Its also BS, if they had one iota of fear they wouldn’t act with such vicious injustice, they are not afraid they are delighted, Sari Nusseibeh, groveling little quisling that he is, hasnt a friend in the world, which is good, Zionists, dont make good bedfellows, especially for Palestinians. Recall the years of acquiescence ’67 to 87, from which the Palestinians got what? The displaced Palestinians have vanished from the agenda as soon as they gave up any actions directed against their western and Israeli oppressors,

      “I condemn these rallies” you are in the clear then, “because they are spiteful and stupid” No Pamela, there is much more to it than that, as your post implies, “and it’s not helpful”, the fate of Nusseibeh, Arafat and Abbas would tend to indicate that nothing works, as far as Palestinians attempts to placate Zionists go, these kind of actions are aimed at the policy of incapacity, surrender and supplication followed by folk like Nussiebeh and the PA, however upsetting Jews and or Zionists find them.
      If you dont want people to glorify your extinct enemies probably best not to murder and rob, occupy and humiliate them, no Westerners or their “stinking murder states” (tm Bruce Cockburn) have any grounds to condemn anyone, as they do look much the same as Nazi’s from the perspective of their victims, sad but perhaps you should grow up and accept it, your (our) societies have caused far greater suffering and destruction than the Nazi’s managed in their brief period. I believe we all condemn that dont we? ( to what end god knows but hey it feels pure)
      Thing is no one is listening any more to these whining complaints, would Brandeis invite Neil Ferguson, a real supporter of UK imperialism, which according to some epidemiologists cost, in India alone, some billion lives, I condemn anyone who stands for their dirge like anthem, again to what end who knows or cares, ejaculating condemnations is so satisfying though.
      In Palestine its only been a century of repression, murder, rape, theft, expulsion and confinement, which as Kate’s column shows is on going and with accelerating brutality, gorgeous as Uncle Tom is, he’s no use in the struggle, I am more offended by Westerners groundless sense of moral superiority, and their worthless approbation of genteel victimhood, if people find inspiration in Nazism, perhaps you should reflect as to why that might be the case,

      refighting the war of ’39 is pointless, but enjoyable for a certain sort of Euro/American activist, having paid vastly for the defeat of Nazism and the post war welfare states in Europe, we, I am jumping ship for a second, orientals dont really give a shit about your instrumentalized sensitivities. The joke is on “Geneva2” Nussiebeh, MJ must be worried though, its not only Abimunah it may be all of us, sorry perhaps if you look hard enough you can find worthy victims, not given to stupidity and spite, but that wont be the people of the eastern med, and we know it.
      I hear Tibetans are really cuddly and that the Fur are without blemish.

      who are you to condemn anything done under your boot, albeit that your foot might be in the boot unwillingly, context as ever is the determining factor, those Nazi salutes are an indictment of you, me and the whole worthless “left” in the west, ( see the STW crowd in the UK dis-inviting that unruly nun Agnes), we dont want to be your acolytes, go lose your struggle somewhere else.
      Obvs hope this doesnt offend and cost me your ineffectual support. For us its our struggle, we know what we mean and if a little salute gets you fritzzing what use are you, it changes nothing, means little, I think it is you who need to free yourself from this atavistic superstition, to us the Nazi’s are indistinguishable from Churchill, De Gaulle et al, because of what they did and are doing. The problem is Brandeis and Zionism not those demonstrators, even if they lose the Alice Rothchilds of the anti-Zionists, there are vital internal struggles to wage the defeatist trend must be isolated, and this unlike most other political objectives can be achieved by trouble making of the right kind.

      Better than throwing stones? why, its not either or you know. Quite a few of my relatives briefly, 39-41, flirted with the Nazi party as an avenue of resistance against Britain’s brutal occupation of the country, so what? they didnt care by extension what Nazi’s thought of them, their concerns were the praticalities of a real hot life death struggle, it wasnt pretty conflict never is and has its own ineluctable logic.

      Having decided to spurn any peaceful overtures, Israel and the West are opting for war, in which case we can expect some impropriety, perhaps even insolence from our victims, yes I have the right to be both us and them, I have earned it even if it makes my posts less clear than otherwise would be the case, i feel no lesser sense of kinship with Netanyahu than that reciprocal kind I have with my folks, why not, we all frail and temporary and are brothers and sisters whether we like it or not, in person though I probably wouldnt be polite to him, discourtesy has its place.

      Respect Ms Olson, which I mean I dont mean to be rude, and am as unworthy an individual as I am able to be, I think westerners can be a bit lacking in self awareness, the owner of this site is a proud supporter of the on going destruction of Libya, what of it? Should Arabs refuse to post here, in the cause of ideological purity? Or out of some lachrymose solidarity with the “victims”, perhaps we should all be condemned for posting here, or torture ourselves with dark concerns about the sinister inner workings of Mr. Weiss’s psyche?

      like those of my kin who can not discern between the words and phrases, al-kaffireen and al la dhina kafaru and man kafar, the latter never appears in the Quran and we kill and kill each other and condemn each other, and obviously I cant condemn condemnation without looking like an idiot, but as I am sure I have that already covered, so my condemnation stands, not really incoherent just utterly despairing at the moment, it, like everything, even eternal Reichs and empires, will pass.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        Stephen Shenfield
        November 22, 2013, 4:40 pm

        These students are part of the culture of abysmal historical ignorance. In the interwar period the Zionists forged close ties with the fascist powers — first with the Mussolini regime in Italy, which trained the future commanders of the Israeli navy, then with the Nazi regime in Germany, which they faithfully served by sabotaging the anti-Nazi boycott. By facilitating the transfer of German Jews to Palestine with their assets, which were spent on importing German goods, Hitler played a crucial role in strengthening the Yishuv at a crucial period and making a Zionist state a real prospect for the first time. Together Zionists and fascists celebrated the attacks against Libya and Ethiopia.

        But all the buffoons at Al-Quds “know” is that “the Jews” are their enemy and the Nazis were enemies of “the Jews” and killed a few million of them, to which they apply the naive logic of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” It’s just the Zionist worldview, based on the identification of “Jews” with “Zionists” — except that the value signs are reversed.

        And yet university students, to a much greater extent than most people, have the opportunity to study and uncover real history. Sad.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        Stephen Shenfield
        November 22, 2013, 6:28 pm

        More thoughts on this.

        I can accept Pamela’s judgment that this is a sort of “lashing out” — the emotional dynamics are not difficult to understand. But a more important question is: whose interests does such behavior objectively serve?

        The Zionists will use this over and over again. This photo will become a fixture of their propaganda. Especially used out of context, as it will be used, it will convey to most people exactly the impression of the conflict that the Zionists seek to convey, but much more effectively than they could ever do by their own unaided efforts. It undercuts the struggle for justice for the Palestinians in the crucial arena where it has recently been making significant progress — the struggle for Western public opinion.

        I’ll go further. I suspect that for this very reason the Israeli secret services are even now exploring ways and means of secretly funding and otherwise helping the group behind this demo and others of the same kind, just as at an earlier period they secretly backed the Islamists. These are the sort of Palestinians the Zionists just “love to hate” — because objectively they are on the Zionists’ side.

      • MHughes976
        November 22, 2013, 6:38 pm

        I think that this is bringing us close to the heart of the tragedy and horror that is unfolding. I do think that unrelenting oppression has unrelentingly terrible effects on both victim and perpetrator.
        I’m very Western in all my thoughts and values, so I look to Western books. I think Xenophon’s comment on the lesser ranks in Sparta, that they would willingly have eaten the ruling Spartans raw, also brings us close to the heart or at least to one aspect of the heart of the matter.
        Another aspect of the same heart of the same matter is that Jewish, Palestinian and Western people are much more alike than they are different, all human. So there’s always something wrong with hatred and contempt between different sections of the human race. That’s a cliche but it’s true.

      • traintosiberia
        November 23, 2013, 12:09 am

        Thank you

      • Chu
        November 25, 2013, 9:19 am

        good points.

  2. Woody Tanaka
    Woody Tanaka
    November 22, 2013, 11:21 am

    “Why is Brandeis ending a historic relationship on the basis of one incident on campus about which there may be some ambiguity? ”

    Because there is a deep Orwellian strain in zionism: It’s not enough that Winston Smith minds his own business, he must love Big Brother. Notice what Netanyahoo points to as the impediment to peace: not the oppression, death and destruction that he and his fellow criminal dish out every day to the Palestinians, but a couple of confused goofballs making a fool of themselves WHILE HURTING NO ONE. Lawrence expected Nusseibeh to unequivocally express his love of Big Brother and when he didn’t, when Nusseibeh put the demonstration in full context, well, that’s just not acceptable.

  3. W.Jones
    November 22, 2013, 12:16 pm

    Yes, the Nazis did use this salute, however it may surprise you to know that Taiwan, Japan, Malaysia and probably other far east Asian countries use this salute as well.
    Before WWII this salute was used in some American schools as well, after which the practice was stopped. Those countries did not take their salute from the Nazis but actually this salute pre-dates the Nazis as shown by the fact that you can find photos of American students saluting the American flag this way, called in America “the Bellamy salute.” The origin of the flag is not actually the Germans but 18th century European ideas of what the Roman salute looked like.

    The straight-leg march step was actually created by the English. I believe the Russians got their goose-stepping from the Germans, since at one time Prussia was considered a model for military order, and then the Chinese picked it up from them. An example of admiration for Prussian military order was the fact that Washington used Prussian generals to train his troops.

    Forces of the US trained Palestinian Authority ( ) are not the only military that have used a straight arm salute in the Middle East: not only Hezbollah, but the anti-Islamic Lebanese Phalangists do. Iran has a similar one:

    Palestinians should stop using it because of modern associations, but before judging them as Nazis I propose that it be looked into further whether this salute developed from other sources than the mimicry of Nazism that it would look like to many Americans and Europeans at first glance. Why not ask the participants themselves if they meant to mimic the Nazis or whether they did it because “everybody does” in Pal. military organizations, which would be part of a wider regional military tradition. The latter would mean that their insensitivity to change their tradition could be comparable to that of Japan, Taiwan, Russia, China, etc.

    Personally I think the one that should get the most attention is the Finnish airforce’s reinstitution of the swastika from WWII.
    It’s true that it predated the Nazis’ reign, however the origin of it in its use by early 20th century Finland upper class political figures is the same European occult pagan movement that the Nazis spun out of in that era. The reason I say it should get the most attention is because Finns were on the Nazi side of the war, unlike Palestinians who fought with the British.

    • W.Jones
      November 22, 2013, 12:29 pm

      I would add that Palestinian groups do not use swastikas and I am unaware of them using goosestepping either. The reason I mentioned those two examples was to show that in some cases (eg. Russia and China) militaries can use those styles shared by Nazis and yet it does not signify Nazism.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      November 23, 2013, 10:37 am

      This is very interesting. However, I suspect that in all the countries where the so-called “Roman salute” is or has been used its symbolic meaning is roughly the same. According to Wikipedia, in Mussolini’s Italy the salute was seen as demonstrating the fascist’s “decisive spirit, firmness, seriousness, and acknowledgment and acceptance of the regime’s hierarchical structure.” As body language it intrinsically conveys aggressive and authoritarian values, in contrast to the democratic solidarity of the handshake (which the Italian fascists made illegal). If it was also used by the Chiang Kaishek’s Guomindang (Chinese nationalists) and has now been adopted by the Zionists, well, isn’t that consistent with the aggressive and authoritarian nature of those ideologies? And if has also been used in the USA, that suggests to me not that the Roman salute is politically neutral but rather that the democratic strand in the American tradition is not as strong as often assumed.

      In short, this is a symbol of oppressors. But the Palestinians are oppressed (at least in relation to the Zionists — they may oppress one another). So when they use this symbol they are lying. Why would they do that? I suppose it provides psychological compensation. But the lie prevents them from claiming the solidarity and sympathy that is their due as oppressed people and it helps the Zionists push their lie that they do not oppress the Palestinians.

      • W.Jones
        November 23, 2013, 12:33 pm

        “decisive spirit, firmness, seriousness, and acknowledgment and acceptance of the regime’s hierarchical structure.” As body language it intrinsically conveys aggressive and authoritarian values
        In short, this is a symbol of oppressors.

        Due to the association with fascism, I agree and don’t like it. I think groups should not use it for that reason. But I am doubtful that every time it is used, like by ancient Romans or Taiwanese, etc. it is oppressive.

        I am not sure that as some kind of underlying body language it has to be what you say. The best example of the language is when a crowd surrounds a celebrity. The fans hold their arms up over eachother to touch the celebrity. I would say the language shows strong attachment and respect at the same time.

        More to the point, military organizations really do have “acceptance of… hierarchical structure” and other intrinsic values you mentioned, so it is not surprising that militaries would have this. The overall point I am trying to make Stephen, and it is one you and I basically agree on, is that if military groups ranging from Taiwanese to Palestinians to Lebanese anti-Islamic forces use this signal it does not have to mean they are oppressive or Nazis. The main reason I bring this up, Stephen, is because due to those occasional uses, Middle Easterners, whether it be Palestinians as a people or persons like the college’s director, are occasionally mislabeled as being Nazi supporters by their opponents. This mislabeling in turn is used to justify incorrect punitive acts against Palestinians.

  4. Donald
    November 22, 2013, 3:20 pm

    Has the President of Yeshiva University denounced Sheldon Adelson’s comments about nuking Iran, or the cheering that those comments evoked?

    If not, I hope that Brandeis University will cut any ties it may have with Yeshiva. Maybe there are board members that the two have in common–if so, they should be forced to make a choice.

  5. American
    November 22, 2013, 4:30 pm

    Hire a moving crew and pack Brandeis University up and move it to Israel where it can decline and whither and go down the tubes of Israeli centric-ness without the American DNA it needs to be a educational institution.

  6. piotr
    November 22, 2013, 6:19 pm

    I am not sure if being subjected to oppression makes young people more susceptible to fascism than being subjected to paranoid supremacist propaganda. Young Jews and Palestinians live close to each other and are well aware of what the others are doing, probably Palestinians more than Jews, and you have mirroring effect.

    Back to “heroic age” of 1930-ties and 40-ties, varieties of fascism were popular all over the place, and more leftist Jews used word “fascist” to describe the Revisionists. Was it exclusively leftist bias? I stumbled on Polish fascist website posting a reminiscence of one member from 1930-ties, when he participated in “bojowka” (fighting group? gang?) of ONR (National Radical Camp, Polish fascists of the time) that together with a bojowka of Betar was trashing offices of Bund (Yiddish socialists). Mini-Kristalnacht, if you will. The context was a discussion about correct fascist ideology, basically that enemies should not be defined by “race” but by the ideology (but beating up people for a good cause is OK). Like Jewish fascists, Polish fascists do not call themselves that way, so one has to dig a little deeper to decide if the “fascist” label is a fighting word of the opponents or a precise description.

    Betar even enjoyed sponsorship of Mussolini before the latter signed Pact of Steel. Fascism in in DNA of Zionist right wing and it is pretty much alive on campuses in Israel, e.g. Im Tirtzu, and they have supporters among professors and members of the Knesset.

    Clearly, it is a bit of “whataboutery”, but whataboutery is not invalid per se. Reports of fascism among Israeli Jews are met with curses heaped upon the “anti-semitic” or “hating” messengers, and the reports of fascism among Palestinians are used to organize witch hunts.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      November 22, 2013, 6:42 pm

      No, it wasn’t merely leftist bias. Jabotinsky, the leader of the Revisionists, did not call himself a fascist and arguably was not one, but a number of their second-rank leaders, above all Abba Achimeir, made no bones about their fascist sympathies.

      Regarding the Polish national radicals of the 1930s, I haven’t studied them in depth and am not sure whether they can be considered fully fascist, but they weren’t far off. Together with Mussolini’s Italy, they were the Revisionists’ main foreign allies. They provided Betar with weapons and ran a military training camp for them.

  7. Sumud
    November 22, 2013, 7:01 pm

    As if Netanyahu can talk.

    He has been photographed repeatedly making “Nazi-style salutes”, even at the UN in 2012.


    While threatening Iran (again) earlier this year Netanyahu also couldn’t resist another “Nazi-style salute”. Netanyahu has repeatedly referred to Iranians as Amalek and his buddy Adelson wants to nuke Iran. It’s obvious he is threatening the nuclear annihilation of an entire nation of 77 million people. The nazi salute may even be a symptom of his one-upmanship, “you [nazis] think you know genocide, i’ll show you genocide”:

    Netanyahu threatens Iran over nuclear energy program

    When will Netanyahu condemn this brazen display?

    • traintosiberia
      November 23, 2013, 12:12 am

      He does look like a Nazi saluter . No one has ever done this before in UN

    • Xpat
      November 25, 2013, 7:43 am

      Thanks for all the interesting comments.
      1) In a public setting, the leader receives the salute from his followers (see Stephen’s comment above on the Italian fascist salute).
      2) The Nazi salute is given with an outstretched, straight right arm pointing forwards and up.

      To state the very obvious, the U.N. pics of Netanyahu are not Nazi salutes. As the guy at the podium, Netanyahu should be the man receiving the salute, not the one giving it. Netanyahu uses his left arm and it’s pointing off to the left, in the general direction of Iran.

      Lawrence is most likely responding to his donors.
      What will the Brandeis faculty and students say in response?

      • Sumud
        November 25, 2013, 10:49 am

        Yes, thanks Elliot, of course Netanyahu isn’t giving a nazi salute and he isn’t really threatening to annihilate the Iranians – who then could he focus his two-minute hates on…?

  8. traintosiberia
    November 22, 2013, 7:02 pm

    This is one of those many incidents that will have powerful propangda value. It is at par with’ Death to America ,Death to Israel, or meeting of Mufti of Jersalem with Hitler or the Iraqi leaders patting the children of US hostages . It does not need brain to process. It has everything in the message- the issues, the nature of the recalcitrant problem,and the solution. All in a language that is logical and secular. But the responses are not. It is demagogic,reactionary predicated on ‘ ought” and ‘should’ of the ideal ,rather than on empathic understanding of an University that has allowed a venting , a limited hangout of the frustrated young souls . The reaction is more becoming of an obscurantist religious or cultist group who place more faith on ritual than on spiritulity or psychology of understanding human needs.
    By this behavior, Brandeis has ended up providing the best arguments the BDS may have on the campus for boycotting the Israeli universities.

  9. traintosiberia
    November 22, 2013, 7:34 pm

    Everything gets thrown out . Arafat , Hamas. And Saddam,and Basher Al Assad . They meet the demands,they prove the loyalty. The meet the expectation. But there is always more. The beast can never be satisfied. The same line of expectation and thinking goes in the media. Sanchez or Olovia Nasr or Helen Thomas – they should know the red lines. The same in the administration. Susan Rice and Hegel have to swallow their pride and misidentify themselves in the mirror every morning. Academy is no difference- whether it is Juan Cole or Hamdan or Scheuer or Finklestein.
    Brandeis had a role cut out long ago to project a softower of the Zionism but it can never veer away too far from the Jabotinsky”s looming shadow,that does not allow any imaginary threat in case they become real to the lives of guilty minds.

  10. November 23, 2013, 9:54 am

    I wonder why this event is not discussed here. Certainly some of it is relevant to what is going on on this blog.

    • W.Jones
      November 23, 2013, 12:17 pm


      Hello. The main idea of BDS is avoiding products because of abuse of Palestinian rights. For their part, Palestinians at this point are conquered and nonthreatening. By making conferences and discussions about opposing BDS, the participants are forced at some level to think about the state’s abuses of a conquered people that will be ongoing.

      A main redemptive result I see of focusing on it is that people who really do care about human rights are going to be redeemed from supporting the state’s abuses when they would otherwise be ignorant of them.

  11. November 23, 2013, 4:01 pm

    Ok, let me show you a perspective which is different from what is agreed upon on this blog. So here it is.

    Historically in any occupation the way to end it was that some sort of a mutually agreed deal is reached. Two months after Israel unexpected victory in 1967 Six Days War led to its occupation of the West Bank Israel was presented with the famous three no’s of the Khartoum Arab League resolution
    “no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.”

    No negotiations!! You understand! And this lasted until Egypt’s Anwar Sadat (after his failure to win in 1973) decided that enough is enough and offered to negotiate. And got back ALL SINAI from Israel!! What he could not get by war he got just by recognizing Israel and its right to exists and making peace with it. Israel withdraw from 60.000 sq. km of strategically important and almost uninhabited land (with oil which Israel found and developed in Abu Rodes) just for a piece of paper.

    But Palestinians still did not want to negotiate. This denial was actually a continuation of a long story from their failure in 1948 when they incited 5 Arab states to join and all failed but refused to negotiate and tried and hoped to defeat Israel. But ’67 and ’73 wars buried those hopes but they still refused to negotiate and recognize Israel. .

    So occupation of the West Bank continued. Instead of negotiating after loosing hopes that Arab countries will defeat Israel Palestinians tried terror, first from Jordan then from Lebanon but this failed. The next step was that they swindled us with Oslo. We were so eager to reach agreement that we bought it fullheartedly and celebrated hoping we are on to the full peace finally.

    It was not – in response to Clinton – Barak offers they used this incredible inhuman suicide bombings to try to overcome us.

    This failed because Israel stood firm, erected the wall, put on the road blocks, send its units back to Jenin and other places etc .

    So now they try a new trick – appeals to international community, lies of apartheid and BDS. And again they make the same mistake – not recognizing Israel right to exist and actually striving to destroy it. Just listen to Bargouti saying this loud and clear

    Or to this N. Finkelstein interview
    Finkelstein says it very clearly – right of return means no Israel.

    I personally understand the first two out of the three BDS goals. But the 3rd one makes it all irrelevant. Full right of return is tantamount to destroying Israel. More over it is tantamount to endless bloodshed, suffering and fighting.

    That is what I hope you will understand from the my link to the conference in Brandeis.

    • traintosiberia
      November 24, 2013, 1:33 pm

      Win a preemptive wars by sitting on a fortified stolen lands does not earn you to hear “please welcome ‘ . It takes a while even for the utterly vanquished to accept that settlements in a court . Denial,disbelief,anger,acceptance run through its own time course. Sudan conference did not lead to war. It was a declaration If Israel wanted , it could have vacated the lands. UK have withdrawn,France and Soviet have. Indonesia has . Deite violence and outstanding issues , Sudan has.
      Israel can do it today. But it always comes with argument- we offered it yesterday, you did not take it then, it is not valid any more-. This argument oneday will be slapped back on its face. It will have nowhere to turn.

    • eljay
      November 24, 2013, 2:01 pm

      >> Full right of return is tantamount to destroying Israel.

      Full RoR might destroy Israel…but it might not. What full RoR most likely would destroy is supremacist “Jewish State”, and that’s a good thing.

      But that’s also what hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists like the perfesser are afraid of because it would mean an end to their supremacist privilege.

      It would mean equality with non-Jews; the possibility of being held accountable for past and ON-GOING (war) crimes against non-Jews; and the likelihood of having to give up most of what they have stolen from non-Jews.

      And, so, their solution to past and ON-GOING injustices committed by Jews against non-Jews is more injustices committed by Jews against on-Jews. But they’ll be sure to cry the entire time they’re oppressing, stealing, occupying, colonizing, destroying, torturing and killing.

      Aggressor-victimhood is such a tough gig… :-(

Leave a Reply