Trending Topics:

The Center for Jewish Life is stifling free speech at Princeton University

US Politics
on 30 Comments

I have never met Slav Leibin.

Nonetheless, it recently came to my attention that he vetoed, with the approval of the Center for Jewish Life, my right to participate in a proposed panel on the recent hostilities in Gaza. Apparently this preemptive act of exclusion was carried out on entirely political grounds. This strikes me as an attempt to stifle the exchange of views on an important, if contentious, issue of concern to many in the Princeton University community — an egregious violation of our community’s values.

Slav Leibin is the Jewish Agency Israel Fellow at the Center for Jewish Life, which is home to Hillel at Princeton. Founded in 1923, Hillel is the world’s largest Jewish student organization, with branches at more than 550 colleges and universities, guided by the mission of helping students “to explore, experience, and create vibrant Jewish lives.”

Beginning in 2003, Hillel International has partnered with the Jewish Agency for Israel in order to place some 60 such Israel Fellows on almost 70 North American campuses, including Princeton. Prior to its creation in 1929, the JA was known as the “Palestine Zionist Executive,” and during the pre-1948 period it was responsible for Jewish settlement, immigration, and defense in Palestine. Since 1948, the JA has been the leading international Jewish nonprofit organization, funded by the Jewish Federations of North America as well as private donors in Israel and abroad, “providing meaningful Israel engagement and facilitating Aliyah” — literally, going up — that is, immigration of Jews to Israel and their naturalization as citizens there.

Although technically autonomous, the JA effectively operates as an advocate for the government of Israel. For someone representing the JA to bar a member of the Princeton faculty from sharing his or her expertise and perspectives is no more acceptable than it would be for an envoy of the Chinese, Canadian or any other government to do the same.

As a tenured member of the Princeton faculty with a joint appointment in the Departments of History and Near Eastern Studies, and as a scholar of the modern Middle East with considerable expertise in the history of Israel/Palestine, I am deeply troubled to discover that our campus life is not only being patrolled but even policed by non-academic figures here with a political mandate.

In the wake of Operation Protective Edge, Princeton students attempted to organize a public event that would address the context and consequences of the Israeli assault on Gaza in July that left over 2,100 Palestinians and nearly 70 Israelis dead. Students then reached out to the Center for Jewish Life for co-sponsorship, presumably for an event to which I was going to be invited (I did not know of these plans at the time). In response, Mr. Leibin wrote in an email on Sept. 8, “I would like to bring to your attention that Max Weiss has recently signed a public statement supporting boycott of Israel. This issue complicates the program for us, as it is Highly [sic] sensitive for a CJL ASG to sponsor a program with a speaker who made a statement like this, which is one of the red lines in our Israel policy.”

This point about “red lines in our Israel policy” needs to be understood in a larger context. Hillel International has a policy barring local chapters from sponsoring talks by, or symposia including, people whom Hillel deems overly critical of Israel. This policy has prompted a revolt by many students in Hillel chapters around the country, who insist they have a right to hear all perspectives, and a national Open Hillel movement, which held its first national conference this past weekend at Harvard.

On October 10, president and chief executive officer of Hillel International Eric Fingerhut affirmed in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz that Hillel is committed to promoting “an environment that is “intellectually rigorous, respectful of difference and committed to honest conversation.” What Hillel International will not do, Fingerhut wrote, is “partner with organizations that espouse anti-Semitism, apply a double standard to Israel, spout racism or promote Islamophobia.” Recently Fingerhut met with Open Hillel activists, however, and told them, “every student is welcome at Hillel regardless of his or her personal views on Israel or any other topic in Jewish life.”

Apparently, at Princeton, the same does not hold for faculty.

I therefore ask the CJL to explain whether it believes that Mr. Leibin’s decision to bar a faculty member from sharing his expertise and perspective on an issue of concern to many members of our community is acceptable behavior and serves our students by promoting the free and full exchange of ideas and opinions. According to its own mission statement, the CJL “acts as a liaison with Princeton University on matters related to Israel.” How does the CJL understand the role of such a liaison? Is the CJL committed to sponsoring open debate and the free exchange of ideas with respect to “Israel or any other topic in Jewish life?” Or, does the CJL favor excluding some viewpoints and certain members of the Princeton community based on political criteria?

Princeton must remain a place where open debate and academic exchange is encouraged and allowed to flourish, even on the most controversial issues. Now is a particularly urgent moment for the Princeton community — faculty and students alike — to sit up and take notice of the struggle to protect free speech and academic freedom in this country. After all, it’s happening in our own backyard.

A version of this article first appeared in The Daily Princetonian

Editor’s Note: The Center for Jewish Life responded to Weiss’s piece in The Daily Princetonian:

Every member of the Princeton community is always welcome at the Center for Jewish Life. However, participation in a panel that we sponsor is a privilege and not a right. Our decision to sponsor or co-sponsor an event is an opportunity we evaluate in each case, not an entitlement on the one hand, nor an infringement of free speech on the other.

The CJL is a community that promotes dialogue and open conversation. Last week, the CJL sponsored a program together with the Princeton Committee on Palestine, the Muslim Student Association, Near Eastern Studies, Tigers for Israel, and J-Street U featuring a Palestinian peace activist, Ali Abu Awwad. We were happy to sponsor a compelling program promoting a constructive, pro-solution perspective on ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Like any other organization, we have policies that inform our programming decisions.  A few years ago the CJL Board of Directors carefully crafted guidelines that embody our values. Under these guidelines, the CJL sponsors programs that provide opportunities for open discussion and the expression of differing views in the spirit of University life and in commitment to a pluralistic Jewish community. The CJL will not, however, sponsor groups or speakers that intend to harm Israel or promote racism or hatred of any kind.

When Professor Max Weiss was suggested as one of many possible faculty speakers for a program that two CJL-affiliated student groups were hoping to co-sponsor with the Princeton Committee on Palestine in response to this summer’s conflict in Gaza, some of the student organizers ultimately decided not to invite him. They did so in consultation with CJL staff member Slav Leibin, and on the basis of the fact that Professor Weiss has supported the cultural and academic boycott of Israeli professors and institutions of higher learning, a position that infringes academic freedom and is incompatible with CJL event sponsorship on the basis of our guidelines outlined above. Professor Weiss’s personal attack on Slav Leibin, and the Jewish Agency with whom we partner, was unwarranted, and we believe Professor Weiss owes Slav and the CJL an apology.

The CJL is committed to ongoing learning and exchange of ideas through panel discussions, travel experiences, ongoing dialogues such as the Muslim-Jewish and Black-Jewish dialogues and hundreds of one-on-one conversations. We believe these efforts are more likely to bring about positive change than boycotts or newspaper articles that attack those working to find common ground.

Rabbi Julie Roth, Executive Director of the Center for Jewish Life

Pierre Gentin ’89, Chair, Center for Jewish Life Board of Directors

Melissa Lane, Class of 1943 Professor of Politics, Princeton University, and Vice-Chair, Center for Jewish Life Board of Directors

Max Weiss
About Max Weiss

Max Weiss is an Associate Professor of History and Near Eastern Studies and an Elias Boudinot Bicentennial Preceptor. He can be reached at [email protected]

Other posts by .


Posted In:

30 Responses

  1. just
    just
    October 16, 2014, 11:33 am

    Is the infection spreading, are folks becoming more desperate, or are these issues just coming to light?

  2. Ismail
    Ismail
    October 16, 2014, 11:37 am

    Weiss, meet Salaita. Salaita, Weiss.

    Of course, the outrageous sidelining of Prof. Weiss isn’t as bad as the retraction of a job offer, but still, branches from the same tree.

    I am appalled at the shabby treatment Prof. Weiss received. Never fails to astonish me that otherwise sober and intelligent people can spin such ludicrous apologiae for what is transparently nothing more than the erasure of inconvenient opinion. From a renowned expert. At a university.

  3. Xpat
    Xpat
    October 16, 2014, 11:46 am

    From the response:
    “Professor Weiss has supported the cultural and academic boycott of Israeli professors and institutions of higher learning, a position that infringes academic freedom and is incompatible with CJL event sponsorship”.

    This is dishonest. The call for the academic boycott is clear that it stands for academic freedom and mere association with Israeli universities is not enough to merit boycott.

    http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1108

    The statement is dishonest a second time in that it willfully ignores the Israeli government’s well -documented manipulation of academic freedom and international collaboration to promote its racist ideology. overseas.

  4. amigo
    amigo
    October 16, 2014, 12:15 pm

    I wonder if Princeton has a centre for Roman Life or Latino ,or Celtic or dare i say it , Arab Life.

    Just wondering.

    • Kay24
      Kay24
      October 16, 2014, 6:33 pm

      That would be interesting to know. But I have never seen any official looking building like the Center for Jewish Life. There it is firmly established down Washington Road among Princeton’s finest buildings. If there were any plans to have a building with say Center for Islamic life, I bet there would be strong attempts to strike it down.

  5. Shmuel
    Shmuel
    October 16, 2014, 12:31 pm

    Based on the above information, it seems that 2 pro-Israel groups (“CJIL-affiliated”, whatever that means) tried to organise an event about Gaza, together with the Princeton Committee on Palestine. Someone proposed Prof. Weiss’ name (perhaps the Committee on Palestine). The “CGIL-afiliated” students ran the proposals by CGIL and were told that Weiss is a no-go (red lines, etc.).

    In other words, it was a pro-Israel event that sought an aura of even-handedness through a co-sponsorship with the Committee on Palestine, but would not give up control — barring someone for supporting a non-violent campaign in favour of Palestinian rights. Presumably, no one was barred for having, in the past, taken any action in support of Israel and its policies.

    Does the Committee on Palestine support BDS (as things stand today, if it doesn’t, it’s hardly a supporter of Palestinian rights), and if so, why was it OK to co-sponsor events with them, but not to allow Prof. Weiss to speak at one of these events? I would also like to know how the Princeton Committee on Palestine responded to this attempt to veto the participation of someone who represents their point of view at an event they were supposed to be co-sponsoring.

    What Hillel International will not do, Fingerhut wrote, is “partner with organizations that espouse anti-Semitism, apply a double standard to Israel, spout racism or promote Islamophobia.”

    Arguably, Fingerhut’s own organisation is guilty of all of those things (most notably applying a double standard to Israel) — even anti-Semitism, in its insistence that racism, nationalism and crimes against humanity are inherent to Judaism and are supported by all “good” Jews.

  6. Horizontal
    Horizontal
    October 16, 2014, 12:50 pm

    Funny how a support of BDS is presented as stifling free speech whereas uninviting a speaker to hear their views somehow supports it. Black is white and white is black. Seems the defenders of the status quo are running out of rational responses.

    We have green lines, now we have red lines. Just in time for Christmas.

  7. DaBakr
    DaBakr
    October 16, 2014, 1:08 pm

    oh come come. he acts as if he is completely unaware of the many ‘red lines’ (be they official or not) that anti-zionist, pro-Palestinian groups enforce in colleges and so-called liberal bastions across the US. It may not be fair but to cry out loud as if one side were steamrolling the other is disingenuous at best and ludicrous at worst. If students wanted to here “all views” JVP wouldn’t be out there trying to silence and censor speakers { A.Hirsi @ Brandeis recently comes to mind}

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      October 16, 2014, 4:22 pm

      “oh come come. he acts as if he is completely unaware of the many ‘red lines’ (be they official or not) that anti-zionist, pro-Palestinian groups enforce in colleges and so-called liberal bastions across the US”

      They refuse to send pizzas to the IDF, or run out there and “comfort” the brave, rough men who allow Israelis to sleep at night?

    • Donald
      Donald
      October 16, 2014, 6:10 pm

      “A.Hirsi @ Brandeis recently comes to mind}”

      Comes to your mind. Hirsi was told she could speak at Brandeis, but not as a commencement speaker. I think it’s sad that anyone wants to listen to her, but there was no attempt at censorship–colleges don’t necessarily want to have a famous bigot speaking at their commencement ceremonies, as it seems to imply an endorsement. Would it be okay if Gilad Atzmon (who I despise as much as Hirsi) were invited to speak at Brandeis’s next commencement. How about David Duke? Should the Nazis who wanted to march in Skokie Illinois many years ago have been invited to speak at the University of Chicago commencement?

      Your comparison is ridiculous, but it is a sad commentary that people nowadays think that they are defending “free speech” when saying that a noted Islamophobe has a right to speak at a graduation ceremony. Sorry, but no.

      • Kay24
        Kay24
        October 16, 2014, 6:36 pm

        Hirsi is quoted many times by Islamaphobe, Bill Maher. He is too ignorant to do some research and find out she has been caught lying many times, and is not a very credible person to quote.

      • MRW
        MRW
        October 16, 2014, 8:16 pm

        Hirsi is talking at the Venetian Casino in Las Vegas this weekend (I think) promoted by some Adelson educational foundation or ‘university’.

  8. ckg
    ckg
    October 16, 2014, 1:14 pm

    Apparently Max Weiss’s offense was to be one of the 400 scholars and librarians working on the Middle East to sign the letter pledging to boycott Israeli academic institutions, as covered here on MW: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/scholars-librarians-institutions Other Princeton signatories are Richard Falk, Molly Greene, and Sara Pursley.

    • just
      just
      October 16, 2014, 2:36 pm

      ‘academic institutions’ like Bar Ilan U?

      “Professor Weiss teaches, where else, at Bar Ilan University. That’s also the home of such other wunder-mensches as Mordechai Kedar, who advocates raping Palestinian women as a deterrent to terrorism; and Gerald Steinberg, that convicted libelist who runs the fraudulent NGO known as NGO Monitor.

      Here is what Weiss posted on his Facebook page:

      Listen, Abu Mazen: you aren’t a people and therefore there can be no genocide [against Palestinians]. To exterminate you like a simple rabble is a mitzvah and it will be fulfilled finally despite the fact that the government of Israel still doesn’t accept its responsibility for raising mendacious international recognition of you [Palestine]. [This process] started with Begin ended with Gal-On. It contributed to the deception of the entire world and [increased] the popularity of these monsters [Palestinians] who rose up due to our weakness and lack of faith.

      The quicker you [Abu Mazen] can concede that you are not a people and that your place is nowhere within the borders of the land of Israel, the better off you will be…as long as you evacuate the country of your own volition.”

      http://www.richardsilverstein.com/

      • John Douglas
        John Douglas
        October 16, 2014, 5:34 pm

        I’m confused, Just. The Prof. Weiss referred to in Silverstein’s link is Hillel Weiss, not Max Weiss. Or am I missing something?

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 16, 2014, 8:58 pm

        Weiss is a pretty common name. Are we talking about the same Weiss?

      • Xpat
        Xpat
        October 16, 2014, 9:45 pm

        Mooser is right. Soon you will be accusing Phil of all sorts of evil.
        The Bar Illan villain is the infamous Hillel Weiss.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 17, 2014, 10:55 am

        “Mooser is right.”

        I give you fair warning, Eliot! You may live to regret those words. I usually do.

  9. JLewisDickerson
    JLewisDickerson
    October 16, 2014, 3:32 pm

    RE: “The Center for Jewish Life is stifling free speech at Princeton University”

    MEANWHILE, ADL IS WORKING TO STIFLE FREE SPEECH ON THE INTERNET:
    Stopping Cyber Hate – A new “crime” discovered by friends of Israel, by Philip Giraldi, The Unz Review, October 14, 2014

    [EXCERPT] . . . For those who are not familiar with ADL [Anti-Defamation League], it is a group established one hundred years ago to combat bigotry directed against Jews. It is generally considered to be a major component in the Israel Lobby. The ADL National Director since 1987 has been Abe Foxman.

    ADL has recently been meeting in California with a British group called the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Anti-Semitism, which included the Community Security Trust (CST). The CST advocates physical response to anti-Semitic incidents, to include the equipping and training of organized “self-defense” forces. CST is controversial in the UK, partly because many British Jews believe they are adequately protected by the police. It has also been criticized because its Director is the highest paid head of any Jewish organization in the country and its finances are alleged to be non-transparent.

    An article entitled “Web giants unite to fight online hate” described the purpose of the California meeting. It reported that a “game changing” agreement was reached with Twitter, Facebook, Google and Microsoft to take steps to stop “the proliferation of racist and abusive comments” and to “force racism and hatred from the web.” This will be accomplished in part by “tougher sanctions against those who post abusive messages.” The internet companies, who already have the ability to automatically block content that they disapprove of, will devise proactive strategies to deal with the problem while being guided in the process by the ADL, “a leading anti-Semitism watchdog” which has been designated the “co-convenor” of the project.

    The issue of online hate is important to all web users as efforts to define and then curb it will affect everyone who works on the internet. There are, of course, constitutional rights to free speech that would be impacted by anyone trying to define what is or is not “hate” and there will be an inevitable tendency on the part of anyone seeking to come up with definitions to expand the scope to favor particular constituencies. Given the participants and the combatting anti-Semitism theme of the gathering, there should be no doubt that the meeting in California was only concerned with criticism of Jews and Israel and quite likely will have no interest whatsoever in controlling the much more widespread disparagement of Muslims. . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.unz.com/article/stopping-cyber-hate/

    • JLewisDickerson
      JLewisDickerson
      October 16, 2014, 3:57 pm

      P.S. ALSO SEE: “Fire Foxman”, by Joey Kurtzman, Jewcy, July 8, 2007

      [EXCERPT] . . . What’s surprising is how unabashedly forthright Abraham Foxman has become about what motivates him and his institution. In October of 2005, Foxman addressed a classroom of Jewish students at New York University. Young heads nodded and brows furrowed as Foxman riled them with his customary rhetoric: Isn’t it antisemitic for pro-Palestinian groups to seek divestment only from Israel, ignoring the far greater crimes of regimes like Sudan or North Korea? How do we describe this sort of selective flagellation of the world’s only Jewish state, if not as antisemitism?
      “What if the campus Free Tibet club campaigned for divestment from China? Would that be anti-Chinese bigotry?” asked Asaf Shtull-Trauring, a 20-year-old student and conscientious objector from the Israeli army.
      Of course not, answered Foxman, but it was preposterous to compare the two conflicts, what with the Jews’ experience of two millennia of murderous persecution. Shtull-Trauring responded with two questions: Did Foxman mean that selective treatment is okay so long as it’s not directed at Jews? And where did the Anti-Defamation League get off telling Jewish university students which opinions about Israel were acceptable and which verboten?
      The dialogue spiraled into a confrontation. Shtull-Trauring says Foxman, frustrated and under attack, placed his cards on the table, angrily retorting: “I don’t represent you nor the Jewish community! I represent the donors.”
      Foxman’s outburst was surprising not because of its content, but because of its candor. Foxman needn’t bother himself with the trifling concerns of American Jews who happen not to be multimillionaire philanthropists. If he makes the Jewish community less appealing to young Jews, if his theatrics turn us off and turn us away, that’s all beside the point. Foxman’s job is to keep the millionaire benefactors happy: the rest of us can go jump in the Kinneret.
      Without a meaningful mission to pursue, the ADL has resorted to scaremongering to fill its coffers and justify its existence. These efforts have grown increasingly bizarre and damaging. . .

      SOURCE – http://www.jewcy.com/post/fire_foxman

    • JLewisDickerson
      JLewisDickerson
      October 16, 2014, 4:06 pm

      P.P.S. AND SEE: “The ‘Israel First’ Industry and CEO Profiteering”, by James Petras, dissidentvoice.org, 1/16/14

      [EXCERPTS] During the first half of the 20th century, socially conscious Jews in the United States organized a large network of solidarity and charity associations financed mostly through small donations, raffles, and dues by working and lower middle class supporters. Many of these associations dealt with the everyday needs of Jewish workers, immigrants, and families in need. . .
      . . . Over the past fifty years a far-reaching transformation has taken place within Jewish organizations, among its leaders and their practices and policies. Currently, Jewish leaders have converted charities, social aid-societies and overseas programs for working class Jews into money machines for self-enrichment; converted charities funding health programs for Jewish refugees fleeing Nazism into the funding of colonial settlements for armed Zionist zealots intent on uprooting Palestinians; and organized a powerful political machine which buys US Congress people and penetrates the Executive in order to serve Israeli military aims. From defending human rights and fighting fascism, the leaders of the principle Jewish organizations defend each and every Israeli violation of Palestinian human rights – from arbitrary arrests of non-violent dissidents to the detention of children in ‘cages.’ Israel’s Kafkaesque prolonged administration detention without trial is approved by contemporary leaders. In the past Jewish leaders, especially labor and socially-engaged activists had joined forces with Leftists in opposition to political bigots, McCarthyite purges and blacklists. Today’s leaders practice the very same bully, blackmail and blacklist politics against critics of Israel and its Zionist appendages.
      In the past Jewish leaders of social aid organizations received modest salaries . . .
      . . . The moderately social liberal Jewish weekly, The Forward, recently completed a survey of the salaries of Jewish “not-for profits” leaders, with the aid of a professor from the Wharton School of Business (University of Pennsylvania). Among the leading profiteers was Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) earning $688,280, Howard Kohr of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) — $556,232, David Harris of the American Jewish Committee (AJC) — $504,445, Morton Klein of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) — $435,050, Janice Weinman of Hadassah — $410,000, Malcolm Hoenlein of the Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations (PMJO) — $400,815, Mark Helfield of the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society — $268,834 and Ann Toback of the Workmen’s Circle/Arbeter Ring — $185,712. These salaries and perks put the Jewish leaders of non-profits in the upper 10% of US incomes — a far cry from the not-too-distant past. According to the analysis by the Forward and the Wharton team, ‘most leaders (CEOs) are vastly overpaid – earning more than twice what the head of an organization of their size would be expected to make”.
      While the membership has declined in many organizations, especially among working and lower middle class Jews, the funding has increased and most important the plutocratic leaders have embraced a virulent militarist foreign policy and repressive domestic policies. Forward describes Abraham Foxman as “diverting the ADL from its self-described mission of fighting all forms of bigotry in the US and abroad to putting the ADL firmly on the side of bigotry and intolerance.” . . .
      . . . The overwhelming response of the Jewish readers to the Forward’s survey was one of indignation, disgust, and anger. As one reader commented, “The economic disconnect between their (CEOs) salaries and the average incomes of those who contribute to their charities is unacceptable”. Another indignant reader remarked succinctly: “Gonifs! (Thieves!)”. Many announced they could cut off future donations. One formerly orthodox reader stated, “I would rather give to a street beggar than to any of these”.
      The drop-off of donations from lower-middle class Jews, however, will have little effect in reducing the salaries of the ‘non-profit’ CEO’s or changing the politics of their ‘non-profits; because they increasingly depend on six and seven digit contributions from Jewish millionaires and billionaires. Moreover, the contributions by big donors are linked to the politics of repression at home and securing multi-billion dollar military aid and trade programs for Israel from the US Treasury. The billionaire donors have no objection to funding the millionaire leaders – as long as they concentrate their efforts on buying the votes of US Congress members and aligning their politics with Israel’s war aims. . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://dissidentvoice.org/2014/01/the-israel-first-industry-and-ceo-profiteering/

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 17, 2014, 7:06 pm

        “The drop-off of donations from lower-middle class Jews, however, will have little effect in reducing the salaries of the ‘non-profit’ CEO’s or changing the politics of their ‘non-profits; because they increasingly depend on six and seven digit contributions from Jewish millionaires and billionaires”

        That’s what I’ve been saying for years now, Dickerson! Judaism, and Zionism, and getting the two mixed up just right, is a job for specialists, professionals! Leaders, not followers!
        Ordinary people just get in the way, and have no stomach for the job.

    • JLewisDickerson
      JLewisDickerson
      October 16, 2014, 4:43 pm

      P.P.P.S. FROM TheJC.com:

      Digital help

      An IT professional with over 30 years experience has launched an initiative to fight antisemitism and anti-Israel activity on social media.
      The DJ First scheme offers free training courses for members of the community on how to use social networks like Twitter.
      Gary Simon, who set up the project, explained that social media could be harnessed as a weapon against antisemitism but the community was suffering from a knowledge gap in the area.

      SOURCE – http://goo.gl/DFssbq

    • JLewisDickerson
      JLewisDickerson
      October 16, 2014, 5:04 pm

      P.P.P.P.S. LASTLY, SEE: “Amateur or professional?” ~ by Rowan Berkley, Niqnaq, posted on Saturday, January 8th, 2011 at 7:56 am

      The weakness of this scheme is that the message boards log IPs and can thus detect sock puppets – RB

      ~ ~ ~ JIDF 4chan operations for Feb 2011 ~ ~ ~
      Jewish Internet Defense Force (offsite)

      This upcoming February we will be launching our largest operation on 4chan and other popular image boards, our objective is to create an image of Palestinians and Lebanese being virulently anti-American and anti-Western.
      Create threads against Israel and fill them with posts from violent Jihadist Palestinians, claim to want to immigrate into the West to do Jihad, later on in the threads post links to propaganda films like Pallywood.
      • Exploit massive Lebanese immigration into Australia as a reason why the Australian people should support Israel.
      • Claim that Israel helps stop Muslim immigration into the West.
      • Post propaganda threads linking to Palestinian and Lebanese suicide bombers and other Muslim extremism, in these threads also reply as a Jew who has been affected by Jihadist violence, explain to the readers that Muslims are a threat to the West.
      Start threads claiming to be Lebanese-Americans or Palestinian-Englanders, portray yourselves as extremely anti-Israel, later on in these threads claim to be a Jew disgusted by the behavior of the Lebanese/Palestinian man.

      MD5: 98bc2f5ba195396e3958bcec640a4292
      -7-6-6-2-5-8-2-1-8-9-3-6-7-8-4-5-6

      SOURCE – http://niqnaq.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/amateur-or-professional/

  10. Nevada Ned
    Nevada Ned
    October 16, 2014, 3:44 pm

    This is a great opportunity for somebody to sponsor a panel including Prof. Weiss., or perhaps have Weiss give a talk by himself. Advertise the talk as

    THE TALK THAT THE JEWISH AGENCY DOESN’T WANT YOU TO HEAR!!!

    That ought to boost attendance, much as BANNED IN BOSTON helped publicize movies a couple of generations ago.

    Include a video clip for Mondoweiss!

  11. American
    American
    October 16, 2014, 6:53 pm

    Princeton may shutting them down but Max is blowing it wide open in a bigger public venue—he’s nailing the Zios it , totally nailing them…listen to his interview with Amy Goodman

    http://media.lannan.org/podcasts/blumenthal-141010.mp3

  12. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia
    October 16, 2014, 10:40 pm

    http://www.unz.com/article/stopping-cyber-hate/#comments
    ADL is meeting with Internet giants to stop ” cyber hate” . Included in the agreements its definition of what hate means
    A:DL. Is also teaming up eith CST how to physically response to antisemitism.
    The Orwellian world has been perfected by the redistribution of semantics ,kind of gerrymandering – some ideas are always antisemite and same some ideas are never .Thr crimes are defined not by the nature but who does and agai st whom.

  13. TheThomas
    TheThomas
    October 18, 2014, 1:01 pm

    The Center for Jewish Life is stifling free speech at Princeton University

    Nothing says freedom like the religious nuts. Freedom FROM religion NOW

Leave a Reply