RUTGERS GETS 'F' FOR PUTTING ANTI-SEMITISM 101 ON THE SCHEDULE

[drdon326]

note: ism related article

http://www.nypost.com/commentary/109.htm

The nation's third college - and the first on the East Coast - to harbor a national anti-Israel hate-fest, featuring tips for destroying the Jewish state and speeches from notable anti-Semites, will not be Columbia or NYU.

A student group at Rutgers University, no slouch in the destroy-Israel department, has snagged the third annual National Student Conference of the Palestine Solidarity Movement, to be held Oct. 10-12.

The event, which organizers expect to draw at least 500 Israel foes from the world over, is to include classes designed to teach kids how to pressure their universities to stop investing in companies that do business with Israel. Expect workshops in nonviolent resistance. Or so we hope.

Organizer Charlotte Kates told me peaceful resistance is the fest's guiding principle. Yet she noted that she, as well as the sponsoring organization, the New Jersey Solidarity Movement - an offshoot of International Solidarity - supports Palestinian homicide bombers.

"Palestinian resistance in all its forms has been a very powerful tool of justice," said Kates, 23, a Rutgers law student. "All forms, from armed struggle to mass protest."

And does Israel have a right to exist?
"Israel is an apartheid, colonial settler state. I do not believe apartheid, colonial settler states have a right to exist."

[smiths_fan_21384]

1. Well, that didn't sound horribly biased.

I don't particularly like NSCPSM, but the Post is so horribly pro-Israel that the slightest deviation from a hard-line stance is labeled as anti-Semitic.

[Gimel]

20. This is then..

one of those "slight deviations"?

national anti-Israel hate-fest, featuring tips for destroying the Jewish state and speeches from notable anti-Semites

Perhaps just a slight deviation from TSOS.

[jos]

2. Bravo for Rutgers!

my alma mater, for standing up to the complaints and threats.

As for the Likud Post, any criticism of Israel is anti-semitism.

[edzontar]

3. More biased, Anti-Palestinian garbage from the NYP

A Repuke and pro-Bush paper if there ever was one!!!

One can disagree with the strident tone of some of these people, but they are coming out against Zionism and/or Israeli policy viz a viz Palestinian rights, which is not EXACTLY the same thing as AntiSemitism.

I really wish people would stop posting this RW, pro-Repuke swill on a Dem board--but hey, I don't make the rules, do I?

[Jim Sagle]

46. And I really wish people would stop posting far-left, pro-terrorist swill

on an American board--but hey, I don't make the rules, do I?

[Violet_Crumble]

48. Of course people don't post pro-terrorist swill here...

So yr wishing for something to stop that doesn't happen, as opposed to someone else wishing for something to stop that does happen. Of course you can put yr money where yr mouth is and post a list of what you see as pro-terrorist swill and WHY you see them as such, but I won't hold my breath waiting...

Violet...

[LARED]

4. Wow

"Palestinian resistance in all its forms has been a very powerful tool of justice," said Kates, 23, a Rutgers law student.

A law student that believes targeting innocent people for murder is a powerful tool of justice? I wonder what kind od law are they teaching over at Rutgers these days?

[mmm]

5. What would you have them do?

It is easy to criticize.
Solutions are not so easy.
Clearly, doing nothing is not at option.

[The Magistrate]

8. Doing Nothing Is An Excellent Option

Violence has got the people of Arab Palestine precisely nothing: its continuation will get them less than nothing.

[ermoore]

36. Actually, it's gotten them a lot.

Violence has gotten them a lot of dead Israelis (which, I guess, is what they seem to want) and a lot of dead Palestinians.

[LARED]

9. I don't have a good answer

But lets not pretend that targeting innocent Israelis is a powerful tool of justice.

It's behavior that is incompatible with justice. It turns the notion of justice on it head. And the fact that a 23 year old law student, no matter what side she advocates, can't see this is disturbing.

[dfong63]

12. tell that to sharon

A law student that believes targeting innocent people for murder is a powerful tool of justice?

why is that any more outrageous than a prime minister of israel not only believing the same thing, but carrying out his beliefs?

[LARED]

17. Can I put you down as

in favor of targeting inoccent people as being a powerful tool of justice?

?

[ermoore]

41. Wrong!

Interestingly enough, if you look at the demographic of Palestinians killed in this latest uprising something like 80% (I think it's actually just a little above 80%) of the deaths are men between the ages of 16 and 40, whereas the Israelis murdered are roughly split fifty-fifty men to women (I think it's actually just under sixty percent male) and there is a much higher percentage of under-16 year olds and above 40 year olds.

In other words, the Israeli casualties represent a more random sampling of the population on account of terrorists just blowing themselves up in a marketplace. The vast majority of the Palestinian casualties are representive of a section of the population that is most often involved in fighting and all that jazz. So it's not like the Israelis are just murdering innocent civilians (though from time to time accidents are sure to happen, thus is the nature of such conflicts). I think you're confusing Sharon with Arafat.

[drdon326]

6. Interesting

"Israel is an apartheid, colonial settler state".

But murderous, fascist, corrupt tyranies are no problem......

what bullshit.

[The Magistrate]

7. The Two Statements Here

One clearly endorsing "all forms" of violence used by various armed bodies of Arab Palestine, without any qualification, and the other denying any legitimacy or right to existence for the state of Israel, certainly indicate a desire not for peace but for continued war.

Nor is there any reason to assume the young lady was mis-quoted; statements like these are a dime a dozen from young radicals in the throes of idealism, and romantic attachment to violence.

[Allah Akbar]

10. Right, they aren't a colonial settler state at all

God GAVE them that land, it says so right there in the bible! Read it and weeps, suckers.

I'm off to reclaim my ancestral home in Scotland, ta!

[Aidoneus]

13. Yes, indeed

and I'm off to reclaim mine in Norway. fair is fair..

banner day today, not everyday do we get the Murdoch's here in all seriousness.

[Darranar]

24. So,

because Jews believe that God gave them the land, they have no right to live in it? Any legitimate, not God-given right to live in Israel is canceled out because according to the Bible, God gave them the land?

Come on. Jews have a legitimate right to live in Israel. The God-given right does not cancel that out; rather, it should be ignored completely in the view of international law.

[Allah Akbar]

34. You must have a comprehension problem with English

I say yes they are a settler state and you say that means I don't think Jews have a right to live where ever the hell they want.

Nope, I think I quite understand what I said and quit trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say.

Thanks

[Muddleoftheroad]

38. Settler states

Aren't ALL states settler states? Should everybody give back their land? Where would the rest of us live?

[Allah Akbar]

44. Exactly my point

Does that mean we can't CALL them settler states?

[drdon326]

11. FWIW...

Here is eva braun's....er...I mean charlottes kates apparent
website.

http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~ckates/cww/index.htm


notice e-mail address at bottom.

d

edit for website...doh!!

[jos]

18. Thanks

I'll send her a congragulatory message!:P

[Violet_Crumble]

26. And you have a problem with that site because?

I just went and looked expected to find anti-semitism, but all I found was a site that was talking about free-speech and an opposition to the McCarthyist tactics of Campus Watch. I can see why you'd have a problem with those issues, Don. :)

Eva Braun? Why are you comparing a student activist to a woman who never, ever spoke out publicly about human rights abuses or as far as I know never made any public political comments? Eva Braun's crime was that in order to stay in her gilded cage she chose pretty much to give up her own mind and in fact refused to step in and speak to Hitler to try to save a church property when it was one that she'd spent a lot of time in as a girl when one of the nuns who'd taught her approached her to try to intervene...

Violet...

[Gimel]

49. Gee

Is that all? Her infamous behavior is no doubt over-blown.

:-)

[dfong63]

14. no state has an inherent right to exist

... not communist Russia, not nazi Germany, not apartheid South Africa, not imperial Rome, certainly not the USA, and not zionist Israel either.

the people have a right to live, but the state doesn't.

stop equating criticism of the state of Israel with anti-semitism.

[The Magistrate]

15. Nothing Has A Right, Sir

Save perhaps what can be vindicated by force. By your logic, there is no right for an Arab Palestine to exist. The concept of "rights" is a purely human invention, and exists only by mutual agreement among people.

[GabysPoppy]

16. When that criticism is wrapped around words of intense venom

It most certainly is Anti-semitism.

Add a dash of praise for terrorists bombers for good measure and if you don't call that dish Anti-Semitic, a good look in her mirror is justified to determine what she really is.

[jos]

19. Oh bullshit

Then anyone who praises the actions of the Sharon government is an anti-Arab, anti-Muslim racist. One can oppose the actions of the State of Israel, or even oppose the existence of the State itself, and not be anit-semitic. Many Jews feel that way, myself included. Zionism is not Judaism. It's only the "Israel right or wrong" crowd that has made it appear as if it were.

[Darranar]

25. Criticism of Zionism...

is not anti-semitism. I agree with you there. But I do not agree that praising the IDf for defending Israel is equivalent to praising terrorists for their "resistance" involving slaughtering innocent civilians.

Certainly, some Israeli soldiers have killed civilians. Many, however, have never fired their gun. Many have never killed a person, or fallen under fire. A suicide bomber always kills, unless he is stopped. He kills innocents on purpose, for no legitimate reason. Equating the two is unjust.

[jos]

27. I wasn't referring to military operations

I was referring to the occupation, land confiscation and segregation of the Palestinians.

[Darranar]

29. Even if you are segregated,

occupied, and have had your land confiscated, you are better off alive then dead.

[Scurrilous]

31. It's better to die on your feet.......

......than live on your knees. It seems that a good number of Palestinians willingly choose death rather than live under Israeli rule.

edit: spelling

[Darranar]

32. Yeah, right...

...taking dozens of innocent civilians with them in so-called self-defense that accomplishes nothing good. Did you miss that little fact? They're far from heroes.

[The Magistrate]

35. That Is A Cheap And Damnable Sentiment, Mr. Scurrilous

Perhaps you might want to cease living vicarious dreams of glory through the suffering of these people, and take up drag racing, or paint-ball wars, or some other means of finding thrill and risk in your own existence.

[Scurrilous]

37. Mr. Magistrate.

Cheap and damnable? Why? Because I pointed out that some people choose death over occupation. The Palestinians are hardly the first group to choose this course. Maybe I should have used a more palatable sentiment, something along the lines of 'Give me liberty or give me death.' Better? Now exuse me while I drag race to a paint- ball war.

[Gimel]

45. Suicide to end it?

That is one way, and it is not couragous. Never has been considered a way to solve problems. Taking innocent lives? Not just suicide, but homicide, will only ensure that future generations suffer from the crime. A glorious death? hardly.

[Poll_Blind]

39. Did I miss something in Mr. Scurrilous' post?

I find his message neither cheap nor damnable. Your over-the-top condemnation is self-highlighting in it's incongruity.

PB

[The Magistrate]

40. The Sentiment, Sir

Sits poorly in the mouth of a spectator. This sort of exaggeration and romanticism steels many to resist compromise, that might at many times in the past have brought an end to the killing, and might still do so in the near future. Nothing is served by glorification of a futile resistance, that has resulted in nothing through the decades but the continual reduction of the possible area for a sovereign state of Arab Palestine, and has beggared the people who would have that state for their own. Such rhetoric accomplishes nothing but the gratification of those who utter it: it is an impediment to clear thinking, and to any prospect for peace.

[Scurrilous]

42. All exaggerations aside Mr. Magistrate...

I glorified noone. I romanticized nothing. I sought no gratification in my own rhetoric. I was merely replying to Mr. Darranar's post. I neither condoned or condemned the actions of the Palestinians. My intent was to point out that their willingness to kill themselves belies Mr. Darranar's contention that life under occupation is preferable to death.

[The Magistrate]

43. Fair Enough, Sir

It is to me a foolish attitude that has got them nothing but grief, and will get them nothing but grief, but that is more a matter of personal temperament than anything else. It is a thing that can get right up my left nostril at times: please accept my apology, Sir, for exercising my intemperance on you; it was undeserved.

"No fool like an old fool."

[Gimel]

22. I don't hear much...

actual criticism, at least not the constructive kind that actually focuses on the context of the issues. I hear more slander and hate against Israel, and yes, it often sounds like the wish to destroy the people of Israel, including the GOI. The government and the people make up a state in a democracy.

The state's inherent right to exist, since the Magna Carter, has been with the people's participation and consent in forming the government.

[Gimel]

21. I guess ...

that throws the cover off of ISM.

[drdon326]

33. You guess right...

d

[Cassandra]

23. Notwithstanding the Post's usual low standard for headlines,

""Palestinian resistance in all its forms has been a very powerful tool of justice," said Kates, 23, a Rutgers law student. "All forms, from armed struggle to mass protest."

And does Israel have a right to exist?
"Israel is an apartheid, colonial settler state. I do not believe apartheid, colonial settler states have a right to exist." "

I would say that Kates is a fool and by her standards, most of the Americas, as well as Australia and other nations, have no right to exist. How easy it is, when you're 23, with no sense of history before 5 minutes ago, to see everything in black and white.

BTW, making up stupid NYPost headlines can be a very entertaining party game.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. And the low standard for content...

That seems to be something consistant in every article from the NYPost that gets posted here. I read something in Ha'aretz yesterday about Rutgers that didn't contain the same dribble from the author as the NYPost one, which does indeed suggest that political criticism of Israel = anti-semitism. The Ha'aretz article talked about free-speech, etc...

For her first comment, if 'all forms' didn't mean attacks on civilians, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Her second comment was as you pointed out just plain silliness and doesn't stand up if you apply a bit of logic to it. That comment might be silly but it's not anti-semitism, either. Mind you, she's right when she said that Israel was an apartheid, colonial settler state. She's just wrong imo about it not having a right to exist, and even if she draws a line in time and says that Australia, the US etc do have a right to exist because the colonial settlement of those nations took place a few centuries ago while Israels happened in the 20th century, it still doesn't justify saying Israel doesn't have a right to exist....

Is the NYPost is owned by Murdoch? It looks like an even worse variety of Murdoch rag than our own Daily Telegraph...


Violet...

[Cassandra]

30. A few years ago,

some of the major department stores were approached by the NYPost for advertising. The stores said, "Your readers are our shoplifters. No thanks."
I can't remember whether it's Murdoch or Kalikow that owns it. It's only 25 cents, but I think that's a lot to pay for toilet paper.
I remember when it was a sweet little family newspaper that my father used to bring home for us when the NY Times seemed a bit daunting.

edit: changed a word.

[sabbat hunter]

47. owner of post.....

is rupert murdoch. i barely consider the NY post a newspaper as it is barely above tabloids such as the national enquirer. the headlines are a joke as are half the 'news' stories. the editorial page is naturally conservative.
if it wasnt such a rag on other points its conservative editorial staff would be a good thing. it is always good to get both sides of issues and have an debate over the issues. helps keep people informed and make their own honest decisions. also by keeping informed of the conservative viewpoints one can sucessfully counter them with the progressive viewpoint

that is why fox news, while in no way 'fair and balanced' or 'we report..YOU decide' accurate, it is something i watch on occassion to keep myself up to date on what conservatives are thinking.


peace
david
:hippie: