top
Palestine
Palestine
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Calendar
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
General Union of Palestine Students Statement Regarding May 7th
by sfgups
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 12:40 PM
The media has misrepresented what really happened on May 7th at the General Union of Palestine Students protest at SFSU. Here is a summary of what really happened.
Copy the code below to embed this movie into a web page:
The Scene
· Police barricades were erected, creating an area where pro-Palestinian supporters were to be contained. This is not a tactic regularly used by the university. Several times, pro-Israel students have counter demonstrated at GUPS events, but never once have they been caged.
· Trashcans were taken off of campus in the area where the pro-Israel rally and the counter exhibit were to take place. Again, this is not a tactic the university has used during GUPS events. By removing the trashcans administration followed tactics used by anti-terrorism specialists around the world; succumbing to the stereotype of Arabs, Muslims and pro-Palestinians as aggressive terrorists that may cause a riot or plant a bomb. This form of racism should be considered intolerable.
· San Francisco Police Department forces were brought onto campus before the event even started to ensure the security of the pro-Israel rally attendees. Again during events held by pro-Palestinian students, off-campus Police forces have not been brought onto campus before events have even commenced. This makes it clear that SFSU administration considers the security of Pro-Israel supporters more important than pro-Palestinian supporters.

The Event
· 11:30 Pro-Palestinian students begin to set up their planned educational exhibit on the grass. This exhibit included, a mock refugee camp, a mock checkpoint, a mock massacre scene and several posters. Despite the cage, our intention was to go ahead with the event.

· 11:50 Pro-Israel supporters begin to flood Malcolm X plaza. Various reports of pro-Palestinians being called racist names begin to sporadically come in. Note: Racist slurs began to occur before their first speaker came on.

· 12:00 The first speakers at the pro-Israel rally began to talk. In an attempt to hear what they were saying pro-Palestinian supporters (inside the cage) lined up behind the barricade (100 feet away) from the stage. Pro-Israel supporters began to taunt and tease. Comments such as: "animals", "terrorists", "sand niggers", "camel jockeys", etc. were hurled in our direction. Pro-Palestinian supporters began to chant as a form of defense. Such chants, include "hey hey, ho ho the occupation has to go", "no justice, no peace", "stop US aid to Israel",
"Sharon:War Criminal". It became quite clear, that this was not a pro-peace rally.

· 12:30 Pro-Palestinian supporters abandoned the original plan because of the slurs aimed in their direction. Chants continued. Chanting is allowed by the university. Heated debates between the two sides began to occur. Although there may have been some arguments, several exchanges of ideas were made. By this point: pro-Palestinian students were yelled at and harassed. In addition to things mentioned earlier these are some other comments reported: "go fuck your camels", "Arab losers", "go back to your caves". The tense atmosphere on May 7th was initiated by the pro-Israel supporters.

· 1:20 At about 1:20 the rally began to wrap up. Pro-Israel supporters were escorted off of campus. We were let out of the cage. It should be noted that during this period students were prevented from walking freely on their own campus. Pro-Palestinian students were finally allowed into Malcolm X plaza. It was then that students noticed an Israeli flag hanging from the student union. The student union is for all students and hanging a flag from there is against school regulations. Many students didn't feel that the Israeli flag should be hung from the student union. The Israeli flag represents oppression and occupation of the Palestinian people. It was then that students began chanting "take it down, take it down". An administrator took down the flag, supporters cheered and dispersed shortly after. It did not seem as if the police were concerned about the developing situation as they did not tell people to move back or take out there batons as they do when they feel a confrontation is likely. No arrests were made.


The events of May 7th have fit into a continued pattern of discrimination perpetuated by the San Francisco State University Administration. They have made it extremely difficult for GUPS to reserve rooms, to hold events and to express ourselves freely. Other student groups on campus do not have to jump the hurdles GUPS has to when planning an event. We have been labeled and stereotyped as aggressive terrorists by our own administration. Instead of representing us, it seems as though they are working against us, trying to find any way to suppress our voices and the pro-Palestinian movement on campus. In lieu of the events on May 7th, President Corrigan has released a statement, that is one sided and unfair. He along with others on campus, in their attempts to suppress our voices and take away from the Palestinian movement, are attempting to label us anti-Semites and hate mongers. Unfortunately, they are sadly mistaken. We stand firmly against anti-Semitism and all other forms of racism. We will not be intimidated by these politically motivated attacks on pro-Palestinian students.


It is time for the community to get involved and let President Corrigan and the SFSU administration know that their attempts to block free speech on campus will not be tolerated. Here are lists of demands we are making:
1. An apology from the administration for their treatment of pro-Palestinian students
2. Retraction of President Corrigan's letter attacking the counter demonstration
3. The establishment of an Arab and Muslim studies program to expand knowledge of the history of Arabs and Muslims. This is necessary in order to ensure Academic freedom on our campus and a fair and balanced course offering.
4. Administration must drop all disciplinary action against GUPS and pro-Palestinian demonstrators
5. In a post September 11th era, it should be a requirement that members of administration take a sensitivity training course. There has been and continues to be a severe backlash against Arab Americans and the administration should be sensitive to this, not take part in it.


Please send all letters/email to the following. Address everything to President Corrigan but CC it to everyone else on this list.



President Robert Corrigan
Corrigan [at] sfsu.edu
1600 Holloway Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94132
415-338-1381


J.E. Penny Saffold
Vice President, Student Affairs/Dean of Students
1600 Holloway Avenue, San Francisco CA 94132
415-338-2032
psaffold [at] sfsu.edu


Donna Cunningham
Judicial Affairs Officer
1600 Holloway Ave., San Francisco CA 94132
415-338-2032
drcunn [at] sfsu.edu


University Dean, Human Relations
Ken Monteiro
1600 Holloway Ave., San Francisco CA 94132
monteiro [at] sfsu.edu


College of Ethnic Studies
415-338-1693

Office of the Chancellor
California State University
401 Golden Shore
Long Beach, CA 90802


Senator Jackie Speier
400 South El Camino Real, Suite 630
San Mateo, CA 94402
Senator.speier [at] sen.ca.gov
§Chants heard at protest:
by sfgups
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 12:40 PM
Copy the code below to embed this movie into a web page:
Pro-Palestinian Supporters yelling:
Free Palestine (non racial, NOT Anti semetic chant)
End the occupation now (non racial, NOT Anti semetic chant)
Zionist off of campus now (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
No Justice, No Peace (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
Hay Hay Ho Ho the occupation's got to go (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
Israel is a racist state (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
Israel is a terrorist state (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
War criminal, Ariel Sharon (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
Stop US aid to Israel (non racial, NOT anti semetic chant)
Propaganda (repeated)

The moderator of the GUPS groups was calming the crowd down, telling them to relax, and to move back from police lines. He was also putting the crowd in order.

There were no chants that had anything to do with Anti Semetism, or any racial slurs, or any threatening remarks made towards the Pro Israeli students and supporters

Pro-Israeli Supporter yelling:
Supporter squaring up to fight with a Pro-Palestinian supporter
"We don't want peace" yelled by and Israeli women
"You're a pig" yelled by an Israeli supporter
"Killers………Terrorists" yelled by and elderly Israeli supporter
"Shut the fuck up" yelled by Pro-Israeli student
"Fuck you, you fucking pussy" yelled by the same student
Supporter towards the end of the rally insinuating a fight from behind the police

Campus Police:
Did not listen to police captain, by telling the officers to keep the peace. They left a heated discussion by an Israeli supporter, and a Palestinian supporter alone, and did not care to back them up, or to stop the discussion, even though told by students they would take care of it, they should have been the authorative figure.

Police did not make an attempt to keep the Israeli supporters 100 feet away from the Palestinian supporters, they let them get as close as two feet from each other until they started to move each side back.

Campus police would not allow Palestinian students and supporters into Malcolm X Plaza after the rally was over, or to go into the Caesar Chavez Student Center. Kept a human wall between the students and the Plaza.

Israeli flag was hanging on the Student Center wall, and was not supposed to be there in the first place. This is a diverse campus, and the flag should not have been on the Student Center wall. The Police did not attempt to tell the Israeli supporters to take it down, and provoked the Palestinian supporters to keep chanting "Take it down" until, they actually took it down. The police as well as the administration could of have prevented this from happening, if they simply told the Hillal students to take the flags down from the Student Center walls.

Administration:
Dr. Bowmen, and Dr. Brown did not make any efforts as heads of Administration to stop the rowdiness of the Pro Israeli supporters. When they got close to the Palestinian supporters, they let them get close, when they saw people getting into heated debates and discussions, they did not push back the crowds that were forming. They sat back with their arms crossed, and just simply watched, as both crowds got out of hand.
Add Your Comments

Comments  (Hide Comments)

The following statement is in response to the various allegations that have been made against the organizers and participants that were involved in the counterdemonstration to protest Israel on May 7th at San Francisco State University . The purpose of this statement is to express solidarity with theGeneral Union of Palesetine Students and to counter the distortions in the letter President Corrifan has written concernign GUPS . All forms of protest and dissent against the policies of the United States and Israel which condemn the Palestinian people to lives of oppression and desperation should continue without reprisal from the university administration. On a campus which consistently prides itself on its diversity and history of progressive activism, the current witchhunt against the General Union of Palestine Students is nothing less than a politically motivated attack aimed at wiping out all forms of dissent at San Francisco State University. As individuals and members of student organizations, first and foremost, we oppose all forms of racism, prejudice, and bigotry, including that directed against Jews, Arabs, and other members of oppressed groups. Anti-semitism in any and all forms is not only morally reprehensible, but creates huge barrier to building solidarity for the Palestinian cause and will only weaken and eventually destroy any movement that attempts to build resistance to the brutality of the Israeli government.

We in fact see parallels between the brave struggle of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto uprisings of 1943 and struggle against the Israeli occupation taking place in Palestine today, and are proud to state that openly. Nonetheless, it is important to say that Robert Corrigan's primary concern is not to oppose anti-Semitism on this campus, but to clamp down on political dissent and civil liberties in all forms. The emerging Palestinian solidarity movement on this campus is his first target in a campaign that he would like to extend to all anti-war, progressive, and radical organizing that takes place on this campus. In order to make this school a friendly place for the private sector to set up shop, Corrigan wishes for it to remain as free from political protest as possible. He has taken a cue from the University of California at Berkeley administration in this current campaign against the General Union of Palestine Students and first and foremost wants to see this organization shut down for good. This goes against the tradition of free speech, diversity, and opposition to injustice that has been part of San Francisco State University's activist history since the acheivement of the first Ethnic Studies program in the nation through a grassroots political campaign. In the face of the current attacks, we will continue this tradition proudly and refuse to be intimidated.

We, as San Francisco State University individuals, organizations, faculty, and staff members support the following demands:

- No disciplinary measures should be taken against the General Union of Palestine Students, both as an organization and individuals within it by the administration. Corrigan's targeting GUPS for misconduct is a politically motivated attack that must be oppossed in all forms. Any complaints arising from the protest which took place on May 7th should be directed to Associated Students, the elected voice of the student body.

-Free speech and protest are a basic right, not a privilege, that all students should be able to express. It's a cruel irony that a campus where plazas and conference rooms are named after political leaders such as Rosa Parks and Malcolm X, students following in their tradition of speaking out against injustice such as the General Union of Palestine Students have been made the targets of a witchhunt. This is unjust and free speech should be encouraged, not repressed.

-We support the formation of a campaign calling for divestment of San Francisco State University from the state of Israel and will not be intimidated by the current attacks.

-We oppose all forms of racism and racist scapegoating, whether it's against Jews, Arabs, or any other oppressed groups.
by berkeley
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 12:59 PM
There has been a lot of debate on this site over GUPS actions at this rally. Why are people (even on the Left) pressuring for GUPS to apologize when it is obvious from the video above that the proIsraelis were using racist chants?

Why aren't more people standing up to defend Palestinian students for selective enforcement of hate speech laws?
by supporter
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 1:47 PM
Hi,I don't understand when I watch the video what is happening, it is short and I cant understand who is chanting what. Gups, it would be cool if you posted more video, if it was all over the internet it would make it hard for people to continue with their bullshit. Put it up! If you need assistance, post a request here
by I was there
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 1:48 PM
Do you have any better videos?? I was there and I agree with everything you're saying. If you could get any better evidence, it would be helpful. Our eye-witness accounts don't seem to count for much, or putting the Israeli flag on the student union.

As one prof said - if this was really a 'peace' rally, like they said it was (on t-shirts and banners), then both the Israeli and Palestinian flag would have been flown together.

Good work. Please put out calls on here if you need eye-witness support.
Thanks.
by CA activist
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 2:02 PM
Have you ever spoken with a convicted felon? If you go to a prison and speak with the inmates, 90% of them will tell you that they are innocent, didn't do anything wrong and are being punished by The Man for no good reason.
These palestinian groupies sound just like the inmates. It's pretty pathetic. At least the neo-nazis brag about what they did and don't make up lies to hide their actions. These GUPS screwed up by letting their true hatred be public for all to see and people are not happy. This pathetic letter with its demands only makes things worse.
Why don't you own up to the mistakes that you made and learn something.

Now that Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qadea are threatening to blow up apartment buildings in the USA, you can bet things are going to get even harder for people of Arab descent. If you want to stem the tide of the backlash I'd figure out how to make alliances with Jewish groups and not demonize them. Your hate will boomerang right back on to you. Soon you may find yourself with very few allies.
by Media critic
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 2:08 PM
Not everything that went down is being shown in the video. It has been edited. Typical Pravda Propoganda techniques.

Ho humm.

Maybe things will look different after India and Pakistan blow each other up. Not that anyone here cares. The only people who count are Palestinians. Don't you forget it.

by Me
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 2:10 PM
You guys can have Snehal Shingavi to teach your "Arab and Muslim Studies" that you want established at your school. HAHAHA. It will go great with your 1st jobs after college, where you get ask me, "Would you like fries with that?"

FREE PALESTINE!
by sfsu alum
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 2:39 PM
It isn't only the media that presented you in a bad light but the head of the Jewish studies program, the administration and your fellow students.

So the bonehead shouted, "you terrorist." Big deal. I didn't hear anyone saying "camel jockey" or any of the other slurs mentioned. Even if they did, it's their right to speak freely just as people are free to call the Israeli's "murderers." It doesn't mean that I agree with them but they have that right here in the US.

However, I have heard from professors, students, and the administration that people were calling for the deaths of Jews. That is unaceptable. Our society must draw the line when people physically threaten one another. I'd feel the same way if people were shouting "death to Muslims" whites, blacks, Mexicans, Asians, or any other group. And this is especially the case on a college campus where one would like to think that ideas can be debated without people coming to blows.

There is also the issue of that so-called "blood libel" flyer. If the GUPS "stand firmly against anti-Semitism and all other forms of racism," why haven't they distanced themselves from that flyer in this statement?
by Letter Writer
Tuesday May 21st, 2002 8:51 PM
I am writing a letter right now in support of the Palestinian students. I would like to send a copy to GUPS but do not see a contact E-mail on your website. Please provide us with your contact E-mail. The letter will go without a copy to you if I do not have your E-mail, but I think you should have some idea of how many letters are being written in your support and what is their content.

To the other members of the Jewish community reading this: We have all heard how the Jewish community is a cultured community but apparently the Zionists seem to think they are exempt. All of these names that were hurled at these Palestinian students by both young and old would have made Hitler proud. I am sure these names were hurled as we see those same names and that same arrogant attitude from the Zionists on this and other Indymedia websites. These websites are legal documents in that they are a written, public record, where the Zionists proudly demonstrate to all the world how despicable they are with filthy, racist name-calling and lewd and lascivious pornography. It is clear the Zionists worship money more than culture.
by Patricia A. Jennings, M.Ed. (tish [at] napanet.net)
Thursday May 23rd, 2002 10:38 AM
Dear Editor,

I am the mother of a SFSU Jewish student and I attended the rally on May 7. The above descriptions of what occurred are totally inaccurate.

First of all, the pro-Palestinian counter demonstrators attempted to disrupt the rally with bull horns, drums and whistles which are against university policy and state law. The rally was organized as an anti-hate, pro-peace, pro-Israel rally and came after week after week of pro-Palestinian rallys when speakers continuously made vicious anti-Semitic remarks. Also it came on the heals of the distribution of an ugly anti-Semitic poster depicting saying "Palestinian children meat - Slaughtered according to Jewish rites"
A copy can be found at:
http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/~armel/bloodlibel.html

The Jewish students of SFSU are by-in-large extremely liberal and support a two state solution. They have tried numerous times to dialog with Palestinian students to no avail. They have been told that the Palestinians will not dialog until the Jewish students disavow any support for any Jewish state. Many of the Jewish students are Israeli or have family in Israel. The rally was conducted to try to make an effort towards peace.


At 1:30, the pro-Palestinian counter-demonstrators pushed their way into the plaza and cornered us against the wall. The shouted, "Take it down!" referring to the banner that was hung against the wall. Since it was not yet 2:00 and the Jewish students had reserved the plaza until 2:00 it was not fair for these students to make this demand.

The speech then became extremely hateful. There were threats of violence. Some said, "You guys are chicken. If the police weren't here, we'd kill you!" They chanted, "Kill the Jews!" "Burn mother F-----, Burn" "Hitler should have finished you off." We felt like our lives were in danger. We were trapped against the wall and could not move. The police surrounded us to protect us, but did nothing to remove the counter-demonstrators.

The SFPD had to come and escort us off the campus.
As a liberal and a Jew, it is becomming extremely difficult to tolerate this hatefulness among the supporters of the Palestinians. If we can't work towards peace here in the US, how will there ever be peace in the Middle East?

I hope and pray that you will print my response.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Patricia A. Jennings
by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Thursday May 23rd, 2002 11:00 AM
I forgot to mention that throughout the event, I did not hear one incident of hateful speech directed at the pro-Palestinians. I do understand that there were two cases of individuals yelling "camel jockies" and "sand n------" which I deplore and the Jewish student groups have already apologized for. These do not compare to the threats of violence we heard directed at us. Also, the pro-Palestinian students have yet to apologize to the Jewish students for their treats of death or for the "blood libel" poster.

by evan roberts
Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:15 PM
Up til now I had not had the opportunity to hear what Palestinian students had to say about the events at this rally. The first I heard about them was accounts by pro-Israel demonstrators claiming an "anti-Jewish pogrom", anti-Semitic slurs, and "physical assault".

These claims are not supported by media accounts, e.g. in the Washington Post or the San Francisco Jewish Bulletin....which reported the pro-Palestinian slogans as "Master-subject relationship: creates anti-social behavior." "No peace -- no justice," "End the
occupation now," "Free, free Palestine," and "Israel is a racist state." It also said: "Occasionally there were yells of, "Go back to Europe." One young man carried a Palestinian flag and wore a "Hello My Name Is"
sticker which read "F--- Sharon."

None of which is anti-Semitic.

One of the other comments asked why GUPS hadn't apologized for the flyer with the "canned Palestinian children meat" graphic....well, they did, according to the University administration: in fact, they began blacking out that corner of the flier the next day. They also sent a letter of apology, which was printed in the student paper...
by LQ (gups [at] sfsu.edu)
Thursday May 23rd, 2002 10:34 PM
As said in the statement,
We were not calling for the death of jews at all. In fact the videotape of the univesity and our own videotape footage can corroborate this. There were Jews who stood in solidarity with us inside the cage on May 7th.
The police are currently reviewing their videotape and parts of ours. Hopefully, we will have more footage up on the site soon. I did want to make it clear. The attempt to label us as anti-semites and hate mongers so that we will stop speaking out against Israeli policy is intolerable and it will not work. Ms. Jennings accounts are incorrect. As mentioned in our statement, we do not want to cause tension. Because of the pro-Israeli onslaught of racist slurs, threatening comments and the universities decision to invoke new procedures, Pro-Palestinians were made targets on May 7th. Someone posted saying they didn't hear any racist slurs. I encourage that person to consider my viewpoint. A viewpoint of an individual who was caged and who was harrased and who was called racist names. The Palestinian movement will continue and we will not let these accusations effect it. Another thing, the "blood libel" flier was created by an off campus advisor to the MSA and GUPS and MSA's names were printed without approval of either organization. Once the blunder was noticed apologies were issued. IF ANYONE IS TO APOLOGIZE TO ANYONE: ITS PRO PALESTINIAN STUDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED AND HARRASSED. AND NO FOR THE LAST TIME, WE WERE NOT CHANTING ANTI SEMETIC CHANTS!! aNY EMAILS CAN BE SENT TO GUPS [at] SFSU.EDU
by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Thursday May 23rd, 2002 11:47 PM
Regarding the apology: the Muslim student organization issued an apology to the president of the university. GUPS never apologized and MSA did not send the apology to Hillel nor was it published in the student paper.
by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Thursday May 23rd, 2002 11:53 PM
In response to the last post: the university official who was videotaping was OUTSIDE the mob scene around the table. Consequently, all you can hear on the tape are the loud chants. You cannot hear individual remarks. Furthermore, since the cameraman was outside the scene, all you can see are the backs of the people in the mob. There are many people who can confirm my allegations. Check my web site. Many of us were close to tears as we were attacked with threats of violence including "Kill the Jews" "Hitler should have finished you off" "Burn, mother f-----, burn."

I'm sorry if you can't face facts. The Jewish students have made numerous attempts to dialog with the Palestinian student organizations. Conditions have been set by these groups to make it impossible.

Do you want to continue to promote hatred? Or do you want to promote peace? We are for peace. Why don't you join us?
by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Friday May 24th, 2002 12:03 AM
I am taking the liberty of posting an excellent commentary by SFSU student Benjamin Epstein on the dilemma faced by liberal Jews.

Dear BuzzFlash,

I have read your site since the 2000 (s)election fiasco. And I've always respected your dedication. You have recently put up a link that I have personally experienced, and I am grateful for it. I'd like to inform you... and your readers... about a very frightening development.

Unfortunately, this is a problem I've been finding too much on the Left wing, not the Right.

You see, I'm a Jewish student at San Francisco State University, the same one which recently had the Riot incident that has even been reported in the Jerusalem Post. Our campus has, for a long time, been a nest of Anti-Semitic and Anti-Israel movements. Many of these movements have been trying to attach themselves to Left-Wing causes in general, and have been having some success.

If you are not Jewish, it is hard to express how frightening this is. I have seen Palestinian rallies on my campus, where signs with swastikas were displayed. They had an Israeli flag with a swastika replacing the star of David. Most infamous has been the blood libel poster they posted around campus, one that accused Israelis of using the blood of Palestinian babies for Jewish rites. Speakers have called us the "rise of the Jewish Crackers," have called for the exile of all the Jews from Israel, and cheered wildly upon hearing of the ambush that claimed the lives of 13 Israelis.

The riot story relates to the counter demonstration of our own Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace, Anti-Hate rally. Their counter demonstration tried to shout down every speaker. Our first speaker was a Holocaust survivor, and she had a crowd shouting "Shame on you" at her. When the rally ended and we were trying to clean up, they flooded the plaza, tore down and stomped one of our flags, and cornered us against a wall. A police barrier prevented physical violence. But I saw hate-filled people shouting "Burn Fuckers Burn" and "Hitler should have finished the job!" as we sang Oseh Shalom, a prayer for peace.

BuzzFlash, I am aware of the struggles the Palestinian people go through. And I know Liberals, like those who read BuzzFlash, sympathize for underdogs. And I know that Israel, like all countries, has blemishes on its record.

But it has done beautiful things as well. And after I saw a mob that could have been a Pogrom were it not for the defensive line of police -- I realized that it is more important than ever that Israel survives, for as Anti-Semitism rises, it is of the utmost importance that the one nation that is a consistent advocate of the Jews remains viable.

The most frightening thing is that those students on my campus who are against Israel refuse to talk to us. They condemn us as Zionists, and because we will never convince them, they refuse to listen to what we have to say. I have seen a girl who claimed to be a Socialist refuse to read a piece by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. because it had something good to say about Israel. A liberal refused to read a piece by Dr. King because it was that important for her to continue hating Israel... and by extension, hate the fact that Jews have a place to go. Are these real liberals? Do liberals now hate Jews? Were the Palestinians who were praising Hitler and urging the destruction of Israel... liberals?

I'm fairly certain they aren't conservatives. Conservatives aren't popular on my campus. And the Conservatives have been solid in supporting Israel.

I'm in a dilemma, BuzzFlash As a Jew, I'm afraid. Osama bin Laden has said to his followers that it is their duty to kill Americans, and to kill Jews. I fall in both categories. I have heard some Socialists claim that if Israel accepts it destruction and becomes an Arab state of Palestine, the Jews will be treated fairly. But from my knowledge of history, in the world and the region, I do not believe this.

Yet, I support the Liberal causes... environmentalism, anti-corporatism, and Al Gore. But if the Left wing jumps onto the Anti-Israel bandwagon, where am I supposed to stand? Am I expected to support the Left, and urge my own destruction? Or will I need to turn to the Right -- and support a party that trashes the environment, cares only for wealth, overturned a free election -- but seems more willing to protect me as a Jew and the Jewish state.

Please BuzzFlash, understand that I am praying that I will never have to make such a choice. Help the Liberal movement support a peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians. There isn't one here on the SFSU campus. But remember that a peaceful coexistence includes Israel as a Jewish state, and that is not a bad thing. Zionism has saved millions of Jews from living under Anti-Semitic governments, and that is

no exaggeration.

 

Sincerely,

 

Benjamin Epstein

Graduate Student

San Francisco State University

 


by .
Friday May 24th, 2002 12:29 AM
How many more melodramatic speeches do we have to listen to from privilaged upper class zionists? Really, it's just pathetic. If you have to blow supposed "anti-semitism" so much out of proportion to back your morally twisted causes you will only bring more feelings of disgust on you.
by jill
Friday May 24th, 2002 1:01 AM
thank you GUPS and your supporters for showing what hypocrits you are. You complaining about dishonesty in the media- then try your hardest to add your lies to it. Then there are the lefties spewing about "Zionists" all the time. I di not know any Zionists but anyone who is an enemy of morons like you has to have a lot going for them. Your hatred while demanding peace is laughable. Worse of all you are all settlers- you are on someone else's land while those you stole it from live in the worst ghettos- reservations- in the country. Not one of you whinners-
imigrants, lefties, muslims, arabs and all their slavish fans are willing to step off of this stolen land. You live on it like parasites- living so much better than the natives,and ignoring it all it your frenzy to persecute everyone else.
by .
Friday May 24th, 2002 1:08 AM
How many more self ritcheous speeches will we have to hear from zelous little activists who are just in this for the head rush they get out of acting like fasicts? There are far more repressive regimes the Israel, and yes, many of these receive a buttload of US taxpayer money. Most of these countries Muslim- perhaps little lefties are afraid to confront people of certain religious and/or ethnic groups? You demonize Jews and Christians oh-so-easily, and it is only because it doesn't fit your agenda to place blame objectively.
by Ashley
Friday May 24th, 2002 1:13 AM
You're so right I too am sick of people yelling anti-semitism just because they are called a few names, subjected to a few death threats, have their homes, synogoges, busniesses, and cemitaries vandalized!! OOppps. Sorry, I got too melodramatic! Bad me. Of course you don't want Jews to be vocal when hate crimes happen to them- it is usually lefties who perpetuate it. Other ethnic and religious groups you encouage to speak out again discrimination. How self serving!
by .
Friday May 24th, 2002 1:23 AM
I'd just like to add that the levels of anti-jew racism and anti-arab racism are not comparable. Racism against Arabs is and has been extremely strong in the United States, and the numbers of hate crimes against Arabs, and muslims in general is much higher. Zionists scream about racism while they are slaughtering the indegnious people of Palestine, spreading venomous bigotery across the globe against Palestinians and Arabs, and they expect me to take them seriously while they are a highly privilage and wealthy elite in the US, having BOTH Israeli and US citizenship. They are spoiled children to say the least and the cries of anti-jew racism are extremely exaggerated for their own gains.
by !
Friday May 24th, 2002 4:21 AM
You only have to look at the previous message to see the ignorance that drives the morons on the left.
The number of hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims aren't greater than those against Jews- where'd ya get your statistics? The difference is that hate crimes against Jews are usually carried out by lefties, Arabs or Muslims- so their is a complicite need to downplay it- it painfully shows what liars and hypocrits you are.
As for the hate crimes to be legitimaized by the injustices of the Israeli's- that too it a sad excuse as anyone who knows anything about current events knows that Muslim countries are the most intolererant against everyone and discrimination and persecution against everyone- gays, women- and the banning of any other religious groups are par for the course. Women are still put in prison for being raped, gays are executed as are "nonbelievers" or those who convert to other religions. So according to you it is legitimate to harrass my local Saudi shop owner over it. Luckily I see that racial profiling is wrong, and scapegoating innocent people for something a small group in another country is doing is wrong. That you don't get this, and your continued need to make derogatory stereotypes about Jews shows how full of shit you are. No doubt your one of those people who will call racism at every chance you get when it comes to other ethnic groups.
by me
Friday May 24th, 2002 5:08 AM
So you are upset that Jews fight against racism against them? It just upsets you because it exposes the lies of the lefties claims of fighting against racism. That's almost as bad as GUPS who commits hate crimes then demands that other people take sensitivity training to learn how to better coddle them.
by James
Friday May 24th, 2002 5:23 AM
Looking at these posts that insinate that jews deserve to be racially profilled, that hold all Jews accountable, that call Jews greedy, that try and deflect criticism of racism by denying it or criticizing the victim for "blowing it out of proportion"..... And you people are fighting for justice and peace? Bullshit. Most of the people who post would be protesting this garbage if it was directed towards any other ethnic group. That is the painful truth. You have pointed out a million times the irony that those who were victims of the holocaust victimized others. The new irony in that those who protested against racism, racial profiling, and hate crimes are now it's biggest advocates.
And yes, protesting against Israel isn't racist. But yes, making racial slurs or condoning it is, why's that so difficult for you to figure out.
by Bill
Friday May 24th, 2002 6:34 AM
I think Palestinian students could use their time better working to rid the Palestinan territories of their despotic dictatorship. Yasir Arafat has more to account for than the Israeli government. He is the real oppressor and he keeps pointing the finger at Israel and inciting violence with terrorism to deflect the critism of his own corrupt regime. He has stolen millions of dollars of US money for his own purposes and for his own chronies. He continues to sent poor children to their deaths in the name of "freedom" to terrorize innocent civilians.

Doesn't anyone wonder why the leaders don't go out and blow themselves up? They're too smart for that! They'd rather pick out poor destitute children and pay their parents for the privilidge!

Ha! I think the Palestinian leadership is using these students as their own personal pawns - mouthpieces given amplification by ignorant lefties ready to jump on the bandwagon of any causes that looks like there might be a riot in the works!

Come on folks - time to grow up!
by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Friday May 24th, 2002 6:43 AM
Here is a letter sent by Professor Zoloth to the faculty of SFSU after the incident. Professor Zoloth is a nationally recognized liberal bioethicist and feminist scholar:

Dear Colleagues,

Today, all day, I have been listening to the reactions of students, parents, and community members who were on campus yesterday.  I have received email from around the country, and phone calls, worried for both my personal safety on the campus, and for the entire intellectual project of having a Jewish Studies program, and recruiting students to a campus that in the last month has become a venue for hate speech and anti-Semitism.  After nearly 7 years as director of Jewish Studies, and after nearly two decades of life here as a student, faculty member and wife of the Hillel rabbi, after years of patient work and difficult civic discourse, I am saddened to see SFSU return to its notoriety as a place that teaches anti-Semitism, hatred for America, and hatred, above all else, for the Jewish State of Israel, a state that I cherish.  I cannot fully express what it feels like to have to walk across campus daily, past maps of the Middle East that do not include Israel, past posters of cans of soup with labels on them of drops of blood and dead babies, labeled “canned Palestinian children meat, slaughtered according to Jewish rites under American license,” past poster after poster calling out "Zionism=racism, and Jews=Nazis."  This is not civic discourse, and this is not free speech, this is the Weimar Republic with brown shirts it cannot control.  This is the casual introduction of the medieval blood libel and virulent hatred smeared around our campus in a manner so ordinary that it hardly excites concern—except if you are a Jew, and you understand that hateful words have always led to hateful deeds.

Yesterday, the hatred coalesced in a hate mob. Yesterday's Peace In The Middle East Rally was completely organized by the Hillel students, mostly 18 and 19 years old.  They spoke about their lives at SFSU and of their support for Israel, and they sang of peace.  They wore new Hillel t-shirts that said ”peace” in English, Hebrew and Arabic.  A Russian immigrant, in his new English, spoke of loving his new country, a haven from anti-Semitism.  A sophomore spoke about being here only one year, and about the support and community she found at the Hillel House. Both spoke of how hard it was to live as a Jew on this campus how isolating, how terrifying.  A surfer guy, spoke of his love of Jesus, and his support for Israel, and a young freshman earnestly asked for a moment of silence, and all the Jews stood still, listening as the shouted hate of the counter demonstrators filled the air with abuse.

As soon as the community supporters left, the 50 students who remained  praying in a minyan for the traditional afternoon prayers,  or chatting, or cleaning up after the rally, talking -- were surrounded by a large, angry crowd of Palestinians and their supporters.  But they were not calling for peace.  They screamed at us to "go back to Russia" and they screamed that they would kill us all, and other terrible things.  They surrounded the praying students, and the elderly women who are our elder college participants, who survived the Shoah, who helped shape the Bay Area peace movement, only to watch as the Hillel students were shoved against the wall of the plaza by a threatening crowd.  I had invited members of my Orthodox community to join us, members of my Board of Visitors, and we stood there in despair.  Let me remind you that in building the SFSU Jewish Studies program,  we asked the same people for their support and that our program is generously supported by our Jewish community, who pay for the program once as taxpayers and again as Jews.  Let me remind you that ours is arguably one of the Jewish Studies programs in the country most devoted to peace, justice and diversity since our inception.

As the counter demonstrators poured into the plaza, screaming at the Jews to “Get out or we will kill you” and “Hitler did not finish the job,” I turned to the police and to every administrator I could find and asked them to remove the counter demonstrators from the Plaza, to maintain the separation of 100 feet that we had been promised. The police told me that they had been told not to arrest anyone, and that if they did, “it would start a riot.”  I told them that it already was a riot.  Finally, Fred Astren, the Northern California Hillel Director and I went up directly to speak with Dean Saffold, who was watching from her post a flight above us. She told us she would call in the SF police.  But the police could do nothing more than surround the Jewish students and community members who were now trapped into a corner of the plaza, grouped under the flags of Israel, while an angry, out of control mob, literally chanting for our deaths, surrounded us.  Dr. Astren and I went to stand with our students. This was neither free speech nor discourse, but raw, physical assault.

Was I afraid?  No, really more sad that I  could not protect my students.  Not one administrator came to stand with us.  I knew that if a crowd of Palestinian or Black student had been there, surrounded by a crowd of white racists screaming racist threats, shielded by police, the faculty and staff would have no trouble deciding which side to stand on. In fact, the scene recalled for me many moments in the Civil Rights movement, or the United Farm Workers movement, when, as a student, I stood with Black and Latino colleagues, surrounded by hateful mobs.  Then, as now, I sang peace songs, and then, as now, the hateful crowd screamed at me, “Go back to Russia, Jew.”  How ironic that it all took place under the picture of Cesar Chavez, who led the very demonstrations that I took part in as a student.

There was no safe way out of the Plaza.  We had march back to the Hillel House under armed SF police guard, and we had to have a police guard remain outside Hillel.  I was very proud of the students, who did not flinch and who did not, even one time, resort to violence or anger in retaliation.  Several community members who were swept up in the situation simply could not believe what they saw.  One young student told me, “I have read about anti-Semitism in books, but this is the first time I have seen real anti-Semites, people who just hate me without knowing me, just because I am a Jew.”  She lives in the dorms.  Her mother calls and urges her to transfer to a safer campus.

Today is advising day.  For me, the question is an open one: what do I advise the Jewish students to do?

 Laurie Zoloth,

Director, Jewish Studies Program

by Rachel
Friday May 24th, 2002 6:51 AM
Thank you Patricia and Bill!

Bill, you are totally right! Do any of these folks remember that right before this latest intifata Arafat was being seriously challenged? The uprising began against ARAFAT!!!! This was during the peace talks with Clinton. Arafat has been very good at turning criticism away from him and on to the "all purpose" scapegoat of the world, Israel.

When the world was screaming about Jenin, claiming hundreds of civilian casualties, why didn't anyone ask "Why are there bomb making facilities and terrorist hideouts in a tightly packed refugee camp full of civilians administered by the UN????"

Palestinian leaders are the worst kind of cowards, sending children to do their bidding, hiding out in civilian areas, stealing money for their own use.
Why isn't anyone complaining about the corruption? Why isn't anyone insisting on democracy?
by American Zionist For Peace
Friday May 24th, 2002 6:59 AM
I find the behavior of the left wing pro-palestinian supporters to be utterly reprehensible. What are you people thinking?

First of all, Zionism does not preclude supporting a Palestinian State next to Israel. Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people should have a homeland, like all other people, and that this homeland should be in their historic homeland. Like all ideologies it has a range of interpretations. Millions of Zionists support a peaceful, demilitarized Palestinian state living side by side with Israel. Millions of Zionists are looking forward to building healthy relationships with our Palestinian cousins once this terror war is ended.

So those of you who are trying to sully the name of Zionism by associating it only with right wing Likudniks, you are cutting your own throats (or rather you are cutting the throats of your Palestinian friends). The Zionists and the Palestinians need to learn to live with one another. Calling Zionists Nazis is horribly insensitive, terribly inaccurate, and makes you seem like you are either pawns of a Hamas driven PR campaign, or just plain unsophisticated.

How long will this madness go on for?
by Tracy
Friday May 24th, 2002 7:06 AM
I'm not sure what is more offensive- GUPS actions at the Rally or that stupid post of theirs on this site trying to turn the tables and make them look like innocent victims along with playing the race card to its fullest.
They claim to have been profiled as terrorists without giving anything to back that up- they are just grasping at straws hoping to get undeserved sympathy instead of anger. And we are all supposed to go to sensitivity training class because we objected to the racism and disgusting behavior of your group? You're seriously fucked up.

by Mike
Friday May 24th, 2002 7:37 AM
The Palestinians and their Arab supporters want to see a return to the middle ages and they are using tactics of this era to support their cause.

Here is a most disgusting propoganda video being used to promote the Palestinian cause showing Daniel Pearl's horrible death. Pearl, a liberal who was trying to understand the Muslim fundamentalist cause and was viciously murdered in the process, just because he was a Jew. Do radicals on the left really want to join this cause? Think twice, if you have half a brain.

Not for the faint of heart.
by Sara
Friday May 24th, 2002 8:44 AM
terror.jpg
Innocent Israelis are dying - murdered by Palestinian terror. This baby was targeted by a Palestinian sniper.
by Eric
Friday May 24th, 2002 9:06 AM
close-up_of_sfsu_flyer.jpg
Here's the poster that was posted on my campus. This disgusting image is ANTI-SEMITIC no matter what you GUPS folks say!

Also there was NO apology sent to the Jewish groups and non published in the student paper.

The poster says that the event is SPONSORED BY ASSOCIATED STUDENTS that provides funds for the group and so indirectly funded the poster. Your tax dollars at work!
by hmm
Friday May 24th, 2002 9:08 AM
Why do all the right wing people who post to this site assume that every group that opposes Israel likes each other?

The Daniel Perl video mainly is demanding freedom for the prisoners in Cuba and delivery F16s for Pakistan. I really doubt too many people who care strongly about the Palestinians care about Pakistan getting its F16s.

Grouping all those who you disagree with into one category makes it easier to denounce people without listening to them. Denouncing Palestinians for the actions of those in Pakistan would be like denouncing FDR for the actions of Stalin (since they both opposed Hitler).

It would be nice if people on both sides of this could deal with the real issues. Instead people taking the worst statement by a random individual on the other side and generalize that to the group. One proPalestinian student put an antisemetic statement on a flyer, therefore anyone who opposes Israel must be a Nazi. Several supporters of Israel yelled racist statements, therefore all those who support Israel must be evil bigots.

The real issues that need to be discussed have nothing to do with student groups here. People are dying in Israel and Palestine and people here are quibbling about who called who a bad name first. There have been real hate crimes here but I'm guessing that Israeli students from SFSU did not break windows of Middle Eastern business owners. And I'm guessing that Palestinian activists from SFSU didnt mug the Jewish people who were recently attacked.

Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is a hot issue, and one should expect angry words to be exchanged. But, its a lot better keeping the debate focused on real issues rather than creating some side issue and then hyping that up.
by palestineinfo
Friday May 24th, 2002 9:27 AM
.
  1. Israeli army attacks Hebron, Rafah, Salfit

  2. Zionist regime embraces for Palestinian retaliatory attacks

  3. Abu Shanab: American fabrications to distract world attention

  4. Ben-Ami: unilateral separation won't work

  5. Israeli occupation army murders three Palestinians near Nablus

  6. Jewish settlers killed, injured in Tel Aviv attack

  7. Islamists in Mauritania champion boycotting new wave of Zionist goods

  8. Resigned PA minister: PA security bodies in chaos

  9. PA: martyrdom operation against national interests

  10. PFLP-GC and Hamas vows retaliation

top

 

Israeli army attacks Hebron, Rafah, Salfit

Occupied Jerusalem - The Israeli occupation army on Thursday attacked Palestinian population centers in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip, thus consolidating  Israel's reoccupation of the erstwhile Palestinian Authority-controlled areas.

Israeli tanks stormed Rafah in the southern part of the Gaza Strip and reportedly destroyed three homes, rendering three families homeless.

The Israeli army has destroyed thousands of residential homes since the outbreak of the Palestinian uprising nearly 20 months ago, mainly as a collective punishment for Palestinian resistance to Israeli apartheid.

In Hebron in the southern West Bank, Israeli tanks re-entered the town early Thursday, in an apparent show of force.

The Israeli army have arrested thousands of Palestinians and sent them  to makeshift concentration camps throughout Israel.

Israeli officials said on several occasions they wouldn't hesitate to  adopt "Nazi  tactics" if proven effective against the Palestinians.

top

Zionist regime embraces for Palestinian retaliatory attacks

Occupied Jerusalem - The apartheid Israeli regime is embracing for what was described a  "wave of suicide bomb attacks" by Palestinian resistance groups.

"suicide bombings" is Israel's term  for Palestinian martyrdom  operations against Israeli occupation targets and Jewish settlers living  on  grabbed Arab land.

Israel's minister of war, Benyamin Benaliezer, was quoted as saying Thursday that he expected a wave of Palestinian attacks within  1948-Palestine.

"Trust me, I know what I'm talking about," said Benaliezer, adding that  "we  have returned to the same struggle, which is in my estimation much  more complex."

He said Palestinians, males and females, were joining the ranks of the resistance.

"As you know, we are not talking about  facing an army, rather we are  faced with waves of male and female suicide bombers."

He accused the Palestinians of using what he called "violence and  terror" as a political tool.

He ignored Israel's use of terror on a very large scale to effect  apartheid and perpetual occupation in Palestine.

Israel, which has the most powerful army in the Middle East, has been launching an unrestrained war of annihilation against the Palestinian civilian population.

In this war, Palestinian towns and civilian institutions, including schools, colleges, hospitals, mosques, churches, and NGO centers,  have been bombed and destroyed by sustained Israeli artillery and aerial bombardment.

Thousands of Palestinian civilians, including hundreds of school  children and housewives, have also been killed and maimed in the Israeli  onslaught.

Palestinian martyrdom operations are viewed as a desperate Palestinian response to overwhelming Israeli oppression.

top

Abu Shanab: American fabrications to distract world attention

Gaza-  Ismail Abu Shanab, one of the Hamas Movement leaders in the Gaza Strip, has described as utter fabrication the American news of a meeting in Lebanon between representatives of his Movement, Hizbullah and Al-Qaida.

Abu Shanab told the Abu Dhabi space channel that the Zionist Mossad and American CIA had fabricated the news report, which claimed that such a meeting discussed launching joint “suicide operations” against American and British targets.

He explained that the Zionist and American intelligence aimed at distracting the world attention away from Zionist massacres against the Palestinian people.

Abu Shanab said that they further targeted concealing Zionist crimes against the American people in the USA, elaborating that 120 “Israeli” students were recently arrested in the USA on espionage charges.

He said that such a revelation had scandalized the Zionist enemy and its intelligence in America, opining that the abovementioned fabricated news report aimed at distracting the American people’s attention away from this scandal and to steer the American public anger towards resistance movements.

top

Ben-Ami: unilateral separation won't work

Occupied Jerusalem - Former Israeli foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami has scoffed at the unilateral Israeli plan to build fences and wall between the West Bank  and 1948-Palestine, calling proposals to that effect "politically  unfeasible and diplomatically dangerous."

"The idea of Israeli unilaterally separating herself from the  Palestinians is dangerous and adventurous move which should only be made at a last  resort."

Ben-Ami predicted that unilateral Israeli separation from the  Palestinians would never happen, because it is unfeasible and unworkable.

He said any such a scheme would be followed immediately by  the  declaration of Palestinian statehood.

Ben-Ami called for a return to the Camp David formula, which the Palestinians called an enhanced occupation as much of the occupied territories would remain under effective Israeli control.

 top

Israeli occupation army murders three Palestinians near Nablus

Occupied Jerusalem - The Israeli occupation army on Wednesday murdered at least three Palestinian activists at the Balata refugee camp near Nablus.

Palestinian hospital sources said the three young men, aged  30, 25 and  22 respectively died  when an Israeli apache helicopter gunship fired  several missiles at their car around sunset today.

The bodies of the three were mutilated and incinerated beyond  recognition.

One of the three is reportedly the local head of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades.

Earlier, the Israeli army murdered two Palestinian civilians, one  outside al-Qods and the other in the northern part of the West Bank.

The Israeli occupation also carried out a large operation in the town  of Salfit south West of Nablus  during which more than 25 Palestinians  were arrested.

The Palestinian Authority, drastically weakened by the ongoing  three  month old Israeli blitz, called on the international community to  pressurize  the Zionist regime to stop its aggression on Palestinian population  centers.

top

Jewish settlers killed, injured in Tel Aviv attack

Occupied Jerusalem - Two Jewish settlers were killed and several others injured near Tel  Aviv last night when a Palestinian guerilla blew himself up in Rishon  Letzion.

The Israeli army said at least two settlers were killed and as many as  30 others wounded, five seriously.

The Fatah's Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades took responsibility for the attack, saying it was carried out to avenge the murder of three Fatah activists near Nablus yesterday.

The rising frequency of Palestinian retaliatory attacks inside the  Zionist state suggests that the ongoing Israeli Nazi-like blitz against  Palestinian population centers failed utterly to put an end to Palestinian  resistance.

The Palestinian Authority condemned the attack in Tel Aviv, saying it undermined Palestinian national interests.

However, Palestinian resistance groups argue that Palestinians have no choice but to defend themselves and their families against a ruthless  army that knows no red lines and ignores all standards of humanity.

 top

Islamists in Mauritania champion boycotting new wave of Zionist goods

Nouakchott- A weekly independent newspaper in Mauritania warned a couple of days ago of the grave consequences of a new wave of Zionist goods that had flooded the local markets.

Weekly ‘Al-Raya’, close to the Islamic trend in the country, called on the citizens to boycott the Zionist goods.

It said, “Despite national unanimity on severing relations with the Zionists and boycotting their goods, yet new Zionist products had entered the Mauritanian markets.

The report noted that three kinds of Zionist-made products had recently infiltrated the domestic markets.

The paper said that “rudely enough” Arabic, English and Hebrew languages were written on the goods to indicate that they were “made in Israel”.

It said that anyone buying those goods would be directly contributing in providing money for the usurping Zionist soldier to add new martyrs to his records after “Mohammed Al-Dorra, Iman Hajjo and the martyrs of Nablus and Jenin”.

Mauritania is the only Arab country establishing full diplomatic ties with the Zionist entity outside settlement treaties such as those signed by Egypt and Jordan with that entity.

top

Resigned PA minister: PA security bodies in chaos

Al-Khalil- Nabil Amre, resigned minister of Palestinian Authority’s parliamentary affairs, has charged that a state of chaos was prevailing in the PA security apparatuses.

Amre, in a seminar on PA reforms held at his hometown of Dora, Khalil district on Tuesday, said that those apparatuses were turning into conflicting militias.

The resigned minister, who is also member of the Palestinian legislative council, said that he was ready to return to politics only through elections.

He said that many mistakes were made during the intifada, claiming that the most prominent ones were militarizing the intifada and firing during marches.

Amre opined that turning the intifada into armed confrontations had led to wasting many Palestinian accomplishments.

The former minister was apparently opposing many PA decisions such as closure of certain institutions and endorsing the banishment of 13 Palestinians to EC countries.

top

PA: martyrdom operation against national interests

Gaza- The Palestinian Authority last night issued a statement carried by its official news agency, WAFA, charging the Palestinian martyrdom operation on Wednesday evening in Rishon Letzion as “terrorist”.

The statement said that the PA received with anger and dismay news of the martyrdom operation, which the statement described as “terrorist”, against “Israeli civilians”.

The PA alleged that the operation carried dangers on the Palestinian people at the pretext that it would provide Zionist premier Ariel Sharon with justifications to continue in his ferocity against the Palestinians.

It also said that the operation contradicted the Palestinian “leadership” resolutions and, what the statement called, the Palestinian people’s national interests.

“The world that is sympathizing with our people in face of occupation and recognizes our national legitimate rights in accordance with international resolutions does not approve such operations”, according to the statement.

It called on the Palestinian people to declare in public their rejection of the martyrdom operations, affirming that the PA would exert all possible efforts to protect the national project for liberation and independence, which in other words meant that the PA would exert all efforts to halt resistance against Zionist occupation!

The Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, military wing of Fatah Movement, had declared responsibility for the operation that left three Zionists killed and more than 30 others wounded so far.

top

PFLP-GC and Hamas vows retaliation

Damascus- Thousands of Palestinians residing in Syria yesterday took part in the massive funeral procession that laid to rest Jihad Ahmed Jibril, son of the secretary general of the popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command.

Participants hoisted Palestinian flags and photos of Jihad who was assassinated in Beirut last Monday.

The marchers, who roamed the streets of Yarmouk camp for Palestinian refugees, called for revenge from “the Zionist Mossad and its agents in Beirut”.

Talal Naji, assistant PFLP-GC secretary general, has disclosed in a statement to the mourners that Jihad had organized an unsuccessful attempt last year to send a shipload of weapons into Palestine.

Naji added that Jihad, who was in-charge of the Front’s military operations, had ordered firing missiles at Zionist positions from South Lebanon.

Representatives of Palestinian factions and the Lebanese Hizbullah party took part in the funeral procession.

Khaled Mishaal, political bureau chief of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, also delivered a statement at the procession. He said addressing “Zionist cowards … wait for the reprisals, not only from the PFLP-GC but also from Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad, PFLP and the Democratic Front”.

top 

by Bill
Friday May 24th, 2002 9:34 AM
News
Fuel depot closed after bomb attack
By Amiram Cohen and Amit Ben-Aroya
The Pi Glilot fuel depot, just off the Tel Aviv-Haifa Highway, was closed yesterday by administrative order of the mayor of Ramat Hasharon after serious security flaws were discovered in the wake of a terrorist bomb exploding under a tanker that was loading diesel fuel at the site.

Paris embassy gutted in blaze
By Daniel Ben-Simon
Israeli embassy staff in Paris were woken early yesterday morning by calls from the embassy's security officers telling them not to come in to work because the building was on fire and there was "nothing left of it."

Latest Developments
Attacker Tries to Bomb Tel Aviv Club
(AP) - The car wheeled sharply and barreled toward the crowded nightclub, a load of pipe bombs inside. A security guard opened fire, killing the driver and preventing what authorities said was the second of two major attacks targeting Tel Aviv in less than 24 hours. The guard thwarted the attacker's plan to blow up the "Studio 49" club, where about 200 people were dancing early Friday, said Tel Aviv police commander Yossi Sedbon. "A big tragedy was averted here," he said.
by ha'aretz
Friday May 24th, 2002 9:41 AM
19:35 Norway`s ambassador to Israel to return $50,000 prize to Peres Peace Center, which gets Norwegian funds
19:09 Suicide bomber from Wednesday`s attack in Rishon Letzion named as Isa B`dir, 16, from Bethlehem
18:57 LA Times: U.S. probing ties between man who tried to blow up plane with bomb in shoe and Hamas, Hezbollah
18:45 IDF says 3 soldiers hurt in Tul Karm gunbattle; Al-Aqsa Brigades says it carried out ambush in area
18:30 Palestinian exile in Cyprus: Europe has nothing to fear; says main duty was `to protect the peace process`
17:57 Italy`s government proposes applying tough prison conditions, now used for mobsters, to terrorists
17:27 Explosive material residue found in Canadian embassy car in Gaza; driver, British passenger arrested
17:03 German minister says investigating report Taliban, al-Qaida fighters smuggled into Europe to plan new attacks
16:55 Two IDF soldiers moderately wounded in exchanges of fire in West Bank town of Tul Karm
15:59 Palestinians: IDF enters Tul Karm and imposes curfew
15:49 International Red Cross: Exile of Palestinian gunmen contravenes Geneva Convention
15:41 Six-year-old boy suffers serious injuries after being attacked by dog in Safed
15:29 Belgium says that exiled Palestinian gunman cam apply for asylum
15:08 Fire breaks out again at Israeli embassy in France; employees uninjured
15:07 IDF forces and Palestinians exchanging fire in Tul Karm
14:43 Anna Smashnova, seeded 21st for French Open, becomes first Israeli seed at a Grand Slam event
14:26 British lawmaker says anti-Semitism in UK on the rise
14:13 Likud, Shas sources: coalition talks will be accelerated next week
14:05 Court allows Pi Glilot to supply limited amount of gas; hearing on re-opening to resume Sunday
14:02 Pilot who crashed into Nesher factory in Ramle reported engine malfunction shortly before crash
13:47 Helicopter that crashed into Nesher factory in Ramle belongs to Chemnir crop-spraying company
13:27 Former PM Netanyahu: `I will run when we have new elections`
13:18 Engine malfunction likely cause of helicopter crash into Nesher factory in Ramle
12:23 Helicopter crashes into Nesher factory in Ramle; Magen David Adom reports three people seriously injured
12:21 Tel Aviv Court to hear Pi Glilot appeal against Ramat Hasharon council order to close fuel depot
12:04 Presidents Bush and Putin sign accord cutting warheads on both sides by two-thirds over 10 years
11:59 Israel, India to hold joint anti-terror work group in New Delhi next week
11:23 Ambulance driver admits to police that he concocted story about stoning to cover up traffic accident
11:18 Ma`ariv poll: Ariel Sharon has 64% approval rating among Israeli adults; 28% unhappy with PM
11:17 Fatah-linked Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claims attempted suicide bombing at nightclub in south Tel Aviv
11:01 Court extends remand of four Jewish terror suspects; police say indictments likely next week
10:57 Stones thrown at Magen David ambulance near Nazareth; no injuries reported
10:55 More than 60 people feared drowned after ferry sinks in river in Bangladesh
10:00 Court extends remand of Jewish terror suspect Noam Federman by four days
by Swill
Friday May 24th, 2002 10:31 AM
SFSU's Jewish and Palestinian students are the biggest bunch of crybabies I've ever seen — they're like some Strom Thurmond that's completely out of touch.
Anything I say here doesn't factor Sharon, suicide bombers, the West Bank, PLO, or Jewish settlements — just SF State — and offers no blame for what's happening "over there," just for what's happened "over here" at SF State.
What I directly observed over the years:
* The GUPS-controlled Student Govt. would question McCarthy-style newly elected students to the the student council whether they believed Israel had a right to exist . If they said yes, the GUPS boys and girls voted them off the council or would make their lives Hell with constant harassment until they quit.
* During WWII Holocaust Observances in the student union, GUPS would counter-protest...Yes, counter-protesting a Holocaust Memorial of millions of dead people...Good show GUPS! Ya' really proved your sanity there!
* Hillel and/or Jewish students would show up at forums on Israel's horrid treatment of Palestinians to offer the other side.
* GUPS/Student Govt. honchos would attempt to physically intimidate Jewish/Hillel students or anyone they thought disagreed with them.
* GUPS/Student Govt. honchos and Hillel/Jewish students would try to plant people on t he student newspaper — at the time called the Golden Gater — to write pro-Israeli or pro-GUPS/Paelstinian stories. Hard to believe, but true.
* Invariably, despite being "oppressed," many GUPS/Palestinian and Hillel students sure seemed to have wealthy parents to pay for their education and their "radicalism," while the rest of us had to scrounge by with crummy night jobs.
* GUPS/Palestinian students would walk up to your face and demand to know if you're Jewish, and pester and harass you until they got their answer. Hillel would ask similar questions, but in a less confrontational manner.
* Several times a week, I observed Jewish and GUPS/Palestinian students bickering on campus about Israel/Palestine. And of course, fights.
* If the GUPS/Palestinians didn't like something someone said or printed, they would threaten you, smash or destroy the publication, or try to provoke you to a fight. In fact, the student paper printed something they didn't like, so GUPS/Palestinians/Student Govt. honchos walked around campus collecting thousands of copies of the student newspaper and destroyed them.
Long live free speech, GUPS-style.
* And of course, GUPS would sponsor extremist-Zionists representative of a hardcore minority to speak on campus GUPS' point.
* At SFSU, you could hear racist names for Arabs and Jews all the time -- and I heard GUPS-alligned stduents say things like "fire up the ovens," and Hillel-alligned students say things like "camel jockey."
* Of course, don't forget $$$$$. The GUPS-controlled student govt. and student union managing boards would set up their buddies in lucrative deals selling food and other stuff in the student union.
Basically, both sides were waging PR campaigns to make the other look bad. There was so much impropriety on both sides, it's pathetic.
Honestly, many GUPS members (Often years older than even SFSU's higher-than-average student age) seemed like a rich-kid gang of semi-intelligent thugs, while many Hillel members seemed like rich-kid half-wits who had never had any one yell at them before.
One thing was for certain — Both believed in free speech and common respect only for themselves, and screw everyone else.
by .
Friday May 24th, 2002 2:10 PM
First of all, I am not defending racism against jews. That being said, I want to make it very clear that I am NOT a member of the GUPS, but am just stating my opinions.

Pro-Palestinian groups are not, by policy, racist against jews, in fact, there are many anti-zionist jews which work with them and are comrades and friends. What you people want to do is equate racism with being anti-zionist, which is the primary tactics of zionists. Is there racism against jews amoung palestinians? I'd be lying if I said there wasn't, but it does not come from a fucking vaccum, and it's not just part of their nature. Racism against jews amoung palestinians comes from over 50 years of oppression, brutality, and murder from the zionist regime. It comes from the military occupation of their homeland, and the refusal of Israel to recognize an independent state for the Palestinian people. These right wing jews want to cloud the issue while they have been commiting gross human rights violations for over 5 decades, and it's not acceptable. You are not looking at the conflict in a truthful manner and instead play down to emotional rhetoric and it's disgusting. You have huge pro-Israel lobbies in the US, and are able to put YOUR MESSAGE out to the public- the GUPS is an attempt to create balance. Palestinians want justice for their people, thats all.

I should also add that the DA is actually charging MORE pro-zionist protestors with hate crimes from the Malcom X plaza protest then pro-palestinian ones... kind of throws your bullshit statements out the window huh?

Now please, create some more articles based on quanity instead of quality to try and force your bullshit down people's throats, it seems it's what you do best. Keep the spam coming! Lobby for oppression and death!
by Steve
Friday May 24th, 2002 2:48 PM
No if the police are charging more pro-Israeli demonstrators with hate crimes than Palestianians it would throw out your charge that Arabs and Muslims are being scapegoated while Jews committ hate crimes without punishment. Throws this Pro-Palestianian persecution-by-authorities victimazation ploy out the window, eh?
by S.
Friday May 24th, 2002 2:57 PM
To He who complained that the Daniel Pearl subject was out of bounds for this discussion- it is you who are either uninformed or trying to divert attention. His kidnappers made it clear that as a Jew they were holding him responsible for the situation in Palestine. They addressed this several times. It shows how Muslims all over the world scapegoat Jews. While there are Jewish groups that protest what they see as injustices people of their faith committ on others there is not one group of Muslims who protest the atrocities committed worldwide by people of their faith against
Christians, HIndus, Jews, Buddhists, homosexuals and women. Islam has the sad distinction as being the only religion that persecuted people of other faiths worldwide. Why doesn't the Mulim Student Union and their ilk protest these things? They never defend any other persecuted group but themselves.
by M.
Friday May 24th, 2002 3:07 PM
I recently e-mailed GUPS expressing my unhappiness with what I had heard were their actions that now infamous day. I was e-mailed back a long rant claiming it was all untrue and just a way to derail their noble efforts. I was also told that it was part of a huge anti-arab anti-muslim ploy by the powers that be an SFSU. When I confronted her with the fact that I had been a passer-by and seen acts committed that she denied in her e-mail she changed her story- she says she was in a cage during the whole protest and was only reporting to me what she saw (while in the cage).
Why did she claim to have been an eye witness then later admit that she in fact was unable to see what was happening? Why did she send out an e-mail claiming with 100% certainty what the facts where, and now she claims she really doesn't know?
If GUPS had an integrity they would make sure their press releases weren't full of lies. It is them that needs to go to sensitivity training and learn a thing about conducting yourself with dignity.
by A SFSU Junior
Friday May 24th, 2002 3:17 PM
Your PR statement is pathetic emotional blackmail. The silent majority at SFSU holds you in well deserved contempt.
by USF student
Friday May 24th, 2002 3:19 PM
GUPS have made it clear- if you call them on anything they do- no matter if its racist or violent- you are anti-arab and/or anti-muslim.
by me
Friday May 24th, 2002 3:32 PM
GUPS claims that students at SFSU and Berkeleya are being punished for supporting the Palestinians?
What bullshit.
You are being treated like everyone else- punished when your actions turn into harrassment and violence.
Funny you didn't mind it when people were being punished when they were committing these actions against arabs and muslims.
You complain about being stereotyped as terrorists then you complain when you are reprimanded for behaving like terrorists. Why do you think just because
your Palestianians you can treat others like shit?
by Great Point
Friday May 24th, 2002 3:36 PM
To He who complained that the Daniel Pearl subject was out of bounds for this discussion- it is you who are either uninformed or trying to divert attention. His kidnappers made it clear that as a Jew they were holding him responsible for the situation in Palestine. They addressed this several times. It shows how Muslims all over the world scapegoat Jews. While there are Jewish groups that protest what they see as injustices people of their faith committ on others there is not one group of Muslims who protest the atrocities committed worldwide by people of their faith against
Christians, HIndus, Jews, Buddhists, homosexuals and women. Islam has the sad distinction as being the only religion that persecuted people of other faiths worldwide. Why doesn't the Mulim Student Union and their ilk protest these things? They never defend any other persecuted group but themselves.





Thank you for pointing this out.

How many Jews have we seen speak out criticially against specific Israeli policies?
Yup -A whole bunch load.
How many Palestinians and their supporters have we seen speak out against the litancy of human atrocities committed by Muslims?
I'm still waiting.
by debate coach
Friday May 24th, 2002 4:25 PM
>They addressed this several times. It shows how Muslims all over the world scapegoat Jews.

No it doesn't. It shows nothing about "Muslims all over the world," and precious little about the people it does show.

This is called an unrepresentative sample.

See: http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/unrep.htm

It's like saying, "Meyer Lansky was a gangster. This shows that Jews all over the world are gangsters."

by SFSU student
Friday May 24th, 2002 5:07 PM
I am so sick of the Arab students on my campus! (Yes, I mean you too, you GUPS you!)

And I'm NOT Jewish! But I really feel sorry for the Jewish kids on this campus. You can't step out of a classroom without being faced with some nasty anti-Jewish, anti-Israel propoganda staring you in the face. And these so-called "poor oppressed" folks are wearing all the rage - and they drive better cars than mine. I wonder if they are really Palestinians at all! Maybe mommy and daddy have some oil wells in Saudi Arabia!

They have taken over our student govenment and question you if your name has even a hint of sounding Jewish. They have become the student association gestapo!!!!

Time to knock it off or there's going to be a BACKLASH BIG TIME!!!!

Go away GUPS!!!!

by Julia
Friday May 24th, 2002 5:18 PM
Yeah! Ditto to the above. I'm an SFSU student too and I'm Sick of GUPS!!!!

You guys are just a bunch of cry babies!!!

Knock it off!!!!!
by student
Friday May 24th, 2002 5:54 PM
Im a Jewish SFSU student and I have no idea what any of you are talking about. I really havnt had any issue with this GUPS group. Can you guys stop all of this "he hit me first" nonsense?
by sfsu
Friday May 24th, 2002 5:57 PM
Since there has been such a spate of GUPS bashing on here I thought I'd chime in that many of us here actually support GUPS.
The Hebron Massacre

'With you we live
With you we march forward,
With you we hunger;
And when you die
We try not to die with you.
For upon your grave new wheat will grow,
And upon it new rain will fall;
And you will see us
Marching forward
Forward,
Forward.
(Darwish)

TO THOSE WHO SOWED DEATH
AND FED THE EAGLES IN OUR LAND:
You will not prevail.

'because I bear in me
not my little life
but all the lives
and I walk steadily forward
because I have a thousand eyes
I strike with the weight of a rock
because I have a thousand hands
and my voice is heard on the shores
of all the lands
because it is the voice of all
those who cannot speak
all those who cannot sing
and who sing today with this mouth:'
PALESTINE WILL BE FREE. JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL.

On the night of February 25th 1994, a Jewish American Zionist physician decided to materialize the dream of the typical Zionist movement of annihilating the Arab existence in Palestine. Baruch Goldstein prepared for the move. It was during Ramadan when Dr. Goldstein decided to execute his old plan of vengeance.

At that time of the holy month of Ramadan, there were many people who flocked the Abraham Mosque to perform their prayers. Goldstein passed two army checkpoints at the dawn of February 25, 1994 from the northeastern gate of the mosque near privy. That privy could be the reason why Goldstein decided on that gate because he, probably, received his contemplation about Arabs from the Rabbis of Kach in Kiryat Arab where the Arabs were described as the demons of the privy. [Talmud - Mas. Kiddushin 72a ''Shew me the Ishmaelites.'-'They are like the demons of the privy.''] The privy of the mosque is important not only because it has two Israeli army checkpoints on its nearby mosque's gate, but also because it is surrounded by Israeli army posts from the east and army patrols in the west. So Dr. goldstein was acting from the deepest parts of the Zionistic ideology in liquidating the demons. But in this case and as a typical Zionist, shooting from the back was the style. Dr. Goldstein walked at least 100 yards in the mosque before he decided to choose the exact location to liquidate his demons. Dr. Goldstein positioned himself at the last row of the main hall, just opposite to the Imam's place (Manbar.) The position was not arbitrary not only because it enabled him to shoot directly at the largest number of the backs of the worshippers but also because it was supposed to have enabled him to get a fast escape or protection from the Israeli soldiers who were scattered right behind him in the northern hall "the plate" of the mosque.

Dr. Goldstein thought about the best moment to execute the plan: maximize the number of casualties and secure the escape or rescue. The best moment, of course, was when the Muslim worshippers knelt on the floor with their backs towards Dr. Goldstein.

It was first a hand grenade that he threw among the worshippers causing casualties, confusion, and possibly an invitation to the Israeli soldiers in the halls and outside of the mosque to intervene for rescue. And in no time, the automatic massacre took place with the same kind of mercy that other Zionists like Dr. Goldstein showed in the past toward Arabs.

An eyewitness told HIPRS that when Dr. Goldstein was executing the massacre and people attacked him, there was a soldier who attempted to come closer to the scene. But instead of "rescuing" Dr. Goldstein, the Israeli soldier shot his bullets in the air and then escaped from the inside eastern door of the northern hall to the previously known "women praying area." In the opinion of the eyewitness, the soldier could have rescued Goldstein by killing 5 or 10 more Palestinians, but it appeared that his personal safety was above any Jewish blood value.

There were many massacres in the history of Hebron and Jews happened to be the victims of the 1929 massacre which was committed by Arabs. But aside from numbers and ratios, there was the unique difference in all the massacres. Zionists very much planned in advance for each and every massacre. The 1929 massacre against Jews was an irrational reaction of the news coming from Jerusalem that Jews raided Muslim sites. There is no need to stress the fact that from the Jewish neighborhoods in Iraq to those in Poland, Zionists provoked local people to invite them to oppress innocent Jews to force Jews to come to Palestine.

It does not appear that the Hebron massacre will be the last one. Muslims and Jews are and will remain candidates for victimization. But the cause will always be the same:- The Nazi style laws of the Zionists occupation in Palestine.
by yeah, right
Friday May 24th, 2002 6:19 PM
Pleasssseeee!
Would you all grow up!!!!!
by B.E. (be663Sfsu.edu)
Friday May 24th, 2002 6:32 PM
Why...

WHY...

WHY?!

Why do the GUPS and MSA refuse to have any dialogue with Hillel?

It was quite insulting to read in the Xpress paper. They claimed they have no animosity towards the Jews, BUT they refuse to associate at all with any Jewish organizations.

Why?

Are the only Jews they like the disenfranchised dhimmi, the ones who don't band together with other Jews to do Jewish things?

Or is it some other reason?

What's the point of debate if only one side is allowed to speak?



by Singh
Friday May 24th, 2002 7:21 PM
Better video?

YOU'RE TOO FUNNY!!!

There is none. It's fantasy, invoking style and words that appeal to the specific rhetoric you are susceptible to.

For further understanding, type into your web search engine "taqiya"

Here's one source for the beginning of your enlightenment.

Al-Taqiya by Prof Walid Phares Department of Religion, Florida International University Author, "The Arab Mind"

In the early years of the Tawheed (Islamic conquest of the Arabian peninsula) and in the Fatah (Arab-Islamic invasion and conquest of the upper Middle East and the outside world), a Muslim concept was devised to achieve success against the enemy, Al-Taqiya.

Al-Taqiya, from the verb Ittaqu, means linguistically dodge the threat. Politically it means simulate whatever status you need in order to win the war against the enemy.

According to Al-Taqiya, Muslims were granted the Shar'iya (legitimacy) to infiltrate the Dar el-Harb (war zone), infiltrate the enemy's cities and forums and plant the seeds of discord and sedition. These agents were acting on behalf of the Muslim authority at war, and therefore were not considered as lying or denouncing the tenants of Islam. THey were "legitimate" mujahedeen, whose mission was to undermine the enemy's resistance and level of mobilization. One of their major objectives was to cause a split among the enemy's camp. In many instances, they convinced their targeted audiences that JIhad is not aimed at them, that indigenous people are not targeted, only Bysantium power. They convinced many Jews that they will be protected from Christians, called pagans), and they convinced many Christians that Jews were the mortal enemies, because they killed Issa (Jesus). THey convinced the Aramaics, Copts, and Hebrews that the enemy is Greece, and signed peace agreements with the Bysantines Greeks at the expense of Maronite Aramaics, etc.

This Jihadic agency of subversion was one of the most fascinating and efficient arms of the conquest. In less them four decades the MIddle East fell to the Arab-Islamic rule, followed by north Africa and Central Asia. Al-Taqiya was a formidable weapon, used by the first dynasties and strategists. Today, scholars may identify it as deception. But the JIhadic deception was and still is more powerful than the James Bondian methods of Western classical intelligence tactics, for the simple reason that it has a civilizational, global dimension versus the narrow state interest of the regular Western subversive methods.

Al-Taqiya is still in use today but not necessarily state-organized. One can easily detect Taqiya in the two discourses used by Islamist strategists. On the one hand, one comprehensive Islamist theory is attempting to mobilize Middle East, and sometimes Western Christia leaders and intellectuals, against "evil Jews." We see considerable success on that level. And on the other hand, another Islamist comprehensive theory is attemting -with success also- to mobilize the Jews against "evil and pagan Christians." One can easily detect the sophisticated work of Taqiya, for the strategic objective of Islamists is to destroy the foundations of the Judeo-Christian civilization, as a prelude to the defeat of an isolated Israel.

Taqiya is not a unique phenomenon in History, many strategists from all backgrounds implemented subversion. But the uniqueness of today's Taqiya is its success within advanced and sophisticated societies. Taqiya is winning massively because of the immense lack of knowledge among Western elites, both Jewish and Christian.

For interesting examples of Taqiya methods, visit Christian discussion groups and forums and note the discourse of Islamist visitors, aimed at undermining the Christian perception of Jews, and visit Jewish discussion groups and forums and note the subtle anti-Christian discourse of Islamists visitors. It is really informative and fascinating.

by SmashTheLeft
Friday May 24th, 2002 7:37 PM
Yep. Those guys sound alot like them commies. I have it on good authority that they have these secret ninja skills that let them infiltrate our great Amercian society. And bam! when your not looking they hit ya with some of that dialectic stuff and next thing ya know yer walken around like a zombie.

These Fundamentalists seem alot like that. You never know they are hiding. I heard that Al Gore was secretly one of them, what do you call that, Wasabi muslims. He was just hiding out and when he didnt get elected he had to try another route. Yep these wasabis are inflitrating everything these day, school systems, Hollywood, you name it. Ive even heard it suggested that flouridation of water was some kinda muslim plot to sap our Americanism right out of us.
by Evan
Friday May 24th, 2002 8:34 PM
If anybody has the MSA's April 25 letter about the so-called 'blood libel' flyer, I'd be interested in seeing it, if you'd be so kind as to post it here...
by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Friday May 24th, 2002 8:55 PM
This is a combination of e-mails between myself & university administration regarding an apology. I was very upset about the poster and was in contact with the university over the situation long before May 7. As I mentioned before, I am the parent of a SFSU student.

E-mails are in quotations

Ken Monteiro told me there was an apology for the poster floating around but no one had seen it so I sent him this letter, and he responded:

Sent 5/9/02
"Hi Kenneth,

I would just like to reiterate that I spoke to the leaders of the Jewish groups and none have received an apology from the student group that put up the poster. This is to let you know that the group may be telling you they made an apology when they did not. I would appreciate if you would check on this matter.

Thank you for your concern.

Patricia Jennings"

Received 5/9/02
"You are correct. The MSA has not sent an apology to Hillel. I would have preferred that, but, they sent their apology, addressed to the President, in response to the President's letter. I can fax you a copy of it if you wish. I do not want to make more of the jesture (sic) than occured (sic), but I did want to share the information about the small movement, and of the fact that they no longer produce the flyer.

Regards,
Ken"

On Wednesday, 5/15, Pete Wilson of KGO covered the incident. My son was on and did a wonderful job of making the case for the Jewish students. Ken Monteiro defended the university. When Pete asked about the "blood libel" poster, Ken mentioned that the organizations had apologized for it. This reminded me that I hadn't received the fax yet!

Sent on 5/16/02
"Ken,
On May 10 you offered to fax me the letter of apology that your office received regarding the "blood libel" poster. I have not yet received it. I heard you on KGO a while ago and you mentioned this apology again. Could you please fax it to the number below? Could you also please be sure that Seth at Hillel receives a copy.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Patricia Jennings"

At long last! On 5/16/02 he faxes me this "so-called" apology!
From Ken Monteiro:

"Patricia,

I have just sent both a copy of the original letter and the newspaper article. I will have a copy sent to Seth (Hillel director) as well.
Regards, Ken"

My reply on the same day:

"Ken,
Thank you for faxing me the apology that was sent to President Corrigan from MSA on April 25.

At the end of the letter he states:

'Once again thank you for your reminder, time, and effort. Please let us know if there is anything we can do to further amend our error. May God guide us all in these troubling times.'

Did either you or President Corrigan ask him to apologize directly to the Jewish groups? If not, why not?

Why did you wait so long to forward this apology to Hillel?

--
Patricia A. Jennings, M.Ed."

Here's the apology including my introduction sent on 5/16/02:


Here is a copy of the apology that the administration received from MSA. They received nothing from GUPS and this letter was not forwarded to any Jewish organizations until today. I had asked Ken Monteiro to send it to me and to the other organizations several weeks ago. At the bottom of the letter, he asks the administration to tell him what more he can do to make amends. As far as I know, he was not asked to make an apology directly to the Jewish groups themselves. Furthermore, the letter as not been printed in any campus publication. This would have been nice.


"April 25, 2002

Robert Corrigan
President, San Francisco State University

Dear President Corrigan,

On behalf of the Muslim Student Association, I would like to sincerely apologize to you and the Jewish community as well as to the entire university community for the offence contained in our flyer for the April 8 campus rally. While the mistake was unintentional, we thank you for reminding us of this serious offence. Please understand that the flyer was actually designed by a non-student community member. While it is my responsibility to ensure that such flyers are reviewed before distribution, several had already been distributed by the time we noticed the offensive phrase "according to Jewish rites." We in no way intended nor desired to have this obviously offensive and injurious phrase on our flyer. As you noted in your letter, "Some MSA members did attempt to eradicate the words from the already posted flyers," In fact, in roughly 90% of the distributed and posted flyers, the offensive phrase had been eradicated. We would also like to stress that nobody "pointed this out" to us. The phrase's gross and offensive nature was immediately obvious to us when we saw it. Nonetheless, we are saddened by our mistake. We as God for forgiveness and we hope that the entire university community will understand and forgive our mistake, and as you state in your letter, "One moment, one flyer, does not define the Muslim Student Association or its individual members."

Having said this, we would also like to remind you and the entire university community that the MSA will remain firmly committed to condemning the atrocities being committed by the state of Israel. We, along with countless other organizations both on and off campus firmly believe that the Israeli government and its racist ideology does not represent the great monotheistic religion of Judaism nor the totality of the great Jewish people. Thus we are not "anti-Semitic;" we are anti-Zionist. We firmly believe that between the two there is a profound distinction. Thus we will continue to believe and proclaim that Israel is a racist, apartheid-like, neocolonial state which openly commits atrocities of genocide and ethnic-cleansing against the Palestinian people; for this we will offer no apology. The atrocities being committed by the Israeli government are no way an "obvious unreality;" they are a dark and painful reality against which we will continue to speak out.

Once again thank you for your reminder, time, and effort. Please let us know if there is anything we can do to further amend our error. May God guide us all in these troubling times.

Sincerely yours,

Piras Shehadeh
President, Muslim Student Association"


by Patricia Jennings (tish [at] napanet.net)
Friday May 24th, 2002 9:03 PM
genocide_poster_from_sfsu_4.jpg
I forgot to mention. The poster says that the rally that it advertises is sponsored by Associated Students, MSA, and GUPS.

GUPS has not apologized at all and AS has refused to make any effort to distance themselves from it.

Here's the poster in full:
by free palestine
Saturday May 25th, 2002 4:30 AM
I Want to Say Something



By Jeff Kingham

After nearly two weeks in this so-called Holy Land, senses and skill of analysis begin to fail me, confounded as they are by disbelief and indignation.

The conditions under which the Palestinians have been forced and are continuing to endure are nothing short of barbaric; I know this from personal observation ... from continuing evictions across the street from my hotel in East Jerusalem to persistent, arbitrary harassment in every Israeli-controlled zone, from the shocking brutality of Ramallah and Jenin to, worst of all, the institutionalized outrage against humanity known as the Gaza Strip. Despite the unreality of their condition, the Palestinian people remain without exception the warmest, most unselfish, friendly people I have ever met, never knowing who I am or why I am here. Their resilience and generosity opens channels within me and others who came here with me through which unfamiliar emotions rise like vapors from a bottle of ether broken deep within heart and mind.

Last week I returned from Jenin, where I had been with a few other internationals. It was a site of unconscionable, inconceivable barbarism. Thousands upon thousands of homes destroyed, housing for at least 15,000 reduced to nothing more than concrete powder -- a bitter, painful dust replete with unexploded bombs and missiles and shreds of personal belongings and corpses. Between 1 and 5 people, mostly children in Jenin had been losing limbs or worse daily. Were it anywhere else in the Western world, this monstrous scene of devastation and human misery would have long ago drawn official political and rescue responses from world governments; but it seems clear that the international community already made the shameful decision to cast off the Palestinians. While I helped in Jenin to distribute food and identify and mark unexploded bombs, the sole official international efforts in Jenin consisted of a small slowly assembling United Nations team and another small group of Norwegian and British search and rescue experts.

Hardly any Western media, the bastion of democracy and the free press were evident, save for BBC and a handful of others. What an outrage! There were no international dignitaries touring the site of this war crime (save one Scottish parliamentarian, come to Palestine of his own accord) and absolutely no other international expert teams made available to direct search and relief efforts. Where in the world could these sorts of teams, routinely mobilized by Western nations as good will and humanitarian gestures, have been more useful than in Jenin? Where were they? Where are they? Where will they be after the next Israeli outrage? Many dozens, and maybe more Palestinians remain buried beneath dust and rubble, bombs and belongings.

While these neglected victims of unconscionable aggression were all certainly dead bodies by then, after more than a week beneath the rubble, expert international teams were disturbingly obvious in their absence. Were they in Jenin, search and rescue experts would have saved the lives and limbs of desperate family members clawing through what remained to be exhumed of former lives, looking for answers about missing family members, or trying to retrieve some important possession in the great Palestinian tomb that is now Jenin.

Now, however, weeks after the carnage, the great work in Jenin is not saving, but remembering making sure the world never forgets what happened there.

Gaza, in most ways, is even more shocking, for the outrages here are status quo. The Gaza strip is an Israeli-constructed prison for 1.3 million Palestinians which the world community ignores by international convention. It is a concentration camp divided up into three cell blocks and several isolation cells where the men, women, and children of this bitter slice of Palestine wile away lives, cut off from trade, opportunity, freedom, and the world; it is a prison, nothing more. Israel controls the economy within and without the Strip Gazans are literally forced by the barrel of American-made guns, the turret of American-made tanks, the missile launchers of American-made Apache helicopters and F16s to be the unwilling consumers of Israeli trade and commercial products.

The innocent prisoners of this Israeli-built, Israeli-guarded penitentiary breathe every breath, eat every meal, sleep every night, and wake up every day hemmed in by electric fences and security walls, houses, buildings and infrastructure destroyed in Israeli raids, refugee camps that are the most densely populated places on earth, a small strip of Israeli-patrolled shoreline, checkpoints that are really arbitrarily deadly harassment centers, Israeli settlements that are really thinly disguised fronts for heavy concentrations of IDF forces, etc, etc., etc. Gazans, however, somehow manage to struggle on.

To me, as a foreigner in Gaza, hope would seem a state of mind with no bearing here. Many Gazans, nevertheless, continue to draw their meager portions from a closely guarded well of hope.

Though no one I have met in the cities and camps of Gaza has actually read the works of Franz Kafka, a new word has gained currency in the lexicon of Palestinian Arabic. Palestinians of the Strip in particular have come to refer to their plight and condition as Kafkaesque; nowhere perhaps has this label ever more appropriate. On my return I think I will look into Arabic translations of The Castle and The Trial for shipment to Gaza. I think perchance that with the works of Kafka in hand, Gaza will soon produce the world's most renowned Kafka scholars, living as they do the unreality and absurdity of institutionalized alienation and dispossession.

Jeff Kingham, is one member of the International Solidarity Movement who stormed the Church of the Nativity with food, he was arrested and has been deported back to the United States.

-Please consider supporting the Palestine Chronicle with a one-time donation, or through ongoing support. You can Donate Online using an easy and secure payment method, or kindly mail your donation to (The Palestine Chronicle; PO Box 196, Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043-0196, USA)

by free palestine
Saturday May 25th, 2002 5:13 AM
Palestinian Enslavement Entering a New Phase

The Israeli far-right – always the best indicator of Israel's true intentions – is quite outspoken: its aim is to make Palestinian life unbearable to a point that they would rather get up and go. Asked about his conception of "voluntary transfer" of Palestinians, Minister of Tourism (Rabbi) Benny Eylon compared the "voluntary" element to that of a Jewish husband who refused a rabbinical order to divorce his wife. Since rabbinical court cannot undo the marriage without the husband's consent, it should use force – excommunicate the obstinate husband, slash him, jail him etc. – until he "voluntarily" agrees to divorce. This is how the Palestinians should be "voluntarily" made to leave. And obviously, as long as they do not leave – because they cannot or will not – they should be struggling to survive rather than resist their oppression.


A New Draconian Measure

Analysing the Israeli oppression is a like playing chess with the devil: the evil minds behind the occupation are always two steps ahead of you. What was the real aim of "Operation Defence Shield"?

The official pretext – "dismantling the infrastructure of terrorism" – cannot be taken too seriously. Now that resumed suicide bombings have to be explained, military experts suddenly claim that the simple equipment of the suicide bombers hardly needs any infrastructure at all. The further expansion of the settlements, mentioned in my previous column, is always an aim; "Defence Shield" has undoubtedly given it a great push, with Palestinians too weak and too frightened by the extent of Israeli terror to resist their on-going dispossession.

But Ha'aretz journalist Amira Hass has now reported a new draconian measure imposed on West Bank Palestinians, which may be a real break-through that "Defence Shield" was aiming at:

"The Israeli army has been tightening its grip on movement of Palestinians in cities and towns in the West Bank by insisting that they obtain new freedom-of-movement permits from the regional administration to travel from one city to another. [...] Pedestrians, as well as drivers, have been left with one entrance into the area – which can be crossed only after receiving the proper freedom-of-movement permit. [...] [T]he new measures have divided up the area into eight population regions, effectively isolated from one another, with traffic and movement control exercised by the Israel Defence Forces. The eight regions are Jenin, Nablus, Tul Karm, Qalqilya, Ramallah, Jericho, Bethlehem and Hebron."

East Jerusalem, once the economic heart of the West Bank, annexed by Israel and cut off from the rest of the West Bank, can be added as a ninth sealed-off enclave. And whoever believes Gaza is the tenth enclave, is too optimistic: the Strip itself has also been split in two, with the 200.000 residents of Raffah ordered to get a permit to go north.

From Closure to Siege

Curtailing Palestinian freedom of movement has been a central feature of Israeli occupation during the last decade. "Terrorism" has always served as a good excuse for this premeditated policy (and was served by it in turn). Up to 1991, Palestinians were free to move both within the occupied territories and to Israel; in fact, they formed the basis, in terms of cheap labour force, of Israeli economy. It was during the Gulf War that Israel for the first time closed its territory to Palestinians. The 1990's, especially the Oslo period since 1994, saw a gradual routinisation of this measure, for which the euphemistic term "closure" was introduced. At the same time, massive import of cheap labour force from Asia, Eastern Europe and Africa replaced Palestinian workers. In 1996, the notorious "internal closure" was introduced, later known by the Hebrew euphemism "keter" (original meaning: "crown"!), correctly translated as "siege": cutting Palestinian towns and villages from each other. Since October 2000, Palestinians are no longer given permits to enter Israel, and the closure policy has turned into a strangling siege.

Thus, step by step, Palestinians have been dispossessed and surrounded by settlements, military camps, by-pass roads and checkpoints, squeezed into sealed-off enclaves. Palestinian towns are besieged by tanks and armed vehicles blocking all access roads. West Bank villages too are surrounded by road blocks, preventing the movement of vehicles in and out: three successive mounds of rubble and earth, approximately 6 feet high, with 100 metre gaps between them. All residents wishing to move in an out of the village – old or young, sick or well, pregnant or not – have to climb over the slippery mounds.

At present, this policy seems to have been perfected to an extent that it can be further institutionalised by long-term bureaucracy: a permit system, considerably worse than the "pass laws" imposed on blacks in Apartheid South Africa.

The severity with which the restrictions on movement are imposed was demonstrated again this week, when, in two different incidents, Israeli soldiers shot dead innocent Palestinians in the vicinity of road blocks. Since both Palestinians were Israeli citizens, the army "regretted" their killing; otherwise the incidents might have been dismissed as "self defence" or whatever. But the army made its point: movement in the occupied territories is an exclusive privilege of Jewish settlers. All other people – the local residents and their visitors – may pay for it with their lives. "Regret" or not, Israeli terror prevails.

Impoverishing the Palestinians

The damage to the Palestinians as a nation is obvious. Nation building often means political unification of territory: think of Italy or Germany. Israel is imposing on the Palestinians the very reversed process, hoping to reduce them into numerous separate groups with no collective interests, consciousness and institutions. The human catastrophy too is not hard to imagine: any movement outside your enclave becomes a tedious project, to say the least: going to school or university in a neighbouring town, moving patients or medical staff, not to mention "luxuries" like visiting friends or family.

But the economic side is just as essential. While travelling thousands of miles in the United States and in united Europe is free, Israel is putting towns and villages individually under siege, dividing the West Bank into nine separate "cantons" (Swiss tranquillity aside). The entire West Bank is about 130 km long, never more than 50 km wide, its eastern third a desert. Jenin is just 25 km away from Nablus; Tul Karm is 15km away from Qalqilya; and Bethlehem is just a few hundred metres away from East-Jerusalem. The Gaza Strip is about 50 km long and just a few km wide, and has been cut in two. The Israeli travel permits are valid from 5:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M., and must be renewed every month.

Amira Hass adds:

"Under the new system, goods can be transported within the territories only using a 'back-to-back system' in which a truck goes to a certain location where goods are unloaded to another awaiting truck, which then carries the merchandise further."

Imagine doing business (or just providing for a village) under such circumstances. There are reports of big price differences between towns: one town is flooded with cheap vegetables, in the other town vegetables are rare and expensive.

Real income pro capita in the occupied territories has been proved inversely proportional to the number of closure days. Compared to 1994, income per capita was dropping 15% up to 1996, while closure periods were rising towards 80 days a year. In the relatively quiet Netanyahu years, 1996-1999, days of closure were declining towards zero in 1999, with income per capita on the rise, almost reaching the 1994-level. With Barak elected in 1999 and provoking the Intifada a year later, the tide turned once again. 2001 saw a record of 210 days of closure; Palestinian income level now lost 30% on its 1994-level. 2002 will be worse.

In September 2000, 600.000 of about 3 million Palestinians were defined as poor, living on less than $2 a day. At the end of 2001, the number of poor reached 1.5 million – half the population. After "Operation Defence Shield", it is estimated that 75% of the Palestinians have reached poverty.

So the main measure to subjugate Palestinians is not war, but closure and siege. This is why Israel is so anxious to institutionalise it. World Bank experts estimate the damage caused to Palestinian economy by Israeli military attacks at $305 million in the first 15 months of the present Intifada (up to "Defence Shield"). The damage caused by closure and siege during the same time is estimated at $2,4 billion. (Ha'aretz, 19.5.02.)

To Sum Up

Having pushed the Palestinians out of its labour market, Israel is now institutionalising their long-term seal-off in besieged enclaves by a system of "permits". It counts on the world community – "the donor states" – to finance the intentionally impoverished people through the Palestinian Authority. This dirty game must be exposed. As the "permit system" demonstratees, Israel is clearly the effective force ruling the occupied territories, and thus solely responsible for their welfare. It must stop the systematic destruction of Palestinian economy and society. Freedom of movement is a basic right; due to its disastrous human, political and economic implications, Israel's policy of curtailing this freedom should be fought against at top priority.


http://www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h-col.html
by SFSU Student too
Saturday May 25th, 2002 10:31 AM
COME ON! DON'T GO CHANGING THE SUBJECT! Even if all the above were true. How does it justify attacking Jews in America?

The event on May 7 was a peace rally. The SFSU Jewish students have been working towards peace with their fellow Arab students and have been rebuffed continuously and treated hatefully.

Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why cannot a person support the existence of Israel and not be branded for it? The Jewish students are not calling for an end to Palestine! Why is it ok for Arab students to call for an end to Israel?

Why can't we talk about peaceful coexistence? Why does it have to be black or white? Why do people extoll the horrors of what the Israelis are doing without equally condemning the terrorist attacks that plague innocent Israeli civilians?

PLEASE! There's got to be a better way - a more balanced way to view this situation! Otherwise there is absolutely no hope for peace!

And - there is NO EXCUSE for the hatred dumped upon the Jewish students at SFSU. They are good people who are trying to work for peace.

Thanks for listening.

by Free Palestine...from Arafat
Saturday May 25th, 2002 11:36 AM
Yes, the Palestinians have a tough time.

But why?

Point 1) They blame Israel. For some reason, they don't blame the Arab nations, that kept these people in refugee camps for fifty years, simply to use them as a weapon against Israel. The Arab nations have more than enough land and resources to have taken them in. They could end the refugee problem any time they want, and it would be easier for them to assimilate the Palestinians, who speak their own language, then forcing them into the tiny state of Israel.

But they don't. Because they want to use the Palestinians as a pawn against Israel. Oh well. Must be Israel's fault for existing.

Point 2: Israel, no doubt, has ben taking measures against the Palestinians. Why? Because for some reason, Palestinians have a hobby of crossing the boarder and blowing themselves up. When suicide bombers become a constant threat, Israel, like every othe nation in the entire world, takes defensive measures. So if Palestinians don't want to pass through a checkpoint to enter Israel, maybe they shouldn't keep smuggling bombs into public places, which is why the checkponts are there! If they don't want ambulances being stopped by soldiers, then maybe they shouldn't carry bombs in ambulances! It happened! it's on the record! And intead of blaming the nuts who blew themselves up to murder civilians... or the people who made the bomb... or financed the bomb... or used their propaganda to convince the bomber to do this... or who taught children Anti-Semitism since their elementary years (this has also been done) they blame Israel. Why?

Point 3) Yassir Arafat has squandered money for years. Given to him by the nobel peace price, the United States, and yes, even Israel itself, he did not build infrastructure. He just bought weapons. This man has no interest in making life better for his own people. But the Palestinians have suffered under his disasterous leadership for over 20 years. But does he get blamed for this? No! They blame Israel.

Point 4) The GUPS on our campus have posted inflammatory signs. They have had speakers who blamed Israel for bombing the world trade center. They have posted the blood libel. They have harrassed students. They tried to prevent Jewish student from getting on student council. They pushed Jewish students against the wall at their own rally. But do they accept any responsibility FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS? No! They blame Israel.

And isn't this what anti-Semitism is? Using the Jews as a scapegoat? That's what the Nazis and the Church did. That's what the PLO does, what the Arab nations do. And that's what GUPS does. And even though this is one of the fundamental elements of Anti-Semitism, they deny their own anti-semitism. How convenient it must be to have an eternal people to blame for everything, including your own actions.

My advice to the Palestinians is simple.
A) The best revenge is living well.
B) If you want your own state, a peaceful, non-violent resistance h in the style of Dr. King or Mahatma Ghandi will do you more good than all the suicide bombs in the world.
C) If you want to destroy Israel... well... Israel will defend itself. If you want war, you'll have war. But Israel will never voluntarily agree to her own destruction.. just like any other country in the history of the world. But if this path brings you misery, remember that you always have points A and B available.
by free palestine
Saturday May 25th, 2002 3:14 PM
You are really naive my friend... peaceful protesting in the occupied territories is met with bullets. You don't know shit about the conflict. Palestinians DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN OTHER COUNTRIES. The fact that you said that all other Arab countries don't accept them it just bullshit, and shows your ignorance. Palestinians are given full citizenship in Jordan. Are all the Arab countries friends of the Palestinians? No, unfortunately, but in what way does that excuse the expullsion and stealing of Palestinians homes and culture by a colonist regime? The past wars with Israel have been to gain back stolen land, nothing more, specifically the 1948 war, which was a move of defense to prevent zionist forces from taking ALL of Palestine, since Israel was expelling and SLAUGHTERING Palestinians from both Jewish and Arab partitioned areas. !967 was not started by Egypt, which has been made very clear in revised historical accounts, and from the Israeli leadership themselves. 1973 was an Arab launched invasion to take by land stolen by Israel in 1967, after Israel refused a peace agreement. This is the history up till 1973. Since then Palestinians have lived under a brutal military dictatorship which is destroying their land, trees, homes, and souls. You are just another American who doesn't know shit about the conflict, and has these images of a "virtual Israel" as many say. You don't know the truth about Israel. Whats funny is that Jewish Americans are even more violently zionist then most Israelis themselves. They have dreams of a country they do not know, but claim to speak for. You are similar in that you are beliving their distortions, and it's pathetic. Please, read some real history on the conflict then get back to me.
by Benny Morris
Saturday May 25th, 2002 3:53 PM
Free Palestine should read my book "Righteous Victims," and then come back and see if he is still wiling to make an ass of himself like he did in the previous post, where he pretended to be a historical expert without citing sources.
by free palestine
Saturday May 25th, 2002 4:24 PM
I have read rightous victims. How does it change anything I've said? Obviously you haven't even read the book, since you seem to believe it is a right wing pro-zionist piece. Rightous Victims is a history of the creation of Israel, and includes much documentation on the goals of the zionists to remove all the palestinians from palestine, as well as the documented slaughters and explusions. Seems YOU are the one making a fool of themselves. I have probably read more about Palestine, then you have read about anything. Get lost.
by Patricia Jennings, M.Ed.
Sunday May 26th, 2002 2:09 PM
I just watched the so-called video evidence that the GUPS claim as proof that pro-Israel individuals were attacking them.

All you can hear are the GUPS with their illegal bullhorns and drums drowning out the rally speakers. There one guy yelling at them to be quiet so he can hear!

Yeah, this is evidence all right, evidence of the GUPS disobeying the university regulations regarding use of bullhorns and drums at counterdemonstrations!

by berkeley
Sunday May 26th, 2002 2:20 PM
At all the Berkeley antiwar rallies, the prowar people yelled down all the speakers. And, at many of the Palestinian protests I've been to here, the proIsraeli crowd has tried to chant over the Palestinian speakers.

At first thought, the idea of a school having rules against counterdemonstrators seems great. But it really is a bad idea since one wouldnt want the KKK to be able to show up and have it be illegal to get in that way of their message.

It seems like it would be more productive for people to deal with the situation in the Middle East rather than this side issue of who yelled what bad names at who. And who did it first.People are dying in the Middle East and someone calling someone else a bad name really seems petty in comparison.
by Patricia Jennings
Sunday May 26th, 2002 6:24 PM
I was there, I stood there being screamed at. I stood there, trapped in a corner having these people spit on me and yell, "Kill the Jews" "Hitler should have finished you off" "Burn, mother f-----, burn" "Chicken! If the cops weren't here we'd kill you"

This is the issue. False imprisonment, and death threats. These are not trivial complaints! Had we been any other group, say, gays, or African Americans, I doubt this would be so easily dismissed!
by evan
Sunday May 26th, 2002 6:52 PM
Ms. Jennings, Thanks for posting the letter, I hadn't seen it or the full poster...

I have to say, though, that other observers, including the reporter for the Jewish Bulletin, failed to hear anyone say "Kill the Jews" or anything of that nature...which makes me doubt your version of events. And I can hear the guy saying "You terrorist" in the video linked here.

I'm not the only one either, apparently, since someone else said, "So the bonehead shouted, "you terrorist." Big deal. "

They're right...nothing that can be confirmed so far as happening at SFSU is a big deal. But apparently some people are trying to blow it up in order to have an excuse to ban GUPS and other groups...

And frankly, as GUPS did not design the flyer, why should they apologize for it?
by evan
Sunday May 26th, 2002 7:41 PM
And BTW, the university administration says the letter of apology was printed in the student paper:

"On April 25, 2002, MSA sent a letter of apology to President Corrigan for the "blood libel" image. The letter also reaffirmed the organization's commitment to speak out against the foreign policies of the Israeli government. The apology was published in the student newspaper. "

http://www.sfsu.edu/~news/response/summary.htm

Seems to me the administration has less of an axe to grind than Ms. Jennings....who, like other pro-Israel demonstrators, has provided nothing to back up her claims.

The administration also confirms that MSA&GUPS began removing the offending image the next day...before any official action by the administration is mentioned...which would seem to fit, or at least not contradict, MSA's claim that they began to do this as soon as they noticed the problem.
by Or is there no free speech here?
Tuesday May 28th, 2002 2:01 AM
Really fair to try and go after someone when they've been banned for spurious reasons. If IndyMedia is really an advocate of free speech the "collective" will let Ms. Jennings post responses to these allegations, which by the way have been corroborated by numerous eyewitnesses.
by frankly makes me sick
Tuesday May 28th, 2002 10:25 AM
well, folx, if there's ever a fine example of why NOT to join monotheistic religions, this it it. you people are all nuts. here we have the whole problem encapsulated in one endlessly rambling thread. you people almost make the christians look good. well, that's going a little too far but YEESH.
by frankly makes me sick
Tuesday May 28th, 2002 10:26 AM
well, folx, if there's ever a fine example of why NOT to join monotheistic religions, this it it. you people are all nuts. here we have the whole problem encapsulated in one endlessly rambling thread. you people almost make the christians look good. well, that's going a little too far but YEESH.
by the truth
Wednesday May 29th, 2002 5:21 PM
It's beautiful to see how all these anti-racist "activists" are trying to throw the attention off their hate crimes and keep babbling about the state of Israel everytime they are questioned about the their actions. This link was supposed to be regarding the racist actions of GUPS and their supports and these two groups have tried to avoid scrutiny every way they can. You have no shame. Yeah your cause is just, but you aren't!
by x
Wednesday May 29th, 2002 5:26 PM
In an e-mail to me Lelia from GUPS admits that she was in a cage for the entire time of the protest and didn't see what happened in regards to the claims made by her group or of the Pro Israel side. Earlier she had passed around a statement claiming she was an eyewitness to the whole scene and that the Pro-Pal side was well behaved while the Pro Israel side threw around racial slurs left and right. Isn't indymedia supposed to be about truth in media? GUPS admitted to distibuting their above statement w/o even knowing if it was factually correct, or not.
by Jason
Wednesday May 29th, 2002 5:29 PM
All this talk about Zionists is a way for these fanatics to avoid having to talk about the hate crimes they commit-
the more injustices they perpetuate under the name of
their Palistinian cause the more fanatically they get- like leeches who get fatter and fatter by the continuous sucking of blood. Holy shit that was a good analogy.
by X
Wednesday May 29th, 2002 6:24 PM
Already, then... GUPS and MSU aren't responsible for the racist poster... then who made it? Who had it printed? Oh, I know it was the Zionists! All the lefties at SFSU are afraid to look for the answer to that question because it would be showing certain activist groups on campus are racist hypocrits.
by history buff
Wednesday May 29th, 2002 6:32 PM
It could have been. They've flown false flags before.
by X
Thursday May 30th, 2002 2:06 AM
right, unlike lefty organizations? GUPS has lied so much since this whole thing begun is can be 99.9% guarenteed any denial they make is a lie. Trying to blame the Zionists is a way for all the feeble minded apologists to try to defer the well deserved blame that is being heaped on them. Someone one said you can judge a persons character by their enemies. If that is the case I would like to be a Zionist as they seem to attrack the hatred of the biggest losers on this planet along with the usual anti-racist rasists that we see at all the lefty rallies.
by TRUE PATRIOT
Thursday May 30th, 2002 2:13 AM


Benjamin Franklin (a great man we could use more like him he’d probably be arrested nowadays though) said freedom and liberty is the most important thing, “if we give up some of our freedom for more security we will end up neither security or our freedom”
The main terrorist are the fascists mole police state cops and their related organizations like the riders in Oakland rampart in la and many others in the police around the usa and of course the paramilitary death squads around the world paid for by the robber baron oil companies

I saw what happened was not in the protest though just a tourist on the bridge the protest was peaceful no banners on the bridge the protesters stayed on the side walk the cops stopped the protest at 1:35 the cops blocked the sidewalk the cops stopped the traffic on the bridge so the could get their buses in to take off the courageous protesters that where abused by the chpig fascists
The little girl I saw arrested after the protest near that little parking lot by the bridge walk way about 50 yds from the bridge at about 1:59 the courageous little girl did not assault the chpig the chpigs where pushing the people with sticks she said stop pushing me an the chpigs attacked her after the chpigs tied the little girl up and tossed her to the ground one chpig fatass kneeled on her and grabbed her ass I took a photo of this
If courageous people like the 11 yr old don’t protest the fascist practices of our dictator bush over in other peoples countries more terrorist will be willing to come over here and kill the people that support their oppressors
by X
Thursday May 30th, 2002 3:58 AM
On GUPS web site they declare that the Pro Israel demonstrators had no right to fly their flag because it was an area of campus that was supposed to foster "diversity" (then the flag of no arab or muslim country would be allowed either since Israel is more racially and ethnically diverse and tolerent than any muslim or arab country). GUPS has tried to foster an atmosphere where for their cause they can do anything, and if anyone calls them on anything they scream that their movement is being sabotoged and persecuted. I say they are sabatoging their own movement by showing their true colors.. Now they are trying to prevent GUPS students from being prosecuted if it is shown that they commited hate crimes. They are also trying to force SFSU to force "sensitivity training" on anyone who accusses them of anything. "Sensitivity training" is just a euphamism for trying to "re-educate" anyone who has the nerve to call them on their racist and illegal behavior. I am
furious that students were forced to pay for the racist poster created by one or more of the following: AS, GUPS, MSL. While all 3 deny responsibilty it is obvious that it didn't materialize out of thin air. There needs to be accountablility and we must demand answers as to who made and distributed this racist flyer along a demand student funds be reimbursed for the funds taken to create it.
I am starting a group to push for the accountablity and to fight GUPS lies and propoganda. GUPS is claiming to be outraged that they have been taken to task for their actions. Has our campus become so racist that a group of students think it is racist for them not to be allowed to get away with commiting hate crimes and violating others rights to free speech? I support the Palestinian cause, but this isn't about Palestine: It is about a group on campus that has given themselves the right, in the name of their cause, to degrade and harass students on campus and to intimidate anyone who questions their tactics.
This group is neither Pro-Palestinian or Pro-Israel (or even political) but rather a group that demands that GUPS are held to the same accountability as any other group of students who violated others rights. The e-mail address is:
sfsuantiracist [at] hotmail.com
by Sean
Thursday May 30th, 2002 4:32 AM
Gups website says they held a big get-together for "community leaders" last Thurs. to gather support for their fight to force administration to apologize for not allowing them to get away with hate crimes. Was anyone at this meeting? I really wanted to go but I've heard all the lies, propoganda, threats, and hysteria from GUPS that I want to (and then some).
by R
Thursday May 30th, 2002 4:37 AM
Yeah I read the GUPS website and was amused at their claim the Israeli side had no right to put up their flag on the grounds it didn't promote "diversity". If GUPS was pro-diversity none on these incidents- the poster, the disruption and harassment at the rally- would have occurred. GUPS is the most anti-diversity group on campus, they have shown it in their unwillingness to extend themselves to anyone who doesn't 100% agree with them- they have that "you're either with us or against us" mentality bullshit.
by David
Thursday May 30th, 2002 12:11 PM
All you need to do is remember some simple facts about the Israel/Palestine situation:

1) If the Muslim Palestinians were to stop all violence against Jews in Israel and peacefully protest, they would have a state. In fact, even without stopping violence, they were presented with a plan that allowed them to keep 92% of the territory in the West Bank and Gaza and establish their own country.

2) If the Jews in Israel were to disarm and give up armed responses to the Muslim murderers, the Jews in Israel would be slaughtered. Don't believe me? Go look at what the Arabs say in their countries' government run papers at http://www.memri.org. Or listen to the Iranian government official who stated that the morning they get a nuclear bomb, by that afternoon it will be dropped on Israel. (one wonders if he realizes that should Iran do that, Iran would cease to exist by that evening)

Furthermore, this whole talk about "occupation" and "right of return" is completely ridiculous. Israel went through several wars of survival and in the process took territory. This happens in wars. Don't believe me? Look at some historical world maps. I know they don't teach real history anymore, but I'm sure you can figure it out by looking at maps. Notice borders....notice how they change after wars....Germany's border....France...Russia...China....Japan....Mexico..USA --they all move around after wars. Tough. If the UN existed after WWII, we'd have 12 million Germans in refugee camps in territories "occupied" by Poland and Russia demanding their "right of return." Think about that. What about the "righ of return" of all the Jews expelled from Arab countries after Israel's founding? Do they have a right of return or of compensation for their seized property?

The Palestinian "Authority" has received millions and millions of dollars in aid from the UN and the EU (and even the USA). How do they spend it? On bombs to kill their own people in the hope they'll murder a few Jews. Great way to run a country.

Finally, does anyone really think that being called a "camel jockey" is anything close to being told that "Hitler should have finished the job"? Come on and grow up GUPS.

By the way, can't the Arabs be original?...I mean that blood libel is SO 10th century Western Europe. You'd think that the multi-culturalists could find something else to blame the Jews for that didn't come from dead white men.




by Che
Thursday May 30th, 2002 12:58 PM
I guess none of you Zionists assholes saw the irony in flying Zionists flags and having a pro Israel rally at Malcolm X plaza, a plaza named after the revolutionary anti-racist. Malcolm X was anti-Zionist, in case you didn't know. You dumbshits. Go ahead and talk shit about Malcolm X. Expose your racism and support for US imperialism.
by Mohammad
Thursday May 30th, 2002 1:00 PM
Who are these people?

A large group of people on the surface of Earth contributes very little to nothing to the welfare of human race. This group of people has invented no medicine of significant importance in the last several hundred years. Modern medicines have saved hundreds of millions of life in the last hundred years. Medical technology saved far more life than the total number of life lost during all the war combined in last few hundred years.

Same group of people has declared all technological advances as not necessary or of very little importance. This group of people has not invented anything significant for human comfort, enjoyment or to reduce the pain and misery of poorest 1 billion people of the world. Since they do not have the technology they try to downplay the benefit of technology to human kind. But they also want to reap the benefit of technology and other's hard work. They are extremely jealous of other group of people who has achieved much higher standard of living by good work ethic, civic mindedness, and hard and smart work over a long period of time. The jealous group of people’s unspoken motto is, “if you do not share your wealth with us then we will destroy you by blowing ourselves up in your high value property areas. You can’t stop us showing up to your high valuable vicinity because you folks enjoy higher civil liberty. We will use your Bill of Rights to destroy you.”

This extremely jealous people’s heart is full of hatred because of extreme inferiority complex. They teach hate to their children. They are over a billion in the world. Even though they are like parasite, grows, multiplies faster than bacteria does, you do not want to exterminate them all since you hold higher moral standard. Although, these people neither has the capability to advance in science and technology, nor has the sense of fairness but they think their belief system is superior to all others and wants to rule the world. They grow like cancer cell grow. These bacteria like people, instead of focusing on constructive ideas has decided to work on destruction. They believe in suicide bombing.

Who are these people? What are you going to do about it?

An alien from outer space.
…whose measuring stick is "Reward the group of people who contributes most toward the welfare of human race, independent of national boundary, religion, or ethnicity."



by Mike
Thursday May 30th, 2002 3:35 PM
This tread is great. It reads like the transcript of my ugly divorce - 'Did not', 'did too' ' liar'....

Gosh, I'm just glad I don't live in the mid-east with all these looney-tunes from both sides.
by Something else
Thursday May 30th, 2002 5:46 PM
Well, perhaps Malcolm X was against Israel.

But the flag was hanging from the Cesar Chavez student center.

And Cesar Chavez supported Zionism and Israel. Just like Dr. King.

Good men they were too.

After all, we remember what King said to his people after they were being assaulted by police, drenched with fire hoses, and sometimes killed in their marches for justice.

He said: "Screw this. Let's go strap bombs to ourselves and blow up these damn whites!"

Actually, for those of you who know your history, he didn't say that. If he did, he wouldn't have gotten anywhere, he would have been a criminal, he would not have had any moral advantage over his opponents.

Kinda like the Palestinians and GUPS, don't you think?
by X
Thursday May 30th, 2002 6:36 PM
Oh so now anyone who criticizes Malcolm X is a racist?
Emotional blackmail only works for so long!!
Nation of Islam is considered nothing by most practicing Muslims in the MIddle East. You are funny, Che, in your pathetic attempts as self importance by throwing around terms flippantly. Yeah the "Zionist" flag should fly anywhere a flag from far more barbaric countries- Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan, and the Palistinian Territories would be allowed. Your yakking away at Zionism is nothing more then proof you have too much time on your hands to get all worked up about nothing.
by S
Friday May 31st, 2002 3:22 AM
I just received an indignant e-mail from Leila from GUPS incorporating new McCarthy tactics along with her old. She indignantly claims the Hillel, AS, all SFSU administration, the press, and everyone who is angry about their hate crimes is offensively "unpatriotic"- she says that GUPS should be applauded for their bold "free speech" (strange since earlier she claimed no "bold" words were used). She also claims pro-Zionist members of AS printed "that" poster to defame MSU and GUPS- a conspiracy! She went on to claim that all the above groups are working together for their cause of futhering "arab racism" with an intention to stifle the Palestinian cause. Why is it that we all protested hate crimes against Muslims and Arabs 8 months ago and now we are being told by GUPS that hate crimes (as long as it's not directed at them ) are just euphamisms for patrioticly doing your part to show you love this country. She asked me to join her battle against these racists and people who hate this country be sending letters to dozens of political officials on her behalf.
by Sean
Friday May 31st, 2002 5:50 AM
I've witnessed GUPS and their supporters acting like terrorists- so what is wrong with people telling them that, it is true. No one accussed them of blowing up the WTC- If you look up the word terrorist in the dictonary you will find its a pretty good description of their behavior. GUPS can't blame others if they act in ways that make people come to some very logical (and negative) conclusions about them.
by Sean
Friday May 31st, 2002 5:50 AM
I've witnessed GUPS and their supporters acting like terrorists- so what is wrong with people telling them that, it is true. No one accussed them of blowing up the WTC- If you look up the word terrorist in the dictonary you will find its a pretty good description of their behavior. GUPS can't blame others if they act in ways that make people come to some very logical (and negative) conclusions about them.
by Sean
Friday May 31st, 2002 5:50 AM
I've witnessed GUPS and their supporters acting like terrorists- so what is wrong with people telling them that, it is true. No one accussed them of blowing up the WTC- If you look up the word terrorist in the dictonary you will find its a pretty good description of their behavior. GUPS can't blame others if they act in ways that make people come to some very logical (and negative) conclusions about them.
by Sean
Friday May 31st, 2002 5:50 AM
I've witnessed GUPS and their supporters acting like terrorists- so what is wrong with people telling them that, it is true. No one accussed them of blowing up the WTC- If you look up the word terrorist in the dictonary you will find its a pretty good description of their behavior. GUPS can't blame others if they act in ways that make people come to some very logical (and negative) conclusions about them.
by sfsu student
Saturday Jun 1st, 2002 12:54 AM
I was not there at the rally but reading the statement by GUPS makes me think they are inconsistent and crazy.
They complain the Pro-Israel side wasn't flying the Palestinian flag. Why should they? The Palestinian government, like in most Arab countries, teaches anti-jewish lies as part of it's curriculum starting in grade school.
Then GUPS admits to yelling "Zionists off Campus!" then turns around to complain that they were met with "Islamic Terrorists off Campus!" Well, Islamic terrorists have killed more innocent people, both here and abroad then the Zionists, so duh, why should'nt they speak out against them? Why do Mulims and Arabs seem to think that anything negative spoken about terrorists are a personal insult to them? If you aren't a terrorist, then it doesn't pertain to you.
by me
Saturday Jun 1st, 2002 1:15 AM
GUPS has been committing hate crimes for years and getting away with it. Several members have admitted to make death threats in recent years. At this point Israel is just a red herring that allows them to thrive while similar hate groups would have been forced off campus years ago.
by .
Saturday Jun 1st, 2002 2:55 AM
The Israeli Flags was on the STUDENT UNION. This is totally unacceptable since the Student Union is for all students, and is not suppose to support one ethnic group over another. There were not "hate crimes" commited by GUPS members, and this whole thing is a smear campagin by the Zionist students on campus, similar to such campaigns carried about by the ADL. GUPS are up against some very powerful lobby groups in SF and Im sure this kind of bullshit will only continue. All you fools spamming here with utter lies to try and discredit them are inhuman pieces of shit and should get the fuck off indymedia. Im sure that whatever "zionist peace group" you are a member of told you to come here and spam shit. You are fucking pigs.
by Real Mature
Saturday Jun 1st, 2002 6:49 PM
I didn't see one credible fact posted in that diatribe by . Jews have a right not to be persecuted and there are several accounts of abusive, imperious, anti-democratic behavior by GUPS at the expense of SFSU's Jews. Stop the poisonous rhetoric and hate-mongering and stop blaming the victims. Only through reasoned discourse can peace and justice for all be achieved.
by Patricia A. Jennings, M.Ed. (pajennings [at] ucdavis.edu)
Saturday Jun 1st, 2002 11:56 PM
Re: Editorial Commentary
Web site: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SFSU/

Several weeks ago, I was subjected to the most disturbing violations of my civil rights that I have ever encountered in my life. At the conclusion of a peace rally supporting Israel, an unruly mob of Palestinian supporters cornered us against a wall. Chanting, "Take it down!" they demanded we remove a banner hanging on the wall behind us. The banner said, "We Stand with Israel with Hope for Peace." As the anger and hatred intensified, they maliciously attacked us with threats of death and violence screaming, "Kill the Jews!" "Burn, mother f-----, burn!" "Hitler should have finished you off!" "Zionists off our campus now!"

To our astonishment, the police made no attempt to stop them. Rather, surrounding us they created both a protective shield and a confining barrier. We were trapped, afraid for our safety, even our lives, and forced to endure this ferocious assault. Individuals taunted us saying, "chicken," chastising us for hiding behind the police. I heard someone say, "If the police weren't here we'd kill you!" As I felt tears welling up in my eyes, we sang Oseh Shalom, "May he who brings peace in love, may he bring peace unto us and all of Israel. And let us say, Amen." Finally the police escorted us away. As we left, flanked by police, we sang the words of John Lennon, "All we are saying is give peace a chance."

This occurred on May 7 of this year at one of the most liberal state funded campuses in the country, San Francisco State University. The campus police did not protect our civil rights. They allowed the counter-demonstrators to drown the words of rally speakers with illegal bullhorns and drums impinging on their freedom of speech. They allowed the Palestinian supporters to invade the plaza while university officials pressured rally organizers to clear the plaza before the scheduled event had concluded impinging on the Jewish student's right to assemble. Rather than arrest the counter-demonstrators and escort them to jail, they imprisoned us and then escorted us away. Something is horribly wrong with this picture.

In subsequent days, the administration dismissed accounts of the event equating the behaviors of both groups. The account on the university web site states, "video tapes of the incident indicate that individuals from both sides said offensive words." Although I stood near the counter-demonstrators during the rally I saw no evidence of hateful retorts from the pro-Israel participants. I did hear people yelling at them to be quiet so they could hear. Evidently one woman, unknown to the organizers of the rally, called the counter-demonstrators "camel jockeys" and it was captured on tape. She and two pro-Palestinians are being prosecuted and their cases have been referred to the district attorney. In what universe does "camel jockey" equate "kill the Jews?" Since it is near impossible to identify the majority of the perpetrators after the fact, any action resulting from this incident is doubtful.

This confrontation arose in an insidious campus climate of anti-Semitism and hatred. For years Jewish students have complained about the daily verbal assaults and intimidations they experience on campus if they show any signs of being Jewish. After a succession of weekly pro-Palestinian rallies where Jews were publicly demonized, they had to face a widely distributed poster depicting a dead baby with the caption, "Palestinian Children Meat -- Slaughtered According to Jewish Rites Under American License." The Muslim Student Association (MSA) General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS) and Associated Students (AS) were identified on the flier as sponsors.

Fighting overt anti-Semitism at SFSU has been a constant uphill battle. In 1994, members of the Pan Afrikan Student Union tried to stop riot police and university officials from removing a Malcolm X mural that depicted dollar signs over Jewish stars. Radical Muslim leader, Hatem Bazian, as a student and AS president, refused to allow Jews to run for office by declaring them Zionists, and therefore, racists. As a student, Troy Buckner-Nkrumah publicly announced, "we believe every Zionist should have a bullet in their head." After graduation, he was hired on as a lecturer in the Department of Ethnic Studies. In 1999, Professor George Frankel sued the university, claiming he had been denied tenure in the business department because of "a pattern of [anti-Semitic] discrimination" within the department. Arbitration awarded Frankel nearly half a million dollars in lost wages and a return to his job with full tenure. Despite his current claims to the contrary, in 1997 President Robert Corrigan called SF State, "the most anti-Semitic campus in the country."

As in the past, the university administration claims to be working on a solution to this problem, however, I am beginning to wonder. It took three weeks for the director of the Office of Student Programs and Leadership Development to acknowledge my official complaint despite the stated university policy requiring a review within five days. President Corrigan has invited me to join a task force to study the problem, however, I have yet to be informed of a task force meeting and administration officials do not respond to my requests for updates on the matter.

Campus police say they have forwarded my complain to the district attorney's office, however, the DA's office has no recollection of my case, most likely because the one person I can identify cannot be found. Finally, prompted by the university public affairs office, the media continues to dismiss the importance of the incident writing it off with a "kids will be kids" attitude. Perhaps they didn't count on the presence of a "real adult" at the rally.

I am the parent of one of the Jewish student leaders. For two years my son has complained about the anti-Semitic climate on campus. Frankly, I found it hard to believe and I came to the rally to check out the situation for myself. As an academic, I am familiar with campus life. I have never experienced such vile, disgusting hatred in my life. I will not allow the university to dismiss the reports of the Jewish students or to equate their behavior with that of the Palestinian supporters. To do so would be wrong. Jewish students have a right to attend a state university without fears of violence or intimidation. They have the right to assemble under the protection of the police. They have the right to speak without fear of having their words drowned by bullhorns. They have a right to demand peace in Israel and peace on their campus. Enough is enough.

Patricia A. Jennings, M.Ed.
University of California, Davis
by me
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 1:41 AM
The term Zionist is used by GUPS and their supporters to try and discredit anyone who accuses them of any impropriety. When they are called on anything they always claim it is 'Zionist lies'. This shows they are a racist group because they never scrutinize the claims of Arabs who claim to have expreienced harrassment, - two very different additudes depending on whether the victims are Jewish or Arab. Several people posting here have labelled anyone who speaks out against hate crimes against Jews as "Zionist". I am neither Jewish or a Zionist but someone who sees how on campus GUPS have persecuted people at whim and anyone who calls them on it is labelled one or more of the following: racist, anti-arab, anti-muslim, pro-Israel, zionist, nazi. I am for a Palestinian state and the right to return BUT I would never support a group like GUPS who have used that cause to attempt to blackmail and intimidate every student and faculty into looking the other way and allow them to behave like terrorists. Supporting them is no different then supporting any other hate group- their worthwhile cause doesn't make the fact that they victimize innocent people any less criminal, ethically, if not legally.
by I'm not a law student but....
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 2:17 AM
I was under the impression that schools were required by law to provide a non hostile enviornment for students and faculty regardless of their race, religion, political affiliation, etc. If the University is knowingly higher people who discrimintate or are intimidated to persue people who harrass students because the Univerisity is afraid of being labelled "anti-Arab"- too bad- they legally have to provide equal rights for everyone. It's ironic that most of those on campus persecuting Jews are of ethnic and religious groups that have fought against discrimination themselves. Use legal action to demand the University treat you with respect just like African Americans have in the past.
This is the kind of bullshit rhetoric that the pro-Israeli groups/lobbies always use. The GUPS has done NOTHING TERRORIST LIKE. They have not commited any hate crimes, they have done nothing illegal. This is really getting out of hand. These sophisticated lies from zionist professors, etc, are the pride and joy of the zionist movement. They are able to disguise their venom with a mask of "professionalism" and I am getting seriously disgusted by it. Their statements are just not based on any reality. They are attempting to smear any Pro-Palestinian groups as terrorists, or potentional terrorists, or anti-Jew, and it's the epoch of intellectual dishonesty. I really don't know how people are suppose to fight these kinds of coordinated assaults from zionist attack dogs. I mean seriously, the Israeli government has these types of groups established all over the world to do their mass propoganda campaigns, they are government funded and coordinated. How can grassroots groups defend themselves from these people when they don't have the manpower, or money to go up against it? Im curious if anyone has thoughts on this.
by Patricia A. Jennings, M.Ed.
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 1:53 PM
Sorry to inform you that my words cannot be dismissed as "Israel lobbies and propoganda."

I have no connection with Israel what-so-ever. My son is a Jewish student. I attended the rally. My words are the truth.

I am not some right-wing infultrator trying to spread lies. I am one of you. I am a very liberal person who has supported all the liberal causes throughout my life. I demonstrated against Viet Nam. I demonstrated against the last presidential election.

I teach psychology at Sonoma State University and I'm working on my doctorate in human development at UC Davis.

I cannot stand by and idly let this so-called independent medium become a stage for the lies of GUPS supporters.

Something is terribly wrong when you can't be both a liberal person AND support Israel's right to exist.

This is just nonesence and I will not let you vilify me!
by Let it "be"
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 3:56 PM
Look.

You cannot understand Zionism if you know nothing about Jewish history.

You cannot understand Israel if you know nothing about Anti-Semitism.

If you did know something about the history of Anti-Semitism, you would recognize that the GUPS blanket condemnation of Zionism smacks of classical Anti-Semitism. I mean classical in the terms of the Church or the Nazis. There are many parrallels.

I could list them, but what's the use? None of the GUPS representatives here seem to remotely care.

After all, they might learn something about themselves, their opponents, or the world. And we know what that could mean.


-Me

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deep or taste not the pierenian spring."

-Alexander Pope

by INURFCE
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 4:46 PM
ISRAELI ZIONAZIS ARE THIEVEING CRIMINALS THAT STOE THE LAND THEY OCCUPY
by Logic
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 7:35 PM
Your use of profanity-laden tirades against Zionists says you have nothing to say to counter the logic of Patricia Jennings and Let it "be". Jews did not steal the land -- they were given it by a UN resolution in 1948 in the wake of a Holocaust where 6 million Jews were killed for want of a haven.
by INURFCE
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 7:53 PM
THOSE THEIVEING ZIONAZI PIGS SHOULD GO BACK TO EUROPE WHERE THEIR FROM AND LOVED OR DIE
ALSO I HOPE YOU ARE IN ISRAEL YOU ZIONAZI SCUM AND I HOPE YOUR ASS GETS BLOWN TO BITS BY ONE OF THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PALESTINIAN FREEDOM FIGHTERS
SO FUCK OFF
by Truth prevails over hate
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 8:17 PM
Shameful display of violent antagonism. Seems like some will never accept the Jews wherever we are. And obviously, based on the experience of 6 million Jews murdered during the Holocaust, and in light of current events where Jews are subject to violence and harassment across Europe, Jews are not being treated particularly well in Europe.

Such antagonistic hate-laden speech inciting/ wishing violence is unbecoming of the United States. If INURFACE intends to act on his hateful and violent wishes, then I hope the authorities are alerted and can stop him from doing so.
by INURFCE
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 8:41 PM
I JUST THINK YOU THIEVING CHEATING DISHONIST BASTARDS SHOULD LEAVE THE LAND YOU STOLE
AND AS FOR KILLING YOU THIEVES TO GET YOU OUT OF PALESTINE OR PUSHING YOU BACK TO EUROPE THATS THE JOB OF THE BRAVE HEROIC PALESTINIAN FREEDOM FIGHTERS AND I COMMEND THEM ON DOING A GOOD JOB
SO GO FUCK YOUR SELF ASS HOLE
by .
Sunday Jun 2nd, 2002 9:05 PM
I understand the root causes of Zionism. It has been a movement lasting over one hundred years, and yes, before World War 2. Zionists came to Palestine, bought and stole land, then expelled the native population using terror. Im sorry if you cannot face these simple truths. Perhaps somce choice quotes from your "peaceful" Zionist leaders?

"We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country .... expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." -- Theodore Herzl (from Rafael Patai, Ed. The Complete Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Vol I)

"... it is the duty of the [Israeli] leadership to explain to the public a number of truths. One truth is that there is no Zionism, no settlement, and no Jewish state without evacuating Arabs, and without expropriating lands and their fencing off." -- Yesha'ayahu Ben-Porat, (Yedi'ot Aharonot 07/14/1972) responding to public controversy regarding the Israeli evictions of Palestinians in Rafah, Gaza, in 1972. (Cited in Nur Masalha's "A Land Without A People" 1997, p.98)

"The very point of Labor's Zionist program is to have as much land as possible and as few Arabs as possible!" --Yitzhak Navon ("moderate" ex-Israeli president and a leading labor party politician.) Cited on p.179 of Nur Masalha's A Land without a People who cites Bernard Avishai's The Tragedy of Zionism 1985 p.340.

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist." -- Golda Meir Statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.
(Classic lies and bigotry)

"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel.... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours ... When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle." -- Israeli Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan (Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 4/13/83, NYTimes 4/14/83)

"Arabs tend to confess; it's part of their nature" -- Moshe Etzioni, an Israeli high court justice, in an interview with Amnesty International, when asked about the unusually high rate of confessions from Palestinians (indicating Israel's use of torture), 1977. Quote from a Noam Chomsky interview in the progressive

"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail." --Rabbi Ya'acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein (Cited in the New York Times, 02/28/1994.)

Zionism is an extremely racist ideology which resulted in the misery of thousands of native Palestinians who were killed, terrorized, and expelled by Zionists with the funding of imperialists.

Palestinians at this point in time, are living under a brutal military dictatorship for 30 years, and have been murderered, tortured (legal under Israeli law), and expelled fruther. Israel is trying to make life for the Palestinian people living hell so that they will give up on their attempts to returning to their homeland or creating a viable Palestinian state. What does this mean for the Palestinian people? It means that they can either live a horrible life under the abuse of Israel, or attempt to immigrate to another country (quite difficulty for Palestinians) and live a life of saddness and humilitity that they can never return to their homeland with pride or dignity as world citizens. Israel is destroying and dehumanizing these people for it's own goals and it's disgusting. Any of you who thinks it's ok for Israel to do this is a bigot and an imperialist who cares nothing about freedom or justice. Can I really blame you for supporting Israel before you knew truths about this conflict? No, since the US media does not tell the truth about this conflict.. but I do expect you know to at least try to learn something. I recommend "The Hidden History of Zionism"

http://www.balkanunity.org/mideast/english/zionism/

or

The Fateful Triangle: The U.S., Israel and the Palestinians

I want to make this clear that the this conflict is not one between equals. Palestinians are brutalized and oppressed, and have been for over 30 years. When Israel talks about "protecting" it's self from "terror" it means it is reacting to REACTION from Palestinians living under constant ISRAELI TERROR, a terror that has lasted for 50 years, since the creation is Israel (hundreds of Palestinian villages were destroyed and hundreds, perhaps thousands were slaughtered by Zionist militas)! Zionists are attempting to change the facts on the ground, to remove the history of Israel's creation, and to funnel in settlers to create Jewish majorities, protected by IDF (even "illegal" settlements are protected by IDF soldiers) and Jewish only roads so that these areas can be annexed. This was made perfectly clear at Camp David, when Barak increased settlement building to the highest levels seen, then spit in Arafat's face. Am I an anti-Semite for making these facts clear? Zionists would like to think so, I know the ADL does. But I am not an anti-Semite because I am critical of a history of colonization and slaughter, only those without a moral compass would support such actions. There are a small minority of Jews which are against Israel's slow genocide of the Palestinian people- are they "self hating Jews," not "real Jews?" Why don't you ask these people yourselves

http://www.netureikarta.org/

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/

http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

Ultimately it comes down to either you are infavor of justice, truth, and equality, or oppression, denial, and death. It's up to you to decide.


by Sean
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 2:20 AM
Regarding the above foaming at the mouth posts from GUPS claiming that all accusations against them are "zionist lies" spread from "Israeli spies" stationed all over the world. GUPS memebers have twice in several years been arrested for making death threats to Jewish organizations with no affiliation with Israel.
Also while they are correct that accusations of being anti-Jewish have been made against a several campus Palestinian groups, those accusations, like those against GUPS are backed up by facts.
For example, an Islamic group at NYU circulated "informative" pamphlets that were supposed to help students learn about Jewish history. It included many quoates by David Duke. They later claimed to have no idea who he was!
The reality that people are waking up to is that a lot of many people associated with Pro-Palistinian groups learn in such a racist enviornement at home, mosque, or "teach-ins" that they don't even realize they are being racist even when it is obvious to everyone else.
After Sept 11th the vast majority of us refused to be disrespectful and direct our hate at all Muslims and Arabs and stood up aginst those who did, that has not been reciprocated.
by Patricia Jennings
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 8:38 AM
What totally has become flabbergasting to me is that the left wing of this nation chooses to embrace organizations like GUPS while alienating and even rejecting left-leaning Jewish people like me and many hundreds of thousands more.

Think twice before you choose those who advocate suicide bombers over intellectual and politically active Jews. By alienating a large faction of typically left-leaning people, you are shooting yourselves in the foot.

Many Jewish people who I know (myself included) who have been left-leaning all their lives are re-thinking their political affiliations. Who wants to hang with folks who accuse you of racism simply because you support Israel's right to exist? Who wants to hang with folks who think it's ok to corner you and threaten your life simply because you are Jewish? Is this what has become of the left? Wow.

Most of us have condemned Israeli policies and have been promoting the idea of a two state solution for many years, but lately the argument has included the possibility of no Israel at all, the REAL goal of the Palestinian people. This is nonsense and is the REAL genocide. When people advocate the killing of Jews, this is the REAL racism. GUPS and other Palestinian organizations are very good at spreading misinformation and lies (in fact the Koran specifically tells them it's virtuous to lie to infidels to promote their cause!)

The reason those postings above are full of epithets and vile words it that's the only retort they can come up with, because, simply state, I am right. GUPS members attacked us and threatened our lives because we are Jewish. They called for our deaths because we are Jewish. This is racism. This is genocide. Wake up folks, and smell the coffee. After the Jews, the rest of you are next. In less, of course, you choose to convert to Islam.

by Jawed
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 9:41 AM
I see all these posts trying to convince GUPS to see the error in there ways. I would be more perplexed about GUPS actions if I had not seen films showing white southeners in the 40's indignantly claiming not
to be racist while stringing up a black man to be lynched. That's what GUPS is like. They would never admit to any wrong doing because in their eyes other people don't deserve the respect they do. They are simply a hate group and should be dealt with the same way the KKK would be. Trying to reason with people with so little dignity and reason is futile.
As for the person who listed all the Zionist quotes- big deal- There are hundreds of pro-Nazi, Jewish conspiracy lies, and/or calls to commit violence against all Jews on record by the rulers and/or high religious figures of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, UAE, Kuwait, Pakistan, the Palestinian territories, and Immans in the US. The Palistianian movement is nothing like the civil rights movement as they have more often then not taken the low road then try to blame the "zionist media" for their failure. Their failure is due to their lack of integrity. They claim to be victims of racism for being criticized for their hate crimes. I would rather be dead then associated with such a pathetic, undignified group.

ps- I am a Tunisian muslim so don't start that "zionist" crap on me.
by .
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 10:54 AM
I seriously doubt you are "left leaning" like you claim, perhaps in the US, where the left is anything but. Obviously you are trying to play to the left wing Jews on this website. It is not the "Palestinians truth goals" to destroy Israel and I think you know this. Please don't exaggerate and throw us bullshit and expect me to take you seriously, or respect you. Palestinians want justice, and human dignity, which they have been rejected for over 50 years. If you support a "two-state solution" you would be condeming Israel's current actions of further colonization and terror against the Palestinian people. But you don't because you are a coward, that's the bottom line. You are part of a privilaged group and you don't want to give that up. Until you are willing to support a just and fair solution for the Palestinians, after they have been wronged in so many ways, then I will take you seriously. But if you continue spreading exaggerated lies then I see no reason why I should continue talking to you.

by .
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 11:04 AM
"I see all these posts trying to convince GUPS to see the error in there ways. I would be more perplexed about GUPS actions if I had not seen films showing white southeners in the 40's indignantly claiming not
to be racist while stringing up a black man to be lynched."

The GUPS has not killed anyone, they have not incited anyone to kill anyone. The GUPS has not promoted or organized hate crimes against Jews. The GUPS is attempting to bring awareness of the plight of the Palestinian people to SFSU. When people you like exaggerate to such extents I think it's pretty clear that you have no argument based on reality.

As for the charges of "anti-semitism" well I think that when people are killing your familes and driving your people from their historical homeland by a people who claim to speak for all Jews, that you will develop prejudice against them. Jews and Muslims lived in peace up until the Zionist movement. A choice quote from "My Enemy, Myself" is from a Israeli women who speaks to the author, who is sitting on a curb selling oranges, that "We used to live like brothers," and it's the truth, but that brotherhood was broken when Zionists invaded and carved up Palestine for their own racist regime.
by .
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 11:16 AM
Binoculars of Miss Klein
(a letter to Globe and Mail)
By Israel Shamir

Binoculars are a handy thing, usually used to enlarge small distant objects. But one may turn them other way around and turn a close and threatening object into a small and distant one. This procedure, usually a reserve of kids, was applied by Naomi Klein, the best-selling author of No Logo, in her letter to Toronto daily, Globe and Mail . Under her magic pen, the most powerful group of people in North America, owners of almost all Canadian and the US media and of a sizeable chunk of real estate, was turned into a handful of fearful Jews hiding for their lives in a remote synagogue. It takes time to understand that she writes about people we know in the time we live through, not about some medieval event.

Ms Klein writes: “Most Jews are so frightened that they are now willing to do anything to defend Israeli policies”. The second half is right. We know that most Jews are willing to do anything to defend and support and promote ethnic cleansing in Palestine. They are willing and doing it all the time. They booed down Paul Wolfowitz, the most bloodthirsty member of Neo-Liberal pack, for not being sufficiently bloodthirsty. In your average synagogue, they consider Sharon being a bit too kind-hearted man for his job, rather a closet Leftie. But fear does not enter this equation: nowadays the Jews have nothing to fear. They say and do what they want, without looking back. The Jewish tradition forbids mistreating a Goy, as long as such mistreatment can misfire and endanger a Jew. Apparently, now the Jews do not feel themselves threatened at all.

A few days ago, I went to a Jewish solidarity gathering in Brighton Beach near New York. The Jews cheered Yvet Lieberman, an Israeli minister who left Sharon’s government protesting Sharon’s liberal approach. They spent a lot of money, put up screens and satellite links to proclaim their feelings unequivocally. One does not have to go to a public gathering: open any Jewish newspaper, from Israeli Haaretz to the American Jewish Week, and a stream of unadulterated hatred will hit you square in the face.

It is not news: ten years ago, Danni Rubinstein, a liberal Israeli journalist, complained that the American Jews invariably support the most extreme nationalist forces in Israel. American Jews are not exclusion: the Jews of England and Russia are braying for the Goyiish blood, as well. A skilful apologist, Ms Klein prefers to explain away this criminal and culpable encouragement to mass murder by their fear. She would do a fine defence lawyer in Nuremberg. Indeed, who is not fearful? As Dr Nolte wrote, the Nazi atrocities were caused by their fear of Russian Communism. Communist atrocities were caused by their fear of imperialist aggression, etc. In other words, fear is not a defence. If they are afraid they can consult a shrink, not support genocide.

Ms Klein builds a syllogism: Jews support Sharon because they are afraid, let us therefore fight anti-Semitism, and the problem will be solved. Alas, her conclusion is as weak as her premise Sharon does not use Jewish fear, he mobilizes Jewish chauvinism, including that of Ms\Klein. In her book, No Logo, she tells us that her activism began with defence of the rich Jews who were underrepresented at the board of their companies. It ended with the defence of Sharon’s supporters. Now, most of the Jews speak with one voice, from ‘left’ Naomi Klein to ‘right’ Barbara Amiel. For them, there is no Left, neither Right, just the Jewish ethnic interests.

Ms Klein makes a lot of mileage out of some damaged synagogue. We have not heard from her and her friends a word of protest against the siege of the Nativity Church in Bethlehem, or destruction of the ancient Green Mosque in Nablus. Not a word! I can imagine what would happen if a synagogue would be besieged and its occupants starved and shot as in Bethlehem. Klein would like us to care about synagogues. Synagogues are used to collect money for Sharon’s offensive. Netanyahu and other monsters habitually speak in synagogues to their devotees. Should there be peace to synagogues and war to churches and mosques? Synagogues are not neutral, and Ms Klein admits it: “At my neighbourhood synagogue”, she writes, “the sign on the door says, "Support Israel . . . Now more than ever."

Now – after the massacre of Jenin, after the attack on Bethlehem, after mass destruction of Ramallah and Hebron, they wish to support Israel more than ever. Without their support, Sharon would never commit his atrocities. Without their support, Israel would shrink to its natural size. In my opinion, these people should not be protected, as some wee little innocent group of religious believers. These powerful and influential men should be treated with extreme prejudice.

There is no danger of racialist attacks on peaceful Jews, and it is good. The present level of intermarriage and social connections excludes such a possibility. Even Jean-Mari Le Pen has a Jewish son-in-law Samuel Marechal and very close Jewish friend Jean-Claude Martinez, both prominent members of FN. But the Jewish extra-territorial state, this extension of Israel overseas, should be pointed out as a perpetrator of atrocities.
Israel Shamir
Jaffa
by Leila
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 1:41 PM
Whoever is saying I am emaling them and giving them all of this information is incorrect. I have not been emailing anyone on this page so stop using my name. In addition, GUPS is not a hate group. The reason no apology was made for the poster was because our name was put on it without our permission. MSA wrote an apology clearing GUPS and AS of responsibility as the poster was not approved by us. In addition, GUPS is trying to foster free speech on our campus. We were not slandering people, nor were we yelling hateful slurs. As I said earlier and will repeat again: do not misconstrue my words this time: I was there for the whole event and did not witness any of the accusations that are being hurled our way. The point of all of this is to draw away from pro-palestinian activism on our campus. Being critical of Israel and being anti-semitic are two different things. WE ARE NOT ANTI SEMITIC: our actions do not represent Anti-Semitism. As Americans we have rights to. When our students get harrassed, or threatened or are in fear of wearing their hijab on campus, why isn't there all the media attention and full page ads taken out on that issue? All were asking for are equal rights, on campus and off. AGAIN WE ARE NOT HATEFUL ORGANIZATION.
by Patricia Jennings
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 2:20 PM
You know what you are saying is absolutely untrue. I have in front of me the letter of apology from the MUSLIM STUDENT ASSOCIATION, not from GUPS. This letter was sent to President Corrigan, not the Jewish organizations. Whether or not you personally approved the poster, the poster names GUPS, MSA and AS as co-sponsors.

Funny how lying comes so easily for you.
by X
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 5:43 PM
I am the person the Lelia wrote to and my post was 100% correct as to the statements she made- She's now embarressed because she didn't realize they would be made public. She did indeed claim at first to be 100% sure her group did not yell racial slurs then in a later e-mail claimed she had no idea as she was stuck in a cage for the entire protest. Yes, Lelia I will use your name as your are accountable for statements you make, try as you may to play the race card over and over and over. And it is obvious GUPS was aware of the flyer as several members of GUPS were aware of its contents before it was distributed. For Lelia to present that someone put GUPS name on it without their knowledge is a pathetic lie that a few dozen people know, as a fact, isn't true.
For GUPS to act in the way they have and claim it is for the Palistianian cause is like for the people who committed hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims to claim they are doing it to fight terrorism.
Lelia, I have heard you rants and lies on several web sites claiming everyone who criticizes your group is anti-arab and anti-muslim and anti-palistine and needs sensitivity training. It is you- so ignorant and undignified, who needs to learn to conduct yourself with integrity. You are a huge liar and when the truth comes out you'll need to find another way to try and justify your dispicable hypocritical behavior. All this zionist conspiracy shit and anti-arab claims have run their course. The campus stuck by Arabs and Muslims when you were the victims of hate speech and action - don't expect the same coddling now that you are the perpetuators of it.
by Sean
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 5:47 PM
you claimed that anti-semitism was understandable as the Zionists in Israel claimed to speak for all Jews.
Well, the Arabs who killed Daniel Pearl, RFK, and and responsible for Sept 11th claimed to be speaking for the Islamic world... so by your definition all Muslims are culpable! Your logic is anti-logic. Its amazing how hard lefties will try to make their racism not look like racism.
by David
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 6:14 PM
So, let me get this straight.

You're not "racist" yet you call for the expulsion of Jews from Israel.

You're not "anti-Jew" yet you believe the lies that Jews control all the major media and 90% of the money. Do you believe that Jews need the blood of Gentiles to make their pastries too? Or that Jews poison wells? How many of those 1000 year old European anti-Semitic lies do you Arabs believe? I guess the only one is that you don't think Jews killed Jesus because somehow the Muslims think that Jesus didn't really die on the cross (just another example of the complete disregard for facts that seem to characterize Arabs)

You're not a hate group, but Arabs who kill themselves in the hopes of murdering a few Jews on the way are "freedom fighters."

You think that "Palestinians" really are a separate people. Show me their different language, their separate culture from the Middle Eastern Arabs.

The Arabs of the West Bank are suffering under a brutal military dictatorship--Arafat's.

What kind of country could have been built in the past 10 years if Arafat accepted peace and used all that money to build up a country instead of killing his own people?

How is it the Jews' fault that Arabs as a whole toil under corrupt dictatorships or militant theocracies?

And don't ever dare compare the Palestinian cause with the civil rights movement. Martin Luther King Jr quietly sat at the front of the bus. He shamed the establishment, peacefully, into accepting blacks' equalities. If he were like the Arabs, he would have blown the bus up. There's no comparison.

Concentrate on building yourselves up instead of blowing Jews up. You'll go farther in life.




If he'd been a Founding Father, America would still be a colony of England.
by .
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 7:12 PM
I want the expulsion of all Jews from Israel? It is quite scary when people can get this type of message from what I have read after I have not made even ONE hint to this idea, and it again show the completely unreality which is your mind state. You people are getting anti-Semitism from nothing. All that I, and other "pro-Palestinian" activists want is Israel out of the occupied territories. Any else which you want to attribute to us is of your own dellusions, nothing more. Personally I find it disturbing that people can be this manipulated by the Israeli lobbies.
by .
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 7:19 PM
Palestinians are not the aggressors in this conflict. They were the ones attacked, murdered, terrorized, and ultimately expelled from more then 80% of their home. When people act as if the current conflict comes out of no where, that is hasn't resulted from over 50 years of dysphoria of the Palestinians, then they are not only lying to themselves, but attempting to dehumanize a people and deny them a home or dignity.
by Native American
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 8:51 PM
Attention GUPS- you are occuping my land and liviing better than most of my people. You a settler and the nerve of you to pollute this land with your bitterness is bullshit- If you had a conscinsce you would not be here but would have gone to a more just country , to fight your fight. You don't mind taking from my people, making you a huge capatalist, but you want to bitch and what's been taken from you.
And I've never heard of the Israeli lobby so please stop throwing out those tired cliques every time someone throws a painful dose of reality over your head.
by Chad
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 8:57 PM
GUPS are going to chant "Israeli propaganda" "anti-arab" "anti-palestine" "anti-muslim" "zionist" everytime someone shines the light on their fuck up way of acting. This counter racism thing, Lelia, get more of an imagination, say that it was actually Israli spies posing as GUPS! There you go! A new lie for you to try and promote. As someone who was friends with Lelia several years ago her viciousness and pathological lies come as no surprise. She will do anything and say anything, stoop to any level, to "win".
by patty
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 9:41 PM
you peoplle are absolutely hilarious....you try to distort truth and make it into lies. What GUPS has been saying all along is true...I was there..and there were plenty of other folks there that day also. The palestinian movement is not anti-semetic..it is for the freedom of palestinians. Palestinians are persecuted on a daily basis in Palestine and look, now, America is following suit, persecuting Palestinians in the states. PAtricia Jennings, I doubt you were even there. You did not see what I and plenty of others saw that day.
by big time
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 9:53 PM
I actually think its the same person posting all the anti gups emails. They just want the same rights you folks think only belong to you. Get overyourselves. I'm an SFSU student and I support them.
by ANON
Monday Jun 3rd, 2002 11:45 PM
First the poster was one that was not agreed upon by Gups as a whole, I know becasue I knew nothing of it until the thing was posted.
Second an apology was made, and it seemed to have been bushed under the rug.
Third, GUPS did ot make the flyer, GUPS did not throw the event, and most importantly GUPS' name was put on the flyer without our knowledge.

A mistake was mad, an apology was made as well.
by .
Tuesday Jun 4th, 2002 12:02 AM
New Statesman. 3 June 2002. John Pilger sees Israel denying its past.

Ethnic cleansing attended the birth of Israel but, more than 50 years
later, the country is still in denial about its bloody past. Those who
speak out risk their jobs. By John Pilger

Behind the turbulent news from Israel, a struggle for historical truth
has passed almost unnoticed outside academic circles; yet its wider
significance is epic. In May 1948, more than 200 Palestinians were
killed by the advancing Jewish militia in the coastal village of
Tantura, south of Haifa.

According to the recorded testimony of 40 witnesses, both Arab and
Jewish, half the civilians were shot in a "rampage". The rest were
marched to the beach, where the men were separated from the women and
children. They were taken to a wall near the mosque where they were shot
in the back of the head.

The "cleansing" of Tantura (a term used at the time) was a well-kept
secret.

When they were interviewed four years ago, several Palestinian witnesses
said they feared for their lives if they spoke out. One survivor, who as
a child witnessed the murder of his entire family in Tantura, said to
the interviewer: "But believe me, one should not mention these things. I
do not want them to take revenge against us. You are going to cause us
trouble..."

Trouble indeed. The researcher, a student called Teddy Katz, has had his
masters degree annulled by Haifa University, even though he was awarded
a top grade by the Middle Eastern department. When his research was
revealed in the Israeli press, Jewish veterans of the attack on Tantura
sued him for libel, and several Jewish witnesses recanted.

Katz had breached the taboo of the ethnic cleansing that gave birth to
Israel and which the Palestinians mourn as Nakba - the catastrophe.

Without waiting for the case to come to court, the university struck
Katz's name from its honour roll. Whispered to be a traitor, and under
pressure from his family and friends, Katz, a devout Zionist who lived
on a kibbutz, apologised. Twelve hours later, he retracted his apology.

Professor Ilan Pappe is one of the few to have read all the transcripts
of more than 60 hours of Katz's taping of eyewitness evidence. "They
include," he wrote, "horrific descriptions of executions, of the killing
of fathers in front of children, of rape and torture."

He describes Katz's thesis "as a solid and convincing piece of work
whose essential validity is in no way marred by its shortcomings".

The shortcomings, he says, come down to four minor mistakes. But the
importance of the Katz research is its illumination of Israel's history
in terms of "the expulsion, direct and indirect, of some 750,000
Palestinians, the systematic destruction of more than 400 villages and
scores of urban neighbourhoods, as well as the perpetration of some 40
massacres of unarmed Palestinians."

Although other prominent scholars supported Katz, a silence and
hostility familiar to those who break academic and political ranks in
Israel descended on the case.

Since the election of Ariel Sharon last year, this hostility is such
that not even national heroes are forgiven. Last month, Yaffa Yarkoni,
"Israel's Vera Lynn", whose emotional, wistful songs have celebrated
Zionist triumphalism from 1948 to the present day, lost her huge
popularity overnight when she remarked that Israeli soldiers ought not
to be writing numbers on the arms of Palestinians. "Isn't that what the
Germans did?" she asked. One newspaper headline called her an "enemy of
the people"; an editor said she "has joined the new anti-Semites in
Europe".

In challenging the Zionist version of Israel's past, Ilan Pappe is one
of Israel's "new historians", a distinguished and courageous critic. He
has likened the Israeli state to apartheid South Africa, with its
Palestinian "bantustans" and plethora of humiliating controls which now
restrict the movement of people within their own communities.

He says that Sharon's goal is to begin the mass expulsion of
Palestinians across the Jordan; only a pretext is required. According to
one poll, 44 per cent of Israelis support this latest "cleansing", known
as "transfer", another euphemism from the past. In 1948, David
Ben-Gurion, Israel's founding prime minister, wrote, "We have
accomplished our settlement by transfer of the [Palestinian]
population."

Not quite. The notion of a "final transfer" is supported by a number of
cabinet members in the ruling Likud government, by leading Labour Party
members and professors and media commentators.

"Very few now dare to condemn it," says Pappe. "A circle has been
closed. When Israel took over almost 80 per cent of Palestine in 1948,
it did so through settlement and ethnic cleansing. The country has a
prime minister who enjoys wide public support and who wants to determine
by force the future of the remaining 20 per cent."

Now it might be Professor Pappe's turn to be expelled from Haifa
University.

In an open letter circulated two weeks ago, he writes that the dean of
the humanities department has demanded his expulsion for criticising the
university over the Katz case. This runs deeper; Pappe has been a
consistent opponent of Israel's illegal military occupation of
Palestine. He describes the university "court" that threatens to punish
him as a "McCarthyite charade".

He has called upon "universities worldwide to debate a boycott of
Israeli institutions, given their contempt for basic principles of
academic freedom and dispassionate research". He says that only
international shaming, free of the intimidation that equates criticism
of Israel with anti-Semitism, will break the silence about "horrific
deeds in 1948, and so prevent their repetition".

Others in Israel, as courageous as Ilan Pappe, are also under pressure,
both crude and insidious.

In Ha'eretz, Israel's equivalent of the Guardian, two outstanding
journalists, Amira Hass and Gideon Levy, have consistently reported the
unpopular truth about Israel's occupation of the remaining 22 per cent
of the Palestine it conquered in 1967.

They live daily with threats and hate mail. Upholding the bravest
traditions of Jewish humanity, they need international solidarity. You
can support Ilan Pappe, and the cause of justice in both Israel and
Palestine, by e-mailing [pappe [at] poli.haifa.ac.il].
by Let it "be"
Tuesday Jun 4th, 2002 1:07 AM
Dear period,

I've been looking at your posts, and you seem a little different from some of the GUPS members I have seen.

I am a pro-Israel supporter though. Still, I think I can identify our differences, and hopefully, our similarities.

One thing that is different, and is likely to remain different, is our histories. And I don't mean our personal pasts or ethnic heritage. I mean what we believe happened in 1948.

You'll refer to Israel slaughtering and exiling Palestinians.

I'll refer to five Arab nations charging into Israel to "push the Jews into the Sea."

You'll talk of the end of a relatively peaceful Moslem/Jewish existence.

And I'll refer to the massacre of the Jews in Herbron twenty years earlier, by Arabs.

You'll talk of the 900,000 Palestinian refugees from Israel.

I'll talk about the 900,000 Jewish refugees from the rest of the Arab nations.

Now I don't have a time machine, and I doubt you do either. I know I have my authors, and you have yours. You'll accuse my sources of lying, but I could just as easily do the same to your books.

So it is likely we won't come to an agreement on what happened in that dark decade.

But it isn't our job anyhow. We're here in the 21st century, and you and I, supporters of Palestine and supporters of Israel, Jews and Arabs, need to find another way forward.

Looking over your posts, I found a certain honesty. I'm confident you believe in what you say and that you've done your homework. I've done my study as well. I am gratified in an early post where you mentioned the Palestinians lived under occupation for 30 years, rather than 50, referring to 1967, rather than 1948... or so I presume. I sometimes grow a little bothered at how the West Bank and Gaza were part of Jordan before 1967, yet there was no Palestinian movement to liberate them from Jordan.

You say you want an end to the occupation of the territories. And I'm glad to hear you say it.

Now I'd like you to listen to my position and concern. And please try to listen to it.

There are two ideologies that have been coming out of the Palestinian movements. GUPS has done this, and so have others, up to and including Yassir Arafat. And these are them, in a nutshell.

1) The Palestinians desire their own state in the occupied territories of the West Bank and Gaza. If Israel withdraws the occupation and lets the Palestinians live there, the violence will end, and we'll have peaceful coexistance; Israel as a Jewish state, Palestine as an Arab state, and then they'll be no more need for struggle.

This seems to be the position you support. I have many Pro-Israel friends in the Hillel who also support this position. I have little trouble with it myself, and I think it will be a blessing when the day comes when this happens.

But the problem comes in this second philosophy, which goes like this:

2) Israel has no right to exist, the entire country should belong to the Arabs. The Jews should be expelled to Europe, or pushed into the sea. The violence will never end until the Jewish state is simply no more.

I hope you disagree with this second position. I know I do.

But I have heard it supported. Not by all GUPS. But by some of them. In the April 9th Palestinian rally on SFSU, there were speakers who spoke of the "Rise of the Jewish Crackers" and advocated exiling the Jews to Europe. I have this on tape. We can watch it together sometime, if you like.

This philosophy, which is supported by Hamas and Arafat (Arafat's opinions often vary according to his audience) is a death knell to Jews. Jews have suffered persecution in Europe for centuries. From the Inquisition to the Crusades to the Holocaust. One of the reason Jews support Israel so strongly is that we know if Israel falls, we'll have no place to go, just as we had no place to go during the Holocaust.

At times Arafat has said that a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza will form an ideal launching point for further attacks into Israel, until the entire state can be wiped out.

And as long as this philosophy is strong, many Israelis will feel great trepidation at the thought of surrendering the territories, and possibly giving this weapon to the Palestinians. After being invaded in 1948, 1967, 1982 and so forth, Israel has a pretty well-founded paranoia.

If I can get no assurance that terrorism or violence will stop once the territories are given, why should I advocate surrendering them?

it would be like if someone was shooting at me in the street. I take away the gun. The guy says: "Give me my gun back." I say, "If I give you your gun back, will you try to shoot me again?" And if the guy says "Yes" then why should I comply? For my own life, it would be imperative that I keep said gun until I get some promise that it won't be used against me.

As long as Palestinians use suicide bombers, they demonstrate that they want to continue firing the gun. And Israel will continue to try to 'disarm' the gun. We've seen where that leads.

I am not sure which philosophy the GUPS advocate... #1 or #2. Actually, I have seen both advocated by different people, on different occassions. Hence our dilemma. Which is it?

I would be very happy to meet Arab supporters of #1. As for #2, well, that would not be much of a comfort. I have no desire to see my people exiled or murdered yet again.

If we can pass this hurdle, then perhaps we can come to understanding. After all, we don't have a time machine.

-BE
by Debate Coach's alter ego
Tuesday Jun 4th, 2002 1:41 AM
Posting allegations about ethnic cleansing when the subject at hand is about a biased intolerant group which staged a riot out of its refusal to hear a different perspective is a logical fallacy known as begging the question.

In other words, penalty 10 yards for improper change of subject without rebutting the substance of aforementioned statement.
by evan
Tuesday Jun 4th, 2002 12:07 PM
Funny thing...somebody posted a while back saying that Patricia Jennings had been banned by Indymedia and protesting this as a violation of free speech.

Now here she is posting again...without saying anything new, of course.
by X
Tuesday Jun 4th, 2002 3:50 PM
It's a fact that at least several members of GUPS knew about the poster... These statements of innocence are lies that only those who really, really want to believe it can swallow. Yeah, their name was added without their knowledge!! If this were true they would be more than forthcoming about who it was who added their name to it. They are probably concocting a story right now which would claim the poster was designed by the Mosaad and spread by zionists to counter the success of these heroic "freedom fighters" on campus. Happens all the time. What a stupid lie.
As far as the person who claims that nothing happened, as someone who had the misfortune to be passing by the Pro-Pals I know this is untrue. Perhaps GUPS could stop reposting lies again and again and again. And no, sorry, you committed a hate crime and your continuous playing out of "we are so victumized and now we are being victumized more" is only swallowed by those who adore your stupid little martyr complex as much as you do. Your hypocrits and liars and you got caught, you have only yourselves to blame.But please do not stop, it is enjoyable to see all the conspiracy lies these freaks can concoct. Can't wait to hear the next one!!
by The Story of GUPS
Tuesday Jun 4th, 2002 5:06 PM
To begin with, let me state equivocally that we are against the war on terrorism and the support of Israel (aka the Nazi State) any harrassment of Arabs, Muslims, and lefties who follow us around like puppy dogs. Not in our name!!
But Palestine is worth fighting for and if we have threaten to kill every Jew in the country to make our voice heard, vandalize every synagoge with swaskas, quote from every Jew hater that ever lived and post the sum of all these as a flyer and hang it in every nook and cranny of every campus in the world- so be it! And if we have to deny we did all this- so be it! We are not encouraging hatred of Jews- we are encouraging the love of Palestinians! In Our Name! We are not anti-semities- we love Arabs! We love people who love Arabs as much as we do. Those who hate Arabs try to defame us. Look at Corrigan- he tried! An agent of the Mossad! Corrigan is a typical zionist last name! And Ms. Jennings, don't even go there. I have first hand knowledge she was in Israel for a romantic weekend with Ariel Sharon at the time when we were defending ourselves from the freedom hating zionist defenders. She was probably watching on a spy cam the Israeli's have linked to our campus. I know this for a fact! Do not call me liar, zionist lover! If you doubt me it only shows you are a reactionary who hates Arabs and Muslims!
While zionists and their defenders try and defame us Arabs and Muslims all over campus are being persecuted. You have all seen it time and time again- yet have done nothing! You have seen them burning the Palistianian flags and tearing the hajibs off the women- and you sat around laughing while it was happening! And It's not like Corrigan tried to stop it! Sure he issued a few statements after Sept 11th telling people it was wrong to commit hate crimes against us. But it is not what he meant! Now they are issuing the same statments saying it is wrong to commit hate crimes against Jews- and what they really mean is it is okay to committ hate crimes against us, and our cause! We
will not be detered. Our fingerprints aren't on a damn thing! Our conscious is as clear as the Ganges river!
We only want to control you, and if they hadn't tried to stop us, none of this would have happened! It's not our fault, and it's not fair! We are fighters of freedom and will promote freedom through hatred, lies and intimidation whereever we go! In the name of Palestine!

ps- we are holding a rally protesting the fucked up tactics of our govenment- come or risk being labeled a facist lover!

(yes this is a parody although yes, I know it sounds like one of their posts)
by Joe
Wednesday Jun 5th, 2002 10:43 AM
Hey Palestinians I hope you have a good time throwing rocks and blowing your selfs up.

get ready to meet allah in hell
by Patricia Jennings
Sunday Jun 23rd, 2002 12:00 AM
Hmmmm. Let me see if I can get this straight. I was actually in Israel visiting Sharon on May 7? You must be kidding. Sorry to disappoint you but I have never set foot in Israel.

On May 7 I was standing beside my son on Malcom X plaza surrounded by a mob lead by GUPS screaming "kill the Jews."

This is a fact.

Another fact is that the Jews (at least the organized ones) at SFSU do not hate the GUPS. They have tried unsuccessfully to develop a peaceful and constructive relationship with GUPS to no avail.

President Corrigan required that both Hillel and GUPS participate in mediation with Professor Fisher, a former diplomat. Members of Hillel welcomed this opportunity to begin the process of constructing a positive relationship with GUPS, however, GUPS refused to participate.

Despite GUPS claims that they are not anti-Jewish, last week it was discovered that the GUPS web site contained a anti-Jewish hate material including an animated GIF called "blood sport" depicting a soccer player kicking a ball towards a Star of David. The ball explodes, destroying the star. The Palestinian flag arises. The player cheers. What's more, the site was linked to a slew of terrorist organizations including Hamas and the Holy Land Foundation. I brought this web site to the attention of the administration because of safety concerns. SFSU immediately shut it down.

President Corrigan today announced that because of the behavior exibited on May 7, and because of their unwillingness to participate in mediation, GUPS is suspended.

I have no problem with GUPS expressing opinion. This is America where we have civil rights. What is deplorable is GUPS unwillingness to recognize the civil rights of Jewish students. Their attempts to silence the Jewish students backfired. GUPS, you only have yourselves to blame.

Patricia A. Jennings, M.Ed.
Department of Human Development
University of California, Davis
by .
Sunday Jun 23rd, 2002 5:02 AM
Ms. Jennings-
I was the one who posted the GUPS parody- although it exemplified perfectly their hypocritical paranoid stupidity and attempts at emotional blackmail. The part about you being in Israel for a romantic weekend with Ariel Sharon was a parody of how GUPS villafies anyone who calls them on their bullshit ,much like the Arab press does ,as being as agent of the Mossad, etc. The fact that this is a parody was stated at the end of it. It is not suprising that people couldn't tell it was a parody though as it sounds frighteningly like the fanatical character assasination they have attempted to stir up at anyone who has the audacity to call it like it is. How is GUPS working to despell the image of Muslims and Arabs as being fanatical zelots by acting like it? They are freaks who cry racism when people have the backbone to point out when their tacticals are unconstitutional and veer into hate speech/crimes.
§!
by ?
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 6:37 AM
cia chief dulles sent ss skorzeny and 200 nazis to egypt in1952 where they purged the jewish population of 75000 after installing gamel nasser as dictator. new files released by congress under the "war criminals disclosure act...
by sfsu_student_rally_participant
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 8:54 AM
If she couldn't tell that posting was a parody, how could she tell what was happening on the plaza that day in May?

It's one thing to point out something about a website - which has some facts that can be displayed as evidence - but it's another to post about the rally like only one side was to blame.

I was there and both sides were angry and taunting each other - BOTH.

It was wrong of Corrigan to come down hard on one side and not the other. The university is the place that is supposed to show balanced and fair treatment, to set an example. I was saddened to see that my own school is tainted by influence, just another awakening for me over the past year. Thank god I was forwarded the more responsible emails from professors who witnessed the situation and reported back accurate descriptions, angered by the response of their own colleagues and the president - it gave me hope. And I know because I was there for the whole rally.
by me
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 9:44 AM
The only reason SFSU didn't come down harder on GUPS (which they badly deserve- they are a thinly cloaked hate group whose webwite, until recently was pro-terrorist and pro-racism) was because of how shrilly and manipulatively they played the race card. They are liars who have changed their story repeatedly- every time their lies are exposed they have produced new ones to cover it. Then when backed into a corner they resort to shrill cries of "anti-arab" "anti-Muslim" accusations in order to stop the truth about their hate group from coming out. Now lets hear from Lelia or Nessie with their ritcheous indignation and empty rhetoric and accusations.

p.sp- I am neither Jewish or Pro Israel. I have just seen their stupidity and McCarthyism in action too many times.
by Chen
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 11:31 AM
I was there too... not on either side but walking by. GUPS are liars who play the race card every time there lies are exposed. Later I will foward an e-mail sent by Lelia Q of GUPS who claimed there were no racial slurs uttered by the angels in her group and that it was all a Zionist plot to discredit the o-so-honorable Palestinian cause. Later she admitted this wasn't true.
GUPS should get kicked out of SFSU as they have committed numerous hate crimes over the years and then go into shrill diatribes scraming "anti-arab" and "anti-muslim" at anyone who dares point out that they act like... well, terrorists. If I thought this pathetic group of students represented your typical Muslim and/or Arab then I have a very negative view of people in these groups. As a student visiting from China they have left me with a poor impression of activists in general and Palestinian activistist in particular. They are undignified and act like babies rather than the politically conciencious adults they claim to be.
by x
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 1:09 PM
you are a liar as all terrorist apologists are. Gups is a hate group the has been treated with kid glove by SFSU as they mastered the art of playing the race card.
Although I am Pro-Palistianian I would have nothing to do with this group that has history of committing hate crimes (including death threats to groups that question them) that go years back. They have functioned as nothing but a terrorist group that harrasses anyone who has the integrity to call them on thier bullshit. Now lets hear from Nessie and Leila- their self ritcheous propoganda speaks for itself.
§?
by confused
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 1:29 PM
"Nessie and Leila"?

what are you talking about? Be a little more specific in your accusations since I have no idea what you are talking about.


by sfsu student
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 6:02 PM
I'd side with GUPS any day. These zionists are basically out of control with thinking this small group of students is a hate organization. I was there, as I said. The actual GUPS group was small, but many students of all races, seeing the all-white group of zionists all clad in white t-shirts bearing the blue star and the word 'peace,' being just as rediculous as anyone else, came and joined in on the side of GUPS.

At least I'm being rational, and allowing the idea that both sides had a role - these zionists are foaming at the mouth to press Shrub's 'good' and 'evil' into everyone's minds, like one side is perfect.

The fact is, as I've said before on here, these are two groups of students whose families and potentially whose own lives are at risk - I, for one, was not surprised not to see people go overboard, on both sides.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised to see zionists trying to make it out to be that they did nothing.

As one prof stated, if that rally was really about peace, the Palestinian flag would have been flown alongside the Israeli one. It WASN'T about peace.

And now, thanks to Corrigan, students who were unfairly persecuted will be more radicalized than ever, seeing no justice in even our own university.

Sad and pathetic.
by Someone
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 7:45 PM
The organizers of the May 7th rally wore shirts.

The shirts said peace in three languages.

In English they said 'peace.'

In Hebrew they said 'Shalom' (in Hebrew letters)

In Arabic they said 'Salaam' (in Arabic letters)

If they only said peace in English and Hebrew, the GUPS would no doubt be crying that if the Zionists wanted peace, they would have added Arabic to those shirts.

But they were added. Any words of thanks, acknowledgement? Oh, of course not, don't be silly.

They wanted us to have a Palestinian flag next to the Israeli and American flags. Pay no mind that you'll never see the American flag at a GUPS rally.

If there was a Palestinian flag next to the Israeli flag at the rally, no doubt GUPS would still find something to complain about. Probably too many Pro-Israel speakers. Or too many people who think its sad that Jews sufferered through a Holocaust and 50+ years of Terrorism.

What do the GUPS do for peace, besides having a little website that features a little brat throwing a rock and shattering the star of david? (Yes, they did that) And passing out fliers claiming that the Jewish students who belong to Hillel are spies for the South African apartheid governments? (Yes, they did that too.) Or carrying flags with swastikas on them, trying to equate them to the star of david, about as hideous an insult as you can make?

If GUPS cared about peace, how about if they join the Hillel students in a rally for peace? Two state solution, end violence on both sides, et cetera, et cetera? Well, perhaps because GUPS absolutely refused to do ANYTHING with a Zionist organization. No talking. No socializing. No dialogues. Don't even shake their hands. What excuse do they give for this? Nothing worth remembering.

And why? Well, G-d forbid that you might learn that Jews are human, or that we have ancestral ties to Israel, or... or whatever. It might interfere with their program of hate. Especialy in hating Jews. What better way to hate Jews than to deny their humanity and refuse to shake their hands, or associate with their student groups? Or to refuse to talk to them?

Yes. Very sad.
by Someone
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 7:58 PM
If SFSU is so anti-arab, why do the Arabs have TWO campus offices? (One office for MSA and one for GUPS) and if SFSU is so pro-Jewish, why is it the Jewish students haven't been allowed to have an on-campus office for over TWENTY YEARS?
by sfsu student
Friday Aug 30th, 2002 11:18 PM
Is that no efforts were made by many groups - on BOTH sides - to bridge that gap. My understanding also is that the fact that the Hillel group was so well funded was also a factor - most groups at SFSU, like campus political organizations, operate on a minimal budget and could never afford to have their own space off the campus. But my knowledge comes from only one source and I'm not an expert on it.

BUT, that doesn't have a lot to do with only blaming one side at a rally and only punishing one side. The status of the groups to eachother or to the campus as a whole does not justify a biased response by the administration. If that were the case then all the groups could take their organization off campus and then expect to be treated in a special way at events.
by Someone
Saturday Aug 31st, 2002 5:45 AM
"Is that no efforts were made by many groups - on BOTH sides - to bridge that gap. "

I know people at Hillel who tried to get a dialogue going with the GUPS. The GUPS told them they'd only have a dialogue if the Jewish students sign a contract claiming Israel has no right to exist and that the Jews kill their people out of hatred. The Jewish students can't sign that, and it's ridiculous to as them to do so.

(If you need help imagining how ridiculous this is, try imagining that the Hillel students tell a questing GUPS student that they'll only debate the GUPS if the GUPS sign a contract stating Palestine has no right to exist, and Palestinians murder Israelis out of hatred. See?)


My understanding also is that the fact that the Hillel group was so well funded was also a factor - most groups at SFSU, like campus political organizations, operate on a minimal budget and could never afford to have their own space off the campus. But my knowledge comes from only one source and I'm not an expert on it.

Glad you aren't, 'cause it's bullshit. The Jewish students go to San Francisco Hillel, which graciously lets them use their space. But its an outside organization, just like Arab students can get outside assistance from local Arab groups. The Jewish students have been prevented from having on campus resources for over twenty years. Why?

BUT, that doesn't have a lot to do with only blaming one side at a rally and only punishing one side

Hillel did get a letter of warning, and a Russian Jewish student has been cited for telling some GUPS to go fuck a camel. That sounds like its not entirely one sided.

The Hillel students did NOT make a website using SFSU webspace, with graphics of smashing the religious symbol of another faith. Nor did Hillel use SFSU webspace to deny or belittle the Holocaust. Nor did Hillel use SFSU webspace to connect to links condemned by the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Gups did. You don't think they should be responsible for this?

The GUPS ran a near riot when Jewish students had ONE rally supporting Israel. Meanwhile, GUPS had FOUR rallies in one semester against Israel, and not once did the Jewish students run a near riot. Nor did Jewish students try to shout down every speaker, or yell "Shame on you" at a Holocaust survivor. Why is it GUPS were allowed to run four times as many rallies as the Jews, yet they claim Jews somehow have an easier time getting the quad? My God, take some responsibility for your actions already!

. The status of the groups to eachother or to the campus as a whole does not justify a biased response by the administration. If that were the case then all the groups could take their organization off campus and then expect to be treated in a special way at events.
by SFSU student II
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 2:09 AM
GUPS sucks and Nessie is a middle aged man who has no life
by sfsu student
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 10:07 AM
Are different than shutting down a group altogether. If the adminstration thinks they have enough evidence to show this was necessary they should put it out there for the whole city to see, since they've gotten the city involved with lawsuits.

The document you are referring to with GUPS also seems bizarre and most likely a misinterpretation - seeing how the rally itself got spun by the pro-Israeli group into a 'near riot' and a 'riot' and completely one-sided - I can't see why that one incident should decide whether pro-Israeli groups should be on campus or off. Where is the proof of this?

I also didn't appreciate that the counter demonstrators were allowed to verbally overwhelm the rally speakers - I never got to hear what they had to say. But I think it's important to look at why this happened - for one, people are mad as heck about this issue and any pro-Israel rally that calls itself a 'Peace' rally is going to infuriate a lot of people. Next, the GUPS isn't a large group, so why did so many other people come along and start chanting with them? I was up there with all sorts of people, of all races and genders.

People see a military force knocking down houses and know that their tax money is going toward paying for that. As Nancy Pelosi said at a townhall last weekend -- security for Israel will never happen without addressing the needs of the Palestinian people.

Right now that isn't being done and people are pissed off - so yes, they will take over a rally that supports the country that is knocking down houses and making settlements on Palestinian lands.

My understanding is that no new student groups will be allowed to form in September - is this true?
by Someone
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 4:10 PM
"Are different than shutting down a group altogether. If the adminstration thinks they have enough evidence to show this was necessary they should put it out there for the whole city to see, since they've gotten the city involved with lawsuits. "

No group has been shut down altogether. GUPS has been put on probation, it hasn't been shut down. What are you referring to?

"The document you are referring to with GUPS also seems bizarre and most likely a misinterpretation - seeing how the rally itself got spun by the pro-Israeli group into a 'near riot' and a 'riot' and completely one-sided - I can't see why that one incident should decide whether pro-Israeli groups should be on campus or off. Where is the proof of this? "

Look, if you were there, it wasn't spin. There were horrible insults being yelled at us while we were singing Oseh Shalom, Heena Mahtov, and Give peace a chance. This is our genuine perspective. Sure, maybe it looked different if you think the Israeli flag has no right to be carried anywhere on campus. But I would not call it spin.

This incident may not need to be the deciding factor on whether the Jewish students should be allowed to have an office on campus. However, it is a fact that the Jews have not been allowed to have office space for over 20 years. Why not? And why shouldn't they? It is this absence of a visible on-campus presence that is permitting so much anti-semitic disinformation to spread.

"I also didn't appreciate that the counter demonstrators were allowed to verbally overwhelm the rally speakers - I never got to hear what they had to say. But I think it's important to look at why this happened"

They tried to verbally overpower the speakers. If you like, I can provide a video tape which includes nearly all the speakers before the battery ran out at the end. You can also hear the constant shouts of the Palestinian crowd; their claim that they were a "silent" demonstration is an absolute farce.

"for one, people are mad as heck about this issue and any pro-Israel rally that calls itself a 'Peace' rally is going to infuriate a lot of people. Next, the GUPS isn't a large group, so why did so many other people come along and start chanting with them? was up there with all sorts of people, of all races and genders. "

Hillel isn't a large group either, but lots of people came to support Israel, of various races,genders and religions too. It's an emotional issue for people on both sides.

Also...

"People see a military force knocking down houses and know that their tax money is going toward paying for that. As Nancy Pelosi said at a townhall last weekend -- security for Israel will never happen without addressing the needs of the Palestinian people.
Right now that isn't being done and people are pissed off - so yes, they will take over a rally that supports the country that is knocking down houses and making settlements on Palestinian lands. "

People also see bombs blowing up children, teenagers, and college students at Hebrew University, as well, as people sitting down to a Passover Seder, and that makes them angry too. I dated a girl for a while who was friends with one of the victims of the Hebrew University bomb. And they get angry when these tactics are swept under the carpet. And they know that Saddam Hussein pays money to the families of the suicide bombers, as a bribe/reward/insurance policy.

You of course demonstrate your bias by thinking something is contradictory by calling yourself Pro-Peace and Pro-Israel. I can't say I'm surprised, since it seems you belong to the Palestinian camp. I'd be kind of suspicious if I saw someone claiming to be pro-palestinian and pro-peace, especially since I've had that "no peace" chant ringing in my ears too many times.

But here's one thing that's certain, and I hope you can agree with me on this:

Both sides are tracing back to different histories to explain the conflict. Each history is biased to a different side. Either "the Arabs did no wrong, and the Jews are the monsters" or "the Jews did no wrong and the Arabs are the monsters."

As long as our groups are separate, and only talking amongst themselves, these worldviews cannot be reconciled.

The only chance for reconciliation is a calm discussion, where the alternate histories can be discussed, without instant blame, shouts, chants, or condemnations.

This has not been happening. And as long as GUPS and MSA publicly declare that they will never even talk to Zionist organizations- using a policy of ostracism- it will not happen. And with the continued division, these things will continue.

Now are you willing to try to partake a less-excitable forum of dialogue? Or do you want to continue the clash of mob confrontations? I think we know what we can expect from the second.

"My understanding is that no new student groups will be allowed to form in September - is this true?"

This may be possible. I'm not sure what they're deciding.
by Someone
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 4:14 PM
"Are different than shutting down a group altogether. If the adminstration thinks they have enough evidence to show this was necessary they should put it out there for the whole city to see, since they've gotten the city involved with lawsuits. "

No group has been shut down altogether. GUPS has been put on probation, it hasn't been shut down. What are you referring to?

"The document you are referring to with GUPS also seems bizarre and most likely a misinterpretation - seeing how the rally itself got spun by the pro-Israeli group into a 'near riot' and a 'riot' and completely one-sided - I can't see why that one incident should decide whether pro-Israeli groups should be on campus or off. Where is the proof of this? "

Look, if you were there, it wasn't spin. There were horrible insults being yelled at us while we were singing Oseh Shalom, Heena Mahtov, and Give peace a chance. This is our genuine perspective. Sure, maybe it looked different if you think the Israeli flag has no right to be carried anywhere on campus. But I would not call it spin.

This incident may not need to be the deciding factor on whether the Jewish students should be allowed to have an office on campus. However, it is a fact that the Jews have not been allowed to have office space for over 20 years. Why not? And why shouldn't they? It is this absence of a visible on-campus presence that is permitting so much anti-semitic disinformation to spread.

"I also didn't appreciate that the counter demonstrators were allowed to verbally overwhelm the rally speakers - I never got to hear what they had to say. But I think it's important to look at why this happened"

They tried to verbally overpower the speakers. If you like, I can provide a video tape which includes nearly all the speakers before the battery ran out at the end. You can also hear the constant shouts of the Palestinian crowd; their claim that they were a "silent" demonstration is an absolute farce.

"for one, people are mad as heck about this issue and any pro-Israel rally that calls itself a 'Peace' rally is going to infuriate a lot of people. Next, the GUPS isn't a large group, so why did so many other people come along and start chanting with them? was up there with all sorts of people, of all races and genders. "

Hillel isn't a large group either, but lots of people came to support Israel, of various races,genders and religions too. It's an emotional issue for people on both sides.

Also...

"People see a military force knocking down houses and know that their tax money is going toward paying for that. As Nancy Pelosi said at a townhall last weekend -- security for Israel will never happen without addressing the needs of the Palestinian people.
Right now that isn't being done and people are pissed off - so yes, they will take over a rally that supports the country that is knocking down houses and making settlements on Palestinian lands. "

People also see bombs blowing up children, teenagers, and college students at Hebrew University, as well, as people sitting down to a Passover Seder, and that makes them angry too. I dated a girl for a while who was friends with one of the victims of the Hebrew University bomb. And they get angry when these tactics are swept under the carpet. And they know that Saddam Hussein pays money to the families of the suicide bombers, as a bribe/reward/insurance policy.

You of course demonstrate your bias by thinking something is contradictory by calling yourself Pro-Peace and Pro-Israel. I can't say I'm surprised, since it seems you belong to the Palestinian camp. I'd be kind of suspicious if I saw someone claiming to be pro-palestinian and pro-peace, especially since I've had that "no peace" chant ringing in my ears too many times.

But here's one thing that's certain, and I hope you can agree with me on this:

Both sides are tracing back to different histories to explain the conflict. Each history is biased to a different side. Either "the Arabs did no wrong, and the Jews are the monsters" or "the Jews did no wrong and the Arabs are the monsters."

As long as our groups are separate, and only talking amongst themselves, these worldviews cannot be reconciled.

The only chance for reconciliation is a calm discussion, where the alternate histories can be discussed, without instant blame, shouts, chants, or condemnations.

This has not been happening. And as long as GUPS and MSA publicly declare that they will never even talk to Zionist organizations- using a policy of ostracism- it will not happen. And with the continued division, these things will continue.

Now are you willing to try to partake a less-excitable forum of dialogue? Or do you want to continue the clash of mob confrontations? I think we know what we can expect from the second.

"My understanding is that no new student groups will be allowed to form in September - is this true?"

This may be possible. I'm not sure what they're deciding.
by Someone
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 4:14 PM
"Are different than shutting down a group altogether. If the adminstration thinks they have enough evidence to show this was necessary they should put it out there for the whole city to see, since they've gotten the city involved with lawsuits. "

No group has been shut down altogether. GUPS has been put on probation, it hasn't been shut down. What are you referring to?

"The document you are referring to with GUPS also seems bizarre and most likely a misinterpretation - seeing how the rally itself got spun by the pro-Israeli group into a 'near riot' and a 'riot' and completely one-sided - I can't see why that one incident should decide whether pro-Israeli groups should be on campus or off. Where is the proof of this? "

Look, if you were there, it wasn't spin. There were horrible insults being yelled at us while we were singing Oseh Shalom, Heena Mahtov, and Give peace a chance. This is our genuine perspective. Sure, maybe it looked different if you think the Israeli flag has no right to be carried anywhere on campus. But I would not call it spin.

This incident may not need to be the deciding factor on whether the Jewish students should be allowed to have an office on campus. However, it is a fact that the Jews have not been allowed to have office space for over 20 years. Why not? And why shouldn't they? It is this absence of a visible on-campus presence that is permitting so much anti-semitic disinformation to spread.

"I also didn't appreciate that the counter demonstrators were allowed to verbally overwhelm the rally speakers - I never got to hear what they had to say. But I think it's important to look at why this happened"

They tried to verbally overpower the speakers. If you like, I can provide a video tape which includes nearly all the speakers before the battery ran out at the end. You can also hear the constant shouts of the Palestinian crowd; their claim that they were a "silent" demonstration is an absolute farce.

"for one, people are mad as heck about this issue and any pro-Israel rally that calls itself a 'Peace' rally is going to infuriate a lot of people. Next, the GUPS isn't a large group, so why did so many other people come along and start chanting with them? was up there with all sorts of people, of all races and genders. "

Hillel isn't a large group either, but lots of people came to support Israel, of various races,genders and religions too. It's an emotional issue for people on both sides.

Also...

"People see a military force knocking down houses and know that their tax money is going toward paying for that. As Nancy Pelosi said at a townhall last weekend -- security for Israel will never happen without addressing the needs of the Palestinian people.
Right now that isn't being done and people are pissed off - so yes, they will take over a rally that supports the country that is knocking down houses and making settlements on Palestinian lands. "

People also see bombs blowing up children, teenagers, and college students at Hebrew University, as well, as people sitting down to a Passover Seder, and that makes them angry too. I dated a girl for a while who was friends with one of the victims of the Hebrew University bomb. And they get angry when these tactics are swept under the carpet. And they know that Saddam Hussein pays money to the families of the suicide bombers, as a bribe/reward/insurance policy.

You of course demonstrate your bias by thinking something is contradictory by calling yourself Pro-Peace and Pro-Israel. I can't say I'm surprised, since it seems you belong to the Palestinian camp. I'd be kind of suspicious if I saw someone claiming to be pro-palestinian and pro-peace, especially since I've had that "no peace" chant ringing in my ears too many times.

But here's one thing that's certain, and I hope you can agree with me on this:

Both sides are tracing back to different histories to explain the conflict. Each history is biased to a different side. Either "the Arabs did no wrong, and the Jews are the monsters" or "the Jews did no wrong and the Arabs are the monsters."

As long as our groups are separate, and only talking amongst themselves, these worldviews cannot be reconciled.

The only chance for reconciliation is a calm discussion, where the alternate histories can be discussed, without instant blame, shouts, chants, or condemnations.

This has not been happening. And as long as GUPS and MSA publicly declare that they will never even talk to Zionist organizations- using a policy of ostracism- it will not happen. And with the continued division, these things will continue.

Now are you willing to try to partake a less-excitable forum of dialogue? Or do you want to continue the clash of mob confrontations? I think we know what we can expect from the second.

"My understanding is that no new student groups will be allowed to form in September - is this true?"

This may be possible. I'm not sure what they're deciding.
by sfsu student
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 7:53 PM
Don't know exactly why I'm spending my Sunday evening with this, but I seem to be compelled . . .

"The Jewish students have been prevented from having on campus resources for over twenty years. Why?"

Since you seem to be a part of that group, I’d think you’d know more about that. I’m not arabic or jewish, so I don’t know the details of why one group is not located on the campus – I seriously doubt it’s because other groups wouldn’t "let" them be on campus. I imagine that they themselves also play a part in that decision. But if it’s true that other groups are ‘keeping’ them off campus, then make that public on campus and start gathering signatures for a petition – I’d gladly sign.

"The Hillel students did NOT make a website using SFSU webspace, with graphics of smashing the religious symbol of another faith. Nor did Hillel use SFSU webspace to deny or belittle the Holocaust. Nor did Hillel use SFSU webspace to connect to links condemned by the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Gups did. You don't think they should be responsible for this?"
Just show me the evidence. I know someone in their group got out of control with the thing about baby killing, and they apologized.

"No group has been shut down altogether. GUPS has been put on probation, it hasn't been shut down. What are you referring to?"
To me, not being able to have a website, or a table, or a demo, or to get funding is pretty much being ‘shut down,’ although it may come under the term ‘probation.’

"Look, if you were there, it wasn't spin. There were horrible insults being yelled at us while we were singing Oseh Shalom, Heena Mahtov, and Give peace a chance. This is our genuine perspective. Sure, maybe it looked different if you think the Israeli flag has no right to be carried anywhere on campus. But I would not call it spin."
The professor who immediately fired off an email that went nationwide with the idea that a ‘riot’ took place, among other extreme inaccuracies represented spin, Corrigan’s immediate response to put the full blame on arab students who ‘went too far,’ (in a context where they appear to have no provocation – meanwhile I had to stand with a poster of an arab caricature in my face the whole rally) represents spin, students who said they were being surrounded and attacked (when in fact the gups students were calling for them to take down the flag – which they refused to do, thus escalating the situation) for no reason represents spin, and the many many outside non-observers from the Jewish community who commented in local newspapers and columns about the situation as an attack on the group (without also including anything like the arab caricature) represented spin.
I think there were individuals who were yelling horrible insults, but as a group in the rally the most horrible thing we chanted was ‘zionists off our campus.’ And I stopped chanting that because it seemed to be extreme. Aside from Give Peace a Chance – how could anyone like me, who speaks English, know what songs are considered sacred?
I don’t think the Israeli flag or the American flag or Palestinian flag should be on campus – I’d like the world better if none of us were waving flags but were instead taking hands. Flags are one thing that’s wrong with this world. Imagine if there were none.

"It is this absence of a visible on-campus presence that is permitting so much anti-semitic disinformation to spread."
I wish it were that simple, and let’s hope that it is. I’m too busy with other organizing against the right-wing in SF to take on this also, but you guys should work to get on campus, or at least find out why and then make that known.
My feeling is that some anti-semitism today (aside from older people who are already set in their ways) has more to do with reactions to the policies of Israel under Sharon. The one thing I haven’t yet talked about was the amazing thing of the many pairs of arguing students eventually coming to terms with their differences at the rally. Most students I heard didn’t support Sharon but they didn’t feel it was appropriate to show that there. There was really a lot of coalition building that went on, despite – if not because of – the release of all that anger.
But small things – like my getting spammed day in and day out with tens of emails several times a day by zionists because I have had my email on pro-palestinian group lists – starts to get people angry. And small things, like knowing that we’re giving Israel over **$10 million** per day, while the Palestinians don’t even have jobs and have rockets coming in their homes, starts to get to people. That’s my money going to defense contractors who are running our country and Sharon giving them the excuse to do it. And now that AIPAC has stepped in to control congressional races – man, people are really going to get pissed, especially African American democrats . . . If I were in a pro-Israeli group I’d be trying to ask some questions about that sort of stuff – why is AIPAC so visibly trying to manipulate the US government? That’s going to be like a bomb going off when people start to realize what’s going on. And who are these anti-arab people that are spamming people all over the country – JVP, Francis Boyle, Zmag, etc.? I’d be asking these questions if I wanted to stem potential anti-semitism.

"People also see bombs blowing up children, teenagers, and college students at Hebrew University, as well, as people sitting down to a Passover Seder, and that makes them angry too. I dated a girl for a while who was friends with one of the victims of the Hebrew University bomb. And they get angry when these tactics are swept under the carpet. And they know that Saddam Hussein pays money to the families of the suicide bombers, as a bribe/reward/insurance policy."

I don’t think these are swept under the carpet – today IDF bombed a car with a missile and killed two children in the adjacent area. I’m guessing you feel as sick about that as I do. The problem is that on the one hand you’ve got these destitute people who are now getting all sorts of hardcore illnesses, can’t work, have mud roads, dirty water, are entering a state that HR orgs call a ‘crisis’ and have used their own lives to murder their way out of their situation – and on the other hand you have a functioning and comfortable state which has clean water, plenty of food, univeristies conducting high-level research in many fields, unprecedented military funding and support from the US, and which is bombing, assassinating, and generally ‘punishing’ the Palestinian people with twice the rate of murders as their own. ‘The state’ murdering ‘civilians’ in the name of a hunt for suicide bombers is not about Jews or anti-semitism – from outside observers - but it can easily become connected.

Imagine if here in the US we used bulldozers to knock down the houses of drug dealers who had killed cops – and then the family was just left to go elsewhere, or the kids in the house got killed in the process. It’s when the rule of law goes out the window – suicide bombing is against the law, and so is killing cops, but we don’t knock down houses and start taking over land as a response to criminal actions. Palestine doesn’t even seem to have a government, much less a building for them to be in. Yes, they’re getting funded from someplace, probably Iraq, where we’ve killed hundreds of thousands of children over the years with our sanctions. I realize it’s all complex, but lots of people work their whole lives to protect our laws and abide by them, and now our money is being used to rocket apartment buildings and cars and kill kids, against our will.

Why is our own congress no longer representing the will of the people – according to polls that show most Americans want us to butt out - ? Because of AIPAC, spineless democrats, and republican war mongers.

That’s what I’d be worried about if I were afraid of anti-semitism happening.

A lot of groups are working hard to find solutions, like JVP and Tikkun. I’d urge you guys to hook up with them if you haven’t already. Rabbi M. Lerner is an excellent speaker. If prominent JVP and Tikkun people came to SFSU in conjunction with pro-Pal people, I doubt there’d be riot, and maybe some healing. Because there was no overt separation between ‘Sharon’s policies’ and ‘Pro-Israel,’ a lot of people got angry who might not have otherwise. The GUPS group was complaining about Arafat just before the rally – what a problem he is. And probably they wouldn’t come out and promote anti-Arafat stuff, but these are the things we will all have to start to do. I consider Sharon a zionist and a war criminal, as do many other people, and Arafat is just as bad. But you and I are paying for one side of this, supporting one side over the other. And we have no say in it. Frankly, that pisses me off.

"I'd be kind of suspicious if I saw someone claiming to be pro-palestinian and pro-peace, especially since I've had that "no peace" chant ringing in my ears too many times."
That chant really means that there won’t be peace until there is justice – end the occupation. Lot’s of people on both sides want peace, I don’t think you can say one side doesn’t want peace. People on both sides are willing to kill for their goals, and people on both sides are willing to negotiate for peace. We need to get past the Sharons and the Arafats, and the religious history and look at the here and now.

"This has not been happening. And as long as GUPS and MSA publicly declare that they will never even talk to Zionist organizations- using a policy of ostracism- it will not happen. And with the continued division, these things will continue."

I’m noticing that you put ‘zionist’ organizations. Zionists support (originally) ‘creating a Jewish national homeland and state in Palestine.’ Guess the Palestinians have to move elsewhere? I wouldn’t use the term unless you’re proposing the Palestinians all leave the area, or convert. For a lot of people that’s like saying, "Why won’t you talk to National Alliance members? – what’s wrong with you?" A lot of people disagree with any extremist policy based on a religion or a skin color. But you’re right, everyone has to talk or nothing will get solved. I disagree with a policy of not talking. The organization should – at the least – find one rep willing to talk, even if it’s a lawyer.

"Now are you willing to try to partake a less-excitable forum of dialogue? Or do you want to continue the clash of mob confrontations? I think we know what we can expect from the second."
I think the campus should hold a large symposium with reps from all over the Bay Area from both sides – lots of hard liquor and pot, and maybe ecstasy might help! – and then have a huge day-long teach-in and discussion, with no classes that day (or maybe on a Saturday?). Tell the cops to stay home (or at least out of sight with their spray that they love), and serve lots of Israeli and Arab foods – free! – and have bands, historical posters, and then some sort of ceremony of peace between the two sides. Also, maybe on a different earlier day, have student reps from the groups hash out a peace plan with the lands situation and then assign all the military money equally to both sides for reconstruction and peace education. Assume that Sharon and Arafat must step down and the US cannot install a puppet person in Palestine.
I know the peace thing breaks down once everyone leaves a safe space, but at least as a model, and a precedent, it could be incredible . . .


by Someone
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 10:44 PM
"Since you seem to be a part of that group, I’d think you’d know more about that. I’m not arabic or jewish, so I don’t know the details of why one group is not located on the campus – I seriously doubt it’s because other groups wouldn’t "let" them be on campus. I imagine that they themselves also play a part in that decision. But if it’s true that other groups are ‘keeping’ them off campus, then make that public on campus and start gathering signatures for a petition – I’d gladly sign. "

There was a group of Palestinians on campus a few years ago that prevented Jews from getting student government positions. If someone went up there with a Jewish last name, they were asked if they were Jewish, if the supported Israel, et cetera. And if so (and often if not) they were voted against. Kinda like the UN. The problems with the office is just one example. I'm working on it now though, so maybe it'll be rectified. And if not, we'll see. They use the excuse that there's no room, but organizations that have been waiting for less time than the Jewish students have somehow gotten offices anyway.

"Just show me the evidence. I know someone in their group got out of control with the thing about baby killing, and they apologized. "

Okay, I did see the website with my own eyes. But as you pointed out, it was taken down, so if it was moved, the web addresses I could give you are undoubtable outdated by now. If you're really interested, I'm pretty sure I could get copies of the information from Hillel. The old address was http://userhttp://www.sfsu.edu/~gups, but like I said, the link is gone.

Ah, here it is! A member of our community made a copy of the animated graphic from the GUPS website. Here's the address: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SFSU/files/Media/intifada.gif

I checked it, and it still works.

As for the baby killing, GUPS never apologized at all; they simply denied responsibility. The MSA however sent a letter of apology to president Corrigan- but not to Hillel.

"To me, not being able to have a website, or a table, or a demo, or to get funding is pretty much being ‘shut down,’ although it may come under the term ‘probation.’ "

Again, GUPS own actions led to their predicament.

"The professor who immediately fired off an email that went nationwide with the idea that a ‘riot’ took place, among other extreme inaccuracies represented spin, Corrigan’s immediate response to put the full blame on arab students who ‘went too far,’ (in a context where they appear to have no provocation – meanwhile I had to stand with a poster of an arab caricature in my face the whole rally) represents spin, students who said they were being surrounded and attacked (when in fact the gups students were calling for them to take down the flag – which they refused to do, thus escalating the situation) for no reason represents spin, and the many many outside non-observers from the Jewish community who commented in local newspapers and columns about the situation as an attack on the group (without also including anything like the arab caricature) represented spin. "

Well, it's hardly surprising if both sides "Spin." GUPS has also spun, as this very article we're posting on indicates. Speaking of the flag, I just have to vent some of my irritation.

What right on G-d's green Earth do these people think they have, that they should be allowed to box us in a corner, demanding that we take down the Israeli flag? Why? We never demanded that they take down the Palestinian flag on their rally. GUPS has stated that their action was a natural response to seeing the flag of a "racist state" on the student building. Bullshit. Who are they to decide it's racist? I don't happen to think its racist. Who are they to disrespect our space? We never did anything remotely as obnoxious during their rallies.

Furthermore, Seth Brysk took down the Israeli flag. He's the Hillel director. I asked him that day why he was giving in to the chanting lunatics. His answer was simple: "It's 3:00. We no longer have the plaza."

It was taken down because our time of reservation of the plaza was finished, not giving in to this wild chant.

If you don't like flags, okay, we can talk about that. But that doesn't justify the mob. I mean, would you defend Hillel if we crowded the GUPS into a corner, demanding that they take down the Palestinian flag on one of their rallies, justifying it later that it's the symbol of a vicious, terrorist state?

"I think there were individuals who were yelling horrible insults, but as a group in the rally the most horrible thing we chanted was ‘zionists off our campus.’ And I stopped chanting that because it seemed to be extreme. Aside from Give Peace a Chance – how could anyone like me, who speaks English, know what songs are considered sacred? "

Yes, I find "Zionists off our campus now" to be particularly loathsome. As I said many times, I consider myself a Zionist and I am not leaving until I have my diploma in hand. Also, I find it insulting that the GUPS complained that some pro-Israel supporters responded with "Terrorists off our campus now." I mean... what do you expect? That they lower their heads and meekly submit to it?

I do understand that people may not be familiar with Hebrew peace songs. But we were singing them. And I tell you, "Oseh Shalom" affects me now in ways that it never did before. Many of us were singing, not shouting insults.

"I wish it were that simple, and let’s hope that it is. I’m too busy with other organizing against the right-wing in SF to take on this also, but you guys should work to get on campus, or at least find out why and then make that known. "

I kinda wish it was that simple too, but we'll do what we can.

"My feeling is that some anti-semitism today (aside from older people who are already set in their ways) has more to do with reactions to the policies of Israel under Sharon. The one thing I haven’t yet talked about was the amazing thing of the many pairs of arguing students eventually coming to terms with their differences at the rally. Most students I heard didn’t support Sharon but they didn’t feel it was appropriate to show that there. There was really a lot of coalition building that went on, despite – if not because of – the release of all that anger. "

Okay, well. G-d knows Sharon isn't perfect. G-d knows Arafat isn't perfect. Yes, countries often have bad leaders. But it's hardly a justification for anti-Semitism. I know far more people who don't like Sharon than those who do, and that's among Jews! Still, I understand Sharon, and I understand why he was elected. But to explain this, I have to go into some of the history of Barak, the Camp David accords, and the intifada. But here's where it gets scuzzy, because Palestinians and Jews have very different interpretations of Camp David and the intifada. They can be discussed intelligently. But they also often start insult slinging. Which is a pity, because these are issues that need intelligent discussion and not slogans.

"But small things – like my getting spammed day in and day out with tens of emails several times a day by zionists because I have had my email on pro-palestinian group lists – starts to get people angry. And small things, like knowing that we’re giving Israel over **$10 million** per day, while the Palestinians don’t even have jobs and have rockets coming in their homes, starts to get to people. That’s my money going to defense contractors who are running our country and Sharon giving them the excuse to do it. And now that AIPAC has stepped in to control congressional races – man, people are really going to get pissed, especially African American democrats . . . If I were in a pro-Israeli group I’d be trying to ask some questions about that sort of stuff – why is AIPAC so visibly trying to manipulate the US government? That’s going to be like a bomb going off when people start to realize what’s going on. And who are these anti-arab people that are spamming people all over the country – JVP, Francis Boyle, Zmag, etc.? I’d be asking these questions if I wanted to stem potential anti-semitism."

Okay now be careful on this. AIPAC is not as big an influence as you might think. But it is a brand of anti-Semitism when people start claiming the Jews control the government and all the money. Just like thinking African Americans to be lazy and stupid is a form of Anti-Black prejudice, anti-Jewish prejudice often takes the form of Jews as the conspiratorial behind the scene groups. I find a lot of hysterical accusations fly on these topics.

But since I support Israel, I don't mind the financial aid. But I also know that the government gives out money to all sorts of weird states, including Egypt and, yes, the Palestinian Authority. Now the PA is having a lot of trouble simply because of corruption. Actually, let me correct that, the PA is doing quite well... they found out that Arafat's net worth is about $1.3 billion... but the Palestinians themselves are doing quite badly. But I blame much on this on the intifada. Israel's response to the intifada is... well... you tell me, how would you stop it? Yes, they have check points, but yes, there are people trying to cross the boarders and blow people up. You can say "just leave the territories" but sending the message that all you need to do to get something is to start killing innocents, then you become more vulnerable to terrorism, not less. It's an issue that gets ugly, and again merits intelligent discussion, not hysterical sloganeering.

"I don’t think these are swept under the carpet – today IDF bombed a car with a missile and killed two children in the adjacent area. I’m guessing you feel as sick about that as I do. The problem is that on the one hand you’ve got these destitute people who are now getting all sorts of hardcore illnesses, can’t work, have mud roads, dirty water, are entering a state that HR orgs call a ‘crisis’ and have used their own lives to murder their way out of their situation – and on the other hand you have a functioning and comfortable state which has clean water, plenty of food, univeristies conducting high-level research in many fields, unprecedented military funding and support from the US, and which is bombing, assassinating, and generally ‘punishing’ the Palestinian people with twice the rate of murders as their own. ‘The state’ murdering ‘civilians’ in the name of a hunt for suicide bombers is not about Jews or anti-semitism – from outside observers - but it can easily become connected. "

This is similar to my above answer that the intifada brought much of this on, as well as Arafat pocketing aid money, rather than spending it on Palestinian infrastructure. I get irritated though of the amount people place on these figures. Two thousand Palestinians die in two years, and people compare it to the Holocaust, where six million Jews died in six years. No comparison, but I hear it all the time, and it irritates me. Also, other countries, such as Syria, have killed tens of thousands of civilians after a few terrorist acts, but people do not remember them. It's here that I find traces of the double standard. If Lebanon started blowing up Syrians, demanding that the Syrians end the occupation of Lebanon, you would not have a ration of 2:1 Lebanese killed for each Syrian. More likely it would be 1000:1. That's why despotic states never suffer from Terrorism. There's a new book out by Alan Dershowitz called "Why Terrorism Works" that explains some of this. You might find it interesting.

"Imagine if here in the US we used bulldozers to knock down the houses of drug dealers who had killed cops – and then the family was just left to go elsewhere, or the kids in the house got killed in the process. "

Yes, they knocked down houses, but they do give warning for the families to get out first, though there is propaganda claiming people are still in the buildings going around."

" Yes, they’re getting funded from someplace, probably Iraq, where we’ve killed hundreds of thousands of children over the years with our sanctions."

Of course, Saddam Hussein killed hundreds of thousands of his own Kurdish population with poison gas.

"I consider Sharon a zionist and a war criminal, as do many other people"

Okay, now let's stop here. You want to call Sharon a war criminal, I may not agree, but I'll let it go. But I'm really tired of people trying to make Zionist into an insult. I consider myself a Zionist, and I think no other group has been as stained since McCarthy changed the definition of Communists.

"I’m noticing that you put ‘zionist’ organizations. Zionists support (originally) ‘creating a Jewish national homeland and state in Palestine.’ Guess the Palestinians have to move elsewhere? I wouldn’t use the term unless you’re proposing the Palestinians all leave the area, or convert."

You see, I disagree with that. I don't accept this extremist definition of Zionist. That's like me saying that you should't call yourself a Palestinian unless, like Hamas, you want to "liberate" all of Palestine by conquering Israel, and killing, expelling, or at least turning the Jews their into disenfranchised dhimmi. You might argue that I shouldn't say that. I agree, but you shouldn't twist the meaning of Zionism around.

Zionism refers to the philosophy that Jews- expelled from their home in Israel 2,000 years ago by the Romans, and suffering persecution in the diaspora ever since- deserve a land of their own, ideally the one they came from, to rule themselves, and be free of Anti-Semitism. The early Zionists did not come with guns. They bought land from absentee landlords, land which even Mark Twain said was mostly barren and uninhabited. They worked the land, and some Arabs came by to get jobs at Zionist villages... whom became the first Palestinians.

During the Holocaust, Britain prevented Jews from escaping certain death by prohibiting them to enter Palestine. However, they let plenty of Arabs in. All setting the stage for ethnic conflict.

In 1948, the UN divided Palestine. Most of it went to the Hashemite kingdom, to become Jordan. (Why THEY got it when it was promised to Jews and the Palestinians is a mystery explained by political expediency) The Jews were given a tiny bit to call Israel, and the Palestinians got another territory to call Palestine.

The Jews accepted it. The Arabs did not, and six Arab nations invaded Israel on her Independence day, to "push the Jews into the sea." A second Holocaust after the first one. Sweet people.

But they lost the war. If they didn't start that war, Israel would be far smaller today, and Palestine would be having it's 54th independence day.

Only Jordan accepted the Palestinian refugees. No other Arab state let them in, in spite of their huge land masses and oil resources. Instead, the Arab states expelled a half million of their own Jews, through threats, anti-semitism, and force. No one remembers these refugees, mostly because Israel accepted them all, while the Palestinians were turned away by their own brothers, to be a pawn of ferment.

Ethnic conflict, you see. Arab vs. Jew. So Britain could assure that this region would never become a significant threat to her. They sure set the stage well for this little Drama we've been living with.

I consider myself a Zionist because I believe Jews do deserve a homeland to be free from anti-Semitism. I do not believe that they should always be at the mercy of whatever government they live in. Yes, the United States is good, and I love the U.S., but it too closed its doors to Jews trying to escape Nazi Germany.

Now frankly, I don't care so much for the settlements. I would take them down for peace. I understand holding on to the disputed territories as a security method against future invasion. But I would give them to the Palestinians for their own state, if that would end this war.

Barak offered just this in 2000 at the Camp David accords, and was turned down by Arafat, who tried to get more by intifada. Maybe some future Palestinian leader will accept them. And Palestinian and Israeli alike will ask themselves "why did we let 3,000 people die before doing this now?"

I would give the territories away in response to diplomacy. But I would not give them away in response to Terrorism. I don't want to see a slippery slope of demanding more land.

And though it is popular among the GUPS, I do not want to see a Palestinian right of return. I'd be fine to see a Palestinian right of return to a new Palestine, but not to Israel. I'd like to see a two state solution that allows Jews to keep a majority of themselves in their own country. Why? To prevent them from, again, finding themselves at the mercy of a potentially hostile majority. That's why.

And I am a Zionist who supports the existance of Israel; I will never accept any plan that requires Israel to end its uniqueness as a Jewish state, or ends itself completely. No country in the world ever agreed to that, and Israel won't be the first.

Okay, now you really got me rolling. But let's step back. I am not Ariel Sharon. I lack the power to do any of the things I described. All I can do is talk about it, here, in the United Staes.

I would much rather see GUPS and Hillel talking, rather than fighting.

I would like to see Jews have an on campus office.

I would like to see a mixed rally of Palestinians and Israel supporters, calling upon both their peoples to make peace, and to make an example here at SFSU that maybe our relatives can learn from.

I would like to be able to discuss difficult issues intelligently, rather than be told that this Moslem organization refuses to talk to a Jewish student group.

Is this too much to ask for? We can affect things here. I don't think I can change the mind of the Knesset, and I doubt you can change the mind of Hamas. But we can do something about the minds at SFSU.

It's not right that someone can hold a rally with flags that carry swastikas on them, and justify insulting certain students by their historical story of what goes on 'over there.' That's just not right. The university is a place where students should be learning about issues and about different people, not polarizing them into these opposed camps.

Heck, I've been polarized. I will admit that when I came to SFSU, I knew very little about Israel. But when I saw the Black Moslem rally last Yom Kippur make the absurd accusation that Israel of blew up the World Trade Center, I studied the situation a great deal... only to see the International Socialist Organization make the stupidest, most factually absurd assertions, and then deny the facts. Hell, I saw those kids refuse to read a statement by Martin Luther King Jr. It was pitiful.

Okay, enough of this babble. But one thing is certain... this polarizing effect on the campus is not doing anyone any good. I'm confident that I can find pro-Israel students who are willing to hold a discussion or dialogue with palestinian students. If you can do the same, we might have something here to work on.


by sfsu student
Sunday Sep 1st, 2002 11:43 PM
You have one version of history, and Palestinians have another. How does anyone reconcile when they see history in two separate ways?

To pick a major point, my understanding is that there was no 'land without a people,' that many many people were there and were driven out, and that that saying there was no one there was convenient and is a myth.

Maybe we could start here. Where are the facts? I'll have to consult people I know to get links, so I'll have to get back to this later.

I'm glad to hear you aren't supporting the settlements. And yes, its wrong to have a website with those images.

I was amazed to learn the other day about that comic figure's origin and how old it is.
by Bob N.
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 1:33 AM
There is a lot of stuff on this thread. Where should I start? Is one of the issues the need for an articulate defence against accusations of being anti-Jewish or racist?

Bob N.

Imigh leis an saol agus tiocfaidh sé thart.
(Irish - Go to the world and it will come to you.)
by Someone
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 1:43 AM
"You have one version of history, and Palestinians have another. How does anyone reconcile when they see history in two separate ways?"

Exactly. This is by far one of the problems of SF Indymedia, and the sickening debates that go on here.

There's some historical distortion that is debatable, but then there are some that are torturous.

For example, debating how the refugees in 1948 became that way may be worth discussing. And Israel's actions in Lebanon weren't the best. One of my friends from Hillel, a very liberal Israeli who still loves his country, is very critical about Lebanon.

But then there are histories which are offensive. I lost my temper on another SF Indymedia board when the person I was talking to brought in some absurd claims that the temple mount is not the site of the Jewish temple, and that its hundreds of miles away, and Jews are just idiots who worship around the dome of the rock. This kind of historical revisionism is more dangerous, because it has a very specific aim, which is to deny that Jews have any connection to their holy land. I once saw a Palestinian at a Jewish film festival (yes, go figure). First she insisted that we all call her a Palestinian, not an Arab, because that's how she identified herself. But then she said we shouldn't call ourselves semites because European Jews were converts, not people who came from the land. I found it grotesque that she demanded respect for her identity, but denied respect to ours. And her claim, aside from being false, was deliberately aimed at trying to claim that Jews are (I suppose) Aryan and not Semites. This kind of historical revisionism is more dangerous.

But yes, there are conflicting histories. And it's cute how they always have their "good" and "bad" guys.

"To pick a major point, my understanding is that there was no 'land without a people,' that many many people were there and were driven out, and that that saying there was no one there was convenient and is a myth. "

Yes, I've heard them say that. My understanding is that people weren't really "driven out" until the 1948 war produced its refugees, when the Jews were attacked and won the fight. Before that there were some racial riots, but not "forced removals." Saying there were forced removals appeals greatly to left-wing sensitivities, however.

Maybe we could start here. Where are the facts? I'll have to consult people I know to get links, so I'll have to get back to this later.

If you want to hear the Israeli side, a very good resource is Mitchell Bard's "Myths and Facts." His research is very extensive and well cited.

It also has a very convenient web access. You can look it up at:
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mftoc.html

It's also organized well, as it names the accusation, and then delivers the response. However, it is pretty technical, but its not that hard to read.

"I was amazed to learn the other day about that comic figure's origin and how old it is."

I'm not sure what you're referring to here....
by Modern History of the Middle East Conflict
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 2:05 AM
Please check out Noam Chomsky's "The Fateful Triangle" for a comprehensive, objective and impartial history of the conflict there. You should be able to find it at your university's library.

Here is an excerpt from that book:
http://www.infotrad.clara.co.uk/antiwar/fatefultri.html

Earlier chapters in the book run through the creation of Israel and all the Arab-Israeli wars that follow.

Noam Chomsky is Jewish and once lived in Israel with his wife for a short while around 1954.
by sfsu student
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 2:13 AM
Here’s one strand I’m referring to when I’m asking for some help in understanding, i.e., the influence of AIPAC on the US government (Someone’s words here):
"Okay now be careful on this. AIPAC is not as big an influence as you might think. But it is a brand of anti-Semitism when people start claiming the Jews control the government and all the money. Just like thinking African Americans to be lazy and stupid is a form of Anti-Black prejudice, anti-Jewish prejudice often takes the form of Jews as the conspiratorial behind the scene groups. I find a lot of hysterical accusations fly on these topics."

What do you think Bob N.? I’ve heard some talks on this and my understanding is that AIPAC is such a huge lobby in Washington that when someone says ‘the lobby,’ they’re understood as meaning – not the NRA – but AIPAC.

Also, this information:
"But since I support Israel, I don't mind the financial aid. But I also know that the government gives out money to all sorts of weird states, including Egypt and, yes, the Palestinian Authority. Now the PA is having a lot of trouble simply because of corruption. Actually, let me correct that, the PA is doing quite well... they found out that Arafat's net worth is about $1.3 billion... but the Palestinians themselves are doing quite badly. But I blame much on this on the intifada. Israel's response to the intifada is... well... you tell me, how would you stop it? Yes, they have check points, but yes, there are people trying to cross the boarders and blow people up. You can say "just leave the territories" but sending the message that all you need to do to get something is to start killing innocents, then you become more vulnerable to terrorism, not less. It's an issue that gets ugly, and again merits intelligent discussion, not hysterical sloganeering."

Any thoughts?

Thanks.
by ...
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 2:42 AM
The charge of anti-Semitism is usually used to stifle debate. This is how you respond when you don't want any discussion on a certain topic.

AIPAC is only one of about 126 pro-Israeli PACs in existence.

The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs is your best source when it comes to pro-Israel PACs.
The below excerpted article is from there.

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
Richard H. Curtiss
Most special interests have PACs, as do many major corporations, labor
unions, trade associations and public-interest groups. But the pro-Israel
groups went wild. To date some 126 pro-Israel PACs have been registered,
and no fewer than 50 have been active in every national election over the
past generation.

An individual voter can give up to $2,000 to a candidate in an election cycle,
and a PAC can give a candidate up to $10,000. However, a single special
interest with 50 PACs can give a candidate who is facing a tough opponent,
and who has voted according to its recommendations, up to half a million
dollars. That's enough to buy all the television time needed to get elected in
most parts of the country.

Even candidates who don't need this kind of money certainly don't want it to
become available to a rival from their own party in a primary election, or to
an opponent from the opposing party in a general election. As a result, all
but a handful of the 535 members of the Senate and House vote as AIPAC
instructs when it comes to aid to Israel, or other aspects of U.S. Middle
East policy.

There is something else very special about AIPAC's network of political
action committees. Nearly all have deceptive names. Who could possibly
know that the Delaware Valley Good Government Association in
Philadelphia, San Franciscans for Good Government in California, Cactus
PAC in Arizona, Beaver PAC in Wisconsin, and even Icepac in New York
are really pro-Israel PACs under deep cover?

Hiding AIPAC's Tracks

In fact, the congressmembers know it when they list the contributions they
receive on the campaign statements they have to prepare for the Federal
Election Commission. But their constituents don't know this when they read
these statements. So just as no other special interest can put so much
"hard money" into any candidate's election campaign as can the Israel
lobby, no other special interest has gone to such elaborate lengths to hide
its tracks.

Although AIPAC, Washington's most feared special-interest lobby, can hide
how it uses both carrots and sticks to bribe or intimidate members of
Congress, it can't hide all of the results.

Anyone can ask one of their representatives in Congress for a chart
prepared by the Congressional Research Service, a branch of the Library of
Congress, that shows Israel received $62.5 billion in foreign aid from fiscal
year 1949 through fiscal year 1996. People in the national capital area also
can visit the library of the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID) in Rosslyn, Virginia, and obtain the same information, plus charts
showing how much foreign aid the U.S. has given other countries as well.

Visitors will learn that in precisely the same 1949-1996 time frame, the total
of U.S. foreign aid to all of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin
America and the Caribbean combined was $62,497,800,000--almost exactly
the amount given to tiny Israel.

According to the Population Reference Bureau of Washington, DC, in
mid-1995 the sub-Saharan countries had a combined population of 568
million. The $24,415,700,000 in foreign aid they had received by then
amounted to $42.99 per sub-Saharan African.

Similarly, with a combined population of 486 million, all of the countries of
Latin America and the Caribbean together had received $38,254,400,000.
This amounted to $79 per person.

The per capita U.S. foreign aid to Israel's 5.8 million people during the same
period was $10,775.48. This meant that for every dollar the U.S. spent on an
African, it spent $250.65 on an Israeli, and for every dollar it spent on
someone from the Western Hemisphere outside the United States, it spent
$214 on an Israeli.
by Someone
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 2:51 AM
There's not much love between me and Bob.

Hey Bob, if you wanna take the time to read some truth about the Camp David accords, try this link.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Peace/cd2000art.html

Oh. I do admit I may have gotten Sharon's rank wrong when I mentioned how he oversaw the withdraw of Israeli settlements from Sinai.

But everything else I still stand by.
by Bob N
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 9:58 AM
I haven't had a chance to read your posts on this thread. I hope to soon.

Thank you for the link. I read its content. There is one part I would like you to explain.

<<<<While then-president Clinton made clear that Barak had been prepared to make peace, apologists for Arafat insisted that the only offer made by Barak was a fragmented state divided into four “cantons,” none of them connected with the Gaza Strip; that Arafat eventually accepted a settlement offer, which was withdrawn when Ariel Sharon was elected Prime Minister; and that this final offer was not a serious one, and was never put on paper by the U.S. or Israel. These myths, in varying forms, have become the backbone of the Palestinian revisionist account, supported most vocally by New York Times journalist Deborah Sontag, U.S. negotiator Robert Malley, and the Palestinian Authority itself. >>>

I don't understand why the term "revisionist" is used so much lately by pro-Zionist pundits, to describe what is essentially a different version of the story. Deborah Sontag was, and I believe still is a staunch supporter of Israel. Her stories are included in the archives of the Palestine Media Watch (http://www.pmwatch.org) as examples pro-Israel biased reporting.

In 2001 she wrote, "Quest for Middle East Peace: How and Why It Failed" in which she describes mistakes made by all three parties in the negotiation, Israel, the US and the PA. Apparently, because she wrote the story as an honest, objective professional journalist and not as a pro-Israel mouthpiece, she is being castigated, banished from the Pale.

Robert Malley was a negotiator for the American team. Why shouldn't his version of the story be given credence? By the Palestinian Authority, it is meant the Palestinian negotiators including Abu Ala, who are considered highly respectable individuals.

________________________________________

Fictions About the Failure at Camp David, July 8, 2001
By ROBERT MALLEY, The New York Times

WASHINGTON — A year ago this week, President Bill Clinton, Prime Minister Ehud Barak of Israel and the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat gathered at Camp David for what, in retrospect, many consider a turning point in Israeli-Palestinian relations. From right to left, hawks to doves, comes unusual harmony of opinion both here and in Israel: Camp David is said to have been a test that Mr. Barak passed and Mr. Arafat failed. Offered close to 99 percent of their dreams, the thinking goes, the Palestinians said no and chose to hold out for more. Worse, they did not present any concession of their own, adopting a no-compromise attitude that unmasked their unwillingness to live peacefully with a Jewish state by their side. I was at Camp David, a member of the small American peace team, and I, too, was frustrated almost to the point of despair by the Palestinians' passivity and inability to seize the moment. But there is no purpose — and considerable harm — in adding to their real mistakes a list of fictional ones. Here are the most dangerous myths about the Camp David summit.

Myth 1: Camp David was an ideal test of Mr. Arafat's intentions. Mr. Arafat told us on numerous occasions that he had not wanted to go to Camp David. He thought that Israeli and Palestinian negotiators had not sufficiently narrowed the gaps separating their positions before the summit, and once there, he made clear in his comments that he felt both isolated from the Arab world and alienated by the close Israeli-American partnership. Moreover, the summit occurred at a low point in Mr. Arafat's relationship with Mr. Barak — the man with whom he was supposed to strike a historic deal. A number of Israeli commitments, including a long-postponed Israeli withdrawal from parts of the West Bank and the transfer to Palestinian control of villages abutting Jerusalem, remained unfulfilled, and Mr. Arafat believed that Mr. Barak was simply trying to skirt his obligations.

It also took a genuine leap of faith — for Mr. Barak as for the United States — to imagine that the 100-year conflict between Jews and Palestinians living in this region, with roots going back thousands of years more and tens of thousands of victims along the way, could be resolved in a fortnight without any of the core issues — territory, refugees, or the fate of Jerusalem — having previously been discussed by the leaders.

Myth 2: Israel's offer met most if not all of the Palestinians' legitimate aspirations. Yes, what was put on the table was more far-reaching than anything any Israeli leader had discussed in the past — whether with the Palestinians or with Washington. But it was not the dream offer it has been made out to be, at least not from a Palestinian perspective.

To accommodate the settlers, Israel was to annex 9 percent of the West Bank; in exchange, the new Palestinian state would be granted sovereignty over parts of Israel proper, equivalent to one-ninth of the annexed land. A Palestinian state covering 91 percent of the West Bank and Gaza was more than most Americans or Israelis had thought possible, but how would Mr. Arafat explain the unfavorable 9-to-1 ratio in land swaps to his people?

In Jerusalem, Palestine would have been given sovereignty over many Arab neighborhoods of the eastern half and over the Muslim and Christian quarters of the Old City. While it would enjoy custody over the Haram al Sharif, the location of the third- holiest Muslim shrine, Israel would exercise overall sovereignty over this area, known to Jews as the Temple Mount. This, too, was far more than had been thinkable only a few weeks earlier, and a very difficult proposition for the Israeli people to accept. But how could Mr. Arafat have justified to his people that Israel would retain sovereignty over some Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, let alone over the Haram al Sharif? As for the future of refugees — for many Palestinians, the heart of the matter — the ideas put forward at Camp David spoke vaguely of a "satisfactory solution," leading Mr. Arafat to fear that he would be asked to swallow an unacceptable last-minute proposal.

Myth 3: The Palestinians made no concession of their own.

Many have come to believe that the Palestinians' rejection of the Camp David ideas exposed an underlying rejection of Israel's right to exist. But consider the facts: The Palestinians were arguing for the creation of a Palestinian state based on the June 4, 1967, borders, living alongside Israel. They accepted the notion of Israeli annexation of West Bank territory to accommodate settlement blocs. They accepted the principle of Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem — neighborhoods that were not part of Israel before the Six Day War in 1967. And, while they insisted on recognition of the refugees' right of return, they agreed that it should be implemented in a manner that protected Israel's demographic and security interests by limiting the number of returnees. No other Arab party that has negotiated with Israel — not Anwar el- Sadat's Egypt, not King Hussein's Jordan, let alone Hafez al-Assad's Syria — ever came close to even considering such compromises.

If peace is to be achieved, the parties cannot afford to tolerate the growing acceptance of these myths as reality. The facts do not indicate, however, any lack of foresight or vision on the part of Ehud Barak. He had uncommon political courage as well. But the measure of Israel's concessions ought not be how far it has moved from its own starting point; it must be how far it has moved toward a fair solution.

The Palestinians did not meet their historic responsibilities at the summit either. I suspect they will long regret their failure to respond to President Clinton — at Camp David and later on — with more forthcoming and comprehensive ideas of their own. Finally, Camp David was not rushed. It was many things — inadequately prepared for, perhaps; too informal, possibly; lacking proper fall-back options, without a doubt — but premature it was not. By the spring of 2000, every serious Israeli, Palestinian and American analyst was predicting an outbreak of Palestinian violence absent a major breakthrough in the peace process. The Oslo process had run its natural course; if anything, tackling the sensitive final status issues came too late, not too soon.

The gloss that is put on the past matters. The way the two sides choose to view yesterday largely will determine how they choose to behave tomorrow. And, if unchallenged, their respective interpretations will gradually harden into divergent versions of reality and unassailable truths — that Yasir Arafat is incapable of reaching a final agreement, for example, or that Israel is intent on perpetuating an oppressive regime. As the two sides continue to debate what went wrong at Camp David, it is important that they get the lessons right.

Robert Malley was special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs to President Bill Clinton from 1998 to 2001. He is joining the Council on Foreign Relations as a senior fellow.

The Peace Criminal Uri Avnery 21.7.01 The Peace Criminal Everybody knows who is a war criminal. For example, somebody who kills prisoners-of-war or massacres a civilian population (or allows others to do this) is one.

The time has come to define who is a peace criminal: somebody who kills peace and thereby makes war inevitable. Golda Meir, for example, in the early 70s, killed the chances for peace with Egypt and caused the Yom Kippur war, in which 2000 Israelis and countless others died.

Ehud Barak is such a peace criminal. He brought about the failure of the Camp David summit and its consequence, primarily the present intifada, in which hundred have already died. This might well lead to a general war, in which thousands will perish. If there were an International Court for Peace Crimes, Ehud Barak would be indicted on two counts:

Count 1: The accused pressured Arafat and Clinton into agreeing to the summit and brought about its failure by presenting to it an ultimatum of unacceptable proposals.

Count 2: The accused spread the lie that he had offered Arafat “everything he asked for” and that Arafat rejected it. By spreading this lie, the accused destroyed the Israeli peace camp which believed him, brought the extreme right to power, prepared the ground for a “national unity” based on the lie and almost obliterated any real opposition.

At the Barak trial, evidence will be produced to show that he proposed at Camp David the formal annexation of 10% of the West Bank area (“settlement blocs”) and informal annexation of another 10% (Jordan valley etc.), with the rest of the territory cut up into enclaves and cut off from the neighboring countries (Egypt and Jordan); that he pretended to “give up” East Jerusalem but without giving the Palestinians full sovereignty there, and especially not over the compound of the mosques (“Temple Mount”); that he did not agree to any compromise on the refugees; and that he demanded that the Palestinians declare this to be “the end of the conflict”.

Until now, Barak’s blind admirers have fervently denied these facts. But this week a witness appeared who could decide the outcome of the trial. He is a neutral and objective eye-witness, whose integrity cannot be doubted by any judge: Robert Malley, personal assistant to President Clinton on the Middle East, who took part in all the Camp David deliberations. He will testify to the following facts, among others:

Before the summit, Barak reneged on his promise to transfer to the Palestinian Authority the village of Abu Dis and two other villages near Jerusalem, in spite of the fact that Clinton personally conveyed this promise to Arafat. Also, Barak refused to honor Israel’s obligations under the previous agreements: the third withdrawal from most of the West Bank areas, the release of Palestinian prisoners etc. Because of this, Clinton was furious with Barak on several occasions.

v Before the summit, Barak continued to enlarge the settlements and build by-pass roads at a furious pace, thus destroying any vestige of Palestinian trust in his intentions.

v Before and during the summit, the Palestinians not only gave up 78% of Mandatory Palestine, but also agreed to the annexation to Israel of “settlement blocs” and the Jewish neighborhoods built in occupied East Jerusalem. They also agreed to the principle that the Right of Return should be implemented without prejudicing the demographic and security interests of Israel. No other Arab government has ever agreed to similar concessions.

v In exchange for the settlement blocs, Barak offered the Palestinians areas amounting to one ninth of the territory to be annexed, a ratio of 1 to 9, without specifying where.

v During the course of the summit, Barak did not submit any proposal in writing nor specify the details of his oral proposals, and, most importantly, did not disclose either to Arafat or even to Clinton his ideas for a final settlement. In return, Arafat, too, did not submit any proposals, so that in practice there was no negotiation at all.

v Clinton agreed with Arafat that Barak is “politically inept, frustrating and devoid of personal contact warmth”, but believed, in spite of this, that Barak wanted peace. Arafat believed that Barak did not want peace; he only wanted to convince the world that the Palestinians don’t want peace. As a matter of fact, since the summit and until now, Barak’s main boast has been that he “unmasked Arafat”.

v Clinton has broken his word to Arafat. Before the summit, he promised that if it fails, he would not blame the Palestinians. Only on this condition did Arafat agree to come to the conference, which took place without proper preparation. After the failure, Clinton put the sole blame on Arafat, in order to help Barak in his reelection campaign.

* * *
When Barak’s admirers were compelled to admit that the story about “the generous Camp David offers” is a legend, they fell back to another line: “True, at Camp David no reasonable offers were made, but later, at the Taba meeting in January 2001, much more generous offers were made. These met all Palestinian demands, but were nevertheless rejected by them. At Taba the Israeli negotiators also submitted a map that reduced further the areas that Barak wanted to annex.”

Here are some of the answers:

v If Barak really wanted to make much more “generous” offers, why did he not make them at Camp David, even when he realized that the summit was about to break down?

v The failure of the summit caused the outbreak of the intifada, as we (and, it now appears, the Americans, too) prophesied. From that moment on, the political reality on the Palestinian side changed completely, hundreds were killed, and it became much more difficult for Arafat to convince his public opinion to halt the uprising without getting an important political achievement in advance.

v The Taba proposals were never put to paper, and until this very moment it is not clear what was proposed, who proposed what and on whose authority. Barak, of course, repudiated everything the next day.

v In the meantime, the election campaign had started in Israel and all the polls showed that Barak was about to be defeated by a landslide. How could Arafat make sweeping concessions to a man who, almost certainly, would lose power within two months?

Especially since Barak did not reveal the proposals to his own public?

v Arafat did not reject the Taba proposals, but declares even now that they must serve as a basis for any future negotiations, while Barak himself proclaims that the Taba proposals are null and void.
At the end of the trial, the question will remain: Did the accused, Barak, sincerely intend to reach a peace agreement, and only a mixture of arrogance, ignorance and political stupidity prevented him from achieving this (as Clinton believes, according to Malley), or did he, from the beginning, not have any such intention, but only intended to convince the world that he wanted peace while Arafat wants to throw Israel into the sea?

It’s up to the judges to decide that.
______________________________________________________

Bob N.

Bíonn dhá insint ar gach scéal, Agus bíonn dhá leagan déag ar gach amhrán.
(Irish - There are two tellings to every story, And twelve versions of every song.)
by Bob N.
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 10:15 AM
Here are the links to an exchange between Benny Morris, Ehud Barak and Robert Malley over what really happened.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15501

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15502

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15540

Bob N.

Bíonn minic an fhirinne searbh.
(Irish - Truth is often bitter: )

Pronunciation: bee-un minik ahn eeringeh shaarv
by Bob N.
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 10:26 AM
Here is an interesting article, an assessment of the role of AIPAC writtten by someone who might be considered an objective onlooker, Umut Uzer, a doctoral student at the University of Virginia. Uzer is from Turkey, a country considered to be a ally of both Israel and the United States.

_________________________________________________

http://www.mfa.gov.tr/grupa/percept/VI-4/u.uzer.htm

THE IMPACT OF THE JEWISH LOBBY ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY IN THE MIDDLE EAST

UMUT UZER

Umut Uzer is a PhD candidate at the Department of Government and Foreign Affairs, University of Virginia.

INTRODUCTION

For the last half century, America has played a key role in efforts to bring a peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The state system in the Middle East has consolidated itself and the United States is dissuading any attempts at the revision of the Middle East subsystem, as the US’s policy of dual containment toward Iraq and Iran demonstrates.

While American engagement in Middle East peacemaking efforts can be perceived as a positive development, the role of domestic constraints in American foreign policymaking have the potential to distort the even-handed approach that is expected of the United States if it is to contribute to the peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute. One such policy is the US Congress’ constant attempt to transfer the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

This article analyses the impact of the internal dynamics of American politics on American foreign policy in the Middle East. More specifically, the role of the Jewish lobby in American foreign policy toward Arab-Israeli negotiations is investigated through focusing on a series of US government policy formulations. In this regard, a brief conceptual introduction of interest groups in the American body politic will be followed by case studies —such as the sale of AWACS planes to Saudi Arabia or the pressure on Congressman Paul Findley— to prove or disprove the power of the Jewish lobby in American politics at large. The respective impacts of the President and the Jewish lobby on policymaking toward Middle Eastern affairs will be explicated.

From this study it will be evident that the power of the Jewish lobby in America, while real, is substantially exaggerated. While the Jewish lobby has some influence over the policymakers, when the President perceives a particular policy of major significance (what we call ‘salience’), then he will overrule the lobby and implement the policy he prefers. It will be demonstrated that security issues have a higher priority for the president than economic policies. Hence, it follows that politics has primacy over economics.

INTEREST GROUPS IN AMERICA

Alexis de Tocqueville claimed that the political culture of the United States induced the establishment of associations “to promote the public safety, commerce, industry, morality and religion”. James Madison before him argued that the duty of the government was to reconcile the divergent interests of interest groups.1 An interest group is defined as “any group that, on the basis of one or more shared attitudes, makes certain claims upon other groups in the society for the establishment, maintenance, or enhancement of forms of behaviour that are implied by the shared attitudes”.2
Interest groups lobby the government to open a “communication process” and present technical information to congressmen. In fact, it was argued that the pressure group had no power to punish a legislator.3 These analyses stemmed from the low-level of success and sophistication among the lobbyists of the 1950s. However, the rapid increase in the lobbyists’ strength in the 1980s was a function of greater specialisation and the lobbies’ readiness to support political campaigns financially. America’s strongest labour union, AFL-CIO for instance, contributed significant sums to friendly congressmen. Big corporations similarly made important contributions to the legislators.4

Typical interest groups such as the American Federation of Labor (AFL), National Rifle Association (NRA), and the American Medical Association (AMA) and others such as big companies began competing with each other and established political action committees (PACs) to influence their friends financially. ITT and other large corporations were more influential than the labour unions since they made larger contributions through PACs and employed better lobbyists. With this technique, they were able to have more impact on the legislators’ orientations since campaign reform legislation had outlawed large contributions to political parties thereby diminishing the parties’ organisational capabilities in many parts of the United States.5

The lobbyists’ success emanates from their mobilising of constituents, providing information to the public and consequently changing public opinion to their favour. In this endeavour, while money is important, it is not the only factor shaping policy. Needless to say, interest groups do not control public policy but have a significant contribution in the formulation of some parts of it.6

AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICYMAKING AND
THE POWER OF THE JEWISH LOBBY

The major actors in Middle East policymaking are the President together with his national security and minority affairs advisers; the State Department with the secretary of state at its head, the Bureau of Near East and South Asian Affairs under an assistant secretary of state, Bureau of International Organisations and the Policy Planning Staff; the Department of Defence together with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the International Security Agency; the Intelligence community with the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency playing key roles; the Congress; the Press, interest groups (both pro-Israeli and the oil companies supplementing the pro-Arab organisations) and lastly public opinion.7 Policymaking can be a function of calculations by rational decision-makers working for the national interest, the result of competition between governmental agencies or the influence of domestic constraints on foreign policy decisions.8

One interest group cannot have total influence over American foreign policy in the Middle East; it can increase the saliency of the issue and engage public opinion as well as focus on Congress, the President and the State Department. It can thus constrain the policies but not initiate or dictate new policies. Since public opinion is to a large degree pro-Israel, the Jewish lobby or ethnic interest group can define the boundaries of policy. In other words, the lobby can have an influence on the details of a policy but cannot guarantee its success or failure. Neither the Jewish lobby nor the oil lobby has a significant influence on foreign policy decision-making.9

Keeping this framework in mind, we can proceed to the sources of Jewish power in the United States and its impact on major government decisions. It is one thing to say that Jews are influential in American politics and another to claim that Jews control America, a claim made by former congressman Pete McCloskey, who argued that the Jewish lobby “distorts” American foreign policy, “terrorises” Congress and prevents an even-handed policy in the Middle East. Former Illinois Congressman Paul Findley believes that the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) controls Congress’s Middle East policy and South Dakota Senator James Abourezk argues that United States Middle East policy has became a “captive of its client state”, that “the Israeli lobby shapes United States Middle East policy”10

AIPAC targeted these representatives and they lost their congressional seats. Thomas Dine, executive director of AIPAC, took credit for this situation as well as the 1984 defeat of Senator Charles Percy of Illinois, Roger Jepson of Iowa and Walter Huddleston of Kentucky. All had voted for the AWACS sale to Saudi Arabia. Paul Findley believes his defeat in 1982 was not a result of the Lobby’s efforts but rather the economic difficulties in his district. Nonetheless, AIPAC tried to magnify its power by claiming that it was instrumental in Congressman Findley’s and other congressmen’s defeats.11

There is almost a consensus on the sources of Jewish power in the United States. There are approximately six million Jews in the US, i.e. around three percent of the US population.12 Yet, they exert a disproportionate influence on the policy process. This is a function of numerous factors; a high rate of financial contribution to political campaigns, concentration on key states that could determine the result of elections, high turnout in elections, a high level of institutionalisation with 500 synagogues and 300 national organisations.13 To demonstrate the importance of financial contributions, it would be in order to mention that in 1977, 70 out of 125 members of the Democratic National Financial Council were Jewish. Population wise, 81 percent of Jews are concentrated in nine states. In New York they form nine percent of the population and 18 percent of the electorate; in New Jersey 5.5 percent of the population and 9.9 percent of the electorate; in Florida 4.7 percent of the population and 8.2 percent of the voters; in Massachusetts 4.5 percent of the populace and 8.3 percent of the voters; in Maryland 4.3 percent of the population and 8.1 percent of the electorate; in Connecticut three percent of the population and 6.2 percent of the voters; in California three percent of the population and 5.8 percent of the electorate; in Pennsylvania 2.7 percent of the population and 4.9 percent of the voters; and in Illinois 2.3 percent of the population and 3.9 percent of the voters.14

It should be evident that being concentrated in a few key states as well as showing greater participation than other ethnic groups in elections significantly increases the power of the Jewish community in America.

Fifty to 60 percent of Jews always vote for the Democratic Party and around 10 percent vote for the Republicans. There is a 30 percent swing vote, which the politicians always try to pull in their favour.15

Other factors in Jewish power are the rise in the number of Jews running for public office and single-issue voting, testing friendliness to Israel as a, if not the, major criterion for voting for a particular candidate.16

Public opinion has been overwhelmingly pro-Israel in America: 52 percent pro-Israel, seven percent pro-Arab in 1974-1975 with 63 percent supporting Jerusalem being the capital of Israel. The lowest point was reached in 1982 with the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camp massacres of Palestinians, when support for Israel dropped to 32 percent and rose for Arabs to 28 percent. However, in January 1983 the ratio was 49 to 12 in favour of Israel.17 The image Arabs held in public opinion was warlike, backward, greedy and arrogant whereas Israelis were seen as peaceful, honest, intelligent, like Americans, brave and exploited. Moreover, the attentive public and opinion leaders —politicians, bureaucrats, academicians, journalists and businessmen, etc.— were more pro-Israeli than the general public.18 It should also be added that there were strong partisans of Israel in groupings such as the AFL and the Christian Evangelicals. The latter saw in the establishment of Israel the realisation of biblical prophecy. Evangelists Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson, both of Virginia, were among the ardent supporters of Israel, Fallwell being awarded the Jabotinsky prize by Menachem Begin. Evangelical-Jewish relations however were predicated only on support for Israel while on domestic issues, Jews, who are mostly liberal, were on opposing sides to the archconservative fundamentalists.19

Support for Israel was not confined to protestant evangelicals only. A Catholic priest, Robert Drinan, argued that it was the religious and political duty of American Christians to contribute to Israel’s security.20

The Lobby contributes to the existence of a special relationship between America and Israel, comparable only to the one between the United States and Great Britain, emanating from common Judeo-Christian roots, democracy, pioneering spirit and strategic interests.21
The AIPAC is the most influential and one of the best-organised lobbies in Washington. Its precursors are the American Zionist Emergency Council, established as the Zionist Organisation of America’s lobby in Washington in 1943, which changed its name to the American Zionist Council as Louis Lipsky assumed its presidency. The name was changed again in 1953 to the American Zionist Council of Public Affairs (AZCPA) and finally the AIPAC in 1959.22 It was Secretary of State John Foster Dulles’ demand to talk to a single Jewish organisation that precipitated the establishment of the AIPAC.23 I.L. Kenen, AIPAC’s first executive director, claims that they established the organisation to counter the propaganda and the power of the “petro-diplomatic complex”, which included oilmen, diplomats, missionaries and CIA agents. James Forrestal, Secretary of Defence, and the Arabists at the State Department were an important part of this complex.24

Kenen was head of AIPAC from 1951-1974. The Executive Directors that came after him were Morris Amitay, 1974-1980, Tom Dine, 1980-1993,25 Neal Sher, 1993-1996, and Howard Kohr in 1996.26 With Amitay assuming power, a more activist lobbying effort was taken and this became even more so with Dine, who boasted about increased aid to Israel and defeat of congressmen not friendly to Israel. In fact, the AIPAC’s leverage was increasing as there was a marked increase in the tendency of middle class Americans to get involved in politics and of Congress to become more responsive to special interests. An ethnic interest group can be compared with single-interest groups such as those focusing on the environment or abortion. While AIPAC was accused of dual loyalty at the expense of the American national interest, it is possible to say that lobbying is part of American democratic practice and political tradition.27
For an ethnic lobby to be successful, the general public needs to share its concerns and the government should have parallel orientations. Also, the locus of decision should preferably be the legislative rather than the executive branch and the issue at stake should be of major concern to the lobby. There should be a unity of purpose, cohesiveness, financial resources and an active constituency (factors that the Arab lobby lacks) and the lobby should have a clear strategy and understanding of the techniques of lobbying. Possessing most if not all these factors, AIPAC successfully lobbied the Congress to lobby the Executive.28

Providing economic aid to Israel was a major consideration in AIPAC’s establishment. Furthermore, it published the Near East Report to provide information29 to the policymakers from a pro-Israeli point of view.

It would be in order to analyse some of the policy decisions in which the AIPAC in particular and the Jewish lobby in general tried to influence Congress. Economic and military aid to Israel were paramount among these decisions.

In 1962, during the Kennedy administration, in what became the first major military sale, the US sold Hawk anti-aircraft missiles to Israel. The transfer of 200 Patton tanks and some Skyhawk planes followed in 1966. By 1968, however the sale of Phantom jets became a major issue in American politics. The AIPAC as well as the American Jewish Committee, with the AFL (which is traditionally friendly to Israel) were all pressuring the government to go ahead with the sale. Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party endorsed the sale, as well as the presidential candidates. However, these domestic pressures did not in the end lead President Lyndon Johnson to approve the sale; France’s reluctance to supply arms to Israel and the Soviet Union’s unwillingness to co-operate with the US to limit arms to the Middle East encouraged the president to sell Israel the Phantoms. Furthermore, the public was supportive of such a decision.30

Despite reluctance of the bureaucracy (State and Defence departments) and some members of Congress, such as William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the President saw the sale of Phantoms to Israel in strategic terms and decided in its favour.31

In the war of attrition, the arrival of Skyhawks and Phantoms throughout 1969 improved Israel’s air force both quantitatively and qualitatively,32 and this symbolised the beginning of ever-increasing quantities of American military aid.

The sales to Saudi Arabia of F-15s in 1978 and AWACS in 1981 led to an open clash between the President and the Jewish lobby. AIPAC put its full weight behind the effort in the Congress to block the sale. In both cases, the President was victorious, which shows that when the President presents an issue as a matter of national security, it is highly unlikely that the Lobby can prevail over the Executive. Yet, a lobby’s very challenge to the US President shows its level of confidence.

In February 1978, President Jimmy Carter announced the administration’s intention to sell Saudi Arabia 60 F-15s; Egypt 50 F-5Es and 15 F-15s and Israel 75 F-16s as a package. AIPAC tried to prevent the sale but the Saudis threatened to buy planes from France and started their own lobbying effort, which included 25 lobbyists including former Defence Secretary Clark Clifford, former Senator Fulbright, and Fred Dutton. The National Association of Arab Americans lobbied Congress in favour of the sale. In May 1978, the Senate voted 54 to 44 in favour of the sale, proving that the Lobby cannot win against “a fully committed president”.33

The 1981 AWACS debate was much harsher than the 1978 F-15 sale. In this incident, the AIPAC mobilised its constituency more than ever, bombarding congressmen with letters, telegrams and phone calls. The Arabs, on the other hand, had Boeing, United Technologies and Mobil on their side, the latter giving advertisements to major newspapers arguing for the Arab side’s validity. Former presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter also rallied to President Reagan’s side. Ford said that America could not let the Jews run American foreign policy and Reagan said it is “not the business of other nations to American foreign policy”. The President met with numerous Senators to both offer inducements and make threats. The House of Representatives voted 301:111 against the sale whereas the Senate approved the sale with 52 votes for and 48 against. The President convinced the Senate that he should not be humiliated or constrained in the making of foreign policy. This event was seen by the Jewish lobby as the validation of the power of the Arab lobby and led to an increased interest in AIPAC among American Jews, contributing to its increase in power.34

While the Lobby lost these issues, it is fair to say that the sale would not have had so much, if any, opposition but for its efforts. Similarly, the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which conditioned the granting of most favoured nation status on the Soviet Union to its allowing Jews to emigrate freely, or the anti-boycott legislation against the Arab economic boycott of Israel would not have come to Congress if the Jewish lobby had not brought these issues on to the agenda.35 Similarly, the letter of 76 senators addressed to the President countered the reassessment of the Ford-Kissinger policy (to force Israel to negotiate with Egypt) and, to show its disapproval, Congress blocked the sale of Hawks to Jordan. In fact, there was no public support for the policy of reassessment. The US-Israel memorandum guaranteed supplies of arms to Israel and the non-recognition of the PLO until it accepted United Nations resolutions 242 and 338 and recognised Israel’s right to exist.36

These examples show the significance of the Jewish lobby and its power. Yet, they also demonstrate that the President can defeat the Lobby if he perceives an issue as salient.

Israel’s 1991 demand for $10 billion over the following five years led to the prevalence of the administration as well. With the break-up of the Soviet Union, Jews in that country began to emigrate to Israel in ever growing numbers. Israel asked the United States to provide it with an additional $10 billion on top of the $3 billion it was getting. In April 1991, Housing Minister Ariel Sharon announced 13,000 new housing units in the occupied territories for the prospective Russian immigrants. On 6 September, President George Bush asked for a delay of the economic aid for 120 days to compel Israel to stop the settlements. The release of the loans was seen as a top priority for the AIPAC and was presented as an economic and humanitarian issue, whereas the administration argued that it was a security issue. Loans were freed after the Labour Party under the leadership of Yitzhak Rabin won the elections in Israel and froze the settlements. The AIPAC’s role was seriously curtailed in this incident since Congress and public opinion were not particularly supportive and American-Israeli interests were not converging. It clearly demonstrated that the AIPAC could limit but not lead policy.37

The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 can be viewed as proving the power of the Lobby, yet the executive overruled this irresponsible policy. In Congress, the power of the Israeli lobby is always stronger than in the Executive and the passing of this act can be seen as the result of the endeavours of friends of Israel in the Congress in conjunction with AIPAC lobbying.

The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, Public Law 104-45 passed by the 104th congress calls for the “relocation of the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem”, stressing that the city had been the capital of Israel since 1950 and was the seat of Israel’s President, Parliament and the Supreme Court. It recalled the 1990 Senate Concurrent Resolution arguing for the necessity of Jerusalem remaining undivided and the 1992 Senate Concurrent Resolution commemorating the 25th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. In June 1993, 257 members of the House of Representatives sent to Secretary of State Warren Christopher a letter asking for the American embassy in Tel Aviv to be transferred to Jerusalem. In March 1995, 93 senators sent a letter to Christopher reiterating the same demand. Finally, the Jerusalem act declared that Jerusalem should remain undivided and be recognised as the capital of Israel. Moreover, the US embassy “should be established in Jerusalem no later than May 31, 1999”. By 8 November 1995, this became a law without the President’s signature but he used the waiver provision to delay the transfer of the Embassy.38

This piece of legislation, had it been implemented, would have been a major obstacle to the peace process since the Israelis and Palestinians have yet to negotiate and decide on the status of Jerusalem. Its implementation would have pre-empted the final status negotiations. Similarly, after the outbreak of the al-Aqsa Intifada in the autumn of 2000, such a decision would have further exacerbated the situation.

More importantly, one study showed that 57 percent of the American public agreed with the decision, whereas 30 percent disagreed. While 88 percent of Americans supported the peace process, 60 percent were against an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital because many believed that the Arabs’ hidden objective was Israel’s annihilation.39

The cases studied show that the Jewish lobby’s influence on American policy in the Jackson-Vanik amendment and anti-boycott legislation was substantial. Whereas it was very limited or non-existent in the 1978 and 1981 decisions on arms sales to Saudi Arabia and during the Lebanon War and the first Intifada (1987-1993).40

THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT

Presidential involvement is essential in the formulation and implementation of a particular policy. To demonstrate this interrelationship between policymaking and the Lobby, these observations are essential: Truman supported the Lobby 54 percent of the time, Eisenhower 55 percent, Kennedy 67 percent, Johnson 59 percent, Nixon in his first term 48 percent, in his second term together with Ford in 1973-1976 58 percent, Carter 36 percent and Reagan 54 percent. This means that most presidents since Truman supported the Lobby in its initiatives more than half of the time. When the President supports the Lobby, it wins 95 percent of its policy initiatives, whereas when the President opposes it, it still wins 27 percent of the time. In general terms, 60 percent of its initiatives are successful.41

When the locus of decision is on the Executive, the Lobby wins 11 percent of the time despite presidential opposition. When the locus of decision is on the Legislature, the Lobby wins 55 percent of the time,42 undoubtedly an impressive success.
The policy content is also significant in the relative influence of the Lobby. The Lobby wins 54 percent of economic issues, 22 percent of security issues and 13 percent of political issues, despite the President. The Lobby’s success on economic issues stems from the fact that Congress decides these and its lack of success with politico-strategic affairs stems from their being decided by the executive branch.43

We now come to issue of salience for the President. When an issue is deemed of utmost importance, political and strategic issues for instance, the Lobby’s influence decreases, however when the issue is not considered vital to American interests, mostly economic issues, then the Lobby’s influence increases dramatically.

Steven Spiegel formulates this matter as such: if the President gives low priority to the Arab-Israeli Conflict, then Congress’s and the Lobby’s influence increases, whereas when the President sees the area as a major American foreign policy priority then interest group leverage decreases.44 In fact, the significance of the role of the President is manifested as each newly elected president brings new advisers, hence people with different ideological orientations, assumptions and hence new rules. He actually changes the framework in which foreign policy is articulated and implemented.45

CONCLUSION

The proposition that Jews control or dictate American foreign policy is false. Yet, the political weight of the Jewish community on foreign policymaking is well taken. Otherwise, events such as the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 could not be explained. After all such legislation has no direct bearing on American interests.
A strong executive severely constrains the Lobby’s involvement. In Congress, the Lobby finds close allies, who often take decisions that could negatively affect the peace negotiations.

Foreign policy is designed and implemented according to the interests of the nation. Domestic constraints, while taken into consideration by the decision-makers, can be overruled if the sublime interests of the state dictate otherwise in the judgement and analysis of the statesmen. America has the resources and the prestige to contribute to the peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the transformation from a conflictual to a peaceful relation between the Arabs and the Israelis, American help is needed. The United States, as a superpower, if it is responsive to and respectful of the cultures and needs of the world, and pursues a balanced policy toward all the contending parties, can contribute to peacemaking in various regions of the globe.



1 Wilson, Graham. Interest Groups in the United States, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981, p. 2.
2 Walker, Jack, Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and Social Movements, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1991.
3 Wilson, pp. 107-08.
4 Ibid., pp. 113-15.
5 Ibid., pp. 127-28, 141-44.
6 Browne, William. Groups, Interests, and US Public Policy, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 1998, pp. 236-37.
7 Quandt, William. ‘Domestic Influences on United States Foreign Policy in the Middle East: the View from Washington’ in William Beling (ed.), The Middle East, Albany: SUNY Press, 1973, pp. 264-67.
8 Quandt, William, Peace Process, Berkeley: UC Press, 1993, p. 8.
9 Quandt, William, ‘Domestic Influences…’ in Beling (ed.), pp.267-68, 274-75, 282; Carol Silverman, ‘Image versus Reality’, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Virginia, 1996, pp. 10-11.
10 Silverman, Carol, ‘Image versus Reality’, p. 1; Novik, Nimrod, The United States and Israel, Boulder: Westview, 1986, p. 56; Findley, Paul, They Dare to Speak Out, Westport: Lawrence Hill, 1985, pp. 25-26; Bard, Mitchell, The Water’s Edge and Beyond, New Brunswick: Transaction, 1991, pp. 1,5.
11 Findley, pp. 49, 321-22.
12 Goldberg, J.J., Jewish Power, Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1996, pp. xx-xxi.
13 Jordan, Hamilton, Memo 6/77; Novik, p. 59.
14 Jordan, op. cit.; Goldberg, J.J., ibid., p. 30.
15 Goldberg, J.J., ibid., p. 35.
16 Novik, ibid., pp. 63-64.
17 Gilboa, Eytan, American Public Opinion toward Israel and the Arab-Israel Conflict, Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 1987, pp. 66, 111, 146.
18 Gilboa, op. cit., pp. 307, 316-17.
19 Novik, Nimrod, ibid., pp. 87-90; Findley, Paul, ibid., p. 244.
20 Drinan, Robert, Honor the Promise, Garden City: Doubleday, 1977, p. 220.
21 Gilboa, ibid., p. 1.
22 Tivnan, Edward, The Lobby, New York: Simon Schuster, 1987, pp. 24, 35-39.
23 Tivnan, op. cit., p. 40.
24 Kenen, I.L., Israel’s Defense Line, Buffalo: Prometheus, 1981, p. 114.
25 Silverman, ibid., p. 2
26 Goldberg, ibid., p. 226.
27 Silverman, ibid., pp. 6, 10, 17, 19, 22.
28 Silverman, ibid., pp. 27-33.
29 Silverman, ibid., pp.78, 83-84.
30 Silverman, ibid., pp.87-88, 98-100.
31 Silverman, ibid., pp. 86, 109.
32 Korn , David, Stalemate, Boulder: Westview, 1992, pp. 163-77.
33 Bard, ibid., pp. 39, 41, 45, 49; Silverman, ibid., pp. 157, 160; Goldberg, David Howard, Foreign Policy and Ethnic Interest Groups, New York: Greenwood, 1990, pp. 69-70.
34 Tivnan, ibid., pp. 142, 153, 157, 160; Bard, ibid., pp. 57-59.
35 Bard, ibid., pp. 78, 291.
36 Ben-Zvi, Abraham, Alliance Politics and the Limit of Influence, Tel Aviv: JCSS, 1984, pp. 16-22.
37 Silverman, ibid., pp. 237, 240-41, 251, 255, 259-60, 271, 295.
38 Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995.
39 Pipes, Daniel, ‘A View of US Jews’, Jerusalem Post, 28 September 1999.
40 Goldberg, David Howard, Foreign Policy and Ethnic Groups, ibid., p. 97.
41 Bard, ibid., pp. 255, 267-69; Halperin, Morton and Arnold Kanter, ‘The Bureaucratic Perspective’ in Robert Art and Robert Jervis, International Politics, 2nd edition, 1985, p. 465.
42 Bard, ibid., p. 276.
43 Bard, ibid., pp. 278, 299.
44 Spiegel, Steven, The Other Arab-Israeli Conflict, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986, p. 10.
45 Spiegel, op. cit., p. 15.
by Someone
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 11:52 AM
This articles of yours on the Camp David accord fails to match your earlier claim that they were "a joke." In fact, I don't seem to see much that seems to be worth refusing.

Let me tell you a story now.

To thank Jewish help during WWI, Britain promised to the Jewish people the whole of Palestine.

By 1948, after the Holocaust, the amount of land allotted to Israel after partition was about 12% of the promised land. The largest chunk went to the Hashemites to become Jordan. And another large fraction went to the Arabs, which would have been Palestine had not the Arabs attacked Israel in the war of Independence.

But even before that, David Ben-Gurion accepted the offer. It was 12% of what the ZIonists were hoping for, but they took it anyway. Perhaps after the Holocaust, they chose to take what they could get.

Now maybe in Camp David, Arafat didn't get 100% of what he was asking for. Maybe he only got 90%. But he turned it down all the same.

There's a saying that if the Zionists had Arafat in 1948 instead of Ben-Gurion, there would never have been an Israel.

And besides, are the Palestinians better off now than they would have been had Arafat accepted the accords? I think not.
by Bob N.
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 12:21 PM
To say that the Camp David offer was a "Joke" is the use of a rhetorical expression. However, when the information from all the sources is assesed (not just Barak), it can't be called a "Generous Offer" by any stretch of the imagination.

Britain did not specify any amount of land. They only promised a homeland in Palestine.

<<<<Foreign Office
November 2nd, 1917
Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,
Arthur James Balfour

>>>>>>>>>

Quotes from David Ben Gurion


David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): " If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs.


Ben Gurion also warned in 1948 "We must do everything to insure they (the Palestinians) never do return." Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes, "The old will die and the young will forget."

Also Ben Gurion stated " The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British mandate. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill -- From the Nile to the Euphrates."

Note: After the 1967 war, Ben Gurion was for withdrawing from most of the occupied territories. He did not think it was realistic to occupy them.

Bob N.

Sláinte is Saol! )
(Irish - Your health and a long Life!

Pronunciation: sloyn-chah iss sail
by Clare
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 3:56 PM
Bob, where does your information retreived?
sources that are pro Zionist or anti zionist>
by Bob N.
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 8:09 PM
The quotes from Ben Gurion come from - http://www.palestineremembered.com

What Ben Gurion said should be done with the
West Bank and Gaza came from Chomsky's "The Fateful Triangle."

The text of the Balfour Declaration can be found in many places on the net. Most Zionists don't seem to know what it really says. The British (unfortunately) gave them an inch, but they interpreted it as a mile.

I will repeat again, I advocate a two-state solution in which Israel withdraws to behind the pre-1967 borders and dismantles its settlements including those in East Jerusalem. Most Palestinians accept this as the "attainable" solution.

To advocate the complete dismantling of Israel or the establishment of a secular state only fortifies the position of the Sharonists and extreme right in Israel.

In time Zionists may be weaned of their craving for an ethnically pure (or ethnically dominant) state, but this will have to take time, another fifty years or so maybe. It cannot be accomplished overnight.

I don't think there can be a solution that everyone will like. Just as in Northern Ireland, we need to seek the solution that the majority on both sides will agree to. Meanwhile, the generals and the gunmen need to be persuaded to put down there guns and back off.

Bob N.

D'fhir cogaidh comhaltar síocháin.
(Irish - Towards men of war vouch peace.)

Pronunciation: deer cogah cowel-ter shoh-Xoyn

Note: “X” represents a sound like a respirated 'k" or the sound of someone clearing their throat. The sound occurs in Arabic, Hebrew or German, but not in English.



§<
by clar
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 8:13 PM
bob, thankyou for sharing the sources.
perhaps I interpetted your position wrong,
by Someone
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 9:18 PM
"To say that the Camp David offer was a "Joke" is the use of a rhetorical expression. However, when the information from all the sources is assesed (not just Barak), it can't be called a "Generous Offer" by any stretch of the imagination. "

It did offer prettty much everything you say you want.

Even if you do not call it a "Generous offer" (though it was more than Israel was ever previously willing to concede) it was still an offer. Are the Palestinians only obligated to accept 'generous offers' rather than an offer which covers pretty much everything you say you want?

"Britain did not specify any amount of land. They only promised a homeland in Palestine. "

I cite:

According to the Peel Commission, appointed by the British Government to investigate the cause of the 1936 Arab riots, "the field in which the Jewish National Home was to be established wa sunderstood, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, to be the whole of historic Palestine, including Transjordan.

Jordan ate up 80% of Palestine, that could have gone to Jews and/or Palestinians. Instead it went to the Hashemites, who had neither a historical connection to the land, nor were they able to claim long-term residency as the Palestinians did. And yet they got the bulk.

Now, would you mind if I continue my conversation with SFSU student? At least both of us attend SFSU and have a reason to be particularly involved on this board.

by sfsu student
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 11:27 PM
I'm going to school to learn, and right now I'm observing and learning, from Bob N. and from a zionist viewpoint.

It's hard for me to know where to look for all these historical facts.

But I do see that in August, the *majority* of the Palestinians killed by IDF were civilians, many of them children. The US has laws against selling arms to countries that are killing civilians. It scares me that a zionist appears to value the life of one person over another because of what god that person believes in. Rather than zionists saying "they're dead because they deserved it by their stupid decisions," why aren't zionists saying, "everyone's life has value - as our god taught us - and we need to correct the policies of the Israeli government which lead to children being killed, and a *majority* of the dead being civilians. We need our government to follow the rules of international law - just because Palestinians have resorted to killing themselves and others to make change, doesn't mean we have to also now kill as many civilians as we like to get our 'terrorists.'""

What if our government adopted the policy of all law out the window when fighting criminals or 'terrorists'? Already the patriot act starts to do that, but what if we too shot missiles into apartment buildings? But only in poor areas, never rich. And only at people who believed in the wrong religion, regardless of whether the actual criminal was in the building for sure or not, or whether kids were playing in front or not.

"well, they asked for it," appears to be the appropriate answer according to zionist logic and the responses I've observed.

Is Israel safer now? It will have to murder every man woman and child to undo the harm it has done in maiming and killing these children already - they will grow to be terrorists too. And Israel is suffering the same way - soon there will be terrorists coming out of Israel and blowing things up. But right now, its the government that's been reduced to becoming a rogue state. America is idiotically doing the same thing and now the war monger defense contractors running the country can take all our rights away and 'dissapear' people, hold them without charges, search their home with no warrant, deport people at a moments notice who have lived here all their life, all in the name of 'anti-terrorism'.

Are we safer now? Now that we've killed over 3000 Afgans? Now that most of the world hates the US?

BTW, are you a republican?

Someone I respect recently told me - read your history - we're entering a the first stages of fascism.

Also, I'm fine with Bob N. being here because it's important to fill in the history I'm missing - he obviously won't try to talk about the the May rally events, but he provides a huge resource of info.

And the thing is, when someone tries to justify killing kids with 'well, they deserved it for electing Arafat' or 'for starting the intifada' then we need a lot of work to get done.

I don't know about you, but kids are really innocent and I *do* see a difference between state sanctioned killing of children with missiles, and individual suicide bombers killing children, and themselves in the process. I pay for one of them, on top of it.

Lastly, do you support the death penalty? I don't. I will never support any state having the 'right' to murder people. Individuals who murder people should be locked up, not murdered. It was like Clinton telling high school students not to kill - after Columbine - while he bombed the shit out of someplace.
by Bob N.
Monday Sep 2nd, 2002 11:40 PM
Dear Someone,

There is no explicit language granting the whole of the Palestine Mandate, or even the whole of the cis-Jordan part of it to the Jewish state. This comes from the Jewish Virtual Library. I don't think you can call it a pro-Palestinian institution.

The Peel Commission

From the Jewish Virtual Library: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/peel.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the height of the 1936-39 disturbances, a royal commission of inquiry came to Palestine from London to investigate the roots of the Arab-Jewish conflict and to propose solutions. The commission, headed by Lord Robert Peel, heard a great deal of testimony in Palestine, and in July 1937 issued its recommendations: to abolish the Mandate and partition the country between the two peoples. Only a zone between Jaffa and Jerusalem would remain under the British mandate and international supervision.

The Jewish state would include the coastal strip stretching from Mount Carmel to south of Be'er Tuvia, as well as the Jezreel Valley and the Galilee. The Arab state was to include the hill regions, Judea and Samaria, and the Negev. Until the establishment of the two states, the commission recommended, Jews should be prohibited from purchasing land in the area allocated to the Arab state.

To overcome demarcation problems, it was proposed that land exchanges be carried out concurrently with the transfer of population from one area to the other. Demarcation of the precise borders of the states was entrusted to a technical partition committee. The Peel Commission did not believe that Jewish immigration was detrimental to the financial well-being of the Arab population and assumed that the issue of Jewish immigration would be resolved within the Jewish state.

The British government accepted the recommendations of the Peel Commission regarding the partition of Palestine, and the announcement was endorsed by Parliament in London. Among the Jews, bitter disagreements erupted between supporters and opponents, while the Arabs rejected the proposal and refused to regard it as a solution. The plan was ultimately shelved.
_________________________________________________

Note: If you do a search, you will find that SFSU student asked for my input on the question of AIPAC. I think you should let other people decide where and how they get their information.

Bob N.

Ceannigh droch rud is bí gan aon rud.
(Irish - Buy a bad thing and be left with nothing.)




by Bob N.
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 12:20 AM
<<<Also, this information:

<<<"But since I support Israel, I don't mind the financial aid. But I also know that the government gives out money to all sorts of weird states, including Egypt and, yes, the Palestinian Authority.>>>

Three billion dollars, 30% of the US foreign aid budget goes to Israel. In addition, since the Gulf War, Israel has gotten 2 billion dollars a year in loan guarantees.
(See: http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=753&CategoryId=4)

Egypt gets the 2nd largest amount, 1.3 billion dollars a year and 600 million in loan guarantees. Egypt is a major power in the Middle East and has signed a peace treaty with Israel. This relationship has provided a stability which is an advantage to Israel. The US has also provided funding to the PA as have European countries, for assistance in building physical, educational and medical infrastructure, much of which has been destroyed in the past few months.

<<<Now the PA is having a lot of trouble simply because of corruption. Actually, let me correct that, the PA is doing quite well... they found out that Arafat's net worth is about $1.3 billion... but the Palestinians themselves are doing quite badly. >>>

Israeli businessmen have been enablers and abettors in corrupt business relations. The nature of the money flow and control has encouraged a dismal web of under the table payoffs. Most Palestinians are aware of this, but have more immediate concerns like day-to-day survival.

<<<But I blame much on this on the intifada. Israel's response to the intifada is... well... you tell me, how would you stop it? >>>

One way would be to not hold peace negotiations hostage to the latest violent incident. Britain did that in Northern Ireland for thirty years. As soon as they declared that movement toward peace would not be derailed by extremists, the violence subsided and the majority of the parties were brought to the peace table.

<<<Yes, they have check points, but yes, there are people trying to cross the boarders and blow people up. >>>

The Sharon government has refused to close the borders along the green line because that would leave the settlements on the other side. Even now, the construction of the "Fence" is resisted.

<<<You can say "just leave the territories" but sending the message that all you need to do to get something is to start killing innocents, then you become more vulnerable to terrorism, not less. >>>

In the 10 years between 1957 and 1967, when the border was closed, there were only 35 civilian deaths caused by Palestinian guerrilas. Now the borders are open and settlers and the army are encroaching on Palestinian towns and land throughout. How many Israeli civilian casualties have there been this year? The evidence says, if they leave, they will be more secure.

Read what Israeli military historian Martin Van Creveld has to say on the subject: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/06/14/1023864349259.html

<<< It's an issue that gets ugly, and again merits intelligent discussion, not hysterical sloganeering." >>>

I firmly agree.

Bob N.

Is fearr an tsláinte mhór ná na milte bó.
(Irish - Better great health than many cattle.)


by Bob N.
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 8:16 AM
To classify Egypt as a 'weird state' suggests a racist, anti-Arab or Eurocentric view. Egypt is a large third-world country, the largest and most influential in the Middle East, with a population of 66,000,000. It is an ancient country, with a long history during which it has contributed many ideas, concepts and inventions to the modern world.

Egypt is provided a large foreign aid package, in part, as a signatory of the Camp David accords, to promote stability in the Middle East and security for Israel.

Does the person who calls Egypt a weird state say that the US should cut off foreign aid to tthat 'weird state?' What is the alternative? Does she or she want us to threaten that country with nuclear weapons and the slaughter of its 66 million people if it doesn't behave itself or threatens Israel?


FOREIGN AID
From the Arab American Institute: http://www.aaiusa.org/foreign_aid.htm

Background

In the wake of Camp David Accords and subsequent peace agreements between Arab states and Israel, the Middle East has received a larger amount of U.S. foreign aid than any other region in the world. Israel and Egypt, the original signatories to the Arab-Israeli peace process, have received the lion's share of this aid. Even as the foreign aid budget has been declining since 1985, spending for Egypt and Israel has remained constant.

Aid to Israel

In addition to its direct foreign aid, Israel normally receives more than one billion dollars in assistance from other portions of the federal budget. This extra aid from the Pentagon and other federal agencies in several years actually shows an increase in total foreign aid to Israel by an additional 12.2 percent. Estimates for total additional funding for fiscal year 2000 are not yet known, but preliminary indications are that Israel will receive substantial funds from the defense budget for joint U.S.-Israeli development of various weapons systems.

Israel also benefits from a system known as "early disbursal" which is enjoyed by no other U.S. foreign aid recipient. By receiving its total aid package at the beginning of every fiscal year in a single "lump sum", the Israeli government is able to invest is foreign aid in interest-bearing accounts, thus accruing millions and millions of dollars until the money is actually needed.

This long-standing formula of aid to Israel was recently challenged by the chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations who called it "stupid foreign policy". The status quo was eventually upheld by supporters claiming that it was no time to change the formula to Israel's disadvantage.

Experts in foreign aid and the architects of the current U.S. policy admit that other deserving aid recipients are often being squeezed out of the picture. Indeed, countries devastated by natural disasters or in need of immediate assistance often become embroiled in partisan budget politics and must then wait for funding to be allocated in periodic installments. Jordan, for example, has only received a portion of its emergency aid supplement after the death of King Hussein in February 1999.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aid to the Palestinians

Congress has routinely used its "power of the purse" to hold hostage U.S. aid to the Palestinians. Not out of coincidence, those who have called for the suspension of aid have also been part of efforts to blame the Palestinians for periodic impasses in the peace process while absolving the other party of any guilt. Wherever they have been able, they have sought to impose broad and stringent conditions on any U.S. aid to the Palestinians.

It is important to note that all U.S. funds for the Palestinians go to specific projects rather than to the Palestinian Authority. Furthermore, U.S. aid to the Palestinians is provided indirectly through non-governmental organizations not controlled by the PA. Every penny is regulated, completely transparent and accounted for under strict U.S. guidelines.

After the Oslo Agreement, the U.S. announced a five-year, $500 million economic aid package for the West Bank and Gaza: $375 million in grants from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and $125 million in loan guarantees from the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).

From all international sources, the Palestinian Authority was promised $4.2 billion in foreign assistance in the five years following Oslo, but received just $2.5 billion, most of it from Western Europe.

Aside from the huge discrepancies in aid to the parties of the Oslo peace process, the Palestinian people continue to endure economic hardship that could be at least partially alleviated by U.S. economic aid. President Clinton has repeatedly stressed the importance of economic development for the Palestinians by saying "no peace stands a chance of lasting if it does not deliver real results to ordinary people". Secretary Albright has noted that pledges of financial assistance to the Palestinians symbolize "a message of hope and concrete support".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

The U.S. has long-standing commitments to parties of the Middle East peace process to help advance negotiations and implement agreements. With past agreements such as the Camp David Accords, America has lived up to its commitment by providing funding to ease the financial burden placed on the negotiating parties in carrying out their obligations. It is particularly important for the U.S. to provide funding for the following reasons:

1. The tremendous effort America put into reaching the agreement.
2. The unprecedented role we committed to play in guaranteeing that all sides meet their obligations.
3. The specific assurances that we provided the parties that money would be forthcoming to help them fulfill their promises.


Bob N.


Is fearr stuaim ná neart.
(Irish - Better sense than strength.)

by sfsu student
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 8:49 AM
Thanks Bob N. for posting that Peel Commission stuff - I'd heard of it but didn't really know what it was.

Also, the relation of Egypt and Israel, the money we give each, etc.

It scares me that someone will justify things like killing people with a 'well, that's what they get,' attitiude - there's no moral grounding.

It also seems strange of someone to point to Arafat's 'wealth' - I don't really see what this accomplishes. What is Sharon's wealth? Cheney's wealth? All these criminals are dripping in money - that doesn't justify anything except that we have corrupt leaders, the US, Israel, Palestine.

Thanks for contributing to my education.

Someone - what about JVP and Tikkun? Is the group at SFSU not associated with them?
by Leila
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 10:54 AM
Frankly, I am sick and tired of Zionist Jew-dogs who huff and puff about their supposed "oppression". I am beginning to think that Hitler was probably correct about them. Maybe if he had been allowed to finish the job, we'd have our homeland today. In any case, I have no intentions of "shaking hands with" or "dialoging" with these subhuman vermin ever in my lifetime. And most GUPS members feel the same way!
by sfsu student
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 11:08 AM
I support the cause of GUPS and I support the anger. Last night I went to a presentation in Marin with ISM people who showed pictures of the damage to one man from the acid that the IDF soldiers had poured on him. Luckily they were able to document this.

But if we show that anger in this way - calling them names and deriding them - we are becomming what they are.

I support the need to scream and yell, and maybe this is even the place for that, but I also don't want GUPS to become prey to these zionists by being targetted with incidents where the average uninformed student or person can then assume that GUPS is out of control and 'terrorist.' We need to protect our organization and the best way to do that is to keep it the dialog reasonable.

But hey, this is Indymedia - blast away!!
by Truthteller
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 12:41 PM
Note that "SFSU Student" makes his own pro-Hitler and naziesque sympathies clear by not criticizing anything Leila said, only her "tone". He has no objections at all to her frequently-expressed desire that all Jews be exterminated. At bottom, THIS is what the "Palestinian struggle" is all about: the systematic extermination of Jews as a people, religion and race-not just in the Middle East but throughout the world. It is indeed a tragedy that Leila, "SFSU Student" and all of their friends and family members could not have been in the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11. At least, there's some hope they might catch AIDS!
by sfsu student
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 3:38 PM
Don't call a kettle black already.

I don't wish any harm to a single jewish or palestinian person. I'm concerned about the people on here who do wish harm. Leila is angry, so are a lot of people. This is sometimes a forum for people venting their anger in a nonviolent way and so I'm not going to spend my time addressing every single vent that people have.

I responded in detail to 'someone' because we were both at the rally and were discussing issues around it. I'm realizing that I don't know what it means to put a religion above people's lives - and it's important for me to learn about that if I'm going to talk to people about it.

I will never excuse either side for killing innocents, and I don't believe in the term collateral damage.

Let's lose the flags.
by Jim
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 6:20 PM
Please be critical of what you see here.

These are truly anonymous posts and you can never tell if the person posting is for real or someone posing as them to make them appear extremist.

This post is probably not from Leila but from a vicious Zionist trying to pose as her to discredit her.

They did this to me and others as well, so I no longer use a handle.
http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/08/140241_comment.php#140244

They are unscrupulous and will resort to any means to "defend" their beloved Israel.
by Jim
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 6:37 PM
Compare her statement above (june 03) with this recent one to get an idea of whether or not she would say something like this:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GUPS
by Leila • Monday June 03, 2002 at 01:41 PM

Whoever is saying I am emaling them and giving them all of this information is incorrect. I have not been emailing anyone on this page so stop using my name. In addition, GUPS is not a hate group. The reason no apology was made for the poster was because our name was put on it without our permission. MSA wrote an apology clearing GUPS and AS of responsibility as the poster was not approved by us. In addition, GUPS is trying to foster free speech on our campus. We were not slandering people, nor were we yelling hateful slurs. As I said earlier and will repeat again: do not misconstrue my words this time: I was there for the whole event and did not witness any of the accusations that are being hurled our way. The point of all of this is to draw away from pro-palestinian activism on our campus. Being critical of Israel and being anti-semitic are two different things. WE ARE NOT ANTI SEMITIC: our actions do not represent Anti-Semitism. As Americans we have rights to. When our students get harrassed, or threatened or are in fear of wearing their hijab on campus, why isn't there all the media attention and full page ads taken out on that issue? All were asking for are equal rights, on campus and off. AGAIN WE ARE NOT HATEFUL ORGANIZATION. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note also, that spammers were sending emails that appeared to come from her but did not.

This is also a typical Zionist hackers method for disrupting activists -- using email identity theft and sending anti-Semitic emails posing as activists.

See this post for more information on that:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/08/143082.php

Basically, Leila is the victim here but they attempt to make her look villainous.
by sfsu student
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 6:52 PM
I sort of figured it wasn't her, but didn't know who or what it was so I tried to make a balanced response.

I've been spammed by zionists in the hundreds of emails from myself, so I know about that. My friends and I for awhile only used a header called 'it's me, not the zionazis!' so we could recognize eachother amongst the junk. Now I've got them completely blocked.

I think there are a lot of naive people who believe the revisionist history they are told in order for them to adopt the policies of Zionism. And sadly, even 'someone' admitted his attitude about the killings as 'they deserved it,' which I consider very scary no matter what side anyone is on.

And hi Leila - I look forward to helping out GUPS in whatever way I can this semester!
by Bob N.
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 7:53 PM
<<< This is also a typical Zionist hackers method for disrupting activists -- using email identity theft and sending anti-Semitic emails posing as activists. >>>

I've had the same thing happen to my username. If there is more information on this or somebody who is discussing the issue, I would like to know.

I don't know if there was any connection, but it started happening last July after I suggested on Palestine.Indymedia that some of the grossly anti-semitic postings were placed there by pro-Zionists to discredit the website.

Perhaps a system of registering a name and a password at the IMC site could be used to assure personal control of posts. This would limit freedom somewhat but could effectively curb much of the spamming. I don't think it would involve divulging any more private information than the intelligence agencies (US and other) already know about many of us. I'm sure there are files on Bob N. out there somewhere.

One way to protect your posting is to use a difficult to copy trailer with unusual characters (accent marks etc). That's one of the reasons I use the Irish Proverbs. It won't stop intelligent trolls, but a lot of them are dummies.

Bob N.

Ní mar a síltear a bhítear riamh.
(Irish - Things are not always as they seem.)

Pronunciation: nee mar a seel-tare a vee-tare ree-uhv
by ?
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 9:03 PM
But the ID thief was posting as Average Jeff, MS, Arafat (possibly others) -- these are all people, who like myself, challenged Tom and the gang that not all Zionists are murderers.

So this ID imposters attributes all kind of anti-Zionist comments to these people, some of whom I don't think have been on P-IMC any time recently.

The more and more I am questioned by ! or Tom or any of an number of P-IMCers, they all have very similar tendencies to phrase things in particular ways.

Personally, I think Tom is a "puppeter" -- using many IDs and responsible for probably 2/3 to 3/4 of the stuff on P-IMC of late. Today, it looks as if no one came out to play, so Tom had to steal IDs and play foil to himself.

If anyone over at P-IMC ever got off their lazy butt and checked the logs for IP addresses, I'd bet anyone a $100 donattion to the Red Crescent (If I win it goes to B'TSelem) that it all leads back to Tom. Double or nothing that Tom is a lone-wolf white supremacist following an agenda of blaming Jews by using the convenient label "Zionists" and disrupting a communication channel that (in the future) could be a threat to their schemes.

They seem to be really working the 9/11 Conspiracy theory -- reminds me of the the state "militias" after the Oklahoma bombings trying to instigate revolution by vis-a-vis a nerver-ending stream of conspircy theories directed at the US government and Jews.

Just keep an open mind and be aware that there are people in this world who will play on your fears to seduce you into their web of lies, spinning hate at the world and everyone in it but themselves.
by redsam
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 10:49 PM
Why don't you ask IMC-Palestine to start posting partial IP addresses on the articles and comments so that there is proof that people are posting as imposters instead of making speculations and accusations with none?

Thanks
by X2
Wednesday Sep 4th, 2002 2:55 AM
I've got a better plan. Simply give people an option to register a nickname, with a password. Not obligatory but you can if you want to. It doesn't expose IP addresses (I personally don't really want mine exposed) but it gives a unique identifier to each person. Now, second feature. For the staff, each registration will require an IP address to be recorded in a log at the server. Put that in a file which can cross-index both IP addresses and registered nicknames. If you are not registered you can post as anonymous. This limits ALL trolls to having to use anonymous or having their nick registered and easily visible to see how many and which nicks they have registered. Why not, I say? It couldn't really do any harm!
by Bob N.
Wednesday Sep 4th, 2002 7:56 AM
Sounds good. What do Nessie or other SF.IMC people think? Can it be done with existing equipment and software?

Is túisce a thiteann oíche Fómhair ná cloch í bpoll móna.
(Irish - An Autumn night falls faster than a rock in a boghole.)
by redsam
Wednesday Sep 4th, 2002 8:27 AM
I am not for exposing whole ip addresses, but only PARTIAL ip addresses, such as displaying only the first two or three subnets which would be a limited security risk, if even completely save. Like this...

63.202.*

Or even a better idea, although probably harder to implement, the IMC-Palestine could create a random code generater for diffrent IP addresses, but they would be unique to each one. So say someone's IP address is 64.202.186.150, they could get a code like FG10Kl8 and that would show up for every comment or article they post under that IP address. This would identify them to us, yet keep their IP address hidden.

Registering is also a good idea, but I don't see it preventing trolls and instigators since they can merely create multiple logins, however it could be a good way to prevent imposters and name stealers.
by redsam
Wednesday Sep 4th, 2002 8:28 AM
I am not for exposing whole ip addresses, but only PARTIAL ip addresses, such as displaying only the first two or three subnets which would be a limited security risk, if even completely safe. Like this...

63.202.*

Or even a better idea, although probably harder to implement, the IMC-Palestine could create a random code generater for diffrent IP addresses, but they would be unique to each one. So say someone's IP address is 64.202.186.150, they could get a code like FG10Kl8 and that would show up for every comment or article they post under that IP address. This would identify them to us, yet keep their IP address hidden.

Registering is also a good idea, but I don't see it preventing trolls and instigators since they can merely create multiple logins, however it could be a good way to prevent imposters and name stealers.
by Someone
Wednesday Sep 4th, 2002 8:36 PM
First of all, from what I know of the real life Leila, it is not beyond her to say something like that.

I am also consistently agitated by people who hate Zionists so much that whenever any monstrously anti-semitism shows up, they blame it on those conspiracy-oriented Jews... err, I mean "Zionists." Well bubs, sometimes anti-semitism is just that.

Now back to SFSU student...

"But I do see that in August, the *majority* of the Palestinians killed by IDF were civilians, many of them children. The US has laws against selling arms to countries that are killing civilians. It scares me that a zionist appears to value the life of one person over another because of what god that person believes in. Rather than zionists saying "they're dead because they deserved it by their stupid decisions," why aren't zionists saying, "everyone's life has value - as our god taught us - and we need to correct the policies of the Israeli government which lead to children being killed, and a *majority* of the dead being civilians. We need our government to follow the rules of international law - just because Palestinians have resorted to killing themselves and others to make change, doesn't mean we have to also now kill as many civilians as we like to get our 'terrorists.'""

Well, look at it this way. The majority of people murdered by Palestinian suicide bombers were civilians. I am also willing to bet that a higher proportion of Israeli victims were civilians than Palestinians targeted by the IDF.

Why? because the IDF targets the militants; the gunmen, the bomb makers, those who make the attacks possible. The bombers deliberately target civilians. That is their target, beginning, middle and end. They almost never go after soldiers.

This, of course, does not bother GUPS or most other Palestinian supporters. Do you figure the Jews just "had it coming?" After all, they were riding busses, or go to Passover seders, or were just five year old girls sleeping in bed.

"Is Israel safer now?"

Tough question. I don't know if Israel would be better off if they never retalliated for terrorist attacks. Maybe. Or maybe they'd be worse off. And perhaps Sharon elevated the situation. I don't know.

But I am quite sure the Palestinians were better off before they launched the intifada. You'd be hard pressed to demonstrate that they weren't. One moment they were about to sign Camp David and get the land they say they wanted... the next, their villages are being locked down in an attempt to root out terrorist cells. So unnecessary.

"Are we safer now? Now that we've killed over 3000 Afgans? Now that most of the world hates the US? "

I don't think the world's opinion of us was any better before 9/11 than afterwards.

And going after Afghanistan has enabled us to remove the Taliban from power. The Taliban which made women wear full body veils with only tiny pinholes for their eyes. The Taliban which outlawed shaving; men had to have long beards, or be arrested. The Taliban which outlawed music, kites, and all sorts of little pleasures. The Taliban who found a set of 2,500 year old statues of Buddha to be blasphemous, and destroyed them by firing cannons.

Frankly, I am glad the Taliban are gone, and I think many Afghanies are also.

No, I am not a Republican. But nor am I a socialist. I'm just your run of the mill Democrat. But I have been rethinking some stuff after I've seen San Francisco Leftists carrying signs with swastikas on them, with no apology. I just tell myself this city is an outlier amongst most left wingers, and I hope it stays that way.

"And the thing is, when someone tries to justify killing kids with 'well, they deserved it for electing Arafat' or 'for starting the intifada' then we need a lot of work to get done. "

So what's your justification when Palestinians murder Israeli kids? They deserve it for electing Sharon?

It is a fact that people often suffer for the sins of their leaders. I'm not saying its right or that its wrong. It's just true. If a leader starts a war, his people can suffer, not because of their flaws, but because of their leader. If a leader squanders the economy, or embezzles money, again it is often the people who suffer.

And yes, the people suffer from the consequences of their uprising. What would you rather do? Should the IDF target only the leaders of Hamas and the PA who order the attacks?

And if so, what if those same leaders surround themselves with children and civilians? What then? Strike or don't strike? Strike, and they'll be international criticism. Don't strike, and more of your own people may be killed by said terrorist.

But for some reason, the PA is allowed to murder all the civilians they want, with no international criticism, while only Israel gets criticized. Why is this? Is Israel supposed to have a higher moral code? Perhaps. And if so, thank you. It's nice to know we're held to a high standard, even if it gets really annoying...

"I don't know about you, but kids are really innocent and I *do* see a difference between state sanctioned killing of children with missiles, and individual suicide bombers killing children, and themselves in the process. I pay for one of them, on top of it. "

I find it rather disgusting that Saddam Hussein sends $25,000 to the family of anyone who blows themselves up to kill Jews. Maybe that doesn't repulse you. But it repulses me.

And there have been soldiers who have been put in these impossible positions. During operaton Defensive Shield a group of soldiers saw a Palestinian child run towards them. What do you do? Do you shoot the child? No doubt if you shot the child, there'd be an international storm.

So the child ran towards them. What happened next? The child blew himself up. Killed himself and 13 soldiers. Was that the right answer?

The Palestinian Authority has been condemned for violating the rights of children. This is only proper. It is a violation of children's rights to send them to the front lines. Palestinian television urges children to put down their toys, pick up rocks, and go throw it at an Israeli soldier. Where's the sense in that? So the kid can get killed and become a piece of propaganda? Would you risk your kids life for that? Would you drive a bus to deliver these kids to the front line?

There's an awful lot your friends don't tell you about the conflict.
by sfsu student
Wednesday Sep 4th, 2002 11:30 PM
I'll only have time for one line at a time now that school has started, and then we should move this elsewhere before it takes a 1/2 hour to load . . .

"So what's your justification when Palestinians murder Israeli kids? They deserve it for electing Sharon?"

I would never justify anyone murdering anyone else - no human or animal deserves to die. We have too much power in the hands of too few, and not enough debate and discusssion. We're all far more intelligent and naturally compassionate to condemn others to die - take the corrupt leaders and corporate media out and see what happens.

This is the first step - no religion, or god, or country - as far as I'm concerned - deserves the death of a human life. People may choose to sacrifice their life, but no one ever deserves to have it taken away by anyone else.

We all only get one.

And yes many Israeli civilians have died - is the US supplying arms to Palestine? - my issue is with the fact that our laws are being ignored in the name of helping one side of a conflict and endlessly justifying it. The US has laws that say we cannot suppy arms to countries killing civilians.

Bush did the same thing with the election - they condemed other election frauds around the world and refused to recognize those 'elected' leaders, but then conveniently ignored our own laws about counting votes, and about taking away people's rights to vote, then stole the right to our white house. Lawsuits are still ongoing. But the numbers have it.

We all know what the truth is.
by Someone
Thursday Sep 5th, 2002 4:00 PM
To Nessie: I have a video of the April 9th Palestinian rally at SF state. On it you will find signs with stastikas on them.

To SFSU student:

Okay. That's a step. I don't like how Bush took the election either. And remember there are also Arab nations supplying the Palestinians with arms. And perhaps there are people out there whose interest it is to keep the violence going.

So encourage your Palestinian friends to start advocating non-violent resistance in Palestine.

I'm always reading about Jewish and Israeli peace groups. So where are their correspondents from Palestine? Where are the Palestinian peace groups urging a non-violent resolution to the conflict? I have not seen them. If they ever show up, they'll have more success than the entire PA became one giant suicide bomb.

But they aren't there. And the GUPS who cheer the deaths of Israeli soldiers (again, April 9th) are not exactly advocates of non-violent resistance. If they were, they wouldn't end each rally by saying they don't question the methods of their brothers.

Well, maybe they should.

I can question it all I want. I'm a Zionist, a Jew, and a supporter of Israel. No one's going to listen to me.

But if you advocate the end of Palestinian violence, they may listen to you.

And if both sides want peace, neither Iraq nor the United States could stop them.
by sfsu student
Thursday Sep 5th, 2002 5:19 PM
Why is it the Palestinians who have the responsibility to stop all violence?

Your opinon seems to be that the Palestinians are primarily at fault because they didn't lie down while all their land got taken away. If you didn't already know, the settlements are growing all the time. Have you ever looked at a map of them? My understanding is that they now take up nearly half of all the land that Palestinians have.

If we started building houses on Native American reservations and, consequently, violence started - in the form of Native Americans blowing themselves up in cities to protest the taking of their land - why should it be them to stop the violence? They're not doing it because they 'hate all Americans' but because we were aggressively moving into the areas of land they live on. Both sides have to have a neutral mediator to bring the violence to an end, particularly when one side is heavily armed and backed by a superpower.

Israel is aggressively moving into Palestinian land - this is not to 'protect' Israel, but to steal land. And most zionists don't seem to hear the phrase everyone says over and over - end the occupation: a key part of which is getting the settlements out of there.

There's incredible violence on both sides, so please try to keep it balanced. Both sides need to agree to stop the violence, not just one, or one only if the other does first.

The other night I had to look at photos (taken by a person I met in the ISM) of a man who had had acid poured on him, who was not even arrested, but was tortured by IDF. This was recently documented and continues to be documented by ISM. And Israelis can tell of other horrific tales of bombing victims. The violence is ubiquitous.

Jimmy Carter has a good article in the Washington Post on the rediculousness of the govt right now.
http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/09/145171.php

He talks about the unbalanced method the US is using right now by taking sides and not making a neutral place for peace to happen.
by Someone
Friday Sep 6th, 2002 1:52 AM
Because their state and land was offered to them in 2000 at Camp David, and they refused.

They were asked to stop the violence, and they refused.

Or more specifically, Arafat refused.

If I show you pictures of Israelis lynched by Palestinians, does that make any difference?

If I show you pictures of Palestinians lynched by other Palestinians, does that make any difference?

The dismantling of the settlements was part of the Camp David accords. But Arafat refused them. How many more times do I need to say this? I feel like Marc Antony going on about "Yet Brutus said he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man..."

There are many Israeli peace groups wanting to stop the violence. But no country in its right mind can stop fighting when their citizens are under continual attack. Like I told you before, there is no corresponding Palestinian peace movement. You seem to think there doesn't need to be one. I disagree.

Let's say Israel withdraws the settlements, and the Palestinians continue to launch suicide bombers. Then what? Should Israel go back there? What will you give the Israelis if they withdraw the settlements? More violence? Increased violence? No change at all? If so, I see little reason to comply with your demands.

Why should Israel do all the bending? Compromise is a two way street, and if you can't see that, then you'd better get used to status quo.
by X2
Friday Sep 6th, 2002 2:49 AM
1) There are actually Palestinian calls for peace. They are unable to organize themselves into well-heeled financially backed media-capable organizations due to the conditions in the occupied territories and the economic destruction, but they do exist. One of these is the International Solidarity Movement.

http://www.palsolidarity.org/about_us.htm

2) If I showed you pictures of Palestinians lynched by Israelis, would that make any difference? How about Israeli refuseniks imprisoned and tortured by Israelis?

3)"There are many Israeli peace groups wanting to stop the violence. But no country in its right mind can stop fighting when their citizens are under continual attack" - hmmmm OK so I guess you are saying peace groups are out of their mind, then. I guess also you are saying India was out of its mind when it used nonviolence as a response to British atrocities and became independant as a result. And furthermore, I would suppose you are also saying by logical extension that the Palestinian terrorists are sane ....
by sfsu student
Friday Sep 6th, 2002 1:31 PM
"Let's say Israel withdraws the settlements, and the Palestinians continue to launch suicide bombers. Then what?"

Let's say Israel withdraws the settlements, and the Palestinians STOP launching suicide bombers.

Then the peace process can begin.

Please do not talk about what was offered to Arafat unless you have SEEN with your own eyes, the maps of what was offered to them. There is huge propaganda about what the offering was.

Chomsky tried to get the maps to be published - because he pointed out, if anyone saw those maps they would immediately understand why the offer was refused - but the US media refused to publish them. Show me one US news source that published the maps of what was offered.

by Someone
Saturday Sep 7th, 2002 10:50 AM
Hey X2.

Whatever happened to our wonderful conversation on that other message board?

We should go back there sometime.

I'm just using this board to talk to SFSU student, who's also a student at the school I'm (unfortunately) attending at the moment. I was wanting to get down to reapproaching some form of sanity on the campus, but somehow it always gets to the same other issues.

Let's talk on our old board.
by Someone
Saturday Sep 7th, 2002 11:51 AM
"Let's say Israel withdraws the settlements, and the Palestinians STOP launching suicide bombers. Then the peace process can begin. "

Israel will never give in to terrorists. If your way of getting the West Bank is to launch terror attacks... and yes I am talking about suicide bombers... and Israel backs down in the face of that, terror will increase, not decrease. You want to know why? Because Israel would be sending a message that terrorism works, and if you kill enough civilians, she'll surrender whatever you want.

And considering the charter of Hamas is the complete extinction of Israel, and to replace it with an Islamic state (An Islamic state... NOT a secular state) then there will be no decrease of terrorism if Israel withdraws the settlements, withdrawls to the '67 boarders, or even the '48 boarders. Israel will not appease terrorists. Appeasement does not work. It didn't work against Hitler, it never worked against Arafat, and people have tried to appease Arafat... even non-Israelis. I can tell you the stories if you like.

Now Israel may return the territories to a diplomatic approach. They did to Egypt and Jordan. Neither if them got their "peace" by fighting wars.

Diplomacy works. Terrorism does not. And Terrorism SHOULD not. It would be the absolute wrong message to send, especially as the world grows more dangerous these days. For your own sake, here in the United States, you had better hope that Israel does not compromise with terrorism. Because the U.S. is also a target of terrorism. And you ought to remember that more Americans died in one day, on September 11th, than Palestinians and Israelies, put together, in two years of intifada. Does that fact not impress you at all?

"Please do not talk about what was offered to Arafat unless you have SEEN with your own eyes, the maps of what was offered to them. There is huge propaganda about what the offering was.
Chomsky tried to get the maps to be published - because he pointed out, if anyone saw those maps they would immediately understand why the offer was refused - but the US media refused to publish them. Show me one US news source that published the maps of what was offered."

Actually, the propaganda is the other way around, with pro-Palestinians trying to justify Arafat's absurd opinion.

I have seen a map of the West Bank. It nearly cuts Israel in half. Surrendering that entire territory to a hostile population that may want to attack you in a war is almost unthinkable, and grows worse when you consider its higher elevation. Even surrendering 95% of that involves a huge risk on the part of the Israelis. I'm almost having second thoughts myself.

And also, I have little use for a self-hating Jew like Chomsky. However, you might learn something from a Jew who doesn't hate himself, like Dershowitz. Maybe someday I'll show you an essay Dershowitz wrote about Chomsky.

I'm still looking at maps, though I'm having trouble uploading them onto SF Indymedia. (me and my damn computer) But even the ones I see put out by Palestinian groups look like pretty sizeable chunks out of Israel. Enough to make me nervous if the Palestinians ever decide all they want their land for is to start a war. (Which even Arafat has hinted at)

Are you really willing to keep up this bullshit over a few more percentage points of land? The Jews got 12% of what they hoped for, but they agreed to it. The Palestinians are offered 90% of what they hoped for and refused? At what point does your side become accountable?

by X2
Saturday Sep 7th, 2002 12:00 PM
I think you mean SFSU Student.
Scroll up.
by draco
Saturday Sep 7th, 2002 12:03 PM
well then - simple solution.
Do not commit apartheid and create a Soweto-style "homeland".
Cease oppression of your own fellow citizens and grant Palestinians full legal rights as well as electoral representation.
Anything else, is a racist state.
by sfsu student
Sunday Sep 8th, 2002 11:19 PM
war.008.gifr16228.gif
"Israel will never give in to terrorists. If your way of getting the West Bank is to launch terror attacks... and yes I am talking about suicide bombers... and Israel backs down in the face of that, terror will increase, not decrease. You want to know why? Because Israel would be sending a message that terrorism works, and if you kill enough civilians, she'll surrender whatever you want."

Then there should be no such thing as hostage negotiators, either - let all hostages die! They got themselves into their situation in the first place - it isn't our problem. We can't give in to terrorism! No matter how many die - the only thing that matters is that we smash anyone who challenges us and show them who's REALLY in charge around here! That works like a charm every time!

And kids too, when one kid starts a fight and expects to get his way - don't just discipline him or give him limits - smash him so he never forgets! He might grow up and try to hurt someone else, so best to show him who's master right now! The more you smash him, the more he'll wise up, I'm sure of it. We don't need laws! Just bring in the army and start shooting! Everyone will understand right away that the revolution will not be televised.
by sfsu student
Sunday Sep 8th, 2002 11:30 PM
"Because the U.S. is also a target of terrorism."

Explain why is the US a target of terrorism (besides 'because we're so powerful' - I never heard any terrorist say they came after the US because "it's so powerful')?

"And you ought to remember that more Americans died in one day, on September 11th, than Palestinians and Israelies, put together, in two years of intifada. Does that fact not impress you at all?"

Number of Afgans killed: over 3k. Number of Afgan hijackers:? Number of Saudis killed: ? Number of CIA/FBI agents killed: ? If some thugs born and raised in Connecticut, decided to use Oakland as their lab for building weapons, organizing, and recruiting terrorists, should the US government bomb Oakland to bits?

"And also, I have little use for a self-hating Jew like Chomsky"
Wow . . . so you’re one of those people who calls a person who disagrees with Zionism (and happens to be Jewish) a ‘self-hating Jew’ . . . now I get it. Are you also Jewish? Or are you a Christian Zionist? But I guess a Christian might be labeled an anti-semite if they said that . . . Anyway, Chomsky is one of my heroes.

"Maybe someday I'll show you an essay Dershowitz" – You mean, Dershowitz ,of the war party’s AIPAC?

"Are you really willing to keep up this bullshit over a few more percentage points of land?"
I’m a renter – it’s scary what happens to landowners.
by :
Monday Sep 9th, 2002 3:10 PM
Who is not Jewish or Arab (I am of African decent). I have been involved with civil right causes for 30 years. GUPS comes very close to being a hate group and many faculty here are sick of having to pretend othersie. They shrewdly manipulative all events in order to force everyone to bend to their will. Civil rights on campus were not ment for GUPS alone and until they respect others as much as they demand others cater to their infantile whims they will never get the respect they are demending, nor will they deserve to.
by redsam
Monday Sep 9th, 2002 3:22 PM
GUPS isn't about "rights," it's about stopping the genocide of the Palestinians being done by the IDF and right wing extremists in Israel. They will show the students at SFSU this, if they like it or not. If people aren't willing to help end this genocide then they should be alienated anyway.
by redsam
Monday Sep 9th, 2002 3:24 PM
GUPS isn't about "rights," it's about stopping the genocide of the Palestinians being done by the IDF and right wing extremists in Israel. They will show the students at SFSU this, if they like it or not. If people aren't willing to help end this genocide then they should be alienated anyway.
by X2
Monday Sep 9th, 2002 6:06 PM
cheers and welcome to the discussion.
can someone tell me what GUPS is please?
by .
Monday Sep 9th, 2002 7:51 PM
The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls.
by redsam
Tuesday Sep 10th, 2002 12:31 AM
Thanks X2 :) Sorry we got off on the wrong foot.


GUPS = General Union of Palestine Students. I think they are a SFSU student organization which has been trying to organize around ending US funding to Israel, education about the oppression and death which the occupation brings to Palestinians, etc.
by z
Tuesday Sep 10th, 2002 10:18 PM
Not to mention antagonizing Jews, spreading lies about Israel, accusing Jewish students of being spies for the South African government, and accusing Jews of eating the flesh of babies. Also, promoting Holocaust denial and Terrorism on SFSU webspace.
by ...
Tuesday Sep 10th, 2002 10:38 PM
Palestinian students at SFSU set record straight
Exposing the real bigots

By Todd Chretien | May 31, 2002 | Page 2

ISRAEL SUPPORTERS caused a storm of controversy at San Francisco State University (SFSU) by claiming that pro-Palestinian students organized an anti-Semitic counterprotest opposite a May 7 pro-Israel rally. But Palestinian rights activists are speaking out to set the record straight--and to expose the real bigots at SFSU.

Thanks to the frenzied efforts of a pro-Israel professor, the supposed anti-Semitic slurs of Palestinian rights supporters became national news. SFSU President Robert Corrigan added fuel to the fire when he took out a full-page ad in the campus newspaper--and directly e-mailed more than 20,000 students--to denounce pro-Palestinian students who "abandoned themselves to intimidating behavior and statements too hate-filled to repeat."

Corrigan wasn’t at the May 7 event and relied on pro-Israel faculty and students for his facts. For weeks after the rally, university officials claimed to have videotaped evidence to prove the charges against the counterdemonstrators. But they refused to release anything.

And when SFSU turned over material to the District Attorney’s office for a possible hate crimes investigation, pro-Israel demonstrators were--for the first time--singled out for their racism against Palestinian supporters.

At a May 23 press conference, the General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS) released videotapes of the rally that refute the charges against their supporters--and show what really happened.

"Pro-Israel supporters began to taunt and tease [Palestinian students]," said Fadi Shamieh, a GUPS officer. "Comments such as ‘animals,’ ‘terrorists,’ ‘sand niggers,’ ‘camel jockeys,’ were hurled in our direction." As Shamieh concluded, "The events of May 7 fit into a continued pattern of discrimination…President Corrigan, along with others on campus, in their attempts to take away from the Palestinian movement, are attempting to label us anti-Semites and hate mongers. They are sadly mistaken. We stand firmly against anti-Semitism and all other forms of racism. We will not be intimidated by these politically motivated attacks on pro-Palestinian students."

Alicia Thorndike, an SFSU student and member of the International Socialist Organization, also described facing harassment and threats from pro-Israel students. "We won’t let Corrigan’s false charges stop us," she said. "We demand that all charges be dropped against GUPS and that the university divest all financial holdings from the state of Israel."

Corrigan seemed to retreat after the truth was revealed at the GUPS press conference. He’s reportedly set to agree to a deal where all charges will be dropped if pro-Palestinian students agree to meet with pro-Israel students to "diffuse tensions."

Having set the record straight, GUPS and other student activists plan to launch a Students for Justice in Palestine chapter next semester--to demand divestment of all university holdings from companies that profit from Israeli occupation or military aggression.

by sfsu student
Tuesday Sep 10th, 2002 11:14 PM
Not only can you not spell, but your grammer is wrong.

"They shrewdly manipulative all events"
Yes, of course, GUPS is omnipotent - ALL events, which must include births, weddings, classes, etc. I guess GUPS is everywhere, at all times!

"in order to force everyone to bend to their will."
Yes, GUPS knows how to 'force' everyone to do things - people don't have their own free will around the magnetic control of GUPS, also known as GOD.

Are you a professor, or an infant?

Oh, and thanks Todd, for the write-up.
by BILL SCHEAFFER
Friday Sep 13th, 2002 7:59 AM
PALESTINEANS ARE AN ILLEGIDIMATE PEOPLE,
WE DON'T WANT YOU HERE, YOU WORSHIP A FALSE GOD, WE ARE ONE NATION UNER THE GOD,
JEHOVAH. TAKE YOUR HATE ELSEWHERE. DON'T YOU GET THE PICTURE. LEAVE.
by sfsu student
Friday Sep 13th, 2002 9:41 AM
Why are people barely able to write a sentence on this thread, much less make any sense? It's like somewhere at a mental institution a computer is running and this thread has been found . . .
by sfsu student
Friday Sep 13th, 2002 10:01 AM
Someone new from down the hall at the institution, where apparently no one is monitoring the use of the computer at the nurses station.
by popeye
Friday Sep 13th, 2002 2:06 PM
don't talk to him. He goes nuts. If you think he's insane now you should see the threads where no one will talk to him (like in his real life)
by GUPS
Friday Sep 27th, 2002 2:45 PM
July 11, 2002



Dear President Corrigan and our beloved San Francisco State Community,

As an organization, we the General Union of Palestine Students (GUPS) would like to express our adamant opposition to all forms of racism, including but not limited to Anti-Arab and Anti-Jewish sentiments. The Pro-Palestinian movement on this campus is aimed at aiding the Palestinian people in their struggle for freedom and self-determination. We identify with the struggles of all oppressed peoples around the world and throughout history.

As a Semitic group of people, we are deeply disturbed by accusations of anti-Semitic behavior. We stand firmly against any and all types of anti-Semitism. The flyers issued for the April 8th, Muslim Students Association event, had the General Union of Palestine Students name on it. As an organization we had no prior knowledge of this flyer or its contents. MSA has issued a separate apology for its blunder. The contents of the flyer are not accurate representations of our organization. As mentioned before, we condemn ALL forms of racism including the contents of that flyer.

In addition, we want to make it vehemently clear that our objections and critiquing of Israeli polices are in no way equivalent to anti-semitism or hate speech. The protests held on this campus are to express student discontent with the continued subjugation of the Palestinian people.

As discussed in our meeting with President Corrigan and several Arab-American community leaders, we want to see equal and fair representation of all students on this campus. We find bold moves such as the sanctioning of our organization without due process, quite disconcerting. Our organization is deeply troubled to see racism against Arabs, Muslims and Pro-Palestinians on the rise. Despite our administrations deliberate actions against us we welcome and embrace our San Francisco State students, staff and faculty. We know that among us love really is stronger than hate and that together we can combat racism and champion social justice.

With sincere hope for justice, peace and a free Palestine,

The General Union of Palestine Students
by Leila
Friday Sep 27th, 2002 3:06 PM
I haven't visited this site in a while and haven't seen the comments that have been posted by someone pretending to be me. The terrible comments that were posted earlier with my name attached to it, did not come from me and the person who thought them up is extremely vengeful. For once, i'd like to see civil debate on this issue. I'd like to bring up the fact that Palestinians have been continuously oppressed since 1948 and that what what movements accross the states are working for is an end to the occupation and peace and security for all in the region. I am offended that people try to turn political debate into religious criticisms. Hate is intolerable in all of its forms and I can't reiterate that enough, so for the person pretending to be me, I offer the sentiment that you haven't fooled anyone. I strongly condemn Anti-Semitic behaviors the same way I condemn anti arab racist behaviors and the same way i condemn racism in all of its forms. Personal attacks aren't acceptable but if you want to debate issues pertaining to the ongoing occupation, israeli human rights and international law violations and other issues pertaining to the Middle East by all means, post! A meaningful post is much better than garbage posts as some of these have been.
by peace
Friday Sep 27th, 2002 4:13 PM
I agree..civil debate is needed. There is no excuse for an entire nations displacement and the fact that they have been put in refugee camps
by peace
Friday Sep 27th, 2002 4:13 PM
I agree..civil debate is needed. There is no excuse for an entire nations displacement and the fact that they have been put in refugee camps
by Someone
Friday Sep 27th, 2002 4:17 PM
"For once, i'd like to see civil debate on this issue. "

-Leila

Okay, Leila, for once we agree on something. We also want to see civil debate.

So why don't you call Hillel and tell them you'd like to set up a debate/dialogue between the Pro-Palestinian and the Pro-Israel students.

I myself have gone to the GUPS office more than once to try to set up a debate, but I was turned down.

We'd be glad to discuss this in a civilized, academic matter, rather than through insulting posters, signs, chants and rallies.

The ball is in your court.

Contact Hillel and make arrangements with the Pro-Israel coalition, and we'll set up a civilized debate.
by X
Sunday Sep 29th, 2002 5:41 AM
Sweetheart, the fact is that one moment you claimed that the whole accusation that anything unseemly happened coming from your group on that fateful day was a huge Zionist lie. Then it was proved YOU in fact were lying. THEN you backtrack. You are a spineless liar who cries racism to try and silence people unwilling to placate you.
by ...
Monday Sep 30th, 2002 5:23 PM
Leila had some pro-Israeli pose as her up above and place anti-Semitic crap in her name.

After setting the record straight, some pro-Israeli creep comes by and tries to smear her some more.

Pretty disgusting, I think and it shows the moral level of these people...

And as Americans, we pay them around twelve million dollars a year. This has to stop.

No more money for racists.
by ...
Monday Sep 30th, 2002 6:12 PM
"And as Americans, we pay them around twelve million dollars a year."

That should read "twelve million dollars a day."

Or 5-12 billion a year...
by sfsu student
Monday Sep 30th, 2002 7:04 PM
Civil debate is one thing, but when someone believes that Palestinians (or anyone) 'gets what they deserve' then civil debate is pretty much out the window.

Until you can show compassion for both peoples, not just one side, I doubt much will be accomplished. Similarly, the arguments you made earlier about - if I can recall - about there not being any significant numbers of Palestinians already living there when Israel came into existance, are also a huge roadblock to any discussion, particularly when this idea has been debunked over and over.

In order to have a debate, you have to at least agree on the basics - the UN rights that all people have (which doesn't get sidelined because 'they deservedf it', the history of the place, etc.
by Someone
Monday Sep 30th, 2002 10:04 PM
SFSU, we agreed a long time back that there is a great gap between the two camps, that has come through a lack of communication, or debate. Further separation will only exacerbate this problem.

You don't like my figures for the Arab residences of Pre-Zionist Palestine? Well, I don't particularly care when I see Pro-Palestinians claim that Aushkenazi never came from Israel (false) that there was no Holocaust (false) that the temple mount was not the site of the Jewish temple (false) that Israel started the six day war (false) or any number of claims that have similarly, as you claim, been "debunked." I could go on, but I'm not in the mood tonight.

But that doesn't matter to me. Let there be a debate, because I believe discussion is preferrable to separation, even if we are certainly coming from two different histories. Can you admit even that? If you want to "debunk" us or have us "debunk" you, then at least let's do it in person, face to face.

I'd like to think that Palestinian denial of the entire history of the Jewish people would be a stumbling block to discussion, but you know what? I'm willing to set that aside for a dialogue. Are you?

by X
Friday Oct 4th, 2002 6:47 PM
"X is a racist and pro-Israeli"

haha ha... typical attempts to label anyone who has the audacity (and the brains) to say it like it is. Where is the racism in my past statement? It is not there, yet someone's definition of "racisnm" is anyone who is in disagreement with him. How cowardly.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

Donate Now!

$ 50.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network