Exeter University Jewish Society and Israel Society - raising money for Islamic Relief

Two weeks ago I reported on Harry Markham's experiences with Bristol University Jewish Society - their policy of disassociating themselves with Israel and their leader pushing a narrative of "pervasive racism in Israel" and "Jewish settlers carrying out terrorist attacks".

Now Harry has alerted me to what is going on at Exeter University. Like Bristol, the Jewish Society and Israel Society there have rejected his offer to present Israel's case, but are perfectly happy to team up with those who seek Israel's destruction. In an act of supreme virtue-signalling (which would be comical if it wasn't true) they have decided, for "Charity Week", to join the Islamic Society in raising money for the 'charity' Islamic Relief.

If Jewish students really are determined to virtue-signal in this way, there are surely suitable Muslim charities they could have teamed up with (although why they would take precedence over, say Hindu or Sikh charities I have no idea). Unfortunately, Islamic Relief is not one of them. Those unaware of the dubious history of this 'charity' should look at this detailed report from the Middle East Forum that is summarised in this article. I have previously covered Islamic Relief on this blog when Norwood made a similarly incomprehensible decision to team up with them. Islamic Relief has long been accused of involvement in terrorism as reported here. In 2006 the Israeli Government outlawed Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW) from its work in Judea and Samaria,  declaring that it was "designed to further Hamas's ideology among the Palestinian population" and in 2014 claimed that the 'charity' was involved in sending cash to Hamas. In 2014 HSBC cut its ties with IRW due to concerns over its terrorist links.  Even the United Arab Emirates banned IRW because of its terrorist links.


So Britain's Jewish student leadership regard dynamic, young unapologetic Zionists like Harry Markham as extremists to be censored, while cosying-up to (and now funding) terror-supporting Islamists.

See

• Unite Our Powers Chairty Week: Jewish students raising money for Islamic Relief
• The depressing state of Britain's Jewish students
• Islamic Relief: Charity/Extremism/Terror
• Norwood and Islamic Relief

The depressing state of Britain’s Jewish students.

Harry Markham, the dynamic and brilliant young National Director of Herut UK and self-declared 'unapologetic Zionist' has offered several times to speak to Bristol University’s Jewish Society (one of the country’s biggest). They have never even responded to his requests and it appears they have a policy of disassociating themselves with Israel.

To gain some insights into this Yachadization of Britain's Jewish students, Harry alerted me to this public post on the Facebook page of Bristol University student Sabrina Miller. 

https://www.facebook.com/100002208381787/posts/2437338879683034

Sabrina is an active Jewish student at Bristol who has been “elected as an NUS delegate to represent the entire Bristol student body”. Despite the article title (“Being a Zionist on Campus”) and the promising beginning in which she says that campus Israel hatred she feared never materialized, it is clear that, whatever her thoughts about Israel before entering the University, her thoughts must have changed since she got there as she says:

After being forced to digest some really uncomfortable truths about Israel I am so grateful that I've been able to discuss the conflict with many people who don't preach that the IDF “is the most moral army in the world” or that “Israeli settlements aren’t a barrier to peace”

I invite people to read the comments on the article. For those who cannot access FaceBook, I reproduce the most relevant parts of the discussion between Sabrina and Harry Markham below. It is depressing to know that Sabrina, rather than Harry, may represent the future of British Jews (I have highlighted some of Sabrina's text).

Harry Markham: What are the "uncomfortable truths about Israel" you are talking about? Why are Israelis living in Judea and Samaria an obstacle to peace? If it was such an obstacle, why wasn't there peace from 1949 till 1967 when Jordanian Islamism made that region Judenrein?! This kind of appeasement doesn't work, Sabrina.

You write beautifully, but you now believe these false narratives.

Jews not in the Bristol Jsoc exec should be thoroughly outraged by your Jsoc and its sheer cowardice.

Sabrina Miller: Firstly, why do you keep attacking the JSOC committee because we don't agree with you on Israel. JSOC is so much more than Israel, we do so much for the jewish community here and calling us cowards because we're not right wing is neither true or helpful. Secondly we were all democratically voted in so whether or not you like it, Jews at Bristol support us and this committee..  So onto your first question of 'uncomfortable truths'. Uncomfortable truths include the racism that exists and pervades Israeli society. Those truths include listening to the impact that occupation has on the lives of Palestinians. Uncomfortable truths is learning about the terror attacks committed by Jewish settlers to name a few. Truths like 750 000 Palestinains were displaced during the independence war and many of them still live in refugee camps in Lebanon, Gaza, WB + other places * I believe in a 2 state solution. Like jews have a right to self determination so do Palestinians. Thus in my opinion settlements prevent the establishment of a future autonomous Palestinian state - hope that answers your questions xx

Harry Markham: 1. Your Jsoc and its refusal to do Israel/Zionist activity only contributes to antisemitism in Bristol. It is quite extraordinary that the voice of Jewish students at Bristol rather than taking a lead in the fight against antisemitism, it has become part of the problem.

2. I wholeheartedly agree that Jsoc should be more than Israel. But your Jsoc represents different parts of Jewish identity - and Zionism is part of it. I can think of no other reason than cowardice for your Jsoc not doing Zionist activity. And if those in your Jsoc don't like it, then just like how some don't like the religious part, they don't need to come to those events. But don't make Zionist students feel they have no representation.

3. Why is racism in Israel an uncomfortable truth? Like me, you strive to normalise Zionism and Israel, so why shouldn't Israel have societal issues like racism? Every nation in the world suffers from this cancer, Israel is no different. We have our problems, which country in the world doesn't have problems?

4. How can Israel occupy something which under international law belongs to them? The Mandate for Palestine 1922, later reaffirmed by Article 80 of UN law, means an Israeli presence is legal. Which law makes our presence illegal? Which law states our presence is that of "occupation"?

5. Which terror attacks?

6. Firstly, 750,000 is an overly inflated figure. The real number is around 550,000 - 600,000.

And let's look at this idea of "displacement" -

In 1937 and in 1947, a two state solution was proposed. The Arabs rejected this, Israel agreed to it. Arab leaders such as Azzam Pashra said on the day of Israeli independence, where Israel stated its commitment to live with all people in harmony, "This will be a war of extermination and to a momentous massacre which will be remembered like the Mongolian Massacres and the Crusades." Inspite of Israel's efforts at peace, Islamic intolerance meant this is what Israel was up against. And Israel had a duty to defend itself. There was no surgical effort to remove Arabs residing in Israel. This was a lie that arose from the myth of Deir Yassin "Massacre", which was used as a tool of fear by the Arab leaders to get the Arab population out of Israel, and return when Israel is destroyed. Just look at Haifa, in 1947 it had the second largest Arab population in the land. The Hagannah insisted the Arab population will stay, they even broke the festival of Passover in order to bake bread for the local Arab inhabitants. Sir Alan Cunningham, the British Commissionor of Palestine said, "British authorities in Haifa have formed the impression that totllal evacuation is being urged on the Haifa Arab quarters and that the townsfolk themselves are against it." The local British Police Commander noted in a letter "Every effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives."

And yes, they are living in nasty refugee camps. Israel has offered opportunities at resolving this such as the Lausanne proposal, however everytime the Arab leaders reject these proposals. Why?

Yassar Arafat's side, Sakhwe Abesh said, "To us, the refugee issue is the winning card toneuich means the end of the Israeli state." Or even Lt Geb Galloway, former director of UNRWA said, "It is perfectly clear that Arab nations do not want to solve the Arab refugee problem. They want to keep it ae an open score, as an affront against the UN and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don't give a damm whether refugees live or die."

The real injustice is your failure to speak about what happened in Hebron 1929 (67 Jews massacred), Arab Riots 1936 -1939 (over 400 Jews massacred). These are just two of many anti Jewish massacres in pre state Israel. These were real injustices - what you have given me is unsubstantiated and this historical revisionism has become the new Blood Libel.

You have the privilege of living in the diaspora. You are not living in Sderot facing regular rocket attacks. If you want to change Israel, move there. Don't be part of the problem and put Jews on the backfoot here in the UK by endorsing antisemitic narratives. Debunk them. Israelis don't want your North West London diaspora privilege, they want your support.

The ball is in your court...

See also:

• Fighting Academic Boycotts of Israel 
• Wow. This new UJS campaign is really going to force the antisemites to change their strategy 
• OneVoice at Birmingham University: Pity Britain's Jewish students if this is the best 'pro-Israel' advocacy they hear on campus
• Yachad stoops ever lower and becomes increasingly dangerous for Israel supporters in the UK
• Whose idea was it to have an anti-Zionist and a Muslim Brotherhood supporter put Israel's case to the Cambridge Union?

The real lesson of Malia's antisemitism that everybody is missing

For all those (including especially British Jews) demanding unlimited immigration from Muslim countries, imagine millions more like Malia - only less educated and more extreme - in positions of power. This is the future of the UK.  No matter how well educated and secular they are, it seems many immigrants (and their children) from Muslim countries can NEVER shake off their sense of Islamic supremacism (which includes contempt for Christianity) and most of all their antisemitism. It is in their bones.

And, of course, like all leftists Malia is a Palestinianist.

Yachad stoops ever lower and becomes increasingly dangerous for Israel supporters in the UK

This is an important update to recent postings.

Earlier this week I reported how Yachad - the anti-Zionist group fraudulently claiming to be 'pro-Israel' - closely partners with the vicious B'Tselem organisation who are so anti-Zionist that they hand over Arabs who sell land to Jews to be tortured and murdered by the Palestine Authority. I'm still waiting for a Yachad response/statement on this.

I then reported on the irony of how Yachad's attempt to delegitimize Israel ended with their own event being sabotaged by antisemites proving that, no matter how low Yachad stoops to kiss the boots of Israel haters, it will never be low enough. The event was the talk by the leftist former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon at Kings College London. Yachad brought Ayalon  to the UK for a lecture tour simply because he is an outspoken critic of the Israeli Government, demanding that Israel make major unilateral concessions to the Palestinians. Most significantly, Ayalon has stated that Israel is 'heading toward being an apartheid state' and much of what he says is used by Israeli haters in their propaganda, hence contributing to the international delegitimization campaign. Also, many believe that Ayalon's disgraceful contribution to the film the Gatekeepers was an act of treason against Israel.

The only reason Yachad brought Ayalon to the UK was because they knew he would speak exclusively about  Israel's faults and blame Israel for most of the problems in the Middle East. By emphasizing his former Shin Bet credentials he was an extremely useful and 'credible Israeli' pushing exactly the Yachad narrative. Now, Ayalon - like most left-wing Israeli useful idiots - genuinely thinks that parroting the narrative of Israel's enemies in the UK will help Israel win friends. But, ultimately, he is still an Israeli who believes in the Jewish State (albeit much reduced and indefensible) and in the eyes of Israel's enemies that makes Ayalon a 'war criminal' who, like every other "Zionist", must be silenced.

So Yachad - whose members are normally among those protesting when Israelis speak in the UK - found themselves on the receiving end of the Israel haters' venom as reported by Richard Millett.


But if you think that this kind of brutal exposure of the futility of Yachad's policy (of adopting the narrative and lies of Israel's enemies) has been a wake-up call then you will be disappointed. As I reported the day after the event their Facebook page actually tried to downplay what happened. But now it gets much worse. Incredibly, Yachad's leader Hannah Weisfeld has written an OpEd in Haaretz (where else do you expect?) with the title It's Not Only pro-Palestinian Students Who Use Intimidation to Silence Free Speech. She says (about the behaviour of the violent antisemites):

This behavior is emulated by members of the Jewish community here in the U.K. who, seeing the behavior of the Israeli government, believe that shutting down voices that disagree with the policies of the Israeli government is now the model of how to be a truly committed supporter of Israel.

She is referring to the fact that pro-Israel Jews had objected to an orthodox synagogue hosting one of the lectures by Ayalon on his Yachad tour of the UK. Given that the only voices that are publicly heard about Israel in the UK are those which are critical of its Government, it is strange that Weisfeld should bring out the censorship card here. Nobody in the Jewish community is trying to to ban her from hosting talks by Ayalon and his ilk. But she thinks she has a right to demand that such talks take place in orthodox synagogues and that is where any sane Israel supporter would draw the line. Does it mean, for example, that Yachad also have the right to demand, say, that Hamas or Hezbollah supporters speak at Zionist Federation events and that failure to do so amounts to censorship?

The fact is that the scenario Weisfeld paints is the perfect inversion of reality. While anti-Israel speakers are everywhere, it is becoming increasingly rare for any strong supporters of Israel to be heard publicly anywhere. Moreover, to demonstrate the hypocrisy of Weisfeld it should be noted that Yachad and their supporters have been at the forefront of trying to ban such pro-Israel speakers from the UK.

The fact is that 80% of the British Jewish community are strong supporters of Israel and ; if they knew what Yachad's true objectives were they would have been totally shunned by now. Yet, not only are Yachad fully embedded in mainstream Jewish organisations (including the Board of Deputies) but they are gaining an increasingly influential role. Most worrying is that they have devoted serious resources to brainwashing young Jews and this is reflected in the fact that they have managed to take over many of the Jewish Student societies (convincing naive Jewish kids that they really are 'pro-Israel, pro-peace').

If anybody thinks my concerns about Yachad are an exaggeration, then you need to know what the highly respected Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz thinks about their sister organisation JStreet in the US. While Derschowitz is a supporter of Israel nobody can accuse him of being a 'right-winger'. He is a Democrat who supported Obama and has been a consistent critic of Israel's policy of retaining East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. Yet this is what he said (Tablet Magazine, August 2015) about the US version of Yachad:

"I think J Street has been the most damaging organization in American history against Israel. It has been the most damaging, more damaging than Students for Justice in Palestine [and] more damaging than the early anti-Zionist Council for Judaism. J Street has done more to turn young people against Israel than any organization in the whole of history. It will go down in history as one of the most virulent, anti-Israel organizations in the history of Zionism and Judaism. It has given cover to anti-Israel attitudes on campus and particularly its approach to Israel's self defense"

Exactly the same is true of Yachad and people need to wake up to this.

Yachad's attempts to delegitimize Israel fail to save it from attack by antisemites at London University

PLEASE SEE IMPORTANT UPDATE TO THIS POSTING HERE.

As I reported earlier Yachad is the anti-Zionist group (fraudulently claiming to be 'pro-Israel') that partners with B'Tselem who are so anti-Zionist that they hand over Arabs who sell land to Jews to be tortured and murdered by the Palestine Authority.

But, no matter how low Yachad stoops to kiss the boots of Israel haters it will never be low enough, and this was proved by what happened  yesterday at Kings College London. It is Yachad who  brought the leftist former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon to the UK for a lecture tour. Ayalon has been a vocal critic of the Israeli Government, demanding that Israel make major unilateral concessions to the Palestinians. His claim that Israel is 'heading toward being an apartheid state' is contributing to the international delegitimization campaign and much of what Ayalon has said has been used by Israeli haters in their propaganda. This includes his disgraceful contribution to the film the Gatekeepers which many believe was an act of treason against Israel. But while Yachad brought him to the UK to speak about Israel's faults, Ayalon is still an Israeli who believes in a (much reduced) Jewish State. And in the eyes of our enemies that makes Ayalon a 'war criminal' who, like every other "Zionist", must be silenced.

So Yachad - whose members are normally among those protesting when Israelis speak in the UK - found themselves on the receiving end of the Israel haters' venom. Richard Millett provides an eye witness report of what happened. The story has even been picked up by some main stream media and a Government spokesmen has condemned the disruption.


But if you think that this kind of brutal exposure of the futility of Yachad's policy (of adopting the narrative and lies of Israel's enemies) has been a wake-up call then you will be disappointed. Their Facebook page is actually trying to downplay what happened. Their report says

Whilst some of what happened at the event has already been documented on social media, some important details have been left out.  

Except their report contains much less detail than Richard Millett's. The only 'detail' seems to be the following assertion that attempts to downplay the significance of what happened:

These 20 something protesters were incredibly small in number

UPDATE

Jewish student complains about Hitler poster on Birmingham University campus - gets bombarded with antisemitic (and anti-Israel) abuse

When Jewish student Izzy Lenga complained about the above "Hitler was right" poster being put up at Birmingham University she might have expected a sympathetic response. Below is a sample of the hundreds of 'supportive' messages she got on twitter (and Britain's 'official Jews' - especially CST and JLC take note: stop deluding yourselves that antisemitism in the UK has got nothing to do with the tsunami of anti-Israel lies propagated by the media and politicians).

New tweets are coming in all of the time. These are a few from yesterday:

@izzyjengalenga Ashkenazi wasting police time because they don't like the truth. Suck it up

@noahlevy94 @vicmandrake @izzyjengalenga I am sickened by the crimes and perversions of #Jews #HitlerComeBack

@DanTwitWit I cry how these parasites aren't glassed every day #SaveUsIran @izzyjengalenga @drewmistak

Tyr Man @AryanIsOurTitle @izzyjengalenga Adolf Hitler was right. He is the hero for every European, but most are under the veil of lies told about Adolf Hitler.

Glengoolie Black @GlengoolieBlack This bitch is the problem with the UK. Making everything about the Jews. #HitlerWasRight #FuckAllNonWhites https://twitter.com/izzyjengalenga/status/659670049897230336 …

Glengoolie Black ‏@GlengoolieBlack 18 hrs18 hours ago @izzyjengalenga Hitler hated all people of colour, stop making this just about the jews. They whine enough as it is. #HitlerWASRight

John Preston ‏@ClericPreston2 16 hrs16 hours ago @unibirmingham @izzyjengalenga You called the policed over a difference of opinion ?Isn't University supposed to be about conflict of ideas?

audrey ‏@2nd_hydra 16 hrs16 hours ago @izzyjengalenga i bet you put this up yourself, you just want more victim points

Ban Xenophilia ‏@AWashington88 15 hrs15 hours ago @izzyjengalenga @Bjorn_blonde how is this anti Jew? It doesn't mention Jews at all or what Hitler was right about..

sadie ‏@segaqt 11 hrs11 hours ago i'm glad we're finally teaching history accurately in our schools @izzyjengalenga

Lucien Dumatin ‏@Luci3nDM 9 hrs9 hours ago €50 says she posted them herself... Wouldn't be the first time a "proud jew" did so GamerGate Developer ‏@GamerGateSF 7 hrs7 hours ago @izzyjengalenga @bird_bangs Hitler did nothing wrong

Not Jay ‏@SchmukkenSchmay 7 hrs7 hours ago @bird_bangs @GamerGateSF @izzyjengalenga not true hitler did do something wrong his paintings were shit

park ‏@bird_bangs 7 hrs7 hours ago @SchmukkenSchmay @GamerGateSF @izzyjengalenga Not true. I enjoyed his work with zyklon b.

See also:

• Official Jews response to Kaufman antisemitism
• Is anti-Zionism the same as antisemitism?
• If the media reported previous acts of violence like they are now reporting those against Israeli civilians
• How the media distinguishes from the truth and lies about Israel
• Compare and contrast responses to terrorism in Israel
• Rules and Guidelines for Western reporting on Israel 
• Media ignores or dehumanizes murdered Israelis
• Responding to Israel Apartheid week 

LSE and its antisemitic Middle East Centre over-represented with jerks signing academics' boycott Israel letter

No surprise that the LSE is over-represented with jerks signing the academics' boycott Israel letter in the Guardian (21 out of the 343). The LSE hosts the Arab funded Middle East Centre, which ever since it was set up in 2010 has been a focus of anti-Israel bigotry and discrimination.  I have been covering this from the start (see links below) - although this barely touches on the extent of their appalling behaviour (I have not had time to publish all the stuff I know). It is especially telling that the Centre Head, Prof. Fawaz Gerges, is one of the signatories as it confirms what a fraud and liar he is.  In my various correspondence with the LSE they have tried to deny, for example, not only blatant anti-Israel bias but also discrimination against Israeli academics and students. Yet, now we have the Head, no less, declaring openly that he is a boycotter.  And this is also the guy who claims to be an expert on the Arab-Israeli conflict and is often used in that capacity by the BBC an Sky News, who go along with the pretence that he is somehow an even-handed expert.

In addition to the odious Gerges, Dr. John Chalcraft (who is on the Management Committee of the Centre) is also a signatory. It was Chalcroft who in 2011 proposed the LSE motion to boycott Israel  - a position hardly consistent with somebody managing a Centre that is supposed to be dedicated to research about the Middle East. But a quick look at the Centre's publications and seminars over the last 5 years confirms that genuine academic research is not what they do. They do political propaganda, much of it targeted against the one country in the Middle East that they actually have no knowledge of because they do not allow its representatives (except those who campaign for it destruction) to be staff, students, visitors or speakers.

For the record the rest of the LSE signatories are: Prof. Gautam Appa, Dr. Robert Boyce, Mike Cushman, Dr. Konstantina Davaki, Prof. Conor Gearty, Prof. David Graebe, Dr. Jason Hickel
Prof. Nick Humphrey,Prof. Richard Hyman,Prof. Frank Land, Prof. Ailsa Land,Prof. Susan Marks,
Dr. Claire Moon, Prof. Martha Mundy, Dr. Linda Pickard, Prof. Jonathan Rosenhead, Prof. Richard Sennett, Dr. Tony Whelan, Dr. Kalpana Wilson

Update 30 October 2015: LSE hosts exhibition honouring Palestinian terrorists

Previous links

• LSE 's New Middle East Centre eradicates Israel
• LSE's anti-Israel Middle East Centre: Update 
• Another update to the LSE Middle East Centre saga
• Yet another update to the LSE story
• LSE Director forced to resign  
• Israelis barred from applying to the LSE's Middle East Research Centre
• Guess which Israelis are welcome to speak at the Centre .... 
• Update on LSE Middle East Centre

See also:

• Murder of Israelis glorified at LSE
• Israeli ambassador's talk disrupted at LSE
• Academics vote to boycott themselves 

UCU's dedication to 'equality': Now anti-white racism can be added to its institutional antisemitism

Britain's University and College Union (UCU) - which encompasses all higher education employees - has for a long time been at the forefront of the antisemitic campaign to boycott Israel, and in recent years has simply been institutionally antisemitic. But now, as further evidence of its dedication to "Equality" its Equality Unit is promoting a "blacks only" course of "activism". Your could not make this stuff up. The following (and this really is not satire) was forwarded to me by a friend who is a (non-black) member of UCU (note especially how they define a 'black' person):

From: Yasmin Ibrahim
Sent: 17 August 2015 12:55
To: XXXXX
Subject: A course for black members new to activism

Hi XXXXX - Please can you circulate this note below to all Black Members in UCU.

best,
yasmin

--------------------

Dear Member,

This course is aimed at new black* activists and members who are keen to get involved with their branch and the wider union. The course will also contain a CPD session around leadership and mentoring.

*In UCU the word black is used in a political sense to describe people who self-identify as being from a visible minority (more usually from an Asian or African heritage) with a shared experience or understanding of discrimination

This new one day course is specifically designed for UCU *black members who are interested in becoming more involved with UCU. The course will also include a leadership CPD session Come and meet like-minded black members who want to make a difference at work! This course will cover:

• issues and positive solutions – becoming active in UCU locally
• leadership and mentoring a professional development session
• UCU campaigns, how you can get involve.

This course IS for you if:

• if you are new to activism in UCU
• if you want to get more involved in your union and are looking to learn more about UCU
• if you self-identify as black.

Register at link, https://www.ucu.org.uk/index.cfm?articleid=4772

Yasmin Ibrahim Equalities, UCU

The link provided also interestingly seems to suggest that, if employers are reluctant to allow time off for this fabulous course then UCU can do something about it, since it says:

Please ensure that you have secured the time off from your employer before applying for a place. If you have any difficulties in doing this please contact training@ucu.org.uk

***The boycotters describe (without any hint or irony) the "right to boycott Israeli academics" as an issue "free speech on Palestine and Israel on university campuses". In other words they insist that, as a free speech 'right', they have the right to deny free speech to Israelis or their supporters.


See also:

• What academics and leftists believe  
• Antisemitism versus anti-Zionism
• Unions in shock move to boycott themselves
• LSE's antisemitic Middle East Centre

Southampton University's disgraceful statement on cancelling anti-Israel hatefest

Southampton University statement in summary:  

"We are sorry but we have had to cancel this excellent unbiased event due to threats from the Zionists"

Southampton University has cancelled the planned anti-Israel hatefest. That ought to be a cause for a small celebration. However, the statement the University has issued is a disgrace, and probably far more damaging than the planned conference itself would have been. It does not mention any of the multiple arguments explaining why the University should never have supported the event in the first place, but instead justifies the cancellation on the grounds of public safety, implying that the planned protest by those opposed to the event (i.e. 'Zionists') posed too great a risk to University personnel and visitors.

The University is effectively promoting the idea (already prominent in the main stream media and not just among Israel haters)  that threats from 'Zionists/Jews' have put a stop to free speech. But it is even worse. Instead of criticising the blatant bias and antisemitism of the organisers of the conference (almost every single one of the scheduled speakers was an advocate of boycotting Israel) , the statement goes out of its way to actually praise them and invert reality:

"The University ... has been impressed by the commitment of the organisers to include a broad spectrum of views, and indicated to the organisers that it will work with them to find a venue suitable for a conference of this nature at a later date."

The University's statement is a disgrace which compounds the original error of supporting such an event. It was issued on 1 April but sadly it was not a joke. It is now time to challenge the statement as hard as we challenged the conference.

Another update to the story of Southampton University's anti-Semitic hatefest

As previously reported, the University of Southampton is funding a three-day event in April devoted to searching for ways to use international law to deny the world’s only Jewish state the right to exist (the ZF has a petition about it). David Collier has done a very thorough analysis of the speakers - it is even worse than most people originally imagined. Another excellent analysis of the speakers is here.

My friend has had a further response from the University. Below is that response and his follow-up.

Letter from Southampton University 10 March 2015

Dear XXXX

Thank you for your follow up email of 25 February, and I apologise for the delay in responding.

You have asked a number of questions, to which I hope to be able to respond.

On speakers, as I emailed on Friday, the programme for the conference showing speakers and titles of presentations is now on line. There have been a large number of other speakers who were approached to speak at the conference but who were unavailable or did not wish to participate.

On funding, the cost of the 3 day conference is approximately £49,000. This will be funded by a mixture of conference fees paid by attendees and by donations. Donations have been received by both individuals and organisations, and all donations for the conference will be approved in accordance with our Gift Acceptance Policy (as is the case for any donations to the University). Speakers are unpaid but do have their travel and subsistence costs covered. The University will not be providing direct funding to support the conference. However, academic staff in the School of Law do have access to administrative support staff available to them in carrying out their work, and a small element of this administrative support is being used to help with the organisation of this conference. I am sorry that I cannot give you an estimate for the cost of this support, but it is certainly small compared with the cost of the conference.

You mention that the University would not support an event that challenged the legitimacy of any one of the 58 Islamic States. I wanted to assure you that if a member of the University’s academic staff proposed an academic event on such a subject then it would be considered in exactly the same way as this conference, according to our Code of Practice for ensuring freedom of speech within the law.

I hope that this provides an answer to the questions you raised.

With best wishes

Gavin Costigan 

Follow up letter:

Dear Gavin

Thank you for your response.
Your comment about the speakers is curious. For the record there is not a single participant to put the case for the existence of Israel. In a detailed analysis here http://david-collier.com/?p=98 the author has noted that 80% of the speakers have PUBLICLY demanded a boycott of Israel. I believe that the other 20% can also be defined as anti-Israel.
Hence the idea – as the University continues to maintain – that somehow this conference will consider different and balanced views is palpable nonsense.  As I said in my original letter, this is an anti-Semitic hatefest masquerading as valid academic activity. You should be totally ashamed of yourselves. The University’s reputation is going to be severely damaged by this.

Finally, regarding the financing could you please clarify whether or not the organisers are paying the full commercial cost of conference and lecture room hire.

Yours 

And for those who keep telling me anti-Zionism has nothing to do with anti-Semitism please see here.

UPDATE 18 March 2015: 

• Ben Dor / Uni of Southampton, who are you trying to kid?  (note the University stopped an Israeli speaker from delivering a talk on optical sensors last year)
• Open letter to Southampton University

Update on the tax-payer funded antisemitic hatefest at Southampton University

See 10 March 2015 update here.

The University of Southampton is funding a three-day event in April devoted to searching for ways to use international law to deny the world’s only Jewish state the right to exist (the ZF has a petition about it). A friend of mine has written to the Vice Chancellor of the University (see correspondence below, which is very interesting). The latest update is that the programme for the event is now available and it is even worse than anybody could have imagined. There are 58 speakers and, contrary to what Southampton University said in response to my friend, every single one appears to be an anti-Israel activist (see the excellent Open Letter to University of Southampton).


1. Email sent 20 Feb 2015

Dear Professor Don Nutbeam

Can you please explain why the University of Southampton is funding a three-day event in April devoted to searching for ways to use international law to deny the world’s only Jewish state the right to exist? I am referring to this:

http://hurryupharry.org/2015/02/20/delegitimizing-israel-at-southampton-university/

Are you aware that the member of your academic staff behind this event (Prof Oren Ben-Dor) actively supports well-known anti-Semites such as Gilad Atzmon and is in turn supported by former Klu Klux Klan leader David Duke who has praised Ben-Dor as “perhaps the bravest and clearest thinking person of Jewish descent in the world.”

You must surely be aware that the recent massive increase in anti-Semitism is being fuelled in part by lies and propaganda directed against the tiny Jewish State. I find it incomprehensible that, in such a climate, your University is actually funding such anti-Semitism under the ludicrous guise of academic debate.

Yours

XXXXXX

2. Response 24 Feb 2015

Dear XXXXXX

Thank you for your email dated 20 February to the Vice-Chancellor concerning the conference on International Law and the State of Israel. Professor Nutbeam has asked me to reply on his behalf.

The University of Southampton is legally obliged under Section 43 of the Education (No 2) Act 1986, to take such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for members, students and employees of the University as well as for visiting speakers.

Our ordinances state that academic staff “have freedom within the law to question and test received wisdom, and to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions, with due regard for the need to respect others and promote the best interests of the University and academic learning, without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs or privileges.”

The title of this conference raises an important question, but the conference itself takes no explicit perspective, and academic contributions from all interested parties are most welcome. The conference is designed to have a multi-cultural emphasis, and speakers and delegates have been invited from all perspectives. Their participation has been actively encouraged in relation to the presentation of individual papers and the running of dedicated panel sessions.

Details about the conference can be found at:

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/israelpalestinelaw/index.page

Separately from the conference, this University is very proud to host the Parkes Institute, the world's oldest and most wide-ranging centre for the study of Jewish/non-Jewish relations across the ages. The Institute was founded by James Parkes, a tireless fighter against anti-Semitism, who transferred his extensive library and archive to the university in 1964. The Parkes Institute carries out a range of activities. As well as teaching at both undergraduate and postgraduate level, and an extensive research programme, the Institute has a rapidly developing outreach programme which includes adult education classes and cultural days, schools and colleges visits, as well as public seminars and lectures.

Our academic staff from Parkes - and across the university - have a range of education and research collaborations with colleagues in Israel.

Yours sincerely

Gavin Costigan

Gavin Costigan

Director of the Office of the Vice-Chancellor

University of Southampton

Room 4035, Building 37, Highfield Campus

Southampton SO17 1BJ

3. Second email sent 25 Feb 2015 

Dear Gavin

Thank you for your response.

Unfortunately, there is a fundamental and demonstrably obvious error in your response. You said

“The title of this conference raises an important question, but the conference itself takes no explicit perspective, and academic contributions from all interested parties are most welcome.”

The conference website very clearly contradicts this.

Whereas the title is ambiguous, the theme is not since in the opening paragraph it says

“(The conference) is unique because it concerns the legitimacy in International Law of the Jewish state of Israel.”

It then says

“The conference aims to explore the relatedness of the suffering and injustice in Palestine to the foundation and protection of a state of such nature and asks what role International Law should play in the situation.”

To suggest, as you do, that this takes “no explicit perspective” is an insult to my intelligence, since the perspective is very clearly one that rejects the legitimacy of the Jewish State – a view very forcibly and openly known to be held by BOTH of the listed academic organisers of the conference, as well as all the other academics on the Southampton Organizing committee. As the conference website STILL does not list any of the speakers how can you possibly know that “academic contributions from all interested parties are most welcome.”? Perhaps you can let me know of speakers who will be presenting the unequivocal case for Israel.

There are other aspects of your response that I find deeply insulting. By stressing your commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom to raise controversial issues, you are clearly implying that I am somehow against these principles. In fact, I was asking why Southampton University was providing FUNDING support for an event that is clearly an anti-semitic hatefest of lies and propaganda under the cover of simply being just ‘anti-Zionist’. I recognise that  these people are perfectly entitled to hold their views and even run events using their own funding, but not that of a tax-payer funded institution. I would also like to point out that I suspect your University would not, for example, support an event that challenged the legitimacy of any one of the 58 Islamic States (including, for example, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which was only recognised by the UN in the same year as Israel). 

I was also insulted by your reference to the Parkes Institute – this actually reminded me of the classic “Some of my best friends are Jewish” response to complaints of anti-Semitic behaviour. What on earth is the relevance of the fact that Southampton has a research centre on “Jewish/non-Jewish relations” got to do with my complaint. The Parkes Centre clearly has no input or relationship to this conference, and I was not accusing the University of institutional anti-semitism. I was asking why it was funding a demonstrably political anti-semitic event under the ludicrous guise of academic debate. And you have not answered that question.

I would, of course, welcome Professor Nutbeam’s comments on the above points.

I would also like to know how much funding support (including the time of support staff) that  the University is providing for the conference.

Yours sincerely

XXXXX

4. Follow-up sent 2 March 2015

Dear Gavin

I was wondering if you or the V-C were going to respond to the attached follow-up letter I sent on 25 Feb.

If not I will be taking the matter up with the University Council.

Perhaps I need to stress that Professor Ben Dor’s fundraising letter asking to support the conference notes explicitly that the “conference is fully hosted, and supported by the University of Southampton. The university enables us to use its hospitality services, event organisation, marketing network and financial administration for the organisation, delivery, recording of the conference. It is a remarkable achievement in itself that such a conference will be help [sic] in UK academia.”

What I am asking for is the real cost of the above-stated University services.

XXXX

5. Response 2 March 2015

Dear XXXXX

Thank you for your email, and I do apologise in the delay in responding. We have received a number of queries about this conference and we are currently preparing answers to questions that you and others have raised.

I hope to be able to respond by the end of this week.

With best wishes

Gavin Costigan

6. Followup email 5 March 2015

Gavin

While I await your response, I think it is important to know that I have learnt that one of the speakers is going to be Richard Falk, a former UN advisor whose career has been marked by outrageous claims and statements. These include:

• Publishing an anti-Semitic cartoon, for which he was condemned by the US.
• Promoting 9/11 conspiracy theories, for which he was condemned by Ban Ki-Moon
• Describing Israel as 'genocidal,' for which he was condemned by Canada.

• Blaming the Boston Marathon bombings on American foreign policy, specifically her relationship with Israel. This was not only condemned by the US and Ban Ki-Moon, but the British Foreign Office specifically described his comments as being anti-Semitic.

Yours

******

7. Response 6 March 2015

Dear XXXXX

I am writing to let you know that I will not now be able to provide a full response to your email until Monday or Tuesday next week, for which apologies. However, you asked about speakers and I wanted to let you know that the conference programme is now on the website and can be found here:

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/israelpalestinelaw/programme/index.page?

I will respond more fully next week.

With best wishes

Gavin

See 10 March 2015 update here.