Israel/Palestine post 10/7 - follow-on events/thoughts as relate to other countries

jewish parents in this case sounding increasingly like anti-CRT parents in the south mad that their white children feel uncomfortable when slavery is being taught.

anyway my son is about to graduate, thank god, and go to UC Santa Cruz

Nice. Have often wished that I could have been born a Californian so I could have gone there.

(Not that I regret my college years, but I probably would have found out a lot more about myself in the woods of Santa Cruz than the cornfields of Ohio)

I stayed a couple days in a house in Santa Cruz that had 12 people living there, mostly young UCSC graduates, and it felt like being in another world.

I agree that a couple of those slides seem inaccurate and mildly problematic, but hardly worthy of a lawsuit, and I doubt that they make anyone unsafe.

FWIW, it's a small thing but we decided to indefinitely postpone any future travel to Israel, including for my daughter's bat mitzvah (if anything, especially for that, as I don't want her to think of Israel's current regime as somehow being an essential part of Jewishness). Things are already a bit strained with H's extended family, and this means not seeing them, but tbh there has always been this grudging attitude among them toward H and her immediately family as the ones who left. I'm going to start looking into boycotting at least some types of Israeli or Israel-related businesses - whichever are most directly associated/implicated and would have the most impact.

That’s not a small thing! Big big love to you

Yes, those must be difficult steps to take, man alive. It speaks to your empathy and integrity. <3

(Not that I regret my college years, but I probably would have found out a lot more about myself in the woods of Santa Cruz than the cornfields of Ohio)

It's all a little 20/20, anyway. I just don't think my alma mater was the best environment for me, in retrospect.

You would have likely been the smartest kid in every class and made friends with the crusties who hang downtown imo

I wish Havana Syndrome was real

A major military ground operation in Rafah risks killing more civilians. It risks wreaking greater havoc with the provision of humanitarian assistance. It risks further isolating Israel around the world and jeopardizing its long term security and standing. pic.twitter.com/bYfTqJMUCv

— Department of State (@StateDept) March 23, 2024

So it's apparently wrong and bad on to advocate for Palestinian liberation on university campuses because it could make Jewish students feel "uncomfortable," but tenured profs can spread lies and hasbara-inflected articles like the one above without any institutional pushback. Infuriating

CitationsNeeded did an ep about this, with audio and transcript here

https://citationsneeded.medium.com/episode-199-the-golden-age-of-crybullyism-a0c28690a1b3

I told my wife recently that I feel like a lot of American Jews (and even a fair number of Israelis) have an Israel of the Mind that is fairly different than the Israel that exists, and they don't realize how much bigger the chasm has become in recent years. I guess tbf you could say the same of Americans about America when it comes to our foreign policy, it's just that American foreign policy feels a lot more remote from every day American life.

Seriously! This also accounts for the differences in age and media consumption habits, which is one of the reasons you get younger folks(“younger” here being decades younger than the mean age of your cable news consumer) with sharply different support levels than older folks

thanks for that rec, Kingfish

seeing a lot of 'stab in the back' discourse re: the USA's abstention at the UN

interesting phrasing

Exclusive: the German bank account of Jüdische Stimme / Jewish Voice has been blocked by their bank, who has demanded a full list of members and their addresses. The group sees a worrying echo of history. pic.twitter.com/W09DP3oz98

— James Jackson (@derJamesJackson) March 27, 2024

Ah Gallup has a poll fully conducted after the aid convoy disaster, now clear majority disapproval of military action in Gaza. Disapproval holds true whether you’re following closely or not, only Republicans hold out while super majorities of indies and dems disapprove. pic.twitter.com/rZ3443VG5G

— tyson brody (@tysonbrody) March 27, 2024

Hi David, do you know if any of the people treated in this hospital were injured by UK-made military equipment?

For example, were any of them injured by an airstrike from an Israeli F-35 fighter jet, which are partially made in the UK and carry out strikes in Gaza? 1/2 https://t.co/PtQLSUGVH3

— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) March 27, 2024

An event with Palestinian writers was cancelled. This letter gives a summary.

https://commapress.co.uk/blog/comma-press-statement-in-relation-to-cancellation-of-home-event-and-baseless-allegations

insane story. the European Broadcasting Union and the Charity Commission are all trying to shut down the Rio cinema in Dalston because it cancelled a planned Eurovision party. https://t.co/mKGX2oYmTp

— bat020 (@bat020) March 30, 2024

New by me @FT — Saudi officials fear brutal images emerging from the shattered Gaza Strip will radicalise their young population, disrupt economic and social reform plans https://t.co/983Hg9wfw0

— Ahmed Al Omran (@ahmed) March 31, 2024

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_eVKOtQZAw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BEVBAjIrD4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA3vtGZwyeo

in reference to my post in the other thread.

disgusted he can smile at all when talking about this

The fact that all three Britons killed in this attack on the aid convoy were ex-servicemen - including an ex-marine and an ex-special forces commando - has really changed the narrative in the UK. It shouldn't but that's just how it is. Otherwise they could have been dismissed as misguided and naive do-gooders, dupes of Hamas, Corbyn voters, you name it.

disgusted he can smile at all when talking about this

He used to be a regular contributor to, of course, MSNBC. He was on all the time.

Should note that these bits are from December 2023.

"Some people think American Jews are growing apart from Israel due to violent warmongering, but that's wrong! Here's why"

By A. Violent Warmonger

https://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/israel-zionism/2016/04/if-american-jews-and-israel-are-drifting-apart-whats-the-reason/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc1&utm_campaign=december23_registrations&utm_content=lal_if_american_jews_and_israel_are_drifting_apart_what%27s_the_reason+-+Copy&fbclid=IwAR3NyFjncr8pffaSO1NVfyI93_hIPRfAmeQsKoXdUke6qH-Qq5TlVt6XE1o

(did not actually read this paywalled trash)

https://theconversation.com/albanese-government-has-irreparably-damaged-australias-relations-with-israel-peter-dutton-227572

Embarrassed there’s a market for this kind of drivel in my nation. What a remorseless human being

Comparing a pro Palestinian rally to our nations largest mass shooting just a baffling and disgustingly offensive take.

At least the libs will never get voted in with this potato as their leader

Bunch of dumb shit in the US on all sides recently.

UC Berkeley Law school kerfuffle: there are plenty of links on this, here's a fairly general one. https://www.berkeleyside.org/2024/04/11/confrontation-erupts-at-dinner-for-law-students-at-uc-berkeley-deans-home. Obviously the Dean's wife probably should not have put her hands on the protestor, but, on the other hand, claiming it's an 'assault' is dumb and doesn't help the protestors' cause.

As for whether the protestor should have been allowed to speak...if I were the Dean I probably would have let her finish. But he'd already allowed students to plaster the law school with cartoon images of him with blood dripping from utensils in the interest of the First Amendment so I am inclined to think he'd been gracious enough. The ultimate question to me is why they went after this Dean in the first place; he supports a two state solution, has been clear about his support for Palestinians. Targeting him reeks of antisemitism and the protestors claiming their speech at his house is protected makes me wonder how they got into law school in the first place.

there's this one too. i haven't gone digging to see what she linked to or what she said. why anyone was digging deep on her in the first place is another question of course.

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/usc-cancels-valedictorian-speech-over-safety-reasons/3388883/

yes that's also pretty stupid

Jodi Dean from Hobart and William Smith Colleges has also been put on leave, but I'm inclined to think that's slightly less stupid, given that she twisted herself into academic pretzels claiming Hamas is a force for good. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-professor-leave-describing-october-7-attacks-exhilarating

ehh, the Dean case is a textbook violation of academic freedom; doesn't matter what she wrote. The USC story also looks pretty straightforwardly bad on USC's part afaict.

But oof that Berkeley story is a mess. It strikes me as extremely confusing and bad to host university-related events at your private home, to then insist that 1A doesn't apply for that reason, but to then also threaten anyone who protests further university-related events at the dean's home with a violation of the student conduct code. Surely following this incident, the wiser move would be to clearly demarcate the difference between your home and the university? Claiming "assault" is def absurd if the article's description is accurate, but OTOH if you're a professor you absolutely know not to touch students without their consent. None of this excuses those images though; those are definitely antisemitic.

"Academic freedom" isn't some absolute, enshrined constitutional principle, it's just an ideal. A private college especially can put someone on leave for whatever reason, as long as they're not violating the law. I think it's reasonable for a college to put someone on leave for praising the slaughter of civilians.

As for the Berkeley case, Chemerinsky is like one of the world's leading experts on the US Constitution. He wrote what is probably the most used textbook on constitutional law. It might be "confusing" but you don't have an unfettered right to free speech in someone's private home, and the fact that it was "university related" (he invited students to his home to celebrate graduation) doesn't really change that. And it's not actually contradictory that a student conduct code can include off-campus behavior. An obvious (extreme) example would be that a law school could expel a student for murdering someone off campus. 1A and where a code of conduct applies are mostly unrelated.

As far as Prof Fisk, supposedly the students had been disrupting the event for a while and had been repeatedly asked to leave (meaning they were no longer invited and were technically trespassing in a private home). In the video, it looks like the professor got frustrated and briefly put her hands on the student, but did not harm the student. Was it exactly the right thing to do? Maybe not, but it seems pretty minimal, regardless of whatever technicalities of law (e.g. whether it matters that the student was trespassing). We are talking about adults here. Graduating law students are in their 20s. The idea that she or the dean should be dismissed for it is pretty ridiculous. And if she had called the police instead, it would be evil zionist professor calls the police on student.

SCOTUS has long ruled that protesters do not have First Amendment rights on private property, that private property owners are free to restrict speech on their own property as they wish. I think the "it was a school sponsored event" was definitely a big reach, legally.

I wasn't making a legalistic argument. I'm fully aware academic freedom isn't a constitutional right -- it's an important, bedrock principle for the modern academy though. The fact that private institutions can censor scholars within the confines of constitutional law is precisely why it exists! The fact that "it's reasonable for a college to put someone on leave for praising the slaughter of civilians" is only ever applied selectively is a strong argument in favor of fighting for and preserving this principle, even in cases you dislike. No academic is in danger of being put on leave for, e.g., praising the US slaughtering civilians in the Middle East or arguing the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were justified/positive or etc etc. There are countless academic defenses of colonialism, empire-building, and other projects that entailed mass slaughter of civilians -- it's ludicrous to suggest that a ban on this idea is enforced in a reasonable and equitable manner.

Likewise, I understand that the Berkeley couple know the law and use that knowledge to their benefit. But IMO, by hosting academic events in his home Chemerinsky is obfuscating the distinctions between the rights and responsibilities of being a student, professor, dean, university employee, and private citizen. No, that's not illegal but, again IMO, it's not wise or kind to do that, and there are endless examples of this problem in recent decades. And as a reminder, I'm talking about the fact they are planning to continue hosting these events and to threaten the livelihoods of anyone who protests them. I know they're within their rights to do that, I'm just saying they're being dicks.

I didn't realize there was video of the event, and I haven't watched it, so you can ignore that part, though I already said I thought "assault" was absurd, so not sure why you're bringing up calling the cops. ftr I also don't think they should be dismissed from their posts, I'm pretty narrowly suggesting they learn from this incident and stop hosting campus events at their private home.

SCOTUS has long ruled that protesters do not have First Amendment rights on private property, that private property owners are free to restrict speech on their own property as they wish. I think the "it was a school sponsored event" was definitely a big reach, legally.

― CEO Greedwagon (Neanderthal), Tuesday, April 16, 2024 2:23 PM (sixteen minutes ago)

I'm not sure if you're addressing my post or just the story in general (that might be true of man alive's posts too, but they seemed like a direct response to my eyes -- happy to be corrected), so can I ask why are you only, or primarily anyway, concerned with the legal aspect? I have to stop posting now lol and can't really elaborate on this, but I read stories like these through a lens informed by the way power works on campuses. man alive is correct that everyone involved is a legal adult, but they're hardly equals in this world

i was responding to what man alive said regarding the legal angle of it, since there were a lot of amateur lawyers on Twitter claiming their legal rights had been violated.

Likewise, I understand that the Berkeley couple know the law and use that knowledge to their benefit. But IMO, by hosting academic events in his home Chemerinsky is obfuscating the distinctions between the rights and responsibilities of being a student, professor, dean, university employee, and private citizen. No, that's not illegal but, again IMO, it's not wise or kind to do that, and there are endless examples of this problem in recent decades. And as a reminder, I'm talking about the fact they are planning to continue hosting these events and to threaten the livelihoods of anyone who protests them. I know they're within their rights to do that, I'm just saying they're being dicks.

I didn't realize there was video of the event, and I haven't watched it, so you can ignore that part, though I already said I thought "assault" was absurd, so not sure why you're bringing up calling the cops. ftr I also don't think they should be dismissed from their posts, I'm pretty narrowly suggesting they learn from this incident and stop hosting campus events at their private home.

― rob, Tuesday, April 16, 2024 1:39 PM (nineteen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Sorry, no, completely disagree. They were not "being dicks." They went above and beyond by hosting students in their home, and they have defendant the free speech rights of pro-Palestine students in the past. The students were being dicks. There was no need to stage a protest in the professors' home, nor were they deserving targets. I don't think that some students being dicks should dissuade them from doing the totally normal and reasonable thing of having adult students as guests in their home, and I hope it won't.

*defended

And it's not actually contradictory that a student conduct code can include off-campus behavior. An obvious (extreme) example would be that a law school could expel a student for murdering someone off campus. 1A and where a code of conduct applies are mostly unrelated.

I teach at a Florida public university, and events like, say, the president's holiday party is considered a Campus Event even when his house is miles away.

"No academic is in danger of being put on leave for, e.g., praising the US slaughtering civilians in the Middle East or arguing the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were justified/positive or etc etc."

There's a pretty big difference between "the bombing of Hiroshima was necessary at the time" (which I'm not defending tbc) and actively cheering for a slaughter that just happened and speaking publicly about how it gave you a huge boner. The latter is about a hair away from encouraging more slaughter, which by extension could easily be targeted at "zionist" or Israeli students in the US.

But also, it's a private university and it's under no obligation to have a "uniform" ban of anything.

Berkley is private?