u of cali declares anti zionism anti semitic

[cheka.]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/higher-education/university-of-california-approves-anti-semitism-statement/2016/03/24/a25d5cda-f181-11e5-a2a3-d4e9697917d1_story.html

SAN FRANCISCO — The University of California’s governing board is set to sign off Thursday on a statement condemning anti-Semitic behavior and a companion report urging campus leaders to confront “anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism.”

A committee of the university’s Board of Regents voted unanimously on Wednesday to send what is being called a “Statement of Principles Against Intolerance” and a report summarizing the context for it to the full board for consideration.

A year in the making, the documents were prepared at the urging of some Jewish groups that argued the 10-campus UC system needed to affirm its opposition to anti-Semitism amid growing student activism on behalf of Palestinian rights.

“There is absolutely no doubt that anti-Zionism is the driving force behind the alarming rise in anti-Semitism at UC and at schools across the country,” said Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, a Hebrew lecturer at the university’s Santa Cruz campus who led the campaign, said.

When a draft of the statement was released last week, critics expressed alarm over language in the accompanying report that cited both anti-Semitism and “anti-Zionism” — the rejection of Israel’s right to exist — as types of discrimination that don’t belong at the university.


Faculty and student groups said the report, if endorsed along with the principles themselves, could be used to stifle free speech and scholarship. The regents’ Educational Policy Committee softened the disputed wording slightly on Wednesday.

“Anti-Semitism, anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism and other forms of discrimination have no place at the University of California,” it now reads.

Regent Norman Pattiz, who served on the task force that drafted the statement and report, said it was appropriate for the university to link disapproval of Israel with prejudice toward Jewish people and that the issue was a personal one for him.

[cheka.]

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-makdisibutler-uc-antisemitism-report-20160323-story.html

In a few paragraphs, the report conflates two distinct phenomena: hatred of Jews on the one hand, and criticism of a political ideology on the other. The overall claim is that the latter — objections to the Israeli state, its military occupation, its demolition of homes, its two-tiered system of citizenship — is the new, covert form of anti-Semitism.

These are issues regularly debated in public discourse; it is imperative that they be freely discussed in universities as well. But if the report is adopted, scholarship and teaching that include critical perspectives deemed “anti-Zionist” could be branded illegitimate, and open discussion shut down.

And the report was produced under a cloud of external pressure by, among others, UC regent Richard Blum, who publicly issued a veiled threat: “My wife, and your senior senator” — Dianne Feinstein — “is prepared to be critical of this university,” unless UC finds a way to punish the supposed new form of anti-Semitism.

The report is as bad as it sounds. Its adoption would be catastrophic. It would be a travesty to let UC become a place where censorship triumphs over the pursuit of truths, however uncomfortable some may find them.

[Norweger]

Free Palestine!

[Neuro]

This is all very good developments. This kind of over reach by the filthy hooknosed Jews will wake up more people. Anti-Semitic label will be a badge of honor among larger groups of people. Then what will they accuse people of then? Being bankers? LOL

[palani]

“Anti-Semitism, anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism and other forms of discrimination have no place at the University of California”

The Federalists came out with a bunch of 85 papers to convince people a strong federal government was needed. Theirs was a NATIONALIST argument. Their opponents were actual FEDERALISTS because they believed in the role of the previous colonies as independent COUNTRIES. But since the Federalist name was taken all they could call themselves was the ANTI-FEDERALISTS.

Now applying the ANTI- prefix to Semetics or Zionists is discriminatory. Could it be the ANTI- crowd are arguing for the very principles they are charged with being against?

Can you discriminate the sense imparted by words?

[hoarder]

There is no doubt who controls all the Universities. They need to make sure the indoctrinated graduates know nothing about how the Federal Reserve works. The fact that they don't speaks volumes.