It's Almost Supernatural

Carte Blanche Story on El-El Security - Update

2009-11-20T13:18:04+02:00

Courtesy of a comment from RZ, here’s a YNet update on the latest regarding the Carte Blanche feature on El-Al security at OR Tambo International (original story: Carte Blanche: El Al a front for spooks).

The security guard that questioned the Muslim person during the Carte Blanche show has been deported out of South Africa.

El Al security officer deported from South Africa via Ynet News
Itamar Eichner

The South African authorities several days ago deported a security officer working for Israel's El Al airlines, who is employed by the Israeli Embassy in the country and has a diplomatic passport.

The authorities issued an ultimatum to Israel, saying that if an arrangement on the employment of El Al security guards is not reached by the end of the month, they would all be deported from South Africa.

The Yedioth Ahronoth daily has learned that the Foreign Ministry immediately sent out a team of diplomats to South Africa to negotiate the matter, in a bid to have security guards stay in the county in favor of El Al's Johannesburg-Tel Aviv flights.

The affair began about two months ago, when Julian Gareb, who had worked as a security guard for El Al for 19 years, was fired. In an act of revenge, he revealed the Israeli airline' security methods to a prestigious South African investigative television program.

"We classify people on a racist, ethnic and even religious basis," he claimed. Gareb said that during his training he had been sent to Israel for advanced studies and was hired by the Israeli security services. "We trained with weapons at a secret base where the special Israeli forces train. We used guns and submachine guns in face-to-face combat."

The program also sent a Muslim investigator with a hidden camera to El Al's security check station at a local airport. Within second, the man was stopped by an El Al security guard, who was later deported from the country. The program's reporter accused El Al of having a racist policy, of deceiving the South African authorities and of seriously violating the constitution.

El Al officials expressed their hopes on Thursday that the Foreign Ministry would be able to solve the crisis. According to the sources, the flights from South Africa to Israel were not at risk of being canceled.

Yossi Levy, a spokesman for the Foreign Ministry, said in response that "the ministry cannot comment on security matters."

Sad Farewell to a Communal Giant, Mendel Kaplan, 73

2009-11-20T10:11:44+02:00

Mendel Kaplan, aged 73, passed away last night after a sudden illness. His energy and leadership and commitment to Zionism will be forever missed.

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Mendel Kaplan, a prominent leader of the South African Jewish community, died in South Africa on Thursday evening at the age of 73 after suffering a massive stroke on Tuesday.

He was a major figure in the world of Jewish organizations, especially renowned for promoting and mobilizing the issue of Soviet aliya after the fall of the Soviet Union.

"Mendel was the most well-known southern African Jewish philanthropist, and will be sadly missed both in Israel and abroad," said Maish Isaacson, chairman of Telfed.

Kaplan will be remembered as "a very committed Jew who continued to study Judaism until his last day," Alan Hoffman, director-general of the Jewish Agency's Education Department and a close friend of Kaplan's, told The Jerusalem Post.

"He was a great Jewish leader who managed to go beyond South Africa," said Hoffman, adding that Kaplan had been gifted with a unique ability to combine "an enormous commitment to Judaism and the Jewish people and the ability to solve problems and deal with global Jewish issues."

Here’s the tribute from the SA Zionist Federation:

It is with great sadness that we notify you of the death last night of Mendel Kaplan.

Mendel was a giant among men, a blessed tzaddik, a man for whom the future growth and success of the Jewish community in South Africa, in Israel and indeed internationally was enormously significant.

His acts of kindness, charity and warmth will remain forever etched in the memories of all those he assisted and whose lives he touched. His concern and love for the State of Israel gave him international status within the Jewish community. The enormity of his loss cannot be measured, neither in words nor in deeds.

The Chairman, President, Executive and staff of the SA Zionist Federation extend deepest and most heartfelt sympathies to his beloved wife Jill, his adored children and all the members of his family. We will never forget him.

May he be blessed among all the mourners of Zion.

Budlender Report - No Racial Profiling Took Place at Limmud

2009-11-18T09:00:18+02:00

Advocate Geoff Budlender last week rejected allegations made by the Wits Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) that Limmud’s security marshals carried out “racial profiling” against students and academics of colour during the course of the Limmud event on August 9.

David Saks reports in last week’s Jewish Report:

THE INVESTIGATION instituted by Wits University into the events that took place on campus during the Limmud event on August 9 this year, has rejected allegations that Limmud’s security marshals carried out “racial profiling” against students of colour.

In a report that overwhelmingly vindicated Limmud, Advocate Geoff Budlender SC did, however, say that Limmud marshals overstepped their authority and appeared “heavyhanded”. But he found no male fides on their part. His 13-page report found that Limmud participants were subjected to offensive slurs and intimidation by those protesting outside the university. The controversy centred around the participation on the programme of Lt-Colonel David Benjamin of the Israeli Defence Forces, labelled as a “war criminal” by pro-Palestinian factions on and off campus.

Budlender based his conclusions on more than 70 written submissions received from those who were present on the day and individual interviews with some of the latter whose testimony was regarded as particularly significant. These included senior members of the Wits administration, Limmud, SAUJS, the SAJBD and the Palestinian Solidarity Committee.

The SAJBD has welcomed Budlender’s findings, saying that the findings had vindicated all the essential points it had made in its own submission. SAJBD National Director Wendy Kahn, called the report balanced and thorough, and felt that Budlender had done “an excellent job” in getting to the heart of what had happened, without being swayed by people’s political agendas. “We were very disturbed that those protesting against Limmud resorted to baseless charges of racial profiling in order to smear our community. Fortunately, a thorough and non-partisan investigation has revealed these to be false,” she said.

Whilst some may be tempted to celebrate these findings as a resounding victory, the whole saga will ultimately prove to be a depressing defeat for South African Jewry. The Palestinian and Muslim lobby have sent a strong message to Jews in South Africa that not only will they not tolerate our political positions; but our deeply enshrined value of robust inner debate too, will not be allowed.

Are these just empty threats? The fraudulent tactics employed may be cheap, but they are not empty. In fact, they are very effective. Take one high profile consequence as an example, the gratuitous comments of the Wits Vice Chancellor and Principal Professor Loyiso Nongxa immediately following the allegations. Before even issuing an investigation, he lamented the appearance at Wits of anyone who seeks to justify Israel’s military action in the Gaza Strip (by his language this would have to include the majority of Jewish students) and then, accepting the PSC accusations as fact, he proceeded to apologise to anyone who felt they were discriminated against during the Limmud event.

These comments confirm the strategic value of these mephitic accusations. The mark of Cain sticks, especially on campus but also in the minds of our community leaders who need to steer a course clear from the rough rapids that may capsize our boat.

This time a proper investigation has ruled against the PSC. But what of next time? Have we moved into a situation where we will need to spend energy defending ourselves following every event or activity involving Israel that takes place at a public premises. The answer may be to use a different and more private venue. To creep further and further into the shadows and to hope against hope that next time no-one will notice us. And that is exactly the nature of the PSC victory. They want us to consider the impact of their baseless accusations after each and every event so that we think twice before organising the event and so that we reconsider the people we invite.

It’s been a tough year for the community - protests within the hub of our residences, members of cabinet yelling that we control the world, unionist incitement via our inboxes, dock workers refusing to offload Israeli goods, accusations of racial profiling at an event usually renowned for its openness and courage of ideas. On the bright side, however, it’s good to end the year on a positive note. The efforts expended by our students on campus was inspirational and we all owe them a debt of gratitude for not taking this without a fighting response.

Though not involved in Limmud, SAUJS dealt with the consequences of Jews being accused of racial profiling on campus. I caught up with SAUJS National Chairperson Benji Shulman this week. He candidly explained that he was content with how the report revealed the truth despite the PSC’s coordinated lies. “The PSC were exposed and the report showed exactly how they like to operate on campus.”

The saddest part of the ordeal for Shulman was the conduct of the Vice Chancellor, who apologised to the students before waiting for an investigation. However, when there was basis for an apology, after the report ruled that Limmud participants had been abused and insulted, including being called “Nazis” and “child killers”, the Vice Chancellor was not so forthcoming. “This is something you don’t expect at a university” he lamented.

Perhaps not, but I for one wasn’t entirely shocked to read Nongxa’s remarks. Even despite his lashing of Israel, perhaps one can’t read too much into his political views from his statement alone. It’s worth considering the stressful nature of the pressure the PSC and co. placed on him, a pressure which may have forced him into reclaiming his liberal credentials in the simplest way possible – by giving into the anti-Israel line immediately and completely.

The report findings may not be irrelevant, but the true "victors" in this saga should be judged by Nongxa’s immediate and utterly foolish response.

Norwegian University Considering Boycott of Israeli Academics

2009-11-12T22:11:05+02:00

Here's a disturbing piece of news from our friend Chaya who is the Chairperson of the Word Union of Jewish Students (WUJS). The Norwegian University of Science and Technology is considering a resolution to pass a boycott of Israeli academics.

Chaya penned a strong letter of appeal to student representatives at the university to vote against the proposed boycott.

World Union of Jewish Students urges board members of Norwegian university to fight proposed boycott of Israeli academics

JERUSALEM - Chaya Singer, the South African Chairperson of the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS), has urged student representatives on the board of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim to vote against the proposed resolution calling for a boycott of Israeli academics. In her letter, the WUJS leader appeals to NTNU student leaders - "as the trustees of the traditions of the university as a bastion of open debate and education, and the safeguards of academic freedom and tolerance" - to take a firm stand and vote, on behalf of young people everywhere, against the boycott. If the board at its meeting on 12 November votes in favor of a boycott, NTNU would become the first Western university to enact a boycott of Israeli academics.

WUJS has been in contact with various students and representatives of student bodies at NTNU, and responses indicate that many students are against the boycott. As one student representative commented regarding the students on the board of Norway's prestigious university, "I would be surprised if they voted for the boycott, because academic freedom is important for them as well."

"The idea of a university calling for a politicized boycott of academics on the basis of their national origin is utterly absurd in a 21st century characterized by globalized information sharing and open-source education", Chaya Singer declared. "This would be a violation of the most fundamental principles of academic freedom and indicative of an anti-Israel agenda that unfortunately has been growing in strength recently, especially in Europe. The World Union of Jewish Students condemns such threats of boycott as an assault on academic freedom and the universal values of education and academic pursuit," she added.

WUJS was established in 1924 under the chairmanship of Albert Einstein to combat the rigid quotas against Jewish students in European universities. As the umbrella organization of independent Jewish student unions around the world, WUJS cooperates with a broad network of Jewish and non-Jewish organizations and student bodies to battle anti-Semitism on campus and to provide Jewish students with a voice in the political youth arena.

Contact:

Chaya Singer
Chairperson, WUJS

Zaptrash - A Fraudulent Recall of Berlin

2009-11-12T21:52:32+02:00

I’ve been away for a while but there is no scarcity of content to start again with some updates. First in line is the stinky pencil belonging to Jonathan Shapiro (aka Zapiro).

Close your eyes, and imagine if you will, an alternate universe where the Berlin wall was built by Communists to prevent the flood of Westerners from illegally entering their territory in order to enjoy the prosperity that Western governments were failing to deliver. Try to imagine the Soviets building the wall in order to defend their citizens from Westerners who were trying to cross into their territory in order to kill and maim. Now look at the cartoon.

Does it work for you? No? Not very clever is it?

The Berlin wall was built by East Germany to prevent East Germans from escaping East Germany. Israel has not built any walls to try and prevent Israelis from escaping Israel. Israelis don’t want to escape Israel the way Palestinians want to escape Hamas.

Ultimately, any powerful imagery, no matter how fraudulent can and will be used against Israel in the court of public opinion.

By the way, Goldstone's report concerns the war which took place in Gaza and there is no Israeli wall around Gaza.

Blogging Light

2009-10-12T01:40:28+02:00

Over the next three weeks I won't be able to contribute much to IAS as I'm going to be away on a business trip (with some much-needed leisure time strapped on the side). It's been a very difficult year for me personally and the amount of time I've been able to devote to Israel related issues via this blog or any other medium has been sparse.

To those who continue to read what we have to say, and who continue to further the discussion via the comments, we thank you.

Nicole Fritz gets it wrong

2009-10-12T01:27:09+02:00

Here's an article in the Business Day last week that bewilders me beyond exasperation. It is authored by Nicole Fritz, Director of the South African Litigation Centre and former law clerk to Justice Richard Goldstone: SA must insist on justice without exception

The article draws equivalence between Israel and Sudan, claiming that both use the same banal excuses of selectivity in order to deflect attention away from their crimes. It behoves the director of the SA Litigation centre to do better than to put forward evidence suggesting that the application of a critique by one actor (Israel) is incorrect because it has been applied speciously by another actor (Sudan).

Fritz states that the report by Goldstone cannot be accused of being selective. Her evidence? “It subjects both Israel and Palestinian faction Hamas to scrutiny. It concludes that Israel and Hamas committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity. If the report pays greater attention to allegations made against Israel, that was unavoidable. Despite numerous requests to co-operate in the investigation, Israel refused. It refused the mission permission to enter Israel or the West Bank.”

Fritz does nothing to counter one of the major critiques of the report – that of its origins. It originated from the UN Human Rights Counsel that was formed to rid the world’s primary Human Rights organisation of the tainted history of selectively censuring Israel. But the new counsel has fared no better than the old commission. The new UN Human Rights Counsel has spent as much, if not more, of a disproportionate focus on Israel as the previous disbanded UN Human Rights commission did. Over 80% of its country specific resolutions have targeted Israel. Its members who oppress their own people with impunity, free from fear of retribution, use it as a shield to protect their own records by focusing only on Israel. This is the same counsel that congratulated Sri Lanka after it brutally wielded its power to topple a Tamil Tiger uprising, allegedly killing more than 20 000 civilians. But listen to Nicole Fritz. Listen to Goldstone's previous law clerk. The Gaza report was not selective. Oh dear!

Digging deeper into its origins, the original mandate of the resolution called for an investigation into only the war crimes committed by Israel. Granted, Goldstone did widen its mandate to include investigations of Hamas but the original mandate was never actually altered. Perhaps for this reason, in the context of the findings against Israel, the criticism of Hamas is provided almost as an after-thought, almost as if it were there serving purely as the veneer of balance.

Thirdly, the make-up of the investigation team was highly questionable, in particular, Christine Chinkin signed a petition declaring that Israel had committed war crimes before the investigation began. Including her on the investigation was akin to including a Nationalist apartheid judge to rule over a dispute between a white and black person in the 1960s. The positions of the Nationalist judge are already known, so why even bother with the investigation?

Fritz also discounts the affront caused by the Report’s conclusions, pretending that it equally condemned Hamas and Israel. But the report’s over-arching conclusions are (1) that what happened in Gaza was nothing but a premeditated, deliberate and targeted attack in order to punish, humiliate and subjugate a civilian population, and (2) that Hamas fighters did not abuse civilian compounds such as mosques, schools and hospitals as bases for cover.

Without even looking at a critique of the facts that the report stands upon, it is patently clear that Israel launched the attack to stop incessant rocket fire from Gaza. Further, there is an abundance of evidence in the public domain supporting the Israeli claims that Hamas operated from civilian compounds. The report doesn’t find against Israel. It makes a mockery of justice! Whilst I can tolerate criticisms of methods used by Israel, a distortion of the entire objective renders it nothing but a vicious and personal attack on Israel and all her citizens and supporters.

Judge for Yourself: SAUJS vs Shministim

2009-10-12T00:33:44+02:00

Today on eNews SAUJS Political officer Rafi Eliasov and Shministim member Sahar Vardi debated issues raised by the young Israelis visiting South Africa who refused to serve time in the Israeli Defence Force.

The debated was aired on the programme Judge for Yourself (hosted by Judge Dennis Davis) and if you missed it you can catch the repeat on DSTV Channel 403 at the following times throughout this week:

Judge for Yourself
Monday 21:30
Tuesday 10:30
Wednesday 21:30
Thursday 9:30
Friday 23:30
Saturday 12:30

JPOST: What South African Jews think of Goldstone

2009-10-07T08:10:08+02:00

Here's an article from the Jerusalem Post on the views of South African Jewish communal leaders regarding Goldstone's Gaza report: What South African Jews think of Richard Goldstone (thanks Shaun).

"He sold us out," said an angry Ze'ev Krengel, the usually soft-spoken, liberal, Zionist chairman of the South African Board of Governors. "The damage has been done. He proved that terrorism works, that if you fight from within your own civilians you can win."

[...]

Krengel and the others, who preferred to remain anonymous, say they are "very, very angry" at Goldstone.

"In the end, the biggest loser will be Richard Goldstone, who will go down in history as the person who judged Israel unfairly," said Krengel. "He had the power to right the wrongs [of the anti-Israeli Human Rights Council], but he didn't. He did the opposite."

Benjamin Pogrund slams Goldstone report

2009-10-07T08:04:08+02:00

The Cape Times has published former anti-apartheid activist Benjamin Pogrund's criticism of the Goldstone report. Its for subscribers only at the Cape Times, but you can view the full article at the UN Watch blog: U.N. Goldstone Report Slammed by Anti-Apartheid Activist

Pogrund believes that Goldstone has acted only with the best of intentions throughout his life and, like us, cannot fathom how Goldstone could have been so duped by the UN Human Rights Council's extreme malevolence - at the expense of all other victims of abuse in the world - towards Israel.

Furthermore, Pogrund questions Goldstone's "own good sense" for his decision to allow Christine Chinkin to remain a member of his four person mission, even though she had publicly signed a letter accusing Israel of war crimes before any "investigations" had even started.

Read it all.

Press having a field day with Shminitism

2009-10-07T07:52:53+02:00

Shminitism (meaning twelth graders) are a group of 19 and 20 year old Israelis who served time in Israeli military jails because of their refusal to serve in the Israeli Defence Force. They are currently in South Africa having been brought here by Open Shuhada Street, the group that Doron Isaacs helped to establish.

Over the past two days I have seen four articles in the local press screaming that they have been barred from speaking at the Jewish Day schools in South Africa. Various speakers often make requests to adress schools and the schools often turn them down, but obviously in this scenario the decision to turn the Shminitism speakers down will be leveraged as a fat political cow ready to be milked. The group will in the end have more coverage. That is no fault of the school, just an implication of the way Jewish communal politics meshes with media coverage. At least one of the two articles in the Cape Times quotes the Herzlia principle along with David Saks.

Herzlia principle Geoff Cohen said that although the school would defend freedom of speech, it reserved the right to vet those wanting to address learners at the school. A perfectly acceptable position.

David Saks, associate director of the SA Jewish Board of Deputies also weighed in on the spurious comparison between the Shminitism campaign and conscription in apartheid South Africa, explaining that "conscription in apartheid South Africa perpetuated an unjust system whereas in Israel it is protecting the country against external threats."

Questions (without answers) for Goldstone

2009-10-05T09:03:03+02:00

Former South African anti-apartheid activist, Maurice Ostroff, has devoted more effort to leading the fight against the Goldstone report than probably anyone else not paid to actually do so. Throughout the process he has opened up a civil dialogue with Goldstone, sending through points and questions like the ones below, that Goldstone is unwilling, or perhaps unable, to answer.

Dear Richard,

[...]

Paragraph 9 of the Report deals at very great emotional length with the unfortunate shooting of Amal, Suad, and Samar, daughters of Abed Rabbo, and accepts, without any attempt at corroboration, testimony that they walked out of their house carrying white flags to find an Israeli tank. The Report describes two soldiers sitting on top of the tank, one eating chips, the other eating chocolate. One cannot but wonder how the witnesses in the tense circumstances were able to distinguish what the soldiers were eating. Without warning, the report says, a third soldier emerged from inside the tank and started shooting at the three girls. All very incriminating, creating an emotional picture of callous Israeli soldiers eating chips and chocolate while a third mows down innocent children carrying white flags. It is not inconsequential that none of these types of emotional descriptions are used when Hamas' infractions are mentioned.

BUT! Most importantly, the writers of this Report failed in their bounden fact-finding duty to check the accuracy of the information they purveyed. With just a little attention to detail, they would have read the report by Palestinian News Agency Ma'an and MECA the Middle East Children's Alliance, that the unfortunate girls were killed in collateral damage from an attack by Israeli planes. No tank, no soldiers eating chocolate (or chips), and no white flags are mentioned. I trust you will agree that the Report must be amended to correct this and other inconsistencies.

Sept 26, 2009

Dear Richard,

While you may not feel an obligation to respond to individual responses, very many responsible people believe that because of the momentous implications of your report, all persons who have taken the trouble to address sincere credible questions to you, deserve the courtesy of considered replies to the issues raised, if not in direct correspondence, at least in your published comments. In fact, if the HRC is to arrive at a meaningful decision, it too, is entitled to receive explanations to questions that have been raised.

Unfortunately, none of the valid critical issues that have been raised have been addressed in your many public comments in the press and on TV.

Your recent interview on Al Jazeera TV was disturbing, and I quote only one example of a factor that cries out for correction. You quoted the firing on a mosque as one of Israel's heinous crimes, denying Israel's claim that mosques were used for military purposes and storage of weapons. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbi6FnvWwvc

Yet on August 14, while your report was being prepared, a fierce gun battle was reported as Hamas stormed a mosque that had been taken over by a group of Islamic militants resulting in 22 people killed, (or massacred in the words of Mahmoud Abbas), including an 11-year-old child, and 125 badly wounded.

This incident unambiguously confirms Israel's claim that mosques are used for military purposes and in the circumstances it is not only fair, but incumbent that your report be amended accordingly. Or does Hamas enjoy the impunity that you mistakenly referred to in regard to Israel, during that interview?

Sincerely
Maurice

Spet 25 2009

Also see Ostroff's recent article at the Intellectual Conservative: Send the Goldstone Report Back to the Drawing Board

Let's Talk Israel

2009-09-15T11:33:34+02:00

David Saks, Associate Director of the SA Jewish Board of Deputies has requested that we temporarily remove the link to "Let's Talk Israel" as they are currently experiencing some technical glitches.

The post has temporarily been removed. We will repost the link when it's sorted out.

My apologies to users. There is a problem with the link to the above site, so that only the introductory voice-overs to the various sections can be accessed and not the main content. We are working on this. In the meantime, if IAS could please remove the above posting - again, sincere apologies.

David Saks

Joel Pollak to Run for Congress

2009-09-03T18:26:14+02:00

Our friend Joel Pollack has just publically announced his intention to run for a seat in the US Congress.

You can see him announce it here on fox news: The announcement on Fox news

He has also put up a website www.pollakforcongress.com. I encourage people to sign up and offer support.

Joel is smart, principled, capable and deeply committed to human rights and the safety and security of all people in the United States and the state of Israel. America needs more people like Joel in Washington DC!

Joel's Facebook page has all the details of his campaign. You can also follow him on twitter at www.twitter.com/joelpollak

Good Luck Joel!

Dugard Heads Witch Hunt of South African Jews

2009-09-03T18:16:01+02:00

Former Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Israeli-Palestinian Disputed territories John Dugard and the Media Review Network are considering an application to the International Criminal Court to bring the charge of war crimes against 75 South Africans who allegedly served in the IDF during the recent war in Gaza.

Last month we blogged about the anti-Israel lobby’s attempt to convince the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to charge 75 unnamed South Africans who allegedly took part in the recent war in Gaza.

Since South Africa is a signatory to the Rome statue, its citizens can be prosecuted at home for war crimes committed elsewhere.

Professor John Dugard is leading the attempts, flanked by a possy of Jew haters at the Media Review Network, which has recently featured hate stories on their website about Israelis kidnapping Palestinians in order to steal their kidneys. They have also featured articles about Holocaust denial and about a Jewish Broederbond conspiracy in South Africa. Dugard should be judged by the company he keeps.

Since the NPA has up until now not investigated the charges, Dugard is threatening to take the charges to the International Criminal Court.

Even though Dugard concedes that “except for one individual, whom he declined to name, there was scant proof that these soldiers actually participated in the fighting” he has nevertheless wasted the time of the NPA and intends to do the same with the ICC. Its not like the NPA are busy with a serious crime problem!

Since there is no attempt to call for charges against war crimes committed by Hamas, since there is no proof that the 75 South Africans actually took part in the fighting, and since there is no proof that even if they did that they were involved in war crimes, I can only conclude that this is nothing but a sinister witch hunt against South African Jews.

Here’s the full report from IOL: War crime warning to SA

Mail & Guardian Interviews Finkelstein

2009-09-03T07:41:44+02:00

Is it just me, or is there something wrong with the tone of the introduction to this interview? MG: People exploit tragedy for personal gain.

“Those South Africans with an interest in the conflict in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories would have had a field day recently. First, there were speaking engagements by Alan Dershowitz, the pro-Zionist author of A Case for Israel, followed by discussions and talks by David Benjamin, legal adviser to the Israeli Defence Force.”

It doesn’t say Jews or Zionists have had a field day, but it still sounds to me like a taunt. If there is some kind of comparison between what the Israel supporting and Israel hating crowds have been up to however, then to say the Zionists have had a “field day” is crazy talk. First of all, there were no “speaking engagements by Alan Dershowitz” - he was not even in the country. His film was screened recently, but that hardly amounts to a speaking engagement! The Israel haters on the other hand have been entertained by a type of Harlem Globetrotters Finkelstein tour where he spoke at every opportunity, on virtually every campus and every radio station. He was typically left unchallenged on his every point, and this interview is a fine example.

The interview questions say it all, here’s a sample, but go see for yourself.

Although you are generalising, you talk about a superior ethnic identity complex amongst Jews in the US. Have you found the same thing here in South Africa?
How is it that Alan Dershowitz has managed to garner so much support in the US?

Oh dear.

Carte Blanche: El-Al a Front for Spooks

2009-09-01T20:36:28+02:00

Sunday’s episode of Carte Blanche featured an expose about a former El-Al security official’s shocking allegations of race profiling, degrading interrogations, and operating illegally under the nose of South African authorities at OR Tambo international.

Jonathan Garb went to Carte Blanche with these allegations after being dismissed from El-Al presumably for leading a protest for higher pay and better medical benefits.

Although most allegations were about racial profiling, considerable time was devoted to Virginia Tilley’s interrogation by El-Al in South Africa on her way to Israel. Tilley is a white woman who is one of the foremost anti-Israel lobbyists in South Africa. Had Carte Blanche done some research they would have found nothing at all sinister about a country interrogating someone who is leading the calls for the destruction of said state.

The Star reported on the story yesterday, claiming that Garb is leading a trio of former employees claiming that their former employer is a front for Israeli spooks.

The Star reports that Acsa’s Solomon Makgale said El Al had security threats because of the Middle East conflict but that the allegations were of concern.

If you missed the show, our friends at the Media Review Network (who are still pushing the blood libel that Israelis kidnap Palestinians to steal their kidneys) have the entire transcript, so you can find it there.

As for the response from El-Al, you can find it here: El-Al responds to Carte Blanche Allegations

El-Al Response

Last night’s Carte Blanche insert on the El Al airline showed the public only too clearly the dangers faced by the Israeli airline from terrorists and fundamentalists determined to attack innocent passengers irrespective of their ages, colours and creeds, and blow them into oblivion.

The security regulations enforced by El Al to ensure the safety of all its passengers, which is the first and most vital aspect of any passenger airline, are of the highest standard, and were attested to by the complainant himself who said that had El Al security been active at the time of the World Trade Centre attacks in New York in 2001, there would have been no 9/11.

Because of the nature of the threats made against the airline, El Al unapologetically questions and challenges any suspicious person or passenger. That is the airline’s right, and is similarly carried out by airlines all around the world. The accusation of racial profiling, however, is completely without justification: Virginia Tilley is white, and an outspoken enemy of Israel. In addition, among all the tens of thousands of people of different colours and religions who travel safely and regularly to Israel, the statements of two men cannot be taken as testament to a policy which in fact does not exist.

No-one who travels to the USA can deny that the security into and out of that country, and the checks at the various airports, are thorough and unpleasant but are necessary in these days of increased and unrestricted acts of terror and murder. While South Africa has to date remained fairly immune from such acts, no-one can afford to be complacent; and the fact that EL Al makes every effort to protect the lives of the passengers should be highly commended rather than condemned.

Update at 2009/09/03

A comment from the Blacklisted Dictator highlights the special need for El-Al security at foreign airports:

L.A. AIRPORT GUNMAN IDENTIFIED AS EGYPTIAN IMMIGRANT

The FBI identified the gunman who shot and killed two people in the Los Angeles International Airport yesterday as Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, a 41-year-old Egyptian who came to the United States ten years ago.

On the Fourth of July holiday, Hadayet opened fire at the LAX ticket counter of the Israeli national airline El Al, killing two and wounding several others. He was subsequently shot and killed by an El Al security guard. According to the FBI, the gunman used a .45-caliber handgun in the shooting, and was also armed with a 9-mm pistol and a six-inch hunting knife.

In the shootout, Hadayet killed 25-year-old El Al employee Victoria Hen and 46-year-old Jacob Aminov, who was waiting at the ticket counter. A 61-year-old Canadian woman was shot in the ankle and a male victim was treated for injuries received from being pistol-whipped. The El Al security guard who finally shot Hadayet was also treated for a knife-wound.

Update at 2009/09/03

The SA Jewish Report has reported today that since the labour lawsuit has taken a political twist, Michael Bagraim has recused himself from the case.

Wits Responds to Allegations of Racial Profiling at Limmud

2009-08-30T20:48:40+02:00

I’ve received a couple of emails asking about a recent letter the Vice Chancellor of Wits University sent to the entire campus. The letter was a response to allegations lead by the Palestine Solidarity Committee that “apartheid era” styled racial profiling took place on campus during Limmud.

During Limmud, a small silent protest was allowed just outside the entrance to the building where the lectures took place. I have been told that the number of protestors allowed was agreed upon prior to the start of Limmud.

Outside the campus, some individuals, draped in Palestinian regalia, were prevented from entering the university. Whilst private security was on-hand to ensure the safety of all Limmud attendees, when I entered the campus it was the Wits security that allowed me in whilst preventing a young screeching Muslim man from entering. It is clear to me that race was not a factor in deciding who to allow onto campus. In fact, during the course of Limmud, I noticed many black students attending some of the lectures I was in. But even if I hadn’t seen black students, why on earth would Limmud, a liberal and progressive Jewish movement, prevent black and Muslim people from entering the campus? What would they possibly have to gain from such discrimination?

I’d be interested to know why it seems that students reported their allegations of racial profiling to the PSC. Are they the gatekeepers of racial equality on campus? My conclusion is that people who were barred entry, were those that were looking to join the protest, which had already used up its allowed quota. I say this because the allegations have been spearheaded by the PSC, whose strategy on campus is often to hurt Israel by painting its supporters as apartheid loving racists. The PSC’s cries of racism are equivalent to Bernie Madoff shrieking antisemitism!

I have reprinted the letter from Wits Vice-Chancellor and Principal professor Loyiso Nongxa. It’s a despicable display of cowardice, giving into the accusations, almost accepting them as fact, and then ordering an investigation. In the letter Prof. Nongxa explains his personal view, that anyone (and that would include students) who can justify what happened in Gaza, should not be welcome to Wits University. This means that almost all Jewish students who support Israel’s right to self defence, in the eyes of the Vice Chancellor, should not be allowed at Wits.

It’s an extremely heated issue and its obvious from his personal views that Prof. Nongxa has sympathy with the cause of the students making the allegations. Without the investigation even starting, he issues an apology and thereby accepts the allegations as fact – “I would like to apologise to the all people who felt targeted because they were Black.”

The investigation will be headed by former apartheid activist advocate Geoff Budlender.

From: Vivienne Rowland
On Behalf Of #Dept-Marketing-WitsNews
Sent: 13 August 2009 04:28 PM
To: #Dept-Marketing-WitsNews
Subject: MESSAGE TO THE WITS COMMUNITY

Dear Members of the Wits community

Yesterday, at rather short notice, I met with a group of students who issued an ‘open letter’ that was circulated widely, expressing their concerns at Wits having hired one of its venues to an external Jewish organisation, Limmud, who invited a controversial speaker to their event over the weekend.

I undertook to initiate a formal investigation based on the disturbing allegations contained in the letter and in other communications that I have received in this regard.

It was brought to my attention, during the meeting, that (certain sectors of) the University community wanted a public statement to be issued from the University about the events of the last few days. The students informed me that failure to do so would lead to the conclusion that the University associates itself with the views and actions of the controversial speaker. I found this assertion disturbing, particularly because it reduces the commitment of the University to issues of human rights, freedom of speech and the right to protest, to a single event and how we respond to it.

My position as the Vice-Chancellor does not always qualify me to speak on behalf of the Wits community on all matters. Sometimes I do, when I am confident that the majority of the University community would support that stance, the Dalai Lama issue being a recent example. I don’t feel confident that I can speak on behalf of the Wits community when it comes to the complex politics of the Middle East, and especially the ongoing conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis. I do have personal views that I will express below, knowing that certain members of the Wits community will be vehemently opposed to them.

As a South African who lived under Apartheid and who was once stripped of South African citizenship and declared, against my wishes, a citizen of a pseudo-country which I did not recognise, I am appalled at what is happening in the Middle East. There can be no justification for what I see as atrocities committed against civilians. My late mother taught me that, as an adult, we should treat every child as our own. The traumatic experience of the children of Gaza haunts me. The destruction of people’s homes and livelihoods and the loss of their limbs and body parts horrifies me. The human being inside me would find it difficult to welcome to my home, and Wits is my home, anybody who would justify what has happened there, whether it’s based on legal, religious or historical grounds.

But we live in a diverse community and a country which values and celebrates differences and diversity and as the Vice-Chancellor of a public institution which invariably reflects this diversity, I have to uphold the values of freedom of expression which is an integral part of academic freedom.

I believe that many of us have not thought carefully about what it means to live in a society that celebrates freedom of speech – universities are spaces where all views should be aired and heard. Many of us have not thought carefully about what it means to live in a non-racial or non-sexist society. Sometimes we tend to impose on others our sectarian view of that future democratic, non-sexist and non-racial society.

Let me now offer a preliminary response to some of the allegations in the “open letter”. The first time I received notification about the weekend event at which Lieutenant Colonel David Benjamin was to speak, was on the morning of Friday, 7 August 2009. I responded to the student concerned and informed her that I was leaving for the Eastern Cape and that I would refer the issue to colleagues in the Vice-Chancellor’s Office. The students that I met with yesterday seem to disbelieve this response and one even called my response “outrageous”. The investigation will possibly throw some light on this issue. I appointed one of my senior colleagues as Acting Vice-Chancellor in my absence. On Saturday, I received correspondence between the Acting Vice-Chancellor and the students on their concerns and endorsed what was being discussed. The correspondence was cordial, respectful and spelt out the University’s views on freedom of speech and right to peaceful protest. On Tuesday, I received a briefing on how the difficult situation was managed in my absence and at short notice. I take full responsibility for all the decisions that were taken on my behalf while I was away - they are now my decisions.

Let me stress that I am appalled by allegations of racial profiling. There is no place for that in South African society and certainly no place for that at Wits. I would like this to be part of the investigation. If we are to look at this as an opportunity to learn about what it means to live in South Africa in the 21st Century, I would like us all, as members of the Wits community to reflect on our own prejudices around this matter. How many of us become uneasy or even panic when we see a Black, African male at night and instinctively worry about being robbed? What comes to mind when we see a Muslim woman wearing a burka or a Rastafarian student donning his colourful garments? This is racial profiling that we may be guilty of knowingly or unknowingly.

There have been questions raised about the presence of external security on our campus. This is a complex matter on which the University community should advise. There have been many instances when external security has been present on our campus without incident. Possibly the key issue here is how they behave when they are on our campus. It has been brought to my attention that people were photographed and that there are concerns that these photographs could be used for illegal or suspect purposes. I have already raised this matter with the parties concerned.

Another issue has been the use of University venues and how the University should exercise its responsibility in managing what takes place in these venues. This is again another complicated matter. Wits provides a platform for various (and often conflicting) views to be aired, and forms part of our commitment to freedom of expression and freedom of speech. As the Vice-Chancellor of Wits, I was not given the power to ’vet’ people who come onto campus, nor do I think that any one person within the University should have the right to do so.

Lastly, the students that I spoke with seem to feel that the senior management of the University have let them down, in not living up to their expectations with regard to the values to which they are committed and that they believe this University stands for. I am saddened by that and would like to apologise to them for feeling that way. I would like to apologise to the all people who felt targeted because they were Black. Earlier this year Prof. Yunus Ballim and I met with students who felt hurt that they have been targeted because they identified themselves with the State of Israel. They told me that this is part of their identity and upbringing. I was equally saddened by that and again will apologise to them for that hurt. I am saddened by the feeling of alienation of some Black students at Wits and apologise to them for that hurt. I am saddened by cases of violence against women students, in many cases these perpetrated by fellow male students. I would like to apologise to them for the hurt, some suffer in silence and never report these incidences. I am saddened by the acts of violence against gay and lesbian people. I am saddened by the intolerance that I witness in our community.

As I have indicated, I will be appointing an investigation into the matter and I will advise the University community as soon as more details pertaining to the terms of reference and timelines are decided.

Prof. Loyiso Nongxa
Vice-Chancellor and Principal Wits University
13 August 2009

Irwin Cotler Public Address on Genocide Convention

2009-08-23T21:40:01+02:00

International human rights and the Genocide Convention will come under scrutiny at a public Lecture at Wits University on Thursday 27 August at 6pm at the Great Hall Wits University. Professor Irwin Cotler, former Canadian Justice Minister and world-renowned constitutional and comparative law scholar, will address issues around the effectiveness of international bodies in addressing human rights concerns.

Topical current events will be discussed. These include the indictment of Sudanese President Al-Bashir on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court, the danger of a nuclear, rights-violating Iran and the Goldstone report on the Gaza conflict.

The event is being co-hosted by the Faculty of Humanities at Wits University, The Weekender and the SA Jewish Board of Deputies.

Topic: The Genocide convention 61 years later: What have we learned, what must we do?

Time: 6PM

Venue: Great Hall, Wits University

RSVP: events.avusa.co.za/theweekender

Enquiries: Lucille Davids on 011 280 3652

Also, see Cotler's devastating critique on the seriously flawed UNHRC Goldstone commission: Tained to the Core

SAJBD Conference - Facing Forward 2009

2009-08-19T21:21:21+02:00

The Chairman and National Executive Council of the

South African Jewish Board of Deputies

have pleasure in inviting you to the

Opening Session of their 45th National Conference

----------- Address By ----------

H E Mr Jacob Zuma

The President of South Africa

----------- Address By -----------

The Hon. Irwin Cotler, MP

Former Canadian Minister of Justice

Topic Pursuing Justice: Jewish Values and Human Rights

VENUE the Maroela Room, Sandton Sun Hotel ADDRESS Corner 5th and Alice Streets, Sandton

WHEN Saturday 29 August at 20h15 Please be seated by 20h00 DRESS Smart Casual

RSVP Shirley to make a booking and obtain a confirmation reference number TEL 011 645 2583/23
E-MAIL beagle@beyachad.co.za

Download Conference Invite

(This advert has been paid for by the SA Jewish Board of Deputies)

An open letter to former minister of Intelligence Ronnie Kasrils

2009-08-18T20:37:28+02:00

From Maurice Ostroff

Dear Mr. Kasrils

As you and I have a common interest in philosopher Bertrand Russell, you may recognize this quote by him. “Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives' mouths”

The reason I consider this quote appropriate, is my conviction that your renewed, relentless attacks on Israel, are similarly based entirely on misinformation.

Let’s take the epiphany you described in your article "Sixty years after Deir Yassin", published last year on the anti-Israel website Electronic Intifada. You explained then that your anti-Israel attitude originated when you were “shaken to the core” by horror stories about an alleged massacre of Palestinian villagers at Deir Yassin in 1948.

The incontrovertible fact is that the story was a complete fabrication by Hazem Nusseibeh, editor of Palestine Broadcasting Service's in 1948, on the direct instructions of the secretary of the Arab High Committee, Hussein Khalidi. Incontrovertible, because during a 1997 BBC TV interview, Nusseibeh himself, admitted that he was instructed by Khalidi to falsify claims of atrocities at Deir Yassin so as to encourage Arab regimes to attack Israel. You can view a video clip of this interview at http://deir-yassin.tripod.com/ and if you have any doubts about its authenticity, you can check it out with the BBC.

Nusseibeh, told the BBC that the fabricated atrocity stories about Deir Yassin were "our biggest mistake," because "Palestinians fled in terror and left the country in huge numbers after hearing the atrocity claims" adding a new facet to research about the reasons so many Arabs fled in 1948.

All the stories about an alleged massacre that were rapidly circulated around the world were based on this fiction.

In your writings you frequently refer to the statement by then Israeli agriculture minister, Aharon Cizling, who said in a cabinet meeting "Jews too have behaved like Nazis and my entire being is shaken". In the light of this BBC revelation, Cizling's outburst must be seen as a manifestation of extreme Israeli sensitivity to reports, albeit false, of Jewish misbehavior. He was so deeply moved by the fabricated reports of behavior that is not tolerated in the IDF doctrine, that he used the exaggerated and offensive Nazi comparison.

The unreliability of your information sources is underlined when you quote Ilan Pappe, and it is relevant to point out that when Pappe was a professor at Haifa University, he vigorously defended Teddy Katz, a student whose Master's thesis was proved in a court of law to contain fabricated evidence of a fictitious massacre of unarmed civilians at a village called Tantura.

The horror stories about Israel, that you refer to, would justify your strong reactions were they factual and I trust that you will accept in good faith some contrary information from a person whose outlook in regard to apartheid is not unlike yours. When you were about five years old, I was already a low-key anti-apartheid activist and member of what was probably the first mass movement of whites promoting the liberation of Blacks, namely the Springbok Legion that was formed during WW2 by South African soldiers who objected to the discriminatory treatment of fellow Black soldiers. Later, as a Wits student, I participated in many anti-apartheid meetings on the Johannesburg City Hall steps where we were attacked by opponents and hounded by the security police. I admired some great personalities who you certainly also knew very well, like the late Jock Isacowitz and the late Wolfie Kodesh. Most of all I was influenced by Chief Albert Luthuli who insisted on peaceful coexistence even after the massacre at Sharpeville. The sad factual difference between the ANC and the PLO or Hamas is that the latter two have lacked leadership of the caliber of Chief Luthuli or Nelson Mandela.

While your empathy for the PLO as fellow freedom fighters is understandable I remind you of some concrete facts that show that the parallels you have drawn, in some of your articles, between the ANC struggle against apartheid and the Palestinian struggle are not quite congruent

Whereas the ANC Charter states "South Africa shall strive to maintain world peace and the settlement of all international disputes by negotiation - not war" article 9 of the PLO Charter declares bluntly that the armed struggle is not merely tactical, it is the overall strategy. The Hamas charter makes it even clearer that there is absolutely no room for peaceful negotiation. Article 13 unambiguously states, "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.”

It is difficult to understand your support for the irrationality of the Hamas concept, so different from the sober tone of the ANC Charter, as illustrated by obsessive phobia about freemasons, rotary clubs, Lions and similar organizations, promising that the day Islam is in control, these organizations, will be obliterated.

Nor would the ANC tolerate the incitement to indiscriminate violence against uninvolved civilians, (women, children and invalids alike), which continues in mosques and PA controlled media and is taught in schools from the earliest age.

Mr. Kasrils, what I find most difficult to understand is how your narrow focus on Israel appears to obscure your view of gross crimes in your own backyard that cry out for your attention. In his January article in The Citizen, Andrew Kenny wrote of your support of Robert Mugabe’s tyranny in Zimbabwe. He referred to a radio talk in which you called for pressure on that “murdering regime called Israel” and you suggested that because pressure against apartheid had worked it would work against Israel.

Kenny wrote, that although you tacitly acknowledged that pressuring Mugabe’s regime would help to bring it to an end, you never publicly condemned his tyranny even after he slaughtered around twenty thousand black people in operation Gukurahundi, murdered, mutilated, tortured, beat and gang-raped people who voted against him, wrecked the economy and drove the Zimbabwean people into hunger and despair

I ask the same question Kenny asked. “Why doesn’t Kasrils shout as loudly as possible against Mugabe’s crimes?” and I wonder as he did, why you care about third party reports about the Palestinian people, 8 000km away, but not about the obvious suffering of Africans on your border.

I would appreciate a considered response, which will be distributed in the same manner as this open letter.

Sincerely, Maurice Ostroff

In Defense of Nadav Tamir

2009-08-17T21:34:32+02:00

Israel's consul-general in New England, Nadav Tamir, has been is serious hot water over the last few weeks for a memo he authored that criticized the current Netanyahu led government’s confrontational stance towards the Obama administration (see FM fumes over Boston Consul's remarks).

He warned that "The atmosphere of confrontation between the Israeli government and the Obama administration puts the American-Jewish community, which is so important to us, in a difficult position. Many of them are distancing themselves from the State of Israel because of this conflict."

Having spent a fair amount of time recently in the United States, I think sadly Tamir is dead right. It is time Israel and the rest of the Jewish world wakes up to the fragile nature of American Jewish support, particularly among the youth.

In general meeting young American Jews, particularly the non-Orthodox variety, has been a profoundly disturbing experience for me. For many, being Jewish is as significant as being left handed or having brown hair and perhaps eating Gefilte fish. Their knowledge of and connection to the Jewish people, its traditions and culture is pathetic. So often I get the question, “are there really Jews in South Africa”? And this is from tertiary educated people.

They do not feel anti-Semitism and threats to Jewish identify in the same way many other Diaspora Jews do. There are no guards outside synagogues. When one explains that many communities are forced to establish security organizations to protect themselves and their institutions they seem shocked at the thought. This lack of any real anti-Semitism coupled with their poor Jewish identity leads many to question the need for a Jewish state. One person recently put it to me that it would have been far better if all the Jewish refugees that have found safe haven in Israel over the decades had just come to America. When I tried to explain the desire for national self determination and the benefits of being a free people in your own land like having Jewish holidays as national holidays, I got a strange look. If you know how many young Americans Jews go to university on Yom Kippur, you would understand how out of touch my example was.

Support for the Democratic Party, and particularly for Obama, is for many equivalent to Judaism. I sometimes have to pinch myself when people speak of enshrining their Jewish values through their work in pro-choice, anti-gun, pro affirmative action or anti-climate change activism. And if one looks closely at the history of Reform and Conservative Judaism in America this makes a lot of sense. The laws and traditions were quite literally rewritten and recreated to comply with modern Liberal thinking. They owe much more allegiance to these principals than some piece of land thousands of miles away.

Nadav Tamir gets this. I have had the good fortune to hear him speak to a large group of young Jews in Boston and was thoroughly impressed. His message is not the rah rah type of Zionism that we in the rest of the Jewish world may be used to. He understands his audience and connects with them and connects them to Israel through their ‘Jewish values’.

Rather than scold Nadav, the new government in Israel should listen to his warnings. The old style blanket American Jewish support for Israel will not continue indefinitely. As more and more of the next generation take on roles in the Jewish community and the broader American society, Israel will have to change its message and its actions if it wishes to maintain its special relationship with American Jewry. People like Nadav are key to bridging this potential and dangerous divide.

Palestinian Lobby Seeks to Incite Racial Hatred Against SA Jews

2009-08-12T22:30:44+02:00

A SAPA press report today alleged that organisers of Limmud prevented black students from entering the Wits Medical School on Sunday where David Benjamin, legal advisor to the IDF, was speaking.

These accusations reveal the nauseous depths to which the Palestinian lobby will sink in order to delegitimize Jewish South Africans. To their good fortune, they were obviously armed with a partisan journalist willing to blindly report on any accusations.

Under the sub-heading “Harassment and racial profiling” the report quotes some hysterical claims from students without bothering to contact Limmud to determine the accuracy or allow a response. The lies are backed up with action, as 50 students are reported to have marched at Wits against this fabricated racial profiling.

“Students allege that on the day of the talk, a private security firm took control of the gates at the university and barred many students, mostly black, from entering.

"They were disallowing black students onto campus for the most part... the control of campus gates were taken over by a private security company who were mostly 17- to 25-year-old young white men," said student, Natasha Vally.

Protest organiser, Mbuyiseni Ndlozi, said around 50 students would gather on campus on Wednesday and march to the concourse at Senate House.

‘Harassment and racial profiling’

The students are requesting that the university management distance itself from Benjamin's visit and the "harassment and racial profiling" that took place on Sunday.

"They had private security people monitoring who comes in and who goes out. Some of the students were barred and most of these were black or Indian," he said.

Vally said students had expressed concern over Benjamin's visit, due to his role in the Gaza war, by sending letters to management.

"We are not asking that the university distance itself from him because of his opinions but because of his deeds. It's because he himself indicated his involvement in the Gaza war."

Students want university management to acknowledge there was racial discrimination on campus on Sunday and to disassociate itself from Benjamin.

Read the rest of this smutty piece of reporting here: Wits protest over soldier's visit

This is nothing but a deliberate attempt to incite tensions between Jews and black South Africans by claiming that Jews are racist. Yet no racial profiling took place. This is a bald faced lie – which follows hot-on-the-heals of the lobbie's previous lie (as per theMedia Review Network) about Jews kidnapping Palestinians and stealing their kidneys to make money.

A small protest was allowed at Limmud, with about 15-20 (as per the legal standards for protests at private events) anti-Israel activists gaining permission to demonstrate inside the university. No-one was allowed to enter unless they had either paid and registered for Limmud, or had in their possession a Wits student card (and I saw at least one woman enter with a card that was obviously not hers but which looked to belong to a prominent Wits professor).

When I entered the grounds I heard the high pitched complaints of a young gentleman demanding why I was allowed access yet he was not. The answer was quite simple. I was registered for Limmud. He wasn’t. Nor did he have a student card. Why should this young man, draped in the Palestinian supporter’s club official gear, be allowed inside the grounds of a university where he is not registered? And it wasn’t a young white Jewish man that prevented his entry. It was Wits security.

Here are some shots of the protest within the grounds of the Wits Medical School, just outside the building where the Limmud lectures took place. On many occassions protestors, particularly those outside the univeristy, shouted that we were Nazis.

Here’s the official response from Limmud.

Baseless Misinformation Needs to be Countered

As an innovative organization that arranges a festival of Jewish learning and culture, Limmud SA embraces the full spectrum of Jewish religious and political opinion and thought.

Given the large number of delegates involved at Limmud SA and the potential threat of violence, the University and Limmud SA worked together to increase security. Members of the University and conference delegates were all allowed to enter onto the university premises. The notion that racial profiling took place is a lie put out to try and harm the image of Limmud SA and the University with no justification. It is also offensive in that it assumes all Jews are whites (which is false) and that we did not have delegates who were of differing racial groups. It also represents an ugly form of anti-semitism, seeking to label Jews as racist. Indeed, the protesting groups organised by the Palestine Solidarity Committee repeatedly hurled abuse at conference delegates calling those - simply because they were Jewish - Nazis and racists. This goes beyond the boundaries of legitimate speech into hate speech and represents an insidious and disgraceful form of discrimination.

The Wits University Community who are concerned with equality, dignity and freedom for all would have been proud of the way in which the Limmud SA conference was conducted on Wits campus. If anyone wishes to come forward with comments as to the way in which any aspect of the Limmud conference was handled, we are open to hear any issues that need to be raised.

It is in the spirit of learning and constructive engagement that David Benjamin, a senior lawyer and former legal advisor to the Israel Defence Force, and Shlomy Zachary, a human rights lawyer working in Israel and an expert in international humanitarian law presented their differing views on the Middle East conflict and, in particular, Israel’s compliance with or violation of international law. Contrary to the claims made by the MRN and PSC, Benjamin has not been indicted on any charges nor has he been convicted of any crime.

Those committed to human rights will not convict someone without hearing their point of view, nor will they prevent them from speaking on the basis of an allegation. Wits University as with any other institution should not take any view or express any opinion on a matter that does not lie within its jurisdiction and is to be commended for allowing the Limmud organisation to continue to promote academic freedom and debate on Wits campus where some voices wish to drown those out.

Based on democratic principles, Limmud SA is committed to allowing the right of individuals to protest even against decisions of our organisation or those who present at Limmud SA. That right must be exercised responsibly and be consonant with the right of delegates to associate freely and enter into the conference area. A senior member of the Limmud executive defended the right of Wits students to protest whilst requesting that they enable conference delegates to enter the building. The protest went ahead peacefully on these grounds.

Free speech really matters where we are prepared to defend the rights of those with whom we may even vehemently disagree. Limmud SA represents the spirit of the post-apartheid South Africa by holding out the possibility of a community in which diversity and inclusivity are celebrated. We hope through dialogue and constructive discussion to advance the cause of knowledge but also hopefully peace and human rights in our world.

Campus Corner: SAUJS HAMAS Week at Wits University

2009-08-10T21:39:18+02:00

Hamas Week at Wits - "Terrorists not freedom fighters"

Well done to SAUJS for putting together a HAMAS week that will start tomorrow (Tuesday 11/08) at Wits University.

There will be daily audio and visual displays on the Library lawns from 12:00-14:15.

On Wednesday SAUJS are hosting Professor Hussein Solomon, progressive Muslim academic and director for the centre of international political studies, for a lecture that I urge everyone to attend. The lecture will be from 13:15 to 14:15 on Wednesday 12 August at the Senate House Basement.

On Friday 14th August from 13:15-14:15 SAUJS will host a lecture entitled “How Hamas differs from the ANC” that will be delivered by Advocate Madasa who is an ANC member and past chairperson of the parliamentary portfolio committee on foreign affairs, also at the Senate House Basement.

Rights and Wrongs in East Jerusalem

2009-08-10T20:00:09+02:00

The outcry over Israel’s eviction of two Palestinian families in the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah has been deafening. “Provocative”, “contrary to peace”, “violations of Israel's obligations under the U.S.-backed "road map" peace plan” ... Is this criticism fair? Is it balanced? I think the international community has missed the point on this whole issue.

Contrary to its portrayal in the media, this was not a political act. It was a legal one. The Israeli Supreme Court, renowned for its professionalism and impartiality, has ruled that the property does not belong to the Palestinians who lived there. It was purchased during Ottoman rule by Jews. After 1948, when the Jordanians gained control of that part of the city, they took over these plots under the Enemy Property Law. In 1956, 28 Palestinian families that had been receiving refugee assistance from UNRWA were selected to benefit from a relief project, in which they forfeited their refugee aid and moved into homes built on this formerly Jewish property. There is little dispute that the evictions were legal in terms of Israeli law.

A democratic state must adhere to the rule of law. If the Supreme Court makes a ruling, no matter how controversial, it must be implement. The international community cannot and should not expect the government of Israel to short circuit, the independence of its judiciary no matter how heart breaking the images of Palestinians thrown onto the street maybe.

But what they can demand is that Israel applies the rulings of the Supreme Court equally. The international community should be asking if Sheikh Jarrah why not the tens of illegal outposts in the West Bank that the Supreme Court has called on the government to dismantle. Why is it that alternative accommodation is sought for the illegal squatters in Migron before they are evicted but no such care is taken for these Palestinian families? There certainly does seem to be a double standard. One that is unacceptable and Israel should be called out for.