It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


California academics: State assembly resolution on Palestine activism ‘poses clear threat’ to a

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 08:29 AM
California academics: State assembly resolution on Palestine activism ‘poses clear threat’ to academic freedom

“The driving concern behind House Resolution 35 is not anti-semitism. Indeed, HR-35 itself is fundamentally anti-semitic because it associates and conflates with Judaism an unending list of well-documented racist policies and crimes against humanity committed by the state of Israel,” the slashing letter reads. “Far from the worthy goal of fighting real anti-semitism, this resolution was written to serve the propaganda aims of the government of Israel at the expense of constitutionally protected rights of California residents.” The pushback on HR 35 comes about two weeks after it was easily passed, with no debate, in the California Assembly. The resolution, which was drafted with the help of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, encourages colleges to ensure that “no public resources will be allowed to be used for anti-Semitic or any intolerant agitation.” Among the examples the resolution lists as being anti-Semitic is languaging describing Israel as an apartheid state; criticizing Israel of ethnic cleansing; and the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement.

Say goodbye to freedom of speech on campuses in California. I find it sicking that students are allowed to point out wrongdoings by their own government but Israel is off limits. Hopefully the voters out there will remember this and vote these anti Americans out come election time.

Here's a link to the bill.

House Resolution No. 35

Over the last decade some Jewish students on public postsecondary education institution campuses in California have experienced the following: (1) physical aggression, harassment, and intimidation by members of student or community groups in student-sponsored protests and rallies held on campus; (2) speakers, films, and exhibits sponsored by student, faculty, and community groups that engage in anti-Semitic discourse or use anti-Semitic imagery and language to falsely describe Israel, Zionists, and Jews, including that Israel is a racist, apartheid, or Nazi state, that Israel is guilty of heinous crimes against humanity such as ethnic cleansing and genocide, that the Jewish state should be destroyed, that violence against Jews is justified, that Jews exaggerate the Holocaust as a tool of Zionist propaganda, and that Jews in America wield excessive power over American foreign policy; (3) swastikas and other anti-Semitic graffiti in residential halls, public areas on campus, and Hillel houses; (4) student- and faculty-sponsored boycott, divestment, and sanction campaigns against Israel that are a means of demonizing Israel and seek to harm the Jewish state; (5) actions of student groups that encourage support for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah and openly advocate terrorism against Israel and the Jewish people; and (6) suppression and disruption of free speech that present Israel’s point of view

People of other religions face the same kind of criticism on campus where is the bill protecting them?

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 08:36 AM
reply to post by buster2010

This is a perfect example of why a clear and distinct line must be drawn to show where Judaism, Israel, and Jewishness diverge.

As long as all of these are allowed to be interchangeable, anything and everything is antisemitic.

Criticism of a government is not racist. I don't criticize the actions of the government of Israel because they are Jewish. I do it because I feel they are in the wrong in some cases, and should be held accountable as are the rest of the worlds nations.

And no, saying this does NOT mean I support terrorism against Israel, not at all.

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 08:36 AM
Interesting and i thought California was the most liberal state around.

I would argue that political activism is almost a inherent part of any post-secondary education institution.

I recall my time at University, the Israeli students and Palestinian students would meet in one of our campus's giant atriums where they would protest the activities of one another’s home nation.

The problem is when these demonstrations became mobile and a parade of 300 Israeli or Palestinian students marched through lectures. I am all for free speech, but do not infringe on my right to listen to my lecture.

I would agree that policies that are put in place to deter some levels of free speech is a terrible idea as it could set a precedent for future restrictions, however I am not opposed to policies that ensure a safe and comfortable learning environment for all.

edit on 14-9-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 08:41 AM
reply to post by buster2010

This is yet more evidence that most of our lawmakers don't even read the laws they pass. They're negotiated and written by well-connected special interests, who then lobby and bribe until they have enough support for passage.

It's almost enough to make one cynical....

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 08:51 AM

WHEREAS, The Assembly urges both the University of California and the California State University to take additional actions to confront anti-Semitism on its campuses, with due respect to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution; and

Great. Now where are the related bills that urge the same actions towards, anti-Muslims, anti-LGBT, anti-African American, anti-Asian, anti- etc. etc. etc?

If this bill had to be passed, it should have been an anti-Hate bill, not just anti-Semitism. Singling out specific groups and applying specific legislature on them is further segregating groups of people and won't make things any better.

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:08 AM

suppression and disruption of free speech that present Israel’s point of view
This tells me everything I need to know.I thought a representative democratic republic was suppose to nullify any advantages of any one specific group over another. Apparently not.

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:14 AM
Looks like a testing ground to bring in something bigger.

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:50 AM
Funny, an American ambassador is dead because of free speech allowing the derogatory film about Islam.
Why no law against that too?
The Whole thing is a blatant attack upon the first ammendment.

top topics


log in