Published by eJewish Philanthropy 12/19/23; Opinion by Yossi Prager After the brutal events of Oct. 7 and onset of the war between Israel and Hamas, funders, organizations and individual volunteers instantaneously leaped to action from a standing start, their on-the-fly efforts saving lives and raising the morale of a nation with many reasons to mourn. It sounds like the triumphant story of a spontaneous, ad hoc response from the Jewish philanthropic community — but I believe this framing is a fundamental misreading of the past few months, one which distorts the most important role of philanthropy. In Israel, the response on the ground was driven in large part by nonprofits like the humanitarian aid group IsraAid and mental health organization NATAL, whose capacity was also built over time by prescient funders. These organizations rose to the occasion in a dramatically impactful way because of groundwork laid over many years. Similarly, the strength of the North American response is primarily attributable to structures and institutions set up long before the crisis materialized. The Jewish federations, among North American Jewry’s oldest institutions, have again proven their fundraising mettle; UJA-Federation of New York alone has already allocated over $50 million from its Israel Emergency Fund. And the 3,300 Birthright Israel alumni who have volunteered so far to spend two weeks in Israel harvesting crops or packaging goods for civilians and the military — all paying their own travel costs — were only available only because, over 20 years ago, a group of committed philanthropists drew the Israeli government into a partnership that has brought 850,000 young people on trips to Israel. The response to antisemitism on campus is likewise attributable to investments made by the philanthropic community well before the post-Oct. 7 surge. Hillel, for instance, is the oldest of the Jewish campus organizations. In addition to serving and supporting the needs of students, local Hillel directors build relationships with university administrators. Both have become crucial in recent months. The Louis D. Brandeis Center, a nonprofit founded in 2012, is taking the lead in helping students bring discrimination cases against their universities; and Hillel, the Brandeis Center, and the Anti-Defamation League are coordinating with the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher to guide legal strategy and provide pro bono legal services to students who have experienced antisemitism on campus. Far-sighted philanthropic vision, development and investment made an effective response to the present crisis possible. There are other players in the campus arena that are playing significant roles; I’ll mention just three, though many more deserve recognition. The Israel on Campus Coalition was created in 2002 to share resources and coordinate strategies among the many pro-Israel campus organizations. Right now, the ICC is conducting ongoing polls; the findings they release both inform pro-Israel organizations about student perspectives and help them craft the language that will be most effective in engaging hearts and changing minds on campus. Passages, a Christian organization founded in 2016, has brought thousands of non-Jews to Israel for a Birthright-like trip that helps cultivate non-Jewish, pro-Israel voices against antisemitism on campus. And as recently as 2021, eight foundations came together to establish Shine a Light, a convening platform for organizations, companies and individuals to unite in shining a light on antisemitism. This is my key point: The most important role of philanthropy is not in the moment of crisis. It is in the generation of ideas and the creation of structures that serve the community under “normal” circumstances and can be ramped-up to meet the needs of a crisis as well. The best philanthropy is strategically driven and forward-looking rather than reactive. Dr. Joel Fleishman of Duke University actually argues that the ability to generate strategic initiatives and pilot new ideas is the chief public policy justification for the relatively free hand given to foundations in America. While businesses have shareholders to whom they report and government officials must seek re-election and nonprofit organizations have donors to satisfy, foundations are free to pursue ambitious and innovative ideas that may take much longer to develop than the limited patience of shareholders and electorates would otherwise allow. This is the “competitive advantage” of philanthropy at the highest level. This understanding of philanthropy has led the Jewish Funders Network to hire me to establish JFN Consulting, which provides personalized philanthropic services to individuals, families and foundations. In addition to offering introductory programs for new funders and foundation professionals and guidance on foundation governance and compliance, JFN Consulting draws on a network of 3,000 donors who can help inform the thinking and giving of their peers. The staff of JFN’s Israel office — who meet daily with Israel’s Home Command and are available to assist Israeli funders as well as Americans funding projects in Israel — are a particularly important asset right now. After 30 years leading strategic Jewish foundations, including AVI CHAI, I think JFN Consulting’s most important role will be helping funders operate strategically to realize the full potential of their competitive advantage. A crisis generally creates the space for revisiting and reevaluating old ways of operating, an opportunity the Jewish philanthropic community needs to seize. The opportunity to optimize philanthropic giving is especially important now as we experience the largest intergenerational transition of wealth in history. I am excited to lead JFN Consulting and look forward to working with interested funders who want to not only meet emergency needs but continue laying the groundwork for thriving Jewish communities for years and decades to come.
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Right Under Law (the Brandeis Center) commends Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) President Eric W. Kaler and Colorado State University (CSU) Interim Executive President Dr. Rick Miranda for their strong public statements condemning anti-Semitism and anti-Israel activity on their campuses. As the Brandeis Center noted in its letter congratulating President Kaler, “Such leadership has been sorely needed at this time when anti-Semitism has risen to historic levels, including on college campuses around the country.” CWRU’s President Kaler demonstrated exemplary leadership and moral clarity by condemning the “profoundly anti-Israel and anti-Semitic” Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) resolution passed by the undergraduate student government last semester. As President Kaler correctly noted in his statement: “Passing this resolution last night undermines the safety and comfort on our campus of members of our Jewish community.” His statement further emphasized that the resolution “undoubtedly [] promotes anti-Semitism. A vote for this resolution is clearly a vote against Israel and an aggression towards the Jewish members of our community.” Indeed, BDS often correlates with a rise in anti-Semitic incidents on campus. Therefore, it is important for university leaders to clearly and forcefully reject this pernicious manifestation of anti-Semitism, as President Kaler did. . In his statement, Interim President Miranda drew attention to “several steps [the university has taken] to improve the environment for Jewish students, staff, and faculty” in response to anti-Semitic incidents on CSU’s campus: . A [Presidential] task force [on Jewish Inclusion and the Prevention of Antisemitism] was charged with making several recommendations, and we have continued the work this year, and started with implementation. A formal unit in our Office for Inclusive Excellence, the Jewish Inclusion Advisory Council, has now been established to continue the work of the task force, and will be a resource for our entire community. We are adding faculty expertise in Jewish Studies to our Department of Ethnic Studies; new courses and curricula are being developed and planned for, pending further investments. We regularly engage with Hillel and Chabad, the Jewish student groups on campus, and we will look for ways to continue to support their activities, including the Holocaust Awareness events later this semester. . Dr. Miranda went on to personally recommend attendance of the school’s Holocaust Awareness event, describing it as, “a powerful remembrance of both tragedy, and triumph.” . Importantly, CSU has also endorsed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism (the IHRA definition). The IHRA definition is a vital tool in the efforts to combat today’s anti-Semitism. If anti-Semitism is not understood, it cannot be recognized and condemned for what it is. The IHRA definition assists university leaders in raising awareness about the dangers of anti-Semitism and educating their campus communities about the history and continuing impact of this form of bigotry and discrimination. . As leaders of educational institutions, university administrators have an obligation to speak out against hate and bigotry in all forms, including anti-Semitism. As anti-Semitism continues to rise on college campuses and beyond, it is vital for all university administrators to communicate a direct stance of support for their Jewish students. Campus leaders have a responsibility to maintain a safe and inclusive environment for all members of their campus community. . Anti-Semitism not only harms the targeted individuals but also creates a climate of fear and intimidation for the larger Jewish community on campus. The public statements from Presidents Kaler and Miranda help shape the community climate by reinforcing the message that anti-Semitism on campus is incongruent with the university’s values and will not be tolerated. . Speaking out against anti-Semitism is a first step. It is important for all college and university administrators to understand the best practices for combating campus anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism, and to follow-up with structural changes which protect Jewish students on campus. . The Brandeis Center applauds Presidents Kaler and Miranda for their public responses to anti-Semitism and encourages other administrations to follow their lead.
The Worst Place for a Jew to Be What is the worst place to be a Jew in America in 2021? According to Professor Günther Jikeli of Indiana University, it is on a college campus. His statement is substantiated by three new surveys of American college students and other Jewish Americans, all reported within the last month. The Louis D. Brandeis Center (LDB), as we have posted previously, found that 65 percent of openly Jewish students felt unsafe while 50 percent hid their Jewish identity. A national survey conducted by ADL and Hillel International discovered that one-third of Jewish college students experienced anti-Semitic hate directed at them personally in the last year. Three-quarters of respondents in an AJC poll stated that reports about the Gaza attacks on Israel last year made them feel less safe as Jews in the United States. Deeper dives into the reporting further clarifies just how threatening is the atmosphere facing Jewish students on U.S. campuses. According to the Hillel/ADL survey, 40 percent of Jewish students who reported incidents to campus staff believed that their reports were brushed off and remained unaddressed. The LDB survey stated that ten percent of students were aware of physical attacks on Jewish students. The AJC reported that forty percent of American Jews changed their behavior in the last year because of the fear of anti-Semitism. These are alarming statistics. That all three organizations, LDB, ADL/Hillel and AJC, each with their own surveys and statistical analysis methods, came to identical conclusions demonstrates how grave the crisis is. Moreover, three additional factors signal that the situation for Jews on campuses will only get worse. First, the interviewed students responded at the start of the 2021-22 academic year and their comments reflected their experiences during the previous year. But virtually every campus was closed for part of the 2020-21 academic year. These attacks, verbal and otherwise, therefore occurred when students were not physically interacting. We can only imagine how much worse things will be for Jews now that campuses have reconvened in person. Secondly, in the wake of the Gaza attacks, numerous academic departments have openly pledged to integrate Boycott, Divestment, Sanction beliefs and propaganda into their academic teaching. Just to be clear: BDS advocates have stated in no uncertain terms: “The real aim of BDS is to bring down the state of Israel,” because “Jews are not indigenous to Israel and have no right to self-determination.” In other words, these signing departments are going to teach their students, and require their students to regurgitate on exams and in papers, the “facts” that Israel is an illegitimate imperialist, evil state which perpetrates ethnic genocide. Finally, the campaign against Jewish students comes at a time when virtually every other group which claims an identity of its own is permitted to define its identity which then can neither be questioned nor commented upon by outsiders. Only Jews are denied that right. Ironically proliferating safe speech/safe spaces regimes on campuses have made the problem worse for Jews. Historically and even more so today, anti-Semitism/anti-Zionism is the one hate that is permitted to be shouted aloud. As a result, Jewish students are informed by their peers that if they do not sign on to the BDS and “Israel as apartheid” platform, they will be ostracized, forbidden from joining campus government and dismissed as racist. If you think this is an exaggeration, ask Rachel Beyda at UCLA and Max Price at Tufts University, both of whom faced cancellation from student governments solely for their Zionist beliefs. We have been here before. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency, which been running articles about these surveys, has a related article on its website. The JTA article describes how attacks on Jewish students were launched at the Technical College, at the Engineering College, which had been founded by Jewish philanthropists, and at one of the nation’s most prestigious colleges, where students and faculty organized a “Day Without Jews.” In each case the university administration proved unwilling or unable to make a stand to protect Jewish students. The byline was Poland; the date was February 28, 1938.
Penn State’s “Old Main” (Wikimedia Commons) Last week, the large menorah which sat outside the Zeta Beta Tau Fraternity house at Pennsylvania State University was first torn down and later stolen by vandals. Stunningly, the two incidents were unrelated, with separate parties first tearing down the menorah, then stealing it the next day. State College police identified suspects in both cases and department officials stated that they were working hard to bring them to justice. Though the menorah was recovered soon after its theft, members of Penn State’s Jewish community were rattled by the incident. Penn State is home to more than 4500 Jewish students. Zeta Beta Tau is the oldest and largest Jewish fraternity in the United States, with more than 140,000 Jewish men having participated in its chapters since 1898. The president of the Penn State chapter, Adam Schwartz, raised the money for the menorah following the shootings at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh. Schwartz stated that he was “appalled that this could happen once and disgusted that this happened again so soon.” Penn State Hillel Executive Director Aaron Kaufman stated, during a lighting of the menorah, with over 100 attendees, a day after its recovery, that “[t]he resilience in the face of the repeated desecration of this menorah is inspiring.” Penn State’s administration acknowledged the event, with college president, Dr. Eric J. Barron, penning a blog post following the incident. Barron also invoked the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting and referred to the recent ADL report on anti-Semitism. Barron states that “nationally there is an increase of anti-Semitism…in the context of the national climate, we need to protect against hate and prejudice of any kind.” The University Park Undergraduate Association (UPUA) also released a statement in support of the Jewish community following the incident. The UPUA condemned the incident, stating that they continue to “stand by our Jewish classmates, professors and community members as they face yet another attack on their community.” Despite the fear surrounding the vandalism and theft of the menorah, Zeta Beta Tau held all its planned candle lighting events, with many Penn State students, alumni, and members of the campus community in attendance for ceremony.
A trial date of March 4, 2019 has been set for a lawsuit brought against San Francisco State University (SFSU) by two Jewish students represented by The Lawfare Project and others. This lawsuit, which was originally filed in June of last year and re-filed on January 30, 2018, alleges that SFSU was complicit in the “intentional and discriminatory exclusion of Hillel and its members from the ‘Know Your Rights’ fair.” This fair was intended to serve as an informational and training aid for those vulnerable populations who felt targeted in our present political climate. According to the lawsuit, Hillel was originally intended to be “excluded from participating in the fair and was only invited to the fair by accident.” After this invitation was extended, the organizers of the event then found a way to exclude Hillel from attending the fair by changing the cut-off date for student groups’ registration. The intention and result was the exclusion of “Jewish students from full and equal participation in the event.” Furthermore, not only was Hillel precluded from attending this fair, but the SFSU administration had “direct and active involvement” in this discriminatory conduct. After the decision was made to exclude Hillel from the event, it was then sanctioned by high-ranking university officials, which, as the lawsuit claims, is “denied full and equal treatment to Plaintiffs Volk and Kern,” who were members of Hillel. Speaking on why Hillel was excluded from the fair, one of the organizers stated, “Providing a table to Hillel, whose conduct has threatened the safety of campus Palestinians and other advocates for justice in Palestine, is akin to giving a table to ICE at a gathering of undocumented communities, or having the Ferguson Police Chief table at an event discussing police brutality against black teenagers.” This statement, in conjunction with the fact that SFSU administrators approved the decision to exclude Hillel from the fair, is indicative of, “a larger systematic pattern of discrimination against Jewish students” at SFSU. The lawsuit claims that SFSU’s conduct is a violation of California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which requires that “government entities, including state universities, refrain from taking actions that suppress the rights of students or deprive any students of full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services based on their religion, race, ancestry, or certain other characteristics.” With the trial date now set, SFSU may now be held accountable for their failure to provide a safe and cooperative learning environment for their students.
On April 11, the Associated Students Senate at University of California—Santa Barbara (UCSB) unanimously passed a resolution condemning both anti-Semitism and hate speech. Passed on Yom HaShoah, which is the Holocaust Remembrance Day, this resolution affirms the Senate “will strive to be allies of the Jewish community,” and members of other identities including religion, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, class, and gender. This news coming out of UCSB, which has also been the site of numerous failed BDS resolutions, is another positive step in the ongoing battle against campus anti-Semitism. This resolution comes on the heels of numerous high-profile anti-Semitic incidents within the University of California system. In October of 2014, flyers circulated on UCSB’s campus stated that “ ‘9/11’ was Mossad,” Israel’s intelligence agency. In 2017, UC Berkeley’s student newspaper, the Daily Californian, published an anti-Semitic image following a speech by Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz. This image portrayed a grinning Dershowitz, who had recently given a speech on campus entitled the “Liberal Case for Israel,” while stepping on a man with a Palestinian flag and holding up an Israeli soldier shooting an unarmed man. While the Berkeley Chancellor responded by condemning both the incident, it left many in the University of California system feeling angry and disappointed. Most recently, the word “Jew” was found spray painted on a dumpster on UCSB’s campus. These incidents provided the catalyst for the Senate resolution as several students voiced their concern with the rising levels of anti-Semitism on campus. One student, who also was a student sponsor of the resolution, stated that these anti-Semitic incidents “makes Jewish people feel like they’re being compared to trash.” The resolution passed last week builds on a similar declaration agreed upon by the UCSB Associated Students Senate in 2015. Similar to the recently passed resolution, the 2015 declaration also “unequivocally condemn[ed] all forms of anti-Semitism…and reject[ed] attempts to justify anti-Jewish hatred or violent attacks as an acceptable expression of disapproval or frustration.” In an attempt to provide clarity and guidance as to what is considered anti-Semitic activity, the 2015 resolution adopted the United States Department of State definition of anti-Semitism and included numerous illustrative examples of this form of bigotry. The more recent declaration is broader in scope. It condemns anti-Semitism as well as all forms of hate speech. One of the authors of the resolution summed up the bill well, saying: “It’s not just the Jewish community. For example, I am not Jewish, however, I come from a Hispanic background and I am from a marginalized community as well, so I could sympathize with what my allies in the Jewish community have witnessed here at UCSB, and beyond UCSB. This resolution is something that not only condemns anti-Semitism, but also hate speech.” Sponsored by the Santa Barbara Hillel, Isla Vista Chabad, Guachos United for Israel, and Students Supporting Israel, this resolution also states that the Senate “will respect the right of all students to freedom of speech, while exercising its own First amendment rights to condemn hate speech whenever it occurs on campus.” The UCSB resolution is indicative of an encouraging trend occurring in recent years as more student governments have begun passing resolutions condemning anti-Semitism. For example, in 2015 the Undergraduate Student Assembly at the University of California—Los Angeles passed a resolution that denounced all forms of anti-Semitism and protected Jewish students from future discrimination. In addition, the Associated Students at San Diego State University passed “A Resolution to Condemn Anti-Semitism,” last year which had similar objectives. These resolutions, as well as those passed at campuses like Capital University, Indiana University, and the Toronto-based Ryerson University, formally adopted the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism as well. Setting the tone for the rest of the university community and raising awareness as to the prevalence of anti-Semitism and hate speech on campus, the UCSB resolution condemning anti-Semitism and hate speech represents a significant win in the struggle against anti-Semitism. As more campuses follow in UCSB’s admirable footsteps, the place for these regressive behaviors will soon no longer exist.
On June 19, 2017, The Lawfare Project and Winston & Strawn LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of six students and several members of the Bay Area Jewish community against San Francisco State University (“SFSU”). The complaint alleges that the university has fostered a climate of anti-Semitism on campus, violating the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights to free speech and equal protection, as well as their rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. President Leslie Wong, the California State University Board of Trustees, and other top administrative officials were named as defendants. SFSU Anti-Semitism The lawsuit was prompted by alleged complicity of university administrators and police officers in the disruption of an April 2016 event, when San Francisco Hillel invited the Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat, to speak on campus. At the event, audience members were allegedly “subjected to genocidal and offensive chants and expletives by a raging mob that used bullhorns to intimidate and drown out the Mayor’s speech and physically threaten and intimidate members of the mostly-Jewish audience.” Protesters yelled and chanted “Intifada,” [Arabic for “uprising,” the term “Intifada” has come to mean a call for violence against innocent Israeli civilians. The First and Second Intifadas in Israel resulted in 170 bombings perpetrated by Palestinian terrorists against Israeli civilians between 1989-2008], “Get the [expletive] off our campus,” and “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” [the destruction of Israel entirely] while university administrators allowed the disruption to continue and instructed campus police to “stand down.” The plaintiffs also allege that Hillel was unfairly excluded from a campus “Know Your Rights” fair aimed at members of vulnerable populations on Feb. 18, 2017. The complaint contends that the way administrators handled the April confrontation and the most recent exclusion is consistent with other incidents on SFSU’s campus over the years. According to the complaint, “SFSU and its administrators have knowingly fostered this discrimination… SFSU has not merely fostered and embraced anti-Jewish hostility — it has systematically supported … student groups as they have doggedly organized their efforts to target, threaten, and intimidate Jewish students on campus and deprive them of their civil rights and their ability to feel safe and secure as they pursue their education.” Readers may recall how a SFSU professor of ethnic studies, Rabab Abdulhadi, used university tax-payer funds to finance a student trip to the Palestinian territories, where they were met by Leila Khaled, a Palestinian heralded as the first woman to have hijacked an airplane in an act of terror in 1969; or former student Mohammad Hammad, who infamously posted a picture of himself holding a blade on social media, saying: “I seriously cannot get over how much I love this blade. It is the sharpest thing I own and cuts through everything like butter, and just holding it makes me want to stab an Israeli soldier.” Further, the complaint notes that “no actions were ever taken by SFSU against the disruptive students, no disciplinary charges were ever filed, and no sanctions were ever imposed against the groups or students responsible for committing these acknowledged violations.” Lawyers for the students hope the case will set a precedent under Title VI, which protects Jewish students from being targeted for their ethnic or ancestral identity. “Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the underpinning of the modern American ethos of equal protection and anti-discrimination. This case isn’t about Jews, it’s about equal protection under the law,” Brooke Goldstein, director of The Lawfare Project, said in a written statement. “If the courts fail to apply Title VI in this context, we are creating a massive loophole that will ultimately be exploited at some point to target other marginalized minority communities. If we refuse to enforce anti-discrimination law for Jews, if we say Jews don’t deserve equal protection, it will erode constitutional protections for everyone.”
Today, the Pitzer College Trustees announced that they had rescinded the recent BDS amendment passed by the Pitzer Student Senate. The initial amendment was made to the Student Senate’s Budget Committee Bylaws. The changes, introduced in April, included a new paragraph (Paragraph IV) within Article III (student Activities Funds) which prohibited the use of Student Activities Funds to “make payments on goods and services from any corporation or organization associated with the illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, as first delineated by the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.” This was followed by a list of corporations that would be affected by this change, comprised of the following companies: Caterpillar, SodaStream, Ahava Dead Sea Laboratories, Hewlett-Packard, and Sabra. Pitzer announced, following efforts by Hillel, the Academic Engagement Network, and various other organizations, that the board had decided to “rescind Paragraph IV and declare it to be of no effect.” Pointing to the complicated nature surrounding questions pertaining to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Pitzer stated that “[the conflict] is among the most complex, emotional and divisive issues of our time, and is one on which the College has not taken a position. Students and other members of the Pitzer community, from all faiths and backgrounds, represent the full spectrum of viewpoints on this challenging issue.” The letter from Pitzer goes on to state that it had not once in 54 years had to intervene in this regard, and that they felt they had to intervene due to the fact that this decision “[did] not align with Pitzer’s commitment to inclusion and respect for diverse viewpoints.” The vote that saw this BDS amendment pass, where Jewish students reported feeling ambushed due to the fact the it was held over Passover, is indicative of the similar vote taken this April at Tufts, a vote which also led to the adoption of a BDS resolution. With the quick action taken by Pitzer, in direct response to the outcry from the American Jewish community, a message has been sent to Tufts and other campuses that have adopted other over-reaching and misguided BDS resolutions, BDS will not be allowed to dominate campus life and organizations on these campuses. BDS is also on the retreat in academic associations in the United States, with the Modern Language Association overwhelmingly adopting an anti-BDS motion this month, and the lawsuit against the Academic Studies Association allowed to continue after a Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of the ASA professors in four out of six claims, authorizing the case to move forward to discovery. With push back against BDS in all of its main areas of attack, as well as over twenty-one US states having passed their own anti-BDS legislation, it is only a matter of time before BDS finds no home in the United States, whether on or off campus.
Temple University and Philadelphia Skyline We are deeply troubled by the physical assault against a Jewish student at Temple University. A CAMERA Fellow and member of the Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity, was punched in the face and knocked down and called “baby-killer, racist, Zionist pig” by individuals at the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) table that was part of “Templefest,” an organizational exhibition on August 20, 2014. A university campus should be the setting for thoughtful discussion and intellectual debate. Such an atmosphere should be encouraged by all responsible student groups. Unfortunately, Students for Justice in Palestine is not such a group. It has a proven track record of intimidation, harassment, and incitement merging into anti-Semitism against Israel and its supporters on campus. This is unacceptable and must be exposed and condemned by all those who value free speech, civil discourse, and cultural understanding among the diverse members of the university community, including students, faculty, and administrators. We are concerned that the campaigns and materials that are promoted and produced by SJP subvert the normal and proper campus environment and may inspire violence, particularly during Israel’s struggle against Hamas, an Islamist terror organization whose genocidal charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state and war against all Jews. Groups like SJP should be closely monitored by campus authorities to ensure that they abide by the basic university rules for open academic discussion and intellectual debate. Otherwise, there is no place for them on campus. We commend Hillel for its statement on the deplorable episode at Temple and encourage all groups and individuals to join in calling on Temple University to publicly condemn the recent assault committed at the SJP table on campus as well as to publicly condemn intimidation of any individual or group based on their identities or viewpoints. AMCHA Initiative Americans for Peace and Tolerance CAMERA David Horowitz Freedom Center Hasbara Fellowships Proclaiming Justice to The Nations, Inc. Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) Simon Wiesenthal Center Campus Outreach StandWithUs The Lawfare Project The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law Zionist Organization of America (ZOA)
LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus has published this article in the Jerusalem Post today: Ten ways that BDS is different now By KENNETH L. MARCUS 02/24/2014 22:33 Four academic associations have now also endorsed anti-Israel boycotts. On American university campuses, the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement is different in many ways and stronger than it was just a few semesters ago. Here are 10 ways that things have changed lately: 1. There’s blood in the water After years of defeat, the BDS campaign scored victories recently at the University of California campuses at Berkeley, Irvine and San Diego, among others. BDS resolutions are still mostly losers. These victories have been largely symbolic, since universities inevitably reject such student resolutions. Still, the wins license anti-Israel extremists to smear Israel with falsehoods and distortions. With each victory, extremists are emboldened. 2. Professors are engaged Worse, four academic associations have now also endorsed anti-Israel boycotts, including the American Studies Association (ASA). Fortunately, several faculty organizations oppose them. The American Association of University Professors, hardly a pro-Israel organization, opposes all academic boycotts. Three other faculty groups now forcefully advocate against BDS: Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, the Israel on Campus Coalition’s Center for Academic Engagement, and the new International Grass Roots Faculty Committee For Academic Freedom and Integrity. 3. The map is wider This is not just a West Coast issue anymore, if indeed it ever was. More East Coast and Midwest campuses are involved. Indeed, there has been recent notable anti-Israel activity at colleges and universities in nearly every corner of the United States. 4. The groups are smarter Instead of just hosting an “apartheid wall,” BDS activists will now typically host a series of anti-Israel events. This requires better organization, more manpower, and greater resources.They are also less likely to use explicit anti-Jewish epithets like “kike,” instead derogating pro-Israel Jews as “Zio-Nazis” or “ZiZis.”5. The battle is moving to the law schools Increasingly, anti-Israel groups are moving beyond the main campus and conducting BDS events at law schools. Fortunately, some law students are now organizing to oppose this. The Louis D. Brandeis Center, for example, has recently established active law school chapters at UCLA, the University of Pennsylvania and American University, with more in formation. (more…)