web analytics
October 25, 2014 / 1 Heshvan, 5775
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Lori Lowenthal Marcus’

Philly Federation: Urge Your Alma Maters to Leave Group Boycotting Israel

Wednesday, December 25th, 2013

The president of the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia sent out a statement condemning the recent boycott of Israeli academic institutions by the American Studies Association to the Federation’s boards of directors and trustees. The statement will also be sent to the general public.

In the statement, high-powered securities lawyer Sherrie R. Savett makes clear that the Philadelphia Federation finds the boycott of Israel by the ASA to constitute an effort to both delegitimize Israel and to undermine the fundamental principle of academic freedom.

Savett quotes condemnations of the boycott by the American Association of University Professors and by the Association of American Universities, and the suggestion of the executive committee of the AAU to “American scholars and scholars around the world who believe in academic freedom to oppose this and other such academic boycotts.”

Then she calls on all who will read the statement of the JFGP to do two things.

First, she suggests that “any academics or people who are closely affiliated with the leadership of a college or university, to contact them regarding institutional resignation.” Several schools have already withdrawn their membership in the ASA because of the boycott of Israeli academic institutions.  Those schools include Penn State University, Brandeis University, Kenyon College and Indiana University.

Second, she asks Federation supporters and others in the region to “condemn this action and exert influence by writing to the presidents and provosts of your alma maters, calling on them to make public statements in opposition to all academic boycotts.

The Jewish Press reached Savett by phone who was still in her law office late in the afternoon on Christmas Eve.

“There is a concerted strategy of public relations warfare here in the U.S. to poison the minds of students and others against Israel.  We have to use our voices loudly and clearly to push back at the deep-rooted anti-Semitism that is driving these efforts to destroy and dismantle the state of Israel,” Savett said.

“The goal of the people driving these boycotts is to turn Israel into a pariah state, and then to destroy that state, and they are doing this in the guise of liberalism.

“We at the [Philadelphia] Federation call upon universities and colleges to withdraw from the ASA and to condemn it for embracing this boycott of Israeli academic institutions, a move which is antithetical to academic freedom.”

The Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia is the first Federation to take such a clear, unequivocal, action-oriented stance against the ASA boycott. Go Philly!

This is the statement that was sent out by Sherrie R. Savett, president of the JFGP, on Tuesday, Dec. 24

Good morning everyone,

 As you are well aware, last week the American Studies Association (ASA) voted to adopt an academic boycott of Israeli academic institutions.  Unfortunately, this issue has gained national attention.  Coverage also spotlights several organizations that have or are considering endorsing anti-Israel resolutions. In the case of academic boycotts, these efforts both seek to delegitimize Israel and undermine the fundamental principle of academic freedom.

Together with the 40,000 member American Association of University Professors (AAUP), we believe in and support the right of scholars to freely pursue ideas without being targeted for repression, discipline, or institutional censorship. To echo the AAUP, the ASA “vote represents a setback for the cause of academic freedom.”

Further, the Executive Committee of the Association of American Universities (AAU), an association of 62 leading research universities in the United States and Canada including Harvard, Stanford and Yale, condemned the move. “Any such boycott of academic institutions directly violates academic freedom, which is a fundamental principle of AAU universities and of American higher education in general,” their statement read. “Restrictions imposed on the ability of scholars of any particular country to work with their fellow academics in other countries, participate in meetings and organizations, or otherwise carry out their scholarly activities violate academic freedom. The boycott of Israeli academic institutions therefore clearly violates the academic freedom not only of Israeli scholars but also of American scholars who might be pressured to comply with it. We urge American scholars and scholars around the world who believe in academic freedom to oppose this and other such academic boycotts.”

There are currently efforts underway by academics both in and outside of ASA to call on their universities to withdraw their institutional memberships from the ASA using the message of the endangerment of academic freedom and the singling out of one country for discriminatory treatment. If you are an academic or closely affiliated with the leadership of a college or university, contact them regarding institutional resignation.

Please see the attached list of institutions that hold institutional membership in ASA. Two universities have already dropped their membership and many have publicly condemned the boycott move (they are listed in the attached document).

We ask you to join us in the effort to condemn this action and exert influence by writing to the presidents and provosts of your alma maters, calling on them to make public statements in opposition to all academic boycotts.

Thank you for your leadership.

Clever PR Move: Al-Quds University Offers Course on Hate Speech

Tuesday, December 24th, 2013

In early November, a rally vilifying Israel and glorifying jihad and martyrdom took place on the campus of Al-Quds University. Following articles about this appearing in various media outlets, there was a public outcry, particularly amongst those in some ways affiliated with American universities that have academic relationships with Al-Quds.

After his initial clumsy public relations move to quell the outcry fizzled, Al-Quds University president Sari Nusseibeh has now moved on to a more subtle form of what still appears to be faux contrition. Al-Quds University, home of the Abu-Jihad Museum, named for one of the most notorious Jew/Israeli/American murderers of all time, will be offering a course this summer on “Hate Speech and Racism.”

Still, this effort is a far more masterful public relations move than Nusseibeh’s original “Blame The ‘Jewish extremists’” for making a big deal about an anti-Israel hate-theater performance on his campus which took place on Nov. 5.

In a move that clearly surprised Nusseibeh, the presidents of two American schools with long-time close links to Al-Quds were not satisfied with his offensive statements and finger-pointing (at Jews!).  As Brandeis President Fred Lawrence said, Nusseibeh’s public response was “unacceptable and inflammatory.”

Because of the rally and Nusseibeh’s response to criticism about it, both Brandeis and Syracuse universities severed their ties to Al-Quds. Brandeis also removed Nusseibeh from the board of advisers of its Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life.

SPECIAL SUMMER COURSE ON HATE SPEECH ONLY APPEARS IN ENGLISH VERSION WEBSITE

In a move that might be lauded as nearly brilliant by westerners, and a sell-out by his own constituency if word gets out, this coming summer the Al-Quds University will offer a summer course on “Hate Speech.”

In a posting on the English version – and only on the English version – of its website, Al-Quds announced that in June and July of 2014, Al-Quds will be offering a course on Hate Speech and Racism.

Of course nothing at all about the summer course on Hate Speech appears on the main, Arabic language version of the Al-Quds University website. And once you get past the perfectly reasonable-sounding title, a few alarm bells may go off.

For one thing, the course on Hate Speech and Racism which Al-Quds University is offering this summer not only does not appear on the Arabic website for the school, the course will be taught in English.  Given that the vast majority of Al-Quds University students speak Arabic, this program appears to be geared for a special audience, not its regular students.

The Nov. 5 rally that started the whole kerfluffle (which actually was simply a repeat of a similar Jew- and Israel-hating rally which took place on May 10 at Al-Quds University) was held entirely in Arabic.  Do you get the sense that the Hate Speech course is not really directed at the people who glorified martyrdom and trampled on the Israeli flag?

There’s more that should raise the eyebrows of a jaundiced Al-Quds/Nusseibeh watcher.

The announcement of the course refers to the “anti-Israeli para-military” rally which sparked the disruption between Al-Quds and the two American schools.  But the language used still seems to place the onus of blame on the “American Jewish sources” which were “critical” of the rally.

There is no mention in the course description of Nusseibeh’s offensive response to Brandeis President Fred Lawrence which blamed “Jewish extremists” for starting a “vilification campaign” against Al-Quds.  The language is softer, but the blame remains squarely on the Jews. Nusseibeh’s “unacceptable and inflammatory” response to the original situation has softened in tone, but not in spirit.

Members Flee Academic Group Boycotting Israel, May Form New Group

Friday, December 20th, 2013

When the American Studies Association decided to spurn Israel because it disagrees with some of its policies, it should have anticipated that some of its own members might do the same and that it would be on the receiving end.

When a majority of the voting members (only one quarter of those eligible voted) of the American Studies Association voted to ratify a resolution to boycott Israeli academic institutions, elation broke out amongst the advocates of the economic warfare movement against Israel known as BDS.  BDS stands for the Boycott of, Divestment from and Sanctions against Israel.

Given the vagueness of the actual terms of the boycott (it doesn’t apply to most individual Israeli professors and it doesn’t apply to American professors who wish to teach in Israel), and of the goal it seeks to achieve (the resolution talks about ending the “Occupation,” but it cites as its inspiration a Palestinian Arab organization which sees the entire Jewish State as the occupier, not just some towns beyond an imaginary Green Line), perhaps the only thing the ASA boycott may achieve is a dissolution of the American Studies Association.

Already two universities have formally withdrawn their membership from the ASA.

PENN STATE’S AMERICAN STUDIES DEPARTMENT WITHDRAWS FROM ASA

Penn State University, whose American Studies Department is located at its Harrisburg campus, was the first to walk out the door.  Dr. Simon J. Bronner chairs his school’s American Studies Department. He was the editor in chief in 2011 of the Encyclopedia of American Studies – an ASA publication. Bronner  issued a statement announcing his department’s withdrawal from the ASA.

The ASA boycott decision, Bronner wrote, will act to “curtail academic freedom and undermine the reputation of American Studies as a scholarly enterprise.” Bronner went further.  He said that not only will his department drop its ASA membership, he “will encourage others to do so.”

BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY’S AMERICAN STUDIES DEPARTMENT SECEDES FROM ASA

The Brandeis University American Studies Department was the second school to secede from the ASA.

Professor Stephen Whitfield has taught American Studies at Brandeis for more than forty years. He is the Max Richter Professor of American Civilization and the author of eight books dealing with the field of American Studies, along with dozens of scholarly articles, as well as ones of public interest.

The Jewish Press asked Whitfield about his department’s response to the ASA boycott. He responded by email that the vote by the ASA

defies the very purposes of the American Studies Association, which is a scholarly organization–not (as the boycott vote suggests) the conscience of humanity.  The members of the ASA are free–as citizens, as individuals–to take any position they wish on the vexing issues of the Middle East and elsewhere.  But the deepening politicization of the ASA, which ought to ensure that its members feel at home as Americanists regardless of their politics, is deeply offensive, indeed repugnant.

The statement on the Brandeis American Studies Department website announced it will discontinue its affiliation with the ASA. It condemns the boycott vote as a “politicization of the discipline,” and scolded that it was “a rebuke to the kind of open inquiry that a scholarly association should foster.”

We remain committed to the discipline of American Studies but we can no longer support an organization that has rejected two of the core principles of American culture– freedom of association and expression.

ALTERNATIVES TO AMERICAN STUDIES ASSOCIATION TO FORM?

In an exchange between Penn State’s Bronner and Prof. William A. Jacobson of Cornell Law School, Bronner hinted that alternative organizations for serious scholars in the discipline who want to concentrate on American Studies rather than contemporary politics may be forming.

Dead Gaza BDS Advocate Sought Israeli Medical Care

Thursday, December 19th, 2013

Eyad El Sarraj, a prominent psychiatrist in the Gaza Strip, died on Wednesday, Dec. 18. El Sarraj was 70 years old. He died of complications from Leukemia.

Throughout his professional life, Sarraj was a fierce proponent of resistance to the “Israeli Occupation” and vigorously promoted boycotts of Israel. But when his health failed, Sarraj sought medical care in Israel. He died at Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem, where he had been receiving treatment for more than a month.

In 1990, Sarraj founded the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme, which is headquartered in the Rimal district of Gaza. El Sarraj was the medical director of GCMHP until his death.

“He is considered the father of mental health and the pioneer of mental health in Palestine. Our commitment to Dr. Sarraj is to continue his message and his struggle for respect of human rights,”  said Husam El-Nounou, the administrative chief at GCMHP.

Arab media and others hailed Sarraj as a human rights defender and a promoter of peace between Israel and “Palestine.”

Actually, Sarraj was a major promoter, supporter, advocate and cheerleader for the form of economic warfare against Israel known as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.

He and members of his staff were promoters of vindictive bald-faced lies about Israel.

According to the highly-respected oversight group NGO Monitor, Sarraj and his GCMHP

used unsubstantiated medical claims as an avenue to criticize the Israeli government, including allegations that the Jewish state engages in “systematic state organized violence,” “collective punishment” “massacres,” “war crimes,” and a system of “apartheid” against the Palestinian people.

El Sarraj’s Mental Health Center hosted numerous anti-Israel tracts on its website. The site itself is a bizarre conglomeration that NGO Monitor calls a “politicized medical NGO.”

In one such tract, “War Crimes and Tragedy: The Occupation of Palestine,” the author claims: “We can no longer remain silent nor turn our backs and pretend ignorance to a gruesome occupation of stolen land, the cruelest collective punishment in the open-air sewer prison where Palestinians once lived in peace. The situation has deteriorated as we observe Jewish settlers who spew their hate with such revulsion and racism on Palestinian families, it makes my stomach turn.”

One of Sarraj’s GCMHP doctors provided expert testimony to the infamous Goldstone panel in 2009. Dr. Ahmed Abu-Tawahini  offered what he called “professional insight” into the reason why Israeli soldiers “shoot children in front of their parents.” The doctor claimed such an action – as if it ever happened – can only be explained by “the psychological instability” and desire of the Israeli soldier to “restore his lost image.”

El Sarraj was on the board of advisers of the “Free Gaza Movement.” Those are the people across the globe who organize flotillas to try and break the legal Israeli blockade of Gaza.

Following the 2010 Mavi Marmara incident in which a boat of internationals attempted to pierce the blockade and during which Israeli soldiers were attacked with lead pipes and other weapons, Sarraj signed a public statement which demonized the Israeli soldiers and lionized the thugs aboard the boat.

We insist on severance of diplomatic ties with Israel, trials for war crimes and the International protection of the civilians of Gaza. We call on you to join the growing international boycott, divestment and sanction campaign of a country proving again to be so violent and yet so unchallenged.

And yet, just three years later, when Sarraj was dying from leukemia, he violated the principles he had espoused so strongly when he was strong and healthy.  He went to seek the best medical care he could find.  He went to Israel.

Shushed and Booed, Podhoretz Walks Out on 92 St. Y Panel

Wednesday, December 18th, 2013

There have already been several reports of the ruckus that occurred during a talk entitled, “What Does it Mean to be Pro-Israel in America Today?” which was held at the 92nd St Y in Manhattan Monday night, Dec. 16.

But no accounts thus far examine the role of the audience in inciting a panelist to get up and walk out of the event.

There were first hand accounts by John Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary and the panelist who walked out of the event, and another by Jane Eisner, the editor of the Daily Forward, who was the moderator of the event.

The other two panelists were Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street, and David Harris, president of the American Jewish Committee.

One account can be found on this website.  Haaretz and the New York Times weighed in with their own versions, based, loosely, on the earlier accounts.

The rabidly anti-Israel blog Mondoweiss headlined the story “Podhoretz leaves 92nd St Y stage after saying Swarthmore Hillel deserves to be ‘spat on.’”

Over on planet Mondoweiss, the editor was so eager to prove his true lefty street creds he expressed outrage that the event was held without a single Palestinian Arab on the panel. He mused: “I wonder what liberal Jewish forum would have staged a debate on Jim Crow back in the ’60s without black leaders…” Earth to Mondoweiss: the topic for the evening was “What Does it Mean to be Pro-Israel in America Today?”

WHY AND WHEN DID PODHORETZ EXIT STAGE RIGHT

Podhoretz admits saying that the decision by the Swarthmore “Hillel” to vote itself out of Hillel so it could sponsor anti-Zionists was their right, just as it was his right to (rhetorically, he claims) “spit at” the Swarthmore (former) Hillel group. This was the topic of discussion by several commentators.

But that isn’t when Podhoretz left the stage.

According to the accounts of the two participants, Podhoretz became agitated during the discussion of the recent American Studies Association’s decision to boycott Israeli academic institutions.

What happened was that although all of the panelists said they disapproved of the ASA boycott, J Street’s Ben Ami then began recounting what he said were Israeli policies that led people to believe that a boycott of Israeli institutions was appropriate.

PODHORETZ DEFENDS ISRAEL, AUDIENCE EXPLODES, ‘ENRAGED’

“You’re blaming the victim!” Podhoretz exclaimed.

To which the 92nd Street Y audience erupted into loud booing.

According to the moderator, Eisner, who is much closer to Ben-Ami’s Israel viewpoint than the others – having served as a co-chair of her local New Israel Fund regional council – there was not just scattered booing. She wrote in her blog on the topic that when Podhoretz accused Ben-Ami of blaming the victim, some “members of the audience became enraged.”

The audience was so disruptive with what Podhoretz described as a “prolonged bout of booing,” that he turned to the audience and asked with what he thought was obvious irony, “why don’t you also hiss?”

Eisner did not understand that Podhoretz was being sarcastic.  She wrote that “mystifyingly, the Commentary editor encouraged them, challenging them to boo and hiss.”

The audience also did not understand, or was not embarrassed by Podhoretz’s sarcastic effort to remind them they were adults listening to a panel discussion, not bloodthirsty members of a bullfight audience, howling for blood. We know they didn’t understand because their response was to hiss, along with the booing.

That appears to really be what tipped the balance.

It was with the audience hissing and booing, that Eisner claims Podhoretz raised his voice and wagged a finger at Ben-Ami. Eisner wrote: “That’s when I stepped in, trying to rein in the argument, using my hands (I am known to gesticulate) to try to calm him down.”

California Student Leader Wants to Decapitate ‘All Who Support the IDF’

Wednesday, December 11th, 2013

Several weeks ago The Jewish Press brought you the story of the California student leader, Muhammad G. Hammad, who posted on a social media platform a picture of himself holding a sharp blade, and describing how he wanted to stab Israeli soldiers with it.

Well, he’s baaaaaa-aack.

A new posting on Tumblr from Mohammad G. Hammad, president of San Francisco State University’s General Union of Palestine Students (GUPS), has been discovered by the AMCHA Initiative.

It’s even more graphic than the earlier one.

In this post, Hammad discusses the death of an Arab 17 year old in Hebron last year. The 17 year old was shot by a female Israel Defence Forces soldier after the youth attacked her and pulled a realistic-looking toy gun on her.  The post includes an entirely fabricated version of the actual events, one which portrays the Arab as a deaf teenager innocently out to get some birthday cake when he was shot to death by the IDF soldier, following an “altercation.”

In his “CUPCAKESANDKITTENS4EVER” Tumblr account, Hammad writes:

I’m sitting here looking through pictures of that f[EXPLETIVE DELETED] s[EXPLETIVE DELETED] [NAME REMOVED TO PROTECT THE SOLDIER] ….Anyone who thinks there can be peace with animals like this is absolutely delusional, and the only “peace” I’m interested in is the head of this f[EXPLETIVE DELETED s[EXPLETIVE DELETED on a plate, as well as the heads of all others like her, and all others who support the IDF

The Liberation of Palestine can only come through the destruction and decimation of this Israeli plague and it can’t possibly come soon enough.

The Jewish Press contacted Dr. Leslie Wong, the president of San Francisco State University. We wanted to know whether the school plans to take any action against Hammad, given that he has now named a specific individual whom he wants to kill, and has stated his desire to decapitate anyone who serves in the IDF and any IDF supporters. Surely that includes at least some people at SFSU.

Ellen Griffin, SFSU’s  associate vice president for communications, shared with The Jewish Press a statement issued yesterday by Dr. Wong. That statement addressed Hammad’s earlier Tumblr threat.  According to Griffin, the administration had not been aware of the second violence-glorifying post by the president of the Palestine Students Union.

It is now.

In yesterday’s statement Dr. Wong promised his university population that they should

trust that I will step in when speech or actions cross the line into violations of law or University policy. I am absolutely committed to maintaining a safe environment. In both recent cases, for example, we have conducted thorough threat assessments with law enforcement, increased campus safety measures, facilitated dialogue with student groups, offered counseling resources and initiated the student conduct review process. I am confident these actions protect both the safety and the rights of our campus community.

Can the SFSU environment be considered a safe one with a student leader – let’s say that again, a student leader! -  who has already posed making threats while caressing a knife, and is now calling for the beheading of IDF soldiers and anyone who supports them? Surely any “dialogue with student groups and counseling resources” is a tack already taken, one revealed to be insufficient.

Will SFSU make clear that threats against its population will not be tolerated? The SFSU administration is already on notice.  Any action taken after someone is already harmed will not be defensible.

We await a response from Dr. Wong.

Editor Deleted Post of J Street U Students’ Misconduct

Tuesday, December 10th, 2013

Last week The Jewish Press ran an op-ed,  “J Street Activists Defame Former Israeli Spokesperson.” It was written by a Brandeis junior, Daniel Mael.

That op-ed was an edited version of one which had briefly appeared as a blog post, but had been pulled by a Times of Israel editor. It was removed post-publication, even though the editor had read and approved the blog post before it was published. The reason it was removed, according to the editor, is that the subjects of the post complained that information in the article could hurt their chances for employment. Since when is that a justification for censorship?

Here’s the full background.

Mael wrote the op-ed in order to provide a fuller context, and to correct misrepresentations in an op-ed penned by two other Brandeis students about an event that took place on their campus this fall. Mael was present for the entire event. The op-ed to which Mael was responding was printed in the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent (the two authors are from the Philadelphia region) and various J Street publications and sites.

J STREET U ARTICLE HEAVY ON VIEWPOINT VICTIMHOOD

As Mael explained, the J Street U students described negative feedback they received as being solely based on the “Brandeis pro-Israel tent” rejecting their critical view of Israel.  It set up the authors as the brave defenders of the minority viewpoint, struggling to have their voice heard amongst a crowd of adamantly, single-viewpoint supporters of Israel.

In fact, as Mael pointed out, one of the op-ed’s authors, who is the current president of Brandeis J Street U, was indeed heavily criticized by many other Brandeis students.  But the criticism was not of his political views, it was of his hostile and disruptive verbal attacks on the event’s speaker, former spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces, Capt. Barak Raz.

Following the Raz talk, but before penning the op-ed, Eli Philip wrote on his Facebook page that Raz had lied to the Brandeis audience when he said there were “no checkpoints in the West Bank.”

As Raz himself pointed out in the comments that followed, Philip would have understood what Raz was saying had Philip been present during the first hour of Raz’s talk.  It was during that time that the former IDF spokesperson set up the context for his statement, and provided the technical definitions of terms he used – including checkpoint – throughout his talk.

Philip walked in an hour late to Raz’s talk – he had first attended that night’s J Street event, a speaker from Breaking the Silence.

Because he was so late, Philip missed the explanations Raz gave. Having missed those explanations, what Philip heard Raz say seemed entirely inconsistent with what Philip believed to be true.  That is why Philip challenged Raz, in a manner that even Philip acknowledged in his op-ed was intemperate.

Mael provides the context, and linked to the Facebook exchange in which Philip wrote that Raz lied to the Brandeis audience.  That entire portion of Philip’s Facebook wall has since been deleted.  But before writing the op-ed, Philip knew that Raz had provided official definitions of the terms he was going to employ in his talk before Philip entered the room. So even if Philip actually believed Raz lied when he posted that statement on his own Facebook wall, by the time he penned and submitted his op-ed, he knew he was omitting a relevant fact.

THE CENSORED BLOG POST

Now back to the Times of Israel disappearing act.

Frustrated by what he believed were distortions of reality in the Exponent op-ed, Mael wrote up his description of the event and of Philips’s behavior and its aftermath, and posted it as a blog on the Times of Israel. His op-ed went live following the pre-publication editorial review for bloggers. People began reading his version of events.

But in less than 24 hours, Mael’s Times of Israel blog post was deleted from the site, with no explanation.  It just disappeared.

Mael and other students who wanted to read his explanation of what happened at the Raz talk were perplexed by the blog disappearance. Several people wrote to the Times of Israel editor to ask what happened, including staff for pro-Israel organizations.

The reason the Times of Israel editor gave for pulling Mael’s op-ed was that the J Street U students who were the “subjects of its criticism made a convincing case that it could cause them economic hardship in terms of future employment.”

Wow.

It’s okay for the students to disrupt a speaker brought to campus, it’s fine to publicly call a former IDF spokesperson a liar on social media, and it’s just dandy to pen and have published an op-ed that paints yourself as someone victimized because of unpopular political opinions (which are actually the mainstream political opinions on American campuses, so where’s the glory in that?) while omitting critical inculpatory details.

But when someone who disagrees with your version of reality, who was an eyewitness to the event, calls you on showing up an hour into a speaker’s talk and being disruptive, rude and even slandering the speaker, you turn tail and whine about possible harm to future employment?

RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF ONE’S ACTIONS

There is a lesson for students to learn from this experience, lessons that are applicable to their lives as students and beyond.  First, students need to understand that the safe university bubble only extends as far as the university.  Once you venture out into the public – the first step here was calling Capt. Barak Raz a liar in a Facebook posting, the second was publishing an op-ed in a non-university publication – you might actually be held responsible for the consequences of your actions.

Perhaps the Times of Israel editor thought she was doing the Brandeis students a favor by pulling a post that named and shamed them. But everyone, even college students, need to stand up for their convictions. If the fallout threatens their livelihood and they fold when that happens, perhaps their convictions weren’t that strong in the first place.

Here’s a catchy shorthand version of the lesson: “if you can’t do the time, don’t commit the crime.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/editor-deleted-post-of-j-street-u-students-misconduct/2013/12/10/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: