UCSA resolution condemning anti-semitism excluded Jewish organizations’ input

Related Posts

Two years after an ASUC vote on divestment from Israel prompted outcry from Jewish groups across the nation, the UC Student Association passed a similar resolution two weeks ago without protest from pro-Israel organizations — that is, until the Jewish community learned of the resolution.

For weeks, Jewish student groups were left in the dark while a resolution was penned for the UCSA condemning HR 35 — a California Assembly resolution that condemns anti-Semitism at California’s higher education institutions — claiming it stifles free speech.

The resolution also encourages the university to divest from countries perpetrating human rights violations — acts it alleges Israel has committed.

While members of the campus student group Students for Justice in Palestine presented the resolution to the board at its Sept. 15 meeting, no Jewish student groups were reached out to prior to the meeting, according to UCSA Organizing and Communications Director Darius Kemp.

The resolution passed unanimously, 12-0, with two abstentions.

Student leaders have since acknowledged the uneven outreach as a flaw that tarnished the vote.

“With UCSA, we made some mistakes because we did not realize the magnanimity of what could have happened,” said Shahryar Abbasi, ASUC external affairs vice president and a UC Berkeley representative on the UCSA Board of Directors. “I do think it could be worthwhile to reconsider this (resolution) with more voices at the table.”

Abraham Levine, president of Tikvah: Students for Israel, said he found out about the UCSA resolution a day after it passed.

“I couldn’t believe it went through without being on anyone’s radar,” Levine said.

Historically, the UCSA posts meeting agendas online after the meetings have already taken place, and agendas remain open to change up until the day of each meeting.

According to Abbasi, that process even left some board members unsure about the topics up for discussion at the meeting. He said he only saw the resolution the day before the vote.

The UCSA resolution was originally written by UC Berkeley graduate student and SJP member Emiliano Huet-Vaughn.

Huet-Vaughn has been at the center of a number of pieces of legislation calling for divestment from Israel, including the 2010 ASUC bill, which he co-authored, and a similar bill in 2008 at the London School of Economics that he proposed.

The 2010 ASUC resolution garnered national attention after then-ASUC president Will Smelko vetoed it, with prominent figures like Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu weighing in.

Following the national scrutiny, four ASUC senators who had initially voted in favor of the resolution did not vote to overturn Smelko’s veto, allowing the proposal to die.

In light of that experience, an apparent effort was made to limit awareness of the resolution facing the UCSA.

“There was not much word spread about this in the last few days that led up to the meeting,” SJP member Luma Haddad wrote in an internal email to the SJP board after the resolution passed. “This was done in order to prevent unwanted lobbying/intimidation tactics.”

In a Sept. 21 op-ed for The Daily Californian, Haddad said senators who voted in favor of the 2010 bill received hate mail threatening future job prospects.

“Without threats, intimidation and emotional diversions, UCSA representatives chose to take a stand for free speech and the right to criticize any state political actor with no special exceptions,” she wrote.

A representative from SJP declined to comment for this article.

Going forward, ASUC senators Jason Bellet and Nolan Pack hope to draft a bill calling on Abbasi to make amends to the UCSA’s legislative process to ensure greater transparency and inclusion. The pair plans on suggesting a final deadline for agenda amendments, among other adjustments.

“I hope to work with Nolan and Shahryar making sure (the UCSA) is accountable to each and every student that they claim to represent,” Bellet said. “The way that their infrastructure and communications processes exist right now is not the most effective way to carry out their mission.”

Contact Curan Mehra and Libby Rainey at [email protected]

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • Joe

    Anybody else notice the flawed headline? The UCSA didn’t pass a resolution condemning anti-semitism. They passed a resolution condemning a resolution which condemns anti-semitism. Those are polar opposites.

  • Samantha Ng

    Now at least we realize the UCSA needs more oversight and more active supervision. The passage of this resolution was a travesty- it was passed under cover of darkness- and snuck through without debate. Shame on all those involved with this.

  • Nihaya

    Gotta love that 12 random people make a decision on behalf of tens of thousands, without consultation, feedback, or imput. Not in my name, UCSA. Not in my name.

    • Armando

      yeah, totally random, just elected by the student bodies at each campus. i’ll join you if you extend your concerns about the problems of representative democracy to other issues, but i suspect you only care about direct democracy critiques of the process when you are in the minority. that’s fine if it’s not in your name, but for the majority of us we support free speech and don’t like what Israel has been doing.

      • Dan Spitzer

        Armando, if you truly support free speech as you say, then you would love Israel, the only country in the Middle East where speech is truly free. Correspondingly, you would loath the Palestinian territories where any criticism of the political leadership and their policies can lead you to be beaten, jailed or even murdered.

  • berkeleyprotest

    Can the ASUC and UCSA follow through on their beliefs? Taking over ucb student government has been a premier goal for zionist organizations like aipac

    • Dan Spitzer

      Yes, we know, it’s all a “Jewish Conspiracy.” You fools all goose-step to the same Stupids for Just Us in Foul-Asstine propaganda, repeating the old “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” nonsense. At least try a little originality (oh sorry, you don’t have the intellect to do so).

  • The Elders of Zion

    Here’s how it usually works when anti-Israel resolutions and motions get passed by UCSA and other student council groups and other organizations:

    1. Anti-Israel individuals rise to positions of power within organizations like a student council or food co-op.

    2. Those anti-Israel individuals use their power to make some statement about how evil Israel is, and make it look like their view represents that of the tens of thousands of UC students or the thousands of food co-op members.

    3. The rank and file members of the organization find out what their leaders are doing, and they flip out, because after all, a student council or food co-op governing board is not supposed to conduct U.S. foreign policy, and those individual radicals represent nobody but themselves.

    4. The resolution then goes nowhere and dies.

  • Daily Cal got it wrong

    sadly, the reporters haven’t bothered reading the bill they are reporting about. He says “The resolution also encourages the university to divest from countries perpetrating human rights violations” but in fact the bill talks about “companies implicated in or profiting from violations of international
    human rights law, without making special exemptions for any country” http://calsjp.org/?p=1297 . Similarly, the 2010 bill didn’t call for divestment from Israel as the reporter claims misleadingly, but for divestment from “companies that a) provide military support for or weaponry to support
    the occupation of the Palestinian territories or b) facilitate the
    building or maintenance of the illegal wall or the demolition of
    Palestinian homes, or c) facilitate the building, maintenance, or
    economic development of illegal Israeli settlements on occupied
    Palestinian territories” http://www.caldivestfromapartheid.com/sb118/

    finally, both resolutions have been supported by some Jewish groups (like Jewish Voice for Peace) and opposed by others (AIPAC), but instead of using the word “Zionists” to characterize supporters of Israeli policies, the reporters simply call them “Jewish groups”. Since the conflation of Judaism and support for Israeli policies is at the center of the entire discussion, this story’s bias just serves to perpetuate the problems that led to this bill in the first place.

    • Dan Spitzer

      When organizations who call for the destruction of Israel via BDS like Jewish Voice for Peace support such a resolution channeled through their allies of SJP, you know that such faux Jews advised to UCS to hold the meeting on the Jewish Sabbath and the day before the High Holy Day of Rosh Hashanah because they knew that genuine Jews would be preoccupied. Talk about manipulative assholes, which JVP and SJP prove themselves to be time and again. As noted, they reflect the contempt for democracy shown throughout the Islamic world in general and within the Palestinian territories in particular.

      • Dan Spitzer is CRAZY

        CRAZY. No one had a meeting on Saturday to exclude Jews. Thats when the UCSA always meets. JVP doesn’t want to destroy Israel, you moron, many of their member are Israeli. How can you be the arbiter of who is a real Jew and who is a faux Jew. You are an asshole.

        • Dan Spitzer

          And you are an advocate of Stupids for Just Us in Foul-Asstine and a supporter of second class citizenry for women, brutalization of gays, and suppression of dissidents. Oh and yes indeed, an anti-Semite.

          BTW, why don’t you tell us your name, you gutless twat?

      • Dan Spitzer is CRAZY

        CRAZY. No one had a meeting on Saturday to exclude Jews. Thats when the UCSA always meets. JVP doesn’t want to destroy Israel, you moron, many of their member are Israeli. How can you be the arbiter of who is a real Jew and who is a faux Jew. You are an asshole.

  • anony

    Daily Cal does the easy reporting. Why haven’t any Daily Cal reporters approached the California State Assembly Committee on Higher Education to ask about the process leading to HR 35, which the UCSA resolution condemns?

    • Dan Spitzer

      Just how “representative” is the UCSA resolution focused upon condemnation of Israel? It is reasonable to conclude that UC Berkeley student attitudes are a reflection of Americans at large. Hence:
      Seventy percent of Americans view Israel favorably, according to a survey conducted by the Foreign Policy Initiative.

      Moreover, when asked their view of Israel, nearly 81 percent of political conservatives share that view while the number is at 68.5 percent for moderates and roughly 63 percent of liberals.

      The survey, called Foreign Policy Matters in 2012, was conducted from Sept. 15-17 by Basswood Research for the Foreign Policy Initiative. It’s margin of error is 3.1 percent. Roughly 40 percent of respondents identified as Republicans, 40 percent as Democrats and 20 percent as either Independents or with no party affiliation.

      When asked the open-ended question who was “America’s best ally in the world?” Israel came in at 15.9 percent, second only to the United Kingdom, which had 54 percent.

      One may therefore conclude that the UCSA is reflective not of US or UC student thought but rather the stilted propaganda line of Stupids for Just Us In Foul-Asstine.

    • abebird

      The mission of California State Assembly is to defend the truth and NOT the Islamic proPALganda !!!!!

  • juan

    Couldn’t the article be entitled “UCSA divestment resolution featured Palestine group’s input, none from Arab or Muslim organizations”? I mean MSA, ASU (or really any other group) weren’t any more in on this than any officially Jewish group. Even the SJP girl is telling her group sorry you didnt know about it. I don’t understand why the DailyCal likes to present this stuff as if its the Jewish community that was intentionally excluded when it just seems like the UCSA doesnt reach out to student groups to come to their meeting. I mean that’s what they say right, they historically don’t post their agendas til afterwards. Maybe that should be fixed since its not very transparent, but why does the DC want to make this into some kind of exclusion of Jews sort of thing unique to this bill. As that op-ed from Tuesday pointed out (http://www.dailycal.org/2012/09/25/jewish-students-support-ucsa-vote-on-hr-35/) a Jewish Israeli was the other student asking the UCSA to write the bill, so clearly its not like “the Jewish community” as a whole felt left out, just some of the more pro-Israel parts of it. Let’s just say that from now on, no?

    • Dan Spitzer

      That Jewish Israeli who advocated support for the bill is akin to the kapos who supported the Third Reich and the blacks who owned slaves. Alas, such scum do exist.

      • guest

        Talk about hate speech.

        • Dan Spitzer

          And guest, here you had us believe that you supported ALL speech. Certainly, you are an advocate of the “Israel is an apartheid” hate allegations which bear no correspondence with reality. Ditto SJP, MSU and now UCSA’s call for BDS vs Israel which surely would mean the destruction of the Jewish state. Oh, that’s right, you support the Palestinians who in both territories have elected leaders whose parties call for Jewish genocide. But you won’t call that advocacy of genocide “hate speech,” would you?

          • guest

            And you get the prize for reading the most out of a four-word comment.

            But for the record, I understand the need to be cautious before comparing one situation (say, the political situation of Palestine) with another (say, South African apartheid). But I would hope you would be equally careful before comparing some of your peers to Nazis or slave owners. Just saying.

          • Dan Spitzer

            But guest, Stupids for Just Us in Foul-Asstine correlate Israel with S. African apartheid all the time. Yes it is stupid.

            On the other hand, the PLA and Hamas covenants calling for the genocide of Israeli Jews are congruent with what the Third Reich deemed appropriate. So the comparison is indeed apt.

          • Mic Jordan

            You Israeli goons sold nukes to PW Botha in 1971 !!!
            As always you made and continue to make money off the sick and powerless. While extorting money from the US taxpayers.

      • Mic Jordan

        So Dan Spitzer, “the Berkeley door hanger gate election fixing, vote caging goon” you are unaware of the trappers, the owners and the dealers of the slaves in America? Your kith and kin. Your thirteenth tribe of rich blood-soaked Khazars who have for 5,000 years mutilated your men, abused your women, enslaved the blacks in west Africa, shipped them to South Carolina, and sold tactical nukes to South Africa in 1971 to make sure the Boors would keep the ANC at bay be able to mine gold for your greedy little wives and mistresses and whitefish smelling children. What a proud heritage you carry on Danny Boy. Whatever evil is lurking in your bile-filled veins today? Have you performed your daily blood “libel” today? Sell any organs of Gaza children to a rich rabbi?

    • I_h8_disqus

      They want to make it into an exclusion of Jews, because that is just what it was. The articles have pointed out where they kept this all silent to specifically exclude other presentations. Welcome to Berkeley, where we want to hear all sides. If you want to exclude information, you should go to some other university.

    • Calipenguin

      Suppose a spot opens up in Lower Sproul and it can either go to a Mexican restaurant or an Ethiopian restaurant. The decision makers hold a meeting and invites Latino students to make a presentation for the Mexican restaurant, and Ethiopian students who despise Ethiopian food to make a presentation for the Mexican restaurant. Guess which restaurant wins?

  • L

    So awesome that the Daily Cal continues to neglect that one of the students who approached the UCSA about condemning HR35 is Jewish. AND Israeli. Great reporting of the facts. I should honestly call you the Faily Cal because that’s how much you succeed in presenting an impartial and accurate representation of the issue at hand.

    • I_h8_disqus

      So they hand picked one Jewish person to let talk, while the rest of the community was excluded? This isn’t Palestine where there isn’t democracy or one of a multitude of nations where puppet speakers can pass as being legitimate.

      • sally

        uh no. they didn’t handpick anyone. the student came to them seeking there support since HR35 is trying to shut him up.

        • I_h8_disqus

          Considering nobody knew about this topic on the agenda except the SJP, I don’t believe you.

        • Calipenguin

          Even if a student has a grievance against a particular state assembly bill the UCSA should have tried to get testimony from students who have a different point of view. Instead, the UCSA deliberately excluded any dissenting views and stealthily crafted a decision, and then publicized it as if it represented all UC students. Stupid sophomoric tricks like this may be fun in high school Junior State or Model U.N. meets but we’re all adults now and UCSA should grow up and act like adults in order to make the California legislature take us seriously.

    • Calipenguin

      So UCSA picks a pro-Palestinian Jewish guy to talk. That’s like asking a Black Republican to testify about the need to censor hip hop music, or a Greenpeace founder to advocate for nuclear power while shutting out all other Blacks or Greenpeace members. Incredible how UCSA thinks it can get away with that dishonesty.

      • Bruno

        you’re doing the same dishonest stuff that HR35 does, trying to make Jewish identity equivalent to supporting Israel no matter what. A majority of American Jews identify with Israel, sure, but a majority also oppose Israel’s settlement expansion, and in the Bay and at Berkeley pro-BDS Jews lead numerous Palestine solidarity orgs (and certainly are far more common than Black Republicans or a Greenpeace activist advocating nuclear power). Jewish Voice for Peace is based here and represents hundreds of thousands of Jews who stand firmly against Israel’s human rights abuses and occupation. The only thing dishonest is you trying to claim that Jewishness is the same as being anti-Palestinian. Very few believe this.

        • Dan Spitzer

          Bruno, you are a fool if you believe that more than a tiny minority of kapos who support the misogynist, anti-gay, anti-dissident Palestinians are Jews. There are probably more Jews for Jesus in Berkeley than there are Jews who are advocates for Palestinian Islamofascists. The few who are are just loud, screaming anal passages.

        • peepsqueek

          To Bruno-

          The implication of many settlement critics is that it would be better for peace if the West Bank were empty of Jews. This idea would be called anti-Semitic if Jews were barred from living in New York, Paris or London, but barring them from living in the West Bank, the cradle of Jewish civilization, the birth place of Solomon, David, and Jesus is called what?? Give it a name!

          Arabs have doubled and tripled their numbers inside Israel proper as citizens, but they do not want Jews living in the disputed territories. Why?

          Jews have lived in Judea and Samaria—the West Bank—since ancient times. The only time Jews have been prohibited from living in the territories in recent decades was during Jordan’s rule from 1948 to 1967.

          The periodic removal of Jews from Gaza goes back at least to the Romans in 61 CE, followed much later by the Crusaders, Napoleon, the Ottoman Turks, the British and the contemporary Egyptians. However, Jews definitely lived in Gaza throughout the centuries, with a stronger presence in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

        • Calipenguin

          @Bruno: I’m hardly being dishonest. There really are Black Republicans. And one of the co-founders of Greenpeace really is pushing for nuclear power (look up Patrick Moore). However, these guys hardly represent their original groups so when they pretend to speak for Blacks or Greenpeace members at any debate they are not really that convincing. Clearly the UCSA was trying very hard to NOT include any students who would argue for Israeli jurisdiction over the disputed West Bank. It asked SJP members to speak as well as anti-settlement Jews to speak just so it can pretend to be fair and balanced, when in fact it cherry-picked the speakers to present a one-sided view of UC student opinions. By choosing such an underhanded trick to feign unanimity (a trick worthy of the Communist Party of China) the UCSA has destroyed all credibility in representing UC students, which could hurt in future issues when student issues need to be championed by a representative UC student council.

    • Dan Spitzer

      L, read a little bit of Nazi history to learn what a kapo is. This label fits that Jewish Israeli student. And again, these aberrants do happen–as I noted, there were some black slave owners.

  • andrea

    how transparent is this “journalist’s” totally partial totally politically motivated piece? if one party approaches their reps to help them regain their speech rights, why the fuck should anyone at all be invited from any party? what a stupid strategy the daily cal has taken to try and delegitimize a perfectly legitimate passage of a bill.

    • guest

      andrea- i’m starting to think you’re right, seems the daily cal lately has
      become obsessed with finding a way to make this bill seem wrong in
      whatever way they think of. and from what i understand, no student
      groups or groups of certain religions were at the meeting. only a couple
      individuals who would be directly
      impacted by the bill (not weirdly indirectly impacted because they were
      jewish or muslim or whatever, but because hr 35 was directly trying to
      them and they wanted their reps to do something). you can disagree with the
      subject but with the procedure? sounds like the most typical
      representative democracy way of doing things to me, no? what are these dc nuts goin on about? i really dont get it.

      • Dan Spitzer

        Well, Andrea and the statement of guest above may pretend to advocate freedom of expression, but that was abrogated by the UCSA whose failure to be transparent in promulgating their agenda flies in the face of genuine governance featuring freedom of open debate. Of course, the Stupids for Just Us in Foul-Asstine simply reflect the dictatorial regimes they so love in the West Bank and Gaza by acting in such an anti-democratic and underhanded manner.

        • L

          Too bad the UCSA doesn’t actually allow a public forum when they consider such bills in their regular meetings. That’s not just a policy regarding this resolution; that’s for ALL resolutions, whether penned by individual members of SJP or any other student group. Stay cool, Dan.

      • I_h8_disqus

        Another obvious troll.

    • I_h8_disqus

      I see the SJP has decided to post a bunch of comments. I can tell that these are troll like posts, because no authentic Cal student would support closed government talks that only listen to one side and then vote. This is the US. This isn’t Hamas controlled Palestine. We like to allow open discussion before a vote is taken.

      • Jaydeen

        whose supporting a closed government? i’m sure everyone agrees that it’d be good for the ucsa to make their process more transparent. it’s just that this article tries to make it seem like there was something exceptional with the process on this bill. not cool.

        • I_h8_disqus

          It was exceptional. You had one group working this thing and purposefully keeping everyone else uninformed. You are not cool for supporting such an underhanded attempt to pass a bill without more input. It is also not cool that you think it is OK for US based student government to run like the intolerant countries of the Arab world. We should boycott Palestine until they give women, homosexuals, and other religions rights.

          • Cesar

            listen there you go again, l_h8_disquis. I see your shit on these posts every time i’ve read an article about israel. clearly your not down with palestinians arabs etc., anyone whose read a comments page knows. but just cause you have that view doesn’t mean the rest of us do. and just cause you don’t like the content of some pretty trivial ucsa bill doesn’t mean you can pretend like the problems in ucsa process (or the asuc for that matter) are unique to this issue. read what was written: “Historically, the UCSA posts meeting agendas online after the meetings
            have already taken place, and agendas remain open to change up until the
            day of each meeting.” I mean that is stupid, but that doesn’t sound like some conspiracy to be less than transparent about this bill. I support as much open debate on this issue as people want to have and as the previous poster noted, I’m pretty sure all sides would. I mean that’s sort of the purpose of the pro-Palestine group, right to get debate going. They are the ones working against the status quo, so that’s about all those types of groups can do.

          • Dan Spitzer

            Cesar, are you a student at Cal? If you are, it’s remarkable that they admitted you given your manifest lack of English skills. “Just cause” this and “just cause” that…

            On the other hand, you might be in one of the departments for slow learners, such as Latino Studies or Black Studies Dept’s. Or it could be that you are in the Middle E. Studies Dep’t or perhaps Peace and Conflict. Those departments will take virtually any moron and pass them, no matter how deficient they are in written and spoken English.

            And then above there is yet another classic failure of decent English seen in the comments above by someone whose screen name is Jaydeen. “WHOSE supporting a closed government?”

            Well Jaydeen, you write as if you have transferred from one of those Palestinian schools where the emphasis is on how important it is to one day kill Jews rather than the basics of reading and writing.

          • Fozzie

            wah-wah! there he goes again, our lovable resident racist and grammar expert Dan Spitzer, today reminding us how miserable all of you are who study brown people and peace.

          • Dan Spitzer

            Yes, Fozzie, they must be miserable because on a certain level, these students realize how little they have learned in these pathetically PC departments. Talk about the waste of a college education.

          • peepsqueek

            Please read my above comments to Buga and to Leslie, and respond.

          • BugaBugasonESQ

            What are you talking about? What a dignified rhetorical attack, I see Cal undergrads aren’t as well selected as they used to be. Well speak with me if you must. I am a grad student at Cal and did my undergrad at Columbia, oh yeah, and I’m Jewish. If you have anything substantive to say, please do so. I have been following this bill for a long time. I am very glad that the outcome is what it is, militant pro-Israeli groups have long weighed undue influence on these processes and anything that keeps them out is an improvement. More so,Why would you want a bill that restricts freedom of speech in the guise of combating anti-semitism? The hijacking of the Jewish community and the label “anti-semitic” by Israelis and Israeli supporters threatens to marginalize legitimate instances of anti-semitic speech or activity. It is not anti-semitic to oppose Israel, get that through your head.

          • leslie

            right on! these fools are watering down what anti-Semitism means and making it more and more difficult to make people pay attention to it when it really happens. the dailycal’s whole framing of this as a marginalization of the jewish community is so dangerous when there are so many jews who support this bill: stop identifying judaism with support for israel’s occupation.

          • peepsqueek

            To Leslie-

            The question of statehood was resolved at the United Nations, with the 1947 U.N. partition plan (a Jewish State and an “Arab” State living side by side). However, six “Arab” armies invaded the newly formed Jewish State, in an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to destroy it. It is ironic that Palestinian “Arabs” now seek statehood via a path they have rejected for the Israelis all these years. Remember, the banner of Islam already flies over 99.9% of the Middle East land mass, and 1.5 million Arabs live in Israel proper as citizens.

            The implication of many settlement critics is that it would be better for peace if the West Bank were empty of Jews. This idea would be called anti-Semitic if Jews were barred from living in New York, Paris or London, but barring them from living in the West Bank, the cradle of Jewish civilization, the birth place of Solomon, David, and Jesus is called what?? Give it a name!

          • Dan Spitzer

            Hey Jewish or not, Buga, you are an anti-Semitic cocksucker as the resolution you support defines its support for BDS vs Israel and BDS vs Israel, surrounded by millions of Arabs benton its destruction, would mean the death of nearly six million Israeli Jews. But that doesn’t bother you a whit, does it, you ass-licker of the Islamofascist kind.

            If you are as well-educated as you claim, how can you support a people whose PLA and Hamas leadership have pledged their followers to Jewish genocide? If that is not anti-Semitism, pray tell let us know what you think is.

          • BugaBugasonESQ

            The resolution provides for freedom of speech. I do not support Hamas. Perhaps you are under the assumption that this bill does something it does not. Also, thank you for bringing the holocaust into it and implying (though thankfully not stating outright) that I am a self-hating Jew. Israel denies the Palestinian people basic civil and human rights. Israel occupies and steals land and uses forces as a legitimate expression of its foreign policy. These are not things civilized countries do. Unfortunately, people like you have forced Israel into a corner, it has become , unfortunately, an isolated and violent state. Israel has taken these peoples homes , it has taken their livelihoods, it has taken their very land, why should the world sit and watch it happen? Israel, on occasion , has acted to no better than any terrorist organization would.

            All people, Jewish or otherwise, have the moral obligation to stand on the right side of history. Berkeley boycotted the apartheid South African regime, it is only righteous that once again the University of California uses the economic and political force at its command to contribute to the expression of justice. However, this is all besides the point. The bill would have equated disagreement with Israel to anti-semitism. This is not the livelihood of Israelis at stake or the process by which a new genocide can take place, those are absurd claims. The defeat of the bill makes it possible to have mature discussions on the actions of the state of Israel and how the rest of the world should respond.

          • peepsqueek

            If you were to boycott Israel for “apartheid”, then you have to establish a factual basis. If you believe Israel to be an apartheid state, please tell us all: Which Israeli hospitals refuse to admit Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli restaurants refuse to serve Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli universities refuse to admit Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli buses refuse to board Israeli Arabs?

            To be balanced, which Islamic Countries are being boycotted today for institutionalized apartheid, gender apartheid, religious apartheid, etc.? Answer: None!

          • Dan Spitzer

            I’ve done reportage in apartheid S. Africa and when anyone compares Israel to that racist state and calls Israel “an apartheid nation,” they are engaging in the worst falsehoods. Unlike S. African blacks under apartheid, Israeli Arabs carry no passbooks, are free to marry whom they choose, may buy property in Jewish areas, join largely Jewish labor unions, and may elect their own representatives to government. So where, pray tell, is the “apartheid?”

            On the other hand, Palestinians make their women second class citizens, brutalize gays, and suppress dissidents barbarically. Moreover, the Palestinian ambassador to the UN openly stated that when the Palestinians have their state, no Jews will be allowed to live in it. Now that’s the ultimate in apartheid, other than of course the genocide of Jews which both the PLA of the West Bank and Hamas of Gaza have advocated.

          • I_h8_disqus

            A UCSA bill is not trivial. It is the student government for the entire UC system. How did you miss the articles that mentioned how JSP were preparing for this meeting? The fact that they are the only group that knew about the agenda so far ahead of time that they could prepare a presentation and get to the meeting shows conspiracy between the UCSA and the JSP.

            If you actually like debate, then if we are going to talk about a boycott related to human rights violations, then Palestine and most Arab countries should be added to the list. Then we can also add China and numerous countries in Asia and Africa. Israel is small potatoes compared to so many other nations when it comes to human rights violations. If you want to boycott them, then you should easily agree to boycott so many others.

          • rebecca

            i agree. lets boycott israel’s human rights abuses and chinas. both are engaged in occupations that should have ended long ago. poor palestinians. poor tibetians. such an unfair world.

          • I_h8_disqus

            If you agree, then you should agree to boycott Palestine. A knowledgeable person also shouldn’t equate Palestine to Tibet. Palestine violates the human rights of women and many other groups, which the Buddhists of Tibet don’t.

  • Stan

    Right Daily Cal: “human rights violations — acts it alleges Israel has committed.” Just an allegation there by the UCSA. No fact of the matter. What a totally biased and worthless paper.

    • guest

      Yet, among the the thousands of news sources on the Internet, you bother to read and comment articles here.

      • Stan

        well, i do go this school and unfortunately its the only sort-of daily paper we have. at least they give us unbiased info on the crime reports. that’s worth something.

        • Dan Spitzer

          And the UCSA resolution should be placed under the rubric of “crime reports.” In true democratic governance, failure to be transparent is akin to a criminal act.