The UCU, the British academic union, was born of a merger between the AUT and NATFHE. Lots of initials there, but let me add another set into the mix. If the union needs to reinvent itself again, how about KKK?
What am I talking about? Read David Hirsh, David T and Robert Fine to find out. Robert’s piece is particularly good, though one can reasonably wonder whether he’s being generous in treating Jenna Delich - the UCU activist who circulated an antisemitic article from the website of Klansman David Duke - as having made a mistake.
Here’s my response to Robert, in the comments on his article:
“Robert, the points you make here are unarguable. But are you being generous in portraying this as an unfortunate error? I am not on the UCU list, as you are, so maybe you know something I don’t - that said, I find it hard to believe that Delich did not know who Duke is. And even if she didn’t know, ten seconds on his site - which links to the notorious Nazi “Stormfront” site as well as “Facts About Black Crime in America” and “Innate Intellectual and Psychological Differences” - is enough to establish that it’s utter filth (unless you are a complete fool, which she may well be). Engage readers should also remember that Duke is closely associated with MAUP, a private university in Ukraine which publishes a wealth of antisemitic titles.
I do admire those who stay in the UCU and fight. It’s not up to me to say whether or not you should continue to do so. But politically, it strikes me that the UCU is a sewer. Here is an example of a colleague, a teacher of young minds, who encourages others to read the ravings of the leader of a movement known for cross-burnings, lynchings and other acts of terror against African-Americans. Hasn’t a red line been crossed now? Isn’t it incumbent upon the UCU leadership - in the name of anti-fascism, and out of respect for, among others, the four little black girls incinerated in a church in Alabama in 1963 because of a bombing carried out by Klan scum - to discipline Delich, including by expelling her?”
The article was NOT by David Duke. It was an article by another person originally published elsewhere and republished on Duke’s site.
I won’t say, like Zionists would do, “if you were wrong about this, you may be wrong about everything else you claim.” But it’s a good idea to follow the links and actually learn what we’re talking about. If you read the article, you’ll see it’s not antisemitic at all.
A person in Argentina
“The article was NOT by David Duke.”
That is correct and has been highlighted by most blogs covering this issue, albeit not explicitly by this one.
But…that isn’t really very important is it. David Duke liked the article. So did Jenna. That’s kinda the point here. Are you really that stupid?
Oh..and the article is anti-semitic.
“like Zionists would do”
I think we can guess where you are coming from then.
Thanks for coming ;-)
The article is clearly antisemitic and misrepresents the actions of the Israeli army, whilst also invoking classic blood libel and conspiracy theories. It is irrelevant that the article was not written by Duke. What is relevant is that an academic is citing from a website which is openly racist and antisemitic. There’s no justification for that at all.
As Matt and David say, whether or not Duke wrote the article is really irrelevant. What counts is that it was carried on a racist website and then circulated by a British academic who was either too myopic to note the Nazi branding all over Duke’s little corner of the internet, or (like our correspondent from Argentina here) not concerned by it.
The author of the article was Joe Quinn, a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. And this line about Israel (”What more can I say - either someone does something about these sick psychopaths, or they, and their kind in Washington and around the world, will destroy us all”) is worthy of the Grand Wizard himself.
Joe Quinn who wrote the article is not just a conspiracy theorist - he has the following to say:
Moreover, in the same article Joe Quinn links to the web site of the Holocaust Denier David Irving with his following comment:
The latin phrase Res ipsa loquitur comes to mind.
Something good has come out of this. The UCU has been exposed–and exposed internationally–for being an organization that (at the very least) tolerates racism.
Regards,
Inna
SOTT is a very strange place, shove Illuminati in the search box and up pops, Eric Hufschmid’s weird views:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/106485-The-Media-is-the-Enemy
for background on “Eric” see http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/11/eric-hufschmid-gets-sadder.html
Mike, the article you’re quoting is NOT the one Jenna linked to.
Ben, claiming that someone is a psycopath and his supporters too is not antisemitic, especially considering that that person claimed that when he drops a bomb his only feeling is a slight bump to his plane.
That said, I’d like to give you all a general response.
All of you seem to think that because an accusation was once falsely made against the Jews, that accusation will be always false. Thus, if the Jews were falsely accused of trying to dominate the world in The Protocols, that means that AIPAC doesn’t want to control American foreign policy. You use bombastic terms like “trope” and “canard” to characterize any such accusation.
Such line of reasoning is fundamentally flawed, and I’ll give you an example. It was formerly FALSELY claimed that the Jews poisoned wells. The accusation was FALSE during the Middle Age and up to some 15 years ago.
Therefore, you claim that if anyone dares say that wells are posioned by Jews, he’s repeating a trope and a canard and the assertion is false.
But nope. In recent years, the formerly FALSE claim has become TRUE. Jewish settlers are poisoning wells in the name of Jewish interests in the West Bank. Allow me to point to an instance reported both by the BBC and Maariv.
There is a State responsibility, since those settlers are heavily subsidized by the Israeli government.
Therefore, what was formerly a canard is not so anymore. And the same applies to other accusations (fundamentally made against Zionism, not Israel). To say that Israel kills a disproportionate number of children in the Occupied Territories has nothing to do with the medieval claim that Jews killed children to make matzah with their blood, for instance.
I submitted this to Engage but since Ibn Yusuf “la persona en Argentina” also posted this here I will reply here as well:
“All of you seem to think that because an accusation was once falsely made against the Jews, that accusation will always be false. Thus, if the Jews were falsely accused of trying to dominate the world in The Protocols, that means that AIPAC doesn’t want to control American foreign policy. You use bombastic terms like “trope” and “canard” to characterize any such accusation.” Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf
There is nothing bombastic about terms like canard. If you don’t know its meaning look it up.
Just because an accusation was falsely made against the Jews once doesn’t mean that accusations being made today are true. This is in effect what you are saying.
You point about “well poisoning” is not substantiated by the article s you cite. In fact they refute them.
When one accused “the Jews” of well poisoning which was done in the Middle Ages it meant that all Jews were responsible for the act. You accusation seems to follow the same logic.
You say, “There is a State responsibility, since those settlers are heavily subsidized by the Israeli government.”
In other words the Jewish State and not just a group of misguided individuals who broke the law is responsible for a tawdry act.
Yet, on closer inspection it is the Jewish State that is investigating this allegations:
Form the article:
“Settlers suspected of polluting wells”
“Residents of Palestinian village near Hebron complain settlers threw dead chickens in their water reservoirs. Police investigating.” By Uri Glickman and Marwan Athamna
http://web.archive.org/web/20040822135907/http://www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=9734
If the State was responsible it wouldn’t be investigating these allegations. Moreover, the account was given in a Jewish newspaper (Maariv) which takes these allegations quite seriously.
It should be noted that the Jewish settlers denied the allegations and made charges of their own. In any case, Jewish organizations seem to support the Arab villagers’ claims.
The article speaks of “polluting wells” and not poisonings, though I don’t expect someone who has trouble with terms like canard would care about such nice distinctions.
Finally, this incident occurred in 04. Any idea how it was adjudicated (or is this too, too bombastic a term for you?)?
Your claims, then, about Jews poising wells today is total nonsense. So is your claims about AIPAC trying to dominate US foreign policy. I noticed that you didn’t bother to back up your allegation and I don’t expect you will. In fact you conveniently avoid rebutting any specific counter argument to your species claims.
Yes, Mr. Ibn Yusuf, you are still dealing in antisemitic canards.
Since Yusuf claims to be an Argentinean I wonder what his view of Iran’s bombings of the Jewish center and the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires is.
If the State was responsible it wouldn’t be investigating these allegations.
The Russian state investigated the Kishinev Pogrom. Not only that; it also sentenced 22 people to prison terms. Does that mean that the Russian state was not responsible for the pogrom?
The Israeli state acts just like Czarist Russia. It ostensibly opposes settler violence, while doing next to nothing to stop it, and giving offenders ridiculously short prison terms in the very few cases in which someone is found guilty. Like Czarist Russia, Israel condones the violence because it’s functional to its geostrategic interests, i.e. grabbing as much Palestinian land as possible and taking over their natural resources, notably water.
So is your claims about AIPAC trying to dominate US foreign policy. I noticed that you didn’t bother to back up your allegation and I don’t expect you will.
What I say is that AIPAC tries to dominate US foreign policy that might affect Israel, and that it usually succeeds. A recent article in the Jewish Press may illuminate you. I excerpt from it:
***
Some of Obama’s older speeches have also echoed the rhetoric of pro-Palestinian activists, and he has raised eyebrows by referring to a “cycle of violence” in the Middle East, and suggesting that the real enemy of Israel is “not just Hezbollah, it’s not just Hamas, it’s also cynicism.”
But recently Obama’s speeches have changed their tone, becoming hard to decipher from speeches made by hawkish Israel supporters such as President George W. Bush. While meeting with AIPAC this June, Obama had Zionists kvelling with his vow to keep Jerusalem undivided and his promise to “bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security.” He also denounced Iranian threats to Israel, saying “the danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.”
***
As you can see, Obama has changed from “echoing pro-Palestinian rhetoric” to making speeches worthy of “hawkish Israel supporters.” That happened after his use of the expression “cycle of violence” referring to the I/P conflict was vehemently protested by the Zionists.
I think only a high degree of naiveness could lead anyone to think that, after thoroughly analyzing the situation, Obama concluded that, contrary to his previous beliefs, Israel is right and the Palestinians are wrong. The theory that he was intimidated by AIPAC holds, in my view, much more water.
I wonder what his view of Iran’s bombings of the Jewish center and the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires is.
Did Iran bomb a Jewish center in Buenos Aires? Pardon my antisemitism, but although this charge has been made by an Argentinian judge I don’t believe it; Iran and Argentina were negotiating a treaty by the time of the bombing; also, the “evidence” was provided by objectionable witnesses.
The bombings were a barbaric act of terrorism, and I hope the culprits are eventually punished. But I wouldn’t like a country to be scapegoated just because we’re frustrated at not being able to find the perpetrators.
Mr Yusuf–
I also responded to you on Engage (but did not keep a copy of my response). My response went something like this:
Thank you so much for being honest enough to say that you don’t actually have a problem with Zionists or Israel but with Jews, qua Jews. Or, as you put it “All of you seem to think that because an accusation [of poisoning wells, controlling the world, and eating Gentile children] was once falsely made against the Jews [in the Protocols], that accusation will be always false.”
This attitude of yours has nothing whatsoever to do with any objections you might have about the State of Israel’s policies. Indeed, it has nothing whatsoever to do with Palestinians. It has to do with your problem–and it is your problem–with the Jewish people.
Thank you for being honest about your problem.
Regards,
Inna
The issue here is not AIPAC. The issue is pressuring the UCU leadership to clean up their union. Let’s not get sidetracked.
Seems to me that Ibibyu has learned a few buttons and he has been pushing them very successfully and repeatedly in order to get a rise out of Jews or Zionista, or Israelies.
Note this:
“Mike, the article you’re quoting is NOT the one Jenna linked to.”
Of course we all know that, because Mike did not claim to be linking to the article but wanted to show that Jenna’s article writer is consistent with David Duke’s theories and quoted another article by way of proof.
Yusuf is counting on exhausting his interlocutors in this way, again, a common ploy among antisemites.
it’s a common ploy among the deranged of all stripes
“A person in Argentina”
“The Russian state investigated the Kishinev Pogrom. Not only that; it also sentenced 22 people to prison terms. Does that mean that the Russian state was not responsible for the pogrom?”
This is ridiculous; the Israeli government did not advocate those alleged attacks and most major Israeli papers took the side of the Arab villagers not to mention all the Jewish civil rights groups.
“The Israeli state acts just like Czarist Russia.”
An easy and stupid analogy: why not say it acts like the Argentinean government?
The Argentinean government, (your own country) was also guilty of vicious antisemitism for many years.
You need to spend more time cleaning up your own back yard. You sound like someone who would be perfectly at home at some ministry there.
“Did Iran bomb a Jewish center in Buenos Aires? Pardon my antisemitism, but although this charge has been made by an Argentinian judge I don’t believe it; Iran and Argentina were negotiating a treaty by the time of the bombing; also, the “evidence” was provided by objectionable witnesses.”
Yes, you are an antisemite; and this comment about the bombing says all we need to know about you.
Now, go post on David Duke’s website.
I posted this on engage and am reposting it here since “the person in Argentina” has made similar comments on this website.
Ibn Yusuf has made many unsubstantiated claims but the most gulling claim he made is the following one:
“Do you understand your objections lack any logic? I’m using the screen name Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf to say things that someone actually called Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf would be expected to say — what’s the problem?”
http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-candour-of-mahmoud-darwish/#comments
How does this antisemitic Argentinean know what someone named “Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf” would say?
Here is what someone named, Salah Choudhury, a real name of a real person from Bangle Dash who is a journalist and who has been arrested and is facing the death penalty for saying that he admires Israel.
http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2008/08/21/muslims-who-admire-israel-what-significance/
Many other Muslims who have made such declarations have faced severe penalties in the Muslims world. That an Argentinean antisemite, would pretend to know what a Muslim would say about Jews and Israel is outrageous especially in face of courageous Muslims who have been condemned for affirming friendship with Israel.
I suggest you not publish this individual with his fake name any more as his comments are not true and are full of the kind of antisemitic innuendo we are fighting against. Besides, all he is doing is seeking attention here.
I would add that his claim that Iran was not behind the massacre of Jews in the bombing of the Jewish center in Buenos Aires is equally gulling.
The issue here is not AIPAC.
To some extent it is. It was claimed that the article Jenna linked to is antisemitic, and part of the evidence were the remarks made there about AIPAC and its influence on US foreign policy.
The article may be utterly one-sided, but antisemitic it is not.
The best argument was made by David Hirsh over at HP who postulated that doesn’t anyone at all in the UCU pro-boycotters list pause to think that their views are identical to those in which David Duke believes?
“It was claimed that the article Jenna linked to is antisemitic, and part of the evidence were the remarks made there about AIPAC and its influence on US foreign policy.”
I made that claim, and the article is antisemitic.
You didn’t say AIPAC “influenced” US foreign policy it said it controlled it.
Your claim was that:
“All of you seem to think that because an accusation was once falsely made against the Jews, that accusation will always be false. Thus, if the Jews were falsely accused of trying to dominate the world in The Protocols, that means that AIPAC doesn’t want to control American foreign policy.”
http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/comment.php?id=2058
So stop lying Argenenean Jew hater!
You are not someone people should be taking seriously.
Ben, I think you’re being too generous in presuming over her protestations that Delich would know who Duke is. I guess, though, she’s revealed more about herself than that she’s prone to pushing blatant antisemitism. My take on that:
What is Yusuf’s definition of antisemitism? I have asked him on Engage, on my blog and now I’m asking here. He has to tell us what antisemitic discourse is, what it includes, what it excludes, what is its purpose and what language it uses. If he can’t do that, then he can’t make the claim that an article is not antisemitic.
“What is Yusuf’s definition of antisemitism?”
His definition is like that of Humpty-Dumpty when he says:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
HP has been attacked, and is functioning from a backup blog, http://jennadelich.blogspot.com/
Modernity, thanks. All - get the word out. Let’s direct as much traffic as we can to the HP back up.
“Ibrahim,” you are probably wondering why your comment has not been posted. Well, we don’t permit hate speech and malicious rumor posing as fact.
Part of your comment read as follows:
“Jews poison wells in the West Bank with the condoning of the Israeli government”
“Barack Obama changed his views on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict under pressure from AIPAC”
“Israel uses human shields as young as 11″
“There is an attempt by Zionist and Jewish institutions, like ADL, to muzzle free speech regarding Israel”
“Israel advocates try to shut up Israel critics in blogs by making undue queries about their identities and unsustained allegations of antisemitism”
None of these canards - yes, I will use that word - has any basis in reality. Moreover, your choice of words (”Jews poison wells..”) is clearly designed to provoke. Your strategy is to enable antisemitism while denying that it exists.
You are perfectly free to say these things on your own blog. We will not legitimize them here.
@Ben Cohen
“we don’t permit hate speech and malicious rumor posing as fact…None of these canards - yes, I will use that word - has any basis in reality.”
It seems that even the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem has been involved in promoting the maliciously false canard about Israel using human shields as young as 11.
http://www.btselem.org/english/Testimonies/20070228_Human_Shields_in_Nablus_witness_Jihan_Daadush.asp
Ben White, are you not getting confused with Hamas? Are you unaware that, in March, al Aqsa TV called upon children to form a human shield around a building in Gaza they thought would be targeted by the IDF?
Let me remind you - for the last time - that this thread is about a UCU member promoting the website of a neo-Nazi. Any comments not relating to this will henceforth be deleted. And you can whine all you like about “censorship”, “muzzling” and all the other baseless CANARDS - frankly, given the disgraceful onslaught of your boycotter friends against Harry’s Place, we’re not interested. At which point, let me remind you all to visit, and encourage others to visit, http://jennadelich.blogspot.com/.
“‘There is much evidence to warrant an in-depth investigation of the role played by agents of Israel in the 9-11 attacks.Yet the ubiquitous, tiresome and completely baseless threat of being labelled “anti-Semitic” for criticising the actions of the Israeli government effectively prevents all but the most courageous from following the leads. Coincidence? We think not….
Just what level of power do Israeli interests wield in the halls of power in the US that any investigation into Israeli spying activities on US soil against US intelligence agencies can be so completely quashed? Would this constitute a level of power and control that would allow those interests to carry off a terrorist attack like 9-11 and have it blamed on “Arab terrorists”?’
Most assuredly….
Moreover, in the same article Joe Quinn links to the web site of the Holocaust Denier David Irving with his following comment:
‘On the morning of September 11th and just as the WTC towers were crumbling the 5 Israelis were caught doing the “happy dance” as they videotaped the Twin Towers fall.’”
Anti-Semitism is as endemic within the 9/11 ‘Truth (AKA Lies) movement’ as it is amongst the UCU activists pushing for a boycott. No lie, no smear, no base act of Jew-hatred is too contemptible for them:
http://www.911myths.com/html/4000_israelis.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/zim_shipping.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/odigo.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/dancing_israelis.html
http://slate.msn.com/id/116813
http://www.nocturne.org/~terry/wtc_4000_Israeli.html