It's the Jews, stupid

It's the Jews, stupid

Dror Eydar

While Britain, and Europe as a whole struggle with the threat facing the continent — its slow transformation into an Islamic caliphate — the culprit behind Europe's weakness and loss of survival instinct has been found: the Jews. Of course.

In 1943, as half of Europe was in ruins, "Der Stürmer" ran a cartoon featuring a Jew in the form of Satan looking down on his handiwork, a destroyed Europe. The perpetrator wasn't the Nazis, the cartoon tried to explain, it was the Jews. It isn't murderous Palestinian terror that has taken thousands of Jewish lives, it is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's thirst for blood that prompted him to use Palestinian blood to build a protective wall around Israel.

It is no coincidence that this cartoon ran precisely on International Holocaust Remembrance Day. Ever since the 1950s, Holocaust denial has grown more and more common among the European fringe, with the Jews being turned into Nazis and the Palestinians into their victims. Over half a century later, the fringe has now become the mainstream. Even if the Holocaust is not being categorically denied (yet), the Jews are consistently being portrayed as executioners. The cruel irony is that Israel is currently serving as the entire world's first line of defense in its battle against radical Islam. But the Europeans are deluding themselves into thinking that if only they distinguish themselves from Israel, they will be spared.

Paradoxically, the new anti-Semitism grew exponentially more potent after the Oslo Accords. The desperate attempt to make peace with our neighbors served mainly to cement the Palestinian version of events, which rests on countless lies, while our truth remained unheard.

What are the odds that The Sunday Times — which ran a cartoon depicting Netanyahu as the one person standing in the way of the peace process by way of Palestinian blood — much like the rest of the world's press, actually understands an iota of what is going on in our part of the world? This is not just negligence, but also mental laziness — refusing to delve into a complex reality, to truly examine the regional myths, with all their religious nuances, or thoroughly study the education and media systems of both peoples. Who needs all that, when you can just blame the Jews?

It is a good thing that the owner of The Sunday Times, Rupert Murdoch, apologized. But let us examine the paper's response in the two days prior to the apology: This is not anti-Semitism, they said. It is only directed against Netanyahu. Ah, British humor. Netanyahu, the prime minister of the Jewish state, is drawn as a bloodthirsty butcher on International Holocaust Remembrance Day. The trowel in his hand looks like a sword, dripping with blood, like a veritable anti-Christ. Humor, you know.

The truth is that over the last 20 years we have tried to build a house of peace, but every time we get close, the Palestinians just added more Israeli victims to the "house" of the peace process — a type of pagan shrine with the word "peace" embossed on its gate and beside it a "thank you, Europe" sign.


http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=3338

Engaging with anti-Israel charities

Engaging with anti-Israel charities

Isi Leibler

I had to rub my eyes in disbelief when I observed yet another botched initiative by the well-intentioned leadership of the Board of Deputies of British Jews recently. By a vote of almost 2:1, the board's plenum endorsed a linkage with the British branch of Oxfam International, one of the world's largest charity organizations, with branches in more than 90 countries.

The Board of Deputies will send 30 representatives to a training weekend with Oxfam, where they will be taught how to raise funds to "tackle injustices in the international food system." The cost, about $13,000, will largely be borne by Oxfam.

It is unprecedented for an umbrella body like the Board of Deputies to enter into partnerships with charities. The board struggles to fulfill its clearly defined constitutional obligations. Besides, Jews are renowned for their generous philanthropic contributions, and there is no rational reason why it should seek to highlight such non-Jewish activity.

But even if the board felt an obligation to become visibly engaged with a charity, it is staggering that it chose to do so with Oxfam, an organization which has a notorious reputation for engaging in anti-Israeli initiatives totally beyond the normal province of a charity.

Oxfam's hostility toward Israel goes back over a decade. One particularly troubling example of this was when in the wake of the Durban hate fest, when the Belgian branch produced huge posters with oranges dripping in blood titled "Israeli fruits have a bitter taste: Reject the occupation of Palestine, don't buy Israeli fruits and vegetables." Following a storm of protest, this blood libel was withdrawn.

In 2009, Oxfam effectively promoted the boycotts, divestment and sanctions campaign by terminating its relationship with actress Kristin Davis, one of its principal spokespeople, because she had endorsed Israeli Ahava cosmetic products.

Oxfam director Jeremy Hobbs proclaimed that "the people of Gaza are living in the world's largest prison but have fewer rights than convicts." Oxfam called for ending the boycott of Hamas and repeatedly condemned the "illegal" Israeli presence in east Jerusalem. It was party to a document urging the international community to demand that Israel "provide compensation for the damage caused during Operation Cast Lead and other Israeli military action."

Following the 2010 Gaza flotilla incident, which Oxfam considered "a direct result of the Israeli blockade in Gaza," it denounced Israel's "appalling use of violence and killing of civilians."

Oxfam has condemned Israel's security fence, which has played an important role in bringing an end to suicide bombings inside Israel. To this day Oxfam calls for the specific labeling of goods produced beyond the Green Line — clearly a form of boycott. In addition, Oxfam cosponsors initiatives with bodies that have clear records of supporting terrorists such as the London Muslim Center and Islamic Relief.

It is thus inexplicable why a Jewish representative body would associate itself with a charity that prides itself on maintaining a consistent record of hostility toward the Jewish state.

Even more bizarre was the fact that the board was encouraged by other Jewish establishment bodies. These included the principal public relations organization promoting Israel, the British Israel Communications and Research Center, and the United Jewish Israel Appeal, the principal Israel fundraiser whose former leader had the dubious record of having urged British Jews to speak out against the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel.

Astonishingly, even the British Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, intervened, telling the London Jewish Chronicle that the board should engage with Oxfam as well as with other bodies that criticize Israel. It is unprecedented for a British civil servant, an ambassador to Israel, to intervene in such a controversial domestic issue. What motivated him to do so on this occasion?

In justifying the initiative, Board of Deputies President Vivian Wineman sought to calm his constituents by remarking that working with Oxfam did not mean the board shared its views. However, he opined that his executives felt obliged to "engage" with bodies that were hostile to Israel.

He stated that after meeting with Oxfam, he was satisfied it would not boycott Israel or associate itself with organizations linked to terrorism. If it did, the board would terminate the association.

However, Oxfam refused to modify ongoing political attacks on Israel or suspend its campaign to oblige Israel to label all products produced beyond the Green Line.

The board also failed to explain why, if it sought to "engage" with organizations hostile to Israel, it chose a charity which it was unlikely to influence, rather than concentrating on "engaging" with more relevant organizations such as the government and political parties. In this context few would hail the board's promotion of the case for Israel in the broader political arena as a stellar success.

Clearly, sole British Jews would be happier if the board was seen as more "balanced" or "evenhanded" in relation to Israel. There are undoubtedly pressures from elements within the Jewish establishment — the "trembling Israelites" — that are discomforted at being perceived as a pro-Israel lobby. Perhaps they sought to distance themselves from this by displaying their broad-mindedness and commitment to society at large by linking to an anti-Israeli charity.

During the debate, there were repeated remarks that dealing with Oxfam might not be good for Israel but it was good for Anglo-Jews to be seen as helping charities providing food for children. Senior Vice President Laura Marks conceded that it was highly unlikely that the board would succeed in persuading Oxfam to modify its policies toward Israel, but gushed that the board's involvement would at least result in "helping Oxfam understand our values as Jews, to help them to see that we share values with them."

It should be noted that those opposed to this initiative were not calling for a Jewish boycott of the charity. They argued, with irrefutable justification, that there was no rationale for the official organ of the Jewish community to provide an imprimatur to an organization which has a consistent record of hostility toward the Jewish state.

There is also the issue of Jewish dignity. What sort of message is the community sending to the British public? And for that matter, what example is it providing to Jewish youngsters, when it associates itself with such an organization?

Following the plenum vote, Jonathan Hoffman, an leading opponent of the association with Oxfam, said it was a sad day for British Jews. "To Israel's enemies it says: Even the board supports an organization hostile to Israel — look how isolated Israel is. To Israel's friends it says: The board is not serious about fighting delegitimization. How can it be when it rushes into a tie-up with one of Israel's most hostile charities?"

Despite obtaining a plenum majority to endorse their initiative, it may well be a Pyrrhic victory for the leaders of the board because the divisions created will not soon be healed. British Jews who are passionate supporters of Israel and at the forefront of Jewish activity will not easily forgive their leaders for shamefully linking them with an organization consistently displaying double standards and bias against Israel. According to the Jewish Chronicle, numerous outraged constituents have already threatened to withdraw their communal levy payments from the board.


http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=3341

America and Israel

America and Israel

What if Americans woke up to hear on the morning news that Canada had tens of thousands of missiles, many with chemical warheads, aimed at them? And that the Canadian government — a vicious enemy of the US itself — was losing control of these weapons, which were in danger of falling into the hands of terrorist groups that were sworn to destroy the US?

And what if, at the same time, it was reported that Mexico — whose president had recently called Americans “bloodsuckers, warmongers … descendents of apes and pigs,” and said that Mexicans should “nurse their children on hatred” for the US — was descending into chaos, unable to feed itself but still, above all, obsessed with hatred for its neighbor.

If that wasn’t enough, suppose the newscaster reported that terrorists who had taken over a coastal strip of California from the Mexican border to Monterey — who had pelted the rest of the country as far as Washington DC and New York City with deadly missiles a few months ago — had instituted military training in high schools to produce the “next generation of resistance fighters” who would “liberate the land” occupied by those pesky Americans.

Finally, what if, say, Venezuela was developing nuclear weapons and every other day one of their officials promised to root out the ‘cancer’ that was the US?

Boker tov, people, welcome to Israel.

I didn’t mention that the UN is planning yet another resolution condemning Israel, or that Jew- and Israel-hatred is reaching new heights worldwide, especially in Europe and of course the UK. Or that the president of the US, Israel’s main ally, has nominated three more or less anti-Israel candidatesfor Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and CIA director.

But despite all this, Israel just completed a free and fair election — not so usual in the Middle East — in which the major issues were social and economic. Surveys (like this one last year) show Israelis to be happy overall. Israel’s economy is doing well, although there are concerns about rising inequality and a housing shortage (but there is also a recognition that these problems can and should be solved). There is a broad consensus in Israel on questions of national security, including the need to attack Iran if it is about to obtain nuclear weapons, and on the unlikelihood of a peace agreement with the Palestinians.

Here in the US, the nation is bitterly divided on left-right lines. There is no consensus on how to deal with either security or economic issues. The Congress is suffering from permanent gridlock. The economy is slowly improving, but employment is not — and that appears to represent a structural change in the kind and number of jobs available. Many states and municipalities are close to bankrupt (California and Fresno come to mind). Infrastructure is decaying and we don’t seem to have the will to fix it. The middle class is becoming harder to get into from below, and harder to stay in. Americans don’t (yet) have to worry about missile attacks from Mexico, but its prestige and ability to protect its interests abroad have fallen sharply.

Despite the existential threats, Israel is in some important ways doing better than we are. And if it succeeds in weathering its primarily external threats, it will be around for a long time. The US, on the other hand, while still enormously powerful, seems to have lost its way.

http://fresnozionism.org/2013/01/america-and-israel/

Jerusalem, Capital of Israel: An Islamic Prophecy

Jerusalem, Capital of Israel: An Islamic Prophecy

by Ali Salim

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3548/jerusalem-israel-capital-islamic-prophecy

Jerusalem is the capital of the Children of Israel, now called the Jews; and it is forbidden for Musims to demand it, just as a married woman belongs only to her husband. Is it possible that Allah, who on His infinite mercy, calls them the Chosen People, and promises them the Holy Land, also plans to murder them, using the Muslims in Palestine as His intermediary? Every Muslim knows that Allah does not break His promises.

If you listen in Arabic to the hate-speeches made by Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi; or to Turkish President Erdogan; or to the calls made from Qatar by Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi and from the Gaza Strip by the head of Hamas, Khaled Mashaal for the killing of the Jews, you will understand why Arabs and Muslims believe Allah is punishing them by having them kill each other: It is because His prophecies are not being fulfilled.

For example, it is heresy and a violation of the will of Allah to sidestep calls for recognizing Jerusalem as official capital of the Children of Israel, and moving the American embassy there. It ignores the prophecy of the Noble Qur'an, which predicts the return of the Children of Israel to their land from the four corners of the earth, as it is written in Al-Isra, Verse 104, "And we said to the Children of Israel after him, "Dwell in the land, then, when the final and the last promise comes near, we shall bring you altogether as a mixed crowd."

Although the stance adopted by the leaders of the Western world in general, and the American administration in particular, may be the consequence of their desire to strengthen their image in the eyes of the Muslim countries, their image is seen only as reflecting their weakness and attempts to ingratiate themselves with both radical Islam and Christian anti-Semitism.

It is not my intention to state that the other monotheistic religions do not also have their place in the holy city of Jerusalem. But political lies come mostly from radical Islamist sources, then somehow become accepted facts. This violates the prophecies of the messengers of Allah, and especially those of the greatest of His prophets, Muhammad (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam).

The various distortions of history and religion by politically-oriented Islamic sheiks and leaders for the sake of false, infidel, political goals, are legion. The way the Salafist Islamic sheiks and members of the Muslim Brotherhood twist the Noble Qur'an to suit their narrow political goals makes me angry, as it also makes angry the millions of Muslims around the world who know the eternal truth written in Islam's Noble Qur'an.

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, for example, invented the fabrication that Palestinians are the descendants of the Jebusites and other Canaanite tribes of the land of the at the time of the Book. Behind this fabrication was Arafat's attempt to "prove" that the Palestinians lived in the Holy Land before the Children of Israel, and that therefore they have a greater right to it,

According to the Qur'an, however, "a race of giants" lived in the Holy Land but were destroyed by the Children of Israel, led by Joshua with the help of Allah the Almighty. There were never "Palestinians" in the Holy Land, nor is there one word of them in the Noble Qur'an, nor any prophecy regarding their existence, nor any right to the Holy Land or any other place in the future or on Day of Judgment in the Noble Book of Allah.

The Palestinians are not mentioned or even hinted at in the Noble Qur'an, but the Children of Israel are mentioned countless times and they are mentioned as the Chosen People, as it is written in Al-Baqara, Verse 47, "O Children of Israel, remember My favor that I have bestowed upon you and that I preferred you over the worlds." They are mentioned as inheritors of the Holy Land which, according to all the Islamic commentators, is Jerusalem and the country around it. The Muslim claim that the Divine promise to the Children of Israel appears in the Noble Qur'an in the past tense and therefore is not relevant today is a malicious lie. Everyone knows that most of the Noble Qur'an was written in the past tense, but what was written about the Children of Israel was a promise and a prophecy, and Allah does not change His mind or break His promises.

Anyone who claims that what is written about the Jews is only relevant for the past and that the Children of Israel disappeared turns our beloved Prophet from prophet to mere historian who did not know what the future would bring. Anyone who claims that the "real" Children of Israel disappeared and that the Jews of today are not the genuine Children of Israel of the Noble Qur'an is a liar and a deceiver, because if there are no Children of Israel then the prophecy of Muhammad, (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him) (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), is irrelevant and he did not foresee the return of the Children of Israel to their land for the third time and instruct them to settle it, and promise that if they did what was right in the eyes of Allah and acted well they would succeed, as it is written in Al-Isra, Verses 6 and 7, "We gave you back the power against them, and aided you with wealth and children, and made you larger in numbers. Now, if you do well, you will do well for your own souls; and if you do evil, it will only go against them…." And if one prophecy is false then all are false, and the Noble Qur'an has no value. Thus we have to admit that regardless of the mistakes the Jews make concerning our Palestinian brothers, they in fact act well, even to the Arabs in Israel, and they are charitable according to the tradition of Islam, and they are clearly more honest than the Arab and Muslim leaders today who oppress their own people and daily slaughter them and shed their blood.

To the eternal credit of Islam it must be said that in the seventh century the armies of Islam invaded Palestine and wrested it from the Byzantines, and that Jerusalem was turned over without a battle to the Muslims by the Christian Bishop Sophronius. This was the beginning of the Arab presence in the Holy Land, which ended and was renewed for years under various conquests, including the Crusaders, but ended for good nearly a century ago, when the Turks went back home. The Holy Land was then given back into the hands of the Children of Israel, according to the decree of the Noble Qur'an and the prophecy of Muhammad, (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). The Children of Israel came from all the corners of the earth, as it is written in Al-A'raf, Verse 137, "And we caused the people who had been oppressed to inherit the eastern regions of the land and western ones, which We had blessed. And the good word of your Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel because of what they had patiently endured."

The Palestinian claim that the Prophet Jesus was a Palestinian Arab is also a fabrication, unfortunately characteristic of Palestinian leaders who invent them and invest enormous sums of money to buy weapons, kill the Children of Israel, carry out terrorist attacks and launch Qassam rockets at civilians instead of rehabilitating the Palestinian refugees, their brothers, who, as a result of the establishment of Israel, actually returned to the bosom of the Islamic nation.

The more the Palestinians repeat the infamy that Jesus was a Palestinian Arab, the more likely it is that the Christians themselves will believe it, especially those who, by ignoring and denying the rights of the Children of Israel to Jerusalem, reveal their own baseness and lack of respect for their own religion, based on Judaism and begun in the Jewish capital of Jerusalem. According to such an absurdity, the Jewish prophet Jesus, son of Mary, who opposed the corrupt Jewish priests in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, was a "Palestinian Arab; " but it is just another way of denying the Jews the right to their land. Christians who ignore the Jewish right to Jerusalem are also denying their own religion.

From a religious point of view, the connection between Muslims and Jerusalem began with the "Night Journey," a dream that appears in the Noble Qur'an and was also reported by the Prophet's beloved child-wife, Aisha. According to the dream, Muhammad (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), went on a night journey from Mecca to Jerusalem riding on a marvelous animal named Al-Buraq, and from Jerusalem to heaven, where he received the principles of Islam. Jerusalem was then temporarily designated as the "Kibla," the first direction for Muslims to face during prayers; but Muhammad (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) changed the direction to Mecca. Since that time Jerusalem has been considered as only the third most sacred place for Islam.

It is saddening to think that we deny the Jews, the modern-day Children of Israel, their identity, despite the fact that we know that they preserved their faith for thousands of years in the face of torture, rape, persecution, burning and genocide, all crimes committed against them because they were Jews and were determined to remain Jews. We, however, the faithful of Islam, accept into our ranks every criminal and murderer who converts, in or out of prison, who only has to say, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet;" all it takes is five minutes. This new Muslim is considered a good Muslim, but a Jew who has adhered to the history and faith of his Jewish ancestors, the faith kept for thousands of years, is not in our eyes a genuine Jew, a Child of Israel. How long will we deny the Islamic faith and the prophecies of our Prophet Muhammad, (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him) (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam)?

Unfortunately, even those among us who do believe that the Jews in Israel are genuine Children of Israel, the ones Muhammad (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), referred to in his noble Surahs, the ones who have inherited the Holy Land promised to them by the Noble Qur'an, conduct themselves despicably. They adopt the counterfeit, apocalyptic, false sayings which do not appear in the Noble Qur'an and are falsely attributed to the Prophet of Allah. They adopt as genuine traditions those which are lies, and, contradicting the promises made by Allah in the Noble Qur'an, falsely prophesy the destruction of the Jews by the Muslims in Palestine.

These commentators, inspired by Satan, refer to the Jews as "Zionists," as though changing their name makes it permissible to kill the People of the Book and violate the words of Allah and His prophets. Is it possible that Allah, who in His infinite mercy calls them the Chosen People, and promised them the Holy Land, also plans to murder them using the Muslims in Palestine as His intermediary? Every Muslim knows that Allah does not break His promises. Therefore, his promise to the Children of Israel is both relevant and eternal. The Jews, weak and miserable, who came from all over the globe, victims of hatred and murder would not found their state in Palestine unless it were the will of Allah, who supports them.

Jerusalem is the capital of the Children of Israel and it is forbidden for Muslims to demand it, just as a married woman belongs only to her husband. Jerusalem is never mentioned by name in the Noble Qur'an, but it is mentioned there as the heart of the Holy Land given in perpetuity to the Jews. It therefore has to be capital of the Children of Israel in the Land of Israel and not of the planned state of "Palestine." If, as Muslims, we look into our hearts, we have to admit that a state called Palestine never existed but we need to help it come into being, with the help of Allah, next to Israel. Since there never was a state called "Palestine" or a Palestinian people, Jerusalem was never their capital or the capital of any people or country except for the current State of Israel. Therefore the Palestinians cannot demand Jerusalem as its capital, but they can demand the right for all Muslims to pray at Al-Aqsa mosque. Actually, the Jews allow freedom of worship to all the religions in Jerusalem, and Al-Aqsa mosque is under the management of the king of Jordan, a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam).

In addition, nowhere in the world have Muslims turned a city holy to Islam into a capital. Neither Mecca nor Madinah is the capital of Saudi Arabia and Karbala and Qom are not the capitals of Iraq and Iran. Even Jordan, whose capital is Amman, did not turn Jerusalem into its capital when it controlled the city between 1948 and 1967.

Instead of the monotheistic religions' helping the Jews to construct Jerusalem in preparation for Judgment Day and as proof of the truth of the prophecies in the Noble Qur'an, the infidels protest construction of new housing. If the Muslims used the return of the Children of the Book to Israel as proof of the truth of the prophecy of the Noble Qur'an, they would succeed in fulfilling the mission of Muhammad, the prophet of the entire world (Peace and the blessing of Allah be upon him: sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) to Islamize the world. Whoever goes against the will of Allah will fail. The Christians as well suffer from the historical lie and from the denial of the rights of the Jews to Jerusalem. What is happening in the Middle East and the mutual bloodletting of the Muslims is not a consequence of the "problem of Palestine." It is a manifestation of Allah's anger at the infidels of the world who do not accept His prophecy regarding the return of the Jews to their land and establishing their capital in the united holy city of Jerusalem.

Exposing the Palestinians' Anna Baltzer Will Oxford Endorse a Fraud?

Exposing the Palestinians' Anna Baltzer
Will Oxford Endorse a Fraud?

by Lee Kaplan

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3564/anna-baltzer

Anna Baltzer -- apparently neither a Fulbright Scholar, nor a descendant of Holocaust survivors, nor an alumna of the Birthright Program -- appears to be just a fraud and a fabulist. So why is Oxford having her speak January 31st?

Anna Baltzer, a pretty lady who heads the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation (USCEIO) in Washington, DC., has developed a platform for herself going about the world lecturing as a Jew who once supported the State of Israel, but who had an epiphany and discovered that Israel and "Zionists" were exploiting and abusing the Palestinian people. The USCEIO is, in fact, the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) renamed for the purpose of lobbying Congress in Washington. It was created by Huwaida Arraf, one of the co-founders of the ISM who also serves on the group's steering committee.

Placing Anna Baltzer as the titular head of the Campaign was intended to convince both Jews and non-Jews that opposition to Israel's existence is fine because even Jews such as her believe in the necessity of destroying the Jewish state, especially through boycotts and divestment. Anna Baltzer is a modern day Tokyo Rose for the ISM against Israel: she speaks at anti-Israel events and promotes boycott and divestment campaigns against Israel, in support of terrorist groups such as Hamas in its plans to destroy Israel any way it can. She has participated or helped at demonstations staged by Code Pink, Global Exchange, the Gaza Flotilla, Viva Palestina and other anti-Israel groups that make up the ISM.

USCEIO has been frantically sending out fundraising email blasts and announcing on its website that Ms. Baltzer will appear in a debate about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be presented by the distinguished Oxford Union in England on January 31st. According to the Oxford Union's website, "The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 189 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe."

The Oxford Union has delivered these debates by distinguished academic, religious and national leaders from ex-President Ronald Reagan to the Dali Lama. The purpose of the debates is the furtherance of education and knowledge. The subject of this debate will be: "This House Believes That Israel is a Force for Good in the Middle East."

The announcement of the three debaters for the anti-Israel point of view, however, disturbingly advertises propagandists and fabulists such as Ilan Pappe, Ghada Karmi and most importantly, Anna Baltzer, who is billed on the Oxford Union's website as head of the USCEIO and who will apparently speak in opposition to Israel's right to exist.

Ilan Pappe has already been proven to be bankrupt as a scholar after it was proven in court he was involved in fabricating a phony massacre by Israeli forces of the Arab village of Tantura in 1948. In a defamation and libel lawsuit brought by veterans of the Alexandroni Brigade in Israel, Pappe's PhD student under his advice admitted on the witness stand that he fabricated the entire massacre with his supervisor's knowledge and that he was paid $6,000 by the PLO to do so.

The other speaker alongside Anna Baltzer will be Ghada Kharmi, a Palestinian academic at the University of Exeter, Britain, and the author of Married to Another Man: Israel's Dilemma in Palestine. Her writings are merely polemics devoid of any history or facts with which to back them up. She claims, incredibly, for example, that Israel has never made a peace offer to the Palestinians, along with standard slanderous Palestinian propaganda and claims that masquerade as facts -- such as that Israel violates "international law" by the building of settlements, which are completely legal per UN Resolution 242, and the stopping of the Gaza Flotillas that was completely legal by international maritime law. Karmi encourages war by proxy, such as writing in support of the British boycott of Israeli academics and Israeli universities.

What is Karmi's intellectual solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which she also claims is the reason for al Qaeda? She says Israel must become one state called Palestine; must withdraw to the 1949 borders; must give the Palestinians half of Jerusalem, and then allow seven million Palestinians to move inside Israel, creating a flood of Muslims that would demographically overwhelm the current Jewish population there. As for terrorism, she glosses over it as the desperate actions of some extremists who are fighting "colonialism." Her writings hardly reflect anything in the way of solid research or intellectual balance.

Stephen Stotsky of CAMERA.org has written an excellent exposé of Baltzer's lies about Israel. However, new information has arisen about Baltzer's background and history as a Jew.

In her Wikipedia entry and various speeches she has presented, mostly to Christian churches, Ms. Baltzer has claimed she comes from a Jewish family in which her grandparents were Holocaust survivors; that she was a Fulbright Scholar from Columbia University, and that at first she was pro-Israel. After touring with Fulbright in 2003 in Turkey, she alleges she visited "Palestine," Syria and Iran and met "friends" who "educated" her on the suffering of the Palestinians at Israeli hands, so that today she is a dedicated anti-Zionist. She included a cry at the end of an interview recorded in Ireland in 2010 on an anti-Israel radio station that it is her hope "Inshallah, to one day bring down Zionism" -- meaning to end the Jewish state.

More recently, Anna Baltzer, back in the United States, lent her name and prestige to an attempt by the Students for Justice in Palestine at UC San Diego to prompt the entire student body association there to boycott and divest from Israel. The appearance, presumably intended to be a springboard to spread the boycott and divestment to other campuses, failed. While the event was being debated at UC SAN Diego, Anna Baltzer made a video, which appeared on You Tube, in support of boycotts and divestments from Israel, and directed to the anti-Israel campaign at the UC Campus. In this video, she claimed that she went on a Birthright tour -- a program that provides free trips to Israel for Jewish college students and recent graduates -- in the year 2000 as an enthusiastic pro-Zionist Jewish girl. She claims that after finishing the tour, she researched the suffering of the Palestinians and became a supporter of the anti-Israel movement.

There is just one problem with this scenario: According to my research, Anna Baltzer never went on a Birthright tour of Israel in the year 2000 or any other time. Inquiries to the New York and Israel offices to ascertain if she went with Birthright, revealed absolutely no record of any Anna Baltzer attending the program ever, let alone in year 2000. In short, it seems that Anna Baltzer lied about her participation in Birthright to convey the false impression that she was once a loyal Jew who supported the Jewish homeland but had discovered the justification for Palestinians' goals to overthrow Israel.

Further, after researching Ms. Baltzer's claims of being a Fulbright Scholar from Columbia in 2003, it has been determined from both Columbia's and the Fulbright websites, as well as Fulbright officials, that Anna Baltzer was never a Fulbright scholar either. A list of Fulbright Scholars at the Fulbright website contains the names of all Fulbright scholars from the United States and abroad from the late 90's to the present. Ms. Baltzer's name is nowhere to be found.

Anna Baltzer's claims about her personal and academic background should come as no surprise: it has gained her entrée to speaking engagements at colleges across the US and abroad where she spreads lies against Israel. At her presentation at St. Joseph the Worker's Presbyterian Church in Berkeley, California in 2007, Anna Baltzer recounted a tale of a pregnant Palestinian mother who, in an emergency, was taken by ambulance, but forbidden to pass a checkpoint manned by Israeli soldiers, who had told her that her ambulance could not pass through the checkpoint until 7 am, although she had arrived in an a Code 3 state at 6:30 am. Baltzer claimed -- drawing gasps from the audience -- that due to this delay, the woman miscarried twin fetuses. In an implicit comparison of Israeli soldiers to Nazis, she alleged the IDF soldiers kept telling the poor woman that they "were just following orders" -- a veiled reference to the Nazis' excuses, at the Nuremberg trials after the World War II, for their role in the death camps. There was no mention that the checkpoints had been erected in the first place to stop what had been incessant terrorist attacks and suicide bombings.

When asked the name of the woman who had miscarried, the location of the checkpoint, the time of day, the names of reliable witnesses and the outcome of any military investigation of such cruelty, she said that she did not know, that she had not been there. She even said she was surprised to hear that the Israeli army would have received a formal complaint if such an event had actually occurred. Pressed still further about the authenticity of her tale, in a book she was selling that supposedly contained her personal eyewitness accounts of Israeli atrocities against Arabs, Baltzer admitted she did not know the details because the story had been told to her second hand by Lamis Deek, a well-known Arab propagandist from the ISM. In the 2010 radio interview in Ireland, however, Anna Baltzer changed the story and said, after recounting the same tale, that she interviewed the poor Arab woman who had lost the two babies -- again with no names, dates or places.

The ISM with which Baltzer works regularly uses the imagery of Holocaust survivors who see the need to end the Jewish state. Hedy Epstein, in her eighties, is paraded around by the ISM at their boycott and divestment events in California colleges. Epstein also appeared on the ISM Flotilla Boats to Gaza, and has always been presented as a "Holocaust survivor" who is against Israel. Research has shown that as a child Ms. Epstein spent the war in the safety of England, and was never in a concentration camp or even on the European continent. Rather, in her youth, Ms. Epstein was party to several pro-Soviet communist movements, whose Stalinist leanings were anti-Zionist, and she even supported Pol Pot's regime of mass murder.

Using the same "Holocaust survivor" imagery, Baltzer claims she is the descendant of Holocaust survivors who instilled in her a need to support Palestinian aims against Israeli persecution. After researching her grandparents through the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Israel, as well as the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, to see if her family were actually in concentration camps, nothing could be found. This, too, appears to be a fabrication by Baltzer, or at best an embellishment, like Hedy Epstein's, of being a Holocaust survivor.

The Oxford Union's President was distressed to learn these facts about Ms. Baltzer's academic fraud and said she would share such information with the faculty advisers with the possible outcome of her being removed from the debate.

An educational debate, especially at a university as august as Oxford, should feature academics or speakers who are genuine, not imposters or fakes planted to distort facts and slander and demonize a fellow democracy. Anna Baltzer seems to be neither a Fulbright scholar, not a descendant of Holocaust survivors nor an alumna of the Birthright program. She appears to be just a fraud and a fabulist. So why is Oxford having her speak?

If you would like to express your opinion to the Oxford Union about Ms. Baltzer's lying to them about her background, to pass herself off at an academic event, please email Oxford Union's President Maria Rioumine with your comments at President@Oxford-Union.org while there is still time left before this fraudulent "debate."

Israel, Hamas and Gay Rights: Who Are the Real “Pinkwashers”?

Israel, Hamas and Gay Rights: Who Are the Real “Pinkwashers”?

By Daniel Greenfield 

Which is gay-friendlier? Hamas or Israel?

According to queer theorist leftist Judith Butler, Hamas and Hezbollah are progressive movements that are on the left. The Israelis however are “pinkwashers” who exploit their record of not stoning gays to death to divert attention from their record of killing Islamic terrorists after repeated provocations.

Hamas is on record as saying that homosexuality deserves the death penalty and it’s punishable by ten years in Gaza.

The left claim to be the true supporters of gay rights… and of Islamist groups that believe in killing gays. It would almost seem as if it is the left that exploits its record of supporting gay marriage to divert attention from its record of supporting Islamic thugs who kills gays.

It is the left who are the true pinkwashers.

Professor Aeyal Gross (TAU,Law), who is considered the intellectual father of “pinkwashing,” has returned to the subject in the context of the Israeli election. He charges that Israel’s liberal policy toward gays is a ploy to hide its “sins” of occupation.  The broad array of civil and political rights that gays enjoy in Israel – which Gross himself lists, as well as the robust condemnations by assorted politicians of anti-gay sentiments – are all an elaborate plot to mask the violations of human rights against the Palestinians and others.

The inherent admission in Gross’ argument is that gay rights, like feminism or civil rights for any group, is not an end in and of itself, but part of an indivisible collective project whose end is not the fulfillment of any set of rights, but the success of the left.

Thus gay rights can be subtracted for Hamas, but they cannot be added for Israel. Gay rights are only of value when they serve the program of the left, and the left, as Judith Butler says, views Hamas and Hezbollah as “part of the global left” but with problematic dimensions, such as wanting to take away the civil rights of women, gays, non-Muslims, etc. But these dimensions do not detract from their place on the left. On the other hand Israel’s rejection of Islamic terrorism does.

It speaks volumes about the real agenda of the left that fighting Islamic terrorism is a dealbreaker but killing gay people isn’t.

The real pinkwashers are those like Judith Butler, Gross, Chomsky and the rest of the pro-terrorist left.

 http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/israel-hamas-and-gay-rights-who-are-the-real-pinkwashers/

Jewish Students Threatened at UC Davis

Jewish Students Threatened at UC Davis

By Leila Beckwith and Tammi Rossman-Benjamin 

Editor’s note: The following is the text of a letter written by Leila Beckwith and Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, co-founders of the AMCHA Initiative, to UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi regarding the university’s silence and inaction in the face of anti-Jewish hostility during a recent student protest.

Dear Chancellor Katehi,

As you know, we are faculty members at the University of California, who have been investigating and documenting anti-Jewish bigotry on California public university campuses for the last several years.

We are writing to you now to express our serious concern regarding an incident that occurred during a student protest on November 19, 2012, during which UCD students “occupied” an administration building on campus. We believe that numerous violations of state and federal law and university policy may have occurred at the event.  To our knowledge, your administration has neither acknowledged nor addressed these violations.

In addition, it appears that at least 5 university administrators, including the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, were present and witnessed much of this behavior, yet they did not take action to ensure the safety of the students who were targets of possible assault and hate crimes. Please see below for an account of the events as well as the federal and state laws and university policies which were potentially violated as a result of them.

Detailed Account of Events

Takeover of Dutton Hall

We have learned the following from newspaper articles, on-line videos, and conversations with Jewish students who attended the rally on the East Quad and the subsequent “occupation” of Dutton Hall.

At 12:30pm on November 19, a rally entitled “March in Solidarity with Gaza,” sponsored by the Graduate Student Association, began on the East Quad. (See HERE for an announcement of the rally).

At approximately 2pm, about 40 of the protesters marched from the East Quad to Dutton Hall, where they hung a larger banner that read “DAVIS+GAZA ARE ONE FIST” from the building’s entryway and “occupied” the building’s entrance hall. Several protesters held anti-Israel and anti-Zionist signs and large banners, two of which read “DEATH TO ZIONISM” and “LONG LIVE THE INTIFADA!”

The occupation leaders refused entry to Jewish students who were known to identify with the Jewish state, and at least one Jewish student associated with a pro-Israel group on campus reported that when he tried to enter Dutton Hall at the beginning of the “occupation,” a rally organizer physically blocked his entry through the front doors and refused to let him pass, because he was a “Zionist.”

At about 2:15pm, three Jewish students managed to slip into Dutton Hall, and one of them proceeded to film the discussion taking place inside the “occupied” entrance hall. Although a chief complaint of the “occupiers” was that pro-Palestinian students were being stifled on campus and not afforded their constitutionally-guaranteed right to freedom of speech, nevertheless, several times in the 20 minutes of the rally captured on video, the “occupiers” themselves expressed the sentiment that “Zionists,” including pro-Israel students at UCD, should not be given freedom of speech. For example, when a Jewish student wanted to know whether free speech could involve a civil discussion between pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian perspectives, the leader answered, “I would say absolutely not. I would never discuss anything with Hitler.  He is our enemy…there’s no question of free speech when it comes to the Nazis. And the KKK, when they march in Sacramento and the cops defend them…you should not talk to these white supremacist, racist, mother-fuckers.”

Escalation of the Protest

At about 2:30pm the rally leader said, “I just want everyone to know that there are Zionists filming everything we’re saying, and I think we should ask them to leave.” Several protesters demanded that the Jewish students leave the public building, loudly chanting “Leave our space” and “Shame on you” repeatedly, and accusing the Jewish students of “hate speech” because of their support for Israel (see HERE).

After the Jewish student stopped filming, most of the 40 protesters surrounded the Jewish students, who were standing up against a wall of windows, and screamed “Death to Israel,” “Fuck Israel,” and other curses. For about 10 minutes the protesters, many of whom stood 1 to 2 feet away from the Jewish students, continued to scream at the Jewish students to leave Dutton Hall and pounded their fists into their hands in a threatening way. Although the Jewish students were not physically harmed, they reported feeling physically and emotionally harassed and threatened until they finally managed to leave the building.

When an Aggie photographer who had photographed the confrontation inside the hall followed the Jewish students outside for comments and contact information, protesters at the rally turned on him and demanded to see his photos of the physical confrontation and that he delete them.  Aggie staff members were also told by protesters that unless they were on the side of the “occupiers,” they would also have to leave the administration building.

See article written by an Aggie staff member HERE. In the article, the staff member asserts, “We witnessed many students…[end] up leaving, disgusted, as soon as the bullying began. Free speech is crucial. Ideally, our campus would be rife with protests, counter-protests and open dialogue regularly. But if students are scared to speak — scared of other students who resort to intimidation tactics — we have a serious problem.”

At approximately 2:45pm, after a student in Dutton Hall expressed disagreement with one of the protest signs, a protester grabbed his collar, raised his fist and forced the student to leave the building.

UCD and Staff Member Witnesses of Event

According to a student outside of Dutton Hall at the time of the “occupation,” 3 UCD administrators (the Vice Chancellor and 2 Associate Vice Chancellors of Student Affairs) and 2 staff members associated with the Center for Student Involvement were right outside the building during the “occupation.” According to one of the 3 Jewish students surrounded by protesters inside Dutton Hall, since she and her friends were standing against a bank of windows which were in full view of those standing outside, she believed the 5 administrators and staff members could see them being harassed and intimidated by the mob of protesters.

The administrators and staff standing outside did nothing to help the 3 Jewish students, but when they exited the building, one of the administrators asked one of the students if she was OK, which suggests that the administrator had witnessed the violent behavior of the protestors but did not take action. The Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, who it appears also witnessed the protestors’ behavior toward the Jewish students, spoke earlier that afternoon at the rally on the East Quad, where she was quoted as saying: “I will not permit violence to occur in the context of free speech.” There were no other administrators, staff or faculty present at the rally inside Dutton Hall, and at no time did any campus police appear in or near the hall.

Violations of Federal, State, and University Policy

We would like to bring to your attention the following aspects of this deeply troubling series of events:

1) We believe that incidents of this sort have the potential to create liability under the following legal authority:

• Civil assault (Restatement 2d, Torts §21) - ”An actor is subject to liability to another for assault if (a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with a person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and (b) the other is thereby put in such imminent apprehension.”

• Civil battery (Restatement 2d, Torts §13,18) - ”An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if (a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with a person, and (b) harmful or offensive contact with the person directly results.”

• Criminal assault (CA Penal Code 240) - Assault is “an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.” To be charged with criminal assault, physical contact is not required.  A person must simply place another in reasonable fear of immediate bodily harm.

• Criminal battery (CA Penal Code 242) - Battery is ”any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another.”

• Disturbing the peace (CA Penal Code 415(3) - It is illegal to “…maliciously and willfully disturb another person by loud and unreasonable noise…[and to] use offensive words in a public place which are inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction.” In other words, it is illegal to use “offensive words” that “necessarily invite a breach of the peace.”

• CA Civil Code 51.7 “The Ralph Civil Rights Act” - ”All persons within the jurisdiction of this state have the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of their race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, political affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, age, disability, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of those characteristics.”

• CA Civil Code 52.1 “The Bane Civil Rights Act” -  ”If a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes by threats, intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney may bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured.”

• CA Penal Code 422.6 - “No person, whether or not acting under color of law, shall by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with, oppress, or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the Constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution or laws of the United States in whole or in part because of one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics of the victim.”

• Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act – Prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance.



2) We believe the protesters’ behavior may have violated the following UC Davis policies and principles:



• UC Standards of Conduct for Students 102.06 -  prohibiting the “unauthorized possession…of any University properties.”

• UC Standards of Conduct for Students 102.08 -  prohibiting  “physical assault, including threats of violence, or other conduct that threatens the health or safety of a person.”

•  UC Standards of Conduct for Students 102.09 - prohibiting racial and other forms of harassment, defined as “conduct that is so severe…objectively offensive, and so substantially impairs a person’s access to University programs or activities, that the person is effectively denied equal access to the University’s resources and opportunities on the basis of his or her race…national or ethnic origin, alienage, religion…or perceived membership in any of these classifications.”

• UC Policies Applying to Campus Activities, Organizations and Students (PACAOS) Section 30 - “The University is committed to assuring that all persons may exercise the constitutionally protected rights of free expression, speech, assembly, and worship…It is the responsibility of the Chancellor to assure an ongoing opportunity for the expression of a variety of viewpoints.”

•  UC Davis Policies and Procedures Manual Ch. 270 Section 05(C) -  “The University prohibits illegal, arbitrary, or unreasonable discriminatory practices. Campus organizations receiving University privileges, assistance, or supervision must abide by the University’s policy on nondiscrimination to qualify for any University privileges or assistance.”

• UC Davis Policies and Procedures Manual Ch. 270 Section 20 - Public expression in the form of freedom of speech and advocacy may be exercised on University properties at such times and places and in such a manner as is compatible with the use of the property and as follows: 1) Assures orderly conduct; 2) Avoids disruption or interference with University operations; 3) Allows for the free flow of persons and traffic; 4) Avoids disruption or interference with the ability of the University to carry out its responsibilities as an educational institution; 5) Protects the rights of all individuals who use University properties; 6) Protects persons against practices that would make them involuntary audiences; 7) Assures the safety of all members of the University community; 8)  Does not interfere with property entrances or exits.

• UC Davis Student Judicial Affairs Statement on Free Expression - “Efforts to quell unpopular opinions (e.g., by shouting down a speaker) stifle discourse and cut off dialogue…Even legal acts of intolerance and incivility erode our capacity to trust, and to work, live, and learn together…We can uphold both the need for respect and understanding and the right of free speech by responding appropriately to each incident. Crimes must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent, and infringement of civil rights must be addressed by campus administrative processes and/or state or federal agencies. Discriminatory acts or violations of campus conduct standards, including disruption, are subject to disciplinary sanctions or grievances.”

•  UC Davis Principles of Community - “strives to maintain a climate of justice marked by respect for each other….affirms the right of freedom of expression…and commitment to the highest standards of civility and decency towards all…recognizing the right of every individual to think and speak as dictated by personal belief, to express any idea, and to disagree with or counter another’s point of view… promoting open expression of our individuality and our diversity within the bounds of courtesy, sensitivity and respect.” In addition UC Davis vows to “confront and reject all manifestations of discrimination, including those based on race, ethnicity…religious or political beliefs, status…or any of the other differences among people which have been excuses for misunderstanding, dissension or hatred…striving to build a true community based on mutual respect and caring.”



3) We believe the UCD administrators and staff members who witnessed the illegal and unethical behavior of the protestors but did not take action may have been negligent in carrying out their administrative responsibilities:



• The Vice Chancellor and 2 Associate Vice Chancellors of Student Affairs who witnessed the “occupation” are responsible for Student Judicial Affairs, whose role is to enforce community standards and campus codes of conduct. As noted above, the protestors were in blatant violation of several UC policies which have the primary goal of ensuring student safety.  Evidence points to the fact that the administrators were aware of most, if not all, of these violations, and that student safety was being threatened as a result of their inaction.

• Two staff members from the UCD Center for Student Involvement witnessed the “occupation.” CSI avows that it promotes the UC Davis Principles of Community, which affirm the right of freedom of expression within the Davis community and its commitment to the highest standards of civility and respect, by helping students learn from each other in a safe and constructive environment.  However, during the solidarity rally, the protestors were in blatant violation of the Principles of Community in addition to violating 7 UCD students’ rights of free expression.  Protestors also failed to treat these students with civility and respect. The staff members from this department did not ensure a safe and constructive environment for students when they failed to intervene during a student group’s assault, harassment and violation of fellow students’ rights.



Outcome of the Events

Jewish UCD students, within sight of UCD administrators and on public university property, were harassed, intimidated, and physically threatened. This is an abrogation of university policy and unlawful.

We are deeply concerned about the virulent and hate-filled actions taking place on the UCD campus as a result of students’ religion and beliefs. And we are also concerned for the safety and well-being of Jewish students who want to feel free to express their beliefs and attend public university events without fear of harm or intimidation.

As the Chancellor of UC Davis, we know that you too have these same concerns.

As a result, the following are important actions that we urge you to take now in order to protect the physical and emotional safety and civil rights of Jewish (and all) students on your campus:

• University policy must spell out actions that campus police, administrators, and staff are responsible for taking to ensure the safety and civil rights of all students, and we urge that this policy be published widely to the campus community.

• Police, administrators, and staff must be immediately informed about actions they should take and protocols they can access to afford all members of the campus community — including Jewish students — the protections that are afforded to them under University policy and state and federal law.

• Perpetrators of disruptive and threatening behavior must be identified and appropriately disciplined.

• The University Chancellor should use her First Amendment rights to consistently and publicly condemn behavior which targets other students for harassment and intimidation.

• The official status and funding of student groups that engage in behavior which targets other students for harassment and intimidation should be subject to suspension and revocation.



We look forward to hearing from you whether these steps can be taken to ensure that Jewish UCD students – and all UCD students – can enjoy a campus where they feel safe, protected, and able to enjoy their civil rights no matter their identity or beliefs.

You will be receiving a copy of this letter by U.S. mail.

Sincerely,

Leila Beckwith

Professor Emeritus, University of California at Los Angeles

Co-founder the AMCHA Initiative

Leila@AMCHAinitiative.org



Tammi Rossman-Benjamin

Lecturer, University of California at Santa Cruz

Co-founder the AMCHA Initiative

Tammi@AMCHAinitiative.org



Cc:   UC President Mark Yudof

UC Regents

UC Chancellors

UC General Counsel Charles Robinson

UC Advisory Council on Campus Climate, Culture, and Inclusion (c/o Jesse Bernal)

UC Davis Counsel Steven Drown

California Speaker of the Assembly John A. Perez

California Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson

California State Senator Lois Wolk  (Davis)

California State Assembly Member Mariko Yamada  (Davis)

Congressman John Garamendi (3rd District)

Bcc:    Members and supporters of the Jewish community

 http://frontpagemag.com/2013/leila-beckwith-and-tammi-rossman-benjamin/jewish-students-threatened-at-uc-davis/