2 dec 2018
CNN firing commentator Marc Lamont Hill exposes yet another layer of mainstream media's bias and lack of objectivity.
Last week, the US mainstream media demonstrated once again that it has a Palestine problem. CNN suspended the contract of commentator and Temple University Professor Marc Lamont Hill, after he gave a speech at the United Nations in which he criticised the Israeli occupation and the abuse of Palestinian rights.
Hill based his speech very much on facts. He cited Israeli laws that discriminate against Palestinians; the use of arbitrary violence by the Israeli security apparatus; the use of torture against Palestinian detainees; the denial of due process to Palestinians by Israeli courts; the restriction on movement in the occupied territories, etc - all violations that have been well-documented and condemned by the UN and a myriad of human rights organisations.
Yet CNN, which last year adopted a new slogan - "Facts first" - did not seem to agree with these facts. After pro-Israel organisations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) condemned the speech, the TV station was quick to sever its ties with Hill.
While CNN did not announce why it chose to do so, it is clear to many of us it caved in to pressure from pro-Israel groups. Hill was accused of being anti-Semitic for using the phrase "free Palestine from the river to the sea", which supposedly is a "Hamas slogan" and a call for the destruction of Israel. Well, it is neither.
Throwing accusations of anti-Semitism at people criticising Israel and supporting the Palestinian right to self-determination is a convenient tool of the Zionist lobby. But calling for the freedom of Palestinians and for the recognition of their rights is not anti-Semitic; it is pro-Palestinian.
Conflating anti-Semitism with pro-Palestinian positions and criticism of Israel is not only ill-intentioned but also dangerous, as it does a disservice to Jews who have faced hate speech and hate attacks.
In Palestine, the Israeli authorities have brought this tactic to the extreme and have already passed a number of laws curbing freedom of speech. This means that those of us who dare criticise Israeli policy or call for resistance to Israeli occupation, even if in the form of a poem, face the risk of imprisonment.
In the United States, those who do so clearly face the risk of being fired, as in the case of Professor Hill and as in the case of many others before him- and probably many others after. The way CNN (mis)handled this situation offers us an opportunity to discuss how media organisations succumbing to Israel's campaign of silencing critics is particularly problematic.
For a long time, mainstream media organisations in the West, like the CNN, have been hiding behind the veneer of objectivity when it comes to issues such as the Palestinian struggle.
These outlets claim to be covering these issues objectively - applying certain procedures and high standards of verification that supposedly guarantee full and balanced reporting. With that grand declaration of objectivity, they then claim to present the true picture of what is going on. But they often don't.
The language employed by many mainstream media networks in the West when reporting on Palestine is often imprecise and misrepresents certain objective realities. CNN and its peers often talk of a "conflict" between Palestinians and Israelis, skipping the fact that the latter are - legally and objectively speaking - occupiers.
They talk of "contested lands" - as if there is no illegal settler-colonialism going on in Palestine, pushing Palestinians out of their land. They would often call the Israeli army's violence against peaceful protesters "clashes" (as if the two sides are equal) and conveniently use the passive voice in titles reporting killings of Palestinians (as if Israeli soldiers were not the ones who shoot Palestinians dead).
Claiming objectivity but then, clearly using obfuscating language and intentionally skipping certain facts is not only damaging to the media profession but also spreads disinformation. The firing of Professor Hill has exposed once again this disingenuity, the apparent political bias, and perhaps even the fear of the Israeli lobby within Western mainstream media.
It also shows that even media institutions that claim to be fighting for freedom of speech, to be delivering "facts first", to be "speaking truth to power" can also partake in the silencing of critical voices. What is particularly disconcerting, in this case, is that CNN is not only succumbing to political pressure and Israel's speech policing policies but also perpetuating them - even if indirectly.
CNN is clearly not ready to take on the "controversial" topic of the Palestinian question and pursue "facts first". Instead, it has chosen to stay on the political "safe side": report only on certain events with bias, obscuring the real dynamic of relations between oppressor and oppressed and using a certain preset discourse.
Unfortunately, this "safe side" logic has also been adopted not only by media outlets but also by Western institutions - both academic and political ones - and even by governments.
Just recall all those fake condemnations by political leaders in the West during Gaza's Great March of Return, when in one day Israeli snipers shot dead more than 50 unarmed, peaceful Palestinian protesters and wounded hundreds of others, with local hospitals unable to cope. They all called on Israel to exercise "restraint" and threw in there for "balance" and "objectivity" a reference to Hamas, which killed no Israelis that day - or any other day of the march for that matter.
Those who do not stand on the "safe side" of things - people like Marc Lamont Hill - have been taking clear positions on Palestine, based on facts and critical thinking. They - like others throughout history who stood up for oppressed peoples' rights - are vilified and viciously attacked, but they will persevere and continue to speak truth to power, objectively and factually.
Meanwhile, Western institutions (academic, media and others) will eventually have to engage in self-scrutiny because they are not only regularly succumbing to political pressures and adopting misrepresentations, but are also complicit in reproducing Israel's policing and silencing strategies.
Last week, the US mainstream media demonstrated once again that it has a Palestine problem. CNN suspended the contract of commentator and Temple University Professor Marc Lamont Hill, after he gave a speech at the United Nations in which he criticised the Israeli occupation and the abuse of Palestinian rights.
Hill based his speech very much on facts. He cited Israeli laws that discriminate against Palestinians; the use of arbitrary violence by the Israeli security apparatus; the use of torture against Palestinian detainees; the denial of due process to Palestinians by Israeli courts; the restriction on movement in the occupied territories, etc - all violations that have been well-documented and condemned by the UN and a myriad of human rights organisations.
Yet CNN, which last year adopted a new slogan - "Facts first" - did not seem to agree with these facts. After pro-Israel organisations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) condemned the speech, the TV station was quick to sever its ties with Hill.
While CNN did not announce why it chose to do so, it is clear to many of us it caved in to pressure from pro-Israel groups. Hill was accused of being anti-Semitic for using the phrase "free Palestine from the river to the sea", which supposedly is a "Hamas slogan" and a call for the destruction of Israel. Well, it is neither.
Throwing accusations of anti-Semitism at people criticising Israel and supporting the Palestinian right to self-determination is a convenient tool of the Zionist lobby. But calling for the freedom of Palestinians and for the recognition of their rights is not anti-Semitic; it is pro-Palestinian.
Conflating anti-Semitism with pro-Palestinian positions and criticism of Israel is not only ill-intentioned but also dangerous, as it does a disservice to Jews who have faced hate speech and hate attacks.
In Palestine, the Israeli authorities have brought this tactic to the extreme and have already passed a number of laws curbing freedom of speech. This means that those of us who dare criticise Israeli policy or call for resistance to Israeli occupation, even if in the form of a poem, face the risk of imprisonment.
In the United States, those who do so clearly face the risk of being fired, as in the case of Professor Hill and as in the case of many others before him- and probably many others after. The way CNN (mis)handled this situation offers us an opportunity to discuss how media organisations succumbing to Israel's campaign of silencing critics is particularly problematic.
For a long time, mainstream media organisations in the West, like the CNN, have been hiding behind the veneer of objectivity when it comes to issues such as the Palestinian struggle.
These outlets claim to be covering these issues objectively - applying certain procedures and high standards of verification that supposedly guarantee full and balanced reporting. With that grand declaration of objectivity, they then claim to present the true picture of what is going on. But they often don't.
The language employed by many mainstream media networks in the West when reporting on Palestine is often imprecise and misrepresents certain objective realities. CNN and its peers often talk of a "conflict" between Palestinians and Israelis, skipping the fact that the latter are - legally and objectively speaking - occupiers.
They talk of "contested lands" - as if there is no illegal settler-colonialism going on in Palestine, pushing Palestinians out of their land. They would often call the Israeli army's violence against peaceful protesters "clashes" (as if the two sides are equal) and conveniently use the passive voice in titles reporting killings of Palestinians (as if Israeli soldiers were not the ones who shoot Palestinians dead).
Claiming objectivity but then, clearly using obfuscating language and intentionally skipping certain facts is not only damaging to the media profession but also spreads disinformation. The firing of Professor Hill has exposed once again this disingenuity, the apparent political bias, and perhaps even the fear of the Israeli lobby within Western mainstream media.
It also shows that even media institutions that claim to be fighting for freedom of speech, to be delivering "facts first", to be "speaking truth to power" can also partake in the silencing of critical voices. What is particularly disconcerting, in this case, is that CNN is not only succumbing to political pressure and Israel's speech policing policies but also perpetuating them - even if indirectly.
CNN is clearly not ready to take on the "controversial" topic of the Palestinian question and pursue "facts first". Instead, it has chosen to stay on the political "safe side": report only on certain events with bias, obscuring the real dynamic of relations between oppressor and oppressed and using a certain preset discourse.
Unfortunately, this "safe side" logic has also been adopted not only by media outlets but also by Western institutions - both academic and political ones - and even by governments.
Just recall all those fake condemnations by political leaders in the West during Gaza's Great March of Return, when in one day Israeli snipers shot dead more than 50 unarmed, peaceful Palestinian protesters and wounded hundreds of others, with local hospitals unable to cope. They all called on Israel to exercise "restraint" and threw in there for "balance" and "objectivity" a reference to Hamas, which killed no Israelis that day - or any other day of the march for that matter.
Those who do not stand on the "safe side" of things - people like Marc Lamont Hill - have been taking clear positions on Palestine, based on facts and critical thinking. They - like others throughout history who stood up for oppressed peoples' rights - are vilified and viciously attacked, but they will persevere and continue to speak truth to power, objectively and factually.
Meanwhile, Western institutions (academic, media and others) will eventually have to engage in self-scrutiny because they are not only regularly succumbing to political pressures and adopting misrepresentations, but are also complicit in reproducing Israel's policing and silencing strategies.
30 nov 2018
|
American Cable News Network (CNN) has severed ties with its political contributor Marc Lamont Hill after he recently delivered a speech at the UN accusing Israel of practicing "state violence and ethnic cleansing" against the Palestinians.
A CNN spokesperson said in a brief statement on Thursday that Hill, a professor of media studies at Temple University, was "no longer under contract.” The network did not give a reason, but the move came amid objections to Hill's speech by pro-Israel groups, including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which is known for its enmity against Arabs and Muslim. Hill, a recurring political commentator on CNN, had called for “free |
Palestine from the river to the sea" in a UN meeting marking the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People on Wednesday.
“We have an opportunity to not just offer solidarity in words but to commit to political action, grass-roots action, local action and international action that will give us what justice requires and that is a free Palestine from the river to the sea,” Hill said in the speech.
ADL claimed the "river to the sea" phrase was a code for the destruction of Israel, adding that the annual UN event promoted "divisiveness and hate.”
“We have an opportunity to not just offer solidarity in words but to commit to political action, grass-roots action, local action and international action that will give us what justice requires and that is a free Palestine from the river to the sea,” Hill said in the speech.
ADL claimed the "river to the sea" phrase was a code for the destruction of Israel, adding that the annual UN event promoted "divisiveness and hate.”
20 nov 2018
On Monday, the international crowdsourced bed and breakfast company AirBnB announced that they will no longer allow listings that are located in Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land.
The decision comes after a two year campaign of Human Rights Watch and other organizations, who pointed out that the promotion of listings in the Israeli-occupied West Bank is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and of international law.
According to a statement on the AirBnB website, “We concluded that we should remove listings in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank that are at the core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Israeli military forces began occupying the Palestinian Territories of Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza and the Syrian territory known as the Golan Heights in 1967.
Such military occupations are meant to be temporary situations, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, and are not meant to last for decades, like the Israeli occupation of Palestine has. In addition, it is expressly forbidden, under the Fourth Geneva Convention, to transfer civilians into land occupied by military force.
Over the past 51 years, Israel has, in direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, transferred more than 500,000 civilians into housing developments on stolen Palestinian land – most of which was initially seized by the military for ‘security purposes’, then transferred to civilians for colonial settlement takeovers.
In response to the announcement by AirBnB, the Israeli Tourism Minister Yariv Levin said that the Israeli government will restrict AirBnB’s operations in Israel as a whole. Levin claimed without evidence that AirBnB was ‘singling out’ Israel, and that the decision was based in ‘anti-Semitism’.
The Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Gilad Erdan said that he would be contacting U.S. officials to try to charge the company in U.S. courts for an alleged violation of the Israeli anti-boycott laws recently passed in 25 US states following lobbying by Israeli-government funded lobbying groups.
AirBnB, in their statement, made clear that Israel is not being singled out, and that this decision is based on its newly released international standards on not allowing listings on lands where people have been displaced.
The decision comes after a two year campaign of Human Rights Watch and other organizations, who pointed out that the promotion of listings in the Israeli-occupied West Bank is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and of international law.
According to a statement on the AirBnB website, “We concluded that we should remove listings in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank that are at the core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Israeli military forces began occupying the Palestinian Territories of Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza and the Syrian territory known as the Golan Heights in 1967.
Such military occupations are meant to be temporary situations, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, and are not meant to last for decades, like the Israeli occupation of Palestine has. In addition, it is expressly forbidden, under the Fourth Geneva Convention, to transfer civilians into land occupied by military force.
Over the past 51 years, Israel has, in direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, transferred more than 500,000 civilians into housing developments on stolen Palestinian land – most of which was initially seized by the military for ‘security purposes’, then transferred to civilians for colonial settlement takeovers.
In response to the announcement by AirBnB, the Israeli Tourism Minister Yariv Levin said that the Israeli government will restrict AirBnB’s operations in Israel as a whole. Levin claimed without evidence that AirBnB was ‘singling out’ Israel, and that the decision was based in ‘anti-Semitism’.
The Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Gilad Erdan said that he would be contacting U.S. officials to try to charge the company in U.S. courts for an alleged violation of the Israeli anti-boycott laws recently passed in 25 US states following lobbying by Israeli-government funded lobbying groups.
AirBnB, in their statement, made clear that Israel is not being singled out, and that this decision is based on its newly released international standards on not allowing listings on lands where people have been displaced.
18 nov 2018
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg
Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, the son of a Holocaust survivor, accuses Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of anti-Semitism: 'He has called Jews "hooked-nosed people." He has questioned the number of people that have been killed in the Holocaust. He banned "Schindler’s List" as a movie being shown.'
Australia and Malaysia have escalated their war of words over the possibility Canberra might move its Israeli embassy to Jerusalem.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison proposed the embassy move during a local election campaign last month, sparking concern from Indonesia and Malaysia.
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad raised the potential embassy switch in a meeting with Morrison in Singapore on Thursday, later telling reporters such a move could increase the threat of terrorism.
“I pointed out that in dealing with terrorism, one has to know the causes,” Mahathir said. “Adding to the cause for terrorism is not going to be helpful.”
Some 60 percent of Malaysia’s population is Muslim.
Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg responded Friday, saying Canberra would make its own decisions. Frydenberg, the son of a Holocaust survivor, also pointed out past comments that the leader of Muslim-majority Malaysia has made about Jewish people.
“He has called Jews ‘hooked-nosed people.’ He has questioned the number of people that have been killed in the Holocaust. He banned ‘Schindler’s List’ as a movie being shown,” Frydenberg told reporters in Melbourne.
In an interview with the BBC last month, Mahathir said “the problem in the Middle East began with the creation of Israel,” and he defended his description of Jews as “hook-nosed” in his book, “The Malay Dilemma.”
“They are hook-nosed. Many people called the Malays fat-nosed. We didn’t object,” he told the BBC.
Mahathir also challenged historical accounts that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, saying the figure was 4 million.
In 1994, “Schindler’s List” became one of many films banned in Malaysia during Mahathir’s previous time as prime minister, with the country’s film board rejecting it as Zionist propaganda.
When asked by The Associated Press in an August interview about his past comments about Jewish people, Mahathir said “we should be able to criticize everybody.”
“Anti-Semitic is a term that is invented to prevent people from criticizing the Jews for doing wrong things,” he said.
Australia’s indication that it may follow the United States’ contentious move of relocating its embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv was seen by many Australians as a political stunt. Critics called it a cynical attempt to win votes in a by-election last month for a Sydney seat with a high Jewish population. The seat was lost anyway, leaving the government ruling with the cooperation of independent lawmakers.
But on Friday, Frydenberg insisted shifting the embassy made sense, although it has also inflamed tensions with Australia’s closest neighbor Indonesia.
“Australia already recognizes Israel’s sovereignty over West Jerusalem. It’s where the Israeli Parliament (the Knesset) is. It’s where the Australian ambassador presents his or her credentials. It will be the capital of Israel under any two-state solution,” Frydenberg said.
Speaking on Friday, Morrison confirmed Mahathir had raised the subject of the embassy but declared that only “Australia determines Australian foreign policy”.
“I think what Josh said today was filling in the history of his (Mahathir’s) record on various issues over time,” Morrison told reporters on a visit to Darwin, where he is due to meet Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
“Make no mistake. I will not have our policy dictated by those outside the country,” Morrison added.
Morrison said a decision on the embassy would be made by Christmas, but rejected fears the plan had caused collateral damage by placing in jeopardy a proposed free trade agreement with Indonesia.
“I do not conflate the issues,” Morrison told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio.
“What we need to understand is that Australia has to set its own foreign policy and all I have said is that we would consider this question if we believed that it would advance the issues of the two-state solution.”
Indonesia is the world’s biggest Muslim-majority country, where tens of thousands protested against President Donald Trump’s decision in May to move the US embassy to Jerusalem.
Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, the son of a Holocaust survivor, accuses Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of anti-Semitism: 'He has called Jews "hooked-nosed people." He has questioned the number of people that have been killed in the Holocaust. He banned "Schindler’s List" as a movie being shown.'
Australia and Malaysia have escalated their war of words over the possibility Canberra might move its Israeli embassy to Jerusalem.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison proposed the embassy move during a local election campaign last month, sparking concern from Indonesia and Malaysia.
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad raised the potential embassy switch in a meeting with Morrison in Singapore on Thursday, later telling reporters such a move could increase the threat of terrorism.
“I pointed out that in dealing with terrorism, one has to know the causes,” Mahathir said. “Adding to the cause for terrorism is not going to be helpful.”
Some 60 percent of Malaysia’s population is Muslim.
Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg responded Friday, saying Canberra would make its own decisions. Frydenberg, the son of a Holocaust survivor, also pointed out past comments that the leader of Muslim-majority Malaysia has made about Jewish people.
“He has called Jews ‘hooked-nosed people.’ He has questioned the number of people that have been killed in the Holocaust. He banned ‘Schindler’s List’ as a movie being shown,” Frydenberg told reporters in Melbourne.
In an interview with the BBC last month, Mahathir said “the problem in the Middle East began with the creation of Israel,” and he defended his description of Jews as “hook-nosed” in his book, “The Malay Dilemma.”
“They are hook-nosed. Many people called the Malays fat-nosed. We didn’t object,” he told the BBC.
Mahathir also challenged historical accounts that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, saying the figure was 4 million.
In 1994, “Schindler’s List” became one of many films banned in Malaysia during Mahathir’s previous time as prime minister, with the country’s film board rejecting it as Zionist propaganda.
When asked by The Associated Press in an August interview about his past comments about Jewish people, Mahathir said “we should be able to criticize everybody.”
“Anti-Semitic is a term that is invented to prevent people from criticizing the Jews for doing wrong things,” he said.
Australia’s indication that it may follow the United States’ contentious move of relocating its embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv was seen by many Australians as a political stunt. Critics called it a cynical attempt to win votes in a by-election last month for a Sydney seat with a high Jewish population. The seat was lost anyway, leaving the government ruling with the cooperation of independent lawmakers.
But on Friday, Frydenberg insisted shifting the embassy made sense, although it has also inflamed tensions with Australia’s closest neighbor Indonesia.
“Australia already recognizes Israel’s sovereignty over West Jerusalem. It’s where the Israeli Parliament (the Knesset) is. It’s where the Australian ambassador presents his or her credentials. It will be the capital of Israel under any two-state solution,” Frydenberg said.
Speaking on Friday, Morrison confirmed Mahathir had raised the subject of the embassy but declared that only “Australia determines Australian foreign policy”.
“I think what Josh said today was filling in the history of his (Mahathir’s) record on various issues over time,” Morrison told reporters on a visit to Darwin, where he is due to meet Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
“Make no mistake. I will not have our policy dictated by those outside the country,” Morrison added.
Morrison said a decision on the embassy would be made by Christmas, but rejected fears the plan had caused collateral damage by placing in jeopardy a proposed free trade agreement with Indonesia.
“I do not conflate the issues,” Morrison told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio.
“What we need to understand is that Australia has to set its own foreign policy and all I have said is that we would consider this question if we believed that it would advance the issues of the two-state solution.”
Indonesia is the world’s biggest Muslim-majority country, where tens of thousands protested against President Donald Trump’s decision in May to move the US embassy to Jerusalem.
15 nov 2018
Nearly 3 weeks into its planned 4-week run, an electronic billboard honoring first responders in the Gaza Strip was pulled on November 13th when the billboard company received phone calls and email complaints labeling their staff as terrorists and anti-Semites, and threatening a boycott.
The Palestine Advocacy Project sponsored the billboard on Interstate 93, near Boston, Massachusetts, USA, to highlight the desperate situation in the Gaza Strip, and to emphasize the humanity and agency of the people of Gaza, who are often portrayed as terrorists or victims.
The billboard included a photo of deceased Palestinian medic Razan al-Najjar, and text reading: “Honoring the First Responders of Gaza. Saving Lives.
Rescuing Hope.” It was estimated to be viewed by over a half million motorists each week of its planned 4-week run, beginning 24 October. The billboard was met with positive media coverage.
This week, a coordinated, aggressive campaign was launched against the billboard company with accusations of anti-Semitism, intended to damage the company for hosting this billboard. Sarah Gold, a volunteer with the Palestine Advocacy Project, said, “This campaign is neither engaging us nor our perspective. Instead it is attempting through intimidation to eradicate the avenues of free speech we have endeavored to use; to silence us.”
The billboard is another casualty in an ongoing attack on free speech. Palestine Legal states in their 2017 report, “The Israeli state and its proxy organizations in the U.S. are investing heavily in punitive measures to intimidate and chill the free speech of those who wish to express criticism of Israeli policies.” The report documents 308 attacks on U.S.-based Palestine-related free speech in 2017 alone, according to the PNN.
Razan al-Najjar and other Gazan first responders were doing their best to attend to wounded civilians; yet celebrating them is construed as an act of “hate & anti-Semitism.”
One complaint reads in part: “A billboard glorifying those who try to kill and destroy our People and Homeland! Anti Semitism is as old as time itself, Hate of Israel is hate of Jews, completely unacceptable!”
This negative campaign appears to be based on the erroneous notions that all Gazans are anti-Semites intent on murdering Jews, that Gazans are not entitled to basic human rights, and that any display of solidarity with them equates to a call for the destruction of Israel.
Richard Colbath-Hess, founder of the Palestine Advocacy Project, remarked that “The billboard was extremely positive and does not even mention Israel.
Instead it was a celebration of Palestinian heroes. Apparently, there cannot be Palestinian heroes without some advocates of Israel feeling attacked.”
The Palestine Advocacy Project sponsored the billboard on Interstate 93, near Boston, Massachusetts, USA, to highlight the desperate situation in the Gaza Strip, and to emphasize the humanity and agency of the people of Gaza, who are often portrayed as terrorists or victims.
The billboard included a photo of deceased Palestinian medic Razan al-Najjar, and text reading: “Honoring the First Responders of Gaza. Saving Lives.
Rescuing Hope.” It was estimated to be viewed by over a half million motorists each week of its planned 4-week run, beginning 24 October. The billboard was met with positive media coverage.
This week, a coordinated, aggressive campaign was launched against the billboard company with accusations of anti-Semitism, intended to damage the company for hosting this billboard. Sarah Gold, a volunteer with the Palestine Advocacy Project, said, “This campaign is neither engaging us nor our perspective. Instead it is attempting through intimidation to eradicate the avenues of free speech we have endeavored to use; to silence us.”
The billboard is another casualty in an ongoing attack on free speech. Palestine Legal states in their 2017 report, “The Israeli state and its proxy organizations in the U.S. are investing heavily in punitive measures to intimidate and chill the free speech of those who wish to express criticism of Israeli policies.” The report documents 308 attacks on U.S.-based Palestine-related free speech in 2017 alone, according to the PNN.
Razan al-Najjar and other Gazan first responders were doing their best to attend to wounded civilians; yet celebrating them is construed as an act of “hate & anti-Semitism.”
One complaint reads in part: “A billboard glorifying those who try to kill and destroy our People and Homeland! Anti Semitism is as old as time itself, Hate of Israel is hate of Jews, completely unacceptable!”
This negative campaign appears to be based on the erroneous notions that all Gazans are anti-Semites intent on murdering Jews, that Gazans are not entitled to basic human rights, and that any display of solidarity with them equates to a call for the destruction of Israel.
Richard Colbath-Hess, founder of the Palestine Advocacy Project, remarked that “The billboard was extremely positive and does not even mention Israel.
Instead it was a celebration of Palestinian heroes. Apparently, there cannot be Palestinian heroes without some advocates of Israel feeling attacked.”
12 sept 2018
The US administration is considering measures to ban and sanction the international movement to boycott Israel, from U.S. universities where the movement thrives.
Hebrew sources said, according to the PNN, that the U.S. has already started taking steps to ban the BDS movement on American campuses, after Kenneth L. Marcus was appointed as the new director of the Department of Civil Rights in the United States.
Marcus announced the start of an investigation into old cases, the most important of which was the Rutgers University case, in New Jersey, where there will be an investigation into its activities, and deal with a number of reported anti-Semitic incidents against Jewish students, several years ago.
The Obama administration closed the file, at the time; however, Marcus told the Zionist Organization in America that he would cancel the decision of the Obama administration and reconsider the case, to see if it is one of religious hatred or attacks on ethnic groups.
According to Israeli media, the Trump government also began to define the activities of the boycott campaign against the State of Israel as anti-Semitic.
Arab and Palestinian activists and supporters at the United States expressed their disappointment with the anti-BDS decision, saying that the US administration has taken a side in the conflict and “decided to accuse all those who sympathize with the Palestinian cause as anti-Semitic.”
Hebrew sources said, according to the PNN, that the U.S. has already started taking steps to ban the BDS movement on American campuses, after Kenneth L. Marcus was appointed as the new director of the Department of Civil Rights in the United States.
Marcus announced the start of an investigation into old cases, the most important of which was the Rutgers University case, in New Jersey, where there will be an investigation into its activities, and deal with a number of reported anti-Semitic incidents against Jewish students, several years ago.
The Obama administration closed the file, at the time; however, Marcus told the Zionist Organization in America that he would cancel the decision of the Obama administration and reconsider the case, to see if it is one of religious hatred or attacks on ethnic groups.
According to Israeli media, the Trump government also began to define the activities of the boycott campaign against the State of Israel as anti-Semitic.
Arab and Palestinian activists and supporters at the United States expressed their disappointment with the anti-BDS decision, saying that the US administration has taken a side in the conflict and “decided to accuse all those who sympathize with the Palestinian cause as anti-Semitic.”