Thursday, April 15, 2010


Update: In the time it took to write this, it looks like the divestors, knowing the vote was going down for them, decided to table the motion until their next meeting, extending Berkeley's pain for at least another week. (Was it just me, or did anyone else following the meeting via the UCBDIVEST Twitter feed recall BDSers screaming IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS just an hour or two ago that a vote MUST BE TAKEN NOW!) Anyway, I'm letting my write up stand until I hear more from people on the ground about this latest delaying tactic.

Well, it looks like the Berkeley Student Senate (or ASUC) wasn’t “in the bag” for divestment after all.

After a debate that began at 7 PM last night and looks to be just wrapping up now (at 6:30 AM, West Coast Time), a vote was finally taken with regard to overturning the Student President’s veto of the UC Berkeley divestment bill. An override required 15 votes to pass (or two-thirds of the Senate) and the final count turned out to be 12 for, 7 against and 1 abstention (down from 16 for and 4 against the first time around).

And so BDS loses again. (I never tire of typing that sentence.) And this time, they not only lost on friendly ground (the most sympathetic-to-their-issue campus in America), but they managed to pull off a defeat with virtually the entire BDS pantheon (Chomsky, Tutu, Klein) behind their efforts. They lost despite support from virtually the entire global BDS network applying pressure to ASUC members. They lost with the support of vast stretches of Berkeley’s Balkanized student organizational leadership behind them. And they lost after arguing this issue in an all-night session that ended with what sounded like some serious bullying of Senators who chose to not join the boycott crew.

Now this is not to say that anti-divestment forces didn’t also have inside and outside support. In fact this article, while a bit sensational, does point out the individuals and organizations supporting each side in this debate. But given that the BDSniks would have hailed a victory as a clear-cut repudiation of the people and organizations who urged a no vote (like Hillel, AIPAC, AJC, etc.), doesn’t this mean divestment’s defeat represents a similar reputation of Chomsky, Students for Justice in Palestine, etc., and everything they stand for? (Just asking.)

Needless to say, the post-vote chatter falls along the familiar lines of “even though we lost the vote, we actually won.” And depending on how you define “victory,” this morning’s losers do have a point. Clearly if we mean by “win” that you actually are victorious in a political battle, then BDS clearly lost (again, I love typing that phrase). And if you define “win” as showing support for the Palestinians, remember that BDS is really a way to tell those Palestinians: “don’t compromise, don’t negotiate, help is on the way!” Given how well that’s worked out for the people in the region over the last six-and-a-half decades, I would think the boycotters (who claim to care about the Palestinian people) might at least give this matter a little bit of thought.

But that brings us to where the divestment victory really lay. For if you define “victory” as allowing a bunch of people who fantasize that they are part of a great revolutionary vanguard to spew anti-Israel venom for twelve hours straight and now huddle together to talk about how they were defeated by a vast conspiracy of powerful forces, their tiny voices stilled, then indeed last night was a victory for them. If Palestinian suffering has to be extended for another decade or three, or the UC Berkeley campus turned into a war zone of competing factions divided along ethnic and religious lines to allow SJP and its friend and allies to dwell in such a fantasy world, then so be it.

But in the end, I can point out two real (vs. imagined) winners in this struggle: the Berkeley students who valiantly fought against this resolution, holding their ground (and their principles) against what looked at times to be a snarling mob. And the second winner is UC Berkeley itself.

Despite hours of be-fogging rhetoric about human rights and fair play, what last night’s twelve-hour session really demonstrated is what the campus could expect for the coming months and years if this resolution passed. Just as in other communities where divestment has been attempted (Somerville, PCUSA, etc.), the Berkeley BDS resolution succeeded only in dividing another community into warring camps. One needed to only look at all the ASUC meetings, or read the comments that accompanied Daily Cal articles on the subject, or (one guesses) look at the 13,000 e-mails Student Senators each received to see that a “Yes” vote would have turned a campus founded on mutual respect to a place where students ran the gauntlet between partisans waving bloody photos at each other.

Just as there are winners, there are also heroes to this tale, the top of the list being the eight Senators who decided not to inflict the mayhem they were exposed to for hours and hours to the entire campus for months or years on end. While most of the 13,000 kibbitzers who communicated with them (including me) were telling them where their conscience should lead them, conscience is a personal thing. And as much as it would be nice to think that a Zionist heart secretly beats in the chest of each of these people, their vote against divestment demonstrates something more powerful and profound: their desire to put their campus and their constituents first despite unprecedented pressure to do otherwise.

I’ll have a few more things to say on this matter over the coming days (including thoughts on those representatives and their constituents). But for now, it’s safe to congratulate Berkeley for dodging the BDS bullet just in time.

Berkeley BDS: Untangling the Final Vote

Well it took a little doing, but I was finally able to figure out the Byzantine nature of decision-making at UC Berkeley to determine that yesterday’s “tabling” of the final divestment vote was just a way to ensure that headlines the next day read “No Final Decision” vs. “Divestment Loses at Berkeley.” While this has worked with regard to how web sites and blogs sympathetic to BDS portray yesterday’s defeat, most news sources are calling it like it is: ASUC Fails to Override Divestment Bill Veto....

Anyway, what appears to have happened is that divestment supporters used a procedural move to avoid a final vote while they worked on the one Senator who had abstained for two more hours. And once it was clear that no one was going to change his or her vote, they “tabled” the motion in order to avoid that being the final say on the matter. It doesn’t look like the same motion will be brought up again this semester (or possibly ever), although new resolutions that are not quite so ludicrously dishonest might make it onto the floor before the end of the year.

So, as ever, eternal vigilance is the watch-phrase of the day (and every day). This is OK for me since I take great pleasure in watching BDS get its ass handed to it week after week, month after month, year after year, but I know that other people (including, I expect, 95% of the population of Berkeley) would prefer it if those devoted to bashing the Jewish state in order to inflate their own sense of importance would do so on their own time and leave everyone else out of their personal psycho-dramas.

at least the faculty at UCSB, unlike Berkley, didn't fold to the standard bribery extortion and general intimidation, the grand megaphone of the Lobby was able to assault this divestment project with.
but remember, some times honor wins against the Lobby.
Santa Barbara rocks.
Professor Robinson rocks

They also have the most beautiful women in the world there.
As well as an incredible campus and Isla Vista is too cool for words with the most monster California Burritos you ever tore into.
screw Berkley

Missed these BDS Fiascos

I’ve been so busy covering BDS getting kicked down the stairs at Berkeley over the last couple of weeks, I’ve neglected a few additional divestment defeats during that period, including:

* The Swedish Cooperative Union has ruled out boycotts of Israeli goods at Swedish cooperative stores. (Perhaps they are following the Rochdale Principles on political and religious neutrality cited by the Davis Food Co-op when they unanimously rejected a boycott last year.)

* Canada (the land where the Buycott was born) is issuing a postage stamp commemorating 60 years of Canada-Israel diplomatic relations. The usual suspects are planning a boycott. It’s unclear how they will do this, given that no one buys stamps any longer.

* At last week’s Israel-bashing blarney-fest at the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the local Israeli union representative gave the assembled delegates what for after the Irish Foreign Minister criticized the union’s boycott calls and former Irish President Mary Robinson refused to attend the meeting. This was all largely moot since the recent volcanic eruption in Iceland, which has halted most European airline travel, meant few people were actually able to make it to the event.

For that last victory, credit has to go to Yakov Shmiplewitz, the Learned Elder of Zion currently responsible for the earth’s crust.

you gotta hand it to the power of AIPAC...
and the blogs of the zionut, psychopathic, OCD riddled fringe blogs we will be treated to in full measure...

MuzzleWatch " AIPAC- We'll take over the UC Berkeley student ***
Student elections are happening now at UC Berkeley and you can bet everyone's looking for the AIPAC-Manchurian candidate, if such a thing exists.
www.muzzlewatch.com/ 2010/ 04/ 07/ aipac-well-take-over-the-uc-berkeley-student-government/

UCSB still has its honor though.
Go Professor Robinson.

"and the blogs of the zionut, psychopathic, OCD riddled fringe blogs we will be treated to in full measure"
needs to read:

zionut blogs only

forgive my miserable errors and accept my most humble apology for all our collective errors of life.

Nothing makes me any more happy than you wanting me to die or pouring salt into the open pustules of zionism and their little weasels' raw nerves.

Remember folks, if it has a
720 beginning on the bar code; it's from Is Real.

from Canada

http://ijvcanada.org/category/palestine/bds/
About Independent Jewish Voices – Canada (IJV) :
We are a group of Jews in Canada from diverse backgrounds, occupations and affiliations who have in common a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole. We further believe that individuals and groups within all communities should feel free to express their views on any issue of public concern without incurring accusations of disloyalty. -


Protecting Israel’s lawlessness: A smear campaign

By Naomi Klein
published on rabble.ca
March 21, 2010

A while ago, the Reut Institute, arguably Israel’s most influential think tank, published a very controversial report about “hubs of delegitimization.” It attempted to equate tactics of non-violent resistance — like the growing movement to use Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) [...]

seeing the lack of courage to the familiar [ at least to our LA IMC readership ] zionist assault...
I suspect the divestment of Berkeley is about to begin

Israeli exports were up 33% at the end of 2009. Hows that boycott coming, btw?

Rock of Ages

BDS activity in the UK tends to careen between worrying (such as the recent anti-Israel agitation in the British trade union movement) and ridiculous (such as moronic attempts to protest all things Israeli, including violinists and oranges, the political equivalent of a loud, unexpected, public belch).

The latest example from the ridiculous category includes pleadings to the American poet and musician Gil Scott-Heron to cancel a concert he has scheduled in May in Tel Aviv. Now I’m embarrassed to say that I’m not familiar with Mr. Scott-Heron’s work, but that is just testament to the fact that I was as lame in the 1970s and 80s when the musician made his mark (and I was listening to George Thorogood and Sweet) as I am now.

But from these protests I have learned a powerful lesson from the BDSers who have made it clear that any visit to Israel by a famous performer indicates strong support for the Jewish state. They have certainly said that loud and clear in their appeals to Mr. Scott-Heron, just as they have made it a point to claim that any performer who refuses to visit Israel is a tremendous triumph in their march to have Israel made a pariah.

That being the case, and following the boycotter’s own rules, what are we to make of this long list of famous men and women who have made the trek to the Holy Land to sing and dance in front of those dastardly, Apartheid-y Jews?

Iggy & the Stooges
Incubus
Juliet Lewis
Chick Corea
Nine Inch Nails
Paul McCartney
Sean Lennon
Tokio Hotel
Joe Jackson
Mediski Martin & Wood
Joe Cocker
Lauryn Hill
Erika Badu
Branford Marsalis
The Streets
Lord of the Dance
Macy Gray
The Breeders
Pet Shop Boys
Lady Gaga
Kaiser Chiefs
MGMT
Faith No More
Air
Cypress Hill
Jethro Tull
LCD Soundsystem
Madonna
Paul Anka
The Wailers
Myslovitz
Depeche Mode
Lou Reed
Susan Vega

Now I can’t claim to recognize all of those names (except, perhaps Jethro Tull), but this long list of the famous who trooped to Israel in 2009 (with an even longer list of high-profile visitors expected in 2010) seems by the boycotter’s own logic to indicate that support for the Jewish state has never been higher.

Rock on!

nothing "ridiculous " about a boycott on a fascist, theocratic state that has never even stated their borders...attacks their neighbors and commits genocide despite the shyster talk of Palestinians "breeding like rats"
"please stop"
ha ha ha ha

But here the schizophrenic Nazi (who nobody wants) claims to take the high road:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/hidden.php?id=237560

"always trying to be nice and professional about this"

"please stop"
Hah ha hah ha haw haw haw...
Are you really a member of the collective, Yada, like you have stated before?
just pointing to another question.

A rash of swastikas recently appeared on campus. Its debatable if they have anything to do with the divestment nonsense thats going on , on campus. But they are a potent symbol of hate, and a multi-cultural group of students and community members decided to mobilize.
It was a low key event, until a Professor, later identified as Andrew Gutierrez began screaming at the gathering. I don't know how anyone could be opposed to an anti-hate rally, but Prof. Gutierrez made quite a spectacle of himself, until a campus policewomen lead him away. His bizarre reaction shows just how overly sensitive and fragmented our campus has become in the wake of the recent divestment fiasco

there is nothing nonsensical about hating a pirate regime of theocratic, racists. Who menace all of the world with their nuclear arsenal.
look up
The Samson Option.