Billed as a project of the Israel Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project at UC Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender Project ,and led by Hatem Bazian, the official title of this event was “Censoring Palestine at the University, Free Speech and Academic Freedom at the Crossroads.”

Of interest was the event was held at Berkeley’s prestigious law school, in a lecture hall that was provided free of charge to the organizers at the taxpayer’s expense. This very holding of such an event implied there was no censorship going on and the location provided a prestigious venue. The event also showed there was no denial of free speech or academic freedom either, but these were the themes of the entire day, that Pro Palestine activists are being denied their rights in speaking up about Palestine in the Israel-Palestine conflict, their free speech is being prevented intentionally and their academic freedom also denied. This is allegedly being done by campus administrations who are under pressure from Jewish groups and foundations across the US with the help of sympathetic administrations in the colleges. This allegedly creates an atmosphere of “Islamophobia” which results not only in persecution of Muslims but of women also as explained below.

Hatem Bazian, the founder of Cal SJP in 2000 that led to SJP chapters in 80 campuses across the US, led the presentation. Bazian also founded American Muslims for Palestine which was also listed as a co-sponsor. AMP is a front group for Hamas according to terrorism researcher Steven Emerson. Other sponsors included CAIR-Bay Area, UC Berkeley’s Asian American and Asian Diaspora Studies and Near Eastern Studies Department , UC Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Jewish Voice for Peace- Bay Area, Cal SJP and U.C. Berkeley’s Muslim Students Association.

Although the event was to begin at 9am sharp, it did not really start until 9:45 am. The number of attendees in the beginning were eight, counting the speakers. The attendance swelled to no more than 25 people, including the speakers during the entire day with some people going in and out between panels. Of interest was the number of Jewish women, mostly academics, who participated in and spoke at this event. Liz Jackson, a Jewish attorney and former member of Cal SJP while an undergrad who now heads the “Palestine Legal Project” led the first panels.

From the beginning, the speakers all claimed to BDS movement and pro-Palestine activists in the United States are in no way anti-Semitic. It was said by all, that anti-Semitism was just a diversion to smear the activities of BDS and the pro-Palestine that is merely a “human rights” movement. There was no mention of terrorism at any point during the day. Israeli military abuses in Gaza were discussed several times with no mention of rockets fired into Israel before the last three wars. Accusations of genocide and ethnic cleansing by Israel were casually mentioned and accepted by those in attendance without dispute.

The first panel featured Yaman Salahi, a lawyer with the Asia Law Caucus, Liz Jackson, as moderator, and Taliah Mimalek of Cal SJP. Rahim Kurwas, head of UCLA SJP and a member of SJP National’s Steering Committee was scheduled to speak but did not show up for the conference.

Read it all here http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/03/20/anti-israel-censoring-palestine-event-at-uc-berkeley-complains-of-denial-of-free-speech-and-marginalization-from-perch-at-prestigious-taxpayer-funded-venue/

I'm concerned about copyright issues with these incessant repostings of stories from the zionist press.

Specifically, in LA Times vs. Free Republic, the court said that FR could not have reposts of articles. FR had to spend a lot of time deleting articles when the copyright holder, LA Times, demanded. The court said it was not Fair Use to repost entire articles for discussion. For this reason, when I repost, it's a short excerpt with a link.

Reposts like this are risky, and I'm considering asking the collective to consider banning them if they are not short excerpts.

BTW, this issue isn't entirely clear. In Barrett vs. Rosenthal, the court said that reposting something to the internet was protected - but the issue there was libel, while LAT v FR was about Fair Use. The issue of Copyright is about the owner's right to make money from the work balanced against the right of the public to discuss the work in question. I think that FR was, more obviously, operating to make money as a discussion forum for conservatives, and doing it by copying LAT's material in whole, and doing so to attract customers.

Also, in the early 2000s, there was a general feeling expressed at an IMC meeting that we were not interested in reposts of material from the mainstream media, and we started hiding such posts to help clear out the newswire for original posts. Additionally, we thought that aligned with our position that copyrights to works posted to IMC belong to the author, not the site. (At the time, many websites demanded a perpetual right to reproduce. IMC requests a right to reproduce and also allow those copies to be reproduced for noncommercial purposes - similar to CC share alike - and to release IMC from liability due to this distribution. But we ask this up-front. We honor requests by authors to remove material.)

Its not a full article, and I suspect the author and the venue would appreciate the added visibility. But it would be nice to see original content here for a change.