TC
7th June 2006, 07:13
London, May.30 (BNA) Britain's National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE) approved an academic boycott on Israeli higher education institutions that do not condemn Israel's "apartheid policy," Israeli ynetnews.com said.
It said NAFTHE, which with a membership of 67,000 educators is one of the UK's largest teachers' unions, voted 106 to 71, with 21 abstentions, in favour of the boycott during a Blackpool convention. The move to boycott Israeli academics reopened a front which formerly involved a different British teachers' association, the Association of University Teachers (AUT), which advanced a motion in April of last year to shun Haifa and Bar Ilan Universities, the ynetnews added. Responding to the urgings of Palestinian organisations, AUT declared the boycott and decided to exclude the two institutions from conventions and research projects. The motion invites members of the organisation to consider their conduct to promise equality and non- discrimination in academic ties with Israeli academic institutions, and to way shunning those that don't publicly distance themselves from such a country. http://english.bna.bh/?ID=45529
President links boycott of Israeli academics with trend of anti-semitism
Published On Monday, June 05, 2006 1:42 AM
By PARAS D. BHAYANI
Crimson Staff Writer
University President Lawrence H. Summers last week blasted a British boycott of Israeli academicsdrawing flack from a familiar foe and applause from his allies.
Summers statement on the British boycott evokes echoes of his September 2002 Memorial Church address, in which he excoriated a group of Harvard and MIT professors who had called on the University to cut financial ties to Israel. Serious and thoughtful people are advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent, Summers said at the time.
On Tuesday, one of Britains largest unions of university instructors passed a resolution urging its members to boycott speeches by Israeli academics who do not condemn continuing Israeli apartheid policies, including construction of the exclusion wall and discriminatory educational practice.
Summers called the unions action anti-Semitic.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=513653
Why the Boycott of Israel is Justified
by Gabriel Ash
www.dissidentvoice.org
June 6, 2006
The recent boycott resolutions of CUPE and NATFHE against Israels Apartheid predictably awakened Israels willing apologists, initiating a high pitched chorus of condemnation and self pity across the Western media, not to mention the blogosphere.
Their arguments, however, are flimsy, not to say rotten. Ill review them one at a time.
But first a clarification. The boycott/divestment/sanctions (BDS) campaign is a very diverse campaign. Each organization has its own specific criticism of what it condemns. Israels offensive policies of colonization in the West Bank and Gaza are the common denominator, but some organizations go beyond that. Likewise, each organization has a different take on what action its members should undertake. But all agree on the need for and appropriateness of some kind of collective action that puts pressure on Israel. I have my own take on both these questions -- what to condemn and how to respond -- but my following remarks address only the broad consensus.
The rest of the article can be found here: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June06/Ash06.htm
It said NAFTHE, which with a membership of 67,000 educators is one of the UK's largest teachers' unions, voted 106 to 71, with 21 abstentions, in favour of the boycott during a Blackpool convention. The move to boycott Israeli academics reopened a front which formerly involved a different British teachers' association, the Association of University Teachers (AUT), which advanced a motion in April of last year to shun Haifa and Bar Ilan Universities, the ynetnews added. Responding to the urgings of Palestinian organisations, AUT declared the boycott and decided to exclude the two institutions from conventions and research projects. The motion invites members of the organisation to consider their conduct to promise equality and non- discrimination in academic ties with Israeli academic institutions, and to way shunning those that don't publicly distance themselves from such a country. http://english.bna.bh/?ID=45529
President links boycott of Israeli academics with trend of anti-semitism
Published On Monday, June 05, 2006 1:42 AM
By PARAS D. BHAYANI
Crimson Staff Writer
University President Lawrence H. Summers last week blasted a British boycott of Israeli academicsdrawing flack from a familiar foe and applause from his allies.
Summers statement on the British boycott evokes echoes of his September 2002 Memorial Church address, in which he excoriated a group of Harvard and MIT professors who had called on the University to cut financial ties to Israel. Serious and thoughtful people are advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent, Summers said at the time.
On Tuesday, one of Britains largest unions of university instructors passed a resolution urging its members to boycott speeches by Israeli academics who do not condemn continuing Israeli apartheid policies, including construction of the exclusion wall and discriminatory educational practice.
Summers called the unions action anti-Semitic.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=513653
Why the Boycott of Israel is Justified
by Gabriel Ash
www.dissidentvoice.org
June 6, 2006
The recent boycott resolutions of CUPE and NATFHE against Israels Apartheid predictably awakened Israels willing apologists, initiating a high pitched chorus of condemnation and self pity across the Western media, not to mention the blogosphere.
Their arguments, however, are flimsy, not to say rotten. Ill review them one at a time.
But first a clarification. The boycott/divestment/sanctions (BDS) campaign is a very diverse campaign. Each organization has its own specific criticism of what it condemns. Israels offensive policies of colonization in the West Bank and Gaza are the common denominator, but some organizations go beyond that. Likewise, each organization has a different take on what action its members should undertake. But all agree on the need for and appropriateness of some kind of collective action that puts pressure on Israel. I have my own take on both these questions -- what to condemn and how to respond -- but my following remarks address only the broad consensus.
The rest of the article can be found here: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June06/Ash06.htm