I didn’t expect to be rejected by Oxford because I was an Israeli by Amit Dushvani 3:18pm Tue Jul 8 '03 Israeli PhD candidate Amit Dushvani responds to Oxford's race-based rejection of his application. print article I didn’t expect to be rejected by Oxford because I was an Israeli Amit Dushvani When I applied to do PhD research at Oxford University I expected my academic record to be taken into account, but not my nationality or politics. As an Israeli I am well aware that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict arouses strong feelings, but I was astonished when my request to work in his laboratory elicited this e-mail from Andrew Wilkie, Nuffield professor of pathology. “I have a huge problem with the way the Israelis take the moral high ground from their appalling treatment in the Holocaust, and then inflict gross human rights abuses on the Palestinians because they wish to live in their own country,” he wrote. “I am sure you are perfectly nice at a personal level, but no way would I take on somebody who has served in the Israeli army.” The leak of our correspondence last week caused quite a stir. Wilkie has been threatened with disciplinary action and has issued an apology. But his initial thoughts betray a huge ignorance about the situation in Israel, even among educated people who should know better. I have news for Wilkie: in Israel, nobody asks you whether you want to go into the army or not. Service in the Israeli Defence Forces is mandatory. In any case, I don’t feel that I have to apologise for serving my nation. I wasn’t in any elite combat unit, but I did spend three years in an armed forces battalion, as a communications sergeant, while my British counterparts were completing their degrees. It may not be my only spell in the army. Every man (and some women) are in a reserves unit, which has the power to call you up for more than a month each year (pilots, officers and some commando units serve more). When a reserves soldier sees the dreaded brown envelope in his mailbox, he knows he has to drop everything and join his unit in training or active duty, usually guarding a place in the occupied territories. I’ve heard of men missing the births of their babies, having to leave work (which for people running a business is very inconvenient), having to leave university (as in my case) in the middle of a term or, even worse, during exam time. But one doesn’t have to serve in the IDF to know that Israel is unlike anywhere else. Terrorists and suicide bombers are part of our everyday life. News stations in Europe run items such as heavy traffic on the autobahn or bad weather in Scotland. I wish we could start a broadcast with that kind of news instead of daily reports of violence. Wilkie thinks that we are using the moral high ground to justify violating human rights. Six million Jews were put in concentration camps, abused and brutally murdered in gas chambers. How can that be compared with the current conflict? Our army cannot work in sterile conditions and sometimes innocent Arab civilians do get hurt. I appreciate Wilkie’s sensibility to any wrongdoing on our part, but my case has led him from sympathy for the Palestinians (something a lot of us have, too) to pure prejudice and bigotry. Even if some Israelis were violating human rights, as the Oxford scholar suggested, why would he reject me? I am an individual and cannot be blamed for what is going on here. I should be hired or rejected based on my academic experience and skills. I sent a full CV, but all he cared about was my military service and country of origin. Is this how you judge whether someone is a good scientist? Science is an international language and one of its strengths is the way scientists exchange ideas and share information. This would not be possible if every scientist talked or shared ideas only with members of his nationality or religion. I hope, for science’s sake, that there are more pluralistic professors in the UK. It is easy for affluent Europe to criticise Israel. You don’t live the life we have here. What you see on television is often only one side of the story. Are you aware of the number of Israeli left-wing groups and organisations that help Palestinians? There are demonstrations, protests, doctors for human rights etc. All of them support the Palestinians’ right to their own country. This conflict, I believe, should be resolved by peace talks and mutual understanding of the needs of both nations. Both parties will have to make some painful concessions. The sooner leaders on both sides realise this, the less violence there will be in the Middle East. Let me just say that a man who won’t hire an Israeli for being an Israeli, tomorrow won’t take someone because of his colour or race. Has history taught us nothing? add your comments Source file

Just say no to service in the Palestine Lands by John Veldhuis 5:09pm Tue Jul 8 '03 print comment Still, there are a lot of Israeli's NOT in the army, be it for religious or pacifist reasons, or simply because they are against the terrorism the Israeli army sometimes seems to be engaged in. Maybe the Israeli army should upon draft ask draftees: A Do you want to defend Israel? Yes/No B Do you want to defend the innocent? Yes/No C Do you want to defend settler terrorists? Yes/No D Do you want to defend settler racists? Yes/No E Do you want to defend settler fundamentalists? Yes/No And anyone answering No to the last three questions can join the Israeli army with a clear conscience, and won't have to be part in the ongoing war against the Palestinians. "sometimes innocent Arab civilians do get hurt" you write, the problem is that the Israeli army does not give a damn, when acting against jewish terrorists, the gloves come on again... No rubber bullets, no bulldozers, no tear gas for them. Then suddenly the Israeli army knows how to avoid innocent victims. I think it is never allright to refuse anyone simply because of his nationality. Let me ask: did you, while in the army, did you defend any Palestinians from trigger-happy soldiers? I agree that the conflict between the Israeli government (who insists on defending the settlers) and Palestinian militias is uncomparable to what happened in WWII. Only problem is that too many zionists see what happened in WWII as a justification for what they are doing to Palestinians. add your comments

May be john will be here to protect us? by Fuck antisemite assholes 6:19pm Tue Jul 8 '03 print comment john arent' already building crematotiums for us? just waiting the state os Israel to crumble so you can fullfill your dream? add your comments

on another note: by collective punishment punishes the individual 9:12pm Tue Jul 8 '03 print comment joseph mengele was shocked that he wasn't hired due to his background despite his extensive work experience in the medical field... add your comments

Looks like the right decision to me by Blimey 4:56am Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment So an unmitigated apologist for a nasty regime was turned down by Oxford. Good!! Nothing he says makes me doubt that it was the right decision, I wouldn't want to share a lab with him either. His lack of analysis and parrotting of zionist propaganda is hardly the sign of a promising scholar. add your comments

Blimey, you are not only wrong but offensive! by love. 5:26am Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment People should not be held responsible for actions they had no control over. A teenager does not weigh the pros and cons of serving the occupation when s/he is not old enough to have a drink. It is only after they've lived on their own, independent of social conditioning that they are able to consciously evaluate their small part in the big picture. A person who lived up to society’s demands and served the army should not have his career options compromised by the work force. Likewise, an individual who actively refuses to serve in the military should not have doors slammed in his face as a result. add your comments

He's attacked Palestinians .......... by Blimey 5:34am Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment ....... been to College, had time to reflect on it all, and he still comes up with bollocks. I wouldn't want to share a lab with someone who went round spouting that kind of crap. And if you support a regime that screws over an entire population, then expect not to be welcomed by everyone. Time for Israelis to understand that there are many who are disgusted by what their state does in their name, and, when Israelis have played an active role in it, and still defend it, that disgust spreads to them too. How much land did Israel steal today? add your comments

on the contrary by - 5:51am Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment There is no mention of him attacking Palestinians in his letter. There is a sincere appeal for fairness from a citizen who who has fulfilled his mandatory military duty and would like to further his goals in the science field. If one is going to judge the citizens of a country by their countries national policies, then one could be left with a classroom bereft of students. add your comments

why judge> by when you are guilty! 7:25am Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment People are victims of their leaders’ policies; they don’t have the luxury of changing the course of events to meet their ideals. To suggest otherwise is to be ignorant of the chain of command in world politics. We are the pawns in a chest game played by political figures that retain political power by having their citizenry fight each other. The citizens fulfill their specific duty due to a lack of insight to the larger implications of their individual roles. add your comments

My only objection by Dana 11:17am Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment My only objection to the matter is that I didn't see Wilkie stopping paying his taxes to the Britain crown when it resolved to join the US in the militar adventure against Irak. I am in favour of institutional boycott, but against individual boycott, unless ,of course, we are talking about well-known high rank officers responsible for war crimes. add your comments

Blimey is a real Prick by Ivan Lendl 1:14pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment People like blimey think that people who disagree with their politics do not deserve protection from discrimination. With human rights activists like Blimey the Prick, who needs racists? add your comments

Being likened to a racist by a zionist ..... by Blimey 1:42pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment ............ now dats wot I callz irony! Dushvani admits he's served in the West Bank, ie as part of an illegal Occupation Army. He also appears to be an unintelligent life form, who is unable to undertsand that the illegal Occuaption is the source of the Palestinian resistance, which he harps on about. Prop up the Occupation and expect to be increasingly targetted by the boycott lobby. Time to call an illegal occupier an illegal occupier. add your comments

You live in a fantasy world by Lendl 2:52pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment To Blimey the racist pig: When did I say I was a Zionist? You support discrimination based on race, ethnicity or nationality. That makes you a racist. Even if I was a Zionist, you would be no less a racist. I can see you have limited intelligence. Your reading comprehension is marred by hallucinations. Dushvani never said he served in the territories; he said he served in the army, and later said the army calls people to do reserve duty, even in the territories. He never said he served his reserve duty in the West Bank. Like most racists, you don't let the facts interfere with your justification for discrimination. As long as you remain a pig, you will only harm the peace movements you curse with your participation. You contaminate every good place with your vile hate. You are too dumb to see that Israel has had to defend itsself against Arab aggression long before there was any occupation. What part of Iraq was Israel occupying when it launched 39 scud missiles at it in 1991? And what part of Syria did Israel occupy before 1967 that Syria joined in the Six Day war? People who advocate discrimination should be discredited by all good people. Why do we give racists like Blimey a platform to spit hate? add your comments

Contaminating every place with your vile hate by Blimey 4:44pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment And there was me thinking it was you calling me a pig. Do you see the irony in moaning about an Israeli being refused a place at Oxford, and then calling for me to be banned? Thought not! add your comments

Your own falt by Ivan 5:04pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment I don't claim the guy had to be accepted into Oxford. But to be rejected ONLY because he was Israeli is discrimination and therefore a problem. His rejection came as no fault of his own. But you are directly responsible for your comments, and your support for the professor's discrimination. You have proven yourself to be a racist. That, I say, is worth removing from the world. I didn't expect you to see the difference. Acute stupidity is part what makes people racists. And idiot, I was calling you a pig. add your comments

Do you need it spelling out for you? by Blimey 5:20pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment I know it was you calling me a racist pig, and calling for my banning, and claiming that my posts emanate vile hatred, whilst it is now a matter of public record that your posts aren't the most level headed, reasoned and caring pieces of text to be seen on the boards. BTW, when you ask why "we" give the "racist pig" a platform, are you trying to suggest that you are a supporter and volunteer for Indymedia. Cos I'm failing to see why you would use an independent medium to spew out the crap that we can all go and read in Israel Insider for example. And like it or not, Israel has got to end the Occupation. Israelis voted Sharon in, Israelis keep his army able to continue its programme of slow, painful ethnic cleansing, and Israelis should not be sitting there expecting to be exempt from some of the flack. We know what is going on there, we know what is simple misrepresentation of the facts, the myths, the lies, the Zionist bullshit. Bring on the Boycotts. Make em hurt. add your comments

What makes you immune? by Jimmy Conners 5:59pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment You talk a big game, Blimey. You hate Israel so much you are blind to your own bigotries. I expect you to be blind to them, because only a half-wit would say the things you say. You want to critize Israel, go for it. But you can't seem to understand that you are crossing a line. Where does it end. Can Israelis get beaten up in the streets of Paris? Can they be denied seats in restaurants? Maybe they should be forced to sit in the back of buses when they come to Europe (the most "enlightened" place on Earth, I guess). You simply don't understand what you are calling for. And you will get bitten in the end, I'm sure. BTW, I'd like to know, where is this perfect place you come from where no one has to answer for anything at all and has the moral stature to support the discrimination of other people? I'd like to visit such a perfect place. Maybe I could learn something. But somehow, if you are one of its products, I doubt the people there have the first clue about morality. But maybe you are just the ugly exception. add your comments

I've got a friend from Jaffa by Blimey 6:18pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment He's been away from his home for 50 years, living in a Refugee camp. He's bored with it now, and wants to home. I understand exactly what I'm calling for. An economic and cultural boycott of Israel, and Israelis, especially those who have served in the army. Like we did with Apartheid South Africa. And when Israel ends its Occupation and gives back what it has stolen, then there won't be a need for sanctions any more. Will there? And hey, if an Israeli gets refused a meal in a restuarant, I can't see the problem with that. If he gets beaten up, well that'd be an illegal criminal act, no? And your morality is to promote and support the attempts at ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, no? I didn't claim to come from a perfect culture, in fact, I have been at the receiving end of sanctions, not becayuse of anything I did, but because of the country I came from. And I had no problem with that whatsoever, in fact I supported it. add your comments

Either we are for discrimination or against by Bjorn Borg 7:23pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment I don't care if you did 20 years on a trumped up drug charge. You advocate discrimination and collective punishment, which is simply wrong. Israel has what to answer for, but we will get nowhere applying your "two wrongs makes a right argument." The ridiculous academic boycott has not helped Europe contribute to bringing a solution to the problem, which both sides want to solve. It has made Israelis extremely wary of their input, which mirrors the behavior exhibited by your new hero at Oxford. Also, if you haven't noticed, there is, in fact, a process going on for this end. It is impossible to demand more from Israel. There was a suicide bombing just yesterday - in the midst of a cease-fire! - and going any faster will lead to more Israelis getting killed. That's the simple truth. Sanctions against a group that has absolutely no influence on policy, and is itself particularly pro-Palestinian, is one stupid thing. But this was a straight up, no question act of discrimination. You support this at the expense of your moral position. add your comments

what blimey says is interesting by not important 9:03pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment i think what blimey advocates is very interesting. you are saying that all citizens of a country should be held accountable for its wrongdoings. however, as despicable a man as sharon is, has arafat committed no injustices as part of the PLO? are you advocating that all palestinians be held responsible for his actions? you already answered that (yes) in your previous posts in which you applied some pretty righteous and identical logic (if you wanna call it that) to the israeli scientist. ooor, are you one of those people who draws convenient lines at your whim to decide exactly which people are responsible and which are not? the funny thing to me is that this particular israeli seems to be leaning towards the peaceful end of the spectrum in that he prefers a resolution without violence and indicates a palestinian state is in his favor. blimey, you remind me of people who spat upon soldiers returning from vietnam, rather than having compassion for not only the victims of U.S. soldiers, but also the soldiers themselves. your thoughts are admirable in a twisted sort of way because you envision a world in which control is equally distributed among everyone, but your thoughts are also kinda childish and simplified because you take nothing real into account. as someone mentioned earlier, where do you live right now? you answered that you've been victimized by sanctions, but you still didn't answer the question. where are you from? i only want to know because it matters greatly in relation to what you say. add your comments

To "not - important" by Me. 9:18pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment "are you advocating that all palestinians be held responsible for his actions?" They already are, despite the fact that Collective punishment as is practiced by Israel is prohibited by Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. add your comments

Collective punishment is illeagal. by and must be banned... 9:25pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment Amit Dushavni explains that he doesn't expect to be rejected by Oxford because he is an Israeli... Well Palestinians don’t expect to be buried alive under the rubble of their own house for the alleged deeds of a town resident. add your comments

stay with it by goldberg 10:19pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment ....hey..amit...to hell with the europigs, we know where they stood 50 years ago, go to school in israel or the states. note to mr borg thanks for being fair. add your comments

Its about ideas innit? by Blimey 11:01pm Wed Jul 9 '03 print comment "has arafat committed no injustices as part of the PLO?" Plenty "are you advocating that all palestinians be held responsible for his actions?" They already are, the same as Blacks in South Africa were all treated the same by the racists. Every town, village and city has felt the brunt of the IOFs boot on it's neck, and here's the funny bit - it wasn't Mr. Sharon in the tanks, APCs or manning the checkpoints. Twas the likes of Mr.Dushvani and his mates. "blimey, you remind me of people who spat upon soldiers returning from vietnam, rather than having compassion for not only the victims of U.S. soldiers, but also the soldiers themselves." Yeah, you're right I have no compassion for the soldiers who enact the brutality. I was conscripted, and I didn't serve. I preferred to take the flack of not serving. "where do you live right now? you answered that you've been victimized by sanctions, but you still didn't answer the question. where are you from? i only want to know because it matters greatly in relation to what you say." I personally don't see the relevance. I was born and raised in South Africa, I now live in the UK. So, can my friend go back to Jaffa. If not, is it cos he is Palestinian? Cos whats good for the goose is good for the gander. add your comments

"dear" blimey by adi 1:05am Sun Jul 13 '03 print comment Dear Blimey, as someone who lives in the UK and pays tax to a regime that is responsible for taking the lives of millions of people I don’t think you can talk about banning someone because of his nationality, because if so then Americans and British will be the first one to be banned. If you were raised in Africa like you said then you’ll be interested to know that Britain is responsible for killing at least 150,000 people in Kenya alone not to mention Rwanda’s genocide in 1994 where a million people died. What about millions of other innocent people in Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Malaya, British Guiana Afghanistan Kosovo Chechnya AND Palestinians that die from British arms? Like in Israel where the past, mainly the holocaust is being used as propaganda to help brainwashing the youth that Jews need a safe place (and you’re not helping here my friend), your experience in South Africa can’t be used as a reason to discriminate others. Don’t get me wrong, as Israeli I refused to join the army and as someone who is living Outside Israel I do boycott Israeli goods myself. I’m living in Europe for a few years now and I’m sad to continually listen to European “leftist” propaganda that is frequently contaminated with anti-Semitism. hope that the Israeli occupation will end soon. add your comments

My friend still wants to go back to Jaffa! by Blimey 1:20am Mon Jul 14 '03 print comment Adi I already knew that the UK and US are implicated in nasty behaviour. I will be involved in protests against DSEi, the largest Arms fair in Europe, as I was 2 years ago. And if countries decide that they want to boycott the UK and US, I understand why. I'm not sure that I can see why you think it is Okay to boycott Israeli goods yourself, but that it is not okay for me to support an economic and cultural boycott. Either your line is, "we are all doing bad things, so it is irrelevant to single anyone out", or it is not. My feeling is that there is a danger that people end up doing nothing. The Occupation is no longer sustainable and now is the time for its critics to unite and push it over the edge. I intend to be part of that push. As one part of my struggle against the unjust, incompromising injustices committed under capitalism. I hope you can learn to live with that. add your comments

adi , you are not wrong by >ds 1:42am Mon Jul 14 '03 print comment you seem to be jumping on the pro- Arab bandwagon not out of concern for the Arabs but out of disgust and hatred towards Israel as country. add your comments

Just say no to terrorist service by John Veldhuis 6:37pm Mon Jul 14 '03 print comment "But to be rejected ONLY because he was Israeli is discrimination and therefore a problem." Keep repeating that and someday you really believe this is what happened. I'll try to explain again: He was NOT rejected because he was Israeli, he was rejected because of his membership of a terrorist organisation, the Israeli Army. And he doesn't even seem to regret it. Someone as stupid as that wanting to be an academic is applaudable, but unrealistic. Fight terrorism, boycott Israel. add your comments

Veldhuis's Camera by Jason 12:22pm Tue Jul 15 '03 print comment The Veldhuis Nazi simply wants all the Jews put in concentration camps so he can take some nice shots of them with his new camera he got for his high school graduation, along with the bucket of acne cream. add your comments

no by sympathetik 12:36pm Tue Jul 15 '03 print comment What Veldhuis does not want is to see Palestinians being drowned in the dead sea. how atrocious of him. add your comments

Unbelieveable by Shirl 9:18pm Thu Aug 7 '03 print comment I read some of the responses here...and let me just say my mouth dropped open @ some of the things some people here said. Unfortunately, most of you have never been to Israel or Palestine as you would like to call it. You are all basing your assumptions on specific media you choose to be exposed to, and let me just say it doesn't impress anyone. I dont think anyone has the right to judge Israel nor the Palestinians, simply because you dont know shi* about what's going on there. It's amazing how y'all think you have it all figured out. But sadly, all you do is incite against both sides, which doen't help anyone. People who name themselves as "Pacifists" or as "Peace lovers" should behave according to its definition. As a peace loving person, one should promote his agenda with a more peaceful way, instead of calling Israelis occupires, or Palestinians terrorists( and by that excuse antiSemitism) Y'all focus only on who's right ad who is wrong, instead of realizing that it not the point. The point is, that both sides are suffering, and we should act to change that. A Pacifist would never generalize about Israelis nor Palestinians. Unfortuneately what I see is people not trying to help those who are suffering, the people who lost their loved-ones, the people who lost the only home they've ever known, and there are plenty of those ON BOTH SIDES, like it or not. Yet what I see is people attacking specific sides, instead of trying and looking for a solution that will benefit both. Only a few of you are true peace lovers, but the rest are brainwashed people, who would like to live in a bubble and create their own nice world, where there is evil and good, which gets us nowhere. add your comments

Silly side note by Mark Bialkowski 5:18am Sun Aug 10 '03 print comment "It is easy for affluent Europe to criticise Israel. You don’t live the life we have here." Amit may have been directing his displeasure to Wilkie in particular, but the stab at Europe in general not having to live with the fear of being blown to bits (either by a young adult driven to strap on dynamite and take one last ride on Egged, or a young adult driven to aim an M-16 at some poor Arab kid's head) made me realize that myopia is not limited to Europe or North America. Although the daily experience of fear may not be as intense, the British definitely had to worry about bombs going off across England for many years, during the decades of Provisional IRA activity. In Spain, the Basque militant group ETA makes its presence known in explosive fashion from time to time. Other readers can probably draw further parallels, related or not, from this juxtaposition. This is all tangential to the author's primary point about prejudice, although as another poster noted, even in "mandatory" service situations, people have choices. Still, Wilkie blew it; he fumbled away a perfectly good opportunity to open a dialogue with a colleague about the horror that continues to play out in the Middle East to engage in a moment of spite. add your comments

Yes, but ...... by Adrian 10:10am Tue Aug 26 '03 print comment I sympathise with your plight and comments, and acknowledge the many good points in them. But ... What helped bring about, and certainly expedited, the dismantlement of the appalling apartheid system in South Africa? Was it not in large part due to the distaste shown by the free world, in the form of sanctions, media coverage etc. against apartheid? And is it not equally true that many decent, liberal white (and Jewish and black) South Africans were negatively impacted by said actions through no fault of their own as individuals. The whole issue of 'punishment' of a group of people (in this case, Jewish Israeli's) because of the sins of a few individuals (i.e. your government & military apparatus) is fraught with moral difficulty, and is certainly distasteful. But what better example of this exists today than the actions of the state of Israel against both it's Arab citizens, and the people of Palestine- once again, for the sins of a few. Add to this is the fact that Palestine has been illegally and brutally occupied by Israel for over 35 years! Further add to this the fact that the brutality and injustice of the collective punishment system being employed by your government is a fundamental cause of the ever increasing supply of volunteer terrorists and suicide bombers, and perhaps I have given you your best argument against the whole ethos of collective punishment. I can genuinely symapthise with the situation of the many decent people of Israel who, whilst appalled by the policies and actions of their own government, also have to seemingly suffer the scorn and distaste of most of the rest of the liberal world for something they too oppose deeply. All of this in the midst of a seemingly never ending cycle of violence. What certainly does not help and in the long term can only damage the Israeli cause, is the deep hypocrisy being exhibited by your fair weather friends, the good ole' US of A. Like myself and the Government of all Western nations, they support the existence of the state of Israel. Unlike me and most western governments, they seem content to throw money and arms at Israel without linking that aid to any form of commitment to address the many human rights abuses being committed by your government, to say nothing of the long standing,illegal and brutal occupation of Palestine. And it is from this fact that your terrorism problems arise- let's face it the majority of Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims are not radicals or terrorists, and would be delighted to arive at a conclusion in which Palestinians and Israeli's could peacefully co-exist as citizens of neighbouring, viable nation states. Since the PLO recognised the state of Israel in the mid to late 80's (from memory), the distance between reasonable people on both sides is not as large as the Mass Media puppets would have us believe. I repeat, the stance of the USA in this regard helps nobody, including the state of Israel. Unfortunately, we no longer have the benefit of a truly free and independent mass media to disseminate this message to the ignorant American public. Actually, as an Israeli citizen you probably have more freedom of speech in real terms than a US citizen, who is both faced with the litigiousness of the American legal system, a willingness to use it to repress free speech, and a cost basis designed to favour the rich, white establishment. Use it. Honestly, I taste vomit in the back of my throat when I hear the American media describing other people as being brainwashed, to say nothing of when I hear the US President invoke the name of God! It is a fact that the Intifatida- which, until it started resorting to terrorism, I have to say I supported- would bite even more deeply were it not for the foreign aid (actually, military aid) and loan guarantees provided both above and below the table by the US. It is also a fact that in spite of this the Intifatida is causing Israel economic problems, and this is ultimately most effective- (so please, eliminate murder and emphasize economic sabotage). As intelligent people surely we have to ask ourselves- what does the U.S. administration (or their puppet-masters) think they stand to gain by encouraging the present situation to be propagated? Do they think that their own people need to see the world in terms of black and white, goodies and baddies etc- then they will be more pliable in the hands of a manipulative government. (Witness current US foreign policy elsewhere in the Middle East). Is this the reason for the constant, biased American media propaganda bombardment? Most worrying of all, are they right? I hope not. Back to your dilemma- what an unfortunate situation. From my point of view, if you were willing to state in writing that you are opposed to the policies and practices of your government in these regards, I would unequivocably support your application to study anywhere in the world (subject to merit, of course). If you were a bigot that supported the current actions of your government, I too would oppose your application to study abroad on moral and ethical grounds. My real question to you is what other non-violent options are available to decent, liberal people around the world to express their outrage? The USA, as a member of the Security Council, has largely emasculated the United Nations in this regard. I long ago lost patience with the whole situation, and therefore support economic and travel sanctions against Israel. But it is all ultimately so unnecessary- were it not for the USA, I believe we could and would be much closer to an equitable resolution (yes, this involves a viable state of Palestine). So much for your fair weather friends. Yours truly, and with Sympathy A Retired WASP add your comments

A bunch of little potties calling the Kettle by Effendi 6:51pm Sun Aug 31 '03 DJEffendi@Hotmail.com print comment . It is amazing to me to hear yet another Zionist whinning about being discriminated against. No one else in the world has ANY rights in israel unless your a full blown zionist. No one in the world can make any opinion known about the behavior of the zionists without being called Anti-Semetic. I just don't understand how you can complain when people treat you like that, yet you live your entire lives like that to Everyone else?. You would not allow (unclean, heathens) into your areas of higher learning, why should the world smile on you? You want fair treatment for yourself, yet are unwilling to offer it to anyone else. You are the ones that create the seperation between yourselves and everyone else in the world. You are the ones that promote racial purity stronger than ANYONE since Hitler. Yet you cry when no one wants to play with you anymore. You make your bed, you lie in it. Personally I wouldn't trust one of you one inch. I wouldn't trust you in my home, or with my family or in my schools. For the protection of those I love, I would do to you EXACTLY what you do to innocent Palestinians. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. When you can learn to treat others with respect, then others might respect you. Until then. don't be surprised when the world slams the door on you. Once bitten twice shy!! Scott!! add your comments

No Justice, No Peace by anti-zionist jew 2:07am Tue Sep 2 '03 print comment This rejection was right. We must boycott all zionists and all zionist products, worldwide, until the racist nazi zionist entity is totally destroyed. I do not buy zionist products. I do not hire zionists or patronize businesses that do. I do not speak to zionists. I do not speak to those who do. I support total war without terms against the racist nazi zionist state. The Palestinian people, who today are fighting in the spirit and tradition of the fighters of the Warsaw Ghetto and the brave fighters of the camp at Sobibor will achieve total victory and stand over the ashes of the racist nazi zionist entity. The world supports the Palestinian people. Palestine will win. NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE! ZIONISTS OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND OFF OF HUMANITY'S PLANET! Let a hundred oceans of zionist blood stain the earth all around the globe! death death death to the zionist dogs, every one of them. Jewish people, Yes! Zionism, No! add your comments

where does it end? by anti-zionist jew 2:19am Tue Sep 2 '03 print comment As to the comment, "where does it end?" It ends when there is NO "israel" racist nazi zionist entity left on this planet. And yes, supporters of "israel" SHOULD be beaten up on the streets of Paris--AND EVERYWHERE! And more! They should be totally boycotted. They are racists, fascists, nazis. The enemy. They and their businesses, and their friends, and their allies, and their organizations, and their families, are all supporters of evil. They are legitimate targets for all who oppose oppression and support justice and freedom. They should be opposed NOT just by every means necessary, but by EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE! Palestine will be free! All of it! The Palestinian people will return to their homeland! This is NOT "negotiable" and the racist "road map" will be wiped away by the progress of the Palestinian nation's people's war against the evil zionist settler regime! NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE! ZIONISTS OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND OFF OF HUMANITY'S PLANET! AND OUT OF THE KNOWN UNIVERSE! Piss on their graves! add your comments

Found on Usenet by John Veldhuis 5:42pm Thu Sep 4 '03 print comment A professor at Oxford University, Andrew Wilkie, finds himself in serious trouble after having turned down an Israeli student who applied to work in his lab on the stated basis that the student had served in the IDF. The professor has had to apologize, and now the university has apologized for him and has launched an investigation, which may even lead to the firing of the professor for his alleged discrimination. This raises a number of issues: The alleged discrimination was not an the basis of race, creed, color, gender, or sexual orientation, or any of the usual types of discrimination. It was expressly on the basis of the student having served in the IDF (contrary to much of what I've read, Wilkie is completely explicit on this point, and did not turn the student down on the basis of his race, religion or citizenship). Some people think the IDF is a racist, murdering instrument of oppression and denial of human rights to the Palestinian people. Does Oxford really want to get into this debate? Would Oxford have disapproved of a professor in 1947 turning down a German student on the basis that he had been a guard in a concentration camp? Would that be discrimination against Germans? You may not agree with that analogy to the IDF, but doesn't the professor have the right to hold that view? Can you really discriminate on the basis of your feelings of moral disgust, when that moral disgust is based on reasons which are perfectly arguable, and indeed are the views of the vast majority of moral people who have thought about the issue? Israel is on the wrong side of history. Just how far on the wrong side of history is Oxford prepared to be? The professor's real problem was that he tried to make a point of his disgust at the policies of the Israeli government. If he had quietly turned the student down, and not tried to make a political issue out of it, none of this uproar would have occurred. In effect, the university is trying to censor his political views, and the views of anyone who might think like him, under the guise of policing its anti-discrimination policies. Because they are threatening to fire him, it will be abundantly clear that certain political views can no longer be spoken aloud at Oxford University. Moral people will have to meet in private to discuss their heretical views. If Oxford attempts to use its anti-discrimination policies to police a political issue, they will effectively destroy much of the moral force in their anti-discrimination policies. Since all Israelis who don't fall into religious exceptions have to serve in the IDF, you could argue that discrimination on the basis of having been in the IDF is tantamount to discrimination on the basis of being an Israeli, and therefore unacceptable. It is here that the irony in Oxford's position becomes exquisite. For it is not the case that all Israelis who don't fall into certain religious exemptions have to serve in the IDF. Israelis of Arab descent do not have to serve, and as a practical matter most do not serve (Muslim Druze and Circassian men are subject to military service on the decision of their communities, and Bedouin can and do volunteer). Seeing as the main role of the IDF now is to brutalize the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories, it is not unreasonable that Israeli Arabs not serve in the IDF. What is amazing, however, is that Israel limits the citizenship rights of its citizens depending on whether they could be required to serve in the IDF (not on whether they did serve, as that would limit the citizenship rights of ultra-Orthodox Jews who didn't serve for religious reasons, and this point proves that the limitations are essentially discriminatory against Arabs). All citizens can vote, but there are a whole litany of other citizenship rights that are denied to Arabs, some of which are denied for their status as not being Jewish, and some of which are denied based on the completely bogus excuse that such rights should be limited to those prepared to defend their country. So the deep irony is that Israel discriminates against its own citizens on the basis of whether they could have served in the IDF, and Professor Wilkie is in trouble for allegedly discriminating against an Israeli for having served in the IDF. He could make the argument that his actions were intended to protest the racial discrimination of the state of Israel based on its denial of citizenship rights to those not allowed to serve in the IDF. If he accepts students who had served in the IDF, isn't he being a racist by implicitly endorsing the discriminatory practices of Israel? Does Oxford want to be seen as siding with the discrimatory policies of the State of Israel? Much is made of the fact that Israel has some kind of moral superiority over its Arab neighbors because it is a democracy. Once we understand that Israel is only nominally a democracy, and actually discriminates against its own citizens, can we understand where the moral superiority really lies. Being a democracy entails more than giving a minority group the ineffectual right to vote. For all intents and purposes, Israel is a military dictatorship, and its policies are those of the handful of generals who run the country. Even such citizenship rights that Arab citizens of Israel now have are being constantly eroded by the Israeli legislature and courts. All of this fanfare hides an issue which is worthy of debate: is it a good idea to academically boycott Israeli scholars until Israel does the right thing by the Palestinian people? These type of boycotts are already in place, and are becoming more common. Will they have any good effect? Did similar boycotts against South African academics have any effect in ending apartheid, an idea which is close to that of Zionism (which is, regardless of what anyone will say, racism, a point that was made in the UN conference held in early September 2001, and forgotten in the light of what happened later that week)? Is it fair to punish a group of people for the sins of their country, especially if the group is more likely to contain people who disagree with these sins? Will the boycott have any effect on the blockheads who run Israel? Will it actually make things worse? This particular instance of alleged discrimination is quite harsh. Although people do refuse to serve in the IDF, their treatment by the Israeli state is quite severe, and those who will not serve are true heroes. It seems to be a bit much to refuse a student because he didn't want to ruin his life in Israel by refusing to join the IDF. There is also the issue of what he did in the IDF. He might have been in an office filing reports, or he might have been in the Occupied Territories shooting Palestinian children in the face. Should Professor Wilkie have asked him some questions before deciding he did not want him in his lab? Or is any participation in the IDF aiding and abetting war crimes and crimes against humanity? Some of the things that the IDF does are probably not objectionable, but much of what it does is extremely objectionable. Given what the IDF does, it is quite arguable that the Nuremberg Principles would require everyone to refuse to serve in the IDF. The Professor actually wrote: "I have a huge problem with the way that the Israelis take the moral high ground from their appalling treatment in the Holocaust, and then inflict gross human rights abuses on the Palestinians because they (the Palestinians) wish to live in their own country." This was his real sin. The ultimate taboo is to point out that the Holocaust is being used as a weapon against the Palestinian people. 'Never again' is used to justify any and all outrages, on the basis that they will lead to absolute security for the Jewish state. This is no less than a completely obscene argument, as the Palestinians have nothing but stones and the bombs strapped to their own bodies to defend themselves against the ethnic cleansing being imposed on them, and the Israelis have one of the most powerful and effective armies in the world, nuclear weapons, and the power of the United States behind them. Anyone brave enough to point out that Hitler's ultimate victory is to create this fake insecurity in the Jewish people which they use to treat the Palestinians as the Nazis treated the Jews is labelled an anti-semite. This argument is made on the basis that the Jewish people are being held to higher standards than others, and so are being singled out for hatred. Unfortunately, the State of Israel and its apologists have given up any and all claim to insist that their critics weigh the crimes of Israel against humanity against other crimes in the world. You have to have clean hands to make that argument, and their hands are covered in blood. It is an insult to moral people around the world to hear that they cannot make up their own minds about the horrors being imposed by the State of Israel, that somehow they must weigh these horrors against other horrors in the world, with the punishment for expressing one's moral opinion being insulted with the label of anti-semite. Am I not allowed to make even the slightest criticism of Israel because somewhere in the world someone might be doing something that is arguably worse? Are we going to stop criticizing murderers because there are mass murderers in the world? Do I have to weigh some complex system of relative evils before I can complain about any evil? In fact, Israel is so often criticized simply because people feel that such criticism might have an effect on the collective Israeli conscience - the criticisms of Israel are actually a compliment in that people feel, perhaps wrongly, that the Jewish history of being oppressed will lead the country of the Jews to do the right thing. The fact that the apologists for Israel are stooping to name calling betrays a desperate awareness that people are slowly becoming alive to what the Zionist experiment entails. The effect of all this is to render the term 'anti-semite' completely meaningless. Any term that applies equally to Ernst Zundel and David Duke on one hand, and Nelson Mandela and Bishop Tutu on the other, has lost all meaning. As it is now most commonly used, 'anti-semite' seems to refer to those who are against brutality and moral outrages against humanity. By misusing the term, the current generation of defenders of Israel have ruined a term which gained a considerable moral force in the light of the Holocaust. Future Jews will not look kindly on them for taking all the meaning out of the word just so their pet country could continue its gross inhumanity against the Palestinian people. There are Zionist arguments circulating, particularly in the United States, that European support for the Palestinians is the new anti-semitism, in that blaming the Jews for their treatment of the Palestinians makes the European treatment of the Jews during the 30's and 40's more understandable. Leaving aside the fact that the whole world outside the United States is united in its moral disgust at the actions of Israel, and the fact that Americans only support Israel because of their appalling ignorance of the facts due to the misleading coverage of the Middle East provided to them by the disgusting American media, this is again an obscene argument. If the Israelis or their apologists wish to test Europe's bona fides, they should stop oppressing the Palestinians. Until then, they lack the moral standing to criticize the natural moral outrage of the whole world, including the Europeans. Remember, it was the failure of the world to complain about the early actions of the Nazis in the 1930's that led directly to the disasters of the 1940's. Some of the more radical Zionists, even ministers in Sharon's cabinet, are making public statements that if carried out will lead to a humanitarian disaster. Is the world supposed to stand idly by because to say anything will hurt someone's feelings? The Israelis and their apologists have to come to realize that the jig is up - the world is rapidly losing its patience with what they are doing to the Palestinians. It is not just hurting themselves and the Palestinians, but has led to much of the terrorism we have seen in recent years, much of which Europe has had to suffer. How did this become an issue of discrimination? Isn't it an issue of academic freedom? As long as it does not fall under one of the standard categories of discrimination, what we have here is a discrimination action being used to stifle freedom of speech and association. It is Professor Wilkie's lab; he has to work with his students. The relationship of professor to student is a personal one. Who will Oxford force him to associate with? If every academic institution in the world boycotted anyone who had ever served in the IDF, it would have an effect on Israel's ability to oppress the Palestinians. One of the many problems of Israel is that Israel provides citizenship rights based on religious affiliation, or rather, on stated religious affiliation (which explains why the country is full of Russian Orthodox fake 'Jews'). Israel had the choice of defining itself as a state whose purpose would be to support and encourage the Hebrew language and culture, and other Jewish cultures, without discriminating against any of its citizens, but instead has chosen to define itself in explicitly discriminatory terms, a process which continues to get worse (this isn't hopeless: Israel could still decide to redefine itself). All of this of course was made possible by Hitler, whose actions made the notion of a Jewish sanctuary seem quite reasonable in the late 1940's. In the twenty-first century, allowing a country to discriminate against its own citizens, people actually born in the country whose ancestors were born in the country, seems positively insane and evil. The deep contradictions in the State of Israel itself put the alleged discrimination of Professor Wilkie into its proper context. add your comments

Ocford was right about you by rez 6:40am Wed Sep 17 '03 print comment "Let me just say that a man who won’t hire an Israeli for being an Israeli, tomorrow won’t take someone because of his colour or race. Has history taught us nothing?" as a jew, let me be the first to say that you are full of shit for comparing prejudice against you for fulfilling your term in the army to racial prejudice. If being in the army is a race, i am a racist! In my jewish family, we are at least 4 generation of draft resistors, including my great grandfather who left russia to aviod being put in suicide missions against imperial japan and my father who was hunted by the american FBI for councilling young people on how to resist the US army's draft. Here in norway, my neighbor is serving jail time for refusing to comply with millitary conscription orders. you may believe in your state but your millitary does not constitute a race and your double standards are an example of what the man at Oxford was referring to. Isrealis mimic their state in demanding apology from the world for their treatment in europe, but offer none for the atrocities of the jewish state even agianst sister and brother jews from other parts of the world. wake up, isreal is just another violent european colony! -rez add your comments