Segacs's World I Know

Posts Tagged ‘hillel’

Concordia University has had a change of heart. Reversing its initial decision to disallow the speech due to “security concerns”, now Barak will be allowed to speak on campus:

Backtracking on a decision that fuelled a furor over free speech, Concordia University in Montreal has agreed to invite former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to speak on its campus.

The university reached the decision after “extensive discussions” with Jewish community leaders, according to a press release yesterday. Concordia says it will welcome Mr. Barak once it can upgrade security in one of its buildings.

Federation CJA has applauded this decision, and I hope that the support that the university receives from the public will convince them that they are doing the right thing by allowing the former PM to speak.

Many students will be upset by this decision, and I can understand why. They don’t want more tensions, more headlines, or the risk of another riot. They just want the situation to calm down and go away.

But ultimately I believe that this is the right decision. I hope that the average student can understand the importance of defending free speech – not just for rioters, but for everyone.

If the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh had any kind of lesson, it’s that certain kinds of speech are very dangerous, because certain groups have ensured that this is so. Upon hearing that news, Damian had this reflection:

It’s worth remembering a scene in Martin Himel’s Global TV documentary, Jenin: Massacring Truth, in which a cartoonist for The Independent is asked about his cartoon showing Ariel Sharon eating a baby, and why he wouldn’t draw Arafat in such a manner. He responds, glibly, that “Jews don’t issue fatwas.”

Martin Himel, you will recall, was also behind the controversial documentary Confrontation at Concordia, about the 2002 Netanyahu riots.

The point here is that certain people are willing to resort to violence in order to shut down speech they disagree with. They cannot be allowed to succeed. Otherwise, they will grow bolder and bolder, until eventually the only speech permitted will be their point of view.

Concordia made the wrong decision at first. I believe that strongly. And their change of heart is a case of better late than never.

To all of you out there who may have written leaders or participated in the awareness campaign about this event, I believe you had an effect. Thank you.

To the students and alumni who will be upset or angered by this decision – including some members of a divided Hillel – please try to understand the larger implications of this decision, and realize that defence of free speech – while not always smooth – ultimately benefits us all.

And to anyone considering rioting: you may have thought you were victorious. This new decision proves you were wrong. If you disagree with Barak’s message, feel free to mount a peaceful protest. That’s what freedom of speech is all about. But I hope you think long and hard before resorting to violence again. That has absolutely no place in a free society.

The Gazette reports that today’s Hillel rally outside Concordia was “peaceful”:

Almost two years after a violent demonstration outside Montreal’s Concordia University against former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, there was another protest.

Only this time, it was more vocal than violent.

About two hundred people staged a peaceful demonstration outside the university’s downtown campus Tuesday.

They were protesting the administration’s decision not to allow a speech by another former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.

I’m sure we’ll be seeing lots more on the 6 o’ clock news. This story was just a placeholder. But even in its brevity, it says a lot.

Hillel holds peaceful protests. The right to free speech in Canada incorporates – and in fact, depends on – the right to peaceful protest.

But when the line is crossed into violence, protest becomes thuggery. That’s what happened when Netanyahu came to speak.

And now, Barak is denied his right to speak because of the fear of a repeat of the violence of the 2002 Netanyahu riots. SPHR has succeeded in shutting down any speech it doesn’t like at Concordia, through the use of violence.

But when speakers came who Hillel disagreed with, they protested peacefully. So speakers continue to come who Hillel disagrees with.

In other words, the viewpoint that the violent thugs agree with gets to be heard. But the viewpoint that the peaceful demonstrators agree with gets shut down.

Concordia is sending a strong message here: violence works. Who will be the next groups to employ SPHR’s tactics to muzzle speech they don’t like?

That’s why this isn’t just an issue for pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian students. It’s not just an issue for Concordia students. It’s an issue for all Montrealers, all Canadians, and all people committed to democracy. We cannot let violence win.

Sadly I couldn’t get off work to be there. But Adam Daifallah has pictures. More to follow.

Hillel:

“A small group of thugs are holding an entire university community hostage and deciding who is allowed to speak and who is not. All people who value democratic principles such as freedom of expression and speech should share our outrage with this intolerable situation.” – co-Presidents Jason Portnoy and Yacov Fruchter, in a press release.

“That peace that we all felt at Concordia was a Band-Aid. This was not resolved.” – Jason Portnoy, co-President, as reported by CTV news.

“I am truly embarrassed by such failures in a democracy in the 21st century. I am afraid to ask, but if my fellow students are not interested in free speech and inquiry for all of us on campus, regardless of a speaker’s political opinions, than what exactly are we learning at school?” – Tal Elharrar, in an opinion piece in today’s Link

Federation CJA:

“This is a day of great sadness for those who value freedom of expression in our universities and in Canadian society. Concordia University has allowed itself to be taken hostage by a small and violent group within its campus. With this decision, Concordia has demonstrated that the right to free speech is only as strong as the institutional will to protect it.” – Sylvain Abitbol, President, in a statement.

The university administration:

“It is unfortunate, but a reality nonetheless, that the safety of its community members and guests must occupy a central position in planning events at an institution dedicated to free speech.” – Concordia vice-president Michael Di Grappa, in a press release.

SPHR:

“It’s a matter of Canada respecting its own laws. You don’t allow someone into the country who’s an accused war criminal. [ . . . ] Bringing (Barak) to campus would have shown a general disregard for a very large number of people who don’t want him to speak.” – Erik Yingling, SPHR, in today’s Gazette

“He is a war criminal and he shouldn’t be allowed to speak at a public institution like Concordia. Free speech is not unlimited in Canada. I’m glad they learned from their first mistake and came to their senses.” – Chadi Marouf, SPHR, in today’s Globe and Mail.

“I want to make this clear, there would still be people who would not want him to come, he is after all an accused war criminal, but personally I would go to the speech and, if a question and answer period was guaranteed, I would call him out on the crimes he is accused of,” said Yingling. “That being said, I think the university exercised a good degree of common sense when rendering their final decision.” – Eric Yingling, SPHR, in today’s Link.

The Media:

“Freedom of speech is again under assault at Montreal’s Concordia University by administrators who seem to value tranquility on campus more than they do the rights of people to debate controversial ideas.” – Toronto Star editorial.

“[The SPHR] is amazed at its own success… they don’t even have to break windows again. Their reputation precedes them. The mere threat of violence was enough to get the university to capitulate.” – Tommy Schnurmacher, on CJAD radio this morning.

At large:

The contention that a speech by a former Head of State of a democracy can be classified as “provocation” is absurd; rather, it should be seen as a welcome beginning to open dialogue. The stigma associated with a “controversial” speaker represents a disturbing delusion. If a controversial viewpoint is defined as one that many people will disagree with, then controversial speakers are the ones who will most likely advance the course of debate on contentious issues. I’d far prefer to listen to a “controversial” speaker than one who attracts no dissenting opinions. – Josh Fisher, Concordia student in a letter to the Link.

“This would no doubt please the anti-Israeli activists who prevented Benjamin Netanyahu from speaking in 2002. With one riot, they’ll have managed to prevent two Israeli statesmen from speaking at a Canadian university.”- Jonathan Kay, posting to the National Post blog.

“Congratulations, my leftie friends. Concordia is yours. You will no longer have to suffer the indignity of viewpoints you don’t like being represented on campus. It may be some time before the dictatorship of the proletariat takes over society as a whole, but dang it, this is a start.” – Damian Penny.

Many media outlets, when covering the tensions and flare-ups at Concordia, have tried to construct timelines. Most of them get it wrong, or at least omit many crucial points. Certainly it’s hard to be comprehensive, but here’s a partial look back at some of the key events of the past five years or so:

• April 1, 1999: The Rob Green executive is first elected to CSU office, ushering in an era of far-left dominance of the Concordia Student Union. His slate was re-elected one year later. A member of this executive, Sheryll Navidad, would eventually defraud $196,000 from the Union… something which the executive hushed up until a week after the CSU won provincial accreditation by a student referendum, ensuring that the University would have limited or no say on the Union’s actions.
• September 2000: The “Al-Aqsa Intifida” begins in Israel, setting off a wave of escalating violence. At Concordia, pro-Palestinian groups step up their tabling, exhibit, and promotion efforts.
• November 27, 2000: The CSU, upon request by SPHR, holds a general assembly to vote on whether to pressure the Canadian government to cut off ties with Israel for (in their view) not respecting UN Resolution 242. Though the assembly was boycotted by Hillel and failed to achieve quota, the CSU nonetheless decided to add this as a referendum question on the next CSU election ballot.
• December 18, 2000: The CSU condemns Hillel after SPHR complains about material that Hillel was distributing.
• March 2001: The leftist slate ACCESS is elected to the CSU to succeed the Rob Green executive. The referendum against Israel passes with 54% of the vote.
• August 20, 2001: Two leftist CSU executive members, Tom Keefer and Laith Marouf, are expelled and banned from campus for spraying anti-Israel graffiti on campus and threatening a security guard. The ban is reversed eight months later, after Keefer and Marouf complained of being denied due process.
• September 2001: The CSU publishes its student agenda, entitled “Uprising” which, among other things, calls for “intifada, anarchy, and revolution” and contains numerous articles containing antisemitism, incitement to theft and flag-burning, and violence. Released just after the 9/11 attacks, the handbook comes under fire from a large number of people.
• September 2001: Angry students begin circulating a petition to recall the CSU executive and force new elections. The petition eventually amasses over 3000 signatures – more than the number of people who voted in the election in the first place.
• October 15, 2001: Faced with the inevitable fact of the recall petition being submitted, Sabrina Stea resigns as CSU president, blaming the administration and forcing new elections.
• October 31, 2001: The CSU considers suing B’nai Brith for what it perceived as “racist” remarks made against the CSU. The CSU hurries to launch the lawsuit before it is forced out of office, but it never proceeds very far.
• November 29, 2001: The moderate Representative Union slate wins the by-elections with a record turnout, despite initial disqualification for fraud allegations that were never proven. The results of the election are, however, contested, and eventually annulled by the CSU judicial board. An interim CSU led by Leftist perennial Patrice Blais is appointed, leading to widespread disgust by the student body who had hoped, briefly, that their votes might make a difference.
• March 20-21, 2002: SPHR sets up their “Concordia Under Occupation” exhibit, setting up phony “checkpoints” at student entrances and harassing students for ID, then transforming the mezz into a mock graveyard with a sign saying “made in Israel”. The exhibit was received with widespread disgust.
• March 29, 2002: The widespread disgust from the November by-election leads to voter apathy. CanDo wins the CSU elections, under the leadership of Sabine Freisinger, ushering in a fifth straight year of leftist control of the Union, and a perceived mandate to “shake things up”.
• April 2, 2002: Hillel holds a peaceful sit-in, with singing and instruments, to protest SPHR’s virulent attacks on pro-Israel sentiment on campus.
• September 9, 2002: A mob of angry rioters, backed by the CSU and SPHR, violently shuts down Benjamin Netanyahu from speaking in the Hall Building auditorium. Many rioters are arrested and 11 are charged. The police have to use tear gas to disperse the crowd. The Concordia administration – in a move that implies that Hillel shares the blame for the riot – calls a “cooling-off period” issues a “moratorium” on all events or speeches having to do with Israel or the Palestinians. It also issues a temporary ban on student tabling of any kind.
• December 2, 2002: The CSU shuts down Concordia Hillel on the grounds that it was actively recruiting for a foreign military by distributing pamphlets about how people can volunteer for an IDF program. This gets widespread international coverage and criticism. The CSU later agrees to reinstate Hillel only if it signs a “pledge”. On principle, Hillel refuses to succumb to blackmail.
• December 5, 2002: Hillel holds a massive Chanukah rally to protest the unfair treatment by the CSU.
• December 21, 2002: Hillel files a lawsuit against the CSU, asking for unconditional reinstatement and an unfreezing of funds. The lawsuit is eventually suspended on the grounds that it is an internal matter, showing a lack of understanding of Concordia’s discrimination on the part of the justice system.
• March 12, 2003: CSU pro-Palestinian “activist” Laith Marouf draws a swastika on an Israeli flag in an art exhibit. He was acquitted of harassment charges.
• March 28, 2003: “Evolution, not Revolution” wins by a landslide in the CSU election, representing the first time that a moderate slate successfully ousted a far-left slate in five years (not counting the annulled 2001 by-elections).
• May 9, 2003: Global TV airs its documentary on the events of September 9th, entitled “Confrontation at Concordia”. The documentary comes under fire for being too “pro-Israel” in its bias.
• October 22, 2003: SPHR brings Eric Ben-Artzi, an Israeli “refusenik” and a nephew of Benjamin Netanyahu, to campus to speak. He is billed as a courageous dissenter. This is just one of a series of lectures that SPHR is allowed to hold, without any riots, protests, or violence.
• December 10, 2003: CSU council votes to ban Operation SICK, an international group opposed to children being used in warfare, from seeking club status at Concordia, on the grounds that it was loosely tied to Israeli Hasbara. An SPHR member called the group a “whitey-whitey group telling visible minority groups how to deal with their children.”
• March 26, 2004: “New Evolution” wins the CSU election, ushering in a second straight year of moderate CSU leadership.
• October 4, 2004: The university administration denies Hillel’s request to bring Ehud Barak to speak. Hillel plans a protest.

It’s impossible to list all the relevant events, but the above is a summary. The point is, the situation at Concordia is not just a series of isolated events. It is a pattern extending back a number of years.

And this latest flare-up proves that, while things have cooled down in the last year or two, they haven’t been resolved. When Jewish and pro-Israel students have their freedom of speech denied merely because people are afraid of things getting ugly, that’s not resolution, that’s avoidance.

Federation CJA has issued a release condemning Concordia’s decision on Ehud Barak:

“This is a day of great sadness for those who value freedom of expression in our universities and in Canadian society,” stated Federation CJA President Sylvain Abitbol. “Concordia University has allowed itself to be taken hostage by a small and violent group within its campus. With this decision, Concordia has demonstrated that the right to free speech is only as strong as the institutional will to protect it.”

I wonder how long we’ll have to wait to see similar condemnations from Muslim community leaders. I wouldn’t hold my breath…

Update: The Montreal Gazette, the CBC, and Canoe all have the story. Lots more coverage sure to follow. I’m sure the university won’t know what hit them.

Another semester, another scandal.

This time, Hillel submitted a request to bring Ehud Barak to speak at Concordia, but, according to a press release from Hillel, the university has denied their request for anywhere on both campuses – even Loyola. Now, they’re holding a protest:

FREEDOM OF SPEECH DENIED AT CONCORDIA

First Ehud Barak, WHO’S NEXT ???

Join us for a FREE SPEECH RALLY:

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2004

12 PM at the corner of McKay and De Maisonneuve

Please read the open letter below for more information.

Dear fellow student,

We are writing to ask for your support. Last week, Concordia University denied former Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak permission to speak anywhere on campus – including the quiet, and more easily guarded, Loyola campus – hiding behind a “security risk assessment”.

They claim that they cannot effectively secure their campuses. We say that it is their duty to protect their students and to allow freedom of speech to exist on their campuses.

A small group of thugs are holding an entire university community hostage and deciding who is allowed to speak and who is not. All people who value democratic principles such as freedom of expression and speech should share our outrage with this intolerable situation.

This is not acceptable in our Quebec and Canadian society. We ask for your cooperation in FREEING speech. We will be gathering outside Concordia’s Hall building on Tuesday at 12pm (Corner Mackay and Maisonneuve) calling for the Board of Governors, the Administration, the Faculty and students of Concordia to reclaim their campus.

This is a historic opportunity and no matter what your political affiliation is… This affects you!

Today is a day of great sadness for freedom of expression at universities and in Canadian society.

We invited Ehud Barak so that we could all learn from him. We have been told that the Administration has restored peace to its campuses. This unfortunate incident has demonstrated that we have appeased the violent side but we have not achieved true peace. Peace should not be confused with appeasement.

We will know that we have peace on campus when we can all learn together- when we can all reason together, safely, intelligently and constructively. For that, we and our parents sacrifice so much- in order to pay tuition and learn at this school.

In return, all we demand, is equal treatment and a safe learning environment, just like everyone else.

Is that too much to ask?

Looking forward to your support,

Yacov Fruchter

Montreal Hillel President

Jason Portnoy

Concordia Hillel co-President

When the idea was first floated to bring Ehud Barak – a left-wing dovish former Israeli PM who offered Yasser Arafat a historic settlement at Camp David in 2000 – to Concordia, there were mixed opinions. Some students thought he would be an interesting and valuable speaker.

Others, however, worried that bringing a “controversial” speaker like Barak (I guess at Concordia, anyone associated with Israel is controversial) would disrupt the relative calm that has returned to students’ lives over the past two years, and bring back the chaos and divisiveness of the period before and after the Netanyahu riots. For example, this student:

Forget all the bickering over how dovish or hawkish Barak is, or whether he has a right to come to Concordia. He’s a legitimate politician of a democratic state, and of course he should be permitted to speak, here or anywhere else. That said, it would be better for all of us if Barak did not come to Concordia. I say this not because I have anything against the man, but because this is the first year in all my time at Concordia where I can go to class without passing people in the Mezz screaming at each other, or reading inflammatory letters about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Link. We’re not making national headlines because of riots, moratoriums or arrests; and people now are talking about tuition fee hikes, fair trade coffee, the excellent performance of this year’s CSU, and other issues much more relevant to Concordia students at home. I like this kinder, gentler version of Concordia, and would very much resent Hillel, SPHR, or any other organization’s attempts to sabotage that simply to make a point. Bring Barak to a synagogue or a community centre, and I’d be the first person to see what he has to say. But for the love of God, not at my school. Not at the cost of setting us back another two years. Signed, -Another Jewish student sick of it all.

I am all too aware of what it’s like to go to a school that is in the midst of hostile tensions. The atmosphere on campus is finally calmer and friendlier, and I can understand why students wouldn’t want to shake things up again.

I can understand. But I vehemently disagree.

You see, denying Barak’s right to speak means letting the people who rioted against Netanyahu win. They used violence to shut down Netanyahu’s right to speak. In the process, they ensured that nobody they dislike would ever be allowed to speak on campus again, because the university would be too afraid to let them. So pro-Palestinian speakers are more than welcome at Concordia – there were several last year – but Israeli speakers are shunned.

That’s victory to thuggery over reason. That’s victory to – and no, I’m not exaggerating – terrorism over freedom. Because using violence or the threat of violence to shut down free speech is in fact a form of terrorism. SPHR and their friends have terrorized the university, the student population, and the administration, into

Above all, that’s a lack of a free, open exchange of ideas, which is what education is supposed to be all about.

This isn’t really about Barak who – despite his dovish politics, is going to be as demonized by SPHR and the Palestinian lobby as any Israeli. It has nothing to do with whether I liked Barak’s policies or Netanyahu’s or Ariel Sharon’s or anyone else.

This is about a competition of ideas, and whether one set of ideas will be allowed to shut down and stifle another. It’s about the future of Jewish students at university campuses all over North America, and whether they will have the right to bring in speakers or openly proclaim their views without fear of violence. It’s about whether we – as a society – want to accept the notion that anyone can speak at a university campus… except an Israeli.

As a Concordia alum, I support Hillel in this call to action. It is my hope – though, sadly, not my expectation – that any reasonable student, regardless of political affiliation or background – who supports the right to free speech, will go out there and join them.

I won’t be there in person but I’ll be there in spirit. Please spread the word.

September 9th, 2002, when this was the scene at Concordia:

The riot forced cancellation of Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech, but that was just the short-term effect. It brought a campus war to a head, resulting in endless finger-pointing, international media attention that dragged Concordia’s name through the mud, and all-out political dissention that devolved into a CSU fight against Hillel. Concordia became known as “Gaza U”, as a hostile campus environment for Jewish students, and as a school that had pretty much hit rock bottom.

So what’s changed in two years? In March of 2003, anger at the CSU for the Netanyahu debacle was partly responsible for an upset victory for the moderates in the CSU elections. This was repeated in 2004, and the two years of relative calm have done a lot to help the student atmosphere. Activism is still alive at Concordia, but moderation is trumping extremism, and, on the whole, students are free to go to class without harassment. Speaking to friends who are still students there, I’m told that the difference between the atmosphere of two years ago and today’s campus atmosphere is like night and day.

But has progress really been made? Or is it just another sort of defeat? Could Hillel bring a pro-Israel speaker back to Concordia now, or would the event be shut down – not by violent protest, but by insinuations that they shouldn’t “rock the boat”? Is that really better?

For the past two years, the goal has been to ease tensions, cool everyone down, and neutralize the campus atmosphere. A lot of progress has been made on that front. But come March, if the extremists get elected again, things could go right back to the way they were. Unless the next step is taken: that of standing up for what’s right. Students need to be able to express their opinions freely, and not suppress them for fear of being provocative. They need to be able to do this in an atmosphere where they have the freedom to say what they think, without the risk of violence or being shut down. They need to be able to wear their support of Israel with pride, not hide it away because it’s not politically-correct.

There’s still much work to be done. Luckily, the new crop of student leaders seems to be rising to the challenge. I wish them luck and strength.

For the second year in a row, the moderates have won the CSU elections, thus ensuring that – at least for next year – the university will not be overtaken by those merely interested in shit-disturbing for headlines:

In election results announced just moments ago, Chief Electoral Officer Tara Tavender has declared victory for New Evolution, who gained exactly 50 per cent of the vote in this year’s election.

This is good news indeed. New Evolution was the slate favoured to win by – among others – Concordia Hillel, as it has promised to take a moderate, apolitical stand on Mideast issues.

Of course, there could still be trouble ahead:

The victory may be short-lived, however, as contestations are expected from both Renaissance Concordia and Concordians In Action, claiming that the New Evolution slate violated election regulations to get more votes.

Contestations are almost a standard occurrance. And I don’t know enough about this election to know whether they will have a leg to stand on. We’ll have to see. In the meantime, the students have spoken, and they’ve spoken against rioting and turmoil on campus. Let’s hope they get their wish.

In 2002, they tried to ban Hillel at Concordia. Now, regular reader DaninVan sent me an e-mail letting me know that something similar is developing at York University.

Tensions have been running high at York for quite some time. Last week, the campus chapters of Hillel and SPHR both had events on the same day. The Excalibur reports that Hillel’s event was a vigil to remember victims of suicide bombers, and SPHR’s event was a “tribute” to Rachel Corrie. It seems clashes erupted.

Flash forward a week. Today’s Globe and Mail reports that the university has banned both Hillel and SPHR from hosting events for one week.

Slap on the wrist, right? Not quite:

Ms. White said Hillel had permission to hold a vigil outside Vari Hall for those who have died because of terrorism.

The pro-Palestinian group gave no official notice to the university of its demonstration, although Ms. White said rumours were circulating around campus that one would be held. The university requires five days notice from a club if it plans to hold an event on campus.

Equal punishment for unequal crimes is what this sounds like to me. And it gets worse.

Hillel has issued two press releases. I’m posting the first in its entirety here because I can’t find online links.

Jewish Student Community Shocked as York University Suspends Hillel Club status and privileges revoked leaving students feeling vulnerable, silenced and fearful.

Students at York University are shocked by news that the university administration has suspended the club privileges of Hillel @ York, the recognized voice of York’s Jewish students. This statement from the University, which is purportedly based on the confrontation last Tuesday, March 16 in Vari Hall, where Jewish students defended themselves against an incendiary form of anti-Israel guerilla theatre, has left Jewish students on campus feeling betrayed, silenced and vulnerable.

As a group that has always respected university directives and strives to pursue a healthy working relationship with the administration, we are shocked by this heavy-handed crackdown, which affects all areas of our religious, social and cultural activities, not only our political advocacy, said Jordie Saperia, the President of Hillel @ York. We are also extremely nervous at the message that this disproportionate response to the Jewish student voice on campus sends to the entire student body. We feel betrayed.

On Tuesday, March 16th, members of Hillel @ York clashed verbally with pro-Palestinian activists who set up provocative and instigatory mock Israeli checkpoints in Vari Hall, an academic building off limits to political demonstrators. University Administration and security officials stood by, watching, during almost an hour of intense confrontation.

The disciplinary measures taken against Hillel are allegedly in response to Tuesday’s clashes, said Seth Winberg, Vice-President of Hillel @ York. But the record shows that the university has turned a blind eye to dozens of illegal and unauthorized rallies by opposing groups. It is only when Hillel members chose to begin defending themselves that the university decided to punish us.

Students are furious that such disproportionate, harsh action has been levelled against them for the simple act of verbally and non-violently opposing a highly insensitive and unauthorized demonstration, while in the past, rallies held in direct contravention of university guidelines have been ignored and glossed over. In contrast, the location of a Jewish Unity rally scheduled by Hillel for last Thursday was dutifully changed only twenty-four hours in advance when the university’s Office of Student Affairs backtracked on permission granted weeks earlier. We are confused and hurt by the university’s actions, said Talia Klein, the Director of Hillel @ York. Despite the marked instability at the Office of Student Affairs over the past few months, we have always maintained a close and mutually beneficial working relationship with university officials. Now it seems as if York has turned into Concordia.

For more information:

Jordie Saperia, President, Hillel @ York

Talia Klein, Director, Hillel @ York

The second press release has a long list of unauthorized rallies and demonstrations held in the past by anti-Israel campus groups at York. In each case, the administration issued no sanctions whatsoever. It seems it only felt it necessary to step in when Hillel held an event of its own.

I’ll try to follow the situation as it develops. If anyone attends York or can provide a firsthand account, please e-mail me. We can’t let this happen again.