Despite the vast amounts of negative publicity the University of Illinois has received, and continues to receive as a result of its decision to terminate Professor Steven Salaita, it has yet to reverse its decision.  Its Board of  Trustees will be meeting on September 11, and they should be made aware directly of the consequences their decision will have on the University, both in terms of the law and its academic reputation.  Please take some time and write an e-mail to the trustees expressing your opposition to the decision to terminate Professor Salaita and demand his reinstatement.  The names and the e-mails of the trustees are set out below:

This morning, I read this disturbing report that the University of Illinois rescinded an offer it made to a professor to join its faculty on account of his anti-Israel tweets. It is important that we write to the University of Illinois protesting this decision.  Please consider sending an e-mail the University Chancellor, Phyllis Wise, explaining why this decision is not consistent with the values central to a university in a democracy.  Her e-mail address is chancellor@illinois.edu (or in the alternative, pmischo@illinois.edu).  Here is the note that I sent her:

Ilana Feldman, an anthropologist at George Washington University, has written this informative post on Israel’s evolving policy of isolation of Gaza, which is now reaching its crescendo in “Operation Protective Wedge.” She concludes with the following bleak assessment of life in Gaza:

“So Gazans are immobilized in every sense: cut off from other members of their community, isolated from the “international community,” deprived of economic opportunity, basic goods, and access to advanced medical care. Imposed immobility is itself a form of violence against people, and it cruelly magnifies the violence of military assault. The current catastrophe in Gaza is a product of years of preparation. Restriction of Palestinian movement goes back to their displacement in 1948. And mobility management has been a central tactic of Israeli occupation since 1967. The phone call ahead of the bomb, the “roof knock” (a small bomb) ahead of the lethal strike, are twists in this long trajectory. That sometimes the phone call is not followed by a strike underscores its potency in psychological warfare. These tactics are yet another weapon in the massive arsenal deployed against Palestinians.”

When Israeli propagandists talk about Hamas diverting resources from needy Palestinians to fight Israel, keep this factoid in mind, courtesy of Shin Bet, Israel’s intelligence services (from WikiLeaks):

“According to the leaked cable, Gaza’s de-facto Hamas government spends an estimated budget of US$290 million annually, on a population of approximately 1.5 million residents. The PA’s budget is four times bigger, at approximately US$1.24 billion in 2010. The PA provides services to about 2.4 million residents in the West Bank, as well as covering some of the costs of certain services for Gaza’s residents. The Shin Bet estimates that Hamas uses US$40 million (13.8% of its budget) for military and security needs, and invests the remainder in administration and civilian projects. Israel, by comparison, ran a budget of US$96 billion in 2010 (for a population of 7.6 million), and spent 18.6% of it on military and security purposes – so that, ironically, even according to Shin Bet estimates, Israel spends proportionately more on its military than Hamas spends.”

We all know that Israel’s expressions of concern for the Palestinians it kills, whose homes it destroys and whose lives it has destroyed is all nonsense, but perhaps we don’t know the details behind how the propaganda has been constructed, in coordination with public opinion experts from the US with the express goal of manipulating US public opinion.  This article from the UK’s Independent sheds some light on what can only be described as an incredibly cynical and duplicitous, if not evil and despicable, strategy of Israeli decision makers to try to mask the ugly reality of their actions from public opinion in the one state they believe can stop them — the United States. There are so many despicable statements in the article, but here is one for starters:

“Dr Luntz cites as an example of an “effective Israeli sound bite” one which reads: “I particularly want to reach out to Palestinian mothers who have lost their children. No parent should have to bury their child.”  The study admits that the Israeli government does not really want a two-state solution, but says this should be masked because 78 per cent of Americans do. Hopes for the economic betterment of Palestinians should be emphasised. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is quoted with approval for saying that it is “time for someone to ask Hamas: what exactly are YOU doing to bring prosperity to your people”. The hypocrisy of this beggars belief: it is the seven-year-old Israeli economic siege that has reduced the Gaza to poverty and misery.”

From The Electronic Intifada:

“If you support Israel’s “right to exist as a Jewish state” in a country whose indigenous Palestinian people today form half the population, then you, like Soffer, must come to terms with the inevitability of massacres. If you oppose the horrific, repeated massacres in Gaza, then join the movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), a movement that aims to decolonize Palestine and restore to all the people all their legitimate and inalienable rights.”