Responding to IHRA Question from NJ Journalist
Editor’s Note: NJ political media sites have been absolutely absent from their journalist duty in that they give NO ATTENTION to critics of the IHRA repressive bills that could harm over 1 million NJ voters, citizens and residents who do not support Israel’s proclaimed “right to exist” that depends upon genocide, impunity, delusional acceptance of blatant lies about Israel’s behavior, forced starvation, ethnic cleansing, terrorizing populations with weaponized exploding consumer products, etc. The pro-Israel crowd includes all of those behaviors as its pursuit to a “right to exist” – mandated by IHRA false attempts to redefine anti-semitism to include opposition to Israeli policies. Also since Israel’s right to exist is absolutely dependent upon US tax dollars funding Israel’s government and the provision of US weapons to Israel, opposition to US support for Israel is considered also to be questioning Israel’s “right to exist.”
The silence of the media in the face of these threats to NJ’s beloved protected free speech rights is not due to any lack of trying to get media attention. This editor routinely sends information to 100s of NJ journalists and is usually roundly ignored. Others who advocate against IHRA also have similar experiences.
We did get a journalist inquiry yesterday asking: “The bill says things like it doesn’t hurt free speech and one could still criticize Israel. That’s not enough, tho?” This editor, with some assistance from collaborative partners, responds as follows:
IHRA defines certain political perspectives – such as calling Israel a racist state or comparing any actions of the Israeli government to the Holocaust – as antisemitic. Thus that political speech would not be protected in the category of “free speech” but be in the category of “antisemitic speech” and subject it to sanction. The punishing sanction is the complete cut of funds from any state funded entity. So public schools, colleges. Libraries, non profits will all be shaken to the core in the fear of costly lawsuits and cuts in funding and will err on the side of repression with firings, punishment, calling the cops etc at any sign of possible antisemitism per the IHRA Israel conflation definition. Pro-Israel groups will accuse of hostility, discomforting environment for Jewish people, despite the fact that many of those protesting and speaking out for Palestinian rights are themselves Jewish. All over statements and actions that oppose Israel’s activities – will be accused of creating hostility. This has already happened in Camden County where county commissioners threatened to withdraw funding for a school if they allowed a pre-approved student walkout to take place. The Camden County commissioners letter claimed that saying “free Gaza” and “stop bombing Gaza” was antisemitic and violated the IHRA definition.
IHRA false narrative also suggests questioning Israel’s “right to exist” is an example of its false definition of anti-semitism. It can be interpreted that even questioning aid to Israel including weapons – since Israel depends on the support “to exist” and will cease to be able to “defend itself” and its “existence” without the support – questioning or opposing the support is tantamount to denying Israel’s right to exist. Israel’s existence depends upon impunity, its need to “wipe out Hamas”, to invade Lebanon. Any questioning of it and any questioning of Israel’s narrative of what it needs to do to exist can be litigated to be creating a hostile environment. Indeed pro-Israel groups are accusing us here in NJ of being anti-Semitic for wearing keffiyeh’s, saying “genocide,” “starvation,” “slaughter,” “resistance, “intifada,” carrying a Palestinian flag and saying “from the River to the Sea Palestine Will be Free” – for teacher’s who on their own time support Palestine, a book and course being taught at Princeton was accused. High school students were reported to the Department of Education for supporting an end to the genocide in Teaneck NJ. All of this before these laws are even passed.
There are dozens of cases in NJ where there are accusations of anti-Semitism even before these laws based upon expressions of support against genocide and pro-Palestine – we can acquaint you with the cases and provide you people to interview.
The proposed NJ IHRA bills are one sided and do not take into account the perspective of American Palestinians or simply supporters of Palestine.The bill does not take into account a painful decades long history of oppression, apartheid, and occupation. It only disallows criticism of Israel and its brutal policies (as agreed on by several international organizations). The proposed bills are threatening to Palestinians. It is a continuation of dehumanization of the oppressed.
With increased fears of censorship under the Trump administration, this is certainly not the time for our Democratic led legislature to pursue such repressive criminalization of free speech.
I can connect you to legal scholars who can speak in more precise legal terms if you are serious about covering.
These issues are real and politicians are trying to push it off as if we overreact – they basically mandate loyalty to Israel and there are over a million NJ-ans who no doubt would dissent from being forced to take up that world view.
Resources – Sahar Aziz Issue Statement
https://fightbackbetter.com/presumptively-antisemiti-csrr/
Talking Points – NO IHRA Collective
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K_Wmc6Rqm_Bf35W7IURvzVQqLwX5cSF53e7cfuEOnqw/edit
Sincerely, Bob Witanek, Editor FightBackBetter 908 881 5275 Editor@FightBackBetter.com
