Growing Jewish Support For UC Berkeley Divestment From Israeli Occupation 4/28/10

Jewish Letters of Support for page 1
page 1
Divestment from the Occupation
Rabbi Brant Rosen: One of Newsweek’s top 25 U.S pulpit rabbis 2

Richard Falk: Milbank Professor of International Law & Practice Emeritus, Princeton 5
Noam Chomsky: MIT Linguist, writer, activist 8
Judith Butler: UC Berkeley, Maxine Elliot Professor in the Departments of Rhetoric and
Comparative Literature 9
Israeli supporters of Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, including
Ofra Ben Artzi, sister-in-law of Israeli Prime Minister 14
Naomi Klein: Journalist and syndicated columnist 16
Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb: One of first woman rabbis in the United States 18
8 Israeli Peace Groups in Support of UC Berkeley Divest Bill 20
Gush Shalom: One of Israel’s best known peace groups 22
Jeff Halper, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions 23
Advertisement: 263 Jews in support of UC Berkeley Divestment Measure 24
Jewish Voice for Peace: Leading American Jewish organization that supports full equality
for Israelis and Palestinians 26
Independent Jewish Voices, Canada 28
Daniel Boyarin, Professor of Talmud, Department of Near Eastern Studies and Department
of Rhetoric, UC Berkeley. 30
Chicago chapter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network 31
Jonathan Simon (AB ’82; JD ’87; PhD ’90) A personal statement as an alumnus of the Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley, on the ASUC Divestment debate 33
Avraham and Ruchama Burrell, members of Berkeley's Congregation Beth Israel 35
Hajo G. Meyer PhD, Auschwitz survivor 36
European Jews for a Just Peace 37
Addendum: Am I My Brother’s Keeper If My Brother Lives Halfway Around the World? 39
Jewish Voice for Peace • 1611 Telegraph Avenue, Suite 550 • Oakland, CA 94612 • 510-465-1777 • www.jvp.org
page 2
Rabbi Brant Rosen:

One of Newsweek’s top 25 U.S pulpit rabbis
Why I Support the Berkeley Student Divestment!Resolution
I’m sure many of you have been following the huge communal dust up that has been brew-
ing in reaction to a resolution recently passed by the Associated Students of UC Berkeley.
Known as SB118, it calls for the ASUC to divest its holdings in General Electric and United
Technologies because of “their military support of the occupation of the Palestinian territo-
ries.”
The bill further resolves:
(That) the ASUC will further examine its assets and UC assets for funds
being invested in companies that a) provide military support for or weap-
onry to support the occupation of the Palestinian territories or b) facilitate
the building or maintenance of the illegal wall or the demolition of Pales-
tinian homes, or c) facilitate the building, maintenance, or economic de-
velopment of illegal Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian territories
(and)
(That) if it is found that ASUC and/or the UC funds are being invested in
any of the abovementioned ways, the ASUC will divest, and will advocate
that the UC divests, all stocks, securities, or other obligations from such
sources with the goal of maintaining the divestment, in the case of said
companies, until they cease such practices. Moreover, the ASUC will not
make further investments, and will advocate that the UC not make futher
investments, in any companies materially supporting or profiting from Is-
rael’s occupation in the above mentioned ways.
On March 18, after eight hours of dialogue and deliberation, the resolu-
tion passed by a vote of 16-4. After a barrage of criticism from Jewish
community and Israel advocacy groups, the resolution was vetoed by the
President of the ASUC on March 24. As things currently stand, the veto
can be overridden by 14 votes. The final decision will be made on
Wednesday April 14 at 7:00 pm (PST).
The most prominent Jewish statement of condemnation against the resolution came in the
form of a letter co-signed by a wide consortium of Jewish organizations (including J Street,
the ADL and The David Project) that called the bill “anti-Israel,” “dishonest” and “mislead-
ing.” Supporters of the resolution have mobilized as well: Jewish Voice for Peace recently
responded to the consortium’s letter with a strong public statement and other prominent
page 3
public figures, including Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Naomi Klein have voiced their
support of the Berkeley resolution.
As I’ve written in the past, I do believe that the longer Israel’s intolerable occupation con-
tinues, the more we will inevitably hear an increase in calls for boycott, divestment and
sanctions (BDS). I’m certainly mindful of what these kinds of calls mean to us in the Jewish
community – and I know all too well how the issue of boycott pushes our deepest Jewish
fear-buttons in so many ways. Despite these fears, however, I personally support the ASUC
resolution.
While I understand the painful resonance that boycotts historically have had for the Jewish
community, I truly believe this bill was composed and presented in good faith – and I am
troubled that so many Jewish community organizations have responded in knee-jerk fash-
ion, without even attempting to address to the actual content of the resolution.
It is also unfair and untrue to say that this resolution is “anti-Israel.” The bill makes it clear
that it is condemning a crushing and illegal occupation – and not Israel as a nation. The
wording of the resolution leaves no doubt that its purpose is to divest from specific compa-
nies that aid and abet the occupation – and not to “demonize” Israel itself. If a group of
students oppose the occupation as unjust, then why should we be threatened if they ask
their own organization to divest funds that directly support it? This is not demonization –
this is simply ethically responsible investment policy.
Why, many critics ask, are the Berkeley students singling out Israel when there are so many
other worse human rights abusers around the world? To answer this, I think we need to
look at the origins of the BDS movement itself. This campaign was not hatched by the Ber-
keley students, or even by international human rights activists. It was founded in 2005 by a
wide coalition of groups from Palestinian civil society who sought to resist the occupation
through nonviolent direct action.
In other words, BDS is a liberation campaign waged by the Palestinian people themselves –
one for which they are seeking international support. By submitting this divestment resolu-
tion, the Berkeley students were not seeking to single out Israel as the world’s worst human
rights offender – they are responding to a call from Palestinians to support their struggle
against very real oppression.
The JVP statement (see above) makes this point very powerfully:
Choosing to do something about Israel’s human rights violations does not require
turning a blind eye to other injustices in the world as these groups suggest; but
refusing to take action because of other examples would indeed turn a blind eye
to this one. Now is the time to support Palestinian freedom and human rights.
Berkeley students have done the right thing. Others should follow suit and divest
from the occupation, as part of their general commitment to ethical investment
policies.
I believe that the actions of these Berkeley students represent an important challenge to
those of us who believe that Israel’s occupation equals oppression. Quite simply, we can-
not stay silent forever. Sooner or later we will have to ask ourselves: when will we be will-
ing to name this for what it really and truly is? When will we find the wherewithal to say
page 4
out loud that this policy of home demolitions, checkpoints, evictions, increased Jewish set-
tlements, and land expropriations is inhumane and indefensible? At the very least, will we
be ready to put our money where our moral conscience is?
I know that this debate is enormously painful. And I respect that there are members of the
Jewish community who disagree with this campaign. But I must say I am truly dismayed
when I witness the organized Jewish community responding to initiatives such as these by
simply crying “anti-Semitism.” For better or worse, we are going to have to find a better
way to have these conversations. Because whatever happens with the ASUC resolution to-
morrow, we haven’t heard the end of this movement by a longshot.
This summer, in fact, the Presbyterian Church General Assembly will be taking up a num-
ber of resolutions related to Israel/Palestine, including one that recommends divestment
from Caterpillar because the company knowingly supplies Israel with bulldozers that are
used for illegal (and deadly) home demolitions in the West Bank and Gaza. I’m sad to see
that the organized Jewish community is already gearing up for another major confronta-
tion…
page 5
Richard Falk: Milbank Professor of International Law & Practice Emeritus,

Princeton
Special Rapporteur for Occupied Palestinian Territories, UN Human Rights Council!
April 13, 2010!
!
To the Senate of the Associated Students of the University of California, Berkeley (ASUC):!
I am writing to encourage renewed support for Senate Bill 118A (“A Bill in Support of
ASUC Divestment from War Crimes”), including the override of ASUC President Will
Smelko’s veto on March 24, 2010. The earlier passage of the bill by a 16-4 vote in the Sen-
ate has been widely hailed as a major step forward in the growing global campaign of di-
vestment and boycott!as a means of holding Israeli accountable for flagrant and persistent
patterns of violating fundamental rules of international criminal law, as well as those por-
tions of international humanitarian law applicable to military occupation. We have reached
a stage in world history where citizens of conscience have a crucial role to play in the im-
plementation of a global rule of law, and this initiative by Berkeley students, if imple-
mented, will be both a memorable instance of global citizenship and an inspiration to oth-
ers in this country and throughout the world.!
I would agree that recourse to divestment and boycott tactics should be reserved for excep-
tional and appropriate circumstances. Such initiatives by their very nature deliberately in-
terfere with the freedom of the global marketplace and the normally desirable free interplay
of cultures, nations, persons, and ideas. There are several reasons why the circumstances of
prolonged Israeli criminality resulting in acute suffering for several million Palestinians liv-
ing under occupation since 1967 present such a strong case for reliance on the tactics of
divestment and boycott.!!
First of all, it has become painfully clear that neither the United Nations, the United States,
the actions of other governments, nor world public opinion are willing or able to persuade
or pressure Israel to terminate policies that are both violations of Geneva Convention IV,
governing occupation, and international criminal law, relating to both war crimes and
crimes against humanity. At the same time, there is reason to believe that efforts by Pales-
tinians to wage what might be called the Legitimacy War, are having a strong impact on
Israel and elsewhere. It should be remembered that many of the conflicts of the last 75
years have been resolved by reliance on soft power superiority, which has more than com-
pensated for hard power inferiority. In this respect the anti-apartheid movement, waged on
a symbolic global battlefield, created a political climate that achieved victory in the legiti-
macy war that was translated,!nonviolently, into a totally unexpected political out-
come—the peaceful transformation of South Africa into a multi-racial constitutional de-
mocracy. The Palestinian solidarity movement has become the successor to the anti-
apartheid movement as the primary legitimacy war of this historical moment. Berkeley’s
participation by way of this divestment initiative thus takes account of the failure of gov-
ernments and the international community to protect Palestinian victims of ongoing crimi-
nality, but also joins in a movement of solidarity that contains some hope of an eventual
peaceful and just resolution of the underlying conflict allowing both peoples to resume a
secure and normal life.!!
page 6
Secondly, we in the United States face a special challenge as our tax dollars, economic and
military assistance, and unconditionally supportive diplomacy have shielded Israel from
mechanisms of accountability for criminal behavior. Most recently, the U.S. Government
repudiated the Goldstone Report, a highly respected fact-finding mission conducted under
UN auspices, that had carried out a scrupulously fair and comprehensive investigation of
allegations of war crimes attributable to Israel and Hamas during the Israeli offensive in
Gaza that started on December 27, 2008, and lasted for 22 days. The Goldstone Report’s
main findings confirmed earlier respected investigations, concluding that the evidence
supported overall allegations of criminal tactics, including intentional efforts to target in
Gaza civilians and the civilian infrastructure in flagrant violation of the provisions of the
law of war, which should have been particularly upheld in a situation of such one-sided
military operations conducted against an essentially defenseless Gaza, an unprecedented
situation In which the entire civilian population of 1.5 million were locked into the combat
zone, and denied even the option to become refugees.!!
It should be also noted that the people of Gaza have been subjected to an unlawful Israeli
blockade that has for more than 32 months limited the entry of food, medicine, and fuel to
subsistence levels, with widely reported drastic harm to physical and mental health of the
entire population. There are two related points here: the allegations of criminality are
abundantly documented, including by a range of respected human rights organization in
Israel and occupied Palestine; and the U.S. Government has done its best to ensure the
continuation of Israeli impunity and it has been complicit as arms supplier and as a coun-
try deferential to the blockade despite its gross and clear violation of the prohibition
against collective punishment contained in Article 33 of Geneva IV. In this respect, as
Americans we have an extra duty beyond that of those living elsewhere to support the
global divestment campaign, thereby showing that our government does not speak for the
whole society when it comes to the application of the rule of law to Israel and its political
leadership.!
Thirdly, by targeting General Electric and United Technologies for divestment, the Senate
shows that it is not acting arbitrarily or punitively, but seeking to take action against corpo-
rations that are supplying precisely the weaponry used by Israel to impose its unlawful will
on occupied Palestinian territories. Israel in legally dubious ways has relied on Apache and
Sikorsky Helicopters and F-16 fighter bombers to mount periodic attacks against a variety
of Palestinian targets, thereby abandoning its primary duty as an occupying power to pro-
tect the civilian population of an occupied territory.!
Although most emphasis on criminality has been placed on Israeli policies toward the
Gaza Strip, it is also relevant to note that Israeli policies on the West Bank and in East Jeru-
salem have consistently ignored the obligations imposed on an occupying power by Ge-
neva IV, and have done so in a manner that has consistently undermined hopes for peace.
Israel has continued to build and expand settlements, unlawful by Article 49(6) of Geneva
IV prohibiting transfers of population of the occupying power to an occupied territory; the
scale of these unlawful settlements, with some 121 settlements established on the West
Bank alone and over 200,000 Israel settlers now living in East Jerusalem, has produced an
aggregate settler population of about 450,000. Such a massive violation of international
humanitarian law is serious on its own, but also creates a situation on the ground that has
greatly diminished prospects for a viable Palestinian state or for the sort of withdrawal from
occupied Palestine that had been unanimously decreed by the UN Scecurity Council in its
famous Resolution 242 way back in 1967.!!
page 7
A final expression of Israeli lawlessness can be noted in its continued construction of a

separation wall!on occupied Palestine!land!despite a 14-1 judgment by the International
Court of Justice (ICJ) that the wall was unlawful, should be dismantled, and Palestinians
compensated for the harm done. It is notable that the ICJ is a diverse and respected interna-
tional institution that rarely reaches such a level of unanimity on controversial issues. Un-
fortunately, less notable is the fact that the sole dissenting judge was the American judge,
and that the U.S. rejected the judicial authority of the ICJ in relation to the wall without
even bothering to refute its legal reasoning. Although the judgment was in the form of an
‘Advisory Opinion’ it represented a detailed and authoritative assessment of applicable in-
ternational law that was endorsed by an overwhelming vote of the UN General Assembly.
Consistent with its attitude toward international law, Israel immediately expressed its un-
willingness to abide by this ICJ ruling, and has continued to build segments of the wall,
using excessive force to quell nonviolent weekly demonstrations by Palestinians, Israelis,
and international activists at construction sites. To give perspective, if the Soviet Union had
constructed the Berlin Wall in such a way as to encroach on!West Berlin by even a yard, it
would have almost certainly have caused the outbreak of World War III.!
I hope that I have demonstrated that divestment is justified in light of these realities. Israel
has consistently defied international law. The United States Government has been unrelent-
ing in reinforcing this defiance, and is a major facilitator through its overall diplomatic,
economic, and military support. The international community, via the UN or otherwise, has
been unable to induce Israel to respect international humanitarian law and international
criminal law. With such a background, and in light of an increasingly robust worldwide
movement supportive of divestment, it seems both symbolically and substantively appro-
priate for Berkeley to divest from corporations supplying weaponry used in conjunction
with Israeli criminality. Such a decision taken at the behest of students at one of the world’s
leading universities would send a message around the world that needs to be heard, not
only in Israel but in this country as well. It also shows that when our government cynically
refuses to uphold the most fundamental norms of international law there is an opportunity
and responsibility for citizens to do so. I salute the members of the Senate (and their sup-
porters in the Berkeley community) who vote to override this ill-considered veto of Senate
Bill 118A.!
!
Sincerely,!
!
Richard Falk
Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law & Practice Emeritus, Princeton University
(since 2002) Visiting and Research Professor, Global Studies, UCSB
Special Rapporteur for Occupied Palestinian Territories, UN Human Rights Council!
page 8
Noam Chomsky: MIT Linguist, writer, activist
April 13, 2010
I would like to express my support and appreciation for the principled statement of the
ASUC Senate calling for divestment from US corporations providing military technology for
Israel to use in the occupied territories and in its past and possibly future invasions of
Lebanon. !Amnesty International has gone further, calling for a full arms embargo during
Israel's murderous attack on Gaza in January 2009, with pretexts that do not withstand a
moment's scrutiny, one of the most egregious of recent US-backed Israeli crimes.
There can be no question about the right, in fact responsibility, of students to express their
concerns about official actions of their university, and to call on university authorities to
refrain from improper actions -- in this case, indirect participation in ongoing crimes. !The
statement appropriately focuses on our own responsibilities: on our own actions -- or inac-
tion -- and their consequences. !That much is hardly more than moral truism. !In the pre-
sent case, the decision goes beyond moral truism: the US plays a decisive role in imple-
menting illegal Israeli takeover of occupied territories, harsh repression, violence and ag-
gression. !It is our responsibility to do what we can to act ourselves, and to mobilize others,
to change the US government policies that foster serious crimes and bar the path to peace-
ful diplomatic settlement. Terminating support for US corporations that participate in US-
backed Israeli crimes is a significant step towards this end, both in its policy and educa-
tional implications.
Noam Chomsky
page 9
page 9
Judith Butler: UC Berkeley, Maxine Elliot Professor in the Departments of

Rhetoric and Comparative Literature
You Will Not Be Alone
Let us begin with the assumption that it is very hard to hear the debate under consideration
here. One hears someone saying something, and one fears that they are saying another
thing. It is hard to trust words, or indeed to know what words actually mean. So that is a
sign that there is a certain fear in the room, and also, a certain suspicion about the inten-
tions that speakers have and a fear about the implications of both words and deeds. Of
course, tonight you do not need a lecture on rhetoric from me, but perhaps, if you have a
moment, it might be possible to pause and to consider reflectively what is actually at stake
in this vote, and what is not. Let me introduce myself first as a Jewish faculty member here
at Berkeley, on the advisory board of Jewish Voice for Peace, on the US executive commit-
tee of Faculty for Israeli-Palestinian Peace, a global organization, a member of the Russell
Tribunal on Human Rights in Palestine, and a board member of the Freedom Theatre in
Jenin. I am at work on a book which considers Jewish criticisms of state violence, Jewish
views of co-habitation, and the importance of 'remembrance' in both Jewish and Palestin-
ian philosophic and poetic traditions.
The first thing I want to say is that there is hardly a Jewish dinner table left in this country--
or indeed in Europe and much of Israel--in which there is not enormous disagreement
about the status of the occupation, Israeli military aggression and the future of Zionism,
binationalism and citizenship in the lands called Israel and Palestine. There is no one Jew-
ish voice, and in recent years, there are increasing differences among us, as is evident by
the multiplication of Jewish groups that oppose the occupation and which actively criticize
and oppose Israeli military policy and aggression. In the US and Israel alone these groups
include: Jewish Voice for Peace, American Jews for a Just Peace, Jews Against the Occupa-
tion, Boycott from Within, New Profile, Anarchists Against the Wall, Women in Black, Who
Profits?, Btselem, Zochrot, Black Laundry, Jews for a Free Palestine (Bay Area), No Time to
Celebrate and more. The emergence of J Street was an important effort to establish an alter-
native voice to AIPAC, and though J street has opposed the bill you have before you, the
younger generation of that very organization has actively contested the politics of its lead-
ership. So even there you have splits, division and disagreement.
So if someone says that it offends "the Jews" to oppose the occupation, then you have to
consider how many Jews are already against the occupation, and whether you want to be
with them or against them. If someone says that "Jews" have one voice on this matter, you
might consider whether there is something wrong with imagining Jews as a single force,
with one view, undivided. It is not true. The sponsors of Monday evening's round table at
page 10
Hillel made sure not to include voices with which they disagree. And even now, as demon-
strations in Israel increase in number and volume against the illegal seizure of Palestinian
lands, we see a burgeoning coalition of those who seek to oppose unjust military rule, the
illegal confiscation of lands, and who hold to the norms of international law even when
nations refuse to honor those norms.
What I learned as a Jewish kid in my synagogue--which was no bastion of radicalism--was

that it was imperative to speak out against social injustice. I was told to have the courage to
speak out, and to speak strongly, even when people accuse you of breaking with the com-
mon understanding, even when they threaten to censor you or punish you. The worst injus-
tice, I learned, was to remain silent in the face of criminal injustice. And this tradition of
Jewish social ethics was crucial to the fights against Nazism, fascism and every form of dis-
crimination, and it became especially important in the fight to establish the rights of refu-
gees after the Second World War. Of course, there are no strict analogies between the Sec-
ond World War and the contemporary situation, and there are no strict analogies between
South Africa and Israel, but there are general frameworks for thinking about co-habitation,
the right to live free of external military aggression, the rights of refugees, and these form
the basis of many international laws that Jews and non-Jews have sought to embrace in or-
der to live in a more just world, one that is more just not just for one nation or for another,
but for all populations, regardless of nationality and citizenship. If some of us hope that
Israel will comply with international law, it is precisely so that one people can live among
other peoples in peace and in freedom. It does not de-legitimate Israel to ask for its com-
pliance with international law. Indeed, compliance with international law is the best way
to gain legitimacy, respect and an enduring place among the peoples of the world.
Of course, we could argue on what political forms Israel and Palestine must take in order
for international law to be honored. But that is not the question that is before you this eve-
ning. We have lots of time to consider that question, and I invite you to join me to do that
in a clear-minded way in the future. But consider this closely: the bill you have before you
does not ask that you take a view on Israel. I know that it certainly seems like it does, since
the discussion has been all about that. But it actually makes two points that are crucial to
consider. The first is simply this: there are two companies that not only are invested in the
Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and peoples, but who profit from that occupation,
and which are sustained in part by funds invested by the University of California. They are
General Electric and United Technologies. They produce aircraft designed to bomb and kill,
and they have bombed and killed civilians, as has been amply demonstrated by Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch. You are being asked to divest funds from these two
companies. You are NOT being asked to divest funds from every company that does busi-
ness with Israel. And you are not being asked to resolve to divest funds from Israeli busi-
ness or citizens on the basis of their citizenship or national belonging. You are being asked
only to call for a divestment from specific companies that make military weapons that kill
civilians. That is the bottom line.
If the newspapers or others seek to make inflammatory remarks and to say that this is an
attack on Israel, or an attack on Jews, or an upsurge of anti-Semitism, or an act that displays
page 11
insensitivity toward the feelings of some of our students, then there is really only one an-
swer that you can provide, as I see it. Do we let ourselves be intimidated into not standing
up for what is right? It is simply unethical for UC to invest in such companies when they
profit from the killing of civilians under conditions of a sustained military occupation that
is manifestly illegal according to international law. The killing of civilians is a war crime. By
voting yes, you say that you do not want the funds of this university to be invested in war
crimes, and that you hold to this principle regardless of who commits the war crime or
against whom it is committed.
Of course, you should clearly ask whether you would apply the same standards to any
other occupation or destructive military situation where war crimes occur. And I note that
the bill before you is committed to developing a policy that would divest from all compa-
nies engaged in war crimes. In this way, it contains within it both a universal claim and a
universalizing trajectory. It recommends explicitly "additional divestment policies to keep
university investments out of companies aiding war crimes throughout the world, such as
those taking place in Morocco, the Congo, and other places as determined by the resolu-
tions of the United Nations and other leading human rights organizations." Israel is not sin-
gled out. It is, if anything, the occupation that is singled out, and there are many Israelis
who would tell you that Israel must be separated from its illegal occupation. This is clearly
why the divestment call is selective: it does not call for divestment from any and every Is-
raeli company; on the contrary, it calls for divestment from two corporations where the
links to war crimes are well-documented.
Let this then be a precedent for a more robust policy of ethical investment that would be
applied to any company in which UC invests. This is the beginning of a sequence, one that
both sides to this dispute clearly want. Israel is not to be singled out as a nation to be
boycotted--and let us note that Israel itself is not boycotted by this resolution. But neither is
Israel's occupation to be held exempt from international standards. If you want to say that
the historical understanding of Israel's genesis gives it an exceptional standing in the world,
then you disagree with those early Zionist thinkers, Martin Buber and Judah Magnes among
them, who thought that Israel must not only live in equality with other nations, but must
also exemplify principles of equality and social justice in its actions and policies. There is
nothing about the history of Israel or of the Jewish people that sanctions war crimes or asks
us to suspend our judgment about war crimes in this instance. We can argue about the oc-
cupation at length, but I am not sure we can ever find a justification on the basis of interna-
tional law for the deprivation of millions of people of their right to self-determination and
their lack of protection against police and military harassment and destructiveness. But
again, we can have that discussion, and we do not have to conclude it here in order to un-
derstand the specific choice that we face. You don't have to give a final view on the occu-
pation in order to agree that investing in companies that commit war crimes is absolutely
wrong, and that in saying this, you join Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Christians and so many
other peoples from diverse religious and secular traditions who believe that international
governance, justice and peace demand compliance with international law and human
rights and the opposition to war crimes. You say that you do not want our money going into
page 12
bombs and helicopters and military materiel that destroys civilian life. You do not want it in
this context, and you do not want it in any context.
Part of me wants to joke--where would international human rights be without the Jews! We
helped to make those rights, at Nuremberg and again in Jerusalem, so what does it mean
that there are those who tell you that it is insensitive to Jewishness to come out in favor of
international law and human rights? It is a lie--and what a monstrous view of what it means
to be Jewish. It disgraces the profound traditions of social justice that have emerged from
the struggle against fascism and the struggles against racism; it effaces the tradition of ta-
ayush, living together, the ethical relation to the non-Jew which is the substance of Jewish
ethics, and it effaces the value that is given to life no matter the religion or race of those
who live. You do not need to establish that the struggle against this occupation is the same
as the historical struggle against apartheid to know that each struggle has its dignity and its
absolute value, and that oppression in its myriad forms do not have to be absolutely identi-
cal to be equally wrong. For the record, the occupation and apartheid constitute two dif-
ferent versions of settler colonialism, but we do not need a full understanding of this con-
vergence and divergence to settle the question before us today. Nothing in the bill before
you depends on the seamless character of that analogy. In voting for this resolution, you
stand with progressive Jews everywhere and with broad principles of social justice, which
means, that you stand with those who wish to stand not just with their own kind but with
all of humanity, and who do this, in part, both because of the religious and non-religious
values they follow.
Lastly, let me say this. You may feel fear in voting for this resolution. I was frightened com-
ing here this evening. You may fear that you will seem anti-Semitic, that you cannot handle
the appearance of being insensitive to Israel's needs for self-defense, insensitive to the his-
tory of Jewish suffering. Perhaps it is best to remember the words of Primo Levi who sur-
vived a brutal internment at Auschwitz when he had the courage to oppose the Israeli
bombings of southern Lebanon in the early 1980s. He openly criticized Menachem Begin,
who directed the bombing of civilian centers, and he received letters asking him whether
he cared at all about the spilling of Jewish blood. He wrote:
I reply that the blood spilled pains me just as much as the blood spilled by all other human
beings. But there are still harrowing letters. And I am tormented by them, because I know
that Israel was founded by people like me, only less fortunate than me. Men with a number
from Auschwitz tattooed on their arms, with no home nor homeland, escaping from the
horrors of the Second World War who found in Israel a home and a homeland. I know all
this. But I also know that this is Begin's favourite defence. And I deny any validity to this
defence.
As the Israeli historian Idith Zertal makes clear, do not use this most atrocious historical
suffering to legitimate military destructiveness--it is a cruel and twisted use of the history of
suffering to defend the affliction of suffering on others.
page 13
To struggle against fear in the name of social justice is part of a long and venerable Jewish
tradition; it is non-nationalist, that is true, and it is committed not just to my freedom, but
to all of our freedoms. So let us remember that there is no one Jew, not even one Israel, and
that those who say that there are seek to intimidate or contain your powers of criticism. By
voting for this resolution, you are entering a debate that is already underway, that is crucial
for the materialization of justice, one which involves having the courage to speak out
against injustice, something I learned as a young person, but something we each have to
learn time and again. I understand that it is not easy to speak out in this way. But if you
struggle against voicelessness to speak out for what is right, then you are in the middle of
that struggle against oppression and for freedom, a struggle that knows that there is no
freedom for one until there is freedom for all. There are those who will surely accuse you of
hatred, but perhaps those accusations are the enactment of hatred. The point is not to enter
that cycle of threat and fear and hatred--that is the hellish cycle of war itself. The point is to
leave the discourse of war and to affirm what is right. You will not be alone. You will be
speaking in unison with others, and you will, actually, be making a step toward the realiza-
tion of peace--the principles of non-violence and co-habitation that alone can serve as the
foundation of peace. You will have the support of a growing and dynamic movement, inter-
generational and global, by speaking against the military destruction of innocent lives and
against the corporate profit that depends on that destruction. You will stand with us, and
we will most surely stand with you.
About Judith Butler
Judith Butler is currently a Rockefeller Fellow at the Center for Human Values at Princeton.
She is the author of several books on feminist theory, continental philosophy and contem-
porary politics.
page 14
page 14
Israeli supporters of Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions move-

ment, including Ofra Ben Artzi, sister-in-law of Israeli Prime Minister
April 5, 2010
Dear Friends at UC Berkeley SJP,
!
Two weeks ago news of the vote to divest UC Berkeley from companies that provide mili-
tary support for the Israeli occupation has reached us here in Israel. Like many who have
been working hard to liberate Palestine and restore justice to Palestinians, we were very
happy to hear of your decision.
We witness the extent to which Israeli society becomes increasingly radicalized and indif-
ferent to the systematic brutality it employs against Palestinians. As it does, the prospects
for an internal change in Israeli society are almost nil. The efforts of friends like you stand
the best chance to exert the necessary pressure to secure the full rights of Palestinians.
!
There is enough evidence today which allows one to safely state that the only pressure Is-
raelis are sensitive to these days is that put forth by BDS activities. Boycott, sanctions and
divestment from Israel and from companies invested in Israel are perceived by Israelis as
questioning the legitimacy of Israeli policies and Israeli society. This indeed seems to be a
cost Israelis are not willing to pay.
!
For example, in October 2009,!Aluf Benn, Haaretz correspondent testifies: “Only one thing
does bother the Israelis, according to the!polls:!fear!of a diplomatic embargo and an inter-
national boycott. The Goldstone Report and the International Court of Justice in The Hague
are arousing concern and interest, far more than Obama's peace speeches.!However, as
long as relations with the rest of the world are satisfactory, Israelis see no reason to emerge
from indifference and listen to the president of the United States.”!
(http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1116923.html).!
!
A month later, mainstream journalist,!Sever Plocker, admits that “Israel’s image has hit a
nadir; it is isolated, unwanted, and perceived as bad. The world is telling us that should we
continue along the same contemptible path, we will!lose our legitimacy.”
(http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3798761,00.html)
!
Along the same lines,!Yoav Karny who writes in Globes estimates: “Israel will not continue
to exist if the educated middle class of the West turns against it. The experience of South
Africa has taught all the boycotters in the world that!there isn’t a more effective tool to
weaken a society's stamina!than the withdrawal of foreign investments”.
(http://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?QUID=1056,U1259349558910&did=10005174
67). (For more information on the impact of BDS activities on Israel and Israelis, see
http://boycottisrael.info/content/milestones-history-israeli-bds-movement-brief-chronology).
!
We believe that actions such as yours will make Israelis face the fact that the people of the
page 15
world will not be silent when human rights are crushed. We therefore applaud your efforts
and thank you for them. They are not only the best hope for Palestinians but also for
Israelis.!
!
!
In solidarity,
!
Ronnie Barkan
Ronnen Ben-Arie
Ofra Ben Artzi
Adi Dagan!
Shiri Eisner
Prof. Rachel Giora
Yoana Gonen (Coalition of Women for Peace)
Prof. Lev Luis Grinberg
Chaya Hurwitz
Peretz Kidron
Yana Knopova
Yael Lerer
Eytan Lerner
Yossef Lubovsky
Ya'acov Manor
Eilat Maoz (Coalition of Women for Peace)
Dr. Anat Matar
Rela Mazali
Inna Michaeli (Coalition of Women for Peace)
Dr. Dorothy Naor
Ofer Neiman
Dr. David Nir
Jonathan Pollak
Deb Reich
Ayala Shani
Tal Shapira
Yonatan Shapira
Yasmin Sivan
Dr. Kobi Snitz
Kerstin Sodergren
Sonya Soloviov
Gideon Spiro
Jonatan Stanczak
!
Members and supporters of
BOYCOTT! Supporting the!Palestinian BDS call from within
http://boycottisrael.info/
page 16
page 16
Naomi Klein: Journalist and syndicated columnist

Open Letter to Berkeley Students on their Historic Israeli Divestment Bill
On March 18, continuing a long tradition of pioneering human rights campaigns, the Sen-
ate of the Associated Students of the University of California, Berkeley (ASUC) passed "A
Bill In Support of UC DIVESTMENT FROM WAR CRIMES." The historic bill resolves to di-
vest ASUC's assets from two American companies, General Electric and United Technolo-
gies, that are "materially and militarily supporting the Israeli government's occupation of
the Palestinian territories"-and to advocate that the UC, with about $135 million invested in
companies that profit from Israel's illegal actions in the Occupied Territories, follow suit.
Although the bill passed by a vote of 16-4 after a packed and intense debate, the President
of the Senate vetoed the bill six days later. The Senate is expected to reconsider the bill
soon; groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace are asking supporters of the bill to send letters
to the Senators, who can overturn the veto with only 14 votes.
Here is the letter I just sent:
Dear members of the ASUC Senate,
I am writing to urge you to reaffirm Senate Bill 118A, despite the recent presidential veto.
It comes as no surprise that you are under intense pressure to reverse your historic and
democratic decision to divest from two companies that profit from Israel's occupation of
Palestinian territory. When a school with a deserved reputation for academic excellence
and moral leadership takes such a bold position, it threatens to inspire others to take their
own stands.
Indeed, Berkeley--the campus and the wider community--has provided this kind of leader-
ship on many key issues in the past: not only Apartheid in South Africa but also sweatshops
in Indonesia, dictatorship in Burma, political killings in Nigeria, and the list goes on. Time
and again, when the call for international solidarity has come from people denied a politi-
cal voice, Berkeley has been among the first to answer. And in virtually every case, what
began as a small action in a progressive community quickly spread across the country and
around the world.
Your recent divestment bill opposing Israeli war crimes stands to have this same kind of
global impact, helping to build a grassroots, non-violent movement to end Israel's viola-
tions of international law. And this is precisely what your opponents--by spreading deliber-
ate lies about your actions--are desperately trying to prevent. They are even going so far as
to claim that, in the future, there should be no divestment campaigns that target a specific
country, a move that would rob activists of one of the most effective tools in the non-
violent arsenal. Please don't give into this pressure; too much is on the line.
As the world has just witnessed with the Netanyahu government's refusal to stop its illegal
settlement expansion, political pressure is simply not enough to wrench Israel off its current
disastrous path. And when our governments fail to apply sanctions for defiant illegality,
page 17
other forms of pressure must come into play, including targeting those corporations that are
profiting directly from human rights abuses.
Whenever we take a political action, we open ourselves up to accusations of hypocrisy

and double standards, since the truth is that we can never do enough in the face of perva-
sive global injustice. Yet to argue that taking a clear stand against Israeli war crimes is
somehow to "discriminate unfairly" against Israelis and Jews (as the veto seems to claim) is
to grossly pervert the language of human rights. Far from "singling out Israel," with Senate
Bill 118A, you are acting within Berkeley's commendable and inspiring tradition.
I understand that there is some debate about whether or not your divestment bill was
adopted "in haste." Not having been there, I cannot comment on your process, though I am
deeply impressed by the careful research that went into the decision. I also know that in
2005 an extraordinarily broad range of Palestinian civil society groups called on activists
around the world to adopt precisely these kinds of peaceful pressure tactics. In the years
since that call, we have all watched as Israeli abuses have escalated dramatically: the at-
tack on Lebanon in the summer of 2006, a massive expansion of illegal settlements and
walls, an ongoing siege on Gaza that violates all prohibitions on collective punishment,
and, worst of all, the 2008/9 attack on Gaza that left approximately 1,400 dead.
I would humbly suggest that when it comes to acting to end Israeli war crimes, the interna-
tional response has not suffered from too much haste but from far too little. This is a mo-
ment of great urgency, and the world is watching.
Be brave.
Yours sincerely,
Naomi Klein
Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist and syndicated columnist and the author of
the international and New York Times bestseller The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster
Capitalism, now out in paperback. Her earlier books include the international best-seller,
No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies (which has just been re-published in a special
10th Anniversary Edition); and the collection Fences and Windows: Dispatches from the
Front Lines of the Globalization Debate (2002). To read all her latest writing visit
www.naomiklein.org
page 18
Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb: One of first woman rabbis in the United States
Advisory board member of Jewish Voice for Peace
Cofounder of Shomer Shalom Network for Jewish Nonviolence
April 8, 2010
Dear friends:
I am writing in support of the ASUC Senate's bill calling for divestment of ASUC assets
from General Electric and United Technologies "because of their military support of the oc-
cupation of Palestinian territories."!
I have been involved in Palestinian and Israeli conflict transformation work for the past 40
years during which time I have witnessed various formulations of the peace process come
and go including Madrid and Oslo, Camp David, the Beruit Summit, the Road Map, the
Saudi Peace Plan, the Geneva Accord, the Peace Valley Plan, and various cease fires,
summits and declarations.
I have also been an eye witness to victims of horrific violence on both sides. The loss of
even one life is a matter of profound mourning for every family. May everyone who has lost
a love one be in our prayers.
In light of the incontrovertible evidence of the Goldstone Report, the break down of the
latest effort at 'talks', the siege of Gaza, the ongoing appropriation of West Bank land and
the forced removal of Palestinians from East Jerusalem which can be considered 'ethnic
cleansing', I believe we have arrived at a new place in the struggle for a possible two-state
solution. I believe, for all of us who still hold out hope in a future that embraces the full
humanity of two peoples sharing the land, the time has come to initiate a global movement
for boycott and divestment of all institutions and corporations which profit from violence of
illegal occupation of Palestinian people and lands.
Profiting from the fruits of violence is not kosher.
Lest we forget, the government of Israel is sustaining a policy of forced displacement, hu-
manitarian blockade, air strikes and use of deadly weapons on civilian populations,! tor-
ture, beating and sexual humiliation, arbitrary arrest and administrative detention of minors
and adults, water and land theft, Jewish only roads, hundreds of military checkpoints, secu-
rity fences, nightly incursions, human shields, collaborators, deportation, permit systems,
denial of access to economic opportunity, health care, culture and education, military tar-
geting of sewage and electricity plants and water installations, uprooting of tens of thou-
sands of trees and the destruction of thousands of homes.
How can we conduct business as usual in the face of the overwhelming abuse of human
rights?
Only a universal standard for human rights can ensure long lasting security for people
trapped in zones of conflict. Boycott and divestment support a universal human rights stan-
page 19
dard and are a concrete action that we, as citizens concerned with the future of families
and children in Palestine and Israel can adopt.
It takes tremendous courage to take such a stance. Thank you.
You are standing in partnership with Jews, Muslims, Christians, Israelis and Palestinians and
others around the world who are working for a nonviolent solution that affirms the dignity,
security and well-being of everyone residing in Israel and Palestine. Only through such a
global and sustained partnership will we cultivate a truly viable movement that makes sup-
port for the occupation so distasteful to those who profit! from it, that Israel will be forced
to end the occupation and negotiate a just and mutually agreed upon peace.
L'shalom,
Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb
Advisory board member of Jewish Voice for Peace
Cofounder of Shomer Shalom Network for Jewish Nonviolence
page 20
8 Israeli Peace Groups in Support of UC Berkeley Divest Bill
!
April 12, 2010
Dear Members of UC Berkeley’s ASUC:
We, Israeli organizations, comprised of Jewish and Palestinian women and men, dedicated
to building a just peace, promoting human and civil rights in Israel/Palestine, join the call
made to the UC Berkeley Senate to overturn the veto of Senate Bill 118A and to stop in-
vesting in the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.
It has come to our attention that the UC Berkeley student Senate voted 16 to 4 to divest
from two American companies, General Electric and United Technologies, whose activities
materially and militarily support and maintain the Israeli occupation, in violation of inter-
national human rights and humanitarian law. We understand that the vote also advises di-
vestment of ASUC and UC assets from companies that a) provide military support for the
occupation of the Palestinian territories, b) facilitate the building or maintenance of the il-
legal apartheid wall or the demolition of Palestinian homes, or c) facilitate the building,
maintenance, or economic development of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Pales-
tinian territories.
We see UC’s investments in these corporations as contradictory to UC Berkeley’s commit-

ment to international law, and the university community’s long standing commitment to
peace, justice and democracy.
As Jewish and Palestinian Israelis, we know better than most the long standing injustices of
the occupation. On a daily basis we confront human rights abuses committed by the Israeli
government such as land theft, blockades on civilian food supplies, systematic arrests and
indefinite detentions of nonviolent demonstrators, and targeted destruction of Palestinian
farm land and homes. Far from serving to protect Israelis, these actions serve the interests of
an Israeli extremist agenda which dehumanizes Palestinians, fuels rampant racism, and
jeopardizes the safety of both Palestinians and Israeli citizens.
Further, as Israelis, we reject the unsubstantiated argument that divestment delegitimizes

Israel. We believe that the opposite is the case. Just as various civil rights movements
served to strengthen and improve American society, our human rights groups are an inte-
gral part of the movement here which seeks to strengthen Israel/Palestine by making it a
place for all of its citizens. Apartheid in South Africa and the Jim Crow laws in the United
States did not end because of silence. They ended because thousands, including students
like you, took action to say NO. Like South Africa and the United States, we need citizens
around the world to stand up and say NO to occupation, apartheid and oppression.
We recognize that members of the US Congress are far behind most US citizens who rec-
ognize that Israel’s illegal behaviors fuel anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish and anti-American hatred
throughout the world. That is why, for the good of Israel, for the good of the United States,
page 21
outside pressure from principled people, including students is needed to reverse the 43
year policy of illegal occupation. Israel is unlike other countries that violate international
law--, the US government does not hold Israel accountable for its illegal actions, making
efforts like divestment necessary in encouraging corporate actors to do the right thing and
in communicating to our political leadership that young people are disenchanted with US
support for Israel's occupation.
We therefore urge ASUC to overturn the presidential veto and to remove all corporations
that support and maintain the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories from its in-
vestment portfolio. Do it for a better Palestinian future. Do it for a better Israeli future.
Coalition of Women for Peace

http://coalitionofwomen.org/home/english
Shministim
http://december18th.org/
Yesh Gvul
http://www.yeshgvul.org.il/index_e.asp
Hithabrut - Tarabut
http://www.tarabut.info/he/home/
Union of Progressive Women

(Affiliated with the National Progressive Assembly party - Tajamoa)
http://www.tajamoa.org/?mod=arch&ID=38
The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD).

http://icahd.org/eng/
New Profile - Movement for the Civilization of Israeli Society

http://www.newprofile.org/english/
BOYCOTT Supporting the Palestinian BDS Call from Within! (Israeli)

http://www.boycottisrael.info/
page 22
page 22
Gush Shalom: One of Israel’s best known peace groups
Tel-Aviv - April 10, 2010
Dear Members of UC Berkeley’s ASUC,
We, hereby join the call to stop "investing in the occupation".
It has come to our attention that the UC Berkeley student Senate voted 16 to 4 to divest
from two American companies, General Electric and United Technologies, because of their
activities helping to maintain Israeli military rule in the territories occupied since 1967. We
see this as a vote for Israeli-Palestinian peace, for the upholding of human rights! and a
stricter implementation of international law and thus as fitting with a university community!
committed to peace, justice and democracy.
As longtime Israeli peace activists, we know the injustices of the occupation and we have
confronted them for decades.! We did that out of solidarity with the occupied Palestinians
but also out of enlightened self- interest. The future of Israel and its citizens is not served by
land robbery and oppressing another people. As long as Palestinians are oppressed and
don't have their own state, the future of the state of Israel is at risk; there is no viable alter-
native to peace with the neighbors and integration in the region.
We therefore urge ASUC to overturn the presidential veto - for a better future for Israelis,
Palestinians and the entire world.
On behalf of Gush Shalom,
Adam Keller
pob 3322, Tel-Aviv! 61033

+972-3-5565804
adam@gush-shalom.org
page 23
Jeff Halper, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
April 11, 2010

Dear ASUC Members,
As the head of an Israeli peace and human rights organization, The Israeli Commit-
tee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), I would like to add our voice to those
who have urged you to overrule the veto of the Senate President and reaffirm the
decision to divest in companies profiting from the Israeli Occupation.
ICAHD, like many other Israeli and Jewish organizations in the US and other coun-
tries, endorses the call of Palestinian civil society to divest from companies profiting
from the Occupation – and especially those like General Electric, United Technolo-
gies, Motorola, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Caterpillar who are so heavily in-
vested in the Israeli military. After more than four decades of diplomatic and grass-
roots efforts aimed at inducing Israel to end its Occupation while watching it grow
ever stronger, more permanent and increasingly violent and repressive, we believe
the time is overdue for people the world over to tell Israel in no uncertain terms that
it cannot be expect to be a part of the international community as long as it violates
human rights, international law and dozens of UN resolutions with impunity.
And what we know as Israelis actively struggling alongside Palestinians “on the
ground” in the Occupied Territories is that Israeli actions are motivated not by secu-
rity concerns but by a pro-active intention of expanding into the West Bank and
East Jerusalem in order to claim that land as it own and thereby foreclose the estab-
lishment of a viable, truly sovereign Palestinian state. The demolition of more than
24,000 Palestinian homes in the Occupied Territories since 1967, the expropriation
of more than half the land of the West Bank, the building of 150 settlements hous-
ing a half-million Israelis, the uprooting of almost two million olive and fruit trees,
the devastation of the Palestinian economy and the immiseration of its people and
the construction of a wall twice as high as the Berlin Wall through Palestinian
communities – all this, together with the bloodshed, cannot be explained by “secu-
rity.” As Bishop Tutu and others in South Africa who have visited the Occupied Ter-
ritories – including the Jewish Minister Ronni Kasrils – will testify, Israel is con-
structing an apartheid regime that in many ways is more oppressive that was the
South African regime.
Now as then, governments were moved to action only when civil society raised its
voice. Berkeley has always been one of the strongest and principled of those
voices, and has often spurred the rest of us into action. Your reaffirmation of the de-
cision to divest in GE and UT will once again lead the way.
In appreciation and solidarity,
Jeff Halper
ICAHD Director
page 24
Advertisement: 263 Jews in support of UC Berkeley Divestment Measure
' Mn^l]Zr%:ikbe*,%+)*) Ma^=Zber<Zeb_hkgbZg ?08303E4AC8B4<4=C
THIS IS A PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT
page 25
?08303E4AC8B4<4=C Ma^=Zber<Zeb_hkgbZg Mn^l]Zr%:ikbe*,%+)*) (
THIS IS A PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT
Ad placed by
Berkeley Stop the
War Coalition,
treasurer: Nick
Kardahji.
Ad paid for by
Jews for Justice,
treasurers: Henry
Norr and Matthew
Taylor
page 26
page 26
Jewish Voice for Peace: Leading American Jewish organization that supports
full equality for Israelis and Palestinians
Congratulates the UC Berkeley Senate for their first historic divestment vote- before it
was vetoed by the Senate president
(March 19, 2010) Jewish Voice for Peace congratulates the UC Berkeley student Senate for
the historic vote to divest from companies that profit from Israel's Occupation of Palestinian
Territories.! JVP supports the right of individuals and communities to use the divestment
tool in order to bring their financial portfolios in line with their values and applauds the
use of nonviolent strategies in order to bring about a change in US policy towards the
Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
What's more, the resolution is very much in line with Jewish Voice for Peace's current
campaigns to support divestment from companies that profit from the Israeli Occupation.
This includes companies operating in or from occupied Palestinian territory, exploiting Pal-
estinian labor and scarce environmental resources, providing materials or labor for settle-
ments, or producing military or other equipment or materials used to violate human rights
or to profit from the Occupation.
We draw inspiration from this victory and think that many people around the world, in-
cluding Israelis and Palestinians who struggle every day to make democracy and equality a
reality, will also take heart and redouble their efforts.
In a week during which the Israeli government continued to build on Occupied Palestinian
land under the nose of the Vice President of the United States and declared Palestinian vil-
lages "closed military zones" for their unarmed protest against the Wall, the vote at UC
Berkeley is a much needed victory. The authors of the resolution mentioned other human
rights violators such as Congo and Morocco, demonstrating that holding Israel accountable
can only advance the cause of human rights globally.
"I have been horrified by Israel's increasing desperation to defend both the indefensible
and the self-defeating. At the same time, I am greatly inspired by the work of Palestinians
protesting for democracy on the ground, with the support of Israelis and internationals. This
vote shows there is so much we can do here in the United States to follow their example."
-- Jesse Bacon, JVP Board member and co-editor of The Only Democracy blog.
The UC Berkeley vote also comes at a time of growing discussion around the Boycott Di-
vestment Sanctions movement. There is nothing Jewish about a multinational corporation
making money off of the Israeli Occupation. What's more, given the violent nature of the
occupation and the growing backlash from the Israeli government and the defenders of its
policies in the United States against any criticism, all nonviolent methods should be openly
discussed and considered.
About JVP:
page 27
Jewish Voice for Peace is the only national Jewish organization that provides a voice for
Jews and allies who believe that peace in the Middle East will be achieved through justice
and full equality for both Palestinians and Israelis. With offices in New York and California,
100,000 online activists, chapters across the country and an Advisory Board comprised of
numerous prominent Jewish thinkers and artists, JVP supports nonviolent efforts here and in
Israel-Palestine to end Israel’s Occupation, expand human and civil rights, and implement
a US policy based on international law and democracy. JVP opposes anti-Jewish, anti-
Muslim, and anti-Arab bigotry and oppression and seeks an end to the Israeli occupation of
the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.
!
page 28
page 28
Independent Jewish Voices, Canada
April 23, 2010

P.O. Box 23088
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Dear folks at UC Berkeley,
Independent Jewish Voices (IJV) is an organization of Canadian Jews who share a commit-
ment to social justice and universal human rights. Our primary focus is on promoting jus-
tice, adherence to international law and respect for human rights in Israel and Palestine.
IJV honours UC Berkeley's historical stands, including the Free Speech movement, leader-
ship in the protest against the Vietnam War, and its role in the boycott, divestment and
sanctions campaign against apartheid South Africa.
We admire the courageous stand that was taken by the Student Senate when it voted to di-
vest UC Berkeley from investments in Israel in order in support human rights for all people
in Israel and Palestine. The Palestinians, who have been treated abysmally by Israel, deserve
no less than our full commitment to mount pressure on Israel until it complies with interna-
tional law and ends the occupation of Palestinian land.
The Palestinian people have endured more than 60 years of ethnic cleansing, imprisonment
in their own lands, racist oppression, and escalating violence. "Hafrada" is the Hebrew
word for "separation." This Israel term refers to the country's policy of racial separation and
discrimination in regard to the Palestinians inside Israel as well as in the Occupied Palestin-
ian Territories. The Afrikaner word for this was "apartheid". The American term was "segre-
gation". Regardless of the word that's used to describe it, such behaviour constitutes a
crime against humanity.
Campaigning against this form of injustice is not anti-Semitic. We all share an obligation to
combat oppression wherever it exists. The campaign to encourage universities to divest
themselves of investments in Israel is an important means to pressure Israel to right this on-
going wrong. In 2009, after careful consideration and discussion, our organization voted
overwhelmingly at its annual general meeting to join the international BDS movement.
IJV supports Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against the Israeli government. We
congratulate the UC Berkeley students and faculty for your efforts to join the growing
movement to end to the oppression of the Palestinian people.
Yours truly,
Sid Shniad, Spokesperson

Independent Jewish Voices
--------------------------------------
Independent Jewish Voices – Canada is a national human rights organization whose mandate is to promote a
just resolution to the dispute in Israel and Palestine through the application of international law and respect for
the human rights of all parties. IJV has chapters in Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, Winnipeg,
Saskatoon and Vancouver plus many individual members.
page 29
page 30
Daniel Boyarin, Professor of Talmud, Department of Near Eastern Studies

and Department of Rhetoric, UC Berkeley.
Professor Boyarin is one of the foremost Talmudic scholars in the entire world, an orthodox
Jew, and a dual citizen of the United States and Israel.
You will hear this evening, I’m sure, many arguments for and against this divestment bill. I
am strongly in favor of it, but I am not going to explain right now my reasoning for that
conclusion. I want to talk about something else in my brief opportunity, some that I think
few others will address, namely who gets to speak for “the Jews.”
In yesterday’s Daily Cal, you will, no doubt, have noticed that there were two “paid adver-
tisements.” You might have noticed that the one supporting the bill was deemed a “paid
political advertisement,” while the one attacking the bill was just a “paid advertisement.”
This distinction may very well have been inadvertent, but it is, I think exemplary. The Jew-
ish organizations, including something called Christians United for Israel, do not seem to
realize that they are making political statements.
For them, including the Evangelical Christian members of the Jewish community, unthink-
ing, obedient support for all of Israel’s actions and policies is religion, not politics, so any-
one who disagrees with them is attacking their religion, or even worse, promulgating anti-
semitism. You have heard that from them in the last weeks from many sources, including
the consul of the very government who policies and actions are being criticized.
Can you imagine a student group or organizations being pressured behind closed doors by
a representative of the Sudan not to protest genocide in Darfur, a representative of the
apartheid South African former government behind closed doors telling students who pro-
tested apartheid that their actions or speech were an attack on all Dutch people every-
where in the world? I am here with one message and one message only.
As the second paid ad in yesterday's Daily Cal makes clear, there are many Jews, including
professors of Jewish studies, members of Orthodox and other synagogues, practitioners of
Jewish arts, people who have dedicated their lives to the promotion of social justice the
name of the Torah and Jewish history, who support this measured and careful bill. The self-
appointed, so-called 'Jewish Community,' that most political of imaginary entities, does not
speak for us, and ethical, political judgments are not ever to be construed as anti-semitism.
It is, rather, anti-semitic to assume that all engaged Jews and Israelis have only one opinion.
And if there is any marginalization that is going on and delegitimation, it is precisely the
attempt at excluding dissenters from the Jewish community itself.
page 31
page 31
Chicago chapter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network
The Chicago chapter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network congratulates the
Berkeley student senate for voting to divest from companies that support the Israeli occupa-
tion of Palestinian territory.! We encourage the Senate to vote tonight to overturn the presi-
dent's veto.
In voting to divest, the Berkeley senate honors the call by Palestinian civil society for an
international movement to boycott, divest from, and sanction the State of Israel until it be-
gins to comply with international laws, ending the illegal occupation and dismantling the
apartheid system.! The international BDS movement is a powerful nonviolent method of
solving the crisis in Israel/Palestine and builds on the success of the international BDS
campaign against South African apartheid.! Berkeley students were on the vanguard in that
international anti-Apartheid movement, and we appreciate your courage in taking a similar
role in the struggle today against Israeli apartheid.
The lopsided 16-4 vote in favor of divestment indicates that you have a grasp of these is-
sues and the importance of divestment.! But the veto message from President Smelko and a
subsequent statement by Zionist organizations attempt to challenge your actions with
veiled accusations of antisemitism.! Particularly, we would like to rebut the claim by Presi-
dent Smelko that the divestment bill is "a symbolic attack on a specific community of our
fellow students.”
It simply incorrect to imply that targeted divestment from companies involved in the occu-
pation constitutes an attack on the Jewish community.! Chicago IJAN is one of many Jewish
organizations who oppose Israeli apartheid and who support divestment.! The letters of
support from Jewish Voice for Peace, Judith Butler, Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky, and oth-
ers make this abundantly clear.
A letter from a large group of Zionist organizations says that the actions by the Senate
"marginaliz[e] Jewish students on campus who support Israel."! We see this as a veiled ac-
cusation of anti-semitism, suggesting that challenging Israeli policies amounts to hurting
Jews who support them.! But we find this argument far more anti-semitic than its supposed
target.! To imply that Jews are marginalized by criticism of Israel only marginalizes those
Jews, like us, who oppose Israeli apartheid from the Jewish community.! To deny our Jew-
ishness and to associate that Jewishness with immoral and violent policies is anti-semitism.!
Our criticism of the State of Israel is based on the illegal actions of the State, not the iden-
tity of the perpetrators.
Chicago IJAN would like the Berkeley Senate to know that Jewish groups like J Street, AI-
PAC, and the World Zionist Organization do not speak for all Jews.! As Professor Butler
makes clear, there is a deep Jewish tradition of social justice and respect for co-habitation
from which perspective the occupation is abhorrent.! Some of us call on this Jewish tradi-
tion in our support for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions.! But more importantly, none of
us are "marginalized" by the BDS movement.! In fact we are empowered and encouraged
page 32
by it.! Chicago IJAN stands beside the Berkeley Senate in its support for BDS, and we look
forward to continuing the nonviolent international resistance to Israeli apartheid together
with you.
page 33
page 33
Jonathan Simon (AB ’82; JD ’87; PhD ’90) A personal statement as an alum-
nus of the University of California, Berkeley, on the ASUC Divestment de-
bate !
(Delivered to the following Student Senators on April 9, 2010)!

Dear Students Senators: Kim, Nguyen, Lee, Gala, Franco, and Shami, !
!
You are facing a historic vote on a resolution to financially segregate UC and the ASUC,
from companies involved in aiding the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.! I admire
your opportunity and sympathize with what must be a great deal of pressure.! As a UC
Berkeley alum (AB 82, JD 87, PhD 90) I want to offer you a few thoughts for consideration. !
!
I was here at Berkeley in the 80s when we made a successful movement to lead the UC
Regents into divesting from Apartheid South Africa.! We were aware that our actions were
largely symbolic; but symbols matter.! The Berkeley divestment made the front page of the
Johannesburg Star.! It helped white South Africans of good intention confront the reality
that faced them; that they could not be a modern democratic global society while main-
taining a racist domination of a majority of Africans within their borders. !
!
Israel confronts a different reality to be sure.! White South Africans had to accept minority
status in a common state. Israeli Jews have an opportunity to participate in the creation of a
second Palestinian state that will leave them a likely majority in one of the two.! But so
long as they continue to seek to govern or dominate areas of Palestinian population to
whom they grant no citizenship, they are moving on an inevitable path toward Apartheid.!
A path that will ultimately lead to their de-legitimation as a nation under International Law
and potentially a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East !
!
This is not about economics.! Israel is one of the most advanced economies in the world.!
They do not need US companies. They have their own.! This is a wake up call.! George
Bush's misguided policies left many Israelis believing that they do not have to confront
hard choices. !That they can live as a rich society without addressing the massive injustice
perpetrated on the Palestinian people.! Along with President Barack Obama's clear mes-
sages to the Israeli leadership, this vote can be a message to Israeli civil society to awaken
to realities that now doom their values and their future. !
!
We can have a future in which the Israeli and Palestinian peoples live in peace and col-
laborate to solve the vast environmental and human problems that actually confront them;
but time is running out.! This vote is an opportunity to ring part of that alarm bell.! Intelli-
gent Israeli leaders understand that someday soon, students on campuses all over America,
including Jewish students (and Jewish faculty like me) will be condemning Israel as the
new South Africa.! Shall we ring the bell now, or wait another ten, twenty, or thirty years to
see what happens? !
!
Do not be distracted by those who insist that Israel's violations of International Law are no
worse than many others.! Should we divest from companies that do business in Saudi Ara-
bia, Egypt, China, and dozens of other countries that violate human rights routinely?! I'm
page 34
not against that at all.! But few of those countries think of themselves as democracies
committed to human rights and the rule of law.! Symbolic acts mean little to dictatorships.!
Israel thinks of itself as a genuine democracy committed to the rule of law, which is pre-
cisely why a historic act of symbolism can be meaningful. !
!
With best wishes on resolving your own judgment about this historic vote. !
!
!
Jonathan Simon (AB ’82; JD ’87; PhD ’90)
page 35
page 35
Avraham and Ruchama Burrell, members of Berkeley's Congregation Beth

Israel
To the Senate:
We have carefully read the Bill In Support of Divestment From War Crimes. As members of
Berkeley's Congregation Beth Israel community, we feel compelled to address you on this
important issue.
!We believe that many who have written in opposition to the Bill have done so without
having read or carefully considered the text. Others have such! emotional reactions to what
is perceived to be an attack on Israel that they cannot analyze the Bill rationally. We want
you to know that the feelings and opinions in the Beth Israel community, in particular, and
the Jewish Community, in general, are not unanimous on the issue of divestment.
Because of the emotions involved it is easy to forget that the issue isn't Israel.! Rather, it's
whether the University, its students, or faculty should profit from investments in General
Electric or United Technologies.
Whatever arguments might be advanced to justify actions taken by Israelis or Palestinians

do not apply to General Electric or United Technologies. Their only motive is profit. By in-
vesting in these companies the University tacitly ratifies their actions. Failing to divest and
urge divestment would be inconsistent with Cal's proud history of protest and! principle,
Including divestment during the era of South African Apartheid.
In taking this position, we are following Jewish Law and Tradition. From Moses to the Sages
of the Talmud and throughout Jewish history, principles of social justice have been central
Jewish values.
The Israelites were reminded repeatedly to "be kind to the strangers among you because
you were strangers in Egypt.! The prophets never stopped crying out against injustice, and
demanding justice for all, including the "stranger."!
The Talmud states: The world is founded on three things: on justice,on truth and on peace.
(Sayings of the Fathers 1:18). and further, that true and just judgments must be given to eve-
ryone, not merely the People of Israel.! We are heart sick that these guiding principles seem
to fall by the wayside in the wake of the continuing occupation and the conflict that it in-
evitably engenders.! We are appalled that American corporations profit from the these
tragic circumstances. We urge you to override the veto and adopt the resolutions.! !Do not
be intimidated by those who would prevent you from taking a stand against profiting from
violations of human rights and the shedding of innocent blood.
Avraham and Ruchama Burrell

Berkeley
page 36
page 36
Hajo G. Meyer PhD, Auschwitz survivor
As one of the very few still living Jews with four Jewish grandparents who survived 12 full
years under Hitler, including ten months of Auschwitz, I am fully with you. Israel is on a
completely wrong track by refusing peace and only wanting more area in Palestine. The
only way to bring Israel to its senses is BDS. I am especially in favor of University and cul-
tural boycott, but obviously also of divestment. So please use this testimony to forward
your course.
Best regards, sincerely Yours
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!Hajo G. Meyer!! PhD
page 37
page 37
European Jews for a Just Peace

European Jews for a just Peace
P.O. Box 59506 1040 LA Amsterdam The Netherlands
+31 20 67955850 contact@ejjp.org http://www.ejjp.org
!"#$%&'()&'*+*&
&
,--.&$/&01""2#3&24&56&78#98%8:&;$<8=3&7$%%&&
&
&
;8>#&?8@A8#=&24&56&78#98%8:B=&!056C&D8)&,--.&>&/83E2#9&24&-8E$=F&2#G>/$H>3$2/=&4#2@&
38/&I21/3#$8=&$/&,1#2"8)&J8J$I>38J&32&A1$%J$/G&>&K1=3&"8>I8)&"#2@23$/G&F1@>/&>/J&I$<$%&
#$GF3=&$/&L=#>8%M.>%8=3$/8)&K2$/&3F8&I>%%&@>J8&32&3F8&56&78#98%8:&08/>38&32&2<8#31#/&3F8&
<832&24&08/>38&7$%%&++N!&>/J&32&=32"&$/<8=3$/G&$/&3F8&L=#>8%$&2II1">3$2/&24&.>%8=3$/$>/&
38##$32#:O&&
&
L3&F>=&I2@8&32&21#&>338/3$2/&3F>3&3F8&56&78#98%8:&=31J8/3&08/>38&J8I$J8J&32&3>A%8&3F8&
J8I$=$2/&32&2<8#31#/&3F8&<832&32&J$<8=3&4#2@&3E2&!@8#$I>/&I2@">/$8=)&P8/8#>%&,%8I3#$I&
>/J&5/$38J&Q8IF/2%2G$8=)&EF2=8&>I3$<$3$8=&@>38#$>%%:&>/J&@$%$3>#$%:&=1""2#3&>/J&
@>$/3>$/&3F8&L=#>8%$&2II1">3$2/)&$/&<$2%>3$2/&24&F1@>/&#$GF3=&>/J&$/38#/>3$2/>%&
F1@>/$3>#$>/&%>EO&D8&1/J8#=3>/J&3F>3&3F8&<238&>%=2&>J<$=8=&J$<8=3@8/3&24&!056&>/J&56&
>==83=&4#2@&I2@">/$8=&3F>3&>R&"#2<$J8&@$%$3>#:&=1""2#3&42#&3F8&2II1">3$2/&24&3F8&
.>%8=3$/$>/&38##$32#$8=)&AR&4>I$%$3>38&3F8&A1$%J$/G&2#&@>$/38/>/I8&24&3F8&$%%8G>%&>">#3F8$J&
E>%%&2#&3F8&J8@2%$3$2/&24&.>%8=3$/$>/&F2@8=)&2#&IR&4>I$%$3>38&3F8&A1$%J$/G)&@>$/38/>/I8)&2#&
8I2/2@$I&J8<8%2"@8/3&24&$%%8G>%&L=#>8%$&=833%8@8/3=&$/&3F8&2II1"$8J&.>%8=3$/$>/&
38##$32#$8=O&D8&=88&56B=&$/<8=3@8/3=&$/&3F8=8&I2#"2#>3$2/=&>=&I2/3#>J$I32#:&32&56&
78#98%8:B=&I2@@$3@8/3&32&$/38#/>3$2/>%&%>E)&>/J&3F8&5/$<8#=$3:&I2@@1/$3:B=&%2/GS
=3>/J$/G&I2@@$3@8/3&32&"8>I8)&K1=3$I8&>/J&J8@2I#>I:O&&
&
!=&-8E=&%$<$/G&$/&<>#$21=&I21/3#$8=&$/&,1#2"8)&E8&9/2E&8T3#8@8%:&E8%%&3F8&J$44$I1%3$8=&$/&
#>$=$/G&3F8&$==18&24&L=#>8%U=&I#$@8=)&>/J&8<8/&@2#8&=2)&J8@>/J$/G&A2:I233)&J$<8=3@8/3=&
>/J&=>/I3$2/=&>G>$/=3&=1""2#38#=&24&3F8&2II1">3$2/O&L=#>8%&<$2%>38=&F1@>/&#$GF3=&8<8#:&
J>:O&QF8=8&>A1=8=&>#8&I>##$8J&213&A:&3F8&L=#>8%$&G2<8#/@8/3&>/J&$/I%1J8&%>/J&3F843)&
>#A$31>#:&>==>==$/>3$2/=)&A%2I9>J8=&2/&I$<$%$>/&422J&=1""%$8=)&=:=38@>3$I&>##8=3=&>/J&
$/J84$/$38&J838/3$2/=&24&/2/<$2%8/3&J8@2/=3#>32#=&>/J&3>#G838J&J8=3#1I3$2/&24&
.>%8=3$/$>/&4>#@%>/J&>/J&F2@8=O&V>#&4#2@&=8#<$/G&32&"#238I3&L=#>8%$=)&3F8=8&>I3$2/=&=8#<8&
3F8&$/38#8=3=&24&>/&L=#>8%$&8T3#8@$=3&>G8/J>)&EF$IF)&J8F1@>/$H8=&.>%8=3$/$>/=)&418%=&
#>@">/3&#>I$=@)&>/J&K82">#J$H8=&3F8&=>483:&24&A23F&.>%8=3$/$>/=&>/J&L=#>8%$=O&&
&
D8&>#8&>E>#8&24&3F8&=8/=$3$<$3:&24&3F8&@>338#&>/J&F2E&@>/:&-8E=&488%&3F#8>38/8J&2#&F><8&
A88/&3>#G838J&A:&>I3$2/=&42I1=$/G&2/&L=#>8%$&I#$@8=O&D8&I>/&2/%:&8/I21#>G8&8<8#:&-8E&32&
=3>/J&1"&42#&3F8&83F$I>%&<>%18=&24&-1J>$=@&>=&E8%%&>=&32&4$GF3&#>I$=@&$/&>/:&42#@&$3&3>98=O&&
&
V1#3F8#)&>=&-8E=)&E8&#8K8I3&3F8&1/=1A=3>/3$>38J&>#G1@8/3&3F>3&I#$3$I$=@&24&L=#>8%&$=&8W1>%&
32&>/3$S08@$3$=@O&D8&A8%$8<8&3F>3&3F8&2""2=$38&$=&3F8&I>=8O&L=#>8%&$=&1=$/G&>/3$S08@$3$=@&
>=&>&322%&32&=$%8/I8&I#$3$I$=@&>/J&><2$J=&F><$/G&32&G$<8&>#G1@8/3&2#&#8>=2/&42#&$3=&$%%8G>%&
>I3$2/=O&L=#>8%&$=&2A<$21=%:&1=$/G&3F8&>/3$S08@$3$=@&>=&>&"#838T3&32&I>##:&213&>">#3F8$JS
%$98&J$=I#$@$/>3$2/&>G>$/=3&3F8&.>%8=3$/$>/=O&
&
-1=3&>=&<>#$21=&I$<$%&#$GF3=&@2<8@8/3=&=8#<8J&32&=3#8/G3F8/&>/J&$@"#2<8&!@8#$I>/&
=2I$83:)&21#&G#21"=&>#8&>/&$/38G#>%&">#3&24&3F8&=2%$J>#$3:M>/3$&2II1">3$2/M"8>I8&
@2<8@8/3&$/&,1#2"8)&EF$IF&=889=&32&IF>/G8&L=#>8%M.>%8=3$/8&$/32&>&"%>I8&EF8#8&8W1>%&
European Jews for a Just Peace is a network consisting of groups from the following countries:
Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom
page 38
page 38
European Jews for a just Peace

P.O. Box 59506 1040 LA Amsterdam The Netherlands
+31 20 67955850 contact@ejjp.org http://www.ejjp.org
!"#$%&'(!)'(**+"),'%-'.-%$'/&!()+"&'(0,'1(+)&%"0"(0&2'3*(!%$)",'"0'4-5%$'36!"7('(0,'%$)'8"9'
:!-;'+(;&'"0'%$)'<0"%),'4%(%)&',",'0-%')0,'.)7(5&)'-6'&"+)07)2'=$)>')0,),'.)7(5&)'
%$-5&(0,&?'"07+5,"0#'&%5,)0%&'+"@)'>-5?'%--@'(7%"-0'(0,'*!-%)&%),2'A"@)'4-5%$'36!"7('(0,'
%$)'<0"%),'4%(%)&?';)'0)),'7"%"B)0&'(!-50,'%$)';-!+,'%-'&%(0,'5*'(0,'&(>'CDEF'%-'
-775*(%"-0?'(*(!%$)",'(0,'-**!)&&"-02'
'
G)'(!)'(;(!)'%$(%'9)9.)!&'-6'%$)'<0"%),'4%(%)&':-0#!)&&'(!)'6(!'.)$"0,'9-&%'<242'
7"%"B)0&?';$-'!)7-#0"B)'%$(%'/&!()+H&'"++)#(+'.)$(I"-!&'65)+'(0%"J/&!()+"?'(0%"J8);"&$'(0,'
(0%"J39)!"7(0'$(%!),'%$!-5#$-5%'%$)';-!+,2'=$(%'"&';$>'-5%&",)'*!)&&5!)'6!-9'#!(&&'
!--%'9-I)9)0%&'(0,'DKE&?'"07+5,"0#'&%5,)0%&?'"&'0)),),'%-'!)I)!&)'%$)'LMJ>)(!'*-+"7>'
-6'"++)#(+'-775*(%"-02''
'
/&!()+'"&'50+"@)'-%$)!'7-50%!")&'%$(%'I"-+(%)'"0%)!0(%"-0(+'+(;2'=$)'<242'#-I)!09)0%',-)&'
0-%'$-+,'/&!()+'(77-50%(.+)'6-!'"%&'"++)#(+'(7%"-0&?'9(@"0#')66-!%&'+"@)',"I)&%9)0%'
0)7)&&(!>'"0')07-5!(#"0#'7-!*-!(%)'(7%-!&'%-',-'%$)'!"#$%'%$"0#'(0,'"0'7-9950"7(%"0#'%-'
-5!'*-+"%"7(+'+)(,)!&$"*'%$(%'>-50#'*)-*+)'(!)',"&)07$(0%),';"%$'%$)"!'#-I)!09)0%&N'
&5**-!%'-6'/&!()+N&'-775*(%"-02''
'
G)'%$)!)6-!)'5!#)'34<:'%-'-I)!%5!0'%$)'*!)&",)0%"(+'I)%-'(0,'%-'!)9-I)'(++'
7-!*-!(%"-0&'%$(%'&5**-!%'(0,'9("0%("0'%$)'/&!()+"'-775*(%"-0'-6'%$)'1(+)&%"0"(0'
%)!!"%-!")&'6!-9'"%&'"0I)&%9)0%'*-!%6-+"-2'O-'"%'6-!'('.)%%)!'1(+)&%"0"(0'65%5!)2'O-'"%'6-!'('
.)%%)!'/&!()+"'65%5!)2'
'
'
P5!-*)(0'8);&'6-!'('85&%'1)(7)'
'
'
'
'
'
'
European Jews for a Just Peace is a network consisting of groups from the following countries:
Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom
page 39
page 39
Addendum: Am I My Brother’s Keeper If My Brother Lives Halfway Around

the World?
by Ruth Messinger and Aaron Dorfman*
From Rabbi Or N. Rose, Jo Ellen Green Kaiser, and Margie Klein, ed., Righteous Indignation: A Jewish Call for
Justice, Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Publishing, 2008.
Ruth Messinger is the president and executive director of American Jewish World Service (AJWS).
Aaron Dorfman is the director of Jewish education at American Jewish World Service (AJWS)
(*This section from a larger essay written in 2008 is not an endorsement of divestment from Israel’s Occupation
and should not in any way be considered an endorsement by the essay’s authors of such an effort. It is a public
document that we have included in an addendum because it is a profound statement on the Jewish tradition of
and commitment to responsible consumption and investment. It deserves a wide audience.)
Responsible Consumption
Any idea where the coffee you drank this morning was grown? Did your orange juice come
from Latin America? Were your clothes manufactured in a developing country? All of us are
global consumers, purchasing items that have arrived in our stores as a result of transna-
tional economic interconnectedness. And most of us are also global investors: anyone who
owns a share of a mutual fund is likely a part owner of some multinational corporation.
These economic interconnections create specific responsibilities for us as consumers. Ac-

cording to Maimonides, the great twelfth-century scholar and codifier of Jewish law:
One may not buy from a thief the goods he has stolen, and to do so is a great
transgression because it strengthens the hands of those who violate the law and
causes the thief to continue to steal, for if the thief would find no buyer he would
not steal, as it says, “He who shares with a thief is his own enemy.” (Prov. 2:24)10
As Maimonides articulates, when we pay for a product whose origins are unjust, we enable
the injustice to continue and become tainted by the injustice. In a world in which our pur-
chases may go through many hands before reaching ours, we are tainted not only when the
seller acquires the goods in an unjust way, but also when any part of the chain of produc-
tion perpetuates an injustice. For example, if a commercial coffee plantation abuses its
workers, our purchase of that coffee represents a form of doing business with a thief. We
ought not to be let off the hook because the thief happens to be operating behind a retailer,
a domestic distributor, an importer, and an exporter. Intentionally or not, our purchase of
unjustly produced goods enables the injustice to continue. And, of course, the opposite is
also true: underlying this contention is that every economic transaction is an opportunity to
pursue justice and, in the process, to become more just ourselves.
This means that we need to investigate the origins of the goods we buy and not buy things
that were produced unethically. It means that we must ensure that the products we buy are
produced using fair and safe labor practices. And it means that we must invest in compa-
nies whose practices meet our standards of ethical and responsible businesses, and when
appropriate, invest in the companies we criticize in order to help change their policies
page 40
through shareholder activism.
In practical terms, if the diamonds that sparkle in our jewelry are “conflict diamonds”
whose international trade fuels many of Africa’s wars, we have an obligation not to buy
them and instead to support conflictfree diamonds. If Central American farmers work to
produce the coffee that we consume, we have an obligation to ensure that they receive
sufficient income to support themselves and their families and that their worksites meet
basic standards of health and safety. And if we own shares of stock in a company that
funds a regime that is violating human rights, we have an obligation to pressure that com-
pany to change, and if necessary, divest from that company as a way of signaling our dis-
approval until such a time that the regime is no longer in violation or the company has dis-
tanced itself from the regime.
By refraining from purchasing items that fuel strife, by committing to purchase fair-trade
goods, and by making socially responsible investments, we can move along a continuum
toward responsible consumption.11
Furthermore, the very act of making these commitments enhances both our own awareness
of the consequences of our economic decisions and models socially responsible consump-
tion to friends and peers.
Finally, we must exercise our power as consumers and investors not only through purchas-
ing and investment decisions, but also through direct pressure on corporations. As corpora-
tions invest incredible sums of money in their brand names, activists have grown ever more
effective in changing corporate policies by raising the profile of unjust corporate policies.
For example, in 2002 students from around the country transformed the paper industry
when they convinced Staples to multiply its recycled product offerings tenfold.12
In 2004, Rainforest Action Network pressured Citigroup not to invest in logging projects
involving the destruction of ancient rainforests.13
In 2006, in collaboration with worker efforts nationwide, religious groups from coast to
coast used their consumer power to boycott hotels with poor labor practices, which helped
lead to victories in wages and benefits for hotel workers around the country.14
8 Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, The Dignity of Difference (New York: Continuum International Publishing
Group, 2003), 30.
9 Pirke Avot 2:19.
10 Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Theft 5:1.
11 For more information on where to find fair trade goods, see www.transfairusa.org. For more in-
formation about
socially responsible investing, see www.socialinvest.org.
12 www.dogwoodalliance.org/content/view/52/113/#staplevictory.
13 www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/23/0453233.
14 See, for example, www.cluela.org/victories.html and
www.thejewishadvocate.com/this_weeks_issue/news/?content_id=2765.

Growing Jewish Support For UC Berkeley Divestment From Israeli Occupation 4/28/10

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Growing Jewish Support For UC Berkeley Divestment From Israeli Occupation 4/28/10

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Jewish Letters of Support for page 1

Rabbi Brant Rosen: One of Newsweek’s top 25 U.S pulpit rabbis 2

Rabbi Brant Rosen:

The bill further resolves:

Richard Falk: Milbank Professor of International Law & Practice Emeritus,

A final expression of Israeli lawlessness can be noted in its continued construction of a

(since 2002) Visiting and Research Professor, Global Studies, UCSB

Special Rapporteur for Occupied Palestinian Territories, UN Human Rights Council!

Noam Chomsky: MIT Linguist, writer, activist

April 13, 2010

Judith Butler: UC Berkeley, Maxine Elliot Professor in the Departments of

You Will Not Be Alone

What I learned as a Jewish kid in my synagogue--which was no bastion of radicalism--was

About Judith Butler

Israeli supporters of Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions move-

Naomi Klein: Journalist and syndicated columnist

Here is the letter I just sent:

Dear members of the ASUC Senate,

Whenever we take a political action, we open ourselves up to accusations of hypocrisy

Profiting from the fruits of violence is not kosher.

It takes tremendous courage to take such a stance. Thank you.

8 Israeli Peace Groups in Support of UC Berkeley Divest Bill

Dear Members of UC Berkeley’s ASUC:

We see UC’s investments in these corporations as contradictory to UC Berkeley’s commit-

Further, as Israelis, we reject the unsubstantiated argument that divestment delegitimizes

Coalition of Women for Peace

Union of Progressive Women

The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD).

New Profile - Movement for the Civilization of Israeli Society

BOYCOTT Supporting the Palestinian BDS Call from Within! (Israeli)

Gush Shalom: One of Israel’s best known peace groups

Tel-Aviv - April 10, 2010

Dear Members of UC Berkeley’s ASUC,

We, hereby join the call to stop "investing in the occupation".

pob 3322, Tel-Aviv! 61033

Jeff Halper, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions

April 11, 2010

In appreciation and solidarity,

Advertisement: 263 Jews in support of UC Berkeley Divestment Measure

' Mn^l]Zr%:ikbe*,%+)*) Ma^=Zber<Zeb_hkgbZg ?08303E4AC8B4<4=C

THIS IS A PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT

?08303E4AC8B4<4=C Ma^=Zber<Zeb_hkgbZg Mn^l]Zr%:ikbe*,%+)*) (

THIS IS A PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT

Independent Jewish Voices, Canada

April 23, 2010

Dear folks at UC Berkeley,

Sid Shniad, Spokesperson

Daniel Boyarin, Professor of Talmud, Department of Near Eastern Studies

Chicago chapter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

(Delivered to the following Student Senators on April 9, 2010)!

Avraham and Ruchama Burrell, members of Berkeley's Congregation Beth

Whatever arguments might be advanced to justify actions taken by Israelis or Palestinians

Avraham and Ruchama Burrell

Hajo G. Meyer PhD, Auschwitz survivor

European Jews for a Just Peace

European Jews for a just Peace

Addendum: Am I My Brother’s Keeper If My Brother Lives Halfway Around

These economic interconnections create specific responsibilities for us as consumers. Ac-

through shareholder activism.

Potrebbero piacerti anche

' Mn^l]Zr%:ikbe,%+)) Ma^=Zber<Zeb_hkgbZg ?08303E4AC8B4<4=C

?08303E4AC8B4<4=C Ma^=Zber<Zeb_hkgbZg Mn^l]Zr%:ikbe,%+)) (