Lawry deBivort wrote:
> Interesting thesis that USSR products may have been built from rigged US
> secret 'plans.' I hadn't heard this idea before, but it makes a certain
> Spy-vs-Spy sense...  I think, though, that the Soviets scientists and
> engineers have all the expertise they need to smoke such gimmicks out.

As an American general allegedly exclaimed after the Soviets'
Sputnik success in space:  "We captured the wrong Germans."
(rocket scientists)     http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4201/ch1-6.htm


> Re. religion and engineers....  My sense is that the world is slowly
> discovering that religion generally is misleading, and that it imposes
> undesirable biases on any human endeavor.

There may be hope!  (see news item below)
Could this be the beginning of the end of the last Apartheid state?

Chris


http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,1785633,00.html


Lecturers back boycott of Israeli academics

· Critics of state policies exempt from sanction
· Narrow vote welcomed by Palestinian groups

   Benjamin Joffe-Walt
   Tuesday May 30, 2006
   The Guardian

Britain's largest lecturers' union yesterday voted in favour of a boycott
of Israeli lecturers and academic institutions who do not publicly
dissociate themselves from Israel's "apartheid policies".

Delegates at the annual conference of the National Association of Teachers
in Further and Higher Education (Natfhe) in Blackpool narrowly backed the
proposal, despite mounting international pressure from those opposed to a
boycott, including a petition from more than 5,000 academics and a plea
from the Israeli government. The decision was greeted with disappointment
and anger by anti-boycott campaigners last night, but Palestinian groups
issued declarations of support.

Presented on the final day of the Natfhe conference, the motion criticised
"Israeli apartheid policies, including construction of the exclusion wall,
and discriminatory educational practices" and invited members to "consider
the appropriateness of a boycott of those that do not publicly dissociate
themselves from such policies".

After failed efforts to prevent the debate, speakers outlined the litany of
difficulties experienced by Palestinian students and lecturers living under
occupation, including the number of Palestinian schools shelled by the
Israeli army.

"The majority of Israeli academics are either complicit or acquiescent in
their government's policies in the occupied territories," said Tom Hickey,
a philosophy lecturer from the University of Brighton, member of the
union's national executive committee and proposer of the motion. "Turning a
blind eye to what an Israeli colleague thinks about the actions of their
government is a culpable blindness."

Delegate John Morgan, who seconded the motion, said there was no academic
freedom for Palestinians.

But the union's general secretary, Paul Mackney, spoke against the motion:
"Most of us are very angry about the occupation of Palestine," he said,
"but this isn't the motion and this isn't the way. Any motion to boycott
requires the highest level of legitimacy. As far as I can see no more than
a couple of branches have discussed this motion. You cannot build a boycott
on conference rhetoric."

Natfhe delegate Ronnie Fraser, chair of Academic Friends of Israel, the
primary opponents of the motion on the conference floor, said he was "not
happy at all", adding that the vote brought "dishonour and sheer ridicule"
upon the union.

Last year the Association of University Teachers (AUT) elected to impose an
academic boycott on two Israeli universities. But after an international
outcry and a revolt by members it reversed the decision.

Yesterday's boycott resolution will have an official shelf life of less
than three days, as on Thursday the two unions will merge, forming the
world's largest higher education union with more than 110,000 members. The
resolution will only be advisory to the new union. But proponents say the
Natfhe decision is important and represents a step change in the wider
boycott campaign against Israel.

Aharon Ben-Ze'ev of Haifa university told the Guardian he was "very
disappointed", adding: "This ... will only serve to impede the peace
process and strengthen extremism on both sides. I never say to British
colleagues if you don't subscribe to my beliefs I will boycott you."

David Hirsh, an AUT member, added: "It may not have anti-semitic
motivations, but if you organise an academic boycott of Israeli Jewish
academics but no one else in the world, that is an anti-semitic policy.
What's Natfhe going to do? Set up a committee before which Israeli
academics will be hauled?"

The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
sent its support, saying British academics had "proved once again that they
are up to the challenge of meeting injustice".

Stephen Rose of the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine,
who began the boycott campaign with a letter to the Guardian in 2002, said
he was delighted, adding: "We recognise that this has not been an easy
decision faced with the extreme pressure put upon the union by outside
forces." He said the vote was "a historic step forward" in "helping
persuade our Israeli academic colleagues that it is time to cease silent
complicity with the illegal acts of the Israeli state".

But he warned that this was likely to be the start rather than the end of
the debate. "I expect those people who oppose it to mobilise on UK campuses
and around the world in the weeks ahead."

Backstory

The first rumblings of an academic boycott surfaced in 2002 when Stephen
Rose, professor of biology at the Open University, wrote to the Guardian
arguing for a moratorium on European funding of Israeli research. The
campaign gathered pace at last year's AUT conference in Eastbourne where
delegates voted to boycott Bar-Ilan and Haifa universities because of their
alleged complicity in the Israeli government's policies. The move provoked
a storm of international protest and a month later the boycott was
overturned at a special conference.



Academic boycott of Israel
12.05.2006: New call by lecturers for Israeli academic boycott
20.09.2005: Israel boycott feud resurfaces
31.05.2005: Storm blows union off course
27.05.2005: Vote ends Israeli boycott
26.05.2005: Lecturers to go second round on Israeli boycott

Israeli and Palestinian universities
26.05.2005: West Bank college benefits from boycott backlash
30.09.2003: Degree of separation
30.07.2002: Academics appeal for West Bank education rights
12.07.2002: Palestinian university building closed by Israelis

Comment
24.05.2006: 'Boycotts are a last resort'
26.05.2005: Letters: Wider focus on the boycott debate
25.05.2005: 'A boycott will only strengthen the Israeli right'
25.05.2005: 'Both Palestinians and Israelis will benefit from a boycott'



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword
"igve".



_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to