November 9, 2007

The Israel Lobby Strikes Again:
Revelations from the Rancourt abitration

By David F. Noble

Going into yesterday's arbitration hearing all assumed that it was about a grievance filed by Professor Denis Rancourt against the University of Ottawa. Rancourt was challenging a disciplinary action taken against him for allegedly describing his course in a manner inconsistent with the course description approved by the Senate. But documents obtained in the course of the hearings suggest that, in fact, the dispute over the course description was merely a ruse and that Rancourt was rather the victim of a zionist campaign against his course.

On September 17, 2005 Rancourt sent out an email describing his upcoming course. Two Days later, September 19, an Ottawa yoga instructor named Shulamit Day-Savage sent an email to U of O professor Pierre Anctil complaining about Rancourt's email. In particular, she expressed concern about Rancourt's reference to a guest lecture by U of O professor Michel Chossudovsky, in which he included several links to websites attacking the guest lecturer as a self-hating Jew because of his criticism of Israel. Day-Savage took exception to Rancourt's note that such websites illuminate 'how Zionism intimidates free thinkers." Day-Savage has worked with the UJA's Jewish Family Services organization. In other unrelated emails Day-Savage had expressed her concerns about criticism of Israel on the part of anti-war activists. Her email to Anctil was signed only by her first name, indicating familiarity.

Since 2004 Anctil has been the director of Uof O's Canadian Studies Institute.  A scholar of Yiddish literature and French Canadian Jewry, Anctil has also served as a member of the Executive Committee of the Israel Association for Canadian Studies, an Israel-based organization. Other Executive Committee members include a number of former presidents of the Canadian Jewish Congress and other leading Canadian zionists. Under Anctil's 'leadership' , the U of O Canadian Studies Institute has established an undergraduate program in Jewish studies funded by Sarah and Zeev Vered. Vered owns the Ron Engineering and Constuction Company and is an important member of the zionist Jewish Federation of Ottawa, whose stated mission is to enrich Jewish life in Ottawa, Canada, and Israel.

According to U of O's counsel Michelle Flaherty, U of O Vice President Academic Robert Major was alerted to Day-Savage's email by Anctil. (No documents have yet been disclosed about this communication. It remains unclear whether Anctil contacted Major directly or through another route, such as the office of the President. President Patry was a participant in a zionist campaign against an academic boycott of Israel). On September 21, Major faxed to the Dean of Science Christian Detellier, Rancourt's superior, a copy of Rancourt's course description, together with a print-out of material from one of the self-hating Jew websites and a hand-written note: "va voir le site alternative voices où D.R. annonce ce cours comme crédité!" (exclamation and emphasis in original). The same day, which happened to be the very day that Chossudovsky was giving his guest lecture, Dean Detellier appeared in Rancourt's classroom and announced that the class would be cancelled. It appears that the U of O is trying to discipline Rancourt in response to direct pressure from Ottawa's Israel lobby, courtesy the good offices of Professor Anctil.

****************
Historian David F. Noble is a professor at York University in Toronto. Click here for more on the Israeli Lobby in Canada by Dr. Noble. http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ David_F._ Noble

RESPONSE BY SHULAMIT DAY-SAVAGE:

----- Original Message -----
  From: "Shulamit" < shulamit@inbox.com >
  To: < admin@canpalnet-ottawa.org >
  Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 1:33 PM
  Subject: Response to David F. Noble from Shulamit Day Berlevtov (formerly
  Day-Savage)

Response to David F. Noble as appearing at
http://www.canpalnet-ottawa.org/Noble_Day-Savage.html

David Noble aligns me with some “zionist campaign” to which he attributes
the cancellation of Denis Rancourt's activism course. I wish to state my
position myself (rather than let Noble, whom I do not know and who does not
know me, do it for me).

1) I identify as an anarchist. I have often criticized the actions of the
State of Israel. The “zionists” with whom Professor Noble associates me
would vilify me much as they do Professor Michel Chossudovsky, if they
knew me, which they do not.

2) I have no interest in the State of Israel. I wish for safe space for
all people. I do not support the actions of the State of Israel against the
Palestinians.

3) I have never worked for Jewish Family Services. I volunteered there in
2000 and 2001. Rather like its sister organization Catholic Family Services,
JFS is a non-sectarian agency which provides services to residents of the
greater Ottawa area.

4) It was never my desire or intention that Professor Rancourt's activism
course be cancelled for any reason. My intent was solely to expand the
range of ideas available for discussion at the lecture given by Professor
Michel  Chossudovsky. In fact, I have attempted to contact Denis Rancourt's
lawyer,  Sean McGee, several times to clarify my position. I did not want my
e-mail  to be used by the University of Ottawa administration as an excuse to
cancel  Professor Rancourt's class. At the time the course was cancelled, I had
no  idea my e-mail was being used as a pretext, and I would have addressed
this  then, had I known.

5) My original concern:

I expressed my opinion first directly to Denis Rancourt. I was upset by
his distribution, to activism course members, of a website that (in Sept.
2005) advocated raping certain Jewish and Palestinian women who were critics of
the State of Israel. I was deeply disturbed that he gave exposure to a
website that promoted violence against women and hate propaganda.

Furthermore, I said such a website does not advance an understanding of
the complex nature of the discourse around criticism of the State of Israel,
which was his stated reason for using the site. By including only the
position of the people at Masada2000, Professor Rancourt implied it
expressed the full range of discourse defending the State of Israel. I
object to this “straw man” characterization.
Professor Rancourt dismissed my concern. Since I was not going to be able
to attend the lecture by Professor Michel Chossudovsky, I contacted the U of
O  Jewish students' association to see if a member was available to attend
the class. They referred me to Professor Pierre Anctil. I spoke to him by
phone  and then forwarded him the e-mail sent by Professor Rancourt with the
website link.

6) Criticism of the State of Israel by anti-war activists: I have stated
my  opinions previously in many contexts, in particular on the NoWar Paix
e-mail  list.

As a person who does not support the existence of any state, it
nevertheless  appears to me that, to some on the “Left,” the State of Israel is somehow
the most violent, sinister and powerful state of all, even to the extent
that the State of Israel dictates US State policies (the “tail wagging
the  dog” theory). The US and Israeli states happen to be on the same page
with  respect to the geopolitical and economic stakes in the Middle East, and
that  is why the Israeli state receives so much support from the US State, but
no one dictates policy to the US State.

Let me state once again for clarity that I abhor and do not in any way
support Israeli state actions against the Palestinian people.

This, above, has been my position all along and yet, look what has
happened:  suddenly, I'm a member of some shadowy zionist conspiracy. On the “Left,”
it  is inconceivable that a person concerned about the manner in which
criticism  of the State of Israel is expressed might not be a zionist. Again, the
“straw man” issue comes up: as soon as one “side” criticizes the other,
it  is sufficient to cry either “Zionist!” or “Anti-Semite!” and both are
silenced. In my opinion, this false dichotomy and name-calling is one of
the reasons this “debate” goes around and around in circles. There is no
ground  for understanding here.

I repeat, I identify as an anarchist, a position that is located on the
“Left.” I do not support the actions of the Israeli state. Given the
hostility I personally have experienced from this very “Left,” I no
longer  attend demonstrations or participate in organizing political action. When
I  see or hear slogans like “Death to Israel,” I am unsure whether the
person expressing them wants the State of Israel dismantled or harbours violent
intent toward Jews as individuals. I'm supposed to trust that it's the
former, yet when I ask to be heard about my concerns, I am denounced and
attacked as part of a zionist conspiracy.

To conclude, I suggest that the University of Ottawa administration had
issues with Professor Denis Rancourt or his activism course and used my
e-mail as part of their case against him. When Professor Noble says,
referring to my e-mail, “documents obtained in the course of the hearings
suggest that… Rancourt was rather the victim of a zionist campaign
against  his course,” Professor Noble is using me as the much as U of O
administration did, but in this case, to advance his theory of a zionist
conspiracy.  I call Professor David Noble to task for writing and
allowing  the distribution of an article with my name in it, in which he attributes
spurious motivations and affiliations to me without contacting me. It
seems  to me that this is falling right into step with the U of O
administration's  divide-and-conquer tactics.

Please note that I have snail-mailed a copy of this letter to Professor
David Noble.

Shulamit Day Berlevtov (formerly Day-Savage)
Ottawa, ON

Your Comments

canpalnet-ottawa.org