Just came back from the UCLA campus. A few quick thoughts:
1. The encampment is not very disruptive. It occupies a tiny part of UCLA's massive campus. Though it's been there for days, I saw a lot of students discovering it for the first time and asking "what's going on?"
1/10
The main disruption is that students have to walk around it (maybe 5 extra minutes) to go from one side to the other. The main path that is closed is actually closed by campus security, not protestors
So not exactly the riot we are told makes the students' lives impossible
2/10
This is just outside the encampment. Very peaceful, students chilling, living their student lives.
3/10
2. The protestors are very well organized: medic tent, media liaisons, security people trained in deescalation, etc. No smoking, drinking, drugs allowed. As of today, people need to have someone inside vouch for them before they are let in.
4/10
Anyone who's been at an occupation or a large protest before, especially very contentious ones, knows about the safety risks of counter protestors sneaking in to provoke and inflame, so vetting people seems reasonable.
This level of organization & precaution was impressive
5/10
3. The pro-Israel counter protest was ridiculous. There was nobody there, just one massive screen broadcasting images of October 7th. I'm guessing there aren't enough pro-Israel students to set up an encampment or they don't actually care that much to go through the trouble
6/10
4. A lot of people aren't let into the encampment. There wasn't anyone inside who knew me and could vouch for me, so despite my keffieh I wasn't let in.
Maybe 50% of people who were trying to go in couldn't because they didn't have someone to vouch for them.
7/10
I saw a few people who were clearly pro-Israel (one wearing a Golda Meir t-shirt, the others just saying "it is my right as a student to access all parts of the campus"). They tried to argue their way in for a few minutes and left.
8/10
But I can see how people who are more insistent and provocative can easily create videos for social media making it seem like they are being turned back because they are Jewish. I was just there for a few hours, but from what I saw it seems like nonsense.
9/10
My conclusion, without claiming to give a holistic picture of the protest movement or even of the situation at UCLA: very peaceful, well organized, and reasonable protest.
10/10
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many Jews and Israelis (including my own relatives) defend Israeli actions no matter the evidence of massacres and horrendous violence. Why?
For one simple reason: ultra nationalism.
1/7
That ultra nationalism has a name. It’s called Zionism. Even “liberal” or “progressive” Zionists think of the “Jewish state” as an end in itself. Support for a “Jewish state” has become a form of idolatry. Religious or secular, right wing or left wing, Zionism is a religion.
2/7
Ultra nationalism means that there is always a good reason to justify violence. There is always an “explanation”.
And most importantly, no matter what happens, they will *always* stand with Israel. We see it with the “stand with Israel forever” profile pics on social media.
3/7
The @torproject just published an insightful report on how Israel's defense and surveillance industry, which is marketed as "field-proven" on Palestinians, exports to the rest of the world and threatens privacy and human rights everywhere.
Here are some examples 🧵⬇️
Israel's pervasive surveillance technology "doesn't end in Palestine, but it often starts with it": theintercept.com/2019/08/25/bor…
Elbit Systems, a leading military tech exporter from Israel, has been deploying these tools at the U.S Southern Border as well as in the UAE and UK.
Je vois cinq raisons expliquant pourquoi, pendant si longtemps, je me suis concentré sur la paix plutôt que sur la justice, et pourquoi il en est de même pour tant de personnes que je connais en Israël et dans les communautés juives à travers le monde.
Actuellement, les Israélien·nes sont sur le pied de guerre : la droite appelle ouvertement au nettoyage ethnique et au génocide à Gaza ; le centre et la gauche affirment que les morts de civil·es sont malheureuses mais inévitables .
Mais cela n’a pas toujours été le cas:
🧵1/30
Ce thread est un resumé du texte disponible sur le site de @TSDKcollectif :
Lorsque je vivais en Israël, j’étais un sioniste « progressiste », et j’étais principalement entouré de sionistes progressistes.Nous étions laïques, opposé·es aux colonies dans les territoires occupés, nous méprisions Netanyahu,et nous voulions « la paix au Proche-Orient ».
Israel didn't withdraw from Gaza in 2005 as a move towards peace. Israel withdrew to prevent peace. It's not me saying it; it's one of the Israeli leaders who led the withdrawal.
This is Dov Weisglass, senior adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, in an interview to Haaretz in 2004. Weisglass was one of the initiators of the disengagement plan.
"The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process."
2/5
He added: "And when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem...
3/5