College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students

Daily Collegian > News

SGA debates UMass’ divestment from Israel

By Nicole Sobel, Collegian Staff

Print this article

Published: Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Updated: Thursday, March 5, 2009

Wednesday, March 4th the SGA gathered in the Campus Center at to vote on whether or not the University of Massachusetts should divest from companies who support Israel such as Caterpillar, General Electric, and Motorola.

The meeting concluded with the motion being tabled until March 25th, after, lengthy and controversial debate.

The main debate was between The Student Alliance for Israel and the Campus Anti-War Network debate over whether SGA should pass the bill.

Michael Feder spoke firest on the topic, representing a pro-Israel outlook. He said the bill contained a number of half-truths.

“Real decisions come from knowing the information on both sides,” said Feder.

Feder’s  speech also had a strong emphasis on ‘war as a symptom.’ He claimed that, “An anti-war stance is a way to avoid thoughtful inquiry.”

The Student Alliance for Israel’s believed the bill should be treated as a starting point for dialogue, not for rash decision. The main qualm expressed by Pro-Israel students was their worry only one side of the issue was being seen, and more debate and dialogue was necessary on the matter.

Hannah Grossman from the Student Alliance for Israel was concerned that “This bill is going to polarize the campus and make it impossible for each side to understand each other.”

Other pro-Israel speakers at the meeting referred to the bill as an “unfair vilification of Israel,” and a “means for polarizing the campus.”

The campus Anti-War network, on the other hand, felt the bill should be passed.

The Anti-War network said  that, “Divestment helps towards peace.” They claimed repeatedly that the bill was urgent, since many Palestinians were dying and starving by the minute.

“Palestinian Civil Society asked the U.S. to make this move.” network representatives said.

The Anti-War network claimed that Israel should not be portrayed as representing ‘democracy,’ considering their recent assault on the Gaza Strip. The Anti-War network felt that this bill would, “protect the Palestinians from being besieged.”

The Anti-War network referred to the Gaza Strip as, “an open air prison right now,” and said this bill needed to be passed in order to, “Divest from occupation of war, and invest in education.”

They were insistent upon this bill being passed quickly because of the urgent humanitarian crisis that was at stake in Israel concerning the Palestinian people.

Nicole Sobel can be reached at nsobel@student.umass.edu

 

Comments

11 comments
Divest
Sun Mar 8 2009 20:40
You see the power of the idea "divest from Israel".
Nicole S.
Fri Mar 6 2009 12:48
I agree and fully understand that the connotation associated with the sentence 'UMASS' divestment from Israel does not apply fully to the bill that was motioned to table...HOWEVER, i did not write the headline, and I already apologized for the holes in the story concerning intricate details on the bill, and am trying to have the online copy at least, corrected.
Mike
Thu Mar 5 2009 23:07
Nicole,
You've admitted that this article is misleading yet the title stays the same. I know you can't change the hard copies, but why most the online version continue to say "UMass' divestment from Israel?" That's incorrect and looks awful to anyone who hasn't read all these comments.
Jerry Dinglebutt, Esq.
Thu Mar 5 2009 20:10
Good point, Sen. Dingleberry. You have my vote!
Senator Dingleberry
Thu Mar 5 2009 14:17
A better lede: Members of the Student Government Association debated weighty geopolitical topics with little bearing on actual UMass students or University policy last night before before tabling the motion in favor of a cigarette break.

"I smoke because it's a way to stick it to the Man. They think they can push us around, but we're not having it anymore," said one senator, who asked to remain unnamed. "This sends a message to the University, to let them know that we do actually google the news once and a while when we're bored of looking at videos on collegehumor.com."

Senior Reader
Thu Mar 5 2009 10:23
'divest from war and occupation, and invest in education' that was the tone i received from the article.
Nicole S.
Thu Mar 5 2009 10:21
I stand corrected on the facts pertaining to the actual motion itself, and how it specifically applies to University of Massachusetts Amherst dealing with companies primarily based in the U.S. This article was written in short time, directly after the long, lengthy meeting ended...that's still no excuse, as a journalist i should have made the time to look more intricately at the actual motion (2009 S29). Apology To readers.
Mike
Thu Mar 5 2009 10:13
Contendere,

Just a quick clarification... there is no "Palenstine."

Your name
Thu Mar 5 2009 09:58
GE also is big in Iran, selling stuff that is real close to military to the Iranians....

Funny how no mention is made of that....

Shai-Hulud
Thu Mar 5 2009 08:59
Funny how at one point a student senator made an amendment that just left in the transparency stuff without the Israel-Palestine stuff... and then it got voted down by everyone, including him.

And to me divesting from firms that "make their millions off the suffering in Palestine" still equals divesting from Israel, at least if you listen to CAN's claims that Palestine has been "occupied" for 60 years, ie: that any Israel at all is an occupation of Palestine.

Annoying bitches. Never give a speech while you're craving a cigarette, it makes you look like a loser!

Contendere
Thu Mar 5 2009 00:37
Just a quick clarification, as the title and first sentence are not quite accurate:

There is nothing in the motion, as presented, that asks for a divestment from Israel. In addition, the motion does not call for a divestment from companies who support Israel.

The motion asks for UMass to "divest from companies that make their millions off the suffering in Palestine." In all likelihood, this would mean divesting from companies primarily based in the US.

The motion also calls for the University to "divest from war and occupation." This particular clause is not specific to any country.

Importantly, the motion calls for transparency in how the university invests its endowment which pays for scholarships. This is vital information which every university member should be allowed access to.







log out