AMS Council passed a motion Wednesday night approving a $700 transfer from the Social Justice Centre (SJC) to Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR) that would fund a humanitarian aid flotilla to Gaza. The decision was made after three hours of heated debate. Approximately 200 students were in attendance in the Norm Theatre.
The motion brought an end to nearly two weeks of fighting between the Israeli Awareness Club (IAC), the SJC and SPHR over the autonomy of AMS resource groups, the legitimacy of the SJC executive and whether the flotilla would be funding terrorism.
“We’re ecstatic…They’ve decided in favour of both resource group’s autonomy and the fact that the SJC can stand for controversial critical causes as outlined in it’s constitution,” said Gordon Katic, member of the SJC and Allies at UBC. “This isn’t just a win for the people of Gaza. This is a win for all six of the resource groups.”
Earlier this month, students affiliated with the IAC complained that the $700 transaction from the SJC to SPHR was not valid, as their executive failed to hold a proper annual general meeting.
“We have been responding to these attacks for two weeks,” said Katic. “It has been a tremendous personal stress [and] it has been a tremendous stress on the resource groups.”
VP Administration Ekaterina Dovjenko presented a report by the Student Administrative Committee (SAC) that disproved these allegations, and stated that an official AGM had been held in February. This meant that SJC’s executives had not broken any AMS regulations, and were permitted to give this money to SPHR.
Debate surrounded the legality of the donation, as many students suggested that funding the flotilla effectively supported terrorist groups or unregistered charities for which the AMS could be held accountable.
Questions were raised about the charitable status of the organization that SPHR would be funding. Arts Councillor Katherine Tyson alleged that a legal opinion commissioned by the AMS stated that Canada Boat to Gaza was not a registered charity. This was confirmed by AMS President Bijan Ahmadian, who had been the only member personally in contact with the AMS’s lawyers personally. This was also the only time Ahmadian spoke during the debate.
However, SPHR President Omar Shaban stated that the money is going to a registered charity called Alternatives that would then be funding the project, itself called “Canada Boat to Gaza.”
Before the motion was passed, it was subject to a number of amendment attempts. A group of councillors, led by Tyson, tried to amend the agenda so that the money would only go to a charity approved by CIDA. Another motion by Arts Councillor Michael Haack sought to force the executive to apologize to students for their original decision and for insinuating that the flotilla project was connected to terrorism. Both amendments failed.
“I feel like we wasted a lot of time. From my understanding, from the legal opinion and the findings of SAC, we didn’t even need to make a decision. It should have been a regular transaction the VPF should have done,” said Haack.
In the lead-up to the meeting, both the SPHR and the UBC Students for Students, which was opposed to the donation, distributed materials to students and councillors, in addition to circulating petitions. The IAC presented a petition of 236 students and 672 alumni, professors, parents of students and prospective students opposed to the donation. The SPHR provided a petition in favour of the donation with 547 signatures from UBC students.
Security was also present in the Norm, and students were told by AMS Council Chair Dave Tompkins that disrespectful behaviour would not be tolerated. However, aside from a few speaker interruptions, the debates remained passionate but civil.
“If there was anyone being divisive in this debate, it was the IAC,” said Katic. “I don’t like my name linked to terrorism [and] I don’t think that it’s appropriate for the IAC to make those claims.”
IAC President Rael Katz said that Council should not have approved this donation.
“The motion that has passed was a political statement more than [for] humanitarian aid,” he said.
Julian Markowitz, former vice president of the IAC, was also disappointed at Council’s decision. “It’s shown that a small group of radicals—in this case under the umbrella of the SJC and the resource groups at large—had the ability to override the democratic mandate of this school,” he said.
However, Katz suggested that the decision was not a total loss. “One of our primary goals was to raise awareness. Nobody knew this was happening. It was completely under the table. And we made it public.”
(+33 rating, 24 votes)
Loading ...
still not sure how this circus began… but good to see the AMS has principles.
also that is a mighty fine barge.
This is completely wrong.
1) Our student fees should be being used on campus. If I wanted to donate to a charity of any kind I would. I’d prefer to see my fees used to improve MY experience on campus.
2) The SJC was wrong to choose such a political issue to tackle in the first place. You’re asking for a divided campus this way.
3) The uninformed who voted in favour of the barge are unaware of the realities of the situation. Should Palestinian refugees receive aid? YES. But Does the aid from the flotilla get to them? NO. Just as has happened in the recent past, any aid attempts that get sent to Palestine are intercepted by Hamas. You’re only feeding the terrorists. Congratulations. Oh, and people die in the crossfire too. Well done SJC.
lol. talk about uninformed buddy, the aid flotillas in the past were intercepted by israel. and they killed 9 people on the boat.
what needs to happen is the removal of the blockade. even if aid was getting to them, thats not enough. they need open borders to develop a sustainable economy. living off handouts is not a solution.
the flotillas seek to provide aid and break the siege.
p.s. “your experience” on campus (aside from sounding totally selfish) is also completely subjective. for us, donating money to a flotilla improves “our experience”.
and the purpose of the SJC is not to make friends, it is to tackle issues of injustice. there is no division on campus that never already existed. this is not the first time the IAC tries to make trouble for SPHR.
What needs to happen is for the Palestinian people to free themselves from the rule and the influence of Islamo-Fascist mindf%$&ers like Hamas and its ideological cronies in the region. That would be the single best and biggest step towards peace. As long as a sufficiently large portion of one group of people wants to drive another entire group into the sea, I’ll always side with the latter, thank you very much. People like you like to equate the biggest guns with the biggest d%$&s, but the fact of the matter, if you have even half a brain and a quarter of a soul, is that there is currently no greater reactionary force on this planet (at least none that rules entire countries) than fundamentalist Islam. And as long as even those Palestinians that may not immediately subscribe to this ideology themselves tolerate it, for whatever reason, I will fight against them and against even a penny of my money so much as potentially fueling their makeshift murder machine.
I feel we need to let the people of Gaza decide for themselves what government they want. We are in no position to dictate what the government of another state should be. This is the what democracy, and not democracy by coercion is supposed to be.
The people of Gaza will vote for their government based on the incentives they are faced with. I hope you will ask why they voted in the government they did instead of using your time to “fight against them,” these flesh and blood people who are being kept in an open air prison in unimaginable circumstance
I hope you will ask why they are “are being kept in an open air prison” in the first place. Especially when people keep insisting on comparing the Palestinians admittedly dire situation to the Warsaw Ghetto.
I would agree with you if only Hamas would quit lobbing missiles into Israel. It detracts from their claims of legitimacy.
When their aim was poor and distance limited, it could perhaps be overlooked. Unfortunately the missile lobbers are getting better at their craft.
I think you’re the one that needs to get your facts straight.
1. Flotillas were checked, NOT intercepted, by Israel, for security reasons (weapons, etc). For you to state that the flotilla was intercepted implies that Israel, a wealthy western nation, is stealing humanitarian aid from Palestinians.
2. Furthermore, you can even youtube the video of how the Israeli soldiers were attacked FIRST by the people on board with knives. So are you saying that Israeli soldiers, who are trained for combat,should recoil in fear, and not defend themselves?
I agree with the first comment (See Noah) that money from our student fees SHOULD NOT fund such a controversial political issue, especially one that is as divided as this one. I believe that the fees that students are forced to pay should go back and benefit us. If people in the SJG support this donation to the Palestinians, they should be the ones donating out of their pockets, not ours!
It’s uninformed arguments like yours that made listening to the discussion period tonight so unbearably difficult.
Ok, how are these published at 8am on Dec 2nd? Does the Ubyssey publish on GMT? If so, I remind you that there are two clocks in Brock Hall behind the info desk that display both times zones that UBC ensconces: Pacific Standard Time (UBCV), and Pacific Standard Time (UBCO).
FYI
Here is an official letter of support that SPHR received from the well-respected Dr. Noam Chomsky:
I am happy to endorse the Social Justice Centre (SJC) and Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR). They are integral parts of the UBC and Vancouver communities, and important voices in the struggle for justice. I oppose any efforts to defame or destroy these groups, and would urge the AMS council to ensure their voices are protected. I support the autonomy of the SJC, and defend the right of the SJC and other Resource Groups to fulfill their political mandates without interference.
Noam Chomsky
MIT
Thank you to the AMS Council for voting as it did
It seemed to me that after SAC’s presentation tonight, the discussion afterward did little to change any of the councilmembers’ minds; it only helped to solidify in their minds that the student population is divided on the issue and that no matter what, someone would be upset.
Why is it such a crime to talk about something that is going to hurt people’s feelings? I understand creating safe dialogues and I completely agree that we should do all that we can to stop the further perpetration of oppression and injustice on groups of people, especially by watching what we say and making sure it’s not offensive. This is why it’s not okay to say sexist or homophobic language: it furthers harm against oppressed groups.
However, talking about the crimes of a state is not the same thing. When we talk about the situation in Palestine we must keep in mind that the people in Palestine are suffering tremendously. For over 60 years they have been living under terrifying conditions of oppression, after their land was stolen from them, first from colonials through distribution, and then through wars and walls. They are living in desperate situations under an illegal blockade right now. They are being slowly squeezed out of their land through the constantly expanding settlements. Their water is stolen from the territory for the settlements to use, then the sewage runs back into the Palestinian centres. Palestinians are treated like second class citizens, as demonstrated repeatedly with courts making rulings that are racist in nature. The atrocities are great and apparent. The truth is clear.
Israel is an apartheid state and anybody who gets offended at this truth is simply not looking at reality. This should not be a “divisive” issue. It should be encouraged in a university setting that people do their research into an issue such as this one and then act accordingly to end any injustice that they might find existent, and in this instance, will find existent.
Students on this campus should be encouraged to think critically about the way the corporate media portrays the issue and to look at the facts. Then they should demand that their university join the BDS Campaign. BOYCOTT, DIVEST, SANCTIONS Campaign. We stopped Apartheid in South Africa this way, we can do it again in Israel. Let’s do our part to stop the oppression of the Palestinian people. Write to your student councilors and let them know that you support BDS at UBC.
Uh yeah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbIQto3KPUM
BDS won’t work on Israel like it did on South Africa.
The UN Security Council has had sanctions on Iran for a year or two right? Iran still hasn’t ended its nuclear programme because the sanction don’t work. Oh look, they’re still building centrifuges and operating reactors. (Stuxnet may change that)
A boycott on Israel will just lead to the organizers wasting tons and tons of money to promote a feeble action that will only strengthen developing economic bonds between Israel’s newest customers: two rising economic powers named India and China.
BDS won’t work.
Hear hear! Very well said! BDS is the answer
People Power!
Michael Haack is right – this should not even have been a debate, the transaction was a regular one and should just have been approved. But considering that the AMS President has a history of putting his own political views before AMS rules and Council’s will, I’m glad the motion was passed as it was. I commend the Council members who voted in favour.
Oh snap!
Indeed, a completely regular transaction. Perhaps next year we can make a donation to a group that delivers aid to the Janjaweed in Darfur in the guise of hand-knitted sweaters. Who knows, maybe we’re even already following a time-honored university tradition here. Someone should research if UBC students sent Christmas presents to the Sudetenland in the mid to late 30s. The German population there was, after all, marginalized.
The ridiculous and offensive parallels don’t do anything to make your side of the debate look legitimate.
I’m impressed! You’ve managed the almost iopsmsible.
The fees I am FORCED to pay should not be used to fund political events on the other side of the world. That should be an individual decision or a fund raiser by a specific group on campus. I am supportive of Israel 125%.
shame shame shame.
Then petition for a change to the SJC, who operates under a constitution and mandate to make exactly the kinds of political statements you are opposing.
In the same way that other resource groups can support abortion or LGBT rights in opposition to the personal views of likely some portion of the student body, the SJC has the mandate to give funding to student groups that campaign for causes of social justice.
Regardless of whether the Israeli blockade is legal, it is fairly clear that it is causing hardships to the Palestinian people. This creates a social justice issue that the SJC is fully within their mandate to support.
In my opinion, if there is any doubt at all with regards to the legality of the blockade/the boat/the charity receiving the donation, then the donation should be nixed. They mentioned this in the AMS meeting but ignored it, though it became pretty clear that this donation could have retroactive legal (if not, moral) repercussions on the donors–AMS who allowed it and all UBC students who the money belonged to.
I think it’s time to change the rules: no resource groups should be allowed to make external donations of any kind, to any cause, for whatever reason. Keep student fees on campus. If you want to support an external cause, hold a fundraiser and spend your supporter’s money.
This is semantics. They could have allocated this money towards helping to operate the fundraiser at which they promised to donate these funds.
Drawing a distinction between operating off-campus fundraisers and donating to them is completely arbitrary. It also impedes the Resource Groups from operating within their mandate, which is to engage students in social issues on and off campus.
Well done UBC. I am very proud to be a UBC student today. Congratulations to the AMS Council members that had the vision and understanding to support not only the autonomy of the Resource Groups but also show that various groups can’t be shut down because they have controversial viewpoints. What’s controversial today is a standard for human rights tomorrow.
Can someone find Palestine on a map for me? I haven’t been able to locate it.
I wonder why…
Sure, I can help, it’s called Jordan, or rather it could also be called 80% of the Palestine Mandate.
http://canadaboatgaza.org/cms/sites/cbg/en/endorsers.aspx
The only endorser/donor that I was able to find on this page that is held in the same spectrum and esteem of an educational institution like UBC is the UWO Palestinian Student Association. No other school in Canada (which are all public entities without explicit political natures) has donated to this project. AND what’s most important is that the UWO group donated funds that IT RAISED ON ITS OWN: through fundraising programs, events and other resources. IT DID NOT TAKE MONEY FROM EVERY STUDENT AT UWO in order to make this donation.
I’m shocked that UBC is willing to stand out amidst all other educational institutions and donate its very own student fees towards this cause. One group (on either side of the argument) should not have this authority to speak on behalf of so many other students.
The SJC can do as they wish. They are given independence through the code. If you don’t like them , then try changing the code or run for positions in the next election. Presently, they have the right to make their own deicisons without external interference.
Congrades SJC! In little time the lunatic fringe will gleefully denounce UBC as ‘Teh Most Anti-Semitic Campus Evah!’ Oh, the sermons will be fun.
But the accomplishment is worth it, right? What could possibly go wrong? Beyond, of course, this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLrX7fznVgI
Here is my modest proposal. I say the AMS should give SJC and SPHR their own building. In return for the use of facilities, these groups will pledge not to get UBC dragged into the morass of the middle-east conflict. Within their confines they can do and say whatever the hell they want. With the understanding that debates over their land dispute with the Israelis do not annoy the rest of the student body on billboards or through bullshit donations of student money to barely-veiled militant causes. Not to be discriminatory, the IAC should be offered the same deal. Since we all know both sides thrive off of each-other, the AMS should pledge both the IAC and the SJC/SPHR the use of the same building. The UBYSSEY can send a reporter in every few weeks to see who is winning the inevitably violent battle for control of common space. Not that the rest of us will care.
lunatic fringe?
Stop calling the SJC a lunatic fringe.
No offense to Durgan, I went for a bio break and was afk, strangely didn’t get facebook bombed or anything while the creepy leftist had control of the keyboard.
Sorry about that bit, I don’t need to make fun of your name to defame your backwards-assed ideologies.
Why make the Ubyssey expend manpower to cover such clashes within a confined area when it would be just as easy to rig most of the building with cameras! Big Brother: Political Student Edition.
Three groups, one building, and one heck of a string of obscenities from each part.
As a UBC Alum and someone involved with student government through the AUS, I am appalled and disgusted that the AMS would vote this way.
No amount of money should be spent on such a divisive issue.
Every member of my family has graduated from UBC, and we will never donate to UBC again.
By that logic, we should not give student fees to Pro-choice or Pro-life groups, since they also are involved in decisive issues. Nor other ‘contentious’ issues on campus.
Like it or not, the SJC has the right to support political causes and donate as they wish. It is not Council’s purpose to approve or deny such a donation for political reasons unless it is explicitly found to be criminal. Council made the right decision.
You are right, student fees should not be spent on Pro-Life or Pro-Abortion issues. Money collected privately by the groups can be spent however the respective group wishes but student fees should only be spent on students. For the Gym, the fields and for other student services, not for donations.
As you mention in another post, if the AMS is $200,000.00 in debt, then clearly they don’t have the $700 to donate for this unworthy cause.
As for the donation being Criminal. The government of Gaza is a terrorist and Xenophobic organization which is banned in most of the worst. A government which jails and kills homosexuals, which forces Christians out of their homes or to convert to Islam. Providing material support which is what the Flotilla is, is criminal.
We won! Thanks to the council for doing the right thing and thanks to everyone who has supported us over the past two weeks and who came out last night. Keep in touch by emailing your contact to: socialjusticecentre.ubc@gmail.com, we’re going to need your ongoing support as the irrational right in the ams continues to try and crush us. Long live Palestine! Solidarity forever.
I’m still trying to decide whether people like you, who somehow always manage to side with virtually every last reactionary state and/or movement on the planet, still considering themselves “The Left” should prompt those of us who truly care about emancipation to be upset over the misappropriation of this category or to finally accept it as utterly unsalvageable because it has become so tainted by a bunch of loud-mouth reformists who believe Capitalism is nothing but a shadowy conspiracy of old white men and can be fought by burning down a Walmart and who maintain that choosing a bunch of religious fascists as your leaders, whose Charter reads like an addendum to “Mein Kampf” and who promote a legal system that treats homosexuality as a criminal offence punishable by death, is a sacrosanct human right. What I am sure of, however, is that you implicitly claiming “rationality” for your side of the argument just now absolutely made my entire day. So, cheers for that.
Take it from the front lines:
“Terry Glavin: University of B.C. students’ inglorious $700 victory on behalf of Gaza”
http://bit.ly/g1d3dV
Can we please stop talking about this (or at least not have it dominate absolutely every discussion on campus nowadays) already?? The $700 is a drop in the bucket and is what, like two cents from every student? Just move on already (both sides).
I’ve been trying to find information on the much more pressing and important land use consultations that ACTUALLY AFFECT STUDENTS and whose impact on your wallet will be FAR MORE than two cents (and for many probably far more than 700$ individually), with little success.
I know that the Ubyssey doesn’t usually get such a surge in comments and readership (notable exceptions being the ubc animal testing fiasco—basically anything that has at least one group super angry), but as a ubc student i would really like to learn more about things that actually directly affect me.
Please balance the huge coverage of this thing (which i think was blown way out of proportion—I personally think the 700$ could have been used in more productive ways for students but don’t think its been worth the blowing out of proportion that has occurred), with more pressing news that actually deeply affects students please.
I agree, but SJC will disagree to the bitter end.
As is their way.
As is the way of the IAC.
Those that stayed for the rest of the meeting would have learned that the AMS is currently facing a $204,000 deficit. Far more important to students than a procedural $700 donation, yet most people don’t even know about it.
Amazing that IAC was able to make this controversial. The Israeli blockade is ILLEGAL. What other 1.5 million people in the world are cut off from all access by land, sea and air, indeed can’t even receive mail service? Gaza is the contemporary equivalent of the Warsaw Ghetto. You will understand, of course, what Israel and IAC represent in that analogy.
“Gaza is the contemporary equivalent of the Warsaw Ghetto. You will understand, of course, what Israel and IAC represent in that analogy.”
I apologize for giving the moderators more work, but why don’t revisionist, relativist fucktard open a history book once in a while? Gawd, I can’t believe that people are still repeating this bullshit and even think of themselves as totally radical while doing so.
1. You cannot compare the Holocaust to the conflict in the Middle East. Doing so just proves that you’re an ignorant halfwit, nothing else.
2. Why can’t you compare them? Well, there’s a whole array of reasons, but the most pressing is that Jews never actually posed a militant threat to Germans and that they never did anything to be treated as such by them. In the 1930s and 1940s, all that was just pretense to carry out an a priori antisemitism that served as both the motivation of the Nazi elite and – at best – an excuse for the all too willing participants at large. No matter which side you fall on, the situation in the Middle East today has nothing in common with that. It’s undeniably a mutual armed conflict in which Palestinians just as undeniably have posed a vital threat to Israelis in the past and where, not least, Palestinian civilians frequently act as combatants. They are fenced in because they are militant enemies of the state, not because they are Palestinians and comparing this situation to the Warsaw Ghetto therefore really does nothing but make you guilty of historical relativism.
3. But, okay, let’s compare. Let’s be ignorant halfwit relativists for a second. If you look at the Middle East conflict and you feel the uncotrollable urge to draw parallels to the era of National Socialism, the interpretation you come up with as a result proves you to be yet another thing: a positivist (for the record, we are at ingorant halfwit relativistic positivist now). Why? Quite simple: Tanks, guns and a trained military doth not a Nazi make, a specific ideology does. An ideology which, among many other terrible things that are less relevant here, singles out entire groups of people *only* because they belong to that group and vows to eradicate them for the good of one’s own group and/or perhaps the world. No matter how loud Omar Shaban may scream or how lurid Norman Finkelstein my write the opposite, this does not describe the role of Israel in this conflict – it describes to role of Hamas. Despite populist claims to the contrary, there is no Apartheid system in place in Israel; Palestinians are not singled out for their race or their religion – many Muslim Arabs live happily and peacefully within the cofines of the state of Israel with no special laws applying to them – they are singled out for blowing up busses and vowing to do it again. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t racists in Israel; of course there are, like anywhere. But it does mean that the state of Israel itself is not racist or at least no more so than any other Western state – but certainly not in comparison to Boer South Africa or Nazi Germany. The Hamas, on the other hand, has vowed on many occasions to, as it were, drive the Jews into the sea. They are the ones who target Israelis for being Israelis, no matter whether they are soldiers or teenagers at a nightclub. And the actions of their supporters in other countries frequently make clear that this hatred is not directed only at those with an Israeli passport. There are areas of Berlin, Paris and London where people in any way identifiable as Jews can no longer move freely without fearing for their safety, betraying the fact that no one on that side of the conflict is actually making a distinction between Israeli and Jewish – they never have. So, if you really must compare, if you really want to press this issue beyond reason, then you had better call things as they are: The Palestinians may be on the inferior side of this armed conflict, but ideologically they, if anyone, are the side that conjures up parallels with National Socialism, with the Hamas as the NSDAP and the majority of the civilian population its all too willing enablers. You will understand, of course what the SPHR represents in this analogy. To be sure, I would never actually draw this analogy myself, because it, too, would be relativization of the specific catastrophe that was the Holocaust. But if you must, at least do it right.
This is wrong!! I admit, I don’t know the whole story. However, I do pay for my schooling out of my own pocket. I bust my ass all summer to pay. If I want to throw my cash to the wind, that’s great. But when I PAY TO GO TO SCHOOL! That’s what I’m paying for. Not to have some liberal to throw my money at every cause. How about saving the $4 your parents give you that you spend on a anti-capitalism, low fat, soy, free trade coffee, and give it away to some cause. Don’t do it with my money! This is a school not a charity. A sad day in my books.
Amen.
Why are students shifting attention away from the HUGE ASS AMS deficit and the multi-million dollar new SUB nightmare to a measly $700 that no one really gives a shit about…and don’t pretend you DO give a shit, you’re just as indifferent as I am and the WHOLE student body. No wonder no one comes to the bullshit AMS meetings, they are totally pointless. But, honestly let’s focus on UBC instead of world conflicts that don’t concern us!
How about an alternative student society with a constitutional imperative to never remove funds from British Columbia? You know, one for thinking men and women, not for internationalist, garden variety campus leftists?
hey guys im da big dawg. just wanna give props to ed dugan and kyle melnick for giving moneys to that israeli ship. thanks bros
oh ya and blue mountain state on spike tv is the best show on tv its on spike tv i think you can probably google what time its on