On Wednesday night, the University of Warwick held an anti-Israel event. The advert for the event implied the discussion would deliver an accusation that Israel engages in eugenics and promote eugenic retaliation to even up the score.
I cannot relate exactly how the ‘academic’ argument was delivered to the audience, because they denied me, and two other Jewish people, entry at the door.
Two Jewish students who did gain entry suggested the talk was not as bad as they had feared:
“We were deeply concerned with the event’s Facebook description, which we believe amounted to dog-whistle antisemitism. As such, a couple of our members attended the event, which had a turnout of 10 to 15 people, and found that the speaker and her content were not antisemitic, and therefore, not worthy of further comment. It is important to note that there was a divergence between the event as advertised, and what was heard on the day.”
Given the complaints, perhaps the Hawthorne Effect was at work. After all, they knew we had ‘clocked’ the event, knew complaints had been made, and knew they had denied us entry. This would explain the divergence referenced by the students.
What is true, without doubt, is that the advert for the event is deeply antisemitic.
Then of course, there is the fact they chose to deny us entry.
Since then, they have been bending over backwards to explain what was clearly racism.
This is no different from a case of three innocent black people turning up and being refused entry to an event. The decision to turn them away was only made when the white racist organizer saw them there and didn’t want the event ‘sullied’. The white man said it was ‘members only’, even though it was advertised as public. They also gave another excuse about irrelevant university policy that was quickly ridiculed. Others have suggested it happened because it was ‘full’. Or because the black people were there to cause trouble. They have made up stories about known agitators who were spotted, or abuse being thrown. Even when none of this is true. Everything the university and its supporters are doing, is typical of all the ways racist behavior against black people was always protected and excused.
There are several levels to this. The event itself, the university environment, the wider issues inside academia, and the exclusion.
The most important part of the unfolding story is the reason I was there. I had received a call for help from students at the University of Warwick who no longer know who they can turn to. Some of them feel that the entire system is set up against them.
The University of Warwick has a small clique of academics who have grouped together to create a nest of anti-Israel activity. They set up their own group because the anti-Israel activity by the students wasn’t ‘extreme’ enough. And because it is Faculty, they have drawn on their connections and budgets to help them. It is why that a year ago, several departments funded a full day anti-Israel conference.
It also means that the Jewish students need to tread carefully. These people supervise them, teach them, and mark their papers. Let us not forget one of the leading lights of this group faced accusations of intimidation and down-marking by an Israeli student in a case that eventually saw the University pay compensation.
Imagine being a flag waving Zionist having an anti-Israel activist in control of your future career? This is reality for Jewish students at Warwick.
As we were rejected on unacceptable discriminatory grounds, their excuses are being built up after the event. We have already been told by the university that it is ‘unfortunate’ we were told we were denied entry under the PREVENT program. Of course, it is unfortunate, because it means their story is not consistent.
I am very much a free speech advocate, so my inherent problem is not the event itself. An academic wanted to discuss her PhD thesis. What we should be asking is how antisemitic bunkum is rewarded with the PhD in the first place. And then why in a place of open debate is criticism is being stifled, as those known to oppose their ideas, are being denied entry. This means the students are not just being fed with antisemitic theories, but a mechanism is in place that allows this to take place without opposition.
As I write Hilary Aked’s PhD which is all about Jewish money and political influence in the UK, is no doubt being given a green light.
We were denied entry to a public event, because the activists (who are the faculty at the University of Warwick) didn’t want the Jews inside, as they did not want any critical analysis of their propaganda to take place.
Once this decision has been taken, it becomes an exercise in justifying that decision, by using the rules to exclude us.
We were initially told it was because of ‘PREVENT’, which is a UK government initiative that places certain restrictions onto universities to fight against the spread of extremism. In this case it has no bearing, but was the *FIRST* piece of ammunition thrown our way.
They spread rumours we were not the only ones denied entry. Except we arrived early, were still outside the door 15 minutes after the event started, and saw nobody else denied entry.
Then it has been rumoured that agitators were with us, and they feared disruption. This too is pure poppycock.
It is an attempt at the University of Warwick to find a suitable response, that fits the acceptable criteria, which they can they all hide behind.
Now they are suggesting we ourselves were the agitators. They are telling media that our behaviour was in some ways responsible for our exclusion. Lisa Tilley, one of these academics, has suggested
‘Mr Collier is very well-known on campuses across the UK for his aggressive behaviour towards female academics in particular, including Jewish female academics, and Mr Collier’s physical and verbal intimidation tactics were very much on display on Wednesday.’
This is a member of Faculty at Warwick, making up false stories about sexist and aggressive behaviour, to excuse antisemitism.
My role is to kick away the stone to shine a light on those who prefer to operate in the shadows, anti-Jewish racism, antisemitism, should be given no place to hide. Where hate-speech can be proscribed, it should be proscribed, where free speech is paramount, it must be vocally opposed. I have never raised my voice in anger, and am always polite, respectful and impeccably behaved.
This is an unfolding story. My report on the event is here. A complaint, including against the diversionary and false allegations, has been lodged with the university.
