Collaborators in the Campus War against Israel and the Jews: Neve Gordon – by John Perazzo


The campus war against Israel and the Jews is led by a group of anti-Semites, many of them faculty members, who have made a career for themselves by traveling from one university to another supporting Arab terrorism. They invariably pretend that they are promoting peace. But in the Orwellian bubble where they live, Arab aggression and terror become self-defense, and Israeli self-defense becomes aggression and terror. Similarly, Israeli democracy is apartheid, while Arab genocide is liberation.

One of the most bizarre aspects of this campus war against the Jews is how numerous self-hating, anti-Semitic Jews are in the ranks of the movement to achieve the annihilation of Israel. For reasons that only a psychiatrist could fully understand, these people use their birthright to give authenticity to the campaign of delegitimizing and demonizing Israel. Today the leading promoters of “divestment” and of boycotting Israel are academic Jewish leftists, some of them from Israel itself. In a few extreme cases, this detestation of Israel is combined with a fawning courtship of Islamic terrorists, American and European Neo-Nazis, and even Holocaust Deniers.

One of these anti-Semitic Jews is Dr. Neve Gordon, chairman of the Department of Politics and Government at Ben Gurion University (BGU) of the Negev. During the first Palestinian Intifada (1987-1991), Gordon served as director of Physicians for Human Rights – Israel, an organization that consistently condemns Israeli military reprisals against Palestinian terrorists while turning a blind eye to the homicidal atrocities committed by the terrorists themselves. In 1999 Gordon earned a Ph.D. from Notre Dame University. Before joining the BGU faculty, he worked variously as a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley, the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, and the Watson Institute at Brown University.

Though he is an Israeli citizen, Gordon invariably sides with Israel’s enemies in the ongoing Mideast conflict. During the siege of Ramallah in 2002, for instance, he barricaded himself with Yasser Arafat, the terrorist responsible for the deaths of more Jews than any human being since Adolf Hitler. For years, Gordon has been referring to Israel as a fascist, terrorist, “apartheid” state that “resembles Nazi Germany.” He has posted numerous writings on Holocaust-denial websites. And he has repeatedly advocated a “one state” solution, in which Israel, by way of the so-called Palestinian “right of return,” would be inundated with Arab “refugees” whose inevitable political supremacy would spell the de facto end of Israel.

Recognizing that Israelis are highly unlikely to ever agree to such an arrangement, Gordon concedes that “the two-state solution is more realistic.” As Gordon explains it, that option “entails Israel’s withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders,… the division of Jerusalem, and a recognition of the Palestinian right of return with the stipulation that only a limited number of the 4.5 million Palestinian refugees would be allowed to return to Israel.”

Gordon was formerly a regular columnist for the Hamas media apologist,, where he regularly accused Israel of seeking to sabotage the peace process and steal Arab lands. Last December, when Hamas rockets and missiles were raining down on much of southern Israel — some of them hitting the BGU campus — Gordon did not denounce the Hamas terrorists. Instead he condemned the Israeli military for “targeting” the building called “Gaza University,” a structure used as a repository for the rockets intended to kill Israelis.

In January 2009, when Israel was engaged in its Operation Cast Lead campaign to diminish the strength of Hamas and put an end to the latter’s relentless rocket bombardment of Israeli towns, Gordon sneered at claims that the Israeli military was taking pains to avoid inflicting civilian casualties:

“The fact that the Israeli military could have razed the entire Gaza Strip, but instead destroyed only 15% of the buildings does not make its actions moral. The fact that the Israeli military could have killed thousands of Palestinian children during this campaign, and, due to restraint, killed ‘only’ 300, does not make Operation Cast Lead ethical.

“Ultimately, the moral claims the Israeli government uses to support its actions during this war are empty. They actually reveal Israel’s unwillingness to confront the original source of the current violence, which is not Hamas, but rather the occupation of the Gaza Strip, West Bank and East Jerusalem.”

Absent from Gordon’s condemnation of the Israeli “occupation” is any mention of the way that occupation came about in the first place. David Horowitz explains:

“In 1967, Egypt, Syria and Jordan attacked Israel for a second time and were again defeated. It was in repelling these aggressors that Israel came to control the West Bank and the Gaza strip, as well as the oil-rich Sinai desert. Israel had every right to annex these territories captured from the aggressors — a time-honored ritual among nations, and in fact the precise way that Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan had come into existence themselves. But Israel did not do so. On the other hand, neither did it withdraw its armies or relinquish its control.”

On August 26, 2009, the Los Angeles Times published an opinion piece by Gordon titled “Boycott Israel,” which depicted Israel as “an apartheid state” wherein “[t]he Palestinians are stateless and lack many of the most basic human rights.” “[T]he only way to counter the apartheid trend in Israel,” said Gordon, “is through massive international pressure” in the form of a boycott beginning with divestment from companies operating in Judea and Samaria, and later moving on to firms that “help sustain and reinforce the occupation.”

Before submitting the foregoing article to the LA Times, Gordon gave his department at BGU advance knowledge of what he intended to say in the piece, and offered to step down as department chair if his colleagues thought his words would prove too embarrassing to them. Yet those colleagues decided unanimously not to let him step down; rather, they stood firmly behind him.

Clearly, the Jewish collaborators in the campus war against Israel are not waging their battle alone. They enjoy a wealth of tactical and ideological support from their fellow faculty members.

Articles in Frontpage’s Collaborators series:

Norman Finkelstein

Tony Judt

Michael Lerner

Marc H. Ellis

  • solemnman

    Israel, suffering from” the light unto the nations” syndrome allows Neve Gordon to impart his disdain and hatred for Israel to the students, he teaches ,who may,in the future,, be asked to put their lives in on the line in the service of their country.He is ,by any definition,a traitor.

  • Victor Redlick

    Lorrie Goldstein, Associate Editor of the Toronto Sun newspaper, has moved on from calling non-Jews and Jews, alike, ” anti-Semites ” and rightfully refers to them all as just plain ” Jew-haters “. The difference is most relevant. ” Anti-Semite ” has taken on a remarkably odious cachet that doesn't seem to bother society's useless dregs. Being acclaimed as a ” Jew-hater “, however, is not a title anyone seems to want to be tattooed with, not interestingly but certainly shamelessly enough. Jews are Semites and so are other non-Jewish, north-African denizens, so ” Jew hater ” is more distinguishable and should be referenced universally from hereonin as such.

  • aliko

    In the end of the movie “The devil's advocates”, Reeves character asks the devil, played fantastically by Pacino, “why the law, dad?” (why choose to conquer humanity through a law firm) to which he responds, “it's the ultimate back stage pass, it's the new priesthood!…all of us, acquittal after acquittal after acquittal, until the stench of it reaches so high and far into heaven, it chokes the whole….”.

    Why work hard a lawyer when you can call the shots from the supreme court and the attorney general?

    I don't even need to look hard for it – for instance, former chief justice, the liberals celebrated Aharon Barak said that “Israelis want to throw the Arabs out”… or the main player for the left (a self proclaimed anarchists supporter) Meni Mazuz, the Israeli Attorney general saying that a case where Israeli Arabs, supporting terrorist organizations while visiting an enemy country – Syria, is of no interest to the public.

    This is like letting the cat guard the milk. Gordon is just one more case adding to the stench coming from the Israeli justice system.

  • Nadine Lumley

    Why is Steve Harper **SO** fanatical about supporting Isreal bombing innocent Palestinian civilians? What’s the secret agenda at work here?

    ‎Canada does one billion dollars of trade with Israel annually. Most of it military. (At the 5:30 mark).

    ‎… the standard picture is that the U.S.(and by extension Canada) is an honest broker trying to bring together two recalcitrant opponents- Israel and Palestinian Authority.

    That’s just a charade.

  • Nadine Lumley

    Harper aligns himself with violent terrorist organization

    There is a very good episode of Fault Lines, Canada-Israel: The other special relationship, that goes into depth on Canada's new one-sided policy in the Middle East. Every Canadian should watch this because the Harper government has aligned itself with the Jewish Defense League, an organization that the American FBI have called a violent terrorist organization.

    Fault Lines – Canada-Israel: The other special relationship

  • Nadine Lumley

    Is Harper Canada's most pro-Israel PM?

    CBC video

  • Nadine Lumley

    Harper buying Trillion Dollar Jets for war machine Israel

    Stephen Harper plucked a Lockheed Martin lobbyist off Bay Street to act as his chief of staff, ensuring that taxpayers are saddled with this junk, and asked for nothing in return. Nothing.

    And Israel is getting all of the largesse. And they are even getting some of the planes FOR FREE!

    So are we buying those planes to fight the Russians as dingbat MacKay suggests, or to defend Israel? Why won't this government come clean with Canadians?

    It's rather disturbing when a Canadian prime minister puts a foreign nation ahead of his own. And as Jennifer Ditchburn said, Canada is standing alone in not denouncing the Egyptian dictator, based on Harper's troubling attachment to this country.

  • Nadine Lumley

    Harper puts Israel ahead of Canada

    snip snip: Watching and listening to Steve Harper’s bizarre and unnerving speech about anti-Semitism and Israel raises the question as to whether or not the man is mentally fit to be prime minister.

    In effect, Harper has taken the position of being Israel’s defender no matter what – in other words, this commitment comes before his duty as prime minister, before his duty to represent Canada’s interests abroad, before his role of elected representative. Harper is a defender of Israel no matter the consequences for Canada. He stated:

  • Nadine Lumley

    Israel: Of course what they’re doing is illegal

    snip snip: If there were serious negotiations, they would be organized by some neutral party and the U.S. and Israel would be on one side and the world would be on the other side. And that is not an exaggeration.

    The issue that’s being debated is a footnote, a minor footnote: expansion of settlements. Of course it’s illegal.

    In fact, everything Israel is doing in the West Bank and Gaza is illegal. That hasn’t even been controversial since 1967.

    I haven’t seen any revelations about Saudi Arabia privately urging the US to pressure Israel to get rid of its nuclear arsenal of over 200 nuclear weapons

  • Nadine Lumley

    Though Muslims outnumbered Jews by two to one in Canada, the Jewish community was more politically impactful.

    Harper stood to gain a major advantage in the Canadian media with his pro-Isreal position. The country's largest media empire, Canwest, was controlled by the Aspers, who made no secret of their allegiance to Jewish causes and became enthusiastic backers of Harper on all related questions.

    According to Lawrence Martin:

  • Daniel

    Israel supporters ARE IN THE WRONG, not antisemites. You seriously don’t get it. One excuse after another. Israel is a colonial project from recent history that had no right to declare independence because it wasn’t theirs. No right to build on occupied land. No right to the land because the biblical claim is beyond ridiculous and is meaningless and baseless. No right to use double standards and excessive force to kill civilians as punishment for what they deem Terroism. No right to insult and smear critics. Do you have a mental illness? Seriously this backwards oddity of Israel support defies rational thought. If you don’t see it, then take off your blinders. If you are incapable or otherwise offended, too bad. Be offended. Again, you are in the wrong and this cannot be stressed enough. Israel’s nukes are real and they scare me. I don’t see a future for Israel or Zionism, and to be quite fair you guys are helping that become a reality more than you even realize. So keep it up