Talk:University of Minnesota Anti-War Organizing League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Anti-War Organizing League, a leftist organization on the Twin Cities campus of the University of Minnesota, is affiliated with the Anti-War Committee. The Anti-War Committee believes that Israel "is an illegitimate apartheid state". This denotes that the AWC believes in that Israel - the Jewish homeland - has no right to exist. With the ample evidence of anti-Semitic propaganda out of the Arab and Persian Middle East, the insistence of the AWC flying Palestinian-Arab flags and a banner that shows a map of Israel with the designation "Palestine", it is evident that the AWC believes that Israel is a non-entity, of the supremacy of political Islam, and the eventual subjugation and probable death of the Jews residing in Israel.

Zionism is the movement to establish and maintain a homeland for the Jews. Anti-Zionism (anti-Israel belief) denies the Jews their homeland and right of self-determination. The AWC is anti-Israel and that fact is clearly stated on their website. The AWOL, being affiliated with the AWC, are also logically affiliated with their beliefs.

Amongst the left and Islamists, anti-Zionism has become a cover for anti-Semitism: the destruction of the Jewish state and along with it, the Jews.

nkras

Nkras, point number one is that this entry is about the Anti-War Organizing League (AWOL) at the University of Minnesota. It is not about the Anti-War Committee, which is a separate organization. The two organizations do work together but it is entirely inappropriate for you to try to use the AWOL page to attack the Anti-War Committee. Second, you make a series of quite incredible leaps in logic in what you wrote above that lead to a completely incorrect and very serious and insulting conclusions about the Anti-War Committee's politics. I think it is entirely inappropriate for you to make such allegations on the wikipedia page of an organization in order to attempt to discredit that organization. I have reverted your changes each time you have made them and will continue to do so as it appears to me that you have a political agenda and are trying to insert your POV and discredit ANOTHER separate organization (the Anti-War Committee), rather than attempting to help create an accurate wikipedia page about the Anti-War Organizing League. Takealeft 15:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Nkras writes: Amongst the left and Islamists, anti-Zionism has become a cover for anti-Semitism: the destruction of the Jewish state and along with it, the Jews." This is an entirely POV statement with no basis in fact. Support for one form of political nationalism is not the same as respecting the rights of any given people. Zionism is by nature an exclusionary ideology. Opposing the "apartheid" nature of South Africa, as noted by Archbishop Desmond Tutu among others, is not the same as supporting the persecution of any people. Ironically, anti-Semitism is the belief that Jews are not a European people, something Zionism not only accepts, but demands. This kind of POV trolling should not be tolerated and any attempts to distort the record of anti-racist organizations because they apply a consistant, democratic standard to exclusionary ideologies should be resisted.In the Stacks 16:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I will not get into a political discussion with either of you. That is not the point. Note that I had edited "anti-semitic" out of the description of the AWC as a compromise. The facts, however, still are:

1. The AWOL is affiliated with the AWC.

2. The AWC clearly states they believe that Israel is "an illegitimate apartheid state".

You may use all the euphemisms you want, and sanitize the entry all you want, but the aforementioned facts remain. That both Takealeft and In the Stacks attack an edit - by denial of clear evidence and fact - is historic and factual revisionism on their part. This is what must be resisted.

I stand my ground, you stand corrected.

nkras

Attacking groups based on "affiliation" is tangential and beside the point. Israel is a state that openly claims to be only for Jews while occupying clearly multi-ethnic land. Laws governing land purchases, for one example, are openly disciminatory. The idea of "apartheid" is not unique to southern Africa, or Israel. But these are two of the most egregious examples of one ethnic group claiming rights to govern another through either codified laws or raw military power. In any case, that is all beside the point – and Nkras's Zionist ideological agenda is immaterial. His criticisms are not directed properly at the UM AWOL. So, stand your ground (and keep telling yourself it's not quicksand).In the Stacks 17:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


Stating fact is not "attacking". Again, I will not engage in a discussion about Israel, Zionism, et. al. Read my comments above re: euphemism and sanitizing an entry. Nkras 15:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Notability?

I don't see how this org. is notable. Can someone tell me how/why it is? Thanks. IronDuke 21:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Is there a generally accepted standard for notability for inclusion in wikipedia? Takealeft 22:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. It is here. In a nutshell: "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the subject itself." IronDuke 22:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the sources, Tal. Two things. 1st) You should not mark the edit as minor. Adding dourecs is not minor. Changing a comma, for example, might be minor. 2nd) The sources you are providing are simply the school newpaper, right? That's not really going to meet the test above. "Multiple" is one part of the test, as is "Non-trivial", and you might also consider whether all subjects covered by a school newspaper would be worthy of inclusion here. Would this, for example? So... I don't want to rush you if you're still looking for sources, but I'm hoping there's more than this. IronDuke 23:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Hey IronDuke, thanks for the link to the 'notability' pages. I glanced at the page talking about organizations, and it seems that maybe AWOL does not qualify as a 'notable' organization. I could find some more media coverage from other non-student newspapers (I know there has been coverage of their protests in the Star Tribune and Pioneer Press newspapers), which would be better than just coverage from the student newspaper (though the MN Daily is a daily newspaper and is the third largest circulation newspaper in the state). I'm not sure that's enough though since AWOL only exists on one college campus and isn't part of a larger national organization. Anyone else have thoughts about this? Takealeft 08:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion review?

Time to review this article? Any more thoughts? Thanks --Tom 15:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)