Change.org may face legal action for censoring petition

The Zachor Legal Institute has written a letter to Change.org threatening legal action if the crowd-sourcing platform does not respond to its request for information about why it has chosen to flag and disable some components of a petition filed by Stop Antisemitism.

The petition calls for the United States Government to investigate the infiltration of global antisemitic organizations in the US Congress, with a specific focus on the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). It includes statements questioning Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib’s close ties with the Muslim civil rights and advocacy group.

The petition was flagged by Change.org earlier this month. Now, a pink bar at the top of the petition page reads, “Change.org has received flags from our users that the statements in this petition may be contested. You should consider researching this issue before signing or sharing.”

Further, Change.org disabled access to the petition via Change.org user searches, blocked comments, and removed the ability for Change.org users to contribute to the petition sponsors after the petition is signed, among other actions.

Zachor is demanding that Change.org provide information that would allow Stop Antisemitism to quantify the financial harm of lost donations as a result of Change.org’s actions; provide complimentary “promoted petition” status for the petition; acknowledge that the actions taken against the petition were wrongful and issue a public statement to that effect; remove the flagged status; allow users to comment; terminate any activity that might be causing outside search engines from having access to the petition; and provide a copy of Change.org’s corporate charter and other documents that specify its purpose as a public benefit corporation.

Stop Antisemitism is a grassroots organization founded by individuals interested in “waking up the American people” and “eradicating the hatred that seeks to ruin our American way of life,” said co-founder Liora Rez. The organization has run other petitions on Change.org before this one.

Rez told The Jerusalem Post that she and her organization believe Change.org is engaging in “100% some form of censorship.”

“Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are such hot buttons of conversation all over the media in America,” she continued. “Perhaps [their people] have contacted Change.org and they are trying to control things as much as possible on their end.”

Rez said that so far nearly 30,000 people have signed the petition, but almost double that number have clicked to sign, and hundreds of complaints have come to Stop Antisemitism saying supporters are unable to click submit.

“We should have close to double the signatures based on what we are seeing in [Google] Analytics,” said Rez.

ACCORDING TO Zachor, while Change.org also has adopted community guidelines that allow it to remove content or restrict user accounts, the circumstances under which such actions can be taken are limited to the following: hate speech, violence, impersonation, violation of privacy, bullying, graphic content, harm to children, spam and illegal acts. Zachor said “Nothing in the… petition has violated any of the community guidelines or terms of service. In fact, even though Change.org’s terms of service clearly state that Change.org doesn’t monitor petitions or support political positions, that is exactly what has happened when Change.org acted to flag, demonetize and shadowban the… petition.”

Zachor noted that when Change.org requested that Stop Antisemitism provide supporting documentation to prove the accuracy of its petition, it did so and added links to the supporting information on the petition page.

These links include information Stop Antisemitism believes prove CAIR is a terror-supporting organization, such as that in 2007, CAIR was listed as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the case that found the Holy Land Foundation responsible for siphoning over $12 million to Hamas, and a 2009 ruling by US District Court Judge Jorge A. Solis determined that CAIR is Hamas.

“The negative effects of Change.org’s wrongful treatment of the subject petition have damaged the sponsor of the subject petition and have materially and adversely affected the subject petition,” wrote Zachor. “While the Constitution’s First Amendment does not generally apply to private parties acting as such, when such a party operates and controls public platforms used by the public for public benefit, that party becomes a quasi-state actor and can be held liable for First Amendment violations.

“We believe that the evidence set forth above demonstrates that Change.org has subjected the subject petition to a discriminatory campaign of demonetization, shadow banning and censorship, in violation of Change.org’s own policies, governance standards for public benefit corporations and applicable state and federal laws, including anti-discrimination principles of California and Delaware law, federal prohibitions on wire fraud and the First Amendment,” the letter continued.

A.J. Walton, a spokesperson for Change.org, previously told the Post that when a petition is flagged by users, “we review its content to see if it violates our stated policies and to determine whether or not the petition should be removed.

“Since the petition itself does not violate our terms, we have not removed it entirely,” he said. “However, we have taken steps to ensure users know we are aware of their concerns by including the banner at the top of the petition, disabled the comments feature, particularly in light of the many that violate our community guidelines, and limited the petition’s discovery on our platform.”

Responded Rez, “Change.org should be an unbiased platform.” 

Full story here.

Change.org Challenges Anti-CAIR Petition

The online petition site Change.org has flagged a petition by the organization Stop Antisemitism that calls on US Attorney General William Barr and special antisemitism envoy Elan Carr to take a deep look at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

This petition no longer comes up on Google or Change.org Internet searches and it cannot be “boosted” to the Change.org network, a key to a Change.org petition’s success.

Earlier this week, Stop Antisemitism co-founder Liora Rez noticed that she was receiving several emails from the organization’s supporters who were experiencing problems signing the petition or accessing it. At first, she told The Jerusalem Post, she thought it was technical problems on behalf of her older members. But when she opened the petition page, she saw access had been changed.

A pink bar at the top of the petition page reads, “Change.org has received flags from our users that the statements in this petition may be contested. You should consider researching this issue before signing or sharing.”

Rez said she immediately appealed to Change.org, which she has used many times in the past. “They are usually very responsive. I get a response to any question in within an hour,” Rez said. “This time it took them three days to reply.”

Stop Antisemitism is a grassroots organization founded by a group of individuals interested in “waking up the American people” and “eradicating the hatred that seeks to ruin our American way of life,” said Rez. The organization has run other petitions on the site.

When the company did reply they accused Rez of her petition being unsubstantiated. But she said her research on CAIR, Omar and Tlaib is well documented and links to this documentation are on the petition landing page. She sent this information to Change.org, including showing that in 2007, CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case that found Holy Land Foundation responsible for siphoning over $12 million to Hamas. Also, in a 2009 ruling, US District Court Judge Jorge A. Solis determined that CAIR is Hamas.

The petition also claims that Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are “strong allies” of CAIR, and that the organization helped get these Muslim women into office.

The CAIR website denies the above allegations and says the group is focused on combating “stereotyping and defamation.”

The Post likewise contacted Change.org about the petition.

A.J. Walton, Change.org spokesperson, explained that when a petition is flagged by users, “we review its content to see if it violates our stated policies and to determine whether or not the petition should be removed.

“Since the petition itself does not violate our terms, we have not removed it entirely,” he said. “However, we have taken steps to ensure users know we are aware of their concerns by including the banner at the top of the petition, disabled the comments feature, particularly in light of the many that violate our community guidelines, and limited the petition’s discovery on our platform.” 

Winston said users can still sign and share the petition. 

“Anytime you mention Ilhan Omar or CAIR, the second you try to question CAIR, you immediately encounter problems,” Rez said. “Without a doubt this is some form of censorship and must be questioned.”

* * *

The original publication can be found here.

More Than 10,000 People Sign: Investigate Ilhan Omar, Tliab, and CAIR

Stop Antisemitism staged a large protest outside the Hilton Hotel in Los Angeles where Ilhan Omar was speaking on March 23, 2019. (photo credit: Gene Blevins)

An online petition calling on US Attorney General William Barr and special antisemitism envoy Elan Carr to take a deep look at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has reached 10,000 signatures.

“It has just been about a week and we are very excited,” said Liora Rez, co-founder of the organization Stop Antisemitism, which launched the petition on change.org. “But what we want is for Barr and Carr to investigate CAIR’s ties to Hamas and how Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are involved with this organization, which we feel is extremely troubling.”

The petition calls into question what lies behind CAIR and states that the organization helped get these Muslim women into office. It further explains that CAIR was founded following a 1993 meeting in Philadelphia of the US Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which the Department of Justice has described as a covert organization established to support Hamas.

In 2007, CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case that found Holy Land Foundation responsible for siphoning over $12 million to Hamas. A 2009 ruling by US District Court Judge Jorge A. Solis determined that CAIR is Hamas.

The CAIR website denies the above allegations and says the group is focused on combating “stereotyping and defamation.”

The petition asks the following:

“While these two Congresswoman are challenging the dual loyalty of the members of the Jewish-American community, since Ilhan and Rashida don’t have dual loyalty, WHO ARE THEY LOYAL TO?”

The petition was launched only days before CAIR hosted Omar at its fourth Annual Valley Banquet in Los Angeles on March 23. Stop Antisemitism staged a large protest outside the Hilton Hotel in Los Angeles where Omar was speaking Saturday night.

The protesters lined the sidewalks, waving Israeli and American flags and holding up signs saying “Omar equals hate” and various other slogans, supporting Israel and denouncing Omar.

Protesters staying at the Hilton waved large banners saying “CAIR hates Jews” and “Ilhan hates Israel” from their balconies.

“We were happy the Jewish community and those who support the Jewish community came together as a whole and really showed that this has to stop,” said Rez. “These antisemitic tropes and continuous insults by Omar will not be tolerated.

“We came together – Democratic and Republican, and everyone in the middle – this is a bipartisan effort to stop antisemitism,” Rez said.

A smaller counter-protest rose up in support of Omar. Minor confrontations and verbal exchanges were reported by NBC 4 Los Angeles.

Omar’s Saturday night address at the CAIR event was first brought to light by The Jerusalem Post, which was also among the first to document the politician’s antisemitic tweets. In February, Omar tweeted that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), whose annual policy conference is taking place this week in Washington, is paying American politicians to be pro-Israel.

Democratic and Republican politicians condemned Omar’s remarks and she has since apologized. However, days later, she was once again caught up in a controversy over whether or not she would be speaking alongside Yousef Abdallah – who has advocated for violence against Jews and expressed antisemitic sentiments on his social media pages – at an Islamic Relief USA dinner on February 23.

Omar did speak at the event, though Abdallah did not participate. The Islamic relief organization has also been accused of being antisemitic and anti-Israel.

Rez said that Stop Antisemitism is a grassroots organization founded by a group of individuals interested in “waking up the American people.

To sign the petition, click here.

*** *** ***

Original Publication can be found here

Petition Launched Calling for UNC Asheville to Replace Tamika Mallory as Keynote MLK Speaker

A petition has been launched on the Stop Antisemitism website calling for University of North Carolina Asheville to replace Women’s March leader Tamika Mallory as their keynote speaker for a Martin Luther King, Jr. event.

The petition states that Mallory has “a history of anti-Semitic behavior, which includes invoking anti-Semitic canards and supporting Louis Farrakhan, one of America’s most notorious anti-Semites and the leader of the Nation of Islam.”

The petition proceeds to note that King was a staunch supporter of Israel, calling Israel “one of the great outposts of democracy in the world.”

“Choosing a bigot like Tamika Mallory as a keynote speaker is an insult to Dr. King’s legacy as one of America’s most important civil rights leaders,” the petition states.

The petition notes that various Women’s March groups are severing themselves from the national Women’s March organization as evidence of how out of step the Women’s March national leaders’ anti-Semitism with the progressive movement.

When asked by the Journal about the petition, a spokesperson from the University of North Carolina Asheville pointed to a statement from Chancellor Nancy Cable and Interim Provost Karin Peterson that read, in part: “The Constitutional and democratic principles of freedom of thought and expression are central to our mission as a university, especially during the day honoring the legacy and enduring values of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.”

“As has been our custom, the university’s invitation to an individual speaker at a university event in no way implies endorsement of that speaker’s comments, critiques, views, ideas, or actions,” the statement continued. “Further, the university’s fundamental principles reject bias in all of its forms including anti-Semitism and discrimination.”

Roz Rothstein, CEO of StandWithUs, said in a statement, “If the administration is genuine about rejecting anti-Semitism and discrimination, it will unequivocally condemn Mallory’s hateful statements toward Jews and praise of Louis Farrakhan. Freedom of expression does not mean freedom from criticism for engaging in bigotry. The university should use its own free speech rights to take a moral stand and confront Mallory on this issue.”

Simon Wiesenthal Center Associate Dean Rabbi Abraham Cooper called on UNC Asheville to cancel the event.

“A keynote address celebrating Martin Luther King Jr’s legacy of unity by a person who embraces anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan, America’s divider-in-chief,” Cooper told the Journal in an email. “We call on UNC to cancel an event that besmirched and mocks MLK. Tamika Mallory must choose between two legacies MLK or Farrakhan. You can’t embrace love and hate simultaneously.”

Source: Jewishjournal.com

Despite anti-Semitic rhetoric, Tamika Mallory to speak at UNC Asheville on MLK Day

“Anyone who propagates hateful messages is free to express their opinions as they wish, but should not be given a public platform at an educational establishment to do so,” said Liora Rez of the Center for Combating Hate in America.

By Jackson Richman

(January 10, 2019 / JNS) The University of North Carolina, Asheville, is scheduled to host Women’s March leader Tamika Mallory as its keynote speaker on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Jan. 24, despite her anti-Semitic rhetoric and ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

This drew condemnation from groups such as StandWithUs and the Center for Combating Hate in America (C4CHA).

“If the administration is genuine about rejecting anti-Semitism and discrimination, then it will unequivocally condemn Mallory’s hateful statements toward Jews and praise of Louis Farrakhan,” said SWU CEO Roz Rothstein. “Freedom of expression does not mean freedom from criticism for engaging in bigotry. The university should use its own free-speech rights to take a moral stand and confront Mallory on this issue.”

The university defended its decision.

“As has been our custom, the university’s invitation to an individual speaker at a university event in no way implies endorsement of that speaker’s comments, critiques, views, ideas or actions,” said Chancellor Nancy Cable and Interim Provost Karin Peterson.

She added that efforts “are currently underway to create opportunities for our campus and the Asheville community to engage in dialogue around the keynote address, as well as many topics emerging from the activities planned for the week.”

“As organizations and individuals condemn Mallory and distance themselves from her hateful vitriol, UNC Asheville provides a platform for her and lends its authority toward legitimizing her anti-Semitism,” C4CHA Liora Rez told The Algemeiner. “Anyone who propagates hateful messages is free to express their opinions as they wish, but should not be given a public platform at an educational establishment to do so.”

The AMCHA Initiative sought to strike a balance over the development.

“While Mallory has a history of promoting anti-Semitism, she has a right to speak on campus. I don’t believe in disinviting speakers,” the group’s director, Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, told JNS. “But if and when she says something hateful or bigoted toward Jewish students or any students, the UNC administration must publicly and promptly condemn those remarks, just as they would a speaker who spouts racist, sexist, homophobic or Islamophobic statements, and make it clear to the entire campus community that while speech may be protected, hateful and intolerant behavior towards any UNC student will not be tolerated.”

Source: jns.org

After CNN Firing, Marc Lamont Hill Blames Israel for Police Killings of Black People, Opposes Renouncing Farrakhan

Marc Lamont Hill, a tenured professor at Temple University who recently lost his contract as a CNN commentator for comments denounced as antisemitic, blamed Israel on Friday for police violence in the United States and rejected calls to denounce Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

Marc Lamont Hill. Photo: Karga Fantasma

Speaking on “The Breakfast Club” radio program, Hill addressed the controversy stemming from his November 28 speech at the United Nations, in which he endorsed the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel in pursuit of “a free Palestine from the river to the sea” — a call typically used by Arab nationalist and Islamist groups to advocate for the establishment of a Palestinian state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, in place of Israel. The BDS campaign itself is often criticized for rejecting the Jewish people’s right to self-determination and denying Jewish indigeneity to the Levant.

In his UN speech, Hill also did not rule out violence as a means of Palestinian “resistance,” suggesting that as “black resistance to American apartheid did not come purely through Gandhi and nonviolence … we must allow the Palestinian people the same range of opportunity and political possibility.”

The Temple University Board of Trustees condemned Hill over these comments, but did not move to fire him. A petition calling for his dismissal organized by StopAntisemitism.org has reached over 2800 signatures.

Speaking on Friday, the professor reiterated that his “river to the sea” comment was not a call for Israel’s destruction, and argued that the phrase was “not a commonly accepted dog-whistle.”

“I don’t want any harm to happen to Jewish people, I don’t want the destruction of Jewish people,” he said.

Hill again endorsed a “one-state” solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which Israel would become a bi-national, Palestinian-majority state. “For me democracy is one-state, everybody lives in it, everybody can vote, and it’s not ruled by religion — it’s not a Jewish state, it’s not a Muslim sate, it’s not a Christian state, it is, in fact, a secular state,” he said.

Touching on past controversies, Hill also criticized the idea that he should denounce Farrakhan — who he previously called “a hero to Blacks of all religions” —  for railing against “Satanic Jews” and calling gay relationships “degenerate crap,” among other controversial comments.

Agreeing that one could “love” Farrakhan, but not like something that he said, Hill explained that he maintained two “key issues” of disagreement with the Nation of Islam leader: “The question of antisemitism — what constitutes it and what the boundaries are — and … LGBT issues.”

“For some reason, if you meet with Minister Farrakhan and you don’t throw him away wholesale, then you’re castigated in a way that doesn’t happen with anybody else,” Hill argued.

“I worked on Fox News for many years. No one ever said, ‘Why are you sitting with Bill O’reilly? Why are you sitting with Sean Hannity? Why are you sitting with Ann Coulter?’ No one ever said that,” he recounted. “And I’m not comparing Farrakhan to them, except to say, that if you think [he’s] extreme, I think they’re extreme.”

“Why is only one set of people untouchable?” He asked. “And why does every black leader have to ritually denounce Farrakhan in order to sustain a position? That doesn’t happen to anyone else.”

“Again, Minister Farrakhan is my brother,” the professor continued, before opposing “the idea that we have to renounce him, denounce him, throw [him] away” based on some disagreements.

“In the black tradition, I ain’t got the luxury of throwing people who love us away,” he added. “I ain’t got the luxury of taking people who have come out of traditions that have saved us and cleaned us and throw them away.”

His comments echoed a statement Hill issued in October, in which he refused to explicitly renounce Farrakhan and asserted, “I do NOT believe … that Minister Farrakhan is an anti-Semite.”

Later on in the segment, Hill explained why he focused on a conflict in the Middle East while racial minorities in the US faced their own domestic struggles, arguing that “there’s a relationship between the two.”

“The New York City police, they’re killing us, but they’re being trained by Israeli security forces,” he said. “They’re being trained — New York City police and in other cities as well. So here’s a connection between the two. I can’t stop one without the other, there’s a relationship.”

“Remember I ain’t talking about Jewish people, I’m talking about the Israeli state,” Hill emphasized.

BDS groups have previously advanced similar allegations, accusing Jewish American groups that host exchanges between American and Israeli police forces of promoting violence against minorities in the US. These claims have been roundly rejected by the sponsoring organizations, among them the Anti-Defamation League, which notes that its National Counter-Terrorism Seminar (NCTS) in Israel focuses on strategies “to deter and disrupt terror attacks and strengthen community resilience.”

Hill was then questioned by host Charlamagne tha God — who said he often only hears the “pro-Palestinian perspective” — about whether Israelis were justified for placing restrictions on Palestinians who committed acts of terrorism. The professor answered that while he did not support the killing of innocent people, “oftentimes … every act of resistance that Palestinians engage in is called terrorism.”

“Of course there are Israelis and there are Jewish people who are victims of unethical, immoral, awful, atrocious acts,” Hill said. “I don’t dispute that.”

“A Jewish pregnant mother was killed two days ago in Israel, that’s awful and I denounce that,” he added, in apparent reference to Shira Ish-Ran, a 30-week pregnant Israeli woman who was critically injured by a Palestinian gunman on December 9th. Ish-Ran’s baby was delivered via an emergency C-section, but died after four days. The mother’s condition has been improving.

Hill argued that the recent attack — among the latest in a spate of Palestinian violence against Israeli targets in the West Bank — was not representative “of what’s been happening.”

“Too often any act of resistance from Palestinians gets called terrorism,” he reiterated. “International law says that an occupied people have the legal right to resist, and I think that’s just common sense. That’s what [Malcolm X] been talking about.”

When asked directly if he supported “violent responses from Palestinians,” Hill replied, “I support self-defense.”

“A violent response to a peace talk — no,” he explained. “A violent response to violence — yes.”

Source: algemeiner.com