RMS Cancels Lectures In Israel

Eesh writes "Globes and Haaretz report that Stallman cancelled his plans for lecturing in Israeli universities as part of a visit to the Palestinian Authority, due to threats by the Palestinian organizers that they won't be paying for his trip if he does so. Globes write: 'Stallman was scheduled to visit Israel in July and to speak at Haifa University, Tel Aviv University and Shenkar College. The Palestinians initiated the visit, but when they understood that Stallman would also be speaking at Israeli universities they told him they would no longer fund the trip. In response, Stallman announced that he would cancel the speaking engagements in Israel, and would be satisfied with visiting the Palestinian Authority regions only.'" Here's the email from RMS and response from the Israeli organizer. Hopefully RMS will brush off being named "Linux founder" by Haaretz. Update: 05/29 19:39 GMT by T : Oops! As user Windrip points out below, it's Globes, not Haaretz, which attributed Linux to RMS.

Comments

makes sense

[roman_mir]

Maybe if universities in Israel want to have him speak there, they should invite him at a different time and by him some other tickets?

Re:makes sense

[mrxak]

Exactly. Is it a dick move by the Palestinians? Absolutely. But it really is their right, after all, they are paying for his trip and they can put whatever conditions on it they'd like.

Now, whether or not he should have, at that point, decided not to go at all, because he's being used as a political pawn, I suppose we can argue about that. But at the end of the day, he agreed to the trip as the Palestinians wanted, then decided he'd also do some other things on their dime, they said no way, so he decided to stick to the original agreement. I can't really fault him for that.

If Israeli universities want to pay for him to come in a week later, then they are free to do that.

Re:makes sense

[GCsoftware]

Unlike the Israelis who don't get any foreign funding whatsoever, especially not for weapons. Nope, perish the thought.

Re:makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Israeli ? Not really. Their land was stolen.

All land was stolen, ultimately.

Re:makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah. After all, Palestinians are not Semites!

Re:makes sense

[SwedishPenguin]

Not this bullshit again. Being against Israel is not the same as being antisemitic, there are plenty of reasons to be anti-Israel considering all the lousy crap they've done and continue to do in that region. And accusing Palestinians of "antisemitism" is especially dumb, as Palestinians are just as Semitic as the Israelis are.

Re:makes sense

[amiga3D]

Trying to pick a bad guy in the region is pretty easy. It's pretty much all bad. I've seen no one that doesn't have blood on their hands.

Re:makes sense

[Shadow of Eternity]

That is true, but when your government charter specifically and explicitly calls for the murder of all JEWS and blames them for secretly being behind pretty much every war or revolution that ever happened in the world while referencing the protocols of the elders of zion it's pretty obvious that in this case they are anti-israel specifically because they are anti-jew.

Re:makes sense

[ZipK]

But at the end of the day, he agreed to the trip as the Palestinians wanted, then decided he'd also do some other things on their dime, they said no way, so he decided to stick to the original agreement.

The reporting suggests that the original agreement did not have a "you will not visit Israel on a trip that we're funding" clause in it. The story suggests that RMS agreed to give some lectures for the Palestinians, and only later, when he added stops in Israel, did the Palestinians attach additional conditions; RMS then subsequently accepted these additional conditions.

Re:makes sense

[bjourne]

'In 2010 he was due to play a gig in Tel Aviv, but this attracted criticism from Palestinian groups who stated "Your performance in Israel would be the equivalent to having performed in Sun City during South Africaâ(TM)s apartheid era... We hope that you will not play apartheid Israel." In response he cancelled the gig.'

There is no factual error in that quote. Israel is an apartheid state.

Re:makes sense

[snowgirl]

Trying to pick a bad guy in the region is pretty easy. It's pretty much all bad. I've seen no one that doesn't have blood on their hands.

I hear that Pontius Pilate was the last person with clean hands in that region...

Re:makes sense

[roman_mir]

If I ever meet RMS, I'd like to confront him on his misunderstanding of economics, I think that beyond the future of HURD, that would be the only interesting thing to talk about with the guy.

Re:makes sense

[makomk]

There is no factual error in that quote. Israel is an apartheid state.

Pretty much, yeah. All the arguments against this that I've seen seem to fundamentally misunderstand either how apartheid actually worked in South Africa or just how little independence Palestine actually has...

Re:makes sense

[TRACK-YOUR-POSITION]

But people like you never mention that when talking about other countries, only Israel gets called on the carpet for that anytime money is in question.

As an AC said, two posts up is someone complaining about Palestinian money coming from the EU.

But more to the point, Israel receives more US foreign aid, including military aid, then any other country. That's not even including all of the support we give to dictators in the region so that they'll take a softer stance towards Israel. That's also not including the costs of all the hate directed our way because we're supporting hated dictators.

Supporting Israel has cost America a lot of blood and treasure, but they don't seem to respect us for it.

Re:makes sense

[poetmatt]

How is israel an apartheid state? Is it not the same middle eastern people that every other country surrounding them is?

Re:makes sense

[cavreader]

You are the prime example on how someone can ignore every fact you encounter that does not support your world view. The palestinians represent the longest and most rewarded scam of the century. They are receiving billions of dollars a year from the EU, US, and Arab countries and the majority of that money never gets to those who need it. The Palestinians were sacrificed by the entire middle east as way to attack Israel which didn't involve getting humiliated by the IDF for a fourth time. The "occupied lands" and the people living there were not Palestinians since they never accepted the UN partitioning there by voiding any borders defined in the agreement. The people living there were citizens of Jordan, Egypt, and Syria after their military ass kicking. The Arabs never agreed with the UN resolution for land divisions but now they want a fucking do over having lost every war of conquest the have launched in 65 years. They could not even defeat Israel at a time when the Soviet Union was supplying the Arabs with all the latest military weapons accompanied by military advisers. And before 1973 the US was not supplying Israel with anything. In 1973 the US re-supplied Israel but they sure as hell didn't send troops or provide them with equivalent weaponry. The Arabs take the cake when it comes to rewriting history and unfortunately they have convinced a lot of people that their interpretation of history is correct. Most of the school books in the Middle East state that Israel attacked the Arab states in 1973 which is 100% verifiably false however the Arabs are raising new generations on lies all targeted at destroying Israel. But hopefully the Arabs will step over the line with their attacks against school buses and Israeli sub-divisions and Israel can finally put them out of their misery once and for all.

Re:makes sense

[Sun]

Actually, there is a great difference between apartheid (discrimination of citizens based on race), occupation (governing by military force over population) and siege (preventing/filtering produce as part of an ongoing war effort).

The Palestinians in the west bank are under occupation (with quite extensive autonomy in most internal affairs). The Palestinians in Gaza are under a military siege. They are not occupied, at all. The Palestinians living inside Israel are equal rights citizens. No apartheid at all. If you want to contradict these statements, please bring forward the facts on which you rely.

All of this does not matter to the question of artists canceling appearances. If an artist does not want to appear in Israel, that's fine. An artists who cancels is being suckered into making a political statement under the guise/threat of avoiding making one. A singer performing in Paris does not mean the singer supports France's laws against traditional Muslim wear. A singer performing in New York does not mean the singer supports the USA's aggressive intellectual property foreign policy. Yet, for some reason, a singer appearing in Tel-Aviv is told that this will be interpreted as supporting the occupation.

Not appearing in Israel does not make a political statement. Appearing in Israel does not make a political statement. A statement is only made when an artist schedules an appearance, and then cancels. The statement can be interpreted as "I live under a rock and only now found out what Israel is doing", or as "I don't have a spine and am too afraid of outside pressure to tell people whom my performance schedule is none of their business to go to hell".

Shachar

Re:makes sense

[hairyfeet]

Well I don't know about him, and call me weird, but I don't think we should be giving a damn dime when it comes to foreign aid when our infrastructure is falling down, we are drowning in debt, we have a huge trade deficit with pretty much everybody, massive unemployment and underemployment, folks losing their homes left and right, borders leaking like sieves, blowing money like shit through a goose on pointless MIC crap like the Osprey, need I go on?

As far as Israel goes i'm proud to say that I believe that AIPAC should be listed as a lobbying firm for a foreign power and STRICTLY controlled, and BTW I'm also damned sick of anybody that is against militaristic Zionism being labeled as antisemitic by AIPAC and Southern Poverty Law Center. As someone whose grandfather helped liberate one of the camps in Poland I find it fucking sick that these douchebags would use the dead to further their own Neocon ambitions, or that they are allowed to so blatantly bribe our elected officials and wield so much power over OUR government!

When you have the candidates for both parties going to kiss the booty of AIPAC before running you can see where the paranoid get their ZOG ideas from because AIPAC and SPLC have too God damned much power over OUR government. If American Jews want to send their money to Israel? Fine, go right ahead. But you should be able to take money out of my pocket to support a regime I don't believe in, nor allow their lobbyists to have more control and access than We, the People do!

Finally, just to piss off the Neocons and Xtians allow me to say this: Basing our Mid East policies on "Jesus won't come back!" is dumb as fuck! You have people dying, billions being blown, and enemies being made all over the region, because our entire ME policy is tied into whether or not a 2000+ year old dead guy, written about on sheep skins by goat herders, has a place to park his fluffy cloud on some mythical day where his dead ass comes floating on down from heaven. Protip" If your "God" is so fucking weak he can't even get a parking spot without the US MIC backing his ass up then your "God" is pretty damned pathetic. And the fact that both sides kiss the AIPAC booty and cause so much suffering because of scribblings written by primitives is fucking idiotic!

Fuck Israel and every other country with their hand out. We should cut our military by half, quit blowing our money on bling bling MIC tech like its still the cold war, and spend OUR money on OUR people, period. As much as I don't agree with Glenn Beck on...well pretty much anything, the man did say one thing insightful. He said it is high time we in the USA decided to "Be Switzerland" and stay the hell out of everyone's business. As he said we have been sticking our noses in other people's business for a century and caused NOTHING but misery, dictators like Mubarak, and suffering wherever we went. it is high time to "Be Switzerland". Oh and before any Xtians believe that "When the Jews return to Zion" line they might just want to look up what it says about 'The Whore of Babylon" which with our sellout congress critters and stirring up shit everywhere is what we are acting like.

Re:makes sense

[BZ]

Glad you asked for a citation, but you did not say which part... Taking them one at a time:

Murder of all jews: Hamas charter Article 7, last paragraph and following Hadith.

Blames them for being behind wars and revolutions: Hamas charter Article 22 (which explicitly blames "the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there" on the Jews, as well as World War I and World War II).

Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Hamas charter article 32, which says: Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.

You can get the full text of the Hamas charter at several of the References on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_Charter but here are two of those just for your convenience:

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/880818a.htm
http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

Or were you talking about some other charter? There are several different charters around in Gaza and the West Bank; the Hamas one is the one for the group that had a plurality (though not majority) of the votes in the one election held so far and the group that is the government of Gaza at the moment.

Re:makes sense

[bjourne]

The Palestinians in the west bank are under occupation (with quite extensive autonomy in most internal affairs). The Palestinians in Gaza are under a military siege. They are not occupied, at all. The Palestinians living inside Israel are equal rights citizens. No apartheid at all. If you want to contradict these statements, please bring forward the facts on which you rely.

The Israeli arabs are citizens of Israel in the name only. Recently, there was a fairly well published case of an arab being sentenced for rape for having consensual sex with a jewish woman. She went to the police when she found out that he was arab not jewish and he was sentenced to 18 months in jail for "rape by deception." The occupation/colonization project of the West Bank has been going on for over 40 years so to not call it an apartheid system is insincere.

All of this does not matter to the question of artists canceling appearances. If an artist does not want to appear in Israel, that's fine. An artists who cancels is being suckered into making a political statement under the guise/threat of avoiding making one. A singer performing in Paris does not mean the singer supports France's laws against traditional Muslim wear. A singer performing in New York does not mean the singer supports the USA's aggressive intellectual property foreign policy. Yet, for some reason, a singer appearing in Tel-Aviv is told that this will be interpreted as supporting the occupation.

Ah, the old "why are you protesting against us and not against every other shit state in the world, you must be anti-semites!"-argument. FYI, there were fierce protests against the olympics being held in China, against various events in Morocco and Turkey and so on. Also note that rms is not a random singer, but a political activist who has spent his life promoting software freedom. It would not be out of character for him to protest against the the occupation of Palestine.

Re:makes sense

[Nimey]

One can dislike Israel without being anti-Semitic. As I read someone say to a Jewish kid they'd grown up with, "we don't dislike you because you're Jewish. We dislike you because you're an asshole.", and he was, and Israel is.

Re:makes sense

[Hognoxious]

And accusing Palestinians of "antisemitism" is especially dumb, as Palestinians are just as Semitic as the Israelis are.

The word "antisemitism" is a modern coinage invented to specifically mean hatred of Jews.

I'm sure you think you're very clever with your minimal knowledge of Latin, but you can't simply break modern pseudo-classical words into fragments, literally translate them, then reassemble them again and expect the literal meaning to match up with modern usage.

Pornography is drawings of whores, right? Wrong. Some of them are just sluts.

Re:makes sense

[makomk]

Actually, there is a great difference between apartheid (discrimination of citizens based on race), occupation (governing by military force over population) and siege (preventing/filtering produce as part of an ongoing war effort).

It's not that clear a distinction. The black regions of South Africa during apartheid were nominally independent states too, just with nothing resembling an independant economy or political system - much like Palestine. What's more, there was a very definite campaign of ethnic cleansing used to drive out the non-Jewish residents of what became Israel proper. As for the difference between occupation and siege... which it's closer to at the time seems to vary depending on the mood of Israeli politicians

The Palestinians living inside Israel are equal rights citizens.

Nominally equal. In practice they don't really have much in the way of political representation, the major parties have to be restrained from outlawing any political party that tries to represent them by the courts, there's fairly impressive racism in employment and housing and provision of services to majority-Arab cities, etc... (To be fair, a lot of this isn't unique to Israel - the US at least has similar race problems.)

Re:makes sense

[Omestes]

That "test" is a bit moronic. First, it wouldn't really be testing for "antisemitism" new or otherwise, it would be testing for "Anti-Israelism". These are still two seperate beasts, even if both are equally idiotic. One can still hate Israel with an irrational passion and not really hate Jews themselves as an ethic or religious group. There are groups of people who hate everything about the US (calling it the "great satan" and such), but might not hate Christians (the majority religious) or ex-European mutts (out main ethnic group).

One can hate Israel without hating Jews or Judaism.

The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz – this is anti- Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.

This is the least objectionable criteria, but it is still a bit flawed. What happens if there are, indeed, legitimate, and educational, comparisons between Israel and other heinous acts throughout history? I'm not saying we can compare it to Nazi Germany yet, and indeed that comparison is distasteful, but that doesn't bar the fact that someday that may be a valid topic, and some may legitimately think so, and should be allowed to present their case without being gagged by the specter of racism.

Again, as a disclaimer, I doubt their case will hold much water, and it might belay their own irrational problems with the state and people of Israel.

The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross – this is anti-Semitism.

This is utterly fallacious. If the topic at hand is the practices of Israel, I shouldn't have to include ten pages of disclaimers stating that they aren't alone in being prone to occasional asshattery. Yes, other countries are capable of bad decisions and abuse, this does nothing to make any single one of there actions okay. It completely silences conversation, since in order to critique Israel I would have to first critique every other country which has ever done any similar action. We wouldn't expect the same criteria if I was going to critique Syria or Myanmar or any other less "important" country with faults. How dare you critique Myanmar without critiquing Israel as well! (I'm not comparing this two, ala your first law, just highlighting the inanity)

Its like the fallacy that you can't care about this social problem without acting againstt ALL social problems as well.

The third “D” is the test of delegitimization: when Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied – alone among all peoples in the world – this too is anti-Semitism.

No, its anti-Israel, not antisemitism still. More so, it is just plain naive, Israel is here to stay for good or ill (depending on your views). I personally think Israel's government is bad, bordering on "evil". I have absolutely nothing against Jews, or even your average Israeli, I just dislike your Government. I feel the same about the Palestinians, but to a very slightly lesser degree since they have inflicted a smaller body count of innocent people than the Israeli government. Again notice the disclaimers, disclaimers I should not have to include, and wouldn't include if discussing any other country but Israel. I also REALLY dislike the U.S. government, but I obviously don't dislike Americans (I'm dating one, all my best friends are American, my parents are American, hell... I

Re:makes sense

[gnomic]

The Israeli arabs are citizens of Israel in the name only. Recently, there was a fairly well published case of an arab being sentenced for rape for having consensual sex with a jewish woman. She went to the police when she found out that he was arab not jewish and he was sentenced to 18 months in jail for "rape by deception." The occupation/colonization project of the West Bank has been going on for over 40 years so to not call it an apartheid system is insincere.

So you claim that Israeli arabs are not true and equal citizens of Israel precisely because you happened to hear about a verdict you disagree with, and which you never bothered to read.

The "rape by deception" charge was actually a plea bargain. And that "consensual sex" is what the defendant told the press, right after the trial where he plead guilty. And of course the appeal that followed was all about the severity of the sentence, not the factually established evidence (the one for example, where the victim was left in a pool of blood, naked).
But hey, why let the details get in your way. It must have been a racist Judge. Not a single one but the whole political system must have been based on racism.

And now for the inconvenient truth.
There is not a single civil and political right that is not equally shared by all Israeli citizens.
Yet there are inequalities in civil duties. For example, Israeli arabs (and not just arabs) are exempt from the compulsory military service, while still allowed to volunteer.

I am not trying to sell the idea that Israeli democracy is pure and perfect. It certainly isn't.
And much more must be done to integrate better different parts of the Israeli society.
But to clam that 20% of the citizens are "citizens in the name only" is idiocy at best and shameless propaganda at worst.

Re:makes sense

[J Story]

The Gaza border is now open permanently to Egypt. Is it therefore under siege?

Re:So cheap

[roman_mir]

What are you talking about, it's RMS, I am even surprised he takes a plane at all unless it's Free (and also free).

Re:So cheap

[Joe Jay Bee]

Something about transportation wants to be free.

Re:So cheap

[ArAgost]

Why should he? It's not like he's going there on vacation.

What a mess.

[jcr]

I think in that situation, I'd be inclined to say "a plague on both your houses", and go to Brazil.

-jcr

Re:What a mess.

[Bloodwine77]

His neckbeard feels more at home in the middle east

It's Ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

Stallman expects the rest of us to live some live of software purity, never compromising on closed software, despite the fact that we often do so for pragmatic reasons like getting paid, getting the job done etc. Yet here is he, quite prepared to give into bullying terms when it suits him.

Re:It's Ironic

[betterunixthanunix]

Stallman expects the rest of us to live some live of software purity

I am not so sure about that one:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware

in particular,

We don't insist that users of GNU, or contributors to GNU, have to live by this rule. It is a rule we made for ourselves. But we hope you will follow it too, for your freedom's sake.

Yes, he hopes that other people will follow in his organization's footsteps, but it is not something he insists on. Elsewhere on the GNU and FSF websites, I have seen remarks that indicate an understanding that some people may not have a choice in using proprietary software. Yes, RMS campaigns for a further expansion of free software use, and tries to make people aware of what they are forfeiting when they agree to proprietary software licenses, but that does not mean that he insists that everyone agree with him or that he has no concept that people may be forced to use proprietary software.

Re:It's Ironic

[CohibaVancouver]

despite the fact that we often do so for pragmatic reasons like getting paid

+1

How does Stallman pay his bills, anyway? AFAIK, MIT doesn't pay him. Is it all from paid speaking gigs? BTW, Speeches Want To Be Free.

Re:It's Ironic

[betterunixthanunix]

The first question you need to ask is, "What are Stallman's bills?" The man does not have a permanent residence, as far as I know, and his travel expenses are paid for by the people who invite him to come speak. For the most part, it appears that the only things he would have to pay for in life are food and clothing, and even then it is likely that other people cover that for him. Essentially, he appears to be living the same lifestyle as Socrates.

Re:It's Ironic

[roman_mir]

RMS is not all of GNU, so here is his personal thoughts on the matter

Richard Stallman: What about them? The programmers writing non-free software? They are doing something antisocial. They should get some other job.

Any more questions?

Re:It's Ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. Pretty selective quoting there. Maybe I can improve on it.

JA: What about the programmers...

Richard Stallman: What about them? The programmers writing non-free software? They are doing something antisocial. They should get some other job.

JA: Such as?

Richard Stallman: There are thousands of different jobs people can have in society without developing non-free software. You can even be a programmer. Most paid programmers are developing custom software--only a small fraction are developing non-free software. The small fraction of proprietary software jobs are not hard to avoid.

JA: What is the distinction there?

Richard Stallman: Non-free software is meant to be distributed to the public. Custom software is meant to be used by one client. There's no ethical problem with custom software as long as you're respecting your client's freedom.

The next point is that programmers are a tiny fraction of employment in the computer field. Suppose somebody developed an AI and no programmers were needed anymore. Would this be a disaster? Would all the people who are now programmers be doomed to unemployment for the rest of their lives? Obviously not, but this doesn't stop people from exaggerating the issue.

Re:It's Ironic

[roman_mir]

I said socialistic/Marxist government crashes the economy, and then it starts pumping money into it trying to push prices up for things that failed and that must die (so the market says - it must die.)

As to whether the act of pumping the money into failing businesses and asset bubbles is socialist/Marxist or no, I am not making that judgment, but what leads to the problem in the first place is socialistic/Marxist government.

Now, whether US government was or is Marxist - no. However it is socialistic in the sense, that it figured out that it can do whatever it wants if it prints money and taxes income to buy votes, and buying votes from the mob is the most socialistic thing.

Re:It's Ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

The book No Logo explains that the Philippines have laws that protect labor standards, but these laws count for nothing any more. They decided to set up "enterprise zones" - that's the euphemism they used for "sweat shop zones" - where companies are exempt from these rules for the first two years. And as a result, no company lasts for more than two years. When their exemption runs out, the owners shut it down and they start another.

- that's sound business but also a way for government officials to get good bribes.

This is the kind of world you're arguing for and you think RMS is nuts? You are not rational.

Furthmore, if disagreeing with the radical viewpoint that the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, safety standards, and all other workers' rights gains made in the last few hundred years should be thrown out because they are a strangling burden on honest corporations qualifies someone as stupid, I imagine you must encounter a lot of stupid people. The problem is on your end.

Re:It's Ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't pretend to be objective about the economy when you are pushing for a completely bankrupt model (that is the laissez faire capitalism you worship). As for the supposed marxism in RMSs statements you should RTFM. RMS clearly says that he is not for abolishing corporations. What sort of marxism would support that? Oh and don't come back and say that the Soviet Union did this or that, the SU model was a bureaucratic state capitalist model with central planning. Its very sad to see so many discussions in /. talking about all the latest facts and then seeing commenters ranting about marxism using 1950s propaganda as a source.

Re:It's Ironic

[thebigbadme]

dude, you're missing the point of pro-labor laws. Higher wages shouldn't make things cost more, they should make anyone not directly providing the work have less profit. Of course, under a pro-capitalist economic system, this isn't what happens.

A person may be free to not have a job with a low wage, but really that can become a life-or-death choice, and thus really isn't a choice.

"Free markets" only provide freedom to the people who control the means of production, not freedom for the people who actually provide the labor of production.

Real reason

[Jethro]

They refuse to call it "GNU/Israel".

Bad call IMO...

[nweaver]

This now sets a precedent that RMS will respond to fiscal pressure, as he's established that the head of FSF will change who he says it to based on who's paying.

Far better for RMS to have refused the trip entirely. Yes, it would have canceled the Israeli university talks anyway, but it would have at least said that he's unwilling to be bullied or change who he talks to.

And for those who say "He could go on a separate time on Israeli money": There is a huge logistical cost in his time and effort involved in traveling halfway across the globe. A trip like this takes two days near dead for travel time & jetlag alone.

This is a cost which RMS, not the Palestinians, is presumably paying. It makes sense, if this cost is incurred, to also give talks at Israeli universities, as this cost is something the Palestinians presumably aren't paying for, he is.

If, instead, the Palestinians are paying for his travel time as well as his ticket, this makes the precedent even worse.

Re:Bad call IMO...

[MysteriousPreacher]

You're drawing a pretty broad conclusion from this one specific event. Had he agreed to *never* have any dealings with Israel then I'd agree there's a problem. All he did was to cancel lectures on this specific trip that is being paid for people kind of entitled to make such a demand - regardless of how petty it may be. I don't see how this is a civil liberties or freedom thing when he's voluntarily traveling on their ticket.

And the Palestinian women

[sv_libertarian]

Will they be there, listening to Stallman, or will they be carefully segregated from their sexual superiors?

Stupid move, rms

[Stormwatch]

In his place, if someone tried to manipulate me like that, I'd do the opposite -- give them a big fat "fuck you" and go meet the other side instead, even if I had to pay for the trip.

nothing ironic about it

[t2t10]

Stallman expects the rest of us to live some live of software purity, never compromising on closed software,

Free software is about receiving source code along with software and being able to modify and redistribute the software. There is nothing inconsistent about Stallman's behavior: you can get paid for software, you can create proprietary software, etc. if you like. Some of your business models may not work with free software, but that's not Stallman's intent, that's just a consequence.

Yet here is he, quite prepared to give into bullying terms when it suits him.

The Palestinians are paying for the trip and they get to set the conditions they pay for; that's the way all invited talks work. "No side trips" is a common condition for invited talks.

What's actually going on is that Israel is forcing foreign scientists wanting to visit the Palestinian territories to travel through Israel, and then saying "oh, we made you come here, why don't you also give some lectures for free". Imagine the US used military force to keep international planes from landing in Canada and then asked foreign scientists diverted through the US to also give free talks in the US; it would be quite outrageous.

The situation is made even worse because the Palestinians are so poor compared to Israel. For Israeli universities to piggy-back on a trip paid for by the Palestinians ought to be a huge embarrassment for Israel.

The obvious thing would be for Israel to pay for the entire trip, including the trip to the Palestinian territories. That would be the obvious, right and peaceful thing to do. Apparently, Israel isn't interested in that.

I hope Israel will turn around and do the right thing.

Re:nothing ironic about it

[SchroedingersCat]

The Palestinians are paying for the trip and they get to set the conditions they pay for; that's the way all invited talks work. "No side trips" is a common condition for invited talks.

Nonsense. Are they requiring him to get on a plane and land in US? I don't know what kind of deal RMS got for himself but I am pretty sure it is quite uncommon that organizers require you to go back to country of origin after the engagement is over. He should have negotiated fee for giving talks like 1k/hour and pay for his trip himself and not be restricted in his movements.

Re:nothing ironic about it

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope Israel will turn around and do the right thing.

Israel could say "oh, we still want you to visit us, so we will fund your trip if Palestinians withdraw their funding. And we will allow you to visit them too."

Now that would be the right thing.

Re:nothing ironic about it

[Anonymous Coward]

Noam Chomsky was barred entry into Palestinian territories (entry and exit to which is controlled by Israel) last year:

My daughter and I, along with two old friends, were going to Ramallah from Amman and were stopped at the border, waited several hours, several hours of interrogation, and finally my daughter and I were denied entry.

The reasons are quite straightforward. I’ve spoken at Bir Zeit University before, but in every prior occasion, it was a side trip, when I was visiting Israel and giving talks at Israeli universities. This time differs in one respect. I was—I had an invitation from Bir Zeit, and I accepted it gladly, as in many other cases, and I had no intention of going on to speak in Israel as well this time. That’s the only difference. So, essentially, what Israel is saying is that they insist on the right to determine who is allowed to just visit a Palestinian university at their invitation and talk.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/5/17/denied_entry_israel_blocks_noam_chomsky

Re:nothing ironic about it

[Shipud]

Wow. So many untruths, Where to start?

"What's actually going on is that Israel is forcing foreign scientists wanting to visit the Palestinian territories to travel through Israel, and then saying "oh, we made you come here, why don't you also give some lectures for free". Imagine the US used military force to keep international planes from landing in Canada and then asked foreign scientists diverted through the US to also give free talks in the US; it would be quite outrageous."

It would also be outrageous is Israel is doing it, which it isn't. I would ask you to find citations for that ever happening. And what is this about "Israel paying"? When a scientist is invited to speak at an academic institution the institution is paying. There is zero government involvement. There is also no involvement from other institutes, unless they are pooling resources for an event (say, a conference).

" 'No side trips' is a common condition for invited talks".

I am an associate professor and I have been invited to give hundreds of talks, at institutes and companies in the US and in many other countries. I have never heard of this "Common Condition".

At most I ask my paying hosts for accurate dates, telling them I will be travelling more. I have never encountered any kind of objection to that, nor a request to share the primary travel venue. Of course, I do not ask for extra travel or Room & Board for the "side" travels.

"Apparently, Israel isn't interested in that."

Again what is "Israel" the university of Tel Aviv? The University of Haifa (which, BTW, in which the majority of students are Palestinians)? The Israeli Immigration authorities? The Mossad? El-Al?

Re:nothing ironic about it

[yariv]

The statement about Palestinians being the majority of University of Haifa's students is not true. About 20% of the students are Arabs, from what I know (but I didn't find any formal numbers). The vast majority of those are Israeli citizens. There is a large minority in Israel of Arabs (about 20%). they usually define themselves as Palestinians, but they are still Israeli citizens. There are almost no citizens of the Palestinian Authority in Israeli universities, if there are any at all.

This doesn't change the actual point, that the universities are not Israel, of course.

One more thing, is the point of going through Israel. The Palestinian Authority have no international airport, Israel will probably not allow one to be opened in any case, but there might be other reasons. As a result, visitors will go either through the Israeli Ben-Gurion airport, or through Jordan. BG is closer, but you will have to go through Israel. This might be what the GP is referring to. The reason Israel won't allow an international airport is that it currently holds all the checkpoints, including the Alenby bridge on the Jordan border. This control is considered important to hold certain weapons, mainly missiles but also mortars, away from the Palestinian Territories. Such weapons would allow Palestinians to target the BG airport and the suburbs of Tel-Aviv.

How about a fair compromise instead?

[rawler]

Easy solution;

Both parties want him to Speak, let both parties pay half each. If both parties refuse, stay home, if only one accepts, then go there.

I fully understand why the Palestinians do not wish to pay the "Israeli" share, and the other way around. However, splitting the costs is fair, and all parties win.

Sure, I realize it might be impolite if the Palestinians had already been promised a visit, but I think at least the option of splitting costs should be proposed.

Re:How about a fair compromise instead?

[seriesrover]

But thats the problem...I'm sorry, but the Palestinians *aren't* within their rights to not let him go to Israel - they're paying for him to come over and give a talk, which I'm sure he'll do to their satisfaction, so obviously they're ok with the terms. They don't 'own' him. All I see is spite coming from the Palestinian side - no amount of giving them a chance is going to remove that. My sentiments would be exactly the same if a company paid for someone to go to a conference half way around the world and then refused them a couple of days vacation to see the sights.

RMS's bills and bio

[ciaran_o_riordan]

> How does Stallman pay his bills, anyway?

(For a detailed answer, you could read a biography about him: http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/faif-2.0.pdf )

Some organisations pay him for the talks he gives. He also won some awards in the 90s which came with chunky cash prizes which he said he would invest.

His bills probably aren't too big anyway. He asks his hosts to pay his travel and accommodation (usually staying with someone in their house rather than in a hotel). He has no kids, which saves him a lot of money.

FSF doesn't pay him any salary.

Re:ha

[mooingyak]

Eddie pointed out the hypocrisy pretty accurately IMHO. RMS is willing to accept conditions on his travel and speaking plans that he would find completely unacceptable in software.

Re:The Jews trying to get RMS at bargain prices?

[Anonymous Coward]

Rockets =/= rocks. The Palestinians toss plenty of those. You should also check the definition of a WMD before spouting more worthless bullshit.

That said, I don't favor either side. They are equally culpable. Just because one has more powerful toys does not make them the worse of the two. If you support either side, you're a sucker.

Politics aside ...

[Meneguzzi]

Well, opinions about the right or wrongness of Israel aside, it is a well known fact that Israeli universities are pretty well funded and staffed (especially if compared to Palestinian ones).
They already have top class academics working for them and plenty of funding to bring other academics to visit them pretty regularly. I have had the privilege to meet many famous Israeli academics, but I am yet to meet a Palestinian one.
If we just ignore the politics for a little while, I can see why an underfunded Palestinian university might feel cheated if they are paying for a guy to come from across the world to give a lecture, and the guys across the border who have lots more funding and better staff than they have tried to amortize Israeli costs of bringing a foreign academic by using Palestinian money. After all, they could have offered to split the bill or something.
On top of that, I'm not sure about the situation right now, but until very recently, Israel (which controls Palestinian borders and tax collection) was withholding tax money from the Palestinian Authority because they were in reconciliation talks with Hamas. Again, ignoring politics, but looking at a very real cashflow issue that their universities might be having, I can see why they might resent this move.

Re:Politics aside ...

[Meneguzzi]

I feel really sorry for you if you have made this interpretation about my comment, despite all my explanations to ignore the politics of the matter. At no point in my comment did I make a judgement of value on Israel, nor did I state anything that was not factually true. I did not make a value judgement on the Israeli position to withhold tax money from the PA, but I did state that a logical consequence of this decision is that Palestinian Universities would likely be affected by their government collecting less money.
Of course it is hard to separate politics from everything else in this region, but my argument was that there seems to be purely economical reasons for this decision, and that other institutions in countries with a similar disparity in wealth (regardless of an ongoing ethno-religious conflict) could have reacted in a similar way.

If it was not clear, let me clarify further. If you replaced Israel and Palestine for, say, Brazil and Paraguay, which are two countries that border each other, and where there is some dependency between the two of them (since Paraguay is landlocked, it depends on its neighbour for many shipping routes), and both of them have very different living standards and investment in academia. If the poorest country invites somebody to come give a lecture and pay for the flight for a guy coming from across the globe to come, and the richer neighbour decides to take advantage of this trip to invite the same lecturer to come to their country right after without offering to help with the trip costs, would it not feel unfair from a purely economical point of view?

He didn't create the problem, it was thrown at him

[ciaran_o_riordan]

There's nothing in the free *software* philosophy about what conditions can be put on plane tickets. There's a hint in the name - it's about software, not planes.

His lousy options were to cancel the Israel gigs, or cancel the Israel and the Palestinian gigs. He went for the former, and apologised.

This isn't news at all. This part of his work must be pretty frustrating for him.

When drawn into a boycott...

[sciencewatcher]

Since RMS consequently rejects any piece of software that restricts his rights or movements, the only right thing to do would be to reject the Arab invitation to visit the former British mandate of Palestine. Of course the Israeli invitees then should pick up the tab to pay for his travel expenses to Israel. The Israelis did not restrict RMS's whereabouts and should be lauded for their policy of sticking to freedom for all, including the Arabs.

Sounds to me like...

[deblau]

The Palestinians don't believe in freedom of speech. RMS should cancel his entire trip; his talk would be wasted on them anyway.

Good decision I think.

[hackus]

However, even a turkey could see that would cause problems given the plans the "New World Order" has for the region.

I would have not accept funds in the first place from any political organization over there for transportation.

I would have a independent source of funds for travel expenses. I would then ask for donations from both sides when I got there to pay for the trip.

Richard runs the risk of looking like he is choosing sides by doing this, even though he might not feel that way about the politics of the region.

I say that because his mission is somewhat political due to the economics he will be discussing and social systems that make open source software very profitable as well as technically superior than close source commercial software.

-Hack.

Re:ha

[hrimhari]

Let me get this straight.

Because some Palestinians invited him to speak and are paying for all his expenses.
Because some Palestinians are not happy that their money would end up funding his speaks in Israel and would rather not pay anything if he chooses to do so.
Because some Israeli can make arrangements for another visit (but instead insist in playing the hypocrisy card).
Considering that if he accepts the Palestinian terms he will do what was originally agreed: talk to these Palestinians.
Considering that if he doesn't accept the terms he wouldn't go to Israel anyway.

Because of all that, he's hypocritical?

I'm baffled by this kind of logic.

Re:Standard behavior

[thasmudyan]

That's why they give you the option to get the stamp on a separate piece of paper that you can just take out of your passport when you no longer need it.

Re:Ahh .. the elephant in the room of free speech

[VortexCortex]

The "Free" in "Free software" stands for freedom, not cost; RMS has been very clear on this point, but he also seems to be ignorant of the fact that the best beer is also Free as in Freedom. IMHO, the saying should be "Free as in Freedom not Free as in promotional".

It would be best to get the message out as broadly as possible, in this case RMS is taking what he can get to give as best he can. Better to speak to some than to none.

I make Free Software. I also make Free Beer. At the local brewers club we exchange our carefully recorded recipes for different brews. We bring free samples of our fee free beer, and we share it Freely with anyone in attendance, both in bottle and in recipe. We have a great time "tasting" different brews: Some do wind up in the swill bucket, while other brews are favored, and their recipes are copied and reproduced again later by those who favor the beer. We make improvements and offer suggestions; Some of my brews have come back to me after being improved and I've had better beer, and better friends, because of it.

It does cost us to make the beer, much like it costs us to make the software, or to make the speeches -- I think it's only fair trade that we receive reimbursement for our labors. In RMS's case: In exchange for speeches about Software Freedoms he accepts money and/or travel expenses. In the case of our brew club I exchange my beer for theirs; For friends and neighbors I exchange free beer for camaraderie and the occasional tool loan.

"Free as in Beer" means something very much like "Free as in Freedom" to a home brewer like myself.

Re:ha

[Aldenissin]

Software is different than travel. If you ask me for a ride or I offer one to the store, and I say no, I don't want you also to go somewhere else while we are out on foot but to stay with me, is that unreasonable? You're comparing apples to oranges.

A better solution would be to ask Isreal if they would like to fund the trip, and then if they agree offer to speak in both places. That gives Isreal the chance to make Palestine look bad and say don't bother coming. If both parties agree, then it makes Palestine look bad. If Israel refuses to fund the trip, then they have no reason to complain. No matter what the man said in the email, he is disappointed, or angry that RMS would not just refuse to spread his message to either side. Sometimes you have to show some love to those that aren't, that is the only way to defeat hate, is with love.

Re:He should not get shat on for this

[ZankerH]

I should have the freedom to choose any software license I want. I've had enough of his my-way-or-the-highway thinking.

Are you saying you don't?

Re:This should be a non-story

[ciaran_o_riordan]

> that RMS went and booked the other speaking engagements shows that he truly has no political sensitivities

By booking engagements in Israel, he showed that he looks past sectarian boundaries and sees people, each of which deserves freedom in their use of computers.

RMS writes extensively about politics:

http://stallman.org/archives/polnotes.html

Israel and Palestine are one of the most recurring topics.

Re:ha

[vajorie]

I'm baffled by this kind of logic.

That's because there's no logic in hate-based politics.

Re:Ahh .. the elephant in the room of free speech

[klapaucjusz]

I'll give props to RMS in this case.

So now he's set the precedent that when you pay for RMS' trip, you're entitled to dictate what he does in his free time. Smart move.

Re:ha

[mooingyak]

I'm baffled by this kind of logic.

That's because there's no logic in hate-based politics.

Now that's a gross misrepresentation of this statement:

RMS is willing to accept conditions on his travel and speaking plans that he would find completely unacceptable in software.

I'd have the EXACT same position if you swapped the roles of the Palestinians and Israelis, or if it were two other random groups who happen to be geographically proximate and don't like each other.

Re:ha

[ZipK]

If you ask me for a ride or I offer one to the store, and I say no, I don't want you also to go somewhere else while we are out on foot but to stay with me, is that unreasonable?

Whether or not it's reasonable, it's a poor analogy to Stallman's trip to the mid-East. How about if you ask me to take the bus to the cleaners to drop off some laundry, and you offer to pay for the roundtrip bus fare. After I complete the trip to the cleaners, I decide to walk next door to get some coffee, but you object and demand that I return immediately from the drop off at the cleaners. Is that reasonable?

Re:He should not get shat on for this

[twidarkling]

Really? Not really. A great deal of the community follows his licence recommendations, and without that licence, often projects will flounder. Further, it leads to in-fighting over what licences should be used and which advances the cause of OSS the most, and that's the height of idiocy, because the answer is simply "all and none." Fighting over what licence is best is useless and redirects effort from where it should be, which is heightening the profile of OSS.

Re:Why is he choosing sides on this at all?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please. You really should read up on the history of the region before you make analogies like that. While I support the Palestinian cause to get a land of their own, both they and the Israelis are and have always been the unwilling pawns in someone else's political game. And the fact that Israelis have managed to build a highly developed society in the little piece of desert they turned into a blooming oasis is commendable. The Palestinians aren't as much the victims of Israel, as of their Arab neighbors' manipulations and schemes. About 2/34rd of the territory originally (1948) intended for the Palestinian state is now part of Jordan, and nobody's even asking to give it back. All the fight is over the remaining third. This is so typical of cynical hypocrisy that the rest of the world is treating both sides with.

Anyway, if I were him, I'd just cancel the whole thing.

Re:Why is he choosing sides on this at all?

[twidarkling]

Except as pointed out, the payment is coming from UN financial support of the area, so your little "imagine if" scenario fell apart after the "wasn't supported by the West."

misunderstandig

[jjohn_h]

>>> ...misunderstand either how apartheid actually worked in South Africa or ... >>>

The majority opinion in SA is that Israel is an apartheid state.

Re:Travel to Palestine...?

[CohibaVancouver]

Have you ever flown into Ben Gurion? It's a very different experience... I arrived, with a friend, with Egyptian and Jordanian visas (in Arabic) in our passports. We were separated, then questioned - Very expertly and professionally. There wasn't any arrogance like you might find entering the USA or Canada, but the questions were very persistent...

"Where are you going?"
"Do you know anyone in Egypt? In Jordan?"
"How long have you known your friend?"
"Who are you meeting there?"
"Why is it you have a Canadian passport, and your friend has a British Passport?"

You got the sense you were interacting with human lie detectors. Answers like "It's none of your business" would not have gone down well.

Re:The Jews trying to get RMS at bargain prices?

[erroneus]

Irony of irony, I don't hate Jews. I actually like Jews. Jews are generally good people. They eat terrific food and so I also eat Jewish food quite often. I disagree with their religion, of course -- I'm atheist. But as people go, I generally get along well with them. Their self-loathing is a bit annoying, but apart from that, I find them largely nice, intelligent and interesting people -- at least the ones I know which are generally east coast, northern, city dwellers.

What I hate is abusive government run by power-mad psychopaths. The list is LONG on who I feel is described under that criteria... and I'm still holding out a little hope that Obama is simply struggling to survive in a tainted and corrupt network of US politics, but I have no illusions that the US government is just as bad or worse in many ways.

Nope, wrong

[Cyberax]

Apartheid by definition is racial segregation within borders of a country.

That's what happens in Israel. Palestine Authority is not a country but a part of Israel, however its citizens are denied the right to move freely within the borders of Israel.

Re:Nope, wrong

[Cyberax]

What exactly?

Palestine citizens need special permissions to move past checkpoints. That's why the wall was built.

And Palestine is NOT a separate state. That's also not controversial at all.

Re:Ahh .. the elephant in the room of free speech

[dvice_null]

> "Free as in air" or something similar that you don't actually have to pay for ever

Canned air, $20:
http://www.nextag.com/canned-air/products-html

Re:ha

[Just Some Guy]

Not married, huh? I'm willing to accept conditions on my travel plans that I would find completely unacceptable in software, mainly because it beats the hell out of sleeping on the couch. As people keep pointing out, these are two wholly separate parts of a person's life, and it's not at all hypocritical to manage them differently.

Re:RMS Titanic

[wrook]

Everybody that I know that knows him personally (which I don't) calls him Richard. I've had a few brief email conversations with him and he didn't sign the emails at all. RMS is his login name. Back in the olden days (which, through the fog of memory, I think I may have been party to) programmers used to refer to each other by their login name. Many people (even me) used to sign their emails with their login name (which would have been the same as their email address). Back when "finger" was the way to check up on what people were doing, it was important to know people's login name.

I still use my normal login name (which isn't wrook, BTW) on a lot of forums and there are people who I've talked with for decades that don't know me by any other name. I've almost certainly referred to myself that way online. That doesn't mean that I use it in daily conversation.

Re:Why do people pretend to be stupid to make a po

[rawler]

What is your real game here?

Not playing any game. I'm clearly not involved, or able to really advice anyone on this topic. Just voicing my opinion. This is slashdot.

Who are you trying to depict as unreasonable?

The one refusing an objectively fair compromise. Both, either, or neither, I don't care. For reference, I don't have much bias in the question, I think both sides are partly responsible for the situation.

The point of the proposal is to force both individually to accept, or depict themselves as unreasonable. Doubly so if the other part accepts. I'm not pointing fingers.

Re:the downside of free

[Falconhell]

Dont mention that most are civilians, where is the declaration of war?

  Why do you support murdering land thieves who gained their country thru terrorism?