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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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:So cheap

[Joe Jay Bee]

Something about transportation wants to be free.

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

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.

Real reason

[Jethro]

They refuse to call it "GNU/Israel".

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]

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: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.

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.

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.

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.

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: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: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: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: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.

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.