Racial equality officer refuses to resign over offensive comments
Lawrence Binitie refuses to go quietly following race-row involving former YUSU Council Chair David Levene.
A row has been sparked following “anti-Semitic” comments made by Lawrence Binitie, one of the YUSU Racial Equality Officers, to a former student of the University of York.
In a conversation held through Facebook’s instant messaging platform, Binitie told David Levene that he “would be ashamed, if [he] was from isreal [sic] or even jewish, to be associated with this.”
After saying he doesn’t associate himself with Israel, despite others doing so, Levene noted he’s “not ashamed of a country [he has] no connection with.”
Bintie went on to claim that “if I was you, I would be, because, like it or not, as a Jew, you are inextricably linked to isreal [sic].”
After an argument, in which Binitie claimed Levene should have publicly criticised Israel, Levene told the Racial Equality Officer to “go to hell,” who swiftly responded with the statement: “sounds like a Jewish response to me, but enough said.”
At this point, Levene is understood to have blocked Binitie from accessing his profile and other details on the social networking site.
Levene, the Labour Councillor for Heslington, has also lodged a formal complaint to the YUSU President against Binitie for making anti-Semitic remarks to a member of the public. He told Vision that, “His language is obviously very concerning and it’s for YUSU and the student body to decide how to deal with it.”
The National Union for Students’ policy follows that of the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency in describing “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” and “accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or perceived wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group,” as explicitly anti-Semitic.
Mandi Madavo, the Racial Equality Officer for 2009/10, commented: “I think it’s unacceptable and very alarming that YUSU’s public representative responsible for speaking up for ethnic minorities is holding an entire ethnic group responsible for the political actions of a few members of that group.
“By definition, the word for that in general is racism, and in this case, the term for that is anti-Semitism.”
Binitie released a lengthy statement to Vision, in which he defended his position.
“I said that I would be ashamed to be Israeli… to be associated with the speech that I was listening to at the time of the conversation.
“I did not say that David Levene or anyone else should be ashamed to be Jewish, just that if I was them, I would be ashamed of the speech. It is like saying I would be ashamed of Berlusconi if I was Italian, that does not mean I feel being Italian is a shameful thing, just that their representative acted in a shameful way.”
Binitie said he did apologise for the “misunderstanding,” and blamed “colloquialism.”
“I believe that expressing my disapproval of what is happening in Israel is part of my job as the Racial Equality Officer, I believe the atrocities occurring there are as severe as Apartheid South Africa… anyone who speaks up is labelled an anti-Semite.”
He criticised former officers for not addressing wider world issues.
“If I am going to be the collateral damage for this cause, then so be it, but I will take a stand.
“You should bear in mind that it was a private conversation and not a public speech.” He also said that it is “common practice for those supporting the crimes occurring in Israel to represent any detractor as racist, this is what I meant when I responded to David telling me to go to hell.”
Though Levene is a former student, Binitie has a responsibility to correctly conduct himself to members of the public, as expressed in the Union bye-laws. His actions can be considered in contravention of this, and other rules, opening the route for disciplinary action.
Binitie refused to apologise for his comments or resign from his post after being given the chance to do so in a meeting held yesterday.
As a result, a motion of no confidence would have to be passed against Binitie to remove him from his position. This would involve a YUSU member proposing a motion of no confidence to the Democracy Committee, who after an initial investigation, would propose the motion at the next referendum, or within four term-time weeks. Members of the Students’ Union would then be able to vote for or against the motion.
The last time YUSU no-confidenced an officer was in early 2008. The then Academic & Welfare Officer, Grace Fletcher-Hackwood, was accused of punching a student outside a Chav D event at Derwent College.
The respective student then lodged a complaint, claiming Fletcher-Hackwood’s violence was “unacceptable” in light of the welfare responsibilities required by her sabbatical position.
As an elected official, Binitie cannot be explicitly dismissed from his position, though there are disciplinary procedures that can be followed.
According to the Union bye-laws, the President can issue Binitie with a first or final written warning, or suspend or revoke his membership of the Union. This is in relation to his conduct as a member of YUSU rather than as an officer.
If he was struck out of the Union, Binitie would no longer be able to use Union facilities, run for positions or vote in referendums or elections. Technically, Bye-Law 13 states that this procedure would also represent a termination of his holding of office, as membership is a requirement of this.
Binitie was originally elected into the position when he ran alongside Basim Al-Ahmadi earlier this year. They ran together and the position was uncontested.
Approximately 1,200 students voted for Binitie and Al-Ahmadi, reflecting less than half the students who voted, with the total number of voters coming to 3,932, a turn-out of around 30% of eligble members.
Part-time officers work alongside full-time sabbatical ones, and represent students in a number of ‘assemblies’, split into four categories. The Racial Equality Officer is responsible for eliminating discrimination across the University and working with the Welfare Officer when cases arise in which students from ethnic minorities have been unfairly treated.
Levene, an ex-student, campaigned unsuccesfully for the position of YUSU President in 2010. He was formerly the Union Council Chair, responsible for overseeing the old-style system of Union General Meetings with the now defunct Democracy & Services sabbatical officer. He was elected Labour Councillor for Heslington civil parish, in which the University is based, earlier this year.
Tim Ellis confirmed that YUSU, “have received a formal complaint, and it is being investigated.”
Loading ...
Indefensible, simple as.
Rate:
14 
17
Several points arise from this story.
Firstly, in my opinion it is not the job of the racial equalities officer to promote or make statements which incite racial inequality. Making bigoted or biased statements in favour of one group of people over another is entirely wrong; supporting Palestine over Israel implies an intrinsic bias which, even if privately held, should not be expressed by someone who is supposed to represent all students equally.
Secondly, Binitie’s actions sum up a problem that exists with Student Unions and the NUS as a whole; namely that they believe that it is their job to focus on global issues rather than issues which directly affect students on campus. This problem is clearly illustrated by the following statement by Binitie:
“I believe that expressing my disapproval of what is happening in Israel is part of my job as the Racial Equality Officer, I believe the atrocities occurring there are as severe as Apartheid South Africa… anyone who speaks up is labelled an anti-Semite.”
Rate:
18 
5
He’s not being anti-semitic because he’s criticising israel, he’s being anti-semitic because he’s holding all jews responsible for what the israeli government is doing!
imagine if levene had said to binitie: look at the terrible things robert mugabe is doing, if i was you, i’d be ashamed if i was black – i wonder if we’d be calling it racism then? of course we would!
it’s totally inappropriate for him to be racial equality officer with views like that!
Rate:
20 
12
He never said he was holding Levene responsible he said that if he were Jewish he would feel ashamed to be associated with Israel- his point being that the speech he was commenting on (which the conversation was based around) was not showing Jews in a good light. It was not blaming Levene for being Jewish!!
The article also takes the conversation entirely out of context- Lawrence and Levene have a personal relationship in which the both talk frequently to one another about political issues and share ideas and often debate. Additionally the article suggests Lawrence was contradicting his position by what he said… but at the end of the day he was ‘sticking up for the minority’ ie. Palestinians… ! Yes it is easy to make it into a sensationalist article because of Lawrence’s role in YUSU but at the end of the day he is entitled to his opinions… and it is not something he was outwardly advocating. Equally Levene never questioned Lawrence’s position as racial equality officer during the conversation and therefore never gave him an opportunity to defend his position. He immediately went straight to YUSU and the press which suggests that he wasn’t too bothered about getting it sorted out but quite excited about hitting the papers.
Also, Lawrence is entitled to his opinion which he can express- there is nothing wrong with that, in fact he is one of the few people I know who have an active awareness of such issues and everyone should be involved in. Finally, the most frustrating thing is that Lawrence highlighted the point you disagree with the speech and that u wouldn’t want to be associated with it- maybe his wording was wrong but that s the gist of the conversation. It is obvious Levene wanted anything to get into the press as whatever the outcome of the meetings between Lawrence and Levene prior to this article, the press was always his intention- he never planned to resolve this privately!!! I know this because I have seen all the screenshots (not just the ones that Vision have chosen to publish) and that Levene went ‘offline’ before Lawrence was able to put his opinion into context ie. the comment ‘a typical Jewish response’ was in retaliation to what had been said in the speech which he would have explained if Levene hadn’t have jumped on it so fast.
Rate:
13 
14
sacked in the morning, you’re going to get sacked in the morning, SACKED IN THE MORNING, you’re going to get sacked in the morning
Rate:
20 
9
not that it’s in any way relevant, but a) the press approached levene, not the other way round, and b) if i was subject to a load of racist abuse by the yusu racial equality officer, i would probably complain to yusu too!
and all the stuff about “context” is rubbish. if the “jewish response” comment was about the israeli’s speech, then why didn’t he say “israeli response”, or “zionist response”? he was clearly saying levene should be ashamed for being a member of an ethnic group cos of what some other members of that group had done. that is racist, and that is relevant to his job
Rate:
11 
8
Given that Levene told Binitie that he would not go press if he apologised and resigned but had already had two draft versions (both very similar) either way the meeting had gone, kinda seems like his intention was always to go to press!! Levene himself said that the problem is that people often associate being jewish with being israeli, Binitie said he would be ashamed to be associated with the speech, which Levene had already said he was unfortunately associated with.
Rate:
9 
3
Hi all, I would just like to confirm that David Levene had already informed Vision that he was not intending to comment, release the transcript or otherwise communicate with the press had Lawrence Binitie resigned, and that he is now stepping out of the debate.
Additionally, the article has now been updated with the full transcript of the conversation that took place.
Rate:
10 
1
no, they had two versions because levene insisted that they didnt go the whole hog against binitie if hedid the right thing, took some responsibility and went with some dignity, but the print deadline meant that they had to have both versions ready. this was all cleared with the yusu president
it’s a disgrace that levene is being attacked for reporting anti-semitic abuse. he shouldnt have to apologise for that, and – as he said – he shouldnt be attacked and have to apologise for the actions of a government he has no connection with
the problem is people like binitie who think that zionist, israeli and jewish are the same thing and that all jews are responsible for the actions of the israeli government. it’s blindingly obvious that was what binitie was saying, but i suppose some people find it more convenient to look the other way
Rate:
9 
9
thanks paul, guess that puts paid to all of this “levene was out to get binitie” nonsense!
Rate:
3 
5
When I met with David Levene, he told me that the conversations would stay private if I signed an apology letter that he had written out for me and resigned. I told him that I can’t do that as a matter of principle and offered him a private apology regardless of what he chose to do with it. I was shocked later when Tim Ellis showed me two drafts of the Vison article, one for if I did as David said, and the other for if I didn’t. David had already contacted them and given them the transcriopts of the conversation, the only difference between the two articles is that one contained direct quotes from david and the other didn’t. What was even more worrying is that I was not consulted before either article was written, I didn’t have a chance to put the conversation in context or explain myself. When I explained these concerns with Tim, I recieved this email from Paul Virides.
Dear Lawrence,
As you will be aware, Vision is reporting on the incidents that have led to the meeting held with Tim Ellis and David Levene this evening. In order to give you adequate right of reply, please answer the below questions. As agreed with the YUSU President, you have two hours from the timestamp of this message to respond, otherwise we will be printing that you were not available for comment. It would be in everyone’s best interests that you do choose to reply. You are also invited to add any further comments in a written statement.
- In your words, please describe the incident from your initial conversation with David Levene on Facebook up until the present.
- Do you continue to stand by your comments that: “I would be ashamed, if I was from Israel or even Jewish, to be associated with this”; “like it or not, as a Jew, you are inextricably linked to Israel”; that you hate “benj net” and, in response to being told to “go to hell”, “sounds like a Jewish response to me”
- Did you apologise to David Levene?
- Do you agree that you have let down the students you had stood to represent in the elections earlier this year?
- Do you agree that your actions were directly against the Racial Equality Officer’s responsibility for eliminating discrimination within the University?
- David Levene has said your language was “very concerning”. Mandi Madavo, the ex-Racial Equality Officer has said “I think it’s unacceptable and very alarming that YUSU’s public representative responsible for speaking up for ethnic minorities is holding an entire ethnic group responsible for the political actions of a few members of that group. By definition, the word for that in general is racism, and in this case, the term for that is anti-Semitism.” Do you have any response to these allegations?
- Do you expect a no confidence vote, if held, to end in your favour?
- The National Union for Students’ policy follows that of the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency in describing “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” and “accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or perceived wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group,” as explicitly anti-Semitic. Do you have any responses to these definitions?
- Do you agree that your actions were in contravention to the YUSU Bye-Laws and Constitution?
With best wishes,
Paul Virides
To which I replied-
- I would like to clarify what I meant. I said that I would be ashamed to be Israeli …. to be associated with this (the speech) that I was listening to at the time of the conversation. I did not say that David levene or anyone else should be ashamed to be jewish, just that if I was them, I would be ashamed of the speech. It is like saying I would be ashamed of Berlusconi if I was italian, that does not mean I feel being Italian is a shameful thing, just that their representative acted in a shameful way.
-I was happy to apologise to David after clarifying the situation, because he clearly misunderstood my intentions and this misundertsanding caused him offense.
- I believe that expressing my disapproval of what is happening in Israel is part of my job as the Racial Equality officer, I believe the atrocities occurring there are as severe as apartheid South Africa. The conspiracy of silence around the issue prevents real change from happening because anyone who speaks up is labelled an anti-semite. I feel that the previous Racial Equality Officers were too concerned with justifying their positions to themselves and the wider York Student body, when they should have been taking action on more important matters happening in around the world. In fact we have planed a big campaign against anti-Islamic sentiment that we expect to launch this term.
-I feel it is an obligation to combat the hypocritical silence about all matters concerning Israel, if I am going to be the collateral damage for this cause, then so be it, but I will take a stand.
-I do not hold jews collectively responsible for the atrocities occurring in Israel, but when one expresses concern regarding the action of some people in a group, then it is a colloquialism to just mention the group. You should bear in mind that it was a private conversation and not a public speech.
To follow on that point, I do believe that it is common practise for those supporting the crimes occurring in Israel to represent any detractor as racist, this is what I meant when I responded to David telling me to go to hell.
-No.
I was even more shocked later to discover that David had been trying to offer the screen shots to Nouse, after he had already given them to Vision, in return for a page on their comment section. This is not the way I expected Vision or David to conduct themselves.
Rate:
24 
10
Politico, I did not say anything analogous to that. I said I would be ashamed of this (the speech). I am black and I have a far more tenuous link to Mugabe, but yes, I am ashamed of him.
Chris. I agree with you to an extent because I believe the issue that should concern me the most is what happens to students in the university. In fact, that is all I have done so far, publicly, since I assumed the role. I do not think it is a matter of equivocation that building settlements on internationally recognised foreign land is wrong, just like the Palestinians bombing parts of Israel is wrong. I was merely commenting in a private capacity on an aspect of the isreali-palestinian conflict – them blocking Palestinian membership of the UN.
Rate:
14 
10
I’m dubious as to how he didn’t intend to release the transcript of what was a private conversation – it appears to have got out somehow.
I’m not defending the comments at all, they were fairly awful, but it strikes me that this should have been an internal matter. Even if the papers had got wind of his dismissal, and the reasons behind it, I don’t think a print screen of the conversation was appropriate. I’d hate to regulate every private conversation I had, were I a YUSU employee, based on them potentially being snitched to the press.
Rate:
17 
2
fletcher-hackwood punched the guy in a private altercation. that was deemed to be relevant to the public nature of her job. it’s the same thing here.
lawrence – you said “jewish”, not just israeli. if david had said to you: “if i was you i’d be ashamed to be black” you and everyone else would have rightly called that racist.
“I was happy to apologise to David after clarifying the situation, because he clearly misunderstood my intentions and this misundertsanding caused him offense.”
oh wow. what a heartfelt genuine apology! “i didnt do anything wrong but sorry if you were offended”! you need to step up and take some responsibility
“I do believe that it is common practise for those supporting the crimes occurring in Israel to represent any detractor as racist”
any why, pray tell, is that a “jewish response”, hmmm? you dont seem to understand that jewish and zionist are different – a common manifestation of antisemitism.
and please do get off your high horse. nobody is trying to silence your criticism of israel, but when you make antisemitic comments you have to face the consequences
“when one expresses concern regarding the action of some people in a group, then it is a colloquialism to just mention the group”
oh wow. just wow. this is the racial equality officer who doesnt understand what’s wrong about lumping all members of a group in together. says it all really!
and paul has already explained why there were 2 articles
Rate:
8 
16
politico u seem to be missing the point- admittedly wording can be misunderstood and it a close line but the point he is making is that he would be ashamed if he were associated with the group of people who believed in such views… admitting that he was ashamed of mugambe’s actions. if a member of your family (admittedly an extreme example) does something that one should be ashamed of then you would usually denounce the actions of that person otherwise you would be associated with it (whether air or not)- this association is something that Levene admits to in the transcript!
Equally, Levene made no attempt to sort this out privately which might suggest that he knows that it was not a personal attack but a conversation, as his reaction displays. Given that there are black students (including Lawrence) who have been physically and racially abused in York, as well as several of my friends, which I’m pretty certain Levene has neither reacted to or taken such a stand. Levene is not a member of YUSU.
Rate:
10 
3
but he’s the 1 dong the associating! how dare you, or he, presume to know what jews as a group think! that’s the entire point – it is racist to assume they all think the same thing, whether that be jews, black people, whoever! levene admits that *others* associate him with israel, but that’s the problem!
as i say, it’s outrageous to attack levene for making a complaint about racism he experienced and for not just “sorting it out”.
“I’m pretty certain Levene has neither reacted to or taken such a stand”
great, so someone can only complain about racism if they meet your standards about previous, unrelated events, with actions or statements that you may or may not know about. brilliant
levene is not a member of yusu, but racism is racism. racism is still racism in a private conversation. binitie and those apologising for his racism are the ones who should be ashamed
Rate:
5 
10
“As agreed with the YUSU President, you have two hours from the timestamp of this message to respond”
Doesn’t the media charter, and standard journalistic code, state there should be 24 hours allowed for a response for an article.
Naive from the President and underhand from the reporter.
Rate:
22 
1
This should have remained a private matter with a private apology more than sufficient.
What is the motivation of a Labour councillor in apparently trying to blackmail an elected student official into resigning? And now, it seems, dropping out of the matter?
If, as I understand, the Councillor stood for the post of Racial Equality Officer then what was he planning to do if not set an example by speaking out against all racism?
Suggest YUSU finds a face saving mechanism, perhaps a public apology for any misunderstanding, but no more.
Rate:
15 
2
Petty from Levene, comments were made privately and should have remained as such.
Rate:
21 
5
“Racial equality officer refuses to resign over offensive comments
Lawrence Binitie refuses to go quietly following race-row involving former YUSU Council Chair David Levene.”
Surely this introduction to the story is somewhat biased?
To what extent is it influencing the comments?
YUSU should be thankful its elected official “refuses to go quietly”.
Remove your Racial Equality Officer at your reputational, and perhaps legal, peril.
Rate:
11 
3
Complaints about councillor conduct:
http://www.york.gov.uk/council/Elected_representatives/Councillors/complaints/
Councillors’ Code of Conduct:
http://democracy.york.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=50912
General Obligations 3. (2), “You must not… (b) bully any person” probably covers what appears to be attempted blackmail.
Could also complain to the Labour Party, do they have a code of conduct?
Rate:
8 
4
Levene is, as always, seeking the spotlight. It’s ridiculous, undignified and low to publish this story to the university media. The man’s need for self-promotion is incredible.
Lawrence’s comments may sound harsh, and you may not agree with them, but they are in no way racist. Nothing he has said shows that he is unfit for office. Chris, supporting Palestine does not show an intrinsic bias. A bias is by definition an unfair prejudice; supporting Palestine or Israel can be based on justifiable reason.
Rate:
12 
5
In short, this really is all about context. A couple of Lawrence’s comments are a little suspect, but the main bone of contention – the “ashamed to be Jewish” thing – has been taken way out of context in a purposeful manner.
What’s more, Levene’s approach to this entire debacle is sly and underhand. Prepared transcripts? Sign a full apology? Since when was David Levene the equivalent to Jesse Jackson, speaking for an entire community? Such a shame that both student media outlets rushed to get the story out without properly consulting Binitie for his full side of the story, which he has had to express clumsily on comments pages at the bottom of these articles.
Lawrence’s comments were ill-judged, sure, but let’s not start a witch-hunt, led by a complete and utter moron and his commenting cronies.
Rate:
13 
2
Levene likes writing words for other people.
Another example are his ‘endorsements’ from sabbs last year which he wrote himself and ascribed their names to…
Rate:
16 
1
History and Mr. X are both right, I forgot to mention: how utterly pretentious and indecent is it for Levene to prepare an apology?! Who does he think he is?
Rate:
13 
1
I think most people have said things on Facebook chat (usually drunk though)that they wouldn’t want repeated in public, I know I have.
Maybe Binitie’s comments cross the line, but Levene’s actions don’t reflect well on himself or the Labour party.
Rate:
9 
0
This is another example of over-the-top sensationalism from a paper that’s the student equivalent of The News of the World. Latching onto any petty insignificant morsel of information if it means a chance for a moral crusade. Less bombast and more neutrality please.
Rate:
9 
7
Grace punching the student at ‘Chav D’ was obviously ironic.
Rate:
11 
0
Just to echo the concern that has been voiced by others. I do not wish to get involved in the actual debate itself, but to work for yusu, as a volunteer alongside a degree, and have to watch everything you say to your “friends” on facebook seems concerning and I feel that there is a huge lack of defence from yusu itself. I agree that some comments are strong, but i am also in a position of responsibility on campus, one which is yusu-affiliated, and i am shaken at the thought that anything i say, particularly out of context, could be printed for all freshers to read without even the correct right-of-response.
Rate:
11 
2
Does anyone else here think that Politico might be Levene? Look at his grammar – just the same as Levene’s facebook posts: no capital letters at the start of sentences, no punctuation…
If so… man, that’s just low and sneaky! At least Lawrence does not invent commentators to defend him!
Rate:
14 
5
If I was Labour, I would be ashamed.
Rate:
13 
4
Before we get tied up in what unfolded after the initial comment, surely the basic point of this whole mess is that Binitie shouldn’t be in such a position if he has biases. Let’s not forget this, if we’re all going to just argue about what followed.
Rate:
4 
5
Also Binitie blaming this all on a misunderstanding of colloquialism is entirely ridiculous.
Rate:
6 
3
“The Basic Point”, and everyone else who keeps talking about bias: the definition of a bias is unfair / ungrounded prejudice. Do you know Lawrence’s opinions to be ungrounded? He never said that Jews are inferior or should be ashamed of being Jewish. He took a stance against Israel’s policies. This is not racist, it’s not discriminatory.
I don’t understand the mentality you guys have: the way you (ab)use the word “bias” indicates that you believe any opinion one has to be biased.
Rate:
5 
4
I am nearly certain that this is the case. The facts:
a) “Politico” has defended Levene in older posts on Nouse.
b) He seems to have inside knowledge of the various issues (e.g. “not that it’s in any way relevant, but a) the press approached levene, not the other way round”)
b) Their writing styles and grammar (or lack of it) are very similar.
C) Levene has not actually posted anything here.
So, which is more likely: that Levene has a fanatic groupie who always jumps to defend him, having all the inside knowledge of situations, whilst Levene himself refuses to comment in public? Or that he does comment in public, but lacks the guts to do so under his name?
I will leave this to the readers to decide. Busted, Levene.
Rate:
15 
6
By saying that he’d be ashamed of a speech an individual made doesn’t expose racial bias at all! The basic point is that Binitie didn’t agree with what one man had to say, and as a result some politically-motivated, attention-seeking loser is throwing his toys out the pram and kicking up a fuss to make his life a little less shit.
I’m disappointed that Vision and Nouse have given Levene an outlet for his trash, and quite frankly can’t wait to see the back of him.
Rate:
10 
5
This would have come out anyway given part of this discussion was had in a public forum.
Given this, I think it is fair to say any Jewish student who felt discriminated against on campus would probably not feel they could approach Lawrence about it. Surely that makes him an ineffective Racial Equality Officer, leaving his position untenable?
Rate:
10 
5
It doesn’t make it right, but Grace SLAPPED someone (not a punch).
David Levene used to call himself “A Politician” on these sites.
Rate:
3 
0
I think people are treating this story as representative of the Palestine-Israel argument, on which many people have strong views already. The story being reported on has nothing to do with that, even though Binitie has tried quite hard to make it so.
Some of these comments seem to show a clear ignorance, both of what happened in this individual story and what constitutes racism, or anti-Semitism, in general. You need to re-read the story, especially this paragraph:
‘The National Union for Students’ policy follows that of the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency in describing “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” and “accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or perceived wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group,” as explicitly anti-Semitic.’
Lawrence Binitie: ‘I would be ashamed, if I was from israel, or even jewish, to be associated with this [referring to the speech]‘
So let’s go through this again: Binitie says that, because Levene is Jewish, he should be ashamed of what an Israeli representative is saying (Binitie repeats this in his comments to Vision). This is “accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or perceived wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group”. The definition of ‘racism’ is not, as ‘Unbiased’ seems to think, as cut and dry as ‘thinking another race is inferior’.
Most of these comments seem to be painting Binitie as something of a hero whose only fault was in not choosing his wording properly. Look a bit closer at what happened – Binitie heard this speech, disagreed with it, and seems to have sought out the first Jewish person on facebook chat that he could bully about it. And I mean bully – look at what he actually says and you can see that he is looking for a reaction. When he’s losing the argument he just says ‘I hate benj net’, a propos to nothing, which seems to be nothing but a taunt. Binitie is not an idiot, and he knows that Israeli and Jewish are separate things (although he links them more than he should), so for him to say ‘Sounds like a Jewish response’ shows that all he is doing is prodding Levene for a reaction. ‘Sounds like a Jewish response’ does not mean, no matter how Binitie tries to twist it, the same thing as ‘You’re shutting down the argument by accusing me of anti-Semitism’.
One last thing – someone spoke about ‘starting a witch-hunt’ of Binitie over these comments. What exactly is happening here against Levene if not a witch-hunt? When someone stands up for Levene, expert linguistic analysts step up to prove that it is actually Levene (‘he doesn’t use capital letters! It has to be Levene!’) . Almost every post about Levene seems to be tinged with a personal dislike of the man that almost certainly influences how they’ve reacted to the situation.
Rate:
11 
7
What is happening against Levene could be described as a witch hunt, but one targeting a very real witch, not some innocent person. Levene has time and again used student media to further his cause, has promoted himself in every way possible (writing endorsements for himself!) etc. This is just a reaction from many people who have been following these events against his latest action.
I’m not a linguistic expert, and “Politico” may not be Leneve. But I presented some facts, based on which I am making an educated guess. Like in any case, if there are two possibilities, I tend to consider the one that is based on fewer assumptions as the most probable.
So, possibility 1: Levene is Politico. Assumption required: that Levene would comment anonymously.
Possibility 2: Someone else is Politico. Assumptions required: a) Levene does not feel like commenting on these forums, b) Levene has a close friend who jumps to defend him and closely follow such posts, c) that friend has a similar writing style.
I just happen to believe that the first is more likely.
Rate:
19 
3
Oliver Blackburn talks sense.
Rate:
2 
1
I just don’t understand all this ‘should have been kept a private matter’ rubbish. Imagine if you were in Levene’s position. I think it would have been completely irresponsible not to go to YUSU after such a provoking and clearly racist conversation with someone elected to promote equality. So it’s OK for Binitie to be a racist anti-Semite douchebag in his spare time to someone he had private conversations with but not publicly? Oh OK. I guess it’s alright for the LGBT officers to be closet homophobes and just bully their gay facebook friends in private then.
And as for Levene leaving the conversation after the ‘sounds like a Jewish response’ who could blame him? I doubt I’d have given Binitie the pleasure of responding to that clearly provoking comment, let alone given him the chance to explain himself.
The entire idea behind this whole conversation completely baffles me. I can absolutely say that I do not feel ashamed for anybody elses actions. End of. I just don’t see the link. How would anything any Jew does anywhere else in the world mean that any other Jew (or man, or woman, or atheist etc.) should feel ashamed? What’s with all the shame? No one is responsible for the actions of anyone else. I do believe that Binitie should be held accountable and feel ashamed of his own actions; the clearly provocative, anti-Semitic ones which contradict his currently held position within YUSU.
Rate:
7 
9
Lawrence Binitie said: “I did not say that David levene or anyone else should be ashamed to be jewish, just that if I was them, I would be ashamed of the speech”. In the context of a discussion between two people who know each other, he is surely asking Levine for his own views, but Levine dodges the question and ultimately tells Binitie to “go to hell”.
I’m not clear there is any offence here or any reason for Levine, beyond politics, to make a fuss.
Is the British Board of Deputies, which I believe calls itself the voice of Britishy Jewry, not rascist in perhaps representing all British Jews as supporters of Israel and its actions?
Rate:
5 
2
On a vaguely related note, the publication of this story illustrates one thing very clearly:
York’s campus media is very good at giving students with political ambition an awareness as to how careful they have to be before publicly expressing potentially controversial points of view.
Rate:
11 
1
… is this what you want from your representatives? I for one want politicians to be transparent, expressing their real views instead of being politically correct all the time.
At the moment, politics is ruled by hypocrites, exactly because the ones who rise to the top are the ones who are better at hiding their real selves, pleasing crowds etc. In other words, manipulative, dishonest people.
Rate:
1 
0
Or even, Chris Etheridge 15:29, non-public points of view!
Rate:
0 
0
Justin – He is clearly not asking Levene for his views but rather telling him what to think.
The problem here is Binitie is making a connection that it is not his choice to make. Everyone has the basic right to choose who they identify with. I could say ‘As a human being, I am ashamed to be associated with Adolf Hitler’. Another person might say ‘Although I am a human being, I feel no part of myself in Hitler or his actions, and so I do not feel personal shame from them’.
Binitie’s example of Berlusconi and Italians is disingenuous because Berlusconi is the leader of the Italians, and Benjamin Netanyahu is not the leader of the Jews. Even then, an Italian could say either ‘I am ashamed of Berlusconi because he is the leader of my country’ or ‘I do not feel that Berlusconi or his actions represent me or my wishes, so I am not ashamed of him’.
Binitie takes away Levene’s right to choose whether or not he feels ashamed for the actions of Israel/the Israeli leader. It is in taking away this basic human right that he makes the mistake that shows him up as unfit for the Racial Equality role.
Rate:
4 
3
‘Yes Chris, but…’ 12 October 2011 15:58 BST said:
“… I for one want politicians to be transparent… politics is ruled by hypocrites… manipulation, dishonest people.”
Yes, Levene is both a Jew and a politician and yet, while he appears to be unwilling to disclose his views on Israel, he is seemingly not above using ‘anti-Semitism’ as a political weapon.
How many Mancunians don’t have a view on Manchester United? It’s possible there are a view who are indifferent, but would they hide that opinion? How many Manchester politicians avoid saying whether or not they support Manchester United?
Like it or not, politically correct or not, Jews do have a connection with Israel. Any Jew from anywhere is allowed to take up residence in Israel. That a British Jewish politician does not have a view on Israel is not credible and, as a politician, that view should be public knowledge.
Rate:
5 
4
Worried 12 October 2011 16:31 BST said:
“Justin – He is clearly not asking Levene for his views but rather telling him what to think.”
There’s perhaps an element of both, but this is a private conversation between two individuals, who are familiar with each other, carried out in the informal context of ‘facebook chat’. Any such conversation is prone to casual choice of words and use of colloquialism.
The mere fact that we are here discussing niceties and technicalities reveals the matter is less illustrative of any real ‘anti-Semitism’ but is rather more about the politics of anti-Semitism.
Rate:
3 
3
“Yes, Levene is both a Jew and a politician and yet, while he appears to be unwilling to disclose his views on Israel, he is seemingly not above using ‘anti-Semitism’ as a political weapon.”
Firstly, David’s views on the Israel/Palestine conflict are his own, and it’s not the role of YUSU’s Racial Equality officer to establish or challenge these views by insinuating that David should be ashamed of being Jewish.
Secondly, just to clear that point you raised, I know David since his first year at York and I can tell you that he is strongly against Israeli aggression and strongly in favour of Palestinian statehood and self-determination.
Which just goes to show that Binitie was foolishly making an enemy out of a political ally just because of his naive assumptions and his provocative and deeply worrying remarks on David’s ethnicity.
Rate:
8 
7
‘Graduate’ 12 October 2011 20:02 BST said:
“… it’s not the role of YUSU’s Racial Equality officer to establish or challenge these views by insinuating that David should be ashamed of being Jewish.”
The transcript shows that Lawrence Binitie said, in the context of a speech:
“I would be ashamed, if i was from israel or even jewish, to be associated with this”
This is not the same as saying that David Levene should be ashamed of being Jewish, only that he Binitie, would be ashamed of any such association. In the context of the, rightly or wrongly, widely held assumption that Jews are associated with Israel, and so its leaders, it is inviting Levene, presumably a ‘facebook friend’, to state his stance.
It is neither abusive nor racist but a reflection of practical realities. It neither claims that Levene was personally responsible for the speech or suggest that Jews collectively are responsible for the speech.
Is Lawrence Binitie anti-Semitic? Not on the evidence presented here. What he may understandably be, is angry at what has been done and continues to be done to the Palestinian people. It is increasingly difficult to express legitimate concerns in relation to Israel, part of that difficulty is the use of ‘anti-Semitism’ as a political weapon, to use the term to denigrate or try to discredit those who make valid criticisms. To make an example of them to deter others from speaking out.
Lawrence Binitie obviously found his exchange with David Levene extremely frustrating. Perhaps what he needs to learn is extreme caution and patience in exposing the wrongdoings and crimes of Israel.
Rate:
4 
3
not that I care because I’ve left york but this article did amuse me as it reminded me of this Daily Mash article
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/oh-go-on,-just-resign,-guardian-tells-cameron-201107214106/
Rate:
5 
1
Maybe Binitie should hire a close friend to monitor his public image? I’m sure YUSU would be happy to fund it and nobody would find out anyway.
Rate:
5 
1