Engage is a site set up by David Hirsh, John Strawson and other Zionists in order to fight the academic boycott of Israeli universities. Not surprisingly, one of their most avid supporters is Gilad Atzmon, who also opposes the academic boycott as ‘book burning’.

Last weekend, Norman Finkelstein, the anti-Zionist Jewish academic and author, was arrested at Israel’s Ben Gurion airport by the Shabak secret police, detained for 24 hours and then deported. No doubt Gilad Atzmon & his devoted groupie, Mary Rizzo, also support this, since being an anti-Zionist Jew, Finkelstein must also be a Zionist according to Mr Jazzmon!

The decision to deport Finkelstein is rapidly becoming yet another embarrassment for ‘the only democracy in the Middle East’. Ha’aretz has printed a robust editorial criticising the decision to deport Finkelstein:

According to the law, both in Israel and in other countries, no one has an intrinsic right to enter a country of which he is not a citizen. Immigration authorities have the power to keep a tourist from entering the country for reasons known only to themselves, and do not even need to provide an explanation. In Finkelstein`s case, the disturbing issue is neither the legality of keeping him out nor the authority to do so, but the reasonableness of the decision. Considering his unusual and extremely critical views, one cannot avoid the suspicion that refusing to allow him to enter Israel was a punishment rather than a precaution.

It is difficult to sympathize with Finkelstein`s opinions and preferences, especially since he decided to support Hezbollah, meet with its fighters and visit the graves of some of its slain operatives. But that does not mean he should be banned from entering Israel, since meetings with Hezbollah operatives do not in themselves constitute a security risk. True, the right to enter Israel is not guaranteed to noncitizens, but the right of Israeli citizens to hear unusual views is one that should be fought for. It is not for the government to decide which views should be heard here and which ones should not.
The decision to ban Finkelstein hurts us more than it hurts him. Every once in a while, the state suffers an attack of excessive sensitivity regarding its visitors. In 2002, it was Romanian flautist Gheorghe Zamfir who was kept out of the country by the Interior Ministry. The interior minister at the time, Eli Yishai, explained that Zamfir had expressed anti-Semitic views and that his entry into Israel would `hurt Holocaust survivors.` Avraham Poraz, who succeeded Yishai, overturned the decision.

When the person refused entry is Jewish, the absurdity is even greater. After all, Finkelstein could realize his right to immigrate to Israel as a Jew, in accordance with the Law of Return. Since he is Jewish and has no criminal past, it is doubtful whether he could be prevented from receiving Israeli citizenship.
The Shin Bet argues that Finkelstein constitutes a security risk. But it is more reasonable to assume that Finkelstein is persona non grata and that the Shin Bet, whose influence has increased to frightening proportions, latched onto his meetings with Hezbollah operatives in order to punish him.

And the decision is all the more surprising when one recalls the ease with which right-wing activists from the Meir Kahane camp – the kind whose activities pose a security threat that no longer requires further proof – are able to enter the country.

The Jerusalem Post reported that:

However none of this has deterred David Hirsh’s ENGAGE from supporting the ban. It seems that for these hypocrites the only academic freedom that counts is the freedom of settler-colonial academics like Prof. Arnon Sofer of Haifa University who believes that the Arabs pose a ‘demographic problem.’