Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
With the organized "Israel Apartheid Week" coming to many campuses across North America, the Ontario Canada Legislature has taken the courageous step of standing up to the radicals and anti-Semites by condemning the event.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/771524
-The Star (Hat tip to the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism)
Beginning March 1, many North American campuses will bring together the usual coalition of Israel-hating Muslim Student Associations, America-hating leftist academics and other misfits. You will see and hear fiery speeches condemning Israel. You will hear speeches condemning America. And yes, some of the speeches will cross the line over into anti-Semitic Jew hatred. Of course, they will try to deny they are anti-Jewish-just anti-Zionist. But what is the distinction when they support suicide bombers, Hizbollah and Hamas or anybody else that is trying to kill every Zionist Jew they can find in Israel?
Yes, it will be another embarrassing week for the universities who host these vile events. They will wring their hands and talk about free speech. Columbia University, that great institution that has hosted Ahmadinejad, but denied the podium to Muslim apostate Nonie Darwish, will host one Ben White this year. He will speak Tuesday evening. White is a UK-based journalist who hates everything about Israel. His language has been so vociferous that he is widely accused of being an anti-Semite. He denies the charge, but has said in writing that he can understand why many people dislike Jews. Strange. I remember a few years back when a radio shock jock called the "Greaseman" made a similar comment about blacks. As a result, he had to go on an apology tour that lasted months.
As for my own campus, UC-Irvine, I don't yet know when their annual "event" will be-probably in May-that is if the MSU still has standing at UCI in the wake of their multiple incidents, the most recent being the disruption of the Israeli ambassador's speech on February 8th.
If you are part of a university community that is hosting such an event, I would suggest you take some time to attend as many of the speeches as you can. Listen to the hate. Find out what is really going on at your local university. If you don't like what you see and hear, let your feelings be known. Write a letter to the newspaper and the university president asking why such hate speech is practiced on the campus. Talk to Jewish students and see how they react to these events. The fact is that universities prefer that these events occur as discreetly as possible lest the public become aware.
Become aware.
People are entitled to their opinions on Israel vis-a-vis the Palestinians. That is no excuse for a rise in anti-Semitism. Make no mistake; anti-Semitism is on the march. It is also on the march in Europe-yes, that sophisticated continent we Americans all like to emulate because they are so......sophisticated. Over there, the rise in anti-Semitism is approaching 1930s levels. The call it "anti-Semitism without Jews" because the Jewish community is so small. (We know why, don't we?) Yet, Jews in many large European cities like Paris, Malmo, London, Brussels and others are afraid to go out wearing Jewish garb lest they be accosted verbally or physically by Muslim immigrants.
But it's not anti-Semitism, you see. It is "anti-Zionism". That's what you will hear most of the speakers say, but some will not be able hold back their hatred of Jews.
But it's free speech, folks. Nobody will be arrested for what they say next week-nor should they be. But their words must be countered and called for what it is. Hate.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Rep. Alan Grayson Rescued by Military Contractor, Blackwater Xe
by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook
Rep. Alan Grayson was in Niger with a science and technology congressional delegation when the Niger military decided to have a coup. Grayson was hustled of the country on a flight believed to be that of a military contractor.
Daniel Schulman, writing for Mother Jones Online on Alternet reports:
Alan Grayson and the First Amendment
Rep. Alan Grayson was in Niger with a science and technology congressional delegation when the Niger military decided to have a coup. Grayson was hustled of the country on a flight believed to be that of a military contractor.
Alan Grayson
Daniel Schulman, writing for Mother Jones Online on Alternet reports:
Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) who made his substantial fortune by suing military contractors and later lambasted them as a lawmaker, was indeed evacuated from Niger by personnel working for Xe Services (the private security empire formally known as Blackwater), his spokesman confirms.From CNN:
He heard gunshots in a building next door on the day military leaders stormed the nation's presidential palace and suspended its constitution.More from Daniel Schulman:
He was taken to the U.S. embassy and put under guard -- it's not clear by whom -- and then flown to Brukina Faso, according to CNN.
...a Blackwater executive testifying before Congress today said, in an apparent reference to Grayson: "Xe Services, through its subsidiary Presidential Airways, provides aviation support and medevac services to Defense Department personnel in Africa. Just last week, our personnel evacuated a congressman from Niger during civil unrest."Grayson, a razor-tongued trash talking attack dog sued an American security firm operating in Iraq, Custer Battles LLC ,for "false claims," and won the case. His fees for the case exceeded $4 million. At the time this case was settled in 2006, the Wall Street Journal described Grayson this way:
A fierce critic of the war in Iraq, Mr. Grayson drives an aging Cadillac emblazoned with anti-administration bumper stickers such as "Bush Lied, People Died." ...Here's some insight into Alan Grayson from his constitutents. The important part of the video below starts about 1 minute 40 seconds in.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Free Speech? Here's an Example of Free Speech by the Anti-Israel Side
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
It seems one of the focal points of the question of free speech revolves around the free speech of Israelis in the US. Now anyone with half a brain knows that Israeli ambassadors or academics should have a right to express their point of view in this great country of ours, right?
Well, not quite. You see the far-left allies of radical Islam and the pro-Palestinian lobby feel that anyone representing the nation of Israel should not have the right of free speech in America. Nowhere does this idea have more currency than in the world of academia. Now we have this outfit that works for the boycott of Israel asking a group to dis-invite an Israeli scholar from participating in a seminar on Iran in Santa Monica, California.
http://usacbi.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/open-letter-to-the-international-society-for-iranian-studies/
For the record, I grew up near Santa Monica. I know it well. It is still part of the United States of America. Tell that to the learned scholars of this rag-tag outfit.
Check out the names who signed this letter. Of course, there is that nut job at MIT, Noam Chomsky. He'll sign anything. In fact, he's signing so many letters and petitions, he probably doesn't have time to teach linguistics anymore-the only subject, I might add, that he knows anything about. Saree Makdisi I remember. He is at UCLA but is on the seminar circuit (including UCI) sitting on "panels" that spend hours telling audiences how bad Israel is. I never heard of the other folks, but I'll bet they all hold PHDs. Note that they all teach at our universities. This is what is teaching (indoctrinating, I should say) our children.
Don't laugh. It's not funny.
Here we have a collection of so-called academics- you know, smart people-who don't have a clue about the First Amendment, our Constitution or anything else. All they know is that what they don't agree with must be suppressed. Of course, they will all stand with the so-called "Irvine 11", when they try to shut down the Israeli ambassador and say that they (the students) were exercising their free speech.
You see, to the academic left, it all comes down to this:
"What I believe is free speech. What you believe must be silenced."
fousesquawk
It seems one of the focal points of the question of free speech revolves around the free speech of Israelis in the US. Now anyone with half a brain knows that Israeli ambassadors or academics should have a right to express their point of view in this great country of ours, right?
Well, not quite. You see the far-left allies of radical Islam and the pro-Palestinian lobby feel that anyone representing the nation of Israel should not have the right of free speech in America. Nowhere does this idea have more currency than in the world of academia. Now we have this outfit that works for the boycott of Israel asking a group to dis-invite an Israeli scholar from participating in a seminar on Iran in Santa Monica, California.
http://usacbi.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/open-letter-to-the-international-society-for-iranian-studies/
For the record, I grew up near Santa Monica. I know it well. It is still part of the United States of America. Tell that to the learned scholars of this rag-tag outfit.
Check out the names who signed this letter. Of course, there is that nut job at MIT, Noam Chomsky. He'll sign anything. In fact, he's signing so many letters and petitions, he probably doesn't have time to teach linguistics anymore-the only subject, I might add, that he knows anything about. Saree Makdisi I remember. He is at UCLA but is on the seminar circuit (including UCI) sitting on "panels" that spend hours telling audiences how bad Israel is. I never heard of the other folks, but I'll bet they all hold PHDs. Note that they all teach at our universities. This is what is teaching (indoctrinating, I should say) our children.
Don't laugh. It's not funny.
Here we have a collection of so-called academics- you know, smart people-who don't have a clue about the First Amendment, our Constitution or anything else. All they know is that what they don't agree with must be suppressed. Of course, they will all stand with the so-called "Irvine 11", when they try to shut down the Israeli ambassador and say that they (the students) were exercising their free speech.
You see, to the academic left, it all comes down to this:
"What I believe is free speech. What you believe must be silenced."
The Zionist Organization of America and UC-Irvine
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
As I have reported previously on this site, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) in New York (their HQS) has issued a statement calling on prospective university students to reconsider their intent to attend UCI in the wake of the disruption of Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren's speech on February 8th. ZOA has also called on donors to stop contributing to UCI. This has unleashed a storm of controversy. Many, including some Jewish UCI students, have called the statement unwise and maintain that more Jewish students are needed at UCI to counter the negative messages of the Muslim Student Union.
This has raised an interesting debate on the those two questions, one in which both sides have merit. I myself have raised the question in the past, both in my writings and what I have uttered. At the same time, I respect the opinions of those students who have taken a stand against ZOA's position.
My purpose in writing this, however, is to remind the readers that no other national Jewish organization has gone to the wall to represent the complaints made over the years by Jewish students at UCI more than ZOA.
The complaint filed by ZOA a few years back with the Department of Education was made in response to actual complaints of harassment made by Jewish students then attending UCI. The incidents described have been described on this blog, most recently in my response to Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky. Where were the other national Jewish organizations when all that was going on?
When British court jester George Galloway (pictured below) came to UCI last May and walked away with boxes full of cash to be delivered to his friends in Gaza-probably to be used to buy more arms and lob more rockets into Israel courtesy of Hamas, who took the lead in protesting and calling for an investigation by the Justice Department and for UCI to launch its own internal investigation into whether campus rules were violated? It was the ZOA (ADL also wrote a complaint as well.)
But where were all the other national organizations? Where was the local Jewish Federation, for example?
That's where.
And in the wake of the February 8th incident that has brought more embarrassment to UCI both nationally and internationally, who has taken the lead?
ZOA.
Meanwhile, the local boss of the Jewish Federation, who has spent years denying the problem, is running around like celebrity attorney Gloria Allred, from news outlet to news outlet, expressing "outrage" ("laying down the gauntlet" according to one article) and demanding the university take "strong action".
Laying down the gauntlet! Gimme a break!
As I have always said as a non-Jew, how sad to see Jewish organizations and individuals not standing as one on these issues when their enemies are so determined and united.
The decision whether to attend UCI or donate to UCI is a personal one that has to be made by each individual. At the same time, I feel that Jewish students past and present owe a debt of gratitude to ZOA for standing up for their concerns. They have kept this issue alive in the public consciousness, and that is no small contribution
fousesquawk
As I have reported previously on this site, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) in New York (their HQS) has issued a statement calling on prospective university students to reconsider their intent to attend UCI in the wake of the disruption of Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren's speech on February 8th. ZOA has also called on donors to stop contributing to UCI. This has unleashed a storm of controversy. Many, including some Jewish UCI students, have called the statement unwise and maintain that more Jewish students are needed at UCI to counter the negative messages of the Muslim Student Union.
This has raised an interesting debate on the those two questions, one in which both sides have merit. I myself have raised the question in the past, both in my writings and what I have uttered. At the same time, I respect the opinions of those students who have taken a stand against ZOA's position.
My purpose in writing this, however, is to remind the readers that no other national Jewish organization has gone to the wall to represent the complaints made over the years by Jewish students at UCI more than ZOA.
The complaint filed by ZOA a few years back with the Department of Education was made in response to actual complaints of harassment made by Jewish students then attending UCI. The incidents described have been described on this blog, most recently in my response to Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky. Where were the other national Jewish organizations when all that was going on?
When British court jester George Galloway (pictured below) came to UCI last May and walked away with boxes full of cash to be delivered to his friends in Gaza-probably to be used to buy more arms and lob more rockets into Israel courtesy of Hamas, who took the lead in protesting and calling for an investigation by the Justice Department and for UCI to launch its own internal investigation into whether campus rules were violated? It was the ZOA (ADL also wrote a complaint as well.)
But where were all the other national organizations? Where was the local Jewish Federation, for example?
That's where.
And in the wake of the February 8th incident that has brought more embarrassment to UCI both nationally and internationally, who has taken the lead?
ZOA.
Meanwhile, the local boss of the Jewish Federation, who has spent years denying the problem, is running around like celebrity attorney Gloria Allred, from news outlet to news outlet, expressing "outrage" ("laying down the gauntlet" according to one article) and demanding the university take "strong action".
Laying down the gauntlet! Gimme a break!
As I have always said as a non-Jew, how sad to see Jewish organizations and individuals not standing as one on these issues when their enemies are so determined and united.
The decision whether to attend UCI or donate to UCI is a personal one that has to be made by each individual. At the same time, I feel that Jewish students past and present owe a debt of gratitude to ZOA for standing up for their concerns. They have kept this issue alive in the public consciousness, and that is no small contribution
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Erwin Chemerinski's Statement on UC-Irvine and my Response
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
Dr Erwin Chemerinsky, who is the dean of the UC-Irvine Law School, has come out with a statement defending UCI from charges of anti-Semitism on campus. This comes in the wake of the disruption of Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren's speech at UC-Irvine on February 8th. He also strongly criticizes the Zionist Organization of America for their criticism of the university, call for students not to attend UCI, and for donors to cease contributions to the school.
I am posting Dr Chemerinsky's statement below along with my own response, which I have emailed to him.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Reality of the University of California, Irvine
by Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean and Distinguished Professor of Law, UC-Irvine School of Law
"The claim that the University of California, Irvine is inhospitable to Jews is so far from reality that one must wonder whether those making the accusation have ever been on the campus or spoken to Jewish students and faculty there. In my almost two years of working and living on campus, I have not seen the slightest indication of anti-Semitism. I have taught hundreds of college and law students at UCI, many Jewish, and have not heard one complaint about an anti-Semitic incident on campus.
I therefore was outraged when the Zionist Organization of America asked on February 16 for donors not to contribute to UCI and students not to apply there. Astoundingly, it declared: “We (SIC)
Unfortunately, the Zionist Organization of America has been making these unfounded accusations against UCI for years. From the moment that it was rumored in the press that I was a candidate to be the founding dean of its law school, I was told that there was anti-Semitism at UCI. Before I accepted the offer to be dean, I carefully investigated these charges. As a Jew, I certainly did not want to spend the rest of my career in a place that is anti-Semitic or to move my family to live in a hostile environment.
What I learned is that almost without exception, the events which led to the accusations involved speeches on campus that were sharply critical of Israel and sometimes were anti-Jewish. On occasion, some very offensive things were said. The incidents generally involved speakers invited by the Muslim Student Union. These did not occur very often and usually were confined to one week in the spring.
Several years ago, the ZOA filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education. The Office of Civil Rights did a thorough investigation and then concluded that there was no basis for finding that there was a hostile or intimidating environment for Jewish students on campus at the University of California, Irvine. Its conclusion was that “there is insufficient evidence to support the complainant’s allegation that the University failed to respond promptly and effectively to complaints by Jewish students that they were harassed and subjected to a hostile environment.”
Those, like the ZOA, who make such accusations ignore the many efforts by the University’s administration to make Jewish students feel safe and welcome, including the beautiful new facilities for the campus Hillel. Also, there are programs such as the Olive Tree Initiative, which has Jewish and Muslim students travel to the Middle East together and then do a series of programs on campus about their experiences.
When anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli sentiments have been expressed, Chancellor Michael Drake has responded and expressly proclaimed the inappropriateness of such speech. A public university can do no more than this; the First Amendment simply would not allow the exclusion of speakers, no matter how vile or offensive their words. Tolerating speech protected by the First Amendment is not the same as “promoting bigotry.” I have spoken with rabbis in the area and officials of organizations like the Jewish Federation. They are uniformly highly praising of Chancellor Drake and how he has handled the issue.
The most recent trigger for the ZOA’s statement was an incident on February 8, when Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren was invited to campus to speak by, among others, the law school (of which I am dean) and the political science department (of which I am a member). A series of individuals, including some UCI students affiliated with the Muslim Student Union, stood up and shouted so that the ambassador could not be heard. As each disruptive person was escorted away, another would stand up and yell.
When this occurred, the audience was admonished and then warned, including by Chancellor Drake, that such disruptions would lead to arrest and university discipline. Eleven individuals were arrested and those who are UCI students now face disciplinary proceedings. The ambassador was able to deliver his remarks.
I cannot think of how Chancellor Drake or the university could have handled this better. Everything possible was done to protect the ambassador’s right to speak.
At UCI, and likely every college campus, there are some members of the Muslim Student Union who are vehemently anti-Israel and who occasionally bring speakers to campus to express this message. But a few dozen students in a school of almost 28,000students hardly is enough to make it an anti-Semitic campus or a place inhospitable to Jews.
Yet, the ZOA’s accusations against UCI continue and it looks for any opportunity to renew them. Any accusations, even false ones, that are repeated enough begin to be believed. I have gotten email messages from people literally all over the world who have heard the ZOA message and wonder why I am working at an anti-Semitic school.
But few seem to know that in the spring of 2008, the student leaders of every Jewish organization on campus signed a joint letter that they found UCI to be a warm and hospitable place for
As I think about our law school, I see how far the ZOA’s accusations are from reality. Almost a third of our first year law students are Jewish. When asked, the Jewish students, including ones involved in inviting the ambassador, said that they have seen no indication of anti-Semitism on campus.
To those donors or prospective students who take seriously the ZOA’s call for a boycott, I invite you to spend some time on the UCI campus. Walk across it, talk to the students, sit in the student center. I am convinced that you will not find a shred of evidence of anti-Semitism. Occasionally, there may be speakers saying things that make you angry or uncomfortable. But that is what a college campus should be about, a place where all views on all issues can be expressed. It is a shame that the ZOA doesn’t realize that."
Erwin Chemerinsky is the Dean and a Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California, Irvine, School of Law
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dr Chemerinsky,
My name is Gary Fouse, and I am an adjunct teacher in the UCI Extension (ESL). I have been teaching part-time at UCI for over 11 years. I am not an academic by profession, rather I am retired from federal law enforcement in the Department of Justice (DEA). I have been involved in this on-going controversy for 3 or 4 years now. I am writing because I respectfully take issue with some of the things you have said in your statement regarding the situation at UCI. I am writing as a private citizen and not as a representative of the UCI-Ext.
I became involved because, though I am not Jewish, I grew up in West Los Angeles among Jews. Later, I served in the US Army in Germany close to Nuremberg, a city with great symbolism in the Third Reich. That experience made me an amateur scholar on the history of the Third Reich. Suffice to say that I am very sensitive to the subject of anti-Semitism.
When I began attending the MSU-sponsored events a few years ago, I heard speech that greatly disturbed me. The primary focus was anti-Israel. Yet, I noted that many of the speakers also bashed America (their right under free speech, I concede), but also used language that I considered anti-Semitic as well (again, protected free speech.)
Let me focus on things that have been said on this campus by MSU-sponsored speakers.
Washington-based imam Mohammed al-Asi has called Jews "ghetto-dwellers" and said that "you can take a Jew out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jew". I have posted Al-Asi's words including video clips of him speaking at UCI on my blog which may be accessed at:
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/02/words-of-mohammed-al-asi-at-uc-irvine.html
Oakland-based imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali has been appearing on our campus repeatedly for years. He has glorified Palestinian suicide bombers as "martyrs" and "heroes"-not terrorists. He has repeatedly called for the violent destruction of Israel. Ali usually takes care to tack on the adjective, "Zionist" when he refers to Jews-as if that makes it alright, a fact I have personally pointed out to him. On one occasion, he referred to Rupert Murdoch as a "Zionist Jew", and repeated it for emphasis.
"Rupert Murdoch is a straight up Zionist Jew" Put that on Fox News. Rupert Murdoch is a Zionist Jew".
Dr Chemerinsky, I invite you to decide for yourself if that is anti-Semitism. The link is here. You can view it yourself.
http://fi.netlog.com/go/explore/videos/videoid=it-450460
Note how Ali literally spits out the words, "Zionist Jew" much as Nazis like Julius Streicher did. You know well that when you spit out the word "Jew", no epithet is needed. In Nazi Germany, they didn't need epithets. Simply the word "Jude" was sufficient if stated the right way. That's how Ali does it. He knows what code language is all about.
That leads me back to your initial point about not having seen anti-Semitism on the UCI campus. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but you were also quoted as having said you saw no anti-Semitism on the UCI campus way before you came to UCI-when you were either at Duke or USC. I heard that statement (quoted) prior to your hiring. With all due respect, how could you have made such a determination at that time if you were not here? In addition, I note in your statement, you acknowledge that anti-Semitic statements have been made by MSU-sponsored speakers.
In the last 11 years, I have also had occasion to meet and speak with Jewish students. Before I come directly to that point, I would like to describe my own feelings about the UCI campus. There is a reason I have chosen to continue teaching part-time at UCI. I have always considered the campus a pleasant place to work. I have always stated that 99.9% of the students at UCI are not involved in this controversy. Most are serious students who don't have time to engage in all the crazy protests one sees at other campuses like Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz or Columbia.
In most respects, UCI is a great place to study or to work. I have never tried to portray the campus as a place where Jews cannot safely walk around. In my conversations with Jewish students, I get varying opinions about the extent of the problem. The problem seems greatest when the MSU holds their events and feelings sometimes get out of hand. My sense is that most Jewish students (that I have spoken to) are not looking for confrontation, prefer to talk it out with Muslim students and want to see more Jewish students attend UCI in order to strengthen their voice.
On the other hand, a few months ago, a Jewish UCI professor who counsels Jewish students was meeting with a group of them and asked them how many actually felt intimidated as Jews on the UCI campus. About half raised their hands-virtually all females. I submit that is a troubling number.
In addition, the anecdotal incidents that have happened over the years are well documented. Fortunately, there have been no serious incidents of violence. Yet, there have been insults and cases of intimidation. How must Jewish students, some of whom are of Israeli origin, feel when they view the Israeli flag torn and smeared with red paint-which happens regularly? I myself have seen the caricature of Ariel Sharon on the MSU "Wall" depicting him in the same style as the Nazi newspaper Der Stuermer depicted Jews during the Third Reich-leering face, thick lips, and big hooked nose.
That, Dr Chemerinsky, is anti-Semitic.
More to the point, however, one Jewish student (now graduated) had her camera shoved in her face while filming an MSU event a few years ago. Another Jewish woman after filming an evening speech by Ali, was followed back to her car by a group of MSU males who surrounded her car while she was trying to leave. This was witnessed by a member of the community who happened to be in the area and tried to get the campus police to take action (unsuccessfully) even though she herself had her car surrounded and sat upon. Another Jewish girl was verbally accosted as she walked past what was supposed to be a silent MSU protest. Instead she was accosted by students who yelled in her face about "the crimes of Israel". Another male student had a rock thrown at his head by a female student on campus because he wore a t-shirt that identified him as a Jew.
These incidents were either reported to campus police or school authorities. No action was taken.
As a result of the above, rightfully or wrongfully, UCI has acquired a national reputation for these types of incidents. It may be free speech, but the fact is that many Jewish prospective students have opted not to attend UCI. That has nothing to do with any statements made by ZOA.
As a retired law enforcement officer, I am aware of what is or is not free speech. I have never argued that the above-referenced speakers or any others be shut down, arrested, disrupted or prevented from speaking. I have sat and listened to many of these speeches and then attempted to engage the speakers in debate during the Q&A. I feel that is the way to deal with it. Let me give you a couple of examples.
Last January, I attended a "seminar" at UCI entitled "Whither the Levant", (not MSU-sponsored) which was nothing more than a day-long bashing of Israel-with no opposing point of view offered. That's fine. However, during the Q&A, I sent up a question to the panel which was given to Norman Finklestein to answer. The question went something like this:
"During the fighting in Gaza, we witnessed many pro-Palestinian demonstrations in places like Ft Lauderdale, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Toronto, in which some demonstrators shouted things like, "Long live Hitler". "Jews back to the ovens", "Hitler didn't finish the job", etc. I asked the panelists if such statements did not harm their cause. Finklestein, as he always does, treated the question with contempt and finished with a comment that people who ask questions like that should "pull their heads out of their navels". The room of some 500 erupted in applause. (Most of the crowd were probably community members.)
On May 21, when George Galloway came to UCI, I posed that same question to him from the microphone. Halfway through my question, he broke in and called me a liar as a room full of about 800 again erupted in cheers. (All the incidents I described to him are on YouTube.) I was asking a respectful question-a question that should have been treated with respect by all. I took the derisive reaction of the audience as being anti-Jewish. (This incident is also documented on YouTube.)
As to the complaint filed a few years ago by ZOA on behalf of UCI
Jewish students, I was not involved in that issue. It is my
understanding though that there was much more to the failure of that
complaint than that the charges were determined to be unfounded, as you
state. Some of the allegations were dismissed because the Office for Civil
Rights (OCR) in the Department of Education determined that they weren't filed in a timely manner, a conclusion that I understand the ZOA has challenged on appeal. Most of the allegations were dismissed because OCR decided that they didn't fall under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. It is my understanding though that it would be inaccurate to say that the complaint was dismissed because the charges were determined to be unfounded, as you state.
In addition, I would refer you to the addendum section of the report issued by the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism in 2008 relative to the above complaint process. In this addendum, the OCITF quotes several examples of incidents from the OCR report which had been reported by Jewish students including, but not limited to, the destruction of a Holocaust memorial display in the Spring of 2003, the harassment of a Sephardic Jew in February 2004 with statements like, "slaughter the Jews", "dirty Jew" and "take off that pin (which had the US and Israeli flags and the statement, 'United We Stand') or we'll beat your ass", a Jewish girl having her Israeli flag on her dorm door defaced with a swastika in May of 2006, and a Jewish student of Russian descent being subjected to harassing and threatening statements from fall 2000 to spring 2002 including, "go back to Russia", "burn in Hell" and that he was an F-ing Jew".
http://octaskforce.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/orange-county-task-force-report-on-anti-semitism-at-uci.pdf
As you may or may not know, I have publicly criticized the university for not adequately responding to complaints from Jewish students and not sufficiently responding to what I consider hate speech on the UCI campus. To their credit, they seem to have respected my freedom of speech (since I am still teaching here). I understand that the university's position is that this is a matter of free speech. I (and others) have asked why the university could not issue a statement to the effect that statements made by a particular speaker are hateful and that the university condemns them. I also understand that the position of the administration is that they cannot get involved in rebutting statements every time something disagreeable is said on campus. I respectfully disagree. We are not talking about a debate on the economy or government health care. We are talking about hate speech directed toward a specific group. It must be confronted and rebutted.
As to your reference to the Jewish Federation of Orange County, I am pleased to see that after years of denial, that organization has now recognized the problem at UCI and is demanding some kind of action after the disruption of Ambassador Oren's speech.
I well understand the passion that the MSU has when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Reasonable people can disagree on this issue, and the MSU has every right to express their support of the Palestinian side. It seems to me that here in America, that can be done in a civilized and mutually-respectful manner. I maintain, however, that this conflict is no justification for a resurgence in anti-Semitism, which is exactly what I see happening, especially in Europe, but also here in America. The MSU denies they are anti-Jewish-just anti-Israel. That may be, but I feel they do a disservice to their cause when they bring in speakers like Al-Asi and Malik Ali to speak for them.
I would like to take the liberty of providing you a link to the European Union's Fundamental Rights Agency's working definition of anti-Semitism. I feel that at least some of the definition's points are applicable to UCI.
http://fra.europa.en/fraWebsite/material/pub?AS/AS-WorkingDefinition-draft.pdf
As a Jewish person, you well know, we have a lesson in history as to what this all can lead to. I maintain that there is indeed a problem on this campus, the extent of which we may disagree on. It is not just UCI. This issue is flaring up on campuses all over North America. I know the American people won't stand for it if they are made aware. I see that as my duty. I too have a right to express my views, and I will continue to do that even if it eventually costs me my part-time job at UCI.
Finally, Dr Chemerinsky, If there is no problem at UCI, why has the school hired a "crisis expert" to address this issue? I submit that UCI is indeed facing a crisis. I take no pleasure in seeing the harm to the reputation of this institution and its students because of this situation. What happened February 8 is not even the culmination of the events of the past several years because, bad as it was, it was not a tragedy. Nobody was hurt. I have said for years now that one day, a tragedy could come to UCI and everybody would be asking, "how could this happen here?" I myself would not be asking that question. However, if it is truly your position that there is not the slightest indication of anti-Semitism on the UCI campus, with all due respect, Sir, I believe you are in error.
Respectfully,
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
Dr Erwin Chemerinsky, who is the dean of the UC-Irvine Law School, has come out with a statement defending UCI from charges of anti-Semitism on campus. This comes in the wake of the disruption of Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren's speech at UC-Irvine on February 8th. He also strongly criticizes the Zionist Organization of America for their criticism of the university, call for students not to attend UCI, and for donors to cease contributions to the school.
I am posting Dr Chemerinsky's statement below along with my own response, which I have emailed to him.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Reality of the University of California, Irvine
by Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean and Distinguished Professor of Law, UC-Irvine School of Law
"The claim that the University of California, Irvine is inhospitable to Jews is so far from reality that one must wonder whether those making the accusation have ever been on the campus or spoken to Jewish students and faculty there. In my almost two years of working and living on campus, I have not seen the slightest indication of anti-Semitism. I have taught hundreds of college and law students at UCI, many Jewish, and have not heard one complaint about an anti-Semitic incident on campus.
I therefore was outraged when the Zionist Organization of America asked on February 16 for donors not to contribute to UCI and students not to apply there. Astoundingly, it declared: “We (SIC)
Unfortunately, the Zionist Organization of America has been making these unfounded accusations against UCI for years. From the moment that it was rumored in the press that I was a candidate to be the founding dean of its law school, I was told that there was anti-Semitism at UCI. Before I accepted the offer to be dean, I carefully investigated these charges. As a Jew, I certainly did not want to spend the rest of my career in a place that is anti-Semitic or to move my family to live in a hostile environment.
What I learned is that almost without exception, the events which led to the accusations involved speeches on campus that were sharply critical of Israel and sometimes were anti-Jewish. On occasion, some very offensive things were said. The incidents generally involved speakers invited by the Muslim Student Union. These did not occur very often and usually were confined to one week in the spring.
Several years ago, the ZOA filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education. The Office of Civil Rights did a thorough investigation and then concluded that there was no basis for finding that there was a hostile or intimidating environment for Jewish students on campus at the University of California, Irvine. Its conclusion was that “there is insufficient evidence to support the complainant’s allegation that the University failed to respond promptly and effectively to complaints by Jewish students that they were harassed and subjected to a hostile environment.”
Those, like the ZOA, who make such accusations ignore the many efforts by the University’s administration to make Jewish students feel safe and welcome, including the beautiful new facilities for the campus Hillel. Also, there are programs such as the Olive Tree Initiative, which has Jewish and Muslim students travel to the Middle East together and then do a series of programs on campus about their experiences.
When anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli sentiments have been expressed, Chancellor Michael Drake has responded and expressly proclaimed the inappropriateness of such speech. A public university can do no more than this; the First Amendment simply would not allow the exclusion of speakers, no matter how vile or offensive their words. Tolerating speech protected by the First Amendment is not the same as “promoting bigotry.” I have spoken with rabbis in the area and officials of organizations like the Jewish Federation. They are uniformly highly praising of Chancellor Drake and how he has handled the issue.
The most recent trigger for the ZOA’s statement was an incident on February 8, when Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren was invited to campus to speak by, among others, the law school (of which I am dean) and the political science department (of which I am a member). A series of individuals, including some UCI students affiliated with the Muslim Student Union, stood up and shouted so that the ambassador could not be heard. As each disruptive person was escorted away, another would stand up and yell.
When this occurred, the audience was admonished and then warned, including by Chancellor Drake, that such disruptions would lead to arrest and university discipline. Eleven individuals were arrested and those who are UCI students now face disciplinary proceedings. The ambassador was able to deliver his remarks.
I cannot think of how Chancellor Drake or the university could have handled this better. Everything possible was done to protect the ambassador’s right to speak.
At UCI, and likely every college campus, there are some members of the Muslim Student Union who are vehemently anti-Israel and who occasionally bring speakers to campus to express this message. But a few dozen students in a school of almost 28,000students hardly is enough to make it an anti-Semitic campus or a place inhospitable to Jews.
Yet, the ZOA’s accusations against UCI continue and it looks for any opportunity to renew them. Any accusations, even false ones, that are repeated enough begin to be believed. I have gotten email messages from people literally all over the world who have heard the ZOA message and wonder why I am working at an anti-Semitic school.
But few seem to know that in the spring of 2008, the student leaders of every Jewish organization on campus signed a joint letter that they found UCI to be a warm and hospitable place for
As I think about our law school, I see how far the ZOA’s accusations are from reality. Almost a third of our first year law students are Jewish. When asked, the Jewish students, including ones involved in inviting the ambassador, said that they have seen no indication of anti-Semitism on campus.
To those donors or prospective students who take seriously the ZOA’s call for a boycott, I invite you to spend some time on the UCI campus. Walk across it, talk to the students, sit in the student center. I am convinced that you will not find a shred of evidence of anti-Semitism. Occasionally, there may be speakers saying things that make you angry or uncomfortable. But that is what a college campus should be about, a place where all views on all issues can be expressed. It is a shame that the ZOA doesn’t realize that."
Erwin Chemerinsky is the Dean and a Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California, Irvine, School of Law
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dr Chemerinsky,
My name is Gary Fouse, and I am an adjunct teacher in the UCI Extension (ESL). I have been teaching part-time at UCI for over 11 years. I am not an academic by profession, rather I am retired from federal law enforcement in the Department of Justice (DEA). I have been involved in this on-going controversy for 3 or 4 years now. I am writing because I respectfully take issue with some of the things you have said in your statement regarding the situation at UCI. I am writing as a private citizen and not as a representative of the UCI-Ext.
I became involved because, though I am not Jewish, I grew up in West Los Angeles among Jews. Later, I served in the US Army in Germany close to Nuremberg, a city with great symbolism in the Third Reich. That experience made me an amateur scholar on the history of the Third Reich. Suffice to say that I am very sensitive to the subject of anti-Semitism.
When I began attending the MSU-sponsored events a few years ago, I heard speech that greatly disturbed me. The primary focus was anti-Israel. Yet, I noted that many of the speakers also bashed America (their right under free speech, I concede), but also used language that I considered anti-Semitic as well (again, protected free speech.)
Let me focus on things that have been said on this campus by MSU-sponsored speakers.
Washington-based imam Mohammed al-Asi has called Jews "ghetto-dwellers" and said that "you can take a Jew out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jew". I have posted Al-Asi's words including video clips of him speaking at UCI on my blog which may be accessed at:
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/02/words-of-mohammed-al-asi-at-uc-irvine.html
Oakland-based imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali has been appearing on our campus repeatedly for years. He has glorified Palestinian suicide bombers as "martyrs" and "heroes"-not terrorists. He has repeatedly called for the violent destruction of Israel. Ali usually takes care to tack on the adjective, "Zionist" when he refers to Jews-as if that makes it alright, a fact I have personally pointed out to him. On one occasion, he referred to Rupert Murdoch as a "Zionist Jew", and repeated it for emphasis.
"Rupert Murdoch is a straight up Zionist Jew" Put that on Fox News. Rupert Murdoch is a Zionist Jew".
Dr Chemerinsky, I invite you to decide for yourself if that is anti-Semitism. The link is here. You can view it yourself.
http://fi.netlog.com/go/explore/videos/videoid=it-450460
Note how Ali literally spits out the words, "Zionist Jew" much as Nazis like Julius Streicher did. You know well that when you spit out the word "Jew", no epithet is needed. In Nazi Germany, they didn't need epithets. Simply the word "Jude" was sufficient if stated the right way. That's how Ali does it. He knows what code language is all about.
That leads me back to your initial point about not having seen anti-Semitism on the UCI campus. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but you were also quoted as having said you saw no anti-Semitism on the UCI campus way before you came to UCI-when you were either at Duke or USC. I heard that statement (quoted) prior to your hiring. With all due respect, how could you have made such a determination at that time if you were not here? In addition, I note in your statement, you acknowledge that anti-Semitic statements have been made by MSU-sponsored speakers.
In the last 11 years, I have also had occasion to meet and speak with Jewish students. Before I come directly to that point, I would like to describe my own feelings about the UCI campus. There is a reason I have chosen to continue teaching part-time at UCI. I have always considered the campus a pleasant place to work. I have always stated that 99.9% of the students at UCI are not involved in this controversy. Most are serious students who don't have time to engage in all the crazy protests one sees at other campuses like Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz or Columbia.
In most respects, UCI is a great place to study or to work. I have never tried to portray the campus as a place where Jews cannot safely walk around. In my conversations with Jewish students, I get varying opinions about the extent of the problem. The problem seems greatest when the MSU holds their events and feelings sometimes get out of hand. My sense is that most Jewish students (that I have spoken to) are not looking for confrontation, prefer to talk it out with Muslim students and want to see more Jewish students attend UCI in order to strengthen their voice.
On the other hand, a few months ago, a Jewish UCI professor who counsels Jewish students was meeting with a group of them and asked them how many actually felt intimidated as Jews on the UCI campus. About half raised their hands-virtually all females. I submit that is a troubling number.
In addition, the anecdotal incidents that have happened over the years are well documented. Fortunately, there have been no serious incidents of violence. Yet, there have been insults and cases of intimidation. How must Jewish students, some of whom are of Israeli origin, feel when they view the Israeli flag torn and smeared with red paint-which happens regularly? I myself have seen the caricature of Ariel Sharon on the MSU "Wall" depicting him in the same style as the Nazi newspaper Der Stuermer depicted Jews during the Third Reich-leering face, thick lips, and big hooked nose.
That, Dr Chemerinsky, is anti-Semitic.
More to the point, however, one Jewish student (now graduated) had her camera shoved in her face while filming an MSU event a few years ago. Another Jewish woman after filming an evening speech by Ali, was followed back to her car by a group of MSU males who surrounded her car while she was trying to leave. This was witnessed by a member of the community who happened to be in the area and tried to get the campus police to take action (unsuccessfully) even though she herself had her car surrounded and sat upon. Another Jewish girl was verbally accosted as she walked past what was supposed to be a silent MSU protest. Instead she was accosted by students who yelled in her face about "the crimes of Israel". Another male student had a rock thrown at his head by a female student on campus because he wore a t-shirt that identified him as a Jew.
These incidents were either reported to campus police or school authorities. No action was taken.
As a result of the above, rightfully or wrongfully, UCI has acquired a national reputation for these types of incidents. It may be free speech, but the fact is that many Jewish prospective students have opted not to attend UCI. That has nothing to do with any statements made by ZOA.
As a retired law enforcement officer, I am aware of what is or is not free speech. I have never argued that the above-referenced speakers or any others be shut down, arrested, disrupted or prevented from speaking. I have sat and listened to many of these speeches and then attempted to engage the speakers in debate during the Q&A. I feel that is the way to deal with it. Let me give you a couple of examples.
Last January, I attended a "seminar" at UCI entitled "Whither the Levant", (not MSU-sponsored) which was nothing more than a day-long bashing of Israel-with no opposing point of view offered. That's fine. However, during the Q&A, I sent up a question to the panel which was given to Norman Finklestein to answer. The question went something like this:
"During the fighting in Gaza, we witnessed many pro-Palestinian demonstrations in places like Ft Lauderdale, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Toronto, in which some demonstrators shouted things like, "Long live Hitler". "Jews back to the ovens", "Hitler didn't finish the job", etc. I asked the panelists if such statements did not harm their cause. Finklestein, as he always does, treated the question with contempt and finished with a comment that people who ask questions like that should "pull their heads out of their navels". The room of some 500 erupted in applause. (Most of the crowd were probably community members.)
On May 21, when George Galloway came to UCI, I posed that same question to him from the microphone. Halfway through my question, he broke in and called me a liar as a room full of about 800 again erupted in cheers. (All the incidents I described to him are on YouTube.) I was asking a respectful question-a question that should have been treated with respect by all. I took the derisive reaction of the audience as being anti-Jewish. (This incident is also documented on YouTube.)
As to the complaint filed a few years ago by ZOA on behalf of UCI
Jewish students, I was not involved in that issue. It is my
understanding though that there was much more to the failure of that
complaint than that the charges were determined to be unfounded, as you
state. Some of the allegations were dismissed because the Office for Civil
Rights (OCR) in the Department of Education determined that they weren't filed in a timely manner, a conclusion that I understand the ZOA has challenged on appeal. Most of the allegations were dismissed because OCR decided that they didn't fall under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. It is my understanding though that it would be inaccurate to say that the complaint was dismissed because the charges were determined to be unfounded, as you state.
In addition, I would refer you to the addendum section of the report issued by the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism in 2008 relative to the above complaint process. In this addendum, the OCITF quotes several examples of incidents from the OCR report which had been reported by Jewish students including, but not limited to, the destruction of a Holocaust memorial display in the Spring of 2003, the harassment of a Sephardic Jew in February 2004 with statements like, "slaughter the Jews", "dirty Jew" and "take off that pin (which had the US and Israeli flags and the statement, 'United We Stand') or we'll beat your ass", a Jewish girl having her Israeli flag on her dorm door defaced with a swastika in May of 2006, and a Jewish student of Russian descent being subjected to harassing and threatening statements from fall 2000 to spring 2002 including, "go back to Russia", "burn in Hell" and that he was an F-ing Jew".
http://octaskforce.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/orange-county-task-force-report-on-anti-semitism-at-uci.pdf
As you may or may not know, I have publicly criticized the university for not adequately responding to complaints from Jewish students and not sufficiently responding to what I consider hate speech on the UCI campus. To their credit, they seem to have respected my freedom of speech (since I am still teaching here). I understand that the university's position is that this is a matter of free speech. I (and others) have asked why the university could not issue a statement to the effect that statements made by a particular speaker are hateful and that the university condemns them. I also understand that the position of the administration is that they cannot get involved in rebutting statements every time something disagreeable is said on campus. I respectfully disagree. We are not talking about a debate on the economy or government health care. We are talking about hate speech directed toward a specific group. It must be confronted and rebutted.
As to your reference to the Jewish Federation of Orange County, I am pleased to see that after years of denial, that organization has now recognized the problem at UCI and is demanding some kind of action after the disruption of Ambassador Oren's speech.
I well understand the passion that the MSU has when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Reasonable people can disagree on this issue, and the MSU has every right to express their support of the Palestinian side. It seems to me that here in America, that can be done in a civilized and mutually-respectful manner. I maintain, however, that this conflict is no justification for a resurgence in anti-Semitism, which is exactly what I see happening, especially in Europe, but also here in America. The MSU denies they are anti-Jewish-just anti-Israel. That may be, but I feel they do a disservice to their cause when they bring in speakers like Al-Asi and Malik Ali to speak for them.
I would like to take the liberty of providing you a link to the European Union's Fundamental Rights Agency's working definition of anti-Semitism. I feel that at least some of the definition's points are applicable to UCI.
http://fra.europa.en/fraWebsite/material/pub?AS/AS-WorkingDefinition-draft.pdf
As a Jewish person, you well know, we have a lesson in history as to what this all can lead to. I maintain that there is indeed a problem on this campus, the extent of which we may disagree on. It is not just UCI. This issue is flaring up on campuses all over North America. I know the American people won't stand for it if they are made aware. I see that as my duty. I too have a right to express my views, and I will continue to do that even if it eventually costs me my part-time job at UCI.
Finally, Dr Chemerinsky, If there is no problem at UCI, why has the school hired a "crisis expert" to address this issue? I submit that UCI is indeed facing a crisis. I take no pleasure in seeing the harm to the reputation of this institution and its students because of this situation. What happened February 8 is not even the culmination of the events of the past several years because, bad as it was, it was not a tragedy. Nobody was hurt. I have said for years now that one day, a tragedy could come to UCI and everybody would be asking, "how could this happen here?" I myself would not be asking that question. However, if it is truly your position that there is not the slightest indication of anti-Semitism on the UCI campus, with all due respect, Sir, I believe you are in error.
Respectfully,
Gary Fouse
Friday, February 19, 2010
Global Warming in the Bunker
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
"Don't worry, mein Fuehrer. The reports of Russians being in Berlin have not been peer-reviewed, and most climatologists still say that our 9th Army will relieve us in Berlin within hours. Oh yeah. You've been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize."
fousesquawk
"Don't worry, mein Fuehrer. The reports of Russians being in Berlin have not been peer-reviewed, and most climatologists still say that our 9th Army will relieve us in Berlin within hours. Oh yeah. You've been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize."
War Is Hell
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
Israeli commentary from Dry Bones
When I first heard the news of the capture of the Afghan Taliban number 2, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the word capture was used and the captors were NATO forces. Within hours it morphed from a "capture" to an "arrest" ... and instead of NATO it was credited to Pakistan.
Here's an initial report out of China (it uses both "capture" and "arrested") :
How important is Mullah Baradar's capture?
Recently a sound has been heard from the graves of Marines killed in past wars. It is the sound of spinning. When it stops, G-d help the traitors who devised this idiotic idea.
Does anyone believe that these men would do what the Marines are ordered to do today?
The Pacific War- Iwo Jima Clip
I don't think so, do you?
Israeli commentary from Dry Bones
When I first heard the news of the capture of the Afghan Taliban number 2, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the word capture was used and the captors were NATO forces. Within hours it morphed from a "capture" to an "arrest" ... and instead of NATO it was credited to Pakistan.
Here's an initial report out of China (it uses both "capture" and "arrested") :
How important is Mullah Baradar's capture?
ISLAMABAD, Feb. 17 (Xinhua) -- "The capture of the top Afghan Taliban commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Pakistan is not only considered as an important breakthrough in connection to the war on terror but also shows development in Pakistan-U.S. relations and regional solution to Afghan problems.Will somebody please explain to the idiots on the left that an military is NOT a police force. If they want people to run around giving out tickets and reading the enemy their rights, they should have sent cops to do the job. They sent the US Marines to do the job. Yet they cannot return fire unless they see the weapons of the enemy, they have to collect evidence after every battle, and read the enemy captured their rights.
Pakistan army confirmed to Xinhua on Wednesday that Mullah Baradar has been arrested in the southern Pakistani city of Karachi, but disclosed no more details due to security reasons. Mullah Baradar was described as ranking the second in influence only to Mullah Muhammad Omar, Taliban's supreme commander in Afghanistan.
Pakistani analysts believed that Mullah Baradar's catch and the information he provides could prove to be a blow to the Taliban in Afghanistan and tribal areas of Pakistan because he was holding important position and knew secrets of Taliban and their strategy." -more
Recently a sound has been heard from the graves of Marines killed in past wars. It is the sound of spinning. When it stops, G-d help the traitors who devised this idiotic idea.
Does anyone believe that these men would do what the Marines are ordered to do today?
The Pacific War- Iwo Jima Clip
I don't think so, do you?
Sunday, February 14, 2010
The UC-Irvine Debacle-Update
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
In the wake of the disruption of the Israeli Ambassador's Speech at UC-Irvine Monday night, it appears that the total number of arrestees stands at eleven, 8 from UCI and 3 from UC-Riverside. The case has been referred to the Orange County DA for possible prosecution. Already, their supporters have dubbed them the "Irvine 11" and are calling for donations to help in their legal defense as well as urging people to write to the university chancellor on their behalf.
After all, it was only an exercise in "free speech".
"American as apple pie", proclaims Mahdi Bray, spokesman for the Muslim American Society of Alexandria, Virgina, who have now emerged and announced they are supporting "The Irvine 11". Here's the full quote:
WASHINGTON, DC (MASNET) Feb. 11, 2010 - MAS Freedom Executive Director Mahdi Bray has been contacted by a family member of the Irvine Eleven (see article below) and is offering its services to the UC Irvine Muslim students. Mahdi Bray of MASF said of the arrests: "Non-violent direct action is part and parcel of the American protest culture, think where this nation would be if students didn't disrupt the segregated lunch counters in the south, or if Dr. King didn't disrupt the status quo of Jim Crow and discrimination in our nation. The Irvine Eleven are not criminals but students of conscience who have taken a principled stand on human rights and the sanctity of all life, non violent protest is as American as apple pie."
Of course, Bray reportedly has a history of defending Muslims charged with far more serious offenses than the "Irvine 11". He has been quoted as calling the war on terror a war on Islam. If you look at some of his past quoted statements, you might conclude he has a strange idea of what apple pie is.
In the meantime, Chancellor Michael Drake is also hearing from folks with a different point of view-those who are calling for his resignation. No doubt, some are writing to University President Mark Yudoff to demand Drake be forced out. Good luck with that too. Personally, I have no dog in that hunt because changing chancellors doesn't solve the problem, which is institutional. It is the very culture of American universities that has to change.
It was during the tenure of the previous chancellor, Ralph Cicerone, that UCI witnessed a similar incident when former Bush Justice Department attorney John Yoo came to speak-at the chancellor's invitation a few years back. Of course, Yoo was one of the DOJ lawyers who wrote memos outlining permissible interrogation techniques on captured terrorists in the wake of 9-11 (Good man, Mr Yoo). When he showed up to speak at UCI, loutish students and loutish professors turned out to turn the event in something resembling an English soccer match while Cicerone reportedly sat silently in the back of the room like a potted plant.
But a bigger problem as I see it is the weakness of some of the local Orange County Jewish organizations. While some of us have been trying for years to bring public awareness to what is happening on the UCI campus, our efforts have been thwarted by certain Jewish groups who have either denied the problem or have tried to work within the university structure-without success, in my view. Now they have egg on their faces. Now they are going around to the news media making statements decrying what happened Monday night.
Where have they been the past several years?
Where have you been Orange County Jewish Federation?
Where have you been UCI-Hillel?
Where have you been Orange County American Jewish Committee?
Missing in action, that's where.
"Problem? What problem?"
fousesquawk
In the wake of the disruption of the Israeli Ambassador's Speech at UC-Irvine Monday night, it appears that the total number of arrestees stands at eleven, 8 from UCI and 3 from UC-Riverside. The case has been referred to the Orange County DA for possible prosecution. Already, their supporters have dubbed them the "Irvine 11" and are calling for donations to help in their legal defense as well as urging people to write to the university chancellor on their behalf.
After all, it was only an exercise in "free speech".
"American as apple pie", proclaims Mahdi Bray, spokesman for the Muslim American Society of Alexandria, Virgina, who have now emerged and announced they are supporting "The Irvine 11". Here's the full quote:
WASHINGTON, DC (MASNET) Feb. 11, 2010 - MAS Freedom Executive Director Mahdi Bray has been contacted by a family member of the Irvine Eleven (see article below) and is offering its services to the UC Irvine Muslim students. Mahdi Bray of MASF said of the arrests: "Non-violent direct action is part and parcel of the American protest culture, think where this nation would be if students didn't disrupt the segregated lunch counters in the south, or if Dr. King didn't disrupt the status quo of Jim Crow and discrimination in our nation. The Irvine Eleven are not criminals but students of conscience who have taken a principled stand on human rights and the sanctity of all life, non violent protest is as American as apple pie."
Of course, Bray reportedly has a history of defending Muslims charged with far more serious offenses than the "Irvine 11". He has been quoted as calling the war on terror a war on Islam. If you look at some of his past quoted statements, you might conclude he has a strange idea of what apple pie is.
In the meantime, Chancellor Michael Drake is also hearing from folks with a different point of view-those who are calling for his resignation. No doubt, some are writing to University President Mark Yudoff to demand Drake be forced out. Good luck with that too. Personally, I have no dog in that hunt because changing chancellors doesn't solve the problem, which is institutional. It is the very culture of American universities that has to change.
It was during the tenure of the previous chancellor, Ralph Cicerone, that UCI witnessed a similar incident when former Bush Justice Department attorney John Yoo came to speak-at the chancellor's invitation a few years back. Of course, Yoo was one of the DOJ lawyers who wrote memos outlining permissible interrogation techniques on captured terrorists in the wake of 9-11 (Good man, Mr Yoo). When he showed up to speak at UCI, loutish students and loutish professors turned out to turn the event in something resembling an English soccer match while Cicerone reportedly sat silently in the back of the room like a potted plant.
But a bigger problem as I see it is the weakness of some of the local Orange County Jewish organizations. While some of us have been trying for years to bring public awareness to what is happening on the UCI campus, our efforts have been thwarted by certain Jewish groups who have either denied the problem or have tried to work within the university structure-without success, in my view. Now they have egg on their faces. Now they are going around to the news media making statements decrying what happened Monday night.
Where have they been the past several years?
Where have you been Orange County Jewish Federation?
Where have you been UCI-Hillel?
Where have you been Orange County American Jewish Committee?
Missing in action, that's where.
"Problem? What problem?"
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Seattle Teen Beaten in Seattle Bus Tunnels - Security Guards Watch
by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook
A fight in a Seattle bus tunnel shows a girl beaten, on the ground, with her face stomped seven times. Three security guards stand and do nothing. America gets sadder every day.
Seattle Teen Beaten - Security Guards Watch (video)
A fight in a Seattle bus tunnel shows a girl beaten, on the ground, with her face stomped seven times. Three security guards stand and do nothing. America gets sadder every day.
Were You Raised In A Barn?
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
My mother (Of Blessed Memory) would ask me that question when I displayed bad behavior or bad manners or both. In other words, she would remind me that how I act in public is a DIRECT reflection on my parents. Thus bad behavior, bad manners would show the world that my parents (especially my mother) were people of the lowest rungs of society (usually associated with prostitution). Good manners, good behavior reflected the message that my family were pillars of the community.
One of the most important lessons I was taught is politeness. Remembering to say the 3 Magic Words: Please, Thank You, and Your Welcome. These open many doors. The other lesson is to allow a person to speak their piece before you have your say. To interrupt a speaker with an outburst is not only rude, but shows a lack of maturity on the part of the person who shouted out. That is why Joe Wilson was wrong when he interrupted President Obama's address to Congress on Health Care. And that is why this is just as bad:
Check out the end of this video. Did anyone else hear a facility member threatening to fail the MSU group on their finals? If that happens, then the members of that particular group will not only fail that class, but could be thrown out of school for such behavior. The MSU could be thrown off-campus if the Administration got over their leftist attitude and dhimmitude. But coming from UC-Irvine, that would qualify as a miracle.
Check out the rest of Fousesquawk for detailed background on the jihad being conducted on the UC-Irvine Campus with the approval and consent of the school's Administration.
My mother (Of Blessed Memory) would ask me that question when I displayed bad behavior or bad manners or both. In other words, she would remind me that how I act in public is a DIRECT reflection on my parents. Thus bad behavior, bad manners would show the world that my parents (especially my mother) were people of the lowest rungs of society (usually associated with prostitution). Good manners, good behavior reflected the message that my family were pillars of the community.
One of the most important lessons I was taught is politeness. Remembering to say the 3 Magic Words: Please, Thank You, and Your Welcome. These open many doors. The other lesson is to allow a person to speak their piece before you have your say. To interrupt a speaker with an outburst is not only rude, but shows a lack of maturity on the part of the person who shouted out. That is why Joe Wilson was wrong when he interrupted President Obama's address to Congress on Health Care. And that is why this is just as bad:
This evening, the Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, spoke at the University of California at Irvine. I attended the event. I wish I could say it was a good evening. Unfortunately, I cannot. While Ambassador Oren comported himself with great class and dignity, the same cannot be said for the campus Muslim Student Union. What happened this evening was a black eye and embarrassment for the university where I have taught for over 11 years (part-time) and cemented the reputation of UCI as one of the worst campuses in the nation for radical MSU activity and anti-Semitism.You can read the whole report and view the pictures of the event at Fousesquawk written by Gary Fouse.
There were several hundred people in the audience, most of whom were from the local Jewish community. They were mostly older folks. The speech was sponsored by the local Jewish Federation, Hillel and several other organizations. As expected the Muslim Student Union also showed up. It was obvious even before the start of the speech that they were going to stage some sort of protest. Half of them sat on the left and half on the right.
A few moments into Ambassador Oren's speech, an MSU protester stood up and began shouting insults at the ambassador. He was removed by campus police. And so it continued. After the first interruption, the moderator, a UCI political science professor, took the microphone to admonish the disruptors. Yet, it did not stop. After about the 5th such disruption and removal, the ambassador left the room and Chancellor Michael Drake addressed the audience pleading for civility.
When the ambassador returned, the disruptions continued. Each time, a protester was removed, the audience become increasingly angry and voiced their displeasure at the disruptors. They also voiced their displeasure at Chancellor Drake and demanded to know what was going to be done to the disrupting students. (Of course, at this point, there is a question as to whether the disruptors were actually students who could be disciplined.) The audience was clearly not pleased with Chancellor Drake's pleas for civility. Cries of "what are you going to do about it?" were heard in the audience.
After the 10th such interruption, the MSU got up as a group and left the hall, screaming insults at the ambassador, who nevertheless managed to complete his speech as the MSU gathered out on the street outside and continued their protest, their chants barely audible inside the hall. The disruptions and delays precluded any hope of having a Q&A, which was the original plan.
Check out the end of this video. Did anyone else hear a facility member threatening to fail the MSU group on their finals? If that happens, then the members of that particular group will not only fail that class, but could be thrown out of school for such behavior. The MSU could be thrown off-campus if the Administration got over their leftist attitude and dhimmitude. But coming from UC-Irvine, that would qualify as a miracle.
Check out the rest of Fousesquawk for detailed background on the jihad being conducted on the UC-Irvine Campus with the approval and consent of the school's Administration.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Can it all be just a mistake?
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
For over a year I have been writing about the rockets that are fired and have been fired into the city of Sderot in Israel from Hamas in Gaza. These rockets have no guidance system in them. It is point, fire, hope that they kill someone. What they really do is to instill terror into a CIVILIAN POPULATION.
For 8 long years these rockets have fallen, they are falling now even though there is suppose to be a cease-fire in effect.
I received this letter last night. The author, Itzik Yarkoni asked me to pass this along to you, my readers.
They retracted it a day later.
Make no mistake, the so-called Palestinians have a single goal:
You can help in the battle against Hamas. Become vocal. Don't be silent on this subject. Let others know about what is and has been happening to Sderot. Tell your family, friends, church/synagogue, pastor/rabbi, your Congressman or woman, your Senator, the President, your local newspaper. But don't be silent!
Secondly, remember people like Itzik Yarkoni and the other residents of Sderot in your prayers. You could sign up for Code Red Alerts, reminding you of the terror the men, women, and especially the children experience every day.
How long does any people have to be terrorized by the neighborhood bully before they will strike back?
For over a year I have been writing about the rockets that are fired and have been fired into the city of Sderot in Israel from Hamas in Gaza. These rockets have no guidance system in them. It is point, fire, hope that they kill someone. What they really do is to instill terror into a CIVILIAN POPULATION.
For 8 long years these rockets have fallen, they are falling now even though there is suppose to be a cease-fire in effect.
I received this letter last night. The author, Itzik Yarkoni asked me to pass this along to you, my readers.
With the result that Goldstone present to the UN Hamas’ response to the Goldstone report that the missiles sent to Israel were “by mistake”, I want to know if you would be interested in publishing my personal testimonial of life under Palestinian rocket fire, or life under the Hamas’ “mistakes.Last week Hamas issued a statement saying that the rocket attacks on Israel were not aimed at civilian centers in Israel, only military ones. (Somebody check the woods for constipated bears, and check Rome, the Pope has converted to Judaism.)
Can it all be just a mistake?
By Itzik Yarkoni
Thursday, February 3, 2010, Jerusalem
Hamas officials said that a 52-page document has been compiled to testify that the offensive missiles fired during Operation Cast lead were “an accident” due to their weapon’s lack of aiming capabilities toward military installations.
However, section 1687 of the “Goldstone Report” presents that, “indeed, Palestinian armed groups, among them Hamas, have publicly expressed their intention to target Israel civilians…. claimed responsibility for the deaths of each of the Israeli civilians killed by rocket fired during the operations in Gaza”.
This begs the question: If Hamas weapon’s suffer from inaccuracy, maybe the information that was given to Goldstone is also off target?
I remember the first time that I heard about Sapir college was when I was traveling in the United States after the army. When I asked about the whereabouts of the college, a friend replied, “It is a nice place next to Sderot. However, the situation is a little strange. Rockets are launched towards the city daily”. I did not know what lay ahead for me at Sapir College, but I decided that I would take the risk. After all, I figured something would be done, eventually, to stop the rockets.
Eight years have passed since the first rocket was launched towards Sderot. The situation has not changed, I was wrong. More than ten thousand kassam missiles, grad, and mortar shells have been fired from Gaza, of which eighty-four fell in Sderot during Operation Cast Lead. Moreover, the “military installations” Hamas speaks of are nowhere to be found in the city. Where exactly were the rockets intended to fall?
I have witnessed firsthand the "mistakes" that have not only produced several deaths, but continue to affect hundreds, if not a thousands, of people with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PSD) as a result of the constant threat of incoming rocket attacks to the city.
What has been the result of the poor aiming capabilities of Hamas rockets?
As a student in Sderot, I awoke every morning to begin the usual routine of my day. However, my routine was not morning coffee and a newspaper. My routine, drenched with fear, caution, and preparation for the next rocket aimed towards my city, was different than the average student from other areas of the world.
Like clockwork, I was awoken at the same time, with the same target hit, and with the same color red alarm. This alarm notified me that I had only 15 seconds to take cover of my life. As I ran to the nearest bomb shelter, I passed the same children on their way to school. Once inside the crammed shelter, I heard the whistle.
That whistle of a rocket falling to my direction quickly became an all too familiar sound. Maybe this time the rocket will fall in my neighborhood? Maybe this time it will land in the home of someone that I know?
While waiting in a bomb shelter, praying for safety, the fire continued. It was not one rocket, or one “mistake”, that came to my direction. Many mistakes were fired towards me through the city. According to the Sderot Media Center, “Palestinian rockets directly hit more than 1,500 Israeli homes and buildings in the south. Three synagogues were hit, in addition to nine educational facilities, which include high schools, kindergartens, and elementary schools.
Can these cases actually be a malfunction in Hamas’ original plan?
After a day full of color red alarms, or after three weeks of 140 alarms during the Operation, the residents of Sderot and myself gathered to listen to the news. We heard about the mistakes that hit our loved one's homes, the mistakes that kept children from going to school the next day, and the mistakes that are expected to continue.
As a student and as a resident, we had to use our nights to recover from our day. There was homework to be done, relationships to build, our homes that we needed to continue to keep alive. We had to continue to live. However, our nights were full of their mistakes as well, for the nightly news had the highest Sderot ratings, and Hamas chose without fail to use that time for mistakes as well.
Maybe I shouldn't complain, for if Hamas had indeed aimed correctly, the extent of the destruction, the mental disorders, the loss of hope would be far greater. With that, I must say I have luck.
They retracted it a day later.
Make no mistake, the so-called Palestinians have a single goal:
To achieve this goal they will lie, cheat, steal, and murder anyone who gets in their way.The total destruction of the State of Israel and the death of every Jew living in the land.
You can help in the battle against Hamas. Become vocal. Don't be silent on this subject. Let others know about what is and has been happening to Sderot. Tell your family, friends, church/synagogue, pastor/rabbi, your Congressman or woman, your Senator, the President, your local newspaper. But don't be silent!
Secondly, remember people like Itzik Yarkoni and the other residents of Sderot in your prayers. You could sign up for Code Red Alerts, reminding you of the terror the men, women, and especially the children experience every day.
How long does any people have to be terrorized by the neighborhood bully before they will strike back?
Sunday, February 7, 2010
White House-Republicans Spar Over Abdulmutallab
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
On Tuesday of this week, White House press officials called in reporters to breathlessly announce that the Christmas bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was again talking to investigators after 5 weeks of silence. As we know, the suspect initially answered questions for 50 minutes before orders came down from Washington to give him his Miranda warning. That unleashed a storm of protest against the Justice Department and the Obama White House.
Republican Senator Kit Bond of Missouri, who sits on the Select Committee on Intelligence, has now stated that he was briefed the day before by FBI Director Robert Mueller with the warning that the information (that the suspect had resumed his cooperation) had to be kept secret. The next day, the White House told the world. Now the finger-pointing is going back and forth.
Of course, the Democrats are accusing the Republicans of politicizing a national security issue. Perhaps, but the fact remains that it was the White House that released information that should have been kept confidential.
White House press spokesman and professional comedian Roberts Gibbs (pictured below)
had previously stated that investigators had gathered all the information they needed in the 50 minutes they had to interview Abdulmutallab after his arrest. Well, if so, then what is the big deal about him cooperating now? We all know what the big deal is; the White House is desperately to stop the public criticism over the government's handling of this suspect. Every opinion poll shows that the majority of the public disagrees with Mirandizing Abdulmutallab and trying him in federal court-as opposed to turning him over to the military.
There are two lessons to be learned here; first, this suspect could have had information relative to a coordinated enemy attack on other planes or a future attack. Whatever he knew, 50 minutes would never be sufficient to fully debrief him and milk every last drop of information he had. We will never know what we could have achieved had he been turned over to military custody. Whatever he is saying now could already be dated information or relative to plans that have been altered.
Second; there is no sense in flooding our courts with this type of enemy. The model to be used is when a group of German saboteurs landed on our shores during the Second World War in order to bomb certain strategic targets. They were quickly captured, turned over to military custody, tried and most were hanged. In a sense, I would have more sympathy for the German operatives in the sense they were soldiers or spies acting on behalf of their country during a declared war. Yet, their military trial and execution violated no Geneva Convention rules since they were acting as spies in civilian dress. Terrorists don't fit into that category. In fact, they have created their own unique category.
There is no way that the White House can justify making public the fact that Abdulmutallab has been talking-either the day of his arrest or now. In law enforcement jargon, it's called, "burning your snitches".
fousesquawk
On Tuesday of this week, White House press officials called in reporters to breathlessly announce that the Christmas bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was again talking to investigators after 5 weeks of silence. As we know, the suspect initially answered questions for 50 minutes before orders came down from Washington to give him his Miranda warning. That unleashed a storm of protest against the Justice Department and the Obama White House.
Republican Senator Kit Bond of Missouri, who sits on the Select Committee on Intelligence, has now stated that he was briefed the day before by FBI Director Robert Mueller with the warning that the information (that the suspect had resumed his cooperation) had to be kept secret. The next day, the White House told the world. Now the finger-pointing is going back and forth.
Of course, the Democrats are accusing the Republicans of politicizing a national security issue. Perhaps, but the fact remains that it was the White House that released information that should have been kept confidential.
White House press spokesman and professional comedian Roberts Gibbs (pictured below)
had previously stated that investigators had gathered all the information they needed in the 50 minutes they had to interview Abdulmutallab after his arrest. Well, if so, then what is the big deal about him cooperating now? We all know what the big deal is; the White House is desperately to stop the public criticism over the government's handling of this suspect. Every opinion poll shows that the majority of the public disagrees with Mirandizing Abdulmutallab and trying him in federal court-as opposed to turning him over to the military.
There are two lessons to be learned here; first, this suspect could have had information relative to a coordinated enemy attack on other planes or a future attack. Whatever he knew, 50 minutes would never be sufficient to fully debrief him and milk every last drop of information he had. We will never know what we could have achieved had he been turned over to military custody. Whatever he is saying now could already be dated information or relative to plans that have been altered.
Second; there is no sense in flooding our courts with this type of enemy. The model to be used is when a group of German saboteurs landed on our shores during the Second World War in order to bomb certain strategic targets. They were quickly captured, turned over to military custody, tried and most were hanged. In a sense, I would have more sympathy for the German operatives in the sense they were soldiers or spies acting on behalf of their country during a declared war. Yet, their military trial and execution violated no Geneva Convention rules since they were acting as spies in civilian dress. Terrorists don't fit into that category. In fact, they have created their own unique category.
There is no way that the White House can justify making public the fact that Abdulmutallab has been talking-either the day of his arrest or now. In law enforcement jargon, it's called, "burning your snitches".
Friday, February 5, 2010
The Utter Hypocrisy of American Feminists
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
The recent speaking appearance of Ayaan Hirsi Ali at the University of Wisconsin has highlighted the hypocrisy of American feminists. Ali is a courageous woman who all feminists should unite behind. Instead, what Ali gets in America is largely silence.
Here is a statement issued by email from the UW Gender and Woman's Studies Department on the eve of Ali's appearance this week in Madison:
“Her approach is so virulently hostile to Islam as a religion (she calls Islam “the new fascism”) that anything she says about women gets lost in this sweeping assault.”
In addition, I am currently involved in a blog discussion on another site which began as a discussion on gay marriage. Somehow, it morphed into the treatment of gays and women in Islam. The only reaction I have received is that what goes on in Islamic countries is not relevant to the US.
Au contraire. While we cannot change things in the Middle East, we should not have to tolerate "honor killings" in the US, which we have witnessed in the US in such places as Arizona, St Louis, Buffalo and other places. We have the case of Rifqa Bari, the teenage convert to Islam who ran away from home fearing for her life. And where are the feminists? Where is that liberal activist group, the National Organization of Women (NOW)? They are out complaining about a pro-life Superbowl commercial featuring Tim Tebow. They are fighting the war to protect abortion. They are calling people like Rush Limbaugh "sexist". And they are fighting for other leftists causes because that is their true agenda. They don't care a whit about the Rifqa Baris and Ayaan Hirsi Alis, people who are right here in America. Here are the results of a search I did on NOW's website:
http://www.now.org/search.html?cx=015960483074374081895%3Aerh82vrjnk0&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=+ayaan+hirsi+ali&siteurl=www.now.org%2F#251
So how is it that someone from the Gender and Women's Studies Dept. issued a statement dismissing Ali, a woman who has been subjected to female genital circumcision, a forced marriage and countless death threats to the point she has to live under constant security-even in America. I'll answer that question. It is because to criticize Islam would go against the politically-correct agenda of the feminists.
Ali tells us about young Somali girls in the West who are sent back home to be married to men they don't even know. She has already told the Dutch about young girls being forcibly circumcised on kitchen tables in Holland. The Dutch witnessed the horrific slaughter of Theo van Gogh on an Amsterdam street for making a movie about Islam's treatment of women. Do the Dutch listen? No. They drive her out of the Dutch parliament and out of Holland as they prosecute Geert Wilders for "Defamation" and slide steadily into a new Dark Age.
And like the Dutch, American feminists ignore Ali. She is divisive, they say. They are blind to the fact that right here in America, a woman who has experienced almost every horror that can befall a female has to speak in front of an audience that passes through metal detectors for fear that she may be assassinated.
Right here in America.
Where is the UW Gender and Woman's Studies Department? Where are all the other feminists who run women's studies departments in universities all over the country?Where is NOW?
They are hiding under their desks, that's where.
How uncomfortable Ayaan Hirsi Ali must make them feel. That is because she shows us how cowardly and hypocritical the professional feminists are. They complain about abortion rights, sexist comments, and most of all, liberal politics. Honor killings, female genital circumcision, and forced marriages?
Can't be bothered.
fousesquawk
The recent speaking appearance of Ayaan Hirsi Ali at the University of Wisconsin has highlighted the hypocrisy of American feminists. Ali is a courageous woman who all feminists should unite behind. Instead, what Ali gets in America is largely silence.
Here is a statement issued by email from the UW Gender and Woman's Studies Department on the eve of Ali's appearance this week in Madison:
“Her approach is so virulently hostile to Islam as a religion (she calls Islam “the new fascism”) that anything she says about women gets lost in this sweeping assault.”
In addition, I am currently involved in a blog discussion on another site which began as a discussion on gay marriage. Somehow, it morphed into the treatment of gays and women in Islam. The only reaction I have received is that what goes on in Islamic countries is not relevant to the US.
Au contraire. While we cannot change things in the Middle East, we should not have to tolerate "honor killings" in the US, which we have witnessed in the US in such places as Arizona, St Louis, Buffalo and other places. We have the case of Rifqa Bari, the teenage convert to Islam who ran away from home fearing for her life. And where are the feminists? Where is that liberal activist group, the National Organization of Women (NOW)? They are out complaining about a pro-life Superbowl commercial featuring Tim Tebow. They are fighting the war to protect abortion. They are calling people like Rush Limbaugh "sexist". And they are fighting for other leftists causes because that is their true agenda. They don't care a whit about the Rifqa Baris and Ayaan Hirsi Alis, people who are right here in America. Here are the results of a search I did on NOW's website:
http://www.now.org/search.html?cx=015960483074374081895%3Aerh82vrjnk0&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=+ayaan+hirsi+ali&siteurl=www.now.org%2F#251
So how is it that someone from the Gender and Women's Studies Dept. issued a statement dismissing Ali, a woman who has been subjected to female genital circumcision, a forced marriage and countless death threats to the point she has to live under constant security-even in America. I'll answer that question. It is because to criticize Islam would go against the politically-correct agenda of the feminists.
Ali tells us about young Somali girls in the West who are sent back home to be married to men they don't even know. She has already told the Dutch about young girls being forcibly circumcised on kitchen tables in Holland. The Dutch witnessed the horrific slaughter of Theo van Gogh on an Amsterdam street for making a movie about Islam's treatment of women. Do the Dutch listen? No. They drive her out of the Dutch parliament and out of Holland as they prosecute Geert Wilders for "Defamation" and slide steadily into a new Dark Age.
And like the Dutch, American feminists ignore Ali. She is divisive, they say. They are blind to the fact that right here in America, a woman who has experienced almost every horror that can befall a female has to speak in front of an audience that passes through metal detectors for fear that she may be assassinated.
Right here in America.
Where is the UW Gender and Woman's Studies Department? Where are all the other feminists who run women's studies departments in universities all over the country?Where is NOW?
They are hiding under their desks, that's where.
How uncomfortable Ayaan Hirsi Ali must make them feel. That is because she shows us how cowardly and hypocritical the professional feminists are. They complain about abortion rights, sexist comments, and most of all, liberal politics. Honor killings, female genital circumcision, and forced marriages?
Can't be bothered.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Ayaan Hirsi Ali's Talk at UW-Madison
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
Ayaan Hirsi Ali last night at UW Madison (Badger Herald)
As I posted yesterday, Muslim apostate Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke last night at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. The first report on her appearance comes from Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch (Spencer is a fierce critic of radical Islam.)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/02/-freedom-fighter-freedom-fighter.html
Here is the report from the Badger Herald (UW campus newspaper).
http://badgerherald.com/news/2010/02/03/hirsi_ali_gives_her_.php
I can not say I am surprised. While it appears there was no major problem, the shouts of "Allahu Akhbar" could only have been meant to intimidate Ali. It sounds somewhat similar to when Daniel Pipes came to my school (UC-Irvine) a few years back and had his talk disrupted by the Muslim Student Union.
I have attended many of the events sponsored by the UCI-MSU. Occasionally, there have been counter-protesters who carried pro-Israeli posters and flags. Yet the standard procedure is to let the speakers have their say then hit them with hard questions during the Q&A, which I think is the proper way to go.
What the Muslim Student Association at UW Madison apparently doesn't understand is that when they try to shout down a speaker who is criticizing Islam and making the case that certain aspects of Islam are incompatible with a free and open society, they are merely putting an exclamation mark on the speaker's words.
Prior to Ali's appearance, MSA president, Rashid Dar told the press that he was concerned that the audience would come away from Ali's talk with a negative impression of Islam. When you combined Ali's compelling story with the shouts from MSA members, it probably was a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Entrance to UW lecture hall for Ali's appearance (Milwaukee Journal)
In addition, consider what neutral or uninformed audience members must have thought as they had to pass through metal detectors in order to enter the hall. Why was that? Just this past Sunday, I attended an AIPAC luncheon in Irvine (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). It was the same thing. We all had to pass through metal detectors. In addition, a bomb-sniffing dog was on duty. Why is that?
Those who oppose Ali's words might ask themselves why she has to live under such security.
fousesquawk
Ayaan Hirsi Ali last night at UW Madison (Badger Herald)
As I posted yesterday, Muslim apostate Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke last night at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. The first report on her appearance comes from Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch (Spencer is a fierce critic of radical Islam.)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/02/-freedom-fighter-freedom-fighter.html
Here is the report from the Badger Herald (UW campus newspaper).
http://badgerherald.com/news/2010/02/03/hirsi_ali_gives_her_.php
I can not say I am surprised. While it appears there was no major problem, the shouts of "Allahu Akhbar" could only have been meant to intimidate Ali. It sounds somewhat similar to when Daniel Pipes came to my school (UC-Irvine) a few years back and had his talk disrupted by the Muslim Student Union.
I have attended many of the events sponsored by the UCI-MSU. Occasionally, there have been counter-protesters who carried pro-Israeli posters and flags. Yet the standard procedure is to let the speakers have their say then hit them with hard questions during the Q&A, which I think is the proper way to go.
What the Muslim Student Association at UW Madison apparently doesn't understand is that when they try to shout down a speaker who is criticizing Islam and making the case that certain aspects of Islam are incompatible with a free and open society, they are merely putting an exclamation mark on the speaker's words.
Prior to Ali's appearance, MSA president, Rashid Dar told the press that he was concerned that the audience would come away from Ali's talk with a negative impression of Islam. When you combined Ali's compelling story with the shouts from MSA members, it probably was a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Entrance to UW lecture hall for Ali's appearance (Milwaukee Journal)
In addition, consider what neutral or uninformed audience members must have thought as they had to pass through metal detectors in order to enter the hall. Why was that? Just this past Sunday, I attended an AIPAC luncheon in Irvine (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). It was the same thing. We all had to pass through metal detectors. In addition, a bomb-sniffing dog was on duty. Why is that?
Those who oppose Ali's words might ask themselves why she has to live under such security.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Iran Hangs Two More Protesters-Where is Yvonne Ridley?
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
Yvonne Ridley
The below New York Times article reports the hanging of two more protesters by the Iranian regime:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/world/middleeast/02iran.html
It is not just the despicable mullahs who run Iran that should hang their heads in shame. It is their apologists in the West. I am thinking about apologists like Yvonne Ridley, the British journalist who works for Iran's English-language Press TV. She's the one who is always attacking Israel and hanging out with radical Muslims in the UK who want to bring in shariah law. Of course, I have already asked Ms Ridley on this blog what she has to say about the repressive Iranian regime, but she won't respond. (I know she has read this site because she once commented on it.) Where is she now-in hiding? So tell me, Ms Ridley-while Israel is digging survivors out of the rubble in Haiti, your pals in Iran are hanging 19-year-old youths who dared to protest fraudulent elections. Are you not embarrassed?
I am also thinking of that ignorant fraud who calls himself an imam-Clarence Reams aka Abdul Alim Musa. Like Ridley, he has also spoken on our campus at UC-Irvine-guest of the Muslim Student Union. Like Ridley, he is an open supporter of the Iranian regime.
Clarence Reams-aka Abdul Alim Musa
Where is he? Oh, he is talking about how American police and FBI are "murdering" Muslims in America.
While I am at it, I might ask where the gay activists are since Iran is now virtually gay-free-according to Ahmadinejad. And no wonder! In Iran, being gay is a capital crime-punishable by death- as a Muslim chaplain at Vanderbilt University has just confirmed. So where are the voices of the gay activists?
Well, you see, they have to moot their criticism here because they don't want to offend Islam. That's why people like me (who oppose gay marriage) get called "homophobe" while those who preach death to homosexuals get a free pass. If you a are real homophobe who goes out and beats a gay to death such as Matthew Shepherd, it's news. But if you do it in the name of Islam, well, that's a different story, you see.
So where are you people? Where are you, Ridley? Where are you, Reams/Musa? Where is the gay lobby?
fousesquawk
Yvonne Ridley
The below New York Times article reports the hanging of two more protesters by the Iranian regime:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/world/middleeast/02iran.html
It is not just the despicable mullahs who run Iran that should hang their heads in shame. It is their apologists in the West. I am thinking about apologists like Yvonne Ridley, the British journalist who works for Iran's English-language Press TV. She's the one who is always attacking Israel and hanging out with radical Muslims in the UK who want to bring in shariah law. Of course, I have already asked Ms Ridley on this blog what she has to say about the repressive Iranian regime, but she won't respond. (I know she has read this site because she once commented on it.) Where is she now-in hiding? So tell me, Ms Ridley-while Israel is digging survivors out of the rubble in Haiti, your pals in Iran are hanging 19-year-old youths who dared to protest fraudulent elections. Are you not embarrassed?
I am also thinking of that ignorant fraud who calls himself an imam-Clarence Reams aka Abdul Alim Musa. Like Ridley, he has also spoken on our campus at UC-Irvine-guest of the Muslim Student Union. Like Ridley, he is an open supporter of the Iranian regime.
Clarence Reams-aka Abdul Alim Musa
Where is he? Oh, he is talking about how American police and FBI are "murdering" Muslims in America.
While I am at it, I might ask where the gay activists are since Iran is now virtually gay-free-according to Ahmadinejad. And no wonder! In Iran, being gay is a capital crime-punishable by death- as a Muslim chaplain at Vanderbilt University has just confirmed. So where are the voices of the gay activists?
Well, you see, they have to moot their criticism here because they don't want to offend Islam. That's why people like me (who oppose gay marriage) get called "homophobe" while those who preach death to homosexuals get a free pass. If you a are real homophobe who goes out and beats a gay to death such as Matthew Shepherd, it's news. But if you do it in the name of Islam, well, that's a different story, you see.
So where are you people? Where are you, Ridley? Where are you, Reams/Musa? Where is the gay lobby?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.BMP)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
