One of 11 Muslims Students being escorted from the room after disrupting Ambassador Michael Oren at UC Irvine, January 8, 2010. (Photo OC Register)

Today the Jewish Federation of Orange County released documents to the OC Register which reveal that in fact UC Irvine has suspended the Muslim Student Union for one year, effective Sept. 1, 2010. One might expect that I would be thrilled at the news. And for a while today, I savored the news. After all, I have been calling for the University to take action against this group for inciting hated against Jews since May 2006, when I called for UCI to ban the MSU.

The decision, a MUST read, is a very detailed account of what happened and the school laws that were broken during the Oren incident. This includes:

Other forms of dishonesty including … fabricating information, furnishing false information, or reporting a false emergency to the University….Disorderly and lewd conduct. Participation in a disturbance of peace or unlawful assembly, obstruction or disruption of teaching, research, administration, disciplinary procedures or other University activities…

According to the documents, the MSU refused to answer every time they were asked about their actions. They took the 5th. The University has hundreds of pages of documentation, testimonies, and hours of video footage they reference. There are 31 pages of emails and notes from their meetings where they planned the disruption, and instructed their members to lie to the school if asked if they planned it as a group. They knew that if it was revealed they orchestrated the disruption, they would violate the rules. So they conspired to lie to university authorities and the police.

This is a very serious issue, and for a moment I want to focus on their violation of student conduct codes. The MSU was emboldened for years because they were impervious to punishment. We documented numerous other occasions where they broke school rules. This is also not the first time they tried to shut down a Jewish student event. However, this is the first time that Chancellor Drake, himself, was present and witnessed their conduct.

If the MSU felt they needed to lie to the university and police about their actions, what else are they lying about? The leadership of the MSU at UCI, the flagship Muslim group on the West Coast, has now been caught in the act of a conspiracy to violate university, student, and possibly civil codes. The MSU believes that any act is permitted for their goals of delegitimizing Israel, slandering Jews, and creating an atmosphere of intimidation on campus.

If they will lie to the University, risking serious academic consequences, how much more so will they be willing to lie to the campus where threat of academic suspension doesn’t exist? A group that will engage in a conspiracy of lies in order to further their goals of delegitimizing Israel, will not hesitate to defame Jews to the student body. They will not hesitate to spread egregious lies and accusations against anyone that disagrees. The same maybe true of other campus groups affiliated with the MSU and MSA.

Now back to why the satisfaction that I feel that the group was finally punished is muted. While the University has in fact banned the MSU for one year, the University failed its students, the community, and all universities…again.

The suspension of this hateful group should have been accompanied by a major press conference where the Chancellor outlined the reasons for the suspension. Drake had a chance to show moral leadership explaining that these activities will not be tolerated on UC Campuses. He could clearly outline the reasons they were suspended, condemn their behavior, and send a clear message that this kind of group has no place on ANY campus.

Instead, the letter written May 27, 2010, was supposed to be kept a secret.

UCI released the documents only through the Freedom of Information Act. They planned on keeping this entire episode a secret. Why does the University continue to protect this group of students? Til today – no University representative has EVER publicly condemned the MSU, or distanced themselves specifically from the MSU.

The suspension says that no current executive officer of the MSU can register another group during the year. However, it does not preclude non-officers of the MSU from creating a new Muslim group at UCI in the fall.

The students are appealing the decision, according to Husam Ayloush, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Predictably, he called the university’s actions “unprecedented, heavy-handed and draconian.” CAIR blames the suspension on politics, “It appears to be politically motivated to silence any future peaceful and legitimate criticism of Israel’s brutal practices”.

Apparently, the MSU students learned their dishonesty from more seasoned professionals.

Read more on the OC Register. Download the letter here.

Two New Jersey men arrested last week at John F. Kennedy International Airport allegedly on their way to fight with an al Qaeda-affiliated group in Somalia were followers of an extreme Islamist group based in New York, CNN has learned.

CNN has obtained an image of the two suspects, Mahmood Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte, attending a protest in New York organized by the Islamic Thinkers Society on May 23 of this year. They appear to have been taking part in a demonstration against the annual Israel Day parade.

“Exterminate the Zionist Roaches.” Has that Nazi ring to it, doesn’t it?

You’ll note he doesn’t bother with the word “Zionist” at the end when he calls the Jews in the audience the “New Nazis.”

Let’s make no mistake, it is not unusual for the terms of the debate in many of these on-campus activities to shift from anti-Israel to anti-Jew. Usually, the manner in which this happens is that the speaker, student or the material that is being distributed will slip up and instead of qualifying a statement by prefacing the word “Jew” with “Zionist,” will omit the adjective.

Of course, another way to consider this, one which many Jewish students and faculty on campuses across North America (no, I am not referring to the small minority that sides with the Muslim and extreme-Left students) have been well aware for years is that qualifying all statements with the term “Zionist” is sleight of hand. The speakers and organizers mean Jews.

As I was going through some recent news about what is happening at some UC schools, I came across two parallel stories that provide an interesting and telling indication of the obvious, in plain sight, devolution of campus life for many Jewish members and particularly on those campuses where the administrators have permitted the anti-Israel forces to push their agenda: bathroom graffiti.

Here’s Berkeley’s (do read the comments following that article):

John Efron, Koret professor of Jewish history, said the drawing of swastikas on campus is a common problem that has only recently been addressed because of the Clark Kerr incident.

“All anyone has to do is go into one of the bathrooms in Berkeley,” he said. “There are swastikas everywhere. People don’t know about it because, until this demonstration, Jewish students have been reluctant to file complaints and let the administration know what anti-Semitism means for them and how it creates a hostile environment.”

Here’s UC San Diego:

I regularly spend days in the library, mostly either in S&E or upstairs on the 7th and 8th floors. Since I started here in fall 2000, I have grown accustomed to seeing bathroom graffiti that called for boycotts of Israel or condemning Ariel Sharon. To be honest, this never bothered me. Since the start of this quarter, I have several times found swastikas drawn in the men’s bathrooms. In one case, the swastika was drawn rather large and followed by the phrase “3rd Reich m**** f****!” In the other incidents, a swastika would be placed on one side of a =, with the drawing of an Israeli flag on the other. If this were an isolated incident, it would not bother me, but I have seen this repeatedly over the past month and half, and it seems that the number of incidents are increasing in frequency.

Now you might think that I’m going to come up with some clever toilet quip, but I’m not. This is not funny.

This is not funny because none of the chancellors in the UC system can claim ignorance. None of the student associations which help to fund anti-Israel activities can claim to be ignorant about these things. The professors who defend the students who bring these activities to campus, like Andrew Gutierrez at UC Berkeley, Mark LeVine at UC Irvine (click on that link to see how LeVine uses the term “pound of flesh” to describe Jewish groups’ actions when they seek to address the problems on his campus) and Luis Martín-Cabrera at UC San Diego, are fully aware that these events are rightfully construed by Jewish students as incitement against the Jewish student body on their campus. Finally, the students on these campuses, since even the ones who don’t care or ignore the anti-Israel activities sit in bathroom stalls, know what is going on.

Nobody is doing anything about it, though.

No, there is nothing funny here. There is a reason for deep concern.

Here is my theory: Jews are an affluent, well-educated group in North America. We are well represented in academia, in the administrations of university campuses and in the donor groups that contribute handsomely to many universities, including those in the UC system. As such, it is difficult for many, including Jews themselves, to view Jews and Jewish students as victims, particularly on these campuses.

Well, things are changing. University administrators would do well to read the writing on their campuses’ bathroom walls.

We cover UC Irvine’s MSU’s shenanigans here regularly. That university can take pride, real pride, in having made their campus nationally famous for their hostility not just to Israel, but also to Jews. Here is one lovely example of UCI’s Israel Apartheid Week and its consequences and in case you think this is an anomaly, the professor is still there and the speaker in the bottom video has been invited for years including after this event was recorded.

However, we now have a better video to show you from UC San Diego. This week is Israel Apartheid Week at UCSD and the Muslim Students Association has speakers coming and all kinds of fun activities like a rapper from England who is apparently going to rap. What is he rapping about? This. They invited Norman Finkelstein, of the famous dog and pony show he used to run when doing his “Holocaust Industry” shtick. Now he’s got a dog and pony show going around the country telling people about the Gaza War book he wrote (and promoted on our site).

Some group at UCSD thought they should bring a speaker to their campus who could provide an alternative to the Israel hatefest. They invited David Horowitz to give a talk. At the end of the talk, an MSA student asks a question and he turns the tables on her and asks her a question in response. When she’s done answering, she says she is for the genocide of Jews prescribed by Nasrallah in Lebanon.

Watch and read and ask yourselves why universities are permitting these groups to bring their hatred – not desire for peace or love of peace, but hatred and desire for destruction of Israel – to their campuses.

Transcript:

MSA member: Good evening, I just wanted to say thank you for coming to campus tonight and presenting your point of view, its always important to have to sets of, ah, views going on at the same time. Um, very useful. My name is [Jimena Imad Musa Ahmal Bahiri](sp) and I’m a student here at UCSD. Ah I was reading your literature, I found that much more interesting than your talk, and I found some interesting things about the MSA, which is an organization that is very active on campus and is hosting our annual “Hitler Youth” week, you should come out to those events. [DS: Horowitz had referred to the MSA's week as a Hitler Youth week.] Um, if you could clarify the connection between the MSA and Jihad terrorist networks, because last time I checked, we had to do our own fundraising, and we never get help from anyone. So if you could clarify the connection between UCSD’s MSA or if you don’t have such information, if you could connect other MSA’s on UC’s, because the connection wasn’t to clear in the pamphlet, just if you could clarify.

Horowitz: Okay. Will you condemn Hamas, here and now?

MSA member: I’m sorry, what?

Horowitz: Will you condemn Hamas?

MSA member: Would I condemn Hamas?

Horowitz: As a terrorist organization. Genocidal organization.

MSA member: Are you asking me to put myself on a cross?

Horowitz: So you won’t. I have actually had this experience many times. You didn’t actually read the pamphlet, because the pamphlet is chapter and verse. The main connection is that the MSA is part of the Muslim Brotherhood Network as revealed…

MSA member: I don’t think you understood what I meant by that. I meant if I say something, I am sure that I will be arrested, for reasons of homeland security. So if you could please just answer my question.

Horowitz: If you condemn Hamas, Homeland Security will arrest you?

MSA member: If I support Hamas, because your question forces me to condemn Hamas. If I support Hamas, I look really bad.

Horowitz: If you don’t condemn Hamas, obviously you support it. Case closed. I have had this experience at UC Santa Barbara, where there were 50 members of the Muslim Students Association sitting right in the rows there. And throughout my hour talk I kept asking them, will you condemn Hizbollah and Hamas. And none of them would. And then when the question period came, the president of the Muslim Students Association was the first person to ask a question. And I said, ‘Before you start, will you condemn Hizbollah?’ And he said, ‘Well, that question is too complicated for a yes or no answer.’ So I said, ‘Okay, I’ll put it to you this way. I am a Jew. The head of Hizbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn’t have to hunt us down globally. For or Against it?

MSA member: For it.

Horowitz: Thank you for coming and showing everybody what’s here.

Yup, she’s for it.

Hat tip to Atlas Shrugs.

UPDATE May 15:

According to this editorial, the UCSD Student Association gave $40,000 to support anti-Israel activities (I was only able to find $31,700 in the documents – but still these people got $31,700 from the student association to make Jewish students on campus feel like dirt?) Not only that, but

“Co-sponsoring the events were UCSD’s Departments of Literature, Visual Arts, and Ethnic Studies, along with its entire Thurgood Marshall College.”

Those departments and UCSD’s leadership should be proud of what they’re supporting, as the video above reveals (as if anybody needs the video to know what these apartheid weeks are bringing to their campuses). How on earth can an entire department or college be supportive of activities like this? How are their students who support Israel supposed to feel?

UPDATE 2: The MSA has sent out a press release sorta and kinda distancing themselves from this student’s statement, except they don’t specifically mention the student and they use all kinds of cute language to make a political point instead of simply rejecting what is unacceptable. MSA members should know that half-baked explanations dressed up with more political rhetoric don’t really express an unequivocal rejection of this student’s endorsement of genocide, particularly because the suspicion already exists that behind all of these anti-Israel fests, lies severe hostility to Israel and, yes, to Jews (unless they’re of the variety that supports the MSA and MSU activities, in which case they’re useful).

Turns out the smoking gun emails made public by The Investigative Project prove other wise.

The UCI administration is naturally doing what they always do – deflect, distance, discredit. They are trying to “authenticate the emails”.

Despite claims to the contrary, internal emails from the University of California, Irvine’s Muslim Student Union (MSU) show that the group orchestrated the repeated disruptions of a speech given on campus by Israeli ambassador Michael Oren February 8.

A copy of the email exchanges was sent anonymously to school and local law enforcement officials, who are investigating whether students violated conduct codes or criminal laws, respectively, in deliberately disrupting an invited guest speaker at the school. The emails include a “game plan,” which details the disruption plan down to where the student disruptors would sit, how they would communicate with each other via text messaging, and how to act if campus police began to arrest students.

Read more at their website.

Recently, the UCI student government passed a first reading of a resolution BACKING the MSU, and the anti-Semitic thugs trying again to shut up the Jews from speaking freely at UCI.

“The only thing that would satisfy the critics now would be if they expelled every Muslim student and painted stars of David on all the buildings.”

So don’t be too surprised that he has written a lengthy article defending the 11 students, 8 from UCI and 3 from UC Riverside, who disrupted the Michael Oren talk at UCI a couple of weeks ago.

Before I proceed, however, I’d like to remind everybody of a couple of events led by students from the UCI MSU and other anti-Israel groups on that campus.

LeVine’s arguments on behalf of the disruptive students can be boiled down to:

1. Yes, the students intended to disrupt Oren’s speech but “not to…scuttle it.”

2. “UC Irvine’s policies on student conduct offer little guidance as to whether the protests against Oren’s speech crossed the line.” “Since Oren was not ultimately prevented from speaking, how the “Irvine 11″ actually interfered with the university’s obligation to protect the Israeli ambassador’s 1st Amendment rights is unclear.

3. “The utter disparity in power between the students and the views they represent, and Oren and the government he represents.” “Oren’s appearance was part of a sophisticated effort by the Israeli government and its supporters to present Israel in the most positive light possible.”

4. “In fact, hard-line advocates for Israel aren’t strangers to “uncivil” behavior against adversaries.” He brings up “the Jerusalem-based World Union of Jewish Students’ “Hasbara Handbook” and explains that it encourages Jewish students to use negative language when referring to anti-Israel organizations. He then adds, “Given this, calling for a pound of flesh from the Muslim students for their protest seems disingenuous to say the least.”

5. “The chilling effect on free speech and dissent the response to the student protests could have on UC Irvine” because UCI sent out an email following the Oren event stating, “if anyone ‘without authority of law, willfully disturbs or breaks up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character . . .’ [they] can be charged with a misdemeanor.”

5 Continued: LeVine adds, “Imagine how a 19-year-old student would react to being told that she could be arrested and face expulsion from the university for merely engaging in vigorous protest against a speaker who supports forced female genital mutilation or the execution of homosexuals — or, more to the point, a speaker who represents a government that engaged in these practices.”

6. He concludes: “Marginalized voices sometimes have little recourse except to push the boundaries of polite debate to get their messages heard…In this case, the “Irvine 11″ played into deeply ingrained stereotypes of irrational and unreasonably angry Muslim men. But should they be punished without clear standards in place and when similarly rowdy protests in the past led neither to arrests nor university discipline?

If I may, I’d like to respond to Professor LeVine, who actually claimed in 2007 that only Stars of David painted across UCI buildings would satisfy critics of anti-Israel advocates on campus and is now using the laden phrase “pound of flesh” to make his case (after the break).

1. LeVine has no idea whether the students intended to scuttle it or not. In fact, I would challenge that assertion. Since we’ve shown that at least 5 (and others claim all 8 ) of the students from UCI are MSU members, this letter to the editor of UC Irvine’s New University newspaper from the MSU indicates they believed Oren had no right of speech at all:

…We oppose Michael Oren’s invitation to our campus. Propagating murder is not a responsible expression of free speech. Oren and his partners should only be granted a speakers platform in the International Criminal Court and should not be honored on our campus.

2. Oren was prevented from speaking over and over again that night. There was no way to know whether there would be further disruptions since the students ignored the numerous pleas and warnings to stop. His right of speech was undeniably curtailed as a result.

More important, as to LeVine’s point that university guidelines about such disturbances aren’t clear, they were made clear during the interruptions to the speech. Both the hosting professor and the Chancellor warned the students to stop. Had they said nothing, LeVine might have an argument, but when warnings are expressed multiple times by officials of the university, the terms of the situation are clarified and publicized. The students were warned there would be academic and possibly police (criminal) sanctions if they continued with the disruptions. This became clear after the first disruption. They chose to proceed with disruptions anyway.

In addition, thanks to the Chemerinsky article, we now know that the UCI administration had gotten wind of the MSU plan and sent them an inquiry and warning about disrupting the event. The MSU denied, through its officials, that it intended any actions, but then the president and vice president of the MSU were among those who disrupted the talk. At the very least, even if one absurdly distances the MSU from the disruptions, the people involved knew the administration did not wish to have disturbances.

3. It doesn’t matter if Oren was the King of the World, the so-called disparity between the students and this individual has nothing to do with disrupting his right to speak or of his audience to hear him, in full, including a question and answer period. If he’s slated for 90 minutes, that’s what should be heard by all.

Second, to claim that these students are not part of a larger campaign is ridiculous. UCI is one of about 200 campuses that have some form of anti-Israel week and it is a well-orchestrated effort. This is not happening in a vacuum.

Third, the disrupting students were mostly from the MSU. While there is no direct information on their website or elsewhere linking them to the Muslim Student Association on other campuses, some sources indicate a connection. The MSA was founded as an outpost of the Muslim Brotherhood decades ago and has been funded with Saudi money in the past. Links and evidence can be found here. Connections to to the Muslim Brotherhood, including some mentioning the MSA at UCI are found in this paper by Steven Emerson’s Investigative Project. At the very least, one has to ask whether the UCI MSU is connected to these organizations (this article from 2008 claims they are under the MSA umbrella) or not before making pronouncements about disparity between the disruptive students and their victim. If they are connected to the MSA, that organization is huge, with hundreds of campuses under its umbrella. Some more information is available here.

4. The good old “Hasbara Handbook” trick. I wish I could find out whether and how that thing was distributed since I keep reading about it from anti-Israel advocates. In any case, whether or not that manual exists or was ever actually put to use by people who advocate for Israel (we need evidence, since all LeVine says is that such a handbook exists but then provides no examples of its use), that has nothing to do with the disruptions to Oren by people who have no connection to the Hasbara handbook, especially since they were made after warnings to the contrary. This was another nice dig at Israel and Jews for Professor LeVine, however.

5. The chilling effect on free speech will not exist at UCI if these students are punished. On the contrary, the university will feel free to bring in serious speakers like Mr. Oren without fear of embarrassment. Audiences will know they can come to UCI to hear serious speakers give lectures without being disturbed. If Prof. LeVine cares so much about chilling free speech at UCI, he might wish to take a look at the second video posted above where the pro-Palestinians on his campus decided to censor any recording of one of their guests, even as he was spewing what can only be described as anti-Semitic venom.

The students could have protested without disrupting Oren’s talk. They could have held signs up in the back of the room. They could have distributed leaflets. They could have chanted outside the auditorium. Etc. None of these would be covered by the UCI administration’s warnings. Dissent and free speech need not mean disruption and interference.

5. Continued: LeVine continues to weaken his argument and his gravity by comparing Israel and Michael Oren to countries that practice “forced female genital mutilation or the execution of homosexuals.” Interestingly, Israel does neither.

However, his point is not about mutilation or murder of homosexuals, that was just another dig at Israel, it is about the unfortunate 19 year old kid who will be afraid to speak his mind. LeVine’s concern is unfounded. That 19 year old kid, or 22 year old president of an on-campus organization, just needs to remember not to disrupt others’ rights to free expression or others’ right to hear speakers. Surely, Professor LeVine recognizes the possibility of dissenting without preventing the speech of others.

6. LeVine concludes by calling the protesting students “marginalized” and excusing their behavior as playing into stereotypes which might be falsely enhancing a desire to punish them. And then he states his belief that they should not be punished in any way since there was no clear university policy and other incidents in the past have not yielded punishments.

Well, of course, the last excuse is the weakest. The past does not indicate that things shouldn’t change, particularly when the behavior is so disturbing. Second, he should really stop using the “stereotypes” excuse since it has absolutely nothing to do with the UCI or UCR students. Nobody serious has said anything about this other than their apologists. Third, they are far from marginalized students. When I looked up their names, they appeared to all intents and purposes to be popular, active students who engaged other students at barbecues and sports teams. Finally, and the reason LeVine’s argument fails, is that these students were warned before the event and during the event. They are adults and they made adult decisions to ignore those warnings. They obviously planned the incident in detail and stuck to the plan even after being asked and warned to stop during the talk.

My prescription for a fair punishment can be found on this post at the end (hint: it does not include expulsion of the students or the painting of swastikas, stars of David or green crescents on UCI’s buildings).

I want to conclude by discussing Professor LeVine’s reprehensible comments regarding Jews. His comment about the Stars of David is nothing less than hateful sloganeering against Jews who had asked that UC Irvine create a less hostile atmosphere on campus during those weeks when the anti-Israel groups bring their hate-fest to campus. The comment about a pound of flesh is no less disgusting and was entirely unnecessary. Also unnecessary was the false comparison of Israel to countries that kill homosexuals or practice forced female mutilation. He should be very pleased that nobody is curtailing his right to free speech, even when it is hideous speech.

In the meantime, a new Facebook group and website called “We Won’t Be Silenced” is demanding that UCI and the UC system take active steps against these students.

Similar conclusions have been drawn by many regarding the disruptions of Michael Oren, a historian who is currently Israel’s ambassador to the US, a couple of weeks ago at the UCI campus. One by one, 11 students, 8 from UCI and 3 from UC Riverside, disrupted the talk so that the audience heard his speech in bits and pieces and never had a chance to ask him questions. The students were warned that they would be removed and there would be consequences, yet they persisted to disrupt the speech. Upon removal from the auditorium, they were arrested and their names were released. It turned out that the president and vice-president of UCI’s MSU were involved as were other members. Despite this, and the website posting against Oren’s appearance, the MSU has denied any connection to the disruptions.

Since then, the campus has entered into a debate about freedom of speech. The defenders of the disruptions claimed that the offenders were merely exercising their free speech rights and, in fact, by removing them from the hall and by arresting them, those rights have been being quashed. Those who oppose the disruptions make the claim that the First Amendment does not give carte blanche to disrupt the right of a speaker to express his views or to have his listeners be prevented from hearing those views.

Well, it turns out that UCI has a recently opened law school and it is headed by Erwin Chemerinsky, its founding dean. As a side note, it appears that his hiring involved unfavorable attention by some Repubicans. Chancellor Drake at first announced that Chemerinsky wouldn’t receive the job he was offered, and denied any outside interference. However, after it was shown that he had been contacted by interested parties, he traveled to meet with the professor, who had recently been called one of America’s top 20 legal thinkers by a prominent legal publication. It appears that Mr. Chemerinsky schooled Mr. Drake about academic freedom, because he got his offer and the job back again.

Needless to say, between allowing UC Irvine to become a punching bag for all sorts of interests, his weak condemnation of the MSU protesters at the Oren speech and the quick turnaround with Chemerinsky and his job prospects, one wonders whether another leader would serve this campus better than Drake.

Anyhoo, Chemerinsky is an expert in “constitutional law, federal practice, civil rights and civil liberties, and appellate litigation.” He’s also Jewish. And, he wrote an editorial in the LA Times about “UC Irvine’s free speech debate.” What does he think?

College campuses, especially at public universities, are places where all ideas should be expressed and debated. No speech ever should be stopped or punished because of the viewpoint expressed. Of course, there must be rules to regulate the time, place and manner of such expression to preserve order and even to make sure that speech can occur.

These general principles are unassailable, but their application to recent events at the University of California, Irvine, has attracted international attention. …

Eleven individuals were arrested, and those who are UCI students are facing disciplinary action. In the last week, I have been deluged with messages from those saying the disruptive students did nothing wrong and deserve no punishment, and also from those saying that the students should be expelled and that others in the audience who cheered them on should be disciplined.

Both of these views are wrong. As to the former, there are now posters around campus referring to the unjust treatment of the “Irvine 11″ and saying they were just engaging in speech themselves. However, freedom of speech never has been regarded as an absolute right to speak out at any time and in any manner. Long ago, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes explained that there was no right to falsely shout “fire” in a crowded theater.

The government, including public universities, always can impose time, place and manner restrictions on speech. A person who comes into my classroom and shouts so that I cannot teach surely can be punished without offending the 1st Amendment. Likewise, those who yelled to keep the ambassador from being heard were not engaged in constitutionally protected behavior.

Freedom of speech, on campuses and elsewhere, is rendered meaningless if speakers can be shouted down by those who disagree. The law is well established that the government can act to prevent a heckler’s veto — to prevent the reaction of the audience from silencing the speaker. There is simply no 1st Amendment right to go into an auditorium and prevent a speaker from being heard, no matter who the speaker is or how strongly one disagrees with his or her message.

…
At the same time, I also disagree with those who call for draconian sanctions against these students or of punishment for a larger group. Only the students who were actually disruptive should be punished. Whether there will be criminal prosecutions is up to the Orange County district attorney. Within the university, the punishment should be great enough to convey that the conduct was wrong and unacceptable, but it should not be so severe as to ruin these students’ educational careers.

I bow my head in humility to Mr. Chemerinsky’s deep knowledge of the law and accept his verdict that “There is simply no 1st Amendment right to go into an auditorium and prevent a speaker from being heard.” I thank him for teaching me about the “Heckler’s Veto.”

My problem with his conclusion, however, is that it only deals with this incident and treats it as an anomaly instead of part of a larger pattern, which is easily provable. By absolving the MSU from any involvement in this case, despite their online call against Oren’s speech and the involvement of key members of this group in the disruptions, Chemerinsky only encourages groups to foment disruptive behavior on campus and if there are consequences to their members, claim innocence or ignorance and let those individuals hang without support. Of course, this type of absolution will mean that any group can organize these sorts of protests without fear of consequences.

I can understand this in matters where there is a bigger question mark about the involvement of the group in question, but in this case, this disruption was part of a much broader pattern.

A meaningful punishment is required for another reason. Chemerinsky himself notes that “Prior to this event, campus officials heard rumors that some members of the Muslim Student Union planned to disrupt the ambassador’s speech…When asked, the officials of the Muslim Student Union denied any plans to do this.”

We don’t know who the MSU officials were, but we can assume that the president and vice-president of the group have to take responsibility for any actions taken by their officials when they are speaking on behalf of the group. Since those two individuals (the pres and VP) were directly involved in the disruptions at the Oren talk, their responsibility not only grows far beyond that of the average MSU student, but it directly implicates the MSU as an organization since they would have had prior knowledge that the university was concerned about such disruptions.

In other words, to allow the MSU to get away with officially denying involvement in the disruptive activities that the university sought to quell, even though its members, and particularly its leadership, were direct participants, is no different than an abuser punching somebody after being asked not to, and then denying that the punch came from the abuser because his right hand acted independently.

Along with punishing the MSU, Chemerinsky should reconsider his position about what makes for an appropriate punishment for these protesters. He doesn’t believe that they deserve the punishment “so severe as to ruin these students’ educational careers.”

In light of the fact that it is virtually impossible that MSU members who participated in the disruption did not know that the university had asked them not to cause disruptions, and in light of the fact that the individuals involved were senior enough to be leaders of this on-campus group and in light of the fact that they are adult students who were given the opportunity not to behave in a manner inimical to the request and best interests of the university, why should the university permit them to continue with their studies? They openly lied to the university.

They may be able to claim that the university was speaking to the MSU, not to its individual student members, but since those members comprise the MSU’s leadership, even as individual students with no MSU backing for their actions, they knowingly went against the university’s desire to avoid disruption.

It seems to me that a severe punishment is due. Should they be expelled? Maybe not. That would galvanize support around them. However, a break from studies to mull over their behavior and learn from it seems appropriate here, as would some permanent mark on their school transcripts explaining why there is a gap between semesters.

The issues here go beyond stealing the opportunity for students at the university to hear a speaker and learn from the exchange of ideas. They touch directly on the ideals of a university as a place where integrity is a must because a lack of integrity undermines properly imparting and receiving knowledge. This is why plagiarism is treated severely in the academic world. Lying to a university’s administration would seem to be on the same plane.

The night after the debacle at UC Irvine where 11 students, some of whom are members of the UCI Muslim Students Union, including its president and vice-president, disrupted Ambassador Michael Oren’s speech and prevented a question and answer period from taking place, UC San Diego hosted Oren. At this event, there were no disruptions. It is obvious from watching this video that UCI’s MSU students really undermined themselves and others on their campus. Instead of hearing and learning, instead of challenging and demanding, they acted like uncouth brutes and prevented others from enjoying the give and take that UCSD’s students enjoyed.

For those watching the video, the first part with Oren’s speech is a little fluffy. The real meat of this event is the question period where Oren is asked about ethnic cleansing and genocide over and over. The pro-Palestinians have swallowed their own poison whole so that their entire range of definition of the Arab-Israeli conflict is based on hyperbole and nothing more than extreme exaggeration.

Kudos to UCSD. Michael Drake, Chancellor of UCI, has much to learn from that campus.

(video source)

Police have identified the students as:

UC Irvine

Joseph Tamim Haider

Osama Ahmed Sabry Shabaik

Mohemed Mohy Eldeen Abdelgany

Ali Mohammad Sayeed

Asaad Traina

Mohammad Qureashi

Aslam Akhtar

Hakim Nasreddine Kebir

UC Riverside

Taher Herzallam

Shaheen Waleed Nassar

Khalid Bahgat Akari

Apparently, the UCI MSU has denied a connection between the disruptions of Oren, which were clearly well organized, and their organization. That may be true, but I thought I might check up on some of the arrested parties above.

Joseph Haider? In this article, he is promoting a UCI-MSU event.

Osama Shabaik (second name on the list)? Here he is interviewed and is described as a member of the UCI-MSU. On the UCI-MSU contacts page he is listed as their VICE PRESIDENT.

Mohemed Abdelgany? Why he’s right on the UCI-MSU website where he is listed as their PRESIDENT or “amir.”

Ali Sayeed? The link is no longer cached, but a Google search still shows that he was team manager for the MSU 1 flag football team at UCI.

Can’t find anything on Asaad Traina or Mohammad Qureashi but on a now-erased page on the MSU website, Aslam Akhtar writes:

“MSU (Muslim Student Union): The MSU has directed and channeled me into the person I am today. It has kept me motivated to pursue my goals, and at the same time has defined my goals into the personification in which they are in today.”

Indeed it has!

Hakim Kebir is an MSU host for a barbecue as listed on this cached Facebook page.

The UC Riverside students have less information online. Shaheen Nassar appears to have belonged to a Muslim Students Association in Pomona before coming to UC Riverside but there’s no information about Akari or Herzallam.

In short, a number of active MSU members, including the President and Vice President of the organization were involved in this orchestrated disruption of a speaker at the UC Irvine campus. Sure, maybe they were acting on their own, but since they happen to be running the organization, the only apt description for the MSU distancing itself from these activities is…HILARIOUS. Thanks for the laughs, guys.

Here is UCI Chancellor, Michael Drake, in a public statement after his poor performance during the talk and especially in the last few years where his campus has enabled anti-Israel and anti-Semitic activities to a degree seen on few campuses in North America.

Campus Disruption
Feb. 9, 2010
Dear Colleagues:

Last night, Michael Oren, Israeli ambassador to the U.S., shared his perspectives on American-Israeli relations in a free public lecture in the UC Irvine Student Center. During his talk, several members of the audience stood and shouted – one at a time, repeatedly – in an effort to disrupt his message.

This behavior is intolerable. Freedom of speech is among the most fundamental, and among the most cherished of the bedrock values our nation is built upon. A great university depends on the free exchange of ideas. This is non-negotiable. Those who attempt to suppress the rights of others violate core principles that are the foundation of any learning community. We cannot and do not allow such behavior.

Eleven individuals were arrested as a result of their actions last night and are being processed accordingly. Additionally, the Office of Student Conduct has initiated the Student Judiciary Review process to address issues under their jurisdiction.

I am very pleased that the ambassador stayed on and was able to complete his speech. This university is, and always will be, committed to the expression of all ideas and viewpoints.”

Chancellor Michael Drake

Here, Chancellor Drake, is what you have permitted to take place on your campus year after year:

Here is some straightforward anti-Semitism in this annual Israel hate-fest run, in part by the UCI MSU. You will notice the video is being shot by a student who is being forced to leave the room because he is videotaping:

When will University President Michael Drake KICK THE MSU OFF CAMPUS? When will the University take responsibility for this?

We have heard Michael Drake for years DENY THAT THERE IS ANY SERIOUS PROBLEM. He said this publicly.

No problem, huh? The University has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on so-called bridge building which is for the most part totally ineffective. As long as the MSU is allowed on campus, as long as students are not held responsible for their actions, this kind of activity will continue.

Update: the police has released information about the protesters. It turns out that the president and vice president of the UCI MSU were among those who protested and were arrested.

Another video after the jump:

Dear California Secretary of Education Thomas,

The “UC Intifada” at UCI – is raging and Chancellor Drake and the University seem unable or unwilling to act in an effective way to protect the best interests of the student body, and keep intimidation, racism, and anti-Semitism off campus.

I have been the campus rabbi at UCI for almost 5 years, under the auspices of an independent Jewish campus ministry. I also serve as the only Rabbi of the UCI Interfaith Center. My concerns are based on long-term, grassroots involvement, which has brought me into contact with thousands of UCI students – Jewish and Gentile.

It is a well established, and sadly, an accepted part of student life at UCI, that Israel and Jews are being singled out, vilified, and targeted for intimidation. It is the same nightmare of previous year’s except much worse and much longer.

Check out a video circulated by the Muslim Student Union on YouTube, which promotes their upcoming “Israel: The Politics of Genocide” nearly-month long campaign.

While some have pointed to the Olive Tree Initiative as the solution, even according to the participants it is irrelevant. It will do little to change the institutionalized commitment for the destruction of Israel held by the hard-line mainstream Muslim group on the campus, and their support for radical anti-Western, racist, anti-Semitic speakers. The OTI is not capable of solving this entrenched problem now, or in the future, even though they have admirable goals and ambition. In addition, the OTI has excluded religious Jews because they hold their major programs on the Jewish Sabbath.

What started as a week of intimidation called Anti-Zionism week, now encompasses nearly the whole month of May and accuses Israel of Genocide. In recent year’s they called the program “Holocaust in the Holy Land”. These outright lies, seem to conflict with the same groups willingness to abide by campus policies.

In 2006, I coined that phrase UC Intifada to describe what I saw.

In 2007, the Muslim Students used that phrase on their t-shirts to describe what they were doing.

The spiritual leader of the UCI chapter of the MSU, Malik Ali, has declared a “Jihad of the Tongue” against Jews, Israel and the West to be waged from here. Malik Ali has spoken many times praising suicide bombers, Hamas and Hizbollah. He is a nationally known racist, inciting hatred against the Jews. Videos of his diatribes are all over YouTube, and many were shot at UCI.

Someone from the UC system needs to provide supervision and protection. The UC System needs to send a message loud and clear that it will not tolerate racist groups from using campus groups to pursue their larger racist, agendas. In addition, it is the students that suffer the most. Theses programs cause anxiety and fear. It disrupts class and homework schedules.

I tried to reach Chancellor Drake, but he is traveling. Funny, they said that last year when we tried to find him during Hate Week.

Please help the students, cancel the events this week, and kick the MSU off campus.

Rabbi Yonah Bookstein
UCI Interfaith Center Associate Rabbi

The event is a HUGE success. The vast majority of students taking part are regular students on campus, checking out the henna, food, and hookah, music, ipod challenge, and give-a-ways.
Go Anteaters for Israel!