Explaining First Amendment to Muslims outraged by video

Posted on | September 18, 2012

Press Enterprise
David Olson

A motorcycle goes up in flames during a protest in front of the U.S. consulate Tuesday in Chennai, India. AP Photo

I attended the annual Council on American-Islamic Relations media breakfast in Anaheim this morning.

It’s an event that the Greater Los Angeles chapter of CAIR puts together every year to link reporters with Muslim sources, offer information on Islam and discuss issues in the news.

Of course, Islam has been in the news a lot lately, as Muslims in more than 20 countries have protested an anti-Muslim video produced in Southern California. Steven Klein, a consultant for the film and an anti-Muslim activist for years, lives in Hemet.

CAIR has repeatedly condemned the violent reaction to the video.

But Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the local CAIR chapter and a Corona resident, and Mohammed Faqih, imam of the Islamic Institute of Orange County, said American Muslims could do more.

Faqih said Muslims in the United States can act as “a bridge between east and west,” so Americans better understand Muslims and Muslims around the world better understand American culture and laws.

Ayloush said one reason for the violent reaction to the video was a lack of understanding of the First Amendment.

“We have not explained what the First Amendment means,” he said.

In much of the world, insulting or denigrating a religion is illegal. Many Muslims in other countries wonder why the U.S. government doesn’t ban the video.

Even Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi asked why the U.S. government didn’t punish the filmmakers.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week explained free-speech protections by stating, “We do not stop individual citizens from expressing their views no matter how distasteful they may be.”

Ayloush said that in the past few days, he has been explaining the First Amendment to Muslims abroad.
He said Muslims from the Middle East have told him that the United States has a double standard. Surely the U.S. government punishes people who criticize Israel, deny the Holocaust occurred or insult Jesus, they say.
But Ayloush explains to them that Americans are allowed to criticize Israel and that – no matter how repugnant the beliefs are – people are allowed to deny the Holocaust existed or to insult Jesus (who is a prophet for Muslims).

“People are shocked,” Ayloush said. “They didn’t know that.”

Ayloush also explains that the same First Amendment that protects the hateful video allows Muslims and others to worship freely.

“That helps,” he said. “They understand.”

Dead Poets Society Lied: What the Movies Don't Teach You About Student Resistance (on Irvine11)

John Hrabe
Huffington Post
9/25/2011

...In February 2010, members of UC Irvine's Muslim Student Association systematically interrupted a speech by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren. On September 23, an Orange County jury found ten of the students guilty of misdemeanor charges and sentenced them to three years of informal probation...

To be clear, I'm not defending the content of the protests, nor do I support the students' outbursts. Freedom of speech doesn't include a heckler's veto, and the students could have protested the ambassador in more constructive ways...

But, Dr. Smith also wisely points out that the heckler's veto wasn't the only First Amendment question in this case. There was also the issue of whether Muslim students were singled out and selectively prosecuted because of their views.

"There is no doubt in my mind that the District Attorney selectively prosecuted," said Hussam Ayloush, Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations - Greater Los Angeles Area, "because the students were Muslim, the speaker was an Israeli diplomat, and the verbal protests centered on Israel's long history of war crimes."

It strains credulity to think that the politics of the speakers didn't affect the decision to prosecute. Had this been a raucous student council meeting about the cost of tuition, the case would have ended in a campus administrative hearing. You'd be laughed out of any prosecutor's office if you tried to turn it into a criminal case. Most hecklers not only avoid prosecution, but get a bigger platform because of their disruptions. Anyone remember Rep. Joe Wilson and Joe the Plumber?

In Orange County, Muslim Americans have other reasons to believe that there's a double standard for free speech. Earlier this year, Villa Park City Councilwoman Deborah Pauly protested an Islamic charity event and exclaimed, "I know quite a few Marines who will be very happy to help these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise." Just this month, San Juan Capistrano City Councilman Derek Reeve said at a council meeting that he named his dog Muhammad to intentional provoke Muslim Americans and make a statement about free speech. These incidents explain why Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Irvine School of Law, described the verdict as keeping an "open wound" in the community.

If you protect the offensive, anti-Islamic rhetoric of Orange Curtain councilmembers, you have to protect the rights of the UC Irvine Muslim Student Association. As Ayloush put it, "No topic should be off limits and no public official or country should be above criticism."

When controversial speakers are prosecuted under ridiculous "disturbing the peace" statutes, it sets up a forced choice for freedom. Every speaker must live in fear of prosecution, or worse, only the dissenting speakers get quashed. Either scenario is unacceptable because both outcomes lead to less speech.

Our natural reaction to contrasting views should always be to speak out ourselves, not shut our opponents up. Muslim students get the same First Amendment protections as Israeli ambassadors. I'm entitled to my review of Dead Poets Society; and Roger Ebert has a right to his -- even if he's wrong.

Read Full article

CAIR-MI Rep Defends Free Speech Rights, even for Pastor Terry Jones

"If Terry Jones becomes unpopular and not allowed to speak about his views publicly, then one day it might be the imam of the mosque. One day it might be myself who someone's trying to censure from speaking freely about their beliefs," said Dawud Walid, who heads the Council on American Islamic Relations.

He's a staunch opponent of Jones and his hateful speech against Muslims and says the prosecutor and court may have had good intentions, but by trying to silence Jones, they've turned up the volume instead.

"Terry Jones has gone from being painted as a racist and bigot to a First Amendment martyr and someone who's standing up for American principles, and this is the problem of the whole issue now," Walid said.

Ayloush responds to UC Mark Yudof on the issue of UCI protests

UC president Yudof: Speech is protected
The Daily Pilot
By Tom Ragan, tom.ragan@latimes.com
November 6, 2010

NEWPORT BEACH — University of California President Mark Yudof spoke before an estimated 350 people at Temple Bat Yahm on Thursday night, telling the predominantly Jewish crowd that he doesn't condone the anti-Semitic statements occasionally made on UC campuses, not just at UC Irvine.

But the reality, Yudof said, is that there is nothing he can do about it because they are protected under the 1st Amendment, which allows for free speech and the right to assemble.

He said he receives hundreds of e-mails daily from angry people in the wake of such protests or activities, and that they all ask him the same thing: Why doesn't he come out and condemn the anti-Semitic remarks made among the more politically involved Muslim student groups on campus?

"Well, I have condemned the speeches," he said. "I do condemn all the anti-Israel speeches, I condemn all the anti-Semitic utterances. I've said that before, and I'm saying it now, and I'll say it in writing again."

But by law, Yudof said, he cannot censor the speeches, "no matter how horrific they are."

Nor, he added, can he "shut down" the activities that occur on campus. The long and short of it, said Yudof, who is an expert in the U.S. Constitution, is that everything is within the legal rights of students when they speak out against Israel and its policies toward the Palestinians.

Still, Yudof compared some of the anti-Semitic activities to the equivalent of the "Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan" coming to campus and giving speeches and holding rallies.

"It's plain vanilla bigotry," he said.

His remarks were also couched and tempered as a result of tension that's built up over the past few years between the Muslim Student Union and Jewish students at UCI.

In February, 11 students from the UCI MSU were arrested after they repeatedly interrupted a speech given by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren, who had planned to talk about the state of U.S.-Israeli relations.

The students said they were merely exercising their free speech rights, but Yudof said that's no defense.

"There is no right to drown out a speaker," he said.

But as far as the MSU and Anaheim office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, are concerned, the students had every right to voice their opinions.

"The students voiced political views to shame the representative of a foreign government accused of war crimes by the United Nations and human rights organizations," said CAIR Executive Director Hussam Ayloush. "Delivering this message in a loud and shocking yet peaceful manner was meant to express the gravity of charges leveled against Israeli policies. It falls under the purview of protected speech."

He went on to say that "legitimate criticism of Israeli policies is not anti-Semitism."

CAIR has also been critical of the punishment levied against the Muslim Student Union at UCI, calling it "selective" and saying that their disruption of Oren's speech should have been "constitutionally protected."

The MSU's subsequent suspension, CAIR said, is nothing but "an attempt to repress legitimate student protests" and that, in the end, it will undermine the importance of free speech at the university level.

CAIR markets itself as one of the largest Islamic civil liberties group in the United States. Its mission is to promote a positive image of Islam and Muslims, according to Munira Syeda, CAIR communications manager.

She said there are roughly 170,000 Muslims who live in Orange County and an estimated 1 million in California.

"It's a big constituency," she said. "He [Yudof] should keep that in mind because he represents the UC system."

Yudof's speech was sponsored by the Rose Project, a Jewish Federation and Family Services. The group was created nearly two years ago and helps create bridges between UCI students and a better understanding of Israel and what it means to be Jewish. The proceeds of the event will go back into the Rose Project.

Is it America's new pastime to blame Muslims for everything? - A Commentary on the Juan Williams Debacle

Juan Williams stereotypes Muslims. Muslims speak against Williams’ comments. Williams' employer, NPR, fires him. Fox News offers Williams a $2 million contract. Muslims are blamed and attacked for Williams' suffering.  What's wrong with this picture?

Juan Williams might not be a bigot; however, he certainly did not measure his words when he spoke on national television on Fox News. Maybe he misspoke. Maybe he was pandering to Fox News viewers. Maybe he was trying to connect with Bill O'Reilly. Or maybe he should have just qualified his views by voicing how sad a state of affairs we as a country have reached when an educated person like him can have such irrational phobia and prejudice against people who merely appear to be Muslims.

Regardless of the reasons behind his comments, the fact is that Williams fueled bigotry against Muslims as a whole, not just against extremists or terrorists. Imagine if he had said that he feels nervous or afraid every time he sees Blacks, Hispanics, Asians when he walks into a bank, convenience store, or a neighborhood.  People would have been outraged, and rightly so. 

Promoting hurtful and negative stereotypes is wrong, no matter which group of people is being targeted.  This cannot be justified as a person just expressing an honest opinion in a dialogue (especially when both O'Reilly and Williams seem to share the same phobia), unless you also consider publicly expressing racist slurs or negative stereotypes about Jews, Blacks, Catholics, Latinos, and other groups to be acceptable “honest dialogue.”

Words have impact. It was words that preceded every genocide – words that dehumanized and demonized a whole group of people.  As citizens of this world, we all have to be careful about what we say.

With that said, let it be clear that Williams and everyone else has the full right to say whatever they want, no matter how offensive it is. And others have the right to speak against and object to such speech. Free speech is a two-way street; it is a right to all sides of any issue or topic and not just to those we agree with.

One strange aspect to this situation is that Fox News has decided to blame Muslims (and CAIR) for Mr. Williams’ firing by NPR; they are spreading half-truths and distortions to further that story, with the result that many who watch their shows now believe it.

Many Americans, including Muslims and CAIR, were offended by Mr. Williams' inflammatory comments that justified increased unfair targeting and mistreatment of Muslims. We did not ask NPR to fire him.  NPR is an independent institution and, like any business entity, has the right to decide what action by an employee constitutes a serious violation of its standards, practices and guidelines. But in truth, many of us will not be shedding tears about NPR's decision either.  Maybe Muslims were just too busy trying to understand why Williams would gratuitously target us with hatred and then why would so many fellow Americans blame us and target us with hatred after NPR fired him as if all Muslims were the ones who run NPR.

Is it America's new pastime to blame Muslims for everything?

UCI committee recommends suspending Muslim student group (Daily Pilot)

By Mona Shadia
Daily Pilot
June 14, 2010

A UC Irvine student conduct committee has recommended suspending the Muslim Student Union, following repeated disruptions by several of its members during a February speech by the Israeli ambassador, a campus spokeswoman said. The recommendation has not taken effect because the student group has appealed the decision, said UCI spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon.

If the recommendation is upheld, the Muslim Student Union, or MSU, will be suspended for the 2010-11 school year.

Reem Salahi, the attorney representing MSU, said the recommendation is unprecedented and would alienate hundreds of students.

“We disagree with the university’s finding of facts that the action of the students who stood was an officially sanctioned MSU activity,” she said. “We disagree with those findings as facts; we do not agree with the alleged violations.”

The recommendation is a result of an investigation conducted by the office of Student Affairs in response to the incident, in which 11 students were arrested, Lawhon said.

Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren’s speech about U.S.-Israeli relations was protested by students, who believe Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians are inhumane.

A letter sent to the MSU states the violation of five university policies as reasoning for the recommendation: fabricating and providing false information; disrupting a teaching or a research activity; disorderly conduct; participation of the disruption of the peace or unlawful assembly; and violating other local, state and federal laws.

The 14-page letter summarizes the months-long investigation, spells out how the students interrupted Oren’s speech, how faculty members and campus officials reacted and how the investigation was conducted. It does not show how the students allegedly fabricated information or broke local, state or federal laws.

The letter, which was sent by Lisa Cornish, senior executive director of student housing, states the recommendation to suspend MSU was based on personal observations by campus police and faculty members, the fact that the 11 students are represented by the same attorney, the fact that MSU discussed Oren’s visit prior to the event and a Google group e-mail discussing his visit.

University officials declined to provide further details.

“Since they are possibly going to be involved in an appeal, they cannot be going public in the media with their reasoning,” Lawhon said, adding that the letter provides all the details needed to support the recommendation.

The Jewish Federation Orange County released a statement hailing the suspension of the MSU. A call to the Jewish Federation was not returned Monday. An official from the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., declined comment.

In addition to the recommendation being unprecedented, Salahi said it is also tainted because it is influenced by outside organizations.

“I do think there’s a massive amount of pressure on the university to respond in a very harsh manner and we can see evidence of that,” she said. “The Jewish Federation issued a Public Records Act request to review this information and to ensure that there has been some sort of sanctions.

“There’s a lot of external pressure on the university. Normally, this is an internal process. This is not internal; this is external. This is not a final recommendation; this is a recommendation. The fact that the information was released prematurely is evidence of the pressure on the university.”

Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Greater Los Angeles chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, called UCI’s recommendations Draconian.

“What happened at UCI and what happened off the coast of Gaza are very much related,” Ayloush said. “The peaceful and symbolic protests of the Israeli ambassador at UCI was a reflection of a growing worldwide campaign by human-rights activists to end the Israeli occupation of the Palestinians and its apartheid policies toward the Palestinian people and, in both cases, the reaction from the Israeli government and its U.S. supporters has been disproportionate and heavy-handed.”

Salahi said suspending MSU, a bustling organization on campus that was given this year’s Social Justice Award by the university’s Cross-Cultural Center, could negatively affect the lives of hundreds of students.

“It’s scary,” Salahi said. “It’s a scary way to have students who are 18- and 19-year-olds up against established organizations who have staff attorneys and are looking to sanction them.”

MSU has more than 100 active members and about 250 registered members.

Muslim Student Union members shocked by suspension

By DEEPA BHARATH and ELLYN PAK

THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
6/14/2010

(entire article posted for informational and educational purposes)

IRVINE – UC Irvine's Muslim Student Union members say a year-long suspension came as a shock and that the university's action would deny Muslim students a sense of community, according to a statement released Monday afternoon. “Suspending the MSU would undoubtedly create a chilling effect and deprive Muslim students -- both current and incoming -- of a place where they can develop a sense of community with one another and with the broader UCI campus community,” said incoming MSU President Asaad Traina. “Depriving Muslim students a venue to associate jeopardizes their rights under the First Amendment and is an act of marginalization at a time when Muslim students and Muslim youth already feel besieged."

Campus officials at UCI have banned the Muslim Student Union for one year and placed the organization on disciplinary probation for an additional year, according to the Jewish Federation Monday morning.

Federation officials say they obtained documents from the university through the Freedom of Information Act, which show that the Muslim Student Union has been suspended on campus effective Sept. 1.

MSU members said contrary to the federation's statements, the student group has not been officially suspended.

To read the decision letter, click here (PDF).

The suspension is the result of a months-long internal review by the university following the arrest of 11 union students during Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren's speech on campus. Oren was repeatedly interrupted by the union members.

Click here to see a raw video of the incident.

The group has appealed the decision, according to Husam Ayloush, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Members also denies that the Oren disruptions were an officially sanctioned MSU activity and that the students acted on their own.

Their attorney, Reem Salahi, said based on her understanding of the university's policies and procedures, what has been issued is not a "ban," but only a recommendation. The student group is waiting to meet with university officials.

"That said, I don't agree with their actions at all," she said. "This is nothing but collective punishment. All Muslim students on campus have been punished for the actions of a few."

So far, UCI has not released any information about this ban and does not plan on doing so, said Cathy Lawhon, director of media relations.

"I do not have personal knowledge of this, as the process and the actions against the students and the group were privileged," she said. "We value the privacy of our students and the process. This is a private and privileged process, and we will honor that process."

Although other individuals and groups might discuss this issue, the university will not, Lawhon said.

A May 27 letter sent to the Muslim Student Union by Lisa Cornish, senior executive director of Student Housing, which was also copied to Dean of Students Rameen Talesh, details the violations that were believed to have been committed by the union and the disciplinary action taken against them. This document was obtained and provided to The Orange County Register by the Jewish Federation.

Cornish's letter says the university's decision to suspend the union was based on Google Group e-mails, personal observations by university officials including the police chief, observations by other students and "the fact that all of the disruptors retained the same attorney to represent them in the student conduct process."

Cornish's letter talks about how the Muslim Student Union held a meeting Feb. 3 prior to the ambassador's visit and methodically discussed how to disrupt the event. The students talked about sending "the speaker a message – our goal should be that he knows that he can't just go to a campus and say whatever he wants" and "pushing the envelope."

They even voted on one method of action and said, "We all go through with this together insha Allah ta'ala, together as one MSU."

Cornish's letter states that the students planned every detail of the disruption including scripting statements.

The letter also goes into detail about what each one of the disruptors yelled out during Oren's speech.

Cornish says in the letter that she has concluded based on her review that the Muslim Student Union and each of its authorized signers violated several university policies including "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 and other forms of dishonesty including ... fabricating information, furnishing false information, or reporting a false emergency to the University."

The letter orders the Muslim student union to cease operations from Sept. 1, a suspension that will be active until Aug. 31, 2011. After that date, the group will be placed on "disciplinary probation" for one more year. Any misconduct during that period could result in further action against the group or its members, Cornish's letter states. Also, group members must collectively complete 50 hours of community service, which also needs to be approved by the university.

Ayloush said he is disappointed by The Jewish Federation's decision to release information that was meant to be confidential.

"I'm puzzled at their attempt to score political points at the expense of the privacy of the students and the process that is internal to UCI," he said.

To watch a YouTube video featuring a statement by Jewish Federation President and CEO Shalom Elcott, click here.

Ayloush called the university's actions "unprecedented, heavy-handed and draconian."

"It appears to be politically motivated to silence any future peaceful and legitimate criticism of Israel's brutal practices," he said. "This was nothing but a peaceful and symbolic protest of the Israeli Ambassador at UCI. It was a reflection of a growing worldwide campaign by human rights activists to end the Israeli occupation of Palestine and their racism toward the Palestinian people."

The Muslim students did not engage in fraudulent, immoral or criminal behavior, Ayloush said.

Shalom Elcott, president and CEO of the Jewish Federation Orange County, said he commends the university's decision to follow through on this issue.

"The university's disciplinary action regarding the MSU establishes an important and appropriate precedent and sends a powerful message to other universities across the nation."

Elcott said the federation along with other campus and local Jewish organizations have worked with the university to resolve this issue.

Jeff Margolis, co-chairman of the federation's Rose Council, said the university's actions show that it has "taken seriously the on-campus actions of the Muslim Student Union and its serial disregard for university policies and civil discourse."

Contact the writer: 714-796-7956 or epak@ocregister.com

Muslim Student Union banned on UCI campus

6/14/2010
By Leanne Suter

IRVINE, Calif. (KABC) -- Religious rivalry has turned into a free-speech issue at University of California-Irvine. The school has been investigating the Muslim Student Union after a protest at a speech by the Israeli ambassador earlier this year. Monday, the school announced its findings.

Both sides call the university's decision to ban the Muslim Student Union unprecedented, but for very different reasons.

Video of the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren's February speech at the University of California-Irvine posted on YouTube shows hecklers in action. Eleven students, all of them members of the Muslim Student Union of UCI, were arrested after repeated warnings to stop disrupting the speech.

After a month-long investigation by the university, the MSU has been banned from campus for a year and placed on disciplinary probation for another year.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations calls the controversial and unprecedented action "heavy-handed."

"What they would be doing is sending a very wrong message that will stifle free speech, not only at UCI but probably on campuses around the country," said Hussam Ayloush, Southern California executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

MSU is appealing the decision. UCI will not comment on the ban or the appeal, saying it is a private and privileged process.

The Jewish Federation Orange County says the university took the right course of action.

"This wasn't a free-speech issue for them. This was a free speech for the Israeli ambassador who couldn't talk because of the coordinated attack," said Shalom Elcott, president of the Jewish Federation Orange County...

On the Irvine 11 - Ayloush and Lafferty: Rude, unpopular speech worth defending

By HUSSAM AYLOUSH and JAMES LAFFERTY

2/23/2010
The Orange County Register
Opinion

Eleven students heckled Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren at different intervals at a UC Irvine event recently and set off a debate on what constitutes free speech and when it should be protected.

The right to freely express oneself, particularly against government policies, is a cherished freedom protected by our Constitution. That's why we were not surprised when people protested at health care town halls, when a congressman interrupted the president's address to Congress, or when audience members disrupted a speech by former White House lawyer John Yoo at UCI in 2005.

While some may argue that the students' tactics against Oren were loud and rude, our opinions on the politeness of such conduct are irrelevant. The students merely voiced their passionate discontent on a grave political and moral matter they deemed worthy of their activism.

Israel has undertaken a massive public-relations campaign to salvage its negative image over its violations of international humanitarian and human-rights law, and Oren – as the Israeli government's representative – must have anticipated vocal audience opposition, the same way supporters of Apartheid-era South African government speaking at U.S. campuses did in the 1980s.

Though their protest was delivered in a loud and shocking manner intended to express the gravity of Israel's immoral policies and actions, the students were nonviolent, nonthreatening and peacefully left the public gathering as soon as they spoke.

Some try to characterize this incident as a case of Oren's right to free speech. News reports and videos of the event clearly show that his talk was not wholly disrupted. The interrupting remarks amounted to no more than 10 seconds by each student, barely two minutes total, versus Oren's allotted time of about an hour. Oren left the stage for some time, but then returned and, despite shout-outs from supporters and opponents, was able to continue his speech.

Public speakers, including ourselves, know that speaking on highly charged topics invites opposing viewpoints. Our own public appearances over the past 15-plus years have been interrupted by jeers, heckling and protests. And, although we don't enjoy being subjected to that, we know that the freedom exercised by some who rudely interrupt us is the same that protects our right to publicly and freely speak our minds on important political matters.

We are troubled to see that, for exercising their right to free speech, the 11 students at UCI were cited by campus police and faced the threat of disciplinary action, including possible expulsion, not only by the university, but also potential criminal charges by the Orange County District Attorney's Office.

It is incomprehensible that an institution of higher learning that claims to engage in and promote the free exchange of ideas now seeks to punish its students for peacefully expressing political views, however unpopular, at a student-organized event.

Over the years, there have been countless instances of protest activities during campus speeches, including at UCI, with no comparable disciplinary action taken that we know of. By disproportionately and selectively punishing one set of protesters and not others, including the counterprotesters at the same event, who cursed, threatened and even assaulted students, the university has chosen to censure a particular set of political views – the legitimate criticism of Israel.

Freedom of speech is a two-way street, and it must not be restricted to what is popular, respectful, or appropriate speech, though such guidelines might be preferred by us and others. Oren has the right to speak, even if it is to justify Israel's occupation and brutal policies. Similarly, the students have the right to dissent, even discourteously.

Both sides exercised that right.

We urge the university to drop all charges and disciplinary actions against the 11 students and redouble efforts to reach out to all students, including Muslim and Jewish students. Not doing so will cause a chilling effect on First Amendment rights on college campuses and our society at large, and leave many students feeling excluded and unwelcome.

Islamic group defends student protest (Daily Pilot)

District attorney should drop charges against 11 students because the incident took place on campus, says CAIR.

By Tom Ragan
The Daily PilotTuesday, February 16, 2010

A pro-Islamic group is urging UC Irvine to drop disciplinary actions against a group of students who were arrested after protesting the Israeli ambassador’s presence on campus by intermittently interrupting him during a speech last week.

In all, 11 students, many of whom yelled and screamed in protest, were detained and cited by campus police for causing a ruckus during Ambassador Michael Oren’s speech. Their tones at times reached fever pitch, according to scenes from the event that were captured in a video posted on YouTube.

Oren was trying to speak about diplomatic relations between Israel and the United States, but was interrupted so often that he had a hard time delivering his message, UCI officials said.

The matter has been forwarded to the Orange County district attorney for possible criminal prosecution, but a decision won’t be made until later this week because the office has not yet received the complaint, said Susan Schroeder, spokeswoman for the D.A.’s office.

But the D.A.’s office should drop the charges because the incident occurred on campus, said the Anaheim office of a pro-Islamic group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

“We feel this is a campus event. It was noncriminal, nonviolent and nonthreatening,” said Hussam Ayloush, executive director of CAIR’s Greater Los Angeles Area office. “Off-campus police should not be involved in such matters. The D.A.’s office shouldn’t be involved in such matters. It was just a bunch of students who spoke out at a student event.”

If the campus decides to pursue disciplinary action, then it would only be perceived as “selective enforcement,” Ayloush said, adding that the campus probably does not want to be viewed in such a light.

“We strongly see the protest as a matter of free speech, regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees,” he said. “Students complain all the time, they interrupt all the time, or they boo people all the time. This is nothing new. People have yelled to me, ‘Go home, you terrorist,’ and I take it. I don’t complain.”

UCI spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon said the process of disciplinary action has already begun and that the university will treat the case “just as it would with any student who faces university discipline.”

She said the students could face disciplinary consequences ranging from a simple warning to a suspension to all-out expulsion. She did not give a timeline on when a decision would be made.

This is not the first time that the Muslim Student Union or a pro-Palestinian group have stirred the pot at UCI as it pertains to Israel-Palestinian relations abroad.

The same can be said of pro-Israeli groups, including the Zionist Organization of America. Demonstrations by both factions have become quite common on campus.

At one point a few years ago, the pro-Palestinian groups during one of its demonstrations compared the plight of the Palestinians to the Holocaust, a view they announced on the back of T-shirts sold at the event.

Jewish students took offense to the comparison.

Eventually, the Zionist Organization of America complained to the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, calling the atmosphere at UCI campus “anti-Semitic.” It cast partial blame at the university for standing by and not doing anything about what it viewed as a “hostile environment.”

Ultimately, investigations stemming from complaints in 2004 and 2007 were conducted by the Office of Civil Rights, and after three years of “extensive investigation,” it was determined that there was no basis to back up ZOA’s claims, according to Lawhon...

On campus, is heckling free speech? Or just rude? (USA Today)

On campus, is heckling free speech? Or just rude?
By Scott Jaschik, Inside Higher Ed
USA Today, 2/17/2010

Every few minutes during a talk last week at the University of California at Irvine, the same thing happened. A student would get up, shout something critical of Israel, be applauded by some in the audience, and be led away by police.

The speaker —Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the United States— was repeatedly forced to stop his talk. He pleaded for the right to continue, and continued. University administrators lectured the students and asked them to let Oren speak. In the end, 11 students were arrested and they may also face charges of violating university rules. (See video of the event)

Those who interrupted Oren, not surprisingly, are strong critics of Israel who believe that they must draw attention to the Palestinian cause. But an argument put forward by some national Muslim leaders in the last week has sent the discussion in a new direction. Those groups maintain that interrupting a campus speech — even repeatedly — should be seen as a protected form of speech.

"The students voiced political views to shame the representative of a foreign government embroiled in controversy for its outrageous violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Delivering this message in a loud and shocking manner expressed the gravity of the charges leveled against Israeli policies, and falls within the purview of protected speech," said a letter released by the Council on American-Islamic Relations. That statement followed one by Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, which said: "These students had the courage and conscience to stand up against aggression, using peaceful means. We cannot allow our educational institutions to be used as a platform to threaten and discourage students who choose to practice their First Amendment right."

Those statements are quite different from the view of Irvine officials. Michael Drake, the chancellor, had this to say after the interruptions: "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."

All of this raises the question: Is interrupting a campus speaker ever a legitimate form of free expression?...

"That's definitely not free speech," Jarret S. Lovell, a professor of politics at California State University at Fullerton, said of the interruptions at Irvine and similar tactics elsewhere. Lovell is a scholar of protest and the author of Crimes of Dissent: Civil Disobedience, Criminal Justice, and the Politics of Conscience (New York University Press).

Not only does Lovell think the tactic is wrong in that it denies a hearing to whoever is being interrupted, but he thinks it fails to win over anyone. "When you only hear sound bites" from those interrupting, the students come off as intolerant, he said. "There are so many better ways to demonstrate."

...As one who identifies himself as critical of Israel's policies and sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, Lovell said that the Irvine hecklers should realize what will happen next. "It's only a matter of time until Norman Finkelstein speaks at UCI and Jewish groups shout him down," Lovell said of the controversial scholar viewed by many Jews as anti-Israel...

Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Los Angeles branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, defended his group's defense of the interruptions at Irvine. He said that it was unfair to say that the students who interrupted were trying to shut down the talk because they voluntarily left the room after each interruption, and let the talk start again (until the next outburst at least) and eventually let it finish. "Let's put it in perspective. The speaker had an hour to speak, and they each had less than a minute."

Ayloush noted that he is frequently interrupted when he gives lectures, and that it goes with the territory. "We firmly believe that both the representative of the foreign government had the full right to speak and the students being addressed have the right to express their speech, too," he said.

Asked why it might not be better to organize protests with a rally outside or leaflets or signs that don't interrupt a talk, Ayloush said such approaches might well be better, but that this was beside the point and that he wouldn't exclude the heckling strategy used at Irvine. "These are all tactics and different methods of expressing their free speech, and everyone might have their favorite," he said. "The First Amendment was never intended to be exclusively polite and courteous."

Yet another perspective holds that some, modest interruption (less than what took place at Irvine) may be seen as an expression of free speech that doesn't limit the right of a speaker to be heard.

Cary Nelson, national president of the American Association of University Professors, said he holds that view, although he said this was not a question on which AAUP has a policy. And he said that he believes that "most faculty members regard interruption as unacceptable."

Nelson said he is a fan of the speech/protest policy of the University of Michigan. That policy says: "Within the confines of a hall or physical facility, or in the vicinity of the place in which a member of the university community, invited speaker, or invited artist is addressing an assembled audience, protesters must not interfere unduly with communication between a speaker or artist and members of the audience. This prohibition against undue interference does not include suppression of the usual range of human reactions commonly displayed by an audience during heated discussions of controversial topics. Nor does this prohibition include various expressions of protest, including heckling and the display of signs (without sticks or poles), so long as such activities are consistent with the continuation of a speech or performance and the communication of its content to the audience."

Along these lines, Nelson said that some brief demonstration against a speaker doesn't strike him as an assault on free speech "so long as the speaker is allowed to continue." He added that "an interruption that signals extreme objection to a speaker's views is part of the acceptable intellectual life of a campus, but you have to let the speech go on," and he said that he did not believe that repeated interruptions were appropriate in that they would disrupt a talk. "Free speech doesn't mean you are able to trample a campus event."

While defending such a tactic as potentially consistent with ideals of free expression, Nelson added that he personally always favored other approaches. Nelson was at a speech by John Sexton, the president of New York University, after that institution ended recognition of its graduate student union and fought off a strike by supporters of the union. Nelson said he walked to the front of the auditorium, turned his back on Sexton and stood silently through the talk. While the speech was not about graduate unions, Nelson said he wanted to show "my rejection of everything he stood for." But he said he wouldn't have interrupted...

Is criticism of Zionism and Israel equivalent to anti-Semitism?

The new documentary "Defamation" (see post about it) triggered a question on my mind.

Is criticism of Zionism and Israel equivalent to anti-Semitism?

Until recently, the Israel Lobby  propaganda groups such as the ADL, AJC, the Wiesenthal Center, AIPAC, ZOA and others had our country (and most of the world) convinced that any legitimate criticism of Israeli actions or policies is a clear form of anti-Semitism that must be demonized and stopped. Similarly, they have equated any criticism of Zionism - the political ideology on which Israel justified its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the theft of their land - with anti-Semitism. The objective was to equate Israel and Zionism with the sanctity of Judaism and vice versa; therefore, rendering it disgraceful or at least controversial to debate Israeli policies or Zionism.

The intellectual (and sometimes physical, by groups such as JDL) terrorism exerted by Israel lobby groups and their well-funded attack dogs (Pipes, Emerson, Horowitz, “JDL-fan” Kaufman, Gaffney and others) contributed to a climate of fear and intimidation for many activists, academics, religious leaders, politicians and media professionals who have contemplated addressing what they clearly concluded to be repressive, racist, illegal, and dangerous behavior by a state that is considered to be closely allied and strongly supported – financially, politically and militarily – by our country. Many have come to the conclusion that the perception of our country as an accomplice in Israel’s war crimes and brutal occupation is creating a major public relations and political nightmare for us.

The hypocrisy this climate of fear allows is astounding. How can our government demand that Iran abandon its nuclear ambitions when Israel, as the only nuclear country in the Middle East, has a reported arsenal of 240 nuclear warheads?

How can we reasonably pressure Egypt, Syria and other Arab countries to respect the human rights of their citizens (and rightly so) when our closest “ally” every day violates the rights of the Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories?

How can the world believe our claims about promoting freedom and democracy when our spoiled “friend,” Israel, has been controlling the lives (and certainly the deaths) of Palestinians and denying them the right to have their own country on their own ancestors’ land?

How can we convince the Muslim world to isolate and reject extremism when we support, fund, and approve of the worst brand of religious and political extremism in the government of Israel?

Our country stands for some of the greatest values and most noble of hopes. It is not fair for us to be tainted by (and often hated because of) the behavior of the State of Israel.

The election of President Obama represents a fresh opportunity to push a new agenda that can genuinely bring a just and lasting peace to the people of that region, promote human rights and democracy, and rebuild America’s credibility and stature among all people of the world.

For this to happen, it must become acceptable for us in America to discuss, analyze and criticize the policies and actions of Israel as is commonly done in Israel by Israelis themselves.

It is not acceptable for the Israel lobby propaganda machine to label President Jimmy Carter, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Professor Norman Finkelstein (who is Jewish himself) and many others as anti-Semites in order to silence their criticisms. An open debate on all legitimate political issues, including Israel, is the first step toward building support among all peace-seeking people for policies and attitudes that advance justice, peace, and mutual understanding among all people.

At the same time, we must all be vigilant to challenge and reject anyone who espouses racism, anti-Semitism or Islamophobia and tries to claim those twisted views in the name of legitimate political discourse. I truly believe that we are intelligent enough to be able to sort out the difference between people.

Therefore, the answer to the question, “Is criticism of Zionism and Israel equivalent to anti-Semitism?” is a clear “No.”

Here are a few previous blog posts that I published in relation to this topic:

Message to Muslims and Jews: Political Debate, Yes. Bigotry, No

Dissenting at your own risk

Ayloush comments on ADL's smear tactics

Denying the Holocaust is immoral and un-Islamic

Rosa Brooks: Criticize Israel? You're an Anti-Semite!