Yesterday, the Anteaters for Israel, a Jewish student group at UC-Irvine had its website hacked into. In opening the site, Arabic music blares out. At this point, perpetrators have not been identified.
The incident is ironic since Anteaters for Israel is presently a fairly liberal group that has not been confrontational vis-a-vis the Muslim Student Union.
Also yesterday, a member of the Jewish/Israel advocacy group, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), sent an e-mail to Vice Chancellor, Manuel Gomez, who replied;
"......I find this act reprehensible. Upon investigation it turns out that both the AFI and the Hacker's website are off campus. Since it does not involve a UCI server, we have no jurisdiction, and there is little we can do. I have informed our police department, and our Dean of Students also alerted AFI...."
This is the standard response from UCI officials ("there is little we can do").
When a female Jewish student (Reut Cohen) had her own camera shoved in her face by an MSU member during an MSU event at UCI....."there was little they could do."
When (last May), a female Jewish student was followed back to her car at night by MSU male students (on the UCI) campus after filming a Malik Ali speech, surrounded and harassed in front of at least one witness and campus police....."there was little they could do."
Whem last May after a day-time speech by Malik Ali on the UCI campus, a black Christian preacher was manhandled by MSU students in front of dozens of witnesses, deans and campus police......"there was little that we could do."
When last May during the MSU week-long event, Mohammed Al-Asi was spouting his usual venom, a group of high school students touring the campus was standing directly behind him waiting to get on a bus, they had to be exposed to this hate speech. There were deans and campus police present, but......."there was little we could do."
When, during that same week, MSU erected a mock wall depicting the wall Israel had erected to keep out suicide bombers, there was a drawing of Ariel Sharon with hooked nose, big lips and a sneering look on his face-in the old Nazi style of Der Stuermer. That depiction stayed there on campus all week long, but...."there was little we could do."
So little, indeed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Gary, this is legitimately out of their jurisdiction. Unless the website were hosted on a UCI server, they have no authority or jurisdiction to do anything about it other than condemn it, which they have.
I also want to say that I was present when that Christian preacher started spouting his vile, hate-filled speech. He was not "man-handled" so far as I could tell. Were you there? Because I was.
Actually, I had just left for class, but I have gotten this account from others that were including one person who interceded in the incident. I would be happy to hear your account.
Do you also think uci has no jurisdiction over the other incidents I mentioned (two of which, I have personal knowledge of because I was there)?
Honestly I think it's a complicated, touchy situation. That's why I didn't really comment on it.
But like I said, what do you expect UCI to do about the hacked website that they haven't already done? That would be like asking them to do something about a student getting robbed while they were off campus. Yes the victim(s) might be associated with UCI in some way, but that doesn't mean that the university has authority and jurisdiction over everything that happens in that person's life. The same applies here. Neither site is hosted on a UCI server. This is the online equivalent of something happening off campus.
Bryan,
I was just going to send you a question about that (and not a rhetorical one). If USC (as they did) could recently order the MSU website to take down a hadith referring to the killing of Jews, is there a difference from the UCI incident?
Is it because the MSU site at USC was on a USC server and the AFI site at UCI is not?
Also, if a university student commits a crime off-campus, does the university have a right to expell that student? And if so, must they wait for a criminal conviction?
What do you think?
I was just going to send you a question about that (and not a rhetorical one). If USC (as they did) could recently order the MSU website to take down a hadith referring to the killing of Jews, is there a difference from the UCI incident?
Is it because the MSU site at USC was on a USC server and the AFI site at UCI is not?
Yes, precisely. USC was 100% within their jurisdiction. UCI has no jurisdiction in this case.
Also, if a university student commits a crime off-campus, does the university have a right to expell that student? And if so, must they wait for a criminal conviction?
What do you think?
I believe UCI does reserve that right and if they choose to exercise it I don't think they have to wait for a conviction. I think this has to do with the university code of conduct.
So in this case, if it turns out that a student or group of students is behind the hacking, they could still possibly be punished by UCI, even though it occurred "off campus" as we have established.
Read section 100.00 in this link for UCI's student code of conduct and discipline procedures.
Bryan,
I thank you for doing the research. I have browsed the document, and it appears to me that if a student commits a crime off-campus-especially against another student, the school may take some action. They listed a number of offenses, but with the proviso-"not limited to".
So, it seems to me that UCI may not have jurisdiction to investigate, they might take some action if a student is found to be responsible.
By the way, remember the Duke case?
Post a Comment