The above picture of the "infamous" Apartheid Wall is truly representative of the week of events fostered upon the UC Irvine campus this week by the Muslim Student Union, with added sponsorship by Students for Justice in Palestine, the Black Student Union, and MECHA. The newly refurbished wall wound up needing more refurbishing after rain washed out the noon event at the flagpoles and forced the event indoors. In addition, Monday and Thursday's noon slots couldn't be filled with outside speakers. Not even Amir Abdel Malik Ali was available this year.
As it was, the events couldn't draw flies aside from the MSU kids themselves, most of whom appeared bored from listening to the same old lines they have been hearing for years from boring speakers that nobody ever heard of. It was clearly the scrubs filling in this year. Most of the events drew about 35 people- at the most 50-60. The biggest drawing event was on Wednesday night when their enemy Daniel Pipes appeared with a panel in a separate hall. As I noted in my early reports, the MSU spent the first couple of days trying to keep me from videotaping. Finally, it took the Dean of Students to advise them that we have something in this country called the First Amendment. They seem to think it only applies to them-certainly not to Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren or Gary Fouse.
What we heard this week was the same old drivel from a bunch of angry misfits who continue to preach victimhood to their bored and exhausted listeners. I say exhausted because hate week is certainly labor intensive for the MSU. Every morning, they have to pick up that "wall" from some storage place, truck it to UCI, assemble it, then sit through the events, take it down at 5 o'clock, then truck it back to the storage place before being on time for the 7:30 event, which apparently they never were because the two events I went to started late.
Of course, as always, the MSU insists on giving their recitation from the Koran and reading a preamble that insists they are not anti-Jewish and reject any form of bias or hate, be it ethnic or religious. Yet, I noted one interesting fact this year. Virtually every recitation from the Koran, when translated by the speaker into English, was focused on God's punishment for the disbelievers. How interesting. (I did not capture these on tape because, as a teacher at UCI, I do not feel it is appropriate for me to take pictures of students or film them.)
So that is pretty much what we heard. You know what we didn't hear?
Not a word about the flames burning throughout the Middle East, which Israel has nothing to do with.
Not a word about the violence, hate and persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt.
Not a word about the murder of our diplomats in Benghazi and the craziness on-going in Libya.
Not a word about Syria, the 70,000+ killed, and the flight of the Syrian Christians.
Not a word about the mad mullahs in Iran, their developing nuclear bomb, and persecution of gays and Baha'i.
Not a word about the on-going massacres of Christians in Nigeria at the hands of Islamic Boko Haram.
Not a word about the Sudanese genocide against black Christians and animists and the refugees in Darfur.
Not a word about the killings between Sunnis and Shia in Iraq nor of the anti-Christian persecution in that country.
Not a word about the Sunni persecution of Christians in Pakistan as well as the persecution of Ahmadi Muslims by the Sunni.
Not a word about the last remaining Jews trying to get out of Yemen.
Not a word about the forced migration of some 700,000 Jews from Arab nations in 1948-49.
Not a word about the vicious anti-Jewish rhetoric across the Middle East.
Not a word about the daily harassment of Jews across Europe by young Muslim male immigrants.
And, of course, not a word about that most recent of events-the Boston marathon massacre.
No, folks. The problem, you see, is Israel.
I would like to make another point, which I made during a previous year; If non-verbal communication means anything, I think the MSU is sending a wrong message to the rest of the student body. Aside from the angry rhetoric and some speakers with their anti-American rhetoric (a wave to my friend Sohail Daulatzai), what kind of message is the MSU trying to send with their militant-looking black and red t-shirts with the word "Struggle" emblazoned across, the red bandannas and armbands? Are they trying to intimidate people? If so, it is not working. All you have to do is watch the UCI students passing by on their way to lunch or class. With rare exceptions, they do not stop. They do not look. They just keep going. If non-verbal communication means anything (and I pay attention to non-verbal communication), they are either oblivious to it or annoyed.
Because that is what the MSU is on our campus-an annoyance. It is because of the MSU activities over the years (need I mention Michael Oren?) that UCI has suffered a black eye in the view of the nation when the other 99% of students have made it an otherwise great university. The only thing the MSU is accomplishing is lending credence to the notion that they are radical and threatening. After all, when you routinely bring in radical speakers, you do take ownership of them.
But that is what I told the MSU last May when Amir Abdel Malik Ali called UC President Mark Yudof a "Zionist Jew".
Final verdict? The MSU flopped this year.
22 comments:
All you have to do is watch the UCI students passing by on their way to lunch or class. With rare exceptions, they do not stop. They do not look. They just keep going. If non-verbal communication means anything (and I pay attention to non-verbal communication), they are either oblivious to it or annoyed.
This is the best way to deal with these bullies. By not giving them the attention they deserve, by ignoring their "speakers", their "wall", by discovering the truth for themselves, they send a very powerful message to the MSU.
As a graduating UCI student and one who has attended AZW the past six years, I really want to educate you on what exactly it means to put on this week. No you won't hear about 'flames in the middle east' or mistreatment of the coptic population in egypt (not to say that those things don't exist, because as you've noted in the comments section of your blog last year, msu was indeed behind many of the recent movements on campus in opposition to the assad regime, as well as his representatives on this campus, namely hazem chehabi), it's a week dedicated to the Palestinian Occupation (choosing my words carefully).
As a member of MSU and one who has been out on ring road daily throughout this week for years (even prior to being a student here), I can proudly say that this year I was able to communicate with more students throughout the day as well as see a drive in them to help the Palestinian people more and more by getting involved with the B.D.S. movement.
Truth is Mr. Fouse, you can attempt to assassinate our character (as well as the character of every speaker we've brought over the years), and choose to live within your world void of context and reality, but war crimes and human rights violations, in this case Israel's war crimes and human rights violations, weren't going to go unnoticed forever. If you feel one of the strongest militaries in the world needs to resort to numerous human rights violations and war crimes to defend itself from a tiny armed militia (that probably wouldn't even exist if there was no occupation to begin with), then that's something you need to take up with your own conscience.
Undoubtedly the most rewarding occurring of my UCI experience was watching Dr. Daulatzai verbally tear you apart in his response to your question. (Take that as you will, I don't feel the need to provide any further elaboration on it).
I don't expect to convince you of anything and don't really know how much you or I could make of me saying this; but if there's anything I wanted to say to you, it was this.
The days of 'truth will prevail' are over, because truth is now prevailing.
MSU student,
Thank you for your comment. It would always be more effective if you attach a name to it, but I can understand it when it involves a younger person with their life still ahead of them. I have the advantage of being retired with a secure pension. My part-time teaching gig at UCI is not so important to me that I would not speak out.
Yes, when it comes to Syria and Chelabi, the MSU and I were on the same side of the issue, though by now,it is hard for me to choose any side involved in the mass fighting.
You have your take on the success of the week, but as one who has been observing them since 2006, I think it was weak. I have outlined why, so let's not argue over that.
I don't feel I am trying to assassinate the character of any students, and I try to criticize the MSU as an organization. I don't post the names of students and I try not to film or photograph them-only the speakers though sometimes it is unavoidable to include student(s) in the picture. I have also often pointed out that I presume that many Muslim students join the MSU for good religious reasons and for mutual support. However, it is long documented that the MSA nationally is a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood.
As for the war crimes of the Israelis, I don't pretend to be an expert on the issue though I believe many have been created by the palestinians to feed to the foreign press. I have conceded that they have grievances. However, Israel has something its enemies do not. They have a system of justice that can correct and punish wrongdoing if carried out. The Palestinians lost any support I may have had back in the late 1960s when they resorted to the terror against innocent Israelis as well as Americans. I am old enough to remember the 1972 Munich massacre, the Achille Lauro, the skyjackings, and so on. I also recall Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9-11.
I believe that Israel has a right to exist and a right to defend itself against terrorism and the threat of attack by its Arab neighbors, none of whose countries are bastions of human rights. I also believe that in the final analysis, this issue is not as much about land as it is about religion.
As for whether you think Professor Daulatzai bested me in our exchange, it depends which side you are on. I accomplished what I wanted to do and my circle is complimenting me. But if you want to be objective, go back and examine the text of his article, "Respect the Architect". What he said about the death of Malcolm X is little more than revisionist history and conspiracy theory. It is true that he was under investigation by our government because he was inciting violence in response to discrimination as opposed to the peaceful approach of Martin Luther King.
As to my question to him, read his article about Malcolm, which I linked in my post about Thursday night. It is virulently anti-American. I love my country with all its warts and dark chapters, and yes, I will defend it when it is trashed in such a manner and so unfairly.
As to Daulatzai's claim that I wrote about what he said in his past appearance even though I was not present, Go back to that posting (also linked) That is a misstatement. I did not write about his words that night. I wrote about his background and specifically pointed out the aforementioned article, which I regarded as inaccurate and offensive. I stand by it and I stand by what I said Thursday night.
You're right, Gary
The MSU students live in an alternate universe. They see successes in failures. They mouth statements about not being anti-Semitic yet they obsess over the single Jewish country in the world while there are over 55 Muslim majority countries with many officially named "The Islamic country of Iran, and so on. They never ever mention the attacks, murders, kidnappings, rockets, that precipitate the Israeli retaliations. They just talk about Palestinians in jail, as though those meanie Jews imprison them for fun.
They get their Jew hatred through their mother's milk and it is re-enforced by their mentors, imams, and propagandists.
Here is a flash piece of news for you, Anonymous, there are no "occupied territories" or "settlements. " There are no Palestinian People or nation. There never was one with any government, king, language, or anything else. They are no different from those Arab's in surrounding countries.... same language, religion, and tribal culture.
Almost all of them who lived on the disputed land at the turn of the 20th century were tenant farmers for absentee landowners in Turkey. There was no demand for a "Palestinian State" when Jordan occupied the West Bank until 1967. Turkey lost all claims to sovereignty over the area when they were on the wrong side and lost WWI. Living there does not give you SOVEREIGNTY.
My dog lives in my house but he has no sovereignty over it. Arabs took over Jewish homes and property in 1948 as well in Jerusalem and other areas.
All people,except perhaps the Japanese or Chinese, live on land once occupied by some other people including England, France, Germany, Australia, and the US. Nobody questions their sovereignty. They have a commonality and can defend their country. Palestinians dont have a commonality and cant defend territory they claim.
All other people have accepted their refugee brethren in history EXCEPT for the Arab countries. They were and still are the ones who built and maintained the refugee camps for so many years. The Jews in Israel took in and assimilated the 700,000 Jewish refugees from Arab countries in 1948. You never mention that either.
Try doing something for yourself besides memorizing the Koran and obsessing about Israel and all your non-existent "oppression" (see the FBI statistics about actual incidents of anti-Islam incidents - it is a fraction of the anti-Semitic incidents. )
.
Hey other Anon,
The main problem with I have the MSU is not that they are critical of Israel. The problem is that they always invite speakers on campus who wish Israel as homeland for the Jewish people would disappear with the mistaken belief that would end the conflict and everyone would live in harmony.
The way many of MSU speakers frame the conflict is not one that will resolve the conflict. It is not a civil rights conflict like the US in the 1960s and a boycott and divestment is not going to solve the conflict. It is not like South Africa. Look, there has basically been a boycott of the Palestinians since the 1960s and that has not dampened their national project ambitions. You really think the BDS movement is going to make Israeli Jews give up their nation?
It is just delusional thinking and something that people talk about to make themselves feel like they are doing something good. The idea behind some of the MSU invited speakers is we cannot get Israel to end the occupation of 22% of the land but we will be able to get them to dissolve their state and we get 100% of the land. It is truly delusional. And it always rests on another false premise MSU speakers have that Israel is on the ropes and with a little bit more of a push and with time it will be destroyed. The truth is Israel is strong and getting stronger. They have a lot of companies in tech and medicine that are doing very well. There is still a ton of sympathy from Americans towards Israel in general.
Spreading a strident version of the Palestinian narrative is not going to convince most Americans that Zionism is the main problem and Israel must go.
The proper way to frame the conflict is that it is a conflict between two people with national ambitions. Miggie is wrong on this. Most younger people do recognize there are a Palestinian people. They do not, however, think the Palestinian have a right to all the land and the Israelis have no right to a state.
The Jews did not live as equals or in harmony in Muslim lands before Israel was created - another mistaken premise I have heard MSU members make. At times Muslims showed tolerance towards Jews but at other times Jews were persecuted and treated poorly in Muslim lands. Jews had not control over their own destiny or any sense of security in many Muslim areas. They finally gained their independence and the Jewish people again joined the world of nations with the creation of Israel. They gained their rights of self-determination, which is what Zionism is all about. The MSU have this mistaken belief that zionism is a bad word.
Many Zionists also wish the Palestinians will have their own homeland. The MSU seems to not understand this when they invite speakers like Malik Ali or Miko Pelad who advocate for the one state agenda. A one state solution is a fantasy that only the far right in Israel and the far left in Israel support.
If you look at the Palestinians, the PLO supports the two state solution. Hamas supports the one state solution. So you have the secular nationalists who support two states and the religious fanatics who are willing to throw political adversaries off rooftops that the MSU seem to want to align themselves with.
If the MSU worked with groups like the American Task Force on Palestine or other like groups that understand the two states for two people solution is the best chance for peace, I'd appreciate it and I think the MSU would get much more support. But it seems the MSU is more interested in being wantabe rebels who are in the forefront of the fight against the man than interested in building bridges to better understanding and building a strong center that the politicians would then have to pay attention.
Anonymous,
The Palestinians as exemplified by what I observe with the MSU-sponsored speakers, want it all. They cannot accept a Jewish state in any form or size in the region.
This is about religion.
Do they really wish a society like the ones they came from? Well, we don't.
Witnessing the anti-Israel week at UCSD for several consecutive years has made me a much stronger supporter of Zionism and the state of Israel.
That week drove home a very important point for me: that Jew-hatred is alive and well in many parts of the word today, including California. Much of the rhetoric of the MSA's anti-Israel week went well beyond "legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies" and into old-fashioned anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. UCI has seen even more of these hate-mongers such as Malik Ali, as Gary has done an excellent job of documenting.
The #1 tenet of Zionism is that many parts of the world are simply unsafe for Jews--witness, for example, that between 500,000 and 1,000,000 Jews were driven out of the so-called Arab countries and Iran in the mid-twentieth century. My own family was forced to flee from a Communist-controlled Eastern European country as well. And it has generally been those same Communist countries, Arab states, and other totalitarian dictatorships that have led the worldwide anti-Israel charge in the last six decades. The reason I bring this up is that almost nobody is willing to stand up against anti-Jewish discrimination (except for an a few righteous souls such as Gary), not even in the relatively low-stakes setting of protests on a college campus.
Jews need a place of refuge for when hateful dictators and their acolytes and easily-aroused rabble start coming after Jews. That's why I'm an ardent Zionist.
One of the posters who is identified as Anonymous says I am wrong about the way I frame the question. He gives the most irrational and irrelevant reason I know of: "Most younger people do recognize there are a Palestinian people."
Most young people can't tell you which war came first, WWII or the Korean War. Most can't tell you when the American Civil War happened, give or take 100 years.
They know absolutely nothing of the international agreements that were made over Israel or the history behind them. They are ignorant of the indicia of sovereignty, while it exists all around them, yet they fail to include Israel as having the same rights and privileges of other countries.
Most people, young people in particular, are oblivious to the fact that every country in the world has some fence or wall at some place along their borders. Yet only Israel is chastised for having one.
Most people, young people in particular, are oblivious to the fact that every country in the world attempts to control, as a matter of national right, who comes into their country. This is another example of accepting what is allowed to all other nations is denied to the single Jewish state in the world.
Dr. Daulatzai obsesses over the fact that Israeli security (prudently) denied him entry into the country and makes it a significant part of his presentation to UCI students. To him, it is an unparalleled Human Rights Violation that the Jews can decide who can come into their country! Let him try to bring a Bible into Saudi Arabia or see how much a hassle it is at their security stations if your passport has a stamp that indicates you passed through Israel. See what happens if you put up a Christmas tree in your window if you are in one of the freedom loving Muslim countries.
Selective application of the law is what they do at UCI and it should not be the same in the international forums.
The way younger people believe is not a justification for anything besides a new cell phone app. Certainly it is not a criteria for national policy, diplomatic stances, or the path to peace.
Gary, there is a talk today that you should try to make at 5 PM today at UC Irvine's Student Center, room Emerald Bay A, on Israel, the Palestinians and how we can move forward given by Hussein Ibish.
Ibish is a good dude. He is the type of guy the MSU should invite to speak. It should be a really good talk. He speaks from what I would call the center. He is not a left wing (Miko Pelad) or right wing (Steve Goldberg) nutjob. He is a rational and pragmatic guy and looks for a realistic solution to the Israel/Palestine Conflict.
I will be in class and I have heard enough of the Israel-palestinian stuff for awhile. I know who Ibish is and unless mistaken, he was originally with CAIR. That's all I need to know.
Max,
Thank you.
Gary,
I appreciate the updates and know you spent a lot of time last week covering this topic so I can understand you needing a break.
But just in case anyone else here is interested in the talk today....I doubt Ibish was with CAIR but I don't know for sure. He does speak out against discrimination against Arab Americans. I appreciate anyone who speaks out against discrimination.
He has also spoken out against MSA groups inviting guys like Malik Ali to speak for the Palestinians.
He is a pretty reasonable guy.
http://www.americantaskforce.org/in_media/mm/hussein_ibish/2009/04/18/1240027200
Hussein Ibish, senior fellow at the Washington-based American Task Force on Palestine, said activists like [Malik] Ali taint the entire
Palestinian movement, causing some to conflate opposition to Israeli treatment of the Palestinians with anti-Semitism.
"This individual has spread poisonous hatred and irrational anger. I think it's unfortunate a Muslim student association would give him a platform."
Miggie,
Yes, there are a lot young people who are not that well informed on many topics.
Most people do recognize there are a Palestinian people. It is pretty much only the far right who don't.
Starting around the 1920s the Palestinians started to gain a Palestinian identity and had national ambitions. Yes, there were some who didn't and you can drum up some quote but most did. The conflict arose when they wanted all of the land and wanted to deny Jews a homeland.
A central problem with many anti-Israel folks is that they deny Jews are a people. That frustrates pro-Israel people.
So it should be easy to understand why Palestinians would get upset that they are not recognized as a people.
The best solution for the conflict is that there are two states for two peoples.
Yes, security is a concern with a two state solution. Israel will have to negotiate to have some security measures included in the agreement.
The last number of Israeli Prime Ministers have recognized this as the best possible solution.
Max, well said. A personal testimony is always better than hearsay or some narrative.
Anonymous,
You say, "Starting around the 1920s the Palestinians started to gain a Palestinian identity and had national ambitions." What is your source for this statement? According to my readings, they went on murderous attacks during that period, not for identity purposes but only to kill Jews.
Insofar as Palestinians being a People, let me ask you what distinguishes them from Egyptians, Lebanese, Jordanians, Syrians, or Libyans, etc.? They have the same language, religion, and world view as all the other Arabs. If you transplant one or more to any other Arab country they would fit in fine... except when they try to take over the country as they did in Jordan.
Although the American revolution had a few different religions, they were united by certain IDEAS, which were put into our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. The fledgling US fought for its independence and was then able to defend its land against all others.
The Israelis are very different from the Palestinians and have a commonality that the Palestinians lack. They fought for and then defended the land granted them by the UN. The Palestinians have done none of these things and have none of the required attributes of a People.
The Palestinians fight between Hamas and the PA and kill each other. There are two Presidents and two Foreign Ministers, etc. Who is Israel supposed to negotiate with?
It is very easy for you to sit safely here and say they should go back it indefensible 1967 borders, and accept the Right of Return, etc.
It is not your life on the line and you have no right to opine on what the Israelis should do in their own self interest... because it feels good in your heart. You can't gain a sovereign nation by whining about it for decades.
Anonymous,
Personally, every time I hear anyone pushing a talk on "discrimination" or "oppression" I know the source and the agenda.
If you would check the facts, you would see that Islamophobia is a figment of the imagination.
Among other sites debunking this myth, see
http://www.care2.com/news/member/296771588/3514126
Miggie,
Lots of historians say the Palestinians saw themselves as a people deserving of their own state starting around the 1920s.
Here is a link to where Daniel Pipes says it.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/palarabs.html
Yes, the Palestinians have two govts for one people and that is a problem, especially when one of those govts are apeshit crazy.
They need to form a single govt for peace negations to really become meaningful.
Rational people know that Israel is not going to take in millions of refugees. Right of return is going to have to be symbolic only and the Palestinian refugees will have to return into Palestine.
Yes, the 1967 borders with swaps will be needed for peace. Olmert proposed 6.4% land swaps. Barak proposed giving up over 90% of the West Bank and Gaza. This is nothing new.
Israel will have to negotiate for security measures. This has all been proposed in the past by Israeli leaders.
Ibish mostly speaks out against discrimination against Arab Americans. He sometimes goes into discrimination against Muslims but they are two different things.
There was a recent story about a cab driver who was beaten up and it looked like he was singled out because he was Muslim. That is a problem to me. If the story I heard was accurate the guy should be charged for a hate crime and assault.
But when people like Bill Maher (who I don't find funny and don't know why people watch his show) are called islamophobic, I don't get it. He speaks out against all religions. And he isn't proposing Muslims or anyone else be persecuted. He is attacking ideas so I do agree that claims of Islamophobia are sometimes not what I would label Islamophobia.
Anyway, you missed a good discussion. Ibish talked about the need for a two state solution. Too bad you missed out on what a reasonable guy had to say. I don't subscribe to everything he said but more than most.
Findalis and I are on the same page today.
Miggie, when the Jews accepted the partition plan, what do you think they were agreeing to in 1947? They were agreeing to a plan that would have established an Arab state on the land.
Yes, once it was rejected by the Arabs all bets were off. But Jews accepted the partition plan that would have established a Palestinian state.
Really, what is your end game if you don't agree with the two state solution?
The demographics will make the area between the river and the sea majority Arab. Either Israel will become a Jewish state that is not democratic or have to accept the two state solution and not get all the land. I am in favor of Israel being democratic and a homeland for the Jewish people so believe the two state solution is the best solution.
Yes, Hamas are assholes and it isn't going to be easy to reach an agreement for the two state solution where Israel is secure. But that should be the goal to work towards.
Yes, the Jews accepted the partition plan and the Arabs did not. By choosing to go to war instead, the Arabs have to accept the consequences.
The Israeli government doesn't ask my opinion on what should be done and it is presumptuous to offer diplomatic advice from here. In spite of all, Israel is thriving now. Palestinians are split and they are really not anyone to negotiate with... they argue among themselves about what should be negotiated and are certainly not ready for statehood. The only thing that unites them is Jew hatred.
I just got back from there last week and am familiar with the demographics.
If it were up to me, I would have a THREE state solution... Egypt, Israel, and Jordan. They all have functioning governments and the "Palestinians" should be given a choice of which Arab nation to become a citizen. If it were all a matter of land swaps and territories, there could be peace in a day. It is the hate against Israel (and America) that permeates the Arab world that keeps them from accepting peace.
Post a Comment