In a word, today was ugly. I arrived shortly before 12 noon, and what I observed were the Israeli reservists whom I described yesterday standing in front of the mock "apartheid wall'' handing out their own literature to counter that of the aforementioned groups. A lady from the administration was soon telling them to move back a few more paces from the apartheid wall as a Jewish professor asked why (first video below). In my mind, they were well removed from the wall as it was. Later, as I started to videotape a subsequent encounter, the lady said she didn't want to be recorded and walked away (third video below).
I also want to say a word here about the National Lawyers Guild. You remember those charming folks. The NLG was founded in the 1930s as a legal arm of the Communist Party USA. During a disruption of an Israeli event on May 18, 2016, they had legal observers present who were assisting the pro-Palestinian disruptors. They were -and are- attached to the UCI Law School. This week, some of them were seen walking around the area with green caps with "National Lawyers Guild- legal observer" written on them. Today, there was a young lady with one of those caps so I approached her and introduced myself. I asked her what the NLG was doing there, and she told me they had been requested to act as neutral observers. She identified herself as a law student and confirmed the relationship between NLG and the UCI Law School. I asked her if (Law School Dean) Erwin Chemerinsky knew she was there or had authorized her to be there. She said she did not know about that. I asked her if she had been one of the legal observers from last May 18, and she replied in the negative. I asked her if she was sure she wasn't on the side of the Palestinians, to which she insisted she was neutral. I asked her who had requested their presence, and she said she couldn't get into attorney-client privilege! I asked if her if she was aware of the fact that the NLF was founded as a legal arm of the CPUSA, and she disagreed with that assertion (second video-The audio is very poor and I am working on enhancing it.)
About 15 minutes after I spoke to her, this neutral observer was hugging one of the pro-Palestinian protesters. Apparently, the lady has not yet had Dean Chemerinksy's class on conflict of interest yet, but what the hell.
Before I left at 1:20, there was a lot of good debate going on between one young man whom I didn't know who was supporting Israel and some of the pro-Palestinian folks. Reportedly, the man had gone over to the pro-Palestinians to ask a question and was told, "Go away, white man." I cannot vouch for the veracity of that claim, and I did not videotape the subsequent exchanges.
Tonight, there is a film about Gaza being shown. I'll take a pass. I would prefer to watch a good film noir instead.
Speaking of film noir, here are today's videos.
9 comments:
1. I thought official UCI policy banned the use of voice amplification devices. Why were they allowed to sue it here?
2. Assuming one is not blocking traffic or creating a disturbance, how can an official tell someone to walk away from the wall. It seems the decision as to how close one stay to the wall is biased, i.e. if you are pro-Palestinian you can stay closer than if you are not. There needs to be an advance plan in place for next year to create a crisis for the system. For example, several pro-Israel should plan to meet at the wall, be polite, not disrupt, but refuse move away when asked. This needs to be filmed and a lawyer for the pro-Israel folks should be present.
The Palestinian narrative, the Apartheid wall, pro-Palestian marches and demonstrations are the same each year. The hatred of Jews, Christians and all other faiths is clear. Wiping out Israel still remains the main theme with MSA/SJP deceptive rhetoric, yelling, and boring hate slogans. What is new? Nothing new here, just like the Koran, Hadith and Sunna. I expect this to be repeated every year at UCI and the rest of the CA UNIVERSITIES. There will be no effort to restrict this hate by the UC Administration because they do not have the skills and/or backing of the CA lawmakers and hired minors like Napolitano.
But, history cannot be changed as well, even though the Islamists would like to change it. Israel was on the map thousands of years prior to the birth of Mohammad. Israelites lived in Israel thousands of years prior to the Muslim take-over of Jerusalem. Israel's Jews are not the occupiers of Israel, they are the rightful inhabitants and the Palestinians are the guests. So do be fooled be Hate week Islamist extravaganza
Squid
The pro-Palestinian folks do not do themselves any favors when they fail to be critical of Hamas.
I'm there with people who say Israel should try hard to reach an agreement and I am not a fan of Israel's current government. But it is also wrong to ignore a huge problem that Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist. They are a bunch of nutjobs and anyone who has looked at this conflict knows Hamas needs to be called out.
Did any of the speakers say anything about Hamas and other groups like them? Or was there standard talk about a right to resist?
Hamas official:
Zahar denied that Hamas was trying to align itself with Fatah's position.
"When people say that Hamas has accepted the 1967 borders, like others, it is an offense to us," he said.
"We have reaffirmed the unchanging constant principles that we do not recognize Israel; we do not recognize the land occupied in 1948 as belonging to Israel and we do not recognize that the people who came here (Jews) own this land.
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-leading-hamas-official-says-no-softened-stance-toward-israel-2017-5
Hamas is never mentioned at these events. They are a terrorist organization that wants only to wipe Israel off the face of the map and kill every last Jew. The MSU and SJP routinely deny they are anti-semitic, but they have a long list of anti-semitic speakers who have come to UCI and screamed for death to Israel and Israelis. Check out Amir Abdel Malik Ali who used to be a regular at these events. He is a blatant anti-semite, and I called him such the last time he came to UCI.
When the speaker hidden by the placards claims that "this colonizer" in the red shirt charged the protesters and pushed a fellow the evening before, what is she referring to?
Go to the 1:29 mark of the below video of the disruption of Wed night. You will see an Israeli girl get face to face with a black guy with glasses on the left side of the screen. They had to be separated and at one point the moderator is blocking the view. Was there contact? Who knows?
https://www.therebel.media/uc_irvine_leftists_pro_palestinians_disrupt_pro_israel_panel
That's what I thought was being referred to, but there's no sense that she "charged" the group. Moved forward, perhaps, or got up from her seat. (She's off camera at that point, but if she "charged," she'd have made it into your frame.) From the video, it does look like she shoves the fellow, but only after he came right up to her face and moves from side to side with her, preventing her from making eye contact with the girl in the kefiyyeh who had her say. Can you imagine if someone on the Israeli side had approached Kefiyyeh Girl the same way when she went into her diatribe?
Btw, before the confrontation, at 1:27, it looks to me like the girl in the black t-shirt gives the fellow in the navy and white top a nudge with her shoulder while immediately launching into "colonizer" name calling.
As far as the confrontation in question, from what I saw in person or on the video, I am not prepared to charge anybody with anything. At any rate, if you are a male you don't get into a physical incident with a female. That guy was the first one who opened his yap interrupting the speaker.
The event was very peaceful and orderly until those mopes entered the room with the clear intention of disrupting the event. A university official was present and saw everything. I expect him to fully brief his superiors on what occurred. As for that unknown university spokesperson who made the statement quoted in the Jerusalem Post, it is ridiculous.
Two rights make a wrong.
Post a Comment