New University: MSU Shows True Colors; MSU Protest of Pipes Hypocritical

My op-ed was edited due to word count issues, but I still hope this gets the point across. I think my op-ed and the letter-to-the-editor pretty much sum up how Jewish and pro-Israel students feel about the MSU's assertion that student groups like Hillel, AEPi and the Anteaters for Israel are racist for inviting Daniel Pipes.

MSU Shows True Colors

By Reut R. Cohen

On Jan. 31, Professor Daniel Pipes, a Middle East scholar and counter-terrorism analyst, spoke at UC Irvine at an event titled “The Threat to Israel’s Existence: Why It’s Back, What It Means.” The program was co-sponsored by Anteaters for Israel, Hillel and Alpha Epsilon Pi.

In an Opinion piece in the Feb. 5 issue of the New University (“Racist Speaker Welcomed by Hillel”), Marya Bangee gives a distorted recap of the lecture, concluding that Daniel Pipes is a racist and suggesting that Orange County Hillel had no business inviting Pipes.

I would like to set the record straight. Bangee attributes a quote to Pipes, asserting that he said “the Palestinians must be crushed.” This is a gross misquotation and taken largely out of context. Perhaps if the Muslim Student Union and their supporters would have remained in the hall, they could have engaged in diplomacy, posing questions instead of trying to destroy the event.

Pipes said “the will of the Palestinians must be crushed” in order to curb terrorism. He called for Israel to push deterrence policies with Palestinians instead of initiating fruitless compromises with those who condone terror against Israeli civilians. Negotiations are fruitless, according to Pipes, because Palestinians are more focused on eliminating Israel than building their own society and economy.

During his lecture, Pipes asserted that he wishes peace could be attained but that the reality of the situation is that without Palestinians recognizing Israel, the situation is hopeless. Pipes acknowledged his pro-Israel position and discussed Islamofacism. However, he did not attack Islam.

Bangee, however, failed to express the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiment articulated by the MSU outside.

“We got the message across,” one member said. “What we did by walking out of there, it really accomplished something very, very, very powerful. … [It] deflates the morale of everyone in that room. So right now they’re all pretty depressed in there,” the member continued, prompting laughter from the crowd. “They have no future. And it’s just a matter of time before the state of Israel will be wiped off the face of the earth.”

When a group of students declare that Israel will be “wiped off the earth,” the UCI community should not sympathize with them. This statement is very threatening because of the current political situation with Iran.

If Palestinians would drop their arms and seek peace, they would be pleasantly rewarded by the willingness of the Israeli people to come up with a solution. However, the situation is currently impossible. Israeli towns are bombarded with qassam rockets. Suicide bombers are coming in through Jordan and Egypt. No country in their right mind would sit down and talk to people who want to destroy them.

Moreover, Bangee needs to take a good look at the MSU before condemning Hillel for inviting Pipes. The Muslim Student Union will be hosting another “Israel Awareness Week” this May. In the past, featured speakers have included Yisroel Dovid Weiss of the Neturei Karta, Amir Abdel Malik Ali and Norman Finkelstein.

The MSU has hosted more racist speakers than any other club on campus. While I respect their right to free speech, the MSU must realize that the UCI community is entitled to draw conclusions based on their repugnant behavior.

The MSU has expressed that it is completely fine to criticize Israel. I would like to point out that there is a difference between criticism and calling for the annihilation of Israel. Moreover, it is difficult to deny that anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiments are highly related.

There has always been a Jewish presence in Israel and there have always been attacks against Jews in Israel, even before it was Israel. Jews simply want a little land to call their home. Arabs have over 20 countries to themselves and yet Israelis are still willing to sit down and talk about “peace,” peace that – as sad as it is to say – will probably never be attained because of the extreme hatred that many have for the Jews.

There is also a broader issue at stake. Obviously, there is a reason that UCI is under investigation by the U.S. Department of Education for anti-Semitism. The administration, however, may only take notice when something tragic happens. It is only a matter of time before someone here takes what the MSU preaches to heart.

Reut R. Cohen is a third-year English major. She can be reached at rrcohen@uci.edu.

-----------------------------------

Letters to the Editor

By Readers

MSU Protest of Pipes Hypocritical

I found myself completely cracking up reading the New University last week. The Muslim Student Union member in charge of public relations, Marya Bangee, wrote what appeared to be a scathing article (“Racist Speaker Welcomed by Hillel,” Feb. 5) condemning both Hillel, a campus club, and Daniel Pipes, a speaker whom Hillel brought to speak on campus. The obvious question now is why would I be laughing when a club that I proudly belong to, and the speaker we brought, were being attacked? The answer is because of the historical nature of the claims that Bangee has made.

She called Daniel Pipes, an intellectual speaker who was speaking to a lecture hall with 300 students and community members about the threats to the existence of the state of Israel, a racist, and said that the decision made by Hillel to bring him to campus makes our organization racist, while using quotes taken out of context (some of which weren’t even properly quoted) to do so. I find it laughingly hypocritical for her, in her official MSU PR position to be making this claim, when just eight short months ago, it was the MSU who was getting international condemnation for their racist week of hatred, “Holocaust in the Holy Land.”

When the MSU brings a speaker, Hillel students raise their objections during the Q-and-A session (if MSU allows one) after the speaker finishes. However, members of the “polarized audience” that Bangee refers to, wearing shirts emblazoned with “UC Intifada,” struck a new low at Pipes’ lecture. Rather than behaving as one commonly does at an academic lecture, they stood up and yelled and screamed and did whatever they could to disrupt Pipes’ speech. I’m no psychologist, but this sort of acting out may be evidence of some students’ need for attention and love.

I think that the right to freedom of speech is important, and I have shown my support for the university’s free-speech policies. However, my support of protesting is limited to when it is done civilly, and within the confines of common sense and decency. Generally, if someone is going to protest a speaker, they stand in the designated protest zone and do it; once inside the room, you are expected to act with a common civility that has become the social norm of collegiate life.

If one has a disagreement with the speaker, there are many ways to go about expressing this displeasure—for example, asking a question during the allotted time or quietly leaving the lecture to join the protestors who are outside. Throwing a tantrum inside a lecture hall while an academic is speaking is not an acceptable form of protest, although it is becoming increasingly popular at UCI (it happened to Yossi Olmert last spring).

Maybe Bangee has forgotten the racist anti-Semitic speeches delivered by MSU-sponsored speakers, but chances are she will tell you that they are not racist, and they are merely speakers using their First Amendment rights. In my opinion, it is now time for the administration to use their First Amendment rights. Maybe instead of sitting idly by and just ushering the student protestors out of the room, they can make a public statement regarding civility and respect, and how when one is protesting, they must do it with these principles in mind. This is an academic environment, but these sorts of childish actions do not allow for a free and fair exchange of ideas. How can we, as students, expect to hear speakers, especially those who may be controversial, if this is how they are treated? By allowing this sort of protest to continue without punishment, the university is going to start to lose out on speakers coming to Irvine, which will only hurt us, the students.

Alex Chazen

third-year political science major