Tuesday, May 20, 2008

OC Human Relations Committee doesn't care about violations at UCI

Gary Fouse, a faculty member at UCI, recently sent an e-mail to Rusy Kennedy of the Orange County Human Relations Commission (OCHRC). Gary Fouse, a faculty member at UCI, recently sent an e-mail to Rusy Kennedy of the Orange County Human Relations Commission (OCHRC). Gary expresses his concern about antisemitism at UCI during Muslim Student Union events and his disappointment at the failure of the UCI Administration to confront this filth. The response Gary received from Mr. Kennedy was quite disappointing.

Below is the original e-mail that was sent out to Mr. Rusty Kennedy:
Dear Mr Kennedy,

My name is Gary Fouse, and I am an adjunct teacher at UCI-Ext (ESL). I have been in that position since 1998 (subsequent to my retirement from the Drug Enforcement Administration. I am writing to you per the suggestion of Dr Brian Levin, CSUSB to give you my perspective as a teacher at UCI regarding the quarterly events hosted by the Muslim Student Union on our campus.

Recently, I have heard that various figures in the university administration have described critics of the MSU events and their speakers as "hysterical Jews", "troublemakers, "outside groups", etc.

I am neither a "hysterical Jew" (I am not even Jewish) nor am I an outsider. I have seen and heard what is happening for several years. I can tell you:

1 The claims of hate speech made by Jewish students are justified. When we listen to the words of Amir Abdel Malik Ali, Abdel Musa, and Mohammed Al-Asi, we hear them call for the destruction of Israel, glorify suicide bombers as heroes and martyrs, rail about "Zionist Jews", advocate the destruction of the Jewish state, defend Hizbollah and Hamas, condemn America, call Jews, "lowlife ghetto-dwellers" (Al-Asi) on and on and on.

This past week, the "Wall" erected by the MSU had a characterture of Ariel Sharon, drawn with a hooked nose and over sized lips, exactly in the style of Julius Streicher's, Der Stuermer, the virulent, anti-Jewish newspaper of the Nazi era. How was this allowed to appear on a university campus?

Also this week, during Al-Asi's speech in front of the flagpoles, while he was spouting his racist rhetoric, a group of about 20-30 small schoolchildren were gathered yards away by their bus listening to this man's vile words. Meanwhile, university deans (who are known to be antagonistic toward the Jewish students' concerns, were scurrying around like hall monitors, moving peaceful Jewish student protesters with their "hate Speech" warning posters here and there and keeping walkways open while ignoring the kids being exposed to this garbage.

2 The leadership of this university clearly has no concern for the concerns of Jewish students. They have dismissed numerous complaints and shown every indication that they are more sympathetic to the MSU and their inciteful speakers. This past week, David Horowitz, in his talk at UCI, described UCI as the worst university campus in the nation when it comes to MSU radicalism. There were two deans in the audience, one of
whom took copious notes on her laptop, yet none of them even attempted to defend the university in the question and answer session. When I told Mr Horowitz that 99% of the students at UCI were not involved in this ugliness, I told him that we had 2 problems: the MSU and an administration that is hiding under their desks, either out of fear, apathy or they just don't care about their Jewish students. They did not respond to me either.

They can't.

Why is it that hundreds turn out to hear and applaud the words of Hamas/Hizbollah, Iran supporter, Norman Finklestein including numerous deans and faculty, but only 20 come to hear Nonie Darwish, a courageous woman who has left Islam, condemned terror and defended the US and Israel? I was the only faculty member present (and I am only a part-timer). No deans (except one pacing outside the hallway who could not bring himself in to hear Ms Darwish's words) were present.

Sir, as a part-time teacher, who has no tenure nor long-term contract, I am fully aware that what I am doing and saying jeopardizes my continued employment at UCI. They don't even have to fire me-just tell me they have no available classes for me next quarter. I am willing to accept those consequences to stand up for what is right.

This is not about free speech. It is about inciteful speech. If this situation is not addressed, someday there will be a tragedy on the campus, and everyone will be wringing their hands wondering how it could happen at UCI. I won't be wondering.

I thank you for your attention, and you may feel free to share this letter with whomever you deem appropriate.

Sincerely,

Gary Fouse
Adjunct teacher
UCI-Ext-ESL
Here is Mr Kennedy's response:
Dear Mr. Fouse

Thank you for sharing your perspective on the issues pertaining to UCI and the state of Jewish/Muslim/Arab relations there.

The OC Human Relations Commission has been deeply involved at the request of the UCI administration, students, faculty and community groups for many years on campus seeking to build a safe, inclusive community where bigotry is frowned upon.

In our years of experience at UCI we have attended the events of all of the sides in this struggle to inform our perspective. We have engaged in conversations, dialogues, discussions and disagreements with all sides. We also carry this work out on other college campuses in Orange County where similar issues arise.

Additionally since our inception in 1971 we have provided comprehensive intergroup relations and tolerance teaching programs that reach over 40,000 students in OC schools annually. We founded in 1991 and have hosted regular meetings/trainings since then of the Hate Crime Network a broad based community/law enforcement network dedicated to building a community wide collaboration at responding to and preventing hate crimes and incidents. We conduct police and community trainings, forums, leadership development programs and dialogues to build understanding between diverse communities that make up Orange County.

Where I agree with you in some of your characterizations of hate mongers who have spoken in OC and at UCI, and regularly speak up to condemn this bigotry, I take strong exception to your comments about UCI and particularly your insulting, demeaning and inaccurate statements about the administration.

In our extensive experience with the UCI administration we have never heard any of them address the concerns that you outline, (and I think they all share) with anything but appropriate concern. And we have never heard them calling those community members who speak out on this, Jewish and others, anything derogatory. In fact, I have seen them time and again address even the most passing comments of hate, bigotry or fear as absolutely top priority, seeking to document, investigate and appropriately respond.

I do not know what you have done to address the bigotry that exists in our community, on campus and across our country, but I have seen the extraordinary steps taken by UCI administration, from the Chancellor, to the Vice-Chancellor, to the Dean of Students, on down through the ranks to condemn bigotry, respond decisively to hate crime, and to set a community standard that works to discourage hate.

I see that you go on with statements like, "the leadership of this university clearly has no concern for the concerns of Jewish students". Rather than respond to this unfair comment I will let the Jewish students speak for themselves as to the lack of veracity of your claim.

You report that you are risking your job to speak up for what is right, this is a noble act. I would hope that you would be more thoughtful about your accusations and hostility to well meaning efforts; more constructive in your engagement; more mindful of the impact of your diatribe; if indeed you seek to do what is right.

Sincerely

rusty

Rusty Kennedy, Executive Director
Orange County Human Relations Commission
1300 S. Grand, Bldg B
Santa Ana, CA 92705
714-567-7470
fax 714-567-7474
www.ochumanrelations.org

MISSION: Fostering mutual understanding among residents and eliminating
prejudice, intolerance and discrimination in order to make Orange County
a better place for ALL people to live, work and do business.
Gary also sent the following after he received Mr. Kennedy’s response:
Dear Mr Kennedy,

I am sorry that you took offense to my email. You probably think that I am some radical "bomb thrower". I am neither. I am retired from law enforcement (DEA). As such, I know a volatile situation when I see it, and I have seen it for several years at UCI. What I am is a concerned citizen simply reaching out to those who should be concerned about hate speech on a university campus.

I will not engage in further debate with you on the performance of the UCI Administration. I have expressed my opinion, and you have expressed yours. I will stand by what I said.

I should state that I was warned that writing to your office was a waste of time, and I won't take up any more of your valuable time. I would, however, like to attach a posting from this morning's Red County blog about an incident that reportedly happened at UCI last Thursday night. I have no personal knowledge and cannot vouch for it, but I will attach it for whatever inquiry you may deem appropriate. It makes reference to the response of the university, in this case, the campus police.


"UCI PD Allow Muslim Students to Attack Jewish Woman
Posted by: Jonathan Constantine | 05/18/2008 9:38 PM


The attacks from MSU members continued after Amir Abdel Malik-Ali's evening lecture. According to a member of the Orange County community who witnessed the event, a young Jewish female who was filming the event was followed back to her car and surrounded by 6 male members of the Muslim Student Union. When officers from the UCI Police Department arrived at the scene, they stood idly by and watched as the Muslim students began to assail the witness. When the witness (turned victim) called the police department for answers, they explained that the MSU members were just "getting back at the Jews:"

"On Thursday May15, 2008 I went to the UCI campus to hear a talk: Death to Apartheid, A Farewell to Zionism. Since much of my life was spent fighting the apartheid system in my native country of South Africa, I was interested to hear speakers who probably had not personally lived through that time. I noticed that there were many people filming the speaker's presentation. Afterwards, I walked
to my car in the university underground parking. I noticed a young woman standing backed up against her car. She was surrounded by at least 6 males who appeared to be of university age. There was an additional young man who appeared to be with the girl. She looked scared and I asked her if she was OK. She said she had called 911. I have 4 children aged 22-30, and was very concerned for her safety. I did notice she had a camera and that she was not engaged in talking with the 6 males that had surrounded her and her car. I thought they wanted her camera but she was not taking photos. She told me that they wanted to see the license plate on her car. Since they were not the police, I thought this to be very strange. I realized that they were trying to photograph her license plate.

I breathed a sigh of relief when the police arrived. I attempted to describe to them the scene that I had just witnessed. The policeman replied sarcastically:
"good ---- do you feel better now that you got that off your chest". I was shocked! My emotions had swung like a pendulum. From the initial fear at seeing the young woman being harassed, to relief at the sight of the police, and now back to fear, as I the realized that the arrival of the police would not provide the protection that I had anticipated. At this point it occurred to me that these were University of California, Irvine campus police. I know that police are usually interested in a witness statement, and what I saw was intimidation of two people in a parking lot who were outnumbered 3 to 1. To my amazement the police refused to take a witness statement from me.

By asking the girl if she was OK, I had somehow become involved in this altercation, and now my safety was in jeopardy. After the officer had expressed his disinterest in my account, I turned to enter my car to head home. The patrol car, though, was blocking my vehicle and preventing my exit. At this point another woman came walking by. I was too afraid to speak, but welcomed seeing another woman there. She said it was not safe to be there in the parking structure and that I should try to get out. I showed her that I could not, since my car was blocked. I asked if she was part of the university administration, as I did not think she was a student. She said that she just happened to be walking through the parking lot - I remembered thinking that it was strange that it was after 10 pm and this is not a parking lot you just walk through. I shrugged off my suspicions. The woman then told me that I could go to other "meetings" with her. She described the meetings as the same as the ones held on campus, but at different venues, such as hotels. At that minute the young boy who had been with the girl student ran over to me and asked for my phone number. Simultaneously, the police angrily shouted to him to get into his car.

After the woman left, I noticed that one of the "intimidators" was situated on the hood of my car in an attempt to photograph the VIN number under the windshield ( he lifted up the windshield wiper to get a better look at the number). He glared at me in a way I will describe as intimidating and menacing. Then he took photos of my car's license plate, and then snapped photos of me. All the while the police officers were present and did absolutely nothing! I asked for their card and told them that if anything were to happen to my person, family or property, that I will hold them and the university responsible.

Once I arrived home, I called the Irvine police and old them what had happened. I asked if it was reasonable for the police to not take a statement or to protect me, and that was definitely not the protocol. It was recommended that I speak to the watch commander. I was put through to them and a lady Lori said she would call him. I told her my concern was about what I saw in the parking garage. After awhile she said he was not available and she further informed me of the following: the 2 people in the parking lot were Jewish and they had been harassing the Muslim students on campus during the day, and the Muslim students were simply getting back at them. I had not asked her what the incident was about, but she volunteered that information. I told her that what I saw was two people outnumbered and surrounded in the parking structure, and I was concerned because the girl looked terrified. It was ludicrous to portray her as capable of harassing anyone. I told her that I did not feel safe and that I was phoning to report the lack of concern on the part of the police to take my eyewitness account. They did nothing to assure that I got safely out of the parking structure. I have reported this to the university and have been told that someone would contact me. My complaint to the campus police has so far gone unanswered, as well.

Even if the 2 Jewish students had in some way "wronged" the Muslim students earlier that day, was it appropriate for the Muslim students to take things into
their own hands? Is vigilantism now acceptable and legal on University of California campuses? The incident has left me struggling with many things. How do the police come to a conclusion regarding this event, while refusing to take a witness statement? If I was scared, how do students feel when confronted with menacing behavior? If we can not depend on police officers to protect us and to intervene in a tense situation, who can we depend on? What were they waiting for- property damage or physical injury? Is the university administration and their campus police in charge of maintaining law and order and a safe campus environment? Or do they allow gangs of students to assume control of the campus through intimidation?"

Thank you for your time and attention,

Gary Fouse

7 comments. Leave a comment:

Good for you, Gary. It's important to stand up to these people.

In regards to the incident we have reported that happened last Thursday night at UC-Irvine, I am listing the contact information for the Orange County Human Relations Commission for anyone who cares to write to their director (Rusty Kennedy) and inquire as to what they plan to do about this incident. (See post entitled: "...and all I got what this lousy....")

Rusty Kennedy
Executive Director
Orange County Human Relations Commission
1300 S Grand Blvd, building 8
Santa Ana, ca 92705
(714) 5677470
fax (714) 567-7474
www.ochumanrelations.org

posted by Gary Fouse @ 4:54 PM 0 Comments

while I agree with Mr. Fouse's observations, sentiment, and his willingness to take a stand, part of me feels that he has one foot in the gutter when he writes for appeals of help.

here's why:

1) ultimately, he attacks speech that is hateful but also considered political in nature. Most politicians (except for a few on the right) are inclined to protect the right to the First Amendment, even if it's protecting something totally stomach churning.

2) It doesn't give the administration -and those that would take the administration to task for non-action- a course of action that would acceptably counter the speech on campus. Most politicians (OCHRC included) probably look at appeals for action as appeals for barring the speakers or events on campus. The administration or the politicians aren't going to sign off on that for sure. So we need to inform them of what options are out there. I thought the SPME ad had great ideas. My big one has been that the administration can always come out with a statement that says "while we encourage thoughtful debate on campus, we condemn *speakers" remarks that "all Jews will be driven into the sea" as hate speech; there is no room for hate speech on campus... here is why this is considered hate speech etc etc, it violates the Code of Conduct, etc etc." Like mentioned earlier, the campus doesn't feel like they can do that because they don't see the difference between it and hate speech which leads me to the next point.

3) Community leaders who aren't Jewish don't know what Anti-Semitism looks or sounds like unless it is obvious. They need to be educated on how what the speakers are saying constitutes hate speech, and implored to speak out. Part of it needs to be done pro-actively, before this week appears on campus every year. Mr. Fouse starts to educate the OFHRC by talking about the Sharon caricature that is straight out of Nazi Germany. It also repeats the terrible (words cannot contain the emotion that I feel for this) blood libel, calling him a cannibal. Last year (I didn't look at the wall this year) other images were straight out of the Nazi propoganda playbook: blood libels, zoomorphism (Jews as a vampire-like snake with Jerusalem in its jaws, teeth barred). These can all be documented with examples from Nazi Germany and prior! But if the politician isn't Jewish, they aren't going to know that they are Anti-Semitic. We need to be louder on that. We are the owners of interpretation of what constitutes Nazi-like actions, not the MSU! It's litteraly my history, and others on campus. And notice, using community leaders in the past has worked for applying pressure for change (DeVore and the filming on campus).

4) There are too many subjects of focus going on in the letter. Focus on one. I would have picked the imagery because its soooo easy to prove its anti-Semitic with examples from the Nazis, and then used it as a springboard for later discussions on how the speech is anti-Semitic and here's how. We need a foot in the door. We don't have one and the imagery's a solid one. The parts about the school children or the Finkelstein-administrator interaction are detractors.

5) A lot of the criticism on the administration is opinion based and not fact based on Anti-Semitism. Mr. Fouse didn't always back up his reasons properly for why something was alarming when attacking the administration. Like his point on the administration failure to look after the needs of Jewish students. He talks about Nonie Darwish. I agree that the turnout for the two talks is a huge contrast, and that the paltry turnout for Darwish was sad. I also agree that the administration's response to Jewish students on campus leaves a lot to be desired, but there aren't any examples of anti-Semitism. The subsequent letter about the UCIPD's response to the parking lot confrontation is a good example. Why is it permissible for Jewish students to be intimidated when challenging hateful speech? This spot would have been also a good place to talk about Jewish students being moved forcibly when protesting the hate speech on campus. Those are valid complaints against the administration! But they need to be in the right section of the letter.

Mainly, politicians want clear cut issues and suggestions for acceptable and reasonable sloutions (barring MSU speakers isn't reasonable or acceptable). If we want action, they we are going to have to do part of the work for them.

Although this isn't included in the letter, and i'm not sure how helpful it would be, I've been toying with the idea that we need to ask people how would they feel about the MSU's campaign if the same language and imagery came from a KKK rally on campus, or from the Nazi's themselves. Or on a more touchy subject - what if they substituted the Minutemen/American Border Group *don't flame me - insert your own non-Arab white-supremacists group* for the MSU and Mexicans for the Jews. Would the administration tolerate that group saying that "All Mexicans need to be driven into the sea and drowned" on campus? Or imagery that shows them as parasitic (breeders) or roaches? Would the campus think that is acceptable imagery on campus? Probably not.

Grad student,

I respect your opinion, but I think you are too caught up in details and niceties. Here I would ask Reut to relate her experiences in dealing with the university when confronted with anti-Semitism on the part of the MSU.

As for me, I have taught at UCI for 10 years, and for the past several years, I have heard and seen what is happening. These are people who are supporting murdering terrorists, suicide bombers and the like. Many of their speakers hate the US as much as Israel. But I am avoiding your point about free speech. Of course it is free speech, and no one is advocating the arrest of these people for what they say. That is the true test of free speech. But is the university constrained to allow these hate-filled demogogues access to our campus? Where will it stop? I say let them find a park bench.

What I am trying to do is to bring public attention to what is going on at UCI. If the public is aware, then something can be done. It should not be allowed to go on behind closed doors.

You also raise a valid point (which supports my argument). Would the university allow a KKK person to come onto campus, spout racist rhetoric and glorify the lynching of blacks? Would the university allow someone to come onto campus and defend murdering Mexicans? Of course not. But if you can justify suicide bombings of innocent men, women and children, you can justify lynching. Why is it ok to have speakers on our campus to glorify suicide bombings and the murder of innocent men, women and children? Because all these politically-correct people are more concerned about certain groups and less concerned about others.

How else can one explain the (alleged) indifference of the campus police to this (alleged) incident last Thursday, if that is indeed the case?

Let me tell you why I care about this so passionately (aside from the fact that I love my country). I have spent over 3 years in Germany (in the Nuremberg area)I have seen the places where the Nazi party rallies were held. I have visited Auschwitz, Dachau, Buchenwald and Sachsenhausen. I am sort of an amateur scholar on the Third Reich and am author of one book about the history of one town in Germany that details what happened to their Jewish population. I don't say that to pump up my resume. I say it because I have learned what this kind of demogogery leads to. It was this kind of demogogery that was going on in Germany 11 years before Hitler came to power.

You also refer to the drawing of Sharon as I did. Are you telling me that no one on our campus recognizes it for what it is? Who do we need to educate here? Why was it allowed to remain? Free speech?

By the way, don't forget that part of your tuition fees are turned over to the MSU to pay for this stuff.

When one speaks out against this kind of hate, they don't have one foot in the gutter, as you call it. When people refuse to speak out, they have both feet in the gutter.

And as for this bureaucrat at OCHRC, if he doesn't do the job the county pays him to do, then I, as a citizen, will point it out. After all, he is accountable to the citizens of OC, is he not?

Sorry if this came across as a little emotional. Don't take it personally. But I think your comment about having one foot in the gutter was unwarranted.

i think my one foot in the gutter comment was a poor use of words, and therefore misunderstood. I'm still having trouble coming up with the right analogy, but basically, you aren't helping your cause, but not because of the subject, but because of the approach.

I know that still sounds harsh, but I speak from experience from the other end, something I forgot to mention in my OP. I've been in the shoes of the OCHRC, so to speak. Please re-read what I said with that in mind. I'm giving you tactics to approach a person like the old me.

Speaking of old me, in answer to your questions, yes, the university is constrained to let these people speak on campus, at least in the free speech area, just like they are constrained to letting the pain in the a$$ preachers that spew their own brand of hatred on campus. This is the newer part of being a college student from when our parents attended college. Or not; some of these kids parents may have attended Berkley during the Free Speech Movement. Unpopular speech isn't going anyway on campus anytime soon, and has been around for 40 years now. It was a part of my experience a decade ago.

What our job, and the university's job, is to teach the students how to decipher the truth from the noise. As far as the law is concerned, those free speech areas are the equivalent of a park bench. Of course, there are limits to what they can say (like, they cannot incite a riot), and that's where zeroing in on the completely antisemitic aspects come in.

What the university can do is make it incredibly tough for these speakers to have a forum on campus. The university isn't inviting them to speak. The university can a) create a hostile environment for the speakers if it wants, b) it can have alternative programing with alternative speakers, c) it can prop up a MSU-like organization and throw money and speakers at it that are more moderate or academically honest. Or in the very least, d) it can denounce the speakers when they are anti-semitic. Kinda like what the paper did to the Stand-with-Us ads (which also totally was unfair when they didn't do it to the MSU ads, but shows it can be done).

It's up to the community (students, faculty, Hillel, OC leaders) to hold the speakers to the fire when they say something dishonest, or misleading. But it shouldn't be our responsibility to police antisemitism too, and right now that's what we are doing, and ineffectively because of lack of support from UCI.

and yes, the KKK would be allowed to speak on campus. Unfortunately, the law is on their side to have a public forum at a public university in a free speech area. There isn't sufficient reason to deny them based on inciting a riot, but the university could make them pay for the extra security it takes to keep the peace !Ah, there's another way UCI could make it difficult for MSU to have speakers, make them pay for the added security to host them!

And, no, I can't explain the indifference that comes from the university. That's why I thought your efforts to write a letter was ennoble. We agree that the administration at UCI is seriously f-ed up when it comes to Jews on campus and antisemitism. What I was trying to do was provide a dissection of where the letter went wrong in appealing for outside help and how it could be more effective.

And as far as Germany goes, I get it very well. I'm a third generation survivor. Words again cannot convey the immense emotion and anger I feel that Nazi tactics are being used against me and my kind again, and then to boot, we are being accused of being Nazis ourselves! These people have no idea what horror was left over after the Holocaust. It has rippled across generations! That it seriously screwed up my grandparents, my parents, myself, and probably will my kids doesn't even begin to describe the effects! I do not believe that any Palestinian/Arab will ever walk in MY shoes and know what a real Holocaust feels like. Except for maybe the Darfurians. I appreciate your passion and your empathy and your action. I'm just trying to help you be more effective.

And yes, I'm not sure people recognize the Sharon pic for what we did, which besides an anti-semitic caricature that has political overtones to it, was a definite repetition of the awful blood libel that is most definitely anti-semitic as well. It's like the cries over Mel Gibson's passion play; we knew it was anti-semitic based on the use of the same format in prior ages and its incitement of violence against the Jews. But honestly, not everyone gets that its anti-semitic. Sometimes its subtle. Sometimes people think its a political image, like Bush and his exaggerated ears in political cartoons.

Is that wrong that someone can't figure out that a picture like that is as offensive to us as a coon caricature is to blacks? Hell yeah! But it being wrong doesn't change the fact that people don't get it or don't care enough to get it. That's why I think we have to be louder, engage community leaders before hand, and be focused on the topic, and that only. Too many other complaints, however valid, get in the way of delivering our message. Your focus on the picture was right on. Cut out the other stuff, and rally people around the images and text on the wall. There were at least 3 examples of anti-semitism on that wall, not even including the now known "passion play" of al-Dura! The Sharon one is the easiest to get, and even then, it needs to be explained. Politicians don't have more than 10 secs to explain on TV/ radio to the masses why something is wrong and why they are fighting it. Ten seconds isn't enough time to explain why its part of the blood libel, why the exaggerated nose is insulting. We need to start the ground work on educating the public early why it is wrong before any of this happens, including politicians and the university. Unfortunately, the univ here will be the last to listen. We need to start the ground work for public outrage, and that starts with educating student to student and community leader to community leader.

So, yes, speak out, but focus your efforts to one message, set realistic goals about what be done (barring speakers is unrealistic, creating a hostile environment for them isn't), and give solutions to leaders for action to take. Please speak out!

As an example: here's a letter to send to the commission. If someone gets me an email address, I'll send it myself.

Dear Mr Kennedy:

I'm writing to you as a student at UCI who was deeply offended by the anti-semitic images that were used as part of the "Apartheid Wall" during the Palestinian Awareness Week on campus last week. I write you to ask that you work with the university to keep this from happening year after year, as it has been.

As the grandchild of Holocaust survivors, I was incredibly upset and disturbed to see images and words that were used by the Nazis as propaganda against the Jews in Nazi Germany employed by the MSU to rally people to their cause. These same images and words are used year after year on campus by this organization.

Most obvious was the caricature of Ariel Sharon as a hook-nosed Jew with the headline "Cannibal." Text that followed claimed that he enjoyed killing small children. implied is that he liked eating them as well. When paired with the obvious depiction of Sharon as a hook-nosed Jew, this is a definite repetition of the murderous blood libel that Jews drank the blood of small children that was used by the Nazis to dehumanize the Jews and imply that they were a threat to the general population. "The Nazi periodical, Der Stürmer, often published special issues devoted to allegations of ritual murder by Jews" (2007, Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, http://www.religioustolerance.org).

Another blood libel is repeated in the panel of the wall painted blue depicting violence against children: Fee fie foe fum/ I smell the blood of a Palestinian/ Be he live, be he dead/ I'll use his bones to make my bread. Nevermind the one-sided portrayal of violence that paints a dishonest picture of Israel, the use of the blood libel poem is used once again to dehumanize Jews and embody them as evil incarnate. It is entirely offensive that this canard is being used today on a modern campus.

The picture of the Jewish Star as the only star in the American flag implies a Jewish domination of government, like the Nazi canard that Jews control the world for their own self gain. This was given as a reason by the Nazis to exterminate the Jews from the society.

The use of the images of the recently established faked Al Dura murder and the text that accompanies it could also be viewed as another repetition of the blood libel, that Jews are interested in the blood of young Arab children because we are monsters. Again, this is a allusion to the blood libel, as well as a subtle take on passion plays that have incited violence against Jews since the beginning of Christianity. Substitute Jesus for Al Dura and the intent is the same.

All of these images and words were used to incite hatred against Jews in my grandparents homeland, to divide them from their rights to live in their native lands. I fear that the same is being used to incite hatred at the UCI campus based on Israel's policies. In images and words, spoken and written, the MSU has made it clear that they DO believe that Jews are responsible for what is happening in the Palestinian territories, despite what they might say to counter that claim when people protest. Why else use anti-Semitic tactics straight out of Nazi Germany?

I urge the OCHRC to promote debate at UCI that is free of anti-Semitism. There are enough facts to debate on Israel's policies toward the Territories without dehumanizing Jews. MSU claims its goal is to protest Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, so why use Jewish imagery? It's totally possible to protest without it. Try substituting Palestinians with an anti-immigrants/border patrol organization, and substitute Jew with Latino or Hispanic in some of the examples listed above to get an idea of how racist the texts and images are; the themes are the same - hatred. They are meant to de-legitimize the Jews ability to speak out on anti-Semitism on campus by portraying them as evil aggressors in Israel.

I should be able to attend a university where the administration takes action against any racist/anti-semitic imagery. To let this continue, as it has from year to year would be to allow the victimization of an entire population on campus to continue.

As a solution, I would like to suggest that OCHRC take a zero-tolerance approach to anti-semitism and racism on campus and advocate for a contract to be formed between MSU and the university and monitored by OCHRC that speakers or images promoted by MSU cannot include anti-Semitic pictures or speech (detailing what constitutes anti-Semitism with documented and recognized examples), and that a violation of that contract results in the loss of the ability to hold events on campus for a period of up to one year. This is fair. Feel free to hold other groups to similar standards. They violate it, their club is suspended. The agreement should be updated periodically to include new forms of recognized hate speech.

Only until the university starts recognizing valid violations of their community code of conduct and enforcing violations by repeat offenders is this campus going to be a free and welcome environment for me and my fellow Jewish students. Please help administrators understand this.

Thank you,
grad student

Mr Kennedy's email is:

rusty@ochumanrelations.org

You know, the more I read what you right, the more it seems our disagreements are tiny. We just disagree on tactics. I just simply feel that the university is so entrenched in political correctness that they and the OCHRC are not doing their job. As such, since they are state/county officials, they need to have their feet held to the fire. It is not just UCI, it is going on all over the country, and at the very least, it should not be done under the veil of secrecy from the public.

As far as I can tell, I am the only teacher at UCI who is speaking out in this fashion. Surely, there are others who agree, but they are choosing to work within the system, for lack of a better phrase, and that is well and good. That is what you choose to do-fine.

Don't forget, that I am expressing my right to free speech as well. I have listened to the hate speeches quietly without trying to disrupt them, but now I am free to respond. If I feel that the university is wrong, I have my right to speak out as well. I also feel that it means something when one who actually works at UCI is willing to come forth and say that something is wrong. I wish there were more to stand with me.

At any rate, I wish you good luck with Mr Kennedy. However, in my opinion, what you will get in response is a litany of all the good things he and UCI are doing to combat prejudice and assure you that there is no room for hate speech at UCI-just as Chancellor Drake did with Hillel recently in Washington.

Good luck. I do appreciate you adding your voice in your own way.

Post a Comment

Comments and feedback are welcome and appreciated. Please stay on topic and avoid profanities unless it is relevant to the discussion. By commenting on the site, you agree that you are not impersonating anyone else and that you are solely responsible for the content you post. In commenting on the website you agree that you are not violating copyright or intellectual property rights of others. Spam and commercial posts are not permitted and will not be published. Disagreement and debates are welcome, but comments which are slanderous, demeaning, obscene, resort to ad hominem, and/or are of a threatening nature will not be published. Opinions expressed in the comments section do not necessarily reflect the views of the website’s author. The author of the website reserves the right to reject or remove comments at any time and for any reason.

Share

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More