skip to main |
skip to sidebar
12:06 PM
Reut R. Cohen
Amir Abdel Malik Ali, a radical imam, is no stranger to UC Irvine where he regularly spreads his seething hatred of America, Israel and Jews on behalf of the Muslim Student Union (MSU). Imam Malik Ali is involved with As-Sabiqun (which means "The Vanguard" in Arabic). This movement is a Sunni endeavor that seeks, through "an organized Islamic movement," to establish Islam "as a complete way of life in America" -- "in total, complete, and uncompromised service of Allah." This movement works closely with Muslim Students Associations across the country, including UC Irvine’s MSU.
It has been brought to my attention that a picture of Amir Abdel Malik Ali is featured at the Anthill Pub on the UC Irvine campus. The picture is displayed prominently among other pictures which feature UCI athletes, a dance team and advertisements for alcoholic beverages. The Anthill Pub is run by the Associated Graduate Students of UCI. Below are two pictures which were taken with a camera phone by Emanuel Movroydis.
Anthill Pub should consider removing the picture of imam Malik Ali who is notorious for his support of terrorism. Otherwise, students should seriously consider refraining from visiting Anthill Pub. The university and university restaurants/bars should not be expressing a political opinion. A pub is a place to socialize and talk about sports.
While the pub's intention was to represent campus life, the context of the photo is unclear as it is featured among photos that are far more innocuous. Malik Ali’s photo was a poor choice of decoration for a wall designated to show colorful examples of people on campus. Though we must respect free-speech codes, Malik Ali advocates violence and displaying his photo sends a mixed message where condemnation is necessary.
Below is another picture (courtesy of a UCI student).
22 comments. Leave a comment:
holy sh*t
inappropriate on so many levels. at the very least the pub shouldn't be taking a political ideology and putting it on public display. it is not their position to do that!!!!
i simply can't believe it. i am ashamed that i go to uci. terrorist supporters should be condemned, not glorified.
I am also very embarrassed that I go to UCI. One more year left of this place.................
After three years at UCI I'm just jaded to the cowardice of the institution in dealing with Islamic bullying when they are otherwise so quick to protest their secular chops. If an evangelical ever came to campus to preach a new crusade to retake the holy land they'd have his ass shut up and shut down faster than you could say Allah Ackbar.
Then again, on another level I can't help but chuckle whenever I hear this guy ranting and raving from whatever (supposedly soundproof) lecture hall I'm in. He sounds like a demented Chris Rock - I half expect a punch-line after every "apartheid" comment.
I've been boycotting UCI for a while. ASUCI gives thousands of dollars to the MSU so that they can promote their antisemitic and anti American speakers on campus. Academia is a joke.
you're all a bunch of douche bags, stop whining about a picture, obviously the point of the wall is to put up pictures of things that take place on campus, there are way more important things for you to worry about, and btw there's ALWAYS evangelicals on campus, if you don't even go to UCI then don't comment like you know what's going down on campus
You should note that there is one picture up that has political connotations: the picture of Malik Ali and company.
The other photos are of athletes (and there is one of the brush fires that burned down parts of Irvine and Orange County). Having a picture of Malik Ali is seriously inappropriate.
I don't want to see that homophobic, anti-Semitic, anti-American lunatic when I'm trying to enjoy my beer. A campus pub isn't the place to hang such a picture and glorifying that fanatical Hamas/Hezbollah/Al-Qaeda supporter is wrong on so many levels.
Malik Ali is part of a movement that has written checks out to Hamas! Hamas kills innocent civilians. If I wanted the pub to hang a picture of Dr. Daniel Pipes or Walid Shoebat (both visited UC Irvine), I doubt the pub would be so willing. If they did, I'm sure you'd hear people complaining that these people are "right-wing" or "Islamophobic." So let's keep the pub for socializing.
It's no place for Hamas/Hezbollah support to be up on display.
Also, it appears many people who commented stated they attend UCI. They have every right to be upset considering that UCI is a hotbed of pro-terror speech and most of the campus is asleep.
As far as I know, everybody here attended UCI at one time or another. A few of us still do. The fact that most of us choose to remain anonymous could stem from any number of reasons - expediency, a wish to avoid certain interested parties in the administration using our words against us, and avoiding becoming the targets of cowardly flamers. I notice that you, our one critic, also chose to remain anonymous in posting.
The evangelicals on campus don't call for terrorism against Jews or the downfall of America. It really is that simple. We've had some people holding up bibles and telling us that non-believers will go to hell.
As far as I recall the MSU is the only group to sponsor speakers who promote the elimination of a group of people (Israelis) and call for the downfall of America.
Heck yes we have the right to be upset. The picture of Malik Ali does not contribute anything positive to the pub. Reut- thank you for your post about this topic. I admire your courage and charisma.
Are you also the one responsible for that video posted by zibbex on youtube reeking of a victim mentality?
It claims that UCI supports "hatred of jews"?
It is truly your own fault if you wish to see offense in everything you look at, but this blog, and the video (containing the exact same first paragraph as the one in your blog) is really taking it too far.
The photographs are award winners, and should be seen as art, not as an excuse for you pro-Isreal maniacs to turn rabid towards UCI.
Anonymous,
No I am not responsible for the video. I don't hide behind false names and am always honest about my beliefs. No where have I indicated that I feel the pub management is anti-Semitic or anti-American. I have only indicated that I disagree with their decision to feature the photo. Don't you think I'm entitled to disagree with the decision to hang the photo so long as I conduct myself respectfully?
I have been speaking to the pub owner, Scott Winterstein, about this matter. I think he is a fair person and I haven't made any demands. I merely wanted to point out to him why I deem the image of Malik Ali as offensive.
Why should I be held accountable for videos that others make or statements others make? You can read my initial blog post where I clearly point out that I doubt the pub management's motivations are malicious.
It's quite rude of you to call me a "maniac" without getting all the facts. That makes you no better than those accusing the pub of anti-Americanism.
I do plan to write up another post tonight as I've discussed this issue with the pub management a little bit and have a better understanding of this situation.
"...containing the exact same first paragraph as the one in your blog..."
Did it ever occur to you that anyone can take content off this blog and make a video on their own?
Oh so someone "stole" your paragraph?
This seems to fit into that entire victim-thing you seem to love so much.
"I think he is a fair person and I haven't made any demands."
I do believe your demand was for the pub to pull the photo down. I'm sure I could find a quote of you saying just that. Oh, and there is something in this country called freedom of speech, perhaps you should look it up.
"I merely wanted to point out to him why I deem the image of Malik Ali as offensive."
Who are you to deem anything unfit? You are not even a student of UCI, you have no reason to even be at the pub. You have no business being on campus. How are you so important that your opinion matters more than anyone else?
"Don't you think I'm entitled to disagree with the decision to hang the photo so long as I conduct myself respectfully?"
No, I do not agree you have to right to demand a photo be taken down. Who are you? How are you important? Why do you think you have the right to say a word?
I have plenty of "facts" and I still deem you a maniac. You spout this censorship nonsense becuase you personally have a problem with something that pretty much has nothing to do with you. And frankly, you don't matter. As soon as you get this entitlement out of your system, the better off this world will be.
Yes, the YouTube user responsible for the video copied/pasted paragraphs off my blog and created a video. If you browse through YouTube I am certain you will find several videos that rip content off other websites or blogs. Did I claim to be a victim? No. I just simply claimed I didn't make the video.
I sent the YouTube user a message yesterday evening and asked that he edit his video and remove the sections taken off my blog without permission. I checked this morning and the video was no longer up. I did not tell him he had to take the video down, only that he used content from my blog without permission and I do not want to take responsibility for a video I did not create. The YouTube user is obviously welcome to make whatever videos he wants so long as he does not take content off other websites without permission.
I also don't agree with the statements made in his video and would like to distance myself from them. Moreover, I have never created videos without signing my name to them as I don't believe in anonymity.
I did attend UC Irvine. I graduated a year early and was supposed to graduate in June 2008. I used to hang out at the pub and enjoyed it very much while it was up.
I made very clear points about my hope that the pub management would either clarify the context or take the image down. I made no demands. I made a pretty simple request. Generally a pub is a place to unwind. A photo of Malik Ali in a vague context among positive aspects of student life appears quite strange. Several people find a photo of Malik Ali in a pub in a vague context to be offensive.
The issue here is that the photo, featured in the context it is, sends mixed messages where condemnation is needed. Any individual who condones suicide/homicide bombers and calls for the killings of Jews & other minorities ought to be condemned.
However, I don't believe the pub management was attempting to be malicious and I stated that too.
I did not call the pub owner or the management antisemitic or anti-American or anti-anything. Can you quote me anywhere saying anything like that? You can't because I did not.
We have a right to disagree in this country. The pub is entitled to leaving the photo up or they can choose to take it down, or they can clarify the context. It's ultimately their decision. But as customers (yes, I still do meet friends at the pub when I'm at Irvine) we should be able to express our position.
You have absolutely no "facts" about anything and your accusations are quite baseless. I've spoken to the pub manager and I do think he's a fair person. You are welcome to talk to him further about this if you feel so inclined.
I really don't care whether or not you think I matter. If anyone sounds remotely crazy it's clearly you. For someone who purports to respect free speech, clearly my right to free speech offends you. Good day.
that last anonymous message is quite hypocritical. anonymous, you support free speech but don't believe customers have a right to tell a business what bothers them? customers can't respectfully disagree with a photo being featured at a bar?
this asswipe malik ali has a right to speak on campus. but people have a right to condemn him. when a photo of him suddenly appears at a pub, people have a right to respectfully question what's going on. freedom of speech is not one-sided. get used to it.
who the hell do you think YOU are??? you're obviously a nobody who chooses to sign everything as anonymous. are you responsible for that earlier "douchebag" comment too? are you part of the pub management or employed by the pub? several of you guys have made ridiculous comments instead of trying to address the issue. attacking people who have politely disagreed makes you seem like the biggest jerk. quite professional, anonymous.
Ok, so I really have nothing furthur to say to Reut, since her "reponses" really didn't match up with anything I said.
However, neither of you understands free speech (I said to look up, maybe next time listen to me?)
Freedom of speech is the right for the pub to place up whatever they want, but what you're asking for is freedom from being offended.
Quite frankly, I'm looking at the constitution, and I don't see anything related to offense.
Complaining to the pub, is NOT free speech, in fact you're "request" is an attempt to raise your opinion above everyone elses, and the Constitution doesn't work like that, either.
Actually, I have no affiliation to the pub. But way to be paranoid. It shows just how logical you're thinking is. I've only been there a handful of times. The Fire Ants are quite good, you should get them next time you're there.
Matt, does it look like I wrote "douchebag" the grammer and typing isn't even the same. It's immature, even if it is also correct.
"Ok, so I really have nothing furthur to say to Reut, since her "reponses" really didn't match up with anything I said."
I think I was quite polite and addressed all of your concerns. You've just decided to attack me personally for whatever reason. Obviously I do support free-speech if I'm allowing your comments to be published on my blog.
"However, neither of you understands free speech (I said to look up, maybe next time listen to me?)"
Customers have every right to share their thoughts or concerns with the management. You claimed I have no business being concerned about the situation. But I, like you, was a student at UCI until very recently. At the very least I asked Scott to perhaps put up a disclaimer underneath the photo which could state that the pub does not condone Malik Ali. It would avoid further confusion regarding the photo. At first glance the context of such a photo is extremely unclear. Most reasonable individuals would not want to support a restaurant or pub if they feature a photo of a hate-monger. Perhaps only clarification is in order. But like I said, it is ultimately up to the pub to decide what they would like to do and we can only calmly express our concerns to them.
"Freedom of speech is the right for the pub to place up whatever they want, but what you're asking for is freedom from being offended."
No one here is stating Malik Ali does not have the right to speak on campus. Over the years I've stated that he has every right to speak on campus despite how disgusting his rhetoric is. I simply believe in condemning what he says and the group that sponsors him as people like Malik Ali only contribute negativity. The bottom line is that Malik Ali should be condemned because he calls for violence and terrorism, but he should be allowed to speak. The pub, however, is a business. I believe that featuring a photo of Malik Ali in a vague context among positive aspects of student life is not productive. But I acknowledged that the pub has a right to keep the photo up if they choose to. However, customers and concerned parties have a right to make their concern known to the management. If there was a t-shirt of Adolf Hitler being sold at my favorite clothing store, I'd approach the manager and ask why such a shirt was being sold. If they insisted on selling the shirts, I would simply refrain from buying any items there in the future. In America we have choice and businesses generally attempt to cater to the customers.
I doubt that you've never made a request or issued concern about something. Your comments are quite immature.
"Freedom of speech is the right for the pub to place up whatever they want, but what you're asking for is freedom from being offended.
Quite frankly, I'm looking at the constitution, and I don't see anything related to offense."
they can place whatever they want on their walls. but customers have a right to ask for clarification when something as obscene as a photograph of a man who has written out checks to hamas/hezbollah and believes all homosexuals need to be killed is featured at the pub. the pub is entitled to leaving up the photo. they can even decide not to issue a disclaimer. it's obviously up to them. however, good businesses will listen to customer concerns and try to find some middle ground. maybe a disclaimer can solve this issue. but regardless, no one is saying the pub has no right to have the photo up. only that the context of the photo is unclear. so the context should either be clarified or the picture should be taken down. however, only the pub has the authority to decide what they would like to do. is that really so difficult for you to understand?
"Complaining to the pub, is NOT free speech, in fact you're "request" is an attempt to raise your opinion above everyone elses, and the Constitution doesn't work like that, either."
of course it's free speech. we're customers and we're talking to the management about concerns. that is free speech. the pub can decide to do what they will with the concerns of the customer. as reut said, no one claims malik ali cannot speak at uci. he is a sick bastard and everyone should aim to denounce what he says, but he has a right to speak under free-speech codes which everyone here respects. obviously you don't respect free speech codes if you find people who disagree with you to be non-entitled to discussing their concerns.
"Actually, I have no affiliation to the pub. But way to be paranoid. It shows just how logical you're thinking is. I've only been there a handful of times. The Fire Ants are quite good, you should get them next time you're there."
it has nothing to do with paranoia. i've been on that facebook forum to discuss this. a couple people associated with the pub can't discuss things calmly. that is unfortunate.
"Matt, does it look like I wrote "douchebag" the grammer and typing isn't even the same. It's immature, even if it is also correct."
your infantile attitude clearly suggests immaturity. like i said, freedom of speech is not one-sided. no one is theatening the pub. they are only attempting to discuss with the management about clarifying the context of the photo.
"If an evangelical ever came to campus to preach a new crusade to retake the holy land they'd have his ass shut up and shut down faster than you could say Allah Ackbar."
That's a good point. During May 08 I personally witnessed Edgar Dormitorio asking the Evangelical Christian guy after that last outdoor MSU event to leave. The guy gave me his card...... his name is Michael Venyah. He told me that I, as a Jew, should convert to Christianity or I'd go to hell. I disagree with him. However, unlike Malik Ali, he doesn't support the idea of blowing me up. This preacher was talking about how Muhammad was a pedophile & those who don't believe in Jesus are bound for hell. While most people didn't agree with him, members of the MSU raced up to him and literally hit him. There was no reason for that behavior as people have the right to free-speech. So why was free-speech one-sided here? The UCI administration was outside and saw this happen. They did nothing. It was assault and witnessed by many, but Edgar Dormitorio asked the preacher to leave.
That is how free-speech often works at UCI. You can feature pro-Nazi and pro-terror speakers on campus. This is definitely allowed under the first amendment. But those opposed to that crap are told they have no right to express displeasure or protest. Those who are harassed or physically assaulted by the MSU don't have the rights protected.
So I agree that the pub can feature whoever they want on their wall. They should at least put up a disclaimer, but they can decide how they want to deal with this. But it is amusing that a couple of their supporters are busy ranting about freedom of speech. Many of you haven't thought about why people take offense to the photo of Malik Ali or why. Nor have you realized that we're not threatening to hurt the pub. Most of us love the pub. We just want clarification. I'm sure if a speaker who called for wiping you out, you would do a double take if you saw his picture mounted on a wall and at least want to know why the hell the pub would put up such a photo in the first place. It's a business. So what purpose does the picture really serve? And if it does serve a purpose, shouldn't the pub indicate what it is? If they are pictures that won a competition, make a banner that says "winners of New U competition" or something. There is a difference between a business and an outdoor location where anyone has a right to speak. The pub has a right to put up any pics they want, but they also have customers to cater to. Who knew it was a crime to try and express yourself to a business management?
I've got one more year and then I'm outta here.
These comments are coming in faster than I have time to read them, so I apologize for having only skimmed. In general, it would be nice to see fewer inflammatory remarks and less name-calling (there are no maniacs here, I think)...but if that's what you're going to do, at least have the guts to take credit for it rather than posting anonymously.
I just met with Edwin, the creator of the Facebook group that discusses this issue, and I thought we had a very productive conversation. And for what it's worth, I think he has every right in the world to ask me to take the photo down, although I'm not inclined to do so at this time.
My hope, in hanging the photo, was that my customers would understand that it represented a highly charged situation on campus and therefore was an apt presentation of campus life (and if that's a sad commentary on campus life, so be it). I also tend to think that extremism should not be ignored or brushed under the rug, but pointed out, even confronted. I congratulate Rory for having been one to do this. I won't pretend to be a political hero of any kind, but I did feel that I was pointing out extremism, in my own small way, with that photo (which is not a flattering depiction of Malik Ali and his cronies). Maybe that crosses the line into stating an opinion, but that's beside the point. More importantly, I feel strongly that the Pub is a place for robust discourse of all kinds, including politics, even when it is controversial, and I have received a considerable amount of support from my customers on this. They are university students, after all, and don't need to be protected from scary things.
That said, a young woman came in today to express her concerns to me about the photo, suggesting that it might be misinterpreted by some people given the highly charged atmosphere on campus with respect to this issue. So I am aware that there is another point of view, and that not everyone interprets things the way I expect or want them to. She also understood where I was coming from, but simply disagreed. And that seems to be where we stand.
Although, honestly, this debate is beecoming a little tiresome, it appears that it will continue, and I will solicit feedback from other interested parties. As I said already, it would be nice if we could all be mature about this.
Scott, thank you very much for taking the time to comment. I've also come to understand what your position on the matter is and I certainly don't find any of your motivations to be malicious.
Sincerely,
Reut Rory Cohen
"It claims that UCI supports "hatred of jews"?"
But the UCI does support the hatred of Jews!
"pro-Isreal maniacs to turn rabid towards UCI."
It seems that anti-Semites, cowards, and retards who can't even use a spell-checkers are all the same.
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.