"Why Islamic hate on campus needs to be tackled"

Hat Tip: VitalPerspective

A commentary on this previous post - this part says it all:

Student unions and vice-chancellors have made various attempts to tackle the problem but have always held back from really dealing with it because they fear being accused of Islamophobia. The radical groups have continued to organise and indoctrinate, often under false names, and have found the process increasingly easy in the climate of anger surrounding the Iraq war.

Jewish students at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London have complained of fears for their personal safety because of the pronouncements of some fellow students. Members of student Islamic societies have been among those arrested and charged in recent counter-terrorist operations.

Campus radicalism persists and is spreading. Mere “guidance” from mandarins in the DfES is unlikely to stop it spreading.

I'm shocked, I tell you - shocked!

Link to article

Times Online November 17, 2006

Omar Khan Sharif, left, who was radicalised on campus and became the first British suicide bomber recruit in the Israel-Palestine conflict, along with Asif Hanif, right

Comment: why Islamic hate on campus needs to be tackled
By Sean O’Neill
A Times expert on radical Islam explains why the threat from Islamist radicals on campus needs to be combated with more than just proposals

Islamist groups first identified Britain’s universities as a fertile recruiting ground more almost two decades ago.

They followed the example set by the far-left, which had been hugely successful in the 1980s in attracting young people with impressionable minds to simplistic utopian ideologies.

The Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HuT) organisation - which at the time was under the control of the radical cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed - was active on a number of campuses.

Over a period of weeks in 1988, I often accompanied one of Bakri Mohammed’s organisers as he criss-crossed London arranging and talking at meetings in university rooms and mosques.

Despite being a full-time employee of Islington council, the man’s entire working day appeared to be devoted to preaching the message of Islamist radicalism which was then a novelty but is now well-rooted in many young Muslims.

One of the meetings was at King’s College in Central London where he delivered a talk to Muslim students about the necessity of returning to the golden age of the Khilafa, an Islamic state to be governed by strict religious law.

It was a sparsely attended event. But more than 10 years later, at similar meetings at the same college, a young man called Omar Sharif was radicalised by what he heard.

Sharif, an undergraduate from Derby, very quickly became devout, began to wear traditional Islamic dress and abruptly ended friendships he had previously enjoyed with non-Muslims. Soon afterwards, he left King’s and went to Damascus to study Arabic.

Returning to Britain, Sharif retained his radical views and was in touch with Omar Bakri Mohammed (by then split with HuT and running his al-Muhajiroun movement) and with Abu Hamza, the former imam of Finsbury Park Mosque.

In April 2003, Sharif and another young Briton, Asif Hanif, went to Tel Aviv where they became the first foreign suicide bombers in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Sharif was not the only young man to be radicalised at university who opted for a life of violent jihad. Omar Saeed Sheikh, who has been convicted in Pakistan for his part in the kidnap and murder of the American journalist Daniel Pearl, was first exposed to the Islamist ideology at the London School of Economics.

Student unions and vice-chancellors have made various attempts to tackle the problem but have always held back from really dealing with it because they fear being accused of Islamophobia. The radical groups have continued to organise and indoctrinate, often under false names, and have found the process increasingly easy in the climate of anger surrounding the Iraq war.

Jewish students at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London have complained of fears for their personal safety because of the pronouncements of some fellow students. Members of student Islamic societies have been among those arrested and charged in recent counter-terrorist operations.

Campus radicalism persists and is spreading. Mere “guidance” from mandarins in the DfES is unlikely to stop it spreading.

The author is a Times reporter and co-author of The Suicide Factory: Abu Hamza and the Finsbury Park Mosque

UK Universities given 'how-to' guide for fighting violent Islam

Hat Tip: VitalPerspective

This just took the cake:

The scenarios described in the booklet include the invitation of a preacher suspected of justifying terrorist attacks against British civilians; the taking over of an Islamic prayer room; and the radicalising of an Islamic students group, in which moderate members are frozen out and bullied into electing hardline leaders.

In another case, "a member of teaching staff has raised concerns with university authorities about some literature that was left lying around in a university room in which she took a tutorial group.

"Some leaflets were written in English, and others appeared to be in Arabic. She reported that the literature in English had titles such as ‘Who is a legitimate target?’ and ‘From Jihad to a new world order.’"

Gee, now why does that stuff sound familiar? Nah, would never happen at UCI - not in a million years!

The just-released booklet on violent extremism at UK universities

UK Press Release

A UK Universities booklet on "promoting good relations"

Click here to see a UK Telegraph news segment on dealing with Islamic Facist Imperialsts on UK campuses

Link to article

Times Online November 17, 2006
Universities given 'how-to' guide for fighting violent Islam
By Sam Knight
Comment: why action is needed

The Government today issued explicit guidelines aimed at tackling violent Islamist extremism on Britain's university campuses.

A 20-page booklet aimed at university Vice Chancellors and principals of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) advises campus administrators how best to resist extremist groups and preachers attempting to radicalise their students and commit themselves to violent jihad.

The document, following general guidelines issued last year to tackle all forms of extremism among students, contains several "real life" scenarios specifically aimed at targeting Islamism.

As well a definition of "violent extremism in the name of Islam", the guidelines describe various pieces of anti-terrorism legislation that might be relevant to controlling extremist groups.

The specific nature of the advice drew a rebuke from Universities UK (UUK), the association of universities that helped prepare the last guidelines, while a coalition of Muslim students said the document contained little to improve campus relations.

Universities UK praised the guidelines for offering "practical and useful information for staff and students alike on recent legislation" but observed: "UUK’s earlier document focused on all kinds of extremism, not just on extremism in the name of Islam.

"Universities are some of the most diverse communities in the UK, and work hard to ensure community cohesion on campus across all faiths and racial groups. Universities have a duty of care to protect vulnerable groups, and they also have a responsibility to assure all their constituent communities that they are party to fundamental values of free enquiry and free expression within the law."

The scenarios described in the booklet include the invitation of a preacher suspected of justifying terrorist attacks against British civilians; the taking over of an Islamic prayer room; and the radicalising of an Islamic students group, in which moderate members are frozen out and bullied into electing hardline leaders.

In another case, "a member of teaching staff has raised concerns with university authorities about some literature that was left lying around in a university room in which she took a tutorial group.

"Some leaflets were written in English, and others appeared to be in Arabic. She reported that the literature in English had titles such as ‘Who is a legitimate target?’ and ‘From Jihad to a new world order.’"

A separate scenario describes a member of the college library staff watching students using the internet. "She reported that two males were looking at some kind of home-made images of other men dressed in military and civilian clothing holding guns," the guidance says.

"The two men were joined by two others and she could see that they were watching shots being fired and explosions on the computer. The images then appeared to show somebody making a home made explosive device."

In this case, the booklet advises: "The HE provider will have a policy on internet use and internet security... If it is alleged that these policies are breached then what is the process for sensitively investigating allegations, and if necessary who should decide whether to inform the police?"

According to the Department of Education Skills (DfES), today's document is the product of 18 months of consultations between colleges, the police and Muslim students and leaders.

Launching the guide this morning, Bill Rammell, the Minister for Higher Education, said: "The guidance provides a recognition - that I believe must be faced squarely - that violent extremism in the name of Islam is a real, credible and sustained threat to the UK. And that there is evidence of serious, but not widespread Islamist extremist activity in HEIs."

"This guidance is not about targeting one particular community."

The document was welcomed by the British Muslim Forum today, although the group said it would like to see similar guidelines issued to help confront "the anti-Muslim extremism of the far right".

But the Federation of Student Islamic Societies (Fosis), an umbrella grup that represents around 90,000 Muslim students in the UK, joined the National Union of Students and other bodies, issuing a statement saying there was a need for positive proposals.

"Demonising Muslims is unacceptable and dangerous, whether in educational institutions or in communities," the joint statement said. "Students and staff should be assured by their institutions that there is no intention of adding to a climate of Islamophobia."

The busy life of university campuses and the fluid nature of student organisations have for years enabled Islamic extremist groups to organise addresses by radical preachers and to target young Muslims amenable to violent interpretations of Islam.

Members of proscribed groups such as Hizb-ut Tahrir and al-Muhajiroun have been reported giving speeches and forming new student associations.

The sentencing of Dhiren Barot, the most senior al-Qaeda operative to be prosecuted in Britain, last week revealed that he had a fake research pass for Brunel University, allowing him access to the campus.

The Sunday Times reported last weekend that fundamentalists had been recently reported at least four British universities: Brunel University, west London, Bedfordshire University, Luton, Sheffield Hallam University and Manchester Metropolitan University.

The newspaper quoted Sheikh Musa Admani, an imam who helps moderate the views of radical young Muslims and is one of Mr Rammell's advisers, saying that extremist groups were adept at avoiding campus bans and joining mainstream organisations with the aim of turning a few members to their cause.

Snippets of Benjamin Netanyahu's General Assembly Speech

Hat Tip: IsraelMatzav



Link if having trouble with the above video

More videos from the General Assembly

NewU Feature: Different Religions Gather to Give Thanks

So much for interfaith - the MSU declined their invitation:

While there are individuals of the Islam faith attending the Thanksgiving service, members from the Muslim Student Union, however, will not be attending the prayer service.

“As Muslims we thank God every day and during every prayer; combining our thanks for God’s many blessings to one day is not enough,” said Mohamed Galal, a fifth-year chemical and computer engineering double-major and president of the Muslim Student Union.

That's a bunch of B.S. and they know it.

Link to article

Features
Different Religions Gather to Give Thanks
By Yolanda Vo
Staff Writer

Thanksgiving is just days away as most of us anticipate spending time with our families and eating delectable dishes that are only served once a year. However, Thanksgiving is more than just a get-together and yummy foods—it is a time to give thanks.

UC Irvine students of all religious backgrounds will be gathering together for the “Interfaith Thanksgiving Prayer Service” on Tuesday, November 21 at 5:00 p.m. in the Interfaith building adjacent to the engineering Interim Classroom Facility. Students will give thanks in their own personal way, native language and in a manner that is reflective of their religion.

“The individuals attending the service include the Baha’i, Christians – including the Catholics, Chi Alpha [campus fellowship], Episcopalians and Latter Day Saints – Jewish and Muslims,” said Director of Interfaith Nancy Jenks, who has been involved in Interfaith for 30 years. “The Interfaith Thanksgiving Prayer Service is an annual tradition and we ask any faith to be present. We’ve had it for about 20 years.”

The prayer service, which was started by Jenks, allows students and staff to reflect on the things that they are grateful for in an environment in which there is no tension among religions.

“The chairs are arranged in a circle with one large, lit candle in the middle for the prayer service. There are little candles on each of the chairs and everyone lights their candle from the center candle,” Jenks explained. “Afterward, we have a buffet of fruit, cheese and punch. We’ve been doing it like that since the very beginning.”

Alex Chazen, a third-year political science major and president of the Jewish Student Union Hillel, also expressed his satisfaction that different religions can gather together for an evening.

“I went last year and will be going this year,” Chazen said. “I think it’s a good example for all religions to work together and have inclusiveness.”

While the format of the Thanksgiving service remains the same year after year, each new Thanksgiving prayer service brings its own unique experience.

“You never know what direction it will take. It’s always really special. And there’s always something that will make you cry,” Jenks said.

The event accommodates each religion and welcomes individuals to read from their religious doctrine and in any preferred language.

“It’s cool hearing everyone read from their religion’s text and in a different language,” said Sarah Killian, president of the University Catholic Community. “It’s the only event I know that different religions can use their own religious texts, whereas usually they can only do so at their own religious services.”

Hooman Eghterafi, who graduated from UCI last year, has attended the Thanksgiving prayer service since his sophomore year as an undergraduate.

“I love the atmosphere,” Eghterafi said. “I’m trying to get as many people from the Baha’i club as I can. We’ll elaborate on God, religion and mankind and recite a prayer of unity.”

While there are individuals of the Islam faith attending the Thanksgiving service, members from the Muslim Student Union, however, will not be attending the prayer service.

“As Muslims we thank God every day and during every prayer; combining our thanks for God’s many blessings to one day is not enough,” said Mohamed Galal, a fifth-year chemical and computer engineering double-major and president of the Muslim Student Union.

The Interfaith facility was established in 1965 and provides a place for students, faculty, and staff from any faith to be involved in faith-based activities, attend religious services, and interact with people from diverse backgrounds and cultures. Interfaith runs as an independent, non-profit organization that is supported by donations from community members, businesses and organized religions and is not funded by UCI.

NewU Feature: A Lonely Soldier

Following up on this previous post:

Link to article

Features
A Lonely Soldier
By Reut R. Cohen
Staff Writer

Adam Harmon is an American citizen, but he once served for the Israeli Defense Forces and has written about his experiences. He spoke at UC Irvine on Monday, Nov. 6. The Anteaters for Israel co-sponsored the event with the College Republicans and the Young Democrats in order to promote what AFI called “awareness” and “coalition building” on the UC Irvine campus.

Harmon, whose book is titled “Lonely Soldier,” described himself as coming from a “typical American Jewish family.” Originally from New England, Harmon had the opportunity to visit Israel as a teenager in 1984, at which time he knew that he wanted to live there someday. In 1990, the Palestinian Intifada was well under way and Iraq was invading Kuwait. Harmon, who had only seen Israel through the eyes of a tourist, was just out of college and decided to join the Israeli military.

Harmon became known as a “chayal boded” or “lonely soldier,” the official term for a newcomer to Israel.

“On the one hand, I’m an American … but there is something about my connection to [Israel],” Harmon said, adding that each time he visited Israel, he felt “an even stronger relationship” to the country, even coming to feel that “Jerusalem [is] like home.”

The transition for Harmon was difficult because he could not speak Hebrew. He described entering the military as something new and a bit scary, but felt that he needed to do this because he “came to the country [to] build a life there.” Harmon knew that joining the Israeli Defense Forces was something that he wanted.

“Like every other Israeli, I had to serve in the army. I knew that I wanted to,” Harmon said.

In the army, Harmon, who became a paratrooper, learned much about the Israeli military culture and general way of life.

“I’m not a person who does well with authority figures,” Harmon said. “Israeli commanders didn’t scream in my face.”

Harmon suggested that the experience was “far more hospitable” than he had expected and that it was “fair.” Harmon characterized his time with the military as “good” and “positive.”

Harmon emphasized that the Israeli military is unique in its high regard for individualism. His commanders relied more on achieving agreement than on issuing commands. Harmon said that every soldier has the moral obligation to disobey an order.

Harmon also said that the “Israeli military experience is informing the American experience in Iraq today.”

Brock Hill, a fourth-year political science major and president of the College Republicans at UCI, said that the event was very engaging and that he was happy to have co-sponsored it with AFI.

“It was really informative,” Hill said. “Personally, I found this event right up my alley. I’ve always been interested in the IDF because this military is focused on urban warfare. The United States has a lot to learn from their military.”

“It was a really interesting event,” said Emily Shaaya, a second-year social ecology major and co-president of AFI. “It was a great way for AFI to work with other clubs at UCI and to educate the fellow students and community members about Israel.”

NewU News: Creationism Offered Winter Quarter for Bio

Link to article

News
Creationism Offered Winter Quarter for Bio
BIOLOGY: Professor Walter Fitch offers an unconventional class setup on an controversial topic.
By Maya Debbaneh
Staff Writer

Among the wide variety of classes offered each quarter, it’s both refreshing and exciting to be able to take what some might call a “fun” class. The biological sciences department is offering a class titled “Creationism” next quarter for non-majors that may very well fall into this category.

The class strays from the traditional UC Irvine format of lecture halls and student anonymity, with a class size of 25 instead of the usual 300-person biology class. This allows each student to participate at least once per class period, which is one of Walter Fitch’s goals as professor of the course.

“I suppose one of the things I aim to teach is civility … trying to understand the way the other side thinks—for creationists to see how evolutionists think and for evolutionists to see how creationists think,” Fitch said.

What started out as one lecture in a course was developed into its own class by Fitch and was first taught last winter quarter. The class ended up sparking some long discussions among students, which Fitch saw as an ideal situation. However, Fitch warns against expecting agreement between both sides.

“The criterion for something being true differs between the two groups, so from that perspective, one cannot expect a debate to resolve anything,” Fitch said. “Evolutionists expect reproducibility of experiment and predictiveness of new things that haven’t been known before—that’s the ultimate criteria for evolutionists. For the creationists – the young earth creationists – their criteria is consistency with the Book of Genesis in the Christian Bible.”

Because of the national debate corresponding to this subject and the strong opinions many already have about creationism and evolution, the class gives priority for freshmen enrollment. Fitch believes the class is more effect for those who have not yet formed an opinion on the matter, which is why it is restricted to first-year students. This is also why it is a non-major biology course.

In addition, while it is taught under the School of Biological Sciences, the class itself involves very little science and so should not be considered a science class.

As an agnostic, Fitch – who is in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and a researcher in molecular evolution – considers this class a beneficial one and believes both arguments should be heard, despite his leanings toward evolution.

“I’m supposed to be an educator, not a proselytizer,” Fitch said. “I’m not trying to get recruits for evolution because that’s what I believe in. I’m trying to get people to understand other people—there doesn’t have to be a conflict between creationism and evolutionism. It’s perfectly possible to maintain both simultaneously.”

Fitch decided to make his original lecture into a class after observing the national debate that, in his view, was deceptive and divisive, so he took actions to help educate students in a more open-minded environment.

“I saw lots of things going on that I thought were very bad for the country and misleading,” Fitch said. “[I thought,] ‘I just can’t complain about it. Either shut-up or do something.’ So I did something.”

While Creationism, listed as BioSci 11, is currently only offered to freshmen, sophomores will be accepted if the class does not fill up.

NewU Editorial: Pledge of Allegiance Story Shows Bias

This was the NewU Editorial Board's take on recent news stories that the Orange County College Student Board's vote to ban the US Pledge of Allegiance at their meetings.

Of course, this little mention was interesting:

After all, no one seems to mind that the pledge is not recited at ASUCI’s weekly meetings.

Link to article

Pledge of Allegiance Story Shows Bias
Editorial
By Editorial Board

If mainstream media reports are to be believed, the Pledge of Allegiance, which most of us have no occasion to recite once we graduate from high school, has fallen victim to a steady stream of attacks. A nation-wide backlash erupted last week when it was reported that Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa voted to ban the pledge. This happened just a few years after the U.S. Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals ruled in 2002 that the Pledge of Allegiance as led in public schoolrooms violated the First Amendment, creating a clear pattern of nearly constant attack which the pledge has only barely managed to withstand.

At least, that’s what the media would have us believe. Reuters reported the story as one of its top headlines on Nov. 9 and described the incident in its second paragraph as “the latest clash over patriotism and religion in American schools.” FOX News reported the story as one of its top national stories the next day. CNN reported the story with this lead: “Student leaders at a community college voted to drop the Pledge of Allegiance after a tense meeting in which one flag-waving pledge supporter berated them as anti-American radicals”; one wonders why that single flag-waver was important enough to warrant a mention in the lead of the story. In a town whose most famous accomplishment thus far has been being the inspiration for the hit show “The O.C.”, Orange Coast College has suddenly found itself in the national spotlight, and been accused on-campus of “coddling a student government of hypocrites, left-wing nuts, freedom-haters and, very likely, ‘commies.’”

Whether or not “under God” in the pledge in fact constitutes a violation of the Establishment Clause is an issue best left to legal scholars and the Supreme Court, who unfortunately (but predictably) neglected to answer the question in 2004. But the eagerness and slanted style with which the mainstream media has jumped on this story, and ranked it as significant as Ken Mehlman stepping down as chairman of the Republican National Committee and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld resigning, is revealing. If the board had instead voted to require recitation of the pledge among all attendees, including the “under God” part, would it have attracted nearly the same amount of attention?

What has been interpreted by Internet bloggers as proof of godless anti-Americanism running rampant on college campuses (even in arguably the most conservative county in the country), however, is neither remarkable nor likely to affect anyone outside the college, as the decision is solely restricted to how the student board of OCC conducts its meetings. The decision does not affect other clubs or campus meetings, nor would students who do not attend board meetings have any reason to care. If public participation at OCC’s meetings in any way resembles public participation at the Associated Students of UC Irvine’s weekly meetings, the number of people with valid grounds to complain about having a precious opportunity to recite the pledge stripped away from them would be very low indeed.

Additionally, there is nothing stopping students from reciting the pledge of their own volition (as was demonstrated by protestors at the next meeting, who recited the pledge anyway), but apparently some feel that the pledge is only meaningful when they are being told to say it by an authority figure. Nevertheless, no one is being punished for reciting the pledge on their own, the decision in no way affects the American people at large and the majority of the student populace will see no change in their lifestyles.

OCC Student Vice President Christine Zoldos, the lone dissenter on the measure, said, “America is the one thing I’m passionate about and I can’t let them take that away from me,” adding, “The fact that they have enough power to ban one of the most valued traditions in America is just horrible.” Putting aside Zoldos’s unorthodox definitions of “take away” and “ban,” the idea that reciting the pledge before student board meetings is necessary to the fabric of America should not be taken seriously, and the supposed newsworthiness of this story stems from a bias in the media to look down on all things secular—no matter how trivial.

After all, no one seems to mind that the pledge is not recited at ASUCI’s weekly meetings.

NewU Commentary: UCIPD Went Overboard at Ayn Rand Event

And yet another piece from this week's NewU, this one from the author of last week's article, giving more insight into his experience at the controversial event:

Link to article

Opinion
UCIPD Went Overboard at Ayn Rand Event
Commentary
By Paul Backus

Here in the United States, we like to think that our laws and law enforcement help to protect the innocent. People should have the peace of mind of knowing that before they can be arrested, they must commit a crime of some kind.

On Monday, Nov. 6, however, the UC Irvine Police Department arrested 15 people after they began singing to protest a guest speaker, an action which, according to Chief Paul Henisey, would not usually warrant arrest. But the singers were members of the LaRouche Youth Movement, which had previously heckled a guest speaker at the University of Southern California by throwing condoms and raw meat.

And there was one little detail omitted from the article I wrote last week (“Fifteen Arrested at Ayn Rand Club Event,” Nov. 13). UCIPD also threatened to arrest me for trying to get interviews at the scene.

When the arrests began, I was interviewing LYM members, but was asked to step aside for “right now.” I complied and, once the detainees were sitting down and everything was calm, I tried to find a UCI student among the LaRouche members to interview. Here’s what happened, transcribed word for word off of my digital recorder:

Me: Hey, are any of you guys students here by any chance?

UCIPD: We need you to leave! You’re interfering.

Me: OK, sorry. Sorry sir.

UCIPD: And if you interrupt again, you’re going to be arrested. Do you understand?

Me: OK.

UCIPD: You’ve been warned two times now!

Me: OK, I’m sorry. Could any of you guys go on record after, after whatever you’re…

UCIPD: Two times you’re warned. You’re gonna go to jail next time!

Me: OK.

UCIPD: Step away farther!

Me: All right.

Just to make sure I’m crystal clear, this happened while the LaRouche members were seated on the ground, under arrest. There was no plausible way that communicating with the protestors could have hindered the officers’ ability to control the situation.

The fact that this whole incident went unmentioned in last week’s front-page story demonstrates a rule of “objective journalism” that sometimes drives me crazy. Since it happened to me, it couldn’t be included in the article because I’m not supposed to mention myself.

If there had been another reporter being bullied by the campus cops, I could have reported his story as news, and readers of the article could have had a better grasp of the level of criminal activity for which our local authorities are willing to send someone to jail. Unfortunately, it happened to the only writer at the scene.

But let’s get back to the LaRouche arrests. USC’s student paper, the “Daily Trojan,” quotes their Department of Public Safety chief, Carey Drayton, as describing the condom-throwing incident as “very peaceful.”

The authorities present in Los Angeles when the situation occurred did not see a need to take any action beyond ejecting the protestors, because they left when asked.

But Henisey said last week that UCIPD considered that event, plus the singers’ apparent plans to keep on singing, sufficient grounds to arrest everybody involved.

In my mind, there’s no doubt that the LaRouche folks are kind of crazy. While discussing these shenanigans with some buddies last weekend, one of my friend’s new roommates told me that she knew someone who had joined the LYM and had virtually disappeared off the face of the earth shortly thereafter. This type of cult-like behavior on the part of LYM members is a common accusation. But I’m far from convinced that they did anything that warranted their arrest on that historic Monday night.

We may never get a satisfactory answer as to what exactly triggered the handcuffing spree on Nov. 6. A review of the weekly police logs this year reveals that even activities like loud indoor jogging can be considered reportable offenses here in Irvine, and since Los Angeles has a lot more actual crime, this could be a factor in the drastically different action taken by USC’s campus police in response to protesting.

I wonder what else you can get arrested for around here. Maybe the next time some abandoned papers are littering the campus grounds, tree-huggers can at least hope that the delinquents who recklessly committed this offense against our Mother Earth were caught in the act by the proper authorities and are now serving some serious time.

Then again, pollution is more of a liberal concern. The tree-huggers should make sure they criticize the litterer very respectfully, or they could wind up in jail, especially if they’ve ever been in a protest before.

Paul Backus is a third-year literary journalism major.

NewU Opinion: Political Cult Invades UCI: Don’t Be Deceived

Related to this opinion is this letter to the editor in the same issue of the NewU:

Link to article

Opinion
Political Cult Invades UCI: Don’t Be Deceived
By David Syatt

You see them on campus with signs proclaiming the evils of the Bush Administration. You listen to their words and believe that they’re preaching freedom and liberty. And now, after being arrested during a protest at UC Irvine, you think that they’re martyrs for the First Amendment. However, do not be tricked by the LaRouche Youth Movement, a radical political cult fueled by conspiracy theories.

It is easy to look at the pictures of President George W. Bush as a monkey on their booths and think to yourself, “That’s funny. These people must be pretty cool.” But these little displays are just attempts to lasso in ignorant college students who think of themselves as liberals.

If you go up to one of these recruiters and tell them that you’ve heard of their leader, Lyndon LaRouche, a look of surprise and hostility will appear on their faces, because they know that if you’ve heard of him and are not waving one of his pamphlets around with ecstatic glee, then you are against him.

Lyndon LaRouche has run for president in every election since 1976, but he has never been nominated as a candidate for any party. This is because of the disturbing beliefs he insists are true.

First of all, LaRouche scoffs at “the mythical ‘six million Jewish victims’ of the Nazi ‘Holocaust’” in his 1978 article, “New Pamphlet to Document Cult Origins of Zionism.” In the same article, he says that only about 1.5 million Jews died in Nazi Germany and holds that “what the Nazis did to Jewish victims was mild compared with the virtual extermination of gypsies and the butchery of Communists.”

Recruiters will tell you that LaRouche has never been an anti-Semite and has, in fact, written many pro-Jewish articles (which is true). However, if you look at the cover of the booklet that is now being handed out on the UCI campus (“Is Joseph Goebbels on Your Campus?”) you’ll see pictures of Adolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels and… Lynne Cheney. Now, I’m liberal. I did my part to give the Democrats the majority in Congress, but do I believe that Dick Cheney – let alone his wife – can be compared to Hitler and Goebbels, two of the most evil people in history? Of course not, and neither should any rational person. This just shows how LaRouche and his followers trivialize the Holocaust.

Yet, LaRouche’s views on the Holocaust show his more tender, cuddlier side when compared to his views on AIDS and homosexuality. LaRouche presents his solution to the AIDS epidemic in his 1986 article, “The End of the Age of Aquarius?”:

“Yes, we must destroy AIDS. It’s going to destroy everybody, … which means we’re going to have to put away every carrier until they can no longer carry.”

Later, LaRouche writes, “Children are going to playgrounds, they go in with baseball bats, and they find one of these gays there, pederasts, trying to recruit children, and they take their baseball bats and they beat them up pretty bad. They’ll kill one sooner or later. … Children go out with baseball bats and beat them up—which is perfectly moral; they have the civil right to do that! It’s a matter of children’s civil rights!”

To end AIDS, people should attack gays with baseball bats? Followers of LaRouche may say that he has changed his views since 1986, which makes perfect sense. After all, he wrote this when he was 64, so I am sure that he’s matured since that young age.

Why does anyone – especially liberal Southern Californian college students – support LaRouche, given views such as these? The youth who follow this man are victims of deceit and should not be blamed.

Yaron Brook, head of the Ayn Rand Institute and the speaker that the LYM recently protested at UCI, basically wants to see World War III happen in the Middle East and compares Islamic regimes to the Axis powers of the past. So it is no wonder that a liberal-minded young person would want to challenge him. LaRouche targets controversial figures such as Brook in order to attract followers. The Ayn Rand Institute is a petty organization. Even the Muslim Student Union, which disagrees vehemently with Brook’s views, declined to protest the event because they felt that it wasn’t worth their time.

LaRouche wants people to think he’s a liberal saint and to believe his inane theories, which compare members of the Republican Party to Nazis. He is a burned-out, 84-year-old man who has been desperately trying to get noticed by real politicians since 1969. Keep this in mind next time one of his recruiters approach you with an inviting smile and you’ll be safe.

David Syatt is a second-year literary journalism major. He can be reached at dsyatt@uci.edu.

NewU Letter to the Editor: Ayn Rand Speaker Hypocritical

Following up on this previous post (see link for additional references):

Link to article

Ayn Rand Speaker Hypocritical

In the article about Yaron Brook, (“Ayn Rand Institute Director Yaron Brook Speaks to Divided Audience,” Nov. 13) Ayn Rand President and first-year humanities major Eric Brunner states that the people of Iran are better off dead than slaves to a totalitarian state. Does this imply that they should all commit suicide or that they should all be murdered? Either way this is a grotesque and evil thing to say.

One false assumption in this statement is that the Iranian people are slaves to their state. Sure, there are aspects of the Islamic Republic that are repressive, but there are also parts that are not. A slave is someone who has no say in anything that happens to him or her and is kept locked in a closed system. This is simply not the case for many Iranians, as is evident from – among other examples – Iranian students leaving Iran and studying in America on student visas and high numbers of Iranian women being educated in Iran. If the people of Iran are slaves to their state, then the people of the United States are slaves to their republic. In any government, there are parts that people agree with and parts that they don’t.

Furthermore, the people of Iran love their country, whether they live in America, Iran or any other country. To quote Brunner, “If people cannot leave Iran and are against Islamic totalitarianism, they should welcome the destruction of Iran even if it could mean their own death.” To call for the destruction of Iran for the purposes of Western self-interest is disgusting. But that’s how Rand’s ideology works—since countries like Iran are perceived as a threat to international security, we should kill the people in Iran. It is interesting that this group works to support the country of Israel, a bastion of objectivism and self-interest. However, it would be wiser for this group to support the nation of Palestine.

If I may modify a quote from Brunner, “If for some reason some people cannot leave Israel and are against Israeli totalitarianism, they should welcome the destruction of Israel even if it could mean their own death.” It can be seen that Brunner’s ideology can support such atrocious things as suicide bombing and even mass murder—as long as these actions support a “rational self-interest.”

The people of Palestine have a rational self-interest in the destruction of Israel “even if it could mean their own death,” and these people are more like slaves to a totalitarian regime than people in Iran.

The Ayn Rand Club advocates laissez-faire economics and the end of altruism. This is like a neo-Social Darwinist movement. The Social Darwinists advocated laissez-faire economics, which failed in the United States in the 1930s and continues to harm the world wherever it rears its ugly face (consider Africa). Laissez-faire economics also works to oppress an internally colonized people.

Furthermore, without altruism the state of Israel would not exist (consider U.S.-Israeli relations). Rand considers selfishness a virtue and believes that if everyone were to care just about him or herself, we wouldn’t need places like hospitals, health care centers, daycare centers, senior centers or any social institutions, which would lead to bliss and maybe heaven on Earth.

Lastly, if these people truly believed in their ideology, which calls for going to war against Islamic totalitarianism because it’s a threat to the world, they can join the military or become mercenaries. But when it comes to this type of people, they lead by what they say and not by what they do.

Shaun Cunningham
Fourth-year Political Science major

NewU Letter to the Editor: New U Honest, Not Biased

Following up on this previous post:

Link to article

New U Honest, Not Biased

I wasn’t surprised when I picked up last week’s New U and read the letter titled “New U Reveals Left-Wing Bias” (Nov. 13). The letter is simply smear tactics from a party that has already proven itself disastrous for America. There are several problems with the accusations of the New U’s liberal leanings, and here they are:

1. The College Republicans knew about the Get Out the Vote rally up to five days in advance. They were even sent invites. Yet, like other times when they were invited to attend bipartisan talks, the College Republicans failed to even respond to the RSVPs, leaving us in somewhat of a quandary as to where they stood on the issues.

2. The College Republicans, after hearing of Cindy Sheehan’s imminent arrival, did not propose a joint rally, but instead opted to plan a protest. They assumed the rally to be one for progressives (it was co-sponsored by the Progressive Democrats of America). Had they contacted the Young Democrats of UC Irvine before the rally and asked to co-sponsor and have a booth at the event, we would have cordially agreed. However, when we arrived, they had signs reading “Friends Don’t Let Friends Vote Democrat,” “How many more soldiers will you dishonor, Cindy?” and the like. Therefore, by being hostile from the get-go, the College Republicans waived any rights to Limbaugh-like claims concerning the rally’s legitimacy as a GOTV event.

3. The New U represented the side of the College Republicans accurately, giving the president, Brock Hill, eight lines of quotes, whereas the Young Democrats received zero. Steve Young urged bipartisanship as a means of mending a broken America, and allowing the College Republicans a quote illustrated their side of the issue. The letter-writer also falsely assumed the event to be sponsored solely by the Young Democrats. The Young Democrats conjured up some 60 supporters throughout the hour (I can name them all if I have to). PDA and Democracy for America gathered the rest, and this is where the middle-aged audience came from. As one can see, there were many groups at the rally, and the article gave time to each, allowing the College Republicans more than enough space to voice their opinions.

The New U represented the rally with accuracy and integrity. So the question still remains: Will the Republican Party, after the election results, continue to disenfranchise their base? Or will they, with integrity, run on platforms that will benefit America, rather than running groups of concerned and passionate individuals such as the Young Democrats (and the American people) into the ground?

David Lorango
Co-president
Young Democrats of UC Irvine

Sunday Night at 9 pm: Ted Koppel does Iran

Hat tip: a friend

Award-winning American journalist Ted Koppel was allowed three weeks of rare access to examine the roots of 27 years of distrust between Americans and Iranians.

Koppel has made a two-hour documentary which he has named: Iran--The Most Dangerous Nation. In this film, Koppel talks to Iranians in all parts of the country about the harsh rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and about his determination to pursue nuclear technology.

Koppel was able to travel outside Tehran to the holy city of Qom, the old capital Isfahan, to the busy border with Iraq, and into the rural areas that are a significant base of support for Ahmadinejad. In so doing, he conveys the deep sense of Persian pride in their 2,700-year history and rich culture.

The documentary will be aired on Sunday, 19 November at 8 PM (ET/PT) on Discovery Channel.

Office Hours with Vice Chancellor Gomez

Per Anteater Weekly - Week 9:

Vice Chancellor Manuel N. Gomez is holding Office Hours with students: November 22, 1:30 to 3 p.m., 405 Administration. You are invited to visit the Vice Chancellor to share an idea, to say hello, or to discuss a concern.

Michael Coren: Hot for Martyrdom

Hat Tip: CAMERA

Here's an interesting take on radical Islam - it's "imperialism":

But [Dr. Tawfik Hamid - the subject of the Michael Coren op-ed below - is] determined to tell a complacent North America what he knows about fundamentalist Muslim imperialism.

"Yes, 'imperialism,' " he tells me. "The deliberate and determined expansion of militant Islam and its attempt to triumph not only in the Islamic world but in Europe and North America. Pure ideology. Muslim terrorists kill and slaughter not because of what they experience but because of what they believe."

According to Answers.com, "imperialism" is defined in the American Heritage Dictionary as:

n. 1. The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations. 2. The system, policies, or practices of such a government.

That fits well with what's going on. Line that up alongside the term "fascism", as in Islamic Facism, defined in the same dictionary as:

n. 1. a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

So the MSU is not just a bunch of Islamic fascists, but a bunch of Islamic fascist imperialists.

Nice.

Hot for Martyrdom

Michael Coren
National Post

Friday, November 03, 2006

Dr. Tawfik Hamid doesn't tell people where he lives. Not the street, not the city, not even the country. It's safer that way. It's only the letters of testimony from some of the highest intelligence officers in the Western world that enable him to move freely. This medical doctor, author and activist once was a member of Egypt's Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Arabic for "the Islamic Group"), a banned terrorist organization. He was trained under Ayman al-Zawahiri, the bearded jihadi who appears in Bin Laden's videos, telling the world that Islamic violence will stop only once we all become Muslims.

He's a disarmingly gentle and courteous man. But he's determined to tell a complacent North America what he knows about fundamentalist Muslim imperialism.

"Yes, 'imperialism,' " he tells me. "The deliberate and determined expansion of militant Islam and its attempt to triumph not only in the Islamic world but in Europe and North America. Pure ideology. Muslim terrorists kill and slaughter not because of what they experience but because of what they believe."

Hamid drank in the message of Jihadism while at medical school in Cairo, and devoted himself to the cause. His group began meeting in a small room. Then a larger one. Then a Mosque reserved for followers of al-Zawahiri. By the time Hamid left the movement, its members were intimidating other students who were unsympathetic.

He is now 45 years old, and has had many years to reflect on why he was willing to die and kill for his religion. "The first thing you have to understand is that it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with poverty or lack of education," he says. "I was from a middle-class family and my parents were not religious. Hardly anyone in the movement at university came from a background that was different from mine.

"I've heard this poverty nonsense time and time again from Western apologists for Islam, most of them not Muslim by the way. There are millions of passive supporters of terror who may be poor and needy but most of those who do the killing are wealthy, privileged, educated and free. If it were about poverty, ask yourself why it is middle-class Muslims -- and never poor Christians -- who become suicide bombers in Palestine."

His analysis is fascinating. Muslim fundamentalists believe, he insists, that Saudi Arabia's petroleum-based wealth is a divine gift, and that Saudi influence is sanctioned by Allah. Thus the extreme brand of Sunni Islam that spread from the Kingdom to the rest of the Islamic world is regarded not merely as one interpretation of the religion but the only genuine interpretation. The expansion of violent and regressive Islam, he continues, began in the late 1970s, and can be traced precisely to the growing financial clout of Saudi Arabia.

"We're not talking about a fringe cult here," he tells me. "Salafist [fundamentalist] Islam is the dominant version of the religion and is taught in almost every Islamic university in the world. It is puritanical, extreme and does, yes, mean that women can be beaten, apostates killed and Jews called pigs and monkeys."

He leans back, takes a deep breath and moves to another area, one that he says is far too seldom discussed: "North Americans are too squeamish about discussing the obvious sexual dynamic behind suicide bombings. If they understood contemporary Islamic society, they would understand the sheer sexual tension of Sunni Muslim men. Look at the figures for suicide bombings and see how few are from the Shiite world. Terrorism and violence yes, but not suicide. The overwhelming majority are from Sunnis. Now within the Shiite world there are what is known as temporary marriages, lasting anywhere from an hour to 95 years. It enables men to release their sexual frustrations.

"Islam condemns extra-marital sex as well as masturbation, which is also taught in the Christian tradition. But Islam also tells of unlimited sexual ecstasy in paradise with beautiful virgins for the martyr who gives his life for the faith. Don't for a moment underestimate this blinding passion or its influence on those who accept fundamentalism."

A pause. "I know. I was one who accepted it."

This partial explanation is shocking more for its banality than its horror. Mass murder provoked partly by simple lust. But it cannot be denied that letters written by suicide bombers frequently dwell on waiting virgins and sexual gratification.

"The sexual aspect is, of course, just one part of this. But I can tell you what it is not about. Not about Israel, not about Iraq, not about Afghanistan. They are mere excuses. Algerian Muslim fundamentalists murdered 150,000 other Algerian Muslims, sometimes slitting the throats of children in front of their parents. Are you seriously telling me that this was because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians or American foreign policy?"

He's exasperated now, visibly angry at what he sees as a willful Western foolishness. "Stop asking what you have done wrong. Stop it! They're slaughtering you like sheep and you still look within. You criticize your history, your institutions, your churches. Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."

Then he leaves -- for where, he cannot say. A voice that is silenced in its homeland and too often ignored by those who prefer convenient revision to disturbing truth. The tragedy is that Tawfik Hamid is almost used to it.

- Michael Coren is an author and broadcaster. www.michaelcoren.com
© National Post 2006

YnetNews: Qassam terror on tape

A Sderot college student hears the alert of an incoming Qassam and turns on her video camera moments before the missile strikes...approx. 50 meters from her location!

Read more about it at this link

The video appears to require Windows Media (sorry folks)

View video in external player

UCI Inaugural Dialogue on Democracy and Islam

Tipped off to this by a friend...

School of Social Sciences
Center for the Study of Democracy

Invites you to attend the

Inaugural Dialogue on Democracy and Islam

With Guest Lecture by

RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN

Assistant Managing Editor,
The Washington Post

IMPERIAL LIFE IN THE EMERALD CITY

Thursday, November 16, 2006

4:30-5:00 p.m. Book Signing in Social Science Plaza
5:00 p.m. Lecture
Social Science Plaza A, Room 1100

FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

Rajiv Chandrasekaran is an assistant managing editor of The Washington Post. From April 2003 to October 2004, he was The Post's bureau chief in Baghdad, where he was responsible for covering the American occupation of Iraq, leading a team of American correspondents, and supervising more than two dozen Iraqi staffers. He also spent much of the six months leading up to the war in Baghdad, reporting on the United Nations weapons-inspections process and the build-up to the conflict.

He currently heads The Post's Continuous News department, which provides breaking news stories to the paper's Web site, washingtonpost.com.

He took a sabbatical from The Post in 2005 to serve as the journalist in residence at the International Reporting Project at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington and as a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center in Washington.

He has appeared on National Public Radio and numerous television programs and stations, including the News Hour, CNN, Fox News, Nightline, NBC Nightly News, MSNBC, and the BBC.

Before the U.S.-led war in Iraq, he was The Post's Cairo bureau chief. Prior to that assignment, he was The Post's Southeast Asia correspondent, based in Jakarta, Indonesia. In the months following September 11, 2001, he was part of a team of Post reporters who covered the war in Afghanistan. He has been a foreign correspondent for The Post since 1999. Prior to that, he was the paper's Washington-based national technology correspondent.

He joined The Post in 1994 as a reporter on the Metropolitan staff. A native of the San Francisco Bay Area, he holds a degree in political science from Stanford University, where he was editor in chief of The Stanford Daily.

In the October 10, 2006 edition of the New Yorker, Chandrasekaran's Imperial Life in the Emerald City was reviewed as follows:

"This revealing account of the postwar administration of Iraq, by a former Baghdad bureau chief for the Washington Post, focuses on life in the Green Zone, the American enclave in central Baghdad. There the Halliburton-run (and Muslim-staffed) cafeteria served pork at every meal-a cultural misstep typical of the Coalition Provisional Authority, which had sidelined old Arab hands in favor of Bush loyalists. Not only did many of them have no previous exposure to the Middle East; more than half had never before applied for a passport. While Baghdad burned, American officials revamped the Iraqi tax code and mounted an anti-smoking campaign. Chandrasekaran's portrait of blinkered idealism is evenhanded, chronicling the disillusionment of conservatives who were sent to a war zone without the resources to achieve lasting change."

For additional information please call 924 824-2904 or visit http://www.democ.uci.edu

Cox and Forkum: "Flashback"

I couldn't have put it better myself - click here for Cox and Forkum's analysis

MSU update

From MSU Week 8 E-Calendar

TUESDAY:
Protest at LA Convetion Center –
2:15pm – Carpools leave from flagpoles to the LA Convention Center
*The Israeli Prime Minister Olmert is going to be down in LA, come protest his presence.
**For more information please contact Br. Omar Kurdi at omarkurdi@gmail.com

THURSDAY:
OUTDOOR EVENT –
12-1pm on Ring Road
Topic: Hijab and Women’s Rights
Speaker: Sister Muslema

And here's a new one - a phone mailing list at http://www.msu-uci.com/phone where one can sign up for MSU phone mail:

Emergency Notices (automatic)
This list is used in the case of an emergency or sudden time/location change of events.

General List
This list is used for general weekly [sic] announcemens.

I have to admit I am impressed by the MSU's adept choice of technology.

"Fighting your opponents with respect and reason works better than aspersion and attack"

Heard this snippet of Bill Clinton on the news this morning:

[The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. monument] will also be a reminder of Martin Luther King's conviction that in the struggle for freedom, equality and justice - non-violence, his passion for peace - is the most effective strategy. When the real battlefield is the human heart, civil disobedience works better than suicide bombing. Fighting your opponents with respect and reason works better than aspersion and attack.

I'm sure that - as usual - that advice will fall on the MSU's deaf ears. Then again, they wouldn't want to listen, as MLK also said this at a lecture at Harvard in 1968 shortly before his death:

“When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews, You are talking anti-Semitism.”

(citation)

Copy this into your RealPlayer program to see the whole event:

rtsp://video.c-span.org/15days/e111306_mlk.rm

NewU: Saddam Scare Is A Big Lie

The following sentence in the NewU article below irked me:

We had spent millions of dollars searching the country, wherever we wanted, and found no indication that Hussein was manufacturing or developing weapons of mass destruction.

LGF tipped me off to this little paragraph (#14 to be exact) in an article published November 3rd in the New York Times:

The Web site, “Operation Iraqi Freedom Document Portal,” was a constantly expanding portrait of prewar Iraq. Its many thousands of documents included everything from a collection of religious and nationalistic poetry to instructions for the repair of parachutes to handwritten notes from Mr. Hussein’s intelligence service. It became a popular quarry for a legion of bloggers, translators and amateur historians.

Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq had abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

European diplomats said this week that some of those nuclear documents on the Web site were identical to the ones presented to the United Nations Security Council in late 2002, as America got ready to invade Iraq. But unlike those on the Web site, the papers given to the Security Council had been extensively edited, to remove sensitive information on unconventional arms.

The deletions, the diplomats said, had been done in consultation with the United States and other nuclear-weapons nations. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which ran the nuclear part of the inspections, told the Security Council in late 2002 that the deletions were “consistent with the principle that proliferation-sensitive information should not be released.”

The evidence of Saddam's aim to build a nuclear bomb did exist - and that he was close to finishing. No indications my foot!

Link to article

Opinion
Saddam Scare Is A Big Lie
Commentary
By Bill Repking

Voters disrobed President George W. Bush on Tuesday, Nov. 7. They removed his political armor. He is now naked, without a conservative Congress for defense, before a vindictive Democratic majority. Like an abused dog, his sides welted from the lash of his master’s whip, the Democratic party has lain servile, yet eager, for the opportunity to strike. The Democrats may not have any new ideas for Iraq, but I welcome their power to force attention towards those most culpable for the war. And to the Democratic party, though I belong to no party, I offer this gift. I offer my recrimination of the president.

Bush shares one trait in common with all other politicians. This trait is not his mysterious smile in press conferences, nor is it the aura of wisdom that wreathes his lips as he recites statistics. It is not the irrelevance of those statistics either. The shared trait is his propensity to lie. Some politicians lie directly and daringly, while others lie discreetly and ambiguously. Former President Bill Clinton lied intrepidly about his affair, and in debates, often the one who evades the questions best wins. I do not blame our politicians for misleading, for the act is a political necessity. In a world where no one is ever completely right or completely wrong, a politician can rarely admit his or her error.

So by calling Bush a liar, I would not necessarily condemn him. However, what concerns me and criminalizes him is the depth of his deceit and its circumstances. His was not a simple omission. He was not one congressman forgetting a fact in his espousal of welfare. It was more historical. He was a young Salem girl telling the mayor he saw his neighbor communing with Satan. His administration’s claim about Iraq’s weaponry was one of those deceptions that will occasionally fester with fear, infect the government, perverting its policies and inflicting enduring harm. It gives me a nauseating sense of nostalgia. Joseph McCarthy used the urgency of the Soviet atomic threat to begin the Red Scare and imprison whomever he wished. Senator McCarthy’s hunt for the Reds afflicted the country with terror, the residue of which still tinges the word “Communism” today.

The 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center created a profound sense of unease similar to the effects of Soviet nuclear testing 50 years ago. We felt a compulsion to act, to eliminate our enemies, who in fact were sometimes our own citizens, sometimes phantoms who appeared and disappeared arbitrarily. We invaded Afghanistan, the most culpable sponsor of terrorism. Then we invaded Iraq.

We know now that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. But we should also understand that at its inception, the invasion should have been recognized as such. We had spent millions of dollars searching the country, wherever we wanted, and found no indication that Hussein was manufacturing or developing weapons of mass destruction. This meant one of two things: that he was developing them in secret, in mobile vans or deep underground laboratories set in the desert sand, or that he was not trying to build weapons at all. If the latter, we had no cause to invade, at least not from a national security perspective. If the former, the weapons would be of such minuscule quantities they would not even threaten his neighbors.

Under these circumstances, Bush pushed and pushed his case against Iraq. He directed the nervous energy of his advisors, the Senate, congressional leaders and some of the American people and impelled them into irrational fear. Bush created an insidious deception, one that arose through his hatred of Hussein and that propagated because of the extreme sense of peril at the time. This frenetic fixation created enormous political pressure within the administration to discover Hussein’s hidden cache, which everyone supposed would exist, even contrary to simple logic.

In Salem, magistrates hardly needed evidence to verify witchcraft they already knew was true. I do not doubt that even Bush believed his lie. Thus, the investigation became a frenzied hunt for any evidence that could justify the inevitable war rather than a cool search for factual evidence that would have prevented a war.

We did depose a brutal dictator – drown a witch – but Hussein wasn’t the witch he was supposed to be. When we invaded, he was a devil to his own country and none other. Our hunt ended Hussein’s torturing of Iraqis but killed thousands of U.S. soldiers. And tens of thousands more Iraqis died than would have otherwise. We could have spent the funds better securing Afghanistan but instead spent the money creating new terrorists in Iraq.

Bush was not the only young girl tattling on witches. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who recently resigned, shares huge responsibility. To the Democrats, I plead: Gnaw through those conservative collars and free your liberal leashes to spring upon Bush in nonpartisan justice. The perpetrator of the Red Scare didn’t evade ignominious recognition, and neither should the perpetrators of the Saddam scare.

Bill Repking is a third-year economics and history double-major.

NewU Letter to Editor: New U. Reveals Left-Wing Bias

Link to article

New U. Reveals Left-Wing Bias

I wasn’t surprised when I picked up last week’s New University and read the headline, “Young Dems Rally the Vote, Reps Protest” (Nov. 4). It is a popular misconception among the general public that the media is biased and leans to the right. You always hear liberals complaining about how the media never tells the truth and is somehow on a corporate or government payroll, and constant allegations of FOX News being biased and right-wing. But whenever I pick up the newspaper in this country or watch the news, I get the opposite feeling.

The best example of how the media is not biased toward conservatives but toward liberals can be seen in the New U. The headline of last week’s newspaper implies that Republicans were protesting the Get Out the Vote rally set up by the Young Democrats of UC Irvine. This is an absurd and misinterpreted view of what actually happened.

To best make a judgment on the neutrality of the headline, we must first analyze the Young Democrats’ rally, which was publicized as a GOTV effort, with special guests like actor Ed Asner, Congressional candidate Steve Young and Iraq-war protestor Cindy Sheehan. However, the rally focused more on partisan politics and left-wing views. All the speakers were one-sided and never portrayed a balanced view. Usually during a GOTV rally, the purpose is to get people to vote, not just to get people who share your point of view to go vote, so the first conclusion we can make is that the Young Democrats’ rally was a rally to get extremely liberal voters to vote.

The second conclusion we can make about the rally was the lack of UCI students. The majority of the crowd was middle-aged men and women who were apparently attending the rally only to see Cindy Sheehan speak. This brings up a good question: Where were all the students the Young Democrats were trying to rally?

But to their dismay, Sheehan did not show up. Apparently Sheehan was “deathly ill” from constantly protesting around the country. This was reported in the New U as well. But, if the biased New U did some research, they would have found out that Cindy Sheehan was not “deathly ill” with the flu but had a more important rally in Orange that same day.

Another thing the New U forgot to report was the fact that the UCI administration tried to silence many Republican protestors and denied the College Republicans a place to set up their booth nearby for a large portion of the event.

So the question still remains: Are media outlets biased toward liberals or conservatives? The answer is very simple at UCI. The New U has done everything in its power to twist and spin their reporting. Will the New U change its policies and attempt to portray a more balanced image of politics on campus or continue to promote biased perspectives?

Edwin Ohanian

second-year,

economics major

NewU: DAC Drops Dead for Darfur

Link to article

Features
DAC Drops Dead for Darfur
By Madelyne Oliver

During a Darfur Action Committee rally last Monday at UC Irvine, the beat of drums coincided with the cheers of members who proudly displayed posters calling to “Save Darfur.” Darfur is a region in Sudan in which an estimated 400,000 people have been killed in what the U.S. government and others have called “genocide.”

DAC members with green T-shirts and ribbons passed out information on the situation in Darfur and offered to educate passersby on what actions can be taken in response.

DAC also set up a booth which was used for recruiting members, accepting donations and selling armbands promoting the message of peace.

But nothing was more effective than when DAC members put down their posters and fell dead on the ground, appearing as a mass of bodies clumped together. Smaller signs saying “I’m a Victim of Genocide” lay strewn across their chests.

This method of protesting, referred to as a “die in,” naturally sparked curiosity in some students, giving DAC the chance to further educate them on the situation in Darfur.

DAC Co-President Anita Issagholyan, a second-year political science and studio art double major, suggested how students could help with the situation in Darfur.

“In order to decide what you want to contribute to Darfur, one must understand and be able to comprehend different outlooks and opinions regarding the multiple issues hovering over Darfur, such as the U.N. peace-keeping, U.S. intervention as well as economic or medical aid,” Issagholyan said. “One thing is for certain—the time to act is now.”

Last week’s demonstration, in which DAC members’ bodies were numbed by cold cement, was only one of many such demonstrations that DAC has organized, and the club hopes to continue to hold such events in the future. One planned future event will bring the ambassador for Chad to UCI for a chance to speak on the relationship that Darfur now has with Chad because of the 200,000 people that have sought refuge in the latter country.

DAC also hopes to get its message across to UCI students by appealing to them through arts, music and politics.

DAC’s projects include educating students on campus, staging high school outreach and writing letters to President George W. Bush and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In “Camp for Darfur,” an event that DAC hosted last school year, club members camped out in tents for three days with limited food supplies and no luxury items—conditions meant to resemble those in refugee camps. This event is also on the club’s agenda for next year.

The Genocide Intervention Network recently reported that on Oct. 26, U.S. Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer responded to calls for concrete action against Darfur by pledging to “hold accountable those individuals responsible for atrocities.”

However, the situation in Darfur remains severe. Last week, 63 people, including 27 children under the age of 12 and a staff member from the International Committee of the Red Cross, were reportedly killed. There were also two separate attacks on U.N. aid convoys in the south part of Darfur.

The 3.2 million people that have been directly affected by genocide in Darfur still need assistance, as do those who are barely surviving in refugee camps.

The British Red Cross has raised 5.9 million pounds (over 11 million U.S. dollars) to provide family kits, tarpaulins, blankets and food to Darfur and Chad, but more help is needed.

The World Food Program estimates that 2.7 million Darfurians will require assistance by the end of 2006.

According to Mark Hanis, executive director of the Genocide Intervention Network, “at least $240 million from the United States alone will be required to support” African Union peacekeepers, which are a ”vital firebreak against genocide.” This is almost four times the current amount being given by the United States

All funds raised by the DAC on campus will be given directly to the International Medical Corps, a group that aids refugees on the border of Chad and Darfur.

NewU: Media Critic Speaks at UCI

I blogged about this previously here

Link to article

News
Media Critic Speaks at UCI
MEDIA: Journalist, filmmaker and former television producer Danny Schechter speaks UC Irvine
By Eugenia Wong
Staff Writer

Today it’s easy to just blame the Bush Administration for the wrongs that have come out of the war on terror. Danny Schechter’s lecture and documentary screened on Nov. 6 revealed another culprit: the American media.

Schechter spoke at UC Irvine as the Associated Students of UC Irivine’s Academic Affairs Speaker, delivering his lecture to a crowded audience at the Engineering Lecture Hall.

Out of 800 news experts since the war began, only six opposed the war. A little biased? Schechter sure seems to think so. As a Cornell graduate, filmmaker and former producer for an array of major news networks, Schechter sees himself as an insider turned outsider. Schechter argued that the media dumbs down the news. “‘The more you watch, the less you know,’ basically sums up my time with ABC and CNN,” Schechter said.

Schechter claimed that America is a “media-ocracy”—a country whose dominant institution is the media. Trillions of dollars are poured into something that is an extremely effective way of teaching values to the American people.

“People must understand this as a communication system with a shared sense of making money and serving the status quo,” Schechter said. “When war comes along this puts [the media] to the test. Will they become patriotically correct and salute the flag?”

Schechter also noted how history tends to repeat itself with regards to the media. He cited the Spanish-American War in 1898 as a parallel of how powerful and crooked the media can be. “Remember the Maine,” was a slogan used throughout this period to prepare the population for war, which Schechter viewed as similar to what has been happening today with the war on terror.

In the Spanish-American War the USS Maine in Havana Harbor had been sunk. “Give me the photographs and I’ll give you a war,” said journalist William Randolph Hearst. Hearst’s paper in New York began exaggerating the atrocities in Cuba, and claimed that Cubans sank the ship. The American public was outraged and support for the Spanish-American War grew.

National Geographic sent a submarine to go into Havana harbor 50 years later and had scientists poke around the Maine. The scientists came to the conclusion that nobody blew up the Maine; it was an accident in the engine room that made the ship sink. “This was the reason why Americans went to war: because of a lie. This pattern is nothing new,” Schechter said.

As a self-proclaimed media critic, Schechter’s job is to dissect the news. The first 20 minutes of Schechter’s film documents him sitting for months studying various news programs and finding similar patterns. Protests against the war on terror had little to no coverage in the United States or abroad, news anchors lovingly described military weapons as though they were toys and when countries such as France, openly opposed the war, the American media simply scoffed at them by labeling them as “cheese-eating surrender monkeys.”

He also gave examples of various news reporters such as Ted Koppel of Nightline, Yousef Ibrahim for the New York Times and David Marr of Australia’s Media Watch who had all been fired from their jobs after questioning the war.

In his film, Schecter gives proof to how even the media acknowledges that it has problems, such as when the New York Times admitted to “coddling sources.”

“Covering the war was not the Time's best,” Schecther said.

Schrechter ended his lecture by stressing that the issue with the American media is not an individual problem but rather an institutional problem.

“Media is central to the understanding of our democracy. It is at the heart of political debate. You can’t have a democracy if the people aren’t informed,” Schechter said. “It’s about us. Are we going to participate and be citizen journalists? Our challenge: seek out alternative sources to better educate ourselves.”

NewU: Ayn Rand Institute Director Yaron Brook Speaks to Divided Audience

Here's the second of two articles published in the NewU on last week's Yaron Brook event.

Link to my blog post of the first of two articles

Link to article

News
Ayn Rand Institute Director Yaron Brook Speaks to Divided Audience
POLITICS: Amidst protest, controversial speaker gives two-hour lecture at Social Science Lecture Hall.
By Julian Camillieri
Staff Writer

A disruptive renegade youth choir, a deeply divided crowd, a World War II history lesson, a radical soap-box performance by a former Israeli Military Intelligence Agent and a dead writer whose philosophy is still influential all came together at UC Irvine on Nov. 6.

Ayn Rand Institute President Yaron Brook spoke Monday to an audience of varying ages, cultural backgrounds and political ideologies for an event held by UCI’s Ayn Rand Club, titled “Destroying Islamic Totalitarianism: The West’s Moral Imperative” at the Social Science Lecture Hall.

The Ayn Rand Club is a student organization whose goal is to promote objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of books like “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead.”

Specifically, the club argues that “reason, laissez-faire capitalism and rational self-interest are the foundations of a free society.”

Brook, whose advocacy group has encountered controversy and protest at many of its lectures at campuses across the country, argued for taking a much stronger stand against countries he deems “Islamic totalitarian regimes,” expressing concern primarily over Iran, and using past military action against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan as models for ending terrorist attacks against the United States.

The first half of the event was marked by a pre-planned protest organized by the LaRouche Youth Movement in which protesters stood during the speech and sang songs critical of Brook. Fifteen of the protesters, some of whom were peaceful and others who violently resisted police, were escorted from the building one by one and were arrested.

This did not deter the calm, collected Brook, who continued his lecture after each wave of protesters were dejected and followed his speech with an extensive question-and-answer section. Ayn Rand Club President and first-year undeclared humanities major Eric Brunner was pleased with the event’s turnout and was also not fazed by the protesters.

“The event was a total success,” Brunner said. “About 170 people attended. The people who disrupted my event are less than zeros and are barely worth mentioning. Simply observing their behavior speaks for itself.”

In his speech, Brook identified several countries – including Iran, Saudi Arabia and Algeria – as “Islamic totalitarian regimes,” which he defined as countries that believe that Islam should dictate all aspects of life and “support terrorists and the ideology that supports those terrorists.”

“The Iranian regime is the fountain of the Islamic totalitarian regime,” Brook said. “As long as that regime is dedicated to the establishment of the Islamic totalitarian state and to the destruction of the United States, it has to be the number-one target on our agenda to eliminate.”

Brook was met with the most vocal opposition when he suggested that the United States should deal with “Islamic totalitarianism” in the same way that it dealt with Germany and Japan during World War II. Brook was never exactly specific about what action should be taken, but he did not rule out options that could take many civilian lives.

“We are attacked by Islamic totalitarianism,” Brook said. “What needs to happen is that we go to war like we did in World War II and doing in that war whatever is necessary to defeat the enemy. Yes, that is going to involve, unfortunately, killing a lot of people. If you don’t want people to die, don’t go to war, and accept the fact that you will be the one that dies.”

In the second half of the evening, Brook answered questions from the audience for over an hour. While there were some supportive audience members, most questions came from students and community members who strongly disagreed with Brook.

“People get worked up over what Brook says because he says the blunt truth,” Brunner said. “A good portion of those who get worked up are Muslim students who actually agree with the Islamic totalitarians’ goals, and other Muslim students are offended because they misunderstand and seem to think that what Brook says applies to everyone who calls himself or herself a Muslim.”

Brook answered every question calmly, almost always reverting back to his original thesis and never wavering on his stance.

Brunner agreed with Brook’s criticism of Iran.

“Those who are living in Iran and do not support Islamic totalitarianism should have left a long time ago,” Brunner said. “If for some reason some people cannot leave Iran and are against Islamic totalitarianism, they should welcome the destruction of Iran even if it could mean their own death. In such a context, the people are better off dead than being a slave to a totalitarian state.”

Iranian Student Association President and third-year international studies and sociology double-major Leyla Rezvani declined to comment about the event, noting that ISA is strictly a social group, not a political one.

In weeks leading up to the event, LaRouche Youth Movement representatives told New University reporters that they were organizing a protest along with the Muslim Student Union. However, the LaRouche Youth Movement, which has no university affiliation, did not actually have MSU support.

“MSU was not going to protest,” said MSU External Public Relations Officer and third-year social sciences major Marya Bangee. “[The LaRouche Youth Movement] presented their case for why there should be active protesting against the Ayn Rand club; we disagreed. We didn’t think a fringe group like Ayn Rand was worth our effort. Any group that advocates the murder of millions of innocent people does not have a legitimate voice. As Muslims, we believe human life is sacred.”

Despite Anteaters for Israel being listed as a co-sponsor on some posters advertising Brook’s talk, the Ayn Rand Club was the sole sponsor of the event.

“For a day or so there was miscommunication that AFI was considering co-sponsoring, but we did not,” said AFI Co-President and second-year Spanish and sociology double-major Emily Shaaya. “While Yaron Brook generally does take on a pro-Israel stance, it would be unfair to AFI’s members to co-sponsor the event, seeing as the members of our organization come from all political affiliations, religions and backgrounds, all of whom would approach today’s current circumstances in a different manner.”

NewU: Fifteen Arrested at Ayn Rand Club Event

One of two articles in the NewU on the Yaron Brook event that was held a week ago - I blogged about it here.

Google Search For "LaRouche"

Link to article

News
Fifteen Arrested at Ayn Rand Club Event
POLICE: LaRouche Youth Movement protestors arrested for disrupting Ayn Rand Club Event.
By Paul Backus
Staff Writer

Eleven arrests were made for disturbing the peace and four for resisting arrest when a radical liberal group with a flair for theatricality disrupted a controversial speech by the president of the Ayn Rand Institute, last Monday Night.

The speaker was Yaron Brook, brought to campus by the Ayn Rand Club. The protestors were members of the LaRouche Youth Movement.

This latest showdown had been building for some time. On Oct. 27, the same LaRouche members who came to UCI Monday night had protested the same speaker at the University of Southern California by hurling liquid-filled condoms at the guest and plopping a raw steak on his notes. In the week before Brook arrived in Irvine, LaRouche members handed out flyers on campus, inviting students to “join the fun” in whatever they had planned for “Nazi Yaron Brook.”

Brook began his speech by addressing a premature question yelled out by a LaRouche supporter, who questioned seemingly excessive police presence at the event.

“I'll assume that's an honest question,” Brook said. “The reason is because we were [told] in advance that this event would be disrupted, that there would be protests and that we would not be able to speak.”

Brook continued relatively un-heckled, receiving only a smattering of laughter at his speech impediment, which protestors likened to that of Elmer Fudd. But all of a sudden, protestors throughout the audience stood up and started singing, delivering lyrics like “300,00 Muslims died. / Sounds like Nazi genocide” in an a cappella choir style. UCI police began escorting the vocalists outside, where authorities arrested LaRouche protestors.

At one point, a protestor attempted to escape arrest and was pinned down by the UCI Police Department.

“Hey freedom of speech guy! I got arrested for watching!” hollered another arrested protester from inside a police car.

“I don’t know on what grounds they could arrest me,” said Tarrajna Dorsey, a LaRouche supporter from Washington.

Some observers who were not arrested seemed surprised at what they considered an extreme reaction to the inappropriate singing.

“There’s been a double standard set,” said third-year criminology and social psychology major William Layne. “[The Muslim Student Union] had an event a couple weeks ago and a lot of people from the Israeli community were out protesting, singing, speaking and yelling over the speaker, but no people were arrested. No police reprimanded anyone, and this is for singing.”

“It seems like when the more conservative groups go up to have their say, the more liberal groups always get arrested,” said MSU member Marya Bangee, a third-year sociology and English double major. “It’s the extreme right and the extreme left coming at each other. Yaron Brook is basically discredited. He’s calling upon the mass genocide of thousands upon thousands of innocent people.”

She added that the MSU had nothing to do with this event because “it’s expressing two viewpoints that aren’t even really active on this campus or the American mainstream.”

UCI Chief of Police Paul Henisey acknowledged that the department’s response to the singing was severe, but he said that the arrests were justified in this case.

“In most cases, we’d ask [disrupters] to stop, and the second time we’d ask them to leave,” Henisey said. “But we were well aware that these were the same individuals who had vandalized the notes [at USC]. When they began singing, it was clear they were not going to stop.”

Henisey also added that out of the 15 people who were arrested that night, 12 were cited and released. Only three people were detained overnight, all of whom had obstructed the police, not just protested. Only one of the people arrested was a UCI student, and he was not associated with LaRouche.

In Memoriam To Those Who Gave Their Lives In The Service Of This Great Nation

Unknown US soldier from the North Africa American Cemetery

Image care of the US Army's History of Veteran's Day

UPDATE

Ways to support veterans (hat tip to LGF):

Operation Gratitude

Project Valour IT - A Soldier's Angels Program

UCI's Student Club Re-Registration Forms Have Been Changed!

I just wandered over to the UCI Dean of Students's Forms and Publications website and took a look at the pdf link for this:

Re-registration Forms (existing groups) [pdf] / Forms required to annually re-register a group on campus.

UCI required in the past student club officers - on the top of page 4 of the annual re-registration of their clubs - to read the UCI Principles of Community and then sign the following statement:

On behalf of my organization, I have read the Principles of Community and we agree to support the principles stated therein.

Both the President / Chair and Vice President / Co-Chair of each club would have to sign that statement. This was present in the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 re-registration forms.

I have hammered UCI for requiring the club officers' signatures on this statement and then not punishing groups like the MSU and SAS when they don't keep to their signed agreement.

Well, I just looked at the 2006-2007 re-registration form. The line between the Principles of Community and the signature lines has changed - it's now:

On behalf of my organization, I have received and read the Principles of Community.

Why is it no longer important that UCI student clubs state that they agree to support the Principles of Community?

Do me and every other Jewish student, staff, and faculty member on campus a favor by asking that very question to:

Chancellor Michael Drake

and

Vice Chancellor Manuel Gomez.

Click the links above to pull up their contact info.

Written, signed messages sent by mail and/or fax create a written record - so those are preferable - but if you want to call them, be my guest - as long as you keep it civil. Remember, we have to uphold those Principles of Community...

Please post in the comments what happened if you do this so we can let everyone know.

Understanding 5,000 Years of Imperial History in the Middle East in 90 Seconds

I highly recommend this (though I cannot vouch for its accuracy):

The 90-second Flash movie will not fit the dimensions of this blog, so please visit this link and click on the big "Play>>>".

Anniversary of Kristallnacht - The Night of the Broken Glass

Occurring 68 years ago today, Kristallnacht - The Night of the Broken Glass - is considered by many as the beginning of the Holocaust. May the souls who perished rest in peace.

NEVER AGAIN

Entry in the Jewish Virtual Library

Images from Wikipedia's Entry