Muslim Students Convicted of Being Mean to Israeli Ambassador
(Gawker)
Last year, when Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren announced his intention to speak at the University of California at Irvine, some members of the school’s Muslim Students Union plotted to inform Oren of their feelings about some of Israel’s policies. They used their voices to do so. This is illegal!
Today 10 members of the so-called “Irvine 11″ (charges against one of the original eleven students were dropped) were convicted on misdemeanor charges of disrupting a meeting and conspiracy to disrupt a meeting in a Santa Ana, Calif., court. Here’s what they did, which is a crime:
In February 2010, as Oren began to speak about the U.S.-Israeli relationship at a campus speech, the students rose one-by-one to object to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank. One shouted, “Michael Oren, propagating murder is not an expression of free speech!” As the offender was removed from the audience, a designated compatriot shouted, “You, sir, are an accomplice to genocide!” And so on. According to an attorney for one of the students, the longest of the interruptions lasted roughly 8 seconds, and the total amount of time taken up by their outbursts—combined—was roughly one minute.
That’s one minute too long when you’re talking about Muslim students interrupting the Israeli ambassador to the U.S. to inform him that some people think his country’s policies are unjust, which is illegal, so don’t do it.
September 26th, 2011 at 9:49 am
No, No, No, it’s only free speech if you keep shrieking false stereotypes at a Muslim speaker. What these students did was insult an israeli official…they should count themselves lucky they’re not in guantonamo bay or dead.
September 26th, 2011 at 10:02 am
Disrupting a meeting is wrong, but not a crime. Let them go, and let them express themselves for crying out loud.
September 26th, 2011 at 11:33 am
I don’t believe what those students did was criminal, and it should not be subject to criminal prosecution in a court of law.
Nevertheless, I do not believe it constitutes “free speech”, and I DO believe it was very rude – no matter how brief a period of time such rudeness occupied. It was quite proper to escort the students out of the meeting, and for the University to take punitive actions against them. But legal action was “a step too far” in my opinion.
A Christian friend of mine (formerly a “missionary” of sorts in a Muslim country) told of his reaction when the church he attends here invited an Israeli man to speak. The church leaders mistakenly believed the Israeli man was a “Messianic Jew” who would be talking about Jews who have “accepted Jesus”. Instead the man was not a Christian at all (though he carefully refrained from saying anything offensive to Christianity), and his message was Zionist propaganda against those evil Palestinians.
Most of the people present avidly consumed the Zionist propaganda; but this friend was quite irritated by it and said he felt a strong urge to stand up and publicly rebuke the Israeli man – pointing out that the Palestinians could no doubt present a lot of evidence of the “evil” of the Israelis. However, my Christian friend restrained his urges because he knew it would be rude and quite out of place. He wasn’t the least bit restrained from voicing his objections later after the meeting was over, though. The Israeli man had his uninhibited free speech, and my Christian friend got his opportunity to speak up later.
That is the way “protected free speech” operates. For Palestinian advocates to rudely interrupt an Israeli speaker is not “free speech”; and of course neither is it free speech for advocates of Zionism to rudely interrupt defenders of the Palestinian cause.
I don’t believe it’s appropriate to quote the adage “turn about is fair play”. If you believe something is rude and wrong when your opponent does it to you, then you should not stoop to his level by doing it back to him. The adage “two wrongs don’t make a right” is more appropriate here. Just because some Zionists may have been at least as rude to a Palestinian speaker previously does not make it legitimate for the Palestinian to “respond in kind” to an Israeli speaker.
September 26th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
They should be proud of their convictions. They have participated in the oldest form of American protest: civil disobedience. Part of participating in an act of civil disobedience is the willingness to be arrested. All they have to do is stay out of trouble and have their records expunged once their sentences are over.
September 26th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Agreed, mooose–it was civil disobedience at it’s best. I hope they wear their conviction with pride. I hope one day they get the respect they so richly deserve from fellow Americans that they chose to speak out against evil.
And yes, stealing other people’s land, ethnic cleansing and aparthied IS evil.
(Not to open a huge can of worms here, but it should be remembered that the USA was largely built the same way Israel is trying to build itself with these methods–maybe that’s why the two nations are so close. Only difference now is that the majority of the world recognizes these means as evil.)
September 26th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
I wonder if the prosecutor would have pursued a Christian or Jew who interrupted a Muslim speaker with the same zeal he pursued these Muslim men? Somehow I doubt it. Non-Muslims are free to post blogs and write books calling for the genocide of Muslims, but if Muslims even verbally support the right of their brothers and sisters to defend themselves against invasion/aggression, then they are labeled “terrorists” or targeted for assassination/killing.
September 26th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
When the intention of a person going into an autitorium to disrupt a speaker because they dont like what he is going to say…or him personally, it is wrong.
I say these young people did something wrong…and the Israeli ambassador did have the right to speak freely.
However, for them to be arrested, charged, with the full backing of Israel and thier various represtntitive entityies in the US is wrong too. That is why these people got such a harsh sentance for what they did.
I am sure there is going to be an appeal, at least to lesson the sentance…simply, because a crime should be judged by the action, not by who the offenders are, or who the ‘offended” is.
I think this shows how much influence Israel has over the basic universal rights of people…wherever they have thier ‘tenticles’. Americans have thier elderly choosing between thier medications, and thier utilities, teachers, firefighters, police officers, border agents being let go because there is no money to pay them…but can always find a carte blanc check for Israel to kill other people’s children and eldery.
…and now, Israel takes the universal rights of Americans to speak out.
How free are Americans is what America needs to figure out.
September 26th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Israel has become the new GOD of the world, yes all caps, uncriticizable and infallible. Even an Israeli criticizing Israel would suffer beating and discrimination and might be denied entry to Israel. Chomsky, Finkelstein, and Rae Abileah the poor brave Jewish woman who interrupted Netanyahu are just a few examples.
September 26th, 2011 at 10:08 pm
It’s not always wrong to disrupt a meeting. I don’t think many of us would object to people disrupting an early speech of Hitler’s in German’s beer halls. So, sometimes, it is good to not be courteous.
September 27th, 2011 at 9:22 am
@Isa; are you seriously suggesting the Israeli ambassador is comparable to Adolf Hitler? How tasteful!
Disrupting a speech is not a very smart way to undo someone’s propaganda. It only makes one look unruly and intolerant.
Here are some smart ways:
1. Organise a protest (outside). Have flyers which contain hard facts about the Palestine/Israel-conflict. “Did you know…?”
2. Have 20 or 30 students prep questions which contain facts about the Palestine/Israel-conflict which put the ambassador in the hot seat. Such as the amount of children in Israëli prisons. “According to Israëli human rights organisations A and B, an x number of Palestinian children are being detained in Israeli prisons, where they are being abused and often sexually molested. How does Israël square this with it’s professed commitment to democracy and human rights?” (if you have 20 or 30 students prepping questions like that, there is no way a lecturer can escape the criticism encased in them).
3. Get on the organising committee and insist Oren is countered with a critical voice (dr. Norman Finkelstein comes to mind). Make it a debate. It seems only fair, in a university, to want to hear both sides, not just one side. Plus, a debate is much more interesting than a feel-good promo by a salesman.
September 27th, 2011 at 9:58 am
Free speech doesn’t include denying someone else’s right to free speech.
That is a misdemeanor under Californian law so I’m perplexed why others are claiming that what these 11 did was not criminal when it clearly was.
September 27th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Rude? Mean? Crime? What is going on in this world today. Ofcourse it is free speech and tons of anti Islamic people that shout out obsenities at Muslims are not charged in the same manner. Atleast the kids were talking truth. Anyone that is Zionist and supports greater Israel is condoning genocide. The truth is a crime in USA. So it seems.
September 28th, 2011 at 4:39 am
Silly statements like that Israel is committing genocide only hurt the cause. And it’s silly, because it can be easily shown that the population in the Palestinian territories is rising. Up to 30% from 1998-2008, according to the Guardian.
If Israel wanted to commit genocide, there would be a couple of million dead Palestinians within the next year. It’s simply a misnomer, meant to evoke indignation, but falling on itself.
September 28th, 2011 at 9:24 am
Meanwhile, Israel violates international law almost with complete impunity. We can compare a few students at Irvine being mean to Israel’s colorful and continuing history of colonization, ethnic cleansing, and territorial expansion.
September 28th, 2011 at 9:53 am
Ok Jack I think you have a point but the statement ” Isreal beats the Sxxx out of the Palestinians on a regular basis ” is not so catchy abet true both economically and on an indevidual basis.