UCI's Police chief says the university doesn't have the resources to protect students from actions by the Muslim Student Union:

UCI Police Chief: Campus Police do not have the means to control boorish and intimidating behavior on campus 

Huntington Beach, CA-- February 12, 2009--In a written response to criticism of UCI's Police Department investigation of complaints of assaults on a student journalist and a Christian evangelist, UC Irvine Police Chief Paul Henisey stated the following": 
"...I do agree there were certainly instances of boorish and intimidating behavior. Some of this behavior involved people not associated with the University. Neither the University nor the Police Department has the means or ability to control such rude or obnoxious behavior...".  

The incidents occurred on September 15, 2008 during a campus rally sponsored by UC Irvine's Muslim Student Union featuring controversial speaker Malik Ali. The victims and eyewitnesses stated that campus police did not immediately intercede when the minister was shoved by several Malik Ali supporters. The student journalist said that he was followed and threatened by Ali's supporters after having his camera pushed in his face. He said they became angered over his filming of the event.  

In the past, concerns have been raised by campus organizations and others over inadequate police protection and the safety of UCI students and campus visitors during controversial events. The university has also been criticized for allowing MSU members to act as "security personnel" during their campus events, in place of uniformed UCI Police officers. At a January 2009 MSU sponsored event on the UCI campus, Malik Ali told the crowd "...We will have to soon engage in civil disobedience, civil disobedience! Yeah, acts of civil disobedience to bring this issue...of what's taking place in Palestine...." The president of the pro-Israel campus group Anteaters for Israel, recently described the UC Irvine campus as "a hotbed for anti-Israel and anti-Semitic activism over the past seven years".  

According to the University of California's Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline, Section 100-102.10: "Chancellors may impose discipline for: "...Physical abuse...and other physical assault...threats of violence; or other conduct that threatens the health or safety of any person....Stalking behavior in which a student repeatedly engages in a course of conduct directed at another person and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety...".  

Chief Henisey said that "The activities of this particular event have been reviewed by the University's Judicial Affairs Officer and follow-up actions were initiated". However, the University has not announced whether any disciplinary action has been taken against the individuals or groups responsible.

Though Pastor Warren certainly has good intentions in reaching out to Muslims and his efforts are forgivable, it's naive to suggest that the Muslim Public Affairs Council is a moderate Islamic organization. Charles Johnson writes at Little Green Footballs:

MPAC's "moderation" is questionable, to say the least. A few hours after the 9/11 attacks, MPAC co-founder Salam Al-Marayati infamously told a Los Angeles talk radio audience: "If we're going to look at suspects, we should look at the groups that benefit the most from these kinds of incidents, and I think we should put the state of Israel on the suspect list because I think this diverts attention from what's happening in the Palestinian territories so that they can go on with their aggression and occupation and apartheid policies."

As you read the article, notice that the spokeswoman for MPAC is Edna Lekovic the former editor of The Daily Bruin, and editor of the Al Tahib, the MSA's publication at UCLA. While she was editor in the 1999 school year, she and her staff wrote:

When we hear someone refer to the great Mujahid (someone who struggle in Allah's cause) Osama bin Laden as a "terrorist." we should defend out brother and refer to him as a freedom fighter, someone who has forsaken his wealth and power to fight in Allah's cause and speak out against oppressors. We take these stances only to please Allah.

The Church is one of the last bulwarks against this type of nonsense, someone as powerful as Warren should definitely wake up.

A year end review of UC Irvine by teacher Gary Fouse:

As my regular readers are well aware, I have written extensively about the situation at the University of California at Irvine, where I teach, and where the local Muslim Student Union repeatedly brings in speakers who believe in the destruction of Israel. Many of them also tend to be anti-American and anti-Semitic. I speak specifically of people like Imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali, Imam Alim Musa and Imam Mohammed al-Asi, all of whom have spoken at UCI on behalf of the Muslim Student Union. Their message is one of poison and hatred. 

While many Jews, both students at the university and interested organizations, have protested the anti-Semitic words spoken at UCI, the university's administration continues to defend the right of free speech, and, beyond condemning all hate speech in general, they have never, to my knowledge, spoken out in response to specific words of hate by specific speakers on their campus. In addition, even some Jews and Jewish organizations have stated that there is no problem of anti-Semitism at UCI and that the administration is doing a great job in this area. It is claimed that "outsiders" with their own agenda are just stirring things up. 

Well, I am not an outsider. I have taught at UCI for ten years and have personally witnessed and heard the words of hate. I have been asked by one of my associates to write a letter for public dissemination to interested persons and organizations. Below is that letter, which is already being disseminated.

"My name is Gary Fouse, and I have taught English as a Second Language at the University of California at Irvine Ext since 1998 until the present. I am retired from the US Drug Enforcement Administration and have been employed part-time as an ESL teacher since retirement. 

In the past few years at UCI, I have become aware of troubling developments at UCI involving the Muslim Student Union (MSU). On numerous occasions, the MSU hosts a week of events on campus, in which several speakers appear. The usual theme of the speakers is the Israel -Palestinian issue, in which, not surprisingly, speakers defend the Palestinian side and condemn Israel. 

There is nothing wrong with this per se. While I defend Israel, I recognize that there are two sides to this issue, and it is entirely proper for both sides to be aired. What I find troubling is the virulent tone of many of the MSU-sponsored speakers, who not only criticize Israel, but call for its destruction and defend and glorify suicide bombers, as well as terrorist organizations like Hizbollah and Hamas. Even more 
disturbing, some of these speakers have engaged in what I can only term as anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish rhetoric). In addition, many of the speakers are clearly anti-American.

One of the speakers who has appeared at UCI on at least two occasions that I am aware of is Imam Mohammed al-Asi from the Washington DC area. He is an open supporter of Hamas and Hizbollah. On a past visit to UCI, he referred to Jews as "low-life ghetto-dwellers". He is also quoted as saying that , "you can take the Jew out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jew". Last May, al-Asi again appeared at UCI. I was present during this speech. On this occasion, he warned Jewish students in the audience that they were increasingly facing the wrath of the entire Islamic world-a thinly-veiled threat of violence in my view.

The most notable MSU-sponsored speaker is Amir Abdel Malik Ali, an Oakland-based imam who appears at virtually every MSU sponsored event. This man has glorified suicide bombers in Israel as "heroes" and "martyrs". He speaks of a fight to the death in the Holy Land between Muslims and Jews over Israel. Like many of his cohorts in the MSU, he will deny he is anti-Semitic-only anti-Zionist. Yet when you listen to his words, he often spits out the term, "Zionist Jew" repeatedly. 

Of course, like al-Asi, Malik Ali has nothing but contempt for America, as he throws out vile insults to his own country and government. But that is not the issue here. Anti-American sentiment on American university campuses is sadly not uncommon.

In his last appearance at UCI in November, I listened to his words and answers to questions (including my own). When one student asked him about President-elect Barack Obama, he laughed contemptuously and mentioned that Obama had as his three top advisors, "Rahm Israel Emanuel, Madelyn Albright and David Axelrod-a Zionist".

I would like to direct the reader's attention back to May 2008, the week MSU hosted its "Palestinian Holocaust Week". As Mohammed al-Asi was spouting his venom in front of the flag pole area, a group of middle school or high school students were standing about 30 feet away. They were on a tour of UCI and were waiting to board their bus. As they stood there, they were exposed to the hateful words of al-Asi. There were several UCI deans in the crowd who were monitoring the event, making sure walkways were clear, and keeping Jewish student protesters from getting too close to the speakers. No one seemed to notice or care that younger students were within easy earshot of this anti-Semitic hate monger, al-Asi.

That same week, MSU students erected a mock wall near the flagpole depicting the wall Israel had erected to keep out suicide bombers. On that wall, were a number of pictures, drawings, photos and quotes. Among them was a drawing of Ariel Sharon, which was drawn in the old style of the anti-Jewish Nazi paper, Der Stuermer, which was published during the Third Reich by Nuremberg-based Gauleiter Julius Streicher. The caricature of Sharon featured him with a big hooked nose, thick lips and a leering expression on his face-typical of the Nazi caricatures of Jews. That drawing sat on that wall the entire week. Numerous school officials, including deans were near the wall during the events. They must have seen it. Yet, no one objected.

In addition, from time to time, there have been incidents of Jewish students who monitor these events and try to film them being subjected to verbal and/or physical intimidation. One Jewish former student I am aware of once had her camera shoved in her face by a Muslim student. No action was taken by campus police or the administration. Last May, after an evening speech by Malik Ali, a Jewish female student who had filmed the talk, was reportedly followed back to her car and accosted by a group of male MSU students who surrounded her car. The incident was reportedly witnessed by a South African woman, who tried to report it to Campus Police but was reportedly met by indifference. (I say "reportedly" because I have no personal knowledge of the incident. I referred the information to the UCI EEO Office for them to follow up on.)

That leads me to my next point. What has been the reaction of UCI's administration to this on-going problem? It is true that Chancellor Michael Drake has met with Jewish community leaders and expressed his disapproval of hate speech in general terms. Yet he and other top university officials constantly refer to the right of freedom of speech-even offensive speech in not reacting to these expressions of anti-Semitism. 

I also believe in free speech. I have never advocated that these speakers be dragged off to jail for what they say. I would hope, however, that at the least, someone from the university would step forward and say that "the words of speaker X when he said X constitute hate speech and we condemn it entirely". I am unaware of any time that anyone from UCI has uttered such a specific condemnation of the words that have been spoken at UCI-which are hateful and inciteful. Generic condemnations of "hate speech" are, in my view, insufficient.

Yet many-even Jews- defend the university and say that the administrators of UCI are doing a great job in this area. This was the reaction when I wrote to the Director of the Orange County Human Relations Commission, Rusty Kennedy. In response, he lambasted me for my criticism of the university. ( I have also outlined my concerns in writing to the UCI EEO office.) The university has other defenders as well, such as at least one Jewish campus organization and many Jewish students at UCI who say there is no problem, and that they do not feel intimidated. I have heard many say that the controversy is all caused by "outsiders". I would like to address these points.

First of all, I am not an outsider. I have taught at UCI for 10 years. I have attended many of the MSU-sponsored events. I have listened to many of the speakers, and, on several occasions, confronted them with questions. As a retired law enforcement officer of almost 30 years service, I think I can recognize hate speech and volatile situations. 

As for the everyday situation at UCI, I have always stressed that 99% of UCI's students are not involved in this ugliness. Most of our students are Asian-American, and they are there to study and enjoy their university experience. I see absolutely no anti-Semitism coming from them or the vast majority of the other students. Yet, two or three times a quarter, the campus is faced with this hateful rhetoric-aimed at Israel, America and Jews.

If many Jewish students see no problem at UCI beyond these periodic events, that is fine. However, if there is no problem, why did Anteaters for Israel take the trouble to protest the speeches of al-Asi and Malik Ali with posters warning students about "hate speech"? 

So there is the problem as I see it. What are my ideas for a solution? I think for one, any further expression of anti-Semitic speech by MSU speakers should be immediately countered by a strong statement of specific condemnation by university officials.

Secondly, in the wake of the much-heralded "Olive Tree Initiative", I think it would be fitting that UCI (which provides funding to MSU) let them know that it is time to find more moderate speakers-or tell the Malik Alis to tone down their rhetoric. Of course, I have stated more than once that if it were my university, the Malik Alis would not be allowed on campus. Most of my colleagues tell me I would lose that case in court. Perhaps so. 

I also strongly believe that, as long as this situation continues to exist at UCI, the public should be made aware of what is taking place on the campus. The public has every right to know what their tax dollars are being used to support.

A couple of weeks ago, there was a brawl at UC Berkeley between Jewish and Palestinian-sympathizer students. Without taking sides on who was at fault, I feel strongly that UCI is potentially the scene of a far worse incident. I pray that it doesn't happen, but if it does, I will not be one of those asking, "how could it happen here?" History has shown that hateful actions are preceded by hateful words. I feel strongly that the groundwork is being laid for a tragedy at UCI. Our campus has acquired the dubious distinction of being considered the most anti-Semitic campus in America according to many observers. In many respects, I would agree that is an unfair characterization. However, in other respects, it is not so unfair.

Finally, I should add that I myself am not Jewish. I am, however, an amateur scholar of the Third Reich and have spent almost three years of my life in the Nuremberg, Germany area. I have also written a book about the history of that area (specifically, the town of Erlangen). I think just the word, "Nuremberg" is sufficient to explain why I have become sensitive to the issue of anti-Semitism-and can recognize it when I see it. I mentioned above the name of Julius Streicher, the so-called "Jew Baiter of Nuremberg", who was hanged as a war criminal after the Second World War. When Imam Mohammed al-Asi appeared at UCI and called Jews, "low life ghetto-dwellers", the only difference between him and Streicher was the languages they spoke in.

This letter may be shared with whomever deemed appropriate."

Police are probing the death of prominent Israel activist Daniel Kilman; it should be noted that he has been assaulted before by ant-Israel activists.

SAN FRANCISCO (JTA) -- A prominent Israel activist was found dead at the bottom of an elevator shaft.

Daniel J. Kliman, 38, was the co-founder of San Francisco Voice for Israel, an affiliate of the national Israel advocacy group StandWithUs, and a well-known pro-Israel activist in the San Francisco Bay area.

His body was found Monday in a San Francisco building where he was taking Arabic classes.  It had been at the bottom of the elevator shaft since Nov. 25, building manager Brad Bernheim told the San Francisco Chronicle. There were no classes held last week, and the elevator supposedly was closed for repairs.

Police are investigating his death.

Kliman was scheduled to fly to Israel on Thanksgiving Day as part of the Honest Reporting mission, a pro-Israel media initiative.

"He was the public face of grass-roots Israel advocacy in the San Francisco Bay area," said Mike Harris, his colleague at Voice for Israel. "He was passionate about standing up for Israel, literally -- standing up in public with flags and signs."

Kliman, also known as a fervent environmentalist, often was seen bicycling around the Bay Area instead of taking rides to reduce his carbon footprint, friends said.

Harris told JTA that he knew of no specific threats against Kliman, but that Kliman had been assaulted before at a pro-Israel rally. 

Kliman's body is being flown for burial to his hometown of Schenectady, N.Y.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism reports on the guilty verdicts of five Holy Land Trial members:

HLF Officials Convicted on All Counts

IPT News
November 24, 2008

DALLAS - A jury convicted five former officials at the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) on all counts in the Hamas-support case after 8 days of deliberations.

The men, Shukri Abu-Baker, Ghassan Elashi, Mohamed El-Mezain, Mufid Abdulqader and Abdelrahman Odeh, could face up to 20 years in prison for their convictions on conspiracy counts, including conspiring to provide material support to terrorists. The verdicts, read Monday afternoon, ended a two-year saga in what is considered the largest terror financing case since the 9/11 attacks.

In the original trial last year, jurors acquitted El-Mezain on 31 of the 32 counts against him, but could not reach unanimous verdicts on any other counts, prompting a mistrial.

Prosecutors made a series of significant adjustments, from dropping 29 counts each against defendants Mufid Abdulqader and Abdelrahman Odeh, to adding new witnesses who could put the charity support in context. In addition, jurors in this trial saw three exhibits Israeli military officials seized from the Palestinian Authority which showed the PA also considered HLF to be a Hamas financer and that an HLF-supported charity committee was controlled by Hamas.

The result was a much more streamlined case that followed a logical narrative, said Peter Margulies, a law professor at Roger Williams University in Rhode Island. Seeing the Palestinian Authority reach the same conclusion as the U.S. government had to have helped, he said.

In addition, prosecutors provided summary exhibits that served as "a road map" to the case and had to help jurors deliberate, Margulies said. "The jury was able to look at the evidence and get past the perceived biases of any of the witnesses and see the evidence as a whole."

That evidence made clear that the defendants knew where the money raised in the U.S. was going despite legal prohibitions against support for Hamas.

The verdict was hailed by M. Zuhdi Jasser, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. Prosecutors prevailed because they were able to "connect the ideology of political Islam and the overriding mission of Islamist organizations like the HLF to their desire to contribute to the efforts of terror groups, like Hamas," he said. "When this connection is made we will see the return of a guilty verdict. In future [terrorism financing] cases DOJ will not only have to connect the financial dots but [will have] to demonstrate an overarching common Islamist mission."

Prosecutors say HLF was part of a Palestine Committee - a conglomerate of U.S. based Muslim organizations and individuals committed to helping Hamas financially and politically. HLF was its fundraising arm, a designation formalized by Hamas deputy political director Mousa Abu Marzook in 1994. Support for Hamas became illegal with a 1995 executive order by President Bill Clinton and subsequent congressional action.

Defense attorneys say the men were simply providing desperately needed charity to Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. HLF routed millions of dollars through a series of Palestinian charities known as zakat committees. While Hamas was designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. Treasury, those zakat committees never were. That, defense attorneys argued, meant donations to them did not violate the law.

"This is one of the most significant victories the Justice Department has won in the war on terror," said Andrew McCarthy, who prosecuted blind cleric Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and 11 others for conspiring to blow up a series of New York landmarks. "Financing is the life-blood of jihadist organizations like Hamas. With the assistance of willing co-conspirators, they conceal their activities and use the Muslim obligation of charitable giving to mask support that is actually channeled to their murderous agenda. Today's verdicts say, loudly and clearly, that Americans aren't fooled and won't tolerate it. As a former federal prosecutor, I am especially proud of the assistant U.S. attorneys who persevered through some real travails in securing justice for the American people."

Journalist Douglas Farah studied the HLF evidence on behalf of the Nine Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) Foundation and was the first to identify the significance of a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum outlining the group's ambitions in America. He said Monday's verdict has implications for unindicted co-conspirators in the case - most notably the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) - because it validates what already was "a clear public record of why these groups were founded and how."

The Muslim Brotherhood memo called for "a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

CAIR is listed as a member of the Brotherhood's Palestine Committee and founders Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad are included on a telephone list of committee members. CAIR has not refuted the evidence, Farah said. Government officials ought to study that evidence to realize CAIR is not what it presents itself as.

"The main currency CAIR and these groups have is their access," he said. "The time is now, with full justification and with a full public record - not a whispering campaign, not innuendo - for the government to now say without hesitation: you don't have access here. We don't want to deal with you."

After the verdicts were read, jurors were asked to determine whether convictions for money laundering meant HLF assets should be forfeited to the government, the Dallas Morning News reported. Jurors agreed $12.4 million from the defendants' assets shold be forfeited. Click here to see more coverage from the Morning News.

Amir Abdel Malik Ali pictured during a rally last May.

Gary Fouse writes on his blog that the Olive Tree Initiative has failed to have a moderating effect as popular UCI-Muslim Student Union speaker Amir Abdel Malik-Ali singled out three  of Barack Obama's advisers on the basis of their Jewish origins:

Amir Abdel Malik Ali Speaks at UC-Irvine

This week is Islam Awareness Week at UCI, where the Muslim Student Union brings in speakers to tell the masses how evil America and Israel are. As is their wont, the MSU featured their old standby, Amir Abdel Malik Ali, an Oakland-based imam who comes to our campus on a periodic basis to spread his message of hate.

In the wake of a recent trip to Israel (Olive Tree Initiative)by Jewish and Muslim students which lent hope that understanding was being reached on both sides, it was anticipated that the MSU might ask Ali to moderate his rhetoric. Yesterday afternoon, he spoke on the topic of "One God". I was not able to attend because I was teaching class. However, one of my colleagues did attend and reported that it was a pretty mild presentation. I attended in the evening. There were about 50-75 people in attendance predominantly Muslim students. Most of the females wore hijabs. Ali's topic in the evening was "My story", which described his life growing up in Philadelphia and the San Francisco Bay Area, his student days at San Francisco State University as a young black activist and his conversion to Islam.

In describing the years of black activism, Ali made reference to the election of Ronald Reagan. He stated that it was that very night, he decided to quit marijuana and get serious in activism. He also stated that after Reagan was elected, blacks started being hanged in the South again and also referred to the serial murders of black children in Atlanta, implying that there was a connection to Reagan's election! He also spoke of the assassination of Malcolm X, leaving the audience with the impression that the US Government carried that out. (He later stated explicitly that the Government was complicit in the murder of Martin Luther King.) He also referred repeatedly to H Rap Brown without telling the audience that H Rap Brown was currently in prison for murdering a police officer. He went on to talk about how the Government destroyed the 1960s movement corrupting it with drugs and gangs and added that today in 2008, when a black man "stands up"-he is killed.

Ali left Israel out of his discussion, only referring once in passing to "Zionist oppression" in the same vein as US Government oppression and oppression of blacks.

In the question and answer session, Ali was asked about the election of Barack Obama. Ali dismissed Obama as a "Fitna" (deception) who would continue the same policies. He also pointed out three of Obama's aides, "Rahm 'Israel' Emanuel, Madelyn Albright and David Axelrod", one of who he called a "Zionist" (I don't recall which.)

In my view, this was a telling moment because it told me that the Olive Tree Initiative had not had the desired effect of moderating the MSU and leaving out the anti-Semitic speech. If the MSU had, in fact, asked Ali to moderate his speech, in the end, he failed.

I was the first questioner to walk to the microphone. I had not decided whether I would ask him anything depending on the tone of his speech. He gave me the issues, however. I told him that since I was a few years older than he, I also recalled many of the historical events he talked about. I first told him that he had implied that the Government had killed Malcolm X when the real assassins of Malcolm were members of the Nation of Islam under the orders of Elijah Muhammed. I also reminded him that the serial murderer of the children in Atlanta in the 1980s was a black man (Wayne Williams-Ali corrected me on the first name). Finally, I threw in a fact that he had not mentioned about H Rap Brown-that Brown was currently in prison for killing a police officer.

In his response, Ali gave me and the audience three conspiracy theories to the effect that;

1 The US Government, through its informants, had manipulated the Nation of Islam into killing Malcolm X.

2 Wayne Williams was convicted on the flimsiest of evidence (carpet fibers). In other words, Williams is innocent. I added that even at the time, I found it preposterous that some white person....

Ali: "Or white persons" (Ali's theory is that the Government wanted to prevent civil unrest if it was found that a white person was guilty of the murders.)

...could drive through the black neighborhoods of Atlanta picking up black children without raising red flags and having people notice and call police.

Finally, Ali told me and the audience that H Rap Brown was also innocent, and that another man had come forward and confessed to the crime only to be ignored by the police.

I want to say at this juncture that Ali is not a stupid man. He is educated and well-spoken. At times, he is quite impressive in what he says. I don't know if he actually believes these conspiracy theories or he is simply standing up there and lying to young and impressionable students. While he was responding to me, I turned to look at the audience to see if they were buying into his conspiracy tales. As I said, almost all were Muslim students and they seemed impassive. (as I sat down, one young Muslim girl in hajib was actually smiling at me in what I perceived as a friendly, not mocking manner.

All in all, "My story" degenerated into the MSU's featured speaker bashing the US Government as an evil entity. Yet.....

A couple of things Ali said should be taken seriously. He stated-and repeated, "Islam is coming. Islam is coming." He also pointed out, correctly in my view, that the more our society and our leaders are corrupted, the more Islam will grow.

Much of what Ali says should be condemned. Some other things he says can be laughed away.

That final comment, I think, bears remembering.