If Muslims Can Express Free Speech Rhetoric, so Can Christians

John R. Houk

© December 6, 2014

Muslim terrorists have infiltrated American Universities. These sly devils don’t openly practice Islamic terrorism on American soil (anyway, not yet). Rather via Professors and university student activists they foment the Jew-hatred and Christian-hatred inherent in the Quran. A part of this hatred is to propagandize Muslim students and idiotic Left leaning students that America is the great satan and that Israel is the little satan.

The propaganda comes from foreign sources pulling the strings to undermine the USA. Those foreign agents of propaganda originate from the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Egypt and the Islamic terrorist organization Hamas.

The Muslim Brotherhood is dedicated to establish a global caliphate reminiscent in power of the bloody ruthless days of conquest that brought the initial cancer to spread across the world that began to metastasize in the early 600s AD (that’s right Anno Domini – year of the Lord, not CE – Common or Christian Era).

Hamas is a wing of the MB embedded in Gaza that agrees with the MB agenda but is dedicated to destroy Israel and kill Jews pretending to be a non-existent people called Palestinians.

This network of radical Muslims foment the destruction of U.S. Constitutional rights while using the very same rights to do so. The U.S. government allows this out of the self-destructive concepts of political correctness, diverse multiculturalism and the vagueness in defining the width and depth of the First Amendment rights of Free Speech and Religious Freedom.

The universality of Free Speech rights in the First Amendment has left the courts to try and define what the extent of Free Speech should be. For most of the U.S. history the courts erred on the side of allowing government-Congress to define the line not to be crossed in Free Speech. Erring on the side of the government defining the limits of Free Speech began during WWI with the head of the American Socialist Party convicted in breaking the Espionage Act by printing pamphlets to resist the draft into the Army.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the 1919 SCOTUS decision defining the limits of Free Speech is measured by how it is or is not a Clear and Present Danger to nation (as in National Security) and the public good. In this way SCOTUS effectively amended the First Amendment to bring a narrower grasp of the extent of the First Amendment.

Although the Clear and Present Danger doctrine established by SCOTUS rather than the Amendment process brought new legal challenges. It turns out there is a lack of definition to the context of the meaning to a Clear and Present Danger.

Between 1919 and 1969 SCOTUS struggled to pin down the parameters of a Clear and Present Danger.

The great break came in the Court's 1969 decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio. There the Court said the government could not take action against a member of the Ku Klux Klan, who said, among other things, "We're not a revengent organization, but if our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court, continues to suppress the white, Caucasian race, it's possible that there might have to be some revengence taken." The speaker did not explicitly advocate illegal acts or illegal violence. But in its decision, the Court announced a broad principle, ruling that the right to free speech does "not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." (Bold Emphasis Mine - Is Violent Speech a Right? By Cass Sunstein; The American Prospect; 12/19/01)

This Brandenburg v. Ohio decision provided a little more clarity in getting a grasp on judging a Clear and Present Danger. This refined Clear and Present Danger legal doctrine runs like this according Cass Sunstein:

First, the speaker must promote not just any lawless action but "imminent" lawless action. Second, the imminent lawless action must be "likely" to occur. Third, the speaker must intend to produce imminent lawless action ("directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action"). (Ibid.)

There still is leeway in pushing the envelope on what is legal and what is illegal. An example from I read from Sunstein is Civil Disobedience. Obviously if Civil Disobedience in non-violent in its nature one would think there would be no Clear and Present Danger to the public good. But what if the peaceful Civil Disobedience advocated by speech or print are acts that might be illegal. For example a march without city permission down a street, 18-wheeler trucks are advocated to block traffic on a busy Inter-State, a city ordinance requires Preachers to turn in a copy of their sermons to city government for speech approval and the preachers refuse and so on scenarios.

Those acts of Civil Disobedience are illegal by at least statute. Does promoting an illegal activity constitute a Clear and Present Danger to the public good?

No the KKK dude managed a Free Speech victory the 1969 SCOTUS:

"We're not a revengent organization, but if our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court, continues to suppress the white, Caucasian race, it's possible that there might have to be some revengence taken."

I am fairly convinced that alluding that “revengence” could be taken if the three branches of the Federal government suppress White Supremacist ideology. A “revengence” act is an act of violence.

As a Christian Right political blogger I often call on readers to stand up to the government on restricting where and when Christians can practice their Religious Freedom. Am I inciting violence?

When I advocate Christians and Americans to stand up against Muslims in America promoting the destruction of the USA in favor of a Sharia based Caliphate, am I inciting violence?

When I advocate Christians to understand that Islam’s revered writings is full of Jew-hatred and Christian-hatred, am I inciting violence?

If I call for Americans – especially college age Americans – to protest Islamic hatred on American campuses, would I be inciting violence? After all the modern history of Islam shows that Muslims enter into crazy violence when non-Muslims have the courage to protest Muslim-hate ideology pertaining to Jews, Christians, Israel and American constitutional Liberty (because Sharia Law elements run counter to the Constitution’s Bill of Rights).

I ask these questions because the reading of the Quran, Hadith and Sunna enlists me to tell you that Islam is no religion of peace and spiritual fulfillment. The Quran specifically calls for the death of all people who refuse to submit to Islam. The evidence of this is the FACT that over the last 1400 years of Islamic history Muslim conquests have resulted in 270 MILLION non-Muslims (Christians, Jews, Hindus and more) killed in the name of Jihad to spread Islam around the globe. Obviously these 270 MILLION people refused to submit to Islam and lost their lives for it.

When hear, read about or see Muslims expressing this hate ideology on American campuses, it is this Islamic Superiority mentality of Jihad that killed 270 MILLION people.

VIDEO: Islam 270 Million Bodies in 1400 Years - What Every Kafir Must Know!

Published by forbidislam

Published: Nov 16, 2010

This vid consolidates the points in Frontpage's interview with Bill Warner "Islam: 270 Million Bodies in 1400 Years".

May every kafir wake up and smell the coffee.

Islam is aids. Whoever in bed with it will be infected and die eventually. I used to say Islam is cancer, every muslim is a cancer cell in our society. Though some cancer cells may not or never spread, but once it does, it kills you. Now I found cancer is better than islam, at least cancer is not contagious.

Since EVERY Muslim supports jihad through the even division of their zakat, the mosque offering/tax, EVERY Muslim's hands are full of innocent blood! Remember, 270 million died under the sword of Islam so that Muslims were able to enter Allah's paradise full of beautiful virgin sex slaves!

In more than 1400 years, muslims have killed much much more than 270 million people:

https://sites.google.com/site/fiavnorge/nyheter/22

http://www.news42day.com/2010/02/islam-270-million-bodies-in-1400-years-2/

http://www.masada2000.org/islam.html [Blog Editor: The Masada 2000 website (Wikipedia) has had a history of trouble to exist. This link may be dead. Webhosts tend to get complaints because of a controversial "S.H.I.T. LIST" which points toward Leftist Jews and I am guessing Muslim apologists. The website always seems to pop up again under another Webhost.]

Studies show that at least every three minutes is a Christian is tortured in the Muslim world and that in 2009 alone, more than 165,000 Christians have been killed, mainly in Muslim countries due to their Christian faith.

There are a number of organizations that report about this, but the cases are still greatly hampered by the power of the lefti's journalistic elite, that … READ THE REST

I want so badly to condemn the ideology of the haters of Islam, but I am choosing to err on the side of Free Speech. Muslim Apologists and Leftists could very easily come after me for hate-speech for exposing the true nature of Islam or for saying Biblical Morality trumps the legalization homosexual normalizing.

So those morons do have a right to express their moronic ideology. HOWEVER, that means I also have the right to upbraid anything that diminishes Christianity and the Original Intent of the U.S. Constitution. Shutting me up violates my First Amendment Rights as much as forcing Radical Muslims to shut up.

On the other hand as a free society Institutions, organizations, business owners have the right to decide whose interests to support. So Universities that allow Muslims to express violent hatred toward Israel, Jews and Americans that want nothing to do with Sharia-hatred of Constitutional Liberty should – rather MUST – must have the freedom to shut down the hate.

In the case of Public Universities voters actually have the power to focus on the hate spewing from Muslims in racist overtones. Most sovereign States in America have an initiative process in which voters can legislate where state congresses fear to tread.

So embark on your own Civil Disobedience and protest those haters of Israel, Jews, Christians and American Constitutional Liberties!

JRH 12/6/14 (Hat Tip: Stop Islam Facebook Closed Group)

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

**************************************

VIDEO: Hamas On Campus

Video also on Facebook

Published by Hamas On Campus

Published: Sep 30, 2014

The Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is Hamas on Campus. An organization dedicated to wiping Israel off the map.

Find out how the The SJP was created to be Hamas on Campus and work in tandem with the Muslim Brotherhood proxy, the Muslim Students Association (MSA).

______________________________

If Muslims Can Express Free Speech Rhetoric, so Can Christians

John R. Houk

© December 6, 2014

_____________________________

About Hamas on Campus

HamasOnCampus.org was set up by a group of students and alumni from different campuses across the USA and Canada. We represent both Jews and non-Jews, left and right, liberal and conservative. We value freedom of speech, women’s rights and human rights. For this reason we are disturbed by the increasingly radical behaviour and rhetoric by Hamas supporting organizations on campus.

In particular, we are concerned by the activities of the MSA (Muslim Students Association) and SJP (Students for Justice in Palestine).  Both share anti-Israel and anti-democratic values.  We are most concerned about the SJP. It declares itself to be secular in nature but in fact, supports the values and deeds of Hamas. The SJP is financially connected to Hamas via a network of organizations including the MSA, CAIR and the AMP.

Please join us in exposing the SJP, also known as Hamas On Campus.

The HamasOnCampus.org Team

Muslim Anti-Semitism

John R. Houk
© March 4, 2010

Anti-Semitism is a word that paints a picture of racism. It is an experience Jews have experienced from time immemorial. The approximately SIX MILLION Jews murdered in Hitler’s Nazi genocide is only unique in the terms of the sheer number of Jews massacred methodically in a relatively short period of time.

Ever since the last Diaspora of Jews courtesy of the Roman Empire, the Chosen People have been harassed. Jews went all over the place in that Diaspora and a large chunk settled into what is today Europe. European anti-Semitism is notoriously legendary from the eastern portions of European Russia to the west coast part of Europe of Spain, France and Britain as well as all European nations in between.

The nadir of European anti-Semitism is undoubtedly the Nazi Holocaust. Yet even before the Holocaust there was guilt over anti-Semitism. Initial British influence momentarily hooked up with the European Zionist movement. Thus as WWI neared its end the Balfour Declaration assured Jews that a national homeland would be established in their pre-Diaspora ancestral Land. After WWI the British and French began carving Arab portions of the defeated Islamic Ottoman Empire (Turkey).

After Britain began to manage its portion of the defeated Islamic Ottoman Empire, the newly formed League of Nations provided a British Mandate of the part of the Levant known as Palestine. There were other Middle Eastern Mandates of which became independent Arab nations. The Palestine Mandate certainly had a majority of Muslims in its area; nonetheless there was also a Jewish presence maintained even after the Diaspora.

The European Zionist Movement began to slowly support the immigration of Jews to pre-WWI Ottoman Empire. After the Balfour Declaration and the end of WWI Jewish immigration back home (aliyah) increased.

The influx of European Jews also meant the arrival of the expertise European industrial and modern farming techniques. The Ottoman Empire had pretty allowed the area to be known as the Palestine Mandate to become barren and worthless land. The innovation of European Jews reclaimed the land and made it productive. The result of this also meant a better standard of living for Arabs.

It is my opinion that modern techniques of management and reclamation turned the land into a very habitable place to live. It is also my opinion that Islamic Supremacist Arabs began to develop a sense of anger when non-Muslims were making the bucks. Large portions of the Palestinian workforce were Arabs from far away who began to resent the prosperity of Western Jews. After WWI the Muslim Arabs began to develop a sense of nationalism. It did not help that the post-WWI Middle East was carved into multiple Arab nations rather than one national Arab government. I am guessing the old European empire thinking of economic exploitation combined with the tribal nature of the medieval-like Middle East made it easier to carve and manage multiple Arab nations rather than one Arab nation. In any event the Arabs began to embrace anti-Semitism on a level of passionate hatred.

Between WWI and WWII Arab nationalism began to spark Islamic revivalism reminiscent of long past Islamic Supremacist jihadism, movements began that called for a return to Islamic purity. Islamic purity is indicative of the primary hero of Islam as the example of purity – Pseudo-Prophet Mohammed (which is why I often use the politically incorrect term of Mohammedanism).

Mohammed was NOT a nice guy to people who disagreed with him or got in the way of spreading his theo-political cult. The Quran might say “there is no compulsion in Islam” but Quranic, Hadith and Sira literature demonstrates the words did not match the action.

As far as prospering Jews were concerned in the Palestine Mandate, Jew-hatred was preached by a Jerusalem Grand Mufti al-Husseini. In fact al-Husseini began to be an admirer of a German-European known as Fuehrer Adolf Hitler. Al-Husseini’s admiration of Hitler was not because the Nazi racist was a Muslim. Kafir Hitler hated Jews and felt their extermination would better his concept of the Arian Master Race. Al-Husseini shared the Jew extermination passion.

After al-Husseini inspired a few Arab revolts against the British Mandate in Palestine his status of unpopularity with the British eventually landed him in Hitler’s lair. The two could not have trusted each other. Hitler was a German Arian Master Race kind-of-guy and al-Husseini was an Islamic Supremacist kind-of-guy. Whatever there differences were they hooked up for the goal of Jewish extermination. Hitler even sent al-Husseini to the Muslim portions of the Balkan States to recruit Muslim-Europeans into the infamous SS to aid in the goal of Jewish extermination.

These are the early seeds of Jew-hatred planted among Arabs were would adopt the name of Palestinian. This Islamic Palestinian hatred of Jews is so prevalent among Muslims that those that have migrated as students and immigrants to the USA have brought their anti-Semitism with them.

In the America that was established as a nation of Freedom defined as Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness; anti-Semitism has been re-awakened. America’s university campuses have become a hot-bed of Muslim propaganda against Israel and Jews. Can you imagine that? America’s institutions of higher learning have become a platform to spread Jewish-Israel hatred. The propaganda campaign has been so effective that an incredible number of American Leftists have jumped on the hate Israel bandwagon. Universities even invite and sanction anti-Semitic speakers of Muslim-American origin and Middle Eastern Muslims from abroad. These hate-Israel Muslims mean they are pro-Palestinian Islamic terrorists. Islamic terrorists wish to be a part of another Jewish Holocaust by eradicating Israel and every Jew living there.

Did you get that? IT IS IN AMERICA!

I came across a website promoting a film that exposes anti-Semitism on American campuses. The film is called “Crossing the Line: The Intifada comes to Campus.” You can view an excerpt of the exposé HERE.



Below is a rough written content of the film. Be prepared to be outraged.

JRH 3/4/10
**************************
Crossing the Line Viewing Guide

CampusIntifada.com
Producer: Raphael Shore
Director: Wayne Kopping

Shaping the World

College is a time for social action, student protest and the formulation of ideas and worldviews; a time to broaden one’s mind and for students to begin to shape the world they live in. In North America, college students have been instrumental in some of the biggest protest movements of the 20th Century, including the fight to end the Vietnam War, Women’s Rights and the Civil Rights Movement. Today, the activism continues with students fighting against the genocides in Tibet and Darfur and the war in Iraq.

Anti-Israel or Anti-Semitic?

There is one issue that seems to evoke more hostility then any other - Israel. Israel’s Operation Cast Lead at the close of 2008 evoked feelings of resentment and hatred from people throughout the world. There was something “different” about the protests that this war sparked as the line between anti-Israel policy and anti-Semitism became blurred. These protests weren’t just against Israel but also against the Jewish People. Around the world, synagogues and Jewish graves were desecrated and anti-Semitic chants were shouted at protests – even on the streets of America.

Bringing the War to Campus

The anti-Israel hostility that had been raging for years on American campuses came to a head during Operation Cast Lead, whereby the situation on North American campuses deteriorated dramatically. Pro-Palestinian groups held vehement anti-Israel protests along with graphic outdoor theater performances demonstrating the perceived brutality of Israeli soldiers against Palestinian civilians.

In the Classroom

Instead of offering fair and objective views of the Middle East conflict, some professors are leading the charge against Israel, often taking advantage of their positions to express pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel views on campus. When this happens, students receive a one-sided and biased view of the conflict. In this scenario, many Jewish students feel uncomfortable in the classroom and are scared to express their views on the Middle East conflict.

Anti-Semitic Attacks

In recent years, there have been numerous incidents on college campuses during which Jewish property was desecrated and Jewish students were assaulted. For example, in February 2008, four Temple University students used anti-Semitic language and assaulted two Jewish males, severely injuring one of them. In April 2009, a swastika was found painted on a Jewish fraternity house at the University of Florida.

"3D Test" of Anti-Semitism

Israeli politician Natan Sharansky uses the “3D Test” to help distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism. Sharansky identifies three categories: de-legitimization, double standard and demonization.

De-legitimize

This refers to the argument made that Israel doesn’t meet the requirements of a legitimate state and therefore should not exist. Rather than addressing the particular issues at hand, there is a call for a destruction of the State of Israel.

Double standard

This is when criticism of Israel is applied selectively. Although other countries can be criticized for human rights violations during times of war, the finger is continuously pointed at Israel and often exaggerated. Little attention is given to the atrocities committed by other countries.

Demonize

Israel is accused of behaving like a demon and its actions are blown out of proportion. For example, comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz.

Lies, Half-truths and Distortions

On American college campuses, many pro-Palestinian activists use unverified news stories and misleading information about the facts on the ground. One example of this is that during Operation Cast Lead, college students put forward the unverified story that Israel had hit a UN school in Gaza. Later reports proved that mortar shells fell in the street near the compound, and not on the compound itself. However, by that time, the damage had already been done as many students had already formed their opinions based on the original misinformation.

Follow the Money

Over the last twenty years, hundreds of millions of dollars have been poured into American universities by Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries which are hostile to Israel’s very existence, with the specific goal of influencing students’ views on the Middle East and Israel. The education that students in Middle Eastern departments are receiving is likely to be unbalanced and anti-Israel as a result of this direct line of funding.

The Muslim Student Association

The MSA organizes anti-Israel events on campus, often sponsoring events with radical speakers that support violence and suicide bombings. The MSA has foundational ties to the Muslim brotherhood, a group created with the explicit goal of implementing Sharia Law across the world. The MSA often works to advance one of the Brotherhood’s goals by advocating for the destruction of Israel.

Not Just about Israel

Another of The Muslim Brotherhood’s aims is to destabilize the West. They believe in a “grand Jihad,” claiming that Western civilization needs to eliminated from within. The Brotherhood is not just fighting against Israel, but also against America and western countries that promote democratic values.

What should Jewish students do?

Jews have a historical connection to Israel. Jews have been living in Israel continuously for thousands of years, never leaving Israel voluntarily. Jewish students should be proud of Israel’s achievements over the past 61 years, including the production of numerous technologies that are advancing the world. It is important for Jews to educate themselves, and be proactive on campus, to express their Jewish views proudly, show solidarity with Israel, and correct misinformation campaigns launched by opponents of the Jewish State.
______________________________

Muslim Anti-Semitism
John R. Houk
© March 4, 2010
____________________________________
Crossing the Line Viewing Guide
Imagination Productions © 2010

Anti-Semitism in UK and America

Inspired by Ari Bussel

John R. Houk
© February 16, 2010

Ari Bussel writes an appropriately scathing essay of anti-Semitism – nay outright hatred of Jews – that has occurred at University settings in the United Kingdom and the United States.

In both incidents an organized illustration of Islamic hatred toward Jews is focused on speakers representing the Israeli government.

At the Oxford Union in the United Kingdom (UK) Noor Rashid shouted in Arabic in which the English translation was taken to mean “slaughter the Jews”. Rashid and Muslim apologists have since claimed the Arabic was misunderstood no doubt to avoid hate-speech prosecution (as if the Brits would prosecute a Muslim for hate-speech).

Rashid’s story is he spoke in the ancient Arabic of the Quran with the English meaning, “Khaybar, O Jews, we will win”. The reference is to an Arab/Jewish battle in which the Arabic yet Jewish tribe of Khaybar was defeated by Mohammed in 629 AD. Rashid and British apologist for Islam George Galloway claim the epithet merely was referencing a historical battle in which Mohammed had won. The claim is classic Islamic taqiyya (deception). Let us look more closely at the result of the battle of Khaybar.

Mo came upon the Khaybar Jews of Medina in an unprovoked attack for no other reason than to expropriate Jewish wealth and treasure. Mo’s alleged lesser army went on to defeat the Khaybar Jews in a so-called retaliation. So what is a Muslim retaliation orchestrated by Mohammed? The Jews of Khaybar were slaughtered and their women enslaved.

You have to agree that excuse given by Rashid and Galloway was a bold faced lie to mislead the readers of the British (and international) media!

Incredibly American Universities are becoming hotbeds of Islamic influenced hatred of Jews. Ari Bussel attended the speaking engagement of Ambassador Michael Oren from Israel. Apparently most of the audience was Jews outside of the academic realm of the University of California Irvine (UCI). Then there were a significant number of non-Muslim students and significant amount of Jew-hating Muslims doing all they could to disrupt the speech with epithets against Jews and Israel. After the speech eleven Muslims found themselves arrested on minor charges. At the very least every Muslim involved with the obvious hate-speech should be expelled from UCI. I am fairly certain nothing of the sort will happen. I have only read the Muslim students were going to be disciplined. What does “disciplined” mean? From my experience in college days long ago “disciplined” means a warning citation and a miniscule fine ($5 for underage drinking in my day).

If the discipline is actually made public I am betting no major Mainstream Media outlets will report it. That is of course unless UCI man’s up and actually expels the haters. Then the MSM coverage will be significant deploring that Muslims in America are their First Amendment rights of free speech infringed upon. After all the First Amendment does protect independent thought and speech, right?

Of course the First Amendment protects and mandates as the rule of law freedom of speech. However the venue where free speech occurs also must keep in mind property rights. If the Muslims were American citizens it does not mean they or any American owns UCI and thus can do as they please. Actual ownership is the taxpayers who invest management authority in Federal and State government. To believe the government on any level would approve of disruption of meetings on University property of invented or approved guests is ludicrous.

Is the Leftist agenda to diversify America multiculturally so invested that we Americans must look the other way when such hatred is spewed? What if it was the KKK interrupting a Jewish or African-American speech? I have seen the ACLU protect the rights of American Nazis to march in Jewish neighborhoods (May need to register to view citation – its free) around Chicago years ago. I saw the news images of Jews rightfully demonstrating their dislike for such event. Is this the same as disrupting a speaker in a University building?

I think not. The Nazis were in the open outdoors and the protesting Jews would have been either on their own property or public sidewalks as the Nazis performed their superior race march. And still the Mainstream Media reported the free speech rights of the Nazis as a huge slap in the face of the American way of Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness.

America please speak to me that you are not becoming anti-Semitic by believing the effective propaganda of Islamic terrorists, particularly the Islamic terrorists who have falsely adopted the name Palestinian?

JRH 2/16/10
******************************************
Coming Soon to a University Near You

By Ari Bussel
Sent: February 16, 2010 8:49 AM

GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS - PRESS RELEASE On Monday night, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon was invited by the Oxford Union to speak at an event at the university. During the speech one student shouted extreme abuse at the Deputy Foreign Minister including Itbach Al-Yahud (Slaughter the Jews). The event was caught on camera and subsequently shown on Israeli television Channel Ten. The Deputy Foreign Minister is looking into the possibility of pressing charges against the student for what is tantamount to a call for genocide.

Two separate events occurred at the same time on two continents. Both followed the same exact script: An Israeli figure came to a hostile campus to talk about the prospects of a better future in the region and to answer questions, including those of the most vigorous opponents. As each started to speak, he was interrupted by shouts “murderer,” “Israel is guilty of …,” “Zionism is the …” etc. A young Muslim man stood and shouted, reading from a note, was escorted out, followed a minute later by another young Muslim man who stood and shouted and the cycle repeated. At one point, the remaining members of the Muslim contingency stood in unison, walked out and continued their noisy interruptions outside, attempting to further disrupt the proceedings.

In previous events they had used loudspeakers and drums. For some reason, these were missing.

Had the opposite been the case, a virulent anti-Israeli speaker speaking, calling Israelis the new Nazis, claiming the Holocaust was an excuse to steal land from the Arabs or even calling for the annihilation of the Jewish State, a feeling of military control would have pervaded. Instead of the local police protecting, there would be private security brutalizing anyone who even seemed to think differently. A chilly fear would have descended, immobilizing and preventing anyone from expressing an opinion, asking a question or veering out of line. It is a most frightening scene, an even worse feeling that stays with a person for a very long time.

But in both cases, the speakers came to speak about Israel’s policies. In the UK it was Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon, previously the Israeli Ambassador to the United States. In California it was the current Israeli Ambassador, Dr. Oren, himself an academic. Dr. Oren implored at one point: “We have an opportunity here to exchange ideas. We have an opportunity to hear a different perspective.

This is why you have come to this campus as students. You have not come to this campus to hear one idea, you have come to hear a multiplicity of ideas. It is a humble suggestion. It is one of the inestimable values of education in this country. You have this opportunity. Don’t squander the opportunity.”

Only members of the University holding an Oxford Union membership were allowed to attend the UK event. In California the vast majority of attendees were members of the local Jewish and Israeli community rather than students and faculty. The constant interruptions by the Muslims were called “uncivilized,” “exceeding the principles of free speech” and the like. Each university has released an announcement denouncing the conduct in these events.

For those participating in such a gathering for the first time, the opportunity was eye opening, traumatic. One lady remained seated well after everyone dispersed. She continued shaking, in shock. Realization dawned for the first time: The very foundations of our society are not as solid and impenetrable as we thought but are crumbling before our very eyes just as we stand by and watch.

Let us look at the California event I attended. By now, many have seen it on YouTube or the news. It is worthwhile watching. The speech itself was not as captivating as the one given by the Ambassador earlier in the day at a Church across the way. Ambassador Oren was visibly nerved and reminded the Muslim objectors of Middle Eastern hospitality.

When a person is invited as a guest to one’s home in the Middle East, said Ambassador Oren, no harm should befall him. Muslims here are either too young to follow the traditions of their own people or have grown up in the United States under the illusion of a false reality and are thus unfamiliar with the very foundations of the culture they strive to spread (brutality, silencing, beheadings, fear and corruption, female slavery and subjugation and ethnic cleansing, essences of Sixth Century existence, alongside some of the tenants of survival in a barbaric society).

Allow me to describe the setting: I arrived late from that earlier event with Ambassador Oren. There was a very long line of people waiting inside the Student Center. Almost two hundred people were being told the hall was full and they must enter an overflow room or leave. As a member of the press I was invited in, bypassing what looked like a long line at a busy airport.

The airport setting analogy was most befitting. Muslims are up in arms against “Profiling,” yet it is no coincidence that Muslims are perpetrating terrorist attacks. If they have nothing to fear, why not embrace profiling as a means to keep everyone safer? They should vomit from within their midst Islamists who want to destroy the 21st Century Western way of life, if indeed they oppose terrorism and Islam is truly a peaceful religion. But they do not. They fight back, insisting they suffer as a result. All too soon they – the perpetrators and their supports – will be protesting against airport checkpoints.


We all suffer as a result. I cannot enter a gate without having my bottle of water confiscated, my computer turned on and half of my wardrobe removed because of what fellow Muslims do “for the sake of Allah, the All Merciful.” They slash the throats of innocent flight attendants, fly into high-rise buildings or simply explode themselves among hundreds of others.

Likewise at my own alma mater, the University of California, I cannot attend a lecture without having to go through multiple checkpoints and screening surrounded by police officers. Under the heading of “free speech” Muslims take away our basic rights, depriving us of legitimate discourse, civil gatherings, normalcy and sanity. Fear prevails.

Jewish students are afraid to stand up. Secular Americans watch, absorb and internalize. Fear is so contagious, it can be felt. It is chilling and cannot be ignored. This new feeling is embedded in the individual and our collective memories and never leaves. Like a nightmare from which we cannot awake, it remains.

I passed security and was now inside. The place was familiar: I was inside this hall before to hear another speaker a couple of years ago. The police were present then too and about a hundred members of the Muslim Student Union. Most were not students at UCI. When the audience was asked to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, they remained seated as a block.

An attending Congressman wrote the next day that as guests in this country (many are here on Student or other Visas), they should have shown some basic respect to their host country, a feeling shared by many. A foreigner is not expected to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, but we expect one to at least stand up.

Later they started interrupting the speaker, until the police were forced to remove a few. Then, they stood in unison, left the hallway and continued the demonstration outside, shouting, trying to create as much an interruption as possible.

This is truly the modus operandi of Muslims: Silence everyone who does not think as they do. Prevent one from speaking and do not engage in discussion. Shout and pervert free speech like a lunatic. Attack (first verbally) those in front of you – not the substance of the argument but their features, heritage, traditions. If possible, threaten and do not hesitate to act. There are no consequences for this behavior. The next step – physical harm – is very easy to reach. All this will be protected under the guise of political correctness, the greatest gift ever bestowed on the Muslim world.

UCI is a hotbed of anti-West activity, a hornet nest. The script is not new, although each time brings an interesting twist. Anyone standing in their way, any reasonable person with clarity of thought and knowledge of history and current events is deemed a threat and must be silenced. An effective way to do so is by utilizing the victim’s mentality: “He is an Islamophob. He hates us. We are poor and weak. We want peace. We just want that to which we are entitled – free speech”— but only for us! What a twisted world.

One would surely ask:

1) Why does the campus allow such inflammatory events? Speakers should be welcome, but events should only be open to students and faculty with valid IDs. Realize, outside agitators are there to exploit. As one enters, one should present his / her ID. If one is removed for unruly behavior, there should be immediate, severe consequences. Outside organizations should not be allowed to rent university facilities for such events (someone needs to cover the costs associated with increased police presence, the bad reputation to the university as an academic institution, etc.).

2) Why was nothing done thus far to better educate and enforce existing rules and regulations (such as the code of student conduct)? If a student knew that she might be expelled form the University, that her loans or grants would be rescinded or her visa to the U.S. would be revoked, perhaps she would think twice before orchestrating or participating in disruptive behavior?

Author and speaker Susanne Reyto observed on another occurrence how University Police “seem to protect protestors more than the audience.” But it is not only the police. It is the faculty and administration, all the way up to the Regents of the UC system. There is a current of dismissal, closing one eye (and often both), acquiescence and silent agreement to look the other way. A dangerous inability to reconcile the idea such behavior can exist in a top academic institution and pose any threat to the very fabric of that institution and society at large.

Excuses abound justifying the Muslim actions against Israel and the Zionists. This reflects a complete lack of understanding of the true nature of the enemy. The Muslims are not only after Israel, they are against the American way of life, the very freedoms our Constitution affords and everything the United States of America stands for and symbolizes.

The Regents reflect in part the approach of the current Administration that talks and reconciliation, consensus building and appeasement can prevail. Try to negotiate with hijackers and history will bear out such folly. Negotiating through strength is the only successful method, not high hopes and dreams. The Administration has taken denial to its highest level, one that translated into movement-constricting action: The true nature of the threat cannot be discussed, ergo it does not exist.

The new language of President Hussein Obama’s Administration includes: These are deranged individuals, not terrorists. These are isolated incidents rather than a well-thought, very carefully planned and superbly executed campaign of war against us. Islam is a peaceful religion, and we are one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. The Islamic roots are deeply connected to those of the Pilgrims who fled to this country and created the best example of a free country on earth. Had it not been the current President of the United States of America who uttered these pronunciations during the last year, one would be justified in asking under what influence is the writer or what substances might he be consuming?

Back at the UCI, the vast majority of those in the hall were non-Muslim. Their student years have long passed. There were two groups of MSU, one on either side. Each block was immediately recognizable by the head coverings of the young women and the unshaven, dark skinned Middle Eastern young men.

The men had notes in their hands, inscribed with phrases they were soon to shout. The women were sitting and laughing, one orchestrating the order in which the men rose from either side of the hall. Hands were raised recording every movement, watching the audience, waiting for the cue, getting ready for the right moment. All were ready, calm, calculated, their passion controlled. They came to perform and inflict harm, and they succeeded as they did numerous times before and as they will undoubtedly do at future events.

One must keep in mind the calculated, cold manner of execution and the role women play, a true testament to equality of the sexes that will never be found in Muslim countries or under Sharia Law.


This was no dress rehearsal, but a very well executed performance in its mth (sic) appearance. The University has done nothing of substance to counteract this increasing tide, thus reinforcing and permitting it to gather strength. Outsiders remain in denial, thus the appearance of the Ambassador in California and his boss in the UK were merely tokens too little, too late. Other than news coverage, they achieved little at the campuses themselves. The university played into the hands of the Muslims, and if anyone won this round, it is the Muslims.

The Muslim anarchists must be uprooted, extracted from the once fertile ground into which they invaded, cut into pieces, crushed and destroyed. If permitted to rise again, they will continue to defile the essence of freedom, attempt to destroy the system from within. We must protect our way of life.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs must act. Preventing free speech in universities is just a small warning sign. Israeli officials already know better than to travel freely anymore as many face the inconvenience of public arrests and trials for crimes committed against humanity if they set foot in places like – unbelievably yes, Great Britain.

We as Americans, must express our disgust and act to protect our own system and ideals. This successful approach against Israeli officials can also be used not less successfully against others – perhaps a US Senator, a local businessman or a labor representative.

Our very system is being undermined and Israel is just a temporary decoration. The scenery may change as quickly as from one play to the next and the victim will change while the perpetrators continue their very effective action.

Wake up oh great nation. Our values and foundations are at stake, as our enemies use them to topple our system. The University of California at Irvine was just a preview of what is coming soon to a University near you.
_____________________________
Anti-Semitism in UK and America
Inspired by Ari Bussel

John R. Houk
© February 16, 2010
______________________________________
Coming Soon to a University Near You

In the series “Postcards from Israel,” Ari Bussel and Norma Zager invite readers throughout the world to join them as they present reports from Israel as seen by two sets of eyes: Bussel’s on the ground, Zager’s counter-point from home. Israel and the United States are inter-related - the two countries we hold dearest to our hearts - and so is this “point - counter-point” presentation that has, since 2008, become part of our lives.

© Postcards from Home, February, 2010
Contact: aribussel@gmail.com