The Muslim Students Association issued a statement calling for UCLA administrators to openly push for the implementation of a diversity-related general education requirement Thursday.
The statement says the requirement would help improve campus climate and combat ignorance and hateful, disrespectful speech. About 40 other organizations – including UCLA student groups, Undergraduate Students Association Council offices, Muslim student organizations at other campuses and independent groups – signed and endorsed the statement.
The press release follows a controversial USAC meeting last month where some individuals used language that could be interpreted as Islamophobic and anti-Semitic during their public comments. In the statement, the Muslim Students Association calls a diversity-related GE requirement a vehicle for UCLA to hold community members more accountable for hateful or racist speech.
“(With a diversity-related GE requirement,) nobody has the excuse (to be ignorant) anymore because you have knowledge of … how creeds other than your own work in operational respect,” said Nida Aslam, the external vice president of the Muslim Students Association and a fourth-year English student.
The Muslim Students Association statement also asks for UCLA Chancellor Gene Block and Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Janina Montero to issue statements urging the UCLA community to prioritize the creation of a positive and inclusive campus climate.
On Feb. 24, Block called on faculty members to pass a proposal for a diversity-related GE requirement by the end of 2014. If faculty start formally working on a proposal soon, a new proposal could go to a vote and be passed by the Academic Senate in time to meet Block’s request.
UCLA is currently the only campus in the University of California system without a diversity related GE requirement. The UCLA Academic Senate has to failed to pass requirement proposals three times in past, despite advocacy from some students and faculty.
Additionally, the Muslim Students Association statement calls for members of Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA to issue statements condemning “the conflation of the Muslim identity with the Palestinian identity” and “Islamophobic commentary” used during the USAC meeting on Feb. 25, where councilmembers voted on a controversial divestment resolution.
The USAC divestment resolution, which failed to pass after an almost 12-hour meeting, asked for UCLA and the UC to divest from specific companies that profit from Israeli military occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. Students for Justice in Palestine wrote the divestment resolution and other cultural student organizations endorsed it.
The statement specifically mentions Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA because the two groups were the most vocal about their opposition to the divestment resolution and some of the Islamophobic sentiment expressed at the meeting could be mistakenly attributed them, Aslam said.
While the statement does not attribute Islamophobic comments said at the meeting to members of the Jewish student organizations, members of the Muslim Students Association think Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA members could improve campus climate by publicly dissociating themselves from individuals who made Islamophobic comments and were also vocally against the resolution, Aslam said.
The Muslim Students Association asked members of Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA to sign the statement, but members of the Jewish student organizations declined because they thought the press release did not accurately address the anti-Semitic language used by public commenters or sufficiently acknowledge that members of the Jewish community also felt attacked during the heated USAC meeting, among other reasons, said Tammy Rubin, the president of Hillel at UCLA and a third-year human biology and society student.
Members of the different student groups also disagreed on a clause in the statement where the Muslim Students Association condemns anti-Semitism and says anti-Zionist sentiment is not inherently anti-Semitic, Aslam said.
Miriam Eshaghian, president of Bruins for Israel and a fourth-year psychobiology student, said she thinks that anti-Zionism is intrinsically anti-Semitic.
Eshaghian said she had wanted to work on a joint statement with members of the Muslim Students Association to call for a diversity-related GE requirement and to condemn both Islamophobic and anti-Semitic language used at the meeting. She added that she thinks the statement would have been more powerful if it came from both the Muslim Students Association and Jewish student organizations.
“We think that both communities were really affected (by the hateful speech) and that both communities have been very attacked,” Eshaghian said. “If you’re asking the campus to be inclusive having only one side isn’t portraying the severity of the issue.”
The Muslim Students Association chose to release the statement on its own because members felt they needed to openly condemn Islamophobia at a time when their statement would be particularly effective and relevant. They felt a sense of urgency to publish the statement before too much time had past since the USAC divestment decision, and further meetings with Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA to coordinate a joint statement could have taken weeks longer, Aslam said.
Rubin and Eshaghian said they condemn any form of Islamophobia and they have not yet decided how to respond to the statement.
At the USAC meeting on Feb. 25, some members of Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA spoke against the passage of the resolution. They said it targeted Israel by supporting the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, even though the resolution included a clause claiming it was only related to divestment.
The USAC meeting included about nine hours of public comments, where students spoke passionately for or against the resolution.
The statement says that some of the commenters at the meeting incorrectly conflated the identities of Muslim and Palestinian individuals, an assumption the statement calls ignorant and offensive.
Individuals on both sides said they received hate mail regarding the discussion at the meeting, and some students said they are still receiving anonymous hate messages.
In the statement, the Muslim Students Association criticized councilmembers and faculty advisors at the USAC meeting for not stopping hateful speech or openly taking a stand against it while it happened. The statement says the silence of councilmembers and other individuals at the meeting demonstrated a need for more accountability.
“No set of arbitrary guidelines will change the behavior of people, but implementing them will help the university hold people accountable,” said Neyamatullah Akbar, president of the Muslim Students Association and a fourth-year biology student.
Members of the Muslim Students Association, Bruins for Israel and Hillel at UCLA are still planning to meet about the possibility of working together on another statement.
What a joke. Islamist fanatics are mad when things don’t go their way. They want history written to the radical Wahhabi Islamist tune. They want Israel out, they want Kashmir, they want the whole world to themselves.
And they’ll lie, cheat, steal, kill to get it.
Yeah, your comment, as well as What a Joke’s comment, are exactly the kind of Islamophobia the release was describing. There’s a difference between valid criticism and slander. It
s important to make that distinction, so as not to make oneself appear stupid.
There absolutely is a distinction between valid criticism and slander. These types of divestment meetings do not provide a forum for “valid criticism” of Israel. Over 50 libelous and false statements were repeated throughout the USAC meeting of February 25th. It’s perfectly acceptable to discuss and criticize actions taken by both Israel and the Palestinians. However, the public comment from that meeting and others like it always involve hours upon hours of hateful lying that attempts to demonize the state of Israel. This is not valid criticism; it is slander. Instead of 12-hour USAC meetings full of slanderous and unfounded accusations, let’s have real discussions–discussions based on facts and mutual respect.
Excuse me BUT I saw hateful lying on the Anti-Divestment side as well, so do not say that in any way are we trying to demonize Israel. As an individual pointed out “It is not about Israel as a nation, it is about the people who are having their human rights violated.”
I have never heard such horrendous things as I did that day. This was not a religious issue, which is why I did not understand why individuals were calling Muslims who were there Radical and stating that we were all a part of Hamas.
So again, David, I agree with you completely that discussion is key, but do not say that there was slander from one side when it was clearly on the other side, too. And if you need proof, ask the individual who was filming without permission on the Anti-Divestment side.
There were many, many instances of public commenters attempting to demonize Israel. I agree that this was not a religious issue, and some comments from certain anti-divestment speakers were disrespectful and untrue–this is itself a separate issue to be addressed.
However, none of this diminishes the blatant lying by pro-divestment individuals. The true intentions of the anti-Israel BDS movement (with which supporters of the resolution adamantly tried to deny an association)–were revealed once again at that divestment meeting in the sheer amount of hatred towards Israel and Israel’s supporters propagated during public comment (interesting that for a resolution that purported to be about human rights, so many of the public commenters decided to slander Israel and spread horrific lies).
I am opposed to slander coming from either side. But again I will repeat: disrespectful comments from some speakers against divestment does not negate the immeasurably hateful and libelous statements made by supporters of the resolution. The sheer number of lies coming from supporters of the resolution far outweighed the number of disrespectful comments made by those against. This is yet another example of the singling out of a single group of people–a consistent theme at these events.
Like I said earlier, let’s be productive and have a discussion based on facts and mutual respect, and stop using USAC meetings as a platform for spreading hate and slander.
Please elaborate on what these lies are? There is some pretty concrete proof that Palestinian human rights are violated in Israel with the help of the five companies divestment mentioned. And the settlements have been internationally condemned as illegal. So please tell me what lies were spread by the pro divestment.
Oh I agree, David, there were some egregious statements made for sure (coming from both sides) that evening, and I agree with you that an open mic session of public comment is not the most effective way to go about navigating different perspectives on the issue. Preferable to that would have been a moderated debate/forum, followed by a vote, but that’s not how USAC meetings are structured, unfortunately.
However, criticism of specific policies of Israel’s that result in humans rights violations (which are well documented) does not amount to slander; i.e., It’s not considered slander if the statements are factual. Since the international community recognizes settlement building in the west bank, the building of the separation barrier which deviates from the Green Line and cuts into palestinian territory, and checkpoints within palestinian land as human rights violations, it’s not slander.
I agree that we have to come into this discussion with respect, especially since this is such a contentious topic. We have to respect Israeli’s right to exist within safe and secure borders. But we also have to respect Palestinian human rights. And we have to remain respectful in our discourse, and not cheer on rhetoric that says things like “Israel will exist and continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it”, or rhetoric that is blatantly antisemetic.
Would you care to elaborate which statements you heard from that night that were untrue?
Your takiya fools nobody but the dhimmis, budallah.
….
They also do kitman, deliberate omission.
Kitman is telling a half truth. There are four forms of lying in pislam – takiya, kitman, tawriya, and muruna.
What are you even talking about? Comments like these make me that much more of a proponent of the diversity requirement
Great logic there. Someone in America expresses a rigid generalization which you don’t like so your response is to align with the most rigid anti-Israel narrative and punish Israelis for protecting their children? Do you realize this conflict is not about you personally or how you feel? There are lives at stake and I wish people would stop using this as an excuse to make themselves feel like Che Guevara when they are not too busy privileged UCLA students.
Do you not see that Muslims are not the only ones supporting this? Stop making this a religious issue because CLEARLY at least 20 other organizations support what those in the MSA are trying to do. Put your pride aside and stop playing the victim.
Islamists always play the victims. They even started attacking Buddhists.
The organizations who support divestment were largely misled into falsely believing that Israel is a racist colonial state by SJP distortions, misleading statements and outright lies. Having numbers does not make you right, certainly not in this case.
The other organizations were misled by SJP distortions and lies to believe falsely that Israel is racist and colonial and evil when it is none of those. Israel is diverse, indigenous and democratic. Numbers do not make right, especially in this case. If I did not have direct knowledge of reality I too could have believed what I was being told by SJP, especially since it is emotionally manipulative, and would have supported divestment even though that is wrong. I don’t blame the other organizations or even most of the SJP students, they believe they are doing the right thing and have bought all these lies about Israel. I blame those who direct SJP, especially those groups outside of campus.
Anyone who was REALLY there heard all the hateful comments. Not once did anyone say anything negative about Judaism, but Islam was attacked multiple times, even though those who were Pro-Divestment were obviously not all Muslim. This just proves there is indeed a bigger issue surrounding this problem.
Islam was criticized because no religion comes close to matching its brutality in the past and certainly no religion matches its brutality in current times.
Please read this. Islam is not the problem, fanatics exploiting religion is. Islam could be the solution to this conflict, ironically. There are countless brave Muslims opposing this demonization of Israel and they do so because of their faith:
http://www.yourmiddleeast.com/opinion/islam-zionism-and-turkey_21253
Demonizing Jewish self determination with vile lies, constantly, is just as evil as slandering Islam. Both are wrong and the demonizing of Israel through lies was done much more often from what I saw.
For the record– Below is the response that I as the President of Bruins For Israel and Tammy as the President of Hillel at UCLA had sent to MSA.
We Share this in efforts of transparency.
——
Hi again,
On behalf of both BFI and Hillel, we respectfully decline to endorse this press release for the aforementioned reasons:
1) Anti-Zionism, for us, equates with anti-Semitism. This does not mean that we cannot be or are not critical of Israel. Please remove this clause because we feel as it misrepresents our community and speaks on our behalf.
2) We condemn the Islamophobic comments that were said during public comment on February 25th and anytime before or after either publicly or privately in person or on any online forums. We cannot, however, concede to the notion that only one community was attacked, hurt, misrepresented, delegitimized, and marginalized on this campus because of the resolution and all of its implications (as indicated in this press release). As we’ve repeatedly mentioned, we want to work together to issue a statement that recognizes both the anti-Semetic and Islamophobic statements in hopes of working together to bridge the gap between our two communities. This statement alienates our narrative and fails to take into account the overall hateful and tense environment we were all forced to be a part of.
Again, we’d like to reach out to you and your community in hopes of writing a response together rather than releasing two statements not only to strengthen the language and the message but to set a precedent for coalition building on our campus in the future.
We mean it more than anything when we say we want to extend an olive branch and work towards not only a more positive campus climate but towards trusting and respectful personal relationships with each other.
Our very best,
Tammy Rubin , President of Hillel at UCLA
Miriam Eshaghian, President of Bruins For Israel
——
SJP is a terrorist organization and we all know from the U.S Congressional Hearings that many Muslim Students Associations across universities in the U.S have ties to terrorist groups like Hamas.
This is exactly why we need a diversity requirement
To compare in any way the number of hateful comments supposedly coming from the Israeli side to that of the SJP/MSA side is an insult to the intelligence of all those who attended. This is a plain attempt by the MSA to preempt and preclude the legitimate criticism that should come forcefully down on the SJP side for its incessant manufacturing and repetition of slanderous and hateful LIES about Israel as their MO. From “Apartheid Week” to BDS the SJP (now suspended on some campuses) regularly traffics in lies and distortions meant to make Jewish and Zionist students guilty until proven guilty for their support of the Middle East’s only (indigenous) democracy: Israel.
The hearing was a reflection of Campus activities generally, where pro-Israel students seek to foster dialogue and positivity (when they are not forced to respond to constant slander) while the SJP is single-mindedly determined to delegitimize Israel and Zionists with lies and distortions. UCLA students need to wake up. They are being manipulated by a national organization which exploits the language of rights and the natural compassion of students to push an extremist narrative and agenda.
***I challenge the SJP /MAS to make a list of the comments made by anti-Divestment speakers at hearing that they find objectionable. We can then compare that to the 56 or more lies or misleading statements/distortions made REGULARLY by the SJP and its allies.***
You do realize that giving a sweeping label to the actions of SJP, calling them slanderous and labeling their actions as antisemetic, also preempts and precludes legitimate criticism of Israeli policies?
It’s very well document that there are violations of palestinian human rights that are taking place as a result of Israeli settlement building in the west bank, the separation barrier that encroaches palestinian territory, and the placement of checkpoints on palestinian land. Numerous international organizations have deliberated on this matter, and it’s the consensus of the global community that Israeli policies have perpetuated this. They’re not “slanderous and hate lies” or “distortions”, as you say, because they’re all well documented.
The separation barrier, checkpoints, and settlement building are legitimate topics which could be a part of the basis for a constructive discussion. However, when speakers spread lies about “genital mutilation” and “shooting children in the face” (to mention only 2 of dozens of other ridiculous and untrue statements meant to manipulate the audience and demonize Israel), the conversation turns away from “legitimate criticism” and becomes hateful, slanderous speech.
I’m all for talking about the tough issues. However, singling out Israel without recognizing abuses of Palestinian rights by some Arab countries (i.e. Syria) and by Palestinian leadership is not constructive. A truly productive discussion about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be holistic.
Discussing the fence (or the checkpoints) without seriously discussing the terrorism that caused them is morally repugnant. It is to say that terrorism is OK but Israelis protecting their children against terrorism is a crime. The very idea of divesting from companies that help save lives without also divesting from the governments that support terrorism is a slap in the face of decency.
Did I say Israel was perfect? Did I say Israel could not be criticized? Are you equating criticism of Israel with the SJP?
What the SJP does — on countless campuses across the US (and under the name SPHR or others in other countries including Canada) is demonize Israel. It is to distort relaity, to invert it, by obsessively highlighting any flaw of Israel AND lying and peddling a dishonest and extremist narrative.
I am not sure what you are referring to as violations of Palestinian human rights and that is the problem. People peddle that phrase as a given, as a slogan, without getting into the details. As if it is assumed that Israel is evil. That is a ridiculous, childish view. Are abuses committed? Yes. Is there a context? Does Israel have a judicial system very focused on preventing those abuses? Yes also. Is Israel doing better than most if not all countries in similar situations (i.e. its civilians constantly targeted, its country under constant threat of annihilation, its peace efforts answered with attacks on its cities)? Also yes. By repeating slogans that move people from thinking to feeling you are in fact making any resolution of abuses on both sides impossible (and I underline that the behavior of Palestinian gvts is incomparably worse than Israel’s).
Also, facts do matter. you call it “Palestinian territory” but that is what you wish as an outcome, it is not reality. There has never been a state called Palestine. There has never been a Palestinian state and the West Bank has never been Palestinians except for the autonomous Palestinian areas that Israel created with the PLO in 1993 ff. Israel has the right to demand peace for withdrawal and the Oslo accords themselves do not forbid Israeli building in the territories. Moreover Israel has and will move the fence and destroy settlements if that is the price of peace. To repeat unthinkingly “illegal” or “Palestinian territory” erases all the reality of the situation and makes one side — the multicultural democracy facing multiple threats and trying to deal with them — into the bad guy, like some cartoon. That is what the SJP wants.
It is absolutely not consensus among anyone that what SJP assets is true. It may be consensus that much of what it asserts is ridiculous slander and in the long run a form of hate speech. To falsely accuse the victims of genocide and ethnic cleansing and war crimes of those things merely because they have the temerity to want a state in their ancient homeland and defend their kids is despicable, it is not enlightened. It is also racist to deny only Jews a right to self determination while demanding a 23rd Arab state. It is also racist to look at any flaw or mistake by Israel and to decide that Zionism itself is illegitimate as a result. Imagine if someone said Palestinian nationalism is illegitimate because of terrorism. That is what Jewish students face every day and again, Israel is incomparably more moral than the current Palestinian gvts, who are not elected (since 204 and 2006) and not accountable.
The SJP is not smarter than the whole planet. Every respected monitoring group says that Israel is a democracy incomparably better at human rights than its neighbours. That doesn’t end magically when Israel crosses some line on a map. Whether or not you believe that Israel’s presence in the territories is illegal (and that is disputed), maybe, just maybe, Palestinian gvts’ constant rejection of Israeli land for peace offers (2000, 2001, 2008 and soon 2014), their support for the most horrific terrorism (blowing up teenagers in dance clubs in Tel Aviv and firing rockets at schools full of poor immigrants) and glorification of it, and the Arab attacks that resulted in this occupation in the first place are something people should look at too. Or maybe I’m crazy for holding Palestinian gvts to a standard.
And just to preempt, Israel was not born in sin, it did not cause the refugee problem (the SJP like to selectively quote Benny Morris but he was adamant about that last point) it is not a white colonial state (if Palestinians are not white then it’s also majority non-white), it is not racist. Those are just more of the lies peddled by SJP to preclude reasoned debate which would expose countless Palestinian leadership mistakes.
In any case, to look at the Middle East now, especially with what is going on today, and to decide to divest from Israel of all places is sheer hypocrisy verging on evil. It is an Orwellian inversion of reality. Those who claim to defend human rights should be huge supporters of Israel for that very reason.
wow, this person is on point