Imagine the outcry if students on a university campus in California set up "checkpoints" to find out whether students with tan complexions are really African-Americans, or whether students heard conversing in Spanish are citizens or illegal immigrants. Screams of protest would rise if students set up similar barriers to check whether olive-complected schoolmates are outfitted with suicide bombs, or if anyone stopped students of any type demanding to know their sexual orientation.Read the rest here.
Cries of bigotry would be deafening — and accurate.
But when Muslim student groups at U.C. Berkeley in 2010 dressed in combat fatigues and carrying fake but genuine-looking weapons manned such checkpoints and demanded that passing students tell them if they were Jewish? No outcry, no protest.
Nothing at all. Not a peep from the large corps of university administrators. Not a move by campus police, even when a counter-demonstrator was whacked with a shopping cart. No demonstrations anywhere.
The only action came from two students who filed a lawsuit charging that Berkeley administrators disregard intimidation by Arab students and foster a climate of anti-Semitism.
Meanwhile, the checkpoints have continued sporadically on campus.
Now a federal court says any attempt to stop them would "raise serious First Amendment issues." So, implied U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of San Francisco last month, campuses can ban use of "hate speech" like the N-word and anti-gay smears, but outright physical attempts to intimidate Jewish students and impinge on their walking space are OK.
New Class: American Orthodox History
5 hours ago
8 comments:
Not to condone for a moment the behavior of these Muslim students, but it raises an interesting and, to me, somewhat frightening question: if any of the charges against Israel outlined in this article were true, or if other charges equally serious were true, would anybody be able to say so?
What a great idea. Pick sides in overseas inter-tribal disputes, then invite the protagonists from both sides here. We could give such a policy a real snazzy name, like Invade The World, Invite The World! The American Left and the American Right will line up shoulder to shoulder in support. Anybody who questions the wisdom of such a policy will be condemned by both Democrats and Republicans as a xenophobic bigot.
So you are suggesting we deport all Muslims and Jews?
I think he wants all but "his kind" outa here, including the "aboriginal" inhabitants.
"His kind" have their own entertaining disputes.
Address my point first: do you think it's a good idea to choose sides in overseas inter-tribal disputes, then invite the protagonists from both sides here? Then we are shocked, shocked when our utopian, multi-culty experiment doesn't work like the social engineers say it will.
Do you think the dar al-Islam or the ethnic nation-state of Israel would pursue such shortsighted idiocy?
think he wants all but "his kind" outa here, including the "aboriginal" inhabitants.
"His kind" have their own entertaining disputes.
This proves my second point. Immigration policy is no longer subject to debate. It has become a gnostic article of faith.
The theatrical variation on a Gaza theme makes me giggle. I wouldn't survive the methane overdose from kissing sacred cows' asses.
+1 Anti-Gnostic.
These "arab" students are ignorantly doing the rabbis' work for them.
Post a Comment