Estelle Ross
February 10, 2004
Your talk tonight and just as important, the way you handled the unruly group of students (if in fact they are truly students) was outstanding. I have come to believe that many in this young group are not students, because I see the same faces at various events and on different campuses. I'd like to tell you why this was a very good evening in promotion of Israel and for the benefit of campus students:
This choreographed group presented themselves in front of other "undecided" students as rude and irritating as was conveyed to me by a young Asian man curious about the Middle East. Your responses were grounded and you did not get rattled (an amazing feat, which I have no idea how you achieved). You must be a knot right now.
Your talk disarmed this group from the beginning, as I think they could have been much more unruly. I think one of the reasons was because you eloquently weaved together what militant Islamists were doing in other countries "of color", without even bringing up the Israel equation until the middle of the talk. You quieted the passion they prepared ready to explode, by making them first listen to what militant Islam was doing internationally (not of too much interest for them and they did not have the knowledge to contradict). Whether it was intentional or not, it was a very good strategy. …
Personally, when I did get to hear you talk, which was frankly much more than I had anticipated, I was most interested in your conclusions. I agree with every article you have written, the time I saw you at San Francisco Temple Emanuel and this time at UCB. We do not have many thinkers such as yourself, or at least not bold enough to speak up so strongly, scholarly and articulate. After having gone to too many of these campus events, I must tell you this one was a success. To add to the success you created, the Jewish community of all ages showed up en masse to support you and let this extremely vocal group of militant "students" see that they do not rule the university as they would wish to think. I think it is this frustration that finally made them scream out and leave.
Some comments I heard from students while I waited in line. "Most of the students on campus, Jewish or Muslim are against the occupation." They found out otherwise and noticed many of their peers wanted to actually learn from you. Another student said, " there is passion on both sides, but passion mixed with ignorance is a dangerous thing."
I saw Allison Weir ("If Americans only knew" - Holocaust denier in my opinion) near the line outside. Weir and Professor Batziam of UCB have been successfully spreading their anti-Israel and anti-Semitic show throughout UCB. … You are the only speaker that has successfully countered their hate speech although several have tried. You must know how absolutely invaluable you are! And, your response to "Racism" and McCarthyism was superb. It was visually apparent that the Hillel and other Jewish students were so validated by your talk and by seeing the community support for you in this oftentimes frightening community of Berkeley.
Forgive me for making this email so long. I want you to know that all the disgusting language and hateful remarks you endure from disrespectful and bigoted children of violence are aimed at all of us. We are in this together. It is my goal to let you know that there are many who support you as a speaker for our voices.
I once wrote you a thank you letter of strong appreciation. Now, I write another. You may as well get to know me, because there will be more. If there is anything I can do to help you...research...survey...etc..if I can do it, I will be more than happy.
An Informal Response about how it was received.
Sabareete
February 11, 2004
There was a great turn out in support for Daniel Pipes at UCB. All 500 seats were filled. My vague guess would be that 2/3 came from the Jewish Community. Of those, 2/3 were Jewish students. There was a group of rude and strongly vocal youth, some with Kaffiyahs, that were individually escorted out by police all throughout the talk. I have come to the conclusion that they may not be students, as I have seen the same faces at other events and they are verbally hostile, unlike many respectful students that have passions on both sides of the issues. They do have an incredible amount of influence with their peers that identify with all of the important causes of groups that have aligned with Palestinian militants. They stood on line very early as a group, unified with a cell phone and choreographed their moves and slogans designed to drown out Pipes. The heavily concentrated police did an exceptional job at calmly removing those that disrupted the vulgar verbal attacks during the lecture.
At one point Pipes did such a good job exposing their true colors, they repeated one of their mantras "Racist Zionist Jew" and exited on their own en masse, as they knew the police were about to escort them out. Pipes defined Racism and McCarthyism eloquently as "this group" carefully listened and may have been somewhat embarrassed and frustrated to find that these words had a definition contrary to their slogans. In other words they were not relevant to the issue of the Middle East. I saw Allison Weir rallying her supporters outside, for those of you who know her and Bertram. …
Flyers were distributed for Professor George Bisharet's talk on Thursday, tomorrow 12:30 -2 pm, room 110 Boalt hall - Law Students For Justice in Palestine Present "Israel's Wall in International Law". I hope there is someone representing our group that attends.
There were an exceptional amount of flyers distributed against Israel. I did not see one promoting Israel. These flyers were handed to students that were curious about the Middle East and did not have an opinion developed. I stood next to several on line. After the event, one Asian student told me that he was irritated by the rudeness of the group that wouldn't let Pipes speak because he wanted to hear and form his own conclusions. I heard another student say "there are passions on both sides, but passion mixed with ignorance can be dangerous". Prior to the event, a pro-Palestine student told me most of the campus students, both Jewish and Muslim were against the brutal occupation of Israelis.
Throughout all this, Pipes actually did have an opportunity to make excellent points and continue with his well presented lecture, that included international terrorism that killed 800 people in various countries prior to 911. I imagine you will read a detailed account of his actual lecture in the next few days. His conclusions are wise, compelling and thought provoking.
Conclusions:
The turnout from our community, as they gave a welcoming and exiting standing ovation for Pipes was incremental to the success of his very well delivered lecture. Some "students" (a questionable term) got to see that their predominant peer group did, in fact, support Israel contrary to their own larger voices, mockery and hostility as witnessed outside the event when it was over. I saw what the Jewish students deal with on campus, outside and after the lecture. It is ugly and their safety is often compromised even if they don't speak up. The Jewish students were supported by the greater community attendance rather than feeling isolated. It is my guess that they left gratified by the outstanding job they did putting this event together with the efforts of all the other sponsors.
This event was very successful in my perspective, if you stayed to the end of the lecture. We need to take these excellent opportunities to distribute massive literature to those students in attendance that are truly craving information. That seems to be an issue with which to focus more attention. The sponsors/presentors did an outstanding job at crowd and safety control. I urge people that might think these events are too rough for them to attend, to come as it is apparent your presence is needed and excessive police presence has proven to be an excellent deterrent to those that may otherwise intend trouble.
The details of the actual content of Pipes exemplary lecture will more than likely be addressed in the days to come. I hope this helps.
U.C. Berkeley Event
Leo Bletnitsky
February 11, 2004
I attended the lecture at UC Berkeley tonight and was not surprised to see the unruly and un-American behavior by the students and other leftist and anti-Semitic activists that attended in large numbers. Other than the annoyance that my tax dollars are being spent to attempt to educate some of the unwashed in attendance I did enjoy the event and the quick wit of Dr. Pipes. … A few months previously I had attended an RJC dinner and lecture at Stanford that did not have the hordes present, and while Dr. Pipes was able to get his point across more easily, it was not as entertaining, nor as good of a demonstration of what he spoke about. Free speech is in a coma at U.C. Berkeley, but having events like tonight help keep it from dying!
Your Presentation Last Night
Len Rossen
February 11, 2004
My Son and I and several of his friends attended your presentation last night at the University of California at Berkeley.
Thanks for your most lucid and sensible presentation and comments. Though I would prefer to think that the lunatic protesters who tried to disrupt the event were not from Berkeley, you made your points so well and so reasonably.
The great bulk of those in attendance and certainly our immediate group greatly enjoyed your comments. The sole regret I have is that you were not able to expound your views even more fully because of the noise generated by the idiot protesters.
And that noise completely demonstrated the truth of your comment about the need for Campus Watch. But for the Campus Police who finally ejected them they would have just continued to scream and drown out your views. What an excellent confirmation and demonstration of why Campus Watch is such a worthy and important program!
Thanks again for coming to Berkeley and for your work overall.
I Saw You at Berkeley Last Night!
Alan Liss
February 11, 2004
FYI, at the back of that cavernous hall at the People's Republic of Berkely - I managed to finally get in to watch your talk last night. (I finally was allowed in at around 8 pm - it took an hour to cycle us through). My guess is that many of the radicals got the "tickets" with the expressed purpose to keep your supporters out - but I am proud to be one of the ones who stuck it out and made it in. It was worth it. For the talk of course, as well as the experience. I was pleasantly surprised that your supporters easily outnumbered the rabble rousers. I have to say that you are a courageous man to do what you do. My good friend Robin told me to stay home - because she was sure there was the potential for violence. That is what free speech at the University has come to. Count yourself lucky.
Remember this is the same place where Netenyahu was prevented from speaking! I still don't quite believe that the change of venue was just for security reasons - but perhaps I am too suspicious. Since I've read your work (I guess I need to get your newest book) - I knew most of what was going to come out of your mouth before you said it - which is a complement to you as a teacher - because very few of my former teachers have had that profound an impact on me.
Hateful Anti-Semitic Protest by Muslims at Dr. Daniel Pipes Talk at UCB Campus Last Night
Sanne DeWitt
February 11, 2004
Daniel Pipes gave an invited talk sponsored by Berkeley Hillel and the Israel Action Committee - ASUC in front of an audience of about 1000 people in Pimentel Hall on the Berkeley Campus last night. There were hundreds of Muslim protesters wearing Kefiyas and shirts with a slogan of "I Am An Arab" on the front. The protesters hooted, hissed, heckled and shouted hateful anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist insults loudly interrupting Dr. Pipes numerous times during his talk. The Muslims refused Dr. Pipes the courtesy of letting him speak. Several of the protesters were escorted out of the hall by police and over 100 Muslim demonstrators staged a mass walkout.
The evicted demonstrators gathered outside of the hall, formed a gauntlet and shouted insults at people leaving the hall. The presence of the police prevented violence but did not prevent the demonstrators from hurling insults.
Among the demonstrators were a few Jews and non-Jews who held banners equating Zionism with Nazism and racism. There were swastikas on some banners. I argued with one such demonstrator, an admitted Jew, who shouted "Police, Police, come over here!" in order to intimidate me. No police came.
Another demonstrator challenged me with the following questions and statements:
"Why the Hell do the Jews need a state?"
"Why do you Jews only associate with only your own people?"
"Have you read the Talmud? The Talmud is full of racist comments."
Several protesters wore gags during the lecture to imply that they were being muzzled and censored. The whole scene was hateful and disgusting.
Daniel Pipes' Talk at Berkeley
Ezra Mirvish
February 13, 2004
I thoroughly enjoyed Dr. Pipes' speech: he was incisive, pithy, and managed to play off of the rabid opposition, which consistently tried to 'exercise' their right to free speech by trying to keep him from speaking. There was a significant police presence by Berkeley standards, but the officers often failed to remove a number of the worst verbal offenders in a timely fashion. However, the 'protesters' were not given total carte blanche as there were plenty of good-guys willing to shout the PLO-types down, the police ultimately removed the worst ones, and, as I mentioned above, … Dr. Pipes was able to harness the vitriol in order to show how absurd the situation in Berkeley is and how hypocritical and simply nonsensical the anti-Israel people are.
The asinine comments, while quite annoying, brought a bemused grin and some apropos comments from Dr. Pipes. For instance, as he was reading a laundry list of the myriad foibles of fundamentalist Islam, angry shouts of "racist" and things of that ilk made it hard to hear what he was saying. When those screaming ran out of steam after about thirty seconds, Dr. Pipes, his countenance its usual collected self, said something to the effect of "In case you couldn't hear me, fundamentalist Islam is misogynist, etc., etc.," counting off all of the negative adjectives that the antis had just tried to drown out. I could go on at length, but suffice it to say that the event, from the speech to the strong, positive comportment of the pro-Israel contingent (which, much to my surprise, made up the vast majority of the audience), was really quite a success, and will provide more than enough material for a forthcoming article.
Daniel Pipes' Talk on UCB Campus
Sanne DeWitt
February 14, 2004
To: Letters, Jewish Bulletin of Northern California
Dear Editor:
Thanks for Joe Eskenazi's excellent report on Daniel Pipes' talk at the UC Campus ( j. Feb. 13 ) http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/21526/format/html/displaystory.html I would like to add some some observations.
Among the anti-Pipes demonstrators were both Jews and non-Jews who held banners equating Zionism with Nazism and racism among other disgusting slogans. There were swastikas on some banners. The demonstrators who were evicted stayed around to hurl insults to identified Jews ( I had a white T-shirt with a blue Magen David printed on it). I told one demonstrator, an Jew with a Kefiya, that his banner was disgusting. He tried to intimidate me by shouting "Police, Police, come over here!" …
Another demonstrator challenged me with the following questions and accusations:
"Why the Hell do the Jews need a state?"
"Why do you Jews associate with only your own people? That is racist behavior!
"Have you read the Talmud? The Talmud is full of racist comments."
Several protesters wore gags during the lecture to imply that they were being muzzled and censored. The most frequent accusation was that Jews, Zionists and Dr. Pipes were racists.
There is no basis for the biological concept of race. There is only one race - The Human Race - to which both Palestinians and Israelis belong. Although there are population groups, the genetic differences between them are trivial and superficial. The genetic differences such as skin and hair color are not linked to intelligence, ability, character or any other behavioral traits.
Daniel Pipes Presentation
Andrew Fine
February 14, 2004
This past Tuesday night, Feb. 10, I took the BART to Cal Berkeley (UCB) to hear Dr. Daniel Pipes speak. … For those who are unfamiliar with Pipes, he is a director of the Middle East Forum. He has a web site that publishes articles on the Mideast, terrorism, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, among other topics. Last week, his column invited all readers in the Bay Area to attend his speech at UCB, noting the "opposition" would be out in force, and he needed all the support he could get. I thought you would find what he said, and the reaction to his talk by friends and foes alike to be of interest.
The site for his talk was moved from one hall to another. Out front, there were many people on both sides. Flags, banners, placards were in abundance. Everyone had to get a ticket, police monitored the gathering, swirling crowd. No back packs were allowed inside, and admission was single file only. As a result, the talk, scheduled to begin at 7:30, didn't begin until almost an hour later.
Pipes' talk was sponsored by Berkeley Hillel and the Israel Action Committee; it took place in front of an audience of about 500 people in Pimentel Hall. There were many Muslim protesters wearing Kaffiyas and shirts with a slogan of "I Am An Arab" on the front. The protesters hooted, hissed, heckled and shouted hateful anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist insults, loudly interrupting Pipes numerous times during his talk. The Muslims refused Pipes the courtesy of letting him speak, without a struggle on his part. Pipes did not respond to the first few interruptions, but he began to toss out barbs such as "I guess your totalitarian impulse is just too strong" as they mounted up, to the delight of the rankled pro-Israel audience members.
Nevertheless, the crowd was something he had clearly experienced previously. Several of the protesters were escorted out of the hall by police and about 50-75 Muslim demonstrators staged a mass walkout. The evicted demonstrators gathered outside of the hall, formed a gauntlet and shouted insults at people leaving the hall. The presence of the police prevented violence but did not prevent the demonstrators from hurling insults. Among the demonstrators were a few Jews and non-Jews who held banners equating Zionism with Nazism and racism. I was talking with an Englishman (looked Pakistani) before the talk; he said Pipes should be a member of the BNP, the British Nazi Party. I asked him if he had read Pipes web site, and he said no. That spoke volumes to me. There were swastikas on some banners. A demonstrator challenged pro-Pipes Jews with the following questions and statements:
"Why the Hell do the Jews need a state?"
"Why do you Jews only associate with only your own people?"
"Have you read the Talmud? The Talmud is full of racist comments."
Several protesters wore gags during the lecture to imply that they were being muzzled and censored.
Pipes began his talk by noting he speaks about 120 times a year. He said the only place he needs security is when he speaks at universities! The bastions of liberal thought, diversity and tolerance. Uh, yeah. He began the substance of his talk by noting the War on Terrorism actually dates to November, 1979, when the Iranians took our embassy personnel hostage. Between November 1979 and September 10, 2001, terrorists world wide had murdered over 800 people. Yet the problem was viewed as a criminal matter, incidents to be investigated by police and the FBI. War was only recognized (and still not by everyone) on September 11, 2001. Pipes notes the other side in this war is militant Islam, not all Islam, which his critics continually misrepresent. Chants of "racist" and hisses filled the auditorium. At this point, Pipes noted this "proves my point on freedom of speech." He noted a fascinating point for all history buffs. He pointed out that the 20th century's major virulent totalitarian ideologies had their origins in the 1920s: fascism (the rise of Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo), Marxism in the USSR with Stalin, and militant Islam. Fascism was rendered irrelevant in 1945, Communism in 1991 with the fall of the USSR, and militant Islam will be as well, though not for a long time.
The director of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum called for "a war on militant Islam." "Militant Islam is derived from Islam, but it is [a] misanthropic, misogynist, anti-modern, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, terroristic and suicidal version of it," he said. I found it fascinating that many of the chanting protesters were woman. I wondered what their fate would be if they protested as they did, in the Afghanistan of the Taliban, or Saudi Arabia.
His second major topic was the Arab/Israeli conflict. He metes out harsh criticism of the 1993 Oslo accords; the result on the Palestinian side was poverty, corruption, death factories. On the Israeli side, the result was an economy in decline, deaths rising (over 1200 dead and over 6000 maimed by terrorism), and national confidence and well being declining. Israel's repeated concessions have not been greeted with equal good will on the Palestinian/Arab side. Rather, they have been viewed as evidencing weakness and vulnerability, to be continually exploited. The duplicitous Palestinians had no intention to recognize Israel. The reason for the conflict between what should have been and what was is that Oslo represented a government to government contract. Yet Oslo meant nothing to the Palestinian people (or to Arafat), who maintained their goal of wanting to destroy Israel. The key looking forward is what to do about the situation. Pipes said Israel and the West must learn from the mistakes of Oslo and the so-called "road map to peace." Until the Palestinians recognize Israel's right to exist, diplomacy must be relegated to the trashcan. Negotiations with them will be futile and actually counterproductive. The two sides can start talking when "Jews who live in Hebron have no more need for security than Arabs who live in Nazareth."
His third topic was Iraq. Here, too, Pipes points out a faulty model. Germany and Japan were "rehabilitated" after WW II because they had gone through total war and destruction. Iraqis were largely untouched by the three week war, as the timeframe was so short, and the US tried to limit "collateral damage." Thus, the Iraqis feel like they can challenge the US, while the crushed Germans and Japanese largely could not. Pipes said he supported the war in Iraq but was displeased by the war's aftermath. Iraq is unlike Germany and Japan, he said, because the inhabitants of those nations had been thoroughly defeated in a long war, while the Iraqis survived a short war and emerged "liberated." After being showered with boos following that statement, he replied: "I'm sorry, I stand corrected. They were much better off under Saddam Hussein." As a "liberated" people and not a "conquered" one, the Iraqis are less receptive to the rule of outsiders, he said. Pipes recommends we pull our troops out of the streets. We should not rule Iraq. We should move our troops to garrisons out of the cities, and use them to "guarantee" Iraqi sovereignty only. It will take years, probably two decades, for democracy to evolve from Saddam Hussein.
His fourth topic was about the corruption of most college campuses by rich sheik Saudi money donations to Middle Eastern studies depts. He lambasted the field of Middle Eastern studies as a corrupt and inept collection of apologists for terror who have been cowed by a glut of Arab money, and he defended his critiques on campus-watch.org, which accusers described as "McCarthyite. His defense against the McCarthyite label, was McCarthy was a powerful Senator, who had real power, while campus-watch.org is merely a private entity with no specific power.
His conclusions are compelling and thought provoking. It's too bad some people are caught up in the "goodness of radical Islam" not to see radical Islam's treatment of women, anti-democratic, anti-Semitic ideals and the slave mentality of most Arab states.
As he finished his speech, large numbers of pro-Palestinians stood and chanted "racist" and entire rows were expelled from the auditorium. A crowd of ejected audience members continued chanting outside. The demonstrators also mobbed pro-Israel attendees leaving the speech, pointing fingers and shouting "racist, racist." Pipes said after the speech that the audience reaction was "about the worst I ever had," and many audience members were displeased as well.
Cal Berkeley, the home of the "Free Speech" movement 40 years ago, has changed. Pipes could speak, and his supporters outnumbered his detractors. Nevertheless, free speech is not completely alive and well at Bezerkely, as it's affectionately known. Afterwards, I walked up to two of Berkeley's finest, and told them I thought they had done a hell of a good job, given the circumstances. They were genuinely appreciative. They also had a sense of humor. One of them laughed and said "what can you expect, this is Berkeley?!"
I Came to Hear You Speak
Kema'ste
February 17, 2004
My husband Keith and I came to hear you speak at UC Berkeley speak last Tuesday night.
When we approached the hall we could hear the din of anti-Israel slogans and see the profusion of Palestinian protesters in their flag, kaffyia and headscarves with their useful idiot supporters. There were the usual signs about Occupation, Zionism is Racism etc.
I wore my sweatshirt that has Hebron—past, present and forever (in Hebrew) on the front. I'd stashed my Israeli flag in the pocket of it. I walked up to the front of the group, turned my back to them and pulled out the flag and held it above my head! I'm six feet tall so no-one could miss it. People—I assume other Jews—were thanking me and taking pictures.
Only one other person had an Israeli flag and it was a small one on a stick. I stood there as long as I could then I went inside while my husband Keith went to put our backpack in the car at security's request. …
I want to make a comment regarding security.
Had I been a person so inclined to hide some kind of weapon upon my body, it would have been a simple matter of strategic placement. The people doing the searching seemed not only shook up by the rabble in front but distracted by it also. I wore a long skirt and had a pullover sweatshirt with pockets in front. They didn't check under my arms or even in my front pockets of my sweatshirt.
Maybe the women searching me recognized me as one of the tribe as I was the only one in front flying the Israeli flag. But as we've seen from the past experience in Israel, IslamoFacists have disguised themselves as Jews. Nonetheless as a former police officer I can tell you that the security was weak, tentative and lacked thoroughness.
It would have been very easy to get a firearm into the auditorium.
Please make sure the individuals conducting the search are better trained for your sake Daniel and for the sake of those who come to hear you.
I had stuffed my flag into my pocket and I'm glad I did because they took that little Israeli flag away from the guy who had it because they weren't allowing banners in the auditorium.
We loved your speech but were agitated at the show of weakness by Berkeley police towards those disrupting it. Those that were allowed to continue only emboldened the rest. It was such an effort to keep ours mouths shut but we didn't want to risk getting thrown out.
When you finished I stood up with my flag and shouted, "Long Live Israel—Am Israel Chai!" Boy did that get their hijab in a bunch...
After it was over all the terrorist-supporting-Saddam-lovers were waiting for us racist Jews outside. They had their little spiel down and were performing like well rehearsed Nazi's.
I had as much as I could take so I yelled out as loud as I could the only Arab swear word I know --- SHARMOOTA!!!!!
They went berserk! They lost it!
As if on cue they all went nuts and said (among other things);
"F*ck you," "Who said that?" "I'm going to burn you b*tch!"
They followed us just a few steps but didn't want to leave the prime protests spot in front of the hall. It was a little scary but I was running on pure adrenaline and already had a plan on what I would do if someone attacked me.
Killing off Free Speech
Joshua Pincus
February 18, 2004
I was pretty outraged by the bedlam that ensued during your talk last week. I submitted this letter to the "Daily Californian", UCal Berkeley's student newspaper. I haven't heard anything back about its possible publication, but I thought I would send it your way, if for no other reason than to show some measure of solidarity.
Take care and keep critiquing.
Exercise of free speech is not about spewing slogans and screaming your point of view into people's faces. Doing so prevents others from speaking and conveying their points of view, and a right isn't a right for all if only one party is allowed to express itself. Self-proclaimed members of the Muslim Students Association and their supporters tried to prevent Dr. Pipes from expressing his point of view during his talk at Berkeley on Feb. 10, 2004.
Before the talk, incendiary and obnoxious posters filled with some of the worst examples of ignorance and distortion were displayed at the entrance to the auditorium. Several pro-Arab demonstrators accosted members of the crowd by marching up to them and screaming into members' faces. They didn't care what anyone else said, and they didn't care if what they said made any sense. They had a mantra and they stuck to it.
During the talk, Dr. Pipes was interrupted every 4-5 minutes with a chorus of about thirty people screaming vitriol in unison. He was accused of being everything from a racist to a bigot to an academic hack. Rather than listen respectfully to what he had to say and then ask hard questions in areas where they felt he erred, they simply stood up and screamed vile epithets. Whenever he tried they speak, they laughed out loud or snickered or hurled insults. Thankfully, the police were there to remove these people from the audience. If it were not for the police, Dr. Pipes would not have been able to talk.
After the talk, demonstrators screamed "Racist!" at everyone who left the talk by the marked exit. They didn't know who any of us were, and they didn't know whether we agreed with Dr. Pipes or not. Attempting to talk to almost anyone in the mob was equally futile. They didn't care what anyone else said, and they didn't care if what they said made any sense. They had a mantra and they stuck to it.
It's a sad day for Berkeley and for any world-class University that prides itself on being a place for elevated dialogue and discussion. The demonstrators exemplified precisely what's wrong with modern, public debate:
Ignorant people who don't know what their adversary has to say screaming their point of view at the top of their lungs hoping, as one demonstrator told me, that what they're saying will "penetrate [our] big, thick skulls." This is idealism run amok, and it's very, very sad.
If more students spent more time reading original sources rather than screaming meaningless propaganda, maybe we'd get somewhere.
To quote the demonstrators, "Shame. Shame."
Daniel Pipes Speaks at Berkeley but the Real Message is in the Audience's Behavior
Abraham H. Miller
Emeritus Professor of Political Science at the University of Cincinnati
February 20, 2004
It had been some four decades since I last walked through the Sather Gate entrance to the University of California, Berkeley campus. Just beyond that gate, in 1964, Berkeley students launched the "Free Speech Movement," to defend their off-campus political activity in behalf of black civil rights. I walked past the Sproul Hall steps recently named after Mario Savio, whose impassioned oratory in behalf of free speech, while standing on those steps, was the rallying cry for my generation.
I was running late for a lecture by Daniel Pipes (February 10, 2004), a distinguished scholar, author of twelve books, and an adviser to the American government on the Middle East. Pipes' visit was sponsored by a coalition of Jewish groups. Muslim student organizational leaders had announced that Pipes would not be welcome, and they were prepared to disrupt his lecture.
The irony was overwhelming. Here in the birthplace of the "Free Speech Movement," Pipes was going to be gagged. Here in 2002, Muslim students and their sympathizers ended a Palestinian Solidarity meeting by screaming, "Kill the Jews." Free speech was supposed to protect them in their call for genocide, but not Pipes in his call for an interchange of ideas.
When I got to the lecture hall, a young woman from Hillel gave me a map and told me that the campus police had to move the lecture to another campus venue for security reasons. I had no difficulty finding the new location, flashing lights from a police cruiser lit up the location. As I approached, police where everywhere, as was a large crowd, delayed from entering by the security procedures.
There was a mixture of protestors. A sizable contingent of Muslims was shouting "racist," as if the Middle East conflict were about race. There were some elderly hippies carrying signs, one with a swastika imposed over a Jewish flag, and there was a young woman with a series of "quotes," attributed to Pipes, hand-printed on posters. These were at least interesting and had citations, albeit they were not to Pipes' words. I walked over to read the posters, and this was instinctively taken as a sign of ideological agreement. The young woman politely asked me if I would help her carry some of the posters into the lecture hall, a task I equally politely declined.
After being searched, I entered the crowded lecture hall, and found a seat. The side aisles were ringed with campus police, as was the stage.
Security concerns delayed the lecture for about an hour, and then a rather large … Muslim student stood up near the stage and refused to sit down. Campus police quickly escorted him to the exit, but as he was being ejected a group of about fifty Muslims and sympathizers, sitting together, stood up and began noisily chanting the name of the corpulent fellow who was being removed.
After they quieted down, Pipes was introduced to the sound of thunderous applause and hissing and booing by the Muslims. Pipes began by apologizing for the delay, noting that a person with his opinions required a large, armed security detail, metal detectors, searches and safe rooms. Of course, if he had held opposite opinions, no such measures would have been required. He hoped that in the citadel of free speech he could speak uninterrupted, and noted that there would be time for questions after the lecture.
Muslims and sympathizers immediately responded by standing up and screaming "racist," while the rest of the audience asked them to let the speaker be heard in the name of "free speech." The request was dismissed with disdain. The police had to wade through the audience and eject several of the protestors.
The speech was repeatedly punctuated by interruption, all too frequently with individuals standing up and talking incoherently in truncated slogans over the speaker. This immediately led me to question not the demonstrators' ideology—whatever it might have been—but their mental health. One young woman sitting near me launched a vitriolic tirade about Pipes being a fascist and a racist and that his speech should be stopped. In the space of a minute, she must have repeated the words 'fascist and racist" with sufficient frequency to secure a space in The Guinness Book of World Records.
Pipes drew the most frequent and loudest interruptions when he spoke about the world threat of "militant Islam," taking care to distinguish this from traditional Islam. No matter. The Muslims saw it as a direct attack. "What about Orthodox Jews?" screamed several Muslims, as if Orthodox Jews were blowing themselves up to kill innocents, burning churches in East Timor, and had established a death cult dedicated to violence against the West.
When Pipes spoke of how militant Wahabi Islam of Saudi Arabia had created little schools of hate in Pakistan, polluted the Middle East Studies programs of great American Universities, and promulgated an intolerant version of Islam, the Muslims were beside themselves. "Racist Jew," they screamed in unison, "shame, shame, shame." Clearly, they were drawing no distinction between militant Islam and themselves.
One Muslim woman with a scarf rapped around her face screamed, "Why don't you talk about how the Jews want to (expletive deleted) the Palestinians and take their land?" When police waded in to eject her, several of the Muslims screamed, "Don't touch her; she's a Muslim woman," and "don't touch our women. Get a woman cop."
The police where having none of it and grabbed her firmly by the arms and ushered her out. Imagine this, a woman stands up and screams an obscenity that fractures the bounds of decency, and then she impales herself on the modesty of her culture. Hypocrisy was in rare form.
Pipes noted, almost as an aside, that those in the audience who had shouted support for Saddam Hussein, also supported Osama bin Laden and Yassir Arafat. The remark drew loud applause.
The obvious and indelible tragedy is that the fifty or so Muslim students in the audience are not peasants from refugee camps but future leaders in Islamic communities. Their behavior showed an abhorrent and vicious disregard for the virtues of both liberty and rational discourse. How one sits across the table and negotiates with the likes of these people is beyond my comprehension. How could one possibly expect them to set aside their vitriol to live in peace with Israel or for that matter with non-Muslims?
When the formal part of the lecture ended and the forum was open to questions, the Muslims and their sympathizers showed no interest in dialogue, they rose as one, on cue and began screaming wildly, police quickly moved Pipes off stage, while others from the security detail waded into the Muslims to eject them.
At the end of the program, only one exit was opened, again for security reasons. As we passed through, almost single file, we were meet outside by the Muslims. They were now organized into an angry mob spread out like a gauntlet and screaming at us. On other campuses, this tactic had been used to spit at and assault people, but here we greatly outnumber them and were backed up by a highly professional and experienced campus security detail.
Pipes lecture was far less important than what we all witnessed in the behavior of the Muslims and their leftist sympathizers. The rationale for inviting foreign students to study in America—at the subsidy of the American taxpayer—is based on the value of cultural exchange. Here, these Muslim students showed that they were incapable of absorbing democratic values. They manifested a crass and vicious set of tactics reminiscent of Hitler-youth breaking into the lecture halls of Weimar universities. Had the Jewish students not been so well organized and had the Muslims not confronted a large security detail, I have absolutely no doubt that the event would have ended in violence. When we exited, we would have met the same orgy of aggression that French Jews routinely meet at the hands of Muslim demonstrators.
The spread of militant Islam is impossible to ignore. The hope for both the West and Islam is in the rise of a new generation that extols the virtues of traditional Islam and their compatibility with democratic values.
If there is any place in higher education where this could come about, it is at Berkeley. This is as culturally diverse and intellectually stimulating an environment as it is humanly possible to create. Here all sorts of dialogues should be possible, even those between Zionist and militant Muslim. That Muslim student leaders at Berkeley chose the path of disruption and hatred instead of dialogue should be of great concern to all of us, irrespective of our politics or the faith we choose to profess.
Appearance at "Berzerkley"
Mike Baker
February 20, 2004
The attendance size, coverage of—especially over the Internet—and overall confrontation and combativeness of the speaking engagement shows well that the intellectual tyranny and fascism of Islam is already here in America. Not that that's news to you. They're not interested in rational and professional discourse
Let me clarify that statement by first pointing out that I am in the midst of Robert Spencer's "Islam Unveiled." Needless to say he is not as generous in his evaluation of Islamic society and culture as you are, although I continue to understand your need to remain as objective as possible due to the continued growth of your reach and influence. I tend to lean more towards his line of critique of the overall scenario (globally, culturally, etc.). He doesn't use the "militant" qualifier much in challenging Islam.
The limp response of the Berkeley Administration to the disruption of the speech further belies the bias of leftist dominated academia, especially here in California. It is interesting to see how various leftist groups and movements in the West, although perhaps ideologically opposed in some areas, have formed alliances together with radical Islamist movements, much like was happening in ways between Iran, Iraq, and Syria, as detailed in Yossef Bodansky's work, "The High Cost Of Peace...." before the Iraq war.
Your appearance would have generated the same response down here at UC Riverside. There's a "professor" of political science, and I use "professor" lightly, on staff there named Armando Navarro who helps head the "Department of Ethnic Studies" program. They had a biographical write up on him a few weeks back in the local paper. From what I could glean from the article, the main impetus behind his "academic" career was an insult by a white guy directed against his father back when he was a kid, thus his entrance into "social activism."
Actually, he's a radical leftist Mexican separatist who just hates white guys, and a major player in the Pacific southwest "Aztlan" movement, which has taken up the "Palestinian" cause ostensibly in opposition to Israeli "occupation" of the Land, in a furtive bid to establish moral equivalency in the eyes of the wider community to their own PC racism. Together they have staged protests here in response to events over the last two years in the war effort.
Brown racism cloaked in the guise of academia. All at the taxpayers expense. I have grown up with and worked with the Mexican people all my life and those from a Conservative background find him and what he and his cadre represents embarrassing.
The UC system is littered with these types. They have been effective in recent years. Radical socialist utopian Howard Zinn has also become mandatory reading in many "history" courses in the UC system, along with Michael Parenti, from my conversations with current and past victims of the UC educational experience. All have been kids of my clients. They have given me their used text books. These people on UC staff are skillful in undermining the basic tenets of American culture—and Israeli culture/history as well, in the minds of their students who are pretty much captive to their indoctrination. Some of these kids have analytical, critical thinking skills developed enough to see the academic environment for what it is. Most do not.
Those who do graduate or continue on to higher academic levels, then on to government and corporate leadership positions, are fully prepped in the same tenets of the Clinton/Albright socialist globalism—and certainly not agitated against much by some Republicans, as well as American transnational corporations which are loyal to no one—that prevailed during his term, doing much to bring us 9/11. I remember I was incredulous that immediately after 9/11, some within the American leadership elite were moving towards more severe "sanctions" and "penalties" instead of exactly how Bush responded.
Further, these types of public displays at Berkeley concern me as a Christian because I have spent some time in personal research trying to find out where in the equation Christianity was in Europe and Germany, pre WWII and the Holocaust. Christendom in Germany and Europe at that point had become compromised and morally bankrupted beyond redemption, and not the moral compass and bulwark against the diabolical evil that swept the continent. "Replacement Theology," a putrid heresy that has been the root of much of the persecutions by "christians" against the Jews also still had full reign—and still does in some quarters. If you follow some of the publications of the more high profile Christian ministries that stand in advocacy of Israel today, the commentary refuting this theology is featured regularly.
From current events and political movements/attitudes in the EU, it has still not recovered. The few Christians who I would deem genuine during the era had dwindled to the few who were killed outright by the Nazis; the others recorded in history for their efforts in rescuing the few Jews they could. I'm pretty well informed on current movements within global Christianity. I don't hear much from the EU community worth mentioning, except a goofy email from time to time criticizing the content of my "America At War" site.
In my opinion, the Evangelical Christian support for the Nation of Israel and the Jews today in America will continue to be the bulwark against anti-Semitism being fomented on American campuses, in partnership with other individuals, groups, and organizations (like CampusWatch), as well as the continuing campaign by Socialist utopians and the radical left to undermine American hegemony globally. I guarantee you, Old Europe Christendom then and now is certainly 'not' American Evangelical Christianity today, and advocacy of Israel from my camp will continue.
I appreciate your efforts to encourage the "moderate" elements of the Islamic world, but even in light of the war in Iraq and the culture shock in the Middle East which followed the fall of Baghdad and the capture of Hussein, we have only made a small dent in what has grown and flourished since the fall of the American Embassy in Tehran—both in the Middle East and in our own Western backyards. Bremer may insist that Sharia law will not be implemented in Iraq, but that assertion remains to be seen. Islam, in my opinion, is still not open to "moderation" and modernization. Not when scenarios like Arafat in Ramallah and Sheik Yassin in Gaza City are allowed to continue, because as many have pointed out, they are the "edge of the sword" of militant Islam. Palestinian Media Watch and Itamar Marcus deliver the proof every day.
Thus, the same intellectual weakness we as a nation have modeled, or rather "political correctness" and blind adherence to the utopian religion of plurality, "tolerance," and multiculturalism has made us vulnerable to the intolerant, bullying tactics shown you at Berkeley, and indeed, on a global level has resisted Bush's efforts in the war on terror (I refer you to your own trials in your Bush nomination to the USIP). The only reason why we have come this far is due to the sheer will of the President and his Administration—and the support of his core constituency. Yet, I am growing apprehensive of the flagging support within that constituency. The Bush Administration has not only the Middle East to contend with, but sappers in the wire at home.
What do we do? A Reagan era inspired "de-fund the left" campaign directed at American Universities? Should taxpayers be paying what amounts to nothing but indoctrination with no opposing viewpoints for balance? I'm assuming your staff tasked with the CampusWatch project are chronicling these trends on American universities. As far as the general population at large, I will find myself in discourse from time to time with people on the streets and trying to correct their mass media inspired misconceptions of American foreign policy, will usually get a "deer in the headlights" stare and "Okay...." Those who really care enough to educate themselves on these issues and have the intellectual self-discipline to do so, are few. It is truly extensive. That's why FreeRepublic is such a great personal outlet and informational resource.
Daily, it reminds me of the cultural conditions of the Roman empire when it was at its zenith and heading for the decline, brilliantly detailed by Thomas Hodgkin in his work, "Huns, Vandals, and the Fall of the Roman Empire." Roman foreign involvement's and policies had become so complicated and extensive, the bulk of the people had simply abandoned any attempts to try and grasp it and immersed themselves in the "games" and self-indulgence. Conditions in the EU and certain aspects of the American experience today model so much of that time. Advances in communications and technology have only speeded up cultural changes that back them took centuries.
So, those are my views on "Berzerkley" and current states of affair. It's a big ugly monster with it's tentacles reaching into some pretty sensitive areas. But in our current relativistic moral environment in a nation that has suffered very little thus far in this war, it will continue to be 'very' challenging.
So I will continue to invoke the Deity in opposition to the secularists and rationalists thus: G-d help us to prevail.
Shocking Realization
James A Willson
April 22, 2004
Dr. Pipes lecture was a fine one, in my biased opinion. He traced the history of the present situation between our culture and the Muslim/Islamic culture, described several current problems associated with the Muslim/Islamic world, including the Palestine-Israeli situation, and suggested some courses of action that we citizens of the United States might take to improve the situation.
The Muslims Attack
Dr. Pipes' planned presentation to an audience of nearly 600 was truncated and almost terminated at its start by a near riot caused by the Muslim students in attendance. These students screamed "Fascist" as he tried to speak. They were particularly incensed when Dr. Pipes made the distinction between militant and moderate and Western-leaning Islam. This massive interruption is chronicled on his website
These website notes do not begin to describe adequately the attempt of campus militant Muslim/Islamists to break up Dr. Pipes' lecture and to keep his thoughts from being freely expressed.
This attempt to quash an expression of ideas took place in a venue where freedom of speech is supposed to be the bedrock of the environment of this once-great university.
From the very start of Dr. Pipes presentation, the spineless campus police in attendance at the lecture, probably some 20 to 30 of them along with a vice chancellor (equally spineless), almost instantly lost control of the Muslim students in the audience. The Muslim students tried to shout down Dr. Pipes just about every time he expressed one or two thoughts. The vice chancellor (name unknown) sat on his hands, as did the campus police.
There were about 150 Muslims of 500 to 600 total attendees. Many of the remaining attendees, probably most of them, appeared to be members of two campus Jewish student clubs which were sponsors of Dr. Pipes' lecture.
After a few minutes of shouted interruptions by the Muslim students whenever Dr. Pipes tried to start his presentation, it became clear that these students had no intention of letting Pipes state his ideas. At this point the campus police began to eject individual Muslim students from the lecture hall.
After some 10 to 20 Muslims had been so ejected, with much shouting and fist shaking, the very loud and vicious shouting by the most of the Muslims - with the threat of continued ejections - caused the estimated 150 remaining Muslims in the audience to stand up en masse, apparently on signal, and leave the lecture hall while they continued their loudly shouted threats as they departed. The remaining members of the audience also started to shout epithets at the departing Muslims. The atmosphere was noisy, hate-filled, and very tense.
After the departure of the Muslim student troublemakers, which required several minutes, quiet reigned in the lecture hall as Dr. Pipes was permitted to begin his presentation (shortened because of the lengthy disruptions). The remaining 400 to 500 members of the audience were largely Jewish. There was also a shortened question period after Dr. Pipes finished an abbreviated version of his planned remarks.
No Physical Danger
Carol and I were never in any physical danger during the near-riot starting minutes of Dr. Pipes' presentation. Tight security measures had delayed the planned start of the lecture at 7:30 PM for over an hour. The campus police had passed all attendees through an airport-type electronic metal detector as well as "wanding us" thoroughly before we were permitted entry to the lecture. Carol and I were confident that there were no concealed weapons in the audience.
There had been a quiet and relatively orderly crowd (of which we were a part), with a few of its members waving mostly anti-Israel placards, waiting about 30 to 45 minutes to enter the auditorium. There were frequent flashbulbs in the dark February evening outside of the auditorium. There were no threats of violence before we entered the lecture hall. There was no real hint of the disturbance—obviously carefully planned—that was to ensue at the start of Dr. Pipes' lecture.
The site of the lecture had been switched at the last minute to prevent demonstrations outside the lecture site before the lecture. But word of the new location for the lecture spread quickly around this very large campus. The final site of the lecture was about one-half mile, mostly uphill, it seemed, from the originally-announced lecture site.
After the lecture and outside of the lecture hall, the tension in the crowd was substantially diminished. There were several small discussion groups, a few placards (mostly anti-Israel), a few more flash bulbs, a small number of campus police, but no noisy shouting. The crowd appeared to go home peacefully. It was by then around 10:00 PM.
Shocking Realization
What shocked us enormously and very deeply was the vitriolic stance of intense hatred expressed in unison by the student Muslims—presumably mostly American citizens - against the Jewish Dr. Pipes, a Harvard PhD, a Director of the Middle East Forum
Repeated Pattern of Attack
Subsequent reports indicate that this pattern of disruption by Muslims, never approaching physical violence, of Dr. Pipes' (and other) anti-Muslim lectures has been and is being repeated often at other universities across the country. These disruptions, taken together, have tended to have perhaps less noise and confusion than we observed at Berkeley.
But it appears that regardless of where you are on most university campuses across our land today, your facts and reasoning do not seem to matter: if you do not agree with the militant Muslim anti-Jewish stance, you may not present your ideas in an open, peaceful forum.
Two Informal Reactions
Thu, 12 Feb 2004 07:24:47 -0800
From: "albroudy"
About 30 of us went to hear Daniel Pipes last night. There were hundreds of others who came. Hillel did an outstanding job of protecting him. We had police who were able to oust those Muslims....there were many of them. Anti-semitic....and also yelling out that Pipes was "racist".
Pipes was very good. Had a sense of humour. Listened to the heckling. Stopped talking and waited until those people were ousted.Continued to speak. There were many of us who clapped and showed our appreciation. I'm going to send you the Daily Cal which had a letter to the editor protesting him.before he spoke,and a letter from the director of HIllel defending Pipes civil right to speak.
----------------------------------
Daniel Pipes' Talk at Cal
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:39:04 EST
From: DSpielvol@aol.com
I went to the Daniel Pipes presentation last night. The only visible opposition to his talk came from emotionally charged and bellicose Arabs, not Jews.
Daniel Pipes gave an excellent talk including the corruption of most college campuses by rich sheik Saudi money donations to Middle Eastern studies depts. He equated the militant Islamic movement to fascism, Marxism and Stalinism and it's structure to engulf other nations. It's too bad more people are caught up in "goodness of radical Islam" not to see radical Islam's treatment of women, antidemocratic, anti Semitic ideals and slave mentality of current Arab states.
------------------
