Chuck Devore demands the banning of anti-zionist student group

[Robert Stark]

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/02/24/1010789/california-assemblyman-wants-muslim-student-group-banned


Chuck DeVore is a Neocon Zionist. He also endorsed Israel War on Gaza. We should get behind Tom Capbell. He is not perfect but he is much closer to Ron Paul and more non-interventionist.

[Flash]

Does it matter? Hes 4% in the polls. Just focus on Kokesh, Rand, or someone else.

[rp08orbust]

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/02/24/1010789/california-assemblyman-wants-muslim-student-group-banned


Chuck DeVore is a Neocon Zionist. He also endorsed Israel War on Gaza. We should get behind Tom Capbell. He is not perfect but he is much closer to Ron Paul and more non-interventionist.

Wow, banning a group--not good.

[MRoCkEd]

Members of the Muslim Student Union have been on the defensive since they disrupted a campus speech two weeks ago by the Israeli ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren. The members are facing disciplinary proceedings by the university and possible criminal prosecution.

DeVore, who is seeking the GOP nomination for the Senate seat now held by Democrat Barbara Boxer, also accused the student union of fund raising for Hamas.

hm

[Free Moral Agent]

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/02/24/1010789/california-assemblyman-wants-muslim-student-group-banned


Chuck DeVore is a Neocon Zionist. He also endorsed Israel War on Gaza. We should get behind Tom Capbell. He is not perfect but he is much closer to Ron Paul and more non-interventionist.

Damnit Chuck why do you have to stick your nose into campus shenanigans! I agree this is no good, but what evidence do you have that Tom Campbell is closer to RP? Chuck DeVore seems to be the closest (although still far), he was endorsed by Tom Clintock.

[Brian4Liberty]

Full text of DeVore's letter:



http://chuckdevore.com/news/247/Chuck-DeVore-calls-for-banning-the-UC-Irvine-Muslim-Student-Union

February 23, 2010
Chancellor Michael Drake University of California, Irvine
Irvine, California 92697-5125

Dear Chancellor Drake:

I write to express my profound concern with the activities of the Muslim Student Union (MSU) at the University of California at Irvine (UCI). Its orchestration of a prolonged and event-ending public disruption during the February 8th, 2010 visit of Israel's Ambassador to the United States – the distinguished scholar, statesman and historian Michael Oren – is but the latest of a series of violations of university policies and probity.

It should now be clear to even the most casual observer that the MSU at UCI is an entity inimical to the University's imperative to provide an education in an atmosphere of academic liberty, free of coercion and conducive to meaningful debate and free inquiry.

I therefore request that you defend this University, its students, and its mission by banning the Muslim Student Union from its campus, and withdrawing all formal recognition of its existence.

Chancellor, I am aware that this is a severe and enduring penalty for any student group. Unfortunately, the history and activities of the Muslim Student Union at your University speak for themselves. I am personally acquainted with this group, having been involved in asking your administration to overturn the UCI-unique policy that allowed the MSU to ban recording of their own on-campus events – lest there be a public record of the radicalism and pro-terror viewpoints promulgated at them.

The mere existence of a student organization professing and promoting these viewpoints ought to be enough to ban it. Worse is that the MSU goes beyond words: it demonstrably raised funds for Hamas, a recognized terrorist group, at a recent on-campus event. This too is sufficient grounds for expulsion from campus. The disruption of Ambassador Oren's speech is merely the latest in a series of incidents demonstrating with appalling clarity that the Muslim Student Union at the University of California at Irvine is dedicated to support of terrorism, anti-Semitism, and the suppression of free speech.

It must be said directly that you, as the Chancellor of this University, must defend it. If not now, when?

Sincerely,

Chuck DeVore Assemblyman, Seventieth District

[Brian4Liberty]

It appears to be a long-running clash:




http://arc.asm.ca.gov/member/70/?p=article&sid=151&id=208261

6/17/2007 | Opinion Editorial
Liberal Groupthink Causes Conservatives To Self-Censor

The ideal academic environment on a college campus is one that encourages vigorous debate and builds reasoning skills, all while the student is learning in his or her area of study.

Unfortunately, universities too often fall short in the first two categories.

For at least six years now, the Muslim Student Union at UC Irvine has made a habit of inviting inflammatory speakers on campus. One speaker declared, "We will bury you in the sand," while implying death to either a nation (Israel) or a group of people (Jews). While another said, "You can take the Jew out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jew," when explaining why he believes Jews have a social pathology that makes it impossible for them to live in peace with anyone else.

Such comments elicited not a peep from a university faculty presumably too concerned with tolerance to criticize speech that crossed the line from commentary to hate. What might make the professionals at UCI reluctant to speak up against hate speech? Imagine the uproar if former klansman David Duke showed up at UCI and said, "You can take the Jew out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jew" or if Duke referred to African Americans when saying, "We will bury you?"

A study of almost 1,300 academics from more than 700 colleges and universities by Gary A. Tobin, Ph.D., and Aryeh K. Weinberg show an American faculty that is overwhelmingly liberal in the key areas of the humanities and the social sciences — two fields with tremendous influence, as all students, even science and business students, have to take some liberal arts courses to graduate. Further, professors from the humanities and the social sciences are those whose area of expertise is politics and social commentary.

Tobin and Weinberg's 2006 survey, "Political Beliefs and Behavior of College Faculty," showed that 58% of humanities faculty believe that U.S. policies in the Middle East have created the problems we face in the region. Similarly, 56% of humanities professors see the U.S. and Israel as the greatest threat to world peace, while only 41% name China, Russia, and Iran combined.

Further, social science faculty voted for John Kerry over President Bush in 2004 by more than a four-to-one ratio while five times as many humanities professors preferred Kerry over Bush. This has led to liberal groupthink, causing the few conservative professors to engage in self-censorship as a survival mechanism.

For these reasons, condemning hate speech by Muslim Student Union speakers may be too much to expect from a faculty who likely sees Middle Eastern Arabs as victims of the West. Rather, a modest step would be to prohibit the student union and any other group from banning the audio or video recording of events so that all campus speech can be heard and commented on freely. Knowing that their words may come back to haunt them may even make a few hate speakers think twice before spewing.

[0zzy]

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/02/24/1010789/california-assemblyman-wants-muslim-student-group-banned


Chuck DeVore is a Neocon Zionist. He also endorsed Israel War on Gaza. We should get behind Tom Capbell. He is not perfect but he is much closer to Ron Paul and more non-interventionist.

stop using labels. i hate it. he wants to ban a group =/= Neocon Zionist.

[Free Moral Agent]

For these reasons, condemning hate speech by Muslim Student Union speakers may be too much to expect from a faculty who likely sees Middle Eastern Arabs as victims of the West. Rather, a modest step would be to prohibit the student union and any other group from banning the audio or video recording of events so that all campus speech can be heard and commented on freely. Knowing that their words may come back to haunt them may even make a few hate speakers think twice before spewing.

I like DeVore's approach in that he wants to OPEN UP the events so that they can be recorded. I can't believe that the student union or any other group has the power to ban recording at a public university. I would be all for this if I was a student on that campus.

[Brian4Liberty]

Found this. Seems to be a description of early interactions on that campus. It is in DeVore's Assembly District.


http://jerrypournelle.com/mail/2008/Q2/mail521.html

I represent UCI and the almost half a million people around the campus in the California State Assembly. UCI is the largest employer in my district. It is a hugely important engine of science and culture. And, it is an institution rife with uneven, politically correct application of administrative power where conservative, pro-American students get shut down (for instance, the “Equal Opportunity Bake Sale”) while peddlers of hate and intimidation are apparently welcomed with open arms. Members of the Muslim Student Union certainly have their First Amendment rights, should they wish to continue to call for the destruction of Israel, a member nation of the U.N. That said, campus administrators should be prepared to denounce hate speech after it clearly and consistently appears. Not to do so is to aid and abet a climate of campus intimidation – or worse.

We can report on modest progress in at least being able to document what is being said on campus by fully exercising our First Amendment rights to record hate speech events sponsored by the Muslim Student Union. Previous campus policy allowed the Muslim Student Union the right to prohibit the recording of their speakers. This led to numerous incidents where student journalists using video recorders or cameras were ejected by campus officials at the request of Muslim Student Union leaders. I decided to test this unfair and unwise policy myself a year ago when I walked into a Muslim Student Union sponsored lecture with my video camera. I was told to leave. I refused. But the speaker himself said he was fine with my recording the event, so a potential confrontation was averted. I used this incident to crystallize action from UCI where Chancellor Drake, to his credit, revised the policy. Now student groups may request no recording at an event, but campus officials are not supposed to force compliance with the request. My earnest hope is that shedding light on hate speech will serve to turn the temperature of that speech down a notch or two while the new policy may defuse confrontations at events featuring hate speakers as it becomes generally known that recording of such events cannot be prohibited.

[Brian4Liberty]

Video of the incident in question:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8TZ9C_6LRk

[Inflation]

Why doesn't Israel just steal some passports and assassinate these troublemakers?

It's not like that kind of thing might start World War 3, right?

Oh wait....

[Agorism]

He wanted to ban the group or to prevent people from banning them?

[dannno]

He wanted to ban the group or to prevent people from banning them?

DeVore wants the Chancellor to ban the Muslim group from campus in the name of free speech... because they disrupted some dude's speech.. and are some how being "coercive" in their actions..

[Agorism]

Anyone else see the guy promise that the kids that they would fail all their exams on their way out the door.

I don't know what to make of the whole thing.

[South Park Fan]

Between this and this (http://newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=CA&last=Campbell&first=Tom), I don't know who to support in the race (Obviously Fiorina's out of the question.)

[Agorism]

Did DeVore want to ban them because of who they were or because of their disruptions?

[Brian4Liberty]

Did DeVore want to ban them because of who they were or because of their disruptions?

From what I know of it, he wants the University to ban that organization for the following reasons:

- At their meetings, they were not allowing non-Muslims to record anything, and using the University police to remove outsiders. The University has changed that policy since DeVore went in person with a video camera and they asked him to leave.

- They have had speakers that were fund-raising for possible terrorist front groups.

- They disrupted other speakers (not at their events), preventing them from speaking (video above).

[Morgan Brykein]

I was enthusiastic about DeVore until I found out about his support for Israel and foreign aid. Nothing against Israel as a country - I just think it's absurd to call yourself a fiscal conservative while supporting billions of dollars on such waste.

[Brian4Liberty]

I was enthusiastic about DeVore until I found out about his support for Israel and foreign aid. Nothing against Israel as a country - I just think it's absurd to call yourself a fiscal conservative while supporting billions of dollars on such waste.

There is no Ron Paul in this race. All three GOP candidates are about the same on that issue.

[klamath]

There is no Ron Paul in this race. All three GOP candidates are about the same on that issue.
So right and it applies to Schiff and Rand as well.

[acptulsa]

Does it matter?

Depends on if you're in this district, I suppose.


Wow, banning a group--not good.

No doubt he's screaming 'racism'. Which is painfully disingenuous--zionism is neither race nor religion, but merely a political movement. You might as well allow a Democratic group but ban Republican groups on the basis of 'average demograophics', for all the real sense you're making or the real good you're doing.

[Promontorium]

This district? Jesus Christ. I tried to tell people on day 1 Devore was a middle of the road Republican. I have no idea how any of you fell into it with supporting him. His own website laid out his politics and his positions had never been a mystery.

This district?

It's the US Senate. Jesus Christ I am glad he lost. Just so the stink of "Liberty lovers" wasn't wafting from his neo con championship belt.

Just imagine, we get Rand and Devore to win their primaries, they would cancel each other out. I wish there were a liberty candidate in California, but there isn't, there wasn't. My Congressional district had one, no one here cared, but he dropped out, so I stopped caring too. Along comes neocon Devore, anti-gay, pro Israel, pro war with China, fuck let's give him a money bomb. Jaaaaaayyyyyyyyzzzzuuusssssss Christ.

[Brian4Liberty]

This district? Jesus Christ. I tried to tell people on day 1 Devore was a middle of the road Republican. I have no idea how any of you fell into it with supporting him. His own website laid out his politics and his positions had never been a mystery.


He wasn't 100% in agreement with Ron Paul, or all the people here. Heck, all the people here don't agree on many things. It was a compromise. And it was before Tom Campbell switched races. All three GOP CA Senate candidates were very strong supporters of Israel, and Carly Fiorina was the first one to start using it in her campaign. DeVore claimed to follow his old boss, Cap Weinberger's more non-interventionist policy (The same Weinberger who successfully pulled our troops out of Beirut during the Reagan administration). That's more than could be said about Carly. There wasn't a candidate that was totally non-interventionist as far as the Middle East is concerned.

DeVore was a proven fiscal conservative. He was against TARP and bailouts. He always talked about the Constitution. He was a strong Second Amendment supporter. We probably all agree with him on those issues.

Carly is the hand-picked McCain/Lyndsey Graham type RINO. Her and Campbell both leaned towards supporting TARP and the Bailouts (although they never had to vote on it, and could change their positions later). Carly was a McCain economic adviser when he ran to Washington to support TARP and the bailouts.

It's not an issue now. We have Carly Fiorina, McCain and Wall St's hand picked RINO: Lloyd Blankfein, Ken Lay, Lyndsey Graham and Marie Antoinette all rolled into one. We can support a different candidate now, one who is more ideologically in line with this forum, and who doesn't have a snowball's chance in California. Should it be the Libertarian or American Independent (the Constitution Party in CA)? Other ideas?

As with any of the candidates who lose their primaries, it's time to archive this sub-forum.