Monday, November 17th 2008
Peace not Prejudice
So it’s “peace not prejudice” week here at Cal. Excellent. Considering that things these days haven’t really been so “peaceful” here on campus, especially between the pro-Palestinian and the Zionist voices, perhaps this peace and not prejudice week is a good idea.
As I walked on campus early this morning, I didn’t really see or feel or hear much of a change. In fact, it felt like any other day walking down Sproul. The only difference was that the pro-Palestinian students decided to have a little rendezvous right where I wanted to walk. Surprisingly, I first thought it was Greek dancing (which put a smile on my Hellenic face); but then I heard the music, noticed the Palestinian flag, and the convenient location of the celebration located right in front of the Cal Democrats table. I couldn’t help but feel a little annoyed. Maybe this was because not too far down from all the happy dancing were the pro-Israel students, holding the Israeli flag and feeling a little aggravated. This is a great step towards peace and not prejudice. I wonder what else I will witness this week.
I think it’s great that people celebrate their own culture and identity. No one should ever be ashamed of doing so. However, following the recent brawl and the extremely high tensions between these two groups, a better step towards peace could have been less obnoxious today and a little more, well, peaceful. I think this week could be better used if the pro-Palestinian and the Zionist students attempt to come together and reconcile their differences here on campus. I know that isn’t as easy as it sounds, and the fundamental differences in beliefs can be a huge road block, but if the two groups really want “peace” and not “prejudice”, then they should be seizing this opportunity. Call me an idealist, but why shouldn’t they try to reconcile differences (if only for this week) for the sake of peace and not prejudice? And why can’t the two groups come and celebrate together on Sproul? UC Berkeley should be a place of free speech, thoughts, and opinions which people can express without the fear of being harassed. If the pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups actually come together in peace, then that would be honoring what this week (and Cal) is supposed to be about. In fact, if I saw that, I may just join in on the celebrating too… although I might end up Greek dancing out of pure habit. It looks similar anyway.
I hardly think that you are qualified to comment on “what this week is supposed to be about.” Are you a member of the coalition? Maybe you don’t know that Peace Not Prejudice was started as a response to BCR’s “Islamofascism Awareness Week.”
PNP is all about speaking against last Thursday’s hate crime. Nobody should ever be attacked because they’re Palestinian and holding a Palestinian flag. Frankly, I think it makes sense for people to publicly proclaim the fact that they’re Palestinian, a few days after they get attacked for doing it.
Comment by yaman — 11/18/2008 @ 12:14 am
“I hardly think that you are qualified to comment on “what this week is supposed to be about.””
I’m sorry you think I don’t stand for peace. I wasn’t aware I had to meet certain qualifications in order to know what peace not prejudice is supposed to be about. I wonder where I came off as being against peace and prejudice week anyway.
“PNP is all about speaking against last Thursday’s hate crime. Nobody should ever be attacked because they’re Palestinian and holding a Palestinian flag. Frankly, I think it makes sense for people to publicly proclaim the fact that they’re Palestinian, a few days after they get attacked for doing it.”
Good. People should speak out against hate crimes. I don’t think I ever said people shouldn’t.
Agreed. Nobody should be attacked because they’re holding a Palestinian flag. And yes! Please do proclaim the fact that you’re Palestinian. I don’t think I said you shouldn’t.
But should this stop you from attempting to reconcile differences and take steps towards some sort of peace here on campus? When I mean you, I mean not only Palestinians, but the Zionist voices as well. That is what I said. Yes, there have been scuffles in the past, but if you can’t see through that and try to work towards some sort of peace and not prejudice, then no change will ever be accomplished. Plus, our campus isn’t supposed to have factions fighting to make it one sided. People with opposite views exist, whether you’re pro-Palestinian or pro-Israel. So take this week to consider being a “bigger person”, realize that you are an educated college student, and actually take steps towards peace and prejudice…Not just celebrating only your own culture and ideas. Failing to take a risk for peace, or rather, refusing to try to work for peace when the opportunity presents itself, just reflects your lack of committment to peace in the first place.
I don’t know why you came off so hostile. Just get over yourself. Why complain when someone is advocating for two conflicting factions to try and come together in peaceful communication? What the hell. Look who wants peace: The “Islamofascist” member of BCR…who doesn’t mind people saying their Palestinian or pro-Israel, but does mind when these students on campus refuse to work towards peace. Shocking, isn’t it? Hooray for jumping to conclusions, and hooray for thinking that someone has to meet certain qualifications in order to be an advocate for peace.
Comment by Danae — 11/18/2008 @ 12:51 am
I apologize for being abrupt, as I did not intend to be hostile. I was annoyed because I felt that your post mainly recycled a few cliches and stereotypes about the Middle East (endless conflicts that people irrationally can’t see past) and applied them to our campus, without attempting to seek any other depth to the issue whatsoever. I agree with you that there is no reason that organizations on campus should be on a “non-speaking basis.” I think you underestimate the cooperative networks that exist on this campus. Tikvah, for example, is not “the Zionist side” on campus. I wouldn’t even say SJP is the “non-Zionist side” on campus. There are other groups that proclaim themselves to be Zionist on campus, that are not violent and confrontational like Tikvah is. Really, the problem is not with Tikvah’s views. It’s with its behavior. Tikvah has refused to speak to SJP on numerous occasions in the past two semesters to discuss precisely what you’ve been mentioning– how to create an atmosphere on campus that allows both our groups to function and to hold events. And, most importantly at all, just because Palestinian students and supporters had a dance on Sproul today, does not mean that they are engaged in other actions this week that go beyond their bubbles.
Comment by yaman — 11/18/2008 @ 1:13 am
Yes, that is a huge problem on campus. And I agree, Tikvah and SJP are not the only groups…and that’s why I didn’t name them in my article. I am glad to hear that Palestinian students and supporters will go beyond their bubbles…I hope other people do as well. Honestly, like I said, change won’t happen unless both groups are willing to take some risks for peace, and can appreciate eachother’s identities, existence, and culture. That goes for people who aren’t Palestinian or Jewish as well. And I hope it comes sooner than later
Comment by Danae — 11/18/2008 @ 1:26 am
Not to bring back old memories here, but rather to recall “facts,” let me just remind you of last year’s “response to BCR’s ‘Islamofascism Awareness Week.’”
Peace Not Prejudice Week then was in fact prejudiced toward not only Berkeley College Republicans, and students on campus who were (and still are) slightly curious if not suspicious of so-called Islamic fascists, terrorists, and fundamentalists who in the name of Allah executed 9/11, but also to the speakers visiting campus that week. I attended BCR’s main event that week to hear Nonie Darwish speak. The disruptions of that event (”disruptions,” in this case, to put it lightly) were hardly exemplary of peace and not prejudice. Those shouting down the speaker, having to be escorted out, banging on doors (a few of which were seen wearing a certain green-colored t-shirt that began circulating around again today) were obviously not sympathetic to or even tolerant of BCR’s Islamofascism Awareness Week. Rather, they represented the “response” that PNP generated.
Let’s just hope this year’s Peace Not Prejudice Week stays “on message.” That is, advocates peace and avoids displays of prejudice. As for next year, one tip may be to include BCR as well as Zionist groups in the week’s festivities. I noticed virtually every other ASUC student group co-sponsored, making it, as yaman seems to have already mentioned, more about providing Palestinian activists with a platform and less about obliterating prejudice from campus.
Comment by Spencer — 11/18/2008 @ 1:46 am
Peace Not Prejudice week is a fucking farce. It’s a demonstration of force by the MSA/SJP group preventing free speech on the Berkeley campus. Now I don’t support “Islamofascism Awareness Week” mind you. But I don’t like the idea of people on campus claiming they’re beeing persecuted when they themselves interrupt lectures and hang flags that, to some, symbolize the destruction of the State of Israel.
On the political side, I thing PNP helps in some respects and hurts in others. It solidifies Muslim’s “victimized” status - thereby opening all sorts of doors in the campus administration (the Dean) and in the ASUC senate. But it also turns off the people they want to appeal to. I won’t, for example, be coming to any event, where, if I say something provocative I’ll be labeled somehow “violent”, “Islamophobic” or “prejudiced.”
Comment by Husam Got Owned — 11/18/2008 @ 2:48 am
Oh and I love Yaman’s first comment:
“I hardly think that you are qualified to comment on “what this week is supposed to be about.” Are you a member of the coalition?”
Way to build “dialogue in the campus community.”
Comment by Husam Got Owned — 11/18/2008 @ 2:50 am
Yaman, PNP week was planned long before last Thursday. It may be about responding to that event now, but it wasn’t when originally planned.
Identifying it as a form of “civil dialogue between people with differences” as the all-hands campus e-mail said seems inconsistent with yesterday’s dancing session. I don’t know whose mistake that was, but Roxanne signed on to the letter, and it seems like she would know.
Comment by Justin! — 11/18/2008 @ 12:34 pm
I did not mean that this PNP was planned as a response to last Thursday’s event. I meant that a response to last Thursday’s attack, such as the dances, was consistent with the PNP message. But the dance was not organized by PNP, though a lot of members and supporters participated in it.
Comment by yaman — 11/18/2008 @ 1:08 pm
Danae, I realize your post was well-intentioned, but it hits a raw nerve. This is a bit like me (as a non-American) suggesting to Americans to get a decent health care system instead of going bankrupt every time they get seriously sick. I don’t think Americans don’t have a proper health care system because they are dumb, I assume it is because they haven’t figured out yet how to get past the special interests that keeping preventing this from happening. So, similarly, you really have no idea of how much time bothe the Arabs and the Jews inside SJP spend figuring out how to dialogue with each other, with Zionists and with the larger community. Just by coperating with each other many of us are going against a lot of the messages we hear from our communities. What we need isn’t encouragement to be more peacful, it’s help in getting that done.
We have cordial relations with most Jewish and Zionist groups on campus, and we have offered several times to meet with Tikvah several times. They don’t even bother to cancel meetings with us, they just don’t show up. Without any sort of communication with them I can’t see how this can be prevented from happening again.
Aand in addition to that, they need to grow up. We don’t get offended about every hateful claim they make (and believe me, there is plenty to get offended about), so they don’t have to blow a fuse every time they see a Palestinian flag.
Comment by Tom P. — 11/18/2008 @ 2:08 pm
I hope you realize that your final paragraphs make it impossible to take you seriously when you suggest you want peace. Perhaps you should spend less effort trying to convince everyone else you want peace, and it’s THEIR FAULT it’s not working.
Comment by Justin! — 11/18/2008 @ 2:30 pm
so a couple years ago I had a flatmate who was constantly putting on very loud dance music around midnight. I tried using earplugs, I tried going deeper beneath the covers, but it really kept me awake. In the end I finally told him, politely, that this is preventing me from sleeping, and he turned down the volume. I don’t think that was an example of being negative or belligerent: I was suggesting some rule which sounded reasonable to me (no loud music after midnight), that I would commit myself to, in order for us to get along better.
Similarly, I am not suggesting that Tikvah stop flying Israeli flags at their events or change their agenda, much of which I disagree with. I am talking about what the minimal conditions should be for both of our groups to minimize friction - in this case, both of us will have to deal with feeling offended without disrupting the other group’s events. And since they refuse to meet with us, I am using this forum to try and get through to them.
Comment by Tom P. — 11/18/2008 @ 3:12 pm
peacemaking isn’t about smiling and having a positive attitude. It’s about figuring out a reasonable arrangement where your needs can be met without infringing upon the right and needs of others.
Comment by Tom P. — 11/18/2008 @ 3:26 pm
“Maybe you don’t know that Peace Not Prejudice was started as a response to BCR’s ‘Islamofascism Awareness Week.’”
If that’s the case, then Peace Not Prejudice is in fact one huge hypocrisy. I mean, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, the basic definition of “prejudice” is:
“Preconceived opinion not based on reason or actual experience; bias, partiality.”
And the movement was created, as you say, as a response to Islamofascism Awareness Week? Except that this “response” didn’t come AFTER Islamofascism Awareness Week. Most (if not all) of Peace Not Prejudice’s events occurred at exactly the same times as BCR’s events. Clearly, it wasn’t a response; it was a preemption based- dare I say it?- on preconceived notions.
Hmmm.
Comment by Francesca — 11/18/2008 @ 3:48 pm
You told your flatmate to turn down the volume. Did you tell everyone else in earshot? Did you put out messages to that effect in the most public way possible? This is what I mean. It seems like you’re trying harder to tell people that you’re trying to make peace than you are trying to make peace. It is not difficult to meet with them. They have tables on Sproul. They have phone numbers, e-mail addresses, facebook profiles, etc. Go say hi, and talk about things. If it doesn’t work, why would you think this method works any better? And more importantly, where does calling them racist fit in? We saw the SJP press release. We saw you accuse them solely of acting simply because they hate Palestinians.
Comment by Justin! — 11/18/2008 @ 4:36 pm
“Just by coperating with each other many of us are going against a lot of the messages we hear from our communities. What we need isn’t encouragement to be more peacful, it’s help in getting that done.”
Tom, I think pnp is supposed to help you “get that done.” Or else, peace not prejudice week is just a symbol…and a failure of instigating any change.
Comment by Danae — 11/18/2008 @ 4:54 pm
“Aand in addition to that, they need to grow up.”
And no offense, I think both sides of the story need to grow up. Really quickly. Come on now, it’s not like you can really save the world by starting fights with eachother on a student campus. I’m not singling out the Palestinians and the sole aggressor, just as I’m not singling out members of the Jewish community, but both sides need to realize that you are going to school…and throwing a punch here or there, or yelling at each other, is simply ridiculous. A heart and mind is not changed that way.
And some good can always come out of compromise.
The Zionist groups should try harder. Palestinian groups should try harder. For peace, right? And not prejudice.
I guess dancing on Sproul is one way of celebrating a single group, in peace, and of making an effort to make peace with others (like the pro-Israel group) and not just those who wanted to dance with you…but whatever blows your skirt up. Like I said, I don’t mind people dancing and expressing their cultural identity…I do have a problem when it seems to be sending an inclusive exclusive message at a time when there are extremely high tensions between two groups. And when the opportunity of pnp week comes up, it would have been slightly better to do something less obnoxious. But then again, that is my humble opinion.
I wish you the best of luck in achieving your peace.
Comment by Danae — 11/18/2008 @ 5:05 pm
Why is BCR violating the Republican principles by not co-sponsoring the peace not prejudice week?
The second one of the Republican principles (www.gop.com) says “I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.”
So why is not BCR co-sponsoring the peace not prejudice week. Have you forgotten that the republican party was always anti-discrimination based on race, religion, etc.? Instead, it valued individualism and human dignity.
Even the Cal Democrats are co-sponsoring it. So why not BCR?
-a traditional paleo-con paleo-libertarian Republican who is opposed to the takeover of the party by the neo-cons
Comment by irshad — 11/18/2008 @ 7:50 pm
PNP folks feel that BCR is not in tune with their principles, and so do not invite BCR to participate.
Comment by Justin! — 11/18/2008 @ 8:03 pm
Then the question that the management of the BCR should ask, why did the PNP organizers thought that BCR may not be fit to join it. Is it becasue PNP is promoting hate gainst a certain groiup or BCR has left the republican principles and promoting hate against some group?
Comment by irshad — 11/18/2008 @ 9:28 pm
“Is it becasue PNP is promoting hate gainst a certain groiup or BCR has left the republican principles and promoting hate against some group?”
Wow. Okay, it’s neither. That would be stupid. And BCR hasn’t promoted hate against some group. Please explain yourself a little further…the stupidity of that statement has left me baffled.
“Why is BCR violating the Republican principles by not co-sponsoring the peace not prejudice week?”
I wasn’t aware that in order to stand for peace, believe in peace, and desire peace, you had to cosponor a event to assert your legitimacy. Seems a little odd, no? Hmm…has pnp week become some sort of qualifying factor which determines whether or not you actually stand for peace. Just because we haven’t sponsored it doesn’t mean BCR doesn’t stand for peace…in fact, I’m sure we would have sponsored it had we been asked. But wait…we weren’t give the opportunity. What a peaceful act of equal opportunity and not prejudice. The best we can do now is do what we normally do…be peaceful at our table on Sproul while people yell obscenities at us as they walk by and pass judgments on our character for being Republican. It’s always a peaceful day for a Repulican on the liberal campus of Cal.
Comment by Danae — 11/18/2008 @ 9:51 pm
BCR is indeed promoting hate against Muslims. Why? Im not sure. Possibly the managements of BCR wants to curry favors with the patrons of such hate, so that those patrons will help them in furture. Possibly, they want to curry favors with the Christo-fascists like John Hagee’s followers, who are manipulating Americans to bomb Iran, so that their vision of apocalypse and the second coming of Jesus comes true.
Whats the evidence? One, there was a Terrorist-picture-board that used to stand next to the BCR table; and all the pictures on that board were of Muslim terrorists in Israel. Not one single picture of a Jewish Defense Leage terrorists. 5/6 years ago JDL tried to kill Republican Congressman darrell Issa, of Christian Lebanese parentage. So it would be natural that Republicans would protest the attempted killing of their Congressman by a terrorist group in American soil. But no! there was never any protest by BCR against those Jewish terrorists. There was no picture of Hindu terrorists either. The hindu group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam has done more suicide bombings than all other groups combined.
Second, BCR has hosted a anti-Islamo-fascist week but no corresponding Judeo-fascist week, not a anti-Christo-fascist week, let alone an anti-Hindu-fascist week. There were two lecturers that BCR hosted this semester (e.g. Wafa Sultan and that ex-terrorist claimant) who were promoting hate not just against Islamo-fascists (hell! I’m against them too!) but against the religion of islam and Muslims in general.
Why not a anti-Judeo-fascist anti-Jewish defense League-week? Hell! JDL tries to kill a republican congressman some times ago! JDL bombed and Alex odeh (a Christian) in California soil sometimes ago. And israel granted refuge and protected his killers for many years. So why no anti-JDL week, instead BCR is promoting events against some palestinian terrorist groups whose enemy is not USA at all, who are commtting their terrorist activities not is US soil but in a foreign country. I admit that I don’t agree with any Hamas terrorist group and their terrorist bombing against Israeli civilians at all (i believe that Hamas is evil) but the fact remains that they have refused to make any attack against USA. So why is BCR forgetting groups in California e.g. the JDL that is attacking us?
These prove that BCR management is focused on activities that singles out Muslims as terrorists, and forgets the other religions terrorists.
Comment by irshad — 11/20/2008 @ 6:58 am
Peace not Prejudice Week has been a disappointment for me thus far. Its political nature has certainly frightened me and other students away from it. Even though I can’t blame the coordinators for it, I believe that this year, it has taken a tone that I cannot condone or agree with.
Matthew White, a Jewish student and member of Tikvah, came into the Senate last night to speak about how he tried joining the dance that you referred to in your article. He brought his Jewish flag, seeing all the other flags there, and was immediately kicked out of the circle, called racial epithets, and asked to leave.
This is not peace. It’s prejudice.
Last night’s meeting really pointed out the hypocrisies of the event and the people involved in the event. As dozens of SJP, etc members stormed the Senate at 9pm in Peace not Prejudice T-shirts, the only thing I saw in their eyes was hatred and extremism. That’s not something I can stand for.
As those members harassed Senator John Moghtader in those bright green T-shirts, I saw the irony and was disgusted by the hatred I felt in the room. I wasn’t the only persosn that felt that way either.
PNP week has taken on a new meaning this year, and I’m not too happy with what that means for the campus community. The Jewish Students’ Union withdrew their sponsorship from the week last night as well, indicating a larger sentiment that the event is about creating peace only within certain spheres of influence - and ignoring or repudiating the rest.
Comment by I was at the Senate Meeting — 11/21/2008 @ 4:47 am
I also spoke to Matthew White, and it made me very sad…
I agree with you.
PNP in my eyes was in some ways a complete failure.
Comment by Danae — 11/23/2008 @ 8:06 pm
There is no such thing as a Jewish flag, Person Who Was At The Senate Meeting. Did you mean the Israeli flag? Not the same thing.
I don’t speak for the PNP coalition, and I am not one of the organizers, but I would say: there is no place for an Israeli flag in a “Peace Not Prejudice” coalition. Israel declares war on its neighbors every few years, kills thousands of civilians, and implements one of the most obviously and explicitly racist governing systems in the world. What part of that fits the description of Peace Not Prejudice?
Comment by yaman — 11/24/2008 @ 2:00 am
And adding to that, having an Israeli flag represent the Peace Not Prejudice week is like having Saudi Arabia lead a summit on religious tolerance. It’s just a complete denial of the complicity of both actors, in the exact opposite: Saudi Arabia for religious intolerance, and Israel for war and racism.
Comment by yaman — 11/24/2008 @ 2:03 am
Again, take a look at Yaman’s idea of coalition-building and dialogue:
“there is no place for an Israeli flag in a “Peace Not Prejudice” coalition”
Are we seriously to believe that this doesn’t represent PNP week? Yaman, didn’t everbody yell and applaud at the senate meeting when your name was mentioned - in a room full of PNP organizers and attendees?
Comment by Husam Got Owned — 11/24/2008 @ 2:52 am
The deliberate exclusion of the Israeli flag in PNP represents a failure to actually promote discussion between differing groups on campus. What good does everyone dancing around under the same (and selective) flag accomplish for peace on this campus?
Comment by yuri — 11/24/2008 @ 11:43 am
The flag question is a complete non-issue that some people are using to vilify and mischaracterize the week. It’s not like the organizers of PNP made a decision to display flags around the world and skipped out on Israel. Flags were not even a part of PNP week. It is absolutely coincidental that during this week, there happened to be an event completely unrelated to the PNP events on one day, during which people danced with the Palestinian flag on Sproul. Some of those participating were wearing PNP shirts, and some of them weren’t. Some of the people wearing PNP shirts didn’t participate, and some did. It’s that simple. The Daily Cal, unfortunately, covered them as if they were one and the same, when they were not. But you appear to be inventing a connection deliberately for your own purposes.
In any case, I find it highly disingenuous that someone who glorifies a violent attack on Palestinian students on campus (”Husam Got Owned”) is pretending to speak about ideals related to peace and against prejudice.
Comment by yaman — 11/24/2008 @ 12:54 pm
I find your glib remarks on last week’s Upper Sproul PNP kick-off event, the one where PNPers danced around the Palestinian flag, a tad bit, well, “disingenuous,” yaman.
Call me prejudiced, but it happened right after pro-Palestinian/PNP organizers handed out PNP shirts to a mass of students who gathered there. The music started up, and soon you had a pro-Palestinian rally, a festive dance with the Palestinian flag as the centerpiece.
Comment by Spencer — 11/24/2008 @ 2:20 pm
What can I say? If Husam throws the first punch, hides behind two women, and claims to represent Peace not Prejudice, well that should stand for itself. I don’t claim, unlike you and your farce of an awareness week, to have a monopoly on peace and anti-prejudicial activities. Husam got what was coming to him, as did the press surrounding the PNP week and its exclusionist leadership.
Comment by Husam Got Owned — 11/24/2008 @ 5:27 pm
Thanks for your testimony, anonymous witness.
Comment by yaman — 11/24/2008 @ 9:10 pm
More than welcome Mr. Libel.
Comment by Husam Got Owned — 11/25/2008 @ 3:58 am
Wow… you guys really have nothing else better to do than to accuse BCR of being against peace for not co-hosting PNP week? As Beetle said, it’s not our fault we don’t get invited. I guess if they weren’t prejudicial against conservatives, they’d give us equal opportunity to join their week alongside the Dems, and let it be our decision to join or not. Whatever.
I wanted to write on here because I’ve been the Treasurer of BCR for 2 years now, and have seen both IFAW week of last year and Terrorism Awareness Day we put on this year and I want to clarify what the point of these were. There is a misunderstanding (mainly created by the sentiments of our former president Ross) about how the BCR members felt about it and what our goals were. This was never created with the intent on hating on Muslims on the Berkeley campus, and that we should support discimination or prejudicial actions against Muslims. We are against these issues wholeheartedly. Rather, we wanted to educate people on this ONE extreme strand of terrorism that had affected our nation on 9/11. We thought it would be interesting and people on the Berkeley campus would like to see Nonie Darwish and our other events. However, because we became aware of the hurt feelings and division as a result of how enthusiastically some members were about this week, we as a board decided to change the direction and make it about terrorism across the world (with our speaker and tri-fold board at the table), including Islamofascism but not just that.
Before people drag BCR’s name in the mud, do some homework about us and learn that it may be ONE extreme member in the club speaking and not the club as a whole.
Comment by Ann Marie — 11/25/2008 @ 11:10 pm
I think that as a result of these events, the BCR have gotten an image of muslim-bashers among many people, so it was very refreshing to read your comment. More people would be interested in hearing this message than those who typically read this blog.
Comment by thanks AnnMarie — 11/26/2008 @ 1:00 am
Does anyone else think we should be able to run a recall election for cheaper than $50,000? That seems like an exorbitant amount of money for an election that will require a “yes” or “no” vote.
Comment by yuri — 12/7/2008 @ 5:23 pm
“Maybe you don’t know that Peace Not Prejudice was started as a response to BCR’s ‘Islamofascism Awareness Week.’”
If that’s the case, then Peace Not Prejudice is in fact one huge hypocrisy.
looooooolllloolloolll.
The recall election is based upon politics and not job performance. It is barbarian in concept. And they want to raise student fees to pay for barbarianism. Talk about responce. lol.
Comment by republi9c — 12/11/2008 @ 12:24 pm
“there is no place for an Israeli flag in a “Peace Not Prejudice” coalition” -yaman
Wow, yaman. Love the double standards.
FYI, JSU was invited to join….so are you then critiquing the leadership of PNP and implying they didn’t deserve to be invited in the first place. Who are YOU to make the judgment call that some countries cannot be a part of the coalition?! This is disgusting on so many levels.
I hope people are reading the unbelievable hypocrisy here. At first I could only suppose that the intent of PNP was positive, but when someone this active in the event is saying Israel isn’t welcome, I am determined to change my mind!
Comment by I was at the Senate Meeting — 12/11/2008 @ 5:24 pm
sounds like what happened was that the organizers were overly cautious given that the fight had occured several days earlier, and made a decision which is probably wrong in retrospect. I don’t think anyone wouldn’t want the JSU there (they were invited, after all), so let’s not jump to conclusions. Yaman was also not “this active” in organizing PNP.
Comment by re: PNP — 12/11/2008 @ 7:37 pm
in any case, several of the organizers of PNP are also active members of the JSU
Comment by re: PNP — 12/11/2008 @ 10:36 pm
Person At The Senate Meeting: You misread what I stated. I know JSU was a part of the coalition, and I don’t see why you think this should bother me (it doesn’t). You are also twisting my words. I didn’t say that Israelis were not welcome in the coalition or at the events. I specifically said the Israeli flag, which is a symbol of racism, has no place in promoting “peace not prejudice.” I don’t see how this is different from raising, say, a Confederate flag, or the South African flag during apartheid.
Since you opted to slice my comment to make it sound like I was arbitrarily prejudiced against Israeli flags, let me show the quote in its entirety and explain:
Obviously the meaning is that declaring war on your neighbors every few years, killing thousands of civilians, and implementing one of the most obviously and explicitly racist governing systems in the world, are all actions contrary to the ideals of “peace not prejudice.”
Comment by yaman — 12/12/2008 @ 1:10 pm
And re: PNP is right. I was not involved in organizing PNP.
Comment by yaman — 12/12/2008 @ 1:11 pm
Ah, I see now. Thanks for the clarification. You completely changed my mind.
Comment by I was at the Senate Meeting — 12/13/2008 @ 12:17 am
“I was at the Senate Meeting”, what do you make of Yaman’s opposition to the Saudi record on religious tolerance (see his 11/24/2008 @ 2:03 am comment). Does this make him anti-muslim?
Yaman, would you oppose using the current US flag for the same reasons - a history of racism (genocide, slavery) and war (invading and supporting coups in a whole host of countries)? how do you make the distinction?
Comment by re: PNP — 12/16/2008 @ 9:17 am
or, for that matter, the current Iranian flag? Iran was involved in a horrible war with Iraq, and is certainly not a tolerant regime. Or, even better, what about the Democratic Republic of Congo, that was recently part of a war that killed almost 4 million people, belonging to many ethnic groups?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War
should PNP organizers have to decide about whether or not to use this country’s flag, based on the regime’s role in the war? do you know anyone with enough knowledge to do that?
if this came up again, it seems like it would be simpler for PNP organizers to allow any flag of oountries that are internationally recognized, without having to form an opinion on each regime and its history.
Comment by re: PNP — 12/16/2008 @ 9:53 am
This entire discussion is kind of skewed. PNP organizers did not “choose” which flags to have. They did not “choose” to allow Palestinian flags and disallow Israeli flags. While many of the people involved in this event were also involved in PNP events, this dance on Sproul was *not* a PNP event. Frankly, I don’t think PNP is about flags in the first place. This is a non-issue, unless you believe that it is never appropriate to raise a Palestinian flag unless an Israeli flag is also there.
Flags have different meanings to different people in different settings. When you approach a bunch of people dancing with Palestinian flags in response to an anti-Palestinian hate crime, and are carrying an Israeli flag, people may see that as a hostile move. It is not obvious when you are carrying an Israeli flag that you are there in solidarity to speak out against anti-Palestinian hate crimes. For many people, the Israeli flag itself represents prejudice, violence, racism, and war.
When it comes down to it, I think flags are stupid. I especially think carrying American flags, in America, is stupid. It is so problematic to assume that you only have a right to protest or a right to an opinion if you also have an American flag in the midst of your protest. If PNP suddenly became a “flags of the world” coalition, I would think it was a stupid, pointless, apolitical, and meaningless venture meant to make people feel good rather than stand up against war and racism.
Comment by yaman — 12/17/2008 @ 2:07 pm
“I would think it was a stupid, pointless, apolitical, and meaningless venture meant to make people feel good rather than stand up against war and racism.”
The truth comes out about about PNP! Finally Yaman admits it.
Comment by Just a Thought... — 12/18/2008 @ 2:15 am
“just a thought”, I think PNP organizers, muslims, christians and jews (and others?) are doing their best to bring together diverse communities on campus. Any kind of activism involves potentially making mistakes or offending someone. If you have better ideas of how to bring together different groups, why not put them into practice? the whole campus would benefit.
Comment by re: PNP — 12/18/2008 @ 10:35 am
If “doing their best” means what PNP has done in the last couple years, it’s not good enough. Activism of course runs the risk of offending people, but why not invite them ALL, and, when they’re invited, KEEP them in your movement? Why the exclusionary, nationalist, anti-zionist rhetoric?
I don’t think PNP is the right way to “bring the campus community together.” I think it’s done the opposite, especially this year.
Comment by Just a Thought... — 12/19/2008 @ 1:17 am
I would like to state my opinions:
Nationalism and Flags are important. We live in a world of nations. Some of us might like our own more than others, but we recognize that nations are the basic, organic unit of the world, and we should organize along these lines.
Comment by Nationalist Man — 12/19/2008 @ 12:02 pm
If the entire premise of PNP is to break down national/ethnic barriers and enjoy cross-cultural understanding, I think it’s fair to say PNP didn’t exactly deliver.
Comment by Just a Thought... — 12/19/2008 @ 5:29 pm
Yep, PNP just perpetuated for me the stereotypes of Islam, violence, and terrorism. Let’s not forget how Israel was excluded, how the JSU withdrew its membership [with specific reasons - they don’t even consider Tikvah part of their member base], and how Jews were excluded. Actually, I have heard through some circles that Jews weren’t the only excluded. Apparently some other religious groups and ethnicities felt they were not really included in the PNP dialogue and therefore did not join the “coalition”. A coalition it was, indeed - one of like-minded individuals who try to victimize themselves.
Comment by pnp — 1/3/2009 @ 10:09 pm