It's online; I quote the text:
Seven students at your institution falsely attributed the “Hate Muslims? So Do We!!” fliers to The George Washington University chapter of Young America’s Foundation.When the fliers initially surfaced you said, “There is no place for expressions of hatred on our campus. We do not condone, and we will not tolerate the dissemination of fliers or other documents that vilify any religious, ethnic or racial group.”
We agree. Vicious personal attacks levied on students are intolerable, and should not go unpunished. The question remains: what will you do about such blatant character assassination now that the truth is out? How will you demonstrate that you don’t “condone” or “tolerate” the dissemination of hate?
To be clear, liberal radicals on your campus accused conservative students of engaging in racist activities, and to buttress those baseless claims, these same radicals manufactured actual racist activities to pin on the young conservatives.
Student Association Executive Vice President Brand Kroeger told the GW Hatchet that he “would support expulsion. These acts are completely heinous.” Again, we agree with this statement if Kroeger believes it is the job of The George Washington University to protect the reputation of students who are wrongfully maligned. In an open letter to you, the culprits admit to distorting the views of the conservatives on campus. They wrote, “We want to reach out to our Muslim brothers and sisters in the Holy Month of Ramadan in hopes that they will embrace our misrepresented, but honorable stand against racism” (emphasis added).
There is, of course, a clear difference between ordinary Muslims who positively contribute to society and radical Jihadists who boast about murdering people indiscriminately. It’s a typical left-wing tactic, however, to just call names, such as “racist,” rather than engage in a serious debate, in this case, over radical Islam. Only the intellectually deficient revert to such slanderous attacks.
The seven who put up the phony fliers are frauds.
You should issue an apology to the conservatives unfairly targeted. It was obvious that the fliers were spreading lies, but your administration, led by Bridgette Behling -- the assistant director of the Student Activities Center -- sent emails to the young conservatives pressuring them to sign statements disavowing any hate speech that may originate at any future Young America’s Foundation event.
That’s astonishing. Maybe she forgot that the presumption of innocence is an American hallmark? Or maybe your administration should pressure leftist groups to sign statements disavowing any future dirty tricks on conservatives?
The political profiling of conservatives MUST stop. You need to organize a forum immediately that embraces intellectual diversity and denounces the Left’s attempts to create hostile learning environments for conservatives. The campus leftists wrote that Young America’s Foundation “should not [be] allow[ed]” to host conservative speakers. These seven students are trying to squelch robust dialogue and free speech. We believe this to be the goal of their scheme. As president of The George Washington University, we hope that you will create an atmosphere where all students, including conservatives, feel welcomed.
Don’t waste the opportunity.
A little too much umbrage, it seems to me, given that the poster was pretty clearly a satire, rather than an attempt to deceive. On the other hand, some critics of the Foundation indeed seem to have been deceived, and did indeed think that conservative students were accusing Muslims of having "lasers in eyes" and "peg-leg[s] for smuggling children and heroin," on a poster labeled "Brought to you by Students for Conservative-Fascism Awareness." Oy.
Thanks to the Washington Times for putting the letter online.
Related Posts (on one page):
- Young America's Foundation Letter About the GW Poster Affair:
- Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week at George Washington University:
Perhaps they were merely erring on the side of caution, having already been taken in by the claim from "conservative[s]" that Muslims had weapons of mass destruction...
:-)
Truly, it IS amazing that university administrators in the grip of political correctness seem to loose any ability to analyze rationally or maintain a sense of humor.
Of course it was clearly satire, but satire of what? Was it an unfair (and unfunny) joke at the expense of Muslims, or was it an unfair (hackneyed and cliched) joke at the expense of Conservatives? The administration thought the former, and I think many reasonable people who were not studying the poster closely (and who think so poorly of conservatives anyways) could have made the same mistake.
What is interesting here is not the message, but the reaction to that message. Was the content defamatory to Muslims or not? If it was (which the administration seems to claim) then the identity of the authors is moot. How does discovering that the Authors were liberals change the fact that there is a poster circulating that makes false and derogatory claims about a race or religion?
If anything, the attempt to pass off the poster as being the views of someone else (defamation and fraud) only compounds, rather than mitigates.
The only way the Administration can get out of that hypocritical pretzel is admit that they didn't read the poster very well and have only now read it close enough to realize that it was satire. But then they have to admit that they are willing to punish students (at least the conservative ones) based on cursory reviews of evidence...not a good place to be.
Bottom line: the administrators were willing to skewer the authors when they thought they were conservative. Once they were found to be liberals, the exact same message suddenly gets the benefit of context. Double standard anyone?
You got the important point, there, sport.
The umbrage, it seems to me, is directed at the administration which started giving the YAF a hard time for something the YAF obviously didn't do. Or, if it wasn't obvious, then the people who did it are smarter than the administration. Let me see. IQ competition. Undergrads vs. university administrators....
The umbrage is justified.
Can people also stop saying stupid things like "The Left" and "The Right"?
And what the hell is "political profiling"? And MUST (as opposed to must) it stop?
Why don't universities just stay out of the business of policing speech instead of threatening disciplinary sanctions or denouncing unpopular speech. Just shut up about it all!
Don't hold your breath.
This is exactly right. They were falsely accused and threatened with expulsion. I'd be pretty teed off, too.
Sure, the letter does read a bit emotionally and it somewhat confrontational. But we are dealing with college kids who are persecuted in class, who are called racists, and who are threatened with expulsion for posters they did not even produce.
Who can blame them for being a bit emotional?
Perhaps this makes the best case of all for the doing away with of speech codes on campus.
But you are certainly right that Saddam did do a good job making many think that he probably was sitting on WMD. And those not willing to take the chance that Saddam had them and might use them at some future time decided he had to be taken out. Like those who put up the "satirical" posters, Saddam didn't get the result he expect with his dissembling.
And that of course was the point. Of course, there was some posturing there, heavy on the umbrage. But less of it would have robbed the letter of force and effectiveness.
And the result? When the hugely offensive posters were thought to be aimed at Muslims, they were Very Disturbing. But when the hugely offensive posters are seen as (a lame attempt at) parody of YAF? Dunno. But I can guess.
This is the same sort of reasoning that leads to speech codes and hate crime legislation. It is not the act alone that determines consequences. One also needs to ask WHY it was done, and WHOM it offended.
In which case, universities need to print up and circulate the rules during orientation week.
("You may only offend White Christians, heterosexual white males, Jews, and campus athletes[excluding Title IX grant-in-aid recipients]. Minorities can be insulted only if they are students in the College of Business, and then only if they are heterosexual 7 come from a household with pre-tax income over $100K[excluding rents collected, gambling winnings, and slavery reparations, if any].")
Otherwise it strikes me as a bit ex post facto. I mean, how was a student at Cornell to know that he wasn't allowed to call a certain fraction of the students 'water buffalo'? Can a Cornellian say "zebu"? "Fox bat"? "Oscelot"? One needs to know this sort of thing from the beginning.
And that's why they look so foolish.
I'd be a bit more skeptical.
No one has less respect for the intelligence and common sense of university administrators than I, except for current students, of course.
However, there are some things that even a moron can grasp and this poster issue is probably one of them.
How's this: The admin knew it was a lame attempt by somebody besides YAF and conservatives--because, dumb as they are, they're not totally without a brain. But, knowing this, they were also aware that it might still be profitably pinned on conservatives. It was this that was the error. The misinterpretation was deliberate. The accusations and implications were done with the presumption they wouldn't be found out.
Anyway, they are stuck with the MSM's defense when caught at a howler. "We're not crooks. We're stupid."
I do understand your point about could be seen as a YAF "gotcha," without evidence to support it. There are equally plausible alternative readings of that paragraph, though, and I think the letter was competently drafted.
I have to agree with that. If the University truly thought that there was a possibility that the posters were genuine, they would have began a long, ponderous investigation and disciplinary procedures against the YAF (as Universities are wont to do). They would not have been sending out emails to the YAF on the same day asking for signed statements promising no future "hate" activities.
How many bin laden killed?? [hundreds maybe thousands]
How many USA terrorists killed?? [MILLIONS including Native Americans, Japanese {hiroshima, nagasaki), Vietnamese, North Korean, Afghan, Iraqi, Philippines]
So much damn blood on your hands im surprized you have the nerve to talk?
you and your country full of terrorists will collapse soon enough, the muslim world have had enough of your shit, we will start selling our oil in the EURO and overcharge your snooty asses.
Damn terrorists cross the ocean to attack a nation that had NOTHING to do with 9/11, and you still want to get bombed from Iran. keep that shit up you terrorists, your nation is living off of borrowed time and borrowed money. Your shit immoral nation will collapse soon.
Do you want to go camping with me?
Most "hate crime" on campus is perpetrated by desperate progressives looking vainly for some real racism to be outraged about. I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that if they find the perp in the Columbia noose incident, that it will be in the outraged horde protesting the incident.
Yeah, it's a shame that this was attributed wrongfully to the Young Americans group. But that doesn't mean that the administration should treat the poster the same when a revelation about its author makes clear that it's intended meaning was not at all what inspired the penalty.
So, Freedom Fighter - who are you really?
The Question is, who are YOU... really?
By the way, when are we going to have the Cristo-fascism awareness week? We can start with an expose of Dobson or Bill Donohue or Ralph Reed. Or look at Billy James Hargis, Ted Haggard or Richard Roberts. They may not have lasers in the eyes, but sharks with freaking laser beams are definitely not out of the question. And their followers are at least as gullible as those who thought the fake YAF poster was real.
Well . . . actually, no. As you say, it was quite clearly a satire. So anyone who calls with equal vigor for punishment of the poster's authors is still too dumb to recognize satire. And yes, anyone who called for punishment in the first place must necessarily admit to being too dumb to recognize satire. Period. Satirists shouldn't be punished for the literal meaning of their words. And so there is clearly no hypocrisy in a decision not to punish them -- just a recognition that satire is satire.
If it bothered people -- and it apparently did -- then the author deserves the same punishment, even if his true intent was to slander a different group of people and then use that as an excuse to get that group suppressed.
The Question is, who are YOU... really?
Does anybody really know what time it is?/Does anybody really care?
I have to wonder why the poster's originators decided to confess. Were they about to be exposed, and then decided to claim that it was all satire?
The GWU students behind the poster all seem to have interesting backgrounds:
"The GW newspaper the Hatchet received an e-mail confession late Tuesday night from seven students admitting to hanging hundreds of controversial fliers around campus. ***
The students -- Adam Kokesh, freshman Yong Kwon, senior Brian Tierny, freshman Ned Goodwin, Maxine Nwigwe, Lara Masri and Amal Rammah -- said their motives were misinterpreted." See 7 GW Students Admit To Posting Anti-Muslim Fliers, www.nbc4.com/news/14306010/detail.html
Adam Kokesh: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Kokesh
"Kokesh was a Sergeant for most of his enlistment, but was demoted to Corporal immediately before being discharged in late 2006 for illegally bringing a pistol he purchased in Iraq back to the United States
***
Kokesh and other IVAW [Iraqi Veterans Against the War] members wore elements of their Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniforms for a street theatre action marking the fourth anniversary of the Iraq War in March. Kokesh and several other IVAW members were contacted by the Marine Corps and warned of possible disciplinary action for violating military uniform policies by wearing their uniforms to a political demonstration. Kokesh felt that they were being subjected to selective prosecution because of their war protest activities, and replied with a defiant letter (ending it with "[I] ... ask you to please, kindly, go fuck yourself."). In May of 2007, a hearing was convened to consider changing Kokesh's military discharge from "honorable" to "other than honorable" on two points: "Disrespect toward a Superior Commissioned Officer", and violating "Wearing of the uniform" regulation
***
On June 4, 2007, the panel recommended Kokesh be given a general discharge under honorable conditions, a discharge status below honorable. Kokesh appealed the decision[10], and that appeal was denied 7 June."
Yong Kwon: It is unclear if he is related to the "Yong Kwon" who was named in the Grand Jury indictment E.D. VA. referring to a "Yong Kwon" of Fairfax, VA.
www.milnet.com/terr-prosecutions/al-Timimi_indict.pdf
and who made a plea agreement and became a government witness. http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/rate/121155
GW Campus Anti-War Network
Officers Matthew Brokman
Ned Goodwin
Lara Masri
Amal Rammah
Brian Tierney
Listed on http://studentorgs.gwu.edu
Lara Masri: Signature No. 57 on Petition to Reinstate Ward Churchill
Maxine Nwigwe: Signature No. 61 on Petition to Reinstate Ward Churchill
Overseas, the poster is being taken seriously. One report:
"CAIRO - University campuses across the United States are becoming the stage for an anti-Islam campaign that includes hate posters and a series of activities to rally students against the alleged threat Islam poses to the US and the world.
George Washington University administration, faculty and students came back from the weekend to find the campus painted with posters and fliers with the message: "HATE MUSLIMS? SO DO WE!!!"
The fliers, posted even on kiosks and mailboxes on standard letter-sized paper, featured a picture of a man next to a diagram describing a "typical Muslim."
***
Fifteen student organizations led by the GW Muslim Student Association, the Islamic Alliance for Justice and the Jewish Student Association issued a statement expressing that they were "appalled at this incidence of hate and Islamophobia."
I can hardly wait to see how it's reported by the Islamic Republic News Agency.
Was Keri Dunn paroled?
And Freedom, I'm interested in your product and would like the free brochure.
A bazillion, I hope.
Moron.
I also e-mailed the prez of Texas State about their harassment of a conservative student mistakenly thought to be involved in inviting Islamo-Fascism Awareness activities. Lots of things are called Kafka-esque, but this one really qualifies.
Don't you get it? It's satire either way. Nobody thought that Muslims really have laser eyes. The difference is in the target of the satire; is it conservatives satirically accusing Muslims of ridiculous things, or is it leftists putting the satire into the mouths of conservatives?
We agree.
I disagree. All popular religions are stupid and primitive and should be freely vilified and mocked. Some religions, i.e. Islam, are more destructive and incompatible with cilivization than other religions, and should be villified and mocked even more.
Vicious personal attacks levied on students are intolerable, and should not go unpunished.
The fliers weren't "personal" (try the dictionary), and, IMHO, they weren't vicious.
Delicacy and daintiness of speech are appropriate in some cases, but not necessarily when the subject is politics or religion. Grow a skin.
The Question is, who are YOU... really?
Does anybody really know what time it is?/Does anybody really care?
Brilliant, brilliant, and brilliant.
How does that work again? And why isn't that a double standard???
Let's see if I can explain why "that isn't a double standard".
If the GWU YAF members decide "to protest," they'll write out something, call and make an appointment to see the Dean, dress up in sports coats, ties and dress slacks, and go sit and wait in the Dean's waiting room till the Dean has 3 minutes to see them. They'll hand him/her what they've written and thank him/her for taking time from his/her busy schedule to actually pay attention to them as GWU students. The door won't quite hit them in the back side as they exit. That will be it.
If GWU decides to take action against any of those who actually made and distributed the posters, Adam Kokesh will call his fellow IVAW members and someone will call Code Pink and get them to stop harassing the wounded vets at Walter Reed for a while. First they'll call the WaPo and TV stations. Then, when they show up outside the Dean's office, where they'll read a statement, and maybe some of the Code Pink members will disrobe. The statement will describe the fascist oppression of free speech by GWU, along with other standard accusations. It will be full of quoteable one-liners for the TV crews. Then they'll hold a die-in or some other event. GWU alumni will see the press coverage and at least some won't send money to fund raising drives.
Of course, if the YAFers arranged for a Rolling Thunder(R) motorcycle ralley in the Dean's office, the treatment might be different. Someone dressed in leathers with a chain for a belt, who has a ZZ Top beard, and who parks his HOG on your desk, isn't someone you P.O. He's probably a perfectly nice, law abiding citizen. But, why find out? And, a Rolling Thunder (R) ralley will also attract press attention -- and that also might affect alumni giving.
Understand the difference?
As for the Freedumb Fighter troll:
I understand your frustration with getting your butt kicked by the U.S. military. Sucks to be you.
No answer yet, but I had another question. How about a list of other student organizations from which she had demanded similar promises?
But, when I went to GWU website, searched for her name, the e-mail and phone numbers were not there. That's strange. Could have sworn they were there yesterday. Huh.
Exactly.
There is no "hate speech" there is speech that proves the speaker may hate. There is rhetoric there is hyperbole there is sarcasim and satirical speech. What the speaker's motive does not matter. It is speech. Sticks and stones may break bones but words will never harm... until some idiot tries to catorgorize it.
As a GW Parent, I am not suprised by the facts surrounding this incident nor am I shocked at the poster. When I first saw the headline "Hate Muslims? So Do We! I immediately knew it was someone taking a pot shot at a conservative organization. It doesn't matter who wrote it or why. As a campus conservative at Tufts in the 70's I was accustom to the ridicule that was thrown my way by campus "libs". I didn't need to call them names, because I became good at throwing there barbs back at them with facts. Learning to use language to persuade was probably the most useful thing I received from my college "experience."
The only bias on campus that bothered me was if a professor would use their bias to affect my grade. To their credit, I had very liberal Profs, who not only encouraged my speaking out for "my side" but who actually rewarded me for taking the those positions and having the guts to express my ideas in face of potential ridicule. Sadly recent events at Tufts have proven that things there have changed for the worse.
Student's need the freedom of speech to learn how to become better persuaders. Someone taking a potshot like this one, marginalizes himself when he is confronted by reasoned opposition. Too much of what passes for debate today has come to pass because political discussion havee been stifled to the point where speakers are afraid to say things that listeners can hear. Expulsion in a case like this is not a real option even if this poster expressed honest thought and not satire. Reprimand not for using YAF as the signatory but for not adding that the words were not thiers but another groups. A simple "Brought to you by 7 left leaning students who are humor challenged" would have been enough.
Sterotyping of any one shows bias and intellectual inferiority on the part of the person who hurls the sterotype. YAF is not sterotyping Muslims. It makes the point that in the Muslim world today, many people, whether for political, ethnic, or religios reasons not only engage in terrorism but support it.
Do all Muslims support it? Clearly not. Do many who hold majorities of power, support it in some countries? Yes. If I am wrong, confront me with facts. If you wish to call me names, you will lose the hearts and minds of the listener far sooner than you believe possible. As for campus administrators, let them argue, yell, poster, debate, think thoughts, and most of all learn not to censor others, but to censor themselves. You will not be there to save them from themselves later in life when it matters. Let them make mistakes now so they can learn from them later. If they fail to learn, that is on them. If you fail to provide a safe place where they can fail to learn, that is sadly on you.
It has been on campus administrators for way too long now. Do not attempt to make your campus' Politically correct. Make them the cauldron pots for learning that they were originally meant to be.
"Understand the difference?" Ahhh... perfectly. I thank you for enlightening me.
henri
Oh, Yeah! That's the gay Muslim nightclub on Halstead Street (Chicago), right?
What are you trying to tell us, Freedom so-called Fighter?
How may will die this weekend because of another attempt to portray some group as anti-Muslim. How many newspaers will report the deaths as a result of anti-mulsim groups poster instead of the real reason - Pro-Muslim group incites racial violence.
Oh, Yeah! That's the gay Muslim nightclub on Halstead Street (Chicago), right?
hahah HOISER TYPICAL YANKEE WHO CANT THINK OF ANYTHING BESIDES WHATS BETWEEN HIS/HER TWO LEGS.
lol "MORAL SUPERIORS" eh?
HIS/HER TWO LEGS?
So would you say your gender-confusion 'issues' are the root of your hatred of America?