.
.
.
This just came in from my good pals at Orange County’s CAIR (Council For American-Islamic Relations.) Looks like our do-nothing DA, who sits on his hands while his powerful cronies conspire to steal our Fairgrounds and run the Public Administrator’s office like a racket, is planning to try some Muslim UCI students who protested a very compromised Israeli politician last year with felony charges. Yet another political ploy from T. Rackauckas – thinking Muslims are an easy target and this’ll get him some good press, to distract from all the fuckups he’s been exposed for lately, from his coddling of Williams, his whitewashing of the Fair Board’s miscreance, to the very shady firing of Spitzer? A distraction sort of like when he ran out in front of the bullshit Toyota case last year? Okay, I’ll shut up now. Here’s CAIR:
An Open Letter, Feb. 2, 2011
Mr. Tony Rackauckas
Orange County District Attorney
401 Civil Center Drive, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Dear Mr. Rackauckas:
It is with deep concern that we, Orange County community religious and civic leaders, write to you regarding the pursuance of felony criminal charges against students who verbally protested a speech by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) in February of 2010.
Earlier this month, we were distraught to learn that several Muslim students from UCI were subpoenaed to testify before an Orange County grand jury, which is almost exclusively impaneled to investigate or indict felonies. Based on this, and Mr. William J. Feccia’s October 22, 2010 letter to interfaith leaders that confirmed that the office of the OCDA was actively investigating the events of February 2010, we have strong reason to believe that your office is planning to indict with felonies some of the students who protested Ambassador Oren.
By writing this, we by no means seek to unreasonably interfere with the exercise of your prosecutorial discretion. But we feel it only appropriate to comment on what we feel would constitute a proper regard for justice.
As leaders whose activities substantially occur in Orange County, we are all too well acquainted with the criminal challenges our Orange County community faces. Members of our congregations or organizations are fraught by the increase in violent and property crime in some of Orange County’s major cities, such as Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, and Orange that saw upwards of an eleven percent increase in violent crime in the first half of 2010, and Santa Ana and Anaheim that witnessed significant increases in property crime. We are therefore intimately interested in the proper use of our constituents’ tax dollars and our county’s limited resources. With so many of the above challenges, can the office of the OCDA seriously afford, in terms of money and staffing, to pursue charges against students who were involved in a university protest?
We fervently regret that the OCDA office’s investigation of the event has risen to the level of grand jury proceedings, and we have no alternative but to believe felony charges would be excessive. First, the students non-violently and verbally protested a university-invited speaker. The students left the event peacefully, and conducted themselves in less of a disruptive manner than some of the counter-protesters, all of which is readily apparent from the video footage available online. Such protests are common to university campuses, where the exercise of free and dissident speech is the bedrock of our democratic process.
It is our understanding that the Muslim Student Union and possibly some of the involved students have already been reprimanded by the UCI administration. The events of February 8, 2010, occurred at UCI, at a UCI jointly-sponsored student and administration event, and the young people in question were or are students. Mr. Oren was able to finish his speech, the event concluded; the impact of the disturbance did not resound beyond the halls of that evening’s event. While we acknowledge that crimes can and do occur on college campuses, we are hard-pressed to understand why a University-specific situation, which was thoroughly dealt with by the UCI administration, would require the OCDA office’s re-opening of the matter, particularly by investigating it as a felony crime.
As District Attorney, it is within your discretion to determine society’s interests in seeking punishment of certain offenses. Over the years, there have been countless instances of non-violent protest activities during campus speeches, including at UCI, with no comparable criminal prosecution. By criminally prosecuting one set of protesters and not others, including the counter-protesters at the same event, who cursed, threatened and even assaulted the students, these indictments would be singular. Orange County citizens would understand from your office’s actions that minority or disfavored groups receive a disproportionate and selective application of the law, while the integrity of the office of the OCDA as well as the justice system would be profoundly undermined.
Most importantly, indicting these students would have a severe chilling effect on the exercise of free speech on campuses and elsewhere. Because the right to freely express oneself, particularly against government policies, is a cherished freedom protected by our Constitution, only in very narrow circumstances may these activities be subdued by state action. At the same time, prosecuting these students may in fact lead to more disruptive and perhaps violent forms of political protests, since non-violent and less disruptive protests would by this new precedent carry nearly the same criminal exposure.
It is difficult for us to put into words the extent to which this development disturbs the conscience and would disrupt the OCDA office’s ability to establish meaningful justice. Our vision for Orange County is that it be a place where all faith groups are treated with equal respect and due process of law, where no political viewpoint is penalized, and where all of our public officials and offices utilize their stations to promote these ends.
We therefore request that you assist in ending what we believe to be an unnecessary and excessive response to the events of February 2010 by exercising your discretion to not indict the students on criminal charges.
Sincerely yours,
- Eric Altman, Executive Director, Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development
- Salam Al-Marayati, President, Muslim Public Affairs Council
- Chuck Anderson, President ACLU Chapter, Orange County; Chair, The Peace & Freedom Party, Orange County
- Hussam Ayloush, Executive Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations, Greater Los Angeles Area
- Rev. Wilfredo Benitez, Rector of Saint Anselm of Canterbury Episcopal Church Estee Chandler, A Jewish Voice for Peace, Los Angeles Chapter
- Issa Edah-Tally, President, Islamic Center of Irvine Shk. Muhammad Faqih, Religious Director, Islamic Institute of Orange County
- Shk. Yassir Fazaga
- Felicity Figueroa, concerned citizen
- Rev. Elizabeth Griswold, Chair, Progressive Christians Uniting, Orange County
- Rev. Sarah Halverson, Fairview Community Church
- Irvine United Congregational Church
- Advocates for Peace and Justice
- Orange County Peace Coalition
- Jim Lafferty, Executive Director, National Lawyer’s Guild, Los Angeles Chapter
- Rev. Darrell McGowan, Senior Pastor, First Christian Church of Fullerton
- Mike Penn, concerned citizen, foreman of the Orange County Grand Jury 2006-2007
- Shk. Sayyid Qazwini, Islamic Educational Center of Orange County
- Dr. Muzzammil Siddiqi, Islamic Society of Orange County
- Rev. Jerry Stinson, First Congregational Church of Long Beach
- Shakeel Syed, Executive Director, Islamic Shura Council of Southern California
- Hector Villagra, Incoming Executive Director, ACLU of Southern California
- Seval Yildirim, Associate Professor, Whittier Law School
T-Rack’s waaaaay off the rails on this one.
The went way too light on these Islam whack jobs… They should have sent the 11 little sh(*& to jail. These little creep’s did something that all of us Americans and American immigrants detest…stopping someone speaking, when in this country, unlike most muslim counties, the fundamental right to speak!
The 11 creeps are not the Northern Irish Gillford 7, because the Gillford 7 where accused without due cause, these little creeps got want they deserved! I would have sent them to Iran to be stoned (small little sharp stones to the a$#).
Wow, that is shocking and disturbing, how can Rackauckus justify felony charges against those kids?
I suggest that anyone who cares about civil liberties, take down the contact information at the end of the video and do some protesting of your own.
They are not kids and they stopped a man speaking…How can YOU justify sticking up of a bunch of hooligans!
These were students, which to me equals young people, which equals; kids.
These kids were engaging in an act of PEACEFUL civil disobedience, which is almost always a misdemeanor, that generally means a short jail stay and a fine, but a felony is much, much, more serious.
A felony conviction can RUIN someone’s life, it affects your ability to get a job, join the military or govt. service, own a gun and sometimes even your right to vote. Do you really think that destroying these kids adult working potential will better serve this country?
Justice is about making the punishment fit the crime, too harsh a punishment is only about vengeance and vengeance shouldn’t have a place in a civilized society’s justice system.
I thought it impossible for you to make me dislike you any more than I already do, but anyone and especially a mother, who would want to permanently ruin a young person’s life over something so minor, is particularly despicable. You disgust me.
They are adults and should be treated as such. Their behavior indicated to me that they think themselves children when in fact they are not kids and should then act like adults!
‘I thought it impossible for you to make me dislike you any more than I already do, but anyone and especially a mother, who would want to permanently ruin a young person’s life over something so minor, is particularly despicable. You disgust me.”
MQ says:
First of all if my children grew up to as intolerable and as hate filled as these bunch of thugs are, I would jail them myself! They deserve every thing that the law throws at them and in the future racist, anti-semics will think twice when they try to disrupt and stop anyone from speaking!
I don’t dislike you nor do I like you, I don’t know you as a mother, friend or what you have done in your life. I find you jaded and unable to discuss issues without having a temper tantrum. You have obviously always gotten your way and are quite nasty if you can’t push your personal beliefs down people’s throats. But then again that is why all the tyrants of the world where socialist, communist fascists!
I don’t dislike or like you, because I don’t really know you! The same as the hooligan 7, they did not know the man who was invited to speak at UCI. They justed pulled a temper tantrum because they felt they had the right to stop him from speaking and in this country unlike most muslim countries we take speech no matter the person speaking as a fundamental right of freedom!
So calm down and don’t blacken your soul with silly things like dislikes, hatred and intolerance a lot of men, women and children have died because of such feelings!
I do want you to know that I am a very loving and funny individual. I was a very good nurse and my patients loved me. I saved a lot of lives as a nurse and was liked by my co-workers of every faith, race and origin. I would help anyone who needed it without question and I have a strong love of animals and recently was able to get an abandoned dog a loving home. I am a great friend, mother and sister. I love to hear people talk about politics, life, and social issues and even if I don’t agree with them, I love the debate and the fun that you can get out of the interaction and the mind dance you get with a one on one debate. I have never hated anyone in my life and I am proud to say I have never made an enemy out of anyone who has met me. So that is the low down on me and I can with all of my heart, every word of the above is the truth.
And I do run a business with my husband and we do provide a good income for quite a few and I am proud of that.
These were 19 and 20 year old kids, students protesting a speaker at a public university, there were 11 of them and they ONLY disrupted the speaker, Michael Oren was able to give and finish his speech.
As Mark A. Levine a UCI history professor put it “no harm, no foul” he also wrote this in regards to the situation;
“If you were that student, what would you do the next time someone was speaking at the university whose views you strongly disagreed with? Would you risk crossing an undefined line and thereby put your future in jeopardy, or would you stay silent? And what does this environment do to the university’s role as a place where boundaries, ideas and actions can be explored? Some of the most creative and impactful protests in history have been extremely theatrical and disruptive. Should students be forbidden from exploring these forms of protest?”
Bottom line; charging these students with a felony will have very chilling affect on protests and civil disobedience, two things which are necessary to a free society.
I KNOW YOU BY YOUR WRITINGS (this IS a blog after all), and everything you write tells me you are a very unlikeable human being.
1) You are a racist, you have proved this over and over and over again.
2) You can NEVER admit when you are wrong, you have many times been proved wrong in your assertions, yet can never admit it. A recent example is when you said the US Postal Service and the DMV cost taxpayers billions, you were wrong, I provided proof, yet you don’t care, no mea culpa’s ever, facts mean nothing to you.
3) You are conceited, always touting your brilliance, charm, wit, and humor even though they are not apparent to anyone else.
4) You are a liar, you offered to tell me your profession if I told you mine. You reneged on a deal that you made.
5) You make erroneous assumptions and accusations about others and again, never apologize when proved wrong.
6) You have no empathy for others, case in point; the above article. Your hateful, bitter comments about “stoning” these young people shows your true nature and it is ugly, reprehensible and negative.
So go ahead, tell us how everyone and their dog, loves you. We who read your words have a different opinion.
“I KNOW YOU BY YOUR WRITINGS (this IS a blog after all), and everything you write tells me you are a very unlikeable human being.”
MQ says:
Quite frankly if you find me unlikeable, that is kind of a badge of honor! I know from your writing that most likely the friends that you have probably walk on egg shells. A typical liberal fascist who cant tolerate your friends having a mind of their own. YOU are what I would call the typical drone: walk like me and talk like me and don’t defect from the ranks!
“1) You are a racist, you have proved this over and over and over again.”
FYI: Mexican is not a race! And I will be honest and say I do have a beef with Mexican activists, welfare recipients and drug lords! I have no problem with most latino’s, because they are not a problem. Where as Mexicans who live in Santa Ana have a lot of social problems that effect us all. I have a problem with people like NAUI, a true racist who advocates the hatared of people based on color… No Anonster, most likely I would rather have 50 latinos in a conversation, than one of you! Sorry, to offend your sensitivity!
“2) You can NEVER admit when you are wrong, you have many times been proved wrong in your assertions, yet can never admit it. A recent example is when you said the US Postal Service and the DMV cost taxpayers billions, you were wrong, I provided proof, yet you don’t care, no mea culpa’s ever, facts mean nothing to you.”
MQ says:
Why would I admit to being wrong, when I am right?
I know you probably bully people in submission, but not me. I have absolutely no reason to bow down to your tantrums!
“3) You are conceited, always touting your brilliance, charm, wit, and humor even though they are not apparent to anyone else.”
MQ says:
There is nothing wrong with being a little conceited it is good for the ego. The fact that you seem to know so much about a person you have never met is quite conceited is it not? And as far as me being charming, I was charming enough to get my man and I am charming enough to make people smile…Brilliant, well thank you, but I might be a little cool, but brilliant no, i don’t think so!
“4) You are a liar, you offered to tell me your profession if I told you mine. You reneged on a deal that you made.”
MQ says:
I never made any deal and I did give you a lot of clues, if you could not figure them out, well sorry I did try!
“5) You make erroneous assumptions and accusations about others and again, never apologize when proved wrong.”
MQ says:
I have never been proved wrong, so bring me the facts and if I am wrong i will say so!
“6) You have no empathy for others, case in point; the above article. Your hateful, bitter comments about “stoning” these young people shows your true nature and it is ugly, reprehensible and negative.”
MQ says:
NO, i have no empathy for wasters, losers and hooligans, especially hooligans that have an opportunity to speak their peace without being you!
“So go ahead, tell us how everyone and their dog, loves you. We who read your words have a different opinion.”
MQ says:
Not every one and their dog loves me, but really if your type loved me, I would feel quite dirty!
I don’t want your love and I don’t need your approval… I have nothing to prove to you!
And really, you keep saying us? Do you have a split personality or do you mean your fan club (conceited?).
“I’m in LA and this happened an hour away from here. I don’t think kicking MSU off campus is really a good option but I am still pretty grossed out by this kind of behavior. I don’t recall pro-Israel students ever heckling an anti-Israel speaker anywhere. I’ve sat down respectfully and listened to members of Palestinian terrorist organizations speak, and I never heckled them once. I am appalled and disgusted and concerned. Very recently 2 students at York University in Ontario were physically assaulted by anti-Zionist thugs (not surprisingly that smug fuck face Jesse Zimmerman, a fellow Kike, was involved). So we see how a lack of basic civility can in due time degenerate further. I suppose it’ll be just a matter of time before Jewish students respond in kind though I hope that never happens. I think the University needs to take its code of conduct seriously and suspend the students involved in the heckling and censure whatever organization spurred them on. God I am so grossed out.”
MQ says:
I have empathy for this kid who might meet the thugs in question!
You feel like telling her, Anonster, about the constant blackballing of respected professors like Juan Cole, Finkelstein, etc., who even mildly criticize Israeli policy? Much worse than what happened to Mr. Oren. That’s where I would go next.
Remember, QUinn won’t understand a word of it, but other people are reading too.
So what, tit for tat Vern?
So Vern is anonster your new right woman thug? Tell me yourself, i will understand it, but most likely not agree with your opinion of it.
And please go for a thug who’s a little less, code pink! I don’t know if its pre-menopausal or what, but, wow…glad I am not the man in their lives! 🙂
I know the Israelis are not angels, but if it’s a toss up between a country who’s people including their women are free and countries that oppress, murder, stone and burn their female children… I go with the guys with the star!
But even though I think the countries that surround Israel have more than their share of cleric nuts, I would still have the civility to allow them to speak!
She just apparently has more time (and patience) to respond to you today than I do. And she does it so well…
Vern, I believe you’ve made Michelle jealous, well, you musicians do have a way with the ladies.
Not well enough!
🙂
Oh, liberal gang attack! Where is Larry?
Hey ignoramus, FYI;
thug
[thuhg]
–noun
1.
a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
2.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) one of a former group of professional robbers and murderers in India who strangled their victims
I’m sure in your twisted world view, the word “thug” is appropriate to describe these non-violent students, but for the rest of us it’s just more proof of your vileness.
And I do mean us, as I am not the only one on this blog that has been critical of and disgusted by, your mean and bigoted attacks on other people.
LOL, even right-wing Brother Larry has taken to censoring her lately.
lol..Larry is not right wing, nor is Bill Campbell!
Liberal Alert….When all else fails use personal, character acts when ever possible! Its like the vancomycin e- last line of defense!
No, in my world everyone has the right to speak and then shut up and listen to the other person speak. In your world we need to listen to you and then shut up!
You come from an era where burning bra’s and spitting on your soldiers formed your characters. You obviously came from a time where people thought they had more rights than other’s…I don’t share the same philosophy! I like my bra and I love my soldiers and I don’t like thugs or hooligans no matter who they are!
And if Larry has joined the ranks of fascists who censor…congratulations, it sure is nice being popular!
Wise up!
I think that this post and the comments completely miss the point. First, charges have yet to be filed and everyone is simply guessing at what might happen. Second, anything that the students were doing that was purely speech is completely protected by the constitution and they can only be prosecuted for the ACTIONS that they took in connection with that speech and then ONLY if those actions independently constituted criminal acts. Third, even if the DA determines to file felony charges (which as the “open letter” indicates in a matter of prosecutorial discretion), the non-speech actions of those charged have to be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” before anyone is tagged with a felony conviction.
This open letter and a majority of the posts seemed to be aimed solely at squashing the free speech rights of those opposing the protestors through threat, intimidation and insult. Hypocritical considering the position that you all take about the right to free speech.
Speaking of missing the point, Tony Rackauckus isn’t just anyone , he’s the DA and he works for us “MR. WATCHDOG”, so, pardon us while we voice our opinion about what he should and shouldn’t do.
Although it looks like he’s charged the students with misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to disturb a meeting and disturbance of the meeting. Perhaps the outcry, did some good.
He works for “the people” which is more than just you. Would you have the same opinion on the beneficial impact of “public outcry” if a group of Israelis had publicly demanded felony prosection and the DA bowed to their will? I don’t think so.
These are some real conundrums you’re spinning, Geoff, if that’s the word.
I believe we know “the people” is more than just a couple of us liberals on the blog.
Are there Israelis who have come out and demanded felony charges? Maybe there are; I have the impression it was just T-Rack grandstanding until he realized he was going too far.
Why would we be as happy about an outcome we think is unjust as we would be about an outcome we think is more just? That doesn’t make sense.
And you really had my head spinning in your first comment when you accused CAIR, myself, and anonster of “squashing the free speech rights of those opposing the protestors through threats…” You’ve really got that rightwing PeeWee Dodge (I know you are but what am I?) down to a tee!
Best parallel that I can come up with is the reaction to global warming detractors a few years ago. I have personally heard several people shout “shut up, you are crazy” at any academic that simply asked for a second look, a peer review, of the science. Global Warming Advocates really just wanted to either 1) shut down business and development or 2) make incredible profits off of government subsidized “green” projects [Al Gore] and realized that couldn’t happen as smoothly in the face of real scientific questions.
In this post, it seems there is outrage at the DISCUSSION of charges. Any speech challenging the legality of the actions of the protestors was painted as innappropriate for these poor tender soles – please ignore their criminal behavior. I notice that the letter did nothing to apologize for the actions but instead seemed to praise the illegal actions. I find that objectionable, though I would always defend their right to express their wrong opinion.
I see a Grand Jury Investigation as simply a proper tool created to aid the DA in properly exercising prosecution. I think that everyone would agree that took place in this case. If you feel like the attached letter had an impact – great – that’s part of the wonderful American process that lets any crazy foist their opinion on others.