JawsBlog

After the President did that whole turkey pardoning thingy, a while later the news cut into a signing of a Huge Defense Authorization Bill

Most importantly though the President remarked: “Our military is making America proud”
And they sure as hell are!

That’s why they deserve the across-the-board average 4.15% pay increase as well as hazardous service and family separation pay [increases]

Other good parts of the bill appear to be:

Cutting the red tape and bureacracy (sp?) at the Pentagon by allowing civilian managers to be moved to areas where they can offer the most help, speeds up the hiring process and gives the defense secretary much greater latitude in the hiring and firing of 700,000 civilian employees

Partially overturns rules preventing disabled veterans from receiving some retirement pay as well as disability compensation—the disabled vets deserve compensation for their service and bravery.

and

Exempts the military to provisions of the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The Pentagon claimed environmental laws restrict training exercises; environmentalists said the laws have had little effect on training and that the exemptions go too far.–which is good because some of the rules were way too strict and put the military at a major disadvantage in terms of training, and gave the military many more hassles than needed.

Finally, the President hit the nail on the head when he said:
“To win the war on terror, America must fully utilize the skills and talents of everyone who serves our country and this bill will achieve that goal”

So I woke up this morning and turned on the news (as I usually do), and all of the sudden they cut to the White House and they’re showing the President giving a live presentation.

The President was issuing a pardon for the national turkey, which is named “Stars and Stripes” (as per an internet vote).

Here’s the coverage of the event from the White House

I’ve never understood why our country has a custom to pardon a national turkey. I know, its a tradition and all, but I simply think that its silly.

At least the President isn’t pardoning a Tofurkey or something like that

I know, I gripe about it a lot…but I’m not big on term papers. In case you’re wondering what I’m currently struggling with, here’s the paper I have to write my paper on:

Homer binds TRPC family channels and is required for gating of TRPC1 by IP3 receptors

It would be much more interesting if the paper was about this Homer rather than this one

Back to work I go….sigh….

I’ve combined all three of my posts on Dr. Pipes’ lecture into one big post and it’s up over at the Brandeis Vanguard if you’d like to read it.

Apparently tolerance on campus doesn’t extend to Republicans (as usual).

As was the case of this email:

I had music on the radio in the background – when the music gave way to Garrison Keilor. This may well be an old joke, but I’ve not heard it before.

Garrison said that while he was growing up, each day at school the students pledged allegiance to the flag, and then to the Republicans for whom it stands.

Yay for tolerance [/sarcasm]

From the Cry Me A River Department:

Big Crowd at Military School Protest Gets Earful of Patriotic Music From Army

The Army’s loudspeakers, playing “The Army Song” and “God Bless the U.S.A.,” were 50 yards away from where protesters were speaking to the crowd.

Leaders of School of Americas Watch, which has protested at Fort Benning every year since the early 1990s, said they planned to sue over the noise tactic and accused the Army of a “psychological operation.”

“There’s a lot of ill will being caused that’s not necessary,” said the Rev. Ray Bourgeois, SOA Watch founder. “The closer we get to closing that school down, the meaner they get.”

“We figure if they can play their music, we can play ours,” post spokesman Rich McDowell said. The Army said the music came from a tape made by the wife of a Fort Benning soldier currently serving in Iraq.

Oh no! They’re playing patriotic music! It may even be jingostic! *Gasp*

Now the floor opened up to Questions from the crowd. People were instructed to keep their questions to a simple one line thing (rather than make a statement), due to time constraints. They were then allowed a follow-up question.

I don’t have most of the questions written down verbatim, but I tried to capture the important part.

Q: What is your response to the allegations made against you?

A: This all began with a “radical” group known as the Council on American Islamic Relgations. This group is an apologist for terrorist groups, and their leaders want the US to be an Islamic country. [Aside from Josh: for more on CAIR see LGF or this piece by Pipes himself with bibliography]

CAIR maintains a list of quotes and publishes it. Pipes then said something along the lines of that a lot of the criticism comes from “some people who don’t do their own thinking”

Pipes then said that the first victims of militant Islam are muslims; militant/radical Islam has the microphone, loud voices and this includes voices and professorships on college/university campuses.

Q: About the Oslo accords and a peace plan (a request for clarification/elaboration)

Israel made a mistake with Oslo. There shouldn’t be talks until the Palestinians are ready [in other words to stop terror and recognize Israel]. Peace treaties also don’t “trickle down” to influence the public’s perceptions either (look at Egypt)

As for settlements and the “right of return”–no talks until the Palestinians make the initial steps.

Q: How can the War On Terror not be perceived as a Judeo-Christian War against Islam?

A: Add any and all anti-radical Islamists should be added to the coalition.

There’s an intramural war that’ll need to take place within Islam itself, the moderates vs. the radicals–and this battle is for the future of the religion.

This isn’t the first war that’s been fought against an ideology. Look at WWII, then there was the Cold War against Marism-Leninism.

As for the Rummsfeld Memo that got leaked to the press, Pipes commented that there needs to be a counter influence on the Madrasas. Pipes agreed with Rummsfeld that we need to somehow counter their ideas.

Q: On the Patriot Act: is it against “thoughts”? How doesn’t it infringe on Civil Liberties?

[Aside: I was suprised this was asked. Dr Pipes isn't a lawyer, nor does he work for the DOJ...seemed like an odd question]

A: The act is over 400+ pages long; before it was passed Law enforcement couldn’t liase with the military and now they can–which is helpful. Local law enforcement and the FBI now no longer have “firewalls” up between them and are able to share information which can help fight terror.

Q: You (Pipes) say its the aim of the Palestinians to destroy Israel, but how can they improve their live under occupation and the substandard conditions? And what about the “Geneva Accords”?

A: Pipes dismissed the idea of the Geneva accords. Noted what he’d said before about Diplomacy, and said he sees no change in the Palestinan mindset about destroying Israel.

Q: In reference to the following quote [and only the quote] from a 1990 article in National Review (NRODT):

Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene—Source

A: Pipes notes that that was one quote taken very much out of context. It was written in 1990, right after the end of the Cold War–the collapse of communism. Pipes saw radical Islam as the next global threat (to replace communism).

Pipes tells people to read the next paragraph of the article. He says that the purpose of the quote was to show how the French and German perceived muslims at the time. Not Americans–Europeans, mainly the French and Germans. As for the part about hygine–Pipes simply said, look at the contrast in standards of hygine between the US and Germany. Then compare Germany and the Mid-East or Pakistan…that’s all it was.

Then Pipes says something along the lines of, this is what happens when people takes clippings from CAIR and other readings..they never read the article in full (*crowd applauds*).

[Aside: See this page where Pipes responds to CAIRs challenges in detail]

Q: Another question about a quote…What about innocense before guilt? The quote in question was:

‘Mosques require a scrutiny beyond that applied to churches, synagogues and temples”

–Source article

Pipes explained that the gov’t has limited resources and should be scrutinicizing things that are ordinarilly suspect. Look at the Gitmo espionage case. The DoD eventually said it would rescreen all its chaplains, but it would take a while b/c it doesn’t have the resources, rahter than just investigating its muslim chaplains (who are much much smaller in number).
[note: if you read the above article you'll see the rest of what Pipes basically said]

Pipes also argued that as a society were’ becoming hyper-politically correct. We’re not really serious about conducting the war on terror if we’re gonna be this PC.

Q: Seeming that the second biggest terror attack on US soil was perpetrated by a Christian [OKC in '95 and Tim McVeigh] why not be equally stringent about Christian Fundimentalists?

A: Were there a campaign going back 24 years, I’d say to take more action against ‘em.

Our country also isn’t being very stringent about Muslims and terror. Look at the July 4, 2002 shooting at LAX. First it was criminal, then eventually the FBI reclassified it as terror. But the gov’t was hesitant about doing so. They kept trying to downplay it as a disgruntled man See this column too

As for the KKK and anti-abortion groups, they’re a problem Pipes notes. but they’re not threat to the nation as a whole (on the same level as radical Islam). They aren’t on the rise in number, nor do they have any state-sponsors for their actions.

Then returned to the “hygine” topic and said it had nothing to do with ideology.

Q: About the Patriot act: doesn’t t suspend rights?

A: Get realistic (regarding our situation). We may need to moderate things, but only temporarilly, because if we don’t and something happens, we could lose more rights.

*At this point in time, it’s about 1:05-1:10PM and there’s only time for 1 more question

So up to the microphone comes one of my least favorite professors. The head of the peace studies program. I wish I had the quote virbatim, but I’ll have to make do with what I could get.

Q: Isn’t it dangerous to characterize movements in such a binary fashion as being “good” or “bad”? And don’t you think the previous actions of the US may have fed into odious feelings (of the terrorists)?

A: Pipes chuckles. [Then 10 students dressed in black, in front row, stand up, throw up some flyers and walk out of room. crowd starts to boo].

Then Pipes simply said that past American actions have nothing to do with it. Then he says: “militant Islam is an evil ideology and I hate it…and if that makes me binary, then I’m binary”.

*Crowd erupts in applause, cheering, standing ovation. Gordies’ students (a few) congregate around him. People are still clapping. Then crowd leaves the room (people have to get to class–like me)

Outside of Sherman there are ~10 protesters with signs saying “Impeach Pipes from US Institute of Peace”, and another one with pictures of Pipes and Joe McCarthy and it mentions campus watch, then another sign saying “don’t hate, tolerate”. Most people just walk by ignoring it.

And that’s the lecture…

Here’s post number two of the notes I took from Dr. Daniel Pipes’ lecture earlier this week:

This resumse on the second of the three “I”s, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Pipes says that there’s a major misconception in the discussion of the Israeli-Palesitinian issue.

That misconception is the result of the letter which Arafat apparently sent the late Israeli PM Rabin saying that the Palestinians accepted Israel. The misconception was that there were just details that needed worked out, and that these would be accomplished through the diplomacy of the Oslo accords.

Over the course of the years since the Oslo accords were originally signed (September 1993), the Palestinians saw Israel as being weaker than she ever was before–in their eyes Israel was a demoralized nation. Naturally, this fed into the excitement of the radical terror groups (Jihad Islami, Hamas).

At the same time, there was nothing in the Palestinian Authority to indicate that they’d come to accept Israel [aside: there's nothing to this day]–one needn’t look further than the Palistinan media, the speeches of the leadership, nothing in the newspapers, and the Friday sermons in the Mosques–forget it.

The Palestinians then decided with the start of their latest round of violence in 2000 that they’d be able to force this “demoralized” Israel into making concessions. And as a result of enough concessions, they’d be able to destroy Israel.

All in all, Pipes said that the diplomacy of the 1990s has turned out to be counter-productive in terms of an Arab-Israeli peace accord.

There were three main points:

First: To learn that diplomacy doesn’t always work–as such, diplomacy shouldn’t be used unless the circumstances are right.

Second, regarding the current state of affairs: one side must win, one side must lose. There’s no meeting in the middle. There’s gotta be a winner and a loser. The arabs are either going to continue to work to destroy Israel or they must learn to accept Israel.

Third, as for the United States, Pipes basically said that the first US goal should be to get the Palistinians to actually (genuinely) accept Israel’s existance. And US policy must change in order to meet this goal.

Now onto the third major part of his lecture, the third “I”: Iraq

Pipes was originally against Operation Desert Storm in 1991 (he didn’t explain why), but he admitted that he was pleased with the outcome. However in 1998 the sanctions regime established by the UN after the Gulf War began to crumble as many of us know. Ultimately, Saddam Hussein broke the ceasefire and something needed to be done.

Now in 2002-3 Pipes supported war against Iraq. We were doing two things by kicking out Saddam Hussein—we were living up to our side of the agreement, and penalizing him for breaking the ceasefire. We were also establishing our doctorine of pre-emption (against terrorist supporting nations).

As for post-war Iraq, Pipes isn’t the biggest fan of the administration’s current course of action. He thought that there should’ve been a “Democratically minded ‘Strongman’”–a harmless dictator built on the Turkey, Tiwan model. Pipes then thought that we should keep US troops in the country, but they should pull out to desert bases and let Iraqis run their country for themselves. We needn’t pay and do things for them. This isn’t a case of rebuilding a country (like Germany and Japan were), rather we just liberated Iraq, we didn’t defeat it.

And with that Pipes recaped what he said and moved on to Questions…

I link…you decide:

F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies (NY Times via Drudge)

The ACLU isn’t happy about it.

Also for insight I suggest reading:: David Frum of NRO

and Amir Taheri’s guest colum: “The London Streets: Who are these anti-Bush people“

I can’t think of a better title right now, so “Craziness on Campus” will have to do. So here are two of the emails I’ve received in the past 24-hours from the University.

[Note: Flyer has the word “Salam” written in Arabic, then it says “Shalom” then “Islam”
Join us as we
PEACE TOGETHER BRANDEIS

We are a community affected by acts of hatred.
We are a community in turmoil.
We are a community in need of solidarity.

Monday, November 24th
9:00pm Chapel’s Field

Let your presence speak louder than words; show that Brandeis is no place for hate.

Sponsored by the Department of Residence Life, Division of Student Life

And email number two:

Our campus community has, to say the least, been challenged on many fronts this semester. From the unexpected loss of members of our student community to the to the hurtful words uttered by members of our community in two forms of written communications, as well as hurtful things endured by some that did not get public notice, we have been dealing with grief, anger, frustration, and a sense of hopelessness. The types of challengesthat we have been facing as a community have students, faculty, staff, and administrators mentally and physically extended, as we grapple with finding some sense of resolve to these issues.

In spite of these difficulties, I am convinced that we need to (WE WILL!) recover as a community. I am persuaded, along with members of the newly formed Civility Group, that we need to come together as a community before the Thanksgiving Break. To this end, I would like to invite you to come to Sherman Function Room on Monday at 2pm to join me and other members of our community for this Community Gathering.

The purpose of this Community Gathering is to give communal voice to the many forms of pain that are present in our student community. This gathering is not a session to point fingers or assign blame. It is a time to pause and acknowledge that we started this academic year with a commitment to becoming a stronger, more inclusive community, and that (in spite of unexpected blows to our efforts) we will not surrender our efforts.

By inviting you to share in this Community Gathering, please know that I am not asking you to pretend that you are not experiencing pain, anger, or disappointment. Quite to the contrary! I am hoping that, by us coming together and giving voice to these feelings, we will be moved to continue the hard work of building a stronger campus community. If your pains and frustrations are such that you do not feel that you are prepared to conform to a civil Community Gathering, we will respect your decision not to attend. If, on the other hand, you have been hoping for an opportunity to
reconnect with other members of our community, this is your chance.

Finally, I have seen and heard from many of you regarding how tired, unfocused on school work, and how disconnected you feel from your university community. I am hopeful that this gathering will send you into your Thanksgiving Break and final exams with energy, a renewed sense of community, and a desire to come back and continue that work that you have
started.

I look forward to seeing you Monday at 2pm in Sherman Function Hall.

More to come….

Just got on my computer after Shabbat…and from preliminary analysis from the flood of email’s I’ve received from a variety of lists, it looks like all hell is about to break loose on campus–over the charges of “racism”. It looks like the far-left groups are unhappy that the university isn’t doing “enough” (in their terms) to proactively fight this (note: they’re dissapointed that people support Daniel Pipes among other things; and they think the MidEast forum is trying to Brainwash people)…

This doesn’t look pretty…..I’ll post some of the emails that i’ve gotten up here as well (w/ names removed). But it looks like the Justice incident was only the tip of the iceberg.

Nothing new here….Michigan Sucks!

At some schools (read as D-I Universities) Midnight Madness is a big to do. But I go to Brandeis, which isn’t known for its athletics.

But here at Brandeis, we’ve got our own version of Midnight Maddness..and its taken place tonight. Here’s the description us students got in our email:

5:30PM–It’s like Midnight Madness…only earlier! Students, faculty, and staff are all invited to the (Women’s Basketball) Tip Off Tournament this Friday evening.

Come watch the Brandeis Women’s Basketball
Team kick off the 2003/2004 season on Friday, November 21st.
FREE pizza and soda, t-shirts and thundersticks, and contests for prizes!!!
Immediately following the game, stick around for the first annual BRANDEIS CELEBRITY BASKETBALL CHALLENGE and other fun contests

Now lets see…midnight madness is normally held the first night schools are allowed to practice (under NCAA rules). And it’s also usually held, um at midnight…

Only at Brandeis…

When I first heard about the SJC ruling, one of the first things I wondered about was what affect this rulilng may eventually have on religions/religious practices/laws in terms of marriage.

As this article from the Cleveland Jewish News mentions

The potential breakdown in the traditonal marriage between heterosexuals worries conservatives and Orthodox Jews [Josh notes: should also mention Conservative Judiasm].

Attorney Harry Brown, president of Agudath Israel of Cleveland, thinks the decision threatens the freedom of religion. He foresees a scenario where an Orthodox rabbi, who refuses to officiate at the marriage of a gay couple, could face some civil sanction.

Brown cites as precedent the 1983 Supreme Court decision upholding the IRS revocation of Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status. The fundamentalist Christian school opposes interracial dating and marriage. Such racial discrimination violated a national public policy and thus the university did not qualify for a tax benefit, the court said.

It’s an interesting possibility…but its something to think about…

Morning thoughts…by me.

I’m not a morning person…I like sleep

I don’t care about Michael Jackson…would you nice folks in the media please stop talking about him

Has PETA said anything yet about Iraqi terrorists using donkeys in attacks?

Have the lefties taken up the “Free Easter Island” campaign yet? I’ll give it a few days.

The 9th Circus is back in the news. Any chance this case will be heard en banc

Is there some sort of conspiracy wherein all professors assign large amounts of work due at the same time? And why do finals start right after we get back from thanksgiving break?

I need some caffine…I hate the morning

I just got back from hearing Dr. Walid Phares talk about the evolution of al-Queda, radical Islamic ideology and our current battle against radical Islamism.

It was an excellent talk and I took notes which I eventually plan on typing up and posting–when time permits me to do so. But I’ve got to work on another paper and graduate school applications. Tons of fun, I know. And no, I haven’t forgotten to transcribe the rest of my notes about Daniel Pipes’ talk either. I’ve been busy.

But in short, Dr. Phares was very, very optomistic about the course of action we’ve taken and thinks that we will in the end win.

And now back to my regularly scheduled homework

On the topic of the purported flyers, I’ve now seen a copy (I got forwarded a PDF version of what the flyer looked like). The flyers were in very, very very poor taste. There’s also a contact email on the flyer (if it’s a valid email address I dunno). I’ll see if I can find a public weblink to the flyers so that anyone whose curious can see them (they are posted on a school server, but I’m not sure if it’s restricted access based on IP #).

A meeting is being held this evening by a bunch of clubs (see the “Uh oh…here we go again?” post below) about these flyers and apparently Dr. Pipes’ lecture.

Here’s what one email said about Dr. Pipes’ talk:

The distinctions that were made between concern about the hateful attitudes
that Pipes’ inspires and this Coalition’s desire for disengagement from the
Israel-Palestine issue ought to be noted. What we were protesting and fighting
was hate, not Israel. By being percieved as such the real issue was being
ignored. It can not any longer.

[two people from the Coalition for tolerance] are too disgusted to be able to put what happened at the Middle East “Forum’s” Daniel Pipes event itself

Again, I’m not sure what was so bad about the Pipes event. Besides the fact that he had overwhelming support from the audience, shot down all the “coalition’s” planted questions, and got a standing ovation from the crowd…

There’s also the following flyer that was emailed (which the “coalition” apparently distributed or wanted to distribute”). Taking the text from the PDF (I love Adobe Acrobat) it read:

We are not disputing Daniel Pipes’ authenticity as a historian or commentator on the Middle East crises. We are not concerned with what he says about Israel, Palestine, or any tension, real or imagined, between the Muslim communities of the world and Jews and Christians.

We are saying that hateful speech is wrong. That it is wrong whether directed towards Jews, Christians, African-Americans,
the GLBT community, the Asian community or the Muslim community. We believe that Daniel Pipes’ bigoted attitude mars his
scholarship of Islam. We also believe that he is irresponsibly feeding an existing fear of Muslims
while inciting a further fear and hatred of them.

We are protesting Daniel Pipes, with our right to free speech, only with concern to the rights of and attitudes toward Muslim communities. Brandeis as a community would condemn, and has condemned intolerant actions if they were Anti-Semitic, Anti-Asian, or Anti-African-American, among others. Let us take a stand against all intolerance. Let us not make a distinction between Anti-Muslim attitudes and others. All are hurtful, wrong and deserving of condemnation. Rationalized intolerance has been of great detriment and pain to the communities that have come before, let us learn from them.

Then there was a flyer posted purportedly posted by the MidEast Forum @ Brandeis (I say purportedly b/c I don’t know if it was indeed by MEFAB). It read as follows:

Resist the tired rhetoric and slanderous allegations hurled by those who seek to silence civilized discussion.

On Tuesday Nov. 18th Dr. Daniel Pipes will visit Brandeis

Seize this oppertunity and engage in an informed discussion with Dr. Pipes, who is considered among the nation’s preeminant scholars and commentators on Islam and the Middle East. An intellectual of Dr. Pipes’ callibur should command our attention and respect. We should no doubt gain from him further insight into the complex issues the United States faces concerning foriegn policy in the Middle East.

Come hear Dr. Pipes speak on the 18th and keep civilized informed discussion and debate alive.

I’ll blog more on this story as it develops…but I’ll let you reach your own conclusions on it.

I just got word that Dr. Walid Phares is going to speak on campus Thursday night! Yay!

He’s gonna speak about: “An analysis the road to September 11, and the current developing strategies of al-Qaida and the international Jihad Movement worldwide. He will review US policy and plans in this regard.”

Not only are we getting two anti-Idiotarian speakers to come in to campus this year, they’re both coming in the same semester, in the same week!

Wow! This is so great!

Uh oh, it looks like we may be in for a whole ‘nother race related incident on campus.

I’ve gotten two emails that have said:

Coming off the double whammy of the “tigger with an n” incident and Daniel
Pipes talk yesterday there have been some racist flyers put up around campus
found today, as well as increasing conditions of extreme discomfort for
students of color. So I urge you all to come out tonight to show solidarity
and to discuss what we can do to help deal with these issues on campus.

and

so some of you probably know that there have been a lot of racist fliers
circulating around campus today. stuff was written that was arguably ‘worse’
than the justice article…especially in light of the reaction to the daniel pipes protests, i think its
really important for us to assess where the atmosphere of our campus is
headed right now…there is talk of a big intergroup discussion about the nature of knee jerk
right wing reaction right before finals

I’ve got no clue what these flyers are/were, nor do I know anything about them besides what I’ve posted above.
Nor do I know anything about the “nature of knee jerk right wing reaction” either (whatever the hell that is?)

Update: Two more emails:

First, a “saner” one:

There will be a very important meeting tonight (Thursday) at 8:30 to discuss community responses to the the recent events surrounding the march for tolerance and the racist flyers put around campus on Wednesday….Come and bring your ideas about what we can do to address racism and prejudice.

and then there’s a wackier one:

ill be honest, im really scared about the direction the atmosphere at brandeis has been going. there is a huge right wing backlash against social justice in general, but more specifically outright racism is being promoted, especially among the
freshmen class. it is REALLY bad. REALLY bad.

[meeting announcement]

students have had their lives threatened, and violence has almost broken out numerous times in conjunction with the march for tolerance, and now there was a large coordinated effort to spread fliers with hate speech around campus.

i think its really important that we are a part of this effort. these are not isolated incidents. they mirror a much larger scary shift in the attitudes of students on this campus.

Now again, I have no clue what the purported flyers are all about–so I’m not going to say anything until I find out more about ‘em. As for the “March for Tolerance” and whatever happened with that (see below), I think that more of the complaints from people had to do with the fact that they didn’t want to be annoyed with people marching down their halls making noise. It’s either that or the fact that a lot of people actually don’t really care about the march.

Third, this whole “huge right wing backlash” thing…where is it? Where do I sign up for it?
[A note: according to these people "social justice" usually goes hand-in-hand with "progressivism"...yes, it's these groups, so many readers know what they're talking about when they say "social justice". And their definition of "right wing" is basically anything they don't agree with].

Fourth–I think a lot of this is because we had a non-liberal speaker on campus, Daniel Pipes, and these groups didn’t get the kind of response that they wanted (Pipes’ supporters vastly outnumbered his foes, vastly–so they’re bitter).

Finally, I don’t think that students on this campus are racist or prejudiced as these people are portraying things. It may be an isolated person or persons; but most of it is likely apathy on the part of students.

In reference to this prior post about the so called “March for Tolerance” monday night, here’s an account from the marchers themselves on what took place.

We started in the ICC at 9:30. We left Swig Lounge at 9:45. We went into Hassenfeld in East and then to Pomerantz- all the while chanting “Oppose Hate, Tolerate”. We then marched into Castle Quad and chanted “‘Oppose Hate, Tolerate.”

North Quad, Cable- “Chanted 1234 Brandeis Students Say No More, 5678 Start the Tolerance and Stop the Hate.”

Basement of Cable, students stood in doorway and threatened violence if we entered the hallway. One of them pushed [a marcher].

The rest of North was ok except for people slamming doors. Also, one of the buildings (Scheffres or Gordon) students took flyers and cut them up with scissors or crumpled them and threw them at the floor. Far unfriendlier than East.

Went to Usdan for a break and refreshments. Moved on to Massell. Ran into serious opposition. Far, far unfriendlier territory. While exiting Renfield a student was banging a two by four against the stair well and the wall in a threatening manner, and telling us to get out in offensive words.

Usen all hallways were blocked with trash cans and chairs. One of the floors there was a group of students lined up along the hall obstructing our path, the moved but with threatening body language. [A marcher] felt unsafe and threatened. The ’07 Senator stood behind her and told her to ignore them, not look back, and walk quickly.

Upon exiting Deroy a student ran angrily towards us, telling us to “Get the fuck out of the quad!”

Shapiro–CA [Brandeis term for RAs], told us not to enter the hall. He yelled at us. Threatened to report us, to whom we dont know. In response to acknowledgment that it wasnt quiet hours, he said that we should just simply leave. All this
was done and said in a threatening, rude, raised voice when we were trying to talk to him reasonably.

We exited the building. Upon exiting we saw students burning our fliers. ([one marcher] got pictures but the faces are not clear in it.) They were chanting Pro-Pipes slogans, something insulting to the effect of menstruate, substituting it for tolerate. Meanwhile, the entire quad was sticking their heads out of their windows and telling us to variously, “get lost,” or “shut-up.”

We exited Shapiro at about 10:55ish right before quiet hours began.

We went on to Ridgewood quad, through Ziv and then to the Village. We were going to put up the posters we were carrying by Sherman Function Hall- but after Massell we felt that they would be burnt down by morning.

Realizing that it was after quiet hours, we decided as a group to enter the Village but to peacefully leave when asked. Ziv, Ridgewood, and Village were very respectful – most doors were shut. One of the bathroom doors in tower C floor 2 had a flier that said “How is this racist?” in response to the quote from Daniel Pipes about “Brown-skinned people…”

A very quick dissection of this whole march thing:

People slamming doors: People probably were annoyed that there were people chanting on their hall and didn’t want to hear the noise? That’s usually what happens in residence halls when there is excessive noise (no?)

Blocking off halls: One can only guess…but maybe they didn’t want the noise and all on their hall? In Usen blocking the hall by making a chain of people…isn’t that “non-violence”…isn’t that what is taught in a lot of the classes?

The kid with the 2×4–um…I have no clue what to say about him. Maybe he didn’t like the noise? Maybe he’s just a bit off the rocker?

People yelling out of windows: Same with slamming doors, people were simply getting annoyed by it. That’s my guess. They were annoying me even when they were outside my dorm. And what’s wrong with people chanting opposite slogans?

As for the Village, I’ve heard conflicting reports about them being rude or not. And that flyer–as Pipes explained at the lecture, the quote isn’t racist (I’ll be blogging on it later), it was taken out of context and its used in a CAIR made “anti-Pipes” sheet.