September 23, 2011 | 2:27 PM | By

Were the ‘Irvine 11′ student protesters singled out for being Muslim?

FILED UNDER: Irvine 11, Muslim Student Union, UC Irvine

Photo by Shirley Jahad/KPCC

Supporters of the "Irvine 11" students outside the courthouse today after guilty verdict was announced

An Orange County jury late this morning found 10 students known as the ‘Irvine 11′ guilty on two misdemeanor counts, one of conspiracy and one of disturbing a meeting, for their interruption of a speech by Israeli ambassador Michael Oren at UC Irvine last year. Prosecutors had argued that the students, from UCI and UC Riverside, “shut down” the ambassador with their repeated heckling; the defense argued that the students were exercising their right to free speech.

The free speech component has made the case national news, but there have also been allegations of ethnic and religious bias, with some pointing to a climate of discrimination against Muslims that in the last year has prompted actions ranging from protests against the building of mosques to hate crimes directed at people perceived to be Muslims.

This week, the Orange County Register ran an opinion piece from the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ executive director and staff attorney Ameena Mirza Qazi titled “Irvine 11’s’ speech infringed because they’re Muslim.”

Qazi pointed out how hecklers who interrupted a speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last year in New Orleans weren’t subject to the same punishment, writing:

It is quite common for shouts, jeers, hooting, stand-ups, walk-outs and sit-downs to occur during political gatherings. In fact, a similar protest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu involving Jewish students occurred in the fall of 2010, and the protesters received not so much as a scolding.

The difference here, however, is that these Irvine 11 young men are Muslim, exercising their rights to critique inhumane Israeli policies in a growing anti-Muslim environment.

In the comments from around the world that have flooded Twitter since the verdict was announced, some of those voicing anger about it have said more or less the same.

Tweeting from London, @Babul7862 wrote:
There u have it, free speech applies to A.N.other except if yr Muslim. A travesty!
Referring to a protest last year, @FourYawkeyWay wrote:
teaparty types can bring their guns to an Obama protest. the #irvine11 though go to jail for bringing just their conscience.

Others, however, have pointed out that the circumstances of the speech played a part, among other things saying it was an invitation-only event, although it was open to UCI students. In a growing comment thread on the website for KPCC’s AirTalk show, which featured a segment this morning on the trial, a listener named Brian posted:

Free speech is a fundamental right no doubt, but lets pull this issue apart. Regardless of what you think about this issue your right to free speech needs to be weighed against someone else right to free speech and someone else right to listen freely. When questions of the first amendment come into play you have to look at the forum.

Where was this protest being held? Was it a traditional public forum? A non-public forum? if it was a public forum was it an open public forum? layer that over this issue…this was a PRIVATE event a NON-PUBLIC event. Your fundamental right to free speech does not apply the same in non-public forums as it does say at a public park. These 11 chose to enter a non-public forum, disrupt the event, and are trying to usurp the first amendment protections to justify their illegal behavior.

Elicsmart had another take:

When is the last time a group college students were prosecuted and convicted by a court of law for disrupting a public speech? I have been to many public speeches that have been disrupted for a variety of reasons and I’ve never heard of anyone else being prosecuted.

I guess our first amendment rights don’t allow us to criticize Israel.

Appearing as a guest on AirTalk today, Salam Al-Marayati, president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council in Los Angeles, said the incident should have been handled by the school instead of the courts, blaming “the politicized nature” of the conflict between Israel and Muslims over the issue of Palestine for why it went as far as it did.

Charges were filed against 11 students who participated in the protest, with the charges against one later dropped. A story posted on the KPCC website features a video of the heckling as it took place during Oren’s February 2010 speech. From the story:

The students planned a protest mirroring one done at the University of Chicago in which students disrupted an appearance from former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The students stood up, minutes apart from each other, and bellowed slogans at Oren such as “Michael Oren, you’re a war criminal,” followed by cheers from supporters. They capped it off with a loud, mass walkout of students.

The incident led to the temporary suspension of UCI’s Muslim Student Union, which was involved in the protest.

Readers, what do you think?

  • geoff kl

    correction. the uci msu wasnt just “involved:” in the protest, they organized and implemented the protest

     

  • M.H.Buraleh

    One eyed is the US politics as the one Dollar bill one eye pyramid. Lobby have it all the money,the power the white house and lastly the president.

  • Dan Foukall

    Justice has been served.

  • Mariamelkholy2010

    so what if it was organized or if it was random does that really matter at least they did it in nonviolent way. .  there is no where else to go.. who should we speak to, where do we go…. this is the only way where ppl are actually going to listen or even care!

  • http://twitter.com/sasss31 sassss

    Great verdict by the court in enforcing the rule of law. The only free
    speech issue that was on hand was of the Muslim kids trying to disrupt
    free speech of the Ambassador. As an Iranian who was “born” Muslim and
    an Orange County resident, I know exactly the mentality of these Islamic
    kids: they feel free speech only applies to them in imposing their
    views upon society and don’t feel the Israeli Ambassador is a human or
    entitled to free speech. I commend the court and jury for justice done -
    although the sentencing by the judge was light. I was hoping to see
    some jail time in this case.

  • Ralph

    It is hard to feel at all sympathetic for the students, especially if you have seen their booths on campus, where they routinely get to exercise their first amendment rights. Unfortunately their views probably are very representative of the Arab world and come through a lens that most educated and rationale people would find grossly warped. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jeff-Klives/763294384 Jeff Klives

    If CAIR’s position was the students acted improperly but the university sufficiently punished them and criminal prosecution was unwarranted, I can see that being a reasonable opinion that could be debated.

    There is little relevance what happened in New Orleans as that is a different jurisdiction with different DA and different state laws. If the students were protesting outside and were arrested, I would be upset that the DA and University picked on them. When Daniel Pipes spoke on the campus, members of the MSU made one loud interuption and then left.   That was rude but they made their point and allowed people to hear the lectue.   No punishment was handed out by the university and the DA did not push for any charges.

    This is a different case than that. Their emails showed the went there with the intent to shutdown the event by way of interruptions and they planned to interrupt it throughout the entire time there were there and planned to stay for the majority of the program.

    Their emails showed the went there with the intent to shutdown the event by way of interruptions and they planned to interrupt it throughout the entire time there were there and planned to stay for the majority of the program.

    The students were wrong to go to a meeting inside a lecture hall and plan and carry out repeated interruptions of a speaker so the speaker would not be heard. I don’t care what their faith is.   That is not protected free speech.     

    CAIR is full of itself.   They are not a mainstream Muslim group.   Instead of directing students into valid ways of protest – handing out leaflets outside the event, marching with picket signs outside the event, inviting a pro-Palestinian speaker to rebut Oren’s views, writing to the local papers and university paper on specific points Oren made that were invalid, CAIR claims Islamophobia and praises the students and tells them they will be in history books and are akin to Martin Luther King Jr.   What a joke.

  • Guest

    I guarantee you that if these were Jewish students who did THE SAME EXACT THING to a Palestinian speaker, the school probably wouldn’t have punished them and the DA would most certainly not have prosecuted–if he did, the Jewish community would have been all over him.

    As a UCI alum myself who attended a pro-Palestinian talk on-campus, I witnessed a heckler being escorted out of the talk by UCI police, but she was never arrested or charged with this same violation of the law. I personally did NOT agree with how these students behaved, but they were already punished by the university for their actions. I DEFINITELY think these Muslim students were singled out and the law was selectively enforced against them. I have no doubt in my mind about that.

    By the way, Oren was not censored–he gave his speech in its entirety. So, no one can say that they didn’t get to hear him talk. Therefore, there was no actual censorship of his Constitutional first amendment right (which is at the federal level, not the county level). Why is it that militant Tea Party hecklers were not arrested for disrupting town hall meetings across the nation? Why weren’t the Jewish students, who heckled Prime Minister Benjaim Netanyahu, arrested for DOING THE SAME EXACT THING as these Muslim students? Why weren’t the University of Chicago students arrested for disrupting Ehud Olmert’s talk?

    This illustrates a double standard of the application of law.

  • Guest

    I guarantee you that if these were Jewish students who did THE SAME EXACT THING to a Palestinian speaker, the school probably wouldn’t have punished them and the DA would most certainly not have prosecuted–if he did, the Jewish community would have been all over him.
    As a UCI alum myself who attended a pro-Palestinian talk on-campus, I witnessed a heckler being escorted out of the talk by UCI police, but she was never arrested or charged with this same violation of the law. I personally did NOT agree with how these students behaved, but they were already punished by the university for their actions. I DEFINITELY think these Muslim students were singled out and the law was selectively enforced against them. I have no doubt in my mind about that.
    By the way, Oren was not censored–he gave his speech in its entirety. So, no one can say that they didn’t get to hear him talk. Therefore, there was no actual censorship of his Constitutional first amendment right (which is at the federal level, not the county level). Why is it that militant Tea Party hecklers were not arrested for disrupting town hall meetings across the nation? Why weren’t the Jewish students, who heckled Prime Minister Benjaim Netanyahu, arrested for DOING THE SAME EXACT THING as these Muslim students? Why weren’t the University of Chicago students arrested for disrupting Ehud Olmert’s talk?This illustrates a double standard of the application of law.

  • Anonymous

    The pretense that their being Muslim had anything tat all to do with the decision is sneaky & divisive. Had any group done what they had done, they would have deserved the same ruling.

  • Anonymous

    The pretense that their being Muslim had anything tat all to do with the decision is sneaky & divisive. Had any group done what they had done, they would have deserved the same ruling.