“Hadith of Hate” Banned at USC

[audtatious]

By Reut R. CohenFrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, August 22, 2008

As Muslim Student Association (MSA) chapters have become increasingly influential at universities and colleges around the country, critics have charged that it is a hate group that sympathizes with the international jihad and promulgates an anti-American and anti-Semitic ideology in its campus actions. In response, the MSA has claimed that it is merely another religious and cultural group similar to Hillel, a club for Jewish students, or the Newman Club for Catholics. That deception has been now unmasked at the University of Southern California, where the school’s Provost, Chrysostomos L. Max Nikias, reacting to a call from the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, has ordered the campus MSA to remove a “despicable” hadith calling for Muslims to murder Jews as a condition for redemption from its website.

David Horowitz, President of the Freedom Center, hails this as a breakthrough moment when the double standards that control the political and intellectual culture of most universities have finally been challenged. “Up to now, the slightest criticism of radical Islam on campus has been slammed as ‘Islamophobia,’ while Muslim groups and their radical fellow travelers have been allowed to say the most hateful things imaginable about Christians and Jews without any reaction from university administrators whatsoever,” Horowitz says. “Provost Nikias has called the hadith on the MSA website for what it is: despicable. Given the atmosphere that prevails on most campuses today, it was an act of integrity on his part to make this call and to demand that the MSA live up to basic standards of civility that should govern the university.”

The hadith (sacred teaching) reads as follows:

“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him….”

Its presence on the MSA website is consistent with other actions the Muslim group has initiated on the USC campus. In 2005, for instance, it hosted a conference featuring a speech by Islamist Ahmed Shama, who praised Hizbollah, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and told his listeners that the terrorists in post-Saddam Iraq were part—as was the Muslim Student Association itself—of a “global Islamic movement” and that it was “necessary to rise up against the occupation there.”

The David Horowitz Freedom Center worked with the Simon Wiesenthal Center to draft a letter to Alan Casden, a USC trustee, about the “hadith of hate,” as it is often called. Disturbed that a call for genocide should be on the USC server, Casden contacted Provost Chrysostomos Nikias to express his concern. Nikias investigated the matter and sent Casden the following letter:

“…The passage you cited is truly despicable and I share your concerns about its being on the USC server. We did some investigations and I have ordered the passage removed.

“The passage in the Hadith that you brought to our attention violates the USC Principles of Community, and it has no place on a USC server.”

The University of Southern California Principles of Community states in part: “No one has the right to denigrate another human being on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, etc. We will not tolerate verbal or written abuse, threats, harassment, intimidation or violence against person or property.” No student group other than the Muslim Student Association has posted any kind of material, religious or otherwise, calling for the destruction of a race or group.

USC’s decision to remove the hadith from the school’s server marks the first time that an American university has acknowledged that the Muslim Student Association’s agenda involves the promotion of ethnic hatred. It is also the first time that an administrator has acted quickly to censure “despicable” material. Rabbi Aron Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center hailed Provost Nikias’ decision: “We commend USC for having the moral courage to stand up against those who hijack speech and religious freedoms and the goodwill of the campus community in order to spread hate and extremist violence.”

“This episode shows that fighting injustice can produce results,” Freedom Center President David Horowitz added. “It also shows what kind of an organization the Muslim Students Association is, which is why the Freedom Center has launched a nationwide campaign, Stop the Jihad on Campus Week, which will culminate the week of October 13.”

The goals of Stop the Jihad on Campus Week are to rally students across the country to sign a petition against the “hadith of hate” and to convince student governments to defund the Muslim Students Association.

[rn79870]

They lost me at the talking stones and talking trees thing. Maybe a stone tablet and a burning bush, but not talking.

Private schools can ban pretty much as they choose. They need only appease the alumni with money, not the feds.

[audtatious]

What does any of this have to do with feds? It's talking about how some hate-monger religious group (which happens to be muslim) are finally getting cracked down on.

I have nothing against muslims, just the hate groups. Same can be said via any religious group (or anyone for that matter) that promotes hate and violence.

[Cold_Zero]

This seems like a no brainer. If you want to be a recognized Campus Group affiliated through the University, you pretty much have to play by their rules. Inciting violence typically goes against any University's policies.

Chrysostomos L. Max Nikias... Now that is a good Greek name.bud

[rn79870]

What does any of this have to do with feds? It's talking about how some hate-monger religious group (which happens to be muslim) are finally getting cracked down on.

If USC were not a private school, there would be no "Cracking down." The feds, and that silly constitution protect the rights of fringe groups to express themselves. That "crackdown" could never happen at a State University.

[AZhitman]

...wonder how many of these morons are paying their own way?

Take their tuition away (scholarship, Federal funds) and see how outspoken they are.

I'm thinking of going back to school and starting an on-campus group. My group will be called, "Pissed-Off Big Americans"

Meeting location: Right at the exit door of the MSA meeting location.

Meeting time: Right about the time the MSA group ends their meeting.

Well-done, USC. Don't back down.

[AZhitman]

If USC were not a private school, there would be no "Cracking down." The feds, and that silly constitution protect the rights of fringe groups to express themselves. That "crackdown" could never happen at a State University.

Not true.

Guess what Bob? Your beloved Ahnold signed SB1234, which classifies as "hate speech" any public expression that makes certain favored citizens feel "unwelcome" or "intimidated." Anyone found guilty of using such expressions could face six months in prison and a $25,000 fine.

You think that doesn't apply here?

BTW, State universities can and do enact prohibitions on hate speech, they're just not legally challenged.

Good article: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publ....html

[audtatious]

If USC were not a private school, there would be no "Cracking down." The feds, and that silly constitution protect the rights of fringe groups to express themselves. That "crackdown" could never happen at a State University.

Let me give you a clue. It has NOTHING to do with the feds and ALL ABOUT the school itself cracking down on that religious fringe group.

Why are you constantly bringing this up as a Fed issue when the article itself is talking about USC itself? Hell, it being a federal issue is not mentioned ONCE in the article.

[rn79870]

Let me give you a clue. It has NOTHING to do with the feds and ALL ABOUT the school itself cracking down on that religious fringe group.

Why are you constantly bringing this up as a Fed issue when the article itself is talking about USC itself? Hell, it being a federal issue is not mentioned ONCE in the article.

Geeze Matt. What I said was that a private school could do this, and a federal/state funded school could not. +1 for private schools.I was making a point.

[audtatious]

Public schools have to allow hate msg's on their computers? You sure? I'm sure private schools could somewhat unless it violated hate laws.

[rn79870]

Public schools (as in Colleges and Universities) are bound by that pesky constitutional free speech thing. Private schools, like this forum are not. Now there's limits to free speech, and those are pretty well defined, but radical beliefs may not transcend those limits.

[szh]

While I am not certain about this, I was under the impression that the hate laws are currently being interpreted as transcending the free speech constitutional rights.

Meaning, I think (not sure) that even public schools have the right to shut down hate groups ... and this would be a good thing for sure. There is no justification or cause for hate crime - against anybody!

Z

[rn79870]

It's not that simple.“The Supreme Court has consistently held that statutes punishing speech or conduct solely on the grounds that they are unseemly or offensive are unconstitutionally overbroad,”

See the full 1st. amendment story at:http://www.firstamendmentcente...codes

[OriginalWheelman]

It's not that simple.“The Supreme Court has consistently held that statutes punishing speech or conduct solely on the grounds that they are unseemly or offensive are unconstitutionally overbroad,”

See the full 1st. amendment story at:http://www.firstamendmentcente...codes

Unseemly or offensive? You must have smoked some bad granola. This is talking about MURDER. Furthermore, it's talking about mass murder. Genocide. No one is allowed to go around threatening the well being of others, that is not free speech. The KKK abdicates mass murder and genocide you going to jump up to defend them too?

[heliochrome85]

i agree with Z. the MSA i am a part of is definately not of this nature. It has tried to bring understanding and unity to the Indiana University community. Its sad that such blatant and obvious hate speech has been put out by this group. It should have been taken down a long time ago.

[rn79870]

So let's say I start a group that wishes actively wishes death on all the detainees in Gitmo? Or I want to start a group to kill terrorlst in their training camp. Would you call that hate speech and demand I stopped it?

I'm not saying it's appropriate behavior, but it may well be constitutionally protected speech, that is, until it moves from speech to planning, where it is obviously is prohibited

[OriginalWheelman]

So let's say I start a group that wishes actively wishes death on all the detainees in Gitmo? Or I want to start a group to kill terrorlst in their training camp. Would you call that hate speech and demand I stopped it?

I'm not saying it's appropriate behavior, but it may well be constitutionally protected speech, that is, until it moves from speech to planning, where it is obviously is prohibited

Free speech has restriction. Why don't you look up disorderly conduct. In New York it is illegal to swear in front of a female, even if you are one. Trust me, I've been arrested for it. I've said it before and I'll say ti again. Doing whatever you want is not freedom, it is hedonism. Everyone doing what they want is not liberty, it is anarchy.

[smockers83]

Seriously Bob, are you really trying to argue this? At the University of Michigan, there has been some crackdown if you will on some groups. One of the most controversial groups here has been cracked down on and is now forced to reveal its list of members and was forced to change its name to remove some of the controversy surrounding it. The controversy was around its name and its rituals which were all Indian based.

The U also rescinded its contract with a publication company because it published a controversial book about Jews in which the U would have had to publish as well (or something like that). Some people claimed censorship, but the U decided it couldn't endorse the book and ultimately terminated the contract. Both parties went their separate ways.

Now, a university can't necessarily dismantle a group, but it can no longer recognize one. Hate speech is illegal, this isn't a free speech issue. When someone at the university draws a swastika, they're searching for whoever did it. If someone writes ****** in the stall, they're looking for whoever did it. Those people can be expelled from a university.

[audtatious]

So let's say I start a group that wishes actively wishes death on all the detainees in Gitmo? Or I want to start a group to kill terrorlst in their training camp. Would you call that hate speech and demand I stopped it?

I'm not saying it's appropriate behavior, but it may well be constitutionally protected speech, that is, until it moves from speech to planning, where it is obviously is prohibited

If someone acts based on your actions then you could be held just as responsible. Look at Charles Manson.

[rn79870]

Read this site on the 1st. amendment rights and the problems the public universities are having cracking down. Remember, they can do anything they please, until someone decides to take it to court where they have been getting spanked for doing it. Several cases are cites in that regard.

http://www.firstamendmentcente...codes