Saturday, December 14, 2013

Will SFSU Act? (Updated)

Michael L.

I just received this email from Ellen Griffin, the Associate Vice President of University Communications from SFSU.
Dr. Lumish: 
This is in response to your inquiry regarding Mohammad Hammad. Consistent with the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, I can confirm that San Francisco State University has a student by that name. In the event of separation from the University, should that occur with any student, I cannot reveal the cause of separation (such as expulsion). Similarly, I cannot I cannot reveal the existence of a disciplinary review or the results of that review.
The clear implication is that, for the moment, at least, Mr. Hammad is still with the university.

Update:

Oldschooltwentysix writes:
According to Student Conduct Procedures - Executive Order 1073

Confidentiality

Information provided to University employees shall be shared with other University employees and law enforcement exclusively on a "need to know" basis. University employees shall endeavor to honor any Complainant's or victim's request for confidentiality; however, the University shall also weigh requests for confidentiality against its duty to provide a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for all members of the campus community. Confidentiality, therefore, cannot be ensured.

http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-1073.html

As such, one may argue that she is not precluded from providing information, and that to impose confidentiality in this matter would not fulfill the "duty to provide a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for all members of the campus community." 
The University must have a reasonable period to conduct its procedures, after there is a complaint filed, and the student is allowed for due process. In other words, he cannot be summarily expelled.
This is the kind of thing that we need to keep an eye on going forward.  School is, of course, correct that the university has its procedures and those procedures will take a reasonable amount of time.  The question becomes, however, how much time represents a reasonable amount of time given the fact that we have clear and obvious proof that Mr. Hammad called for the murder not only of the Jewish people in general, the great majority of whom support the IDF, but he called for murder of a particular female Israeli soldier?

I am willing, now, to give the university and president Wong's office the benefit of the doubt primarily because people that I know and trust on that campus are willing to do so.

Trust, but verify.

13 comments:

  1. If expressing the very same desires as Mr. Hammad, I have to wonder how long such a student would have lasted at SFSU if he were, say, an Aryan Nation member from Idaho instead?

    Besides, in this day and age, one has to wonder how intelligent the guy is in the first place to post the things he does on the internet.

    Did he think nobody would ever find them? Then he's clearly not the sharpest tool in the shed, and one wonders what good higher education will do for him in any case?

    Or is he just so all-consumed with a genocidal hatred, that he simply doesn't care what anyone else thinks? There's a word for that. It begins with an "s" and ends with an "ociopath."

    When his name pops up in the news again, perhaps a few years down the road after he's involved in a jihadi attack in Bakersfield, San Diego or Afghanistan, I have to wonder how many weepy "who ever could have known?" articles we'll have to deal with.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Had he been one of the more well dressed skinheads espousing the same genocidal calls to mass murder he no doubt would have received the same treatment from the the U. It's never about what you say it's who you say it about.

      Delete
    2. True, I did forget that some white Nazis dress well anymore.

      So in other words, unless one looks like Remy in the 1995 film Higher Learning, one can still go quite far in spreading hate speech amongst respectable company, as long as it's aimed at Jews?

      I would like to think this is incorrect, but unfortunately, when I think about it, it's likely true.

      Delete
  2. For the life of me I do not understand how SFSU can NOT expel this guy.

    He called quite specifically for the murder of all supporters of the IDF, which would include the vast majority of Jews and he called the murder of a specific IDF soldier by name.

    I am not a lawyer, but surely this must constitute some form of criminal incitement to murder, if not genocide.

    I feel reasonably certain that the university will do something in this case, but I do wish that they were more forthcoming with just what.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do understand the university not being more forthcoming, and I do wish I was as optimistic as you are that something will be done here.

      I mean, we live in an age where real children (you know, actual nine-year olds and such; rather than adult jihadis, who certain media outlets insist on calling 'youths') can possibly be dragged out of school and arrested for making threats they're almost certainly physically incapable of carrying out, while this vicious (adult) thug waves knives around and talks about how very much he wants to kill people.

      And some would claim there's nothing to see here? I would disagree.

      Delete
  3. A further thought -

    "When his name pops up in the news again, perhaps a few years down the road after he's involved in a jihadi attack in Bakersfield, San Diego or Afghanistan, I have to wonder how many weepy "who ever could have known?" articles we'll have to deal with."

    On second thought, if such a thing were to happen, there'd probably actually be more articles blaming The Joooz for sending him off down such a road in the first place. Because I mean, until we crazed, radical right-wing (heh) bloggers clamped on to this story, this generous, kind-hearted 'youth' leader was clearly on his way to great things, and was not at all consumed by hatred in any way whatsoever, no-siree-bob!

    ReplyDelete
  4. According to Student Conduct Procedures - Executive Order 1073

    Confidentiality

    Information provided to University employees shall be shared with other University employees and law enforcement exclusively on a "need to know" basis. University employees shall endeavor to honor any Complainant's or victim's request for confidentiality; however, the University shall also weigh requests for confidentiality against its duty to provide a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for all members of the campus community. Confidentiality, therefore, cannot be ensured.


    http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-1073.html

    As such, one may argue that she is not precluded from providing information, and that to impose confidentiality in this matter would not fulfill the "duty to provide a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for all members of the campus community."

    The University must have a reasonable period to conduct its procedures, after there is a complaint filed, and the student is allowed for due process. In other words, he cannot be summarily expelled.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You bring up a great point on Hammad's call for the murder of one very singular, particular, female Israeli soldier, Mike.

    Leaving aside for now the fact that when it comes to women's issues, let's just say that Israel is many, many, many generations ahead of its self-declared-enemy-neighbors (let alone many Western nations, even), and leave it at that self-evident fact.

    Here we have a 'man' screeching loudly for the murder and decapitation of one very particular woman.

    (After stalking her on Facebook, and ogling her pictures, of course - can we say "creep who should be on a watch list?")

    I'm sure Western, progressive 'left' Daily Kos-style feminists will be jumping right on this, imminently!

    Right?

    (I can't hear for shit, but even I can hear the sound of crickets...)

    ReplyDelete
  6. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, many threats are"protected" as free speech. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2007/fall/legal-brief
    Oy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We need civil rights attorneys, Dusty.

      Delete
  7. I would park someone with a cardboard box full of marine air horns in every one of Hammads classes if he goes to any and blast them nonstop making the classes completely superfluous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question for me is how far to pursue this story?

      It actually just turns my stomach, because that is my campus, so to speak, as well.

      It cuts a little too close to the bone.

      What we need is confirmation from the university, or from the SFPD, that some significant action has been take viz-a-viz Mr. Hammad.

      Until I we get such confirmation, this story will remain in play here.

      Delete
    2. I believe you have all the answers you need about what SFSU is officially going to do. What remains is to craft some response or responses to it. They are endorsing mass murder, torture, hate crimes and bigotry. Fair enough. Now you need to think of what to do with that.

      If he was saying "I want to rape a woman" or "I want to rape and kill a child" or "I want to bring back black slavery because blacks aren't human" it's more or less in the same category of what he's being allowed to preach here. Again - fair enough. Now what should the response to any of those other scenarios be? And if there's no groundswell of public sentiment AT the University to have a cogent response to it, OR, the students and faculty believe that those too are merely 'free speech' issues, or worse, they endorse those things not as free speech abstractions but because they really think those are good ideas too, then what?

      Delete