Development: Leader attempting to prevent showing of American Sniper calls out Harbaugh,
as part of "violent rape culture infested football" and associated with "racist militarism".
Soon thereafter the same leader was revealed to have vandalized Omar Mahmood's off-campus apartment door, according to the former Michigan Daily columnist who was fired from the Daily for his satirical article Do the Left Thing that appeared in the Michigan Review.
What's that?
"campus is already a hostile place for Arab/Muslim students"
Apparently so, at least for Omar Mahmood as described by Jonathan Chait
Around 2 a.m. on December 12, four students approached the apartment of Omar Mahmood, a Muslim student at the University of Michigan, who had recently published a column in a school newspaper about his perspective as a minority on campus. The students, who were recorded on a building surveillance camera wearing baggy hooded sweatshirts to hide their identity, littered Mahmood’s doorway with copies of his column, scrawled with messages like “You scum embarrass us,” “Shut the fuck up,” and “DO YOU EVEN GO HERE?! LEAVE!!” They posted a picture of a demon and splattered eggs.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html
Mahmood reported that he has known the identity of the vandals all along, but had hoped to reconcile, but said he couldn't hold back any longer in the wake of Khalil’s statements about campus hostility toward Muslims.
Zeinab Khalil, a recent UM graduate, Muslim, and progressive activist who won numerous distinctions during her time on campus, including an award named for Martin Luther King, Jr., thinks it’s the former. A UM group’s decision to screen the film American Sniper offended the sensibilities of some Muslims, including Khalil, who claimed on Twitter that the campus “is already a hostile place for Arab/Muslim students. In one tweet posted on April 9th, she despaired
“Spent 4 yrs at @umich doing anti-oppressive work; admins used me to educate campus. this is what i get in return as exhausted/exploited alum.”
In a sense, she’s right. UM has indeed proven to be a hostile place for at least one Muslim student: Omar Mahmood, whose off-campus apartment was vandalized last December by a trio of women who pelted his door with eggs and left him hateful messages because they didn’t appreciate a satirical column he'd written mocking trigger warnings and microaggressions.
Who perpetrated this act of intimidation against a Muslim student? It was Khalil herself, according to Mahmood, whose account is supported by the testimony of other students, video footage, and emails obtained by Reason.
Khalil was assisted by two others, according to Mahmood, who are also recent graduates and progressive activists in the UM Muslim community.
Mahmood has known this all along—the amateur criminals were caught in the act on the apartment complex’s surveillance video and are identifiable to those who know them—but he says he didn’t report their names to the media in hopes that they would reconcile with him privately. They never did.
In the wake of the controversy over American Sniper and Khalil’s statements about campus hostility toward Muslims, Mahmood says he couldn’t hold back any longer.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/10/at-umich-a-libertarian-muslim-student…
MOD EDIT - I know people won't like locking this, but there are a fair number of people who are not handling themselves well and I really don't want to send anyone to Bolivia today. I am in too good a mood for that. -LSA
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I think the point is that the girl concrned about anti-muslim sentiment caused by the film, also allegedly threw hot dogs and eggs at Mahmoods door. It takes away a bit of credibility.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
It has nothing to do with American Sniper, but it does relate to the situation. If this girl is throwing pork at a fellow Muslims door, I think it calls her motivations and integrity into question. Considering that she is primarily behind this blowing up, I find it to be relevant.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I totally understand where you're coming from, and typically and ideally that's how I try to approach things as well. I just have seen people like her in action enough to know it's primarily about attention and I can't take the hypocrisy behind it seriously. I'm definitely a little biased from past experiences, but I don't think my preconcieved notions will end up being incorrect on this one.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I think the primary point is that if the leader of the fictitious group "Michigan Students Against Violence on Campus" was constantly going on verbal tirades about how U of M had an oppressively violent culture on campus, and received numerous awards for their work trying to end the violence on campus...And then it came out that they themselves committed several violent acts on campus...Well, needless to say we'd all be a tad bit perturbed with that person.
It's connected because it's an example of the anti muslim discrimnation on campus that the person who speaks out against the movie mentioned, and she was the one who perpetrated it.
Here is a cat hugging his teddy bear.
Here is a puppy hugging a cat
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
We should be friends.
... the "if you don't like this country leave" statement is the most democratically subversive argument, and thus most-unamerican statement, one could make. But, hey, I support your right to making moronic statements. God bless this country.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
"I would leave a terrible country if I hated it and had the capability."
Why can't they stay and help improve the place instead? You can't make criticisms without someone saying "well if you hate it then leave". That statement is often directed at certain groups of people but hey. The country isn't terrible but it's not perfect. Systems are flawed. People can say that and still love America/the idea of it.
You didn't offend anyone. We're just amused by such an incredibly stupid statement.
It is these sorts of polarizing, dogmatically rigid replies which force me to remind everyone to PLEASE tread lightly on topic such as these. They aren't strictly verboten, but they often seem to go downhill because of the lack of willingness to understand both sides of the debate more than anything else. This thread will be watched, and if it starts to spin out of control, it will be locked as many such threads are.
mind your p's and q's OR your p's and c's
that you doh't end up on the wrong side of a neg. Not really, but yea I gave ya one.
This reminds of me when people were upset with Dave Brandon and his response was, "why do you hate the players so much!" When did anyone in the terrible thread say they didn't like America? If someone said that American sniper was offensive, racist and stupid, does that mean they hate America?
Seems like what you're saying is more like if "you don't like this country in the same way that *I* or those that *I* agree with in *my* own socio-cultural and political worldview/values then you should leave".
Thematically, this somewhat rigid view of "liking" school, movie, nation dseems quite inconsistent with the historical American narrative. Just saying.
JH has said his piece. He should decline the invitation to engage in agitprop.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I realize the mods may well pull or lock this soon, but I will be following this carefully, and find it of great interest. I am less concerned about American Sniper, and Harbaugh, and more interested in what happens going forward, in particular, with Zeinab Khalil. I'd like to see how and to what degree she is held accountable.
As to those who say it should be pulled: why? It is off season. It is about UofM. It is a matter of great interest to many UofM followers. The topic is not about whether a particular viewpoint is right or wrong. It is about political correctness, and whether there is a bias allowing speech from some in one area of the political spectrum but not from another.
Thanks much to the OP for the link.
Well said. I'm not very concerned about the politics of it all, but I am concerned about the future of discourse, both at the university and in our country.
There are individuals and groups trying to denounce, belittle and stifle expression because it makes them feel threatened or offends them. It's semi-political in this specific case, but the issue bleeds into all forms of art and expression. I know this isn't unique to our time, but it seems like we're regressing.
Even worse, the entire dialogue has devolved into a doom loop. If you disagree with someone offended, you're just "part of them problem" as they see it. It's because you're affiliated with a race, gender, political party, relgious belief, sexual orientation or gender identity that isn't there own, so there's no way you can understand.
Admittedly, I often don't understand, but unfortunately it feels like we're forcing each other into a situation where we won't be able to ever understand or sympathize because we're not allowed to discuss or express ourselves for a fear of being offensive or threatening. I fully believe in respecting people's beliefs and being sensitive and compassionate to those who are stigmatized by society, but stigmatizing everyone who isn't or offends you has consequences. Instead of civil discourse we get polarizing defensiveness. This is bad for a university whose motto is "Arts, Knowledge, Truth."
Edit/Note: I haven't seen the movie and don't really think this has much to do with the movie. I think there's more at stake with how the university handles these types of issues and personalities on campus. It's a reflection of what seems like a trend in our society, at least in the media.
The limitation of disourse in the modern classroom/lab/campus and the primacy of "offense" and politicization versus dialogue is the most serious concern in academia today.
When I went to Ball State we had a late night activity like UMix called...Late Night. It was like a lame, weekly afterprom for people who were having trouble socializing in an education environment and just wanted to, you know, hang loose man!
It sounds like a terrible environment for a movie like American Sniper because it's just too heavy of a subject matter. Instead of removing the film due to complaints they should have removed it because it's not the right kind of movie for a social event.
Who am I kidding though, it was getting politicized regardless.
That would've been the way to do it, if the concern was actually about this film being showed.
Unfortunately, as you pointed out, the entire point behind this is that it fits a political narrative.
Agreed. The movie might be offensive or racist or even inappropriate for a public event at UMich but they showed it and it's over. Let's please stop talking about it. Football season can't start early enough.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Surprise. Surprise. The person virulently screaming, "I'm being oppressed," is the one who is actively attempting to oppress others.
The sad thing is it's not the least bit shocking.
"Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
"Bloody peasant!"
Sorry, couldn't help meself.
Its sad but sadly not all that unusual. People love to exercise their right to protest and shout down trying to stop things they disagree with yet I'll go out on a limb and say she would be defending the right to show something or listen to a speaker that follows her line of thought and would be dismissive of the other side. To people like her, its my way or the highway and the right to do or show something is only a right that should be for people that agree with her worldview.
You want to protest? Fine by me. You want to picket? Knock yourself out. Raising bloody hell to try to prevent the voluntary screening of an Academy Awarding winning movie that is based on a autobiographical book because of some perceived hostility and projection that it encourages violence is fucking ridiculous.
... a radical person uses intimidation to attempt to silence descenting viewpoints. Now that is irony.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
If these gentlemen want to see a racist and voilent environment that would be in the middle east. They are well protected here and exercised their right to free speech. Folks like Chris Kyle provide us that protection and right. In the middle east they would not be speaking out and I hope they learn to appreciate the rights and freedoms they are afforded here. Be happy.
... but one can appreciate the freedom they have here while still fighting for what they believe is right. Note, in this case I think the woman's argument and her tactics are idiotic, but that's not my point. It's dangerous to make the argument that it's better here then where they are from, so why complain. Better than the middle east when it comes to human rights is a pretty low bar.
The individual making the complaint is a woman. The gentleman involved was the guy who wrote a satirical article and got his dorm door vandalized by the woman who complained about the movie.