. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nap Time!!!

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Hurm indeed. I suppose the most interesting part of this op-ed is:
After the attack, several men who were not students rushed onto the second floor and began to yell anti-Arab slurs.
Which, I suppose, means the ones shouting the slurs didn't include John Moghtader. This is interesting, and a bit at odds with Dina Omar's voter guide claim:
"I am one of the three Palestinian students assaulted by John Moghtader.... two females [were] hit, shoved, and manhandled by three men. I have bruises that I did not feel at the time but have shown on my skin and I also cannot walk on my right foot.... the mob of men who assaulted us yelled 'I will kick your Arab ass,' and 'Arab pigs.'"
It's also at odds with a lot of other claims. Take Isaac Miller:
UCPD recommended that you, along with Gabe Weiner, be charged with a hate crime for the battery of two women and one man, while using racial slurs.
The police report seems to take a similar view. Wasn't Winston one of the witnesses they talked to?

By the way, Miller joins in the idiots' parade of nonsensical recommendations:
I completely agree that its stupid to spend $25,000 on a recall election, but that is the system that is currently in place. Don't like it? You had the opportunity to change it. You are a senator after all.
I said much the same thing, but the later statement:
Maybe you could have used that bill to amend the by-laws to make recall elections on-line only, an approach that is entirely feasible and fair given that we are firmly in the 21st century, where college students live large portions of our lives online, and which would erase virtually the entire cost of holding the election


...you could have changed the by-laws to eliminate the cost of the election.
suggests that Miller is yet another ignorant CalSERVEr, and actually wanted Moghtader to eliminate the cost of this recall election by moving it entirely online. This is well outside of his power as a Senator, as polling places are required in the Constitution, which Moghtader can't change without a Constitutional amendment (one which, I should note, no one suggested this year, despite all the bitching and moaning).

But back to Winston's op-ed.
However, I do want to apologize for making the mistake of not being upfront about my personal beliefs on the recall. As your ASUC President, I understand that I should be held to a higher standard of transparency, and I take this responsibility very seriously. That's why we've taken steps this year to increase transparency in the ASUC, such as holding community forums, working to make the grants process online and webcasting Senate meetings. Also, executive office budgets are now available on the ASUC website.
Way to desperately try to change the subject. The rest of the piece is about "transparency," which is in quotes because she apparently thinks webcasting Senate meetings without audio adds transparency. Her "Apolog-Look Over There!" is pretty much an admission she fucked up, as she doesn't provide a defense and wants you thinking about something else.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 3/10/2009 02:58:00 AM #
Comments (11)
. . .
many different slurs were heard. roxanne only mentioned the ones she heard. the balcony door was closed.
actually senator tara raffi submitted a bill to amend the constitution via spring election.
And it doesn't address the impossibility of online elections.
yeah because I dont think elections should be completely online. If a recall election is justified then there should be polling locations on campus.
Damn, 6 minutes before Tara Raffi responded! She's following this shit like a hawk!
Roxanne's op-ed was probably the biggest non-apology in the history of mankind. She and her party are really worried about the fallout of this discovery.

Good work Daily Cal! Keep the bastards honest. You know they're in trouble when they start talking about 1984, a "transparent" nomination process (tokenism), and their claims contradict past op-eds by their other party members.
Perhaps more generally, why would Roxanne mention the slur she heard, if it wasn't John? She's giving it as a reason to recall him, after all.
Seems like this won't be working in favor of Isaac Miller's campaign for Academic Affairs VP!

Maybe he can allow protesters through his office as well next year....if he had the remotest chance of winning!
So straight from SJP's mouth we see the truth: the only people that could have heard slurs used by John Moghtader or Gabe Weiner were the very people involved in the fight (Dina Omar and Husam Zakharia).

Now it's obvious why the DA decided not to press charges.

Do we really trust that they wouldn't lie in order to slam Moghtader?

There were no independent witnesses that heard any slurs obviously.

Good job Roxanne
I'm surprised people believe that there is someone out on the prowl sexually assaulting Berkeley students. The only people who are witnessing them are the victims themselves. What if they're just feminists with vendettas against proud men? How can we know they're not lying? No wonder nobody has found him yet, because he doesn't exist!
nice try anonymous analogy master, but nowhere close.
Post a Comment

. . .