Muslim goons stalk Guilford football players as result of "anti Muslim bias claim hoax" incitement by CAIR and leftists
February 6, 2007
MIM: Note that the official Guilford College statement makes no mention that the men looking to attack the players were Middle Eastern in appearence and claimed to be Muslims.
College's Response to a Feb. 4 Incident in Bryan Hall
Guilford College Public Safety and the Greensboro Police Department responded to a brief incident in Bryan Hall on campus at midday Sunday, Feb. 4.
Based on the public safety report:• At about Noon, three individuals from off campus entered Bryan Hall and approached a suite that is the residence of several football players.
• According to students on the scene, the individuals from off-campus were looking for football players involved in the Jan. 20 incident in Bryan Hall.
• Guilford Public Safety and Greensboro Police were called, and the Guilford public safety officer on duty responded immediately.
• Guilford Public Safety spotted a car driven by the individuals from off campus in the parking lot beside Frank Family Science Center and followed the car off campus.
• Guilford Public Safety has a detailed description of the individuals from off campus and the car that they were driving.
• Greensboro Police arrived after the off-campus individuals had left and began their investigation.
It is important to note that the football players and other students involved in the Jan. 20 incident in Bryan Hall were not in the hall during today's (Feb. 4) incident. They were moved off campus following the Jan. 20 incident.
Within two hours of today's (Feb. 4) event, the Community Response Team, led by President Chabotar, took these actions:• Notified or attempted to notify parents of all students directly involved in the Jan. 20 incident.
• Reinforced heightened security for Bryan Hall.
• Heightened campus security generally and asked the Greensboro Police Department to add patrols of the campus area and Bryan Hall.
• Ordered the notification of the campus community of the incident via campus-wide e-mail.
While the college does not know what these outsiders intended to do on our campus, the college, as it has since Jan. 20, will continue to monitor who is on our campus and to safeguard the best interests of our campus family.
Feb. 4, 2007
------------------------Around 12:15 AM on January 20, 2007, a physical altercation involving Guilford students and one student from another college took place inside the Byran Hall courtyard. Three Palestinian students allege that they were taunted with insults by being called things such as "dirty," "terrorists," and "sand nigger". According to some reports, certain members of the Guilford College football team beat the Palestinians with "fists, feet, and brass knuckles". On January 21st, three members of the football team were charged with assault and ethnic intimidation. All are free on $2,000 bond; all individuals involved in the incident are allowed to continue classes but have been asked to relocate off campus. On January 25th, after a student demonstration, two additional football players were charged with assault.
Supporters of the accused football players complain that the response has been slanted against those now charged with the assault. Some eyewitness reports suggest that the Palestinian students actually provoked the incident; reporting that the physical confrontation began when one Palestinian struck a football player with his belt and that brass knuckles were not used. Those sympathetic to the athletes fear a rush to judgment much like in the Duke Lacrosse team assault case. Furthermore, according to a WGHP Fox 8 news report a parent of one of the accused students asserted that her son sustained a stab wound in the incident. The parent said that police and college officials have yet to allow the football players to give their account of the incident, and the local magistrate denied their request to press counter-charges.
The college is currently investigating the attack, and has issued a statement. On Thursday, 2007-01-25, Guilford College's President Kent Chabotar and Dean for Campus Life Aaron Fetrow granted an interview to the local Fox affiliate (video).
MIM: According to Pipeline News there has been no account of Faris Khader and Osama Sabbah's savage beating of a Jewish student at Guilford:http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=guilford2107.htm
Absent from the media coverage has been any account of the early morning altercation other than that being presented by the Ramallah students.
Sources familiar with the incident have now come forward stating the the attack was initiated by the Palestinian students.
One of those sources told us that the weekend that the event took place was a:
"recruiting weekend for the college [that on] on that type of week athletes are on best behavior [the confrontation took place in] a courtyard in between apartment buildings…a hangout spot…[an eyewitness to the event saw] Faris [Khader] and Mike Six [one of the football players] [with] an argument going on…[the witness had turned away but turned back to view the scene again when] he heard the belt whipping, looked back and saw the belt…[Mr. Six] took about seven strikes from the belt……[Mr. Six then] used a wrestling move and stuffed him [Faris] into the ground….that started a fumble….[like] a rugby match...[which drew in more football players, there were] no brass knuckles….[involved]"
Mr. Khader was suspended from Guilford for the Winter Semester.
The College refuses to comment on Mr. Khader's status believing that to be confidential information.
According to information provided by our sources and as detailed by a former [Jewish] Guilford student [whose name we are not disclosing at this time], Mr. Khader has a history of violence.
According to a weblog maintained by this student he was attacked by Mr. Khader and Mr. Sabbah, the account of which we present below in its entirety. We made the decision to redact the names of persons mentioned aside from the principals.
"I lost sleep over this decision but dealing w/ the work in sculpture and drums , classes, labs and tests i'd have to make up on top of this political mess....ahhhh!!!
We believe that the above information clearly constitutes strong evidence that the so-called hate attack allegedly initiated by Guilford College football team members against defenseless Palestinian students is a hoax and that the members of the football team were acting in self-defense - even absorbing a vicious attack before responding.
Frequently Asked Questions
Here are some frequently asked questions about the Jan. 20 Bryan Hall courtyard incident and a college response to each:
The State of the Campus
1. How does the College view the event?
As an institution and individuals, we are sorry that the incident happened. We sympathize with any student who was injured, and their friends and families. We ask everyone to let the internal College judicial process and the external charges now before the criminal justice system be adjudicated before making conclusions about the facts and who should be held responsible.
2. What is the emotional state of the campus in the wake of this incident?
Many students are upset that the event occurred, and have met and gathered to air their concerns. Otherwise the campus is calm. Extra security has been added to increase the feelings of safety and security on campus and especially among students.
3. Will the College do anything to bridge what appears to be a divide between student-athletes and non-student-athletes?
Approximately one quarter of Guilford's 1,100 students residing on campus participate in intercollegiate athletics. The College is aware that some hard feelings exist between student-athletes and non-student-athletes and is taking steps to unite the two groups. These steps include having student-athletes more involved in the various activities on campus, and providing wider campus participation in athletic events.
4. This has been called a "hate crime" by some people, was it?
Guilford College applies the guidelines of the U.S. Department of Education when considering if an offense was a hate crime. The Handbook for Campus Crime Reporting indicates on page 41 that, "Before an incident can be classified as a hate crime, sufficient objective facts must be present to lead a reasonable and prudent person to conclude that the offender's actions were motivated in whole or in part, by bias." The College's Student Handbook, which includes the Code of Conduct, does not specifically address hate crimes but it does provide that verbal, non-verbal, written or physical abuse of another person is a violation of the Code of Conduct. The Judicial Review Committee, drawn from the Judicial Board of trained faculty and students, reviews the judicial policies and procedures on a regular basis, and they will be revised as appropriate. Until the fact-finders in our internal judicial process have reviewed all of the evidence, any classification of this incident would be premature.
5. Was "hate speech" used in the incident?
As with the issue of "hate crime," the College has conflicting accounts of what was said during and after the incident. Still, if some of the racial epithets being reported by the media as being said were said, their use would be highly offensive, inappropriate and may constitute "hate speech."
6. The Public Safety response to the incident has been described by some as slow. Is that the case?
An officer responded within less than five minutes after they were called. Reports of a 30-40 minute delay in response to the incident after the call was made are contradicted by department log.
7. What is the policy for students calling 911?
If a student is witness to, or involved in, a threatening situation and feels more comfortable dialing 911 then this is the appropriate course of action. The College strongly encourages its students to call Public Safety at extension 2911 so officials have knowledge of a situation on campus. Asking our students to call x2911 decreases Public Safety response time. .
8. How can such a hateful incident happen on the campus of a Quaker-founded college?
As we all know, conflict sometimes occurs on every campus, even ours. The College will continue to gather facts and address any problems it finds.
9. Doesn't the incident indicate that Guilford's student-athletes are out of control or, at the least, troublemakers?
No. These are actions of individuals who, if found responsible, will be disciplined.
10. The College moved some of the students involved in the incident off campus. Why was this done?
Some students involved in the incident were required to reside off campus temporarily as the judicial process continues in order to facilitate the investigation and bring a sense of calm to the campus community.
11. How can the College be sure that an incident of this type won't happen again?
No institution can make that promise. Still, this incident has alerted the College to the need for increased attention to educating on the strength of diversity, relationships between student-athletes and non-student-athletes and other issues that may need more attention in order that incidents of this type don't happen in the future.
College Judicial Procedures and External Criminal Charges
12. The College says violence and verbal abuse will not be tolerated on campus. When the facts are in, what action will be taken toward those responsible?
A student found responsible under the College's Student Code of Conduct can face sanctions ranging from community restitution to permanent dismissal.
13. What does it mean to participate in the fact-finding phase of the faculty-student judicial hearing process at Guilford College?
Receiving internal charges, or participating in the fact-finding phase of the faculty-student judicial hearing process, is merely a mechanism to ascertain facts. It is not an indictment. If the facts presented to the Judicial Board indicate that a charged party is not responsible, the charges are dropped and purged from the student's judicial record.
14. What is the difference between internal and external criminal charges?
Internal charges at Guilford College are used to ascertain facts and are assigned when Public Safety or Residence Life staff reports indicate or student complaints indicate that students were involved in a violation of the Student Code of Conduct.
External charges result from an arrest warrant, based either on an affidavit outlining probable cause for arrest, or on the oath of affiance of an aggrieved party to a magistrate (this means swearing to a judge the truth of your allegations). This is not a Guilford College process.
15. What is the standard of proof for internal and external charges?
The standard of proof is different between Guilford's judicial system and the criminal justice system. At Guilford, our standard of proof in the Student Code of Conduct is "preponderance of evidence." This means that there is a determination that something is more likely than not to be true. In the criminal justice system, the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt," which requires more certainty.
16. What about "self-defense?"
"Self-defense" is what the courts call an "affirmative defense." This means that the accused student has the right to argue to the judicial board (saying to the board) that "I was acting in self-defense and should be found not responsible for any charges."
Jan. 26, 2007