Defining free speech

[crimsonaudio]

Man, I've got to ask, did you read the testimony NT18 posted? If you did, this is an extremely disturbing post.

Yes.

I don't see how literally denouncing the freedom to call on the extermination of a people is disturbing, other than the fact that it highlights the fact that some will seek gray areas where there really are none.

It would seem that a cadre of people even here want to seek nuance in a situation where there should be none - I find it disturbing that some of you are defending these people's unwillingness to answer the direct question.

If you find my attitude towards these people disturbing, oh well.

On that note I'll bow out for now.

 

[Go Bama]

Yes.

I don't see how literally denouncing the freedom to call on the extermination of a people is disturbing, other than the fact that it highlights the fact that some will seek gray areas where there really are none.

It would seem that a cadre of people even here want to seek nuance in a situation where there should be none - I find it disturbing that some of you are defending these people's unwillingness to answer the direct question.

If you find my attitude towards these people disturbing, oh well.

On that note I'll bow out for now.

I'm going to leave this alone. I don't see anything positive coming from you and I discussing this further.

 

[AWRTR]

Yes.

I don't see how literally denouncing the freedom to call on the extermination of a people is disturbing, other than the fact that it highlights the fact that some will seek gray areas where there really are none.

It would seem that a cadre of people even here want to seek nuance in a situation where there should be none - I find it disturbing that some of you are defending these people's unwillingness to answer the direct question.

If you find my attitude towards these people disturbing, oh well.

On that note I'll bow out for now.

I'm in the process of watching the testimony. It's 3 and a half hours so it will take a while to watch all of it, but from reading some of the transcript and the part of the video I have watched so far they seemed willing to condemn antisemitism, but when it got to the code of conduct that seems to be where they balked. I have a thought about that, but it may change as I continue watching the video. If they said that the students had violated the code of conduct then the next call would be to discipline the students involved, and that seems to be where the presidents didn't want to go because that would be a firestorm on their heads from the faculty and students. So they started stammering about context to wiggle out of having to hold any students or faculty involved in calls for genocide responsible. If my thoughts on this are correct then they will pay lip service to the fact that the antisemitism is wrong, but they don't want to do anything about it. If that is the case always remember you tell me who you are by what you do not what you say, and they don't want to do anything.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I've known a number of Jewish rabbis and enjoyed working with them on various issues. I also grew up in a home where racial prejudice of any kind was verboten on religious grounds...that is not how one treats another child of God.

I believe antisemitism is rooted in the Jewish ability to work together and prosper in society. Hard work and support of each other can be threatening to people who are lazy and ignorant. Add in that orthodox and/or Hasidic Jewish communities tend to have a clannish nature and that sets them up for prejudice by those who feel threatened. People on the bottom rungs have need of a scapegoat -- and whether the Germans in pre-WWII or the white supremacists of the 2020's, the result is the same.

We humans are tribal to the core and we will disparage those who are different. I see common elements of this in the treatment of Asian students/people who are high achievers.

Thanks for sharing the testimonies...puts all in the proper context.

I think you've nailed it. I've had more contact with more Jews than anyone here, and I've always seen it as envy. I think that the IQs, on the average, is higher than the IQ, on the average, than Goyim. I think the process of natural selection has guaranteed that. It's interesting to me that, in NYC, I detected far less anti-Semitic sentiment than in areas with fewer Jews. I think that, at least in part, there are so many Jews, your plumber or taxi driver is likely to be Jewish. Outside that environment, most Jews are merchants or businessmen and are generally well-off...

 

[Its On A Slab]

They were literally (repeatedly) asked the question "is calling for the genocide of Jews against the codes of conduct" at their schools.

If you want to make excuses for the schools or their presidents, feel free to to twist yourself into a pretzel doing so. It's literally a yes or no answer. I understand soundbite gotchas, but this one was easy and all three failed miserably.

ETA: if they were asked about whether it was acceptable for students to be calling for the subjugation / re-enslavement of people of color and answered similarly there would be zero discussion, they would have been fired before they left the capitol. Yet calling for the absolute destruction of a people is contextual, even debatable? Get that garbage out of here.

I can't post what I think the university presidents should have said when asked to appear, because I got a 1-week ban for posting euphemisms on the FB board a few weeks ago.

Needless to say, they should have told Congress to go pound sand. This was a Soviet style show trial. That screaming woman wasn't interested in anything but pushing her agenda.

My only fault to them was that they cowered and didn't stand up to the demagogue.

Like I said, it was the same as "have you beaten your kids, lately?"

 

[Its On A Slab]

Yes.



It would seem that a cadre of people even here want to seek nuance in a situation where there should be none - I find it disturbing that some of you are defending these people's unwillingness to answer the direct question.

If you find my attitude towards these people disturbing, oh well.

On that note I'll bow out for now.

I find it hard to believe that you don't see demagoguery in this situation.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I find it hard to believe that you don't see demagoguery in this situation.

You don't think I assume that's in play with essentially every. single. thing. coming out of DC nowadays?

Regardless, the point is there are black and white issues, this is one of them. There's no trick to saying "calling for genocide of anyone violates our school policies". It was a softball across home plate, and they all refused to say something which there's no downside to.

I find it hard to believe you don't see how easily all this could have been avoided.

"It's always the right time to do the right thing..."

 

[crimsonaudio]

I can't post what I think the university presidents should have said when asked to appear, because I got a 1-week ban for posting euphemisms on the FB board a few weeks ago.

Needless to say, they should have told Congress to go pound sand. This was a Soviet style show trial. That screaming woman wasn't interested in anything but pushing her agenda.

My only fault to them was that they cowered and didn't stand up to the demagogue.

Like I said, it was the same as "have you beaten your kids, lately?"

You're so convinced (rightfully so, I imagine) that the questions weren't asked in fairness that you're ignoring the fact they could have avoided this blowback.

The worst thing that would have happened is some students would have (rightfully) been booted from school. Hateful people calling for genocide - big loss.

 

[Tidewater]

Not surprisingly to some perhaps, I am much more of an absolutist on free speech, not because I like everything people might say, but because I do not trust human beings to decide what speech is allowable and what is not.
Should students be allowed to chant "From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free."
Yes. What better way to play the game of "Spot the a-hole?" The guy calling for the extermination of Jews would be a great candidate.
Should future employers take note of which graduates were yelling genocidal chants in public? Absolutely.
Should big money donors be cautious making donations to universities that tolerate genocidal chants? Sure.
The idea that universities should have "safe spaces" where uncomfortable ideas should never be heard is ludicrous. The Catholic Church did not like it when Galileo said there are moons orbiting Jupiter that are not visible to the naked human eye. That needed to be said nevertheless.
Russia today is a great example of what can happen if the government controls what ideas make it into the peoples' minds. Most Russians believe "Ukraine is a nazi regime with a Jew as president."

 

[4Q Basket Case]

A few things:

I thought the surname of the president of MIT. — Kornbluth — sounded German Jewish. So I looked it up. Sure enough, Sally Kornbluth is Jewish herself.

At least as interesting, whereas presidents Claudine Gay of Harvard and Liz Magill formerly of Penn issued progressively more self-flagellating apologies — successfully for Gay, not so much for Magill — Kornbluth has remained stone-silent. I don’t know why, but my guess would be that she’s hoping the whole thing will blow over when the next big thing hits the news, and she won’t have any more statements on the public record.

Also, to my mind, this isn’t about just anti-semitism. It’s about the free exchange of ideas, which is not so free anymore.

Don’t think DEI leads to better outcomes? Better keep your mouth shut, even if you have hard data to prove it. Don’t think ESG investing leads to higher (or even average) returns? Shut your mouth, leave, take your proof with you, and don’t ever come back you knuckle-dragging, hairy-palmed Nazi cretin.

One last thing that I find fascinating: The ultimate insult from the left is to be called a Nazi or compared to Adolf Hitler. So if a neo-Nazi calls for the extermination of Jews, it’s horrific….an abhorrent crime against humanity.

But if a left-wing advocate for some other aggrieved group does the same thing, well, that’s free speech.

Apparently, these ladies have more in common with the neo-Nazis than they would have thought.

 

[NationalTitles18]

Reading some of these comments I hope I'd be forgiven for almost thinking that the presidents testifying before Congress joined in pro-Palestinian chants that were definitely anti-Israel and that some have interpreted as calling for genocide of Jewish people everywhere or that they had at least condoned that speech, shown agreement with it, or made excuses for it.

That didn't happen.

Every one of them condemned the speech, at least one calling it "abhorrent".

I'd also hopefully be forgiven for almost thinking that these ladies can unilaterally make up policy on the spot.

They can't.

And I don't really seriously think anyone wants them to lie to Congress (a crime potentially) about what their university policies actually are.

But I do wonder what option they are left with in answering the question if they've already condemned the speech in question and they cannot change policy unilaterally on the fly.

Here is Stefanik's loaded questioning:

Dr. Kornbluth, at MIT, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate MIT’s code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment? Yes or no? ... But you've heard chants for Intifada. ... So those would not be, according to the MIT's code of conduct or rules. ... I am asking, specifically calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment? ... It's a context dependent decision. That's your testimony today, calling for the genocide of Jews is depending upon the context, that is not bullying or harassment. This is the easiest question to answer. Yes, Ms. Magill. So is your testimony that you will not answer yes? Yes or no? ... Conduct meaning committing the act of genocide. The speech is not harassment. This is unacceptable. Ms. Magill, I'm gonna give you one more opportunity for the world to see your answer. Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn's Code of Conduct when it comes to bullying and harassment? Yes or no? ... The answer is yes. And Dr. Gay at Harvard? Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment? Yes or no? ... It's targeted at Jewish students, Jewish individuals. Do you understand your testimony is dehumanizing them? Do you understand that dehumanization is part of antisemitism? I will ask you one more time. Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment? Yes or no?

The problem here is that she conflates intifada against the State of Israel with calling for genocide of Jews. It's a false premise.

The problems is also that if the presidents lie to Congress about their institutions' policies then they've committed a crime.

The problems is also that these presidents do not get to make up policy or change the Constitution - even from their ivory towers.

They simply do not have the power (nor should they) to make that happen.

They are bound by the Constitution.

One (UPenn) is a government entity.

The other two are not but do take federal funds, which binds them in dealing with 1st Amendment issues.

So, in answering the question truthfully, upholding the law of the land and the policies of their institutions - both of which bind them, and condemning the speech in question what were these presidents supposed to do differently that would satisfy those calling for their ouster?

What about their behavior made them like Nazis or neo-Nazis?

 

[Its On A Slab]

You don't think I assume that's in play with essentially every. single. thing. coming out of DC nowadays?

Regardless, the point is there are black and white issues, this is one of them. There's no trick to saying "calling for genocide of anyone violates our school policies". It was a softball across home plate, and they all refused to say something which there's no downside to.

I find it hard to believe you don't see how easily all this could have been avoided.

"It's always the right time to do the right thing..."

Oh, yes, it could have been avoided. They should have refused to testify in that kangaroo court. The end result was already there before the hearing. Throw mud at academia.

And, no, it wasn't a softball question. It was a hysteric screed straight from the Ron DeSantis/Trump playbook. Check the polling right now. Republicans across the country have their panties in a wad over strawmen such as "liberal education", the horrendous economy (although the stock mkt is raging, and we have historically low unemployment). And many in Congress are carrying water for that freedom fighter in the Kremlin.

Even at the risk of being held in contempt, were I the one getting these spurious questions, I would have given my answer, and when the sophist continued to badger, I would have said, "We're done here. I'm calling my Uber to Ronnie Reagan."

 

[crimsonaudio]

CNN: Some Jewish parents rethink elite schools amid antisemitism concerns on campus

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Kind of off topic here, and kind of not. Off-topic in the sense that it has nothing to do with free speech. On topic in that it's about the selective application of standards of conduct.

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu says holiday party email was a 'mistake' (usatoday.com)

Michelle Wu, mayor of Boston, mistakenly sent out an invitation to a holiday party to all members of the Boston City Council. Problem is, it was supposed to go out to only non-white members. So rather than include them, she rescinded the invitations to white council members.

Of the 13 councilors, 7 are white.

Look, this is a holiday party. Not a big deal in the great scheme of things.

But the idea that the mayor of a major city is so tone-deaf that she would exclude over half of her city council on the basis of race, then double down saying essentially, "What's the problem? We've been doing this for a while," is (or should be) a big dang problem.

The aide who actually sent out the email followed up with an apology for "confusion." But there's no apology from the mayor for scheduling a presumably city-funded event that excluded people based on race. In fact, she defended the event and the "Electeds of Color" group saying that it had been around for at least 10 years.

Ohhhh....I see now. You've been excluding people based on race for a long time. You're right....that makes it fine.

Imagine this from Katie Britt: "Hi y'all & oopsies! We're having a party for (some of) my staff and hope those of you who fit -- you know what I mean -- can come. But it's for only those people who look like me. Sorry all you blacks, Asians, Native Americans and others who don't look like me....we fat-fingered the address list and invited you when we didn't mean to. So please don't come. We've been doing this for a long time now, so I'm sure you understand."

Again, on CNN, CNBC, NBC on continuous loop for weeks. As it is, expect not much attention from the press. And no further comment from Madame Mayor.

 

[92tide]

What about their behavior made them like Nazis or neo-Nazis?

they didn’t wear the ribbon?

 

[92tide]

Oh, yes, it could have been avoided. They should have refused to testify in that kangaroo court. The end result was already there before the hearing. Throw mud at academia.

And, no, it wasn't a softball question. It was a hysteric screed straight from the Ron DeSantis/Trump playbook. Check the polling right now. Republicans across the country have their panties in a wad over strawmen such as "liberal education", the horrendous economy (although the stock mkt is raging, and we have historically low unemployment). And many in Congress are carrying water for that freedom fighter in the Kremlin.

Even at the risk of being held in contempt, were I the one getting these spurious questions, I would have given my answer, and when the sophist continued to badger, I would have said, "We're done here. I'm calling my Uber to Ronnie Reagan."

you obviously hate America and the troops

 

[Its On A Slab]

you obviously hate America and the troops

I also want to see a Tidefans reg's unborn child killed by terrorists(as I was accused back in the day).

Remember when we were part of the "Hate America" crowd? A label coined by people who actually do hate America.

 

[92tide]

I also want to see a Tidefans reg's unborn child killed by terrorists(as I was accused back in the day).

Remember when we were part of the "Hate America" crowd? A label coined by people who actually do hate America.

i apparently loved me some terrorists back then

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I got curious about the Jewish population at UA. Apparently, there are two Jewish sororities and one Jewish fraternity now. (I mean predominantly Jewish, since all admit gentiles as well.) When I was there, there were four Jewish fraternities and three Jewish sororities. The ZBTs, the oldest is still there. The SDTs, the oldest predominantly Jewish sorority is still there. In the '50s, the ZBTs were exclusively Southern men and the SDT was also mostly Southern. The others were made up of students from the north, predominantly the NYC area. Bama was known up there as a good value in education. Hillel states that it serves over 1,000 Jewish students. I was a little surprised by the shrinkage in the number of fraternities and sororities, given that UA only had around 10,000 students in the mid-50s and is pushing 40,000 now. Of course, back then out of state tuition was quite low and it's much higher now...

 

[Its On A Slab]

i apparently loved me some terrorists back then

I take the Hugh Freeze excuse: I didn't honor my terrorist enough. Gets me out of Guantanamo every time.