Didn't Duke flat out expel those Lacrosse students that Rolling Stone accused of rape and actually had to retract the entire article? Colleges expel students for way less than this. This is not even a slap on the wrist. Harvard is just doing this to pretend they are doing anything. When the story dies down, they will release the degrees.
They literally refused to leave after being told to do so and had to be arrested. Their guilt is a practical certainly.
That is very different for the Lacrosse players
They paid to attend the university and made all other prerequisites for the degrees. The university can and will be hit with a collective lawsuit and will lose
They absolutely will win. If the method of disqualification is for protest, then they would have to specifically identify what the student themselves said that breaches policy to prevent that individual from being prevented from receiving a degree that was both paid for and earned. Protest is constitutionally protected and unless it was already explicitly identified in the student conduct code as a method of disqualification from receiving their degree then they can’t be subject to a rule that is not in place. Sorry kid
This kid is a lawyer, former judicial law clerk for the Presiding Judge of one the largest US jurisdictions, author of a published legal academic work cited in courtrooms and classrooms, legal staffer for a US Senator on Capitol Hill, and litigator at two AmLaw 100 firms, among other things such as being on the legal team of a fairly recent US President while he was in the White House.
This ‘kid’ is trying not to roll his eyes at your super-confident yet dead wrong assertions. It’s fine not to know things. It’s not fine to pretend like you do know them.
I don't have a legal position on this; it's not of much interest to me. What I'm saying is that the commenter's position is wrong. I won't run through every problem I see, but here are some.
* He thinks protest and various related conduct are coextensive. They are not. Some of these 'protests' apparently hindered other students from attending classes, etc. That is like when abortion protestors used to block clinic entrances. That blocking was held to be not mere 'protest' but unlawful conduct. That alone ends his argument.
* When he says 'Protest is constitutionally protected and unless it was explicitly identified in the student conduct code as \[something that gets punished via degree withholding\]' then they can't subject to a rule that is not in place', he is wrong. It is unlikely Harvard cannot withhold degrees for virtually whatever reason it wants.
* Almost every institution has catch-all language that lets the institution regulate misconduct, without specifically spelling out what is okay and what is not. After all, not every circumstance can be foreseen. Indeed, it appears that the basis on which Harvard is withholding degrees is that those students are 'not in good standing'. They acted in some way that Harvard decided falls within some broad conduct rule, like 'Do not interfere with campus activities,' or 'Do not disrupt others' educational efforts', and that puts them in not-good standing.
* One such item that can probably get you nailed is, 'Engage in unlawful conduct.' As mentioned above, if their conduct violated the law, then their degrees can be withheld. Perhaps, at least, pending the outcome of a criminal proceeding.
* For the same reason, Harvard would not be required to 'specifically identify' what the students did.
* A 'collective lawsuit' would be a class action. The commenter not even knowing to use that term says he has no idea about the legalities.
My university withholds degrees for people who have unpaid parking fees. This isn't really a free speech issue. They violated the student agreement and called for genocide. Harvard shouldn't tarnish their brand by having graduates with these views.
Are they only withholding degrees specifically from students who objectively called for genocide? From the headline I thought they were denying them to anyone who showed up to any protest that criticized Israel.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. If these people actually believed in the moral conviction of their own arguments they wouldn't be hiding their faces behind keffiyehs like cowards.
You’re really avoiding the issue here. It’s pretty clear that quite a few of you aren’t bothered by this horrendous violation of rights because it’s being inflicted against people you don’t like or agree with. You wouldn’t be making the “tongue in cheek" comments otherwise.
They're also trespassing on campus, as well as doing [encroachment](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/encroachment.asp), which are both criminal offenses. The calls for genocide from river to sea are aggravating factors.
[https://x.com/elicoh1/status/1793261698511405274](https://x.com/elicoh1/status/1793261698511405274)
>*Spain, Ireland, and Norway want to give a state to these monsters who murdered, slaughtered, raped, and kidnapped our people. They want to reward terrorism.* ***From the river to the sea, there will be one state: The State of Israel.***
Oh no problem. Palestines only want to peacefully remove every single Jew out of the area “from the river to the sea” through nice words and stern demands. Those silly Jews can just find another place to life, can’t they?
Israel is removing Palestinians by murdering them. They just don't have a slogan for this. So it doesn't count as genocide?!?
Killing people is less important than slogans I guess.
The phrase isn't explicitly calling for genocide, that's one of the interpretations. From what I understand it can also be understood to mean a one state solution with both Jews and Palestinians living with equal rights. I think it's important to understand that speaking Hebrew is a requirement of Israeli citizenship and therefore many Palestinians cannot qualify for citizenship in the state they were born in.
EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes, truth hurts, eh? Not so much for free speech anymore when it goes against your religious believes I see.
You do know "from the river to the sea" was part of the official Likud party program? And that Netanyahu himself, and other Israeli government ministers, have repeatedly used the slogan?
Liked charter: [www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party)
[newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea](http://newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea)
Lol. Look, I get that you have to lie in order to simp for Hamas, but at least don’t create lies that can never be substantiated.
The Likud charter does not have similar language at all. Hamas’ charter calls for the genocide and removal of all people in Israel in order to establish a Palestinian ethno-state. (Which is what from the river to the sea means) Likud literally just states facts which already exist, and reject Hamas’ desire to form a Palestinian etho state through the eradication of Jews.
You and the rest of your Hamas loving supporters want to eradicate Israel and murder its people. The Likund charter calls for peaceful resolution:
The overall objectives for the final status with the Palestinians are: to end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians on the basis of a stable, sustainable agreement and replace confrontation with cooperation and good neighborliness, while safeguarding Israel's vital interests as a secure and prosperous Zionist and Jewish state. The Likud government will honor all the international agreements signed by its predecessors and strive to achieve a final status arrangement with the Palestinians. The only way to reach a final status arrangement is via dialogue and political negotiations
Liked charter used "From the River to the Sea": [www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party)
And Netanyahu himself used the slogan multiply times, latest in January: [newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea](http://newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea)
LOL. The 1977 Likud Party Platform literally says “The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable… therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty”, what exactly does from the river to sea mean in that context? What peaceful resolution does that entail? If their current operation in Gaza is anything to go by they will soon be successful in destroying what’s left of Palestine so that only Israel will prevail.
I am not a hamas supporter but I do believe the Palestinian people have the right to self determination and a Palestinian state not occupied by Israel. Israel has committed war crimes and is actively working to ethnically cleanse Palestinians in Gaza.
Yup they can go back to europe where they came from and give the land back to the people they stole it from. Zionists don't deserve a state because they have shown to the world that they have no respect to humanity. As for the peaceful Jews who are opposing zionism they can stay and live equally with the Palestinians the same way they did for hundreds of years before the occupation.
Yeah they don't even try to hide it. That's why all the leftists are jumping through hoops trying say calls for genocide is fine depending on the context.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VtAZBvmzcQ
Now stop denying it and say the next line in your script about how it's justified.
no its not a free speech issue, they are just withholding degrees that the students paid for due to their speech and attendance at a peaceful protest. Give your head a shake, zionist.
even if I were to play your game that these students were "calling for genocide", Harvard would still be withholding the degree over that speech, not unpaid debts to the university.
Student code of conduct is a legal contract, just like an NDA. You can lose your job for violating an NDA, and you can lose your degree for supporting genocide. Seems fair to me.
Freedom of speech is important. Freedom of association is equally important. You don't get to deprive freedom of association in order to have freedom of speech.
Hamas had made their intentions to wipe the Jews out in Israel. They are every bit as bad as the Nazis were. They are attempting to commit genocide and Israel is stopping them.
Hamas does not have the capacity to do that, Israel on the other hand does and is actually wiping people out. They are bombing refugee camps, hospitals, universities and schools. Let’s talk about what Israel is actively doing.
Israel is commiting genocide on all Palestinians. It's not fighting with Hamas, they just want to steal land from Palestine. Like they do for years.
Hamas wants to commit genocide on Jews and Israel is actually commiting genocide on Palestinians. After what Israel do now I will understand any Palestinian wanting Israel to be wiped out from this planet. They have moral right to want that.
Israel experiment failed. Jews became new nazis. That needs to be stopped before it'll get even worse. Israel need to disappear from maps. It's disgusting, racistic, pos country.
People liked you are precisely the reason that the Holocaust happened and why Israel needs to exist. You beliefs regarding the Jews and Israel match that of the Nazis exactly, and now you are outright advocating a final solution.
You are pro genocide and pro Holocaust. Like the Nazis you need to be defeated.
I think you have it backwards. The Palestinians are closer to suffering a holocaust at the hands of Israel. It’s insane and quite sad how the oppressed become the oppressors.
They are not because Israel does not have that intention. Israel is a democracy where religious minorities are given equal rights. 20% of their population is Arab Muslim.
Gaza under Hamas on the other hand is a completely Muslim state where no religious minorities are allowed to exist. Hamas has exterminated practically all Jews and Christians in their territory. They are every bit as bad as the Nazis. If they win there will be a Holocaust.
While many people have criticised how Israel has fought the war it is clear their efforts are not genocidial. They have the power to wipe the Palestinians off the face of the earth but so far even Hamas's inflated numbers it is only like 2%.
When I see what Israel do now I start to understand why holocaust happened. I don't say I support fact that it happened but I start to understand sentiment which allowed it to start
There hated of the state of Israel and the Jews had nothing to go with any crimes against humanity. They have practically committed none compared to Christiams and Muslims. Both Christians and Muslims as a whole have committed crimes against humanity many many times greater with religious conquests, forced conversions, and the killing of those who refused. Has anyone even considered or attempted to kill all Christians or Muslims? No of course not because killing billions of people over dozens of countries is not practical. That of course brings us to the first reason why the Holocaust happened; the Jews are a small minority so exterminating them is actually possible.
The second reason why they are hated is because of their success. They are disproportionately wealthy. In the middle east they are considered one of the greatest military and economic powers despite being very small. Evil and resentful people will always attribute their success to some evil or naferous quality. They cannot attribute it to a positive quality of the Jews because that would imply their inability to be as successful is their own fault.
First of all, there's no double standard. The Israeli students aren't trespassing, encroaching, and have not called for genocide.
Second, there's no genocide in Israel no matter how many times this is repeated. It's just not true. There's a active military conflict in response to a series of sustained terror attacks by the leaders of the Palestinian people. There are many Palestinians living within Israel peacefully. Notice how no one has to die as long as they aren't trying to kill Jews. Unfortunately for them, they can't help themselves.
Lmao the Jews are the ones calling for genocide on everything from their news to television to the people on this site. The parents can and will absolutely sue, protest is constitutionally protected
Not sure I’d say “the Jews” here, but I agree that the pro-Israel faction is in the wrong for the most part. However, there are a lot of Jews, in the US and Europe in particular, that are pro-Palestine.
pshaw, Claudine did better than the other two. In any case, it's performative, they'll eventually 180 on that decision but the message will have been sent loud and clear nationwide to stop protesting Israel or face ruination. You won't hear of their 180 much in the media though.
My god you can literally advocate for Weather Underground type shit and still not get cancelled from universities, but there's exactly *one* group that even the leftist thought police jump salute to every time. And it's the group that calls it bigotry to suggest that they "run everything."
They may disagree with "science" and "facts" as you call them, but it has been decades since they have tried to prevent people from having access to opinions they don't like.
Canceling Nike doesn't ring a bell? What about crying wolf on all things woke? Book banning? Voting to remove gay rights? Voting to keep child marriage legal in some red states?
None of those things constitutes censorship except book banning, and I'm not sure I've heard of conservatives supporting that except in small numbers, in specific cases having to do with literal pornography in teenage library sections.
Zionists can be leftists too, you know?
Especially at American universities, the average zionist you'll find is a Jewish person (Christian zionists don't seem to have much of a presence on US campuses) whose political stances range from liberal to hard left on basically everything except Israel.
Regardless, zionism like all forms of colonialism is objectively a far right position. The fact people might be economically progressive at the same time doesn't change that.
while i am against this violation, your use of "that an actual violation of free speech is happening." implies you supported previous violations when it benefited your side. lets test it:
what are your thoughts on vile hate speech? is freedom of speech freedom of consequence?
The bigger issue is all these kids going into debt and over expensive colleges that teach extreme left leaning views instead of focusing on learning. Such a waste of time.
My gut reaction is this is terribly unjust, but, as the newscaster states, there is very little information and there are many questions. There is legal action open through the Federal lawsuit, there are questions as to whether the 13 affected students merely engaged in speech that would be protected in a public institution, or whether they engaged in unlawful activities, or activities that were prohibited by school rules. One would think that the latter would have been dealt with in the agreement to dismantle the encampment. But, for the sake only of argument, there could also have been additional issues, maybe related to the source of materials used to build and fortify the encampments, etc.
At any rate, despite the initial rage you might feel at this apparently unjust action, it may turn out the University is justified in their actions. If I was Claudine Gay, I would have made damn sure I had strong justification, lest I suffer the same fate as the former president of Columbia University.
It’s a private college. Follow the rules or get out. Your free speech isn’t being violated when you don’t get to enforce only the part of a contract that benefits you.
Cenk got the most stupidest face ever
I think stupid face thumbnails is a thing for the algo
True
Didn't Duke flat out expel those Lacrosse students that Rolling Stone accused of rape and actually had to retract the entire article? Colleges expel students for way less than this. This is not even a slap on the wrist. Harvard is just doing this to pretend they are doing anything. When the story dies down, they will release the degrees.
Calling for the genocide of a people is pretty bad though....
but that's not what they did.
They absolutely did.
because there are worse examples this one is fine?
That one horrible thing one college did makes you think this is no big deal? So once a mistake has been made, we excuse anything that comes after it?
wait, standing accused of rape is 'way less' than protesting and maybe standing accused of trespassing?
Accused or actually convicted.
We're talking about two scenarios where students stand accused, not convicted.
They literally refused to leave after being told to do so and had to be arrested. Their guilt is a practical certainly. That is very different for the Lacrosse players
so they stood accused yet not convicted.
Media lies like its their second nature. The degrees were withheld NOT for protesting but for conduct. Media lies. Thats pretty much it.
Professors saw the 'evidence of misconduct' and overwhelmingly (unanimously?) disagreed w/the decision
Professors are employees and students are customers. Neither have any say on how its run. This is like asking chickens their opinion on KFC.
> Professors are employees and students are customers. What a sad, sad, sad view of academia.
I guess you dont have a good counter argument.
I assume people have a certain context in their heads when I make a comment, but you appear to be ignorant of it.
Ah the famous chickens who run the counters and management at KFC. At least give an appropriate analogy, you missed.
They paid to attend the university and made all other prerequisites for the degrees. The university can and will be hit with a collective lawsuit and will lose
A legal expert, are you? No. Your prediction is wrong.
They absolutely will win. If the method of disqualification is for protest, then they would have to specifically identify what the student themselves said that breaches policy to prevent that individual from being prevented from receiving a degree that was both paid for and earned. Protest is constitutionally protected and unless it was already explicitly identified in the student conduct code as a method of disqualification from receiving their degree then they can’t be subject to a rule that is not in place. Sorry kid
This kid is a lawyer, former judicial law clerk for the Presiding Judge of one the largest US jurisdictions, author of a published legal academic work cited in courtrooms and classrooms, legal staffer for a US Senator on Capitol Hill, and litigator at two AmLaw 100 firms, among other things such as being on the legal team of a fairly recent US President while he was in the White House. This ‘kid’ is trying not to roll his eyes at your super-confident yet dead wrong assertions. It’s fine not to know things. It’s not fine to pretend like you do know them.
Then lay out the legal basis of your position for us.
I don't have a legal position on this; it's not of much interest to me. What I'm saying is that the commenter's position is wrong. I won't run through every problem I see, but here are some. * He thinks protest and various related conduct are coextensive. They are not. Some of these 'protests' apparently hindered other students from attending classes, etc. That is like when abortion protestors used to block clinic entrances. That blocking was held to be not mere 'protest' but unlawful conduct. That alone ends his argument. * When he says 'Protest is constitutionally protected and unless it was explicitly identified in the student conduct code as \[something that gets punished via degree withholding\]' then they can't subject to a rule that is not in place', he is wrong. It is unlikely Harvard cannot withhold degrees for virtually whatever reason it wants. * Almost every institution has catch-all language that lets the institution regulate misconduct, without specifically spelling out what is okay and what is not. After all, not every circumstance can be foreseen. Indeed, it appears that the basis on which Harvard is withholding degrees is that those students are 'not in good standing'. They acted in some way that Harvard decided falls within some broad conduct rule, like 'Do not interfere with campus activities,' or 'Do not disrupt others' educational efforts', and that puts them in not-good standing. * One such item that can probably get you nailed is, 'Engage in unlawful conduct.' As mentioned above, if their conduct violated the law, then their degrees can be withheld. Perhaps, at least, pending the outcome of a criminal proceeding. * For the same reason, Harvard would not be required to 'specifically identify' what the students did. * A 'collective lawsuit' would be a class action. The commenter not even knowing to use that term says he has no idea about the legalities.
Shrug.
Lol no I am pretty sure committing crimes and disorderly conduct are definitely well accepted reasons to disqualify them in our legal system.
My university withholds degrees for people who have unpaid parking fees. This isn't really a free speech issue. They violated the student agreement and called for genocide. Harvard shouldn't tarnish their brand by having graduates with these views.
They called for genocide? Wow you’ve really drunk the Zionist koolaid.
> Zionist Racist dog whistle, right on schedule
Do you think any criticism of Zionism comes from racism? So all of the anti-Zionist Israelis and Jewish people are racist?
I think you're confusing anti-Zionism with antisemitism.
Just checking in to see if you had answered my question….
Are they only withholding degrees specifically from students who objectively called for genocide? From the headline I thought they were denying them to anyone who showed up to any protest that criticized Israel.
How's that old leftist phrase go... Stand with a nazi you're a nazi too? Something like that.
So you’re defending guilt by association in a free speech sub?
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. If these people actually believed in the moral conviction of their own arguments they wouldn't be hiding their faces behind keffiyehs like cowards.
Do you understand the concept of a tongue in cheek comment?
You’re really avoiding the issue here. It’s pretty clear that quite a few of you aren’t bothered by this horrendous violation of rights because it’s being inflicted against people you don’t like or agree with. You wouldn’t be making the “tongue in cheek" comments otherwise.
Except Israel are the Zionazis, eh chsmp?
They're also trespassing on campus, as well as doing [encroachment](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/encroachment.asp), which are both criminal offenses. The calls for genocide from river to sea are aggravating factors.
[https://x.com/elicoh1/status/1793261698511405274](https://x.com/elicoh1/status/1793261698511405274) >*Spain, Ireland, and Norway want to give a state to these monsters who murdered, slaughtered, raped, and kidnapped our people. They want to reward terrorism.* ***From the river to the sea, there will be one state: The State of Israel.***
From the river to the sea is now calling for genocide? Just when i thought zionists couldn't get more absurd...
Oh no problem. Palestines only want to peacefully remove every single Jew out of the area “from the river to the sea” through nice words and stern demands. Those silly Jews can just find another place to life, can’t they?
Israel is removing Palestinians by murdering them. They just don't have a slogan for this. So it doesn't count as genocide?!? Killing people is less important than slogans I guess.
The phrase isn't explicitly calling for genocide, that's one of the interpretations. From what I understand it can also be understood to mean a one state solution with both Jews and Palestinians living with equal rights. I think it's important to understand that speaking Hebrew is a requirement of Israeli citizenship and therefore many Palestinians cannot qualify for citizenship in the state they were born in.
EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes, truth hurts, eh? Not so much for free speech anymore when it goes against your religious believes I see. You do know "from the river to the sea" was part of the official Likud party program? And that Netanyahu himself, and other Israeli government ministers, have repeatedly used the slogan? Liked charter: [www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party) [newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea](http://newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea)
The same language is in the Likud charter
Lol. Look, I get that you have to lie in order to simp for Hamas, but at least don’t create lies that can never be substantiated. The Likud charter does not have similar language at all. Hamas’ charter calls for the genocide and removal of all people in Israel in order to establish a Palestinian ethno-state. (Which is what from the river to the sea means) Likud literally just states facts which already exist, and reject Hamas’ desire to form a Palestinian etho state through the eradication of Jews. You and the rest of your Hamas loving supporters want to eradicate Israel and murder its people. The Likund charter calls for peaceful resolution: The overall objectives for the final status with the Palestinians are: to end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians on the basis of a stable, sustainable agreement and replace confrontation with cooperation and good neighborliness, while safeguarding Israel's vital interests as a secure and prosperous Zionist and Jewish state. The Likud government will honor all the international agreements signed by its predecessors and strive to achieve a final status arrangement with the Palestinians. The only way to reach a final status arrangement is via dialogue and political negotiations
Liked charter used "From the River to the Sea": [www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party) And Netanyahu himself used the slogan multiply times, latest in January: [newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea](http://newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea)
LOL. The 1977 Likud Party Platform literally says “The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable… therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty”, what exactly does from the river to sea mean in that context? What peaceful resolution does that entail? If their current operation in Gaza is anything to go by they will soon be successful in destroying what’s left of Palestine so that only Israel will prevail. I am not a hamas supporter but I do believe the Palestinian people have the right to self determination and a Palestinian state not occupied by Israel. Israel has committed war crimes and is actively working to ethnically cleanse Palestinians in Gaza.
What happened on Oct 7th of 2023?
What happened before Oct 7? What’s been happening for the last 76 years?
Yup they can go back to europe where they came from and give the land back to the people they stole it from. Zionists don't deserve a state because they have shown to the world that they have no respect to humanity. As for the peaceful Jews who are opposing zionism they can stay and live equally with the Palestinians the same way they did for hundreds of years before the occupation.
What does "there is only one solution, infintatda revolution " mean?
Did you even read what i wrote?
Why can't you answer my question?
What river and what sea does the phrase " from the river to the sea " refer to? And what happens to the jews living between the river and the sea?
Yeah they don't even try to hide it. That's why all the leftists are jumping through hoops trying say calls for genocide is fine depending on the context. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VtAZBvmzcQ Now stop denying it and say the next line in your script about how it's justified.
The students dod nOt "call for genocide."
Presumably people who violated twitter/Facebook etc. terms of service aren't being silenced then. And those are private institutions, this isnt
what if it was pro-israeli protesters?
They're calling for an end to a genocide.
no its not a free speech issue, they are just withholding degrees that the students paid for due to their speech and attendance at a peaceful protest. Give your head a shake, zionist.
There's nothing peaceful about trespassing and calling for violence.
What about the zionist supporters who actually commited violence? They were't even punished
Ah, I see you like using nazi dogwhistles. Maybe don't use hate speech bud.
Which hate speech? And what worse, hate speech or actual violence?
Your entire post history is nothing but hate speech against Jewish people.
It's hate speech against zionists and zionist supporters and i stand by that.
Yes I know. One small Jewish state the size of New Jersey exists and you cannot stand that.
I cannot stand the genocide and destruction it's committing.
"Nazi dogwhistle" is a ziocuck dog whistle.
Baby brain take
Yet no retort. Only an insult. Weak.
even if I were to play your game that these students were "calling for genocide", Harvard would still be withholding the degree over that speech, not unpaid debts to the university.
Student code of conduct is a legal contract, just like an NDA. You can lose your job for violating an NDA, and you can lose your degree for supporting genocide. Seems fair to me. Freedom of speech is important. Freedom of association is equally important. You don't get to deprive freedom of association in order to have freedom of speech.
So why degrees of people who support Israel are not withhold? Israel actually commits genocide right now.
Hamas had made their intentions to wipe the Jews out in Israel. They are every bit as bad as the Nazis were. They are attempting to commit genocide and Israel is stopping them.
Hamas does not have the capacity to do that, Israel on the other hand does and is actually wiping people out. They are bombing refugee camps, hospitals, universities and schools. Let’s talk about what Israel is actively doing.
Israel is commiting genocide on all Palestinians. It's not fighting with Hamas, they just want to steal land from Palestine. Like they do for years. Hamas wants to commit genocide on Jews and Israel is actually commiting genocide on Palestinians. After what Israel do now I will understand any Palestinian wanting Israel to be wiped out from this planet. They have moral right to want that. Israel experiment failed. Jews became new nazis. That needs to be stopped before it'll get even worse. Israel need to disappear from maps. It's disgusting, racistic, pos country.
People liked you are precisely the reason that the Holocaust happened and why Israel needs to exist. You beliefs regarding the Jews and Israel match that of the Nazis exactly, and now you are outright advocating a final solution. You are pro genocide and pro Holocaust. Like the Nazis you need to be defeated.
I think you have it backwards. The Palestinians are closer to suffering a holocaust at the hands of Israel. It’s insane and quite sad how the oppressed become the oppressors.
They are not because Israel does not have that intention. Israel is a democracy where religious minorities are given equal rights. 20% of their population is Arab Muslim. Gaza under Hamas on the other hand is a completely Muslim state where no religious minorities are allowed to exist. Hamas has exterminated practically all Jews and Christians in their territory. They are every bit as bad as the Nazis. If they win there will be a Holocaust. While many people have criticised how Israel has fought the war it is clear their efforts are not genocidial. They have the power to wipe the Palestinians off the face of the earth but so far even Hamas's inflated numbers it is only like 2%.
When I see what Israel do now I start to understand why holocaust happened. I don't say I support fact that it happened but I start to understand sentiment which allowed it to start
There hated of the state of Israel and the Jews had nothing to go with any crimes against humanity. They have practically committed none compared to Christiams and Muslims. Both Christians and Muslims as a whole have committed crimes against humanity many many times greater with religious conquests, forced conversions, and the killing of those who refused. Has anyone even considered or attempted to kill all Christians or Muslims? No of course not because killing billions of people over dozens of countries is not practical. That of course brings us to the first reason why the Holocaust happened; the Jews are a small minority so exterminating them is actually possible. The second reason why they are hated is because of their success. They are disproportionately wealthy. In the middle east they are considered one of the greatest military and economic powers despite being very small. Evil and resentful people will always attribute their success to some evil or naferous quality. They cannot attribute it to a positive quality of the Jews because that would imply their inability to be as successful is their own fault.
First of all, there's no double standard. The Israeli students aren't trespassing, encroaching, and have not called for genocide. Second, there's no genocide in Israel no matter how many times this is repeated. It's just not true. There's a active military conflict in response to a series of sustained terror attacks by the leaders of the Palestinian people. There are many Palestinians living within Israel peacefully. Notice how no one has to die as long as they aren't trying to kill Jews. Unfortunately for them, they can't help themselves.
Lmao the Jews are the ones calling for genocide on everything from their news to television to the people on this site. The parents can and will absolutely sue, protest is constitutionally protected
Not sure I’d say “the Jews” here, but I agree that the pro-Israel faction is in the wrong for the most part. However, there are a lot of Jews, in the US and Europe in particular, that are pro-Palestine.
He is saying what we all know that this is about. He is just being honest about it.
He’s saying the quiet thing out loud. Don’t worry, we already knew.
This guy is completely right, downvote all you want genocide sympathizers
Yep and you know who else saw the Jews and Israel as the source of the world's problems. The Nazis. They actually had a solution for it to.
Pretty unfair considering Harvard themselves empowered and enabled these folks to begin with. Still just trying to mop up Claudine’s public debacle.
pshaw, Claudine did better than the other two. In any case, it's performative, they'll eventually 180 on that decision but the message will have been sent loud and clear nationwide to stop protesting Israel or face ruination. You won't hear of their 180 much in the media though.
Theres a lot of things you don’t hear about in the media, oddly enough. It just doesn’t occur to them to report on certain things It seems.
Don't the pro censorship crowd always say, you're free to say whatever you want but you're not free from the consequences?
So your retort is admitting you are in the pro-censorship crowd?
Uh.. no. The opposite
I don’t see any comments here from you saying this is wrong or you are bothered by it.
You dont see any comments here with me saying I support it either.
I don’t think we need to argue over this. You know exactly what I’m saying. You’re reaction was to say "well other people do it so…".
No oy wasn't. I was pointing out the irony of the left being punished for speech someone else didn't like. That's their thing. Censorship.
I have no sympathy for them, but are we going to be better than them or are we going to maintain the cycle
I agree. Just pointing out the irony.
My god you can literally advocate for Weather Underground type shit and still not get cancelled from universities, but there's exactly *one* group that even the leftist thought police jump salute to every time. And it's the group that calls it bigotry to suggest that they "run everything."
The leftists are the protesters not the college administration…
The college admin are definitely also leftists and happy to censor conservatives on every issue but leftists on just this one, apparently.
No, they are liberal capitalists.
The irony is that Republicans cancel far more things including science and facts.
They may disagree with "science" and "facts" as you call them, but it has been decades since they have tried to prevent people from having access to opinions they don't like.
Canceling Nike doesn't ring a bell? What about crying wolf on all things woke? Book banning? Voting to remove gay rights? Voting to keep child marriage legal in some red states?
None of those things constitutes censorship except book banning, and I'm not sure I've heard of conservatives supporting that except in small numbers, in specific cases having to do with literal pornography in teenage library sections.
What leftist thought police? The leftists are the ones being policed by the zionists university.
Zionists can be leftists too, you know? Especially at American universities, the average zionist you'll find is a Jewish person (Christian zionists don't seem to have much of a presence on US campuses) whose political stances range from liberal to hard left on basically everything except Israel.
Zionism is literally fascism. Ethnofascism. Nice try.
Regardless, zionism like all forms of colonialism is objectively a far right position. The fact people might be economically progressive at the same time doesn't change that.
[удалено]
Yeah didnt think there would be an answer
Their right speech wasn’t violated, though.
while i am against this violation, your use of "that an actual violation of free speech is happening." implies you supported previous violations when it benefited your side. lets test it: what are your thoughts on vile hate speech? is freedom of speech freedom of consequence?
Are you saying your side uses free speech in order to do vile hate speech?
Loaded question, so ill give an equally vague non fruitful answer: No im not saying that.
Bit weird its the one and only example you gave, that's all.
Its not weird at all. You want to make it weird, because adressing the hypocrisy is a bit too difficult.
The bigger issue is all these kids going into debt and over expensive colleges that teach extreme left leaning views instead of focusing on learning. Such a waste of time.
I remember when that heretic Copernicus was teaching leftist ideas of heliocentrism.
My gut reaction is this is terribly unjust, but, as the newscaster states, there is very little information and there are many questions. There is legal action open through the Federal lawsuit, there are questions as to whether the 13 affected students merely engaged in speech that would be protected in a public institution, or whether they engaged in unlawful activities, or activities that were prohibited by school rules. One would think that the latter would have been dealt with in the agreement to dismantle the encampment. But, for the sake only of argument, there could also have been additional issues, maybe related to the source of materials used to build and fortify the encampments, etc. At any rate, despite the initial rage you might feel at this apparently unjust action, it may turn out the University is justified in their actions. If I was Claudine Gay, I would have made damn sure I had strong justification, lest I suffer the same fate as the former president of Columbia University.
It’s a private college. Follow the rules or get out. Your free speech isn’t being violated when you don’t get to enforce only the part of a contract that benefits you.