Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +--- Thread: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing (/Thread-Columbia-Leaders-Grilled-at-Antisemitism-Hearing) |
RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Mickeypoo - 05-06-2024 (04-30-2024, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: On it's face I agree, it makes very little sense. Islam, as it is practiced in most of the world, is a very regressive and authoritarian ideology. But when you look at it through the lens these kids use, which is who is powerful and who is not, Islam is a victim. What countries are the most powerful? Western nations are largely Christian, especially historically, and the most powerful. These kids view everything as either powerful or not powerful, extrapolated further in oppressor versus oppressed. So to them, Islam is an oppressed ideology by the racist and more powerful western nations. Not coincidentally the western nations the vast majority of these kids grew up in. When kids go through their rebellious phase they rebel against the status quo, what they grew up immersed in, and are ultimately "oppressed" by. Add it a small smattering of education on western intervention in the region and you get what you see today. Sounds like they needed to be raised better/have a better education. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Mickeypoo - 05-06-2024 (05-02-2024, 03:05 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Funny you mention this. As a school project my son and a couple friends did a documentary on the unjust/unfair treatment of Vietnam Veterans. I understand protesting the war, but the protesters who directly protested those poor soldiers are just about the lowest scumbags on the face of the earth. No logic. No reason. Just all feelzed up. You'd think they could put the maybe 2 brain cells they have together and think about protesting the Gov't who was actually responsible for sending the soldiers to fight instead of the actual soldiers who had no choice. Total scumbags. I hope they drown in their patchouli. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Dill - 05-07-2024 (05-06-2024, 04:53 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Funny you mention this. As a school project my son and a couple friends did a documentary on the unjust/unfair treatment of Vietnam Veterans. I understand protesting the war, but the protesters who directly protested those poor soldiers are just about the lowest scumbags on the face of the earth. No logic. No reason. Just all feelzed up. You'd think they could put the maybe 2 brain cells they have together and think about protesting the Gov't who was actually responsible for sending the soldiers to fight instead of the actual soldiers who had no choice. Total scumbags. I hope they drown in their patchouli. Just curious Mick. Why do you think Vietnam protestors were protesting the soldiers and not the war and its leaders Also, you were aware that many veterans protested the war as well, right? RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Dill - 05-07-2024 (05-06-2024, 04:29 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: And here we are a week later with ultra weak leaders scared, for whatever reason, to put the smack down. A lot of people share your feelings on this I'm sure. They see "weakness" whenever unpopular protests are not immediately shut down by force. There is a double problem here though. 1) The protestors have a 1st Amendment right to free speech. Hard to shut them down without shutting that down. 2) On college campuses, academic freedom also comes into play. College leaders who don't respect that won't be around long. There is precedent for use of extreme force. E.g., May, 4, 1970, Ohio Gov. Rhodes, a strong leader, called in the nation guard to quell demonstrations at Kent State. And the soldiers who illegally fired into the students killing 4 (2 merely on their way to class) and wounding 9 others were acquitted. So it can definitely be done. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Mickeypoo - 05-08-2024 (05-07-2024, 07:28 PM)Dill Wrote: Just curious Mick. Not the sharpest crayons in the box? Yes. I didn't say protesting the war was bad. I said taking it out on the Veterans who had no choice vs the Gov't who sent them there was not cool. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Mickeypoo - 05-08-2024 (05-07-2024, 07:45 PM)Dill Wrote: A lot of people share your feelings on this I'm sure. They see "weakness" whenever unpopular protests are not immediately shut down by force. Because it is weakness. Extreme force? I'm not advocating going in shooting. Good grief. Peaceful protests that are not disrupting the campus or it's students, fine. As soon as that changes start arresting/removing people. This is not complicated. Again, when did I say peaceful protests should be shut down? Protestors do not have a right to disrupt college campuses and keep students from the education they are paying for. Well, the ones not covered by Biden's vote buying anyway. Academic freedom? Colleges are practically left wing echo chambers run by left wing activists at this point. Not seeing any leaders at any of these colleges. If there were, none of this would be a story as the campuses would have shut down the issues as soon as they became less than peaceful. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Dill - 05-08-2024 (05-08-2024, 02:28 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Not the sharpest crayons in the box? Sure, I was just saying that I don't recall protests attacking veterans---especially since veterans were an important part of the protests. Notice in the pictures, protestors call for the return of troops, getting them out of harms way, and they blame Johnson and Nixon for the war. What makes you think protestors were taking it out on veterans who had no choice but to go? RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-08-2024 (05-08-2024, 05:23 PM)Dill Wrote: Sure, I was just saying that I don't recall protests attacking veterans---especially since veterans were an That's funny, my father and his friends sure can. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - GMDino - 05-08-2024 (05-08-2024, 06:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That's funny, my father and his friends sure can. My dad and uncles can't. Guess my personal experience cancels out yours? Funny. Okay that's obviously sarcasm....but the point remains that not everyone had the same experience. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-09-2024 (05-08-2024, 08:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: My dad and uncles can't. Where they Vietnam vets? Quote:Guess my personal experience cancels out yours? I have no doubt experiences varied. What I take issue with now, and the first time he asserted it, is the claim that those types of events never occurred. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Mickeypoo - 05-09-2024 (05-08-2024, 05:23 PM)Dill Wrote: Sure, I was just saying that I don't recall protests attacking veterans---especially since veterans were an For starters, my son and his friends did a crap ton of research. I'm blaming the "leaders" er activists pretending to be leaders at the colleges. This is stupid simple stuff. Peaceful protest = not disrupting students ability to learn, go to class, etc. = not a problem. Protests that cause problems for the students and/or the campus = a problem = immediate removal of problem. Weak leaders = not removing the problem OR leaders who agree with the protest not removing the problem. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Mickeypoo - 05-09-2024 (05-08-2024, 08:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: My dad and uncles can't. I've never experienced racism. Must be all made up bs. When did anyone say all Vietnam Vets had the same experience or that all humans have the same experiences? What are you even talking about? RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - GMDino - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 08:12 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I've never experienced racism. Must be all made up bs. I don't know if you are white or black or Asian or what, but if you are white and never experienced racism you're gonna tick off a lot of people who claim whites are as oppressed as every other group due to reverse racism! SSF has twisted what Dill said in another thread to say that Dill said it "never happened" that veterans were the victim of protests or bad treatment. That is not what Dill said. It was clarified many times to SSF but he continues to lie about that. So when it brought it to this thread that his personal experience trumps everything else I responded. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 09:07 AM)GMDino Wrote: I don't know if you are white or black or Asian or what, but if you are white and never experienced racism you're gonna tick off a lot of people who claim whites are as oppressed as every other group due to reverse racism! No, you're lying. He flat out said that vets being spat on was a "myth". Myth is in quotes there because that's exactly what he said. Now, please inform the class if a myth is something that happened or did not happen? Here's the post in full so you can't weasel and say it was edited. (08-09-2023, 10:17 PM)Dill Wrote: Could very well be. The question of whether such things happened is often raised in college history courses on the '60s. From my memory, protestors and hippies and the like were more worried about being beaten up by gung ho active duty types. I do remember returning vets being largely welcomed into protests movements, which many eagerly joined. They became one of the most important constituents of the anti-war movement. So in the same post he claims vets being spat on was a "myth." He cites sources that claim there is "no evidence it ever happened", that such events are a "legend", and that they are an "apocryphal myth." So please tie yourself in knots trying to defend your buddy from the fact that he claimed such events never happened. I think the above rather speaks for itself. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - GMDino - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 11:52 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, you're lying. He flat out said that vets being spat on was a "myth". Myth is in quotes there because that's exactly what he said. Now, please inform the class if a myth is something that happened or did not happen? No knot tying needed. As I said it was a discussion in another thread. It went on a long time. Everything was explained. But you, like a dog with a bone, hate Dill so much that you had to keep ignoring the bigger discussion to maintain your point. (08-10-2023, 07:11 AM)Dill Wrote: I don't think anyone is disputing that protests occurred either of the Vietnam or the Iraq War. (08-10-2023, 09:34 AM)Dill Wrote: No one can determine for certain that no vet was EVER spat upon on returning home--over 2 million returned--but one can determine whether it was a "common experience" as SSF puts it. Just as one can determine whether pro-war demonstrators more commonly attacked anti-war demonstrators--which often included vets. (08-10-2023, 09:30 AM)GMDino Wrote: I'm not willing to say no soldier was ever spit on. It's a big country and everyone has their own individual experiences that we can't discount. We also can't extrapolate them to encompass everyone else either. (08-10-2023, 09:54 AM)Dill Wrote: No one is willing to say "no soldier was ever spit on." (08-10-2023, 11:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: That's a shame. I'm sure some, many, were met with all kinds of different people when they came back. Protestors at a military base seems more likely to have had the vitriol then a small town in SW PA where my family was. (08-10-2023, 06:46 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL "Us" again. Your quote below, from post #60, was the occasion for my use of your term "common experience." I'm sure THOSE quotes are all "wrong" and you are right and I am "defending my buddy" in your eyes. And honestly that's ok. I've seen enough to understand where you come from with this. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 12:17 PM)GMDino Wrote: No knot tying needed. As I said it was a discussion in another thread. It went on a long time. Everything was explained. But you, like a dog with a bone, hate Dill so much that you had to keep ignoring the bigger discussion to maintain your point. So predictable. All of those came after the post I quoted. This is what is know as "walking it back". Dill said something stupid. Dill got called out. Dill slowly walked said statement back, all the while claiming her never really said what he initially said. If Luvnit or another conservative poster went through this process you'd have put him through the ringer. But it's the guy you share a brain with, so you'll defend him to the hilt. Dino, it's ok to disagree with Dill every once in a while. They won't come and take away your progressive membership card. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Dill - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 08:09 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: For starters, my son and his friends did a crap ton of research. Did they find out anything about the causes of the war, what the protestors were really protesting? (05-09-2024, 08:09 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I'm blaming the "leaders" er activists pretending to be leaders at the colleges. I'm wondering if a "strong" leader who cleared the protests right away might not have created a bigger problem--and lost her job. I remember how, back in the 60s, "strong" leaders got blowback from quashing protests that caused problems--especially in Chicago and Birmingham. They gave the advantage and the moral high ground to the protestors. I'm betting today's university presidents are very familiar with that history. That's historical memory is what makes them "weak." RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Dill - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 12:24 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So predictable. All of those came after the post I quoted. This is what is know as "walking it back". Dill said something stupid. Dill got called out. Dill slowly walked said statement back, all the while claiming her never really said what he initially said. If Luvnit or another conservative poster went through this process you'd have put him through the ringer. But it's the guy you share a brain with, so you'll defend him to the hilt. No. Dino represented the debate correctly. And calmly, I might add. The "first post [you] quoted" cites three sources which speak of the "myth" or "legend" of the spat upon vet. History professors now teach courses on the myth of the the absence of evidence for it. Typical dill move--start with the factual record and historians' research. I asked how the myth that all these historians are talking about got started and suggested: "it seems to have emerged in the 90s." Your argument is: 1) Dill and the war researchers said "myth" when addressing the widespread belief that many vets were spat on when they deplaned from Vietnam. 2) A myth is something that did not happen! (See dictionary!) 3) That means Dill et al. claimed no vet was EVER spat on not at all even once, and that is the POINT, not all that talk about politically useful narratives. 4) Your Dad has a friend who says he was spat on--so you've got some third-hand testimony years after the fact that at least one vet WAS spit on. 5) So the "myth" cannot be a myth because at least one or a few somehow were spat upon. (See dictionary again.) 6) Ergo Dill is LYING when, following all those researchers, he calls the vets-spat-on legend a "myth," plus he's calling your Dad a "liar"! And you have the "proof." 7) Further, he is just "walking back" the LIE when he specifies the "myth" is the claim that being spat upon was "representative" because it was always really about claiming no one vet EVER etc. So what is more likely--A) that sources in "the post first quoted" who use the term "myth" were careless non-professionals determined to prove that no vet could possibly have ever been spit on not even one time and you have exposed them and me as "liars," or B) they were addressing a general belief, used as a political narrative, that many returning vets were spat on--which sent them looking for evidence that they have not yet found. Hence their provisional conclusion that the general belief is a "myth," as in false, not true (see dictionary). But you just want to believe "A" anyway because it suits you to claim I'm a LIAR (I said "myth"!) and it stops a discussion undermining a right wing narrative about Vietnam and protestors? I'm going with "B." What you call "walking back" is just me trying to correct your origanl misunderstanding, which you cannot let go: My posts are not about "invalidating the experiences of some of the men returning home from Vietnam"; They are about invalidating the MYTH that this was a common and representative experience. I certainly still do think the bolded is correct, not a "lie," and not refuted by any 3rd hand testimony you introduce. There is at least one law professor who claims he found newspaper evidence from the period. And there was an interesting debate over the evidence in Slate some years back. We could have gone on to debate whether spitting was a common experience or whether it is just another right wing narrative generated before the Gulf War. Many people falsely claimed to be Vietnam veterans after the war, and many veterans falsely claimed combat experience. I'd like to find out how many of those also "remember" being spat upon. etc. But no. We got a rage post begging the moderators indulgence because I called your father a LIAR and was like Holocaust deniers who discount testimony. I.e, Typical SSF move--drive up emotion, call your opponent "liar." Then "stand by" your original claim without addressing the refutation or the facts. So a learning moment about how historical evidence is vetted and the limits of inference from evidence was quashed to protect an ideological narrative. Yet again. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - GMDino - 05-09-2024 (05-09-2024, 12:24 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So predictable. All of those came after the post I quoted. This is what is know as "walking it back". Dill said something stupid. Dill got called out. Dill slowly walked said statement back, all the while claiming her never really said what he initially said. If Luvnit or another conservative poster went through this process you'd have put him through the ringer. But it's the guy you share a brain with, so you'll defend him to the hilt. It's not about me or Luvnit or anyone else you want to name check. It was called clarifying. You jumped to a conclusion and Dill defended his point and made sure to be clear. That you won't admit it, and continue to bring it up, is on you not him. RE: Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing - Dill - 05-11-2024 (05-09-2024, 05:06 PM)GMDino Wrote: It's not about me or Luvnit or anyone else you want to name check. What was interesting about that exchange was the trigger, namely Mickey's story about his son learning that Vietnam protestors were protesting soldiers as opposed to LBJ, Nixon, and the Pentagon. I.e., the "myth" that many or most vets were spit on or otherwise attacked by protestors when they arrived back in the US. To requote one of my statements on the issue: No one is willing to say "no soldier was ever spit on." The interest for me is just how the notion took off decades after the war to become, for younger generations, a stereotypical but false image from that period in U.S. history. Many vets claim it was the government which forgot them, and have claimed that since the war, so from a certain ideological position it becomes very useful to deflect that critique onto people who rightly protested the war. THEY (protestors) mistreated soldiers. etc. While true patriots supported the troops--and, of course, the government's policies. This lines up with the recent history of masses of Americans convinced that the Russia investigation was "fake" and the 2020 election was "rigged." Except historical revision of events which used to take decades now occurs in a few months. Now right wing "memory" of the Vietnam War protests--which placed responsibility for the debacle on government/Pentagon lies--returns to define a new generation of protestors as infantile and lacking the facts, etc. and in dire need of violent comeuppance. As in '68, a "strong" authoritarian president, willing to bend democracy to his will, is waiting in the wings to restore order. |