Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing

[Dill]

Free Speech debate shifts from social media back to universities, of the elite liberal type. 
Seems a purge is under way at Columbia. (Edited for length)

Columbia Leaders Grilled at Antisemitism Hearing Over Faculty Comments
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/17/nyregion/columbia-antisemitism-hearing
5 takeaways from the Columbia University antisemitism hearing
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/17/takeaways-columbia-university-antisemitism-hearing-00152915
House lawmakers on Wednesday grilled Columbia University’s leaders over their enforcemet of antisemitism discipline policies for students and faculty.
But unlike her Ivy League colleagues, whose responses at an earlier antisemitism hearing landed them in turmoil, Columbia President Minouche Shafik left the event largely unscathed....

She told one GOP lawmaker that she spent “many hours” preparing, and another GOP lawmaker congratulated her on “saying the right things.”
“Columbia beats Harvard and UPenn!” Rep. Aaron Bean (R-Fla.) said. “Y’all have done something that they weren’t able to do. You’ve been able to condemn antisemitism without using the phrase: ‘It depends on the context.’ But the problem is: Action on campus doesn’t match your rhetoric today.”
Unlike the previous antisemitism hearing, lawmakers did not call for Shafik to resign. Republicans, and even some Democrats, focused on getting rid of university faculty who they say used antisemitic rhetoric....

Questions about whether protests on campus were anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim, or if phrases used by students were antisemitic, however, gave Shafik pause. In those moments the other Columbia leaders chimed in — but that didn’t stop lawmakers from poking holes in Shafik’s testimony.

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), who helms the House education panel, called some of Shafik’s testimony misleading, and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), who had previously given the other presidents the toughest grilling, tried to accuse Shafik of changing her testimony.
Here are the top five moments from the hearing.

Stefanik tried, and tried, and tried, to create a memorable scene

The No. 4 Republican in the House, who was the first lawmaker to take her seat in the hearing room, showed up with a thick stack of documents littered with yellow sticky notes. Stefanik pressed Shafik on faculty who made antisemitic statements and how they were disciplined — which often wasn’t strict enough for Stefanik.

“On my watch, faculty who make remarks that cross the line in terms of antisemitism, there will be consequences for them,” Shafik said. “I have five cases at the moment who have either been taken out of the classroom or dismissed.”
 
She also accused Shafik of changing her testimony under oath several times about the status of a professor on campus and disciplinary actions taken against him by the school, among other topics.
 
But Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) stole the line of questioning that helped Stefanik go viral in December and tanked Harvard and Penn’s presidents. “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Columbia’s code of conduct?” Bonamici asked the four witnesses.
All responded: “Yes.”...

Columbia law professor Katherine Franke and visiting professor Mohamed Abdou were also mentioned. Abdou was slammed by lawmakers for writing on social media that he is “with the muqawamah (the resistance) be it Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.”
“He will never work at Columbia again,” Shafik said when asked about Abdou’s employment at the university. “He has been terminated.”
“I’m very personally committed to making sure that our faculty do not cross the line in terms of discrimination and harassment,” Shafik later added. “We have mechanisms that are now being enforced and on my watch, they will be enforced. I think many of these appointments were made in the past in a different era and that era is done.”

Lawmakers squabbled about the Bible and ‘folx’
GOP lawmakers asked bizarre questions about a document distributed among students in the university’s school of social work, whether Shafik knew what folx meant and if Shafik wanted “God to curse” her institution.
Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) asked Shafik whether she knew what the terms “Ashkenormativity” and “folx” meant because they were listed in a student document disseminated in the institution’s school of social work. The moment fell flat as Shafik refuted Banks’ claim that the document was officially issued by the institution. She said she did not use those terms and did not know what they meant.
“Is this how Columbia University spells the word ‘folks’?” Banks said.
To which Shafik responded: “No.”
Shafik was also quizzed on her knowledge of the Bible.
“Are you familiar with Genesis 12:3?” Rep. Rick Allen (R-Ga.) asked Shafik. “It was a covenant that God made with Abraham … If you bless Israel, I will bless you. If you curse Israel, I will curse you … Do you consider that a serious issue? I mean, do you want Columbia University to be cursed by God?”

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-17-2024, 11:38 PM)Dill Wrote: Free Speech debate shifts from social media back to universities, of the elite liberal type. 
Seems a purge is under way at Columbia. (Edited for length)

I'm not sure how punishing bigoted speech, such as chanting "death to all Jews", which violates the Universities conduct policy, is a free speech issue.  I would hope that anyone chanting death to "insert any ethnicity you like here" would be cause for discipline up to expulsion.  

[Dill]

I have to admit I'm surprised at how fast these protests are spreading. This is starting to remind me of
Vietnam War and SA Apartheid protests.

When they began, there was a large knowledge gap between universities and the public, which slowly
closed over the following decade.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/columbia-cancels-classes-riot-police-135332159.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

Key Points
NYPD arrests NYU students for ‘disorderly’ conduct and ‘trespassing'

Cal Poly Humboldt closes campus amid ‘dangerous’ situation

At least 45 arrested at Yale University after riot police storm campus during pro-Palestinian protest

Columbia moves classes online for the rest of the semester

House speaker calls on Columbia University president to quit

The speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, has called on Columbia University President Minouche Shafik to resign for her "failure," in his estimation, to protect Jewish students on campus.

“We just can’t allow this kind of hatred and antisemitism to flourish on our campuses, and it must be stopped in its tracks. Those who are perpetrating this violence should be arrested. I am here today, joining my colleagues and calling on President Shafik to resign if she cannot immediately bring order to this chaos,” Mr Johnson said.Mr Johnson said she should step down unless she could immediately end the protests on campus.

[Belsnickel]

There is so much more nuance to this than most people are really grasping. What is frustrating to me is that these university administrators are being called to Washington and not in good faith. The Columbia president quite literally did what the GOP wanted her to be doing and they are still calling for her resignation. I have heard so many conflicting stories when the student journalists on these campuses are telling what they have seen, which is more in depth and layered than what we see in the national media.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-25-2024, 04:29 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: There is so much more nuance to this than most people are really grasping. What is frustrating to me is that these university administrators are being called to Washington and not in good faith. The Columbia president quite literally did what the GOP wanted her to be doing and they are still calling for her resignation. I have heard so many conflicting stories when the student journalists on these campuses are telling what they have seen, which is more in depth and layered than what we see in the national media.

I don't think the Columbia president has handled this well.  She's vacillated on when the protests need to stop, and how, several times.  I agree that she was not invited to Congress in good faith, but that doesn't change her failure to address student safety.  As for the student journalists, I have seen actual footage that rather casts substantial doubt on these protests being peaceful or non-confrontational.  They have to go to classes with the people they're reporting on and there have been several Jewish students who have detailed harassment or being made to feel unsafe.

But no one needs to take my word for it, the university has conceded it's not safe by making classes available online for the remainder of the school year.  Why would they do that if these are safe, peaceful protests?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/us/columbia-university-remote-classes-protests.html

[Dill]

(04-25-2024, 04:29 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: There is so much more nuance to this than most people are really grasping. What is frustrating to me is that these university administrators are being called to Washington and not in good faith. The Columbia president quite literally did what the GOP wanted her to be doing and they are still calling for her resignation. I have heard so many conflicting stories when the student journalists on these campuses are telling what they have seen, which is more in depth and layered than what we see in the national media.

It's complicated. There seem to be "outside agitators" involved, and in some cases right-wing accelerationists may get into the mix.
That's a danger, because then whatever one or "some" protestors do then becomes an opportunity to label all.

And yes, just a week ago Shafik was praised for managing her session in Congress better than the presidents of Harvard and Penn.
Lots of thought policing in both sessions.

Here is one of those "conflicting stories."  (I'm looking for reports that students have actually changed "Death to the Jews" anywhere.)

Jewish student protesters say Columbia’s pro-Palestine demonstrations aren’t antisemitic
“There has been this discourse that Columbia is this hotbed of antisemitism, but it’s just a bunch of nerds sitting on the ground praying, chanting and doing homework,” said one student who has been at the college protest camp.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/columbia-protests-jewish-students-antisemitism-b2534817.html

In the week since a protest camp exploded across the grounds of Columbia University in solidarity with Gaza, PhD student Jonathan Ben-Menachem has been fielding worried calls from his family. They had been watching the news and were concerned for his safety.

"I’ve had to reassure them that I am not about to get mobbed by antisemites anytime I go to campus,” he told The Independent. “It’s just people trying to take a stand for what they think is right, very peacefully.”

He said he has watched with amazement as the media and political figures have attempted to characterise the protests as antisemitic and dangerous, despite Jewish student organisations playing a central role in them.

Mr Ben-Menachem is one of many Jewish students who joined the protests at Columbia and other universities across the US calling for their institutions to cut ties with companies linked to Israel over the war in Gaza.

[Dill]

Just fodder for discussion--23 Jewish faculty from Barnard and Columbia wrote this on Apr. 10, apparently motivated by
the treatment of the UPenn and Harvard presidents.  

I am very concerned about the effect of this Congressional attention on free inquiry.
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Jewish faculty reject the weaponization of antisemitism
https://www.columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2024/04/10/jewish-faculty-reject-the-weaponization-of-antisemitism/
April 10, 2024 at 3:33 PM
Dear President Shafik,

We write as Jewish faculty of Columbia and Barnard in anticipation of your appearance before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on April 17, where you are expected to answer questions about antisemitism on campus. Based on the committee’s previous hearings, we are gravely concerned about the false narratives that frame these proceedings to entrap witnesses. We urge you, as the University president, to defend our shared commitment to universities as sites of learning, critical thinking, and knowledge production against this new McCarthyism.

Rather than being concerned with the safety and well-being of Jewish students on campuses, the committee is leveraging antisemitism in a wider effort to caricature and demonize universities as hotbeds of “woke indoctrination.” Its opportunistic use of antisemitism in a moment of crisis is expanding and strengthening longstanding efforts to undermine educational institutions. After launching attacks on public universities from Florida to South Dakota, this campaign has opened a new front against private institutions.

The prospect of Rep. Elise Stefanik, a member of congress with a history of espousing white nationalist politics, calling university presidents to account for alleged antisemitism on their campuses reveals these proceedings as disingenuous political theater.

In the face of these coordinated attacks on higher education, universities must insist on their freedom to research and teach inconvenient truths. This includes historical injustices and the contemporary structures that perpetuate them, regardless of whether these facts are politically inexpedient for certain interest groups.

To be sure, antisemitism is a grave concern that should be scrutinized alongside racism, sexism, Islamophobia, homophobia, and all other forms of hate. These hateful ideologies exist everywhere and we would be ignorant to believe that they don’t exist at Columbia. When antisemitism rears its head, it should be swiftly denounced, and its perpetrators held to account. However, it is absurd to claim that antisemitism—“discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews,” according to the Jerusalem Declaration’s definition—is rampant on Columbia’s campus. To argue that taking a stand against Israel’s war on Gaza is antisemitic is to pervert the meaning of the term.

Labeling pro-Palestinian expression as anti-Jewish hate speech requires a dangerous and false conflation of Zionism with Jewishness, of political ideology with identity. This conflation betrays a woefully inaccurate understanding—and disingenuous misrepresentation—of Jewish history, identity, and politics. It erases more than a century of debates among Jews themselves about the nature of a Jewish homeland in the biblical Land of Israel, including Israel’s status as a Jewish nation-state. It dismisses the experiences of the post-Zionist, non-Zionist, and anti-Zionist Jews who work, study, and live on our campus.

The political passions that arise from conflict in the Middle East may deeply unsettle students, faculty, and staff with opposing views. But feeling uncomfortable is not the same thing as being threatened or discriminated against. Free expression, which is fundamental to both academic inquiry and democracy, necessarily entails exposure to views that may be deeply disconcerting. We can support students who feel real and valid discomfort toward protests advocating for Palestinian liberation while also stating clearly and firmly that this discomfort is not an issue of safety.

As faculty, we dedicate ourselves and our classrooms to keeping every student safe from real harm, harassment, and discrimination. We commit to helping them learn to experience discomfort and even confrontation as part of the process of skill and knowledge acquisition—and to help them realize that ideas we oppose can be contested without being suppressed.

By exacting discipline, inviting police presence, and broadly surveilling its students for minor offenses, the University is betraying its educational mission. It has pursued drastic measures against students, including disciplinary proceedings and probation, for infractions like allegedly attending an unauthorized protest, or moving barricades to drape a flag on a statue. Real harassment and physical intimidation and violence on campus must be confronted seriously and its perpetrators held accountable. At the same time, the University should refrain whenever possible from using discipline and surveillance as means of addressing less serious harms, and should never use punitive measures to address conflicts over ideas and the feelings of discomfort that result. Where the University once embraced and defended students’ political expression, it now suppresses and disciplines it.

The University’s recent policies represent a dramatic change from historical practice, and the consequences are ruinous to our community and its principles. In the past, Columbia has periodically confronted attacks against pro-Palestinian speech, ranging from the vile slanders against Professor Edward Said to the reckless accusations from the David Project. But where for decades the University stood firm against smear campaigns targeting its professors, it has now voluntarily accepted the job of censoring its faculty in and outside the classroom.

Columbia’s commitment to free inquiry and robust disagreement is what makes it a world-class institution. Limiting academic freedom when it comes to questions of Israel and Palestine paves the way for limitations on other contested topics, from climate science to the history of slavery. What’s more, students must have the freedom to dissent, to make mistakes, to offend without intent, and to learn to repair harm done if necessary. Free expression is not only crucial to student development and education outside the classroom; the tradition of student protest has also played a vital role in American democracy. Columbia should be proud of having participated in nationwide student organizing that helped secure civil rights and reproductive rights and helped bring an end to the Vietnam War and apartheid in South Africa.

We express our support for the University and for higher education against the attacks likely to be leveled against them at the upcoming congressional hearing. We object to the weaponization of antisemitism. And we advocate for a campus where all students, Jewish, Palestinian, and all others, can learn and thrive in a climate of open, honest inquiry and rigorous debate.

Many members of our University community share our perspective, but they have not yet been heard. Columbia students, staff, alumni, and faculty can sign here to show your support for this letter’s message.

The 23 authors of this letter are Jewish faculty members of Barnard College and Columbia University. This letter derives from a much longer one by these same 23 faculty sent to President Shafik on April 5.

[Dill]

I've wondered how I would handle this situation.

Statement from Columbia University President Minouche Shafik
https://president.columbia.edu/news/statement-columbia-university-president-minouche-shafik-4-29
Dear fellow members of the Columbia community,

Our University is committed to four core principles, which underpin all of our work and our shared values as a community:

First, we must keep all members of our community physically safe on campus. 

Second, we are committed to academic freedom and to ensuring that all members of our community have the right to speak their minds.

Third, just as everyone at Columbia has the right to express their views, they also must respect the rights of others to do the same. As a result, protests must comply with time, place, and manner restrictions which, for example, prevent loud protests at night when other students are trying to sleep or prepare for exams. One group’s rights to express their views cannot come at the expense of another group’s right to speak, teach, and learn.

Fourth, our values—as well as our duties under civil rights laws—compel us to condemn hate and to protect every member of our community from harassment and discrimination. Antisemitic language and actions are unacceptable and calls for violence are simply abhorrent.

I know that many of our Jewish students, and other students as well, have found the atmosphere intolerable in recent weeks. Many have left campus, and that is a tragedy.  To those students and their families, I want to say to you clearly: You are a valued part of the Columbia community. This is your campus too. We are committed to making Columbia safe for everyone, and to ensuring that you feel welcome and valued.

We've worked hard to balance these principles. To that end, since Wednesday, a small group of academic leaders has been in constructive dialogue with student organizers to find a path that would result in the dismantling of the encampment and adherence to University policies going forward. Regretfully, we were not able to come to an agreement.

Both sides in these discussions put forward robust and thoughtful offers and worked in good faith to reach common ground. We thank them all for their diligent work, long hours, and careful effort and wish they had reached a different outcome.

The University’s goal for the talks was a collaborative resolution with the protestors that would result in the orderly removal of the encampment from the lawn. The students also were asked to commit going forward to following the University’s rules, including those on the time, place, and manner for demonstrations and events.
While the University will not divest from Israel, the University offered to develop an expedited timeline for review of new proposals from the students by the Advisory Committee for Socially Responsible Investing, the body that considers divestment matters. The University also offered to publish a process for students to access a list of Columbia’s direct investment holdings, and to increase the frequency of updates to that list of holdings.

Additionally, the University offered to convene a faculty committee to address academic freedom and to begin a discussion on access and financial barriers to academic programs and global centers. The University also offered to make investments in health and education in Gaza, including supporting early childhood development and support for displaced scholars. There are important ideas that emerged from this dialogue, and we plan to explore pursuing them in the future.

As the past seven months have shown, our campus is roiled by divisions over the war in Gaza. All year, we have sought to facilitate opportunities for our students and faculty to engage in constructive dialogue, and we have provided ample space for protests and vigils to take place peacefully and without disruptions to academic life.

But we must take into account the rights of all members of our community. The encampment has created an unwelcoming environment for many of our Jewish students and faculty. External actors have contributed to creating a hostile environment in violation of Title VI, especially around our gates, that is unsafe for everyone—including our neighbors. With classes now concluding, it represents a noisy distraction for our students studying for exams and for everyone trying to complete the academic year.
Consistent with our interim demonstration policies, after reading days, exams, and Commencement, protests may continue on campus by application with two-days’ notice in authorized locations. We have no intention of suppressing speech or the right to peaceful protest.

We also do not want to deprive thousands of students and their families and friends of a graduation celebration. Please recall that many in this graduating class did not get a celebration when graduating from high school because of the pandemic, and many of them are the first in their families to earn a University degree. We owe it to all of our graduates and their loved ones to honor their achievement. We want to reassure our community who are trying to make plans that we will indeed hold a Commencement.

For all of the reasons above, we urge those in the encampment to voluntarily disperse. We are consulting with a broader group in our community to explore alternative internal options to end this crisis as soon as possible. We will continue to update the community with new developments.

Sincerely,

Minouche Shafik
President, Columbia University in the City of New York

[Dill]

On Life, Liberty and Levin last night, they were characterizing protestors as Hitler Youth. Levin asserted that some vague number of university professors supported Hitler in 1939 and that is a "precedent" for what is going on now. This seems to a theme which will likely guide hard-right blowback to the current anti-war demonstrations campuses--the demonstrators protesting the mass civilian casualties in Gaza are "pro-genocide."

Trey Gowdy's show followed with similar alarm over "growing anti-semitism" and BIden's refusal to give Netanyahu free rein. He interviewed Hugh Hewitt, who proposed Tom Cotton and Mike Pompeo as Trump VP candidates, or failing that, Secretary of Defense of NSC advisor.  That should start people thinking of how Trump would be manage a crisis which will still be ongoing if he wins the presidency.

Bernie responds by attacking the source:
Sanders hits back at Netanyahu: ‘It is not antisemitic to hold you accountable’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/27/bernie-sanders-benjamin-netanyahu-israel-gaza-war

Bernie Sanders has hit back fiercely at Benjamin Netanyahu over the Israeli prime minister’s claim that US universities were being overrun by antisemitism on a scale comparable to the rise of Nazism in Germany.

In a video posted on X, the progressive senator from Vermont – who is Jewish – accused Netanyahu of “insult[ing] the intelligence of the American people” by using antisemitism to distract attention from the policies of his “extremist and racist government” in the military offensive in Gaza.

“No Mr Netanyahu, it is not antisemitic or pro-Hamas to point out that, in a little over six months, your extremist government has killed over 34,000 Palestinians and wounded more than 78,000, 70% of whom are women and children,” Sanders said.. . .

In a blistering conclusion, he said: “Mr Netanyahu, antisemitism is a vile and disgusting form of bigotry that has done unspeakable harm to many millions of people.

“But please, do not insult the intelligence of the American people by attempting to distract us from the immoral and illegal policies of your extremist and racist government. … It is not antisemitic to hold you accountable for your actions.”

Sanders’ comments were a riposte to a video posted on social media by Netanyahu in which he waded in to protests sweeping American university campuses and claimed not enough was being done to combat a “horrific” rise in antisemitism.

“Antisemitic mobs have taken over leading universities,” Netanyahu said. “They call for the annihilation of Israel. They attack Jewish students. They attack Jewish faculty. This is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s.

“It has to be stopped. It has to be condemned and condemned unequivocally, but that’s not what happened. The response of several university presidents was shameful. Now fortunately, state, federal and local officials, many of them, have responded differently. But there has to be more.”

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-25-2024, 06:34 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't think the Columbia president has handled this well.  She's vacillated on when the protests need to stop, and how, several times.  I agree that she was not invited to Congress in good faith, but that doesn't change her failure to address student safety.  As for the student journalists, I have seen actual footage that rather casts substantial doubt on these protests being peaceful or non-confrontational.  They have to go to classes with the people they're reporting on and there have been several Jewish students who have detailed harassment or being made to feel unsafe.

But no one needs to take my word for it, the university has conceded it's not safe by making classes available online for the remainder of the school year.  Why would they do that if these are safe, peaceful protests?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/us/columbia-university-remote-classes-protests.html

[*Nately120*]

(04-29-2024, 02:24 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote:

In all fairness, I've heard that someone there from the CIA told people it'd be "totally cool" to riot so they couldn't NOT do it.

[GMDino]

(04-29-2024, 02:24 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote:

It was all under control.

[Dill]

(04-29-2024, 03:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: It was all under control.

Funny how the same sides line up against each other and the same stereotypes are deployed,
especially where student protests are concerned.

Then a couple decades later EVERYONE was for civil rights or divestment from South Africa
or against the Iraq war or whatever those crazy immature and disorderly students were protesting.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-29-2024, 10:26 PM)Dill Wrote: Funny how the same sides line up against each other and the same stereotypes are deployed,
especially where student protests are concerned.

Then a couple decades later EVERYONE was for civil rights or divestment from South Africa
or against the Iraq war or whatever those crazy immature and disorderly students were protesting.

You continually trying to equate these pro-Hamas protests to the civil rights or anti-apartheid movement reeks of desperation.  A slight difference, neither of those protests favored the side of admitted pro-genocide, gang rapist, murdering kidnappers of infants and the elderly.  You want to even move in that direction then you've got to eliminate Hamas from the equation.  Which means eliminating Iran from the equation.  Which means eliminating Islamic extremism from the equation.  In other words, you got a long hard road ahead before this even begins to be a discussion.

[GMDino]

(04-30-2024, 12:09 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You continually trying to equate these pro-Hamas protests to the civil rights or anti-apartheid movement reeks of desperation.  A slight difference, neither of those protests favored the side of admitted pro-genocide, gang rapist, murdering kidnappers of infants and the elderly.  You want to even move in that direction then you've got to eliminate Hamas from the equation.  Which means eliminating Iran from the equation.  Which means eliminating Islamic extremism from the equation.  In other words, you got a long hard road ahead before this even begins to be a discussion.

You keep trying to portray the protests as "pro hamas".  What I have seen is pro palestinian people.

Vietnam war protests were not "pro communism" they were anti-war.

Civil rights protests were pro-equal rights.

Now there were a lot of people pro-violence in those days...but they were mostly on the side that ended up on the wrong side of history.

 

[jmccracky]

(04-30-2024, 07:21 AM)GMDino Wrote: You keep trying to portray the protests as "pro hamas".  What I have seen is pro palestinian people.

Vietnam war protests were not "pro communism" they were anti-war.

Civil rights protests were pro-equal rights.

Now there were a lot of people pro-violence in those days...but they were mostly on the side that ended up on the wrong side of history.

 

I've been seeing protesters wearing t shirts that say "Jews cease fire". That's a problem. I even saw it on CNN the other day. Why are we (us liberals) not calling that out? Look....if it said "Israel cease fire", I wouldn't have a problem with that. But calling out Jews for a cease fire is anti Semitic. And it's getting worse and scary for those, like my wife, who are Jewish. 

You are seeing it only as being pro Palestinian people, which could be what a lot of protesters are there for. Protests can be a good thing, but anti Semitic rhetoric has no place. I'm sure you'd have a problem with protesters on the right with t shirts saying "blacks stop committing crimes" amongst the crowds. It's disgusting. But our side isn't as bad is what my fellow left friends say when I bring it up. I hate that way of thinking. 

Not trying to argue. Just trying to make you see what I see if you ain't seeing it. 

[GMDino]

(04-30-2024, 09:46 AM)jmccracky Wrote: I've been seeing protesters wearing t shirts that say "Jews cease fire". That's a problem. I even saw it on CNN the other day. Why are we (us liberals) not calling that out? Look....if it said "Israel cease fire", I wouldn't have a problem with that. But calling out Jews for a cease fire is anti Semitic. And it's getting worse and scary for those, like my wife, who are Jewish. 

You are seeing it only as being pro Palestinian people, which could be what a lot of protesters are there for. Protests can be a good thing, but anti Semitic rhetoric has no place. I'm sure you'd have a problem with protesters on the right with t shirts saying "blacks stop committing crimes" amongst the crowds. It's disgusting. But our side isn't as bad is what my fellow left friends say when I bring it up. I hate that way of thinking. 

Not trying to argue. Just trying to make you see what I see if you ain't seeing it. 

I'm sure there are outliers that are crossing the line. I'd imagine I could find some pro-Israel protestors that are saying awful things to the pro-Palestinian protestors.

I'm just speaking in general.  

Americans become very "anti-protest" and base it on the worst of the worst, or how the feel about the subject being protested.

For example: No one said we should stop all protests because of Jan 6th.  The discussion was on the protestors that went too far and destroyed property and wanted to hang the VP.

So while there are probably examples of people protesting Jewish people vs Israel I'm not going to focus on that.

I want peace and hostages released.  I understand Hamas started this round and that Israel/Netanyahu allowed Hamas to continue for the sake of politics.

That's why I'm focusing on the people who are caught in the middle of the conflict between leaders who only want to see each other dead.

And I'll add that all of these battles and bombing and killing only create MORE people on both sides that want to see each other dead....which is why I want it to stop.

[jmccracky]

(04-30-2024, 10:00 AM)GMDino Wrote: I'm sure there are outliers that are crossing the line. I'd imagine I could find some pro-Israel protestors that are saying awful things to the pro-Palestinian protestors.

I'm just speaking in general.  

Americans become very "anti-protest" and base it on the worst of the worst, or how the feel about the subject being protested.

For example: No one said we should stop all protests because of Jan 6th.  The discussion was on the protestors that went too far and destroyed property and wanted to hang the VP.

So while there are probably examples of people protesting Jewish people vs Israel I'm not going to focus on that.

I want peace and hostages released.  I understand Hamas started this round and that Israel/Netanyahu allowed Hamas to continue for the sake of politics.

That's why I'm focusing on the people who are caught in the middle of the conflict between leaders who only want to see each other dead.

And I'll add that all of these battles and bombing and killing only create MORE people on both sides that want to see each other dead....which is why I want it to stop.

I don't disagree with a lot here. I guess I'm just seeing a lot of the anti Jew rhetoric and several examples enough to concern me. Not just a t shirt or two. I hope you're right and it's just a real minority. But according to the lefties at work and my friends (I'm pretty far left), it's creeping into their psyche. They say "we love everyone!", then say the Jews are bad lol. Then say not all Jews when I give em a look. It's the same as when a racist dude says "not all blacks are bad" when trying to explain that they ain't THAT racist. Lol 

Thanks for the discussion. I hope I'm wrong. 

[Belsnickel]

(04-30-2024, 10:40 AM)jmccracky Wrote: I don't disagree with a lot here. I guess I'm just seeing a lot of the anti Jew rhetoric and several examples enough to concern me. Not just a t shirt or two. I hope you're right and it's just a real minority. But according to the lefties at work and my friends (I'm pretty far left), it's creeping into their psyche. They say "we love everyone!", then say the Jews are bad lol. Then say not all Jews when I give em a look. It's the same as when a racist dude says "not all blacks are bad" when trying to explain that they ain't THAT racist. Lol 

Thanks for the discussion. I hope I'm wrong. 

I think this is the inherent problem of any ethnic state and protesting the actions of it. When it comes to typical activist actions there isn't much room to parse out the nuances between the country, the government, and the people. In addition, the role of the Jewish people as antagonists in western society is so deep rooted that it is not surprising at all to me when people start leaning towards that in these scenarios. This is something that has been a part of the psyche of our culture for centuries at this point and it really isn't going to take much to play on that. Obviously, this is both concerning and problematic but it is something that we need to come to terms with before we can ever move past it.

[Millhouse]

(04-30-2024, 07:21 AM)GMDino Wrote: You keep trying to portray the protests as "pro hamas".  What I have seen is pro palestinian people.

Vietnam war protests were not "pro communism" they were anti-war.

Civil rights protests were pro-equal rights.

Now there were a lot of people pro-violence in those days...but they were mostly on the side that ended up on the wrong side of history.

 

There are both pro-hamas/jihad and pro-Palestine protestors tho. And I hate to use looks of someone in a discussion, but the look of many of these protestors it's hard to tell which. But I do think many if not almost all the pro-jihad/hamas ones are not college students, at least I hope to God they aren't.