Columbia University is colluding with the far-right in its attack on students

[Loren Pechtel]

When Israel continues to seize land against international law on the west bank, drive out the Palestinians (Ethnic cleansing) to effectively expand Israel, I'd say that they have lost credibility to say that they are innocent.

I didn't say innocent, because I don't think there are many of those in the situation.

12,300 dead children, Tom. They were innocent. They were all innocent. That's what it means to be a kid.

Nope.
A 16y/o with a machine gun and a determination to kill the Jews is a child but also a combatant.

This is a problem I keep pointing out and folks like you keep hand waving away. There's no way for the IDF to distinguish between violent terrorists and anybody else in Gaza.
Tom

That is simply nonsense. They have information and they have eyes. Certainly, the difficulty of distinguishing a terrorist does not justify nor excuse killing someone because they might be a terrorist .

Your ignorance doesn't make him wrong. The reality is they are facing people acting like civilians and then grabbing up pre-placed hidden weapons. It's a tactic designed to cause mistakes and sometimes it succeeds.

 

[TomC]

When Israel continues to seize land against international law on the west bank, drive out the Palestinians (Ethnic cleansing) to effectively expand Israel, I'd say that they have lost credibility to say that they are innocent.

I didn't say innocent, because I don't think there are many of those in the situation.

12,300 dead children, Tom. They were innocent. They were all innocent. That's what it means to be a kid.

Name one who was neither target of Hamas or a human shield for Hamas.

And no, frankly, Hamas has managed to blur that line as well by employing child warriors.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Suppose a bunch of Gazans appealed to the international community for help getting rid of the most corrupt and violent leadership.
What does anyone think would happen?

My guess is nothing.
It's easier to just clutch your pearls and blame those dirty Jews.
Tom

Exactly. Standard leftist approach: Blame the side with the power, especially if they are a hated group. Compared to the standard rightist approach: Blame the side without the power, especially if they are not white, male and Christian.

Neither side has any real interest in trying to truly solve a complex problem, it's all about blame.

I do not believe in blame. I do believe in responsibility. A person, an organization, a military must be held accountable on some level for the results of the decisions they make and the actions they take, or the maintenance of civil society becomes impossible.

Hamas chose to attack, knowing that Israel would respond with a major ass-whooping. Why do you refuse to hold them accountable?

And note that you're not trying to solve the problem. You're trying to dictate that Israel sit there and die.

 

[TomC]

Hamas chose to attack, knowing that Israel would respond with a major ass-whooping. Why do you refuse to hold them accountable?

And note that you're not trying to solve the problem. You're trying to dictate that Israel sit there and die.

It's not just the October 7 attack itself.
All the resources that were redirected to the military installations came from resources that could have helped improve the situation for Gazans as a whole.

And I find it impossible to believe that wasn't known to most Gazans.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is a problem I keep pointing out and folks like you keep hand waving away. There's no way for the IDF to distinguish between violent terrorists and anybody else in Gaza.
Tom

That is simply nonsense. They have information and they have eyes. Certainly, the difficulty of distinguishing a terrorist does not justify nor excuse killing someone because they might be a terrorist .

Who does?

The IDF. I realize opinions don't require knowledge but that certainly makes them more convincing.

What makes you think IDF is better able to distinguish better than any other major participants?

Because anything less than perfection is a reason to blame a Jew.

I don't consider protecting innocent Gazans from other Gazans the responsibility of IDF.
Tom

Exactly. The IDF should avoid shooting human shields if feasible, but the deaths are fundamentally attributable to Hamas.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Nor are we attacking anyone.
So what is your point other than defending violent Muslim tribalists?
Tom

I have never made any defense of "violent Muslim tribalists", except insofar as I consider it wrong to commit or materially support religious ethnocide, regardless of target.

You have, indirectly.

Complain about the 10/7 massacre but demand that Israel not actually defend itself means another 10/7 would be coming. Think of it along the lines of harboring a fugitive--you claim to disagree with the fugitive but you want to keep the cops from getting him anyway.

I have never objected to Israel "defending itself". Genocide is not defense, they are slaughtering some of their subjects by the millions and endangering even those citizens they intend to protect by aggravating damn near half the planet against them.

You do not object to the concept of "defending itself" but you will not permit Israel to actually do so in the face of human shield tactics. Thus from a practical standpoint you say that Israel must not defend itself.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They're the world experts, there's nobody else nearly as good at minimizing civilian deaths in combat.

Sure.

In other news, my favourite football team are the best in the world. They only lose because the referees hate us for our success.

Pay a little attention to the world.

Urban Warfare | Center for Civilians in Conflict

civiliansinconflict.org

The average is about 90%.

From your website:

NGOs to President Biden: No Credible Humanitarian Plan for Attack on Rafah Exists

Today, CIVIC joined 46 organizations in sending a letter to US President Joe Biden stating that no credible humanitarian plan for an attack on Rafah exists and urging the US government to use all of its influence to prevent such an operation from occurring in order to avoid further catastrophic...

civiliansinconflict.org

Thus showing that they aren't on Israel's side.

That's in no way a rebuttal of the 90% figure.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So you didn't read the Law Stack exchange or follow the link to New York Consolidated Laws, Penal Law - PEN § 120.00 Assault in the third degree which states that

A person is guilty of assault in the third degree when:

1. With intent to cause physical injury to another person, he causes such injury to such person or to a third person;  or
2. He recklessly causes physical injury to another person;  or
3. With criminal negligence, he causes physical injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument.
Assault in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.

And you didn't follow up on the students who sought medical treatment to see if any of them had received a physical injury or had an asthma attack due to the chemicals in the spray.

You just waited for me to post the relevant part of the Penal Code, didn't you? And now you're going cry about a student being suspended for violating the Columbia Code of Conduct before the investigation into his possible criminal activity has been concluded, aren't you?

So far we have nothing that establishes actual injury took place. Going to the hospital can be because they believed injury might have taken place.

I see nothing in your description that would cover fart spray. I don't think it would cover any form of odor weapon. (I do think it would cover OC spray, though.)

 

[TomC]

So far we have nothing that establishes actual injury took place. Going to the hospital can be because they believed injury might have taken place.

Can we at least agree that it was an assault, if only a minor one?
That we are not just talking about some frat guys pranking one another?
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The issue is "The Zionists do not deserve to live."

Once again, you jump into a discussion by ignoring the context. The issue is freedom of speech.

Once again, you fail to understand.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences for your speech. The government won't put you in jail for that but the university isn't the government, they're allowed to say that someone who says that isn't allowed there.

Of course a university choose to run counter to the ethos of a university and punish speech. If the administration wishes to look like goosestepping morons, that is their perogative.

It's not acting like goosestepping morons to say that someone who advocates for mass murder isn't welcome.

Relevant terms: "plenty of death...from...starvation". Yet nobody is dying of starvation--the line is completely flat.

As usual, you are sadly misinformed:

Gaza’s Health Ministry reported as of April 1, that 32 people, including 28 children, had died of malnutrition and dehydration at hospitals in northern Gaza. Save the Children confirmed on April 2 the deaths from starvation and disease of 27 children. Earlier in March, World Health Organisation (WHO) officials found “children dying of starvation” in northern Gaza’s Kamal Adwan and al-Awda hospitals. In southern Gaza, where aid is more accessible but still grossly inadequate, UN agencies in mid-February said that 5 percent of children under age 2 were found to be acutely malnourished.

(source; Starvation and Malnutrition in Gaza)
1 person dying of starvation is too many in this day and age.

Please note that I said "the line is completely flat". There were some starvation deaths in the early part--pre-existing medical issues. (And, yes, there are conditions that can result in death by starvation even in first world medical systems. What do you do with a patient that has an anaphylactic reaction to fatty acids? There is AFIAK no (and this is something I have dug into) purified form of the essential fatty acids, even in TPN formulas. And yes, I am aware of a death by starvation because someone couldn't tolerate any TPN formula, although I don't know exactly what "couldn't tolerate" entailed.)

And note that you're attempting to prove it with "starvation and disease" or "malnutrition and dehydration". This is a basic logic failure, beloved by those who want to pretend to solve problems.

The set of (laughing dog, Hitler, Stalin) is mostly mass murderers. Therefore laughing dog is a mass murderer.

(source

And why won't you even consider the possibility of Hamas surrendering? Why is the burden always on Israel?

I have - post 331. Hamas started this particular tragedy of death and destruction. But either party can end it any time they want - each has the power to do so, just not the courage nor the will.

But you consider it impossible, that the only solution is for Israel to give in.

I consider it improbable - there is nothing preventing Hamas from surrendering or stopping but Hamas. Just like there is nothing preventing Israel from unilaterally implementing a cease fire but Israel.

But response is based on yet another one of your fallacy of the excluded middle: in between a ceasing of destruction by either Hamas or the IDF, there is a middle ground of a reduced intensity or pace of destruction by either side.

It should be obvious that simply reducing the intensity will make a worse total outcome because there will be more deaths due to the disruption of society.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why not a camp for them in the West Bank?

Seriously, why not?

Israel would find a terrorist or terrorist cell that is using the camp for cover, and use that as pretext to slaughter them all.

Israel seems to be killing terrorists at a rate of about 40x the rate they kill civilians. Why do you persist in this nonsense of claiming it's just an excuse to kill Palestinians?

Because you are using that ratio (or any kill ratio) to justify the killing of terrorists and civilians.

I was using it as a rebuttal to "pretext to slaughter them all".

And the form of your "rebuttal" was to provide demonstrably untrue numbers, then ignore it when you were corrected? That is less than convincing.

He misinterpreted what I said and proved nothing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why not a camp for them in the West Bank?

Seriously, why not?

Israel would find a terrorist or terrorist cell that is using the camp for cover, and use that as pretext to slaughter them all.

Israel seems to be killing terrorists at a rate of about 40x the rate they kill civilians. Why do you persist in this nonsense of claiming it's just an excuse to kill Palestinians?

Because you are using that ratio (or any kill ratio) to justify the killing of terrorists and civilians.

I was using it as a rebuttal to "pretext to slaughter them all".

But it has no logical connection whatsoever to the issue.

The point is they clearly are not trying to slaughter them all.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

They're the world experts, there's nobody else nearly as good at minimizing civilian deaths in combat.

Sure.

In other news, my favourite football team are the best in the world. They only lose because the referees hate us for our success.

Pay a little attention to the world.

Urban Warfare | Center for Civilians in Conflict

civiliansinconflict.org

The average is about 90%.

From your website:

NGOs to President Biden: No Credible Humanitarian Plan for Attack on Rafah Exists

Today, CIVIC joined 46 organizations in sending a letter to US President Joe Biden stating that no credible humanitarian plan for an attack on Rafah exists and urging the US government to use all of its influence to prevent such an operation from occurring in order to avoid further catastrophic...

civiliansinconflict.org

Thus showing that they aren't on Israel's side.

That's in no way a rebuttal of the 90% figure.

I don't need to try to rebut the 90%. I am telling you that your trusted source is saying there is a civilian crisis.

 

[Cognoscenti324]

Why not a camp for them in the West Bank?

Seriously, why not?

Israel would find a terrorist or terrorist cell that is using the camp for cover, and use that as pretext to slaughter them all.

Israel seems to be killing terrorists at a rate of about 40x the rate they kill civilians. Why do you persist in this nonsense of claiming it's just an excuse to kill Palestinians?

So.... with current estimates from the AP at 34,000 Palestinians killed, with some 22,000 being civilians, please show us the evidence for the 880,000 terrorist deaths your math claims....

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So this is appeasement, in your view? Israel is too dangerous to refuse weapons to? Your hypothetical scenario would have to be pretty fucking bad to be worse than what they are currently doing. 2% of the district's population dead in less than half a year, 130,000 children dead, and Israel is actively preparing to escalate and push into Rafah to finish the job. I do not agree that pandering to them has reduced the danger they pose to their subject populations. And you're asking these students to endorse genocide because, in a pure hypothetical, you are trying to paint a picture of an even worse one that could happen if they don't, without providing any rational reason to believe that your hypothetical is true. And even if it were, you're asking me to believe that the same power which would commit unfathomable horrors if left to their own devices will suddenly turn into acceptable members of the international community, as long as college students in the United States stop protesting their actions.

What fucking plane of existence do you live on? Because it isn't reality.

You're the one denying reality.

Israel has a sophisticated military production capacity, in some ways ahead of us. You think you can starve them of ammunition??

And if you did manage to starve them you're just going to push them into using the bomb because they would have no other defense.

Sorry, but they developed the bomb because of people like you who expect them to sit there and die.

 

[ZiprHead]

Until Israel pulverizes the ability to launch attacks from Gaza,

You know that's impossible, right?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Are you actually expecting me to change my mind about the moral acceptability of killing hundreds of thousands of children to achieve vague and insubstantial political goals?

I ignored your 130,000 figure before because I figured it was a simple typo. Apparently you meant it--you have a zero error there.

And what "political" goal are you even talking about? Israel's goal is to dismantle as much of Hamas as possible and to recover their hostages. Military goals, not political goals.

130,000 dead children from atrocities is a threshold only reached by Hitler, Stalin, Sudan, and probably Iran. (I am excluding Mao from this list because I believe most of the deaths he caused were by mismanagement, not by intent.)

 

[TomC]

Until Israel pulverizes the ability to launch attacks from Gaza,

You know that's impossible, right?

Yes I do. Which has a lot to do with dismissing claims about genocide.

What Israel can do is pound the Gazan military installations so hard that the rebuilding process takes more years to get done.
Which is really the goal. Possibly long enough for Muslim neighbors to get over the idea that violence is in their own best interests.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This doesn't justify a siege.

Which comes down to how do you expect them to do better?

So it is siege or nothing?

If there's a better why has nobody said something?

Seriously? How do you know they haven't? This is Netanyahu, why are you giving him the benefit of the doubt?

How am I giving him the benefit of the doubt?? He could hide something that was told to him but he couldn't stop someone from another country from publishing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And no, frankly, Hamas has managed to blur that line as well by employing child warriors.
Tom

Not only that, but one of the building blocks of the massacre was when Israel built the border wall it declared an exclusion zone near it. Hamas responded by making a bunch of innocents go into the exclusion zone until Israel couldn't take the bad press anymore. That is why Hamas was able to charge the border--because Israel no longer enforced the exclusion zone.