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

[Loren Pechtel]

This is an interview from about a week ago, Columbia student Jonathan Ben-Menachem. I don't think I disagree with him.

JBM is a far-left police abolitionist. See his screeds here.

I don't think I disagree with Columbia's decision to ban [Khymani James] either.

He should be expelled, not just temporarily banned from campus.

Because you disagree with his ideas?

Once again you have the facts and omit them from what you quote.

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.

Ethnic cleansing means getting the targeted people to leave. It doesn't matter how - death or movement. There is plenty of death in Gaza - direct from IDF attacks and indirect from disease and starvation. And if people were easier to leave Gaza, I'd suspect there'd be a larger exodus.

So, yeah, it pretty much looks like ethnic cleansing.

Hamas won't let people leave unless they have foreign passports.

And if there's a lot of death from starvation why haven't there been any starvation deaths in quite a while? The Gaza Ministry of Health publishes numbers.

Nothing in your response rebuts my observation that is bold-faced above..

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

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.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Also, ...

CIVIC Joins Call to Stop Arms Transfers to Israel, Palestinian Armed Groups

Center for Civilians in Conflict alongside 15 other international humanitarian and human rights organizations have issued an open call to all UN member states to stop fuelling the conflict and prevent further loss of civilian life by halting the transfers of arms to Israel and Palestinian armed...

civiliansinconflict.org

CIVIC is making a a false equivalence between Israel, a free and democratic country, with terror groups like Hamas or Islamic Jihad.

CIVIC is not making a false equivalence as they have stated things Israel has done and things that Hamas has done. They are actually way more objective than you are.

There is no equivalence here.

There doesn't need to be an equivalence as there just needs to be an end to the war.

Besides, there is zero chance Iran will stop arming their proxies.

That is at least a better argument but lessening arms to Israel doesn't require that there are no equal conditions to Hamas which is actually what CIVIC is for, but not YOU.

So any stop of arm sales to Israel by western countries would be a one-sided action that would harm our ally and strengthen our enemies.

It SEEMS that way to you but where you have gone wrong is that Hamas is not being funded by the US and so if one want the US to act to help stop civilian casualties (their MISSION), then getting Israel to reduce such atrocities would be done with the help of the US.

 

[Arctish]

Show me case law where a person was charged with assault in NY for spraying something like this "in close proximity" to people.
But then again, Alvin Bragg is a highly political DA. Would not surprise me if he found some "novel legal theory" to charge it while ignoring all the crimes by the anti-Israel crowd.

Go look it up yourself. Here, I'll help you get started.

Those are about spraying people in the face, and using things like pepper spray. Not just spraying gag fart spray or cologne sprayed in "vicinity" of people.

It's been reported at multiple news sites that 8 students were hospitalized as a result of the attack. Columbia's Provost said "The New York City Police Department is taking the lead role in investigating what appear to have been serious crimes, possibly hate crimes."

From the Grauniad article:

Columbia’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) said eight students were a hospitalized as a result. Students reported their clothes and hair had a foul smell for hours after the protest.

I would not trust SJP not to twist facts (for example exaggerating the severity of the protestors' condition or treatment) nor would I trust anything claimed by these protesters. Have these alleged clothes even been tested?

Even if it was Skunk (for which, again there is zero evidence), it was designed to be a non-harmful crowd control weapon that would strongly motivate people to disperse because of how extremely malodorous it is. In another article, one of the anti-Israel protestors said that she had an autoimmune condition. It is very much possible she needed medical attention because of it, and not the smell. Same could be true for the other 8.

Doing something that sends 8 people to the hospital is serious shit. Stop trying to trivialize it.

First you'd have to prove that the stinky substance (whatever it was) caused any damage. There is also the possibility that they were malingering.

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?

 

[laughing dog]

This is an interview from about a week ago, Columbia student Jonathan Ben-Menachem. I don't think I disagree with him.

JBM is a far-left police abolitionist. See his screeds here.

I don't think I disagree with Columbia's decision to ban [Khymani James] either.

He should be expelled, not just temporarily banned from campus.

Because you disagree with his ideas?

Once again you have the facts and omit them from what you quote.

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.

Ethnic cleansing means getting the targeted people to leave. It doesn't matter how - death or movement. There is plenty of death in Gaza - direct from IDF attacks and indirect from disease and starvation. And if people were easier to leave Gaza, I'd suspect there'd be a larger exodus.

So, yeah, it pretty much looks like ethnic cleansing.

Hamas won't let people leave unless they have foreign passports.

And if there's a lot of death from starvation why haven't there been any starvation deaths in quite a while? The Gaza Ministry of Health publishes numbers.

Nothing in your response rebuts my observation that is bold-faced above..

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.

(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.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Students at Brown Just Secured a Vote on Divestment. What Happens Next?

On April 30, protesters disbanded their encampment when the university pledged to vote on divestment from companies affiliated with Israel. This shows a different way of doing things.

www.thenation.com

One less reason Israel has to give a crap about US opinions.
Tom
ETA ~ Let me ask this again. What do people think would happen if Israel has no reason to care about US opinions anymore?~

Are you suggesting Israel would commit Genocide? That sounds anti-Semitic.

 

[TomC]

Are you suggesting Israel would commit Genocide? That sounds anti-Semitic.

Nope.
I don't think Israel is capable of a genocide.
They could ramp up defense efforts, though.

It is not anti-Semitic to want peace. I don't think that leaving Hamas in place, or the capability of launching another big terrorist attack, is conducive to peace for anyone.
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ethnic cleansing means getting the targeted people to leave. It doesn't matter how - death or movement. There is plenty of death in Gaza - direct from IDF attacks and indirect from disease and starvation. And if people were easier to leave Gaza, I'd suspect there'd be a larger exodus.

So, yeah, it pretty much looks like ethnic cleansing.

Hamas won't let people leave unless they have foreign passports.

And if there's a lot of death from starvation why haven't there been any starvation deaths in quite a while? The Gaza Ministry of Health publishes numbers.

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

I'm certain laughing dog would love for Hamas to surrender. They won't though.

Hamas was bad before Oxtober 7th. Their existance post October 7th, in light of the hostage taking is effectively unacceptable.

This doesn't justify a siege.

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

If there's a better why has nobody said something? There are a lot of military planners in a lot of countries, why have none of them put forth a better solution?

 

[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".

 

[Politesse]

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.

 

[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?

That is not the ratio they have targeted, let alone executed. Israel herself claims to have killed two civilians for every "terrorist", and the actual ratio is of course almost certainly worse. Though impossible to estimate with any certainty.

You appear to have misinterpreted what I was saying.

Of the population of Hamas approximately 40% are dead. Of the population of Gaza approximately 1% are dead. Percentages. Your source gives numbers, not percentages.

Sources:

Early on in the war, IDF gave clearance to allow 20 civilian deaths for every low-ranking Hamas suspect, intelligence sources said: report

Israeli's military outlined a ratio for the number of civilians who could be killed for every Hamas militant, according to a report.

www.businessinsider.com

From 972 and the Guardian. Don't expect good information.

Counting casualties in Israel’s war on Gaza

My Good Chat with Sarah Parkinson digs deep into what's really going on with those estimates being cited in the media.

abuaardvark.substack.com

Based around the fallacy that Israel is counting all men as combatants.

We have a count of combatants from Israel, we have a count of dead from Hamas and a count of dead from the Gaza Ministry of Health. Strangely enough the Israeli count is pretty close to the difference between the Hamas count and the MoH count. And note that Hamas generally doesn't admit any combatants died (although one official admitted 6,000 some time back.) Given this agreement in the numbers I think the Israeli count is right.

Daily death rate in Gaza higher than any other major 21st Century conflict - Oxfam | Oxfam International

www.oxfam.org

Which proves nothing other than the pace of combat. And I have a very hard time believing it's below the pace in the Ukraine/Russia conflict.

 

[laughing dog]

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.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Students at Brown Just Secured a Vote on Divestment. What Happens Next?

On April 30, protesters disbanded their encampment when the university pledged to vote on divestment from companies affiliated with Israel. This shows a different way of doing things.

www.thenation.com

One less reason Israel has to give a crap about US opinions.
Tom
ETA ~ Let me ask this again. What do people think would happen if Israel has no reason to care about US opinions anymore?~

They would have no recourse except to withdraw from their campaign. They cannot support it without American aid, and the guarantee of our diplomatic support in the UN, in conversation with the EU, and ultimately mutual defense should their attempted provocations succeed in launching a broader regional war. They are a tiny nation, they only get to play big dog because they have powerful friends.

You have the world backwards.

By providing aid we both increase their ability to minimize civilian deaths and push them to minimize civilian deaths.

Would you prefer they switch to unguided bombs and flatten the place???

You are basically telling a nuclear power to submit to genocide. They'll turn their keys before they allow that to happen.

 

[Politesse]

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.

 

[TomC]

You appear to have misinterpreted what I was saying.

Honestly dude, I didn't understand that either. It looked more like a whopping big hyperbole, to be charitable.
I get what you're saying now, but I didn't then.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Expecting Israel to fight their neighbors with one hand tied behind their back

I expect Israel to defend herself against exidtential threats from neighbours, and am happy to support her in doing so with both hands.

I don't expect her to fight a hugely disproportionate war against a lightly armed enclave that poses only a minor threat.

And I don't appreciate her leaders attempting to bully the US, and the rest of the world, into accepting the lie that the latter is indistinguishable from the former.

The problem is that you seem to regard it as a minor threat.

It is effectively impossible to prevent 10/7 type actions other than by destroying the capability to do so. To say that they must not do so is to say they must submit to a death of a thousand cuts.

And the term "disproportionate war" makes no sense. There is an expectation of proportionality in balancing civilian deaths against military objectives, but there is no expectation of proportionality in the forces fielded. Once the line of deadly force is crossed there are no more lines short of WMD. The only part of Israel's actions that in any way violate the norms of war is not pointing out the misuse of protected targets, but that exists to guard against accidents and is meaningless against an enemy that routinely does so.

 

[TomC]

Israel is too dangerous to refuse weapons to?

Nope.
More like Hamas lead Gaza is to dangerous to leave with the military capacity to resume the violence.
Tom

 

[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

And Hamas bends over backwards to cause civilian/combatant confusion.

 

[Politesse]

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?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Ethnic cleansing means getting the targeted people to leave. It doesn't matter how - death or movement. There is plenty of death in Gaza - direct from IDF attacks and indirect from disease and starvation. And if people were easier to leave Gaza, I'd suspect there'd be a larger exodus.

So, yeah, it pretty much looks like ethnic cleansing.

Hamas won't let people leave unless they have foreign passports.

And if there's a lot of death from starvation why haven't there been any starvation deaths in quite a while? The Gaza Ministry of Health publishes numbers.

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

I'm certain laughing dog would love for Hamas to surrender. They won't though.

Hamas was bad before Oxtober 7th. Their existance post October 7th, in light of the hostage taking is effectively unacceptable.

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?