• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

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

So the President of Columbia University calls the cops on protesters, has them arrested, suspends those who are students at Columbia and that is not enough for this goose-stepping jackasses.

Being arrested doesn't mean much since Alvin Bragg is very unlikely to prosecute.

And those who are chanting/displaying pro-Hamas slogans or calling for Tel Aviv to be bombed and 10/7 to be repeated should be expelled, not just suspended.

'October 7 is about to be every day': Columbia rally sees Hamas support

"Goose-stepping jackasses" is a better description for the Columbia terrorism supporters anyway.
encampments_3.jpeg

Be they supporters of Hamas or PFLP or any other terror outfit.
 
So the President of Columbia University calls the cops on protesters, has them arrested, suspends those who are students at Columbia and that is not enough for this goose-stepping jackasses.

Being arrested doesn't mean much since Alvin Bragg is very unlikely to prosecute.
Were you expecting them to? They were arrested in order to clear up the area. Not to put them in jail for a month.
And those who are chanting/displaying pro-Hamas slogans or calling for Tel Aviv to be bombed and 10/7 to be repeated should be expelled, not just suspended.
Is that happening anywhere on campus?
 
Is that happening anywhere on campus?

I can't speak to the two photos. If I had to guess I'd guess the first is on campus and the second is not, but in front of the gates.

Now, if you follow the link, there is an embedded video in the news article. Watching the video, shows a street sign of 116th which is on the opposite side of the street. From that I deduce this is the same spot as in other videos I posted where the militant liberation group from NYC, not Columbia appeared. Furthermore, if you watch the video, you will observe one of those yellow signs which is the same from the other videos.

Since the intersection of 116th and Broadway, i.e. in front of some gates is where outside agitator organizations have been repeatedly and since on social media they said to go there to show support for students being arrested and since we can see their type of rhetoric and their sign, it is the most reasonable inference to say that is the outside agitators.
 
Last edited:
So the President of Columbia University calls the cops on protesters, has them arrested, suspends those who are students at Columbia and that is not enough for this goose-stepping jackasses.

Being arrested doesn't mean much since Alvin Bragg is very unlikely to prosecute.
It means alot more than not being arrested.
Derec said:
And those who are chanting/displaying pro-Hamas slogans or calling for Tel Aviv to be bombed and 10/7 to be repeated should be expelled, not just suspended.
Because you don’t like their views is a pretty authoritarian standard to apply.
 
Gaza Solidarity Encampments have been popping up at colleges across the country, such as Brown, in Texas, in California, Washington, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Michigan....in addition to the places already mentioned in the thread.
 
Remember back just a few years when conservatives were talking about how there is no free speech on college campuses? Back in 2019, Gov Abbot from Texas signed a bill to guarantee free speech on college campuses:


Now this is happening:
University of Texas at Austin


Gov Abbot has said the protestors should all be arrested and expelled.
 
Who could have expected that endorsing religious violence abroad might upset students domestically. Have they no Party loyalty?
Those who celebrate Hamas and the 10/7 attacks are the ones endorsing religious violence.
That is patently illogical. Everyone who supports religious slayings in any way is endorsing religious violence.
 
Remember back just a few years when conservatives were talking about how there is no free speech on college campuses? Back in 2019, Gov Abbot from Texas signed a bill to guarantee free speech on college campuses:
There is a difference between free speech and occupying/camping out and refusing to leave.
 
It means alot more than not being arrested.
Chilling for a few hours in a holding cell is not that much of a punishment.
Because you don’t like their views is a pretty authoritarian standard to apply.
Is it? In previous discussions you were very supportive of universities expelling people they deemed violated their rules. I guess you think that is ok for when it comes to male students wrongfully accused of sexual assault, but when it comes to Hamas-supporters camping out on the quad, you think expelling them is authoritarian.
 
Were you expecting them to? They were arrested in order to clear up the area. Not to put them in jail for a month.
1. My point was that whether or not they should be prosecuted
2. The secondary point is that Bragg, being a leftist, is unlikely to want to prosecute leftist troublemakers even if they did commit crimes. Hardly any NYC 2020 rioters were prosecuted by local DAs. Bragg is only interested in prosecuting Trump and people who defend themselves or others from criminals, like Jose Alba or Daniel Perry.
3. Lastly, there are penalties other than jailing somebody for a month such as fines and community service.
Is that happening anywhere on campus?
And what if it's just off-campus? Should Columbia's hateful speech rules not apply? If they would expel somebody for, e.g., yelling "we are all KKK" and having a sign pointing toward a group of black people that says "next victims", then they should expel these Hamasnik creeps too.
 
At this point, I do not find it interesting any longer that Derec is ready to get the police to go after Columbia students for something that other people said,
I did not say that. They should be responsible for what they said and did. Do you really think that none of the pro-Hamas creeps were Columbia students? Even if one student group leadership denounces it on X, that does not mean there were no Columbia students doing it.
but meanwhile, demands everyone else call clearly guilty people like Chauvin merely "suspects."
I still think that was a miscarriage of justice, esp. compared to the lenient sentence Mohammed Noor got. But it also has zero to do with this thread.
Or for that matter, most recently declaring the person who attacked the Jewish lady in the Detroit area had to be Muslim.
When did I say that he had to be Muslim? Please cite.
 
I'd be absolutely fine with admitting Gazians without any connections to Hamas or any terrorist group if that helped defuse the area.
What do you mean by connections? Membership or support? If latter, vast majority of Gazans supports one of the terror factions. And I do not think letting in large numbers of very hardcore Muslims is good for the West. Just look at how Europe is faring after letting in millions of poorly (if that) vetted Muslim mass migrants from places like Afghanistan, Pakistan or Syria.
However, you and I are in the minority. The vast majority of Americans are against immigration.
Few people are against all immigration. But I do think immigration should be regulated more than it is now where basically anybody can claim "asylum" and get in.
Securing the southern border is the number one issue in American politics.
For good reasons.
And yet, there was no vile terrorist attack from the south into America.
Is that the only consideration for immigration? Crime (e.g. MS-13), economics (3rd world migrants driving wages down while putting more pressure on housing) and culture (mass migrants forming parallel societies and refusing to learn English or otherwise integrate).
We haven't been at war with Mexico.
Not recently at least.
There aren't missiles being launched in Texas. We are in the minority. Most people in the world are against legal peaceful immigration. Let alone forced immigration from people who hate the country.
Most people are for some immigration. Most people are against open borders or de-facto open borders.
It's not a binary choice.
 
I haven't defended any pro-Palestine or pro-Hamas protesters...
Not even in your sarcastic post #108?
No. I absolutely do condemn the actions of the current administration and the murderous actions of their closest allies. I hold them partially to blame for the spreading unrest in our nation. But I do not support, and have never supported, Hamas or its actions. I abhor all species of inter-religious violence, and have never taken any other position on the question.
 
Easily a million Gazans could pass a minimal bit of vetting to avoid the most violent miscreants.
So you want to let half of Gazans into US as long as they are not "most violent miscreants". Merely "violent miscreants" are fine with you? Not to mention those who are not violent themselves but espouse radical Islamist ideology?
As to your "Statue of Liberty" quip, I do not think a mediocre 19th century poem should be the basis for 21st century immigration policy. Even if it is on a big statue.

I don't know about everywhere, but there's already a substantial Muslim population stretching from Chicago to suburban Detroit.
And in Dearborn they are yelling "death to America".

Even more migration of Islamists is not a solution. It was a mistake to let them in in the first place.

But I would honestly think that most would prefer Muslim majority Egypt or Jordan. For some reason, those governments won't allow that.
Tom
Would they? Most Muslim mass migrants prefer rich EU countries because of all the benefits they can get, even if they despise their values and culture. Hell, people are even flooding from Egypt into "Germoney".
Egypt's vanishing village men: Risking it all to get to Europe
These are all economic migrants, even though they claim "asylum" as soon as they land in Europe. They are also virtually impossible to deport.
 
Back
Top Bottom