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

[laughing dog]

Since I doubt that level of detail exists, I’d settle for the proportion of protests that were peaceful. I know the big ones with violence get the media attention, but there were and are plenty without violence or any demands.

I know several universities caved to the anti-Israel creeps. Rutgers, Brown(shirt), Union Theological Seminary are some of them.

In other words, in this context”most” means “whatever I think I know about”.

While you are free to hold any opinion you wish, no rational observer is required to accept your idiosyncratic definition of “caving in” (which includes agreeing to discuss an issue in the future”) or conflate protesting the massive destruction and misery on the civilian population of Gaza as “anti Israel”.

Yes, there are anti- Israel protesters and antisemitic ones snd pro- terrorism ones but they are not the only ones. It is very possible they are not even “most”!

Also, a protest may be technically "peaceful" but still break the law. For example blockading access or occupying quads. Those are not acceptable tactics whether or not they are classified as "peaceful".

Occupation of quads, in and of itself, is a nothing burger. Peaceful protest on a campus is a learning experience and should be treated as one by the administration of institutions of higher learning, not as an exercise in kneejerk authoritarian dumbness in response to the pearl clutching of goosetepping braying jackasses.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Who were the violent UCLA counter-protestors?

Fox News & Friends:
Article with video.

“I can confidently say that they are not UCLA students,” Tsives replied. “The average age of those people was around 26, 27, 28, nine. They were all a lot older, and they were just L.A. residents, Jewish L.A. residents that have noticed how these pro-Hamas protesters were treating Jewish students at UCLA. And they said enough is enough.
....

CNN:
CNN identified several of the counter-protesters who caused chaos at a protest at UCLA recently

Article

All right-wing: presumably mostly Jewish as per the first eyewitness account, but also a Nazi and very far-right participants including a future member of the IDF. It's weird to see pro-Israel people and Nazis working together, but there it is...

 

[Copernicus]

No, it isn't. The 2020 rioters included a conspiracy to overturn the results of a presidential election by occupying the Capitol Building while the Senate was carrying out a Constitutional function, not just some kind of campus protest.

You missed it by a year. That was in 2021.

Good catch. Thanks for correcting my typo.

The 2020 riots were monthslong unrests triggered first by the George Floyd death although there were flareups triggered by other incidents (killing of Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta, non-fatal shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha and suicide of murder suspect Eddie Sole in Minneapolis - that's right, even thugs killing themselves triggers #BLMers into rioting!).

There were weekslong occupations of territory (such as CHAZ in Seattle), billions in property damage and several deaths including a retired police captain in St. Louis and an 8 year old girl in Atlanta.

And yet, to the Left these were all "peaceful protests" for "racial justice". What crock!

Unfortunately, it is your habit to inject your angry obsession with BLM into any discussion of a public disturbance by other people promoting other causes.

The protesters were overwhelmingly opposed to the violence being carried out by the IDF against Palestinian civilians.

The violence was started by Palestinians. And civilians get harmed in war. Blame Hamas for refusing to release all hostages.
Note that protesters started demanding a "ceasefire" from Israel a day after 10/7. They want Israel never to defend itself after being attacked - even after 1,200 Israelis get brutally murdered and hundreds kidnapped by terrorists.

The protesters aren't here to argue with you, but their priority seems to be opposition to the US contribution to the slaughter of civilians in Gaza, not concern over who started the violence. The concern is over the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of them infants and children, as a means of redressing the legitimate grievance that Israel has against Hamas. And the protesters are mainly opposing the US role in supporting the violence that is causing the humanitarian catastrophe there.

They were not there to support Hamas or promote hatred of Jews. Your disingenuous attacks are obvious and despicable.

Some do just that. Others are just useful idiots. Look at how one-sided their demands are. How devoid of any criticism for Hamas and their actions. And it is not disingenuous to point that out.

What makes your attack disingenuous is that it tars all protesters as anti-Semites or idiots, a patent absurdity. If you really believe that, then you are Netanyahu's "useful idiot". But I don't believe you do believe that. It is just your way of oversimplifying the issues and overstating your case against the protesters' anger at the scale of violence against the civilian population of Gaza. If you can make them all out to be bigots and shills for Hamas, then you can ignore their side of the argument.

 

[Derec]

Unfortunately, it is your habit to inject your angry obsession with BLM into any discussion of a public disturbance by other people promoting other causes.

It's the other way around. Every time some unrest or riot is mentioned, there is always "but what about 1/6" from your Ilk.

The protesters aren't here to argue with you, but their priority seems to be opposition to the US contribution to the slaughter of civilians in Gaza, not concern over who started the violence.

Which is very myopic. They are ok with Hamas and other Palestinian terror groups slaughtering civilians in Israel, but the moment Israel starts going after the terrorists, they demand a "ceasefire". Is it any wonder I think they are either supporting Hamas or else are useful idiots?

The concern is over the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of them infants and children, as a means of redressing the legitimate grievance that Israel has against Hamas.

How many of them are children? The numbers are iffy. Hamas ministry numbers are not to be trusted.
Again, this war was started by Gaza, chiefly (but not solely) by Hamas. They also engage in tactics that put their civilians at enhanced risk.
All of that is ignored by the protestors who only blame Israel and even support Hamas ("resistance is justified", "by all means necessary" etc.).

And the protesters are mainly opposing the US role in supporting the violence that is causing the humanitarian catastrophe there.

It is actions by Hamas and other Gazan groups that have caused the humanitarian catastrophe. They are directly impeding aid, for example by their rocket attack on the Kerem Shalom crossing.

What makes your attack disingenuous is that it tars all protesters as anti-Semites or idiots, a patent absurdity.

" Useful idiot" is a term of art. Wikipedia defines it thus:

A useful idiot or useful fool is a person who thinks they are fighting for a cause without fully comprehending the consequences of their actions, and who is cynically manipulated by the cause's leaders or by other political players.[1][2] The term was often used during the Cold War to describe non-communists regarded as susceptible to communist propaganda and psychological manipulation.[1]

It fits well those who are not Hamas supporters but get manipulated by those who are to blame Israel for everything and to protest against Israel.

It is just your way of oversimplifying the issues and overstating your case against the protesters' anger at the scale of violence against the civilian population of Gaza.

I am not oversimplifying the issues, the protestors are. They ignore who started the war. They ignore who vowed to attack Israel over and over again regardless of any ceasefires. They ignore who is holding hostages and refuses any reasonable ceasefire agreements.

If you can make them all out to be bigots and shills for Hamas, then you can ignore their side of the argument.

Again, some of them are that. Most are "useful idiots", manipulated by the former but lacking any understanding of the issue. They are the type to yell "from the River to the Sea" without even knowing which river, or which sea.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You not believing doesn't make it so.

A 57% poll to the contrary doesn’t make most people think 10/7 was the “right” thing to do.

English failure??

57% of the people in Gaza think 10/7 was the right thing to do even given the response. You appear to be interpreting this backwards.

Is that number derived from the poll you cited here. I don't think you read it all the way through. You seem to have missed the significance of the responses from people who hadn't seen the evidence of war crimes who nevertheless overwhelmingly condemned them.

What's the relevance? Yeah, those who have seen the videos are more likely to say they were war crimes, but most of those who have seen the videos do not consider them war crimes. And that has nothing to do with the 57% saying it was the right thing.

Destruction of Palestinian wells? Hamas.

Diverting water? No, Hamas is using well pipe for rockets.

Support your claims, Loren.

You can either deal with the backlog in this thread and the Gaza one, or you can start right now with your assertion that Hamas destroyed Palestinian wells, that it has diverted water, etc.

Don't keep shitting up the thread with unripe bovung. If what you say is true and accurate, show us the links to sources.

Hamas crowed about digging up pipe for use in rockets after the Gaza pullout.

And I didn't say they diverted water. I said they diverted pipe meant for wells. The water wasn't diverted, it's still there in the ground.

I said "[The Palestinians] would have to be allowed to prosper. No more Zionist seizing of productive farmland, no more destruction of Palestinian wells or diverting of Palestinian water to Israel, no more Israeli settlements built in the West Bank, no more interference with the importing or exporting of material goods, no more fuckery by cutting off electricity to Gaza, or closing the borders without notice, or preventing foreign aid from reaching people, no more diverting natural gas from Palestinian territorial waters to Israel, or mining Palestinian minerals for transfer to Israel without paying royalties, etc. ,etc."

You responded with

Destruction of Palestinian wells? Hamas.

Diverting water? No, Hamas is using well pipe for rockets.

... among a long list of unsupported assertions and claiming ignorance of a topic we have discussed multiple times over our 20+ years of discussions.

And now you're trying to weasel out of backing up your statements.

You've forgotten the previous discussions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And there's no way to distinguish between someone who actively supports Hamas without joining and "official" members, whatever that means.

A five year old cannot be meaningfully called a member of a terrorist group.

Absolutely not. But they can, and are, used as human shields by Gazan leadership and you know it.
Tom

A child dragged in front of a soldier as a blockade for bullets is a human shield. A child living in the house they live in is not a human shield. Everyone fucking grows up somewhere, Tom. There's a reason the deliberate targeting of civilians is called a war crime.

When an enemy commander chooses to remain in his house rather than in a military facility during times of war that makes the child living in said house a human shield.

And when the child is living in the house from which fire is coming it makes them a human shield.

The only side deliberately targeting civilians is Hamas.

I hope you'll keep your proposed rules of engagement in mind when China invades. Any veteran's family is a combatant? Half our population will be dead, but at least no war crimes will have been committed.

Also, you realize this disincentivizes laying down arms, right? If you try to leave the fight and go home, we'll kill your family as punishment.

Since when is military commander a work from home job??

And note that the top people generally have tunnel access inside their homes. That's clearly making their homes into military facilities.

So your argument is that Hamas has more than 10,000 "military commanders"?

I don't see where you're getting that number.

When Israel takes out a commander there are usually some others nearby. But most of the Hamas dead aren't from such actions and most strikes don't kill anybody.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Btselem is not a credible source--they severely cherry-pick their reporting.

Media Bias fact check rates them as mostly factual. That they cherry pick doesn't change the facts of what they report.

Yeah, I have never seen them say something that's actually false. They have serious problems with presenting only some of the facts leading to an erroneous conclusion, though. I already pointed out two severe distortions in that source, saying that Israeli actions put non-combatants in danger when there was no danger. That makes me highly suspect the one I don't know about is likewise deceptive.

How did you find out it was false? Is it because you just don't believe it?

They are describing actions that aren't human shield tactics.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Because Israel is leveling homes, not barracks.

Hamas is using ostensibly civilian infrastructure for military purposes.
UNRWA schools too.
Fifteen terrorists killed in ‘Hamas command centre’ at Unrwa school

You believe everything you read, I take it?

You refuse to believe anything bad about Hamas I take it?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This shit has been going since the 10/7 attacks btw.
This protest, clearly supportive of the Hamas massacre in Israel, happened just one day after the massacre.

From here.

You are correct. That non-violent protest happened after 10/7. Also, the non-standard message someone wrote "By Any Means Necessary" is deplorable and immoral.

Front and center, obviously well done sign that says "From the River to the Sea". That's a dog whistle for genocide.

The logical problem you and others face is that you agree with the message of "By Any Means Necessary." When it is Israelis that have been murdered and kidnapped into becoming hostages, possibly tortured and without due process as a form of asymmetrical warfare, you say this is evil, AND EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD HERE AGREES. BUT when it's the flip-side, Israeli extremists, in particular settlers or the extremist right-wing govt, killing civilians in order to free those hostages OR simply the IDF killing Palestinians in unrelated events, you excuse it. We reject the By-Any-Means-Necessary doctrine and we point this out time and time again. We say over and over Hamas is not our ally and what they do is evil, but because you are being logically inconsistent you cannot agree that there must be limits to what the extremist wing of the Israeli govt does.

No, when Israel is blamed for Hamas actions it is saying they aren't evil.

But I also do not make the mistake of believing that particular extremist strains of Zionism that attempt to rule over the whole region by denying a Palestinian state or integration through democracy, only allowing a majority Jewish state and nothing else, led by a means of "By Any Means Necessary" can ever lead to anything else other than a caste system and by that nature will only ever perpetuate a cycle of violence.

The extremist Jews are in a minority and are not able to prevent peace. Tehran has enough control to prevent peace. Hamas is merely the puppet da jour and not actually relevant.

 

[Copernicus]

" Useful idiot" is a term of art. Wikipedia defines it thus:

A useful idiot or useful fool is a person who thinks they are fighting for a cause without fully comprehending the consequences of their actions, and who is cynically manipulated by the cause's leaders or by other political players.[1][2] The term was often used during the Cold War to describe non-communists regarded as susceptible to communist propaganda and psychological manipulation.[1]

It fits well those who are not Hamas supporters but get manipulated by those who are to blame Israel for everything and to protest against Israel.

Excellent point. I see that it can also be applied to those who do not favor killing, injuring, and starving innocent people in Gaza but get manipulated by those who blame Hamas exclusively for all of it and believe that Israel is beyond reproach. There are "useful idiots" on both sides. Those are the ones who consistently defend just one side of the conflict and dismiss all criticism of the other side.

 

[Elixir]

You not believing doesn't make it so.

A 57% poll to the contrary doesn’t make most people think 10/7 was the “right” thing to do.

English failure??

57% of the people in Gaza think 10/7 was the right thing to do even given the response. You appear to be interpreting this backwards.

Given the response and BLINDLY ASSUMING ITS ACCURACY.
Sorry - guess I wasn’t clear.
In short, I doubt it.

 

[Politesse]

Because Israel is leveling homes, not barracks.

Hamas is using ostensibly civilian infrastructure for military purposes.
UNRWA schools too.
Fifteen terrorists killed in ‘Hamas command centre’ at Unrwa school

You believe everything you read, I take it?

You refuse to believe anything bad about Hamas I take it?

Hamas is a terrorist organization whose actions are unjustifiable and unforgiveable. The difference between you and me is that when I meet a terrorist, my first thought is to eschew their methods, not to try and match their level of depravity in my actions toward them, still less to draw new innocents into the cycle of violence who weren't already.

 

[ZiprHead]

Btselem is not a credible source--they severely cherry-pick their reporting.

Media Bias fact check rates them as mostly factual. That they cherry pick doesn't change the facts of what they report.

Yeah, I have never seen them say something that's actually false. They have serious problems with presenting only some of the facts leading to an erroneous conclusion, though. I already pointed out two severe distortions in that source, saying that Israeli actions put non-combatants in danger when there was no danger. That makes me highly suspect the one I don't know about is likewise deceptive.

How did you find out it was false? Is it because you just don't believe it?

They are describing actions that aren't human shield tactics.

Sending unprotected prisoners to do bomb checks sure sounds like a human shield to me.

 

[ZiprHead]

Because Israel is leveling homes, not barracks.

Hamas is using ostensibly civilian infrastructure for military purposes.
UNRWA schools too.
Fifteen terrorists killed in ‘Hamas command centre’ at Unrwa school

You believe everything you read, I take it?

You refuse to believe anything bad about Hamas I take it?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This shit has been going since the 10/7 attacks btw.
This protest, clearly supportive of the Hamas massacre in Israel, happened just one day after the massacre.

From here.

You are correct. That non-violent protest happened after 10/7. Also, the non-standard message someone wrote "By Any Means Necessary" is deplorable and immoral.

Front and center, obviously well done sign that says "From the River to the Sea". That's a dog whistle for genocide.

Original Party Platform of the Likud Party

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty

 

[ZiprHead]

This shit has been going since the 10/7 attacks btw.
This protest, clearly supportive of the Hamas massacre in Israel, happened just one day after the massacre.

From here.

You are correct. That non-violent protest happened after 10/7. Also, the non-standard message someone wrote "By Any Means Necessary" is deplorable and immoral.

Front and center, obviously well done sign that says "From the River to the Sea". That's a dog whistle for genocide.

Original Party Platform of the Likud Party

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty

Oopsie!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

University president in California on leave after agreeing to campus protesters’ demands

Mike Lee told students that Sonoma State would become first US university to refuse to work with Israeli academic institutions

www.theguardian.com

A public university in California has placed its president on leave for “insubordination” after he agreed to student demands for an academic boycott of Israel.

Mike Lee was suspended from Sonoma State University following an announcement on Tuesday that the liberal arts college north of San Francisco had agreed with Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) to become the first US university to refuse to work with Israeli academic institutions.

“None of us should be on the sidelines when human beings are subject to mass killing and destruction,” Lee said in a message to students announcing the move.

...

Lee said in his original message to students that Sonoma State does not presently have exchange programmes or academic collaborations with Israeli universities and that that will not change.

“SSU will not pursue or engage in any study abroad programs, faculty exchanges, or other formal collaborations that are sponsored by, or represent, the Israeli state academic and research institutions,” he wrote.

Lee added that the university will only engage with Israeli academics “acting in a personal capacity”. He also said the college would review its investments to find “ethical alternatives” to Israel and set up a Palestine studies programme

 

[Derec]

While you are free to hold any opinion you wish, no rational observer is required to accept your idiosyncratic definition of “caving in” (which includes agreeing to discuss an issue in the future”) or conflate protesting the massive destruction and misery on the civilian population of Gaza as “anti Israel”.

It may include that but is much more than that. It also includes having so-called "Palestinian Studies" and hiring Palestinian professors, which can then spread propaganda. It includes dropping any discriplinatory actions against anti-Israel students violating university rules.

Yes, there are anti- Israel protesters and antisemitic ones snd pro- terrorism ones but they are not the only ones. It is very possible they are not even “most”!

Whether or not they are the majority, they are significant portion of the total.

Occupation of quads, in and of itself, is a nothing burger.

It is not as serious as breaking and entering a building, but it is nothing. It is trespassing at least. When students refuse to leave, it is legitimate for police to remove them and for the university to discipline them.

Peaceful protest on a campus is a learning experience and should be treated as one by the administration of institutions of higher learning, not as an exercise in kneejerk authoritarian dumbness in response to the pearl clutching of goosetepping braying jackasses.

What to you is "peaceful protesting"? Is occupying the quad that nobody else can use it really peaceful? How about harassing university officials at their homes? What about breaking and entering into Hamilton Hall?

 

[Derec]

You are correct. That non-violent protest happened after 10/7. Also, the non-standard message someone wrote "By Any Means Necessary" is deplorable and immoral.

I did not say they were violent, but that they support Hamas. And I am glad we agree that they are deplorable.

The logical problem you and others face is that you agree with the message of "By Any Means Necessary."

No.

BUT when it's the flip-side, Israeli extremists, in particular settlers or the extremist right-wing govt, killing civilians in order to free those hostages OR simply the IDF killing Palestinians in unrelated events, you excuse it.

It is one thing to target civilians (wrong), quite another for civilians to be collateral damage in warfare (unavoidable in any war, and especially in urban warfare). Those that attack Palestinian civilians, such as some settlers do, should be prosecuted.
What do you mean by "killed in unrelated events"? Do you mean Hamas or Islamic Jihad killed during operations in the West Bank?

We reject the By-Any-Means-Necessary doctrine and we point this out time and time again. We say over and over Hamas is not our ally and what they do is evil, but because you are being logically inconsistent you cannot agree that there must be limits to what the extremist wing of the Israeli govt does.

Of course there must be limits. But Biden drew the limit quite arbitrarily at Rafah even though invading Rafah is necessary to defeating Hamas.
And if you look at the image, it is not just the "by any means necessary". There is also "from the river to the sea" (which advocates for destroying the State of Israel) and "when people are occupied, resistance is justified". That explicitly defends the 10/7 massacre by Hamas (official name "Islamic Resistance Movement").

I have stated and you have read those statements that there is too much association between the campus protests and the outside-of-school movements. I've said it is probably a necessary counter-point in a debate but this is difficult for you to understand because your stance is biased.

No, support for Hamas is not a "necessary counterpoint".

When all the institutional support of the US is directed toward the Israel govt and there are signs such as "I stand with Israel," they do not have to say "By Any Means Necessary" and they do not have to say "Do more violence"--it's all implicitly there through the power structures exerted, through decades of billions of $ of buying and using bombs, through a system of castes and occupations, a lack of freedom.

Institutional US support for Israel is quite limited. Biden just restricted sale of large bombs - the very bombs needed to penetrate Hamas tunnels. In the past, US has always pressured into ending conflicts prematurely - for example in 2008/9, 2014, 2021. That allowed Hamas to build up their infrastructure and weaponry.
And also, parts of US institutions (such as The Squad in Congress) are quite hostile toward Israel.

Do not then respond with the strawman, "Oh yeah, what about Hamas, they are tyrants!" because this is obvious and this is the crux of the problem: Each side wants to rule the so-called holy land, each side wants to be a majority and have the other be subservient.

There is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas. None whatsoever.

 

[Arctish]

Is that number derived from the poll you cited here. I don't think you read it all the way through. You seem to have missed the significance of the responses from people who hadn't seen the evidence of war crimes who nevertheless overwhelmingly condemned them.

What's the relevance? Yeah, those who have seen the videos are more likely to say they were war crimes, but most of those who have seen the videos do not consider them war crimes. And that has nothing to do with the 57% saying it was the right thing.

That is incorrect.

Frankly, I don't see how anyone who actually read the article could have come up with the idea that those who have seen the videos do not consider what they saw were war crimes. It looks like you're bullshitting, as usual.

But in the interests of clarity, please quote the part of the article that talks about what the people who saw the videos think about them.

Destruction of Palestinian wells? Hamas.

Diverting water? No, Hamas is using well pipe for rockets.

Support your claims, Loren.

You can either deal with the backlog in this thread and the Gaza one, or you can start right now with your assertion that Hamas destroyed Palestinian wells, that it has diverted water, etc.

Don't keep shitting up the thread with unripe bovung. If what you say is true and accurate, show us the links to sources.

Hamas crowed about digging up pipe for use in rockets after the Gaza pullout.

And I didn't say they diverted water. I said they diverted pipe meant for wells. The water wasn't diverted, it's still there in the ground.

I said "[The Palestinians] would have to be allowed to prosper. No more Zionist seizing of productive farmland, no more destruction of Palestinian wells or diverting of Palestinian water to Israel, no more Israeli settlements built in the West Bank, no more interference with the importing or exporting of material goods, no more fuckery by cutting off electricity to Gaza, or closing the borders without notice, or preventing foreign aid from reaching people, no more diverting natural gas from Palestinian territorial waters to Israel, or mining Palestinian minerals for transfer to Israel without paying royalties, etc. ,etc."

You responded with

Destruction of Palestinian wells? Hamas.

Diverting water? No, Hamas is using well pipe for rockets.

... among a long list of unsupported assertions and claiming ignorance of a topic we have discussed multiple times over our 20+ years of discussions.

And now you're trying to weasel out of backing up your statements.

You've forgotten the previous discussions.

Link to the previous discussion you are referencing, and highlight the part you think I've forgotten.

Also, support your claims, starting with your claim Hamas destroyed wells. Don't just say it happened, provide links to the reports of it happening. Which wells are you talking about? Where were they located and when did Hamas allegedly destroy them?

If you need me to supply a list of Palestinian wells Israel has destroyed with links to sources, you can start with these.

***ETA: if you want to discuss the history of Zionists destroying Palestinian wells, we can start a new thread. Recently revealed fuckery shows it's a policy that goes all the way back to Israel's founding.