Penn President resigns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

I’m not Jewish nor is my outrage/concern false, and you are too blinded by politics to see it. And give me a break over the spelling, who cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the universities had a history of fiercely supporting free speech, Magill would still have her job. But they have a history of fiercely suppressing free speech except when that free speech is antisemitic, and that is the insurmountable problem for Magill.

Just consider the concept of a university:

“Speech code.”

The very concept of a “speech code” is the opposite of free expression; as in the Constitutionally-protected right to freedom of expression.

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

Actually they are not. “Right wingers,” as you so affectionately refer to us, are overwhelmingly evangelical Christians. Our kinship with the Jewish people is a tight religious and historical bond.

[Anonymous]

Liz Magill will go down in history as the only woman who clerked for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, loved her and worshipped her, all the while actually being an anti-Semite.

How she was treated at Penn is just another chapter in today’s sad America. I feel terrible for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Live by the sword, die by the sword. She and her fellow presidents have been disciplining and harassing students for years who didn’t sufficiently embrace their political monoculture. When you create an environment where all thought is tightly policed, eventually the thought police will come for you too.

+10000. It’s starting to seem surreal to me the amount of resources spent controlling speech on *elite college campuses*!!

I do think it’s pretty funny to watch all these progressives suddenly find that actually maybe they support free speech. But only for causes they like, of course. Def ok to call for the extermination of Jews — free speech! — but saying men can’t become women is apparently literal genocide. 🙄

Both sides act hypocritical IMHO.

Not to defend anyone in particulars, but I thought conservatives were all First Amendment absolutists who didn’t want universities to ban racist, homophobic, and transphobic speech?

And, yes, I agree that a call for genocide of any group of people would create a hostile environment for students. All students, Jewish and Muslim included, are entitled to a safe environment. Just as both Israelis and Palestinians deserve freedom and safety.

I think the issue is the hypocrisy. You can do one of two things: you can allow speech that some may consider transphobic, racist, homophobic, fatphobic etc., providing that students are also allowed to say things that some people may feel is antisemitic. Or you can go the opposite direction and strictly police language that is considered transphobic, racist, etc, so long as you also police antisemitic language. Universities can take either position, and reasonably do so, provided they are consistent. What they can’t do without the dam eventually breaking is selectively enforce the rules, but that’s what has been happening. And now the dam is breaking.

Penn is the school that (allegedly) threatened to revoke the scholarships of women swimmers who raised issues of sexual harassment from Lia Thomas, but that also takes the position that inviting Roger Waters to speak at a campus event should be permitted. This is grossly inconsistent conduct. That’s the problem facing Penn and other universities: they are selectively enforcing their own rules and severely punishing students inconsistently.

Agree, but also just don’t understand how they couldn’t have answered the question directly and avoided this entire viral soundbite. All they had to say was that calls to genocide cross a line!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Liz Magill will go down in history as the only woman who clerked for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, loved her and worshipped her, all the while actually being an anti-Semite.

How she was treated at Penn is just another chapter in today’s sad America. I feel terrible for her.

Oh boo hoo.

[Anonymous]

Both sides act hypocritical IMHO.

Not to defend anyone in particulars, but I thought conservatives were all First Amendment absolutists who didn’t want universities to ban racist, homophobic, and transphobic speech?

And, yes, I agree that a call for genocide of any group of people would create a hostile environment for students. All students, Jewish and Muslim included, are entitled to a safe environment. Just as both Israelis and Palestinians deserve freedom and safety.

I think the issue is the hypocrisy. You can do one of two things: you can allow speech that some may consider transphobic, racist, homophobic, fatphobic etc., providing that students are also allowed to say things that some people may feel is antisemitic. Or you can go the opposite direction and strictly police language that is considered transphobic, racist, etc, so long as you also police antisemitic language. Universities can take either position, and reasonably do so, provided they are consistent. What they can’t do without the dam eventually breaking is selectively enforce the rules, but that’s what has been happening. And now the dam is breaking.

Penn is the school that (allegedly) threatened to revoke the scholarships of women swimmers who raised issues of sexual harassment from Lia Thomas, but that also takes the position that inviting Roger Waters to speak at a campus event should be permitted. This is grossly inconsistent conduct. That’s the problem facing Penn and other universities: they are selectively enforcing their own rules and severely punishing students inconsistently.

Best response yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

Actually they are not. “Right wingers,” as you so affectionately refer to us, are overwhelmingly evangelical Christians. Our kinship with the Jewish people is a tight religious and historical bond.

I just spat out my coffee I was laughing so hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it chilling that you cannot criticize Jewish people or Israel in any way without severe consequences. Cancel culture in overdrive

+1

The irony is that Israel seems to be committing genocide against the Palestinians.

+1. Fired over a hypothetical. No one has called for genocide against Jewish people (one-sided interpretations of a chant don’t count). Meanwhile, the Palestinians are being eradicated (even from Southern Gaza where Israel told them to go).

That’s war.

Not genocide

War has been the pretext for the genocide that’s been occurring for 100+ years in the region, at the hands of Zionists before and since the creation of the State of Israel.

I mean, have a ball denying it. Nobody objective is buying it.

Honestly, if Zionist have somehow been “committing genocide for 100 years”, then they must be really bad at it. I think the general competency of Israel speaks against that argument. If Israel actually wanted to commit genocide, they would have done it by now. Personally, I think they would just rather like it if Hamas would stop firing rockets at Israeli civilian populations.

Everyone screaming genocide has no idea what the word actually means. In 1947 there were less than 2m Palestinians in the region. There’ are 5 million now. Talk about a genocide fail.

Are you paying attention? These dipshits in the IDF cannot even use bleeding edge technology gifted by the U.S. to successfully root out Hamas.

There’s been a minimum 2:1 ratio of innocent civilian-to-combatant deaths since 10/7, and that’s using the notoriously dishonest IDF as a source.

So, no, I don’t find the fact that the racist clowns who identify as Zionists haven’t completed their STATED mission of dispossessing every last indigenous person of their land in the region to be contra-evidence of that mission. They’re just really incompetent, which explains a lot.

But incompetence doesn’t absolve them of their sins.

Yeah, an “2:1 ratio of innocent civilian-to-combatant deaths since 10/7” is what happens when terrorists deliberately and cynically embed themselves in dense civilian centers.

You obviously expect Israelis to just quietly accept the occasional massacre with a side helping of rape and torture and kidnapping. I mean, they already get rocket fire on the regular, what’s the big deal?

Unless you are willing to accept that happening on American soil, without military response, you are a hypocrite.

Hamas started this conflict. They don’t get to dictate Israel’s response to an act of war. Neither do you.

Obviously, nobody is going to dictate anything to a murderous regime hell bent on killing as many Palestinians as possible, especially with the U.S. funding the effort and running interference on its behalf at every turn in the road. But since the U.S. is footing the bill and State is bypassing Congressional review to further provision the IDF, I have a right to speak my mind in opposition.

Israel started this conflict when they began violently dispossessing indigenous people of their land in the region 75 years ago, so based on your logic, you clearly don’t have any right to dictate how any Palestinian, including members of Hamas, chooses to seek redress for their grievances.

Zionists have consistently chosen terrorism to achieve their goals over the past 100+ years. The fact that you feel entitled to dictate how the victims of that terrorism are “allowed” to fight back, lest they be met with your disapproval, is representative of how despicable defenders of Zionism like you truly are.

What a bunch of lies and fabrications. You support terror and genocide. This is the rot that needs to go at universities.

The truth hurts. Every single stitch of what was said is factual, indisputable, and rooted in history. It’s not surprising that the actual supporter of terrorism and genocide (you) is resorting to your usual feeble DARVO instincts to deflect blame.

The not-so-mysterious mystery of why SO MANY global citizens despise people like you is eventually coming home to roost. Bank on it.

I’m not Jewish and I’m not the PP but I assume this is a thinly veiled justification of antisemitism and a call for the extermination of Jews. Disgusting.

It was neither, but what’s your stance on the extermination of Palestinians that’s occurring right now, amigo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liz Magill will go down in history as the only woman who clerked for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, loved her and worshipped her, all the while actually being an anti-Semite.

How she was treated at Penn is just another chapter in today’s sad America. I feel terrible for her.

Oh boo hoo.

Ha ha no doubt Magill has three times the intellect and moral compass as you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

Actually they are not. “Right wingers,” as you so affectionately refer to us, are overwhelmingly evangelical Christians. Our kinship with the Jewish people is a tight religious and historical bond.

The BIGGEST antisemites and racists in this country are leftist extremists. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

Actually they are not. “Right wingers,” as you so affectionately refer to us, are overwhelmingly evangelical Christians. Our kinship with the Jewish people is a tight religious and historical bond.

I just spat out my coffee I was laughing so hard.

Go clean yourself up, sweetie, and maybe go to church this morning. You have a lot to learn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

Actually they are not. “Right wingers,” as you so affectionately refer to us, are overwhelmingly evangelical Christians. Our kinship with the Jewish people is a tight religious and historical bond.

The BIGGEST antisemites and racists in this country are leftist extremists. Period.

+1000. As we saw on display in the Congressional hearing this week. There was no hypocrisy there. Liz, Sally and Claudine were speaking from their dark, warped hearts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the Charlie Kirks and Trumps of the world are closely aligned with these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/

Spare me their concern trolling about antisemitism on campuses

Shouting out “but but Trump” isn’t going to fly here. People are justifiably upset by the behavior of these presidents under Stephanik’s questioning.

Try spelling her name correctly.

A few people are but they aren’t actually motivated by concern about antisemitism— they want to stick it to elite universities. Her questions took the tone of “when did you stop beating your wife” and wasn’t asked in good faith in a way to get a good faith response. They didn’t respond effectively in one exchange during a 5-hour hearing that should not have been held in the first place.

Right wingers by and large are extremely antisemitic so this whole weird conversation is very surreal.

In other words, spare us your false outrage.

So you think that just because Republicans say something, Democrats can never say the same thing? This is an extremely toxic line of thinking that I saw a lot of during covid - politicizing a bona fide difference in policy and thinking that you can do away with internal party disagreements by labeling certain positions as “Trump.”

Obviously we all see that the Congressional hearings were in part a partisan effort. I’m more than willing to say that Hill hearing are most often a joke and not an attempt to solve a problem. I don’t love grandstanding on either side. But the fact that the Republicans held a hearing on anti-semitism does not suddenly make anti-semitism a right-wing issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I guess they now get to keep the $100 million. I have very mixed feelings about this as a Penn alum.

What specifically are the students supposed to have said that "called for Jewish genocide"? I can't imagine Penn students were literally doing that. I know they've protested Israel's butchering of civilians. I know they've called for Netanyahu's resignation. I know they've accused the IDF and Biden and Netanyahu of genocide. I know they've even called for a single Palestinian state "from the river to the sea." None of these are necessarily anti-semitic. All should be considered free speech.

I know the students were accused of chanting, "Netanyahu you can't hide; we want Jewish genocide" when they were actually saying, "Netanyahu you can't hide; we charge you with genocide."

There's certainly a determined effort to shut down free speech by misrepresenting what students have allegedly said. Is there any evidence they have made truly antisemitic comments (as opposed to political comments)?