Protests on college campuses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support peaceful right to protest, what I do not support is counter protest at the same location and the same time, that is just agitation.

-1 You don’t have the right to noncontested speech.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I fully support peaceful right to protest, what I do not support is counter protest at the same location and the same time, that is just agitation.
I don’t agree that a counter protester can claim to be victim of ethnic discrimination

So then you do not fully support the peaceful right to protest. 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support peaceful right to protest, what I do not support is counter protest at the same location and the same time, that is just agitation.

-1 You don’t have the right to noncontested speech.

Protest is not exactly speech
Have your counter protest elsewhere, don’t agitate

In other words, claim a site, set up camp, starting crapping in buckets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support peaceful right to protest, what I do not support is counter protest at the same location and the same time, that is just agitation.
I don’t agree that a counter protester can claim to be victim of ethnic discrimination

So then you do not fully support the peaceful right to protest. 🙄

There is no right to protest. There is a right to free speech, and a right to petition GOVERNMENT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if the protestors demand is for their colleges to divest from investments that support Israel, why don't they divest themselves by withdrawing from their university and taking their tuition dollars to a different university that invests to their liking?

+1000

Best comment on the issue right here, folks.

No, it’s a stupid comment. “Love it or leave it” is deplorable. Students have every right to protest the university investment strategy.

DP.

While simultaneously benefitting from that strategy to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct aid and scholarships, plus benefitting indirectly from facilities, activities, staff, support, etc.?

Certainly agree that they have every right to protest, but seems a bit hypocritical. Kinda like an environmental activist driving a gas-guzzling SUV.

Shouldn't these activists vote with their feet?

No. That’s ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Hate crime by outside agitators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if the protestors demand is for their colleges to divest from investments that support Israel, why don't they divest themselves by withdrawing from their university and taking their tuition dollars to a different university that invests to their liking?

+1000

Best comment on the issue right here, folks.

No, it’s a stupid comment. “Love it or leave it” is deplorable. Students have every right to protest the university investment strategy.

DP.

While simultaneously benefitting from that strategy to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct aid and scholarships, plus benefitting indirectly from facilities, activities, staff, support, etc.?

Certainly agree that they have every right to protest, but seems a bit hypocritical. Kinda like an environmental activist driving a gas-guzzling SUV.

Shouldn't these activists vote with their feet?

The idea that one can’t or shouldn’t push for systemic change unless one’s personal life meets some purity test established by supporters of the system is a pernicious and dumb idea.

Not the point I made.

Again, I support their right to protest (though I disagree with some of the aims and methods).

My argument: fine to criticize the system, but if the system is so wildly unjust, then one should ALSO refrain from directly benefitting from said horribly unjust system. Right?

I'm not suggesting a "purity test"; I'm suggesting these kids put their money where their mouth is.

That’s a ridiculous illogical leap. Paying tuition is not an endorsement of every action or investment of the university. As an undergrad I participated in protests for my university to divest from investments in apartheid South Africa. We were the ones supporting the stated mission and ideals of the university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if the protestors demand is for their colleges to divest from investments that support Israel, why don't they divest themselves by withdrawing from their university and taking their tuition dollars to a different university that invests to their liking?

+1000

Best comment on the issue right here, folks.

No, it’s a stupid comment. “Love it or leave it” is deplorable. Students have every right to protest the university investment strategy.

DP.

While simultaneously benefitting from that strategy to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct aid and scholarships, plus benefitting indirectly from facilities, activities, staff, support, etc.?

Certainly agree that they have every right to protest, but seems a bit hypocritical. Kinda like an environmental activist driving a gas-guzzling SUV.

Shouldn't these activists vote with their feet?

The idea that one can’t or shouldn’t push for systemic change unless one’s personal life meets some purity test established by supporters of the system is a pernicious and dumb idea.

It's not a purity test. Just don't accept "tainted" money and then call for divesment. Such entitled hypocrites.

Ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if the protestors demand is for their colleges to divest from investments that support Israel, why don't they divest themselves by withdrawing from their university and taking their tuition dollars to a different university that invests to their liking?

+1000

Best comment on the issue right here, folks.

No, it’s a stupid comment. “Love it or leave it” is deplorable. Students have every right to protest the university investment strategy.

DP.

While simultaneously benefitting from that strategy to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct aid and scholarships, plus benefitting indirectly from facilities, activities, staff, support, etc.?

Certainly agree that they have every right to protest, but seems a bit hypocritical. Kinda like an environmental activist driving a gas-guzzling SUV.

Shouldn't these activists vote with their feet?

The idea that one can’t or shouldn’t push for systemic change unless one’s personal life meets some purity test established by supporters of the system is a pernicious and dumb idea.

Not the point I made.

Again, I support their right to protest (though I disagree with some of the aims and methods).

My argument: fine to criticize the system, but if the system is so wildly unjust, then one should ALSO refrain from directly benefitting from said horribly unjust system. Right?

I'm not suggesting a "purity test"; I'm suggesting these kids put their money where their mouth is.

That’s a ridiculous illogical leap. Paying tuition is not an endorsement of every action or investment of the university. As an undergrad I participated in protests for my university to divest from investments in apartheid South Africa. We were the ones supporting the stated mission and ideals of the university.

So, let’s say, you disagree with some aspects of Mormonism, would you still attend BYU, for example. You love their pre-med program, but not all of the basic tenets of Mormonism.

Would you enroll then start a protest in the student union screaming to shut it down because Joseph Smith was a polygamist and you’re revolted by that little historical tidbit and you want the board to declare he was an awful man. Oh and let’s say you also don’t like how they send missionaries all over the world to convert people as you think it’s so disrespectful of other cultures.

Wouldn’t it be easiest to just attend another school?

Lots of different flavors of college out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a question for all pro Israeli posters. In the latest negotiations in Cairo, Hamas agreed to release all the hostages in exchange for an end to the war. However, Netanyahu refused this deal ( per Reuters, I haven’t seen this reported in U.S media).

I have seen hundreds of responses here saying that Hamas can end the killing of their people in one minute if they agree to release the hostages. But now we are finding out that it was never about the hostages, this is about Likud’s intentions for explanding Israel’s foot print and Netanyahu’s struggle to remain in power.

At this point if they don’t invade Rafah, Netanyahu is toast so here we are.

There can be no permanent peace deal unless it includes the immediate disarmament and dissolution of Hamas, and the removal of anybody associated with Hamas from governmental roles in Gaza and the West Bank. Hamas knows this, so they blackballed any negotiations by asking for a permanent peace deal without these stipulations. So Israel rejected the so-called “deal,” like any other country in their situation would have.

Your blind support for Israel is astounding.
Had negotiations gone another way you would be arguing how that is the right decision
Clearly nobody is lily white and spotless!

DP. So, just to be clear: you support Hamas terrorists being in power. I mean, we already knew that, but why don't you come out and say it.

Ugh, as every day passes, it just becomes more and more apparent that the perspectives of people supportive of Israel do not coexist peacefully with the perspectives of the rest of us.

That was a long-winded way of simply stating that you are pro-Hamas. Funny that you are too cowardly to just say it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today, around a hundred students assembled at UT, protested for a few hours, and dispersed without incident. Looks like UT has handled this the right way.

I’ll be surprised if this gets any national coverage.

https://x.com/thedailytexan/status/1787169510316818529?s=61&t=txL8mt-h7Q8BLpSNAiAzrQ

https://x.com/thedailytexan/status/1787191507725791383?s=61&t=txL8mt-h7Q8BLpSNAiAzrQ

Shame on UT for not protecting their Jewish students and letting Hamas just openly terrorize the campus.

I’ve been as critical of UCLA and Columbia as anyone for not protecting their Jewish students, but UT is drawing the line at the correct place, imo. These students have the right to speak, however offensive their speech may be. They do not have the right to “occupy” the campus and camp in tents and deny access to the campus to people who don’t share their views. The state police cleared out those who previously attempted to do this (a substantial proportion of which were not students), and they stood by today to make sure the protest did not get out of hand. In contrast to Columbia, the protestors said their piece and moved on, because they knew that further actions would not be tolerated. Columbia messed up by not reacting immediately. They kept “negotiating” and ignoring their own deadlines. Because the protestors were determined to have a confrontation, they kept having to push further and further until they did something that couldn’t be ignored. Texas took control immediately and suffered a one day media hit (that was popular in Texas) instead of letting it drag on for weeks. Now, they are allowing the students their first amendment rights, while maintaining control of their campus and protecting the rights of other students. Of course, it will be ignored by the national media.

Of course they have the right to speak. Literally nobody is arguing with you.

They do not have the right to target Jewish students, call for the genocide of all Jews, and/or support a globally recognized terrorist organization.

These “protests” are not saying, “Israel has a right to exist, and their ongoing operation designed to liberate Palestine from Hamas rule should continue, but maybe they should look at their operations and how they can better protect Palestinian civilians,” which is a 100% valid and reasonable stance.

These protestors are arguing that Israel as a country should not exist, and that all Jewish people are guilty of extreme war crimes. They are arguing for “divestment” from Israel, and removal of American aid, much of which goes towards the Iron Dome, a DEFENSIVE system that continues to save Israeli lives. Divestment would harm Israelis, not the Israeli government, while removal of funding for the Iron Dome would be a massive boon for Hamas’ genocidal actions (like 10/7) and goals.

+1000
Pretty astounding this has to be explained at all.

So the content of their speech is offensive to you and therefore should not be allowed? Only the more sanitized version you shared is ok?

Yes - when the protests get to harassing anyone, Jewish or otherwise, they have crossed from being a protest into violence and should not be tolerated.

Jewish students are not being harassed, the Muslim students are, one university had to cancel a valedictorian speech because a Jewish student group said so

Really?

JFC, these people are horrific. As are the simpletons cheering them on.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a question for all pro Israeli posters. In the latest negotiations in Cairo, Hamas agreed to release all the hostages in exchange for an end to the war. However, Netanyahu refused this deal ( per Reuters, I haven’t seen this reported in U.S media).

I have seen hundreds of responses here saying that Hamas can end the killing of their people in one minute if they agree to release the hostages. But now we are finding out that it was never about the hostages, this is about Likud’s intentions for explanding Israel’s foot print and Netanyahu’s struggle to remain in power.

At this point if they don’t invade Rafah, Netanyahu is toast so here we are.

There can be no permanent peace deal unless it includes the immediate disarmament and dissolution of Hamas, and the removal of anybody associated with Hamas from governmental roles in Gaza and the West Bank. Hamas knows this, so they blackballed any negotiations by asking for a permanent peace deal without these stipulations. So Israel rejected the so-called “deal,” like any other country in their situation would have.

Your blind support for Israel is astounding.
Had negotiations gone another way you would be arguing how that is the right decision
Clearly nobody is lily white and spotless!

DP. So, just to be clear: you support Hamas terrorists being in power. I mean, we already knew that, but why don't you come out and say it.

Ugh, as every day passes, it just becomes more and more apparent that the perspectives of people supportive of Israel do not coexist peacefully with the perspectives of the rest of us.

The perspectives of people supportive of Israel do not coexist peacefully with the perspectives of the rest of America?

Do you realize just how inappropriate and outright disgusting that statement is when we have protesters associated with Hamas in our street in our street targeting and attacking Jewish and pro-Jewish residents, calling for genocide against Jews, at attacking Israel’s right to defend itself because of it’s Jewish faith.

It’s not Jewish people (or Israel supporters) who’s perspective does not coexist with the rest of America.

+100
Clearly the PP lives in an airtight echo chamber of likeminded LWNJs. The vast majority of Americans think the pro-Hamas crowd is poisonous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:if the protestors demand is for their colleges to divest from investments that support Israel, why don't they divest themselves by withdrawing from their university and taking their tuition dollars to a different university that invests to their liking?

Exactly. Go elsewhere. I’m sure some community colleges have openings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a question for all pro Israeli posters. In the latest negotiations in Cairo, Hamas agreed to release all the hostages in exchange for an end to the war. However, Netanyahu refused this deal ( per Reuters, I haven’t seen this reported in U.S media).

I have seen hundreds of responses here saying that Hamas can end the killing of their people in one minute if they agree to release the hostages. But now we are finding out that it was never about the hostages, this is about Likud’s intentions for explanding Israel’s foot print and Netanyahu’s struggle to remain in power.

At this point if they don’t invade Rafah, Netanyahu is toast so here we are.

There can be no permanent peace deal unless it includes the immediate disarmament and dissolution of Hamas, and the removal of anybody associated with Hamas from governmental roles in Gaza and the West Bank. Hamas knows this, so they blackballed any negotiations by asking for a permanent peace deal without these stipulations. So Israel rejected the so-called “deal,” like any other country in their situation would have.

Your blind support for Israel is astounding.
Had negotiations gone another way you would be arguing how that is the right decision
Clearly nobody is lily white and spotless!

DP. So, just to be clear: you support Hamas terrorists being in power. I mean, we already knew that, but why don't you come out and say it.

Ugh, as every day passes, it just becomes more and more apparent that the perspectives of people supportive of Israel do not coexist peacefully with the perspectives of the rest of us.

That was a long-winded way of simply stating that you are pro-Hamas. Funny that you are too cowardly to just say it.

NP. Those of you in this particular string/converstaion calling others pro-Hamas have no basis. There is nothing here that is pro-Hamas.

The pro-Israeli posters cannot admit that you don't really care about the hostages, you and Netanyahu will sacrifice them so that you have an excuse to wipe out all Palestinians. All Palestinians do not = Hamas. Support of innocent civilians in Gaza does not equal support for Hamas. This is logic and truth.

But you just keep lying and making unfounded accusations to distract from the heinous genocide you will commit in order to have Gaza and the West Bank as part of Israeli. Your disregard for any human life that is not Israeli/Jewish is transparent.

YOU are the cowards who will not admit your disgusting views.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if the protestors demand is for their colleges to divest from investments that support Israel, why don't they divest themselves by withdrawing from their university and taking their tuition dollars to a different university that invests to their liking?

+1000

Best comment on the issue right here, folks.

No, it’s a stupid comment. “Love it or leave it” is deplorable. Students have every right to protest the university investment strategy.

DP.

While simultaneously benefitting from that strategy to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct aid and scholarships, plus benefitting indirectly from facilities, activities, staff, support, etc.?

Certainly agree that they have every right to protest, but seems a bit hypocritical. Kinda like an environmental activist driving a gas-guzzling SUV.

Shouldn't these activists vote with their feet?

The idea that one can’t or shouldn’t push for systemic change unless one’s personal life meets some purity test established by supporters of the system is a pernicious and dumb idea.

Not the point I made.

Again, I support their right to protest (though I disagree with some of the aims and methods).

My argument: fine to criticize the system, but if the system is so wildly unjust, then one should ALSO refrain from directly benefitting from said horribly unjust system. Right?

I'm not suggesting a "purity test"; I'm suggesting these kids put their money where their mouth is.

That’s a ridiculous illogical leap. Paying tuition is not an endorsement of every action or investment of the university. As an undergrad I participated in protests for my university to divest from investments in apartheid South Africa. We were the ones supporting the stated mission and ideals of the university.

So, let’s say, you disagree with some aspects of Mormonism, would you still attend BYU, for example. You love their pre-med program, but not all of the basic tenets of Mormonism.

Would you enroll then start a protest in the student union screaming to shut it down because Joseph Smith was a polygamist and you’re revolted by that little historical tidbit and you want the board to declare he was an awful man. Oh and let’s say you also don’t like how they send missionaries all over the world to convert people as you think it’s so disrespectful of other cultures.

Wouldn’t it be easiest to just attend another school?

Lots of different flavors of college out there.

Columbia is not BYU or Liberty or Bob Jones or any other blatantly sectarian institution. You are being ridiculous.