Wealthy donors pull funding from from Harvard and U Penn for failure to denounce “antisemitism”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These students are not being cancelled for being against war or having a different political opinion. They are being cancelled for celebrating or justifying the deaths, rapes and kidnaps of women and children.

Firms who disagree with their viewpoint have the right not to hire them. These students are also hypocritical and should go work for firms that align with their views. It’s a win win.

I don't think that's the issue. You can choose not to hire a student without issuing press statements, doxxing them, spending millions on smear campaigns. The firms don't go through these steps when they decide not to hire other applicants, what they are doing is discriminatory and illegal in many states.

These firms are using their money and platform to suffocate those they disagree with them. They can do that in their companies, not at US colleges.

The firms are just withholding their money.

The ones doxxing them are other activist groups.

Please. These firms have people who do their dirty work for them. They just write a check and tell them to go make life hell for those students. You have to be very naive to think the people at these form would not employ their usual dirty tricks.

Talk about a jesus complex. No one is crucifying these adults, they are just refusing to hire them.

Beneath the dossier’s journey from media obsession to slush pile lies a broader and more troubling story. Today, private spying has boomed into a renegade, billion-dollar industry, one that is increasingly invading our privacy, profiting from deception and manipulating the news.

Big law firms in New York and London are clamoring for the services of firms like Black Cube, an Israeli company that worked for Harvey Weinstein. Dictators are using private spies as freelance intelligence agents, and off-the-shelf technology is making it easier for them to monitor cellphones and hack emails. Over the past decade, spies for hire have become more emboldened — just as their power to influence events has become more pervasive.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/15/business/media/spooked-private-spies-news-media.html

WASHINGTON, Oct 15 (Reuters) - A former Wall Street Journal reporter is accusing a major U.S. law firm of having used mercenary hackers to oust him from his job and ruin his reputation.

In a lawsuit filed late Friday, Jay Solomon, the Journal’s former chief foreign correspondent, said Philadelphia-based Dechert LLP worked with hackers from India to steal emails between him and one of his key sources, Iranian American aviation executive Farhad Azima.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/former-wsj-reporter-says-law-firm-used-indian-hackers-sabotage-his-career-2022-10-15/

UK on brink of barring London law firms from “legal washing” for Putin cronies


ByOur Legal Correspondent
NOV 2, 2022
LAW firms in the UK and the US are to be banned from engaging in disinformation campaigns paid for by associates of Vladimir Putin and Russia’s spy network.

Under moves originally announced in the UK back in September the counter measures will cover any legal organisation working directly or indirectly for bad faith actors, with the US following suit.

The action was was prompted by growing evidence that a small minority of lawyers have been assisting the Kremlin when it comes to ways of evading sanctions, disinformation campaigns, and targeting journalists who expose associates of the Russian president.

Foreign Office analysis reveals that a staggering 85 per cent of legal work commissioned by Russia is from G7 countries, with London the front runner with 59 per cent, followed by New York headquartered firms in second.

UK on brink of barring London law firms from “legal washing” for Putin cronies

https://nationalsecuritynews.com/2022/11/936/

These are the “firms” being employed now against these students. All these firms have connections with dark side of this stuff. Law firms, hedge funds, etc are not passive.

Did you just discover the concept of corporate espionage?

Nobody is wasting time or resources like this on a not-yet-hired associate to dox them or whatever. Give it a rest.

Exactly--this is QAnon type crazy.

No firm is going to spend a dime on discrediting a potential first year associate. They just aren't important enough.

+1 these students think too highly of themselves if they think firms and donors will
Go to these lengths.

[Anonymous]

Citibank fires a worker for anti semitism.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649181/citi-husainova-gaza-israel-citibank.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Citibank fires a worker for anti semitism.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649181/citi-husainova-gaza-israel-citibank.html

Well, and this was a CUNY grad. That's a school system that has really been earning its reputation for Jew hatred lately. If you're trying to protect your institution's brand, you probably don't want people to have this reaction of "yep, that checks out" when they learn someone so publicly full of hate is affiliated with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if universities had stayed politically neutral then you’d be right. but they dug themselves this hole by deciding that the university shoild take sides instead of being an institution that creates a space for all sides.

I agree. I’m so disappointed that an institution like Harvard who knows the true history of they bother to understand it can't see past dollar signs. Instead they are gaslighting and trying to blacklist the truth. Every American has the right to free speech whether you agree or disagree.

This is not a free speech issue. If a donor doesn't like the content of speech affiliated with a university, they are free to place their funds elsewhere.

No that is not what they are doing. They are using the conservative play book of attacking individuals to silence them. This is exactly what Trump and the conservative do every day.

LOL. It wasn't conservatives that came up with TERF or Karen to silence women.
It wasn't conservatives that call everyone a MAGA, Nazi, Bot, troll for everyone opinion they disagree with.
Progressives cannot stand the idea that their monster has turned on them.

Independent voter, and I agree with pretty much all of this.

Then you're a moron. It was Conservatives who started all this BS of attacking something they disagree with. Freedom Fries? Colin Kaepernick? Just to name a few. Those are just the "kind" examples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These students are not being cancelled for being against war or having a different political opinion. They are being cancelled for celebrating or justifying the deaths, rapes and kidnaps of women and children.

Firms who disagree with their viewpoint have the right not to hire them. These students are also hypocritical and should go work for firms that align with their views. It’s a win win.

I don't think that's the issue. You can choose not to hire a student without issuing press statements, doxxing them, spending millions on smear campaigns. The firms don't go through these steps when they decide not to hire other applicants, what they are doing is discriminatory and illegal in many states.

These firms are using their money and platform to suffocate those they disagree with them. They can do that in their companies, not at US colleges.

This. It's the PR mechanism that is illegal and discriminatory. Plus, the framing of it is complete slander as the statements have been misconstrued and falsified in many ways.

It is part of the greater fascism at play. Support Israel or else.....

We see you. And we will not support apartheid. Good thing I'm self employed because failure to support apartheid is now a fireable offense.

It's neither illegal nor discriminatory.

It's not slander.

It's also not the law firms (as was pointed out earlier).

It's DEFINITELY not fascism.

And it's not the "failure to support 'apartheid'" that's the issue.

It's totally discriminatory if the employer does not extend a similar level of scrutiny to ALL applicants.

Also illegal in many states. NY Labor Law Section 201-d of the New York Labor Law (NYLL) - "protects conduct that occurs when an employee is "off of the employer's premises and without use of the employer's equipment or other property" and where the employee is not "suffered, permitted or expected to be engaged in work" or "actually engaged in work."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citibank fires a worker for anti semitism.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649181/citi-husainova-gaza-israel-citibank.html

Well, and this was a CUNY grad. That's a school system that has really been earning its reputation for Jew hatred lately. If you're trying to protect your institution's brand, you probably don't want people to have this reaction of "yep, that checks out" when they learn someone so publicly full of hate is affiliated with you.

She can sue them and get a nice settlement. Slam dunk!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Harvard today........

Meh, doesn't seem too atypical for stuff that has gone on at similar colleges for decades. There are always protests, hunger strikes, sit ins, storm admin building etc.

Just the cause of the day changes.

These harvard students can do whatever they like. That’s the beauty of free speech. These donors can also refuse to fund them or give them jobs. Also the beauty of free speech.

+1000

This is an easy question.

Would you hire someone who suggested that "George Floyd got what he deserved"?

Me neither.

I wouldn't work for someone who publicly threatens a University for holding a literary festival. That's bound to be a shitty employer, life is too short.

Sincere question: what if you were a donor and the literary festival included ideas that you found absolutely reprehensible? (speakers who advocated for shooting refugees at the border, for example).

Wouldn't you stop donating?

Of course not! I would use my money to hold other events to influence public opinion. I have never been successful achieving anything long term using threats.

Threat of what? Using your money to hold other events to influence public opinion means diverting your money from events you do view that are contrary to that opinion. I find it hard to believe that in your every day life you would donate to causes you don’t support.

A university is not a cause, it's a public square. The donors are donating to further their own interests. I went to college with many people that i disagreed with vehemently, I live in neighborhoods with people that don't share my values and i work with people that don't share my values. That's what it means to coexist in a free society.

Ok put your money where your mouth is and every time you donate to a charity of your choice, donate to a charity that supports the exact opposite cause. When you donate to moms against gun violence be sure to also donate to the NRA.

Withdrawing funding from a university is not threatening, it’s not supporting a cause you don’t believe in anymore. Harvard and UPenn are still free to support whatever activities they want to. That is coexisting in a free society.

They threatened for months before pulling their donations. Then they also went public to smear the Universities. If you don't want to donate to a college, pull your money and move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if universities had stayed politically neutral then you’d be right. but they dug themselves this hole by deciding that the university shoild take sides instead of being an institution that creates a space for all sides.

I agree. I’m so disappointed that an institution like Harvard who knows the true history of they bother to understand it can't see past dollar signs. Instead they are gaslighting and trying to blacklist the truth. Every American has the right to free speech whether you agree or disagree.

This is not a free speech issue. If a donor doesn't like the content of speech affiliated with a university, they are free to place their funds elsewhere.

No that is not what they are doing. They are using the conservative play book of attacking individuals to silence them. This is exactly what Trump and the conservative do every day.

LOL. It wasn't conservatives that came up with TERF or Karen to silence women.
It wasn't conservatives that call everyone a MAGA, Nazi, Bot, troll for everyone opinion they disagree with.
Progressives cannot stand the idea that their monster has turned on them.

Independent voter, and I agree with pretty much all of this.

Then you're a moron. It was Conservatives who started all this BS of attacking something they disagree with. Freedom Fries? Colin Kaepernick? Just to name a few. Those are just the "kind" examples.

Who lost their job because of freedom fries?

Colin Kaepernick was engaged in activism. Part of activism entails (or used to) that you are willing to suffer for those things in which you believe. It was an active, conscious choice on his behalf. That was the deal. The prospect of suffering is the flip side of courage and real activism and why similar actions have been lauded in the wash of history. It's not some random Joe caught on film doing a hand sign that some sensitive fool deems offensive and losing his job over it.

Behave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Harvard today........

Meh, doesn't seem too atypical for stuff that has gone on at similar colleges for decades. There are always protests, hunger strikes, sit ins, storm admin building etc.

Just the cause of the day changes.

These harvard students can do whatever they like. That’s the beauty of free speech. These donors can also refuse to fund them or give them jobs. Also the beauty of free speech.

+1000

This is an easy question.

Would you hire someone who suggested that "George Floyd got what he deserved"?

Me neither.

I wouldn't work for someone who publicly threatens a University for holding a literary festival. That's bound to be a shitty employer, life is too short.

Sincere question: what if you were a donor and the literary festival included ideas that you found absolutely reprehensible? (speakers who advocated for shooting refugees at the border, for example).

Wouldn't you stop donating?

Of course not! I would use my money to hold other events to influence public opinion. I have never been successful achieving anything long term using threats.

Threat of what? Using your money to hold other events to influence public opinion means diverting your money from events you do view that are contrary to that opinion. I find it hard to believe that in your every day life you would donate to causes you don’t support.

A university is not a cause, it's a public square. The donors are donating to further their own interests. I went to college with many people that i disagreed with vehemently, I live in neighborhoods with people that don't share my values and i work with people that don't share my values. That's what it means to coexist in a free society.

Ok put your money where your mouth is and every time you donate to a charity of your choice, donate to a charity that supports the exact opposite cause. When you donate to moms against gun violence be sure to also donate to the NRA.

Withdrawing funding from a university is not threatening, it’s not supporting a cause you don’t believe in anymore. Harvard and UPenn are still free to support whatever activities they want to. That is coexisting in a free society.

They threatened for months before pulling their donations. Then they also went public to smear the Universities. If you don't want to donate to a college, pull your money and move on.

Donors are not just some piggy bank. They are stakeholders, stewards and conservators of the brand of reputation of the institutions to which they donate as well. They have every right as stakeholders to try to apply corrective pressure before desisting from making further donations if that is their inclination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Harvard today........

Meh, doesn't seem too atypical for stuff that has gone on at similar colleges for decades. There are always protests, hunger strikes, sit ins, storm admin building etc.

Just the cause of the day changes.

These harvard students can do whatever they like. That’s the beauty of free speech. These donors can also refuse to fund them or give them jobs. Also the beauty of free speech.

+1000

This is an easy question.

Would you hire someone who suggested that "George Floyd got what he deserved"?

Me neither.

I wouldn't work for someone who publicly threatens a University for holding a literary festival. That's bound to be a shitty employer, life is too short.

Sincere question: what if you were a donor and the literary festival included ideas that you found absolutely reprehensible? (speakers who advocated for shooting refugees at the border, for example).

Wouldn't you stop donating?

Of course not! I would use my money to hold other events to influence public opinion. I have never been successful achieving anything long term using threats.

Threat of what? Using your money to hold other events to influence public opinion means diverting your money from events you do view that are contrary to that opinion. I find it hard to believe that in your every day life you would donate to causes you don’t support.

A university is not a cause, it's a public square. The donors are donating to further their own interests. I went to college with many people that i disagreed with vehemently, I live in neighborhoods with people that don't share my values and i work with people that don't share my values. That's what it means to coexist in a free society.

Ok put your money where your mouth is and every time you donate to a charity of your choice, donate to a charity that supports the exact opposite cause. When you donate to moms against gun violence be sure to also donate to the NRA.

Withdrawing funding from a university is not threatening, it’s not supporting a cause you don’t believe in anymore. Harvard and UPenn are still free to support whatever activities they want to. That is coexisting in a free society.

They threatened for months before pulling their donations. Then they also went public to smear the Universities. If you don't want to donate to a college, pull your money and move on.

It’s not a double standard. Students can protest and do demonstrations. So can donors through letter writing to show their views. If students can talk about BDS and divestment so can donors on pulling funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citibank fires a worker for anti semitism.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649181/citi-husainova-gaza-israel-citibank.html

Well, and this was a CUNY grad. That's a school system that has really been earning its reputation for Jew hatred lately. If you're trying to protect your institution's brand, you probably don't want people to have this reaction of "yep, that checks out" when they learn someone so publicly full of hate is affiliated with you.

She can sue them and get a nice settlement. Slam dunk!

It will be interesting indeed if she tries suing. I wonder.

[Anonymous]

The Citibank employee said "No wonder Hitler wanted to get rid of all of them" on social media.

Citibank really had no choice. You can't have an employee fostering that level of hatred in the workplace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citibank fires a worker for anti semitism.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649181/citi-husainova-gaza-israel-citibank.html

Well, and this was a CUNY grad. That's a school system that has really been earning its reputation for Jew hatred lately. If you're trying to protect your institution's brand, you probably don't want people to have this reaction of "yep, that checks out" when they learn someone so publicly full of hate is affiliated with you.

CUNY was a once well respected entity. It’s off the rails now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Citibank employee said "No wonder Hitler wanted to get rid of all of them" on social media.

Citibank really had no choice. You can't have an employee fostering that level of hatred in the workplace.

Why are so many women saying such antisemitic things?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citibank fires a worker for anti semitism.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12649181/citi-husainova-gaza-israel-citibank.html

Well, and this was a CUNY grad. That's a school system that has really been earning its reputation for Jew hatred lately. If you're trying to protect your institution's brand, you probably don't want people to have this reaction of "yep, that checks out" when they learn someone so publicly full of hate is affiliated with you.

She can sue them and get a nice settlement. Slam dunk!

It will be interesting indeed if she tries suing. I wonder.

Good luck with that.