Harvard President resigns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are all these academics at the top of their game just rank cheaters? I’m feeling sort of stupid for not going on for a PhD now, which I didn’t do because I was wary of the amount of work involved. It would have been a lot easier if I’d realized I just had to copy other people’s work.

Not unless you're from a rich family or a favorite of the university administration. A regular PhD candidate getting caught plagiarizing is kicked out of school and bad mouthed during reference checks for eternity.

Right but it looks like a lot of them aren’t caught, and the cheating seems to be endemic. I’m now wondering how many of these folks who are (for instance) well-known academic authors and speakers are basically just cheating grifters. The percentage hit of senior academics who cheated appears to be quite high.

Now that plagiarism checking has been weaponized by Bill Ackman and others, expect more academics to be outed. Ackman has already stated in a recent tweet that the MIT president and the entire MIT faculty are next. (He’s pissed about the attacks on his wife and apparently wants to exact his revenge in this manner).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-05/ackman-wants-plagiarism-checks-on-mit-faculty-after-wife-accused

Hmm - you said “exact his revenge in this manner.” That means:

- exposing many T-20 presidents who got their positions through cheating, plagiarism, and fraud?

- fraudulent Presidents who apparently earn $900,000 per year, and are certainly part of the skyrocketing tuition costs the rest of us bear?

And you have a problem with that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

Great post. Also, I do agree with Gay that context matters. In Gay's case, the context is pretty damning. This is an institution where misgendering someone would be a clear violation. So it's actually worse. When Gay was asked what she meant, she further explained that if calls were directed at an individual they would violate the code. Well, you can't genocide one person. You murder them. So if you listen to what she said, you can't suggest murdering just one, you have to suggest murdering all of them and then it's fine.

The whole Gay fiasco is going down in History as one of the lowest moments in University life since perhaps the Middle Ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are all these academics at the top of their game just rank cheaters? I’m feeling sort of stupid for not going on for a PhD now, which I didn’t do because I was wary of the amount of work involved. It would have been a lot easier if I’d realized I just had to copy other people’s work.

Not unless you're from a rich family or a favorite of the university administration. A regular PhD candidate getting caught plagiarizing is kicked out of school and bad mouthed during reference checks for eternity.

Right but it looks like a lot of them aren’t caught, and the cheating seems to be endemic. I’m now wondering how many of these folks who are (for instance) well-known academic authors and speakers are basically just cheating grifters. The percentage hit of senior academics who cheated appears to be quite high.

Now that plagiarism checking has been weaponized by Bill Ackman and others, expect more academics to be outed. Ackman has already stated in a recent tweet that the MIT president and the entire MIT faculty are next. (He’s pissed about the attacks on his wife and apparently wants to exact his revenge in this manner).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-05/ackman-wants-plagiarism-checks-on-mit-faculty-after-wife-accused

Hmm - you said “exact his revenge in this manner.” That means:

- exposing many T-20 presidents who got their positions through cheating, plagiarism, and fraud?

- fraudulent Presidents who apparently earn $900,000 per year, and are certainly part of the skyrocketing tuition costs the rest of us bear?

And you have a problem with that?

Skyrocketing tuition costs have very little to do with the salaries of university presidents. Public disinvestment in education through horrible public policy is to blame. State subsidies for "public" universities have decreased by more than 50% over the past half century, and we have voted for this over and over again. Our collective social priorities are out of whack and the results show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

You are ill informed. Jews did not create Israel, the UN did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

You are ill informed. Jews did not create Israel, the UN did.

Sure and Ackman orchestrated the removal of Gay because of plagiarism vs Gay was not pushing enough pro israel propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

You are ill informed. Jews did not create Israel, the UN did.

Sure and Ackman orchestrated the removal of Gay because of plagiarism vs Gay was not pushing enough pro israel propaganda.

No. Rufo and Ackman orchestrated Gays ouster because of her embrace and implementation of DEI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If only we could all apply the same sense of outrage that is exhibited here regarding ethical breaches in academia, to ethical breaches in our highest levels of government: Supreme Court ethics violations and out-in-the open grifting of a president while in office (see thread on new House report on payments to Trump by foreign entities while he was president).

This has been a great and eye-opening discussion, but I don't get why some forms of cheating are more bothersome to people than other types.

This isn’t a discussion about the Supreme Court or the House grifters. I have no idea why you’d jump to the conclusion that people disturbed by the overt cheating of high level academics aren’t also disturbed and want action on the grifters in the House or the Supreme Court ethics rules violations. That seems like a ridiculous leap, and makes me question your ability to read. For the record, I think the Supreme Court/House ethics issues are significant and I am outraged by them. I am also outraged by the clear elevation of a cheater to the highest ranks of Harvard, who held students to an entirely duplicitous standard.

That having been said if you are talking about Gorsuch, those plagiarism claims were faked. What he did was entirely consistent with accepted legal scholarship. I have no patience for fake claims of plagiarism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

You are ill informed. Jews did not create Israel, the UN did.

More like the British Empire and Christian countries did, ignoring the will of the Muslim world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

You are ill informed. Jews did not create Israel, the UN did.

Sure and Ackman orchestrated the removal of Gay because of plagiarism vs Gay was not pushing enough pro israel propaganda.

No. Rufo and Ackman orchestrated Gays ouster because of her embrace and implementation of DEI.

She would still be president if she hadn’t plagiarized her already weak academic record. She had the backing of Harvard until plagiarism became just too extensive for even them to ignore.

I honestly don’t get why the progressive left is defending her so much. It looks absurd. We can all read the plagiarism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only we could all apply the same sense of outrage that is exhibited here regarding ethical breaches in academia, to ethical breaches in our highest levels of government: Supreme Court ethics violations and out-in-the open grifting of a president while in office (see thread on new House report on payments to Trump by foreign entities while he was president).

This has been a great and eye-opening discussion, but I don't get why some forms of cheating are more bothersome to people than other types.

This isn’t a discussion about the Supreme Court or the House grifters. I have no idea why you’d jump to the conclusion that people disturbed by the overt cheating of high level academics aren’t also disturbed and want action on the grifters in the House or the Supreme Court ethics rules violations. That seems like a ridiculous leap, and makes me question your ability to read. For the record, I think the Supreme Court/House ethics issues are significant and I am outraged by them. I am also outraged by the clear elevation of a cheater to the highest ranks of Harvard, who held students to an entirely duplicitous standard.

That having been said if you are talking about Gorsuch, those plagiarism claims were faked. What he did was entirely consistent with accepted legal scholarship. I have no patience for fake claims of plagiarism.

Not talking about Gorsuch--talking about Thomas and his unethical habit of accepting gifts from wealthy individuals.

Also, not talking about "grifters in the House" (although I'm sure there are plenty there as well)--talking about the grifter in the White House (see new report "White House for Sale"; it has receipts), the former president. Who you will probably vote for again.

Trump's Businesses Got Millions From Foreign Governments While He Was President
https://www.wsj.com/politics/china-saudi-arabia-top-list-of-foreign-governments-that-spent-millions-at-trump-properties-during-his-presidency-277317cb

"Donald J. Trump’s businesses received at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments during his presidency, according to new documents released by House Democrats on Thursday that show how much he received from overseas transactions while he was in the White House, most of it from China. The transactions, detailed in a 156-page report called “White House For Sale” that was produced by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, offer concrete evidence that the former president engaged in the kind of conduct that House Republicans have labored, so far unsuccessfully, to prove that President Biden did as they work to build an impeachment case against him."
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/04/us/politic...419def9b07accf35c694

Link to House Report
White House for Sale: How Princes, Prime Ministers, and Premiers Paid Off President Trump
https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/sites/de...0Mazars%20Report.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

Let talk about your logic. Jews create Israel out of nothing in the holy site of three religions, expel Muslim from Israel because they are not Jewish, steal their property and now it is the responsibility of other nations to take them in?

No. War crimes are not the fault of victims and others do not need to take care of the dead bodies piled up by the perpetrators of the crime. By your logic nazi German was within it rights.

You are ill informed. Jews did not create Israel, the UN did.

More like the British Empire and Christian countries did, ignoring the will of the Muslim world.

In other words…the UN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only we could all apply the same sense of outrage that is exhibited here regarding ethical breaches in academia, to ethical breaches in our highest levels of government: Supreme Court ethics violations and out-in-the open grifting of a president while in office (see thread on new House report on payments to Trump by foreign entities while he was president).

This has been a great and eye-opening discussion, but I don't get why some forms of cheating are more bothersome to people than other types.

This isn’t a discussion about the Supreme Court or the House grifters. I have no idea why you’d jump to the conclusion that people disturbed by the overt cheating of high level academics aren’t also disturbed and want action on the grifters in the House or the Supreme Court ethics rules violations. That seems like a ridiculous leap, and makes me question your ability to read. For the record, I think the Supreme Court/House ethics issues are significant and I am outraged by them. I am also outraged by the clear elevation of a cheater to the highest ranks of Harvard, who held students to an entirely duplicitous standard.

That having been said if you are talking about Gorsuch, those plagiarism claims were faked. What he did was entirely consistent with accepted legal scholarship. I have no patience for fake claims of plagiarism.

Not talking about Gorsuch--talking about Thomas and his unethical habit of accepting gifts from wealthy individuals.

Also, not talking about "grifters in the House" (although I'm sure there are plenty there as well)--talking about the grifter in the White House (see new report "White House for Sale"; it has receipts), the former president. Who you will probably vote for again.

Trump's Businesses Got Millions From Foreign Governments While He Was President
https://www.wsj.com/politics/china-saudi-arabia-top-list-of-foreign-governments-that-spent-millions-at-trump-properties-during-his-presidency-277317cb

"Donald J. Trump’s businesses received at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments during his presidency, according to new documents released by House Democrats on Thursday that show how much he received from overseas transactions while he was in the White House, most of it from China. The transactions, detailed in a 156-page report called “White House For Sale” that was produced by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, offer concrete evidence that the former president engaged in the kind of conduct that House Republicans have labored, so far unsuccessfully, to prove that President Biden did as they work to build an impeachment case against him."
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/04/us/politic...419def9b07accf35c694

Link to House Report
White House for Sale: How Princes, Prime Ministers, and Premiers Paid Off President Trump
https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/sites/de...0Mazars%20Report.pdf

Okay. I am outraged by that as well, though I will note you seem peculiarly blind to similar corruption by Democrats.

But this is discussion is not remotely about all that. You are off topic and don’t seem to be able to follow the thread of conversation. This topic is about academics who cheat, particularly university presidents that cheat. This thread is not about widespread corruption by both Democrats and Republicans in power. In this thread, we are talking about academic institutions that apparently employ wildly different standards to vulnerable students versus powerful administrators. Try to stay on topic, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There are many examples of genocide being suggested through signs and symbols. It's not clear that anyone is quoted as saying "let's go genocide all the Jews." So as someone who supports Gay's ouster, her comment that "context matters" is problematic. She wouldn't have said for example, "I don't know why the white supremacists were carrying tiki torches. Maybe they were headed to a luau." But she is defending this kind of behavior when Jews are the target. No Bueno. . .

Just did a very cursory DDG search on Harvard pro Palestinian protest; a few signs read:

“When people are occupied, resistance is justified”

“One solution, Revolution “

“From the River to the Sea”

“We stand with the Palestinian resistance “

“By any means necessary “

“Decolonization is not a metaphor “


Several of these campus slogans are direct calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea” - lifted directly from Hamas: a designated terrorist organization). Others are more subtle calls for violence.

All of these protests violate the standard, which is “hostile learning environment.”

While students must be free to express their views on public university grounds (and they SHOULD be allowed at privates like the Ivies), the slogans above clearly create a hostile learning environment for Jewish students.

The fact these Ivy presidents could not even express opposition to genocide of Jewish people is enough to justify their complete dismissal. In Gay’s case, she was not even docked pay; she was merely moved around among the Harvard elite.

If “from the river to the sea”, which is also in the formation documents of the governing party of Israel as a call for Israeli rule over the same territory (thus constituting a call for genocide of all Palestinians, by your logic), is legitimately objectionable on those shaky grounds, then the very existence of Zionism is also a call for genocide of all Palestinians, too, right?

So given that, why is there complete silence around the “hostile learning environment” created by every student, faculty member and staff at these institutions who supports Zionism in any way, shape, or form?

The stated, immutable aim of Zionism is indivisible Jewish dominion (by an immigrant population) over the region through forced displacement (removal or death as acceptable means) of the indigenous population.

Zionism = Genocide, yet we seemingly cannot tackle that one

I don't understand your logic. You are allowed to be Muslim in Israel. The reverse isn't true. Hamas explicitly calls for genocide. Israel doesn't. In fact, they have tried repeatedly to get Muslim nations to take in the Palestinian "refugees." Israel also pays for all of Palestine's every and water. If they wanted to commit genocide, it'd be easy. They would just turn off the water.

They pay for all the water they misappropriate from Syria? That water?