Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s made her views known. Team DH. Just ghost and make an excuse to cancel for the joint vacation. No need to make it a big deal or confrontation, people ghost all the time.

+1
I'm not going to get into my thinking on this because I don't want to delve into the politics. But now that I've seen the letter, I would would find an excuse to politely cancel the vacation. I would NOT raise the letter with her; it will not end well. Just accept that those are her views (and I can guess why you are surprised) and be pleasant when you need to interact with her in the future regarding the kids. But that's it.

I'm sorry, OP.

FFS. Did you even read the letter? I can’t believe how stupid some of you are. I guess there is no freedom of speech now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Telling you right now engaging her will not bring you any satisfaction

I fully agree. Resist the urge, OP. It could get bad and would then interfere with the ability of your kids to be friends.

But do you want your kid to be friends with someone whose parent holds these views?

I would. I share those views. There’s nothing anti-Semitic about them.

Anonymous wrote:OP’s position is actually a perfect illustration of what the problem is. She’s confusing another’s position with regard to which she strongly disagrees with anti-Semitism. There’s nothing anti-Semitic in that letter.

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read the letter and it sure sounds like free, protected and non anti-Semitic to me.

Anonymous wrote:Oh man. This is happening to me too. I’m totally fine with people wanting a ceasefire and being mad at Netanyahu - who sucks and I agree about ceasefire - but the folks who are insinuating that there’s any justification for killing civilians (on either side) or throwing around terms like ‘open air prison’ and suggesting the Israelis are white occupiers (they are the same color as Palestinians) I’m kind of done with. I would not be having a conversation. I just unfollowed and it’s done.

From my pov it’s very easy to support a 2 state solution, be anti killing civilians, be anti terrorist. Honestly anyone who has some other hot take pov I just want them to be quiet

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to push your husband. You can be friends with her without your husband. He has the right to choose his own friends.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, here is the letter that they signed:

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vSxEIf0j1H6v3R4549yxfetSBy1ioc6VHyJa3vKfvgyVFX9TAluk_1laTuSBKAyzqjF3hJT9EVw0P7a/pub

Why is DH not equally concerned about the students being attacked for supporting Palestinian human rights?

“It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.

We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.”

NP - So free speech is ok for some but not all and there should be no consequences for behavior? The student letter and the faculty letter both state that the actions of Hamas on October 7 were a legitimate military action. They were not and to say that is to condone terrorism and yes it is antisemitic.

Imagine if this was white students who said something similar about what happened during the BLM protests in 2020? Every one of those students would’ve been facing worse consequences than a “doxxing truck”.

They clearly stated that staff don’t agree with all the student statements but we’re defending their rights to express their opinions …

I wouldn't be able to resist asking that friend about any other instances in the last three years where she publicly voiced her free speech concerns regarding doxxing, employment terminations, etc., especially for people whose views she does not agree with. If she is an equal opportunity free speech absolutust (and I know some), I would be able to continue the friendship, but I think I know the answer to that question.

Again it is somewhat amazing to me what imaginative world OP (and you) are attributing to the person who signed this statement. She is a faculty member in the United States during an interval of rampant targeting of free expression on college campuses by right-wing ideologues. I virtually guarantee that she will have 5-10 examples of her taking the position you think you’d “gotcha” her with.

Anonymous wrote:She’s made her views known. Team DH. Just ghost and make an excuse to cancel for the joint vacation. No need to make it a big deal or confrontation, people ghost all the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, here is the letter that they signed:

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vSxEIf0j1H6v3R4549yxfetSBy1ioc6VHyJa3vKfvgyVFX9TAluk_1laTuSBKAyzqjF3hJT9EVw0P7a/pub

Why is DH not equally concerned about the students being attacked for supporting Palestinian human rights?

“It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.

We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.”

NP - So free speech is ok for some but not all and there should be no consequences for behavior? The student letter and the faculty letter both state that the actions of Hamas on October 7 were a legitimate military action. They were not and to say that is to condone terrorism and yes it is antisemitic.

Imagine if this was white students who said something similar about what happened during the BLM protests in 2020? Every one of those students would’ve been facing worse consequences than a “doxxing truck”.

The faculty letter does not state that 10/7 was a "legitimate military action." Here's what it actually says:

"In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of October 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years. One could regard the events of October 7th as just one salvo in an ongoing war between an occupying state and the people it occupies, or as an occupied people exercising a right to resist violent and illegal occupation, something anticipated by international humanitarian law in the Second Geneva Protocol. In either case armed resistance by an occupied people must conform to the laws of war, which include a prohibition against the intentional targeting of civilians. The statement reflects and endorses this legal framework, including a condemnation of the killing of civilians."

The faculty letter does not endorse the views in the students statement, that 10/7 was a military response. Nor does it further editorialize that it was a legitimate military response. It's just describing what the student statement says. It then further contextualizes this by noting that even if you view the acts on 10/7 as a military action by an occupied people, that would make it an act of war, and any such act of war would have to conform to Geneva conventions, which do not permit the targeting or intentional killing of civilians.

Sure, it's written with a level of academic remove that intentionally obscures what the signatories actually think about the conflict. But the letter isn't actually about what they think of the conflict. It's about whether the students who wrote and signed the student statement should be targeted and doxxed as they have been, and whether their actions can be considered anti-semitic. The letter makes the argument that you cannot view the statement as de facto anti-semitic because the context of the conflict in Israel make the students' position on these events at least arguably true.

It doesn't endorse their statement. It says they should be allowed to make it, and attempt to contextualize their statement.

I understand why it would upset people. I'm not even saying OP shouldn't end her friendship with this professor over it if she feels she needs to. But the letter does not call 10/7 a legitimate military action or anything close to that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s made her views known. Team DH. Just ghost and make an excuse to cancel for the joint vacation. No need to make it a big deal or confrontation, people ghost all the time.

+1
I'm not going to get into my thinking on this because I don't want to delve into the politics. But now that I've seen the letter, I would would find an excuse to politely cancel the vacation. I would NOT raise the letter with her; it will not end well. Just accept that those are her views (and I can guess why you are surprised) and be pleasant when you need to interact with her in the future regarding the kids. But that's it.

I'm sorry, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hear you, OP. Honestly, I would ask for an explanation from the friend. “Hey, I was surprised to see your name on a letter that containing views about X I frankly find upsetting. Do you really hold those views?”

One other question - how would you ask the question? Text? On the phone? Try to find a time in person? I don’t see her often as our kids are now older but we had socialized maybe once a month or every other month and she texts me a fair bit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh man. This is happening to me too. I’m totally fine with people wanting a ceasefire and being mad at Netanyahu - who sucks and I agree about ceasefire - but the folks who are insinuating that there’s any justification for killing civilians (on either side) or throwing around terms like ‘open air prison’ and suggesting the Israelis are white occupiers (they are the same color as Palestinians) I’m kind of done with. I would not be having a conversation. I just unfollowed and it’s done.

From my pov it’s very easy to support a 2 state solution, be anti killing civilians, be anti terrorist. Honestly anyone who has some other hot take pov I just want them to be quiet

This is how I feel about the matter, but I’ve definitely seen some of my Jewish friends posting on social media the effect that anything beyond 100% support of Israel is antisemitic. I can read their comments on news articles that are very anti-Palestine. It’s not even enough to just stay out of it while they process their feelings, but I’ve seen numerous disturbing statuses that all their friends who are staying silent and not outwardly supporting Israel are the same people who would stand by and let the Nazis kill Jews during the holocaust.

So I think there‘a a lot of strong rhetoric from the Israel can do not wrong and the Palestine is an open air prison sides with people with a more in the middle view feeling like they can’t win. And when someone like OP’s friend tries to speak out or show support for the concern calling things antisemitic can have a chilling effect on free speech, you have idiots like her husband pounding his chest and declaring his viewpoint the only right viewpoint.

Anonymous wrote:Oh man. This is happening to me too. I’m totally fine with people wanting a ceasefire and being mad at Netanyahu - who sucks and I agree about ceasefire - but the folks who are insinuating that there’s any justification for killing civilians (on either side) or throwing around terms like ‘open air prison’ and suggesting the Israelis are white occupiers (they are the same color as Palestinians) I’m kind of done with. I would not be having a conversation. I just unfollowed and it’s done.

From my pov it’s very easy to support a 2 state solution, be anti killing civilians, be anti terrorist. Honestly anyone who has some other hot take pov I just want them to be quiet