pictures from Columbia University

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

Columbia University President Minouche Shafik has faced calls for her resignation if she can't get the protesters under control













https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13334535/White-House-blasts-pro-Palestine-protestors-Columbia-University.html

[Tickle]

1. People of all backgrounds

should feel safe and they don't. That is all

[Think. Again.]

2. Yes, It's clear that's what the protests are calling for, and I strongly agree.

[betsuni]

3. How are the protests calling for people of all backgrounds feeling safe?

[Think. Again.]

4. The protests are calling for a ceasefire...

...which would increase a feeling of safety for all people in the region.

[betsuni]

6. As you know, Hamas isn't interested in a ceasefire. Terrorists are often like that.

[Think. Again.]

8. I don't put any credence into what hamas wants.

[betsuni]

9. I don't understand. They are the Palestinian government, aren't they?

[Think. Again.]

11. I agree with you that hamas is a terrorist organization....

....I don't give credence to what terrorist organizations want, I don't agree with the Isreali government's recognition and support of hamas, and I do agree with the civilians of Gaza who do not recognize hamas as their government.

[betsuni]

12. Don't understand this either.

[Think. Again.]

14. Yes, it's a complex situation.

[betsuni]

15. Then why the simplistic America Bad as if the U.S. president

could solve it with a phone call and won't because "Genocide Joe"?

[Think. Again.]

17. I don't believe I was in on that discussion...

....maybe you're thinking of another thread?

[betsuni]

20. Think. Again.

[Think. Again.]

23. ?

[marble falls]

27. They think that's clever. I'm with you: The hell with Netanyahu, the hell with Hamas. Who's looking out ...

... for Palestinians and Israelis: the ones who are being abused and murdered?

Netanyahu worked with Hamas to undercut Arafat and the PLO.

[betsuni]

52. "They"

[marble falls]

54. They.

[Cha]

163. She is a Valued member of DU and

I don't think she was trying to be "clever". More like an ask.

[Cha]

162. ..

Thank You

[ShazzieB]

21. Arre 6iu saying we shouldn't believe Hamas when they say they don't want a ceasefire?

I don't see why they would lie about that. I really don't.

[Think. Again.]

24. I don't pay any attention to hamas wants...

...I know that the citizens of Gaza and a large percentage of the entire world do want a cease-fire though, and I agree with them.

[betsuni]

26. How do you know that the citizens of Gaza want a ceasefire?

[Think. Again.]

34. I can't be expecte to take that question seriously.

[betsuni]

37. Why won't Hamas agree to a ceasefire? Why do they want war?

[Think. Again.]

39. I don't know and I don't care...

hamas is a terrorist organization that is terrorizing both Gaza civilians and Israeli civilians and must be eradicated.

The citizens of BOTH Gaza and Israel must be protected.

[betsuni]

40. Hamas is the government.

[Think. Again.]

42. Luckily...

...your own personal acceptance of hamas as the legitimate government doesn't matter.

[betsuni]

45. Hamas isn't the government? How so?

[Mountainguy]

102. Magical thinking

Just pretend something isn't true and it doesn't exist anymore. Problem solved!

[bottomofthehill]

176. Hamas actually is the government.

From the CIA Fact book
The Gaza Strip has been under the de facto governing authority of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) since 2007, and has faced years of conflict, poverty, and humanitarian crises. Inhabited since at least the 15th century B.C., the Gaza Strip area has been dominated by many different peoples and empires throughout its history; it was incorporated into the Ottoman Empire in the early 16th century. The Gaza Strip fell to British forces during World War I, becoming a part of the British Mandate of Palestine. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Egypt administered the newly formed Gaza Strip; Israel captured it in the Six-Day War in 1967. Under a series of agreements known as the Oslo Accords signed between 1993 and 1999, Israel transferred to the newly-created Palestinian Authority (PA) security and civilian responsibility for many Palestinian-populated areas of the Gaza Strip as well as the West Bank.

In 2000, a violent intifada or uprising began in response to perceived Israeli provocations, and in 2001 negotiations to determine the permanent status of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip stalled. Subsequent attempts to re-start negotiations have not resulted in progress toward determining final status and resolving of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel in late 2005 unilaterally withdrew all of its settlers and soldiers and dismantled its military facilities in the Gaza Strip, but it continues to control the Gaza Strip’s land borders, maritime territorial waters, cyberspace, telecommunications, and airspace. In early 2006, HAMAS won a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council election. Fatah, the dominant Palestinian political faction in the West Bank, and HAMAS failed to maintain a unity government, leading to violent clashes between their respective supporters and HAMAS's violent seizure of all PA military and governmental institutions in the Gaza Strip in June 2007. Since HAMAS's takeover, Israel and Egypt have enforced tight restrictions on movement and access of goods and individuals into and out of the territory. Fatah and HAMAS have since negotiated a series of agreements aimed at restoring political unity between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank but have struggled to enact them.

[shrike3]

60. How is a protest at Columbia supposed to accomplish that?

Some of these protestors aren't doing themselves any favors, A few on camera said, "We are Hamas," and chanted, "No Jewish State," or words to that effect. Not real supportive of the people of Israel OR Palestine, since Hamas is plainly not doing much to ease suffering in Gaza.

[Jedi Guy]

142. Okay, so if Hamas doesn't want a ceasefire, that means there won't be a ceasefire.

So what Hamas wants does matter to the situation in the region even if it doesn't matter to you. If Israel enacts a ceasefire and Hamas doesn't, that means Hamas will just continue to strike at Israel while the Israelis sit there thinking happy, peaceful thoughts.

Why in the world would Israel do such a (very stupid) thing? Unless and until Hamas genuinely wants a ceasefire, there will be no sustained pause in hostilities, nor should there be.

[ShazzieB]

32. But Hamas is one of the parties that has to agree to a ceasefire.

There can be no ceasefire unless Israel and Hamas both agree to it. The people of Gaza may want a ceasefire, but they don't have the power to make that happen. Hamas is in power, and there can be no ceasefire without their cooperation.

Hamas has made it abundantly clear by their actions that they don't care what happens to the people of Gaza. As far as Hamas is concerned, all the Palestinians who have died since this mess started are martyrs to the "holy" cause of eradicating all the Jews from Israel so it can be Palestine again. That is what Hamas wants, and what Gazans may want is immaterial to Hamas.

[Think. Again.]

35. hamas is a terrorist organization.

[shrike3]

61. Okay. But they're also the government.

[ShazzieB]

123. We all know Hamas is a terrorust organization. So what?

[ShazzieB]

127. Is there an echo in here?

I have no idea what your point is. We all know Hamas is a terrorist organization. In other news, grass is green, and the sun rises in the east.

[mcar]

189. Maybe they should let their government know, then

That would be Hamas - whom one has to pay attention to because they are not only filthy murdering terrorists, but also the government of Gaza.

[Think. Again.]

190. I hope you're not trying to be humorous about...

...the fact that so many, dead, injured, and traumatized people don't have any kind of functioning civil environment left to even try to oppose the horrific terrorist organization that you call their government.

[mcar]

191. Nothing humorous at all about murderous terrorists

being your government. Hamas is the government of Gaza. Why do you keep denying that?

[Think. Again.]

192. Because the citizens of Gaza don't agree with you.

[Happy Hoosier]

46. How many Gazans don't recognize Hamas as their government?

You are tap-dancing HARD to avoid condemning these people openly supporting Hamas.

[Think. Again.]

56. "'We're not Hamas': Gaza residents say airstrikes are putting civilians in grave danger"

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/gaza-residents-airstrikes-death-danger-hamas-attack-rcna119448

[Happy Hoosier]

62. Doesn't answer the question.

I have no doubt there are gazans who do not support Hamas. Do we know how many? I don't think so.

I think support for Hamas is probably higher than you or I would like it to be.

[Think. Again.]

65. Yeah, they're not really in a position to take part in a poll right now.

[sarisataka]

95. Au contraire mon ami

Hamas has a plurality of the support of Palestinians.
https://pcpsr.org/en/node/963

[Think. Again.]

105. Nope, your poll is out of date...

From March 21, 2024, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/gazans-back-two-state-solution-rcna144183

Updating that same source:

"Support for Hamas as a political party has fallen to 34% among Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, a 12-point drop from December 2023, according to a poll released Wednesday by a leading Palestinian research institute."

https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/969

[sarisataka]

109. Interesting as it says

When asked about their own preferences for the party that should be in control in the Gaza Strip after the war, 59% (64% in the West Bank and 52% in the Gaza Strip) selected Hamas; 13% selected the PA without President Abbas; 11% selected the PA with Abbas; 3% selected one or more Arab country;1% selected the UN, and 1% selected the Israeli army.

However my statement that Hamas has a plurality of support is still accurate:

When asked which political party or political trend they support, the largest percentage selected Hamas (34%), followed by Fatah (17%), while 11% selected other or third-party groups, and 37% said none of them or did not know.

However, if new parliamentary elections were held today with the participation of all political forces that participated in the 2006 elections, only 64% say they would participate in them, 30% would vote for Hamas, 14% for Fatah, 6% for third parties, and 15% remain undecided. Among the voters, support for Hamas stands at 47%, Fatah 22%, third parties 9%, and the undecided at 24%.

[shrike3]

63. But without Hamas' cooperation there can be no ceasefire.

What can we do? Regine change? That's worked out so well in the past.

[Think. Again.]

67. Wiping out a terrorist organization...

...that is unwanted by the citizens is not exactly "regime change".

[shrike3]

68. So, you support wiping out Hamas? How? Boots on the ground? Bombings?

Be real good for the people of Gaza: U.S. bombs. Like they don't have enough problems.

[Think. Again.]

73. I absolutely support wiping out hamas...

...I am absolutely against doing it in a way that wipes out a hundredfold more innocent civilians than it does hamas members.

That said, I am not a military strategist but I suspect we have the sophisticated tech and intelligence to successfully target whom we want to hit and the know how to find and access them. Didn't some leader of hamas recently do a televised interview lately? And he made it home safely?

[shrike3]

74. Hoo-boy. Good luck with that.

[Think. Again.]

78. You're probably right...

I strongly doubt netanyahu would want to do it that way.

[shrike3]

82. I strongly suspect Americans won't want it that way.

Getting us into another way would not be popular. Not to mention the fact that conflicts in the Middle East goes back centuries.

[Think. Again.]

93. I disagree...

I think Americans are all for debilitating hamas.

[shrike3]

101. You mean average people who are barely paying attention to the election in their own country?

Who complain about grocery and gas prices? They're going to be cool with taking out Hamas? Okay. Hopefully, all those weapons that only hurt bad guys'll come out of the woodwork.

[Think. Again.]

108. I mean the same Americans you suggested would be against taking out hamas.

I will say it again, I disagree with you and think those Americans would be FOR taking out hamas.

[shrike3]

133. Fine. Would open up a whole world of problems, but that's my thinking.

If we went in, we'd better not kill any civilians because that would be more fodder for the far-left and the protestors. Hamas would have to cooperatively stay out of civilian areas. Let's say we take them out. What then? Gaza will be in ruins. Sounds like it already is in ruins, They'll need civilian aid, which I'd fully support. But what happens with government? They hold elections? What if a similar government takes its place? Do we take that out, too?

No matter we do, the far-left in this country will not be satisfied. They never are. And every time we get involved in another country's government, it bites us in the ass. It would this time, too.

[Eko]

161. I am all for America taking Hamas out.

Because it would be the right thing to do not the political thing.

[shrike3]

166. How? Boots on the ground? Bombing?

Would Hamas cooperate by staying out of civilian areas so that no innocents are killed. Imagine the protests if any were. Then what? We set up a new government? Arrange free elections? What if the results brought a new version of Hamas to power?

Nation building does not go well for us. Nor does regime change. It usually ends up biting us in the behind.

The far left would not be satisfied no matter what we did. They never are. Then there's the fact that Palestine is surrounded by Arab neighbors -- let's forget about Israel for a minute -- who don't appear too interested in the fate of its peoples. There's been conflict there for centuries. We can't fix it. Often when we 've tried to fix things in the past, we've created a new version of worse. When it comes to countries that are not our own, our influence and ability to determine things has always been limited. We have to learn that.

[Eko]

167. Boots on the ground primarily.

Special forces backed up by specialty army and marine units. Yes there will be protests, yes we will have to help set up a new government with free elections and its possible it could bring a new version of Hamas to power. But I think it would go way better than what is happening now.

[shrike3]

168. Oh, that has gone so well the other times we tried it.

[Eko]

169. Do you think we would do worse than what is happening now?

Its not a question of whether we would do everything right or it would all turn out good, its a question of whether it would be better than the status quo that is happening now.

[shrike3]

170. Yeah, I think we could. Afghanistan comes to mind.

Didn't we go in there with boots on the ground, set up a "government" and all that? Worked beautifully, didn't it?

Oh, let's see, we were going to save the world and America too from communism. Then came Vietnam. I guarantee, there were plenty of people back then who thought it was the right thing to do.

[Eko]

171. Maybe so,

But maybe not. At least we would not be shelling civilians with dumb bombs. We would be in there helping to set up hospitals and food. I think the civilian death count would be much smaller and we would have killed more Hamas.

[shrike3]

180. How do you know we wouldn't be shelling civilians?

Even smart bombs screw up. Hamas tends to put its people in civilian populations. Not a new tactic, TBF. They weren't the first, they won't be the last either.

Set up hospitals? My brother was sent over as a special contractor to set up a hospital in Afghanistan -- we were going to do that stuff there, too. Wish I had his permission to tell you how that worked out.

Regime change and nation building does not work for us. Won't work this time, either. And you want boots on the ground? Wait 'tiil American casualties start to come in. Americans will just fall in love with that.

Humanitarian aid, sure. As much as we can get over there. Military action? It'd be the dumbest move an American president has made in a long time. They've been fighting for centuries over there. They'd keep fighting, we'd just be in the middle of it. Uh-uh.

[Eko]

181. Because you asked me how we would do it.

And I told you and shelling civilians was not in how I said we could do it. I did not even include smart bombs. Why on earth would you not be able to tell me how setting up a hospital in Afghanistan ended up? Is setting up a hospital top secret? Cant let anyone know we set up a hospital to help the Afghanistan people, is a top national security secret!! Ah snap! I just released top secret information here! Sarcasm- I did not in any way release top secret information.

[shrike3]

183. Because it was told in confidence to me by a family member. Who won a Bronze star and other commendations

while serving his country.

I tend to keep confidences. Maybe you don't, but I do.

So, you know how to avoid civilian deaths?. The one person in the history of the world to figure how to do that during an extended conflict. And you're here on DU.

We're very fortunate that the Biden administration will not entangle us in a bloody conflict that has gone on for centuries and is likely to continue with us or without us.

[Eko]

193. Maybe you should take a step back and take a breath.

I never said nor inferred at all anywhere that I would be able to do it without civilian deaths. Its insulting that you would then add "The one person in the history of the world to figure how to do that during an extended conflict. And you're here on DU." since I never said anything like that at all. I have no problem with you saying you think I am wrong, I've been wrong many times before and will be again. But there is no reason to insult someone because they don't agree with you. This is not twitter, it's D.U.
Eko.

[shrike3]

194. I don't need to take a breath.

Last edited Wed Apr 24, 2024, 12:32 AM - Edit history (1)

But you do. You wrote, "Why on earth would you not be able to tell me how setting up a hospital in Afghanistan ended up? Is setting up a hospital top secret? Can't let anyone know we set up a hospital to help the Afghanistan people, is a top national security secret!! Ah snap! I just released top secret information here! Sarcasm- I did not in any way release top secret information."

Over-react much? Sheesh.

Time to put you on ignore. Life is far too short

[Eko]

195. I'm sorry.

In searching through US military history there are indeed some top secret hospitals. but they are the ones on top secret bases. Either way I was being sarcastic and I can see that it offended you so I apologize. One could take into account you did put words in my mouth in the previous statement so I could have figured I could take liberties as well but apparently that was not the case. Once again I apologize.

[Always Blue]

48. Israel

By the way doesn't either. This didn't happen in a vacuum. Before the war started Isreal murdered a record number of Palestinian children. But, I think that the only person benefited by this is Netanyahu.

[eShirl]

10. Then I'm sure this protest will be very effective

[yardwork]

124. Yeah, no. A ceasefire means Hamas goes back to terrorist strikes.

There was a ceasefire in place on October 7, and the Israelis weren't safe.

So, let's not pretend that a magical ceasefire will solve this thing.

[shrike3]

184. I fear you're right.

Magical thinking also came up with the idea that Biden can end the conflict all by his lonesome.

[ShazzieB]

5. I was just about to ask the same thing!

Wonder if we'll get s reply?

[Think. Again.]

7. See my reply (#4) above your question (#5).

[AZSkiffyGeek]

130. Just keep walking

They'll go back under their bridge.

[MistakenLamb]

16. what do you think yelling "go back to Poland" to American Jews means?

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=lRLU6Z7mLq1MlgX_qxgAUQ

sure ain’t a call for peace, sounds like a call for a pogrom

[Think. Again.]

19. You would have to ask the individuals yelling that...

...just as the individual yelling "we are hamas" was not representative of the protest as a whole.

[ShazzieB]

22. Ask them what?

[Think. Again.]

25. MistakenLamb asked me a question, I was answering them.

[ShazzieB]

38. I see that now.

And I don't think MistakenLamb needs to ask anybody to explain what yelling "go back to Poland" to American Jews means. It's patently obvious.

[betsuni]

28. "individuals"?

[Think. Again.]

30. Yes...

...intimidation and verbal abuse was not the purpose of the protests, certain individuals within the protest crowd took that upon themselves.

[ShazzieB]

43. I dont think any of us can possibly know exactly what the original purpose of the protests was.

There could be multiple purposes, and intimidation and verbal abuse could very well have been among them, at least for some of the protesters. We can't know how many of the protesters came for that purpose, either.

I'm trying not to automatically assume the worst, but it's extremely hard. Only one thing is clear to me, and that is that none of us should assume we know what they had in mind, much less defend them.

[Think. Again.]

55. It was clearly a protest to demand a ceasefire.

[wnylib]

92. But in an earlier post, you said that Hamas needed to be eradicated.

That's what the war is about, eradicating Hamas.

BTW, it is Hamas that is refusing to agree to a ceasefire. So why aren't protests directed at Hamas instead of at American Jewish college students?

[Think. Again.]

100. hamas is a terrorist organization...

...protests are probably not widely respected by them.

There is widespread doubt that netanyahu's reason for his destruction of all Gaza is only to eradicate hamas, and certainly doubt about the effectiveness of simply carpet-bombing one place to end a broadly reaching terrorist organization.

[yardwork]

152. That isn't clear at all, given the behavior of people at the thing.

You seem to want to ignore what actually happened and replace it with some fantasy scenario that feels better.

[marble falls]

76. Or condemn them.

[ShazzieB]

128. Don't put words in my mouth, please.

I never said anyone should be condemned by anyone, and I never would.

[yardwork]

151. How do you know? Did you organize it?

[forthemiddle]

155. Do you apply the same rules to neo nazis

That show up at a Trump rally
Of course you don’t.

[Think. Again.]

164. Correct...

I would not apply the same "rules" to a vastly different situation (that's just a quirk of mine I guess).

[brooklynite]

51. Share a clip of any of the "real" demonstrators challenging the pro-Hamas, anti-Jewish statements.

[Think. Again.]

57. The protest was a call for a ceasefire.

[brooklynite]

85. And if intruders attempt to hijack the goals for the demonstration...

...I would expect the organizers to do something about it.

[MistakenLamb]

137. yet no one on their side tries to stop them

complicity from the mob

[Think. Again.]

139. I wasn't there, so I don't know that.

[MotownPgh]

41. Harrassing Jews on the streets of the

USA. I remember when I was 21 and thought I knew everything. I was dumb but never an anti-Semite. This is dangerous and disgusting.

[Think. Again.]

59. You should speak to a person of color sometime....

...you might not be so shocked about how abusive Americans can be to each other.

[shrike3]

64. So it's cool Jews are harassed on the street, since people of color are also?

[Think. Again.]

70. Stop, that's a false equivalence and you know it.

[shrike3]

71. No, it's not. You're the one who brought up people of color, not me.

[Think. Again.]

75. It is clearly a false equivalence and I won't continue with your bad-faith discussion.

[shrike3]

77. I'm crushed.

Anyway, your response when someone brought up harassment of Jews on the streets was to mention people of color in America. I did not bring that into the conversatioin: you did. Whataboutism.

[Think. Again.]

81. You falsely equated all of that with somehow being "okay".

[shrike3]

84. What else am I supposed to think?

Someone points out that Jews are being harassed, and you point to people of color. Which means what? Anyway, I thought you were done.

[Think. Again.]

94. You pretended to be surprised that Americans...

...are capable of abusing each other, despite the well known abuse that Americans of all colors, ethnicities, orientations, etc suffer at the hand of other Americans every day.

[shrike3]

96. Guess you're not done, eh?

Where did I pretend to be surprised? I was surprised you'd bring it up regarding antisemitism on this campus and elsewhere. Don't know why.

[Think. Again.]

107. I see, you interjected yourself into a discussion I was engaged in with....

...MotownPgh, who wrote...

"Harrassing Jews on the streets of the USA. I remember when I was 21 and thought I knew everything. I was dumb but never an anti-Semite. This is dangerous and disgusting."

I thought I was still in discussion with them.

[ShazzieB]

131. This is a message board.

There are no private discussions here. We can all read everything posted here, and we are all free to join in on discussion at any time.

[shrike3]

141. Thank you. n/t

[Cha]

165. TY for Explaining that so Well, Shazzie.B

[shrike3]

132. Okey-doke. Carry on.

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2024, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)

I didn't realize I had to ask permission to join a discussion.

[Maru Kitteh]

172. You got confused. That's twice at least in this thread alone?

The onus is upon you to pay attention to who you are addressing. Trying to blame shrike3 for your failure to do so is . . well that's pretty rough.

[Think. Again.]

177. Yes...

...it's difficult for me to keep track when many people are posting at me and taking the discussion in so many different tangents.

I guess I'm accostumed to discussions that follow through logically within the initial topic.

My apologies to all.

[mcar]

115. So you're admitting that the Columbia

“Protesters “ are abusing Jewish Americans. Glad it’s cleared up.

[Think. Again.]

138. Please don't put words in my mouth...

Yes, there were individuals who joined the protest who were wrongly abusive, some may have been students, I don't know (only 10% of those arrested were students).

I do NOT "admit" that the student protesters intended to abuse anyone as part of the protest, as you are implying.

Glad that's cleared up.

[womanofthehills]

153. Lots of ProPalestine protesters are Jewish

Last Nov, Columbia suspended Jewish Voices for Peace


“Appalling: Columbia University suspends JVP and SJP student chapters.”

“As the largest progressive anti-Zionist Jewish organization in the world, counting hundreds of thousands of members and supporters, including Columbia and Barnard students, staff and faculty, JVP condemns the Columbia administration’s unjust suppression of speech and advocacy for Palestinian liberation.” https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2023/11/10/cu-appalling/

[MotownPgh]

118. Person of color

Have you decided that I'm white? (Hint: User name)
I just live in a city where jews were recently slaughtered.....because they were jews.

[yardwork]

125. Auschwitz is in Poland. /nt

[lapucelle]

173. Indeed. It's quite clear what they're calling for at Columbia.

Link to tweet

[sarisataka]

174. They need to put up signs

So they are not bothered by "Zionists"

[lapucelle]

175. ...

[PennRalphie]

13. Protests will end soon

When the semester’s over. There will be some in the larger cities, but won’t get as much attention.

If the protests start up again in August, President Biden will need to get the schools to get a handle on them. Protests close to the election could be a horrible optic.

Unless President Biden finds a solution, which is very likely.

[jaxexpat]

18. Biden's solution is the most likely.

We Americans must learn to understand that, at this point in history, the visible political leadership in Israel and in Palestine are, arguably, two sides of the same coin. Their methods (and their madness) have become similarly intransigent. Their common, though uninhabitable, ground. On this alone there may be enough mutual "understanding of need" to provide a good-faith basis for peaceful cohabitation. Look to the accomplishments of Jimmy Carter. His plan's only flaw was its failure to seek and receive permission from the high-rolling but largely invisible actors in this drama the west calls the Middle East who weren't prepared to allow peace to spread. This was largely because "Monsanto, ARAMCO and ADM*" weren't ready to allow the Shah's kingdom to become a democratic entity, an example for the world's Muslims and any other 3rd world, mineral rich nation. One might notice, they're still not.

*a cross section of the real economic masters of the planet: Their names change over time, but their interests are pretty much eternal and universal.

[Always Blue]

49. Losing

The United States has to quit giving money to extreme right wing socialists. If Israel wants to fund it's war then their citizens should pay the price. Hamas is the fault of Isreal and the United States,for not stepping up to help these people for decades. By the way a good number of Palestinians are Christians and not Muslims. Again the only person benefitting is Netanyahu.

[jaxexpat]

79. I know about the Christian Palestinian factor. Have met and entertained a family.

Regarding the Israelis, they don't look right in jack boots. Someone needs to advise them about this faux pas before they find themselves disinvited to all the best fetes.

[Always Blue]

50. Quit giving money

The United States has to quit giving money to extreme right wing socialists. If Israel wants to fund it's war then their citizens should pay the price. Hamas is the fault of Isreal and the United States,for not stepping up to help these people for decades. By the way a good number of Palestinians are Christians and not Muslims. Again the only person benefitting is Netanyahu.

[EX500rider]

154. " By the way a good number of Palestinians are Christians and not Muslims"

98% of Palestinians identify as Sunni Muslims

https://culturalatlas.sbs.com.au/palestinian-culture/palestinian-culture-religion

[haele]

69. Many of the protesters aren't students.

Just as in the BLM protests and other protest movements in the past, there are a lot of political agitators or non-political opportunists who will invite themselves to otherwise peaceful protest marches or meetings to air their own grievances or further their political agendas - and they tend to be the loudest and most obnoxious.
And the ones the media will be attracted to tend to be these opportunists. No matter who the original organizers or leaders are, the Media always focuses on the loudest and most outlandish voices. Ratings over content.
Whether it's an anti- or pro- type movement; street fair, sit down, or march...those agitators and opportunists always are there to hijack movements. They thrive in chaos and latch themselves onto groups passionate about things, especially groups made up of young people who might not be familiar with their cynical tactics.

Haele (remembering many of the protests of the 60's I lived through while parents were going to college)

[shrike3]

80. You make some good points.

Unfortunately, media are drawn to the loudest and most outlandish, and thus hijack the discussion away from the very real points most protests center around.

[Always Blue]

143. That was the excuse

For Kent State.

[haele]

156. A bad excuse for something that still should not have happened.

But then, the outside agitators don't care who gets hurt or killed. Agitators, throughout the spectrum from "true believers", bullies, narcissists, sociopaths to terrorists, are wrapped up in their egos and consider the rest of humanity simply livestock to be culled if necessary for their cause. If you or I don't agree to their worldview, we are the flawed ones. They believe the more chaos, the closer their chosen reality can be realized.
The ones cynically making money off their beliefs are the worst.
Don't mistake pointing out agitators as giving approval to treating all protesters as if they are agitators.

Haele

[LeftInTX]

157. These outside protesters were camping in front of a gate, that police needed to protect.

The cops told them to clean up their garbage and get their stuff off the street and that they needed to protect the area. The group yells "Move back. Move back" to the cops.

The police told protesters: "This is a police zone. If you want space, you can go here or here. If you stay here you will be arrested."

They purposely antagonized the cops and saying "Leave us alone. Go back to where you were".

I wouldn't be surprised if they touched the cops first. (video is heavily edited and out of sequence)

The cops then begin to cuff this unruly group.

They then try to make themselves look like victims with shouts "What are you doing to me? I'm just standing on the sidewalk! You can't arrest us! Help! Help! Help! You're hurting me!! " They're howling like monkeys.

They were charged with resisting arrest. One was arrested for assaulting a cop.

Obviously this type of stuff becomes something other than the original purpose of the protest.

I wouldn't quite call them outside agitators, but they sure as hell wanted to create a scene.

This one here was spitting on the cop.


Video is heavily edited and events are out of sequence

&ab_channel=StatusCoupNews

[Sugarcoated]

182. This hurts their cause

and convinces no one. In fact, it does the opposite

[Ping Tung]

89. The way to end the protests is to end the killing in Gaza.

[shrike3]

98. How? The conflict is centuries old.

Protesting the U.S. aid to Israel is perfectly justified, IMO. That's the right of citizens who do not like where their tax money is going. That's a direct action the U.S. government is taking. What if aid is withdrawn and conflict continues? (I think it will. Be nice if I was wrong.) The mess over there will continue. If Netanyahu is desperate, he'll be capable of all kinds of things. Protestors are asking for an outcome the U.S. government can't assure.

[Ping Tung]

106. What they're doing now is just piling up bodies and starving people.

And, is very obviously not working.

A good first step to stopping the killing is to stop selling or giving arms to the perpetrators.

[shrike3]

186. I have no objections to that, If enough taxpayers don't like how their dollars are spent, the government

is going to have to start listening. Will it stop the conflict? I doubt it. It'll just head into a new phase. I imagine if the U.S. withdraws its support, Israel's enemies in the region may decide it's party time. Then we'll have a whole new problem.

[dwayneb]

185. And there's the rub

Would be nice if there was a good guy somewhere in this mess but the reality is that you have a far Right megalomaniac in Netanyahu who is using war to cement his power, and you have terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah funded and supported by Iran who will never stop until they have destroyed Israel.

These factions will continue to fight and destroy for decades if not centuries after we are dead and gone. The protesters are incredibly naive if they think that the USA can wave a magic wand and fix this.

[shrike3]

187. I'm with you. This will not end well.

[sarisataka]

110. Go back to the peace

like existed on October 6?

[Ping Tung]

114. Keep killing on April 22?

[sarisataka]

116. Hamas can accept a ceasefire

Several have been offered.

Or is it only Israel who must stop?

[EllieBC]

121. Of course it's only Israel that must stop.

Hamas playbook 101.

[Always Blue]

144. If what they are demanding

Is the same as Yale everyone here should be a supportive. There they wanted the college to quit their investments to weapons manufacturing. Think about that, the schools are investing in weapons and we have mass shootings in our classrooms.

[sarisataka]

149. Would it be too much to ask

them to make their demands without including antisemitism and harassment of Jewish students?

[marble falls]

29. Oh to be young again and in '68 ...

?itok=qsGvIDL3

?itok=Rg4FRDA-

?1524432373547

?w=1440



G*D bless David Shapiro!

[PennRalphie]

31. When I was in college

If we saw a line, we would join. Didn’t matter what it was.

[marble falls]

36. I'm with Johnny ...

?si=14o7tCYHWbeCxpvC

But, I don't cross labor picket lines.

[Polybius]

72. All those protesting for good causes

Hard to believe Nixon won that year.

[marble falls]

83. HHH was the wrong candidate. He was tied too closely to LBJ in voters's eyes.

[LeftInTX]

160. So Nixon was better? Got it!

The protests turned voters off. They certainly turned my parents off. They were Democrats until 1968. My dad was a Vietnam vet and was deployed: Sept 66-July 67. He was career military. I was in seventh grade. (A pre-teen)

The youth culture scared my dad who was a Lt Col at the time.

My parents didn't want us kids to end up like what they were seeing on TV. And that's a fact. They made it abundantly clear.


Somehow, they saw the Democratic party as a party that was responsible for unrest across the country. They did not want their kids to become adults in that environment. (Obviously the unrest appeared much worse than it actually was. But the images were powerful)

[marble falls]

178. Didn't say Nixon was better, just said the "Happy Warrior" was the wrong candidate in '68 ...

... he just couldn't get voters to separate him from LBJ.

[LeftInTX]

188. And what happened with McGovern?

[marble falls]

196. Other than he lost? I do not know. Watergate had broken and Nixon still ran the table. I was all in on McGovern ...

... so far in, I thought he had it in the bag. Obviously Nixon felt McGovern was a major threat, too.

[LeftInTX]

158. Yep!

[SARose]

86. Ooohhhh yes

Those pictures…I try to stay out of this argument because I was arrested 3 times in one year for civil disobedience. My Navy vet father was horrified. 😉

I was full of righteous anger, too. Yes, there were paid agitators then, too.

This is a private university on private land. I hate to see MAGA Stefanik and Shut Up Foxx use this situation for more performance politics.

These folks have a right to peacefully protest. I may not agree with what they say but I will defend to the death their right to say it.

Peace out.

[shrike3]

99. As long as they stay peaceful.

And that agitation doesn't impact the lives of Jewish Americans trying to go about their business.

[SARose]

140. Absolutely

Yes, peaceful protest. The last time I was protesting it turned violent on both sides. Tear gas, dogs, etc etc. screaming, spitting…and then Kent State. I never was arrested again.

Sad to say, my Dad was right when he said control your emotions and work within the system.

[Celerity]

90. 1968 worked out so well!

[marble falls]

179. HHH was the wrong guy to run against him. The feeling was new broom time, and HHH was seen as more of the same.

[Ping Tung]

91. It was the best of times and worst of times.

Humphrey lost because of the war. Nixon won because he promised to end the war.

In '68 the Hawks in the Democratic Party nominated Humphrey who promised nothing but more of the killing.

[mcar]

33. They are letting Jewish students be terrorized

Disgusting.

[tirebiter]

44. All we got from 1968 was a longer war and Richard Nixon.

[Happy Hoosier]

47. Don't point out facts to the folks nostalgic for that time.

Not only did they enable Nixon, they set the stage for teh rise of Reagan... and everything that came after.

[EllieBC]

88. Nostalgia might be the best drug.

If pharmaceutical companies could make it in a pill form they would.

[BannonsLiver]

135. Agreed. Some folks need to close the yearbook and get into the present.

[shrike3]

66. Sad to say, you're right, Unintended consequences.

[Xoan]

145. How narrow-minded of you.

[doc03]

53. These people are going to blow up the Democratic convention like in 1968. nt

[wnylib]

97. They will try to, but might not succeed.

[Oneironaut]

58. Omg these people are absolute fucking cringe.

Between the anti-Semitism and LARPing by wearing head scarfs (“because they’re a ‘revolutionary’ lol), or, littering everywhere and expecting everyone to clean up after them - they’re an absolute embarrassment to this country.

[Deep State Witch]

150. Point To Gaza On a Map

Ask these fine college students to point to Gaza on a world map.

If they're so upset about genocide, they need to worry about Sudan and Congo, too. But, the Sudanese and Congolese aren't making TikToks about being murdered.

[Ping Tung]

87. Congress shall make no law

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Bel eve it or not that applies to people protesting a war in the middle east.

[Mountainguy]

103. Nothing in the first amendment

Gives people the right to sent up an encampment, especially on private property, and disrupt other people right to go about their lives.

[Ping Tung]

111. What part of "no law" did you miss.

Considering that most of the protestors are students at the university they have a right to be there because they're paying for it.

I remember hearing these same arguments about "disrupting other peoples/ lives back in the '60s during the civil rights and anti-war movements. History is repeating itself here.

[EllieBC]

112. Just say you're fine with them

harassing Jewish students. It’s not like it’s not obvious.

And yes private property is different from federal public lands. Do you think you have the “right” to go set up camp on someone’s front lawn?

[Ping Tung]

119. I'm not "fine" with any kind of violence. And that goes for what's going on in Gaza.

Are you OK with the very real violence in Gaza perpetrated by both sides?

[EllieBC]

120. Of course you have a plan as to

how any violence can be stopped? It was peaceful on October 6th. Should Israelis have just apologized for existing after they were attacked?

[Ping Tung]

126. Plan to stop violence? Don't participte.

And that applies to both sides.

[shrike3]

134. Good luck making that happen.

[sarisataka]

113. "no law"

is that as sacrosanct as "shall not be infringed" i.e. absolutely no restriction of any sort?

You are correct about history repeating, but not the sixties, go back a further 30 years.

[Ping Tung]

122. In the '30s my father was in the ILWU and participting in strikes on the "private" docks.

He had a piece of steel in his head put there by a company strike buster.

[Mountainguy]

136. What part of

Private property don't you understand?

[wnylib]

104. But intimidating people of one faith or ethnicity

by people of another faith or ethnicity is a strange application of the first amendment. It fosters bigotry and hatred that borders on incitement to physical action. When that happens, and it will if this kind of public attack against Jews continues, there are hate crimes to deal with it.

[mcar]

117. It's a private school

[Ace Rothstein]

129. When did Congress get involved?

You clearly didn't read the language you posted.

[Zeitghost]

159. None of which applies to private entities

Enforcing rules on private property.

[sarisataka]

148. Open mindedness includes

Judenhass?

I don't think so.

[Vinca]

147. It costs almost $90,000 a year including tuition, housing, etc. for a student to attend this

college. If they are prevented from attending classes because of the protests, the campus should be cleared of them and any students who return to continue the disruption should be expelled. Anyone else who returns should be arrested for trespassing. Free speech is not unlimited.