Defining free speech

[92tide]

I got curious about the Jewish population at UA. Apparently, there are two Jewish sororities and one Jewish fraternity now. (I mean predominantly Jewish, since all admit gentiles as well.) When I was there, there were four Jewish fraternities and three Jewish sororities. The ZBTs, the oldest is still there. The SDTs, the oldest predominantly Jewish sorority is still there. In the '50s, the ZBTs were exclusively Southern men and the SDT was also mostly Southern. The others were made up of students from the north, predominantly the NYC area. Bama was known up there as a good value in education. Hillel states that it serves over 1,000 Jewish students. I was a little surprised by the shrinkage in the number of fraternities and sororities, given that UA only had around 10,000 students in the mid-50s and is pushing 40,000 now. Of course, back then out of state tuition was quite low and it's much higher now...

i had a dorm roommate from connecticut who was a zbt. super nice guy, i went to many zbt parties with him the semester we roomed together.

 

[Tidewater]

A friend of mine at GWU used to go to the ZBT house at GW every afternoon to watch Hogan's Heroes on syndicated TV ("Look! Funny Nazis!")
I guess the actors playing Colonel Klink and Sergeant Schultz were both Jewish.

 

[TexasBama]

I guess the actors playing Colonel Klink and Sergeant Schultz were both Jewish.

They were

 

[Tidewater]

They were

I think the ZBTs at GWU appreciated the irony.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

My law partner got a kick out of the movie scene where a guy says he can always spot a Jew and Paul Newman pulls his lower eyelid down and asks if the guy can see if something is in his eye...

 

[Crimson1967]

Most of the Nazis on the show were Jewish. Werner Klemperer only agreed to do the show if Klink would be portrayed as a buffoon and if he ever “won” in an episode he would quit.

Robert Clary, who played the French POW, was a Holocaust survivor. John Banner (Schultz) had relatives who were murdered by the Nazis.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

I got curious about the Jewish population at UA. Apparently, there are two Jewish sororities and one Jewish fraternity now. (I mean predominantly Jewish, since all admit gentiles as well.) When I was there, there were four Jewish fraternities and three Jewish sororities. The ZBTs, the oldest is still there. The SDTs, the oldest predominantly Jewish sorority is still there. In the '50s, the ZBTs were exclusively Southern men and the SDT was also mostly Southern. The others were made up of students from the north, predominantly the NYC area. Bama was known up there as a good value in education. Hillel states that it serves over 1,000 Jewish students. I was a little surprised by the shrinkage in the number of fraternities and sororities, given that UA only had around 10,000 students in the mid-50s and is pushing 40,000 now. Of course, back then out of state tuition was quite low and it's much higher now...

Bernie Madoff was a SAM (aka Sammy) sometime in the 50s.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Bernie Madoff was a SAM (aka Sammy) sometime in the 50s.

Yes, I knew that. They were across the street from Lambda Chi. I was sent over, as a pledge, to borrow something, during rush, and my looks are ambiguous enough that they all bounced up off the couches to welcome me...

 

[4Q Basket Case]

What about their behavior made them like Nazis or neo-Nazis?

While on campus, they stood idly by while some students called for the genocide of Jews. They were called before Congress to explain that lack of response. While before Congress they were repeatedly asked to give a simple yes or no answer to whether such speech constituted harassment. They repeatedly said it depended on the context.

Not all Nazis killed Jews. But the ones that didn't just shrugged and looked the other way. Seems pretty much parallel, no? If you still don't think so, watch some movies on Nazi testimony in the Nuremberg Trials.

Suppose significant numbers of students on the University of Alabama campus had organized multiple protests in which some advocated killing all Black people. Suppose further that Stuart Bell had responded, "I don't know if that threatens he safety of our Black students or not. Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn't. What's the context? Let's talk about it."

A national meltdown of epic proportions would rightly have ensued, complete with accusations of Bell at the very least being complicit with the Klan. Nobody would even try to defend him. Why these women have defenders in the face of what they said, I simply can't understand.

 

[Go Bama]

While on campus, they stood idly by while some students called for the genocide of Jews. They were called before Congress to explain that lack of response. While before Congress they were repeatedly asked to give a simple yes or no answer to whether such speech constituted harassment. They repeatedly said it depended on the context.

[/QUOTE]
This is not what the presidents were asked. Stefanik asked if calling for the genocide of Jews was against the code of conduct of the different schools. Before anyone could finish an answer, Stefanik would cut them off and demand a yes or no answer. Not all questions can be completely answered with a yes or no.

FWIW, "intifada" is not calling for the genocide of Jews as Stefanik characterized it. It is an uprising.

The testimony NT18 posted clearly stated how each university president feels. I suggest we take them at their word until they act otherwise. Isn’t this similar to what you suggested upthread when saying we’ll know by their actions how they really feel?

In a previous post, you stated:

I thought the surname of the president of MIT. — Kornbluth — sounded German Jewish. So I looked it up. Sure enough, Sally Kornbluth is Jewish herself.

Further upthread in the testimony posts, NT18 posted:

Sally Kornbluth (28:53):

Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx Ranking member Scott and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for this opportunity to describe how MIT is fighting the scourge of antisemitism. My name is Sally Kornbluth. I have been president of MIT since January of this year. As an American, as a Jew, and as a human being, I abhor antisemitism. And my administration is combating it actively. Since October 7th, my campus communications have been crystal clear about the dangers of antisemitism and about the atrocity of the Hamas terror attack.

I did not embolden the sentence where Kornbluth says she is Jewish. NT18 posted it that way. Since NT18’s post was before yours, it suggests you may not have read the transcripts or watched the video. My apologies if you did, I’m not trying to make anyone mad here, but we cannot make informed decisions with partial information.

Also notice the next sentence where Kornbluth states, “And my administration is combating it actively.” Gay also said Harvard has “robust disciplinary processes, that allow us to hold individuals accountable.” So nobody is standing “idly by.”

It’s hard for me to understand how anyone could read the transcripts or watch the video and not reach the same conclusion as NT18:

The whole thing has been manufactured outrage - manufactured by politicians and their wealthy supporters to cover their own bigoted tracks.

 

[NationalTitles18]

While on campus, they stood idly by while some students called for the genocide of Jews. They were called before Congress to explain that lack of response. While before Congress they were repeatedly asked to give a simple yes or no answer to whether such speech constituted harassment. They repeatedly said it depended on the context.

Not all Nazis killed Jews. But the ones that didn't just shrugged and looked the other way. Seems pretty much parallel, no? If you still don't think so, watch some movies on Nazi testimony in the Nuremberg Trials.

Suppose significant numbers of students on the University of Alabama campus had organized multiple protests in which some advocated killing all Black people. Suppose further that Stuart Bell had responded, "I don't know if that threatens he safety of our Black students or not. Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn't. What's the context? Let's talk about it."

A national meltdown of epic proportions would rightly have ensued, complete with accusations of Bell at the very least being complicit with the Klan. Nobody would even try to defend him. Why these women have defenders in the face of what they said, I simply can't understand.

I watched the hearings where the video was played.

I heard nothing of anyone saying to kill the Jews. Nothing.

I do know what some are reading into what was said.

Maybe they are right.

Maybe they aren't.

But policies involving protected speech must follow the law.

When those policies and/or laws are violated then throw the book at them.

Until then it's just throwing a fit because someone said something you (the royal variety) didn't like, but not directing your ire at the person saying it but rather people who had nothing to do with it, condemned the speech in question, and are powerless to change law or policy by themselves.

But Stefanik did her job well.

 

[Go Bama]

Jamie Raskin vs Elaine Stafanik wrt Congress insisting on Caudine Gay and Kornbluth resigning their posts as presidents of Ivy League schools.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

For the record: I never said any of the presidents in question advocated killing Jews. I said they tolerated their students calling for that.

And when each and every one of them characterized calls for killing Jews as dependent on context, that’s exactly what they did — tolerate genocide. Provided, of course, that the right people are calling for it.

To restate: Imagine if the Aryan Nations had established a presence on their campuses and called for the annihilation of Blacks. I have no doubt that they would have found a justification for silencing them.

Imagine further that it was the Aryan Nations that advocated the annihilation of Jews. They would no doubt have wrapped themselves in the Israeli flag, and offered school-sponsored scholarships to Camp Blue Star.

But it was a “progressive” (quite a clever term, that) group.

So if it’s the Aryan Nations, they’re racist/ genophobic / whatever. But if it’s a “progressive” group, given where their hearts are otherwise, calling for the elimination of Jews is OK. Or at least contextual, and we’ll talk about it but actually do nothing.

They (the presidents and their thought processes) have been pantsed in front of the whole country.

As Maya Angelou said, “When someone tells you who they are, believe them the first time.”

 

[Go Bama]

Well, the presidents did tell you who they are in their opening statements. That was the first time.

It’s as if some don’t want to believe what they hear from the mouth of the presidents, rather what they seemed to have not said under duress.

Personally, I don’t buy the Arian nations hypothetical example. I’ve drawn judgment from reading the transcript and watching the video.

 

[AWRTR]

Well, the presidents did tell you who they are in their opening statements. That was the first time.

It’s as if some don’t want to believe what they hear from the mouth of the presidents, rather what they seemed to have not said under duress.

Personally, I don’t buy the Arian nations hypothetical example. I’ve drawn judgment from reading the transcript and watching the video.

Here’s what all of you making this argument are missing. The problem came when the code of conduct came up. They were all willing to say the “right thing” when making opening statements. The problem came when they were asked if what was being done was against the code of conduct for the school. If they said yes then that meant the next question was what are you going to do to the students saying and doing these things? Now they are backed into a corner to have to not just say some random statement they had to actually suspend, reprimand, expel the students involved depending on what the code of conduct said and I’m sure it wouldn’t be kind to these antisemitic goons.

I’ll go a step further than 4quarters don’t just listen to what they say more importantly than even that watch what they do or what they aren’t willing to do.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

A friend of mine at GWU used to go to the ZBT house at GW every afternoon to watch Hogan's Heroes on syndicated TV ("Look! Funny Nazis!")
I guess the actors playing Colonel Klink and Sergeant Schultz were both Jewish.

Werner Klemperer (Klink) was half-Jewish, which would still have doomed him. John Banner (Schultz) was all Jewish. He was an actor in Austria until 1938 and barely made it out after the Anschutz. Banner rapidly learned English and appeared in some 40 movies and on broadway, as well as in Hogan's...

 

[NationalTitles18]

Here’s what all of you making this argument are missing. The problem came when the code of conduct came up. They were all willing to say the “right thing” when making opening statements. The problem came when they were asked if what was being done was against the code of conduct for the school. If they said yes then that meant the next question was what are you going to do to the students saying and doing these things? Now they are backed into a corner to have to not just say some random statement they had to actually suspend, reprimand, expel the students involved depending on what the code of conduct said and I’m sure it wouldn’t be kind to these antisemitic goons.

I’ll go a step further than 4quarters don’t just listen to what they say more importantly than even that watch what they do or what they aren’t willing to do.

They said they could not discuss disciplinary proceedings due to restrictions of laws passed by Congress itself, but that when appropriate that action would be taken. Whether action is appropriate or not is, strangely enough, dependent upon the context of the conduct - the conduct itself is part of the context.

But if they had made a blanket statement then they would be under fire for infringement on free speech rights.

Logic has flown out the window on this issue.

So has consistency.

But the republicans have their distraction from their own actions pushing antisemitism, racism, and associated conspiracy theories. They have cover for calling the homeless and mentally ill "vermin".

Because we all know these three college president have more power than the former and potential future president and all the congress critters combined.

 

[92tide]

They said they could not discuss disciplinary proceedings due to restrictions of laws passed by Congress itself, but that when appropriate that action would be taken. Whether action is appropriate or not is, strangely enough, dependent upon the context of the conduct - the conduct itself is part of the context.

But if they had made a blanket statement then they would be under fire for infringement on free speech rights.

Logic has flown out the window on this issue.

So has consistency.

But the republicans have their distraction from their own actions pushing antisemitism, racism, and associated conspiracy theories. They have cover for calling the homeless and mentally ill "vermin".

Because we all know these three college president have more power than the former and potential future president and all the congress critters combined.

funny how that works

 

[Go Bama]

Claudine Gay resigns the presidency of Harvard University amid plagiarism allegations

Claudine Gay said Tuesday she was resigning the presidency of Harvard University. Gay faced harsh criticism over the school's response to antisemitic incidents as well as an ongoing plagiarism scandal.

www.cnn.com

 

[Go Bama]

Claudine Gay resigns the presidency of Harvard University amid plagiarism allegations

Claudine Gay said Tuesday she was resigning the presidency of Harvard University. Gay faced harsh criticism over the school's response to antisemitic incidents as well as an ongoing plagiarism scandal.

www.cnn.com

This woman's career has been ruined by misinformation and Stefanik's political grandstanding.

From a WaPo article:

The board said it accepted Gay’s resignation “with sorrow.”

“While President Gay has acknowledged missteps and has taken responsibility for them, it is also true that she has shown remarkable resilience in the face of deeply personal and sustained attacks,” the board said. “While some of this has played out in the public domain, much of it has taken the form of repugnant and in some cases racist vitriol directed at her through disgraceful emails and phone calls. We condemn such attacks in the strongest possible terms.”