Politics & Stuff

[Fernando 6,534]

  On 30/04/2024 at 19:53, Vesper said:

I have zero skin in the game, as I am an atheist

no god rivalry bollocks going on in my brain, lololol

Expand  

If you're atheist then why mad at people getting killed? 

Survival of the fittest. People are of no greater worth then an amoeba. 

We are dust and nothing more. 

[NikkiCFC 8,122]

  On 30/04/2024 at 19:53, Vesper said:

I have zero skin in the game, as I am an atheist

no god rivalry bollocks going on in my brain, lololol

Expand  

I'm also not religious but I find some types of buddhism coolest religion. 

For example japanese nichiren buddhism. No fairytales.

Nam myoho renge kyo 

[robsblubot 3,595]

  On 30/04/2024 at 21:17, Fernando said:

If you're atheist then why mad at people getting killed? 

Survival of the fittest. People are of no greater worth then an amoeba. 

We are dust and nothing more. 

Expand  

heh, We are evidently not dust, but are indeed made of star dust.
Sorry, but that's a common misconception that religious people have about agnostics and atheists. I also don't really understand the notion that people are bad, and only religion saves them. So, without religion these people would've been worthless? Perhaps some aren't that great with religion in their lives either. 🤷‍♂️ The Italian mob were notoriously deeply religious for crying out loud.

Being civil and a good contributor in a society isn't that hard; it's just applying common sense. We are taught moral compass from an early age, by our parents and our social groups (small and large). My father was a police officer, for ex, and that certainly had an effect in me; it likely made me think about and value law and order from an early age. My father was religions and Catholic, but my mom wasn't and my sister isn't either.
We are many more than you think and rapidly growing pretty much everywhere in the world, even more so in the developed world. We just aren't loud, which is another great thing about being am Atheist: we don't force our beliefs, of lack thereof, on anyone.

I'm sure that anyone is a blasphemer to someone, or some group of people somewhere in the world--applies to both religious and atheists.
You know the joke right, "I only believe in one fewer god than you do."

The Founding Fathers held non-religion views, including Franklin; one of the reasons there is text that suggests the separation of church and state in the constitution.

I actually think that Atheists would normally put even MORE value in social norms and laws, because they realize there is literally nothing else holding societies together.
If you go back in history, just a bit actually, and you can find atrocities being done by the Catholic church. What happens today in the world is pretty mild compared to what has happened in the not so distant past.

If we go into modern politics, the sentence, "Survival of the fittest" applies far more to the republican party than to the democratic party. The republicans want less or no government at all, and little to no safety nets (or regulations). Needless to say, perhaps ironically so, the same party is called the "religious" party. Irony number 2, their fat cult leader is as religious as I am.

Edited May 1, 2024 by robsblubot
make bad grammar less bad

[Fernando 6,534]

  On 01/05/2024 at 06:59, robsblubot said:

heh, We are evidently not dust, but are indeed made of star dust.
Sorry, but that's a common misconception that religious people have about agnostics and atheists. I also don't really understand the notion that people are bad, and only religion saves them. So, without religion these people would've been worthless? Perhaps some aren't that great with religion in their lives either. 🤷‍♂️ The Italian mob were notoriously deeply religious for crying out loud.

Being civil and a good contributor in a society isn't that hard; it's just applying common sense. We are taught moral compass from an early age, by our parents and our social groups (small and large). My father was a police officer, for ex, and that certainly had an effect in me; it likely made me think about and value law and order from an early age. My father was religions and Catholic, but my mom wasn't and my sister isn't either.
We are many more than you think and rapidly growing pretty much everywhere in the world, even more so in the developed world. We just aren't loud, which is another great thing about being am Atheist: we don't force our beliefs, of lack thereof, on anyone.

I'm sure that anyone is a blasphemer to someone, or some group of people somewhere in the world--applies to both religious and atheists.
You know the joke right, "I only believe in one fewer god than you do."

The Founding Fathers held non-religion views, including Franklin; one of the reasons there is text that suggests the separation of church and state in the constitution.

I actually think that Atheists would normally put even MORE value in social norms and laws, because they realize there is literally nothing else holding societies together.
If you go back in history, just a bit actually, and you can find atrocities being done by the Catholic church. What happens today in the world is pretty mild compared to what has happened in the not so distant past.

If we go into modern politics, the sentence, "Survival of the fittest" applies far more to the republican party than to the democratic party. The republicans want less or no government at all, and little to no safety nets (or regulations). Needless to say, perhaps ironically so, the same party is called the "religious" party. Irony number 2, their fat cult leader is as religious as I am.

Expand  

 

  Quote

Being civil and a good contributor in a society isn't that hard; it's just applying common sense. We are taught moral compass from an early age, by our parents and our social groups (small and large). My father was a police officer, for ex, and that certainly had an effect in me; it likely made me think about and value law and order from an early age. My father was religions and Catholic, but my mom wasn't and my sister isn't either.
We are many more than you think and rapidly growing pretty much everywhere in the world, even more so in the developed world. We just aren't loud, which is another great thing about being am Atheist: we don't force our beliefs, of lack thereof, on anyone.

Expand  

That is the issue, what your taught is because it came from somewhere. Morality in Atheist coming from evolution has no reason or explanation. 

Morality is something that comes from a law giver. So the morality that your taught was handed down in generation that came from somewhere, that in this case would be the bible. 

In the evolution mode animals kill each other and there's nothing morale about that. But humans fall under that same category under evolution since we are from the animal kingdom. 

Under the bible human have a higher value because the where made in the image of god and put his morale law in them. From good and bad, something no animal has. 

  Quote

I'm sure that anyone is a blasphemer to someone, or some group of people somewhere in the world--applies to both religious and atheists.
You know the joke right, "I only believe in one fewer god than you do."

Expand  

First you need to understand why people believe in gods or one god. if you believe in evolution and no god you don't have that problem. 

 

  Quote

I actually think that Atheists would normally put even MORE value in social norms and laws, because they realize there is literally nothing else holding societies together.
If you go back in history, just a bit actually, and you can find atrocities being done by the Catholic church. What happens today in the world is pretty mild compared to what has happened in the not so distant past.

Expand  

Those values comes from a God that was giving in the bible in which Atheist do not believe. So that is just being like hypocrite. We don't believe in the God of the bible but we will take this part because it fits our convenience....

And yes Catholic church done horrible in the past as well as did old Israel, as well some church cults and what not. Don't deny that. 

 

  Quote

If we go into modern politics, the sentence, "Survival of the fittest" applies far more to the republican party than to the democratic party. The republicans want less or no government at all, and little to no safety nets (or regulations). Needless to say, perhaps ironically so, the same party is called the "religious" party. Irony number 2, their fat cult leader is as religious as I am.

Expand  

Could be, but just like Islam is a religion of peace and being distorted by crazy Isis and others similar is happening here. 

 

Edited May 1, 2024 by Fernando

[lucio 5,418]

  On 01/05/2024 at 12:16, Fernando said:

 

That is the issue, what your taught is because it came from somewhere. Morality in Atheist coming from evolution has no reason or explanation. 

Morality is something that comes from a law giver. So the morality that your taught was handed down in generation that came from somewhere, that in this case would be the bible. 

In the evolution mode animals kill each other and there's nothing morale about that. But humans fall under that same category under evolution since we are from the animal kingdom. 

Under the bible human have a higher value because the where made in the image of god and put his morale law in them. From good and bad, something no animal has. 

First you need to understand why people believe in gods or one god. if you believe in evolution and no god you don't have that problem. 

 

Those values comes from a God that was giving in the bible in which Atheist do not believe. So that is just being like hypocrite. We don't believe in the God of the bible but we will take this part because it fits our convenience....

And yes Catholic church done horrible in the past as well as did old Israel, as well some church cults and what not. Don't deny that. 

 

Could be, but just like Islam is a religion of peace and being distorted by crazy Isis and others similar is happening here. 

 

Expand  

Islam was never a religion of peace , it was founded by a warlord who executed people , destroyed towns ,  took and sold slaves as well as marrying many women and a little girl. It’s basically the same as if Atilla the Hun or Genghis Khan founded a religion 

it was spread by the sword since day one , his direct followers were massacring each other immediately after his death too.

its just dishonest to compare Islam with Buddhism , Hinduism, or even Christianity 

[MoroccanBlue 5,322]

  On 01/05/2024 at 12:43, lucio said:

Islam was never a religion of peace , it was founded by a warlord who executed people , destroyed towns ,  took and sold slaves as well as marrying many women and a little girl. It’s basically the same as if Atilla the Hun or Genghis Khan founded a religion 

it was spread by the sword since day one , his direct followers were massacring each other immediately after his death too.

its just dishonest to compare Islam with Buddhism , Hinduism, or even Christianity 

Expand  

Let's be real, Christians deny direct biblical statements and reinterpret Christianity as something that they want it to be just as Muslims do with the Quran. 

[lucio 5,418]

  On 01/05/2024 at 14:34, MoroccanBlue said:

Let's be real, Christians deny direct biblical statements and reinterpret Christianity as something that they want it to be just as Muslims do with the Quran. 

Expand  

Of course but the figures of Jesus or Buddha didn’t sell slaves or decapitate people or molest children like Muhammad did , so their religions were always likely to be less problematic 

[robsblubot 3,595]

  On 01/05/2024 at 12:16, Fernando said:

 

That is the issue, what your taught is because it came from somewhere. Morality in Atheist coming from evolution has no reason or explanation. 

Morality is something that comes from a law giver. So the morality that your taught was handed down in generation that came from somewhere, that in this case would be the bible. 

In the evolution mode animals kill each other and there's nothing morale about that. But humans fall under that same category under evolution since we are from the animal kingdom. 

Under the bible human have a higher value because the where made in the image of god and put his morale law in them. From good and bad, something no animal has. 

First you need to understand why people believe in gods or one god. if you believe in evolution and no god you don't have that problem. 

 

Those values comes from a God that was giving in the bible in which Atheist do not believe. So that is just being like hypocrite. We don't believe in the God of the bible but we will take this part because it fits our convenience....

And yes Catholic church done horrible in the past as well as did old Israel, as well some church cults and what not. Don't deny that. 

 

Could be, but just like Islam is a religion of peace and being distorted by crazy Isis and others similar is happening here. 

 

Expand  

"Morality is something that comes from a law giver."
That's factually incorrect. Law comes from morality and social norms, not the other way around. Humans write the laws based on what they consider right and wrongs, some of which certainly comes from religion too.
Again, go back in time enough and what is right and wrong changes drastically because society was different, even if with the same religion.

IMO, You are missing the whole point about society. Society exists for the whole reason, "it takes a village to raise a baby" which is one of the many things that differentiates humans from other animals. Humans work better in groups, in a society.

"if you believe in evolution"
I certainly don't "believe" in evolution. It's factual, proven in a myriad of different ways. I don't really think about evolution a whole lot, there is no reason to. 

"Under the bible human have a higher value because the where made in the image of god and put his morale law in them."
How does this help when it's human vs human?
In fact, you are suggesting perhaps that atheists would show more respect to other life on earth even though they "did not came from god."

"First you need to understand why people believe in gods or one god. if you believe in evolution and no god you don't have that problem."
The joke I wrote isn't about believing in multiple gods, but different ones. The vast majority of people on earth believe in one god, but not the same one.

"Those values comes from a God that was giving in the bible in which Atheist do not believe"
These values cannot possible come from god, because there is no such a thing. It was written by men, same as laws.

"A Brief History of Humankind" by Yuval Noah Harari is a great read that shouldn't touch religion a whole lot. It does however do a good job explaining how humans get to be the way they are. 

Edited May 1, 2024 by robsblubot

[Fulham Broadway 17,092]

Bill Hicks on evolution....

 

[robsblubot 3,595]

  On 01/05/2024 at 16:18, Fulham Broadway said:

Bill Hicks on evolution....

 

Expand  

Guy was high as a kite.... at least I hope he was. 😆

[cosmicway 1,333]

We can't tell if there is a god from common experience.
We live in a world which has elements of divine presence but also elements of randomness.
Once I believed it was strange that I was born in the 20th century, only a few thousand years after human life first appeared.
Since humans appeared around 100,000 BC -as I believed- and since the lifetime expectation of the planet is estimated as some million years it was strange.
I should have been born around 1,500,000 AD.
I did n't believe in the 6,000 years of course (or if I did what was the unit implied in the genesis book ?).
But I made a mistake and the first signs of human activity on earth are from 3,000,000 years in the past.
Hence we were born at around the right time.
It's not beyond belief for one to be born 10-20 thousand years after the dawn of mankind but if you select a few numbers from a random number generator in the range 0 to 6,000,000 say it's
unlikely you will get so small.
Now the international communist conspiracy. Why are they atheist ?
Why not pick their own archbishop and just send home the czar's archbishop ?
Dictator Papadopoulos did just that. He forced the elected archbishop of Greece Chrysanthos to resign and made archbishop one of his friends, Jeronymus (not the same one as today's
archbishop Jeronymus of course). The patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras who was one of the critics of the dictatorship he could not touch.
But for the communists this is not good enough. The priests do not belong to any government, they belong to the church - sooner or later they will denounce the atrocities of the regime.
Hence they opt for atheism - and continue to this day.

Edited May 1, 2024 by cosmicway

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

  On 01/05/2024 at 19:30, cosmicway said:

We can't tell if there is a god from common experience.
We live in a world which has elements of divine presence but also elements of randomness.
Once I believed it was strange that I was born in the 20th century, only a few thousand years after human life first appeared.
Since humans appeared around 100,000 BC -as I believed- and since the lifetime expectation of the planet is estimated as some million years it was strange.
I should have been born around 1,500,000 AD.
I did n't believe in the 6,000 years of course (or if I did what was the unit implied in the genesis book ?).
But I made a mistake and the first signs of human activity on earth are from 3,000,000 years in the past.
Hence we were born at around the right time.
It's not beyond belief for one to be born 10-20 thousand years after the dawn of mankind but if you select a few numbers from a random number generator in the range 0 to 6,000,000 say it's
unlikely you will get so small.
Now the international communist conspiracy. Why are they atheist ?
Why not pick their own archbishop and just send home the czar's archbishop ?
Dictator Papadopoulos did just that. He forced the elected archbishop of Greece Chrysanthos to resign and made archbishop one of his friends, Jeronymus (not the same one as today's
archbishop Jeronymus of course). The patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras who was one of the critics of the dictatorship he could not touch.
But for the communists this is not good enough. The priests do not belong to any government, they belong to the church - sooner or later they will denounce the atrocities of the regime.
Hence they opt for atheism - and continue to this day.

Expand  

Dude I would love to smoke some weed with you....and I dont even do drugs😂

Football always brings out the most interesting characters. We used to have a Belgian guy on here who would quote philosophy at you angrily if you said anything critical about Hazard. Football really is the peoples game.

[Vesper 29,448]

What Is Really Going On at Columbia University?

Amid arrests and dark warnings about Jewish students’ safety, an editorial at the campus newspaper offered a far different view of the crisis.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2024/04/columbia-university-protests-presidents-jewish-students-encampment.html

 

It was a tumultuous weekend on the campus of Columbia University. The arrest of more than 100 pro-Palestinian students from an encampment on the university’s South Lawn has only emboldened protesters, and it’s led to fears of more action by the New York City Police Department. Dark warnings over the weekend suggested Jewish students may be in danger ahead of Passover and anti-Israel student protesters may be driven from campus altogether. Columbia president Nemat Shafik’s appearance before Congress, which helped spark the latest events, has only amplified anger and disbelief at the university’s response to protests.

Amid all this, the student-run independent newspaper, the Columbia Daily Spectator, ran an editorial, “Is Columbia in Crisis?,” laying bare the administration’s failures in the lead-up to the current escalation. “Your students are willingly risking suspension, arrests, harassment, and internal and external threats,” the editorial read, directly addressing the university’s administration. “Why do you continue to isolate yourself from those whom you allegedly seek to serve?”

On Friday, and again on Sunday after a long weekend of developments, I spoke to Colin Roedl and Milène Klein, the current and former editorial page editors of the Spectator. They told me more about what’s actually happening on campus right now, the impetus behind the impassioned editorial, and whether students—Jewish, Muslim, or otherwise—really face danger on campus right now. Our conversations have been edited and condensed for clarity.

Aymann Ismail: What is the mood on campus right now?

Milène Klein: Actually, pretty good. We’re in the newsroom right now. The mood on campus is actually high. There’s a lot of energy. People are chilling on the lawns.

Colin Roedl: We use this anonymous forum called Sidechat. It came up in the hearings in Congress. On it, we’re seeing calls for solidarity. We’re seeing a lot of mobilization from outside communities rallying in protection of the second encampment that’s gone up. The decision to clamp down on the first encampment has only further mobilized student populations, and that’s what kind of developed into our editorial “Is Columbia in Crisis?”

How has president Shafik’s decision to invite the NYPD to evict student protesters from the campus been received?

Roedl: There’s been a large police presence on campus since October, which has been really distressing for a lot of students of color, especially in New York, especially when it’s the New York Police Department. We have prison buses around campus, and an egregious amount of police officers off and on campus. The presence has been very overwhelming. There was a lot of speculation as to when the police were going to intervene. So, when we received an email from president Shafik saying that she was going to let police on campus, that was a moment in which hundreds of students mobilized on campus to watch. There was kind of a weird spectatorship occurring, and it’s still going to this day.

From what we’re hearing over at the newspaper, it was not well received at all from really anybody on campus. We’re already seeing a large mobilization in response. We’re getting increased op-ed submissions, and there are protesters demonstrating off campus. We’re seeing a large response.

Klein: This weekend is the first time the NYPD had been called to actually break up a protest. There had already been arrests around campus, if not actually on campus, so I think many people are very distressed and extremely disappointed—but not surprised. The university introduced security forces to disrupt peaceful protest simply because they want to appease the people who are watching the congressional hearings and who are asking questions in bad faith. This is the audience they are kowtowing to. I think that’s what people are more distressed by than the police presence, to be honest.

How are students on the pro-Israel side reacting to the move?

Klein: Overall, the most vocal contingents of the pro-Israel movement have been generally more inclined to work with law enforcement. There are student activists and professors like Shai Davidai who have vocally praised the NYPD’s presence and critiqued protests for calling out the NYPD. I wouldn’t go as far to say that all members in that contingent are siding with the NYPD, but I think that that is true in general.

The NYPD seems poised to play an even larger role now. Mayor Eric Adams promised to support the university president and add more police to the area. What are you seeing out there right now?

Klein: Both of us have been in the encampment for a little bit today. It’s been fairly calm. The police have retreated from campus and are remaining outside the gates where a really large contingent of non-Columbia affiliates are protesting. The police seem to be preoccupied with them at the moment. Otherwise, the encampment has been relatively calm. The administration has allowed for the erection of more tents. I think things this week will devolve and get a little crazier. President Biden just made a statement. So perhaps White House affiliates will show up at some point. You never know.

It seems everyone is concerned that things will be getting worse. This weekend, Jake Tapper pointed to calls from an orthodox rabbi for Jewish students to stay home for their own safety. How does that square with what you’re seeing on campus?

Klein: I think that’s honestly ridiculous. I haven’t seen any threats or fear among the Jewish students at the university. I don’t know why there would be fear. On campus there’s really no reason why any student would be more scared now than they theoretically would have been in the past. And even then, I don’t really see any reason for fear. I guess the only potential justification that would make sense to me would be the number of outside protesters. Just that, as in any case, you don’t know who’s going to show up to a large demonstration. There’s always going to be bad faith actors of any kind of kind of mass rally. I think Columbia’s inability to vet these people I guess theoretically could be a cause for concern. But there haven’t been any incidents.

Roedl: The director of the Kraft Center for Jewish Life, Brian Cohen, issued a letter saying he didn’t believe Jewish students should leave Columbia, and that the university and the city need to do more to ensure the safety of the students. So I think—

Klein: Wait. We just got an email from Columbia’s chief operating officer. Are you joking?

What does it say?

Klein: It says, “increasing patrol strength to reach a total of 35 additional guards and two additional supervisors per shift, a total of 111 additional safety personnel”—“this will more than double the current safety personnel per shift. Additional coverage of the Kraft Center during the Passover holiday.” Which I think is simply beyond the pale. Increased coverage during Passover? Please …

Why does it strike you as unserious?

Klein: Because it’s very alarmist. They’ve done this before regarding the Kraft Center. And the truth is that it’s never been under siege. There are no protesters in that area right now. I’ve never seen protesters specifically go by the Kraft Center. I think it’s ridiculous because it implies a level of danger that simply is not there. Honestly, I think this announcement is potentially more distressing to Jewish students than anything else actually happening on campus. Because if you hear the security for the Jewish center is being increased during Passover, the implication is this center could potentially be targeted.

Why do you imagine rhetoric around Jewish students feeling targeted is rapidly increasing like this, then?

Klein: The increased alarm relates directly to the scale of the protests. The protests are larger than anything we’ve seen before, really, aside from the Oct. 10 protest. As a result, pro-Zionist students feel swamped and don’t feel comfortable making their voices heard as opposition just due to the sheer number and constant physical presence of demonstrators. But just because these students feel unsafe does not mean that the center is going to be overrun by a mob, or endangered by people who are protesting not against Jews, but against Israel. I think the rhetoric is honestly the source of a lot of the alarm, as opposed to what’s actually happening. I think it is scary because it feels like campus has been handed over to the police. It almost feels like a military coup. I actually don’t think it has much to do with the protests at all.

Can you give me the play-by-play of what’s happened since Oct. 7, from the perspective of the newspaper?

Klein: I was the head of opinion last semester. On Oct. 7, people took a second to draw in a breath. And then the next day, things began to kick off. News began to do their own coverage, reporting on different gatherings. Whereas we were interacting with different student bodies organizing on campus, seeking pieces from the student body and faculty. The first we got, I believe, was from the unofficial Jewish Caucus of Columbia University Democrats, issuing a condemnation of Hamas and calling for Columbia students to rally around the community. And then there was another piece that we got shortly thereafter in a similar vein. Over a period of time, protests began to grow larger and the administration began to face a lot of pressure to crack down on all pro-Palestinian protests on campus from bodies outside of Columbia, many of them legal bodies or donor bodies with specific vested political interests.

Just the pro-Palestine rallies?

Klein: If you look at internal messaging from our administrators, the rhetoric was very much slanted against pro-Palestinian protesters. They were subject to much more scrutiny than any other kind of demonstration on campus at that time. Pro-Israel protests were given a berth that pro-Palestinian protests were not. And the organizations that had run those pro-Palestinian protests were invigorated by that pushback. The harder they tried to silence someone on Columbia campus, the louder that person will be. And in this case, I think that’s particularly true. And so, protests increased in scale and breadth, and they continued to grow larger. And through that time, we also saw the introduction of more security forces around campus. The NYPD presence at the recent protest was really immense and unprecedented, but it was absolutely not the first time that the police have been stationed around campus as a “peacekeeping force.” That began in October or November.

Was there any one particular flashpoint that in your mind was a turning point on campus?

Roedl: We started receiving a lot of submissions around when the administration suspended Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voices for Peace in November. That was the turning point. There are counterprotests occurring at every event. A lot of the criticism was “you’re suspending Students for Justice in Palestine for unauthorized events without also reacting to counterprotests.” It felt like an asymmetric punishment. After that, we saw the rise of Columbia University Apartheid Divest, and a lot of other student groups mobilizing against the suspension. That’s when Columbia started gaining national attention. This was also around the time of the first congressional hearings and also the doxing trucks. Those two things, I think, were precipitous of greater public scrutiny at Columbia campus and on student organizers specifically.

Can you tell me about the congressional hearings? How have they been received on campus?

Klein: The Columbia delegation under fire—high key, they deserve it. I’m not saying Congress is right about Columbia, because it’s not. But I think we need to see our administrators get a little bit more heat from all angles. The average student wondered why our university president was not saying much about anything. She was new to the role and was stepping into a situation that is really unprecedented at Columbia. I think their strategy at that time was to implement quiet discipline, just to cautiously change policy and to punish student groups quietly so as to not create the kind of controversy that was happening in other universities. I suspect it was to try to also appease forces that were exerting pressure on her to take action. I think what became clear was that her condemnation wasn’t strong enough for those forces, so she became increasingly vocal about the steps that she was planning to take and the disciplinary infractions students could rack up for engaging in certain kinds of behavior and so on. And then obviously, there’s the alleged chemical attack, at which she doesn’t say anything for four days. But I think the lesson that she learned was that trying to avoid saying anything is probably not going to work. I think it had given people the impression that Columbia is avoiding questions because they don’t have answers. So, I think she hoped that by going to Congress, she signals that Columbia is not avoiding these questions and is happy to be transparent.

What is national media getting wrong right now?

Roedl: Actively calling for more police contributes to feelings of unsafety. And those feelings of unsafety are contributing to more police. So we’re seeing a feedback loop with absolutely no communication from our administration. That is the uniting point for a lot of people, regardless of politics, that we’re seeing complete silence from our administration. They made the decision to authorize NYPD on campus, and that’s the last time we have heard from her. Updates from the university either through the university required text messages, or by email, like the one we just read aloud, all read more like press statements about what Columbia is doing, rather than what Columbia is doing for its students. We’re getting a lot of criticisms asking where is Shafik and the Columbia administration. That’s what the newsroom is really interested in right now.

It is also really important to note that we are all students. Regardless of who you are at campus, you know somebody who was arrested. Students watched their friends being carried out by the police. And with all this going on, there are students trying to study. This is our final week of classes. Seniors are finishing theses. And in the background, you have an international microscope on Columbia. The undergraduate student population is like 8,000. That contributes to feelings of being overwhelmed. You’re trying to go to class, but they’re searching your bag or you’re rerouted because the gates are closed.

Klein: There’s a lot of discussion about what is happening at Columbia campus. Like, “There’s crisis at Columbia”—you have this image of students hunting each other in the street, like absolute chaos. There are alarmists framing this all around antisemitism, or a crusade against Jewish students, whom are hiding or being pushed out of campus. I don’t think any of us have seen that. The reality is that we’re a community of people who live together, eat together, and go to class together every single day. And for people who want to hear what Columbia students have to say, you have to read what they’re saying in their own words.

Roedl: I can’t believe the White House chimed in.

Klein: I’m a Jewish student at Columbia. If Joe Biden wants to give me $500, I say why not.

Roedl: The encampment drew people out who have never been to an event before. And we’re seeing the encampment going strong. Students are out there while it rains and are getting sick being out there. Today was admitted students’ day, and the People’s University of Palestine, which is what they’ve dubbed the encampment, was offering different orientation shared resources. We’re still seeing a lot of mobilizations occurring on campus. So it seems like they’re still going strong. And we’ll be here ready to publish voices whenever they come in.

What do you wish the administration pursued rather than going to Congress and deploying the police?

Klein: Fundamentally, it’s the way that every major private university in the country operates. It is beholden to donors and donor interests. Any kind of student protest movement is fundamentally incompatible with these financial and political bodies that are exerting an undue amount of influence on the university and its policy. What I think really needs to happen is the university needs to really reevaluate its relationship to donor bodies, and its relationship with its endowment.

Sounds like you wish that they would just take the protesters seriously.

Klein: Absolutely. I wish they would take the protesters seriously instead of paying lip service.

Roedl: I want them to be genuine. If you’re not going to divest, say it. Currently, there’s just no administration conversation with the community. It feels like the university is sending emails just so they’re screenshotted and posted online, rather than to create genuine dialogue. We hear over and over again from the university president that she wants create spaces for dialogue. But I think a lot of students are saying, “OK, now what?”

Klein: There are spaces for dialogue. They’re outside, on the lawns.

Roedl: Right. Many students are frustrated that there is no way to meaningfully interact and engage. That was something that I was really wanting to stress in the editorial. For example, if they don’t want protests, is the university willing to implement a referendum? That was the intent behind the encampment zone, to get the university to be transparent with them. You have to make sacrifices to be a good institutional body. That’s the reality. You can’t please everybody. I think instead of going to Congress and paying lip service to people who won’t be satisfied no matter what the university does, the university needs to be transparent with its students.

Klein: Protesting is something that Columbia loves to talk about itself in promotion videos and literature. There’s this whole idea of Columbia as a bastion of freedom of expression. To have a university that has long portrayed itself this way then come down hard on student protesters and ignite a conflict between university administrators and a student body that is really passionate about using their voices, is just difficult to understand—it’s sort of shocking.

Edited May 1, 2024 by Vesper

[Fulham Broadway 17,092]

56 Years to the day Columbia University saw cops cracking Vietnam protestors skulls. Columbia have in their reception ( paraphrasing) that the Vietnam protestors are vindicated, they were right. Same with the Iraq war protestors, and it will be the same with the Gaza occupation Genocide peaceful sit in. The military industrial complex and their compliant media in the mean time, will do whatever possible to attack what they see as their profits being undermined.

[Vesper 29,448]

Pro-Israel Agitator Shouts 'Kill the Jews,' Gets Everyone Else Arrested

Around 100 protesters were arrested on Saturday at a pro-Palestine encampment at Northeastern University, but not the one whose hate speech got everything shut down.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/pro-israel-agitator-shouts-kill-the-jews-gets-everyone-else-arrested

 

•  

Northeastern University had around 100 peaceful protesters arrested on Saturday at its Boston campus’ pro-Palestine encampment, claiming that there had been reports of protesters using antisemitic slurs; but according to witnesses, the protester who spewed hate speech was a pro-Israel counter protester.

On Saturday morning, Northeastern Vice President for Communications Renata Nyul released a statement, announcing that the protest on Centennial Common would be cleared by campus police and local law enforcement. In the statement, she explained that the reason they were clearing the encampment was because of the presence of hate speech at the site.

“What began as a student demonstration two days ago, was infiltrated by professional organizers with no affiliation to Northeastern. Last night, the use of virulent antisemitic slurs, including ‘Kill the Jews,’ crossed the line,” she said. “We cannot tolerate this kind of hate on our campus."

Across the country, university administrators and politicians alike have publicized reports of antisemitic speech at student-led protests, as part of their justification for arresting students, and disbanding protests urging them to divest from Israel. These accounts often vary from eye-witness accounts of the peaceful protests.

GBH’s Tori Bedford quickly confirmed that she had heard someone say “Kill the Jews,” but it wasn’t the peaceful pro-Palestine protesters. The chant came from a pro-Israel agitator who joined the crowd late Friday night.

 

 

In a video of the appalling incident, provided by an organizer from Huskies for a Free Palestine, and posted to X by Bedford, a protest leader prepared to lead a chant. “You repeat to me what I say to you. Got it?” they shout.

“Kill the Jews,” yelled one person, holding an Israeli flag. “Anybody on board? Anybody on board?” He was one of two counter-demonstrators who had affixed themselves at the center of the crowd, standing on lawn chairs as they berated the protesters around them.

The crowd of protesters immediately booed the young man. The protesters began chanting, “We’re gonna let them leave,” drowning out the shouts of the two counter-protesters.

 

After midnight, the two counter protesters had disengaged, according to reports.

The next morning, dozens of NUPD and Boston police arrested around 100 demonstrators, but not the one whose hate speech got everything shut down. After they loaded the arrested students into vans, students linked arms to prevent the vehicles from leaving campus for hours, according to The Huntington News.

Professor Matthew Noah Smith who took part in Northeastern’s protest on Thursday, observed a very different protest to the one the administration described. “I hope Northeastern is not weaponizing anti-semitism to justify arresting the protesting students,” he wrote in a post on X. “I spent all day Thursday with the students there and they were clear in standing against all forms of hate and violence.”

[Fulham Broadway 17,092]

Meanwhile, 4000 University students killed, all 12 Universities blown up, 211 Lecturers and Educators killed in occupied Gaza

[cosmicway 1,333]

However all the stories about the holy inquisition are grossly exaggerated - by Hammer films and the like.
During the 800-900 years of holy inquisition only 1800 people were burned and many of them were real criminals.
Capital punishment was the norm everywhere and the states killed many many more for the pettiest of offenses.
As for Spain they were no worse than the British with the witchfinder general (Vincent Price).
But the anglosaxon propaganda made the Spanish inquisition look much meaner than it really was and there was a reason for it as Britain and Spain were bitter enemies.

[lucio 5,418]

  On 02/05/2024 at 09:32, cosmicway said:

However all the stories about the holy inquisition are grossly exaggerated - by Hammer films and the like.
During the 800-900 years of holy inquisition only 1800 people were burned and many of them were real criminals.
Capital punishment was the norm everywhere and the states killed many many more for the pettiest of offenses.
As for Spain they were no worse than the British with the witchfinder general (Vincent Price).
But the anglosaxon propaganda made the Spanish inquisition look much meaner than it really was and there was a reason for it as Britain and Spain were bitter enemies.

Expand  

Same for the crusades , they were a  defensive response to several centuries of Jihad which had conquered 2/3 of the christian world including almost all of Spain and Portugal