Don't worry Windy, your team still has scoreboard

Study shows far left is less antisemitic than far right – The Forward

Quote:

Young, Catholic conservatives are far more likely to hold anti-Jewish views than progressives

Spudone hit on the left or right and who is for and who is against being better described as a generational divide. I agree.

I remember the comedian Doug Stanhope doing a bit years ago in reference to something the Israeli's were doing at the time, asking the rhetorical question of how long are they going to ride that WWII sympathy?

So I guess the answer was around 80 years.

But the US left is like Centralist in France. So we all good.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Weird you would bring this up, just last night a bunch of leftists were marching down my street with tiki torches chanting, "jews will not replace us".

And the Presidents of Harvard, Penn, and Columbia are calling for us to become a Christian nation.

Maybe you can explain to me about Republicans and antisemitism.

Around the time of the Bush II administration, Republicans fell in love with Israel, but they still kept hating the Jews. How does that work?

---

---------------------------
''Sweeney - you can both crush your AG *and* cruise in dead last!! 😂 '' Murphy's Law

To be clear, does believing that the Israeli government is running an apartheid Regime and treating the Palestinians like shit make me an anti semite?

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Armageddon.

The truth about why many evangelical Christians support Israel (msnbc.com)

I believe I addressed your post in the original post

See reflexive reference in the OP

Only you know what resides in your heart

Yeah, it really does simplify your argument when you preemptively dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as being brainwashed.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Typically whenever anyone says anything even remotely negative about Israel they get labeled an anti semite.

So I don’t put much stock in stupid nonsense like this.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Guess you couldn't be arsed to read the article

100,000 people in France marched against antisemitism and this is what you got out of it;

You know the Left has an antisemitism problem
. Really?!

---

---------------------------
''Sweeney - you can both crush your AG *and* cruise in dead last!! 😂 '' Murphy's Law

For the second time in about a week, related to one of your own posts, I have to say, “I did, did you?”

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Not without reason I reflexively expect you to be wrong about pretty much everything, in your tireless efforts to be a dick about pretty much everything.

However, out of a respect you don't deserve I have given your post my considered reflection and determined that, yep, you are again quite wrong. You're coming across as a dick again, though, so you'll be pleased with that result.

His takeaways are always… interesting.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

You can always tell how correct your position is here by how quickly Nutella bot jumps on to try to change the subject to something else

Definitions matter, so maybe we need to get some clarification.

For the Left-leaners in this thread, do you support the recent House censure of Rep. Rashida Tlaib? Why, or why not?

Sure, not a great phrase. Censure away. Though her statements since have been quite reasonable.

I wish though the same sorts of censure could be done on MTG, Gaetz, Gosar, King, who have said anti-semitic things, and attended white supremacist events. Do you agree? Why or why not? Discuss!

Right-wing antisemitism has different flavor then left wing. Left wing is more supportive of Palestinian statehood, with the more extreme elements playing footsie with the uglier forms of militants/terrorists. Right wing is more "Nazi," casting Jewish people as conniving money-controllers who need to be put under control. With the more extreme elements playing footsie with those who want to kill Jewish people.

Yup. Tlaib is an idiot.

The leader of your party called the crowd of thugs marching with torches chanting "Jews will not replace us!' "Fine People". You were silent. Days after Soros received a pipe bomb Kevin McCarthy falsely accuse three Jewish billionaires — George Soros, Tom Steyer, and Michael Bloomberg — of trying to “buy” the midterms. You were silent. Louie Gohmert spews antisemitic troupes you say nothing. Matt Gaetz invited a holocaust denier to the State of the Union. You, Windy, and Tyler said nothing. Steve King has a long history of promoting white nationalism, Islamophobia, and anti-Semitism. How many threads has Windy started on him? Paul Gosar has spewed so much antisemitic hate that his own brother disowned him. You said nothing.

You, Tyler, and Windy are the kings of selective outrage.

Windy prefers to focus on the complex nature of antisemitism in France and ignore the warm embrace his party gives to antisemites.

No. The phrase she used certainly has been used in anti-Semitic ways, but it is not always used that way. She denies calling for the destruction of Israel. Most of what she wrote is well within the bounds of fair commentary, especially given the context. If what she said warrants censure, then by that standard, a vast amount of votes and rhetoric by R members of Congress deserves censure.

Fair points

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

The point my friend is the reflexive whataboutism. Perhaps acknowledging the Left has an issue is frightening to some. I mean there is a reason the far left parties boycotted in France, no?

That's your choice

When even the French left is rejected

You leaving the above out is probably why you're confused

So the French Left parties did join the march or are you just moving your lips and not saying anything again?

I arrived in Toulouse Sunday for a week or meetings. To stay awake I went for a walk and happened upon a gathering of several thousand people, police with some impressive firepower, and my croissant. I guess my tired international travel mind could not put together the signs about a kidnapped child and date written on the sign. Anyway, this happened to be an antisemitism gathering. My jet lagged brain is awake at 4 am local this morning and I found a local story

https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/...isperse-2870120.html

The left (LFI), at least in Toulouse, participated, just not at the same time as the right (RN). From a Google translation of the linked article

"It is not only in Paris that the major demonstration against anti-Semitism is dividing. We know that at the national level, LFI refuses to march in the presence of the RN, which has announced its participation."

Now if I can get a couple more hours of sleep before work...

Your point is to deflect from the fact that a portion of your party has warmly embraced antisemitism. Acknowledging this fact is frightening to you so you post some babble about France.

Your response qualifies as outrage?


I was actively posting at RoadBikeReview, as were you, during Charlottesville. You've been caught lying again.

What did you post here?

Yeah, that’s probably something you should work on.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Prove it. Show us your posts condemning the antisemitism of Gaetz, Trump, Greene, Gomert, Mccarthey, etc. Your fellow traveler Windy is triggered by some vague article about France but is completely silent about his party, in his country.

I wasn't posting on ST or in the LR at all during Charlottesville.

As I showed many leading members of the GOP have promoted antisemitic tropes recently. You, Windy, and Tyler have said nothing. You have been silent.

…….but France

You feel the BBC article is whataboutism? Interesting tack to take

But the bigger question is, do you like pizza? Rogan wants to know ...

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

You've convinced me. I am never voting for Jean-Luc.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Check out this left wing anti Semite.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CzlhxoMyC5X/

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

I think the BBC article has fuckall to do with whataboutism.

I think you're so desperate for the attention you get by being a tool here in this forum that you'll post any article you can find that touches tangentially on anything you can tie to "the Left" so that you can play "whatabout" with problems that are most associated with the far Right and generally just to see if you can get some reaction from any of the more liberal posters here in the LR, and in doing so, you'll be sure to make your post as dickish as you can just for good measure.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

+1

---

"I keep hoping for you to use your superior intellect to be less insufferable. Sadly, you continue to disappoint." - gofigure

What's wrong with my premise? That there is antisemitism on the Left or there would be reflexive responses here that didn't bother to consider the truth of that statement?

Well....

I think Windy's plan is to get Jews, Muslims and "Leftists" to fight with each other

It's a divide and conquer kind of strategy!!

The plan doesn't seem to be working too well
(At least not here in the Lavender room).

There is a lot of sound and fury!

But most of the hatred seems (appropriately) directed at Windy himself.

I'd say I'm a unifyer not a divider but since this place is already skewing left its more of just a myopic echo chamber pile on

"Unifyer"

YES

Keep at it...


It will be a great day when Jews, Muslims and reasonable people the world over-
Unite in their hatred of Windy!!

And with that reference to the "skewing left echo chamber," Windy has completed his journey to the dark side, joining various other previous converts who will undoubtedly have to duke it out to see which of them can rule. Only two may exist, a master and an apprentice.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

How big were the far right protestors in Charlottesville? a few hundred at most? There had to have been at least 10,000 in DC participating in protests calling for wipe out of Israel. Both are problems, but who has the bigger problem?

You have no actual premise. You have clickbait.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

+2

I assume that since left leaning people in the US must now answer for far left people in France you will be willing to go over the actions of Orban, which are even more relevant since right wing people in the US have praised him repeatedly. We could be here a while.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Of course there is some anti-Semitism on the left. If a third of the country is on the left (not a precise number, just offered as an illustration) that is more than 100mm people. There will be considerable diversity within that group, including some anti-Semites.

If you want to have a serious discussion of the causes, extent, and implications of anti-Semitism on the left, that might be possible. But you know perfectly well how politics and the LR work. If you title your thread with just a reference to the Left, you’re gonna get whataboutism, because it’s so obvious that there is huge anti-Semitism on the right. The thread will strike many as disingenuous.

Alternatively, you could begin a thread that concedes there is a lot of anti-Semitism on the right, which perhaps comes in different flavors than anti-Semitism on the left. Positioning the issue that way, you probably could get people on the left to discuss anti-Semitism without them feeling that, by doing so, they are making some concession that this is predominantly a problem on the left. You didn’t try to do that, and the results were predictable.

Sure. There's nothing serious about Windy's posts, so why not have a little fun. It is the first time I can remember him invoking the echo chamber boogieman, which is normally the last refuge of the far right MAGA nutjobs here in the LR.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

So are you! Any reply that puts him near the top of the thread list gives him the needed endorphin rush. This post included.

See post #57.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

“Circle jerk” is the last refuge.

---

Suffer Well.

Well frankly this place tends to be a circle jerk in a left wing echo chamber with the majority all sharing the same brain, and spitting out the same opinions. Anyone with an independent thought or bucks the group think gets the Windy treatment so f glad he posts here.

stop taking refuge you far right MAGA nutjob.

it's really sad what a clown slowguy has turned into

Bless your heart.

---

Suffer Well.

I was thinking that same thing. I used to look forward to and enjoy the information he provided. Now he seems like the rest have rubbed off on him.

When people reply back with those responses, sure they are somewhat about left and right, but I'd say they're at least 50% just about the fact that Windy posts this kind of junk all the time. Those replies are more a rejection of Windy than a response to any particular premise, or a result of some kind of political brainwashing.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I meant that will all due respect and no offense.

Congratulations. With references to circle jerks, echo chambers, and shared brains all in the same post; you win the mixed metaphors award of the day, and cement yourself as a leader in the "not to be taken seriously" group of posters.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

If I were Windy I would look at these responses and see who was on my side. Then wonder how I have gone so far astray.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

of course you would Chappy, er in mean Nutty, er I mean jmh, er I mean whichever one you are. ( all about the same)

There are some very outspoken liberals in the LR. You've mentioned a couple. Jpo doesn't fit into that category, but the fact that you lump basically everyone who doesn't take you seriously into the same group isn't really surprising.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

How far right does the right need to go to present slowguy, a moderate to end all moderates, as a left winger?

About this far I’d say.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Here is the problem with your analysis. Windy doesn't take me seriously and has derided many of my comments and perhaps thrown numerous insults my way. I in no way throw him in with the bots in this forum. It's not about what they think of me, its about why they say and write, all of which is largely the same, save a few folks in here.

What "independent thought" did Windy share on this thread?

Windy is getting the response he gets because his posts lack thought. It is clear he did not even read the article he posted. If he did he would see that it did not support the title he named the thread.

If Windy actually read the article he posted he would see that the French Far Left refused to march with the National Front, a far-right party with a loooooong history of antisemitism. Instead of marching with a party founded by a holocaust denier , and still led by his daughter, they had their own rally against antisemitism.

Do you even take yourself seriously?

I can’t think of a single person here who takes you seriously.

But that’s clearly because of the left wing echo chamber circle jerk and not because you act like a clown.

---

Suffer Well.

Do you really think 10,000 people were calling for Israel to be wiped out? Seriously?

Calling for a cease fire is not the same as calling for a second holocaust. That is some Windy level hyperbole.

Attending a rally where they chant from the river to the see makes you responsible for that message. If people don't believe that then they should leave or chant something Pro Jewish in response.

It is a bit more complicated than that. I also thought that was the meaning of the chant. Turns out there is a lot more to it.

What does ‘from the river to the sea' actually mean? | AP News
‘From the river to the sea’: What does the Palestinian slogan really mean? | Israel-Palestine conflict News | Al Jazeera

I am very much on Israel's side here but it is quite the stretch to say that 10,000 people were calling for Israel to be wiped out. Supporting a ceasefire (I don't) or wanting to provide care to peaceful non-combatants does not mean someone supports Hamas or their goals.

Here is the problem with you. Nothing you say on here is sincere. You lie and make up whatever suits your fancy. Most of the time it is obvious you do not believe what you post. You rarely post your own thoughts and do not stand behind what you say. That isn't what we think about you, it is what we know about you.

If you can't tell the difference between what different people say it is because you either lack reading comprehension or do not care what was written and just reply reflexively.

I get along fine with Windy. He likes to spin people up but he posts real things and has a history of sharing and discussing things beyond just politics. If he sees he can be helpful to someone he does that. Sure he can be a pain in the ass, so can a lot of us. He is deluded in his thinking that a GOP exists outside of the racism, fascism, and moronism. But we're working on that.

You and Tyler are not that. The two of you bring almost nothing to the table. Tyler posts only nonsense and mostly easily discredited political garbage he found on some bottom feeding troll site. You have posted so much that is just not so that no one believes anything you post and they don't bother to seriously engage with you.

You are correct that there are very few right leaning people left here. A good many left when Trump came to power and they were left to defend the indefensible. Those that stayed have ceased to be right leaning. Many of those you blather on about being in the echo chamber spent their first 10-15 years on here as conservatives, But then saw the GOP abandon them.

It can be informative to thoughtful people to see who agrees with them. If only racists and bigots agree with you, maybe you should look at what you said and see if it is racist and bigoted. If only morons agree with you, maybe what you said is stupid. Windy has been so bereft of logical conservative support that I have given serious thought to switching teams. Just to give us something to talk about.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Does the Left have an antisemitism issue?

Pfft Hungary?

It's more that France's rejection of the antisemitic Left is a canary in the coal mine for the Left here

Why do I have to make that statement? Why can't there be a discussion of just one side? Why the double standard?

I do know how political threads go here and have no problem calling out the hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty of many on here.

I bet if you go to threads about antisemitism on the far-right/neo-Nazis your standard of a reasonable dual sided original post won't be met at the frequency you'd think it would be.

I've definitely called this circle jerk an echo chamber in the past.

I figured I would hence my foreshadowing of the reflexive posts.

I'll be honest the amount of whataboutism was unexpected.

Eyeroll emoji

I'd just assume most conservative posters have been run off or stopped posting but that's just me

You're an idiot. JPO may be misguided but he's not a fucking mentally unstable ideologue.

Meh...post retirement announcement he's drifting more and more liberal (or his Freudian slips are increasing)

You have a point?

Your party has embraced Orban, which really isn't surprising as they hate the same people.

More evidence that you did not read your link. It is not about France rejecting the "antisemitic left" but some of the French left refusing to march with the National Front, a party that was founded by a holocaust denier and has a long history of antisemitism. Yesterday Socialists, Greens, and Communist parties marched with 100,000 people in Paris. One party, La France Insoumise, had their own march against Antisemitism.

The fact that you equate LFI with the American left confirms how out of touch you are.

Sorry to snip each of your responses to mostly a single sentence. My point in raising Tlaib's censure was to see if there were any agreement here on what speech is considered antisemitic. So far, seems no.

If someone were to say to you, "Heritage, not hate," what would you think of that person? Maybe one should refrain from using such charged phrases considering what they mean to others.

Now you suddenly care about "charged phrases"? Today's GOP runs on "Charged phrases" "Dog Whistles" and talking points.

Your selective outrage makes it hard to take anything you post seriously.

No you’re missing the point entirely.

He’s not drifting left you simpleton. The right is going further and further right.

Slowguy used to be good at being the devils advocate.

At this point I am guessing that he’s finding it harder and harder to play that role because you simply can’t argue for what the GOP is about. Not and be taken Seriously anyway.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

No problem with the snippets. The question of whether Tlaib should be censured is inescapably intertwined with the question of "what is the standard for how bad bigoted speech must be in order for Congress to censure it?" Very few members of the House (25 or so) have ever been censured and bigoted stuff gets said all the time by members of the House. My point is not a classic whattaboutism -- but the standard for how tough or lenient members will be when it comes to censure for bigotry needs to be applied at least somewhat consistently. Given what traditionally has passed without censure and given the ambiguity of Tlaib's meaning, I don't think the House had any business censuring her.

I agree with your second point. Taking into consideration how phrases affect the listener is important, as is the speaker's intent. Mike Johnson might think that having a Christian nationalist flag outside his office is fine and he does not mean to offend by it. But, in passing judgment we ought to consider not just his intent, but how that is perceived. If someone says something that they don't intend to be hurtful and just don't realize how it is perceived, then the first step is to explain it to them. If they persist, then that's a different issue.

I haven’t gotten any more liberal, but the barometer for being liberal seems to be just disagreeing with a handful of the self-identifying conservative posters here in the LR. I haven’t disagreed with any particular conservative policy stances more than usual, or piled on conservative figures (other than the obvious idiots that everyone should pile on because they’re amusingly stupid) more than usual, or adopted liberal stances more than usual. I have disagreed with idiots on military planning and action, called out Windy for his consistent trolling for attention, and called out what seemed to me to be painfully transparently obvious lies and fabrications. In the burgeoning MAGA tradition, those things apparently make you a liberal.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Though with Tlaib the timing is a factor. MTG's "Feinstein is an agent of the Rothschilds" anti-Semitism (space laser thing) wasn't said during a moment of crisis for Jewish people. It was time of crisis for people affected by California wildfires.

Of course it's also political. Tlaib likely wouldn't have been censured with a Democratic majority. And MTG may have been with the same majority. Gosar was censured for reposting a meme video showing himself committing violence against AOC and Biden. But with a Democrat majority in the House.

With two in rapid succession (Schiff and Tlaib) by historical standards, I do fear the escalation of the censure becoming a partisan tool to the degree it gets watered down to irrelevance.

That kind of what I am saying. You haven’t changed. At least I don’t think so.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Well, not for nothing, but Rep Tlaib’s comments were also made in a time of crisis for the Palestinian people, including her, and not just the Jewish people. Is it more or less forgivable to make these kinds of potentially problematic statements when you’re in crisis, or casually as a matter of the normal course of your level of discussion, like Rep Taylor Greene? I suppose that’s worth some debate, especially as it applies to people ostensibly elected to perform as leaders of our country.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

As to timing, if Tlaib made those comments on October 8, that would be a different story. As I understand it, she posted the “from the river to the sea” stuff on November 3, by which time people in Gaza were suffering greatly. Yes, it was a time of suffering for Israelis, too. MTG and her people were hardly suffering at the time of her statements — that was just unprovoked bigotry. Tlaib can validly claim to feel the suffering of her people.

Agree with the rest: partisanship plays a role and we are in danger of turning censures and impeachment into tools that are too easily used.

Dude look at a map of Israel. There's no other reasonable interpretation of "from the river to the sea" other than the elimination of Israel.

Your last paragraph proves my point. When you start a thread on a political topic where the problem is overwhelmingly on your party’s side, it is important to be clear you are not suggesting some sort of equivalence. Otherwise, people will suspect your purpose is not to seriously understand the left but, rather, to divert attention from the rampant embrace of fascism, anti-Semitic tropes, and Christian nationalism on the right. If you don’t want to begin by expressly denying any equivalence, then you’re likely to be unhappy with the ensuing discussion.

Your premise is flawed since I am now party free (or a party of one) and I would posit that the antisemitism of the far right and far left are equal. (Anecdotally I'd actually argue the antisemitism of the left is more pervasive, widespread, and violent, but I interact with more Leftist whackjobs than far right whackjobs so significant sample bias)

You can hypothesize anything you want. This study started with a similar hypothesis, but their data and conclusions seem to disagree with you.

“ Contrary to the expectation of horseshoe theory, the data show the epicenter of antisemitic attitudes is young adults on the far right.”

https://journals.sagepub.com/...77/10659129221111081

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

You moved the goalposts from the left to the far left. Anyhow, wherever we put the goalposts, you just admitted that you see an equivalence, which is what probably people suspected and caused the reaction you got. If that is truly how you feel, then you don’t need to concede the problem is far more pervasive on the right.

Windy doesn't need to accept reality?

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

No.
The left has an issue with Zionism.

I'd be interested in an analysis of a follow-up poll taken after 10-7. There might be a "George Floyd" effect that spikes certain attitudes on the left.

A couple of things I read today regarding college campuses might be of interest. One more serious, one that reads like a parody.

https://www.msn.com/...r-AA1jSmqh?domshim=1

From The Atlantic, Nichols is rather concerned about what's happening on college campuses and how actions being taken by students are likely to follow them their whole lives - like repeating certain chants.
He's got a point.


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-combat-antisemitism

this. he's a low-rent Duffy impersonator dripping with equal parts desperation and malice.

total shitstain.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

Your assessment will be given the due weight it is owed

https://www.reuters.com/...m-campus-2023-11-14/

 
A reminder for windykins on the GOP’s recent stance toward antisemites:

Share Message - Biden facing growing internal dissent over Israel's Gaza campaign
https://www.bbc.co.uk/...d-us-canada-67453674

It's percolating

Why are you putting this in a thread about antisemitism? What is “percolating?”

This seems to be yet another example of someone (you) implying that criticism of Israel is antisemitism. It’s lazy thinking, but we’ve come to expect that from you.

The people who accused the students who said Israel was responsible for the Oct 7th attack of antisemitism may now come forward with their accusations against 80% of Israeli Jews for being antisemitic as well.

Four out of five Jewish Israelis believe the government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are to blame for the mass infiltration of Hamas terrorists into Israel and the massacre that followed, a new Dialog Center poll released on Thursday found.
https://www.jpost.com/...-news/article-767880

Netanyahu's popularity polled at 4%.

Your complete inability to comprehend the written word is impressive.

I was wrong, the left clearly has an anti-semitism problem. Just this week both Jim Jeffries and Chuck Schumer spoke at a rally with notorious anti-semite John Hagee.

https://www.nbcnews.com/...ch-israel-rcna125346

Hagee is also anti-Catholic:

https://www.catholicleague.org/...hagee-veteran-bigot/

(I am sure windy, being such a defender of papists will be soon critizing this rally for allowing Hagee to speak, any moment now)

Let alone his comments on Muslims and how hurricanes are so to gay people.


This anti-Semite was speaking at the *checks notes* rally for Israel? That can’t be right. Surely they wouldn’t allow him to speak? Ohh, the organizers have refused to comment on why they invited him.

Wrong thread. Hagee is a Trump groupie and is Nikki Haley's favorite.

Is isn't a leftist.....which is why Windy is silent about him.

windy doesn't have time to answer you at the moment.
but shame on you for even asking.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

Windy is disingenuous at best, and a flat out liar at worst. We saw that in the “Christmas is canceled to honor Hamas” thread. He lies, and when his lies are pointed out, he disappears.

Certain posters are blocked for being mentally unhinged

You’ve shown that you both read and sometimes respond to my posts, which means a) you’re lying again, and b) you’re still ducking my question above.

Why do you lie so much?

Actress Susan Sarandon is facing criticism for saying at a recent pro-Palestinian rally that US Jews fearing for their safety amid a spike in antisemitism “are getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country.”

A stupid comment doesn't make one anti-semitic (and yes, this was a stupid comment). Feeling bad for the Palestinian people does not make one anti-semitic. Hating what Israel is doing to the Palestinian people does not make one anti-semitic.

Try harder.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Stupid comment yes, hateful under tones yes and how many stupid comments do you get before you are held accountable?
Stop be an apologist it’s unbecoming.

Watch out Susan Sarandon and Blep.

"Hateful undertones" are a registered trade mark of Trump Troll Fascism LLC.

Constantine, Windy and Tylertri - might sue for copyright right infringement.

I’ve only seen one comment from her. Feel free to show me others.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Such a dumb comment. Jews in the USA have had plenty of "taste" of discrimination and violence against them long before this.

As far as the left/right antisemitism relative to Muslims - Jews are vastly more strongly represented politically. There are ~6 million Jewish people in the USA which represents 2% of the population (summing those who identify by religion and those not religious). There are currently 35 Jewish members of congress, which is 6.54% of Congress, and the historical total of Jewish members is over 200. In contrast, there are currently 3.5 million Muslims (1%). There have only been 4 Muslims ever elected to Congress, 3 currently serving which is 0.56% . So in terms of electability and just going by numbers, being Jewish would seem to be a strong benefit (3x the representation) while being Muslim makes you unelectable in all but a few districts.

A funny story my dad told me related to antisemitism. He grew up on a little farm in western Iowa and there was a small town nearby. They went to the "Christian" church. There were 2 shoe stores in town and they always went to the one and would never even go inside the other. My dad inquired about this one time and Grandpa explained that the other store was run by a Jew. Dad asked why did that matter and Granpda said "Well don't you know? Them Jews killed Jesus!". A few year later my dad discovered that the owner of the store they did shop was also Jewish, but he never told Grandpa.

Her comment is offensive because it implies that Jews are the cause of anti-Muslim discrimination in the US. Why else is she choosing Muslims as the group she is referencing? It is no answer to say that Jews are doing better by some metrics.

Run those numbers again on Jewish lawyers and Muslim lawyers, then get back to us.

Correlation and causation and all that.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Except Hussein Obama!

fwiw, the Sarandon comment was dumb. Per @ike the comment plays into the "zero sum game" idea where anything that's anti-Muslim is pro-Jewish and vice versa. But on the Dumb Scale where 0 is TylerTri and 10 is like MTG's "Rothschild, Inc-funded Spacer Lasers" or Musk's expressing support for "The Jews want to flood countries with dark-skinned people" it's like a 4. Also I wasn't trying to just pick out right wingers there. They're just the first two really dumb celebrity antisemitic comments that came to mind.

Susan has a history of stepping in it.

She was really against the invasion of Iraq and the right smeared the crap out of her. She called the pope a nazi in 2011. She was arrested at a sit in in 2018 in the senate office building. She's been talking out against Netanyahu since his re-election.

She hasn't been in a A-list movie since 2011, but a lot also probably has to do with her age - she's 77.

I didn't read her comment as blaming Jews for anti-Muslim discrimination. I just read it as a tone deaf and ignorant statement, along the lines of "You're playing the victim card now, but Muslims have been victims in this country ever since 9/11." It obviously ignores the longer history of anti-semitic movements and discrimination in the US and around the world.

As to why she's choosing Muslims as the group she's referencing, that seems pretty painfully obvious. Israel (representing and represented by Jews mainly) is in a war against Palestinians (representing and represented by Muslims mainly). And Israel faces a tough regional environment, surrounded by mainly Muslim countries, many of whom have supported Palestine against Israel. Although it's obviously way over-simplified, this is easily painted as a Jewish vs Muslim struggle, so Muslims are a pretty obvious contrast especially since they've been the main religious group that's had trouble in the US for the past couple of decades.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

god you're boring and monotonous

I have no idea as far as lawyers or why it is relevant...maybe what you mean is that Jews tend to be strongly represented in fields like law that are also highly represented in Congress. I work in high tech and would say Muslims are heavily concentrated relative to their overall numbers but that may just be the geo's I've lived in, and to my knowledge not much of Congress has a tech background. I suppose Hindu's would be similar to Muslims in that regard.

I took her comment as more of a "see how you like it" rather than blaming Jews as the source of Islamophobia, unless she is saying Israel and therefore Jews. Other than the Palestine issue I think Muslims and Jews tend to get along pretty well and it's right wing extremists (which, I'm sorry to say can often mean Christian) that are mostly to blame for violence against either group.

The only Jewish family I knew of in the rural town I grew up in, also owned a shoe store!

This seemed the most appropriate thread for this David Frum piece. There Is No Right To Bully and Harass | The Atlantic


And thanks for this forum where we can express our opinions.

I seem to recall that your tribe advocated forcefully against bill C-16 that made it illegal to call for genocide against trans people, good that you have come around and now understand that is bad.

With that being said, always punch a Nazi.

Every story I've heard of some racist, including neo Nazi, who realized the errors of their ways and left behind that belief system, it was because people were kind to them, often people of the group they despised. Literally just read a section of "Black Man in a White Coat" where the black doctor, Damon Tweedy, essentially won over a whole racist family be the way he cared for the grandfather who was dying of cancer.

Thinking you can beat sense into people seems to me to be entirely misguided. And if think there is no point to trying to convert them, well that's how you end up with what's going on in Israel and Gaza.

There's the real Nutella.

It was a symbolic phrase referring to the expulsion of someone calling of the genocide of Jews.

What triggered Frum to write his article was the mealy mouth response by the leaders of MIT, Harvard, and Penn. They were asked whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates their respective school’s code of conduct on bullying or harassment. Their responses were tepid obfuscation.

The correct answer should be hell yes, it violates the schools code of conduct. Calling for the genocide of a group of people should be an obvious reason for expulsion from school, office, agency, etc.

So you're saying we shouldn't be kicking kids out of school multiple times for a cultural haircut or demonizing trans people or calling for democrats to go to hell. Noted.

On the other hand, back in the early days of the OG Nazi era, the general German population thought that the Nazis were just sort of clowns, and thought the best approach was to let them just do their thing, have their little rallies. Pushing back against them would only play into their narrative. Even after the Beer Hall Putsch Hitler was given velvet glove treatment and sentencing as it was seemed wrong to interfere with the political process and anger people by prosecuting him to the full extent. It might even backfire and make him more popular! Better just to kind of let it slide. Also what he wrote in his book wasn't what he actually wanted to do. Just a populist fantasy.

This continued even after he took power. Hitler wants to negotiate for peace, he doesn't actually want to invade Poland. OK, he invaded Poland, but maybe if we talk to him and negotiate he won't actually invade France. OK, that didn't work, but maybe Neville Chamberlain will be successful with the appeasement approach for Britain....

Face-punching sometime earlier in the timeline could have saved a lot of trouble.

Face punching or killing? Killing ends the problem, face punching not so much.

Certainly not saying if they do something illegal, they shouldn't be punished to the full extent of the law.

I really have a hard time figuring out where you're coming from in most of your posts. I don't think we should be doing any of those things. I'm not sure what that has to do with talking about the best strategy to get someone to change an abhorrent way of thinking?

https://www.thecrimson.com/...bi-wolpe-steps-down/

Rabbi steps down from Harvard anti-Semitism committee.

Many people seem to have lost their minds over this conflict. Pick a side and go all in, no middle ground.

European politics is experiencing a shift to the right at present.

It was kinda weird though seeing the president of MIT who is Jewish being lumped in with anti-Semites. Her crime was not agreeing to define her opposition to anti-Semitism in precisely the same terms of some members of Congress wanting to score political points

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 combatting it actively.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Look at Holland. Rapidly joining the UK as the public political basket case of europe

Don't forget Hungary.

Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia have now joined the ranks of racism and woke, where it is simply used to discredit your opponents regardless of whether or not it actually describes their beliefs.

The left has done some crazy things in Holland. Re introducing wolves into wildlife reserves in a country like Holland is dumb. Somebody forgot to tell the wolves not to kill the sheep every third rural Hollander has. Also planning to remove a large percentage of agricultural land to meet climate change has not endeared them to rural folks.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

He listed many things other than the recent testimony of the college presidents. Also gave many other examples of issues with progressives thinking that "free speech" includes them being allowed to enact violence based on their beliefs. Funny coming from the words are violence camp of progessives...

This is the standard kneejerk response, and is exactly what Rep Stefanik was going for when she asked these questions.

Problem is, it seems like the responses provided by the various university presidents were accurate. They were asked whether calling for the genocide of Jews constitutes harassment. They mostly answered, "it might, but it depends." That's an accurate answer, but since we live in the age of binary black and white no thought given to context; it wasn't good enough. This is what happens when you demand stupid answers to complex questions.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Try calling for the extermination of African Americans or killing all the gays on Harvard campus. Care to wager that context matters in those situations as well?

- Claudine Gay: Harvard president sorry for remarks on antisemitism
https://www.bbc.co.uk/...d-us-canada-67662871

You act as if they're capable of such thoughts. They were never taught critical thinking

Sure.

If you walk into the local chapter of Hillel and carry out a protest calling for death to all Jews, that might constitute harassment under the schools' codes. If you're sitting around talking politics with your friends and one of them says "we should just get rid of all the Jews," that probably doesn't constitute harassment, even if the rest of you are horrified by the statement. If a professor teaches a class on how marginalized groups have been treated through history, and reads out a treatise written by Palestinians about how their armed fight against Israel is just, that probably doesn't constitute harassment. If the same professor reads out examples of some of the rhetoric from both sides of the war and one of those examples says "kill all the Jews," again, probably not harassment. If a student makes a routine point of telling a Jewish classmate that Jews should be killed, sure, harassment. If that student is at a rally for Palestinian rights and says, "they want to kill all the Palestinians, but I say kill the Jews first," that single incident probably doesn't constitute harassment.

None of that means these statements are necessarily ok, although that also is context dependent. It just means that there is a wide range of statements that could be considered "calling for genocide" that might not fit the definition of harassment or might not constitute punishable violations of the schools' codes of conduct.

Harvard's code says: Discriminatory harassment is unwelcome and offensive conduct that is based on an individual or group’s protected status. Discriminatory harassment may be considered to violate this policy when it is so severe or pervasive, and objectively offensive, that it creates a work, educational, or living environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive and denies the individual an equal opportunity to participate in the benefits of the workplace or the institution’s programs and activities.

Harvard considers the frequency of the conduct, the severity, whether there's a physical threat, the extent to which the conduct impacts the complaining employee or student's work environment and safety, and the relationship between the harasser and the complainant. There are all sorts of scenarios where someone might call for the death of all Jews but not meet the threshold for actually harassing anyone.

UPenn's code says: The University condemns hate speech, epithets, and racial, ethnic, sexual and religious slurs. However, the content of student speech or expression is not by itself a basis for disciplinary action. Student speech may be subject to discipline when it violates applicable laws or University regulations or policies.

So again, the answer of "it depends" is entirely correct.

The entire concept of free speech is that we protect all speech (absent minimal exclusions for safety), even speech that we don't like. In fact, especially speech we don't like. It's easy to protect speech we enjoy. Everyone here can probably agree that calling for the genocide of Jews is abhorrent. That doesn't mean that such speech necessarily rises to the level of offense that would be punishable under a school's student codes or regulations.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I just finished watching almost the entire hearing. What jumps out on the specific point you’re making is that intellectually you right. The honest answer is “it depends.” But, from a political and PR perspective, Stefanik scored her point. Maybe Gay was not properly prepped for the hearing. Or maybe some academic roles don’t make for the best witnesses in an adversarial setting. At some point, you gotta push back and answer: “It is not a yes/no question. I can explain the considerations if you want to hear them.” Or something like that. You’re the President of Harvard. Show a little force.

Of the three University President witnesses, Kornbluth of MIT was by far the best. Though, defending MIT and being Jewish gave her an easier task.

Absolutely. That’s why I mentioned that this was exactly what Rep Stefanik was going for when she asked the question.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

While you are correct; the ramifications to some institutions of higher learning may be significant. Certainly, some strong students will choose a more hospitable learning environment. Loss of donors will no doubt carry weight as well.
I suspect that there will be some changes. Improvements? One can hope.

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

Practically speaking, how does one call for death of all Jews in your “all sorts of scenarios” without creating harassment? What words are used to call for the death of all Jews in a non-harassing way? Or what? I can’t imagine your scenarios.

Maybe. Time will tell. These colleges have enormous endowments, and a century or more of prestige. Everyone isn't all at the same time going to suddenly stop wanting to have a Harvard degree. They turn away more students every year than they accept. I expect they'll be just fine, although I agree this wasn't handled well from a purely PR perspective, and some individuals may lose their jobs as a result.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I know that the endowments are huge, enough to weather this storm for sure. However, I disagree that this was only a PR mishap, it goes deeper. These highly educated "elite" students aren't behaving that way; they got their ideas from somewhere. And, the institutions they attend have by way of allowing the behavior, encouraged it.
True enough, their prestige won't be washed away; but some "activist" graduates will, or have already found that would be employers actually read and, care about what gets said.
Speech may indeed be free, but I don't have to employ people that will harm my business, I'll go with the ones who enhance my business - DEI compliant, of course.

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

Suppose a student submits a paper to a non-Jewish professor, who finds the pro-genocide argument horrifying, but feels no personal safety threat from the student. The professor has most of the power in this relationship, including the power to grade the paper. Assuming the audience is just the professor, who is being bullied or harassed here?

Suppose the student then murders Jewish students on campus after the professor takes no actions.

That is a different hypothetical. If the professor read the paper as not just an academic exercise — which was my hypothetical — and thought the student was seriously contemplating murder, then the professor had an obligation to report the student. That still does not mean the professor personally felt bullied or harassed. It just puts the student and their paper in a whole different category.

The murders would be harassment. The paper, still isn’t.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Of course there's a wide spectrum of speech, from the type that would give one the willies to purely "academic" type stuff, even "academic" speech we consider to be utter tripe. It's impossible without a specific example to make that judgment call. Bizarrely in Nazi Germany, though, when Hitler wrote Mein Kampf *after* the Beer Hall Putsch where they briefly interrupted government proceedings by taking high level officials hostage (getting farther in the process than the Jan 6 crowd who thankfully failed to zip tie Pelosi and Pence) there were still people promoting the free speech angle to the book at the time even though Hitler as a clear-and-present mass violence risk.

This is CYA situation in my opinion. If you have reason to believe a student is a danger to others you report it to the administration.

Sure. That still doesn’t mean that the paper was harassment

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Police first, then the administration. It's another issue entirely, but though a huge proponent of Title IX overall, I really don't like the notion of universities acting as "investigators" when they are not trained as such. (that in the context of sexual harrassment or assault, not mass shooting type stuff).

To call for something sounds like a public statement promoting an activity or idea. It doesn’t sound like speech that might happen in the privacy of your dorm room or in a private conversation. Maybe Slowguy was envisioning a quiet, private statement promoting the killings?

A statement arguing in favor of something— it’s either giving reasons in support of the killing or otherwise encouraging the deaths. How does that get softened? Does providing a lot of reasons in favor of killing make it more or less threatening? Or maybe calling for less painful ways to die?

To call for the death of someone is pretty clearly advocating for serious harm. Trump doesn’t even go that far— he just says he’ll put people in camps or lock them up.

I read the list of factors (frequency, accompanying physical threats, severity, place, relationship, etc) and tried to use them to soften calling for the death of Jews.

Does the frequency of threats of violence against Jews get measured per speaker who calls for death to all Jews? Does each person get a limit (1x per week) or is it cumulative to a campus? What about the national climate? We’re at historic highs for antisemitic attacks (per a recent BBC article quoting FBI director Wray). Does a school measure the frequency of threats by the Jewish students who hear calls for their destruction?

Obviously physical violence with a call for death is worse than just a call alone. But does that make the stand-alone call for death not problematic? Does our intellectual pursuit at school include advocating for genocide so long as the physical steps to effectuate genocide are not taken? That’s a very low bar for ethics in education.

Is it more threatening or less threatening when someone calls for death to all Jews in a crowded square of 150 agitated students or in a small class of 10 students and the speaker is looking at the face of the only Jew in the room?

Practically speaking, how is calling for the death of people ever okay? If I had to advise a client, what would I say?

No one here has said it’s “okay.” Nazis marching in Skokie, IL is not “okay.” It is also protected by the 1A.

Under Brandenburg, you only lose 1A protection when the risk of violence is imminent. Many private schools use the 1A as a model for their own free speech codes. We can imagine hypotheticals where the risk is imminent and ones where it is not.

I'd contact the administration and let them decide if it's serious enough to go to the police or not.