Graduation is a day for all graduates to celebrate with their families.Graduation is NOT a place for personal vitriol and hate to be spilled to a captured audience.Nor is a private institution obligated to platform anyone’s political ideology. She was not prevented from mouthing off at any of the hate pro Hamas Iran rallies, or from posting all over social media about how unfair her life is.
This was adults running the school making a decision to have graduation be inclusive and a day for all graduates.
The event in Brussels is a Conservative convention that paid to rent space to so that an audience who paid to be there can hear from one another. The opposing political ideology is in power and sent police ( lots of them) to stop the convention .The cops were armed This is tyranny
Tabussum's evil creed is not just some personal thoughts. It was founded on the ravings of a psychotic's hates, a Jim Jones writ large. "A God Who Hates" by Wafa Suktan
Tabussum and her co-evilists in hate are on the move, making war to fulfill the ravings of this revenant creed. She is not some poor beleaguered innocent. She was indoctrinated into the psychotic cult and her thoughts are parrot kind, spitting out ancient venom, nothing more.
Zero sympathy for Tabussum. Zero sympathy for Oliver. Unlike the group in Brussels, Tabussum and her ilk are killing and specifically killing and advocates for killing Jews.
But hey, Oliver, let's not let a bloviating bullcrap "Both sides" cutesy pseudo-thoughtful narrative get spoiled by actual facts. For f*cks sake, Oliver! The FP has had stories about the dangers to Jewish ✡️ students from these people! Safety of Jewish students is a real concern on campuses.
Tabussum and her ideas are a menace, and should be less welcomed on campus than a speech by the KKK. So really Okiver, go f*ck yourself. Take your NYT fake gotcha journo crap and go. This article is appalling.
I agree that these two events have nothing in common. I posted a comment below yours with an additional reason . Not long ago The Free Press ( I think I was TFP) published an Arielle by aIlya Shapiro( constitutional scholar) of the Manhattan Institute about what is and isn’t free speech. The Free Press needs to reread that article
Thanks for posting this. Have you noticed The Free Press is posting the morning articles separately and as a unit. We posted here but it doesn’t show up in the other more read version! I posted it there too because I think it is that important . I hope you will too as what you wrote needs to be read by as many as possible.
Yes, I am seeing this as well. There are two different sites for comments from the same article; and you can reply to a comment on one site, then reply to the same comment on the other and not see the prior one. Hopefully they'll get it ironed out.
When someone spews forth vile antisemitism, when you call for the destruction of Israel, when you call for the death of all Jews, when you say awful things, there can be a penalty. Had any valedictorian written "lynch all the blacks" or "LGBTQ have zero right to exist and we must extinguish them", they would not be allowed to speak either. And shame on USC for being too cowardly to call it what it is. She is a raging antisemite and in a time when Jews are being threatened daily across all college campuses, they're not going to allow someone with toxic views spread their propaganda at graduation. PERIOD! See...that's not hard to say. But USC is too chicken to say it. Shame on them! All these people are helping to further the demise of our country and history books will not look kindly on them. Education is ripe for transformation & if any investors want to back new universities, let's get going. We'll have the most impressive professors and students!!! Let's start them and give our children a place to go that isn't toxic. All this DEI has clearly failed --despite being lectured by leaders about the evils of systemic racism, they seem to be woefully inept at identifying and stemming the tide of growing antisemitism. One side wants peace. The other wants the death of an entire people. So, let's move on and get out of this quicksand and advance forward with those who aren't consumed with hate.
I'm pro Israel and very anti Hamas but I have a different view on this.
IMO:
1) Young people post many things and it's hard to know if the bad posts are one-offs or part of a clear pattern of a belief system. In the very brief amount of time I've spent on this situation, it's not really clear to me that they were more than one-offs, so in full disclosure, the rest of my thinking is based on assuming they were one-offs. In other words, I'm not convinced she's a "raging antisemite" any more than I'm convinced that someone who says one bad thing about a minority is a "raging racist."
2) USC should not select a vile antisemite (or racist) as valedictorian. A post or two expressing sympathy with Palestinians does not rise to the level of a vile antisemite. Perhaps what she actually said is just as bad as your example of "lynch all blacks" but it didn't seem to me to be the same. If it was, then she should have been removed as valedictorian.
3) We had no idea what her valedictorian speech would have been about. Her posts sympathetic to Hamas didn't necessarily mean she was going to say anything about that during the speech. USC would be within their rights to restrict her from including any political messaging. If she violated any agreement, then she can face the consequences, but cancelling the speech just in case is just wrong.
4) USC set a terrible precedent cancelling the speech but allowing her to remain as valedictorian. Either remove her as valedictorian or allow the speech. Anything else is splitting the baby.
5) Using "safety" to stifle free speech is a loss for freedom for all of us regardless of who's speech is being stifled. We should support free speech for all.
TOTALLY hear you! Couple things: 1. Leland Vittert on News Nation did an exceptional segment on this last night. Look it up. He nailed it. You're 100% right...for them to hide behind "safety concerns" is ludicrous & totally unacceptable. 2. The posts I saw weeks ago that captured all the horrible things she had posted really showed that she's not a one-off "silly ill informed person". She had innumerable posts not merely sympathizing for Palestinians. It was the ugly stuff we're seeing all over...destroy Israel, Intifada...etc etc. Leon Uris in "Exodus" recapped how there's been a holocaust in every century and this pattern we're in is following the exact same patterns in ea cent (altho now w social media). There are years where it becomes okay to be outwardly antisemitic and hate speech becomes normalized and accepted. And then that starts to ratchet up into actions. Cancelling Jews. Boycotting them. Cancelling events. Normalizing barring them from classrooms, etc. And all of this happens while good people don't speak up. Whether for fear of repercussions, ignorance or whatever, the good people stay quiet. The Jews wish it away and hope for more normalcy. Which doesn't happen. Then after years of all the hate speech and antisemitic violent acts, things really explode and we end up with a true holocaust where there are the mass m*rders. So, while it might seem overly aggressive to cancel her speech, if it was truly done as a statement of "we will not allow someone who has these beliefs to have the honor of speaking at graduation" just like they probably wouldn't have a KKK member do a commencement address, I think it's right. We are seeing this normalization and acceptance of treating Jews and spreading all the lies unchecked. And it has to stop! It can NOT be tolerated. Unfort USC hid behind safety concerns and if that's their only reason, then that's pathetic. While it's good all of this is being exposed, this vile hatred is being allowed to spread like a cancer because good people aren't speaking up loudly enough. No one is calling these people out. People are tolerating, condoning, excusing, accepting and it's incredibly dangerous....
The simple solution for USC would be to have a speaker of opposing views on stage and have a good old fashioned debate. That might not be a traditional graduation fare, but I doubt anyone would fall asleep.
No. A graduation ceremony is supposed to be a joyful event for students (and their parents who footed the bill). It is not the right setting for a contentious and possibly hostile debate.
Comparing a milestone rite of passage, with parents, friends, and family becoming a captive audience of someone this offensive, with a collegial gathering of peers?
As a USC alumni and session ticket holder....I think we should lie in the bed we made.
She has a minor in resistance to genocide. How the hell is that a minor we offer?
Let her say whatever the hell she wants. She's going to look like an idiot.
What USC really cares about is donor money. They're trying to hide how ridiculous some of the "scholarship" has become at USC.
This is a great time to stick to principles of free speech AND cleanup the unbalanced ideological make-up of the faculty and administration. Let's fix it.
Years ago USC felt like a haven of mildly conservative traditionalism in the middle of the L.A. dumpster fire. This suggests that it's now just UCLA but in a worse neighborhood.
The faculty outside of the business school was liberal leaning when I was there. But the commitment to truth was still there for sure. It's always had a very diverse student body (tons of international students).
I wonder why she was selected in the first place? Was it because she was a Muslim, or was it because of her views? It would’ve been nice to hear what she was going to say. The mob wins.
Not merely a Muslim, but a hijab-wearing one. Imagine the self-satisfied expressions of the academics on the dais behind her as she began her valedictory.
I'm not sure what a mayor shutting down an event in Belgium has to do with a university choosing a graduation speaker based on whether they champion the elimination of Israel.
You could maybe write about universities that ban visiting speakers other groups have chosen. That would be more on point.
Sometimes, when both sides aren't perfect, one side is much more wrong than the other. In the case of censorship these days, the left is more wrong. The opposite could have been said 50 years ago.
In my high school, I remember that 2 students had identical GPAs, and the not Chinese one was arbitrarily chosen as valedictorian. In my college, I don't remember any valedictorian selection. USC selected a polarizing person as valedictorian among 100 students with identical GPAs. Maybe USC should drop the idea that one student is better than 99 others simply because she wore a headscarf. The selection process seems to always put Asians last and minorities first, regardless of their extra curriculars and other factors that should be more important.
I really, really liked what a neighboring school district used to do about high school graduation speakers in the early 2000s. You'd have you valedictorian and salutatorian, who would be acknowledged, but they were not automatically the speaker. The top 10% of the class was invited to submit a speech, totally optional, identified only by student ID number, judged by a panel of teachers and a few on the PTA. The winner would be the speaker, and the identity would be shown after the vote.
If the USC Administration 'picked' this young woman among over a 1000 (I believe) equally qualified graduates, they completely made a fully informed and deliberate choice. They should therefore, let her speak and suffer the consequences of her words AND their actions. No Take Backs allowed!
Interestingly, Emir Kir, the mayor who ordered this shutdown, once took part in a rally that denied the Armenian Genocide (that's a pretty rightwing move to make, wouldn't you say?). He also holds the title of "Commander of the Order of Leopold II" - which is named after the king whose rapacious ivory-and-rubber racket inflicted a genocide on the Congolese.
The 1st amendment is often used as a cover to protect hateful speech, speech that could ignite a mob set on doing damage. I, for one, do not believe that people with public platforms, such as Hungary's leader, or Trump, or college students with more money than brains, or anyone who espouses hate, should enjoy freedom of speech. They should be shut down quickly as peacefully. Punto.
Yeah, I know what is hate speech. Not bragging. I think that sometimes free speech goes too far. Example: the Supreme Court ruling that corporations are people. KKK marches. Nazi marches. There is a very clear line between dissent and hate.
Because some people don't know the dif between hateful speech and actions, and a group loudly disagreeing even with a stream of curses, is the reason we are in trouble.
I think hate is universally accepted as a hostile feeling, that turned into action, is violent. Jan. 6, for example, was ignited by hate. Another example: Anti-semitism is an expression of hate. Blows my mind that university presidents could not tell the different between protected speech and hateful speech.
"I think hate is universally accepted as a hostile feeling, that turned into action, is violent"
The 1st Amendment does not cove that. Its called incitement to riot. Alas to few people are charged with this crime.
"Jan. 6, for example, was ignited by hate."
What Hate? A lot of people expressing their displeasure At what happened on Election night is NOT Hate (BTW I thought the Rally was a Bad Idea, and said so). I have questions about that. Questions I have not seen good answers to. I've been following Presidential elections since Nixon v Kennedy. I've seen some "interesting" things happen in those 60 years, NOTHING absolutely NOTHING comes within 10 mile of what I saw in that election.
The hate part of Jan 6 is the death of 5 people, including a rioter. The hate is defacing the Capitol building, feces in Pelosi's office. The violent defiance of the election results. I guess you could say that the Capitol belongs to the American people, and it does, but that cannot mean you can barge in with intent to do damage, with taunting chants to Pelosi and threats to Pence. Whatever word we use to describe Jan 6, it is not peaceful dissent.
I've been around as long as you, and too have seen plenty of bending of laws to benefit elected people (they can see how their stock is doing BEFORE the rest of Americans?) redefinitions of genders and pronouns (I don't get it at all); exclude people from health care (the ACA does not ensure that people with pre-existing conditions can PAY for certain health plans that are "grandfathered" with language to exclude people who had cancer, like me, for example.
I am a citizen who demands that the courts not give in to all sorts of speech that is dangerous. Peaceful marches, peaceful albeit loud protests. Deep disagreements in debates that are dignified.
Then the rest of us can comment about what we think, without threatening to hang Pence or anybody else.
"Jan 6 is the death of 5 people, including a rioter."
Only on person died because of Jan. 6 Ashli Babbitt.
"The hate is defacing the Capitol building, feces in Pelosi's office."
Gonna have to see A Lot of evidence for that. Photos would be helpful. Point being in the last 3+ years we have seen many many stories about what happened on Jan. 6 1 or 2 of them have actually been true
It would have been instructive for family and donor attendees at USC to hear Ms Tabbasum parrot the leftist orthodoxies taught and demanded by the vast majority of USC professors and staff who comprise that university's wokeshevik echo-chamber. My guess is that the administration paid close attention to what occurred recently at Harvard, Penn, etc., wanting to keep their woke ideological cat in the bag so as not to have to answer parents and donors disgusted by the intended address...which actually represents the received wisdom of USC leadership and most faculties.
I think you are on to something Brett. My USC roommate's (future) wife was Steve Sample's niece. I also met Max Nikias at the Bohemian Grove in 2019. Also, a close work associate is best friends with Rick Caruso.
From what I gather, at the highest levels of the administration - they are super focused on bringing in donor money for the endowment. This group is pretty practical and business minded. Dropping down into the professorial level - the humanities schools have become infused with hard left ideology - think East Germany - strict adherence to whatever is in favor at the time. The administration hasn't pushed back nor insisted on some level of ideological diversity.
Of course, some students go really deep and the valedictorian was planning to give a hard anti-Israel speech / colonial settler argument. She got a minor in "Resistance to Genocide" and claims the USC Shoah Foundation was involved in the minor somehow (which they are denying).
In any case, I think the real issue is that the USC administration is afraid the donors will object to a hard left speech by the valedictorian.
I think they should allow the speech to continue - they're just amplifying her voice way more by banning her. Allow the alumni and donors to see what is going on - so we can get starting fixing the problems. A Jonathan Haidt type program would be great - hire some center and right professors in the humanities departments - even if it was raised to like 20-30% of the faculty - that would have a huge impact.
These two events have nothing in common.
Graduation is a day for all graduates to celebrate with their families.Graduation is NOT a place for personal vitriol and hate to be spilled to a captured audience.Nor is a private institution obligated to platform anyone’s political ideology. She was not prevented from mouthing off at any of the hate pro Hamas Iran rallies, or from posting all over social media about how unfair her life is.
This was adults running the school making a decision to have graduation be inclusive and a day for all graduates.
The event in Brussels is a Conservative convention that paid to rent space to so that an audience who paid to be there can hear from one another. The opposing political ideology is in power and sent police ( lots of them) to stop the convention .The cops were armed This is tyranny
Tabussum's evil creed is not just some personal thoughts. It was founded on the ravings of a psychotic's hates, a Jim Jones writ large. "A God Who Hates" by Wafa Suktan
https://g.co/kgs/g91SXfY
Tabussum and her co-evilists in hate are on the move, making war to fulfill the ravings of this revenant creed. She is not some poor beleaguered innocent. She was indoctrinated into the psychotic cult and her thoughts are parrot kind, spitting out ancient venom, nothing more.
What’s more hateful than the Zionist Jew genocide against the Palestinians?
Talk about hate you must be kidding ?
He says in the article the commonality between the events is that "safety" is being used as the excuse, not that the events themselves are equivalent.
Zero sympathy for Tabussum. Zero sympathy for Oliver. Unlike the group in Brussels, Tabussum and her ilk are killing and specifically killing and advocates for killing Jews.
But hey, Oliver, let's not let a bloviating bullcrap "Both sides" cutesy pseudo-thoughtful narrative get spoiled by actual facts. For f*cks sake, Oliver! The FP has had stories about the dangers to Jewish ✡️ students from these people! Safety of Jewish students is a real concern on campuses.
Tabussum and her ideas are a menace, and should be less welcomed on campus than a speech by the KKK. So really Okiver, go f*ck yourself. Take your NYT fake gotcha journo crap and go. This article is appalling.
I agree that these two events have nothing in common. I posted a comment below yours with an additional reason . Not long ago The Free Press ( I think I was TFP) published an Arielle by aIlya Shapiro( constitutional scholar) of the Manhattan Institute about what is and isn’t free speech. The Free Press needs to reread that article
Yes. https://ilyashapiro.substack.com/p/the-line-between-protected-speech
Thanks for posting this. Have you noticed The Free Press is posting the morning articles separately and as a unit. We posted here but it doesn’t show up in the other more read version! I posted it there too because I think it is that important . I hope you will too as what you wrote needs to be read by as many as possible.
Yes, I am seeing this as well. There are two different sites for comments from the same article; and you can reply to a comment on one site, then reply to the same comment on the other and not see the prior one. Hopefully they'll get it ironed out.
I don't see any other. Can you link to it?
When someone spews forth vile antisemitism, when you call for the destruction of Israel, when you call for the death of all Jews, when you say awful things, there can be a penalty. Had any valedictorian written "lynch all the blacks" or "LGBTQ have zero right to exist and we must extinguish them", they would not be allowed to speak either. And shame on USC for being too cowardly to call it what it is. She is a raging antisemite and in a time when Jews are being threatened daily across all college campuses, they're not going to allow someone with toxic views spread their propaganda at graduation. PERIOD! See...that's not hard to say. But USC is too chicken to say it. Shame on them! All these people are helping to further the demise of our country and history books will not look kindly on them. Education is ripe for transformation & if any investors want to back new universities, let's get going. We'll have the most impressive professors and students!!! Let's start them and give our children a place to go that isn't toxic. All this DEI has clearly failed --despite being lectured by leaders about the evils of systemic racism, they seem to be woefully inept at identifying and stemming the tide of growing antisemitism. One side wants peace. The other wants the death of an entire people. So, let's move on and get out of this quicksand and advance forward with those who aren't consumed with hate.
I'm pro Israel and very anti Hamas but I have a different view on this.
IMO:
1) Young people post many things and it's hard to know if the bad posts are one-offs or part of a clear pattern of a belief system. In the very brief amount of time I've spent on this situation, it's not really clear to me that they were more than one-offs, so in full disclosure, the rest of my thinking is based on assuming they were one-offs. In other words, I'm not convinced she's a "raging antisemite" any more than I'm convinced that someone who says one bad thing about a minority is a "raging racist."
2) USC should not select a vile antisemite (or racist) as valedictorian. A post or two expressing sympathy with Palestinians does not rise to the level of a vile antisemite. Perhaps what she actually said is just as bad as your example of "lynch all blacks" but it didn't seem to me to be the same. If it was, then she should have been removed as valedictorian.
3) We had no idea what her valedictorian speech would have been about. Her posts sympathetic to Hamas didn't necessarily mean she was going to say anything about that during the speech. USC would be within their rights to restrict her from including any political messaging. If she violated any agreement, then she can face the consequences, but cancelling the speech just in case is just wrong.
4) USC set a terrible precedent cancelling the speech but allowing her to remain as valedictorian. Either remove her as valedictorian or allow the speech. Anything else is splitting the baby.
5) Using "safety" to stifle free speech is a loss for freedom for all of us regardless of who's speech is being stifled. We should support free speech for all.
TOTALLY hear you! Couple things: 1. Leland Vittert on News Nation did an exceptional segment on this last night. Look it up. He nailed it. You're 100% right...for them to hide behind "safety concerns" is ludicrous & totally unacceptable. 2. The posts I saw weeks ago that captured all the horrible things she had posted really showed that she's not a one-off "silly ill informed person". She had innumerable posts not merely sympathizing for Palestinians. It was the ugly stuff we're seeing all over...destroy Israel, Intifada...etc etc. Leon Uris in "Exodus" recapped how there's been a holocaust in every century and this pattern we're in is following the exact same patterns in ea cent (altho now w social media). There are years where it becomes okay to be outwardly antisemitic and hate speech becomes normalized and accepted. And then that starts to ratchet up into actions. Cancelling Jews. Boycotting them. Cancelling events. Normalizing barring them from classrooms, etc. And all of this happens while good people don't speak up. Whether for fear of repercussions, ignorance or whatever, the good people stay quiet. The Jews wish it away and hope for more normalcy. Which doesn't happen. Then after years of all the hate speech and antisemitic violent acts, things really explode and we end up with a true holocaust where there are the mass m*rders. So, while it might seem overly aggressive to cancel her speech, if it was truly done as a statement of "we will not allow someone who has these beliefs to have the honor of speaking at graduation" just like they probably wouldn't have a KKK member do a commencement address, I think it's right. We are seeing this normalization and acceptance of treating Jews and spreading all the lies unchecked. And it has to stop! It can NOT be tolerated. Unfort USC hid behind safety concerns and if that's their only reason, then that's pathetic. While it's good all of this is being exposed, this vile hatred is being allowed to spread like a cancer because good people aren't speaking up loudly enough. No one is calling these people out. People are tolerating, condoning, excusing, accepting and it's incredibly dangerous....
The simple solution for USC would be to have a speaker of opposing views on stage and have a good old fashioned debate. That might not be a traditional graduation fare, but I doubt anyone would fall asleep.
No. A graduation ceremony is supposed to be a joyful event for students (and their parents who footed the bill). It is not the right setting for a contentious and possibly hostile debate.
Comparing a milestone rite of passage, with parents, friends, and family becoming a captive audience of someone this offensive, with a collegial gathering of peers?
As a USC alumni and session ticket holder....I think we should lie in the bed we made.
She has a minor in resistance to genocide. How the hell is that a minor we offer?
Let her say whatever the hell she wants. She's going to look like an idiot.
What USC really cares about is donor money. They're trying to hide how ridiculous some of the "scholarship" has become at USC.
This is a great time to stick to principles of free speech AND cleanup the unbalanced ideological make-up of the faculty and administration. Let's fix it.
Fight On!
Years ago USC felt like a haven of mildly conservative traditionalism in the middle of the L.A. dumpster fire. This suggests that it's now just UCLA but in a worse neighborhood.
The faculty outside of the business school was liberal leaning when I was there. But the commitment to truth was still there for sure. It's always had a very diverse student body (tons of international students).
RW is right: What USC really cares about is donors. And donors, did not want her. Donors get what they ask for. $ people!
I wonder why she was selected in the first place? Was it because she was a Muslim, or was it because of her views? It would’ve been nice to hear what she was going to say. The mob wins.
Tabussum is the mob. She is in a war on the side of genocide.
Not merely a Muslim, but a hijab-wearing one. Imagine the self-satisfied expressions of the academics on the dais behind her as she began her valedictory.
I'm not sure what a mayor shutting down an event in Belgium has to do with a university choosing a graduation speaker based on whether they champion the elimination of Israel.
You could maybe write about universities that ban visiting speakers other groups have chosen. That would be more on point.
Sometimes, when both sides aren't perfect, one side is much more wrong than the other. In the case of censorship these days, the left is more wrong. The opposite could have been said 50 years ago.
In my high school, I remember that 2 students had identical GPAs, and the not Chinese one was arbitrarily chosen as valedictorian. In my college, I don't remember any valedictorian selection. USC selected a polarizing person as valedictorian among 100 students with identical GPAs. Maybe USC should drop the idea that one student is better than 99 others simply because she wore a headscarf. The selection process seems to always put Asians last and minorities first, regardless of their extra curriculars and other factors that should be more important.
I really, really liked what a neighboring school district used to do about high school graduation speakers in the early 2000s. You'd have you valedictorian and salutatorian, who would be acknowledged, but they were not automatically the speaker. The top 10% of the class was invited to submit a speech, totally optional, identified only by student ID number, judged by a panel of teachers and a few on the PTA. The winner would be the speaker, and the identity would be shown after the vote.
When you are receiving flak, you know you are over the target.
If the USC Administration 'picked' this young woman among over a 1000 (I believe) equally qualified graduates, they completely made a fully informed and deliberate choice. They should therefore, let her speak and suffer the consequences of her words AND their actions. No Take Backs allowed!
Wait, Europeans are leaning into totalitarianism?
Really?
Well, that is odd. They don't have a history of extreme regimes...
Interestingly, Emir Kir, the mayor who ordered this shutdown, once took part in a rally that denied the Armenian Genocide (that's a pretty rightwing move to make, wouldn't you say?). He also holds the title of "Commander of the Order of Leopold II" - which is named after the king whose rapacious ivory-and-rubber racket inflicted a genocide on the Congolese.
So much for this grandee's moral pedigree ...
The 1st amendment is often used as a cover to protect hateful speech, speech that could ignite a mob set on doing damage. I, for one, do not believe that people with public platforms, such as Hungary's leader, or Trump, or college students with more money than brains, or anyone who espouses hate, should enjoy freedom of speech. They should be shut down quickly as peacefully. Punto.
Who decides what constitutes hate and should be shut down? You?
Yeah, I know what is hate speech. Not bragging. I think that sometimes free speech goes too far. Example: the Supreme Court ruling that corporations are people. KKK marches. Nazi marches. There is a very clear line between dissent and hate.
Clear to you. And if I disagree , you get to decide?
Because some people don't know the dif between hateful speech and actions, and a group loudly disagreeing even with a stream of curses, is the reason we are in trouble.
So I take it that you are against the pro-Hamas demonstrations that have tied up traffic in many of our cities.
Yes, pro-Hamas supporters are dangerously ignorant
Here's the problem. Define Hate, define a speech that could ignite a mob set on doing damage.
IF someone actually does that there are laws on the books to deal with that.
I think hate is universally accepted as a hostile feeling, that turned into action, is violent. Jan. 6, for example, was ignited by hate. Another example: Anti-semitism is an expression of hate. Blows my mind that university presidents could not tell the different between protected speech and hateful speech.
"I think hate is universally accepted as a hostile feeling, that turned into action, is violent"
The 1st Amendment does not cove that. Its called incitement to riot. Alas to few people are charged with this crime.
"Jan. 6, for example, was ignited by hate."
What Hate? A lot of people expressing their displeasure At what happened on Election night is NOT Hate (BTW I thought the Rally was a Bad Idea, and said so). I have questions about that. Questions I have not seen good answers to. I've been following Presidential elections since Nixon v Kennedy. I've seen some "interesting" things happen in those 60 years, NOTHING absolutely NOTHING comes within 10 mile of what I saw in that election.
The hate part of Jan 6 is the death of 5 people, including a rioter. The hate is defacing the Capitol building, feces in Pelosi's office. The violent defiance of the election results. I guess you could say that the Capitol belongs to the American people, and it does, but that cannot mean you can barge in with intent to do damage, with taunting chants to Pelosi and threats to Pence. Whatever word we use to describe Jan 6, it is not peaceful dissent.
I've been around as long as you, and too have seen plenty of bending of laws to benefit elected people (they can see how their stock is doing BEFORE the rest of Americans?) redefinitions of genders and pronouns (I don't get it at all); exclude people from health care (the ACA does not ensure that people with pre-existing conditions can PAY for certain health plans that are "grandfathered" with language to exclude people who had cancer, like me, for example.
I am a citizen who demands that the courts not give in to all sorts of speech that is dangerous. Peaceful marches, peaceful albeit loud protests. Deep disagreements in debates that are dignified.
Then the rest of us can comment about what we think, without threatening to hang Pence or anybody else.
"Jan 6 is the death of 5 people, including a rioter."
Only on person died because of Jan. 6 Ashli Babbitt.
"The hate is defacing the Capitol building, feces in Pelosi's office."
Gonna have to see A Lot of evidence for that. Photos would be helpful. Point being in the last 3+ years we have seen many many stories about what happened on Jan. 6 1 or 2 of them have actually been true
January 6 Hearings Get Under Way
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/07/january-6-hearings-get-under-way.php
John Hinderaker
July 27, 2021
"* We Republicans may have our faults, but if we were actually going to stage an insurrection, at least one of us would remember to bring a firearm.
* Along the same lines, if we were to undertake an insurrection, we would not call on a “shaman” wearing horns and a fur hat to lead it."
We get info from different places. My sources are ginormous fact nerds.
Also, I really do love your promise that if there were to be an insurrection, you would not call on a "shaman." I respect that. Truly.
It would have been instructive for family and donor attendees at USC to hear Ms Tabbasum parrot the leftist orthodoxies taught and demanded by the vast majority of USC professors and staff who comprise that university's wokeshevik echo-chamber. My guess is that the administration paid close attention to what occurred recently at Harvard, Penn, etc., wanting to keep their woke ideological cat in the bag so as not to have to answer parents and donors disgusted by the intended address...which actually represents the received wisdom of USC leadership and most faculties.
I think you are on to something Brett. My USC roommate's (future) wife was Steve Sample's niece. I also met Max Nikias at the Bohemian Grove in 2019. Also, a close work associate is best friends with Rick Caruso.
From what I gather, at the highest levels of the administration - they are super focused on bringing in donor money for the endowment. This group is pretty practical and business minded. Dropping down into the professorial level - the humanities schools have become infused with hard left ideology - think East Germany - strict adherence to whatever is in favor at the time. The administration hasn't pushed back nor insisted on some level of ideological diversity.
Of course, some students go really deep and the valedictorian was planning to give a hard anti-Israel speech / colonial settler argument. She got a minor in "Resistance to Genocide" and claims the USC Shoah Foundation was involved in the minor somehow (which they are denying).
In any case, I think the real issue is that the USC administration is afraid the donors will object to a hard left speech by the valedictorian.
I think they should allow the speech to continue - they're just amplifying her voice way more by banning her. Allow the alumni and donors to see what is going on - so we can get starting fixing the problems. A Jonathan Haidt type program would be great - hire some center and right professors in the humanities departments - even if it was raised to like 20-30% of the faculty - that would have a huge impact.