UT Pro-Palestine Protest Thread

[jimmyjazz 46002]

The crowd didn't need authorization to be there.

[Captainant 27694]

3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Just generally clearing out a crowd that didn't have authorization to be there and was asked to leave...presumably for the previous 1.5 hours.  That's pretty standard practice.  They weren't swinging clubs or anything as far as I saw.

This is not an accurate description of what happened yesterday. They don't need authorization to be there because of the 2019 law signed by Abbott that turns public universities into designated public discourse spaces. The police didn't ask anything of the protesters, the just started kettling protesters and forced them into streets so they could be arrested for blocking the street. 

[deft 6860]

Well you must be wrong because Dixon watched the video.

[DixonHur 11345]

12 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

You're an extremely weird dude. "I'm a lib and I don't like Israel, but I'm all for cops assaulting and arresting peaceful protests" is a pretty rare take. 

I recognize that I have eclectic views...and often they appear contradictory.  But they aren't.  I have one set of beliefs based on how I think the world SHOULD work, and one for the way the DO.

The "should work" side is very liberal...bordering on anarchy, but I realize that's not really feasible in today's world, so I tend to default to a more practical approach.

For example, I am pro-trans, but I also think the left pushes too hard to make it mainstream, which causes a natural backlash on the far right.  At the same time I'm anti-MAGA, because they push too far right ideology too far, but I'm also against mass immigration.

As for Israel, I think its founding is the root of much of the problems in the ME, and should never have happened.

I feel like I've stayed firmly in the middle, but the edges (right and left) have moved further away from me.

[Dahobbs 17627]

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

This is not an accurate description of what happened yesterday. They don't need authorization to be there because of the 2019 law signed by Abbott that turns public universities into designated public discourse spaces. The police didn't ask anything of the protesters, the just started kettling protesters and forced them into streets so they could be arrested for blocking the street. 

That, and students most certainly had authorization to be in the six pack. 

[DixonHur 11345]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The crowd didn't need authorization to be there.

You do once you start blocking access to buildings and walkways.

Here’s what the law says about protesting on Texas college campuses | The Texas Tribune

[DixonHur 11345]

9 minutes ago, Captainant said:

This is not an accurate description of what happened yesterday. They don't need authorization to be there because of the 2019 law signed by Abbott that turns public universities into designated public discourse spaces. The police didn't ask anything of the protesters, the just started kettling protesters and forced them into streets so they could be arrested for blocking the street. 

From the article:

Quote

Individuals themselves don’t usually need a permit to exercise their First Amendment rights, but some entities like cities may require one for unusually large protests or parades, in which case “reasonable time, place, and manner” restrictions may apply. Texas law allows universities to set “reasonable time, place, and manner” restrictions for common outdoor areas, as long as they allow "members of the university community to assemble or distribute written material without a permit or other permission from the institution."

 

[jimmyjazz 46002]

The protesters were herded into those positions.

[deft 6860]

I recognize that I have eclectic views...and often they appear contradictory.  But they aren't.  I have one set of beliefs based on how I think the world SHOULD work, and one for the way the DO.
The "should work" side is very liberal...bordering on anarchy, but I realize that's not really feasible in today's world, so I tend to default to a more practical approach.
For example, I am pro-trans, but I also think the left pushes too hard to make it mainstream, which causes a natural backlash on the far right.  At the same time I'm anti-MAGA, because they push too far right ideology too far, but I'm also against mass immigration.
As for Israel, I think its founding is the root of much of the problems in the ME, and should never have happened.
I feel like I've stayed firmly in the middle, but the edges (right and left) have moved further away from me.

Trans people existing and asking to not be hatecrimed or even murdered: “omg quit forcing your culture into mainstream!”

You do once you start blocking access to buildings and walkways.
Here’s what the law says about protesting on Texas college campuses | The Texas Tribune

The protesters were herded into those positions.

Covered again. And again. And again. Teakettling.

[Captainant 27694]

4 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

From the article:

 

Yes, and as was covered contemporaneously, they did not put any specific rules or restrictions in place or publish any prior to the event. I admire you clicking through the link, but it's not the gotcha you're hoping for

You should really get informed on what happened by reading the first page or two of this thread, or at least before Incredulity did the first threadshit. 

[DixonHur 11345]

5 minutes ago, deft said:

Trans people existing and asking to not be hatecrimed or even murdered: “omg quit forcing your culture into mainstream!”

Yeah, cause that's what's happening.

I'm talking about not being able to be against hormone treatments for children without being labeled transphobic or anti-gay.

[DixonHur 11345]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Yes, and as was covered contemporaneously, they did not put any specific rules or restrictions in place or publish any prior to the event. I admire you clicking through the link, but it's not the gotcha you're hoping for

You should really get informed on what happened by reading the first page or two of this thread, or at least before Incredulity did the first threadshit. 

So are you proposing that the cops and the University didn't try to get the organizers to break it up / leave before using force?

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The protesters were herded into those positions.

What positions? 

[DixonHur 11345]

So what should have happened?  

Should UT have let the protestors erect a tent city encampment for as long as they like?

I'm reading a lot of rage, but no alternate solutions.

[Captainant 27694]

2 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

So are you proposing that the cops and the University didn't try to get the organizers to break it up / leave before using force?

That's literally what happens in the video footage from yesterday? Protest organizers were working with the police and making lanes in the protest so police could move in easily. 

They were being fully compliant and peaceful, and then the riot cops did what they put on all that gear to do. 

[Sawbonz 27580]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

The KUT reporter issued an update to her earlier story

 

So they're at least not being academically punished, but it's still bullshit to bar tuition paying students from campus because you don't like their speech

The only thing left is softball vs Iowa state this weekend so it could be worse

[DixonHur 11345]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That's literally what happens in the video footage from yesterday? Protest organizers were working with the police and making lanes in the protest so police could move in easily. 

They were being fully compliant and peaceful, and then the riot cops did what they put on all that gear to do. 

The riot cops were there, in full gear, from the start.  

And answer the question.  What should the administration have done?

[mchookem 16344]

well...Denver area schools getting in on the action. 

40 arrested today on Auraria campus

(that's a combo campus of CU-Denver, Denver CC, and MSU Denver)

[wildcat09 29360]

36 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Just generally clearing out a crowd that didn't have authorization to be there and was asked to leave...presumably for the previous 1.5 hours.  That's pretty standard practice.  They weren't swinging clubs or anything as far as I saw.

I hear the argument about 1A, but I don't feel like that was violated in this case.  Perhaps that's where we diverge.

Its really not a close call, the first amendment was absolutely violated.

[DixonHur 11345]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

Its really not a close call, the first amendment was absolutely violated.

I don't think they were, but if so, there are legal remedies for that.

 

[Captainant 27694]

2 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

The riot cops were there, in full gear, from the start.  

And answer the question.  What should the administration have done?

They should have done what they did on Thursday. Absolutely fucking nothing. 5x the number of protesters came down and demonstrated and it continued to be peaceful without DPS goons showing up. 

[DixonHur 11345]

Here's the video I watched...seems like a non-event.

Make of it what you will.

[DixonHur 11345]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

They should have done what they did on Thursday. Absolutely fucking nothing. 5x the number of protesters came down and demonstrated and it continued to be peaceful without DPS goons showing up. 

But then they started setting up tents....that's just simply not allowed.

What do you do when a protest turns into an occupation?

[Captainant 27694]

Just now, DixonHur said:

But then they started setting up tents....that's just simply not allowed.

What do you do when a protest turns into an occupation?

That's not what happened on Wednesday. You are being a sockpuppet for hot wheels when you continue to insist what happened in NY and CA is what was happening in Texas. 

[Evil Bill Obrien 3286]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

We'll never know how close it might have gotten to Kent State 2, though.  What if the students had resisted?  What would DPS have done?

 

Maybe not the last one...but yeah very easily could have seen Gestapo Greg's Stormtroopers escalating to slinging lead had the students resisted or started fighting back...

[Dahobbs 17627]

8 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

So what should have happened?  

Should UT have let the protestors erect a tent city encampment for as long as they like?

I'm reading a lot of rage, but no alternate solutions.

One: there is no evidence they were creating a "tent city" or taking any actions that violated school policy

Two: and this is a big one, you don't seem to understand what freedom of speech means. Open areas on campus (e.g., the south lawn) are part of the public forum and available to the public for assembly by law. The government (i.e., the police and UT) does not get to prevent speech because they do not like the content. It does not get to restrict the freedom of assembly because it does not like the content of speech. UT isn't a private actor. These aren't private lands. The Constitution gives those students the right to assemble and speak there. The University destroyed those rights. Why you're ok hand waiving the violation of core civil rights is absolutely beyond me. 

Three: the University should have allowed them to gather and to speak. Only if the gathering starting getting threatening, violent, destructive, or overly disruptive of school (e.g., barring people from class), should the police have been called in. 

But sure, you just ignore core rights because you don't really care what the speakers have to say. 

[DixonHur 11345]

Just now, Captainant said:

That's not what happened on Wednesday. You are being a sockpuppet for hot wheels when you continue to insist what happened in NY and CA is what was happening in Texas. 

The video I posted is from Wednesday

[Dahobbs 17627]

2 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

The video I posted is from Wednesday

Where in that video does it show a tent city? Where in that video is there any violation except a violation of the first amendment? You are way out over your skiis here. 

Edited April 26 by Dahobbs

[bolverk 29701]

3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Here's the video I watched...seems like a non-event.

Make of it what you will.

That's AFTER the cops literally shoved the students off the grass.

I've seen zero footage showing students attempting to erect tents. They planned to hang out on the lawn and march later in the day over to the capitol building.

[DixonHur 11345]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Two: and this is a big one, you don't seem to understand what freedom of speech means

Ok, I can work with that.  Explain 1A in your opinion.  Because my understanding is that it's not absolute, and that creating a threatening environment is one of the areas not covered.  

Explain how advocating the destruction of Israel isn't creating a threatening environment?  Especially Jewish students?

[Dahobbs 17627]

9 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

I don't think they were, but if so, there are legal remedies for that.

 

That's because you are ignorant as to what those rights are. 

[DixonHur 11345]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

That's because you are ignorant as to what those rights are. 

Well, I opened the door for you to show me that error of my ways but so far crickets.

[Dahobbs 17627]

Just now, DixonHur said:

Ok, I can work with that.  Explain 1A in your opinion.  Because my understanding is that it's not absolute, and that creating a threatening environment is one of the areas not covered.  

Explain how advocating the destruction of Israel isn't creating a threatening environment?  Especially Jewish students?

First, how about you show any evidence where that happened AT UT? Protesting treatment of Palestinians is not the same thing as urging the destruction of Israel or threatening Jews. 

Second, the first amendment absolutely protects pretty terrible speech. 

[deft 6860]

Ok, I can work with that.  Explain 1A in your opinion.  Because my understanding is that it's not absolute, and that creating a threatening environment is one of the areas not covered.  
Explain how advocating the destruction of Israel isn't creating a threatening environment?  Especially Jewish students?

Was this happening inside these mythical tents that we can’t see?

[DixonHur 11345]

7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

That's AFTER the cops literally shoved the students off the grass.

I've seen zero footage showing students attempting to erect tents. They planned to hang out on the lawn and march later in the day over to the capitol building.

[Dahobbs 17627]

6 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Well, I opened the door for you to show me that error of my ways but so far crickets.

Wow. There was like 10 minutes between posts. Try not to double down on ignorance and being an ass when you clearly don't know what you're talking about about. 

Also, you just quoted my long post over viewing the law for you. Continue wallowing in ignorance and hate. Whatever. 

Edited April 26 by Dahobbs

[bolverk 29701]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

Thanks for posting. I hadn't seen that yet. Have you seen any of the footage in front of Gregory Gym where the cops start shoving students around?

[DixonHur 11345]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

First, how about you show any evidence where that happened AT UT? Protesting treatment of Palestinians is not the same thing as urging the destruction of Israel or threatening Jews. 

Second, the first amendment absolutely protects pretty terrible speech. 

So you think Jewish students feel safe on campus?  

Quote

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

Please point to the law the US Congress passed in this case?  This was a University making a decision based on its own guidelines.  If they want to sue, go right ahead.  I have a feeling the courts will be on my side in this one.

This is like the people who try to claim 1A rights at work.  

[Nivek 16949]

3 hours ago, Frank Drebin said:

You are a willfully blind dishonest piece of shit.  I am done engaging with you.  To my blocked list you go.

Until your next Username?

4 hours ago, 'stache said:

Oh hey, you found one, congrats! Extrapolation is clearly evident. 

"LibrulS WaNT tO exTErmINaTe ThE jEws"

Is this going to be the updated version of the left-wing extremist violence thread we were all promised but all they could come up with was a few spray painted cars in Sacramento in 1998?

[DixonHur 11345]

6 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Thanks for posting. I hadn't seen that yet. Have you seen any of the footage in front of Gregory Gym where the cops start shoving students around?

Nope.  Again.  I started by saying it was an overreaction by the cops, but I also think this is an overreaction by the posters on this board.

Comparing it to fascism isn't helpful.

In general, I think we've become a nation of pussies on both the right and left and it's infuriating to me.  Everything is either black or white....and I still live in a gray world.

Edited April 27 by DixonHur

[JBJ 3664]

nvm.  Thread is off the rails right now.

Edited April 27 by JBJ
just keep pressing submit and it will work

[bolverk 29701]

20 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Ok, I can work with that.  Explain 1A in your opinion.  Because my understanding is that it's not absolute, and that creating a threatening environment is one of the areas not covered.  

Explain how advocating the destruction of Israel isn't creating a threatening environment?  Especially Jewish students?

 

There were plenty of Jewish students watching the protest. Go to this post and see for yourself. They were not being threatened.

 

[bolverk 29701]

6 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Nope.  Again.  I started by saying it was an overreaction by the cops, but I also think this is an overreaction by the posters on this board.

Comparing it to fascism isn't helpful.

In general, I think we've become a nation of pussies on both the right and left and it's infuriating to me.  Everything is either black or white....and I still live in a gray world.

Several posts with timestamps on this page.

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/883-israel/page/138/

 

[Dahobbs 17627]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

So you think Jewish students feel safe on campus?  

Please point to the law the US Congress passed in this case?  This was a University making a decision based on its own guidelines.  If they want to sue, go right ahead.  I have a feeling the courts will be on my side in this one.

This is like the people who try to claim 1A rights at work.  

Sigh... You don't understand the law or your rights at all. 

1) the University is a government institution. For purposes of the First Amendment it is the government. And yes, the first amendment has been incorporated and applied to the states via the 14th amendment. And the Texas Constitution has its own analogous provision. 

2) the first amendment protections extend beyond mere passage of laws and apply to actions by government agencies and entities. 

Rather than write out a full primer, I direct you here which covers the topic indepth and provides numerous case citations: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorship

Quote

 

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791.

One of the ten amendments of the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment gives everyone residing in the United States the right to hear all sides of every issue and to make their own judgments about those issues without government interference or limitations. The First Amendment allows individuals to speak, publish, read and view what they wish, worship (or not worship) as they wish, associate with whomever they choose, and gather together to ask the government to make changes in the law or to correct the wrongs in society.

The right to speak and the right to publish under the First Amendment has been interpreted widely to protect individuals and society from government attempts to suppress ideas and information, and to forbid government censorship of books, magazines, and newspapers as well as art, film, music and materials on the internet. The Supreme Court and other courts have held conclusively that there is a First Amendment right to receive information as a corollary to the right to speak. Justice William Brennan elaborated on this point in 1965:

“The protection of the Bill of Rights goes beyond the specific guarantees to protect from Congressional abridgment those equally fundamental personal rights necessary to make the express guarantees fully meaningful.I think the right to receive publications is such a fundamental right.The dissemination of ideas can accomplish nothing if otherwise willing addressees are not free to receive and consider them. It would be a barren marketplace of ideas that had only sellers and no buyers.” Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301 (1965).

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the right to receive information is a fundamental right protected under the U.S. Constitution when it considered whether a local school board violated the Constitution by removing books from a school library. In that decision, the Supreme Court held that “the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient’s meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom.” Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982)

Public schools and public libraries, as public institutions, have been the setting for legal battles about student access to books, the removal or retention of “offensive” material, regulation of patron behavior, and limitations on public access to the internet. Restrictions and censorship of materials in public institutions are most commonly prompted by public complaints about those materials and implemented by government officials mindful of the importance some of their constituents may place on religious values, moral sensibilities, and the desire to protect children from materials they deem to be offensive or inappropriate. Directly or indirectly, ordinary individuals are the driving force behind the challenges to the freedom to access information and ideas in the library.

The First Amendment prevents public institutions from compromising individuals' First Amendment freedoms by establishing a framework that defines critical rights and responsibilities regarding free expression and the freedom of belief. The First Amendment protects the right to exercise those freedoms, and it advocates respect for the right of others to do the same. Rather than engaging in censorship and repression to advance one's values and beliefs, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis counsels persons living in the United States to resolve their differences in values and belief by resort to "more speech, not enforced silence." 

By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech and intellectual freedom also applies to state and local governments. Government agencies and government officials are forbidden from regulating or restricting speech or other expression based on its content or viewpoint. Criticism of the government, political dissatisfaction, and advocacy of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy are nearly always protected by the First Amendment. Only that expression that is shown to belong to a few narrow categories of speech is not protected by the First Amendment. The categories of unprotected speech include obscenity, child pornography, defamatory speech, false advertising, true threats, and fighting words. Deciding what is and is not protected speech is reserved to courts of law.

The First Amendment only prevents government restrictions on speech. It does not prevent restrictions on speech imposed by private individuals or businesses. Facebook and other social media can regulate or restrict speech hosted on their platforms because they are private entities. 

 

 

[DixonHur 11345]

3 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

There were plenty of Jewish students watching the protest. Go to this post and see for yourself. They were not being threatened.

 

There are also plenty interviews online with Jewish students who say they are living in fear.

Look at what's happening in NYC.  Jews students have basically gone into hiding.

[Dahobbs 17627]

Just now, DixonHur said:

There are also plenty interviews online with Jewish students who say they are living in fear.

Look at what's happening in NYC.  Jews students have basically gone into hiding.

That has nothing to do with UT. You can't restrict speech because someone somewhere else did something. That isn't how the law works. Seriously, you need to take some time and actually study this topic. Read the primer I posted. Go read some stuff from the ACLU. You're really out of your depth here. You need to learn before you run in defiantly with hot takes. 

[DixonHur 11345]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Sigh... You don't understand the law or your rights at all. 

1) the University is a government institution. For purposes of the First Amendment it is the government. And yes, the first amendment has been incorporated and applied to the states via the 14th amendment. And the Texas Constitution has its own analogous provision. 

2) the first amendment protections extend beyond mere passage of laws and apply to actions by government agencies and entities. 

Rather than write out a full primer, I direct you here which covers the topic indepth and provides numerous case citations: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorship

 

I know as much about law as you do fascism.  

But, and I feel like a broken record, it they think their rights were violation they should file suit.  I think they'll lose, but they can try.

[DixonHur 11345]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

That has nothing to do with UT. You can't restrict speech because someone somewhere else did something. That isn't how the law works. Seriously, you need to take some time and actually study this topic. Read the primer I posted. Go read some stuff from the ACLU. You're really out of your depth here. You need to learn before you run in defiantly with hot takes. 

Hey pot, have you learned what fascism is yet?

[bolverk 29701]

5 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

There are also plenty interviews online with Jewish students who say they are living in fear.

Look at what's happening in NYC.  Jews students have basically gone into hiding.

You do realize the only violence related to the war that has occurred in the vicinity of UT was a Palestinian student being stabbed a couple of months ago, right?

[Dahobbs 17627]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

Hey pot, have you learned what fascism is yet?

Why are you being an ass? I haven't even used the term fascism in this thread. If you want to learn about the law, I'm happy to explain things to you. But right now it seems like you're just here to troll. 

[deft 6860]

The stormtroopers are the ones who shouldn’t feel safe on campuses. Look at these pro Israel thugs getting physical.