UT Pro-Palestine Protest Thread

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1,549]

33 minutes ago, CoTex said:

If the game is "one tribe overpowering the other," isn't that what we have now?  Seems like the tribe with the Blue Star on their flag is beating the ever-loving shit out of the other tribe.  Those Blue Star guys seem to be winning by a lot.  Right?

 

 

 

 

 

yes, of course (to your delight).  Still, it's not antisemitic to criticize Israel , or even the desire to destroy Israel.  To the main point -- hating Jews has got ZERO to do with the protests. 

we have all heard "anti-Zionism is not antisemitism". Many Jewish intellectuals also believe this.  

the argument is about hating Jews and being hateful of Israel is automatically antisemitic. It's zero, nor was that ever the cause of the several wars. It's Israeli propaganda, works well, against the backdrop of western Judeo-Christian culture + hatred of Arabs / Muslims. 

a lot of being pro-Israel is because on the other side is the hated Arabs / Muslims (muzzies!).  One can easily turn the argument around and say it's all about hating Arabs.  Does American culture have a fondness for Muslims? Will Israel be happy to exploit this fondness? 

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1,549]

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

There has never been a more confusing foreign relations issue for me in my lifetime.  I have many Jewish friends, and many Muslim friends.  I just don't engage in the homeland discussions.  I can't see any clear solution.  Many devout Jews will claim complete ownership of that region dating back to Abraham, but that doesn't pass the sniff test, because there have always been a lot more people of other religions & ethnicities there.

I do know this:  I wish they'd stop shooting each other.  What a shitshow.

most Israeli Jews are not devout , never has been that way.  It's not about religion but ethnicity.

[jimmyjazz 45,538]

4 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

most Israeli Jews are not devout , 

I didn't claim otherwise.

[Frank Drebin 5,611]

2 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

most Israeli Jews are not devout , never has been that way.  It's not about religion but ethnicity.

That is changing rapidly.  The religious Israeli jews have a lot more kids than the secular Israeli jews.  

[texasdago 7,552]

6 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

most Israeli Jews are not devout , never has been that way.  It's not about religion but ethnicity.

So you're saying a Jewish person from Ethiopia and a Jewish person from Hungary are the... *checks notes* same ethnicity or race?

Edited May 2 by texasdago

[Mikey4 2,476]

42 minutes ago, Blotto said:

And Netanyahu himself has ruled out a two-state solution clearly stating that Israel aims for full control of "all territory west of Jordan" and his directives have already resulted in 40K Palestinian deaths. Its two sides of the same stupid fucking sky daddy coin. You may find chanting "from the river to the sea" a horrific offense, and many others feel the same way about slaughtering Palestinians and subjecting the rest to a horrific standard of living.

So lets not clutch pearls over a pithy chant while pretending  Netanyahu doesn't plan on subjugating Palestinians (he has stated exactly that) or that he hasn't taken a pretty big lead in the genocide category as well. Its a shitshow over there and I expect that to continue as long as the hardliners on both sides call the shots. Jailing protestors in the US for expressing support for the Palestinian cause is just politically motivated horseshit. 

 

I was responding to the contention that protesting against Israel is not necessarily anti-semitism. Perhaps not every protester is an anti-semite -- hell, some don't even know what they're protesting -- but it's damn hard to draw a line between wanting to annihilate Israel and wanting to subjugate or annihilate the 7 million Jews who live there.

To your point -- Israel was fine with the 67 borders and Palestinian self-governance until attacked. Israel was fine with Palestinian control of Gaza until attacked. Israel has repeatedly offered a two-state solution only to be rebuffed every single time, including by bloody intifada. Don't act like mainstream Israelis are set on annihilation of Palestinians. They want to be left alone.

Edited May 2 by Mikey4

[Frank Drebin 5,611]

8 minutes ago, Mikey4 said:

I was responding to the contention that protesting against Israel is not necessarily anti-semitism. Perhaps not every protester is an anti-semite -- hell, some don't even know what they're protesting -- but it's damn hard to draw a line between wanting to annihilate Israel and wanting to subjugate or annihilate the 7 million Jews who live there.

To your point -- Israel was fine with the 67 borders and Palestinian self-governance until attacked. Israel was fine with Palestinian control of Gaza until attacked. Israel has repeatedly offered a two-state solution only to be rebuffed every single time, including by bloody intifada. Don't act like mainstream Israelis are set on annihilation of Palestinians. They want to be left alone.

As proven by the peace they have made with Jordan, Egypt, etc.

They would prefer to be left alone on their little tiny slice of land in the middle of the very large caliphate.

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1,549]

12 minutes ago, texasdago said:

So you're saying a Jewish person from Ethiopia and a Jewish person from Hungary are the... *checks notes* same ethnicity or race?

i would counter with the question -- if a Jew from Hungary declares himself an atheist, is he still a Jew? Is he then exactly the same as a Hungarian Christian who also declares himself an atheist? 

So what makes someone a Jew? 

Edited May 2 by Make em eat Taco Bell

[CoTex 1,160]

5 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

yes, of course (to your delight).  Still, it's not antisemitic to criticize Israel , or even the desire to destroy Israel.  To the main point -- hating Jews has got ZERO to do with the protests. 

we have all heard "anti-Zionism is not antisemitism". Many Jewish intellectuals also believe this.  

the argument is about hating Jews and being hateful of Israel is automatically antisemitic. It's zero, nor was that ever the cause of the several wars. It's Israeli propaganda, works well, against the backdrop of western Judeo-Christian culture + hatred of Arabs / Muslims. 

a lot of being pro-Israel is because on the other side is the hated Arabs / Muslims (muzzies!).  One can easily turn the argument around and say it's all about hating Arabs.  Does American culture have a fondness for Muslims? Will Israel be happy to exploit this fondness? 

What the hell is wrong with you? 

 

[texasdago 7,552]

10 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

i would counter with the question -- if a Jew from Hungary declares himself an atheist, is he still a Jew? Is he then exactly the same as a Hungarian Christian who also declares himself an atheist? 

So what makes someone a Jew? 

There are plenty of Christians who are non-practicing Christians who are Christian by profession or by association without being Christian in practice.  

If you claim Jewish is an ethnicity or a race, was Sammy Davis Jr. Jewish?  Is Ivanka Trump Jewish?  Lumping Jewish people into one race did not go well last time.

Edited May 2 by texasdago

[YGIFS 19,449]

While they are many subgroups of Jews, ethnically, religiously, and nationality-wise (I am an outlier myself, Sephardic Jew descended from Iberia after the Moorish expulsion).  What most people think of when they think of a Jew (both ethnically and religiously) are Ashkenazi Jews who are spread out across many countries.  But it's hard to count their numbers or singularize their commonalities, because apparently somebody awhile back killed almost all of them.  

[CoTex 1,160]

10 minutes ago, texasdago said:

There are plenty of Christians who are non-practicing Christians who are Christian by profession or by association without being Christian in practice.  

If you claim Jewish is an ethnicity or a race, was Sammy Davis Jr. Jewish?  Is Ivanka Trump Jewish?  Lumping Jewish people into one race did not go well last time.

When you figure it out let us all know.  

And carry this wisdom with you as your guide:

"the Jews are the enemy but they are not the enemy simply because they are Jews.  Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not murdered due to Asian hatred. There is no antisemitism in this entire conflict, never has been never will be." 

Make em eat Taco Bell.

 

[F250 28,674]

34 minutes ago, texasdago said:

So you're saying a Jewish person from Ethiopia and a Jewish person from Hungary are the... *checks notes* same ethnicity or race?

Yes. If a Dominican Afro-Latino and Mexican Asian-Latino can be part of the same ethnic group why couldn't Ethiopian and Hungarian Jews be part of the same ethnic group?

[jimmyjazz 45,538]

Well, it's not a REQUIREMENT that they're part of the same ethnic group.  People can convert to Judaism and thus be "Jewish", regardless of race or ethnicity.

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1,549]

28 minutes ago, texasdago said:

There are plenty of Christians who are non-practicing Christians who are Christian by profession or by association without being Christian in practice.  

If you claim Jewish is an ethnicity or a race, was Sammy Davis Jr. Jewish?  Is Ivanka Trump Jewish?  Lumping Jewish people into one race did not go well last time.

Doesn't answer the question of what defines being a Jew (also silly obsession with the Holocaust)

[texasdago 7,552]

4 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

Doesn't answer the question of what defines being a Jew (also silly obsession with the Holocaust)

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1,549]

9 minutes ago, texasdago said:

the question was answered with no answer and then a diversion to something else (because you have no answer and never will).  Google is your friend, just copy and paste something. 

[texasdago 7,552]

12 minutes ago, texasdago said:

(also silly obsession with the Holocaust)

There.  I copied and pasted something.  

[wildcat09 29,213]

How much longer before TB is proposing a spectrum of skull measurements for determining Jewishness?

[jimmyjazz 45,538]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

How much longer before TB is proposing a spectrum of skull measurements for determining Jewishness?

I can't even figure out the exact perspective here.  "Troll" seems apropos.

[usmc0331horn 934]

1 hour ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

i would counter with the question -- if a Jew from Hungary declares himself an atheist, is he still a Jew? Is he then exactly the same as a Hungarian Christian who also declares himself an atheist? 

So what makes someone a Jew? 

Quoting Der Sturmer these days?

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1,549]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

How much longer before TB is proposing a spectrum of skull measurements for determining Jewishness?

you are Jewish, then tell us what defines a Jew.  It's important in defining the conflict because many believe it's about Judaism (religion) vs. Islam. 

[deft 6,791]

To Jew or not to Jew

[Smax 3,800]

8 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

How much longer before TB is proposing a spectrum of skull measurements for determining Jewishness?

yeah I think hes run his course

[texasdago 7,552]

Sorry it took me so long to figure it out, y'all...  

[Blotto 23,424]

1 hour ago, Mikey4 said:

I was responding to the contention that protesting against Israel is not necessarily anti-semitism. Perhaps not every protester is an anti-semite -- hell, some don't even know what they're protesting -- but it's damn hard to draw a line between wanting to annihilate Israel and wanting to subjugate or annihilate the 7 million Jews who live there.

To your point -- Isreal was fine with the 67 borders and Palestinian self-governance until attacked. Israel was fine with Palestinian control of Gaza until attacked. Isreal has repeatedly offered a two-state solution only to be rebuffed every single time, including by bloody intifada. Don't act like mainstream Israelis are set on annihilation of Palestinians. They want to be left alone.

I'll gladly concede that a non-trivial number of the protestors don't have an informed viewpoint on why they are protesting and are simply protesting to protest. That's been the case on the west mall and other college campuses for decades. Young people are always pissed off at the government for a variety of reasons, so when given a chance to protest the government, they will jump right in. Hell, some of them are probably protesting for no other reason than a hot chick they know said she was going to protest. 

But I would also argue that claiming the majority of these protestors  are antisemitic is fucking laughable. There's one side currently subjugating/annihilating the other right now, and it ain't those poor folks in Gaza. That's what people are protesting. They weren't all out there last June. And while there are almost certainly  some antisemites in the  group, simply protesting Israel's annihilation of Gaza is by no means antisemitic. That's bullshit. You may agree or disagree with Israel's tactics, but you should be free to voice those beliefs without threat of arrest. I get very uncomfortable when the government starts defining what you can and cannot criticize. You should be free to criticize Israel or free to criticize the Palestinians/Hamas. 

I had a reply to your second paragraph (why start at 1967 rather than 1948, etc...), but deleted it as there are threads on this board for discussing the greater Israeli/Palestinian conflict and this thread already suffers from some unfortunate hijacks rather than the protests at UT (see the recent effort at Jewish Taxonomy). I'll just say, I fully expect that region to be a fucking shitshow long after I'm gone from this world. And hopefully students will be free to voice their opinions on the matter without the blessing of whomever happens to be sitting in the governors mansion. 

Edited May 2 by Blotto

[Samson's Wig 3,175]

How have I never come across this jackass before? Does he typically only slither around in the lounge, smelling his own taco-scented farts?   I can understand college kids being drawn into this level of overweening-weisenheimer thinking without the subsequent cognitive dissonance, but it's inexplicable in an adult with a fully developed brain.  Maybe I've made the wrong assumption, and he's posting from a college campus, but it's more likely from his mom's basement or a nap pod at Google headquarters.  I don't think I've ever put someone on ignore before, but he wins the prize.  Based on this thread alone, he's either a propagandist in need of further training or a moron, so:

[The Royal We 3,065]

<Hover over the M annnnnd, Ignore>

ahhhh, much better.

[Welshy 907]

43 minutes ago, Samson&#x27;s Wig said:

How have I never come across this jackass before? Does he typically only slither around in the lounge, smelling his own taco-scented farts?   I can understand college kids being drawn into this level of overweening-weisenheimer thinking without the subsequent cognitive dissonance, but it's inexplicable in an adult with a fully developed brain.  Maybe I've made the wrong assumption, and he's posting from a college campus, but it's more likely from his mom's basement or a nap pod at Google headquarters.  I don't think I've ever put someone on ignore before, but he wins the prize.  Based on this thread alone, he's either a propagandist in need of further training or a moron, so:

weisenheimer?!?!?!     Woah Nelly!

[BurntEyes 5,816]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

How much longer before TB is proposing a spectrum of skull measurements for determining Jewishness?

I'm sure he has a final solution to the Jewish problem.

[CoTex 1,160]

1 hour ago, Blotto said:

But I would also argue that claiming the majority of these protestors  are antisemitic is fucking laughable. There's one side currently subjugating/annihilating the other right now, and it ain't those poor folks in Gaza. That's what people are protesting.

Ok, I'll bite.

If there was a pro-nazi protest at UT, and I went and joined the protest and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Putin rally at UT, and I went and joined the rally and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Kim Jong Il march at UT, and I went and marched and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what you you call me?
 

I'm guessing I wouldn't survive that stretch without being almost uniformly labeled a nazi, fascist, communist, geoncidist, war criminal, and probably some other shit.  Rightfully so.  You march with the nazis, I'm calling you a nazi.

So, if you go and protest and what not and you're protesting for a group of people that voted for leaders that say things like "Israel has no right to exist," (and I don't have a citation but it's out there), I think it's fair to say you're "anti-those people."  If you don't want to call it "antisemitic," then why don't you try on "anti-jewish" or "anti-Israeli." 

From where I'm sitting in Texas, there's not much difference.  You want the people that won the war and got the land to give back the land and go the fuck away, or die, and you'll protest and maybe more to accomplish the goal.

[BurntEyes 5,816]

15 minutes ago, CoTex said:

Ok, I'll bite.

If there was a pro-nazi protest at UT, and I went and joined the protest and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Putin rally at UT, and I went and joined the rally and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Kim Jong Il march at UT, and I went and marched and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what you you call me?
 

I'm guessing I wouldn't survive that stretch without being almost uniformly labeled a nazi, fascist, communist, geoncidist, war criminal, and probably some other shit.  Rightfully so.  You march with the nazis, I'm calling you a nazi.

So, if you go and protest and what not and you're protesting for a group of people that voted for leaders that say things like "Israel has no right to exist," (and I don't have a citation but it's out there), I think it's fair to say you're "anti-those people."  If you don't want to call it "antisemitic," then why don't you try on "anti-jewish" or "anti-Israeli." 

From where I'm sitting in Texas, there's not much difference.  You want the people that won the war and got the land to give back the land and go the fuck away, or die, and you'll protest and maybe more to accomplish the goal.

I see this a bit differently and will provide an example of how I view these protests which I think is more accurate.

Let's say there is a 2nd amendment protest scheduled. I support the 2nd amendment. I want to go to this rally. The point of the rally is to specifically voice discontent with State policy regarding an upcoming bill before the state. 

First, I learn they are holding the rally on a campus. (I would ask the founders why it's not at the capital). Next I find out a lot of students are planning on joining. (This would seem odd to me as 2nd amendment rights don't tend to be popular among college students, so I'd ask why)

Then I find out these students are primarily fraternity folks. Hmmm.. well...

As the protest starts the plan changes from a protest to deciding to take over a building on campus.

Beyond that, the "college students from fraternities joining" are Proud Boy folks.

If I elected to STILL attend said rally (which I absolutely wouldn't and would actually be against, for the record) I could, hypothetically argue I'm not a racist, and I'm just here because I support the 2nd amendment. However, my attendance is likely going to get me labeled a racist, criminal and idiot. 

Rightfully so, even though I don't specifically support those, I'm showing up and being a part of a rally that commits criminal acts and DOES support them. 

Granted, I could argue the rally got co-opted, but if I knew before or saw during any of these developments, then the resulting issues regarding my reputation are entirely on me and fully deserved.

Oh, and nobody even knows or is aware of the bill that I was against to start with regarding the 2nd amendment. Nobody is even talking about it. They are talking about the Proud Boys and their criminal activities, with which I'm now associated.

That's on me.

[F250 28,674]

1 hour ago, CoTex said:

Ok, I'll bite.

If there was a pro-nazi protest at UT, and I went and joined the protest and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Putin rally at UT, and I went and joined the rally and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Kim Jong Il march at UT, and I went and marched and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what you you call me?
 

I'm guessing I wouldn't survive that stretch without being almost uniformly labeled a nazi, fascist, communist, geoncidist, war criminal, and probably some other shit.  Rightfully so.  You march with the nazis, I'm calling you a nazi.

So, if you go and protest and what not and you're protesting for a group of people that voted for leaders that say things like "Israel has no right to exist," (and I don't have a citation but it's out there), I think it's fair to say you're "anti-those people."  If you don't want to call it "antisemitic," then why don't you try on "anti-jewish" or "anti-Israeli." 

From where I'm sitting in Texas, there's not much difference.  You want the people that won the war and got the land to give back the land and go the fuck away, or die, and you'll protest and maybe more to accomplish the goal.

This is reminiscent of the Anti-Apartheid Movement that was considered pro-communist and pro-terrorist when really it was a struggle for basic human rights by an oppressed people.

Shit, even now after the fall of apartheid people still claim that the whites in South Africa will be eliminated.

[CoTex 1,160]

33 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I see this a bit differently and will provide an example of how I view these protests which I think is more accurate.

Let's say there is a 2nd amendment protest scheduled. I support the 2nd amendment. I want to go to this rally. The point of the rally is to specifically voice discontent with State policy regarding an upcoming bill before the state. 

First, I learn they are holding the rally on a campus. (I would ask the founders why it's not at the capital). Next I find out a lot of students are planning on joining. (This would seem odd to me as 2nd amendment rights don't tend to be popular among college students, so I'd ask why)

Then I find out these students are primarily fraternity folks. Hmmm.. well...

As the protest starts the plan changes from a protest to deciding to take over a building on campus.

Beyond that, the "college students from fraternities joining" are Proud Boy folks.

If I elected to STILL attend said rally (which I absolutely wouldn't and would actually be against, for the record) I could, hypothetically argue I'm not a racist, and I'm just here because I support the 2nd amendment. However, my attendance is likely going to get me labeled a racist, criminal and idiot. 

Rightfully so, even though I don't specifically support those, I'm showing up and being a part of a rally that commits criminal acts and DOES support them. 

Granted, I could argue the rally got co-opted, but if I knew before or saw during any of these developments, then the resulting issues regarding my reputation are entirely on me and fully deserved.

Oh, and nobody even knows or is aware of the bill that I was against to start with regarding the 2nd amendment. Nobody is even talking about it. They are talking about the Proud Boys and their criminal activities, with which I'm now associated.

That's on me.

I guess my takeaway is that, if you get in the crowd, you likely own whatever destination that crowd reaches, even if you didn't intend it.

Here's where I think we're headed, we've been here before.

Saturday night, we all go out to take one side or the other and

or

They bleeped out his words but I'm pretty sure Foster in Austin said something to the effect of "the people that actually hate us are too big of pussies to do anything about it [me carrying an AK down Congress avenue]."  I guess he was wrong.

Rittenhouse both sides had guns.

Foster both sides had guns.

[Dbeasy 14,961]

From UT

What rules did protesters break? Here's what UT Austin had to say

UT officials said more than 10 "known violations of Institutional Rules" were committed by protesters.

AUSTIN, Texas — More than 130 arrests were made during multiple pro-Palestine protests at the University of Texas at Austin in recent weeks.

More than half of those arrested now face charges ranging from criminal trespassing, to obstructing a highway or passageway, to interfering with public duties.

Some Austin city leaders say the arrests are overwhelming Travis County's legal system, leading others to wonder what rules were broken by protesters at UT.

According to the university, 11 "known violations of Institutional Rules" were committed during the April 24 and April 29 protests:

• Erecting tents
• Attempting to establish an encampment
• Unauthorized use of amplified sound
• Unauthorized use of tables on the South Lawn
• Demonstrating in unauthorized locations/non-common areas
• Use of face coverings to conceal identity
• Failure to identify
• Failure to comply with directives related to the above
• Shoving staff
• Items brought to use as weapons (guns, shields, objects intended for throwing)
• Failure to follow city, state, and federal laws (criminal trespass, disorderly conduct, assault on public servant)

UT officials said the last two items were just examples and not comprehensive. They also said guns found at the protest were open carry and visible, even though the university would not share any photos of them.

 

What is UT's campus carry rule?

 

In 2015, Senate Bill 11 allowed those licensed to carry to bring a concealed handgun onto university campuses. It also gave public universities discretion to regulate campus carry.

Those with a license to carry are eligible to carry a concealed handgun on campus if they're 21 or older. They must also clear eligibility requirements like a criminal background, mental health history and substance abuse issues.

Concealed carry is "generally" allowed in outdoor areas as well as buildings and spaces accessible to the public. However, "a license holder may not carry a partially or wholly visible handgun on campus premises or on any university driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

Read more about the pro-Palestine protests at UT Austin:

[Sawbonz 27,392]

2 hours ago, CoTex said:

Ok, I'll bite.

If there was a pro-nazi protest at UT, and I went and joined the protest and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Putin rally at UT, and I went and joined the rally and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Kim Jong Il march at UT, and I went and marched and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what you you call me?
 

I'm guessing I wouldn't survive that stretch without being almost uniformly labeled a nazi, fascist, communist, geoncidist, war criminal, and probably some other shit.  Rightfully so.  You march with the nazis, I'm calling you a nazi.

So, if you go and protest and what not and you're protesting for a group of people that voted for leaders that say things like "Israel has no right to exist," (and I don't have a citation but it's out there), I think it's fair to say you're "anti-those people."  If you don't want to call it "antisemitic," then why don't you try on "anti-jewish" or "anti-Israeli." 

From where I'm sitting in Texas, there's not much difference.  You want the people that won the war and got the land to give back the land and go the fuck away, or die, and you'll protest and maybe more to accomplish the goal.

There is a huge difference. Some among the protestors are undoubtedly pro Hamas but it’s not a pro Hamas rally. You are making a false equivalence fallacy. Look at what the Israeli settlers have been doing and where they are expanding. Palestinians have legitimate claims. Now add in the crimes against humanity that the IDF is committing, and under whose umbrella they are committing them. Being against that is in no way anti semitic 

[Blotto 23,424]

18 minutes ago, CoTex said:

Ok, I'll bite.

If there was a pro-nazi protest at UT, and I went and joined the protest and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Putin rally at UT, and I went and joined the rally and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what would you call me?

and then

If there was a pro-Kim Jong Il march at UT, and I went and marched and screamed and waived flags and fucked with people, what you you call me?
 

I'm guessing I wouldn't survive that stretch without being almost uniformly labeled a nazi, fascist, communist, geoncidist, war criminal, and probably some other shit.  Rightfully so.  You march with the nazis, I'm calling you a nazi.

So, if you go and protest and what not and you're protesting for a group of people that voted for leaders that say things like "Israel has no right to exist," (and I don't have a citation but it's out there), I think it's fair to say you're "anti-those people."  If you don't want to call it "antisemitic," then why don't you try on "anti-jewish" or "anti-Israeli." 

From where I'm sitting in Texas, there's not much difference.  You want the people that won the war and got the land to give back the land and go the fuck away, or die, and you'll protest and maybe more to accomplish the goal.

I actually don't have an objection to protestors being labeled as "anti-Israeli" as  long as its understood the objection is to the actions of the Israeli government.  The notion that the Israeli government can never be criticized for their behavior is as absurd as the notion that a US president can never be charged with a crime, regardless of his actions in office. All countries are capable of poor policy decisions. 9/11 was a horrific episode. Invading Iraq as a response was equally horrific. And yet those who criticized our decision to invade Iraq were often labeled as anti-american at the time. That was a bullshit argument as well. 

One additional comment is that I did not attend the protests on campus first hand. My exposure was limited to what I watched online, and what I heard was calls for and end to Israeli aggression in Gaza, calls for an end to US assistance in that aggression, as well as calls for a free Palestine. Those are not antisemitic positions in my mind. If everyone was screaming death to Jews, I missed it.  If its not pissing down rain  on Sunday I may ride down to observe the shitshow, and see if the rhetoric is significantly different than what I have understood  it to be to this point. 

[bolverk 29,394]

I

1 minute ago, Blotto said:

I actually don't have an objection to protestors being labeled as "anti-Israeli" as  long as its understood the objection is to the actions of the Israeli government.  The notion that the Israeli government can never be criticized for their behavior is as absurd as the notion that a US president can never be charged with a crime, regardless of his actions in office. All countries are capable of poor policy decisions. 9/11 was a horrific episode. Invading Iraq as a response was equally horrific. And yet those who criticized our decision to invade Iraq were often labeled as anti-american at the time. That was a bullshit argument as well. 

One additional comment is that I did not attend the protests on campus first hand. My exposure was limited to what I watched online, and what I heard was calls for and end to Israeli aggression in Gaza, calls for an end to US assistance in that aggression, as well as calls for a free Palestine. Those are not antisemitic positions in my mind. If everyone was screaming death to Jews, I missed it.  If its not pissing down rain  on Sunday I may ride down to observe the shitshow, and see if the rhetoric is significantly different than what I have understood  it to be to this point. 

Same. I watched 3-4 hours of the protest and never heard the "river to the sea" chant coming from protesters at UT-Austin. Elsewhere? Yes, including UT-Dallas yesterday.

One absurdity in all this, though, is that the current Israeli government absolutely does NOT recognize the right of Palestine to exist. In fact, the Israeli government is actively expanding settlements on Palestinian land and just annexed more of the West Bank, like, last fucking month. 

Consider Bezalel Smotrich, who is currently the Minister of Defense and of Finance for Israel:

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-12/ty-article/.premium/the-plan-to-subjugate-the-palestinians-goes-ahead/0000018e-32ae-d606-a5ff-7fbf31c80000

https://archive.is/Snrvf

Quote

 

Seven years ago, in the spring of 2017, Smotrich – then still a lawmaker in the Habayit Hayehudi party – presented in closed religious Zionist circles his plan for one state from the sea to the river, for one people. The Jewish people. There were those who concluded that the mass killing of Palestinian children and women was included in his third option: all-out war on Palestinians who refuse to emigrate or to remain and accept the non-realization of their national rights in this country.

In a response to critics of his plan in Haaretz, he refuted entirely the extreme interpretation given to his words, and presumably to the fact that he relied on letters sent by Joshua bin Nun, according to a midrash, to the inhabitants of the land he was about to conquer, according to the Bible ("Haaretz, I didn't call for the wholesale killing of all Palestinians," June 4, 2017).

Already in a candid interview he gave to Ravit Hecht over seven years ago (Haaretz, December 3, 2016), Smotrich mentioned Joshua and his letters. "[W]e are deciding the conflict: I am destroying their hopes of establishing a state," he told Hecht, and when she asked "how," he replied: "When Joshua entered the land, he sent three letters to its inhabitants: Those who want to accept [our rule] will accept; those who want to leave, will leave; those who want to fight, will fight. ... Those who want to leave, and there will be those who leave, I will help them. When they have no hope and no outlook, they will leave, just as they left in 1948."

It is no coincidence that from the beginning of the war, Smotrich has been among the cabinet members and politicians who has pointed enthusiastically at the "humane" solution for noncombatants in Gaza: voluntary population transfer. The airstrikes help. Indeed, every day even the greatest patriots in Gaza leave the territory, fleeing from the horrors of destruction and death, if they have the money or the right connections.

Then, back in 2016, Smotrich told Hecht: "Those who do not go will either accept the rule of the Jewish state, in which case they can remain, and as for those who do not, we will fight them and defeat them." At the time, the young Knesset member focused on the West Bank, and presented its annexation and the expansion of the settlement enterprise and rise in the number of settlers as the main weapon in the subjugation process. Today, defeat and subjugation are the name of the game in all of the regions.

 

Why isn't that shit ever fucking acknowledged? 

[DixonHur 11,154]

6 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I just don't engage in the homeland discussions

That's smart, because there is only one "homeland"...Africa...and it's all of ours.

All the rest are just bullshit made up borders...most of which were created within the last 500 years.

[BurntEyes 5,816]

50 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

There is a huge difference. Some among the protestors are undoubtedly pro Hamas but it’s not a pro Hamas rally. You are making a false equivalence fallacy. Look at what the Israeli settlers have been doing and where they are expanding. Palestinians have legitimate claims. Now add in the crimes against humanity that the IDF is committing, and under whose umbrella they are committing them. Being against that is in no way anti semitic 

Would you remain of the same mindset if rather than pro-Hamas it was Proud Boys joining? Are you willing to acknowledge that illegal activities are occurring above and beyond the protests?

Do you condone the illegal activities?

Do you acknowledge that pro-Hamas is antisemitic?

Are you aware of any efforts by the Pro-Palestine activists to remove or distance themselves from the pro-hamas attendees?

Do you acknowledge that the point of these activities both criminal and otherwise undermine the entire point and actually take attention away from the issue they and others wish to address?

Edited May 2 by BurntEyes

[chainsaw 9,836]

You really think UT officials would do that? Just go on the media and tell lies?
 

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/02/ut-austin-protest-arrests-guns-assault-allegations/

 

Quote

UT-Austin says protesters carried guns and assaulted people. Prosecutors haven't seen proof.

The Travis County attorney hasn’t “seen a single weapons charge or an assault charge” despite school officials’ insinuations of planned violence.

BY ANDREW WEBER, KUT NEWS
MAY 2, 2024
1 HOUR AGO

Despite University of Texas at Austin officials’ claims about weapons and assaults at the recent campus protests, Travis County Attorney Delia Garza says her office hasn't seen a single charge.

UT-Austin said Tuesday night that pro-Palestinian groups with ties to "escalating protests" across the country brought weapons and assaulted people during the rallies.

On Wednesday, Garza told KUT the university's statement — and its insistence that demonstrators had "guns, buckets of large rocks, bricks, steel-enforced wood planks, mallets and chains" — was "interesting."

“It’s concerning … we work in the world of evidence and facts, and we have not seen a single weapons charge or an assault charge," she said.

Garza, whose office prosecutes misdemeanors, said she has called on UT Austin to reexamine its policy of arresting protesters for criminal trespassing, a misdemeanor similar to loitering — because it is currently "unsustainable." The protests have led to nearly 140 arrests for misdemeanors.

People are legally allowed to carry a weapon on the UT-Austin campus. However, if they're committing a crime, like criminal trespassing, they could be arrested for unlawful carrying of a weapon, a misdemeanor.

Garza said after reading UT-Austin's statement Tuesday, she expected to see some of that reflected in arrest affidavits from the University of Texas Police Department, the arresting agency. She didn't.

"I don't know why they are saying that," she said.

Garza, whose office prosecutes misdemeanors, said she has called on UT Austin to reexamine its policy of arresting protesters for criminal trespassing, a misdemeanor similar to loitering — because it is currently "unsustainable." The protests have led to nearly 140 arrests for misdemeanors.

People are legally allowed to carry a weapon on the UT-Austin campus. However, if they're committing a crime, like criminal trespassing, they could be arrested for unlawful carrying of a weapon, a misdemeanor.

Garza said after reading UT-Austin's statement Tuesday, she expected to see some of that reflected in arrest affidavits from the University of Texas Police Department, the arresting agency. She didn't.

"I don't know why they are saying that," she said.

Garza said, on average, her office handles around 85 misdemeanors a day. While she respects the university's right to keep campus safe, she said, the caseload is straining her staff.

“There’s just a lot that goes into processing every single one of those cases and rightfully so — there needs to be a good, strict process when you’re taking people’s liberty away," she said. "[But] it slows down everything … when you have so many at the same time.”

Students organizers told KUT on Wednesday they had consented to searches Monday ahead of demonstrations and that the university's insistence that they have carried weapons is "not happening."

"We're complying and letting [police] know that we don't have anything, and they're free to look through it," said an organizer who didn't feel comfortable giving his name in light of arrests.

The university has not backed down from claims that demonstrators have weapons and are from "outside the community." It said the majority of those arrested don't have ties to the school.

The university hasn't offered proof of that statement, and arrest records to confirm that weren't publicly available as of Thursday.

Another on-campus demonstration is planned for Sunday.

Disclosure: University of Texas at Austin has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism.

 

[BurntEyes 5,816]

9 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

You really think UT officials would do that? Just go on the media and tell lies?
 

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/02/ut-austin-protest-arrests-guns-assault-allegations/

 

 

I don't know if they would or wouldn't but if it at the end of the day they can't verify their claims, it's not going to end well for the University and that is something I'm very much against. 

[Blotto 23,424]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Same. I watched 3-4 hours of the protest and never heard the "river to the sea" chant coming from protesters at UT-Austin. Elsewhere? Yes, including UT-Dallas yesterday.

I did hear one "river to the sea" chant at the UT Austin protest on Monday(?? I think??), but it was short-lived and limited to probably a dozen people. Its certainly inflammatory rhetoric, but lets not pretend there aren't elements within the Pro-Israel movement openly advocating for the removal of all Palestinians from Gaza.  In any case, I hope I can get down to campus on Sunday for a first hand appreciation of what's going down. 

An interesting article I stumbled across today. From what I read, Haaretz represents the more liberal Israeli viewpoint, and i dont know much about the Jewish Federations of North America. But I agree with the bolded part, we don't do nuance very well in today's political climate in the US. Everything is black and white, Israel (or the Palestinians) are 100% right (or 100% wrong). But if that is the sentiment within the Jewish American community, the notion that any criticism of Israel or Netanyahu's government is antisemitic by default is ridiculous. 

 https://archive.ph/dFT7z (from Haaretz.com - Majority of U.S. Jews Uncomfortable With Actions Taken by Israeli Gov't Survey Finds)

Quote

While American-Jews overwhelmingly support Israel, nearly two out of three say they are uncomfortable with actions taken by its government, according to a public opinion survey published on Thursday.

Commissioned by the Jewish Federations of North America, the survey found that 62 percent of Jewish-Americans "sometimes find it hard to support actions taken by Israel and its government."

Nearly a third said they did not feel comfortable supporting Israel in public, the primary reasons being discomfort with the actions of its government, concern about sparking antisemitism and the difficulties of having "a nuanced discussion about the conflict."

 

[Sawbonz 27,392]

1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

Would you remain of the same mindset if rather than pro-Hamas it was Proud Boys joining? Are you willing to acknowledge that illegal activities are occurring above and beyond the protests?

Do you condone the illegal activities?

Do you acknowledge that pro-Hamas is antisemitic?

Are you aware of any efforts by the Pro-Palestine activists to remove or distance themselves from the pro-hamas attendees?

Do you acknowledge that the point of these activities both criminal and otherwise undermine the entire point and actually take attention away from the issue they and others wish to address?

Yes and so what?
 

eta I am purposefully being flippant because your list of question is absurd given the nature of all that is going on. Are you really going to try to tell me that if you were planning a protest, you would have everyone sign a piece of paper, saying what they were for and against and you would be able to screen out the bad actors based on that?

Edited May 3 by Sawbonz

[bolverk 29,394]

2 minutes ago, Blotto said:

I did hear one "river to the sea" chant at the UT Austin protest on Monday(?? I think??), but it was short-lived and limited to probably a dozen people. Its certainly inflammatory rhetoric, but lets not pretend there aren't elements within the Pro-Israel movement openly advocating for the removal of all Palestinians from Gaza.  In any case, I hope I can get down to campus on Sunday for a first hand appreciation of what's going down. 

An interesting article I stumbled across today. From what I read, Haaretz represents the more liberal Israeli viewpoint, and i dont know much about the Jewish Federations of North America. But I agree with the bolded part, we don't do nuance very well in today's political climate in the US. Everything is black and white, Israel (or the Palestinians) are 100% right (or 100% wrong). But if that is the sentiment within the Jewish American community, the notion that any criticism of Israel or Netanyahu's government is antisemitic by default is ridiculous. 

 https://archive.ph/dFT7z (from Haaretz.com - Majority of U.S. Jews Uncomfortable With Actions Taken by Israeli Gov't Survey Finds)

 

Thanks for letting me know that it did happen -- I'm happy to hear that it was short-lived, given that it's such a divisive chant. Based on what I know from my Jewish friends, the poll results don't surprise me in the slightest. The bolded, of course, often gets lost among the simple-minded and the hateful. You only have to visit the national protest thread to see the evidence of that in abundance.

[Hank_Hill 18,484]

1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

Would you remain of the same mindset if rather than pro-Hamas it was Proud Boys joining? Are you willing to acknowledge that illegal activities are occurring above and beyond the protests?

Do you condone the illegal activities?

Do you acknowledge that pro-Hamas is antisemitic?

Are you aware of any efforts by the Pro-Palestine activists to remove or distance themselves from the pro-hamas attendees?

Do you acknowledge that the point of these activities both criminal and otherwise undermine the entire point and actually take attention away from the issue they and others wish to address?

If racist fuckwads diluted a protest I would still support the overall message of the majority of the protest yes.

What power or right do you think pro-Palestine protestors have to remove pro-hamas protestors from a public protest space?? And to that effect are you aware that they haven’t attempted to distance themselves? 
 

Do you actually think that peaceful protests undermine anything when nothing is being done in the first place? What would your suggested alternative be other than sitting on their ass and watching their government support a cause they disagree with? Write their city councilmen? 

Edited May 3 by Hank_Hill

[BurntEyes 5,816]

47 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Yes and so what?
 

eta I am purposefully being flippant because your list of question is absurd given the nature of all that is going on. Are you really going to try to tell me that if you were planning a protest, you would have everyone sign a piece of paper, saying what they were for and against and you would be able to screen out the bad actors based on that?

My questions are relevant and clear. I'm asked some very specific questions about YOUR views and you've chosen not to answer them. 

I will however answer yours directly, despite having a post on this same page indicating my position.

1) Were I leading a protest of any sort, ME, I would NOT violate any laws. 

2) Were I leading a protest if would be at a time and place that engaged directly with the companies or government bodies that directly effected my cause.

3) I would proactively have plans in place to make sure that any bad actors joining my protest were ultimately asked to leave or somehow be strongly encouraged to leave. Be it, by internal group request or law enforcement if necessary.

4) If at, any point, I felt my efforts were counter to the ends of the protest and proactively drawing attention AWAY from the effort I would end them immediately.

I would and have expected the same from every protest I've been a part of and any I might join in the future.

This isn't that difficult. 

[Hank_Hill 18,484]

 

10 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

 

2) Were I leading a protest if would be at a time and place that engaged directly with the companies or government bodies that directly effected my cause.

 

I’m sure all these protestors across the country would love to be able to communicate their message directly to POTUS, Congress, defense company CEOs. If you’re waiting on that meeting to happen you’re a pretty shitty protest leader. 

[jimmyjazz 45,538]

@BurntEyes, your expectations of a bunch of 20-YO kids are wildly optimistic.

Edited May 3 by jimmyjazz

[BurntEyes 5,816]

58 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Thanks for letting me know that it did happen -- I'm happy to hear that it was short-lived, given that it's such a divisive chant. Based on what I know from my Jewish friends, the poll results don't surprise me in the slightest. The bolded, of course, often gets lost among the simple-minded and the hateful. You only have to visit the national protest thread to see the evidence of that in abundance.

I agree that the subject is nuanced. I also fund it interesting that if one is against the broad methodology of the protests they must therefore be Pro-Israel in the discussions here and elsewhere. Most here don't seem capable of having a nuanced discussion or admitting things that are counter to whichever side they are on.

So, to be clear, I think protests to bring attention to what I feel was an overreaction by the Israeli Government is merited and fair. 

As a person who grew up with a Jewish stepfather and Jewish siblings I think that ang such protests need to be extremely clear in both their intent and attendees. Yes, you can manage the attendance of your own protest if you chose to do so. I've seen it done in the past.

I think the place and organizing of these protest and the criminal activities also involved are all counter productive the means of the protest. 

It shouldn't be on universities, it should be better organized, the attendees should be better informed, it should be better self policed and that would create an environment that is more productive to the cause rather than drawing attention away from it.