(03-12-2025 07:10 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 01:21 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 12:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Back in post 1, Rice got a “C” in antisemitism.

Nobody commented.

I would think most people here would prefer an “A”. I would.

But I was also relieved we didn’t get an “F”.

Depends on the grader/grading system.

Didn’t investigate the system used.

Knee-jerk reaction without knowing anything is that it basically graded which “side” universities came down on during the protests and therefore being somewhere in the middle (a “C”) would seem about right?

It also depends on the definition of “antisemitism”. I don’t want Rice to get an “A” on any rating system that defines criticism of Israel as “antisemitism “.

Finally, a tad of discussion. Of course it depends on the system used. To know that, one must read the article. Takes maybe three minutes - less time than it takes to make a post about me.

Agree somewhat with Frizz, too. Key word is somewhat. Certainly Israel is not perfect. But if criticism of Israel is combined with praise or Hamas or excuses for their October 7 attack, you have lost me. How any thinking human being can excuse that attack is beyond me - but many do.

Most of the antiIsrael demonstrations I have seen on TV are NOT just antiIsrael, but also proHamas. Those are the ones I would not like to have seen at Rice.

(03-12-2025 10:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 07:10 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 01:21 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 12:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Back in post 1, Rice got a “C” in antisemitism.

Nobody commented.

I would think most people here would prefer an “A”. I would.

But I was also relieved we didn’t get an “F”.

Depends on the grader/grading system.

Didn’t investigate the system used.

Knee-jerk reaction without knowing anything is that it basically graded which “side” universities came down on during the protests and therefore being somewhere in the middle (a “C”) would seem about right?

It also depends on the definition of “antisemitism”. I don’t want Rice to get an “A” on any rating system that defines criticism of Israel as “antisemitism “.

Finally, a tad of discussion. Of course it depends on the system used. To know that, one must read the article. Takes maybe three minutes - less time than it takes to make a post about me.

Agree somewhat with Frizz, too. Key word is somewhat. Certainly Israel is not perfect. But if criticism of Israel is combined with praise or Hamas or excuses for their October 7 attack, you have lost me. How any thinking human being can excuse that attack is beyond me - but many do.

Most of the antiIsrael demonstrations I have seen on TV are NOT just antiIsrael, but also proHamas. Those are the ones I would not like to have seen at Rice.

One must be equally cautious to not conflate pro-Palestinian with pro-Hamas.

While some people certainly have been pro-Hamas, my hunch is that vast majority of people who are pro-Palestinian are not advocating for Hamas to continue conducting terrorist attacks.

(03-12-2025 07:10 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 01:21 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 12:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Back in post 1, Rice got a “C” in antisemitism.

Nobody commented.

I would think most people here would prefer an “A”. I would.

But I was also relieved we didn’t get an “F”.

Depends on the grader/grading system.

Didn’t investigate the system used.

Knee-jerk reaction without knowing anything is that it basically graded which “side” universities came down on during the protests and therefore being somewhere in the middle (a “C”) would seem about right?

It also depends on the definition of “antisemitism”. I don’t want Rice to get an “A” on any rating system that defines criticism of Israel as “antisemitism “.

Precisely this. The two shouldn't be conflated. The state of Israel has done more than a few despicable things that should be condemned in the strongest terms, and those things had nothing to do with the religion of Judaism.

I guess it is time to tell my Palestinian-Jew story once again.

Some years ago, I was at the World Series of Poker, a very international event. Often it happens that people at a given table tell where they are from. At this particular table, we had a person say they were from Israel and another say me too. Turned out one was a jew and one a Palestinian. They fell on each other - not in combat but like long lost brothers, hugging and backslapping, trading details of where they lived.

Many Palestinians are involved in Israel, as Israeli citizens and officials. They vote and own businesses, and live lives just like anyplace else.

To me, Hamas and much of the pro-Palestinian movement here are akin to those American citizens who tell other American citizens to go back where you came from. Telling the Jews they must leave is like the Choctaw Tribe telling the rest of us we have to go.

The citizens of that Israel need to learn to live to live together. Troops on gliders committing rape, murder, and kidnapping at a music festival is not that. I cannot support that, nor can I support the people who do.

The lands involved have changed hands many times over the past 5000 years. Who took it from who depends on when you want to draw the line.

I support the right of all the citizens of Israel, Jew, Palestinian, or other, to live in peace without fear of rocket attacks, rape, murder, kidnapping, bombing, or other terror attacks. I don't give a damn who took land from who 75 years ago or 1500 years ago.

JMHOs.

(03-12-2025 10:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 07:10 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 01:21 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(03-12-2025 12:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Back in post 1, Rice got a “C” in antisemitism.

Nobody commented.

I would think most people here would prefer an “A”. I would.

But I was also relieved we didn’t get an “F”.

Depends on the grader/grading system.

Didn’t investigate the system used.

Knee-jerk reaction without knowing anything is that it basically graded which “side” universities came down on during the protests and therefore being somewhere in the middle (a “C”) would seem about right?

It also depends on the definition of “antisemitism”. I don’t want Rice to get an “A” on any rating system that defines criticism of Israel as “antisemitism “.

Finally, a tad of discussion. Of course it depends on the system used. To know that, one must read the article. Takes maybe three minutes - less time than it takes to make a post about me.

Agree somewhat with Frizz, too. Key word is somewhat. Certainly Israel is not perfect. But if criticism of Israel is combined with praise or Hamas or excuses for their October 7 attack, you have lost me. How any thinking human being can excuse that attack is beyond me - but many do.

Most of the antiIsrael demonstrations I have seen on TV are NOT just antiIsrael, but also proHamas. Those are the ones I would not like to have seen at Rice.

I will ignore the section of your post that was sponsored by the Society for the Perpetually Aggrieved and will discuss the rest.

I did read the article and it did take all of about three minutes. But I’m still unclear as to how Rice achieved their grade, and what it would’ve taken move up or down.

One of the three main sections is labeled ‘campus conduct and climate concerns’. Do you care to explain how climate concerns have anything to do with antisemitism? I would really appreciate you squaring that circle for me.

When I looked at the list of issues that the ADL had with Rice, many of them seems quite benign and quite difficult to label as antisemitism. A few of the issues were quite bizarre. They dinged us for an incident in December 2024 “when an individual displayed patches with a star of David and Swastika both crossed out.” What individual? Was it a student? What did those dueling crossouts mean? I have zero recollection of this recent “incident” and a brief web search came back empty.

So, the grading system is wicked nebulous. I am not at all concerned about Rice based on our C grade from the ADL. Do you have concerns about an overall wave of antisemitism at rise based on your link? Do you feel that this somehow reflects poorly on Rice? After reading their list of the plus and minus columns do you believe that Rice deserves a C grade when it comes to antisemitism?

open letter calling out Barnard

"I think the biggest aspect of that is acknowledging that what's happening is antisemitism. They're acknowledging that it's a form of hate, and they're acknowledging that it's intimidation and that it's creating a sense of unrest on campus. But they haven't really said anything about antisemitism specifically. And I don't really know why," Birman [a Jewish student at Barnard] said.

Frizz makes a good point, that one can be against the actions of the state of Israel without being against all people who identify with the dominant ethnic group associated with that state, the Jews.

What is lacking is any proof that that the people protesting understand that distinction, especially the leaders of the protests, and agree with it.

(03-13-2025 07:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Frizz makes a good point, that one can be against the actions of the state of Israel without being against all people who identify with the dominant ethnic group associated with that state, the Jews.

What is lacking is any proof that that the people protesting understand that distinction, especially the leaders of the protests, and agree with it.

The burden of proof lies with those making an accusation. Those applying the antisemite label are doing so irresponsibly if they are failing to make the distinction.

(03-13-2025 07:31 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Frizz makes a good point, that one can be against the actions of the state of Israel without being against all people who identify with the dominant ethnic group associated with that state, the Jews.

What is lacking is any proof that that the people protesting understand that distinction, especially the leaders of the protests, and agree with it.

The burden of proof lies with those making an accusation. Those applying the antisemite label are doing so irresponsibly if they are failing to make the distinction.

In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

My late aunt and her husband were pro-Palestinian long before it was cool. Last time I visited them at their house in Wharton, eventually they turned the conversation to this, complaining that the Palestinians had their land stolen and given to the Jews. I just made the statement that if the native Americans wanted to reclaim the land their house was on, or their farm, I would help them defend their ownership rights.

(03-13-2025 08:22 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:31 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Frizz makes a good point, that one can be against the actions of the state of Israel without being against all people who identify with the dominant ethnic group associated with that state, the Jews.

What is lacking is any proof that that the people protesting understand that distinction, especially the leaders of the protests, and agree with it.

The burden of proof lies with those making an accusation. Those applying the antisemite label are doing so irresponsibly if they are failing to make the distinction.

In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

(03-13-2025 09:02 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 08:22 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:31 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Frizz makes a good point, that one can be against the actions of the state of Israel without being against all people who identify with the dominant ethnic group associated with that state, the Jews.

What is lacking is any proof that that the people protesting understand that distinction, especially the leaders of the protests, and agree with it.

The burden of proof lies with those making an accusation. Those applying the antisemite label are doing so irresponsibly if they are failing to make the distinction.

In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. For example, I am skeptical that the demonstrators at Columbia/Barnard are aware that that being anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things, or, perhaps, that their leadership is.

But Rice got a "C". How should we feel about that?

(03-13-2025 10:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 09:02 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 08:22 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:31 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Frizz makes a good point, that one can be against the actions of the state of Israel without being against all people who identify with the dominant ethnic group associated with that state, the Jews.

What is lacking is any proof that that the people protesting understand that distinction, especially the leaders of the protests, and agree with it.

The burden of proof lies with those making an accusation. Those applying the antisemite label are doing so irresponsibly if they are failing to make the distinction.

In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. For example, I am skeptical that the demonstrators at Columbia/Barnard are aware that that being anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things, or, perhaps, that their leadership is.

But Rice got a "C". How should we feel about that?

I've already answered that. It could be a good thing.

https://bsky.app/profile/jvp.bsky.social...bjqeiz5s2b

A Jewish organization fighting to stop this gross violation of the First Amendment

(03-13-2025 11:26 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 10:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 09:02 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 08:22 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 07:31 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  The burden of proof lies with those making an accusation. Those applying the antisemite label are doing so irresponsibly if they are failing to make the distinction.

In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. For example, I am skeptical that the demonstrators at Columbia/Barnard are aware that that being anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things, or, perhaps, that their leadership is.

But Rice got a "C". How should we feel about that?

I've already answered that. It could be a good thing.

Seems mediocre, whichever end of the spectrum one is on. I would prefer Rice to be outstandingly good.

My feeling is that the string pullers for these demonstrations are in the Middle East. The people actually protesting are largely just useful idiots. JMHO.

(03-13-2025 01:24 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 11:26 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 10:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 09:02 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 08:22 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. For example, I am skeptical that the demonstrators at Columbia/Barnard are aware that that being anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things, or, perhaps, that their leadership is.

But Rice got a "C". How should we feel about that?

I've already answered that. It could be a good thing.

Seems mediocre, whichever end of the spectrum one is on. I would prefer Rice to be outstandingly good.

My feeling is that the string pullers for these demonstrations are in the Middle East. The people actually protesting are largely just useful idiots. JMHO.

Again, their grading system seems incredibly subjective and nebulous. Based on what I can tell, I think I would rather have a C grade here than an A or an F.

side effects

Of course, I highly doubt that Hamas cares about Columbia that much.

(03-13-2025 01:24 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 11:26 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 10:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 09:02 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 08:22 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In an American Court of Law, yes. In many other courts, including the Court of Public Opinion, not so much.

Seems like it is just common sense that many of the protesters are antisemite. Certainly neither 100% nor 0%. So the definition of "many" will be a part of the discussion, I guess.

The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. For example, I am skeptical that the demonstrators at Columbia/Barnard are aware that that being anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things, or, perhaps, that their leadership is.

But Rice got a "C". How should we feel about that?

I've already answered that. It could be a good thing.

Seems mediocre, whichever end of the spectrum one is on. I would prefer Rice to be outstandingly good.

My feeling is that the string pullers for these demonstrations are in the Middle East. The people actually protesting are largely just useful idiots. JMHO.

Outstandingly good at what? What does it take to get an "A"? If getting an "A" requires a university to be zealous about suppressing freedom of speech, I'd rather Rice be "mediocre". But that's assuming an "F" goes to schools that are actively antisemitic. If "F"'s are for schools that don't police students' political views and that allow freedom of expression, then "F" is a good grade.

(03-13-2025 01:24 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  My feeling is that the string pullers for these demonstrations are in the Middle East. The people actually protesting are largely just useful idiots. JMHO.

In much the same way, I think the string pullers for the Jan. 6 insurrection were in Moscow. The people engaged in the insurrection were just useless idiots. JMHO.

(03-13-2025 02:16 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 01:24 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 11:26 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 10:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-13-2025 09:02 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  The article at the link you posted was implying antisemitism behind low "grades", then failed to produce any concrete examples. Common sense tells me that I should be skeptical of the conclusions.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. For example, I am skeptical that the demonstrators at Columbia/Barnard are aware that that being anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things, or, perhaps, that their leadership is.

But Rice got a "C". How should we feel about that?

I've already answered that. It could be a good thing.

Seems mediocre, whichever end of the spectrum one is on. I would prefer Rice to be outstandingly good.

My feeling is that the string pullers for these demonstrations are in the Middle East. The people actually protesting are largely just useful idiots. JMHO.

Outstandingly good at what? What does it take to get an "A"? If getting an "A" requires a university to be zealous about suppressing freedom of speech, I'd rather Rice be "mediocre". But that's assuming an "F" goes to schools that are actively antisemitic. If "F"'s are for schools that don't police students' political views and that allow freedom of expression, then "F" is a good grade.

Whether "A" or "F" is the best grade, "C" is mediocre.