The courageous students at Columbia and other universities protesting Israel's genocide and apartheid would have an easier time defending their position if media outlets like The Contrarian would also condemn Israel's crimes against humanity frequently and clearly.
Instead, The Contrarian has not published a single syllable about the ongoing atrocities in the Occupied Territories for weeks, if not months (really, not much at all since this outlet was founded earlier this year).
The heinous and euphemistically named 'Gaza Humanitarian Foundation' has proven to be nothing more than another tool in the US/Israeli project to take over Gaza and wipe out its inhabitants. There has not been a single word in The Contrarian about the Palestinians intentionally starved by Israel, then lured in by meager scraps of food, only to be murdered in cold blood by the IDF.
The aid flotilla on its way to Gaza has already been openly threatened by Israeli and US politicians for the crime of bringing food and medicine to a desperate population, again with no mention in this outlet. Israel has been killing 100+ people in Gaza every day for months...crickets from The Contrarian. So-called 'settlers', many of whom are American citizens, continue to rampage through the West Bank like Jim Crow-era lynch mobs...with no comment from The Contrarian.
The silence of The Contrarian, while claiming to stand for justice and accountability, is truly shameful.
A typical defense of the blatant and open genocide committed by Israel is to simply deny it exists, usually without any sort of facts or evidence, as this commenter does here.
However, scholars of genocide around the world are virtually unanimous in noting that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
One recent study published by the Dutch newspaper NRC interviewed seven academic genocide experts from six different countries, including two from Israel, who unanimously concluded that Israel is committing genocide.
The Israeli researcher Raz Segal was quoted in the study: “Can I name someone whose work I respect who does not think it is genocide? No, there is no counterargument that considers all the evidence.”
Just this week, Dr Melanie O'Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), the world's largest academic association on genocide, declared Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide.
"Applying the legal definitions of genocide as found in the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, I would determine that what is happening in Gaza constitutes genocide," O'Brien said.
"The definition involves acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. These include killing or imposing conditions meant to bring about physical destruction," she explained, referring to the definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention."
Maybe this commenter would feel better to label Israel's actions as merely 'war crimes' or 'ethnic cleansing'? Or maybe limiting Israel's crimes to apartheid and violent oppression would ease your concern?
If so, Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem has thoroughly documented Israel's apartheid policies and brutality in the Occupied Territories since long before October 2023:
Or, maybe you would listen to former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, who recently wrote an op-ed titled: '"Enough Is Enough. Israel Is Committing War Crimes."'
Is Olmert too liberal for you? Then maybe you'll listen to former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, who in 2023 said 'In a territory where two people are judged under two legal systems, that is an apartheid state'.
TBH, I don't usually reply to this particular 'argument'. My concern is that engaging with such a revisionist and patently false statement risks giving this sort of denialism validity it does not deserve.
But, I thought readers of The Contrarian might appreciate some more information, especially since, as I noted above, The Contrarian has maintained a complete blackout on any commentary regarding the Israeli/US assault on both Gaza and the West Bank.
In its mission statement, The Contrarian claims to be 'unflinching, unapologetic, and unwavering in its commitment to truth-telling'. Apparently, it has carved out a big gaping exception for the Israeli/American catastrophe in the Occupied Territories.
It is curious that this commenter didn't point out anything else I said. Does that mean this person agrees that Israel is committing 'apartheid' and 'atrocities' as I also mentioned? Or that the reader does not care about the rest either way, and is only uncomfortable with the G-word?
Shame on all institutions, companies and individuals who bend the knee to the president-in-name-only. Yes, even with Elon gone, I continue to call him that, because other than his revenge binges he is definitely not "ruling" this country in the few hours he actually spends in his office - which does not have enough gold, btw. Why no solid gold wallpaper? Why no gold desk and chairs?
He shouldn't be ruling at all. He should be governing, but ruling is what he is attempting. Hopefully, our resistance will eventually be enough to put an end to his attempt.
Wait! The students aren't "allowed" to wear masks, but the alleged ICE traffickers ARE? Excuse me??? Anyone who believe ANY OF THIS was constitutional OR moral would NOT EVER hide behind a mask or tell the traffickers to hide behind them and pretend they're ICE members.
This article has an undertone of spite, frustration, and sympathy for Hamas-adoring Columbia students, something I found irritating and not helpful in any way. Oh, I see that the author herself is a fresh graduate of Columbia. Was she a keffiya-swathed participant in the demonstrations? I am very glad that the Contrarian doesn’t normally indulge this sort of nonsense.
To answer the commenter Jason, who took this opportunity to jump on the genocide bandwagon and spritz us with the mist of his deep musings, If this is an actual genocide, it would be the first in history in which the government of the people alleged to be victims has the power to stop it by releasing the hostages and surrendering. Or perhaps their government is a party to it, as Ghazi Hamad said on Lebanese television in Oct 2023, “We are proud to be a nation of martyrs.” So they endorse their own genocide. More power to them?
The false “genocide” charge is meant to pressure Israel to stop the war and leave Hamas, the only party in this conflict with a stated aim to commit genocide, in power. And yes, I heard you say “apartheid” and the other one, indefensible, not worth so much as pointing out, and it’s tiresome hearing these lazy and ignorant assertions.
This subject is something Jason and many, many others are plainly over-invested in emotionally. Some sober self-reflection on the matter is long overdue.
Along with labeling anyone who criticizes Israel as being antisemitic, the refrain of 'noun + verb + "Hamas"' is a standard response for the defenders of Israel's generations of apartheid, occupation, and extreme violence against the population it subjugates.
The commenter completely avoids any mention of the numerous scholars and studies I cite and instead 'indulges' in the same 'spite' and 'emotional over-investment' she claims to counter. Instead of any 'sober self-reflection', the poster resorts to hackneyed name-calling such as 'Hamas-adoring students' and 'keffiya-swathed participant.'
The claim that Israel's genocide would stop by simply 'releasing the hostages and surrendering' is so ridiculous at this stage, it's barely worth a response. Over and over Israel has shredded workable agreements for a ceasefire, and unilaterally violated the ceasefire that was briefly achieved this winter, for no legitimate reason at all. Just days ago, the US (with Israel's support) vetoed another UN Security Council resolution to return all the Israeli and Palestinian hostages and implement a ceasefire. The vote was 14-1. Netanyahu and his fellow war crime-indicted allies have shown clearly and repeatedly they have no interest in anything short of the complete destruction of the Palestinian society in Gaza, by any means.
This commenter has zero to say about Israel's intentional starving of an entire population, then mowing down starving civilians who were trying to get scraps of food after walking for hours, nothing to say about Israel's targeting of journalists, aid workers, doctors and UN staff, nothing to say about 50,000+ murdered and maimed children, nothing to say about Israel's public intention to aggressively stop the aid flotilla from committing the apparent crime of delivering food and medicine to Gaza...which isn't surprising really, since there is no conceivable defense for these obvious war crimes.
Contrary to the commenter's assertion, Israeli elected leaders and media figures regularly and openly support Israel's campaign of genocide. It takes little effort to find quotes of leaders wishing to 'erase the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth' and to 'exterminate' the 'animals' from the region. Extremist zealots such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir openly support the intentional starving of civilians, in itself a war crime and evidence of genocidal intent. There are many more examples....more importantly, Israel acts on these wishes.
The commenter also ignores, as most defenders of Israel's occupation do, that Israel has been oppressing Palestinians under apartheid and military rule, stealing Palestinian land via its proxy lynch mob 'settlers', and regularly killing, maiming, abducting, beating and abusing Palestinians for decades before Hamas existed, and not only in Gaza but in the West Bank, where Hamas is not in power. The brutality against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories by Israel has been going on for decades; it didn't start a couple years ago.
It is interesting that the poster is 'glad' that The Contrarian does not 'indulge' in any commentary whatsoever about the daily atrocities committed by Israel (with the US as a full partner). One might think that if the defense of Israel was so obvious, its defenders would like to see this case asserted, since world opinion is overwhelmingly against Israel's actions, especially in a liberal media outlet ostensibly "committed to truth-telling".
From this word salad: '..I heard you say “apartheid” and the other one, indefensible, not worth so much as pointing out...', I am not sure if the commenter agrees that Israel is enforcing apartheid in the Occupied Territories or not..but assuming this was some stammering attempt to disagree, here are a few people that have stated this quite obvious fact:
I quoted former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo above already (see my first comment).
Former attorney general of Israel Michael Ben-Yair, 2022: “It is with great sadness ... I must also conclude that my country has sunk to such political and moral depths that it is now an apartheid regime.”
Former Israeli cabinet minister Yossi Sarid, 2008: “What acts like apartheid, is run like apartheid and harasses like apartheid, is not a duck – it is apartheid.”
Former Israeli prime minster Ehud Barak, 2010: '“As long as in this territory west of the Jordan river there is only one political entity called Israel it is going to be either non-Jewish or non-democratic. If this bloc of millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state.”
There are plenty more examples.
This commenter could use some 'sober self-reflection' herself.
To start, she might try to defend Israel's actions without saying anything to the effect of 'but, Hamas!'.
All my life it has been mind boggling and heartbreaking to witness the defenders of genocides. Already as a kind I was trying to understand Germans that were either negating the Holocaust or defending it by proclaiming Jews to be embodiment of evil. Later on, when I had to witness the genocide in my own country, I found negaters/defenders to actually do both:: negate the genocide but at the same time finding a possible excuse, just in case - as in this comment above. There is no genocide, we are told, but still Hamas must be brought in. Amnesty International defines the total destruction of Gaza and the countless victims as genocide, and every day more and more people and countries do the same - very soon the negaters will have to argue that it is a worldwide conspiracy against them, against the nazi-like government of Israel, against poor Netanyahu and Trump who just want to build a big beautiful resort out of Gaza. The most amazing thing is the capacity to pretend to be victims while on a killing and destruction spree. I keep reading and rereading this comment, trying to comprehend how one can confuse and twist the issues to such a degree - how can one arrive to value one Israeli life thousands of Palestinian ones? Whatever ideas one has, whatever beliefs, dreams, thoughts - how can one not care for children killed, mutilated, maimed, burned? How can one accept and even preach destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, universities, museums, monuments, you name it? How is that possible, how can one hate so much to find excuse for such crimes against humanity of biblical proportions? Just today: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74zj9kv2xjo. It breaks my heart.
The strength of the First Amendment is that it covers speech that someone doesn't like or finds offensive. One could argue that more someone dislikes or finds offensive (within the confines of the law), the more important that First Amendment right is.
Why does it matter what Sofia Matson wore at any time? Is this an attempt to discredit or discount her point of view? She is exercising her First Amendment rights.
The bigger fight should be with a government that arrests people for stating opinions that they disagree with. In the case of Khalil and Ozturk violating, at a minimum their Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Does that bother you?
Columbia did not cover themselves in glory from Day 1 of the protests. President Shipman, based on her experience should have know better then to bend a knee.
We on the pro-democracy side are getting distracted, divided, and taking our eye off of the bigger picture of protecting and preserving this "grand experiment". Authoritarian friendly people love to see that.
This is the most vicious thing I read in a long time, a direct support for endless killing of civilians, good many of them children and women - after 77 years of apartheid which turned Gaza into the world’s largest concentration camp. Almost 60000 people killed, and as many wounded, mutilated, maimed because you and the nazi government of Israel, led by the Trump like criminal, do not like Hamas? The Nakba of 1948 when more than 700000 people were dispossessed of their land was due to Hamas? The 7% of Palestine land in the hands of Jews in 1947 becoming close to 85% today is because of Hamas? Do you even know that the Israel government supported Hamas to counter the PLO? Now, the Amnesty International calls it a genocide, most of the world countries call it a genocide - you know why? Because it is a genocide, a systematic killing spree, now openly admitted to be a part of ethnical cleansing, with Netanyahu and Trump planning a big beautiful resort of the blood soaked land of Gaza. I understand that yo have no empathy for must be to you inferior human beings, but you actually encourage this genocide because of what some Hamas leaders say or do? I wonder how you would have justified the Holocaust had you been a German. How would you justify the systematic killing of Israelis because of what Netanyahu - the war criminal sought after by the ICC - says or does?
It's telling that your only responses here are some nonsense babbles. I guess that's easier than trying to defend genocide, apartheid, using starvation as a weapon, constant land theft and daily war crimes with any coherent argument.
And it's ok to boo and interrupt Shipman? Sounds very one-sided here. As a New Yorker I remember very, very vividly how many Columbia students' rights were marginalized by fear and hatred coming from those who demand the right to say what they like but apparently do not proffer that right to those who disagree with them.
The students of Columbia and many other universities have not simply been 'marginalized. Students have been arrested, expelled, beaten, doxxed..while students who were not US citizens have been abducted and thrown into gulags with no clear charges for months on end. Columbia was largely complicit in all of this, with only the most tepid defense of its own students and faculty at times.
And this is not only happening to students, but to professors, teachers, musicians, artists, journalists..anyone in the US who voices support for Palestinian rights these days is taking a risk.
This is not remotely comparable to a few students booking Claire Shipman.
It is very revealing that the most relevant descriptor of Khalil and Ozturk (the unnamed "graduate student at Tufts University") is omitted here: they're foreign guests with student visas! Holders of student visas have known for years they don't have the same rights as citizens, as evidenced by job and housing restrictions. Therefore, it is unreasonable for anyone to suggest they have the freedom of speech right to brazenly voice their support for any group designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization. Imagine inviting someone to study at Columbia and then allowing them to lead an effort to overthrow our government. With a student visa comes an admonition: keep your sociopolitical views to yourself!
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments would like to have a word with you.
As for First Amendment rights, the US Constitution is unclear on this subject. The US as a nation, should be strong enough to handle anyone's dissenting opinion on a topic, so long as it doesn't violate existing laws on the subject.
The question of whether the First Amendment applies to non-citizens isn't easily answered with a satisfying yes or no. The Constitution leaves room to interpret that question, especially as it applies to unauthorized immigrants. The Supreme Court has not ruled in a direct way that neatly resolves it.
And the First Amendment itself does not make clear whether "the people" given the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition are a narrow group of citizens or a broader category, some of whom come to the United States to visit, learn and work in a country that prevents governments from restricting these five freedoms. /fin
This SCOTUS will decide the issue. You didn't comment on the argument that since student visa holders already have their fundamental freedoms severely restricted, that it's reasonable to suggest their sociopolitical protest activities are also restricted.
You are correct that I didn't state my position on the First Amendment question. I could string together a whole bunch of words and not come up with an articulate answer to my internal dialogue to answer your question.
If I had to cast a vote for either Yes student visa holders have First Amendment rights or No student visa holders do not have First Amendment rights, I would vote Yes. But it is not that easy in my mind. I hear the valid pro and con arguments on this issue.
It's 'very revealing' that a subscriber to a left-leaning media outlet would so eagerly align themselves with the worst elements of the Trump administration.
The claim that 'it is unreasonable for anyone to suggest they have the freedom of speech' is in full contradiction of the First Amendment and its interpretation in numerous federal court rulings going back decades. There is not a word in the First Amendment limiting the free speech protection to only US citizens. As that 'woke' wild-eyed left-wing former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said when asked specifically about immigrants and freedom of speech, "I think anybody who is present in the United States has protections under the United States Constitution".
Neither Mahmoud Khalil nor Rümeysa Öztürk did "brazenly voice their support for any group designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization", or do anything close to that. Khalil acted as a liaison between student protesters and school administrators. Öztürk did nothing more than co-author a single op-ed critical of the university's reaction to a student union vote regarding Israel. The government's case against both students is absurdly weak and obviously ideological, and meant to sow fear and crush dissent.
'Imagine inviting someone to study at Columbia and then allowing them to lead an effort to overthrow our government' - well, this 'effort' only exists in the poster's imagination, since neither of the abducted students he mentions didn't anything remotely close to that.
This Hillary, Joe and Kamala voter feels compelled to first lecture you. The Democratic Party is in turmoil because they don't appreciate the popularity of some of Trump's positions. They're blind to unpopularity of progressives. The majority of Americans don't think foreign students have the right to try and influence any of our sociopolitical positions. You're a guest in my house. Study and shut up.
'Study and shut up.' - spoken like a true MAGA neo-fascist!
I do appreciate how you are able to pack so much nonsense into a fairly short comment.
It's not 'Hillary, Joe and Kamala' that claim green card holders and other residents in the US are protected by the First Amendment, it's decades worth of federal court rulings, as I already said above and you apparently ignored.
It's also the recorded opinion of federal judges spanning the political spectrum, including right wing superhero Antonin Scalia, as I also said above and you ignored. It's also the simple fact that there is not a word in the Constitution that supports your view..you know, that old document MAGA fans claim to respect and revere?
Most American's emphatically do not support deporting green card holders who have committed no crime.
Besides, Trump's GOP have shown quite clearly they hate free speech for American citizens as well. They have fought First Amendment rights related to discussing abortion, Palestinian rights, gay and lesbian history, African American history, transgender rights, climate change, and anything else they don't like.
It would be interesting to see if Biden ordered the abduction of, say, Israeli students who were pro-apartheid and supported Israel's war crimes, or Russian students supporting Putin, or even foreign born students who support homegrown terrorist groups like the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers..then had them thrown into prison for months with no charges and no due process. The right wing punditocracy snowflakes would melt with rage instantly, of course... and hey, they wouldn't be wrong, just absurdly hypocritical.
You are flat wrong about the Democrats, who indeed are flailing but for the precise, polar opposite of the reason you give...its obvious the 'centrist' Dems are facing fire from their base for not fighting Trump enough..while AOC, Sanders and others are more popular than ever, again the complete opposite of what you claim. AOC would easily beat Schumer for NY Senate if there was an election today.
And, of course, Trump is not remotely popular, and neither is his former BFF Musk. So-called 'progressive' positions like supporting a clean environment, health care, housing, and education, are as popular as ever. Ruining the economy and destroying the reputation of the US with nonsense tariffs and siding with dictators is, um, not.
Not that it's remotely relevant, since anyone residing in the US has First Amendment protections, as I have explained a couple times and you continue to avoid addressing....but Mahmoud Khalil DID have a green card. A federal judge has already ruled that Secretary of State Marco Rubio likely violated the Constitution when he stripped Khalil of his green card - there's that 'Constitution' thing again.
Rumeysa Ozturk did have a student visa. She has already been released on bail. The judge in her case said, 'She has done nothing other than essentially attend her university and expand her contacts within the community in such a supportive way.”' and also said the government has offered zero evidence that she has done anything wrong or posed any threat.
Should the US be able to deport Israeli students without any due process, and throw them into prison without any criminal charges, for supporting Israel's illegal apartheid regime and illegal occupation?
Grrr. I have addressed your (mistaken) opinion that “anyone residing in the US has First Amendment protections!!!” Here's a lengthier discussion that any idiot can obtain. The SCOTUS will decide, and not you.
'Shipman has served on Columbia’s Board of Trustees since 2013, and many on campus see in this the explanation for her leadership. Like her predecessors'. I wish the author had told us that Shipman's election was literally a coup at the Columbia Univ. - the Board of Trustees can start the search and the election process for the president, not elect their own member. Please watch this for a serious coverage of what happened at Columbia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzLO1M0Xe30&t=799s
Omg, that is so disgusting. I met my university president, James Laney at his university estate. I heard him speak many times but never at commencement (I attended and graduated at three of them). What kind of people will go to Columbia - only the uninformed? Will rising classmen (alright, class persons) even stay? One of my professors interviewed at Columbia (decades ago) and he was crossing the avenue to the campus and an unfortunate person staggering his way in the opposite direction suddenly had to stop (of course right by my professor) and vomit in the crosswalk. Said professor proceeded to interview without missing a beat. No one noticed (or smelled) the detritus, apparently :) The sad thing is Columbia is, to me anyway, a failed titan, just like leon mush. Who of sound mind would have anything to do with either of them or their products anymore?
The courageous students at Columbia and other universities protesting Israel's genocide and apartheid would have an easier time defending their position if media outlets like The Contrarian would also condemn Israel's crimes against humanity frequently and clearly.
Instead, The Contrarian has not published a single syllable about the ongoing atrocities in the Occupied Territories for weeks, if not months (really, not much at all since this outlet was founded earlier this year).
The heinous and euphemistically named 'Gaza Humanitarian Foundation' has proven to be nothing more than another tool in the US/Israeli project to take over Gaza and wipe out its inhabitants. There has not been a single word in The Contrarian about the Palestinians intentionally starved by Israel, then lured in by meager scraps of food, only to be murdered in cold blood by the IDF.
The aid flotilla on its way to Gaza has already been openly threatened by Israeli and US politicians for the crime of bringing food and medicine to a desperate population, again with no mention in this outlet. Israel has been killing 100+ people in Gaza every day for months...crickets from The Contrarian. So-called 'settlers', many of whom are American citizens, continue to rampage through the West Bank like Jim Crow-era lynch mobs...with no comment from The Contrarian.
The silence of The Contrarian, while claiming to stand for justice and accountability, is truly shameful.
Totally disagree- writer doesn’t know the meaning of genocide
A typical defense of the blatant and open genocide committed by Israel is to simply deny it exists, usually without any sort of facts or evidence, as this commenter does here.
However, scholars of genocide around the world are virtually unanimous in noting that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
One recent study published by the Dutch newspaper NRC interviewed seven academic genocide experts from six different countries, including two from Israel, who unanimously concluded that Israel is committing genocide.
The Israeli researcher Raz Segal was quoted in the study: “Can I name someone whose work I respect who does not think it is genocide? No, there is no counterargument that considers all the evidence.”
Just this week, Dr Melanie O'Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), the world's largest academic association on genocide, declared Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide.
"Applying the legal definitions of genocide as found in the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, I would determine that what is happening in Gaza constitutes genocide," O'Brien said.
"The definition involves acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. These include killing or imposing conditions meant to bring about physical destruction," she explained, referring to the definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention."
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-committing-genocide-gaza-says-top-legal-scholar-melanie-obrien
Several human rights organizations have reached the same conclusion, including:
Amnesty International:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/
Human Rights Watch:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/12/19/israels-crime-extermination-acts-genocide-gaza
The UN Human Rights Council:
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
Maybe this commenter would feel better to label Israel's actions as merely 'war crimes' or 'ethnic cleansing'? Or maybe limiting Israel's crimes to apartheid and violent oppression would ease your concern?
If so, Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem has thoroughly documented Israel's apartheid policies and brutality in the Occupied Territories since long before October 2023:
https://www.btselem.org/
Or, maybe you would listen to former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, who recently wrote an op-ed titled: '"Enough Is Enough. Israel Is Committing War Crimes."'
Is Olmert too liberal for you? Then maybe you'll listen to former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, who in 2023 said 'In a territory where two people are judged under two legal systems, that is an apartheid state'.
Someone truly did their homework. Touché.
TBH, I don't usually reply to this particular 'argument'. My concern is that engaging with such a revisionist and patently false statement risks giving this sort of denialism validity it does not deserve.
But, I thought readers of The Contrarian might appreciate some more information, especially since, as I noted above, The Contrarian has maintained a complete blackout on any commentary regarding the Israeli/US assault on both Gaza and the West Bank.
In its mission statement, The Contrarian claims to be 'unflinching, unapologetic, and unwavering in its commitment to truth-telling'. Apparently, it has carved out a big gaping exception for the Israeli/American catastrophe in the Occupied Territories.
It is curious that this commenter didn't point out anything else I said. Does that mean this person agrees that Israel is committing 'apartheid' and 'atrocities' as I also mentioned? Or that the reader does not care about the rest either way, and is only uncomfortable with the G-word?
Shame on all institutions, companies and individuals who bend the knee to the president-in-name-only. Yes, even with Elon gone, I continue to call him that, because other than his revenge binges he is definitely not "ruling" this country in the few hours he actually spends in his office - which does not have enough gold, btw. Why no solid gold wallpaper? Why no gold desk and chairs?
He shouldn't be ruling at all. He should be governing, but ruling is what he is attempting. Hopefully, our resistance will eventually be enough to put an end to his attempt.
soon
Wait! The students aren't "allowed" to wear masks, but the alleged ICE traffickers ARE? Excuse me??? Anyone who believe ANY OF THIS was constitutional OR moral would NOT EVER hide behind a mask or tell the traffickers to hide behind them and pretend they're ICE members.
Hearten to see the students stood up. More of this please!
This article has an undertone of spite, frustration, and sympathy for Hamas-adoring Columbia students, something I found irritating and not helpful in any way. Oh, I see that the author herself is a fresh graduate of Columbia. Was she a keffiya-swathed participant in the demonstrations? I am very glad that the Contrarian doesn’t normally indulge this sort of nonsense.
To answer the commenter Jason, who took this opportunity to jump on the genocide bandwagon and spritz us with the mist of his deep musings, If this is an actual genocide, it would be the first in history in which the government of the people alleged to be victims has the power to stop it by releasing the hostages and surrendering. Or perhaps their government is a party to it, as Ghazi Hamad said on Lebanese television in Oct 2023, “We are proud to be a nation of martyrs.” So they endorse their own genocide. More power to them?
The false “genocide” charge is meant to pressure Israel to stop the war and leave Hamas, the only party in this conflict with a stated aim to commit genocide, in power. And yes, I heard you say “apartheid” and the other one, indefensible, not worth so much as pointing out, and it’s tiresome hearing these lazy and ignorant assertions.
This subject is something Jason and many, many others are plainly over-invested in emotionally. Some sober self-reflection on the matter is long overdue.
Along with labeling anyone who criticizes Israel as being antisemitic, the refrain of 'noun + verb + "Hamas"' is a standard response for the defenders of Israel's generations of apartheid, occupation, and extreme violence against the population it subjugates.
The commenter completely avoids any mention of the numerous scholars and studies I cite and instead 'indulges' in the same 'spite' and 'emotional over-investment' she claims to counter. Instead of any 'sober self-reflection', the poster resorts to hackneyed name-calling such as 'Hamas-adoring students' and 'keffiya-swathed participant.'
The claim that Israel's genocide would stop by simply 'releasing the hostages and surrendering' is so ridiculous at this stage, it's barely worth a response. Over and over Israel has shredded workable agreements for a ceasefire, and unilaterally violated the ceasefire that was briefly achieved this winter, for no legitimate reason at all. Just days ago, the US (with Israel's support) vetoed another UN Security Council resolution to return all the Israeli and Palestinian hostages and implement a ceasefire. The vote was 14-1. Netanyahu and his fellow war crime-indicted allies have shown clearly and repeatedly they have no interest in anything short of the complete destruction of the Palestinian society in Gaza, by any means.
This commenter has zero to say about Israel's intentional starving of an entire population, then mowing down starving civilians who were trying to get scraps of food after walking for hours, nothing to say about Israel's targeting of journalists, aid workers, doctors and UN staff, nothing to say about 50,000+ murdered and maimed children, nothing to say about Israel's public intention to aggressively stop the aid flotilla from committing the apparent crime of delivering food and medicine to Gaza...which isn't surprising really, since there is no conceivable defense for these obvious war crimes.
Contrary to the commenter's assertion, Israeli elected leaders and media figures regularly and openly support Israel's campaign of genocide. It takes little effort to find quotes of leaders wishing to 'erase the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth' and to 'exterminate' the 'animals' from the region. Extremist zealots such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir openly support the intentional starving of civilians, in itself a war crime and evidence of genocidal intent. There are many more examples....more importantly, Israel acts on these wishes.
The commenter also ignores, as most defenders of Israel's occupation do, that Israel has been oppressing Palestinians under apartheid and military rule, stealing Palestinian land via its proxy lynch mob 'settlers', and regularly killing, maiming, abducting, beating and abusing Palestinians for decades before Hamas existed, and not only in Gaza but in the West Bank, where Hamas is not in power. The brutality against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories by Israel has been going on for decades; it didn't start a couple years ago.
It is interesting that the poster is 'glad' that The Contrarian does not 'indulge' in any commentary whatsoever about the daily atrocities committed by Israel (with the US as a full partner). One might think that if the defense of Israel was so obvious, its defenders would like to see this case asserted, since world opinion is overwhelmingly against Israel's actions, especially in a liberal media outlet ostensibly "committed to truth-telling".
From this word salad: '..I heard you say “apartheid” and the other one, indefensible, not worth so much as pointing out...', I am not sure if the commenter agrees that Israel is enforcing apartheid in the Occupied Territories or not..but assuming this was some stammering attempt to disagree, here are a few people that have stated this quite obvious fact:
I quoted former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo above already (see my first comment).
Former attorney general of Israel Michael Ben-Yair, 2022: “It is with great sadness ... I must also conclude that my country has sunk to such political and moral depths that it is now an apartheid regime.”
Former Israeli cabinet minister Yossi Sarid, 2008: “What acts like apartheid, is run like apartheid and harasses like apartheid, is not a duck – it is apartheid.”
Former Israeli prime minster Ehud Barak, 2010: '“As long as in this territory west of the Jordan river there is only one political entity called Israel it is going to be either non-Jewish or non-democratic. If this bloc of millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state.”
There are plenty more examples.
This commenter could use some 'sober self-reflection' herself.
To start, she might try to defend Israel's actions without saying anything to the effect of 'but, Hamas!'.
Methinks “oy”
what a thoughtful defense of your nonsense comments.
All my life it has been mind boggling and heartbreaking to witness the defenders of genocides. Already as a kind I was trying to understand Germans that were either negating the Holocaust or defending it by proclaiming Jews to be embodiment of evil. Later on, when I had to witness the genocide in my own country, I found negaters/defenders to actually do both:: negate the genocide but at the same time finding a possible excuse, just in case - as in this comment above. There is no genocide, we are told, but still Hamas must be brought in. Amnesty International defines the total destruction of Gaza and the countless victims as genocide, and every day more and more people and countries do the same - very soon the negaters will have to argue that it is a worldwide conspiracy against them, against the nazi-like government of Israel, against poor Netanyahu and Trump who just want to build a big beautiful resort out of Gaza. The most amazing thing is the capacity to pretend to be victims while on a killing and destruction spree. I keep reading and rereading this comment, trying to comprehend how one can confuse and twist the issues to such a degree - how can one arrive to value one Israeli life thousands of Palestinian ones? Whatever ideas one has, whatever beliefs, dreams, thoughts - how can one not care for children killed, mutilated, maimed, burned? How can one accept and even preach destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, universities, museums, monuments, you name it? How is that possible, how can one hate so much to find excuse for such crimes against humanity of biblical proportions? Just today: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74zj9kv2xjo. It breaks my heart.
The strength of the First Amendment is that it covers speech that someone doesn't like or finds offensive. One could argue that more someone dislikes or finds offensive (within the confines of the law), the more important that First Amendment right is.
Why does it matter what Sofia Matson wore at any time? Is this an attempt to discredit or discount her point of view? She is exercising her First Amendment rights.
The bigger fight should be with a government that arrests people for stating opinions that they disagree with. In the case of Khalil and Ozturk violating, at a minimum their Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Does that bother you?
Columbia did not cover themselves in glory from Day 1 of the protests. President Shipman, based on her experience should have know better then to bend a knee.
We on the pro-democracy side are getting distracted, divided, and taking our eye off of the bigger picture of protecting and preserving this "grand experiment". Authoritarian friendly people love to see that.
Jeez
This is the most vicious thing I read in a long time, a direct support for endless killing of civilians, good many of them children and women - after 77 years of apartheid which turned Gaza into the world’s largest concentration camp. Almost 60000 people killed, and as many wounded, mutilated, maimed because you and the nazi government of Israel, led by the Trump like criminal, do not like Hamas? The Nakba of 1948 when more than 700000 people were dispossessed of their land was due to Hamas? The 7% of Palestine land in the hands of Jews in 1947 becoming close to 85% today is because of Hamas? Do you even know that the Israel government supported Hamas to counter the PLO? Now, the Amnesty International calls it a genocide, most of the world countries call it a genocide - you know why? Because it is a genocide, a systematic killing spree, now openly admitted to be a part of ethnical cleansing, with Netanyahu and Trump planning a big beautiful resort of the blood soaked land of Gaza. I understand that yo have no empathy for must be to you inferior human beings, but you actually encourage this genocide because of what some Hamas leaders say or do? I wonder how you would have justified the Holocaust had you been a German. How would you justify the systematic killing of Israelis because of what Netanyahu - the war criminal sought after by the ICC - says or does?
Huffa puffa
It's telling that your only responses here are some nonsense babbles. I guess that's easier than trying to defend genocide, apartheid, using starvation as a weapon, constant land theft and daily war crimes with any coherent argument.
And it's ok to boo and interrupt Shipman? Sounds very one-sided here. As a New Yorker I remember very, very vividly how many Columbia students' rights were marginalized by fear and hatred coming from those who demand the right to say what they like but apparently do not proffer that right to those who disagree with them.
The students of Columbia and many other universities have not simply been 'marginalized. Students have been arrested, expelled, beaten, doxxed..while students who were not US citizens have been abducted and thrown into gulags with no clear charges for months on end. Columbia was largely complicit in all of this, with only the most tepid defense of its own students and faculty at times.
And this is not only happening to students, but to professors, teachers, musicians, artists, journalists..anyone in the US who voices support for Palestinian rights these days is taking a risk.
This is not remotely comparable to a few students booking Claire Shipman.
It is very revealing that the most relevant descriptor of Khalil and Ozturk (the unnamed "graduate student at Tufts University") is omitted here: they're foreign guests with student visas! Holders of student visas have known for years they don't have the same rights as citizens, as evidenced by job and housing restrictions. Therefore, it is unreasonable for anyone to suggest they have the freedom of speech right to brazenly voice their support for any group designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization. Imagine inviting someone to study at Columbia and then allowing them to lead an effort to overthrow our government. With a student visa comes an admonition: keep your sociopolitical views to yourself!
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments would like to have a word with you.
As for First Amendment rights, the US Constitution is unclear on this subject. The US as a nation, should be strong enough to handle anyone's dissenting opinion on a topic, so long as it doesn't violate existing laws on the subject.
https://www.freedomforum.org/non-citizens-protected-first-amendment/ The following is from the end of the cite provided.
The question of whether the First Amendment applies to non-citizens isn't easily answered with a satisfying yes or no. The Constitution leaves room to interpret that question, especially as it applies to unauthorized immigrants. The Supreme Court has not ruled in a direct way that neatly resolves it.
And the First Amendment itself does not make clear whether "the people" given the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition are a narrow group of citizens or a broader category, some of whom come to the United States to visit, learn and work in a country that prevents governments from restricting these five freedoms. /fin
This SCOTUS will decide the issue. You didn't comment on the argument that since student visa holders already have their fundamental freedoms severely restricted, that it's reasonable to suggest their sociopolitical protest activities are also restricted.
Agreed, that SCOTUS will have the final say.
You are correct that I didn't state my position on the First Amendment question. I could string together a whole bunch of words and not come up with an articulate answer to my internal dialogue to answer your question.
If I had to cast a vote for either Yes student visa holders have First Amendment rights or No student visa holders do not have First Amendment rights, I would vote Yes. But it is not that easy in my mind. I hear the valid pro and con arguments on this issue.
It's 'very revealing' that a subscriber to a left-leaning media outlet would so eagerly align themselves with the worst elements of the Trump administration.
The claim that 'it is unreasonable for anyone to suggest they have the freedom of speech' is in full contradiction of the First Amendment and its interpretation in numerous federal court rulings going back decades. There is not a word in the First Amendment limiting the free speech protection to only US citizens. As that 'woke' wild-eyed left-wing former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said when asked specifically about immigrants and freedom of speech, "I think anybody who is present in the United States has protections under the United States Constitution".
Neither Mahmoud Khalil nor Rümeysa Öztürk did "brazenly voice their support for any group designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization", or do anything close to that. Khalil acted as a liaison between student protesters and school administrators. Öztürk did nothing more than co-author a single op-ed critical of the university's reaction to a student union vote regarding Israel. The government's case against both students is absurdly weak and obviously ideological, and meant to sow fear and crush dissent.
'Imagine inviting someone to study at Columbia and then allowing them to lead an effort to overthrow our government' - well, this 'effort' only exists in the poster's imagination, since neither of the abducted students he mentions didn't anything remotely close to that.
This Hillary, Joe and Kamala voter feels compelled to first lecture you. The Democratic Party is in turmoil because they don't appreciate the popularity of some of Trump's positions. They're blind to unpopularity of progressives. The majority of Americans don't think foreign students have the right to try and influence any of our sociopolitical positions. You're a guest in my house. Study and shut up.
'Study and shut up.' - spoken like a true MAGA neo-fascist!
I do appreciate how you are able to pack so much nonsense into a fairly short comment.
It's not 'Hillary, Joe and Kamala' that claim green card holders and other residents in the US are protected by the First Amendment, it's decades worth of federal court rulings, as I already said above and you apparently ignored.
It's also the recorded opinion of federal judges spanning the political spectrum, including right wing superhero Antonin Scalia, as I also said above and you ignored. It's also the simple fact that there is not a word in the Constitution that supports your view..you know, that old document MAGA fans claim to respect and revere?
Most American's emphatically do not support deporting green card holders who have committed no crime.
Besides, Trump's GOP have shown quite clearly they hate free speech for American citizens as well. They have fought First Amendment rights related to discussing abortion, Palestinian rights, gay and lesbian history, African American history, transgender rights, climate change, and anything else they don't like.
It would be interesting to see if Biden ordered the abduction of, say, Israeli students who were pro-apartheid and supported Israel's war crimes, or Russian students supporting Putin, or even foreign born students who support homegrown terrorist groups like the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers..then had them thrown into prison for months with no charges and no due process. The right wing punditocracy snowflakes would melt with rage instantly, of course... and hey, they wouldn't be wrong, just absurdly hypocritical.
You are flat wrong about the Democrats, who indeed are flailing but for the precise, polar opposite of the reason you give...its obvious the 'centrist' Dems are facing fire from their base for not fighting Trump enough..while AOC, Sanders and others are more popular than ever, again the complete opposite of what you claim. AOC would easily beat Schumer for NY Senate if there was an election today.
And, of course, Trump is not remotely popular, and neither is his former BFF Musk. So-called 'progressive' positions like supporting a clean environment, health care, housing, and education, are as popular as ever. Ruining the economy and destroying the reputation of the US with nonsense tariffs and siding with dictators is, um, not.
Hold it! Student visa holders are NOT "green card holders."
Not that it's remotely relevant, since anyone residing in the US has First Amendment protections, as I have explained a couple times and you continue to avoid addressing....but Mahmoud Khalil DID have a green card. A federal judge has already ruled that Secretary of State Marco Rubio likely violated the Constitution when he stripped Khalil of his green card - there's that 'Constitution' thing again.
Rumeysa Ozturk did have a student visa. She has already been released on bail. The judge in her case said, 'She has done nothing other than essentially attend her university and expand her contacts within the community in such a supportive way.”' and also said the government has offered zero evidence that she has done anything wrong or posed any threat.
Should the US be able to deport Israeli students without any due process, and throw them into prison without any criminal charges, for supporting Israel's illegal apartheid regime and illegal occupation?
Grrr. I have addressed your (mistaken) opinion that “anyone residing in the US has First Amendment protections!!!” Here's a lengthier discussion that any idiot can obtain. The SCOTUS will decide, and not you.
https://www.google.com/search?q=the+argument+that+Khalil+does+not+have+freedom+of+speech+like+a+citizen&oq=the+argument+that+Khalil+does+not+have+freedom+of+speech+like+a+citizen+&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRiPAjIHCAIQIRiPAtIBCTMzMzM4ajBqOagCDrACAfEFP3Z8GH_S-3fxBT92fBh_0vt3&client=ms-android-comcast-us-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
'Shipman has served on Columbia’s Board of Trustees since 2013, and many on campus see in this the explanation for her leadership. Like her predecessors'. I wish the author had told us that Shipman's election was literally a coup at the Columbia Univ. - the Board of Trustees can start the search and the election process for the president, not elect their own member. Please watch this for a serious coverage of what happened at Columbia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzLO1M0Xe30&t=799s
Omg, that is so disgusting. I met my university president, James Laney at his university estate. I heard him speak many times but never at commencement (I attended and graduated at three of them). What kind of people will go to Columbia - only the uninformed? Will rising classmen (alright, class persons) even stay? One of my professors interviewed at Columbia (decades ago) and he was crossing the avenue to the campus and an unfortunate person staggering his way in the opposite direction suddenly had to stop (of course right by my professor) and vomit in the crosswalk. Said professor proceeded to interview without missing a beat. No one noticed (or smelled) the detritus, apparently :) The sad thing is Columbia is, to me anyway, a failed titan, just like leon mush. Who of sound mind would have anything to do with either of them or their products anymore?