Jump to content

Mikey4

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    1432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mikey4

  1. 19 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

    Mask bans are very likely constitutional.  I think they are wise. People protesting behave better when you can see their faces.  Also aids in identifying them.  And then convicting them in front of a jury should they destroy property or commit violence.  Courts have long held bans on disguises are constitutional in KKK cases.  
     

    https://casetext.com/case/church-of-the-american-knights-of-the-ku-klux-klan-v-kerik

    That surprises me, but the First Amendment is not my practice area, and I haven't studied it closely in nearly 20 years, so I guess I’m out of the loop. Even if the state can prohibit people from wearing masks when they protest, I don’t think it should for the reasons I gave. I completely share your concern about protesters breaking the law. But if that happens, arrest them and reveal their identity at that point.

    This is also a difficult set of facts for me, and perhaps for you as well, because I disagree with these protesters and their message, and I would be personally happy to see them identified. But it’s also possible that in 20 or 40 or 60 years, my kids or grandkids or great grandkids will need to protest government tyranny while remaining anonymous for their own safety, and the law should be set up to allow them to do that. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. The First Amendment doesn't say that the right to free speech requires the speaker to reveal his or her identity, and requiring people to reveal their identity when protesting could chill protected speech. As long as the speaker is obeying the law and campus policy, I don’t see the problem with masks.

    If it crosses over into illegal conduct, then the speaker can and should be arrested and identified at that point. The threat of arrest should be real enough to serve as an incentive to keep the protest within the boundaries of the law. You do that, you can remain anonymous. You cross the line into violating the law or campus policy, and your shit goes on blast.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  3. 7 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

    i-dont-believe-you-whatever.gif

    What a bizarre thing to post. Is that supposed to be funny? Because it sounds like you’re accusing me of sympathizing with Nazis, which is an outrageously offensive, personal insult and is not humorous in the least. 

    I haven’t called you, or anyone else on here, an anti-semite for sympathizing with these protesters, and I would appreciate the reciprocal courtesy of people not accusing me of hideous things based on my disagreement with the protesters. Those accusations are not based in reality and are not constructive.

     

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 1
  4. 16 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

    The bill that was passed allows them on campus though. Along with people holding signs saying “women are property” and yell at students walking by going to class, calling female students whores and sluts and male students who do don’t look sufficiently masculine to them homophobic slurs

    Thank you for telling me that.

  5. 6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    The campus free speech bill was literally passed in response to ATM students refusing to allow a neonazi speak at their campus. It was designed to hold the door open for hateful speech and a political agenda onto campuses. 

    Great. I oppose Nazis and do not want them on campus.

  6. Just now, jimmyjazz said:

    The "outside group" delineation is what bothers me.  Hate speech and lawlessness should not be tolerated on campus, period.  The affiliated status of those protesting (hateful or not) matters not one fucking whit, but here we go, it's code for "furriners".

    Legally, you are right. But practically, I am much more skeptical of someone who has no apparent reason to be on campus in the first place. if you’re not a stakeholder of the university -- not a student, not a professor, not an employee, not an alum, not there to attend some official function, etc. -- then you may be less likely to care about following university policy. But yes, I agree, hate, and lawlessness have no place on campus, regardless of the source.

  7. 9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

    Well, except for that detail that the public can legally gather on campus.

    You missed the part where I specifically limited my comment to people exhibiting hate or lawlessness. Unless you are OK with the public assembling on campus to engage in illegal conduct or to say hateful things to or about minority groups.

  8. 2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

    Oh, I agree, but you should know that the poster I was specifically referencing has a very long history of it and a well-deserved reputation for being a bigot. 

    OK then, if you're referring to legit racism, then I agree. I couldn't tell what exactly you were referring to.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  9. 36 minutes ago, bolverk said:

    You'd get no argument from me. Can we extend it to folks who shout Islamophobic shit, too?

    Absolutely. We should not support racism of any kind.

    Quote

    Or how about we be consistent by also calling out posters on this board who like to dip their toes in the hate pool with not-so-playful "jokes" so that we, as an online community, don't start resembling the racist idiots on SECrant and Texags? I mean, The University of Texas is supposed to set a higher standard, right?

    Right again. My only caution is that your description is pretty vague, and more than once I've seen accusations of racism lightly thrown around based on very thin evidence, such as some loose guilt by association. if people are exhibiting racism, then they should be condemned. But that accusation should be reserved for real cases of racism and not used as a cheap way to dunk on someone who is not personally engaging in racist speech or behavior. If someone writes something we disagree with, but it is not racist, let’s engage with the idea and debate the idea and avoid slandering people with false accusations.

  10. 34 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


    “OUTSIDE AGITATORS!”

    That’s what we’re supposed to say, right? These pro-Israel, anti Palestinian protests have to be driven from our campus with brutal violence because OUTSIDE AGITATORS! I’m just keeping the standard.

    well, you are right to do so. We should not tolerate hate and lawlessness on campus by anyone, and certainly not by outside forces who are bringing their political agendas onto our campus.

    • Hook 'Em 6
    • Like 1
  11. 11 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

    Anyone who was involved in violence should be arrested and charged. 
     

    As I said upthread, the probability that contentious demonstration will devolve into violence and clashes increases to 1 the longer they go on.  It is completely unreasonable and non-sustainable for a select group of people to claim the right to hold a permanent live-in protest in a place they have no right to occupy, and either police it themselves (they have no right to do that) or demand that the public authorities provide security and support for them as they claim public (and sometimes private) spaces for themselves to the exclusion of the rest of the public or the actual owners.

    Camping isn’t speech.  Allowing it to get this far is a massive failure of responsibility and foresight.

    And this is all the point, the point isn’t to petition or exercise free speech, it’s to cause a disruption. 

    I watched a lot of the UCLA videos, and your description matches what I saw. In a nutshell, the confrontation arose because the protesters were forcibly excluding members of the public from entering a public space. The counter protesters were trying to enter the public space, as they had a right to do, and that led to the escalation and violence. Don’t put up barricades in public spaces, don’t prevent other members of the public from exercising their rights to share in those spaces, and demand that police remove these obstructions immediately, and none of this happens. 

    • Hook 'Em 5
  12. 27 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

    The craziest Lake Travis event in my living memory was the Memorial Weekend flood that filled it up in 2014 (2015?).  Went from low as fuck to 680 in like a few days.  We went out on the lake the week after and the water was all cloudy from all the sediment.  Would like to see that again.

    2015. It was crazy. We need it again.

  13. 35 minutes ago, Helobious said:

    You don’t think making gorilla noises towards black people is racist at all? 

    That's not what you said. You said that racists have overtaken the counter-protests. The implication is that the people displaying the American flag and singing the anthem are engaging in racism. They're not.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  14. 4 hours ago, Helobious said:

    didn’t take long for racists to take over the counter-protests. 

    That's a very big accusation. Which counter-protests were overtaken by racists, and how do you know they are racist? The videos I saw mainly show people singing the national anthem and displaying the American flag, which is protected free speech, not racism. I saw a couple of instances where counter-protesters yelled, hit, or said mean things to protesters, but I didn't see where they had overtaken the counter-protests, and I didn't hear obvious racist slurs.

  15. 1 hour ago, Texzilla588 said:


    These schools should have strict policies in place and act on them immediately. For students, if you violate law or campus policy, illegally enter buildings, destroy property, etc. you will be arrested. You will be immediately expelled. You will be billed for the full amount of all damage by your group. That bill will be sent as well to your parents. If you are a professor or instructor participating you will be arrested and fired. If you are a paid agitator you will be arrested and shipped to Gaza. That is all.

    And none of that should be controversial at all. The people defending these protests are 100% correct -- the police and universities should and must be hands off when it comes to peaceful, lawful protests. But once the protest crosses the line into violence or lawlessness, it needs to be addressed immediately or risk it evolving into the awful displays we are seeing around the country.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  16. 3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

    You are, but if it makes you feel better, just keep painting everything in broad strokes because we all know the the world is black and white.

    If 1 protester meets your criteria they all must.

    I didn't paint in broad strokes, my post was nuanced and accounted for the fact that some of the protesters are capitalists. If you look at the Venn diagram of capitalists and pro-Palestinian protesters on college campuses, there's an overlap. You just have to squint a little bit to see it.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  17. 10 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

    Give me a fucking break.  Stop throwing around words like socialist and communist to describe the protestors.  Especially when you clearly have no idea what they mean...

    It's as bad as @Captainant continually referring to the cops as fascists.  

    You have no idea what their economic ideologies are.

    If you gave the protesters a multiple-choice question -- choose among (a) capitalism, (b) socialism, or (c) communism -- I doubt we see many people picking (a).

    • Hook 'Em 6
  18. 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.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  19. 6 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

     

    enemies of the united states do not identify as anti-christian, so why is anyone who is critical of israel an anti-semite?

    more than half of israel are really pissed off at likud but here we are in 2024, israel is 80 years old, but any criticism of israel is countered with "anti-semitism" which is by definition an attack on the jewish religion and not the israeli state

    we don't teach the history of the jewish people ("zionist history") the same way we have erased mormonism from the history of the western US in the 19th century

    it is more than okay to yell at israel and to yell at palestine and to yell at the sauds and jordanians and egyptians and and and and and and

    criticism of any arab state is not met with violent opposition screaming "islamophobic!"

    only israel has somehow managed to achieve the false equivalency of "questioning israel is an attack on our religion"

    The problem is that people chant "from the river to the sea," which basically rules out a two-state solution, but do not explain what will happen to the Jewish people who have inhabited that land for 3+ generations now. It sure sounds like a masked call at best for subjugation of Jews, and at worst for genocide. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...