(Forward)
In the below issue of Forward, UC Santa Cruz lecturer Tammi Rossman-Benjamin explains why she filed a Title VI complaint against UCSC (America's wackiest university).
http://forward.com/articles/150968/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=The%2520Forward%2520Today%2520%2528Monday-Friday%2529&utm_campaign=D
This is one reason why UCSC is, indeed, America's wackiest university. You have entire departments hosting events 100% against Israel with zero balance, professors encouraging students to demonstrate at diplomatic missions, and pure indoctrination going on at the expense of true learning and critical examination of issues. All of this is presided over by UC President Mark Yudof, who is indifferent to harassment conducted towards Jewish students who try to stand up for Israel.
Gary you know that it is not a crime to attack a Jew on a UC Campus. A judge declared that recently.
ReplyDeleteTherefore it is not a crime to kill a Jew on a UC Campus. I expect that to happen next.
You may be right, but you haven't offered one fact about what actually happens at UCSC. Just some colorful graphics, some adjectives, and some sweeping characterizations.
ReplyDeleteFindalis: citation please?
Siuarlys,
ReplyDeleteFor all your criticism, of Tammi, why don't you read what she writes. She alwsys gives examples of things that happoen there.
@ Siarlys here is your citation: Judge Richard Seeborg Deems Case ‘Free Speech’
ReplyDeleteThank you Findalis. This case seems to turn on whether the woman was "rammed with a shopping cart" or whether someone used intemperate speech in response to her own speech.
ReplyDeleteThe judge wrote as it if was the latter. You speak as if it was the former.
Ramming a student with a shopping cart is battery, not free speech, no matter what words may have accompanied it. It may also be intimidating someone in the exercise of a federally protected right, a distinct federal felony.
Gary, I have read Tammi's long-winded utterances. Why do you assume I haven't? She makes only the vaguest allusions to the facts she relies upon. I think I was talking about your own text, which was even more given to stringing together adjectives and sweeping characterizations.
As I've said before, if there is something to this, the best way to make the point is persistent, detailed, work to push it through every available recourse, sort of like good police work or even competent agitational work.