is that because you don't understand how there could be a distinction, or that you understand but don't see a distinction? When I asked you earlier, I spoke about violence against Israelis. You changed the language in your response and wrote "against Palestine." You thus conflated 2 ideas. I'm trying to figure out why, and if the answer is because you don't see a distinction, then I understand your position.
Reports of what Hamas did on 10/7 were not always accurate, but everyone is afraid to say so because it would look like they’re defending Hamas.
it does in many people's minds because there is no consequence for making egregious statements, instead the institution is inviting that person and the cult of personality that person represents to have a space on campus. The university is trying to draw this distinction, but would it do that if the singer was a klansman?
maybe you misread what she said -- not about what Hamas did, but the false claims about what Israel did.
But false claims about Hamas are fine?
why ask about something which isn't the topic?
I mean, it’s just kind of funny that you criticize someone while doing the same thing.
Invited by a student group, not Cornell.
when have I done that?
That’s the point. These left-wing schools HAVE vetoed conservative speakers, but they are glad to approve of a Jew-hating guest who calls for violence against Jews.
The article I posted said the claims of Hamas and babies were fabricated.
And conservatives took them to court where the courts determined that the first amendment obligates the schools to host those speakers.
Were the speakers advocating for violence against blacks or Muslims, and on campuses where they were being assaulted ALREADY as part of a “movement”? No. They were just conservatives.
Technically this is not a First Amendment issue. Cornell is private.
Conservatives routinely advocate use of military force against various countries. Trump loves to do so.
