Columbia professor's anti-american Rant

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-31 09:00am

These professors need to become human shields.. None of them have ever left there fucking Ivory towers and have seen real war or suffering.. It just pisss me off that he would call for the death of American soldiers..

This fucktard has to go!!!http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/03 ... omalia.ap/

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-03-31 09:06am

He's a frickin' idiot.

I wonder if he has tenure or not? It's one thing to speak out against war etc... it's different to cheer the deaths of your country's soldiers. It's treasonous to encourage people to help kill them.

Besides that, didn't thousands of Somalis die trying to kill those 18 American soldiers? I know that's not what he meant but he's really rolling out the stupid isn't he?

I don't see how he thinks he's helped his anti-war cause. He's just made more people dismiss peace activists as wackos.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-31 09:22am

This is probably one of those peacenik hippies left over from the seventies who did the 'perpetual college' deal during Vietnam to keep from fighting.

His spewings sound like something from then.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-03-31 09:26am

How can dick-brain like him wish the death American soldiers and claim free speech as an excuse.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-03-31 09:27am

Tsyroc wrote: He's a frickin' idiot.

I wonder if he has tenure or not? It's one thing to speak out against war etc... it's different to cheer the deaths of your country's soldiers. It's treasonous to encourage people to help kill them.

Besides that, didn't thousands of Somalis die trying to kill those 18 American soldiers? I know that's not what he meant but he's really rolling out the stupid isn't he?

I don't see how he thinks he's helped his anti-war cause. He's just made more people dismiss peace activists as wackos.

I wouldn't call it treasonous outright. Fucking stupid, yes, but not treason.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-03-31 09:37am

Iceberg wrote: I wouldn't call it treasonous outright. Fucking stupid, yes, but not treason.

You're probably right. Unfortunately.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-03-31 09:56am

It disturbs me how frequently and how easily treason has been invoked since 9/11 to silence dissenting viewpoints. We as a country are BUILT on dissenting views...

I sense a LiveJournal entry coming on.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-03-31 10:14am

I only used the term because he was encouraging people to help kill our service members. Otherwise I agree with you he has a right to state his opinion.

I think he stepped across the line with his statements. I don't use the word treasonous lightly because you are right it is used too often. I shouldn't have used it but on the same note I think he is far closer than anyone else who has been exercising their right to free speach.

Voicing decent is good. Same with alternatives. Hoping our people will be killed, stripped and dragged through the streets is not.

The Somalia comment kind of set me off. I wasn't there when the stuff he mentioned happened but I was stationed off the coast within spitting distance of Mogadishu when Clinton first decided we needed to be there so I've always had stronger feelings about that mess than I probably should.

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2003-03-31 10:15am

Iceberg wrote:It disturbs me how frequently and how easily treason has been invoked since 9/11 to silence dissenting viewpoints. We as a country are BUILT on dissenting views...

Do you have evidence that dissenting viewpoints are being suppressed?

It's one thing to respectfully disagree with the war, it's another to hope for a battle in which American soldiers to be shot and drug through the streets. This professor was publically hoping for the latter.

Andrew Sullivan has it right when he says

De Genova has every right in the world to say what he believes; and I would defend his right to say it anywhere, free from any governmental interference. By the same token, I am allowed to say that his views are morally repugnant.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-31 10:48am

Some famous French philosopher once said, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-31 11:01am

What he said does not surrpise me but the University has been trying to distance itself from his views and failing miserably. They said that he had the right to free speech and thus how could they supress it? They provided him witht the forum in which to speak, they are just as guilty for his distorted views as he for saying it. I'm sure this is not something new from him, someone cannot hate the US that much that these views don't leak out ocasionaly, PARTICULARLY in schools like Columbia. We are seeing what our children will have as teachers in the future and I am afraid. Many of these brainwashed liberal zombies are products of this. I see it all the time every graduation year you have these kids fresh from school spouting their ignorant nonsense about how evil America is and the injustices of "the system" then they get slapped and slapped hard by something called real life that is kept at bay in universities and these same fuckers suddenly realize what they've been spouting and most change their views right quick.

This is a symptom of what is happening in our college system. We have these professors that are given a bully pulpit to spew their trash. College I thought was to open your mind and allow you to see more viewpoints than your own. Instead what we get is a cloistered system that will NOT stand the opposing conservative view and force feeds the student body a nauseating mix of liberal agendas and half baked bullshit sociopolitical theories and passes them off as "truth". These impressionable young minds (these fuckers can't seem to think for themselves, here are the leaders of tomorrow folks) are then influenced by these teachings. Parents don't give a shit because as long as little Johnny or Jane has that diploma they figure it means their future is set, not giving a whit about what nonsense is entering Jane or Johnny's minds.

Also, the guy who organized the event saud that if he knew what this professor was going to say he MIGHT have not let him on. MIGHT? WTF?!?! So in other words you agree with that bullshit then. Its going to be funny watching Columbia backpedal from this. Fact of the matter is this is par for the course for their faculty.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-31 11:05am

BTW Queeb, Don't you think its a little Ironic.. Your statement , since you will not pick up a gun to defend anyone....

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-31 11:27am

Eric Foner is a good historian, at least, he had the balls to speak out against what the previous guy had said.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-31 12:00pm

Alex Moon wrote:Do you have evidence that dissenting viewpoints are being suppressed?

See the PATRIOT act. While I haven't heard of any arrests being made for violating it, it criminalizes the exercising of free speech, so you could very well be arrested if you say the wrong thing. Ice, like me, is just pissed off about being associated with fringe lunatics like this just because he's not pro-war (if memory serves), and that all anti-war people are labeled as "peaceniks," "fucking hippes," "anti-American," "unpatriotic" or whatever asinine stupidity the more rabid (and even some more reasonable) pro-war people wish to dish out. See my signature quote for a full explanation.

It's one thing to respectfully disagree with the war, it's another to hope for a battle in which American soldiers to be shot and drug through the streets. This professor was publically hoping for the latter.

Irrelevant. He is not actively contributing to any efforts to gun American soldiers down in the streets of Iraq, so he can say whatever the Hell he wants.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-31 12:01pm

theski wrote:BTW Queeb, Don't you think its a little Ironic.. Your statement , since you will not pick up a gun to defend anyone....

Thank you for letting us know that you think that the only way to defend anything is with the use of a gun.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-03-31 12:15pm

Irrelevant. He is not actively contributing to any efforts to gun American soldiers down in the streets of Iraq, so he can say whatever the Hell he wants.

True, but he opens himself up to consequences. Aide and comfort is not flippent, and by publicly anouncing the wish to see US troops killed in action, he is opening himself up to investigation or aleast scrutiny. Not to mention the right of the opposing side to call him a moron. Lets face it, the right to free speach gives idiots on BOTH sides to spew bullshit.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-31 12:20pm

theski wrote:BTW Queeb, Don't you think its a little Ironic.. Your statement , since you will not pick up a gun to defend anyone....

A) The French never picked up a gun to defend anyone either.

B) (And more seriously) You don't have to pick up a gun to defend someone's right to do anything. The civil rights movement was founded on that premise. As was India's expelling of the British. So there.

C) I'm not going to commandeer this thread with my pacifist views. I started a string for that already, so if you'd like to talk more about pacifism, I will gladly do it in the "Why I Oppose..." thread.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-31 12:37pm

Durandal, Your right the only way to defend anything is to use a gun

I take you have never heard of "a fiqure of speech" BTW do you ever take a stand on this or do your prefer to snipe from the side..

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-31 12:44pm

Theski, in Durandal's defense, you implied a lot by saying what you did. He was right to counter it.

As for sniping from the side, who says he has to take a side in this? Gray-area sniping is fine, so long as it's even. And considering the anti-war people haven't made silly comments (coughlikeyourscough), he's had no reason to snipe our side. ::Shrugs:: You've become a casualty of debate. Sorry, chum.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-31 01:00pm

Queeb, So you think your comment was not a little silly as well, I have no argument with you, you have stated you postion "fine" I respect that. I do not belive you can be neutral on this.. just my opinion.. BTW it takes a lot more than that to make me a casualty..

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-03-31 01:12pm

Iceberg wrote:
Tsyroc wrote: He's a frickin' idiot.

I wonder if he has tenure or not? It's one thing to speak out against war etc... it's different to cheer the deaths of your country's soldiers. It's treasonous to encourage people to help kill them.

Besides that, didn't thousands of Somalis die trying to kill those 18 American soldiers? I know that's not what he meant but he's really rolling out the stupid isn't he?

I don't see how he thinks he's helped his anti-war cause. He's just made more people dismiss peace activists as wackos.
I wouldn't call it treasonous outright. Fucking stupid, yes, but not treason.

That's exactly what I'm thinking. It was stupid. Opposing the war is one thing, but saying you want American soldiers that are only doing their jobs killed, it's uncalled for, and will only further embarrass the anti-war movement.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2003-03-31 02:27pm

I cant take this shit anymore

. Someone drop HIM into Iraq and see how he like's it.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-03-31 03:06pm

*does quick calculation*

Hmm... so he advocates the death of 1-3 billion people in the third world? Wow... That's like... all of it...

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2003-03-31 03:59pm

Beowulf wrote:*does quick calculation*

Hmm... so he advocates the death of 1-3 billion people in the third world? Wow... That's like... all of it...

I was thinking the same thing..............

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-03-31 04:04pm

There is concern that Columbia's "traditions of free speech" will defend this guy from professional harm.

Local papers here in New York suggest his tenure will be fine despite the calculatedly toxic comments.

What I want to know is how this guy got out of the damn' lecture hall without fists being thrown.