Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

<

>

Open Forum on the Pro-Palestine Encampment on the UCD Quad

598f7067-85aa-4d13-8b6b-0aab5b7ef1c9I went to two Seders this year.  At the first one, no one mentioned the Israel-Gaza war.  It did seem a bit the elephant in the room.  Just before the second Seder, I received an email from the host, referencing an online blog essay by author Ilana DeBare.  It suggested:

I suggest opening up your seder to discussion, not just readings. Ask guests—in advance so they have time to consider—to bring their own thoughts and feelings about Passover and this war, and suggest that they come with open ears and an open heart. Let down the defensive walls that we’ve been carrying for months. At the Seder table, we can hopefully feel safe and able to listen to others, even if their views are different from our own.

So in that spirit, I'm inviting the citizens of Davis to express their thoughts about the encampment on the Quad on the UC Davis campus.  While y'all are hashing this out, I'll be in the kitchen eating gefilte fish.

 

    584e84f0-81a6-4af8-9848-ecb992a57a8a4de1cad8-f4cb-425b-9782-0c790095ac7c E03170f4-a5e0-44ed-a884-d58b5ba4e405

Posted by

Alan C. Miller

on

in

, , ,
Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

85 responses to “Open Forum on the Pro-Palestine Encampment on the UCD Quad”

  1. RK

    I don’t doubt that the flag guy was trying to provoke and to make a statement. Then again, so is the entire encampment at UCD. I also agree that it’s not solid legal ground to display one flag and not allow display of the other. If “time, manner, place” restrictions apply to one of them, they should apply to both.
    Meanwhile, it looks like the “Davis October 7th Coalition” IG account has documented some direct support of a designated terrorist organization (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)) at the UC Davis encampment:
    https://www.instagram.com/p/C6487zZxiS4/?igsh=MWQ1ZGUxMzBkMA==
    The U.S. State Department has had the PFLP on its list of Designated Foreign Terror Organizations since 1997.

    Reply
  2. Alan C. Miller

    RK say: “I also agree that it’s not solid legal ground to display one flag and not allow display of the other. If “time, manner, place” restrictions apply to one of them, they should apply to both.”
    I think that’s a ridiculous assertion in this context. This was one flag in a large tent/dome, not an official display by the Festival. Full disclosure, I helped stand on a ladder and put the flags up. Not with any political intent, I was just helping put the Festival together. I don’t get involved with the student’s political statements. Doesn’t mean I agree with all of it. If I’d heard any actual Jew hatred expressed by anyone, I would have said something and maybe sat-out the Festival this year, but I never did.
    As for ‘time, manner and place’, why are y’all focusing on one flag in one dome at a large Festival? What about the numerous similar flags at the encampment right now? How about digging fifty holes in a large circle on the Quad and installing fifty Israeli flags on poles surrounding the encampment? Then you can test out your “time, manner, place” restrictions in real time.

    Reply
  3. Roberta L. Millstein

    ACM wrote:
    “They are excellent people, and I mean that.”
    I am willing to take your word for that, since I don’t know them.
    “”So, it seems he caught them phrasing things in an inapt way. It happens.”
    It sure does. We are talking about young-adult college students in the 18-22 year old range facing an aggressive, provoking man with impressive giant-flag-waving arm strength and probably twice-or-more their age. Would you be totally “apt” in handling this same situation, even with your extra years of life experience? I had volunteered to talk with this man if he showed up again, but he left. I like to think I’d have handled the conversation well, but . . .”
    It does sound like it was a difficult situation and as described, no doubt I would not have handled it well either. My point is not to criticize the students. My point is to get clarity on the policy and practice. I think that they may have inadvertently made a mistake. Mistakes happen. I’m not trying to come down on them. But I think it’s worth learning from mistakes.
    I also want to be clear that I am not defending the person with the Israeli flag. I don’t know him either. Maybe he is “nice” or “excellent” or maybe he isn’t. That isn’t my point. Similarly, I am not defending his group. I looked through all of the Instagram posts and they say several things that are too extreme for me.
    “”Or perhaps it was a bit more than that.”
    Perhaps, but so what?”
    Because I think it matters that different groups on campus are treated the same. It is important to me and I would hope it would be important to all. I have defended the right of the pro-Palestinian protesters to be there, even as I disagree with some (not all) of the things that they say. I would also defend the right of a person who wanted to display an Israeli flag, even though I have never displayed an Israeli flag myself and don’t have any plans to.
    “”There is the statement “it shouldn’t be happening at our festival” and “that is what we chose to do at our festival.” Not “this is just our personal expression as volunteers.”
    Well, the reality is that the people at that space decided to put up three flags, as I said before, I’m guessing in solidarity with repressed groups. You may disagree with their choices, but it was theirs to make. This was nothing more than that, didn’t require staff consensus, and really isn’t a big deal.”
    I think you are mistaken about this. They were WEF volunteers who stated that they were representing the WEF view. Is that really the WEF view, and if so, is this allowed by campus policy? Is it right for an event that is supposed to be inclusive? Again my point is not to criticize them for remarks made in the heat of the moment but rather, now that the moment is over, to say what should have happened.
    “He also used a short clip that cuts off the woman talking. And maybe more reasonable things were said, and maybe more unreasonable things were said before/after.”
    Entirely possible, I agree.
    Ok, I have done my best to clarify what I am saying and what I’m not saying. But to repeat myself yet again: I’m looking for clarity on issues which will no doubt come up again at future events — not to cast shade on or criticize the students in any way. And I am not defending the particular actions of the Israeli flag waver, only saying that on University property for an event for all, there is no grounds for excluding an Israeli flag where a Palestinian one is allowed.

    Reply
  4. Ron O

    If you guys want to see a REAL confrontation, check out Beth Bourne’s Facebook page. Suggestions to Beth include “put a gun in your mouth”, and physically advancing toward her from behind a banner. Possibly by a UCD professor.
    Not to mention repetitive chants regarding Beth’s apparent home address, tires slashed, her group’s rights violated by a library official – for which no apology or corrective action has been announced, served with an unjustified restraining order by DJUSD, implied threats by law enforcement, shunning by many in the community, etc.).
    That, my friends, is dedication to a cause.

    Reply
  5. Alan C. Miller

    Beth does Israel-Palestine now?

    Reply
  6. Ron O

    Alan M: I understand that she shows up there (on campus) during these protests. Not sure why.

    Reply
  7. Keith

    “Beth does Israel-Palestine now?”
    Pro Palestinian protesters know Beth’s home address now?

    Reply
  8. Alan C. Miller

    RM say: “there is no grounds for excluding an Israeli flag where a Palestinian one is allowed.”
    Again, nothing was excluded, no one was banned, no flag was banned, staff decorated their space as they wished. We had a Ukraine booth the last few years that displayed Ukrainian flags. Should WEF have erected a Russian flag next to it for equal time?
    As for the statement that this was ‘what we decided to do with our festival’, I believe they meant the space did, or more likely they didn’t know why it was put up — I didn’t until I asked because of the flag guy video. You have conversations and through the course of it things are clarified if they need to be. You record a clip of a conversation for video, and edit the parts that make your point, and you can blow a comment out of proportion.
    As for the thing about ‘scaring children’, it wasn’t that the flag would scare children, it was that those who ran the Kid’s Space at the festival didn’t want someone who was being aggressive and provoking people for video fodder to be taking up residence near Kid’s Space. The reason is they didn’t want a confrontation happening near festival spaces, especially not Kid’s Space, if someone were to challenge flag guy. So they asked him to move and suggested a space. He was always free to move about the festival with his flag.

    Reply
  9. Ron O

    The reason is they didn’t want a confrontation happening near festival spaces, especially not Kid’s Space, if someone were to challenge flag guy.
    So it’s “safe for kids” as long as someone doesn’t show up with the wrong flag?

    Reply
  10. Alan C. Miller

    RO: “So it’s “safe for kids” as long as someone doesn’t show up with the wrong flag?”
    How did you get that out of what I said? You all are starting to wear my ass out 😐

    Reply
  11. Ron O

    Ha!
    But seriously, there’s at least a small “hint” of non-objectiveness in your account – perhaps because you have a pre-formed opinion of the group based upon your familiarity with them.
    I wasn’t there (don’t know if you were), but I suspect they could have just been friendly or just ignored the guy.
    One thing you don’t want to do is to suggest that someone go elsewhere in a public space (unless they’re actually harassing you).
    Some claim that Beth is harmful to children, while she claims that they are. (Something to that effect.) Nothing like the “vulnerability of children” to shame others (or try to).
    Another alternative: play dumb, and say – “yeah, I don’t know who hung that Palestinian flag up.” But then (if you want to respond), ask “flag guy” if he thinks the Israeli response is proportionate. And then let it be at that.
    If I was there, they could probably ask me if I think there’s a housing shortage.
    And if Beth was there, she could ask them if they think there’s any concerns regarding gender-based medical interventions, or vice-versa.
    The next time that someone wants to take a photo of me in a public (e.g., distributing anti-Covell Village materials at The Cannery), I might pose for them.

    Reply
  12. Alan C. Miller

    RO say: “Ha!”
    “But seriously, there’s at least a small “hint” of non-objectiveness in your account – perhaps because you have a pre-formed opinion of the group based upon your familiarity with them.”
    I am very familiar with them, I have been helping out for decades and was there working with staff all weekend. You could say I am non-objective, or you could say I know this very intimately and therefore know more. Your choice.
    “I wasn’t there (don’t know if you were), ”
    I wasn’t there when the video was taken, but did see the guy with the flag.
    “but I suspect they could have just been friendly or just ignored the guy.”
    He wasn’t exactly making it possible to ignore him. He was provoking.
    “One thing you don’t want to do is to suggest that someone go elsewhere in a public space (unless they’re actually harassing you).”
    Why not? We’ve done this with many people who are disrupting spaces at the Festival. Such as Bible verse guy.
    “Some claim that Beth is harmful to children, while she claims that they are. (Something to that effect.) Nothing like the “vulnerability of children” to shame others (or try to).”
    I’m not commenting on the Beth vs. Anoosh shit-show here. The Festival runs the Kid’s Space. They didn’t want a someone being aggressive nearby and attracting a possible confrontation.
    “Another alternative: play dumb, and say – “yeah, I don’t know who hung that Palestinian flag up.” ”
    That’s a really bad plan.
    “But then (if you want to respond), ask “flag guy” if he thinks the Israeli response is proportionate. And then let it be at that.”
    That’s an even worse idea. Bringing politics into it inflames the encounter. This is about keeping the festival peaceful.
    “If I was there, they could probably ask me if I think there’s a housing shortage.”
    And . . . SCENE.
    “And if Beth was there, she could ask them if they think there’s any concerns regarding gender-based medical interventions, or vice-versa.”
    I said SCENE!!!
    “The next time that someone wants to take a photo of me in a public (e.g., distributing anti-Covell Village materials at The Cannery), I might pose for them.”
    SCENE!!! SCENE!!! SCENE!!!

    Reply
  13. Ron O

    From this point forward, I’m bringing a kid with me (if I can borrow one somewhere) whenever I engage in a political argument. Or any kind of argument.
    Something like what occurs at the 3:19 minute mark.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQTdy9PS8jw&t=4s

    Reply
  14. Alan C. Miller

    3:19 minute mark –> An unfortunate example of using a child as a human shield. Successfully.

    Reply
  15. Alan C. Miller

    ***** Hello Everyone! I moved the following comments here that were posted by RK on the thread about Mom’s vs. Library, because the subject was about the encampment. I haven’t removed any content *****

    R Keller
    ACM; ok, now apply the same principle to a festival held on public property that decided to privilege the display of certain political flags over others. Did they also think their “political views were more important than free speech principals”?
    This decision has some relevance:
    https://www.courthousenews.com/supreme-court-expands-free-speech-on-government-property/
    “The city was wrong, the Supreme Court ruled. By allowing so many other people to fly flags, the city had turned its flagpole into a public forum and now it is barred from limiting speech that it does support or discriminating on the basis of religion.”

    Posted by: R Keller | May 15, 2024 at 01:28 PM

    Alan C. Miller
    RK, you want to have this discussion in the encampment forum, I’ll respond. You are just being provoking by posting this here, like that ass-hat with the Israeli flag. I won’t post any response to this here, as it’s another discussion, and a proper forum is available.

    Posted by: Alan C. Miller | May 15, 2024 at 01:32 PM

    R Keller
    ACM: is this not an “open discussion” forum for related free speech issues here?
    And how is it being “provoking” to cite recent relevant Supreme Court decisions.
    Your choice as to whether to respond or not here, but equating me with an “ass-hat” is already a response that makes it clear you aren’t prepared to have an actual discussion on the matter.

    Posted by: R Keller | May 15, 2024 at 04:22 PM

    R Keller
    Calling people “ass-hats” here: allowed
    Posting relevant court cases here: not allowed
    Got it.
    Posted by: R Keller | May 15, 2024 at 05:41 PM

    Reply
  16. Alan C. Miller

    RK say: “now apply the same principle to a festival held on public property that decided to privilege the display of certain political flags over others. Did they also think their “political views were more important than free speech principals”?”
    As I’ve said, the flags was not displayed by “by the festival”, this was how those running the space in the dome decided to decorate the space. As I asked before, should there have been a Russian flag erected next to the Ukraine booth with the Ukrainian flag? The Israeli flag was never banned, they just asked him to step away from the Experiential Space and the Kid’s Space, as they didn’t want a confrontation happening near Festival spaces, as this is a very contentious issue and the guy was being aggressive and likely to attract a confrontation. If they told him to put his flag away, that would be a different manner. He was also free to walk around with his flag. If you still think you have a court case over this, sue me; I stood on a ladder and helped the student staff put the flags up. I’m sure your case will go far.
    “The city was wrong, the Supreme Court ruled. By allowing so many other people to fly flags, the city had turned its flagpole into a public forum and now it is barred from limiting speech that it does support or discriminating on the basis of religion.”
    There was only one flag, in one space, not ‘so many other people’, and it wasn’t on a flag pole, and the Festival as such neither sanctioned nor opposed it. Again, the man was asked to not stay by the spaces, not told to leave nor put his flag away. Your arguments are weak soup, the incident was provoked and a creation for display on Instagram. Pretty similar to entrapment in digital video form.
    “ACM: is this not an “open discussion” forum for related free speech issues here?” RK: “And how is it being “provoking” to cite recent relevant Supreme Court decisions.”
    That wasn’t the provoking part, and you know it. Got a mirror around?
    “Your choice as to whether to respond or not here, but equating me with an “ass-hat” is already a response that makes it clear you aren’t prepared to have an actual discussion on the matter.”
    I didn’t equate you to an ass-hat, I said you are being provoking like the alleged ass-hat. I’ll remove the ‘alleged’ after the jury trial to determine if he’s really an ass-hat. So I compared you to the alleged ass-hat, not equated you to him.
    “Calling people “ass-hats” here: allowed. Posting relevant court cases here: not allowed. Got it.”
    I allowed you to post the relevant court case, I just moved it to the forum on the subject, not the forum you subject crashed.
    As for the use of ass-hat, I use the pejoratives here because fellow Jews who make asses of themselves doesn’t help Jews or Israelis or Palestinians or anyone. It just gives ammunition to the those who use the term ‘Zionist’ in the same tone and with the same digust as Jews use the word ‘Nazi’.
    I feel this both towards extreme Israeli nationalists who think Israel’s shit don’t stink, as I do towards extreme, self-declared Jewish ‘anti-zionists’ who think Israeli should be abolished, the 7 million Jews there ‘returned to Europe’, and that October 7th was ‘deserved’ upon Israeli. Both of y’all team-joiners on your extreme sides can go jump into either the River or the Sea, I care not which.

    Reply
  17. R Keller

    ACM said “As I’ve said, the flags was not displayed by “by the festival”, this was how those running the space in the dome decided to decorate the space.”
    Do you read what you write? This makes no sense at all. They were “running the space” at the festival but they weren’t representing the festival in any way? How does this hair-splitting work exactly? Is there some secret manual of responsibility avoidance you are consulting to determine this?
    Like I surmised before, regardless of what thread you decide to stick things in, you are not prepared to have an actual discussion of the issues at hand when people who you personally like do similar things as the librarian you were all too happy to excoriate and ridicule.
    I guess you could always “put your head between your legs and push with your arms…”

    Reply
  18. Alan C. Miller

    RM said: “ACM said “As I’ve said, the flags was not displayed by “by the festival”, this was how those running the space in the dome decided to decorate the space.”
    RM say: “Do you read what you write? This makes no sense at all. They were “running the space” at the festival but they weren’t representing the festival in any way? How does this hair-splitting work exactly? Is there some secret manual of responsibility avoidance you are consulting to determine this?”
    I do read what I write. Over and over again. And genuflect in the glory of my brilliance. And I did in fact read “The Secret Manual of Responsibility Avoidance”. Though I will not admit to having read it.
    To clarify, again: I didn’t say the space didn’t represent the festival in any way. I said the decision to hang that flag in that particular dome, or anywhere, wasn’t made by the Festival staff. The people running that space decided to. The Festival staff doesn’t go around policing how people decorate their space, or tell them to have ‘equal time’ flags. The staff is actually really fucking busy setting up and running the festival. Had the Festival consensed on putting up a Palestinian flag on a flagpole next to the Staff Dome, your point may have had some merit.
    “Like I surmised before, regardless of what thread you decide to stick things in, you are not prepared to have an actual discussion of the issues at hand when people who you personally like do similar things as the librarian you were all too happy to excoriate and ridicule.”
    Bullshit.
    A) I am discussing it.
    B) The librarian was a paid government employee who stopped someone from speaking at a public event because they didn’t like what they were saying. No one told flag guy he couldn’t display his flag. He was being provocative and filming for Instagram hits, and they were concerned of a confrontation and asked him not to stand there. I think I’ve said that several times. That’s not the same thing as shutting down a public event because of words. I doubt we’d have been comfortable with an aggressive Russian guy standing next to the Ukraine booth and Ukraine flag waving a Russian flag acting the same way.
    RM: “I guess you could always “put your head between your legs and push with your arms…” ”
    How is it RK that you know my morning workout?

    Reply
  19. Roberta L. Millstein

    ACM, you said RM a few times when you meant RK.

    Reply
  20. R Keller (not RM)

    ACM: you still haven’t addressed in any substantive way what the people “in charge of” what you have previously as the main festival dome did to favor certain political expressions and bar others on public property. There is a direct parallel with the Supreme Court decision I cited,, in that once you allow for certain political expressions in a public space, you need to not discriminate against others.

    Reply
  21. Alan C. Miller

    RM: “ACM, you said RM a few times when you meant RK.”
    Funny, you don’t look like RK.
    Funny, you don’t act like RK.

    Reply
  22. Alan C. Miller

    RK say: “ACM: you still haven’t addressed in any substantive . . . ”
    Define “substantive”
    ” . . . way what the people “in charge of” what you have previously as the main festival dome did to favor certain political expressions and bar others on public property.”
    They did nothing to favor such. As I explained. Substantively. If you don’t find my explanation substantive, find someone more substantive to argue with.
    “There is a direct parallel with the Supreme Court decision I cited”
    I don’t agree. If you’d like a more substantive opinion, take the matter up with the Supreme Court.
    ” . . . in that once you allow for certain political expressions in a public space, you need to not discriminate against others.”
    Since you like to play the Rick Keller “You Still Haven’t” Game, you still haven’t answered if the Ukraine booth should have had a Russian flag erected next to it. Or should the Jewish Nationalists opposing the Pro-Palestinian encampment on campus have a Nazi flag erected next to the Israeli flag?
    Time for a vote: who won the argument, AM or RK ? The loser of this vote is banned for life from flying a flag on public property without flying an opposition flag.
    “When Captain America throws his mighty shield
    All those who chose to oppose his shield must yield”

    Reply
  23. Ron O

    Time for a vote: who won the argument, AM or RK ?
    To paraphrase something that David Letterman might say, “the reader”?

    Reply
  24. Ron O

    (Damn – I meant to say “who lost” the argument.)

    Reply
  25. Ron O

    (Damn – I meant to say “who lost” the argument.)

    Reply
  26. R Keller

    ACM: Your strawman questions (“you still haven’t answered if the Ukraine booth should have had a Russian flag erected next to it. Or should the Jewish Nationalists opposing the Pro-Palestinian encampment on campus have a Nazi flag erected next to the Israeli flag?”) don’t address the actual issue and are meant to deflect from the actual issue at hand.
    The issue is not whether the WEF representatives and people “in charge of” the main festival dome “should” put up flags/other material representing all possible political views. The question is whether such people in charge and acting in an official manner on public property can allow/favor certain political views in the central community space while barring others. There is clear case law guidance on this. It starts in the very first sentence in the link I posted:
    “Once a government opens up a forum to the public, it might have to allow viewpoints it doesn’t agree with, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a decision that scolds Boston for being selective about which flags citizens can fly outside city hall…. By allowing so many other people to fly flags, the city had turned its flagpole into a public forum and now it is barred from limiting speech that it does support or discriminating on the basis of religion. “

    Reply
  27. Alan C. Miller

    RO: I doubt there are any other readers to win or lose at this point.
    RK say: “ACM: Your strawman questions (“you still haven’t answered if the Ukraine booth should have had a Russian flag erected next to it. Or should the Jewish Nationalists opposing the Pro-Palestinian encampment on campus have a Nazi flag erected next to the Israeli flag?”) don’t address the actual issue and are meant to deflect from the actual issue at hand.”
    The question wasn’t meant to deflect (he says, meaning to deflect).
    RK say: “The issue is not whether the WEF representatives and people “in charge of” the main festival dome “should” put up flags/other material representing all possible political views. The question is whether such people in charge and acting in an official manner on public property can allow/favor certain political views in the central community space while barring others.”
    As I said, no one was barred. But if you want “barred” defined, please take your case to the Supreme Court.
    RK say: “There is clear case law guidance on this. It starts in the very first sentence in the link I posted: “Once a government opens up a forum to the public, it might have to allow viewpoints it doesn’t agree with, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a decision that scolds Boston for being selective about which flags citizens can fly outside city hall….”
    I doubt the Supreme Court would consider a once-a-year festival run by students, “a government”. But if you’d like “government” defined, you can take your case to the Supreme Court
    RK quoteth: ” . . . By allowing so many other people to fly flags, the city had turned its flagpole into a public forum and now it is barred from limiting speech that it does support or discriminating on the basis of religion. “
    I responded to that, above. If you disagree with my response, please take it to the Supreme Court.
    There isn’t actually an issue at hand anymore. As Dave Mason sings:
    “So let’s leave it alone ’cause we can’t see eye to eye . . . There’s only you and me and we just disagree. Ooh ooh ooh, oh oh oh”
    Or you can take it to the Supreme Court.

    Reply
  28. Keith

    “RO: I doubt there are any other readers to win or lose at this point.”
    I’m still here and still losing.

    Reply
  29. R Keller

    ACM: it seems that you still haven’t figured out the basics of this incident: a group of people (who, as you said, were “in charge” of a space on public property) privileged certain political expressions while seeking to stop others. Their actions were very close to those of the librarian who you ridiculed and condemned.
    It seems that someone who is supposedly tuned into free speech issues and assisted the students in setting up would have provided them with better advice.

    Reply
  30. Alan C. Miller

    Hey RK. I gave my view, you gave yours. I think you are wrong. You think I am wrong. What part of “”So let’s leave it alone ’cause we can’t see eye to eye . . . There’s only you and me and we just disagree. Ooh ooh ooh, oh oh oh” don’t you understand?

    Reply
  31. Ron O

    I would never “agree to disagree”. By doing so, we’d no longer be disagreeing, and I certainly can’t agree to that.
    Not sure if I can “disagree to agree” – would have to consider the ramifications of that.

    Reply
  32. Alan C. Miller

    RK say: “It seems that someone who is supposedly tuned into free speech issues and assisted the students in setting up would have provided them with better advice.”
    You obviously know nothing about relating to students, or people.
    What advice, were you in my place, would you have provided, and when would you have provided it?
    After you are done telling me, I’ll tell you how far your lead balloon would have flown.

    Reply
  33. R Keller

    ACM: you claim you want to leave things alone while providing a couple more comments in a row. You obviously know nothing about leaving things alone.
    Ironically, you were strangely silent when you could have provided the students some actionable advice about the problems with trying to selectively favor some political viewpoints while policing others in a public venue.

    Reply
  34. Alan C. Miller

    RK Say: “you claim you want to leave things alone while providing a couple more comments in a row. You obviously know nothing about leaving things alone.”
    I know. Annoying isn’t it?
    RK say: “Ironically, . . . ”
    You obviously know nothing about irony (see above).
    You obviously know nothing about rhetorical bear traps set in your honor (see above) . . . #SNAP!# . . . oh, I’m sorry, how’s your leg?
    RK continue: “you were strangely silent when you could have provided the students some actionable advice . . . ”
    You try telling young adults what do in expressing their political beliefs. Get back to me about how that goes for you.
    ” . . . about the problems with trying to selectively favor some political viewpoints while policing others in a public venue.”
    That is your interpretation of things, which I’ve already stated I disagree with, and have invited you to take it to the Supreme Court for legal clarification. Or even David Rosenberg if you want a less-expensive option and don’t want to wait a few years.
    Why is it that you believe that my helping out as a volunteer at a festival for 40 years obligates me to give advice (your advice, advice that I don’t agree with) to those running said festival? You can attempt to continue to spin it that this is a similar situation to the library incident. I’ve already told you why I disagree with that. No repetition on your part — like an obsessive David Greenwald writing about housing (again) — is going to change my mind.
    And as for being strangely silent, how about you go to the Pro-Palestine encampment and provided the students (and others?) there with some actionable advice about the problems with trying to selectively favor some political viewpoints while policing others in a public venue. Get back to me on how that goes for you.
    I believe the issue flag guy had was with the encampment . . . and you, as he, tried to drag WEF into this because he’all could actually get inside WEF because WEF allowed him inside with a flag, then he’all went instagram-video-provoker apeshit about one flag and tried to make it into some big constitutional-violation legal bullshit that you and he aren’t going to follow up on because you don’t have a leg or a penis to stand on.
    How about instead you focus on the encampment that has blocked a public path, has an army of face-obscured ‘protesters’, is literally policing the area with their own security force — an area which should be open to all — and has dozens and dozens of the very same flag? No one at WEF covered their face for flag man’s video or anyone else’s as we have nothing to hide.
    “Fight the real enemy!” — Sinead O’Conner

    Reply
  35. Roberta L. Millstein

    ACM, again you mean RK not RM.

    Reply

Leave a reply to R Keller (not RM) Cancel reply