Like president Schill, I cannot speak for everyone in the MIT Free Speech Alliance, but what he says exemplifies what we represent. Also like president Schill, I’m Jewish and cannot imagine how any rational human being can condone what Hamas has done. These acts precisely parallel those of Kristalnacht—with a double side order of added b…
Like president Schill, I cannot speak for everyone in the MIT Free Speech Alliance, but what he says exemplifies what we represent. Also like president Schill, I’m Jewish and cannot imagine how any rational human being can condone what Hamas has done. These acts precisely parallel those of Kristalnacht—with a double side order of added barbarity.
That said, allowing free expression of horrific sentiments and beliefs, while painful, is necessary for several reasons. First, it identifies the arguments that underlie the evil. Thus identified, we can counter them. Second, it also identifies the evil people—at least the ones bold enough not to hide after expressing themselves. We, who are pro-Israel, aren’t shy about identifying ourselves.
And third, we have a little rule book called the Constitution that explicitly requires freedom of expression. The Bill of Rights makes no exception in the First Amendment for the expression of evil. I believe that the correct responses to evil speech is more and countervailing speech. And if evil speech becomes evil action, the ability to defend oneself is required. By any means necessary.
As a side note, the previous three MIT presidents, Chuck Vest, Susan Hockman, and Rafael Reif were all very free about speaking ~as~ MIT presidents, implying that what they said represented the general sentiments of MIT professors, students, and alumni. Often they didn’t represent those positions. I know they were called on doing that because I personally protested those actions directly to all three of them. Only Reif finally recognized that what they had been doing was wrong and stopped doing it. Our current president seems to have adopted president Schill’s stance on the matter. A good thing, that.
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
Yes, agree to disagree. In a geopolitical sense, not an individual self-defense: no chemical weapons, indiscriminate targeting of civilians, no nuclear weapons, no torture, ... (lots of rules of war).
Peter—where the Israelis and I part company is that I’m willing to break the same rules as my enemies break. If they use nukes, I use nukes, if they torture, so do I. I will have either a level playing field or one that tips to my advantage. I’m more practical than I am noble.
Didn't know you wanted more details. But since you imply that you do:
Raping people advances zero military goal, so no, not interested in that.
Torture sometimes can yield useful information provided the subject actually knows something useful and has a relatively low pain threshold.
I'm strongly against asymmetric warfare unless I have the advantage. Going to war isn't a game that you play by rigid rules, especially if the enemy is bent on annihilating you and your civilian group. It's a struggle for survival. And if you lose, you're the victim of genocide.
My family immigrated here from the old country about 110 years ago--Poland and Russia. My. grandfather bore the scars of the Kishinev pogrom. He was the one--and only one in his family--who saw what was coming and got out in the early 1910s. He remained unable to persuade the rest of his family to come to the US, even despite bringing them all over there for a visit in 1927. He continued to write to them well into the '40s, but he stopped getting answers in 1941.
All of them were murdered.
That was confirmed in 1946. I was born in April of 1947.
My family has a similar background as well. The problem with torture is that not only is it needlessly cruel, it very rarely produces reliable information. As to who one is "better than", our actions and motivations define us. I'll make sure not to be captured by you then🥸
“Oh how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope.” — Martin Luther
Like president Schill, I cannot speak for everyone in the MIT Free Speech Alliance, but what he says exemplifies what we represent. Also like president Schill, I’m Jewish and cannot imagine how any rational human being can condone what Hamas has done. These acts precisely parallel those of Kristalnacht—with a double side order of added barbarity.
That said, allowing free expression of horrific sentiments and beliefs, while painful, is necessary for several reasons. First, it identifies the arguments that underlie the evil. Thus identified, we can counter them. Second, it also identifies the evil people—at least the ones bold enough not to hide after expressing themselves. We, who are pro-Israel, aren’t shy about identifying ourselves.
And third, we have a little rule book called the Constitution that explicitly requires freedom of expression. The Bill of Rights makes no exception in the First Amendment for the expression of evil. I believe that the correct responses to evil speech is more and countervailing speech. And if evil speech becomes evil action, the ability to defend oneself is required. By any means necessary.
As a side note, the previous three MIT presidents, Chuck Vest, Susan Hockman, and Rafael Reif were all very free about speaking ~as~ MIT presidents, implying that what they said represented the general sentiments of MIT professors, students, and alumni. Often they didn’t represent those positions. I know they were called on doing that because I personally protested those actions directly to all three of them. Only Reif finally recognized that what they had been doing was wrong and stopped doing it. Our current president seems to have adopted president Schill’s stance on the matter. A good thing, that.
Great comment. I disagree that self-defense is required "by any means necessary." No, there are lots of rules also on how to make war.
OPEN BORDERS FOR ISRAEL . . . BECAUSE IT IS ONLY FAIR . . .
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/03/sweden-jews-call-for-ban-on-nordic-resistance-movement/
We can agree to disagree. If I’m endangered, or someone I love is, the gloves come off.
Yes, agree to disagree. In a geopolitical sense, not an individual self-defense: no chemical weapons, indiscriminate targeting of civilians, no nuclear weapons, no torture, ... (lots of rules of war).
Peter—where the Israelis and I part company is that I’m willing to break the same rules as my enemies break. If they use nukes, I use nukes, if they torture, so do I. I will have either a level playing field or one that tips to my advantage. I’m more practical than I am noble.
If you choose to torture then you are no better than those you torture. If they rape, do you then rape?
बलात्कार जिहाद का प्रमुख हथियार है।
(Rape is the main weapon of Jihad.)
-
यहूदियों और मुसलमानों की जड़ें और रीति-रिवाज समान हैं।
(Jews and Muslims have similar roots and customs.)
-
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/67b
OK.
Thanks for your non-response response. Respectfully noted.
Didn't know you wanted more details. But since you imply that you do:
Raping people advances zero military goal, so no, not interested in that.
Torture sometimes can yield useful information provided the subject actually knows something useful and has a relatively low pain threshold.
I'm strongly against asymmetric warfare unless I have the advantage. Going to war isn't a game that you play by rigid rules, especially if the enemy is bent on annihilating you and your civilian group. It's a struggle for survival. And if you lose, you're the victim of genocide.
My family immigrated here from the old country about 110 years ago--Poland and Russia. My. grandfather bore the scars of the Kishinev pogrom. He was the one--and only one in his family--who saw what was coming and got out in the early 1910s. He remained unable to persuade the rest of his family to come to the US, even despite bringing them all over there for a visit in 1927. He continued to write to them well into the '40s, but he stopped getting answers in 1941.
All of them were murdered.
That was confirmed in 1946. I was born in April of 1947.
Please don't tell me who I'm no better than.
-
बलात्कार जिहाद का प्रमुख हथियार है।
(Rape is the main weapon of Jihad.)
-
यहूदियों और मुसलमानों की जड़ें और रीति-रिवाज समान हैं।
(Jews and Muslims have similar roots and customs.)
-
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/67b
-
My family has a similar background as well. The problem with torture is that not only is it needlessly cruel, it very rarely produces reliable information. As to who one is "better than", our actions and motivations define us. I'll make sure not to be captured by you then🥸
“Oh how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope.” — Martin Luther
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/oh-how-fond-they-are-of-the-book