Search the Lounge

Categories

« The Irony of Justice Stevens' Speech Entitled "Oops!" | Main | More On Dean Mutua's Resignation From Buffalo Law »

September 23, 2014

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

anon

KJH:

Your snark isn't clever. It is unprofessional.

If you don't believe there is a Jewish Lobby, say so.

But, more importantly, instead of attacking others, KJH, why don't you explain, in a cogent and reasoned manner, the evidence that supports your view that the President, Chancellor and Board of Trustees (save one) in this instance were all swayed by money and not the merits.

You made the claim. But, I fail to see any support in your comments.

Light a candle in the darkness, KJH! Stop attacking and let's hear your brilliant analysis. Really, wow us with your marshaling of facts, and the brilliance of your insights.

Prove your accusations! Prove that you are more than just a few snarky comments (that make no sense).

anon

And, btw, believing that the University was influenced by donors is EXACTLY the same as believing in the Israel Lobby, i.e., pure fantasy based on hate, lack of information and a tendency to accuse rather than illuminate.

Barry

Howard: "It really is how you count it. Nine referred to donor status. But is mentioning donor status a threat with respect to money? This is kind of broad, since every alumnus and every student is a potential donor. So it arguably is only eight who explicitly linked future donations to the current decisionmaking."

A 'potential donor' is rather different from an actual big-money donor.

Barry

"And, btw, believing that the University was influenced by donors is EXACTLY the same as believing in the Israel Lobby, i.e., pure fantasy based on hate, lack of information and a tendency to accuse rather than illuminate."

Where 'pure fantasy' = 'based on evidence'.

anon

Yes, Barry. Yes. Evidence, indeed.

So, why don't YOU explain, in a cogent and reasoned manner, the evidence that supports your view that the President, Chancellor and Board of Trustees (save one) in this instance were all swayed by money and not the merits.

And, then, and I’m sure that many will really want to read this, tell us all about the “Jewish Lobby.”

Has international Jewry started all the wars in the world with their control of banking and the media? Did the Jews control the President, Chancellor and Board of Trustees in Illinois with their money? Why, I’ll bet you have lots and lots of “evidence” that "proves" this!!! Let’s hear it.

Please, enlighten us. Make your case persuasively. Convince a reasonable person that you are doing more than just throwing around accusations.

With respect to the failure to appoint at issue here, name names. Tell us the names of the President, Chancellor and Board of Trustees. Tell us the identity of the donors who threatened to withhold money, and the effect that those threats had on the decision by each one of them. Perhaps you have investigated this issue and actually know why you are accusing this group of gross impropriety.

However, presuming that you actually know nothing about any of this, at least tell us the volume of donations at stake on BOTH SIDES of this decision, and tell us what financial consequences flow from NOT appointing.

Identify the news reports, hearsay, internet garbage, or whatever it is you are relying on. Be specific.

Barry

Godwin

Anon

A worthwhile video on Salaita's tweets: http://youtu.be/vcDBrXj_t2U

anon

No evidence to back up the first false accusation that President, Chancellor and Board of Trustees were influenced by donors who threatened to withhold money. (Other than some really scant basis to throw around the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.)

Answer: throw out another false accusation. ("Godwin" ... what a laugh. Completely inapposite. Just another risible accusation.)

Nothing. KJH. Barry. Someone!

Please! Play some cards here. Let's hear some evidence to back up your copious accusations.

Again, presuming (and it is very reasonable at this point to do so) that you actually know nothing about any of this, at least tell us the volume of donations at stake on BOTH SIDES of this decision, and tell us what financial consequences will flow from NOT appointing.

And, Barry, please be sure to tell us the evidence that the Jewish Lobby had a role to play in this decision. Again, I think readers will truly want to hear your views on this. You said "based on evidence." Let's hear it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad