4 ms·
>pro-Palestinian activists who “enforced” what it termed a “Jew Exclusion Zone,” prohibiting Jewish students and staff from passing through the camp’s makeshift
by trhway 1y ago
>pro-Palestinian activists who “enforced” what it termed a “Jew Exclusion Zone,” prohibiting Jewish students and staff from passing through the camp’s makeshift barricades.
for me it looks like not just a civil case with UCLA. To me it looks like a straight criminal case of violation of federal civil rights law that FBI is supposed to prosecute. I.e. instead of collective punishment for the whole UCLA, i'd go with criminal prosecution against the specific individuals who perpetrated (i.e. those protesters who perpetrated the discrimination of Jews) as well as who materially supported (i.e. the administrators for example) those crimes.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- hcknwscommenter 1y agoAs best as I can tell, the protestors committed a trespass and used their free speech rights to espouse certain racist ideologies. Protesting against alleged (I take no position here, it's complicated is all I got) mistreatment of Palestinians and Gazans is not a crime or anti-Semitic in itself. The administration committed no crime by failing to immediately remove the trespassers. It is reasonable for the administration to have taken some time to assess the issue and develop a plan and execute the plan. It is reasonable to change tactics as new facts arise. It is reasonable to re-assess the situation as the public and government provides their input on the situation. Did the protestors do some gross/racist things? Yes I think. Did they commit a serious crime? Probably not I think. Did the administration? I doubt it.