reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker questions whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates MIT's code of conduct. They mention instances of anti-Semitic behavior on campus and criticize the university's response. They express concern about incidents of harassment and discrimination against Jewish students and staff, highlighting the fear and dehumanization they experience. The speaker emphasizes the importance of defending Jewish identity and culture, stating that they will not be erased. They assert their strength and unity, declaring "never again is now."

The speaker expresses concern over the CCP's infiltration and funding of woke culture in US colleges and universities. They question the students' support for Hamas during pro-Palestinian rallies, despite Hamas' violent actions. Speaker 1 mentions that Harvard and other universities have provided exclusive training to CCP officials, suggesting that colleges and universities have been invaded by the CCP's ideology. They express sympathy for parents who worked hard to send their children to college, only to see them develop hatred towards the country and its people.

Speaker 0 asks if calling for the genocide of Jews violates the code of conduct at MIT, Penn, and Harvard. Speaker 1 and Speaker 2 state that if the speech becomes conduct and is severe or pervasive, it can be considered harassment. Speaker 3 mentions that it depends on the context and if it crosses into conduct, it becomes actionable. Speaker 0 insists that calling for the genocide of Jews is unacceptable and dehumanizing, and demands a clear answer. Speaker 3 continues to emphasize the context, while Speaker 0 argues that the answer should be a straightforward yes. Speaker 0 concludes by stating that these answers are unacceptable and calls for resignations.

Speaker 0 asks representatives from MIT, Penn, and Harvard if calling for the genocide of Jews violates their respective institutions' code of conduct. Speaker 1 from MIT states that chants calling for the elimination of Jewish people can be investigated as harassment if pervasive and severe. Speaker 2 from Penn says that if the speech becomes conduct, it can be considered harassment. Speaker 3 from Harvard mentions that anti-Semitic rhetoric crossing into bullying, harassment, or intimidation is actionable conduct. Speaker 0 insists that the answer should be a clear yes, and criticizes the representatives for their responses.

During a congressional hearing on antisemitism, the speaker admits to not fully considering the gravity of a call for the genocide of Jewish people on their university campus. They acknowledge that such a call is deeply threatening and intended to terrorize a community that has historically faced persecution. The speaker believes that this kind of speech should be considered harassment or intimidation. They express the need to reevaluate their university's policies in light of the increasing prevalence of hate. The speaker, along with the Provost, plans to initiate a thorough examination of these policies to ensure a safe and supportive environment for all.

Harvard has about 31% foreign students, which is too much because Americans want to attend. The speaker wants to know who these students are. No foreign government contributes money to Harvard, but the US does. The speaker wants a list of the foreign students to determine if they are "okay," assuming many will be. The speaker also claims Harvard is anti-Semitic and that this must stop immediately.

The speaker, Shay Davide, addresses the audience as a concerned parent and professor at Columbia Business School. He expresses his frustration with university presidents, including Columbia's president, for not speaking out against pro-terror student organizations. He highlights the recent kidnapping of US citizens in Gaza and criticizes the support these organizations receive. Davide emphasizes that his own children are considered legitimate targets by these groups. He calls for action, urging parents to question colleges about their stance on pro-terror organizations and to contact their representatives. Davide concludes by stating that he speaks up because he is afraid and feels unsafe on his own campus.

Jewish students on college campuses are facing anti-Semitic protests, including being spit on, physically assaulted, harassed, and blocked from attending class. People are chanting genocidal slogans. The speaker questions where Jewish students are assaulting Palestinian students, emphasizing the lack of evidence.

Talia Khan, an MIT graduate student and president of the MIT Israel Alliance, expresses concern about the rise of anti-Semitism on campus. She highlights the failure of the MIT administration, led by President Sally Kornbluff, to address the issue. Khan mentions the presence of a radical anti-Israel group called the CIA, whose rhetoric has created an intolerant atmosphere. Jewish students feel compelled to hide their identities, and some have received death threats. The administration has not taken action against anti-Semitic actors, including faculty and staff. Khan urges President Kornbluff to prioritize student safety and requests congressional intervention if necessary.

Harvard University and MIT are now being criticized for tolerating and possibly encouraging antisemitism. There is little outcry in America about this issue, with conservative media being the only ones discussing it. The media's focus on a fake news story about a noose in Bubba Wallace's garage overshadowed the seriousness of the antisemitic attacks. The speaker emphasizes the need for more attention and sensitivity towards the attacks on Jewish people.

The speaker accuses President Greenberg of funding genocide and betraying students to Zionist interests. They declare him guilty and express anger towards him.

Speaker 0 asks if calling for the genocide of Jews violates the code of conduct at MIT, Penn, and Harvard. Speaker 1 and Speaker 2 state that if the speech becomes conduct and is severe or pervasive, it can be considered harassment. Speaker 3 mentions that it depends on the context and if it crosses into conduct, it becomes actionable. Speaker 0 insists that the answer should be a clear yes, but Speaker 3 maintains that it depends on the context. Speaker 0 concludes that these answers are unacceptable and calls for resignations.

The speaker states the situation at Harvard is so bad, their options were limited to speaking out or pursuing legal action. The language and treatment described evoke a dark period in history, with uncertainty about sanctions for such speech on college campuses. One speaker asserts that students are telling the truth, but Harvard will not turn over documents because Joe Biden's Department of Justice and Department of Education will not act, prioritizing Michigan. The Democratic Party is split, with a pro-Palestinian wing preventing protection for Jewish students. The speaker predicts the subpoena will expire, a contempt motion will be filed, and the Department of Justice will not intervene.

The speaker expresses their gratitude for being present but acknowledges that they should be focusing on their studies instead. They recount a recent incident on campus where classmates and professors chanted for the genocide of Jews, defaced school property, and spread anti-Semitic messages. The neighboring university's president condemned the incident, but their own university's president remained silent. The speaker describes how their beloved university has become a hostile environment for Jewish students, with acts of intimidation and harm taking place. They criticize the university for not holding the perpetrators accountable and express their fear and lack of safety on campus. The speaker calls for the university to uphold its policies and for their fellow classmates to stand up against this crisis.

The speaker expresses concern over the CCP's infiltration and funding of woke culture in US colleges and universities. They question the students' support for Hamas during pro-Palestinian rallies, despite Hamas' violent actions. Speaker 1 mentions that Harvard and other universities have provided exclusive training to CCP officials, and believes that all colleges and universities have been invaded by the CCP's ideology. They express sympathy for parents who worked hard to send their children to college, only to see them develop hatred towards their own country and its people.

The speaker criticizes universities, claiming that the younger generation is weak and overly educated with no grasp of reality. They argue that universities are teaching students misinformation about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and supporting terrorism. The speaker applauds billionaires and CEOs who are withdrawing funding and refusing to hire students who blame Israel for Hamas' actions. They mock students who ask for therapy after facing consequences for their actions and express frustration with the perceived lack of intelligence and life experience in the younger generation. The speaker concludes by stating that these students should be held accountable in the workforce.

During a congressional hearing on antisemitism, the speaker admits to not fully considering the gravity of a call for the genocide of Jewish people on their university campus. They acknowledge that such a call is a horrific act of violence and should be seen as a threat, harassment, or intimidation. The speaker emphasizes the need to reevaluate their university's policies in light of the increasing hate and intolerance in the world. They commit to creating a safe and supportive environment for all members of their community.

Last night at Columbia University, there was open support for Hamas, with signs threatening Jewish students. The administration is not taking action, allowing terrorists in while keeping the NYPD out. The speaker calls on Mayor Eric Adams to act, warning of potential consequences if he doesn't. They also urge Governor Kathy Hochul to bring in the National Guard to address the situation. Enough is enough. Translation: The speaker expresses concern about support for Hamas at Columbia University and calls on Mayor Eric Adams and Governor Kathy Hochul to take action.

The speaker accuses university officials of prioritizing private property over free speech, funding genocide with tuition dollars, and targeting Palestinian students. The board of trustees is blamed for profiting from weapons sales to Israel. The accused are found guilty and sentenced to divest from companies supporting genocide, protect pro-Palestinian speech, and end academic partnerships with Zionist institutions. The people demand justice and accountability from the university. Translation: The speaker accuses university officials of prioritizing private property over free speech, funding genocide with tuition dollars, and targeting Palestinian students. The board of trustees is blamed for profiting from weapons sales to Israel. The accused are found guilty and sentenced to divest from companies supporting genocide, protect pro-Palestinian speech, and end academic partnerships with Zionist institutions. The people demand justice and accountability from the university.

The speaker discusses what they call "little Gazas" that have risen up on campuses across America. They criticize liberal college administrators and politicians for not restoring law and order and protecting other students. The speaker describes these "little Gazas" as "disgusting cesspools of anti-Semitic hate" full of pro-Hamas sympathizers, fanatics, and freaks. They claim that the terrorist sympathizers in these "little Gazas" are violently and illegally demanding death for Israel, just like the Ayatollahs in Iran.

The speakers question whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates the code of conduct at MIT, Penn, and Harvard. The responses vary, with some saying it depends on the context and others stating that it can be considered harassment. The speakers argue that calling for genocide is unacceptable and dehumanizing, and they believe it should be a clear violation of the code of conduct. They express their disappointment with the answers given and call for resignations.

The speaker expresses concern about the rise of anti-Semitism in the United States, particularly among students at elite universities and in corporate America. They criticize university presidents for evading questions about whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates their policies against bullying and harassment. The speaker provides context by describing horrific acts of violence committed against innocent civilians, including sexual assault and murder. They argue that the university presidents should not pick sides and should protect all students, including Jewish students. The speaker calls for the resignation of the university presidents and urges people to stand against support for violent acts. They express solidarity with the Jewish community and hope for the safe return of missing individuals.

The speaker discusses a situation involving Professor Dershowitz and Dean Kagan at Harvard Law School. The speaker questions whether Professor Dershowitz should be allowed to keep a claim on the website, while expressing frustration with the lack of response from Dean Kagan. The speaker highlights the issue of limits on the website and gives an example of a derogatory post about Dean Kagan's mother. The speaker argues that the institutions protecting Professor Dershowitz are the problem, not him personally.

The speakers question whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates the code of conduct at MIT, Penn, and Harvard. Speaker 1 acknowledges that chants calling for the elimination of Jewish people can be anti-Semitic and investigated as harassment if pervasive and severe. Speaker 2 states that if speech turns into conduct, it can be considered harassment. Speaker 3 mentions that calling for the genocide of Jews can be considered anti-Semitic rhetoric, but it depends on the context. Speaker 0 expresses frustration with the answers and insists that calling for the genocide of Jews should be considered bullying and harassment.

Jewish students are facing death threats and lack of support on campus, making them feel unsafe. The student body and administration deny the existence of antisemitism. One student shares their personal experience of being targeted with hateful words at Columbia's law school. Another incident occurred at Cornell, where Jewish students were threatened, causing fear and lockdowns. Anti-Israel students also trapped Jewish students in a library. These incidents are happening in 2023, not in Nazi Europe. The speaker calls on Columbia to take action and prevent similar incidents from happening.