PDA

View Full Version : UC-Berkeley student body president: "Administrators are not bound to the constitution"




NorthCarolinaLiberty
08-25-2017, 12:04 PM
Summary:


--Professor Mark Cohen and Student Body President Zaynab Abdulqadir-Morris took to Twitter to show their outrage over UC Berkeley’s decision to allow Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, and Ann Coulter speak on campus.

--Cohen called the university re-commitment to free speech a sop to baby boomers, urging his followers to “confront the appeasement of the alt-right neonazis by the @UCBerkeley admin.”

--Abdulqadir-Morris, meanwhile, absurdly declared that the public university has no obligation to the U.S. Constitution, but must honor its own “code of conduct which denounces hate speech.”






Student body prez: UC-Berkeley 'not bound to Constitution'
Neetu Chandak
New York Campus Correspondent
@CampusReform
on Aug 24, 2017 at 9:43 PM EDT


A University of California, Berkeley professor and the student body president recently condemned the school’s decision to allow right-wing speakers on campus.

UC-Berkeley will host conservative speakers Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, and Ann Coulter in September, and school administrators are preparing students by rededicating themselves to free speech after the same speakers were shut down by rioters earlier this year.

According to a letter sent out by Chancellor Carol Christ, “public institutions like UC Berkeley must permit speakers invited in accordance with campus policies to speak, without discrimination in regard to point of view.”

However, American and African American Studies Assistant Professor Michael Cohen took to Twitter on August 23 to demonstrate his outrage with the decision and chastise the administration for failing to ban the speakers from campus.

“Our campus has responded to the rise of Neo-nazism by welcoming them to terrorize, harass and threaten our students,” he wrote, adding, “All so our naive & useless administration can double down the baby boomer free speech branding bullshit. @UCBerkeley should be ashamed.”

Cohen, worried that the “Alt-right invasion” will aggravate racial tensions at the school, then told his followers that a massive and effective organization will need to take place to “confront the appeasement of the alt-right neonazis by the @UCBerkeley admin.”

As of August 24, Cohen has taken down some of the tweets reported by Campus Reform, but Student Body President Zaynab Abdulqadir-Morris shared similar sentiments.

“We know what side UC Berkeley administrators are on,” she said in one tweet, elaborating that “They value Berkeley’s brand > than the us.”

Abdulqadir-Morris further claims that the university is not bound to the constitution, but only to the “code of conduct which denounces hate speech.” [See full tweet in article.]

In another tweet, she states that “A valuable education would involve administrators modeling to us how to combat bigotry on campus” even going as far as to call the speakers “hateful no body's [sic]” and “proponents of ethnic cleansing.”

Campus Reform contacted Cohen and Abdulqadir-Morris for comment, but did not receive responses in time for publication.

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9640

angelatc
08-25-2017, 12:30 PM
So now Ann Coulter is a neo-Nazi.


“We know what side UC Berkeley administrators are on,” she said in one tweet, elaborating that “They value Berkeley’s brand > than the us.”

Why on Earth did the colleges ever decide to let students run the colleges?

Raginfridus
08-25-2017, 01:01 PM
This is good news, they're finally admitting what we knew was basically true.


There are many students, faculty members, and even lawyers who believe, wholly erroneously, that if a college receives any federal or state funding it is therefore "public". In fact, accepting governmental funds usually makes the university subject only to the conditions -- sometimes broad, sometimes narrow -- explicitly attached to those specific programs to which the public funds are directed. (The most prominent conditions attached to all federal funding are nondiscrimination on the basis of race and sex.) Furthermore, the "strings" attached to virtually all federal grants are not always helpful to the cause of liberty, which needs a certain breathing room away from the government's interference. This is one reason why people who worry about excessive government power are often opposed to governmental funding of private colleges and schools.http://www.knowmyrights.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44:free-speech-rights-on-private-college-campuses&catid=18&Itemid=123&showall=&limitstart=1

Majorly overpaid, tacked out campus police and SWAT deal with military surplus, for equipment like this:

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/purdueexponent.org/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/72/c7257a31-314e-5185-8a8b-172b432ee569/526da4cc1ebc8.image.jpg

Purdue PD donated the MRAP, which was donated to them from military surplus, to West Lafayette PD. This is sheer overkill. The damn thing has no tactical application on our town streets, let alone against hypothetical campus shooters. I don't even know if WLPD still have it, or if they gave it to the local Nat'l Guard. Its not like WLPD's mechanics can service this mother. Nobody thought to ask Purdue why they maintain a pipeline with military surplus. I'm sure Purdue's not the only "private" U fortifying their fiefdom, by taking surplus from the military. With an endless war, paramilitaries will only become more lethal.


Why on Earth did the colleges ever decide to let students run the colleges?They're still malleable in their early 20's, and alumni can go on to high places. That means influence, money, and prestige.