Fanning the flames?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

And...Much of what's been done here has been because of where these people "chose to" protest. They could have protested elsewhere, they chose a campus, where they were not allowed to protest in the manner given.

The university is where they study and it was with regard to some university practises which they felt should be curtailed

And? Again, a public nuisance is just another way of saying "uncomfortable" which you so aptly pointed out, isn't a reason to stop speech.

No it is not. PSPOs in the UK will include the drinking of alcohol or the playing of loud music in certain locations and both those activities adversely affect local communities.

Silent prayer is a peaceful protest. You youself (below) argue that the PSPO isn't a law, so she wasn't breaking the law....

She was violating a public order by choosing to pray/stand in a particular location. If that PSPO had been introduced to ban the drinking of alcohol in that location and she had decided to protest by standing and drinking a can of beer she would also have risked being arrested.

Also, once they camped overnight, against school policy, and were asked to no longer do that, then they trespassed, breaking the law, even if they were peaceful.

Purely for clarification are you always so vehemently in defence of the law? Would you condemn the colonists in the 1770s and those various protests, acts of vandalism, and assaults on individuals?

A larger distinction is, as you so clearly spelled out above, was that the PSPO was DESIGNED FROM THE BEGINNING to stop the protests, specifically the protest centered around opposing abortion,

It was brought in for that precise purpose.

whereas the policies violated at Columbia were not designed with stopping Anti-Israel protests, but were general policies long in place designed to ensure schools could continue to teach.

Given that faculty members also walked out in protest at the end of April the ability to teach would have been curtailed anyway.

The students including Jewish students denied accusations that their protest was anti-Semitic and there were allegations that small groups of individuals were exacerbating the situation for their own purposes. Some academics considered the sending in of armed police as an over-reaction and nor can it be entirely ruled out, given the interventions from political individuals, that the protests were deliberately being reported in a particular manner to excuse closing them down:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...lash-1.7184780

[/FONT]

A group of teachers has successfully campaigned for the B.C. Teachers' Federation to lobby the government to include the history of Palestinians in the provincial curriculum.The proposal has drawn backlash from members of the Jewish community, who say the move is problematic and "one sided." [...] Teachers 4 Palestine, a group born in the wake of the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas that includes teachers of different faiths and backgrounds, was behind the motion. Tara Ehrcke, a Jewish high school teacher in Victoria who is involved with Teachers 4 Palestine, said the topic was "noticeably absent" from the curriculum.

An article here https://publicintegrity.org/educatio...y-free-speech/ deals with an incident in the USA

the University of Arizona suspended two education professors who implied during a class lecture that Hamas is not a terrorist organization. Audio recordings of the comments went viral on social media. After weeks of student and faculty protests, the university reinstated the pair.

That same site noted in another article that a professor in Texas was suspended merely for criticising the lieutenant governor in a lecture!

Such incidents are a cause for concern for anyone who values academic freedom or indeed free speech.

[FONT=Helvetica]And other articles note that lines are being drawn on campuses in other countries.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/...ls-war-in-gaza

Students of the Sciences Po university in Paris occupied parts of the institution and blocked entry to a building last week before riot police descended on campus.
On Saturday, Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, who like President Emmanuel Macron is among the university’s notable alumni, said his government “would not tolerate the actions of a dangerously acting minority trying to impose its rules and an ideology coming from North America”, following the three-day blockade at the prestigious school.
On Monday, undeterred by the threat of police action, antiwar protesters at the renowned Sorbonne University demonstrated on campus, setting up tents, chanting and waving the Palestinian flag.
Valerie Pecresse, president of the Ile-de-France region in which Paris is situated, has announced that the region’s funding for Sciences Po Paris will be cut until “serenity and security are restored in the school”.
As well as an end to Israel’s war, they called on their university to cut ties with Israeli institutions and other businesses they see as complicit in the war in Gaza that has to date killed about 34,500 Palestinians, mostly children and women.

So, none of that has to do with the campus protest encampments, or academic freedom WRT them.

It has a great deal to do with those protests and academic freedom.

If you are unable to recognise that then I fear that any further exchanges with you on this topic will be a waste of time. .

Are you saying that the college and police should ignore their crimes...provide them amnesty?

Quod scripsi, scripsi.

You are really trying to split hairs here. "PSPO isn't a law" is a distinction without a meaning. Violating a PSPO is a criminal offense. So, a PSPO is a rule which, when violated, results in a criminal offense. That is, for all intents and purposes, a law, even if you want to give it a different label, but it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and looks like a duck. I'll call it a duck.

You are trying to make a direct comparison between reactions from university administrators in your country concerning student protests on university campuses and a ban introduced by a local council dealing with a particular location within the UK.

The two are not comparable

[CivilDiscourse]

The university is where they study and it was with regard to some university practises which they felt should be curtailed


No it is not. PSPOs in the UK will include the drinking of alcohol or the playing of loud music in certain locations and both those activities adversely affect local communities.

She was violating a public order by choosing to pray/stand in a particular location. If that PSPO had been introduced to ban the drinking of alcohol in that location and she had decided to protest by standing and drinking a can of beer she would also have risked being arrested.

Purely for clarification are you always so vehemently in defence of the law? Would you condemn the colonists in the 1770s and those various protests, acts of vandalism, and assaults on individuals?

It was brought in for that precise purpose.

Given that faculty members also walked out in protest at the end of April the ability to teach would have been curtailed anyway.

The students including Jewish students denied accusations that their protest was anti-Semitic and there were allegations that small groups of individuals were exacerbating the situation for their own purposes. Some academics considered the sending in of armed police as an over-reaction and nor can it be entirely ruled out, given the interventions from political individuals, that the protests were deliberately being reported in a particular manner to excuse closing them down:

It has a great deal to do with those protests and academic freedom.

If you are unable to recognise that then I fear that any further exchanges with you on this topic will be a waste of time. .

Quod scripsi, scripsi.

You are trying to make a direct comparison between reactions from university administrators in your country concerning student protests on university campuses and a ban introduced by a local council dealing with a particular location within the UK.

The two are not comparable

You know, it's funny how you like to complain about comparisons people make on one hand, then suddenly bring up a situation 200 years ago as if you think it pertains to the current day.

[rogue06]

It surprised me that in the course of at least two threads on Ms Vaughan Spruce and about whom you have expressed so much support you referred to her "the woman".

And?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You know, it's funny how you like to complain about comparisons people make on one hand, then suddenly bring up a situation 200 years ago as if you think it pertains to the current day.

You have condemned law breaking by student protesters yet those colonial incidents of law breaking: protests, vandalism, violence, and, on occasion attempted murder, were in response to what were considered by the protesters at the time to be injustices and tyranny by their ruling administration.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

And?

I suppose it is just another manifestation of your short term memory problems.

[CivilDiscourse]

You have condemned law breaking by student protesters yet those colonial incidents of law breaking: protests, vandalism, violence, and, on occasion attempted murder, were in response to what were considered by the protesters at the time to be injustices and tyranny by their ruling administration.

I would point out that law*breaking was your excuse on squashing silent prayer. Why are you now arguing against it?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I would point out that law*breaking was your excuse on squashing silent prayer. Why are you now arguing against it?

My first ever post directly referencing Ms Vaughan Spruce's actions.

It was posted - according to my computer - at 01.42 AM on 24 12 2022

I wonder if this was a a stunt to get some publicity [in which case she appears to have been successful].

I agree with Machinist. One can pray anywhere.

[CivilDiscourse]

My first ever post directly referencing Ms Vaughan Spruce's actions.

It was posted - according to my computer - at 01.42 AM on 24 12 2022

And? Do all posts AFTER that one carry no meaning?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

And? Do all posts AFTER that one carry no meaning?

I do not recall that I have ever written that Ms Vaughan Spruce was breaking the law.

However, if you have nothing better to do you can check that for me.

[CivilDiscourse]

I do not recall that I have ever written that Ms Vaughan Spruce was breaking the law.

However, if you have nothing better to do you can check that for me.

Your complaint was she was violating the PSPO, violation of a PSPO is a criminal offense, ergo, your complaint was she was breaking the law that says you can't break a PSPO. Your hairsplitting notwithstanding.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Your complaint was she was violating the PSPO, violation of a PSPO is a criminal offense, ergo, your complaint was she was breaking the law that says you can't break a PSPO. Your hairsplitting notwithstanding.

She chose to deliberately violate a PSPO by breaking the conditions pertaining to that specific PSPO.

However, you are now leading this topic on to an entirely different issue. So that is the end of it.

If you wish to continue discussing Ms Vaughan Spruce's actions, feel free to start your own thread.

[CivilDiscourse]

She chose to deliberately violate a PSPO by breaking the conditions pertaining to that specific PSPO.

However, you are now leading this topic on to an entirely different issue. So that is the end of it.

If you wish to continue discussing Ms Vaughan Spruce's actions, feel free to start your own thread.

Ok. I will leave your hypocrisy lie.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Ok. I will leave your hypocrisy lie.

This thread is not about Ms Vaughan Spruce.

[CivilDiscourse]

This thread is not about Ms Vaughan Spruce.

I agreed to let your hypocrisy lie, why are you bringing it up again?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I agreed to let your hypocrisy lie, why are you bringing it up again?

I am ensuring you have got the message.

Now if all you want to do is make silly playground replies you are free to make them elsewhere.