Replies

This is my first post to FR, so I really hope I don't screw up. I've been reading avidly for several months (my husband is a long time FReeper, and I used to wonder why he'd get into heated discussions with his computer). Anyway, this subject of DeGenova has made me angry enough to post my first comments.

On 3/28, when I first read about DeGenova's awful remarks, I fired off an email to him and Bollinger. Here's what I wrote:
"De Genova: your public comments advocating death and destruction and a “million mogadishus” on our US troops is nothing short of treasonous. I shudder to think that your seditious opinions are being foisted upon impressionable mindsets in an academic setting. I’m ashamed of you, and I’m ashamed of Columbia University for tolerating such unambiguous hatred for our country. I also find it ironic and more than a little hypocritical that you would publicly declare your wish for US deaths (osenstibly hiding behind “freedom of speech” privileges) yet decry any similar calls for the same outcome to befall you! Freedom of speech carries immense responsibilities, and you’ve abused that privilege for which our troops are currently fighting.

President Professor Bollinger: I sincerely hope that Columbia University swiftly takes the proper measures to cast this poisonous traitor from your midst. It speaks ill of Columbia University to tolerate this blatant anti-Americanism, and it impugns what was formerly your sterling academic reputation. If you no longer care for your academic reputation, then you should at least care about your ability to successfully solicit donations. USF ruefully discovered that having a suspected terror-supporter on its faculty was not helpful in fundraising. There are always consequences to actions and inactions, and as President, you’ll need to evaluate those consequences seriously with regards to your discipline or toleration of De Genova’s disgusting public views."

Then yesterday, I got the same form email reply from one of Columbia's PR lackeys (email address of Public Affairs Rep7 only with Bollinger's signature) that the rest of you got. So, I fired off this reply to their reply:

"I disagree with you on your wimpy defense of Mr De Genova. So many irresponsible people hide behind the First Amendment. You wrote: "there are few things more precious on any University campus than freedom of thought and expression."

I'll tell you something that's more precious which you're overlooking, and it's RESPONSIBILITY and ACCOUNTABILITY for the thoughts you express. That is what is sadly lacking in your generic public relations response, Mr or Ms Public Affairs Rep7.

There are LIMITS to "free speech", and you should realize that. It is a myth that anyone can say anything under the pretense of 'free speech'. You cannot preach overthrow of the government. You cannot preach hateful/violent action against others in the workplace or public arenas; you cannot yell "fire" in public spaces, and you cannot preach discriminatory actions/comments against a particular gender/sexual orientation/religion, etc. There are legal consequences for employers' tolerance of illegal action by their employees. Columbia University employs DeGenova, and as such, you are responsible for his comments and his actions. That you would tolerate his behavior speaks volumes about Columbia University. You cannot say you're appalled by his comments on the one hand, and on the other hand, defend him. You can't have it both ways. What you say and what you do must be congruent. And you should also know that when there's incongruence between oral and nonverbal communication, people always put credence in the nonverbal communication. By allowing him to continue to preach his hate for this county, you're giving tacit approval. Columbia University has certainly plummeted in my opinion."

And then thinking more about Columbia's tolerance for sedition, I got even madder today! So, I copied the US Sedition Act (kindly supplied by another FReeper on another thread) and sent it off to Mr/Ms Public Affairs Rep 7 with the subject line:
"I'm even angrier today about your inexcusable defense of DeGenova--pls read US Sedition Act excerpts below to refresh your memory about the limits of "free speech" "

For those of you who missed that thread, I'll copy that US Seditions Act.

16 May, 1918

The U.S. Sedition Act

United States, Statutes at Large, Washington, D.C., 1918, Vol. XL, pp 553 ff. A portion of the amendment to Section 3 of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917.SECTION 3.

Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies, or shall willfully make or convey false reports, or false statements, . . . or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct . . . the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or . . . shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both....

Thanks for letting me vent and do something constructive with my anger!

Columbia University employs DeGenova, and as such, you are responsible for his comments and his actions. That you would tolerate his behavior speaks volumes about Columbia University. You cannot say you're appalled by his comments on the one hand, and on the other hand, defend him. You can't have it both ways. What you say and what you do must be congruent. And you should also know that when there's incongruence between oral and nonverbal communication, people always put credence in the nonverbal communication. By allowing him to continue to preach his hate for this county, you're giving tacit approval. Columbia University has certainly plummeted in my opinion

You are spot on!

Welcome to FR and that was an outstanding 1st post. Thank you.

Let's keep urging everyone we know to email Bollinger and voice their displeasure and to pass the word on to their entire email lists asking them to do the same.

Also, write your reps and have them sign the letter circulating in the House calling for De Genova's termination/censure. Urge them to adopt/support legislation to cut Columbia's funding. Many Alumni already are.

God bless, and don;t be afraid to become involved. We need a whole lot more Americans willing to do just that.

Jeff

We're Winning Iraqi Freedom, the de Genova's of this world not withstanding.