|
Post by hcpride on Oct 10, 2023 8:38:47 GMT -5
I know I'm kind of stuck in the 20th century, but, even though I think that terrorism, this time in the form of murder, rape, and kidnapping is bad, I don't feel compelled to make a public condemnation of the attack. I don't think the school is remiss in not issuing a public statement. Old fashioned me thinks that, once the students return from fall break, a prayer vigil for the souls lost would accomplish more than a post on social media. Maybe one day I'll catch up with 21st century thinking I think you're absolutely right. It's amusing scrolling through Instagram and seeing professional sports leagues and teams make posts about the Hamas attacks. Thank you, PGA Tour, for letting me know you strongly condemn the senseless attacks by Hamas. I really needed to know your stance on this. However, it is interesting what's going on at Harvard...https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/10/10/psc-statement-backlash/ As of this posting, I don't believe Harvard has issued any official statement. They tweeted one out (following the student organization statement - which itself has to be read to be believed):
|
|
|
Post by alum on Oct 10, 2023 8:40:37 GMT -5
It is possible to believe that Israel's treatment of Palestinians who live within its borders has been quite wrong while also condeming Hamas as a terrorist organziation committing unspeakable actions. For that matter, it is possible to condemn Hamas for its attacks while believing that some of Israel's response has been disproportionate. Those Harvard student groups which issued statements blaming only Israel are apparently unable to see that questions like this can be more complex than they wish to acknowledge.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Oct 10, 2023 8:54:08 GMT -5
I know I'm kind of stuck in the 20th century, but, even though I think that terrorism, this time in the form of murder, rape, and kidnapping is bad, I don't feel compelled to make a public condemnation of the attack. I don't think the school is remiss in not issuing a public statement. Old fashioned me thinks that, once the students return from fall break, a prayer vigil for the souls lost would accomplish more than a post on social media. Maybe one day I'll catch up with 21st century thinking Actually, you raise a good point: what should the role of HC be in commenting on current events? I don't have an easy answer for this. Fr. B and PVR were not and have not been bashful inserting their opinions into current events.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 10, 2023 12:07:34 GMT -5
Actually, you raise a good point: what should the role of HC be in commenting on current events? I don't have an easy answer for this. Fr. B and PVR were not and have not been bashful inserting their opinions into current events. As the President of Harvard noted, members of the Harvard community and their families were directly affected by the events in Israel and Gaza. That statement from the University was criticized by two Congressmen from MA, who are graduates, for not going far enough. Which led t o a second statement from the Harvard President that student groups do not speak for the University. www.nbcboston.com/news/local/harvard-israel-palestinian-statement-controversy/3155744/Fr. B. had a continuing interest in the killings of six Jesuits in El Salvador in 1989. See: news.holycross.edu/blog/2014/11/25/25-years-later-murder-of-priests-in-el-salvador-still-resonates-with-worcester-jesuit-congressman/I don't believe VR issued a statement regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Why didn't he? Perhaps because the invasion did not directly affect the College, the Jesuits, students, or their families. If the Brandeis professor who was killed was a director of the joint Holy Cross-Brandeis program funded by the Hiatts, then VR would probably issue a statement.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 10, 2023 12:15:41 GMT -5
Northeastern University has issued a public statement on the situation.
The Northeastern students studying in Israel have been safely evacuated.
Does Holy Cross have kids over there?
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Oct 10, 2023 12:59:49 GMT -5
It seemed like we were getting weekly emails and posts from the college from Fr. B during the "summer of love" in 2020.
|
|
|
Post by mm67 on Oct 10, 2023 13:01:01 GMT -5
Hamas attacked primarily civilians not the IDF. It was a wide spread major terrorist attack by land, sea & air on the civilian population of Israel. The 9/11 terrorist attack on civilians rightly brought condemnation and statements of sympathy from all quarters. Sometimes expressions of sympathy in a moment of tragedy means a lot to some. I would hope & expect HC & other colleges as well as the Vatican would condemn the brutal attacks and express their sympathy for the people of Israel during this difficult time.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 10, 2023 13:05:34 GMT -5
Actually, you raise a good point: what should the role of HC be in commenting on current events? I don't have an easy answer for this. Fr. B and PVR were not and have not been bashful inserting their opinions into current events. Certainly. I thought the largest mass murder of Jewish civilians since the Holocaust might be something the HC president would want to publicly and unequivocally condemn. I’m not sure of the school’s current connections to the American Jewish community (the Cantor family comes to mind) but I also don’t know our current connection to the Indigenous Peoples’ community (and saw that tweet).
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 10, 2023 13:31:29 GMT -5
Northeastern University has issued a public statement on the situation. The Northeastern students studying in Israel have been safely evacuated. Does Holy Cross have kids over there? No. HC does not have a study abroad program in Israel. There is a program in Jordan. The program in Russia was suspended following the invasion, and apparently replaced by a Russian language program in Latvia.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 10, 2023 13:47:01 GMT -5
Fr. B and PVR were not and have not been bashful inserting their opinions into current events. Certainly. I thought the largest mass murder of Jewish civilians since the Holocaust might be something the HC president would want to publicly and unequivocally condemn. I’m not sure of the school’s current connections to the American Jewish community (the Cantor family comes to mind) but I also don’t know our current connection to the Indigenous Peoples’ community (and saw that tweet). An informal census of religious affiliation, if any, of HC students a few years ago recorded zero Jews attending. Boston College's Hillel chapter states there are about 35 0 Jewish undergraduates at BC. As an aside, Sen. Feinstein graduated from the Convent of the Sacred Heart in San Francisco, and was, thereafter, deeply devoted to the school and its students. rscj.org/news/the-society-of-the-sacred-heart-mourns-the-loss-of-senator-dianne-feinstein
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on Oct 10, 2023 14:08:50 GMT -5
I'll venture a guess that Rabbi Norman Cohen '72 is the only rabbi to have graduated from HC.
|
|
|
Post by ndgradbuthcfan on Oct 10, 2023 14:19:46 GMT -5
1000 Israeli deaths out of a population of 9.73 million would be the equivalent of 34,000 deaths in the US, more than 11 times the US deaths on 9/11. Widespread condemnation of this heinous act should be expected. On the other hand, by bombing Gaza, Israel is also killing many Gazan civilians which is playing right into the hands of Hamas.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Oct 10, 2023 15:47:59 GMT -5
Hyperbole may be the crutch of a [my] weak mind, but I'll make the point here. Does HC need to issue a statement on all "bad" things that happen? All tragedies? Is there a % of population harmed that requires the threshold to be met or exceeded before such a message can be sent? Our hearts and thoughts are with the victims of Typhoon XYZ? We strongly condemn the gang shootings in Chicagoland over the weekend? We stand against discrimination in new Law ABC? We extend our condolences to Johnny whose cat is up a tree? It's not scalable.
I think anyone who wonders what the position of the "College" is is wasting their time. The College isn't materially, directly impacted by the war, and the College doesn't have a collective mindset. If President VR speaks on behalf of the College, his impact is only going to be words, and not funding/defense/aid/humanitarian relief one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Oct 10, 2023 19:13:46 GMT -5
1000 Israeli deaths out of a population of 9.73 million would be the equivalent of 34,000 deaths in the US, more than 11 times the US deaths on 9/11. Widespread condemnation of this heinous act should be expected. On the other hand, by bombing Gaza, Israel is also killing many Gazan civilians which is playing right into the hands of Hamas. Be careful not to get caught up in the numbers game. One death is a tragedy if it is someone you know. At times like this I remember this quote: "A single death is a tragedy. A million deaths is only a statistic." That came from Josef Stalin.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Oct 10, 2023 20:32:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Oct 10, 2023 23:03:04 GMT -5
I know I'm kind of stuck in the 20th century, but, even though I think that terrorism, this time in the form of murder, rape, and kidnapping is bad, I don't feel compelled to make a public condemnation of the attack. I don't think the school is remiss in not issuing a public statement. Old fashioned me thinks that, once the students return from fall break, a prayer vigil for the souls lost would accomplish more than a post on social media. Maybe one day I'll catch up with 21st century thinking Actually, you raise a good point: what should the role of HC be in commenting on current events? I don't have an easy answer for this. It should be like the Hippocratic Oath. First, do no harm. You can just feel that this is going to be a distracting side show on some university campuses with pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli advocates clashing, hopefully verbally only. Right now the outrage is one sided but after Israel implements the announced annihilation of Hamas it will become two sided.
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Oct 12, 2023 5:32:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Oct 12, 2023 6:17:26 GMT -5
Might it be possible that there are forces within these respective nations/lands and others that have no interest -- financial or otherwise -- in peace but much prefer the pro$pect$ of di$cord, divi$ion, and war that Eisenhower warned us of in his Farewell Address on January 17, 1961?
You think? Take a step back or multiple steps and study history.
www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/president-dwight-d-eisenhowers-farewell-address
Think The Establishment which Eisenhower warns of has expanded its scope in terms of the various forms of weaponry used for the stoking of division and ultimate control of the general public here at home and throughout the world?
Come on. Don't take the bait.
#Media #Pharma #ForeignAid #Control
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Oct 12, 2023 6:39:44 GMT -5
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
****** We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
****** Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology-global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs-balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage-balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
****** A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United State corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
****** Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we-you and I, and our government-must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
****** Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
****** So-in this my last good night to you as your President-I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find somethings worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I-my fellow citizens-need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing inspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
LET'S WIN THE ULTIMATE PEACE !!
|
|
|
Post by mm67 on Oct 12, 2023 7:45:49 GMT -5
Eisenhower's famous Farewell Address. It was a work of beauty - very thoughtful & prescient. There are those who in 1960 worried that with the advent of the TV age presidential elections would be reduced to a beauty contest based primarily on physical appearance, heavily emphasizing rousing words & appealing primarily to emotions with less substance or seriousness of purpose. There had been appeals to emotion prior to 1960 but many believe by 1960 with the growing influence of TV, the balance had moved to appearance over reality. Earlier in the 20th c radio & the microphone were adroitly used to gain power. Evil Hitler was a funny looking man with a great vocal presence. There were others who benefitted from radio/microphone FDR, Fr. Coughlin come to mind. By 1960 TV had largely supplanted radio as the mode of campaigning. Physical appearance & attributes along with the voice became the driving force. It seems transitional presidents all had tha "look" - Reagan , Clinton, Obama, Trump. Obviously I cherry picked. (Nixon is an interesting case. Non-telegenic in 1960, he worked hard to become a more TV friendly TV candidate which helped propel him to his transitional presidency.) Obviously, presidential elections are more complex and cannot be reduced to a simple beauty contest. Issues do matter , but still... This comment is not meant as a subtle criticism of any candidate or president from JFK (in 1960 I felt was great)) to today. All candidates run TV based campaigns. The medium truly is the message.(Marshall McLuhan)Can voters on all sides, left & right, protect themselves from superficial & simplistic but attractive candidates?
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Oct 12, 2023 7:59:39 GMT -5
i share the hope that we can become less divided, avoid the "pick a side" trap, and become more focused on what actually unifies us.
completely avoiding corporate media is likely the best place to start in that hope (and in many others).
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Oct 12, 2023 9:04:00 GMT -5
I post this for PRV's recent comments re 'the conduct wars' as well as the speaker's views of current & future conflicts.
About 200 attended after the Colgate game including about 65 NROTC students from HC's unit & the MIT & Tufts units.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 12, 2023 9:09:41 GMT -5
A tenet of the academic hard left is that Israel is an irredemmably evil and western colonizer (and oppressor). And the intersectionality folks join in. That puts university presidents in a rather awkward spot and explains their rather banal (or absent) pronouncements in the wake of over a thousand Jewish civilians slaughtered by terrorists in a single day.
On a happier note, The Babylon Bee nailed it again with yesterday's article Harvard Student Leaves Lecture On Microaggressions To Attend ‘Kill The Jews’ Rally
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on Oct 12, 2023 13:36:48 GMT -5
A tenet of the academic hard left is that Israel is an irredemmably evil and western colonizer (and oppressor). And the intersectionality folks join in. That puts university presidents in a rather awkward spot and explains their rather banal (or absent) pronouncements in the wake of over a thousand Jewish civilians slaughtered by terrorists in a single day. On a happier note, The Babylon Bee nailed it again with yesterday's article Harvard Student Leaves Lecture On Microaggressions To Attend ‘Kill The Jews’ RallyThe positions you note are on the farthest fringe of the left. There is a good column in the NYT today by Michele Goldberg entitled "The Massacre in Israel and the Need for a Decent Left". It's healthy to have liberals and it's healthy to have conservatives, but those at the extremes add a toxic element. Unfortunately at some colleges the administration trembles in fear at the most vocal members of its community. This is a failure of leadership. One can acknowledge the humanity of Palestinians and deplore their plight and still unequivocally condemn the barbarism that took place in Israel at the hands of Hamas.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 13, 2023 6:45:19 GMT -5
A tenet of the academic hard left is that Israel is an irredemmably evil and western colonizer (and oppressor). And the intersectionality folks join in. That puts university presidents in a rather awkward spot and explains their rather banal (or absent) pronouncements in the wake of over a thousand Jewish civilians slaughtered by terrorists in a single day. On a happier note, The Babylon Bee nailed it again with yesterday's article Harvard Student Leaves Lecture On Microaggressions To Attend ‘Kill The Jews’ RallyThe positions you note are on the farthest fringe of the left. There is a good column in the NYT today by Michele Goldberg entitled "The Massacre in Israel and the Need for a Decent Left". It's healthy to have liberals and it's healthy to have conservatives, but those at the extremes add a toxic element. Unfortunately at some colleges the administration trembles in fear at the most vocal members of its community. This is a failure of leadership. One can acknowledge the humanity of Palestinians and deplore their plight and still unequivocally condemn the barbarism that took place in Israel at the hands of Hamas. No doubt places like Harvard are refuges for the pro Palestine/anti Israel academic left and their intersectional allies. So some of the kids get a rather distorted view of what is fringe in general society and what is not…and are then gobsmacked to learn their views (as evidenced by their letter blaming Israel for the slaughter of the Jewish civilians) are rather nauseating to most in this country. Your point that conservative voices on campus would be healthy is well taken and not necessarily a popular view at certain institutions.
|
|