Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (46722)	9/24/2002 8:46:51 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I think the way you are characterizing Summers' position is misleading. Here's the entire text of Summers' speech: Thanks, CB. I had not read it; only read the Times account of it and the faculty reaction to it. So I expected to find the need to qualify my statements. Rather, I have the opposite reaction. I'm much more disturbed after reading it than before. Let me explain. And some here at Harvard and some at universities across the country have called for the University to single out Israel among all nations as the lone country where it is inappropriate for any part of the university’s endowment to be invested. I hasten to say the University has categorically rejected this suggestion. Now, by listing this petition and thus the petitioners in a long list of anti-Semitic things, some of which clearly are, he equates the two. Thus, folk who are troubled by the actions of the Sharon government in the West Bank and Gaza and I count myself among them, who then sign a petition asking that institutions such as Harvard pressure that government into changing its actions, are now labeled anti-semitic. That's astounding. One might seriously disagree with the petition. As I'm certain many members of this thread would do so. But you ratchet your disagreement up to the point beyond that, into a name calling place that is only ugly. I thought Summer was mistaken to have made the speech he did based on the Times account of it and reactions to it. Now I'm even more concerned because I was not aware precisely what actions he equated signing petitions to.