Anti-Semitism at UND

[redwing77]

Thank you RW77 for that educational piece. I appreciate it. I spent two years in England and a little in Europe and I did tour cathedrals (and castles and other historical places), churches, etc. Being an amateur history buff (and I hated history in high school) my favorite TV channels are History, International History, Discovery, etc. I enjoy learning about cultures and historical significance. It is enjoyable and educational to get past some of the blustery pontification and learn the background. Thanks again.

No problem.

Sioux-cia: I understand he went through a lot. However, let's not forget a few things: First ____ is a Jew isn't derogatory. I doubt someone going up to your wall and writing "Sioux-cia is a Lutheran" would be offensive, no?

Let's also not forget that, though the intent was there, the swastika is actually not a Nazi symbol. Historically, it was a religious symbol that the Nazi's distorted into the symbolism it has today. Go to Southeast Asia sometime, you'll find swastikas everywhere and I guarantee they're not Nazis or Anti-Semitic.

The naked truth is this: It is only offensive if you choose for it to be offensive. To me, I've received my share of ignorant statements by Gentiles. I've been accused of killing Jesus at the ripe age of 12. I got the Neo Nazi newsletter that stated that reports of the Holocaust was grossly exaggerated and most probably false.

Being teased is never fun, but it happens. This is because a person or group of people decided that they want to do it. It has nothing to do with the University. The University doesn't support such activities but it can't police it as closely as these people seem to want it to be. We are not Big Brother ala Orwell.

I sympathize with him for his bad experience, but it was just that: a bad experience. If he needs to talk it out, so be it, but it should be with a confidant such as a relative, significant other, a close friend, or a professional such as a counselor. It should not be with the press.

Every time a swastika shows up on campus, the news is there to report it. That's just more attention for the miscreant. It's a game. Do the act, don't get caught doing it, watch everyone scream in horror. FUN!

Ignore it, and it goes away. Go ape:bleep: and it becomes a game.

[Sioux-cia]

I understand what you're saying but this student was bullied by racists and it should not be tolerated.

[Chewey]

I understand what you're saying but this student was bullied by racists and it should not be tolerated.

I was not tolerated, from what I understand. I was investigated and due process was accorded. I would not be surprised if the anti-name crowd itself is behind the swastikas being put up around campus. They obviously would have taken the idea from SCSU. I wonder where the cries of institutional racism were when the swastikas were being put up all over SCSU.

[Sioux-cia]

I was not tolerated, from what I understand. I was investigated and due process was accorded. I would not be surprised if the anti-name crowd itself is behind the swastikas being put up around campus. They obviously would have taken the idea from SCSU. I wonder where the cries of institutional racism were when the swastikas were being put up all over SCSU.

It was investigated long after it was reported. While he waited, the bullying continued. I think, my opinion only, that the reason it was not investigated sooner was because he was an 'able bodied' young man who was presumed to be able to take care of himself. Had a woman (I hope) or a person with a handicap (I hope) been bullied, I believe the investigation would not have taken weeks or months.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

After looking at the picture; that is a swastica?

I have to agree here-the drawing pictured does not immediately jump out at me as the Nazi symbol. At first glance, it seemed to be a somewhat diagonal "infinity" symbol. Granted, the words underneath perhaps made conclusions easier to draw.

Also, from the article-(some) UND professors "refused" to make "allowances" for religious holidays? And the stats quoted indicated that the population in question was perhaps two dozen out of 13,000 students? Everyone can define "allowances" and "refusals" as they wish of course, but IMHO the very small group on campus makes it difficult to reasonably ask for much-otherwise, many many MORE people will be inconvenienced; and what about THEIR rights?

I am also not sure how they can tie that in to the UND nick name?

C'mon Goon, you know the drill by now-anything unpopular is tied to (or caused by) your nickname.

If they could, they'd blame the nickname for identity theft, child porn and forest fires.

[SoCalSiouxFan]

I have to agree here-the drawing pictured does not immediately jump out at me as the Nazi symbol. At first glance, it seemed to be a somewhat diagonal "infinity" symbol.

Good observation. Notice how the media and other special interest groups were very quick to criticize and blame the university, the administration, the Fighting Sioux name, etc., as the underlying cause, even before there was a full investigation. From what I read it seems there was little evidence at first, when the complaint was first presented, just accusations and the picture of a poorly drawn, infinity symbol?

True that the victim has rights but the accused also had rights. The university needed to investigate the matter and at least obtain some credible evidence before accusing someone of a crime. Sounds like the administration did a good job of investigating the incident(s). I thought the university also did a good job avoiding the risk of falsely accusing someone. Sounds like they also took action to prevent further incidents in the future.

What angers me most about this incident is not that a student misbehaved It's how special interest groups and even university professors, in the guise of protecting someone's rights, purposely accused and attacked the character of others that were not involved in the incident. They blamed the university, and even a deceased alumni for the incident. Seems to me the university was also a victim in this incident, after all it was university property that was defaced.

The jewish student may have also been harmed by these special interest groups because typically a victim may want to remain anonymous and may have wanted the issue to be resolved quietly and discretely. It appears that instead of helping the victim they exploited the incident(s) it to promote their own agenda in disregard of the needs of the victim.

Maybe instead of creating an environment of fear and mistrust these special interest groups could work with the university to promote our shared common interest which is to make the school a better place for all students.

[Sioux-cia]

I totally agree that this incident and the name and logo have nothing in common. But, I'm not going to give the University a bye on how they handled this.

These things, at least some of them, occurred and were reported in February. The investigations started in April. Not acceptable.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Sioux-cia

[The Sicatoka]

Jack (a surely credible source) Weinstein's public web page.

Be sure to enjoy the link titled:

"Want to understand Karl Marx flawlessly and dance around with your dog at the same time? Here is am important study aid!"

Dance, Fido. Dance.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

I totally agree that this incident and the name and logo have nothing in common. But, I'm not going to give the University a bye on how they handled this.

These things, at least some of them, occurred and were reported in February. The investigations started in April. Not acceptable.

Sioux-cia, while I agree with the sentiment that there needs to be timely investigations, I do have some other questions. And before going any further, I need to disclose that all I can view are the first paragraphs of the stories in the general-interest, North Dakota newspaper.

The student moved out 4/18, after "several months" of verbal taunts, etc. So does that mean these incidents started even before February? And if so, when were they reported, and to whom were they reported?

Email from advisor-undated, but the article was published 4/24: this cites a "hate crime" that occured "almost two months ago". Now again, are we talking about the February incident only? Or something before that? "Lack of punishment": so have the perpetrators been identified? (Apparently one person was charged, but five days after this email exchange was published.) Also, the author seems to acknowledge that there are privacy laws to be considered, and my first reaction to that was "why didn't the student who felt victimized go to his advisor earlier?" We apparently are talking about a very small group of students, less than two dozen. If this was a disturbing incident, didn't the victim tell any of his fellow students in the club? Or did they know about it and respect his wishes to keep quiet? Just judging from that first paragraph, the advisor seems to be way out in front of the facts with charges like "hate crime" and "perpetrators". If he was "dismayed" that Dean of Students didn't talk to him (even though he acknowledges privacy laws) how does he feel about any of the students who didn't talk to him?

All in all, much like a robbery in a dorm or similar crime this should be investigated in a timely manner. But right now I have a few questions about the person in question that I'd want answers to before I indict the Dorm authorities for negligence. JMHO.

And to echo the thoughts of many others-this thing could (and perhaps does) happen at many universities with homogenous populations. The nickname has no relevance, despite how much the other newspaper wants to tie it in.

[Torpedo]

Check this out....link....maybe it has something to do with our logo after all!

I'm only kidding, btw....

[Sioux-cia]

Sioux-cia, while I agree with the sentiment that there needs to be timely investigations, I do have some other questions. And before going any further, I need to disclose that all I can view are the first paragraphs of the stories in the general-interest, North Dakota newspaper.

The student moved out 4/18, after "several months" of verbal taunts, etc. So does that mean these incidents started even before February? And if so, when were they reported, and to whom were they reported?

....

Read your well thought out comments and rather than responding to each point will simply state:

I side with the victim. I believe he did bring the problems to the attention of the proper authorities as they happened. I believe they opted to do nothing until the problems were made public. It's very telling the University authorities appeared to do nothing until after the incidents were publicized. Had they acted quickly, I doubt ihis would have made the media and subsequently used by the anti-name and logo sector.

Certainly privacy is an issue but whose privacy would be invaded if Chief Czapiewski told the victim, 'We're investigating the situation and will keep you appraised of our progress'? Cops do this all the time for victims. This makes them feel less vulnerable; someone is actually helping them.

[redwing77]

I can't automatically side with the victim on everything.

Sometimes the victim does something to provoke (knowingly or unknowingly) the response. Sometimes it is sheer stupidity dressed up as a bigger piece of miscreance.

I have no doubt that this guy was bullied and is a victim as such. However, is it purely because of anti-semitism? Hard to say.

Look at it this way: The first swastika, I guess, was found as related to this guy in February. Nothing was allegedly done until April. No Press, no nothing. Guess what? The Press picks up the story and BINGO! Another Swastika appears on the Law School windows. Guess what! I predict another will appear within the next 30 days somewhere else on campus. And thereafter until the press stops reacting to it.

These are acts of VANDALISM that gets a rise out of people. It is NOT anti-semitism because if it was, it wouldn't have taken the press to make a big deal out of the first one for a second one to appear!

Interestingly enough, I'm surprised one hasn't shown up on the REA somewhere. I suppose it will happen eventually.

The only issue I see with this incident is the sluggish response by UND. That's it. Nothing more.

[fourwindsboy]

Check this out....link....maybe it has something to do with our logo after all!

I'm only kidding, btw....

I don't know if those are Native Americans and I'll bet that picture was taken pre WWII when no one stateside knew who the nazis where.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Read your well thought out comments and rather than responding to each point will simply state:

I side with the victim. I believe he did bring the problems to the attention of the proper authorities as they happened. I believe they opted to do nothing until the problems were made public. It's very telling the University authorities appeared to do nothing until after the incidents were publicized. Had they acted quickly, I doubt ihis would have made the media and subsequently used by the anti-name and logo sector.

Certainly privacy is an issue but whose privacy would be invaded if Chief Czapiewski told the victim, 'We're investigating the situation and will keep you appraised of our progress'? Cops do this all the time for victims. This makes them feel less vulnerable; someone is actually helping them.

I don't have enough info to call anyone here a liar. My strongest reaction was towards the prof/advisor: he certainly seems like he loves publicity if he's releasing emails which include an acknowledgment of a privacy law and a claim that he speaks for the student. But that's really not the biggest point or problem here. One account says the victim spoke with dorm authorities who promised to talk to campus police, and then a "complaint was never filed". I don't know what it takes to make a complaint, police report, etc but perhaps someone at the police station felt it was a he said/she said case? Maybe if they had to respond to each and every case of "he yelled at me in the dorms" there would need to be a lot more cops? I don't know the answers to those questions. But just as you're saying they "appeared" to do nothing, I am willing to say that appearances can be deceiving sometimes. Not always, but sometimes.

And IMHO, that prof would have made sure this made the media; if nowhere else in the advocacy press. That newspaper harped on the idea that someone refused to call an abstract drawing a swastika. They've got an agenda-and "anything to help..." so the logo would have been drawn in. Englestad was mentioned here: as if somehow a ten year-old story about him being a collector of Nazi items was the reason why some mope with an ice-cream cone chose to attend UND and then draw stuff on a elevator door. That's REALLY a reach IMHO.

I don't know what the police chief said (or didn't say) to anyone-but it appeared that the professor simultaneously complained that he was not informed by campus administration but he also knew of the limitations written into a privacy law. That was the reason for my comment on privacy. I didn't see anything about the police chief in any of the news I could read.

I can't automatically side with the victim on everything.

Sometimes the victim does something to provoke (knowingly or unknowingly) the response. Sometimes it is sheer stupidity dressed up as a bigger piece of miscreance.

I have no doubt that this guy was bullied and is a victim as such. However, is it purely because of anti-semitism? Hard to say.

I agree-its JMHO, but these things can snowball quickly. Once someone gets bullied and complains in a dorm-like situation, things can go downhill in a hurry. That doesn't make it right, but it happens. Think of the old "barracks" you see in war films. And it can be difficult for authorities or superiors to get out ahead of the situation in time. So while the harassment, taunts, threats, etc. might have started as one sort of "ism", it also might have continued for all sorts of other reasons.

The only issue I see with this incident is the sluggish response by UND. That's it. Nothing more.

As noted, everyone is free to judge the speed/effectiveness of a response-I just don't have enough info and that begins with the fact that I'm only reading a very small portion of the newspaper articles.

Also.....

Another Swastika appears on the Law School windows. Guess what! I predict another will appear within the next 30 days somewhere else on campus. And thereafter until the press stops reacting to it.

This is reply is marginally off-subject: don't forget that ANYONE can draw a symbol on your campus. It could be a UND student, or a member of the public, or students from your biggest hockey rival..... anyone. If they know it will stir up a tempest, they have incentive IMHO.

[Chewey]

I don't have enough info to call anyone here a liar. My strongest reaction was towards the prof/advisor: he certainly seems like he loves publicity if he's releasing emails which include an acknowledgment of a privacy law and a claim that he speaks for the student. But that's really not the biggest point or problem here. One account says the victim spoke with dorm authorities who promised to talk to campus police, and then a "complaint was never filed". I don't know what it takes to make a complaint, police report, etc but perhaps someone at the police station felt it was a he said/she said case? Maybe if they had to respond to each and every case of "he yelled at me in the dorms" there would need to be a lot more cops? I don't know the answers to those questions. But just as you're saying they "appeared" to do nothing, I am willing to say that appearances can be deceiving sometimes. Not always, but sometimes.

And IMHO, that prof would have made sure this made the media; if nowhere else in the advocacy press. That newspaper harped on the idea that someone refused to call an abstract drawing a swastika. They've got an agenda-and "anything to help..." so the logo would have been drawn in. Englestad was mentioned here: as if somehow a ten year-old story about him being a collector of Nazi items was the reason why some mope with an ice-cream cone chose to attend UND and then draw stuff on a elevator door. That's REALLY a reach IMHO.

I don't know what the police chief said (or didn't say) to anyone-but it appeared that the professor simultaneously complained that he was not informed by campus administration but he also knew of the limitations written into a privacy law. That was the reason for my comment on privacy. I didn't see anything about the police chief in any of the news I could read.

I agree-its JMHO, but these things can snowball quickly. Once someone gets bullied and complains in a dorm-like situation, things can go downhill in a hurry. That doesn't make it right, but it happens. Think of the old "barracks" you see in war films. And it can be difficult for authorities or superiors to get out ahead of the situation in time. So while the harassment, taunts, threats, etc. might have started as one sort of "ism", it also might have continued for all sorts of other reasons.

As noted, everyone is free to judge the speed/effectiveness of a response-I just don't have enough info and that begins with the fact that I'm only reading a very small portion of the newspaper articles.

Also.....

This is reply is marginally off-subject: don't forget that ANYONE can draw a symbol on your campus. It could be a UND student, or a member of the public, or students from your biggest hockey rival..... anyone. If they know it will stir up a tempest, they have incentive IMHO.

It's probably one of the professor's noble PC hacks doing it.

[redwing77]

Chief- I really think that the professor is making this case, not the JSO. Listen, he's been the JSO for years. I was the JSO President when he became our advisor! He NEVER showed up to meetings or contacted us or responded to our communiques in any way. Now, suddenly this happens and he's a door thumping advocate for the Jews?

Sorry, but this prof stinks of political motivation.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Chief- I really think that the professor is making this case, not the JSO. Listen, he's been the JSO for years. I was the JSO President when he became our advisor! He NEVER showed up to meetings or contacted us or responded to our communiques in any way. Now, suddenly this happens and he's a door thumping advocate for the Jews?

Sorry, but this prof stinks of political motivation.

I agree. As noted, when someone starts releasing email correspondence to the press, and when the emails contain phrases akin to "let me tell you how to do your job" that leads me to believe that at least one desired effect is publicity for the author.

As far as that professor's interview-he admits that for years his response to concerned parents was something like "our campus isn't perfect, and while your child won't be part of the majority there's nothing to be worried about so feel free to attend". Yet a single incident caused by some mope with an ice cream cone has turned him 180 degrees? He gave an endorsement to the campus for many years and in a matter of months he has completely reversed field?

And regarding that incident: this student was a freshman, a resident on your campus for about six months or so I assume. Wouldn't it also be interesting to hear the perspective of a senior, or even a graduate student? Or how about a recent alum? If the campus as a whole is at fault, can this really be the first time something like this has happened?

[Sal Atticum]

Wouldn't it also be interesting to hear the perspective of a senior, or even a graduate student? Or how about a recent alum? If the campus as a whole is at fault, can this really be the first time something like this has happened?

As a (non-Jewish) graduate student, I can say that I generally know very little about anything going on. I imagine this is the norm.

For example:

[MafiaMan]

I don't know if those are Native Americans and I'll bet that picture was taken pre WWII when no one stateside knew who the nazis where.

This symbol had NOTHING to do with the National Socialist Party until Adolf Hitler twisted it and it became an image associate with nothing BUT the Nazi party.

Pleae, read some history on the swastika before thinking it was created around 1939. fourwindsboy, I'm assuming you're aware of Native association with the swastika, right?

[redwing77]

This symbol had NOTHING to do with the National Socialist Party until Adolf Hitler twisted it and it became an image associate with nothing BUT the Nazi party.

Pleae, read some history on the swastika before thinking it was created around 1939. fourwindsboy, I'm assuming you're aware of Native association with the swastika, right?

Here is the history of the swastika in simplified form.

It was basically a good luck and/or religious symbol for all but the last 69 years or so.

In fact, in SE Asia, it still is used as such, according to my friends who either have relatives there or have visited that part of the world.

[Siouxman]

Kupchella responds:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/i...mp;section=news

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Kupchella responds:

Quite an article.

...including a misshapen swastika drawn in a dorm stairwell...

Okay, that's just plain poor writing. If it was a misshapen swastika, then

by definition

it was also a misshapen infinity symbol, a misshappen 4-leaf clover and a misshapen drawing of the Milky Way galaxy.

Please.

...the only accommodation he was offered was to move into an isolated dorm room far from resident assistants and other students where he told housing staff he would feel even more vulnerable to attacks.

Again, defining the terms "isolated" and "far from RA's" is up to each individual. Lets face it-no room SHOULD be isolated from RA's: and if such a room existed the party animals would be requesting it.

So its hard to believe that the University staff felt they were offering this student an "isolated" room.

And what would the student propose is an equitable solution??? Move someone else out of their dorm room so he could move in?

...Lebovitz declined to meet with (the UND President) without an attorney present.

This is a bit much IMHO. If you want your parents or a trusted guardian there, fine. Even if you want the prof who ran the student organization to sit in: that's okay. But insisting on a lawyer in this situation is overkill IMHO.

Kupchella has expressed hesitance about another ADL-JCRC suggestion that UND lobby the North Dakota Legislature to strengthen the state

[redwing77]

As a Jew, I'm shamed to admit the ADL as representative of my culture.

They are exactly like the NA activists. They want to dictate policy wherever they can on the basis of shaming or guilting their way out of people who have better and more important things to do.

I've been solicited by them in the past and I assure you I have not, nor will I ever, contribute to their cause. They are too over the top or too "Us vs. THEM" to be truly effective.... where have I heard that perspective before?

GrahamKracker? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? Louis Pharakhan? Hmmm....

[ozzie679]

I was not tolerated, from what I understand. I was investigated and due process was accorded. I would not be surprised if the anti-name crowd itself is behind the swastikas being put up around campus. They obviously would have taken the idea from SCSU. I wonder where the cries of institutional racism were when the swastikas were being put up all over SCSU.

Everybody knew it was either some local or a student being stupid. The swastikas were in random bathrooms and hallways. Not in the Jewish Center or on the door of a Jewish student. You can thank the Twin Cities media for that story.

[siouxforeverbaby]

Everybody knew it was either some local or a student being stupid. The swastikas were in random bathrooms and hallways. Not in the Jewish Center or on the door of a Jewish student. You can thank the Twin Cities media for that story.

ours were in hallways, it wasn't on the door of the studen't room or in the Jewish Center (Does UND even have one of those? if so where cause that is something new to learn about). If I misunderstood your statement, I apologize and take that back. As for UND's, the first one was perhaps directed at the student, but I can almost bet that half of the others were just people who went "oh, they got attention for that, why don't i do it?" and people who don't understand the connotations of it in our country.