Mar

28

23 Comments

  1. wow  

    did anyone else notice how the spectator removed the online article about the censure letters from the front of their website? the story is on the front page of the print version and up until two hours ago it was in the front of the electronic version.

    administration didnt like it maybe?

  2. unbelievable  

    "It's noteworthy that Columbia reserved the harshest punishment for Latinos-two Mexican-Americans and one Dominican."

    when all else fails, cry racism.

    • it is noteworthy  

      students who got censures:
      Karina Garcia
      Martin Lopez
      Cosette Olivo

      Compare to the students who got warnings:
      Monique Dols
      Andrew Tillet-Saks
      David Judd
      Ryan Fukumori

      They all faced the same 3 charges. Some of the people who only got warnings were found guilty of all 3. Andrew was found guilty of all 3, for example, and looks militant enough in the videos that he was the one Jon Stewart picked out to mock when he decided to be an asshole last year. But, the administration was using, some other criterion, in order to decide severity of punishments.

      its too bad the process isnt more transparent, then we might be able to learn what the first three did that the other four didnt.

    • pissed off  

      no need to cry racism when it ACTUALLY EXISTS...it is ridiculous that a student who wasn't even on the stage, was physically assaulted (kicked in the face) by a minuteman and a Columbia student (Kulawik) gets a harsher punishment than white students involved.

      And where the fuck is Kulawik's CENSURE?

      • haha  

        just because you use CAPS doesn't make "racism" true. Glad to see the ISO/LUCHA can use the internet.

      • Kulawik's censure?  

        well actually, the NYT reported that 8 students received warnings or censures, and no one seems to know who the 8th is.
        Reported in the first round (3 whites and an asian, 4 warnings):
        Monique Dols
        Ryan Fukumori
        David Judd
        Andrew Tillet-Saks
        Reported in the second round (3 latinos, 3 censures):
        Karina Garcia
        Martin Lopez
        Cosette Olivo

        Who's the mysterious 8th? Could it be Kulawik - not going public cause he's ashamed to admit there's evidence of him kicking someone?

  3. She's Joking, Right?  

    Crying racism in this case is such an awful and desperate move.

    I guess whenever I do something as civilly irresponsible as rushing a stage and violently silencing someone, I should make sure to only bring minorities so I can whine about race when punished.

    Time to face up to the consequences of civil disobedience: you will be punished for it.

  4. WHAT?  

    She's not crying racism, but she is pointing out that Martin Lopez, who wasn't even on stage, was kicked in the face, and yet received worse punishment than others.

  5. the race card  

    Why do people dismiss claims of racism so easily? In my experience as a Black person and in my scholarly engagements (as an African American studies major) with the study of race and racism in this country, I find that people just outright dismiss the role of race in society because they don't understand its nuances and pervasiveness. I think that we should seriously engage the claims of Karina and others. In my opinion, it is a rather weak argument to simply assume race has no bearing, or that arguments claiming racism are the last recourse of desperate people.

  6. "crying racism"  

    i wouldn't have thought that the admin was that blatantly racist either. but what's the explanation for the disparity, then? it's glaring, and they all did the same thing...

  7. when  

    the admin won't tell anyone shit about their reasoning, and the only difference we can see in the results is between who got what is race, they can't really complain when people leap to conclusions

  8. hard to believe  

    It's hard to believe that Columbia would determine punishment based on the respective races of the people being investigated. This is a high-profile enough event that the administration would be aware that it was being scrutinized.

    While it's a bit hasty to dismiss claims of racism outright, we should likewise be skeptical of such claims. Columbia can't be stupid enough to not realize the implications of this decision.

  9. wirc  

    Also, isn't the LDC supposed to be part of the community, not a "business partner"? I mean, the article is about how they allegedly betrayed and sold out, right?

  10. John  

    Nothing so collusive, I'm afraid. The censure article was accidentally saved in the slot reserved for the staff editorial. When that was corrected, the article got bumped off of the lead stories list. It's back up top now.

    (For the record, it's tough to bury an article once it appears on A1.)

  11. ugh  

    Kulawik has descended into self-parody.

  12. although  

    i almost never go for the race card, in this case it isn't really such a desperate argument.

  13. of course  

    it isn't racism. discrimination against latino/as is just standard us governmental, and now cu policy.

  14. curious  

    does anybody who is accusing the enraged of simply 'playing the race card' as a convenient tool care to offer ANY possible explanation for why all 3 latinos got censures and all 4 non-latinos got disciplinary warnings? the only evidence the admin has is the same video we all see on youtube- take a look. positive arguments people, positive.....

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.