Meanwhile on the International front....

Sidenote. ... This video is way too perfectly framed. But I'm sharing it because it explains the situation better than anything I could find. The basic facts, as I know them, are correct. ... The subtext will give you a better idea about Claudine Gay and her selectivity about how she deals with situations. ... and why.

 

Israel was shelling that area in Southern Lebanon because Hezbollah started launching rockets and firing artillery into Israel. Israel said its strikes were targeting Hezbollah's military infrastructure, weapons depots and firing positions.

I'm not doing this to minimize what those white phosphorous weapons do or the people who were killed. But Amnesty International is very hypocritical about who it calls a war criminal and who it doesn't. I suspect it is because the people the organization attracts have the same ideologies and agendas and motives as what people have learned about those university administrations.

Unless everything Israel has said is a lie (which I don't discount, I'd just want proof), Israel was firing artillery at Hezbollah positions that were attacking Israel in the wake of October 7. Aand because those positions were located in a number of small villages in Southern Lebanon, the fires the white phosphorous wedges from the artillery started killed 12 civilians. Read Amnesty International's press release about this. It acknowledges that: "Hezbollah and other armed groups have also fired rockets at northern Israel, killing six Israeli soldiers and one Israeli civilian, according to the Israeli army." But it doesn't call Hezbollah "war criminals." Its says: "Amnesty International is investigating attacks by Hezbollah and other armed groups on northern Israel to determine whether they violated international humanitarian law."

In the case of the white phosphorous artillery, though? Their regional director (a woman from Lebanon, so I get it), doesn't hedge. They aren't trying to sort everything out with an investifation. It's just. ... Israel violated international humanitarian law. ... They should be investigated as war criminals.

Compare this to a release Amnesty International put out more than a year ago with regard to the Ukraine war. Ukraine: Ukrainian fighting tactics endanger civilians

In that case, even though they do call out indiscriminate Russian attacks on Ukraine. ... they turned the Russian attack into a criticism of Ukraine, for putting "civilians in harm's way by establishing bases and operating weapons systems in populated residential areas, including in schools and hospitals."

I can't find any instance of Amnesty International doing the same thing with regard to Hamas, which has done that way more egregiously. To the extent some of their stuff giving an overview of the conflict mentions it, it is "Israel claims." They have never put out one of those releases they do, excoriating Hamas for putting civilians in harms way. Nor did they do that in the thing you linked to about the Israeli attack (which was a response to aggression) which barely even mentions Hezbollah. ... Hezbollah was the reason those civilians were under fire. Unless Israel is completely full of shit, Hezbollah put those people in the way of what happened.

Apparently, the use of white phosphorous munitions isn't considered a war crime (by whoever decides these things), in and of itself, which is why the U.S. produces and uses that kind of artillery. I don't know anything about this.Is it more "war is hell" than "Israel shouldn't ever use them in those kinds of attacks"? Maybe. Maybe not. I am sure your feelings are going to depend on just how you see the situation.

But I personally will never take Amnesty International seriously when it has standards that aren't applied evenly over war zones. They choose sides and then adjust the level of criticism and rhetoric based on an ideology. Because people assume as an organization it doesn't have those kinds agendas, in reality they do a lot of harm in a disinformation kind of way.

 

Before clicking and reading. ... of course not.

 

He's a Harvard alum. He has a company called Pershing Square Capital Management. He's very wealthy. He has 980,000 followers on X, so someone knows who he is and cares about his opinions.

He's been out in front of this, and has been very active behind the scenes putting pressure on the board of trustees and organizing other wealthy alum to stop giving the school money. Harvard has lost well more than a billion dollars in donations because of Claudine Gay's handling of this, and he's been probably the primary agitator of it. He matters because of that.

FWIW, I can't stand Ackman -- I can elaborate, but they are things that have nothing to do with this. It's been driving me nuts that he's on the right side of this, because I want more than anything to just call him a dick and hate him.