Meanwhile, at Harvard...
-
wrote on 13 Oct 2023, 23:04 last edited by
They look like problems.
-
wrote on 14 Oct 2023, 14:25 last edited by
https://nypost.com/2023/10/13/brick-hurled-at-doxxing-truck-at-harvard/
An enraged crowd near Harvard University hurled expletives – and a brick – at a “doxxing truck” circling the campus Friday morning to expose students who allegedly signed a letter blaming Israel for last weekend’s Hamas attack, The Post has learned.
Adam Guillette – the president of the nonprofit news watchdog Accuracy in Media that deployed the vehicle – said the rowdy mob blocked the female driver of the digital billboard-bearing box truck and began “banging on the windows, shouting things at the driver.”
“Once you get out of that truck I’m going to kick your f–king ass!'” one person allegedly yelled at the driver, Guillette exclusively told The Post.
The next thing the driver heard was a brick hitting the vehicle as a security guard hired by Guillette rushed to the back of the truck.
The guard found “a young white male in a hoodie (who)… put down the brick and ran,” said Guillette, adding it was the second-straight day the truck was vandalized.
It’s unclear if the culprit was a student at the Ivy League school, which has come under fire for allowing antisemitism to fester in its hallowed halls in Cambridge, Mass.
-
wrote on 14 Oct 2023, 18:55 last edited by
Sounds like fun.
-
wrote on 17 Oct 2023, 02:12 last edited by
-
wrote on 17 Oct 2023, 15:47 last edited by
@George-K said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Ummm...if you sign a letter, it's not "doxxing" when people see you signed the letter.
Stop making sense!!! LOL
-
wrote on 17 Oct 2023, 16:52 last edited by
There seems to be a little bit of an issue where the executives of these student groups unilaterally made the decision to sign the letter on behalf of the group without consent of the group itself. I read a story where one young lady was at a meeting for one student group talking them out of signing the letter while the leader of another group she was a member of was signing the document…
-
wrote on 17 Oct 2023, 17:16 last edited by
Gee, that's how reform starts...
-
wrote on 18 Oct 2023, 16:39 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Don’t ever let anyone tell you cancel culture is only a trait of the woke.
Speaking of Canceled, Voice Actress Tara Strong was fired for posting support for Israel and Anti-Hamas posts.
-
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 01:47 last edited by
@George-K said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Another reason to not go to Starbucks:
LOL.
Starbucks: "No, you can't use our name."
Starbucks and the union organizing its workers sued each other Wednesday in a standoff sparked by a social media post over the Israel-Hamas war.
Starbucks sued Workers United in federal court in Iowa Wednesday, saying a pro-Palestinian social media post from a union account early in the Israel-Hamas war angered hundreds of customers and damaged its reputation.
Starbucks is suing for trademark infringement, demanding that Workers United stop using the name “Starbucks Workers United” for the group that is organizing the coffee company’s workers.
Starbucks also wants the group to stop using a circular green logo that resembles Starbucks’ logo.
Workers United responded with its own filing, asking a federal court in Pennsylvania to rule that it can continue to use Starbucks’ name and a similar logo.
Workers United also said Starbucks defamed the union by implying that it supports terrorism and violence.
-
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 02:05 last edited by
That's an awesome lawsuit. It'll be fascinating to watch.
-
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 02:14 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
That's an awesome lawsuit. It'll be fascinating to watch.
Isn't it though?
Time to set up some "google alerts" for news..."
-
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 02:16 last edited by
The workers are stupid for backing Palestine.
Starbucks are stupid for hiring those workers.
Their customers are stupid for supporting this bunch.
-
The workers are stupid for backing Palestine.
Starbucks are stupid for hiring those workers.
Their customers are stupid for supporting this bunch.
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 13:47 last edited by@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Starbucks are stupid for hiring those workers.
Putting on my Ax hat
I don't think that Starbucks can ask their opinion on the war as a requirement for hiring.
But to me, this is an obvious infringement of the logo of Starbucks.
-
@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Starbucks are stupid for hiring those workers.
Putting on my Ax hat
I don't think that Starbucks can ask their opinion on the war as a requirement for hiring.
But to me, this is an obvious infringement of the logo of Starbucks.
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 14:44 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
I don't think that Starbucks can ask their opinion on the war as a requirement for hiring.
Why not?
-
@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
I don't think that Starbucks can ask their opinion on the war as a requirement for hiring.
Why not?
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 15:05 last edited by@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
I don't think that Starbucks can ask their opinion on the war as a requirement for hiring.
Why not?
I would think that would somehow be prohibited. Your private views should not be a criteria.
Now, if you start saying those private views after you are hired, either with or without company resources, than it can be a problem for you.
-
@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
I don't think that Starbucks can ask their opinion on the war as a requirement for hiring.
Why not?
I would think that would somehow be prohibited. Your private views should not be a criteria.
Now, if you start saying those private views after you are hired, either with or without company resources, than it can be a problem for you.
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 15:18 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Your private views should not be a criteria.
Why not?
I wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden. That only makes good sense.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Your private views should not be a criteria.
Why not?
I wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden. That only makes good sense.
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 15:19 last edited by@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Your private views should not be a criteria.
Why not?
I wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden. That only makes good sense.
Are you actually hiring anybody right now? Like at all?
-
@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@taiwan_girl said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Your private views should not be a criteria.
Why not?
I wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden. That only makes good sense.
Are you actually hiring anybody right now? Like at all?
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 15:20 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Are you actually hiring anybody right now? Like at all?
No, I should have said the wise employer wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Are you actually hiring anybody right now? Like at all?
No, I should have said the wise employer wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden.
wrote on 19 Oct 2023, 15:22 last edited by@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Are you actually hiring anybody right now? Like at all?
No, I should have said the wise employer wouldn't hire anyone that might support Joe Biden.
I mean, if you got a lawn guy or something I suppose you could inquire.
Please love yourself.
