Senate Democrats block resolution condemning anti-Israel college groups introduced by Josh Hawley.
Resolution Condemning Support for Hamas Fails in Senate
A resolution introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) to condemn student groups expressing support for the terrorist group Hamas failed in the Senate Thursday. Hawley had attempted to pass the resolution by unanimous consent, but Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) rose to block the resolution and said it wrongly smeared students who protest on college campuses. The resolution condemned student groups that have celebrated Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel while blaming the Jewish state for the attacks. To date, more than 5,000 people have been killed in the attacks and Israel’s subsequent military response, according to estimates from both sides.
Ivy League Schools Lose Donors Amid Anti-Israel Student Activism
“What you are doing here is smearing all of the students who engage in these protests, and that is just wrong,” Van Hollen told Hawley on the Senate floor. “There are student groups that may have legitimate concerns about the loss of innocent civilian life in Gaza.”
Hawley, in introducing the resolution, said the ”response of some people in this country” was “almost as disturbing as the facts of these terrible attacks themselves.”
“Calling for the death of Jewish people is not just another opinion,” he said. “Calling for the genocide, celebrating the genocide of Jewish babies is not just another opinion. Celebrating the assaults on Jewish people in this country is not just another opinion, and the Senate should be clear and stand with moral clarity and say ‘this is wrong.'”
The statements Hawley referred to were made by pro-Palestinian student groups at a number of colleges and universities, but a statement that was initially signed by 31 student groups at Harvard has drawn the most attention. That statement said that the Israeli government was “entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.” Statements by student groups at other schools have gone so far as to defend the terrorist attacks as “resistance.”
International backlash prompted a number of student groups to disassociate themselves from the Harvard statement, but the university leadership has continued to draw criticism, even as Harvard President Claudine Gay has attempted to quell the firestorm.
Gay released a video statement last week saying the university “rejects terrorism,” “rejects hate,” and “rejects the harassment or intimidation of individuals based on their beliefs,” while asserting the university’s support for free expression.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“Our university embraces a commitment to free expression,” Gay said. “That commitment extends even to views that many of us find objectionable, even outrageous. We do not punish or sanction people for expressing such views. But that is a far cry from endorsing them. It’s in the exercise of our freedom to speak that we reveal our characters, and we reveal the character of our institution.”
At least one major donor, the Wexner Foundation, has closed its checkbook to the Ivy League school because of the institution’s response to antisemitism.
What was the aim of the resolution and why did it fail to pass in the Senate?
Le and celebrating terrorist attacks is not legitimate political activism,” Hawley said. “It is hate speech and it is abhorrent. We cannot tolerate this kind of extremism on our college campuses.”
The resolution aimed to call out and condemn student groups that have expressed support for Hamas, a designated terrorist organization responsible for numerous attacks against Israel. These groups have been accused of blaming Israel for the attacks while ignoring the loss of innocent civilian lives in Gaza. The resolution sought to shed light on the dangerous rhetoric and actions of these student groups and garner support for taking a firm stance against such support.
However, the resolution failed to pass in the Senate due to the objection raised by Sen. Chris Van Hollen. Van Hollen argued that the resolution unfairly smeared all students who engage in protests and voiced concerns about the loss of innocent civilian lives in Gaza. He believed that there are legitimate concerns that some student groups have regarding the Israeli military response and did not want them to be disregarded or condemned as a whole.
Hawley, on the other hand, emphasized the importance of distinguishing between legitimate concerns and the celebration of terrorist attacks. He highlighted the dangerous underlying message behind supporting and celebrating Hamas, which involves calling for the death of Jewish people and promoting hate speech. He argued that this kind of extremism should not be tolerated on college campuses and needed to be addressed.
The resolution sparked a heated debate about the limits of free speech and the responsibility of universities in addressing extremist ideologies. While some contended that the resolution aimed to suppress legitimate activism and dissent, others argued that it was necessary to condemn and reject support for terrorist organizations.
Apart from the Senate debate, the issue of anti-Israel student activism has also had repercussions in the form of donor withdrawals from Ivy League schools. Several major donors have expressed concern over the growing anti-Israel sentiment on campuses and have decided to withhold funding. This highlights the broader impact and consequences of such student activism, not only in terms of political discussions but also in terms of financial implications for universities.
The failure of the resolution underscores the complexities and controversies surrounding the issue. Balancing the right to free speech and the need to condemn extremism is a delicate task. It remains to be seen how universities and legislators will continue to navigate these challenges and ensure an inclusive and respectful environment while addressing legitimate concerns and rejecting support for terrorist organizations.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...