Sat 28 Apr 2007
Meet Robert Shvern, Creepy Boyfriend
Posted by David Dudley Field '25 under Mary Jane Hitler at 12:17 am
Who is “Rob S.”, Julia’s creepy boyfriend? Inquiring EphBlog readers want to know!
Our treasure hunt begins with an anonymous tip from a loyal reader and the site (anonhost.org) that Rob S. used to communicate with the Williams community. (Note that the site no longer features the posters or Rob’s commentary. Here is a cache. Did anyone save a more recent version, especially one with the threats against Noah? Check your Firefox buffers!)
1) Here is the domain information associated with anonhost.org. Note that the registrant’s e-mail address is anonhost@throne.net.
2) Throne Networks controls throne.net and is a defunct(?) company according to the Virginia Department of Corporations. However, their 2000 annual report is available online. Search here to discover this (pdf). Robert Shvern is listed as the President of Throne Networks. Ross Mueller is the Vice President. Ryan Cruse is the Director of Technology.
3) A Google search shows that “Robert Shvern” was arrested for (but not convicted of) computer crimes at George Mason University. Consider this story from 1998:
An alumnus and a current student who say they were falsely accused of
hacking into the computer system at George Mason University have filed a $4.5 million lawsuit against the school for defamation of character and false imprisonment.An attorney for Robert Shvern, 24, of Fairfax County, and Ryan Whelan, 25, of Centreville, said the two men suffered great embarrassment and damage to their reputations and lost jobs and money as a result of charges filed against them last summer, which were later dropped.
If Robert Shvern were 24 in 1998, then he would be 33 now, the same age as our Rob S. And living in Virginia. These pieces seem to be aligning nicely, don’t they? But, to really connect “Rob S.” to Robert Shvern, it would be nice to find a link to Ryan Whelan, who would be about 34 now.
4) Conveniently enough, there is a Ryan Whelan listed on Friendster, a 34 year-old living in Virginia. And he is “friends” with Rob S. (Oh, wait. How clever! Rob S. changed his name to “Roberto” and deleted all the nasty stuff. No worries. Here is an original version.) What a coincidence! Also, two of his “friends” (Ryan Cruse and Tyler) are also friends with Rob S. Glad that they have stuck together all these years.
Not enough evidence? Recall that the Vice President of Throne Networks was Ross Mueller. Shockingly enough, there is a Ross Mueller on Friendster. Who’d a thunk it? Ross’s friends include Ryan Cruse and Peter Beckman, both friends of Rob S. It’s a small Friendster world after all. Now, it is possible that the Ryan Cruse, Ross Mueller and Ryan Whelan listed above are not the same men that Robert Shvern has known for years. Rob S. just happens to have friends with the same names. Yeah, riiiiiiight.
5) So, we can conclude (corrections welcome!) that Julia’s creepy Hitler-poster-designing boyfriend is 33 year-old Robert Shvern of Virginia, proud graduate of George Mason University, and once (and current?) President of Throne Networks.
But the somewhat scary part is that Throne Networks appears to be the host of a number of very nasty websites. Check out domain information on nazi.org, fuckgod.com and amerika.org. I do not know if Robert Shvern is still associated with Throne Networks. Perhaps the Record will interview him! If I lived in the same dorm as Julia, then I might have some concerns about Robert Shvern coming to visit.
UPDATE: This post originally included a picture of Shvern retrieved from his now-closed Friendster page. Schvern has noted that this image is his property and that we have no right to use it without his permission. He is correct. We mistakenly assumed, since the image was on a public Friendster page, that it was in the public domain. EphBlog regrets the error.
Print
• Email
| « Uncomfortable Learning | Dumb Thing To Do » |
113 Responses to “Meet Robert Shvern, Creepy Boyfriend”
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from Slurs » EphBlog
April 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
[…] all the details that it has? Doing so can only help in identifying the guilty party. (An EphBlog specialty!) A student who saw something “weird” last night might provide a clue if she knew the […]
-
Pingback from CGCL Day 6: Visiting Team Final Report : EphBlog
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:44 am
[…] Note: The creepy boyfriends, students building bombs, Wile e N word super penis, the poop on walls, hitler weed leaf posters […]
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post
If a comment you submitted does not show up, please email us at eph at ephblog dot com. Please note that commenters are required to use a valid email address when submitting comments.
Ironic Justice says:
Oh David. I have to admit, that is impressive. I hope you never get a grudge against me (wait, I’m an abstract composite concept…guess there’s not much to discuss).
April 28th, 2007 at 1:41 amIt's Pretty Scary! says:
It’s pretty scary to think that the company that Rob Shvern is the president of the host of such websites as:
“Al-Qaeda Appreciation Society of North America”: http://amerika.org/
“Anarchy Now! A practical manifesto for the practicing dissident”
http://www.anarchy.net/
“As it burned and the smell of dusty planks and charring parchment filled the air… our faces remained calm but our hearts were secretly glad for the end of its dominance, its guilt, and the paranoia that had been in the town for as long as the wood of the church.”
http://www.churcharson.com/
“WHILE Israel fights Hezbollah with tanks and aircraft, its supporters are campaigning on the internet. Israel’s Government has thrown its weight behind efforts by supporters to counter what it believes to be negative bias and a tide of pro-Arab propaganda.”
http://www.infoterror.com/
“Jehovah, father of bondage to impotence / You plead like a child for us to serve you / But we have now risen above shallow ignorance / We shun your weakness and set your Kingdom ablaze”
http://fuckgod.com/
And there appear to be lots more . . .
This is the 33-year-old non-student who created the pro-Hitler posters and hung them around campus in response to the Holocaust Remembrance Day posters?
April 28th, 2007 at 1:45 amHis actions speak for his character, too says:
“If I lived in the same dorm as Julia, then I might have some concerns about Robert Shvern coming to visit.”
Especially if he has access to your computers:
“1997
GMU SCHOOL FILES LOST
Accused Computer Hackers Arrested
Computer hackers have invaded the databanks at George Mason
University, destroying student and faculty files and sending derogatory
messages about a school official.
Fairfax Police and the university have investigated 11 incidents of
computer hacking since April. The intrusions mostly affect projects at the
School of Information Technology and Engineering.
Last month, authorities arrested two George Mason students in several
hacking incidents. Police said Robert Shvern of Alexandria installed a
virus into the school’s computer. Ryan Whelan of Centreville allegedly
erased Shvern’s messages to hinder the investigation.
Shvern is charged with computer trespassing, forgery and theft of
services. Whelan is charged with being an accessory after the fact.”
(“Shvern” is Yiddish for “swear.”)
April 28th, 2007 at 2:07 amAnonymous says:
Since the evidence was destroyed (kind of like the faux-Williams and Friendster sites disappearing), not enough existed when the case was brought to trial.
April 28th, 2007 at 2:10 amAnonymous says:
I guess he’s given Julia her high horse to ride:
“Subject: Re: Nietzschean Ethics
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 1995 20:15:24 -0500 (EST)
From: “Robert Shvern”
I would be interested in anyone who would be kind enough to email me, or post to this list-server information, interpretations, etc. on Nietzschean ethics specifically to the will to power to dominate others.
More specifically would Nietzsche agree that we (sic) it is justified to dominate others if that is our will. Thank you!”
David, maybe you should use “Svengali” in the title of one of your next posts.
April 28th, 2007 at 2:26 amDee says:
In a WSO discussion last spring, after being accused that she had “some real issues to work out with racism”, Julia posted this link on anti-racist nationalism:
http://www.anus.com/tribes/arn/
Anus.com is registered to Throne Networks in McLean, VA.
April 28th, 2007 at 2:33 amAnonymous says:
Was it not a couple of threads ago that some in here
April 28th, 2007 at 6:24 amwent off on my comment to Kane about not pretending to be a babe in the woods on issues such as this? I believe the thread took a bizzare turn in order to out my ip address, did it not? (although I thought we had all agreed, that is not cool) Sadly, this type of thing exists more than any of us would like to admit.
Now I hate to say I told some of you so, but- I told you so!
Anonymous says:
OK, Julia, what do you have planned?
April 28th, 2007 at 7:17 amAnonymous says:
And I don’t see that anyone even mentioned outing your ip address.
April 28th, 2007 at 7:19 amAnonymous says:
Has your hacker boyfriend been foiled?
April 28th, 2007 at 7:45 amWalker says:
Eph ’07, I have to disagree. Although David’s amateur investigative work might seem to be a bit extreme, given the extent to which Rob Shvern’s relevance to the campus has become increasingly significant over the past couple of weeks, I don’t think it is at all unwarranted or immature. From what I’ve seen so far, Rob is actually on campus (I’ve yet to see any evidence that he has left since the day the posters went up, and he himself mentioned meeting / talking to students shortly afterwards), and I believe that students are perfectly entitled to know what that may mean for them. And if it means that the campus is currently playing host to a misanthropic anarchist prone to threats of violence and support of terrorism (both physical and psychological), then all I can say is (1) I’m glad I don’t live anywhere near Noah, or attend any of the same classes as him, and (2) I hope that the administration does something about this for the sake of maintaining the safety of the students.
Cheers.
April 28th, 2007 at 11:26 amAnonymous says:
Taken from the WSO blog about illegal immigrants * Julia*
April 28th, 2007 at 9:10 amI tell dead baby jokes all the time, doesn’t mean I am prejudiced against dead babies, or hell, even live ones. Really, why everybody has their panties in a twist over a game that is obviously a joke is beyond me. Oh wait, no it’s not- they love to pretend to be self-righteously indignant at any chance they get. It might be just because I’m from Texas, but I love shooting things and playing that duck hunt game just hasn’t been doing it for me since I’ve left the Lone Star State. Can’t wait to get home and sit at my door polishing my .45 and waiting for somenody to miss the “Tresspassers Will be shot, survivors WILL be prosecuted” sign.
eph '07 says:
This is seriously creepy and obsessive. Tracking down people you don’t know on the internet, making conjectures about their identities, and then making your assumptions about their characters public does not represent Williams in a way I’d like to be associated with (of course, nor do the Hitler posters, but I really shouldn’t have to say that). Do you realize that you could be completely wrong, and the only information about them that you can be sure you are right about and the only information that is actually your business is what actually happened at Williams? Also, a bunch of alums who really should have lives dredging up old WSO posts to discuss them on an outside blog smacks of torrid gossip and far less maturity than the 20 year olds on campus are exhibiting (and if the 20 year olds on campus did it on WSO itself, it would be less inappropriate than this). Please just give it up.
April 28th, 2007 at 11:14 amAnonymous says:
That’s the craziest thing I have ever read. I didn’t think people like that existed outside of movies. My Lord. All apologies to the JRC folks for thinking they were being oversensitive – the people who mocked what they did apparently really are scary nutjobs.
April 28th, 2007 at 11:33 amK.G.A. says:
Thorne Networks?
Larry Thorne, born Lauri Törni, in Viipuri, Finland, 1919.
A highly-decorated soldier who fought with the Finnish army against the Soviets, leading long-range guerilla raids. He also served with the Waffen-SS. At the war’s conclusion, he was imprisoned as a war criminal under the terms of the Finnish-Soviet armistice.
In his prewar life, Torni served with the Finnish Civil Guard, an organization with distinct Fascistic/irredentist leanings.
Torni eventually made his way to the US. He changed his name to Thorne, joined the US army, and served with the Special Forces in Vietnam, eventually attaining the rank of Captain. He was killed (MIA, but remains later discovered) in a helicopter crash.
http://www.pownetwork.org/bios/t/t375.htm
http://www.larrythorne.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauri_Törni
http://www.amazon.com/Soldier-Under-Three-Flags-Exploits/dp/0934793654
The name could, of course, be a coincidence.
April 28th, 2007 at 12:05 pmK.G.A. says:
Well reading-freakin’-comprehension.
THRONE Networks.
Right. Forget Larry Thorne.
April 28th, 2007 at 12:07 pmAnonymous says:
It looks like one of Mr. Shvern’s websites has spawned a school shooting: http://www.americandaily.com/nucleus/plugins/print/print.php?itemid=7220
April 28th, 2007 at 1:12 pmNot surprised says:
Uncoincidentally, both Julia’s manifesto to Dean Toomajian(http://www.ephblog.com/2007/04/24/Show-Us-The-Posters/)
and “creepy boyfriend”‘s rants on the quasi-official “Williams Commentator” site (since disbanded) borrow heavily from (“bizarrely intersect” with?) Shevren’s Throne Networks sites:
“Writer Steve Martinez of the Nationalist News Network (www.nazi.org/nazi/policy/weise) wrote that the LNSGP, “on whose message board Jeff Weise posted one year before shooting people at his Minnesota high school, today refused to wring hands over a ‘tragedy,’ instead pointing out that such events are to be expected when thinking people are crammed into an unthinking, irrational modern society. According to the LNSG, the school shooting itself is not our failure; society is our failure, and the school shooting is a symptom.”
All of these sites, including the http://www.nazi.org site, appear to be hosted by the Virginia-based Throne Networks.
A call to Throne Networks was not returned and an e-mail requesting comment was returned as undeliverable.
The company’s policy on hosting reads in part (www.throne.net/policies.html), “We do not censor customer web pages because of objections to the opinions expressed within. Our policy adheres to the precedents established for Human Rights by the United Nations, the United States Constitution, and applicable state and local laws. ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. – The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19.’
Throne Networks apparently buys computer space from a Chantilly, VA-based company called Two Radical Technologies, Inc. Their web site is http://www.2rad.net”
At the very least, Williams should have Julia resubmit her plagiarized “statement of intent” with the proper citations.
And further investigation would be a perfect assignment for a serious Record journalist.
April 28th, 2007 at 2:04 pmloves Williams too much says:
“Please just give it up.”
That would just be irresponsible. You would like to believe that if you don’t think about it, it doesn’t exist?
April 28th, 2007 at 2:18 pmouted anon says:
If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and in this case, craps like a duck, it is a duck. Kane is right to do what he is doing chasing this to ground. It beats the state of denial
April 28th, 2007 at 2:23 pmin previous posts.
“This kind of thing can never happen here, here at Williams, we are above all this.” Not so much.
please help says:
“I hope that the administration does something about this for the sake of maintaining the safety of the students.”
Are any students in touch with members of the administration to the extent that they can direct the college to this important information?
April 28th, 2007 at 2:24 pmWalker says:
“Are any students in touch with members of the administration to the extent that they can direct the college to this important information?”
I doubt it’s anything a simple e-mail couldn’t accomplish. I encourage any students with opinions or concerns about this, regardless of which side of the fence you come down on, to e-mail Dean Roseman and let her know about it. I already have, and I hope other students (and others, e.g. alumni, who feel so inclined) do the same.
Cheers.
April 28th, 2007 at 2:46 pmAnonymous says:
I doubt that you care but Williams just accepted 1120 for the class of 2011 and you are not doing much to make it sound like a school students want to attend…I know you will say if you don’t like it don’t come cause we don’t want you anyway…not sure admissions shares that view
April 28th, 2007 at 2:55 pmget some help says:
Just so everyone can see how fine and upstanding our Julia is (from the “No Juden” thread):
“A few posts ago, I told you so. Only to be marginalized and to have my ip address plastered all over this blog…. well… I told you so.
Posted by: at April 27, 2007 11:47 PM
“Only to be marginalized”
April 28th, 2007 at 2:59 pmJulia, you did a good job of doing that yourself. It’s oh-so-easy to always blame someone else. Like it’s been said here before, you have no conscience, no soul, no heart — and no brains. You may have a good vocabulary, but you know nothing about being intelligent.
Posted by: not a lover of white trash at April 28, 2007 12:34 PM”
Walker says:
“I doubt that you care but Williams just accepted 1120 for the class of 2011 and you are not doing much to make it sound like a school students want to attend…”
Perhaps, but I hardly think that rolling over and accepting the distribution of Hitler posters is going to make the most positive of impressions, either. From a strictly admissions standpoint, it’s been essentially a salvage operation from the beginning. Either we ignore it and present ourselves as a campus that has no problem with such bigotry and subsequent threats of violence, or we don’t ignore it and, while it may make the issue more widely-known, earn the opposite reputation. The fact that it happened in the first place, however, makes it difficult for Admissions regardless of where it goes from there, and no amount (nor any absence) of hullabaloo on Ephblog or WSO is going to make that better.
Cheers.
April 28th, 2007 at 2:59 pmDarren says:
Looks like we need to set up some good old fashioned reeducation camps to set these youngsters straight. In my day we used an iron fist to crush any intolerance. No one can veer from the program if we diligently employ thought reform to persuade others to our position. Only this freedom and liberation from bad ideas can save the children.
April 28th, 2007 at 3:53 pmtired says:
Darren,
Like others of your ilk, you’re missing the point entirely.
April 28th, 2007 at 4:13 pmAnonymous says:
I still just can’t believe this. Freakin’ unbelievable – an honest to God neo-nazi loon, at Williams. I honestly thought they didn’t exist anymore. I’m speechless.
April 28th, 2007 at 4:21 pmwow says:
Wow, looks like David Kane’s obsessive interest in Williams has actually generated something useful. Very nice!
April 28th, 2007 at 5:25 pm(blech) says:
Actually, Julia has censored her own speech: while cloaked in the concept of “free speech,” she stops short of proclaiming that the real purpose of her scheme was to “put the Juden in their place.” I guess she hasn’t reached “the level of transcendence necessary for (her) to earn the right to be called educated” (quoted from her manifesto).
Her actions speak much louder than her words, though.
April 28th, 2007 at 5:54 pmLionel Hutz says:
Wow… This saga has been developing and evolving faster than I have been able to follow. If someone has the time, I would really appreciate a (relatively) brief chronology of events to get caught up to speed. Trying to navigate through all of these threads is way too confusing.
But EphBlog was mentioned in The Record, so at least some good has come of this debacle.
April 28th, 2007 at 6:12 pmremember says:
From Julia today @ 6:24 am:
“Sadly, this type of thing exists more than any of us would like to admit. Now I hate to say I told some of you so, but- I told you so!”
Lest we forget what she said four days ago:
April 28th, 2007 at 6:39 pm“There are people at Williams who are pro Hitler. What it means is obvious. There is more of this in our world than anyone would like to admit. Stop playing naive Kane. The babe in the woods routine to create discussion is nice, but I know you are smarter than that. Those of us who have been blogging here for some time, know better.” 4/24/07 11:47 am (“Show Us the Posters”)
sadly says:
“I hate to say I told some of you so, but- I told you so!”
Seems like she loves to hate.
April 28th, 2007 at 6:43 pmeph connection says:
“(“Shvern” is Yiddish for “swear.”)”
The Human Stain?
April 28th, 2007 at 7:08 pmwhat next? says:
So Julia has outed herself as “pro Hitler. What it means is obvious.”
Not so obvious is where Williams will go from here. If I were Jewish (or any of the other non-preferred groups — what those are I don’t care to know), this would constitute, for me, a hostile environment: with the specter of wondering what shape her and her boyfriend’s next “statement” might take.
April 28th, 2007 at 8:00 pmhwc says:
For future reference. Normal people don’t hang Hitler posters in response to Holocaust Remembrance Day. They don’t think hanging Hitler posters is funny. And, on the odd chance they smoke a little too much refer and make a boneheaded mistake, they apologize profusely for doing something so offensive.
April 28th, 2007 at 8:13 pmhwc says:
It’s a tough situation for Morty. What won’t help him at all is a bunch of students championing Bong Hits 4 Hitler and her Idiot Boyfriend as martyrs for free speech.
April 28th, 2007 at 8:20 pmWalker says:
[If I could figure out how to make “quote” tags…]
It’s a tough situation for Morty. What won’t help him at all is a bunch of students championing Bong Hits 4 Hitler and her Idiot Boyfriend as martyrs for free speech.
[…they would go here.]
HWC, although I do think Morty is in a bit of a pickle over all this, I don’t think the “bunch of students championing BH4H & IB as martyrs for free speech” is really the issue. I don’t think the majority of people believe that either should be punished simply for hanging up Yay Hitler! posters.
However, I do think that the majority think that some sort of administrative response, disciplinary or otherwise, is warranted due to what has come afterwards, i.e. the threats of violence (and the refusal to disassociate from them), the associations with organizations connected to school shootings, and so forth.
I’m all for free speech, and was (and still am) one of those students who don’t think that the speech should be punished. At this point, however, it has moved well beyond the realm of simple speech.
Cheers.
April 28th, 2007 at 8:39 pmAnonymous says:
This is really a simple matter…prohibit the boyfriend from ever setting foot on campus again…Williams has no obligation to him and a single act of this nature is one more than should be tolerated…it does not matter what his rights are, let him sue if he wishes, your resources vastly exceed his and if some day he collects some monetary judgement (highly unlikely) it is just a cost of doing business. The girl sounds like a nut but she is a student at Williams and there is such a thing as the 1st amendment, so let it go. You are risking the reputation of a magnificent school, and once lost it is not easy to recover. As the nation watches the kids at Virginia Tech try to get on with their lives it is unseemly at this time to take this issue any further. There are some battles that as they say are worth “dying in the ditch” for but this is not one of them. You may think that your conscience demands that you pursue all avenues to stop what you perceive as intollerable behavior but you are wrong. There is a reason that nations have always shed the blood of their young during wars, because at 19 you do not know what is worth losing everything for. I know that sounds insulting but it is not. Some things require a longer term view. Do you feel it is in the best interest of the school to keep this going until the nation must decide through the fog of media coverage if Williams is a hot bed for Nazi simpathisers. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 million people died fighting this battle you are not going to solve it. Somebody once said it is a bad idea to burn down the house in which you live. Let it go.
April 28th, 2007 at 9:14 pmHorace says:
To wit, there is no case here. There is no violation. Where is the injury? To make claim by a poster is to underwrite the refrain: “a picture is worth a thousand words”. It appears that this incident has overwhelmed our senses and now we can hear the echo of conceit and hubris.
It appears that members of our beloved Williams demand action for the behavior of this young student’s ill found actions for the presumptuous encroachments on certain members of our Williams College household. These forced actions in no certain terms can be categorized as a character flaw resulting in the charge of “Hubris”. As for the pleasure in hubris, in the form of revenge, can often result in fatal retribution.
Let us pause and consider the matter before us and most of all WIlliams.
We must stand together and winter our discontent.
April 28th, 2007 at 10:28 pmWalker says:
Horace (and Anonymous), I’ll reiterate the point once more, since you seem to have missed it. The issue is no longer the posters, nor have they (or First Amendment rights) been the issue for some time. The issue is the perception of threat (and, at least once, the actual presence of threat c/o Shvern) by members of the Williams College community as a result of Julia’s and Shvern’s actions after the fact. Perhaps the hysteria is overblown. However, in the face of the Virginia Tech tragedy, the most realistic approach to this situation is one that most decisively is aimed at avoiding a result involving the words “We saw the warning signs, but didn’t think they would amount to much.”
As an aside, for those of you interested, neither of these two individuals’ Friendster pages are any longer online. Hope somebody saved them while they had the chance, eh? Seems the objective is to erase all possible evidence once again.
Cheers.
April 28th, 2007 at 10:35 pmLoweeel says:
Re: Shvern — if it’s yiddish, it’s probably similar, if not identical, in German. The “Shv-” words didn’t differentiate much, other than regional accents, between the two languages. See, e.g., Schvartz/Schwartz.
I think the best think to do is bar that clown from campus. I actually think asking her to take a year off would be counterproductive, as she clearly needs time away from Svengali, not more time with him.
April 28th, 2007 at 10:50 pmhopeful says:
Julia on a WSO blog, posted at 9:10 am today:
“I love shooting things … Can’t wait to get home and sit at my door polishing my .45 and waiting for somenody to miss the ‘Tresspassers Will be shot, survivors WILL be prosecuted’ sign.”
“This is seriously creepy and obsessive.” eph ’07, today 11:14 am
“in the face of the Virginia Tech tragedy, the most realistic approach to this situation is one that most decisively is aimed at avoiding a result involving the words ‘We saw the warning signs, but didn’t think they would amount to much.'” Walker, today 10:35 pm
I agree wholeheartedly. The community has tried to reach out to Julia, but she’s playing some other kind of game.
I hope the deans are reading. This is one they can’t just “let … go.”
April 28th, 2007 at 11:09 pmdangerous says:
There is a lot of potential harm in wackos having or supporting dissenting social viewpoints. It would be in everyone’s best interest to reel in such people so they can be steered to more agreeable ideas. We don’t want a campus where people entertain such paths and the idea of “uncomfortable learning” is antiquated and inappropriate. Research has shown students do best when taught the classics. Any divergence from that just ensures mediocrity.
April 28th, 2007 at 11:35 pmIronic Justice says:
Appropriate solution:
1) Post fascist Rob from campus. This should be an easy first step (the college can post whomever it wants). School is protected from him and Julia (if she chooses to stay at Williams) is at least given some distance.
2) Drag Julia into the Dean’s office, see if she’s as deranged/intractable as her words suggest and if she’s totally lost touch with reality. Let the school go from there.
April 28th, 2007 at 11:50 pmDee says:
Too bad his old site (http://www.site.gmu.edu/~rshvern) — which apparently had a section entitled “Dedication to pure hate, evil and destruction” — is no longer available. The person who linked to it (http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Bookmarks.html#Rob%20Schvern;%20RobLink) called it “truly weird”.
Looks like Rob also used to post GMU salary information on that site; he later transferred it to http://www.roblink.com, where you can still view it today. You might enjoy reading his rants about censorship and GMU faculty, including a mention of one professor whose “decadent lifestyle brought him a deserved death”.
http://roblink.com/tenyears.html
April 29th, 2007 at 12:49 amhopeless says:
It seems the guy has a beef with people who reject rationalism and work against free speech. No wonder the response he’s received has been so brutal. It’s kind of like smashing the same two brick walls against each other; nothing will ever change because both sides are polarized in their True Belief about what to think. There is no change of opinions or even an attempt to understand, only arrogant ugliness on all sides.
Is it still legal to beat dead horses? Where is the SPCA?
April 29th, 2007 at 1:13 amstill hopeful says:
Hopeless:
You are truly that. If you knew anything about Williams, you would know that the issue is not free speech at this point.
April 29th, 2007 at 1:18 amAnonymous says:
I would be curious to find why he hasn’t moved to a country like Sweden or France where people are a more tolerant to a wide range of ideas. You can’t complain about public intolerance if you are dealing with the wrong public.
April 29th, 2007 at 2:08 amLoweeel says:
You’re being ironic about tolerance to a wide range of ideas, right? France is tolerant to a wide range of some ideas, but certainly not other (e.g., any mention of religion even tangential to the public square). Rob would also probably be displeased by its ban on the sale of Nazi memorabilia.
Free speech doesn’t exist in Continental Europe, not in the sense that we Americans know and enjoy it; “societal” tolerance to ideas doesn’t mean much if the government can trump that on a whim.
April 29th, 2007 at 2:28 amIronic Justice says:
I’m curious- those of you who seem to think fascist Rob is suffering only because our society is intolerant- do you oppose the decision in post-war Germany to proscribe Mein Kampf?
April 29th, 2007 at 2:29 amwhy hope at all says:
For better or for worse, the kid is clearly a free speech radical displaced from the 60s Berkeley Free Speech Movement. It could do some good to bring back campus activism and broader campus advocacy for political causes instead of complacency.
April 29th, 2007 at 3:16 amouted anon says:
“Remember” and “get some help”-
First of all, I am not Julia. Second of all, my comments are critical of the previous assertions that prejudice in this form does not happen in Ivory towers. As you both obviously know, it does.
In the first few threads on this topic, many in here were in denial about the realities of bigotry in our world. What was done here (the posters) was so obviously wrong that it makes me want to get sick. Using my comments and coming up with the conclusion that I am supporting this kind of garbage (the mary jane hitler posters or whatever you want to call them) is way off base. RE READ. My comments are being critical of the naivety of some on this blog who failed to accept that this kind of prejudice is around us, and happens even at places like Williams.
I am being critical of David for not seeing this for what it is right away, and calling for not calling a duck a duck. In the comment above, I am being critical of some of those who blog here who actually found grounds to defend the posters in some way.
There was some Eph bloggers in previous posts who compared the Holocaust to other atrocities in order to belittle the gravity of what the Nazis did. I found that disturbing as well.
So, one last time.
I am not Julia.
I do not support her actions.
I do not attempt to expalin what was done in this case as anything other than what it is on its face. Vile.
Oh, and I did not post that foolish statement about Texas and guns, either.
April 29th, 2007 at 4:14 amouted anon says:
Anyone else checking out the absolute whitewash of this event printed in the current edition of the Record? Talk about protecting the Eph image at all costs! The Record regurgitates some of the old bogus “head in the sand” talking points originally delivered here on ephblog.
April 29th, 2007 at 9:01 amMaybe the folks over at the Record should read this blog? They would discover that the “it was done to encourage debate” snowjob has been proven false by Kanes outstanding legwork. I am glad Kane had the courage to take a closer look at the players in this scandle.
White supremists who have access to campus and girlfriends posting “refer Madness Hitler posters” threatening Eph students with violence. “All in the name of promoting honest debate” YEAH RIGHT! Wake up and smell the coffee.
Anonymous says:
Walker
April 29th, 2007 at 9:03 am“perception of threat”
It looks like you would make an excellent lawyer if that is where your interests take you. As you “shop” for a cause of action and center on the “perception of threat” maybe take a step back. The 1.3 billion in this world who subsist on less than a $1 a day, the people in Darfur, battered spouses who are told my the police that there is nothing that can be done to protect them if they have not actually been assaulted, the kids at VT hearing the footsteps coming towards their room after hearing the shoots down the hall, these and countless others felt threatened. You are not going to find the world will have a lot of sympathy for a bunch of students at an elite $50,000 a year “purple bubble” in the mountains, who go around posting flyers on each others doors, but you just may ruin the reputation of Williams.
Ronit says:
Dear anon@09:03: your post is a complete non sequitur.
April 29th, 2007 at 9:35 amephmom says:
Anonymous @ 9:03 am:
The college is responsible for insuring the safety of its students, and doing whatever it can to make sure that Williams students do not have to suffer the fate of “the kids at VT hearing the footsteps coming towards their room after hearing the shoots down the hall.” As you said, “these and countless others felt threatened.” And the administration has a responsibility to make sure that “the world (does not have to) have a lot of sympathy for a bunch of students at an elite $50,000 a year ‘purple bubble’ in the mountains.” If the safety of all 2000 students is not the college’s number one priority, that “just may ruin the reputation of Williams.”
April 29th, 2007 at 10:13 amAnonymous says:
Ronit
As an aside…complete non sequitur is redundant…
Non sequitur is Latin for “it does not follow.” In formal logic, an argument is a non sequitur if the conclusion does not follow from the premise. In a non sequitur, the conclusion can be either true or false, but the argument is a fallacy because the conclusion does not follow from the premise. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition.
Here are two types of non sequitur of traditional noteworthiness:
1) Any argument that takes the following form is a non sequitur:
If A is true, then B is true.
B is stated to be true.
Therefore, A must be true.
Even if the premises and conclusion are all true, the conclusion is not a necessary consequence of the premises. This sort of non sequitur is also called affirming the consequent.
An example of affirming the consequent would be:
If I am a human (A) then I am a mammal. (B)
April 29th, 2007 at 11:52 amI am a mammal. (B)
Therefore, I am a human. (A)
…There are no partial non sequiturs…
frank uible says:
There is no insurance – barely any bona fide ensurance. Life is a risky proposition.
April 29th, 2007 at 12:19 pmRonit says:
Thanks for the info, Captain Obvious. Glad to see you got a passing grade on intro logic.
April 29th, 2007 at 12:26 pmDee says:
Updated: anonhost.org/williams
April 29th, 2007 at 12:27 pmDiana says:
Well, sort of updated, in the sense that it now automatically redirects to williams.anonhost.org, but that page says Page Not Found, so I guess the update was taking the page down entirely?
April 29th, 2007 at 12:47 pm[space] says:
Its nice to know that if I ever screw something up I’ll have a cohort of internet bloggers to reasearch my entire past history. Makes me sleep better at night.
April 29th, 2007 at 1:00 pmDee says:
Page not found? For me it now shows an essay on free will, which ends: “A gentle tolerance of diversity and polite civility allows human knowledge to increase instead of increasingly constricting intellectualism to lowest common denominator mob rule. Remove the blackness from your heart and have a little faith in mankind.”
April 29th, 2007 at 1:18 pmhuh? says:
I kept looking for the word “hypocrisy.”
And still maintaining it’s only about free speech …
April 29th, 2007 at 2:51 pmephmom says:
“a cohort of internet bloggers to reasearch my entire past history. Makes me sleep better at night.”
David and all the other researchers are actually providing a valuable service to the entire Williams community, both on and off campus. And doing exactly what the College has asked the community to do: in Williams’s April 24th “Message to the Community,” “caring about the well-being of all community members” was emphasized. Earlier (April 6th), in a message announcing the death of a beloved member of the community, Dean Roseman wrote: “I encourage all of us to be aware of who around us could use our support.” This type of community awareness will serve Williams well as (and partly because of this diligence) a signal emerges from the noise.
It’s important to consider the consequences of our actions, especially in this day and age. As has been mentioned, employers, acquaintances, and, even college admission officers are increasingly turning to the Internet as an additional useful source.
April 29th, 2007 at 3:46 pm[space] says:
Am I the only one that thinks the posting of all this personal information in a public space is kind of creepy as well? How would you all feel if it was you instead of this Rob fellow in the spotlight?
April 29th, 2007 at 4:03 pmephmom says:
“How would you all feel if it was you instead of this Rob fellow in the spotlight?”
I wouldn’t mind at all. If I did it, I take ownership for it.
April 29th, 2007 at 4:27 pm[space] says:
ephmom, I doubt most people share your openness. Most people don’t like aspects of their private lives to be made public to such a wide audience, even if they are unashamed of their actions.
April 29th, 2007 at 4:43 pmrory says:
if you don’t want this type of scrutiny, don’t POST A POSTER OF HITLER ON PEOPLE’S DORM ROOMS, especially if you’re a 33 year old non-student with links to hate groups.
it’s really a simple idea.
April 29th, 2007 at 5:05 pmcurious says:
It is not helpful when people speak in negatives. What is the broader issue than whether someone is for or against free speech?
April 29th, 2007 at 5:18 pmephmom says:
It’s really a question of the College having the responsibility to maintain a safe, non-threatening environment for the students — and that includes acting in a proactive, preventive way. Which brings up a related issue: how much of the theft, vandalism, and other destructive activity that occurs on campus is the result of the actions of non-(Williams) students? This comment on WSO in reference to the recent vandalism of a vending machine may provide an answer:
“I did notice a lot of people milling around drinking outside the entrance to Prospect on Saturday night, and I’m really sorry I didn’t call security about them. They looked a bit old to be Williams students.”
The significance of the message of caring and awareness mentioned in recent college missives cannot be underestimated.
April 29th, 2007 at 7:39 pmRonit says:
How would you all feel if it was you instead of this Rob fellow in the spotlight?
I thought he wanted to “provoke discussion”? Well, we’re giving him all the discussion he could want.
April 29th, 2007 at 8:14 pmfrank uible says:
In the 50s the campus was invaded by numerous uninvited outsiders during major social weekends such as Fall House Parties, Reunion Weekend, Winter Carnival and Spring House Parties. A disproportionately high quantity of theft and vandalism arose out of those visitors – who could be discouraged by a student’s closely following them until they moved on.
April 29th, 2007 at 8:18 pm[space] says:
I thought he wanted to “provoke discussion”? Well, we’re giving him all the discussion he could want.
So, you’re basically saying that he’s getting what he deserves by having all of his and his girlfriend’s information posted on the web? Isn’t that a bid vindictive?
April 29th, 2007 at 8:36 pmephmom says:
Isn’t that a bid vindictive?
Not at all. The provocation was made — and answered.
April 29th, 2007 at 9:06 pmephmom says:
“he’s getting what he deserves by having all of his and his girlfriend’s information posted on the web?”
Are you suggesting that free speech should be suppressed?
All that the “research” has uncovered is the truth, at any rate.
April 29th, 2007 at 9:12 pmsteve says:
It looks more like an effort at character assassination really. Why so vindictive?
April 29th, 2007 at 9:46 pm[space] says:
No, I’m not suggesting free speech should be supressed. But if you think about it, isn’t that what some people here are trying to do? This Julia and Rob couple can’t be punished for their actions (the posters at least) by Williams or the law – it is free speech after all. So instead they are attacking them on the internet, trying to harass people that posted fliers that they considered to be offensive.
Just to be clear, I definitely think the posters were a bad idea. I’m not defending them, I’m just questioning the tactics used by some people on this blog to respond to it.
April 29th, 2007 at 9:51 pmRonit says:
It’s not character assassination when it’s true.
April 29th, 2007 at 9:53 pmephmom says:
“trying to harass people that posted fliers that they considered to be offensive.”
I don’t see it as harassment — I see it as trying to understand the real reason for the Hitler posters (other than the pretexts of free speech and provoking discussion) by revealing the entire context. And all that was “discovered” was already on the Internet anyway — now some of what’s out there has been gathered in one place, making it much easier for anyone interested in Williams to see. Speaking for myself, I believe it gives people the opportunity to make much more informed inferences, especially about intent.
April 29th, 2007 at 10:24 pm(d)avid says:
[space] The posters contained no context or hint as to the author’s intent, which seems key to interpreting the posters. The post-hoc rationalizations of Julia and Rob did little to clarify:
None of the manifestos offered insight as to the intent and meaning of the posters.
So David Kane (and colleagues?) did what curious readers often do — look for clues in the author’s life to understand the intent. I’m not always a fan of David’s blog, but I think he performed a public service here.
David is hardly trying to suppress the unpopular dissenting view. After all, Kane is a man who questions the link between HIV and AIDS and believes there is a genetic component to crime and intelligence. Say what you will about David Kane, but he is certainly a champion of free speech and unconventional ideas.
April 29th, 2007 at 10:28 pmum says:
I agree with (d)avid. What is most troubling about Julia and Rob’s posters is the lack of clear intent. She says she posted them to provoke discussion. The implication was that she found the JRC posters regarding the Holocaust to be an invasion of her personal space, and so to counter that she put up posters to try and make others feel the way she did. The thesis, as I understood it, was that the medium — posters on people’s walls, the in-your-face style — was the problem, not the message.
However, Julia’s response did not sustain that thesis. By making the CONTENT of her posters OFFENSIVE as well (and there is no way that she would NOT know that putting images of Hitler would NOT be offensive to many), she was basically saying that the MESSAGE of the original posters was offensive to her: ergo, “posters remembering the Holocaust were offensive to me so I am offending those who put them up.”
As satire, that is the message Julia ultimately sent. I assume that is the discussion she was trying to start: “what if you got posters on your door that featured Hitler (or, by extension, something you did not respect, like marijuana) instead of the Holocaust? What if things you did not respect were invading your personal space?” The problem with that statement is that what speaks louder is not that the part about people’s doors being off-limits, but that someone found Holocaust Remembrance so offensive that they took it upon themselves to counter it. That’s the message Julia ultimately sent: that she doesn’t care.
Perhaps Julia didn’t think this through and we have gone too far in skewering her character, perhaps she is a bigot. Fact is, we haven’t heard enough from her on this. The best comment on this came from a WSO thread from Benjamin Sykes:
Julia, I actually agree that the sifting through of your personal life, particularly as I’ve read it on ephblog, has gotten a bit ridiculous. Who you date and befriend is your business, not ours. This whole thing is getting into an out of hand witchhunt, and that is wrong.
But as far as bigotry is concerned, I think that your inability to recognize the offense and hurt that your posters caused to students (particularly, but not solely Jews) and apologize as such testifies to some level of bigotry and ignorance. Hitler is invoked as a symbol of violence against Jews, and the invocation of Hitler has throughout recent history preceded anti-semitic violence. I know that it was not your intend to imply violence or call for it in any way, but it is important that you recognize the fear that your posters may have instilled in some Jewish students on campus and the threat that they can be perceived to represent.
Had your initial response to these posters simply been “I had no intent to offend anyone and did not realize that such posters would be deemed threatening. I apologize to those who feel threatened, my only intent was satire,” then that would’ve been cool and the issue would’ve died away. Instead, you and your boyfriend sought to combat your would-be attackers and not once recognized the level of hurt your actions may have caused. The lack of any semblance of an apology and the continuing display of insensitivity is, for me and many members of the Williams community, the problem.
April 29th, 2007 at 10:43 pm[space] says:
(d)avid: Fair enough.
April 29th, 2007 at 11:19 pmouted anon says:
Um- She does not recognize the hurt? You believe that, really? Just because someone is unwilling to apologize that does not mean that they do not recognize the fact that they have hurt others.
What about the other option, given all the data here? Perhaps these posters did what they were designed to do, hurt fellow students and attack jews? Perhaps the point is to hurt people and to hurt those you hate while staying inside the technical boundries of the law? What would a person willing to do such a thing do if the law allowed for more brutal acts? What else would they do if they thought they could get away with it? Have you been reading any of the data on her boyfriend? His threats of violence “are not her concern”. You think she cares one bit who he hurts, and how he hurts them?
Why are so many Ephs finding it hard to believe that this level of prejudice and hatred can exist on their campus?
April 29th, 2007 at 11:38 pmum says:
The part about her not recognizing the hurt was a quote from a WSO thread; it was the part I found most compelling to demonstrate to Julia’s defenders why, even though they defend her actions and her person, most of us don’t see it that way.
I personally believe she knows full well what she has done, and am confounded by friends of hers who post here defending her; the level-headed response I found on WSO illustrates why those who don’t know her find Julia’s non-responsiveness hard to swallow.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:23 amum says:
Let me explain that better — I think that Julia knows what she did. But her defenders should understand that by not demonstrating a simple understanding of recognizing what she has done opens the door to criticism from outside. By not responding, Julia is doing the same thing as admitting guilt and saying that those posters had the intention of insulting others.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:31 amephmom says:
Columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. writes recently in an article:
“OK, here are The Rules. Well, actually, there’s just the one:
Don’t be a bully.
…
We are encouraged to belittle the most vulnerable under the guise of deconstructing political correctness [a premise in both Julia’s and Rob’s manifestos]. I intend no defense of PC when I say that argument is a fig leaf of respectability for bullies who are really only doing what bullies have always done.
So you’ll forgive me if I am unimpressed by earnest questions of who can say what, when. The fact is, most of us already know the answer, instinctively if not intellectually. … The moral of this story, then, is not that free speech is under seige.
It is, rather, that even in a coarse and irreverent nation, The Rules still apply.”
I’m quite sure that Julia and Rob are among those who “already know the answer,” at least “intellectually.”
April 30th, 2007 at 1:07 pm[space] says:
And you say Jewish people are “vulnerable” at Williams because…?
April 30th, 2007 at 2:31 pmrory says:
[space]–the use of “you” makes your (and many other people’s) comments very hard to follow. please direct your comments at specific people so we can follow.
Jews anywhere are vulnerable to images of Hitler. The idea that I even need to consider explaining why that is the case is shocking and it shouldn’t be necessary. Just think on it.
April 30th, 2007 at 2:42 pmec says:
to [space], on the subject of feeling vulnerabe:
at the train station last night, I heard a man near me shout an anti-semetic slur I’ll choose not to retype here. he wasn’t egregiously drunk (not that that’s an excuse) and wasn’t in the process of being beaten up by rabbis or something bizarre like that. but he was angry, that’s for sure. and when I hear him say what he did, I froze up. I’m a jewish woman. I don’t “look” particularly jewish, that man hadn’t said anything directly to me, and I had no reason to assume that he was going to use his secret jew-sniffing powers to find me and beat me up. so I guess no, I technically wasn’t any more vulnerable than any of the non-jews I was with. but did I get a hell of a lot more of a shiver up my spine than they did? absolutely. there’s a history of anti-semitism in our country and in others, and things like this cause an immediate, visceral response. because even though you PROBABLY won’t get punched or spit at, you MIGHT. your heart races, your palms sweat. you, [space], may have been fortunate enough to grow up somewhere where there are no racial or ethnic divides and where everyone respects everyone else for the content of their characters. not all of us have been so lucky. can you understand this?
April 30th, 2007 at 3:43 pmAnonymous says:
“The Rules still apply” (“Don’t be a bully.”)
Except, of course, to self-avowed anarchists like Julia and Rob.
April 30th, 2007 at 4:14 pm[space] says:
rory: Yes, I understand that, I was just questioning the use of the word vulnerable used in general.
ec: Ok, yeah.
April 30th, 2007 at 4:43 pmJeff Z. says:
I think everything that could be said, substantively, has been. I’ll just add, David Kane: Nazi hunter — who would have known. Nice work outing this loser, David. Hopefully he will never set foot on the Williams campus again. Better yet, let’s find a way to loan him out to Amherst …
April 30th, 2007 at 5:41 pmsniff says:
From Shevren’s “essay” at the anonhost.org/williams site
“Whether the punishment is … disrupting one’s livelihood, the method is the same: force over freedom, destruction over rationality.”
I guess he’s upset that George Mason University dared to prosecute him after he hacked their system.
Overall, a lot of gibberish from someone who sought the approval of Nietzsche to justify “the will to power to dominate others.”
April 30th, 2007 at 7:37 pmephmom says:
“let’s find a way to loan him out to Amherst …”
How would Julia fare had she done this as a student at Amherst? How would Tony Marx respond, given his imperatives for “moral reckoning” and “responsible action”?
April 30th, 2007 at 8:16 pmKen Thomas '93 says:
Shvern also seems to be rather rare as a last name and to have an equally interesting series of historical uses and translations.
Mr. Shvern seems to be decent in Norwegian.
Did anyone get a copy of what happened on those Friendster pages?
April 30th, 2007 at 8:26 pmhwc says:
I don’t have enough sense of the culture at Amherst to hazard a guess.
As I’ve said, I think Morty’s response in the first couple of days was fine. I’m a little disappointed that it ended there. I would like to have seen a little more administration support for the WCJA town hall meeting and for the College Council discussion of further steps.
Perhaps some of the current students can comment, but I wonder if the campus community feels that the administration has spoken out quite strongly enough? For example, I am surprised that Morty did not force Julia to respond to the community as promised? Her only real response was posting her manifesto here.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:03 pm[space] says:
The only time I really hear about it is on WSO. And I hardly read WSO, and my friends even less. With the people I know, it seems somewhat of a non-issue.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:10 pmjay '10 says:
Yeah, the people on campus don’t feel threatened but the bloggers sure would like to rip up some fresh asshole.
Can someone post the bombers’ names and background?
April 30th, 2007 at 10:48 pm[space] says:
Wait until they’re made public, jay, I’m sure the jackals here will find a way to rip them apart.
Even though they definitely don’t deserve it. I’ll be defending them tooth and nail.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:05 pmAnonymous says:
Here’s another intersting blast from the past:
http://www.driftline.org/cgi-bin/archive/archive_msg.cgi?file=spoon-archives/nietzsche.archive/nietzsche_1995/nietzsche_Mar.95&msgnum=40&start=1469&end=1479
April 30th, 2007 at 11:25 pmAnonymous says:
“Did anyone get a copy of what happened on those Friendster pages?”
Yes, Ken. And I hope I’m not the only one. But I don’t want to tell you who I am because then Shvern — or one of his henchmen — might “erase” me.
May 1st, 2007 at 12:23 amAnonymous says:
“Here’s another intersting blast from the past:”
That email was one of the first entries on this thread — early on April 28th.
May 1st, 2007 at 12:54 amKen Thomas '93 says:
@anon: Thanks– I was a bit too distracted through this to turn on a web spider and set it to copy every 5 minutes.
I don’t know if you caught some of the exchanges in Norwegian, but… well. “Bizarre” at the very least. Evidently Mr. Shvern is a reasonable misogynist as well, to put it somewhat more delicately than it seems to deserve.
I’ve been conducting a fairly unpleasant journey through what might be called the international neo-Nazi movement– as much as I can stomach it– and I have no idea where to begin in reacting. A Nashville teacher copied the contents of a few 14-year-olds’ iPods for me and I’m coming to terms with the most common “genre” category being “Black Death;” the content is a little harder to kauen, as Nietzsche would have put it.
Mr. Shvern– or whomever he is– could use a few read-throughs of the Genealogy of Morals. That little part about Judaism being the first interesting development in the history of human consciousness should …
No immigration records or clear variants for “Shvern” as far as I can tell. But I don’t see any non-Jews carrying that name…
At least I’ve had an excuse to spend a little more time on Hebrew and take some tiptoes into Yiddish.
“Mir shvue” := we swear… it hurts me… (perhaps) ‘vengeance is to me…’
Two of my favorite Jewish women from Vandy just sat down to cram for their Art History exams tomorrow, so … I think I’ll skip explaining this mess to Sam and go with the strategy session on interpretations likely to please their professor.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Shvern and company– sometime when it’s appropriate I’ll tell you about the kind of threats we got on our door in Mexico City.
Shalom.
May 1st, 2007 at 1:58 amanonymous says:
College is supposed to be a positive environment.
Where is intellectual integrity?
Where is freedom of inquiry and speech?
The reactionaries on campus and elsewhere are signs of anti-intellectualism. These reactionaries are determined to stifle expression and intimidate the college.
The student’s impact to these reactionaries far exceeds the act itself. The words ascribed to the posters are innocuous. The picture of Adolf Hitler has assumed a mythical proportion of angst far exceeding its inherent value. What are we to make of the mental condition of these reactionaries in viewing this picture?
Was this student’s reason, a “parody”, a response to the desecration of our learning environment at Williams by having to listen to WSJU outside vigil all year long. The campus is forced to bear the burden of listening to negative energy of a singular chorus dumping daily before our senses. Is this the positive campus climate of intellectual curiosity and diverse harmony?
The student in question is the real victim. A victim of a neurotic group of reactionaries who will not forgive and forget, who will not learn from the past, who will not permit the quiet sanctuary of a unique campus experience without having every single member of the Williams community share in their suffering. Suffering is not unique on this planet. No one has an exclusive right to claim injustice and thus force others to bear witness on a daily basis to their personal obsessions with the “other”. Were it not for these reactionaries, there would have been no poster, no picture.
It appears that there can be no debate, no freedom, no peace without reprisals. Love like hate is an important form of expression. We do hate indiscriminately. In point of fact, hate is important. It is important to understand where that hate is directed and why. To haphazardly assign hate to any potentially threatening response is to invite calumny upon themselves.
Let us clear our campus of all hate and negative performances that insult our senses and provide an environment we all can share with joy and friendship.
Let us provide a campus experience we all can share equally with fond memory. Let us forge lasting bonds of friendship and not enmity. Let us celebrate our commonality. Celebrate our humanity.
Shalom!
May 1st, 2007 at 11:15 amAnonymous says:
Now the Hitlerites are “postering” EphBlog. That’s a novel idea …
May 1st, 2007 at 11:33 amAnonymous says:
“hate is important.”
Tell us how you really feel. At least now you’re admitting it.
May 1st, 2007 at 11:54 amAnonymous says:
Yes, no one will forgive and forget. The fact that there was no apology of any kind….? Maybe we need to forgive and forget re: Nazi’s? 9/11? What else?
May 3rd, 2007 at 8:45 amfrank uible says:
Plea for commonality? What gall! Alternatively in Yiddish, I believe, what chutzpah!
May 3rd, 2007 at 11:08 amephmom says:
And why would Shvern change his story from saying that he designed the posters (on his website) to saying he had nothing to do with designing the posters (according to this week’s Record)? Does the College have a policy about the posting of outside advertisements?
May 3rd, 2007 at 11:42 am