University of Michigan Library - Homepage | U-M Library
| University of Michigan School of Education
By addressing a complicated issue in an extremely offensive, aggressive, illogical, and factually incorrect manner, SAFE also disregarded their own code of conduct. The only “constructive” result of the mock eviction campaign was to tear communities and individuals at the university apart. Before the campaign, U of M students had taken tremendous steps toward focusing on peace initiatives and collaboration. But students who were engaged in Arab-Jewish dialogue with members of SAFE felt betrayed by the action.
Home | University of Michigan-Flint
"The Ren Cen": Detroit's Renaissance Center, which 1) hasn't ever been called by its full name, ever, and 2) didn't spark the "renaissance" that Detroiters had hoped for, and 3) wouldn't fit in as a place to hold a Renaissance Festival. GM finally bought it, likely hoping for their own kind of renaissance, which is just plain tough when you share shoreline with attractions such as Zug Island.
Undergraduate level Essay: Michigan State Research Paper
We held that a No vote meant that representatives would not accept a threat to their safety on campus, that such intimidating behavior was inappropriate and damaged campus unity and peace, and that the broader conversation about Israelis, Palestinians, and the prospects for peace in the Middle East deserved a safer space, with more nuance and patience than a three-minute limit allows. Furthermore, a Yes vote would indicate that CSG—and, by extension, our entire community—supported hateful attacks on our heritage and beliefs, silencing hundreds of student voices.
Essay on Michigan and Great Lakes - 1668 Words | Majortests
Other than the guest speakers, U of M history professor Victor Lieberman (who gave historical context to the debate), and the four students who first introduced the resolution, students were allotted only three minutes to state their case. Even considering those constraints, proponents of the resolution dramatically oversimplified matters. They claimed voting Yes meant that CSG supported human rights; voting No meant they supported Israeli “war crimes.”