"Like something out of another country" - campus mob wants a "day without white people"

[Running Gator]

8 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

These mistakes are extremely minor and would not be an issue if he were not going to be part of the DHS.   No one raised the issue about his thesis for the last 4 years and now all of a sudden, they accuse him of plagiarism, which he didn't plagiarize, so long as he did footnote and cite his sources.

Had he simply lifted them and provide no foot notes, no citation of any kind, it would be really problematic, but that would have probably gotten his work cited for plagiarism a long time ago.   So if it was a serious infraction, then the issue would have been raised years ago.

These "minor" mistakes could have cost him his degree had they been found at the proper time.  I have known people that had to start their thesis from scratch for lesser offenses than this.   The fact that his advisor missed the errors does not have any relevance on their severity. 

By the school's own plagiarism policy, he did plagiarize.  And that is the only standard that counts.  

[Running Gator]

8 hours ago, Davida said:

Makes you wonder just who would not want an upright Lawman like David Clarke in the Homeland Security.... like the MLB,..

Why would Major League Baseball not what him in the DHS? 

[Guest shiloh357]

40 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

These "minor" mistakes could have cost him his degree had they been found at the proper time.  I have known people that had to start their thesis from scratch for lesser offenses than this.   The fact that his advisor missed the errors does not have any relevance on their severity. 

By the school's own plagiarism policy, he did plagiarize.  And that is the only standard that counts.  

They submit these papers to rigorous reviews.  The mistakes were likely not missed.  They are only brought up now because he is going to join the Trump administration.  That's the only reason they are important at this point. 

Even if it is technically plagiarism, it is not the case that he lifted someone else's words and gave no attribution or credit to the author.  He footnoted the texts in question and so it does not rise to anything like what Melania's speech writer did or what Joe Biden did.   Usually the kind of actual plagiarism that gets people into trouble is when they lift entire sections of someone else's work and present it has their own original thoughts.  That is not the case here, and it is not really that important, anyway except to those who want to throw barbs at a man going into the Trump administration.

[Running Gator]

37 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

They submit these papers to rigorous reviews.  The mistakes were likely not missed.  They are only brought up now because he is going to join the Trump administration.  That's the only reason they are important at this point. 

Even if it is technically plagiarism, it is not the case that he lifted someone else's words and gave no attribution or credit to the author.  He footnoted the texts in question and so it does not rise to anything like what Melania's speech writer did or what Joe Biden did.   Usually the kind of actual plagiarism that gets people into trouble is when they lift entire sections of someone else's work and present it has their own original thoughts.  That is not the case here, and it is not really that important, anyway except to those who want to throw barbs at a man going into the Trump administration.

Neither of us really have any idea how these papers are reviewed since we are not part of the Naval Postgraduate staff.  But, you are right had he not made himself into a public figure, we would not know or care about this.  

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, Running Gator said:

Neither of us really have any idea how these papers are reviewed since we are not part of the Naval Postgraduate staff.  But, you are right had he not made himself into a public figure, we would not know or care about this.  

I didn't say it was about him becoming a public figure.  He was already a public figure.  He didn't just become sheriff and a FOX News contributor last year.    This is not about him being a public figure.  What I said was that he is becoming part of the Trump administration. THAT is why this is suddenly so important.

He made a technical error, not a moral error and certainly nothing that would disqualify him from hold a position in the DHS.

[Running Gator]

Just now, shiloh357 said:

I didn't say it was about him becoming a public figure.  He was already a public figure.  He didn't just become sheriff and a FOX News contributor last year.    This is not about him being a public figure.  What I said was that he is becoming part of the Trump administration. THAT is why this is suddenly so important.

He made a technical error, not a moral error and certainly nothing that would disqualify him from hold a position in the DHS.

That would be up to the DHS to decide, not us.  But the only reason the Trump admin is looking at him is because he is a public figure.   Being the sheriff of a medium sized midwest county is not really all that impressive of a resume, there are lots of them around.   He made himself into a public figure and the Trump admin was trying to use his popularity among the far right. 

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, Running Gator said:

That would be up to the DHS to decide, not us.  But the only reason the Trump admin is looking at him is because he is a public figure.   Being the sheriff of a medium sized midwest county is not really all that impressive of a resume, there are lots of them around.   He made himself into a public figure and the Trump admin was trying to use his popularity among the far right. 

Normal people can tell the difference between a moral and technical error.   How do you know that the only reason Trump is looking at him is because he is public figure?

  Lot's assumptions and speculation on your part.

[Running Gator]

9 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Normal people can tell the difference between a moral and technical error.   How do you know that the only reason Trump is looking at him is because he is public figure?

  Lot's assumptions and speculation on your part.

An error is an error, the motivation does not make it anymore "right or wrong".  

That is what this part of the forum is for, assumptions and speculation!  

[Guest shiloh357]

12 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

An error is an error, the motivation does not make it anymore "right or wrong". 

It's about moral vs. technical, not "right vs. wrong."     We all make unintended errors, all of the time and we are readily able in any other context to distinguish between a moral error and a mistake.   Locking your keys in the car is a mistake, and is not a moral error.   Forgetting to turn the oven off before you leave the house is not a moral error. 

Stealing someone's intellectual property is a moral error, and that is not what Clarke did.   He footnoted and cited his sources.  The lack of quotation marks is not a moral error, as there was enough done to  give proper attribution as to dispel any notion that genuine plagiarism has taken place.

What his critics are doing is taking a technical error and treating it like full blown plagiarism and applying  a moral standard to it, as if he had actually stolen someone's intellectual property.   The media critics of the Trump administration are doing what they always do.  They take a mistake that would not ordinarily be important and they try to cast it some kind of crisis or scandal when it happens in the Trump administration. 

This is the same media that tries to downplay genuine scandals like the murder of Seth Rich, Hillary's 110 felony acts,  like the IRS scandal, Ben Ghazi and Fast & Furious.

They make issues out of non-issues while pretending that the real scandals don't exist or don't matter.

 

[Running Gator]

27 minutes ago, Davida said:

Pffft...it is just a SMEAR Campaign by the Corrupt political Left to try to stop Sheriff David Clarke's appointment- Like Cock Roaches they are scared of the Light & the Pest Control Man--LOL! because Sheriff David Clarke will ->CLEAN UP --Their Swamp.

"Sheriff Clarke is FrontPage Magazine’s Man of the Year.  

"While the media celebrates whining crybullies, we stand with the courage and commitment shown by one man. By taking a stand, Sheriff Clarke has become more than the Sheriff of Milwaukee County.

He has become America’s Sheriff.

His leadership is an inspiration to all of us to take a stand in our profession and in our community for our values, our freedom and our country."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261208/frontpage-magazines-man-year-americas-sheriff-daniel-greenfield

  

  

So, a far, far right wing site choose Clarke as their man of the year. not a ringing endorsement, especially they have also given the title to Steve Bannon.