Marc Lamont Hill terminated from CNN over anti Semitic comments
- Thread starter Rell Lauren
- Start date
Techniec
Drugs and Kalashnikovs
Yall actually arguing with that faccot Scitt. I put that dude on ignore as soon as I saw he showed his up here in the coli. Com
I knew this dude 15 years ago on dubcc
Dude is an autistic retard
NO good comes with engaging with him in any way
I knew this dude 15 years ago on dubcc
Dude is an autistic retard
NO good comes with engaging with him in any way
MIZRAHI JEWS DONT EAT THAT U FUCCIN MORON
Yall actually arguing with that faccot Scitt. I put that dude on ignore as soon as I saw he showed his up here in the coli. Com
I knew this dude 15 years ago on dubcc
Dude is an autistic retard
NO good comes with engaging with him in any way
MESSAGE BOARD JIHAD!
Russian Bot v.2.1
Banned
look up the Irgun...then you'll realize how stupid your post it
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
Talking to black lawyers in Chicago about community interaction. Makes mention of "anti-semitism".
the cac mamba
Veteran
get these nets
Veteran
what a coincidencethe people who run israel are mostly this guy
If the massive U,S. govt. aid to Israel stops, then............
Adios , counselor.
The Amerikkkan Idol
The Amerikkkan Nightmare
Then how do 4 million Jews in America have more political & economic power than 50 million Blacks?
With your logic WE should be the ones running the banks and the media and getting people black balled instead of them since so many more Black people vote than them, right?
PLUS, they're mostly concentrated on the East Coast, which means that they're not even THAT desirable of a voting block, you don't see these huge campaigns telling Jews they all gotta vote for one party or they're gonna die, do you?
Face it, voting's not completely worthless, BUT it's not nearly as important as economic and political power that comes from owning politicians and important industries.
Notice none of the Democratic National Committee members on here touched this
8====D
¡Vamos Spurs Vamos!
Sad but true.He got a little too comfortable and started getting bold. As long as someone else is cutting your cheque you've got to watch yourself.
The chairman of Temple University wants Marc Lamont Hill fired
get these nets
Veteran
Marc Lamont Hill wrote an op-ed piece in the Philly Inquirer on Sat. Dec. 1, 2018
Do you think he's copping pleas or standing his ground?
==========================================================
Opinion
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion
Posted: December 1, 2018 - 12:05 PM
Marc Lamont Hill, For the Inquirer
ED HILLE / Staff Photographer
First, I strongly believe that we must reject anti-Semitism in any form or fashion. This means not only preventing physical violence against Jews, but also ugly anti-Semitic images, stereotypes, conspiracy theories, and mythologies. As an activist and scholar, I have done my best to point out these realities and challenge them whenever possible. For example, in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre, I not only decried it as an ugly act of terrorism, but spoke about the broader rise of anti-Semitism in the United States and around the globe. Throughout my career, I have done my best to identify and uproot anti-Semitism in every political and social movement of which I have been part. One simply cannot be committed to social justice and not be committed to battling anti-Semitism.
Related stories
Many have focused specifically on my final remark, which said that justice required a "free Palestine, from the river to the sea." Critics of this phrase have suggested that I was calling for violence against Jewish people. In all honesty, I was stunned, and saddened, that this was the response.
My use of "river to the sea" was an invocation of a long history of political actors – liberal and radical, Palestinian and Israeli – who have called for their particular vision of justice in the area from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. For many, justice will come from a two-state solution. For some, like me, justice will come through a single bi-national democratic state that encompasses Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. I strongly believe that this is the best method to achieve peace, safety, security, and self-determination for both Israelis and Palestinians. Justice requires that everyone, not just a single side, is free and equal.
Throughout my speech, I spoke explicitly about the need for Israeli political reform, specifically as it pertains to Arab citizens of Israel. I also called for a redrawing of borders to the pre-1967 lines, as well as a greater attention to human rights for those living in the West Bank and Gaza. At the time, I believed that these demands made in the speech sufficiently reflected my belief in radical change within Israel, not a desire for its destruction.
Clearly, they did not.
I take seriously the voices of so many Jewish brothers and sisters, who have interpreted my remarks as a call to or endorsement of violence. Rather than hearing a political solution, many heard a dog-whistle that conjured a long and deep history of violence against Jewish people. Although this was the furthest thing from my intent, those particular words clearly caused confusion, anger, fear, and other forms of harm. For that, I am deeply sorry.
As a communicator, I must take responsibility for the reception of my message. In this case, the final words of my speech became a dangerous and harmful distraction from my political analysis. Rather than talking about the plight of Palestinians, or engaging in tough but necessary conversations about a positive and successful way forward for both parties, the bulk of the conversation has been about my choice of words. To this extent, I did no favors to Israelis or Palestinians. For this too, I am deeply sorry.
In the aftermath of this controversy, I remain steadfastly committed to love and solidarity with oppressed people. I remain committed to critical dialogues throughout the city, nation, and world in order to advance the cause of justice. And I remain open to learning, growing, and struggling together toward freedom
Do you think he's copping pleas or standing his ground?
==========================================================
Opinion
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion
Posted: December 1, 2018 - 12:05 PM
Marc Lamont Hill, For the Inquirer
ED HILLE / Staff Photographer
First, I strongly believe that we must reject anti-Semitism in any form or fashion. This means not only preventing physical violence against Jews, but also ugly anti-Semitic images, stereotypes, conspiracy theories, and mythologies. As an activist and scholar, I have done my best to point out these realities and challenge them whenever possible. For example, in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre, I not only decried it as an ugly act of terrorism, but spoke about the broader rise of anti-Semitism in the United States and around the globe. Throughout my career, I have done my best to identify and uproot anti-Semitism in every political and social movement of which I have been part. One simply cannot be committed to social justice and not be committed to battling anti-Semitism.
Related stories
- CNN drops Temple professor Marc Lamont Hill after comments on Israel
- U.N. speech by Temple prof draws fire from university’s board chair
- From Tel Aviv, Marc Lamont Hill’s Palestine comments don’t sound so wrong to me | Opinion
Many have focused specifically on my final remark, which said that justice required a "free Palestine, from the river to the sea." Critics of this phrase have suggested that I was calling for violence against Jewish people. In all honesty, I was stunned, and saddened, that this was the response.
My use of "river to the sea" was an invocation of a long history of political actors – liberal and radical, Palestinian and Israeli – who have called for their particular vision of justice in the area from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. For many, justice will come from a two-state solution. For some, like me, justice will come through a single bi-national democratic state that encompasses Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. I strongly believe that this is the best method to achieve peace, safety, security, and self-determination for both Israelis and Palestinians. Justice requires that everyone, not just a single side, is free and equal.
Throughout my speech, I spoke explicitly about the need for Israeli political reform, specifically as it pertains to Arab citizens of Israel. I also called for a redrawing of borders to the pre-1967 lines, as well as a greater attention to human rights for those living in the West Bank and Gaza. At the time, I believed that these demands made in the speech sufficiently reflected my belief in radical change within Israel, not a desire for its destruction.
Clearly, they did not.
I take seriously the voices of so many Jewish brothers and sisters, who have interpreted my remarks as a call to or endorsement of violence. Rather than hearing a political solution, many heard a dog-whistle that conjured a long and deep history of violence against Jewish people. Although this was the furthest thing from my intent, those particular words clearly caused confusion, anger, fear, and other forms of harm. For that, I am deeply sorry.
As a communicator, I must take responsibility for the reception of my message. In this case, the final words of my speech became a dangerous and harmful distraction from my political analysis. Rather than talking about the plight of Palestinians, or engaging in tough but necessary conversations about a positive and successful way forward for both parties, the bulk of the conversation has been about my choice of words. To this extent, I did no favors to Israelis or Palestinians. For this too, I am deeply sorry.
In the aftermath of this controversy, I remain steadfastly committed to love and solidarity with oppressed people. I remain committed to critical dialogues throughout the city, nation, and world in order to advance the cause of justice. And I remain open to learning, growing, and struggling together toward freedom
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 45,056
- Reputation
- 8,199
- Daps
- 122,244
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
LICE said:
Look up the Buraq Uprising and realize that your objection is invalid.
