CNN gave Marc Lamont Hill his walking papers for saying this....

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/11/cnn-fires-contributor-marc-lamont-hill-criticising-israel-181130061452765.html

American Cable News Network (CNN) has severed ties with Marc Lamont Hill, a recurring political contributor, after he delivered a speech at the United Nations accusing Israel of "state violence and ethnic cleansing" and championed a one-state solution.

A CNN spokesperson said in a brief statement on Thursday that Hill, a professor of media studies at Temple University, was "no longer under contract".

The network did not give a reason, but the move came amid objections to Hill's speech by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and other groups.

Hill, a recurring political commentator on CNN, had called for "a single secular democratic state for everyone" in a meeting at the UN marking the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People on Wednesday, with a "free Palestine from the river to the sea".

The ADL said the "river to the sea" phrase was code for the destruction of Israel, adding that the annual UN event promoted "divisiveness and hate".

According to the Jewish Voice for Peace, "while the ADL markets itself as a civil rights organisation, its history betrays an extensive record of anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian advocacy".

In 1993, the United States police raided the offices of the ADL in San Francisco and found illegally obtained files on nearly 10,000 individuals and at least 950 organisations, including labour unions, LGBT groups, progressive media, Arab-American organisations, anti-Zionist Jewish organisations and other civil rights groups.

Hill defended his speech in social media posts, saying he did not support anti-Semitism and that his "reference to 'river to the sea' was not a call to destroy anything or anyone".

"It was a call for justice, both in Israel and in the West Bank/Gaza," he tweeted. "The speech very clearly and specifically said those things."

"I support Palestinian freedom. I support Palestinian self-determination. I am deeply critical of Israeli policy and practice," he continued. "I do not support anti-Semitism, killing Jewish people, or any of the other things attributed to my speech."

There has been a strong revival in recent years among Palestinians for a one-state solution which they claim will guarantee equal rights to Palestinians and Israeli Jews throughout historic Palestine.

Israel's right-wing government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, has rejected a one-state solution and has stopped short of explicitly endorsing Palestinian statehood.

Calling out oppression 'isn't anti-Semitic'
Politicians, journalists and pro-Palestinian activists called Hill's firing shameful, and accused CNN of kowtowing to right-wing Israeli groups.

"Calling out the oppressive policies in Israel, advocating for Palestinians to be respected, and for Israelis and Palestinians alike to have peace and freedom is not anti-Semitic," said Rashida Tlaib, a Palestinian American congresswoman.

Media personality Mehdi Hasan questioned how CNN could fire Hill while keeping onboard Rick Santorum, who has denied Palestinians exist in the West Bank. Hasan hosts UpFront, a popular news affairs show on Al Jazeera English.

Ayman Mohyeldin, a senior presenter at MSNBC, wrote: "Denying the legitimacy and existence of Palestinians/Palestine/historic Palestine, whether it's on-air commentary, or in official state policy or in simply punditry is widely acceptable among American mainstream media, politicians, and religious figures."

Al Jazeera reached out to CNN for comment but it did not receive a response at the time of publication.

Omar Baddar, the deputy director of the Washington-based Arab American Institute, said it was "disappointing to see CNN cave to transparently dishonest pressure".

READ MORE
Support for Israel 'continues to drop' among US liberals, youth
"Israel's rejection of the historic Palestinian compromise of a two-state solution, and its insistence on building illegal settlements throughout the Palestinian territories is the reason why a one-state reality has been imposed on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," he told Al Jazeera.

"Israeli leaders insist on this one-state reality to be an apartheid state where Palestinians are squashed and dominated. Hill, on the other hand, dared to support a different vision, one of equal rights for all.

"This vision of equality is so appealing to people of conscience that pro-Israel propagandists cannot confront it honestly, which is precisely why they resort to the kind of smears that resulted in Hill's firing.

"The damage, of course, goes well beyond Hill's career. CNN's decision contributes to the chilling effect on freedom of expression on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and to the suffocating environment where speaking honestly about Israel's abuse of Palestinians could result in shunning, and even firing."

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

.

and yes, more than likely Jewish folks rule over Hill.

>and yes, more than likely Jewish folks rule over Hill.

But you also thought it was wrong to call that guy who yelled "Death to Jews" as he shot up a synagogue in Pittsburgh anti-Semitic, so don't let me stop you from making a lot of super good points.

I said I wasn’t a fan of folks rushing to link it to Trump

...and I stand by that.

I don’t like how every tragedy is immediately used for political
gains.

Still weird to ignore the rise in anti-Semitic activity and a bunch of anti-Semites in power, but that's me.

They will praise the "homeland" but still don't want them in "their communities". You get it?

It's a functioning ethnostate that hates Muslims, so it gives them all sorts of fun ideas they can try out here. Bonus, it's somewhere they can send Jewish people once they take over and really get shit started. Until the rapture, of course.

despite being the most explicit cases of anti-Semitism on Earth today

It's a loaded buzz-phrase that today, in 2018, is associated with the annihilation of the Jewish state. It's like "blood and soil" or "lebensraum".

I like Marc alot, but either he was being slick by using that phrase, or he was being super naive, considering that he's hitched his wagon to the Palestinian cause big time in the last 4 or 5 years (he travels to and spends time in Palestine frequently). He's probably the most visible, vocal, high profile B/black advocate for Palestine in the United States, today.

I don't like that he got fired, but I also can't ride with him acting like he doesn't know what that means, in other words, not standing by his convictions.

anti-semetic. A loaded term for some, doesn't mean it's that loaded for him.

I don't have the context to know that that is a deeply offensive phrase and I can't jump on the bandwagon of agreeing it is because ADL says it is.

Remember over here people lost their shit over the phrase Black Lives Matter.


I think it makes more sense to look at everything he said and see if he were advocating for genocide or justice for Palestinians.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Monkeying around. Macaca, etc.

*EDITED* To add, not necessarily get in trouble, but definitely get righteously called out on using those phrases.

Like I said, MLH knows way more about the intricacies of the situation with Palestine and Israel than the average American, plus he's a brilliant dude, so I can't believe he just didn't know what river to the sea meant (and that is what it means today, regardless of whatever it's origins were).

1. Person A makes a statement about something
2a. A group of people don't agree with said statement, and accuse Person A of hate (racism, sexism, anti-semitism, anti-immigrant, ageism, etc.)
2b. Repeat 2a until it becomes "true." Ignore what person A actually said, as well as any and all other perspectives or points of view that don't align with 2a.
3. Person A now has the choice to either get apologize (most-likely forced and fake) or stand tall and face repercussions (loss of job/income/social status/harassment).



Only way to win is to not play that game.

because I agree with you...but want to hear more about the alternative or better scenario

d

...his opinion, or no trouble by stating an opinion that he doesn't believe then the best option would be to say nothing.

Of course that means walking away from a U.N. speaking gig, but it is what it is.







Also, I do see how this can be a potential positive from MLH, since in his business there's the "all publicity is good publicity" thing that may work out in his favor.

His comments may have been genuine but he should have known better than to assume that he could say "From the River to the Sea" without ruffling feathers. I bet he thought that line would be clever but you have to know the power structure and who controls or influences the Media.



.
.
Current Favorite Song: https://youtu.be/8v_KFHnPImY

"I cannot see how nature could have created itself. Only a supernatural force that is outside of space and time could have done that. ~ Francis Collins

impactful. It was borderline poetic (which is probably why it gets used by Israel's opponents). If that phrase didn't have the history it does, it would have been a masterful mic drop line (which was exactly how he used it).

The weight of it?

Does he regret it?

few years. And he's intellectually curious, so I know he's looked into the meaning, after he initially heard it.

To argue that he didn't know what it means is to argue that he's dumb, which he is definitely not.

in the speech



but loaded keywords are just that, and u never kno what the reaction will be


i'd say cnn is the one who has been proven to have a "ruler" over them, not marc

or the various enslaved Black people of Mauritania.

But those aren't sexy enough, oh well he learned nothing from Crispus Attucks, STAY IN YO LANE.

And no PNN (Palestinian.N.N.)!!! #HYON #HYON #HYON



www.Tupreme.com

I mean of all the issues to take a stance on, this one will not go away for hundreds of years. He might as well just take a stance on a black issue. No one will give a damn what he says.

Maybe so LOL, because that issue ain't his lane. God forbid he question Black Palestinians how well (sarcasm) they're treated by their brothers in Palestine.

Although The Palestinian people are like the only people in the Middle East (except Iran, but that's purely political) that give a f**k about Black Issues in America, I'll give them that.



www.Tupreme.com

and the women were pretty but a bit too hairy for my taste

No one at the UN wants to hear him speak about Black folk

>and the women were pretty but a bit too hairy for my taste

there has been slight adjustment (shout out to Don Lemon of all people opening his show with the "The President of the United States... is racist") but this is the channel that:

1) repeatedly hits Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others advocating for "Medicare For All" with the "how are you gonna pay for it" canard

2) was known for "both sidesing" news stories when it was clear that one of those view points was a notorious gaslighting measure (spoiler: it wasn't the left-leaning view). CNN-ing used to mean keeping that Overton Window focused on bullshit moreso than the truth.

despite this orange hellscape under which we live nowadays where they're singled out for whichever reason, it's clear CNN's "appease or die" corporate structure hasn't changed. this is the case here.

The Israel lobby is so firmly planted on the neck of the American ruling class that merely saying "Palestine" can be grounds for getting the boot. and let's be clear, it's not because they are Jewish. it's because they're a bunch of reactionary, right-wing ethno-nationalists hellbent on wiping Palestinians and African Jews out of their homeland for the sake of the "whiter" ones. the whole "Jewish" thing is a facade to build unity the same way white "Christians" use the Jesus blanket to whip up similar sentiment in America and elsewhere.

Many commentators have not quite found the most potent way to express the above in something concise and easily repeated, especially in the political atmosphere in which we live today. To put it plainly, if (explicit) apartheid still existed in South Africa existed today, there is NO way public pressure could undo it -- lobby after lobby would cast the critics of that deplorable condition as "anti-Afrikaaner (African Dutch)" or something like that. That is to say, it is hard to push back on this particular brand of right-wing evil without being cast as an anti-Semite. and one too many critics of Israel do actually have a habit of making it about "Jews" and less about "Right wing agents of apartheid". Ol' boy in DC for example.

Marc Lamont Hill's only crime here was not being scared. that is a quality not afforded a corporate news outlet.