Online database "exposes" pro-Palestinian college students in bid to block future jobs
76 replies, posted
I do not think this will turn the tide of popular opinion of Israel or the Jewish population in their favor.
[QUOTE=Swilly;47825588]You can mainly blame, at least here, gamergate and a general recurring theme of people abusing social justice for their own ends instead of actually being for social justice.
However, there is a larger narrative and that's mainly the silencing of other views on subjects such as feminism.
There's a growing trend of alienating other voices in academia in the name of safe spaces and its being heavily abused by people who don't even understand what a 'safe space' is.[/QUOTE]
Are you even in a college? Do you know what a safe space is?
[QUOTE=thisispain;47826652]Are you even in a college?[B] Do you know what a safe space is?[/B][/QUOTE]
doesn't really look like it tbh.
Just because of how fucking rude this is, I'd hire them on just because of the fact that they're on the list*
*and also have the proper knowledge and experience for the job.
Find the people running this, out them for the world to see.
[QUOTE=Monkah;47819010]i don't think I'd want to hire someone that supports terrorism either. anti-israel is one thing, but pro-palestine is scary
what, you guys would willingly hire, say, an ISIS supporter?[/QUOTE]
Guilt by living in the same area is one s tep above the typical guilt by association by posting in the same hashtag we see in GG. The hypocrisy is amazing.
Being pro-palestine means pro-terrorist/hamas, it's definitely not a good thing and the people who do openly support rocket and suicide attacks against Israelis deserve far more than public humiliation.
[QUOTE=popbob;47833205]Being pro-palestine means pro-terrorist/hamas, it's definitely not a good thing and the people who do openly support rocket and suicide attacks against Israelis deserve far more than public humiliation.[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. By being concerned about the welfare of people; one doesn't necessarily consent to endorsing a terror group(s) that also share the same cause. You don't have to necessarily associate with Hamas and others in order to be concerned for the Palestinians. In fact, if one truly cares about the Palestinians, it would be advised to condemn Hamas for its wanton use of human shields.
On another note, this database is disgusting. It is both amoral and, in truth, detrimental to their cause, for it only serves to confirm the McCarthyist methods that are often brought up as scrutiny again their cause. The Pro-Palestinian groups will have a precious moral high-ground as result of this, and this cannot possibly work in the interest of the parties involved.
[QUOTE=popbob;47833205]Being pro-palestine means pro-terrorist/hamas, it's definitely not a good thing and the people who do openly support rocket and suicide attacks against Israelis deserve far more than public humiliation.[/QUOTE]
when will you people understand that 99% of people who are "pro-palatine" are not "pro-terrorist?" Most us us are "anti-killing innocent people"
Israel has every right to protect itself from terrorist groups, with force if need be. The problem is that they routinely use the excuse of "terrorism" to take more land for themselves by displacing (if not out right [URL="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/israel-bombs-6-un-shelters-killing-women-children-despite-repeated-please-un.html"]killing[/URL]) innocent people. That's why people are pro-Palestine.
[QUOTE=popbob;47833205]Being pro-palestine means pro-terrorist/hamas, it's definitely not a good thing and the people who do openly support rocket and suicide attacks against Israelis deserve far more than public humiliation.[/QUOTE]
Does being pro-United States mean you condone the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and the thousands of civilian casualties in wars started by the US (among other things)?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;47834765]Does being pro-United States mean you condone the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and the thousands of civilian casualties in wars started by the US (among other things)?[/QUOTE]
No, the difference here being that Palestine is not a country while the US is a country.
[QUOTE=popbob;47835024]No, the difference here being that [B]Palestine is not a country[/B] while the US is a country.[/QUOTE]
It's more of a country than Israel has been for half a thousand years.
[QUOTE=Van-man;47835063]It's more of a country than Israel has been for half a thousand years.[/QUOTE]
Well, Israel has the legal standing of statehood by most important international organizations-- namely the UN, where Palestine is granted only the status of an 'observer state'. I can understand why you're sympathetic to the Palestine cause, but, in a factual sense, Israel's legitimacy has greater fortitude and standing than Palestine.
[QUOTE=Marceline;47835180]Well, Israel has the legal standing of statehood by most important international organizations-- namely the UN, where Palestine is granted only the status of an 'observer state'. I can understand why you're sympathetic to the Palestine cause, but, in a factual sense, Israel's legitimacy has greater fortitude and standing than Palestine.[/QUOTE]
Israel is recognized by 82% of UN states, Palestine is recognized by 69%, according to wiki.
Honestly, Israel has very poor recognition for a UN member state, while Palestine is the most recognized non-UN member state..
[QUOTE=Marceline;47835180]Well, Israel has the legal standing of statehood by most important international organizations-- namely the UN, where Palestine is granted only the status of an 'observer state'. I can understand why you're sympathetic to the Palestine cause, but, in a factual sense, Israel's legitimacy has greater fortitude and standing than Palestine.[/QUOTE]
Interesting how the world has became so small, that in the next 'toss up landgrab' the guy who has a flag could easily start up a country if he has the backing of the biggest, strongest mates at the time, and easily just re-jig the borders afterwards.
As for the release of people personal information and opinions, this website seems to label people as terrorists for having a different opinion and that is straight up wrong. Somebody needs to get smacked for this.
[QUOTE=thedeadlydodo;47835402]Interesting how the world has became so small, that in the next 'toss up landgrab' the guy who has a flag could easily start up a country if he has the backing of the biggest, strongest mates at the time, and easily just re-jig the borders afterwards.
As for the release of people personal information and opinions, this website seems to label people as terrorists for having a different opinion and that is straight up wrong. Somebody needs to get smacked for this.[/QUOTE]
That is historically inaccurate. The USA, besides offering itself as the first nation (contrary to the judgments of General Marshall and the State Department) to recognize the Levantine state, did not truly affirm a relationship with Israel until the Yom Kippur War of 1973. Where, following six years of preparation undertaken by Sadat, Assad, the Ba'ath party in Iraq, and their Soviet backers, a full-on surprise attack (taking place both on Yom Kippur and Ramadan) against Israel from all sides. The USA, through some careful planning by Henry Kissinger, would delay aid to the Israeli forces as to goad them to making concessions to Egypt (namely the surrender of the Sinai Desert land acquisitioned in 1967), but would then later begin to deliver arms shipment to Israel as General Sharon began the push into Cairo. Later, the USA would broker the peace talks, successful ones, between Egypt and Israel. This diplomatic success, coupled with the success of the IDF following military aid by the USA, would come to mold the status quo between the USA and Israel.
The War of Independence (1948) would provide the IDF only with Czech-exported weaponry and aircraft; the USA offered no explicit assistance to the Israeli forces. In fact, during what became known as the Six Day War of 1967, the USA actually refused to give Israel any preemptive military aid. Furthermore, in 1956 -- on account the Suez Canal Crisis -- the Eisenhower administration actually butted heads with Israel on account to its willful collaboration with the French and British forces in their invasion of Egypt.
[url]http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/consequences-of-the-1967-war[/url]
Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East, Michael B. Oren, 2002
[QUOTE=popbob;47833205]Being pro-palestine means pro-terrorist/hamas, it's definitely not a good thing and the people who do openly support rocket and suicide attacks against Israelis deserve far more than public humiliation.[/QUOTE]
Even if being pro-Palestine meant being pro-terrorist, it's all just a matter of petty opinions, and anything more than public humiliation (Honestly, even humiliation sounds pretty bullshity to me) over just a fucking opinion is overkill and it makes you people look just as overly zealous as said "terrorists". If there's one thing I would do, I would be cautious around them and take reasonable precautions due to the possibility of them doing exactly what they support, and that's likely just about it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.