• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deleted member 6230

User-requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,118
CNN reportedly fired contributor Marc Lamont Hill over remarks he made that rationalized terrorism against Israelis and the destruction of Israel.

"Marc Lamont Hill is no longer under contract with CNN," a CNN spokesperson told Mediaite.

In a speech at the United Nations on Wednesday, Mr. Hill Hill urged nations to boycott Israel and called for a "free Palestine from the river to the sea" — a term widely used by terrorist groups in calling for Israel to be replaced by an Arab-majority state stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

SOURCE

"We have an opportunity to not just offer solidarity in words but to commit to political action, grass-roots action, local action and international action that will give us what justice requires and that is a free Palestine from the river to the sea," Hill said at the U.N. on Wednesday afternoon.

"From the river to the sea" is a phrase used by anti-Israel terror groups, including Hamas, that have stated it wants to replace Israel with a Palestinian state that would extend from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

n a series of tweets, Hill staunchly defended the remarks, calling the criticism "silly and inaccurate."

"This is silly. And inaccurate. 'River to the sea' is a phrase that precedes Hamas by more than 50 years. It also has a variety of meanings. In my remarks, which you clearly didn't hear, I was talking about full citizenship rights IN Israel and a redrawing of the pre-1967 borders," he wrote.

SOURCE

Yikes
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,123
Brooklyn, NY
Absolutely disgusting, cowardly, and craven on CNN's part. Trying to exclude a binational state from the discourse isn't going to make a two-state solution more than a fantasy, nor will it halt Israel's descent further and further into apartheid territory.
 
Nov 20, 2017
793
Where exactly is he advocating "the destruction of Israel"?
map-israel-1967-to-1979.jpg

 

Muad'dib

Banned
Jun 7, 2018
1,253
Nothing new for CNN or US media that said they previously fired Jim Clancy Octavia Nasr for the same thing really, what unites the left and right politicians, democrat and republican in the US is their utter blind devotion to Israel.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,179
Disgusting, but not surprising. The mainstream media are some of the biggest cheerleaders for the genocide going on in Palestine.
 

Kasai

Member
Jan 24, 2018
4,286
As a jew, few things piss me off more than the inability of people to speak out against Israel.

Palestinians are human. They deserve the land, because they were there first. I do support a 2 -state solution, but I feel that the biggest roadblock is American politicians felating Bibi
 

Powdered Egg

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
17,070
Complete and utter trash network. White supremacists and the President's racist lackeys have a seat at CNN's table. MLH can't even get a tenth of the benefit of the doubt.
 

scitek

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,076
Wait, was he fired for speaking out against Israel, or for using the phrase commonly used by terrorists?
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_nationalism#From_the_river_to_the_sea

"Palestine from the river to the sea" was claimed as Palestine by the PLO[65] from its establishment in 1964 until the signing of the Oslo Accords.[78] The PLO claim was originally set on areas, controlled by the State of Israel prior to 1967 War, meaning the combined Coastal Plain, Galilee, Yizrael Valley, Arava Valley and Negev Desert, but excluding West Bank(controlled then by Jordan) and Gaza Strip (occupiedbetween 1959 and 1967 by Egypt). In a slightly different fashion "Palestine from the river to the sea" is still claimed by Hamas,[79] referring to all areas of former Mandatory Palestine.

From the River to the Sea
(Arabic: min al-nahr ila al-bahr ) is, and forms part of, a popular political slogan used by Palestinian nationalists. It contains the notion that the land which lies between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea be entirely placed under Arab rule at the cost of the State of Israel, excluding the contested Golan Heights, conquered from Syria in 1967 and unilaterally annexed in 1981.[80] It has been used frequently by Arab leaders[81][82] and is often chanted at anti-Israel demonstrations.[83]
For reference from wiki.

Context/history matters. The phrase was used as a claim by the PLO over Israeli occupied territory. Trying to frame it as a call for a "binational" state is to deliberately ignore history and the massive issues about the implications of using the phrase because of its history. Other people can't read your intent if you meant it differently, much like if you stepped out of a time capsule from 2008 and used SJW unironically on the forum as a liberal criticism of obnoxious activists on the left. Intent won't matter, because other people will still think you're right wing because of the history.
Wait, was he fired for speaking out against Israel, or for using the phrase commonly used by terrorists?
The latter, the phrase is completely loaded with over a half century of baggage.
 

DigitalOp

Member
Nov 16, 2017
9,289
I heard worse from CNN contributors that resulted in no action.

It essentially because America can't stop sucking Israel off, absolutely pathetic
 

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,589
It seems like any criticism of Israel means you're antisemitic
some would love this to be the accepted reality, and have tried really hard to make it so.


him using that obscure phrase that was associated with Hamas doesn't help, especially via the framing. It will fuel those nitwits on both sides that think there's a secret war between black and Jewish cabals though. ugh. we have enough nitwits and enough cabals.
 

scitek

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,076
The latter, the phrase is completely loaded with over a half century of baggage.

The phrase. It's fine to be against what Israel is doing. He was stupid for using the phrase.


Thanks. I've seen MLH on TV a lot over the last decade or so. He's always come across as a pretty smart guy, so he clearly chose those words for a reason. I don't really get why, but It's unfortunate that whatever point he was trying to make fell completely flat. This is the kind of thing that will likely stick with him forever.
 

Like the hat?

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,577
I have to be honest and admit i really don't know shit about Israel and what is good versus bad. Can any of you point me towards a good book or documentary or something to get me up to speed? I feel like this is an important subject that I really want to remedy my ignorance of.
 

Barzul

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,965
He fell into the very real professional trap of criticizing Israel from the left as a non-Jew. You are basically buried with allegations of anti-semitism. Anyone with eyes can see what the Israeli government is doing with the Palestinians is a disgusting abuse of human rights but voicing it as a non-Jew just exposes you a very powerful form of criticism that can ruin your career.
 

Deleted member 2145

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
29,223
oof, yeah he shouldn't have used that phrase. I don't know about the firing but if he is an intelligent human being he should have known better.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,123
Brooklyn, NY
the people who got Hill fired would have framed any sort of call for a binational state as a call for "the destruction of Israel" (read: the genocide/expulsion of Israeli Jews) regardless of what rhetoric he used, let's be real here
 

Daitokuji

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,602
A free Palestine from the river to the sea implies that Israel will no longer exist. So he is either calling for the destruction of Israel or advocating that they change the name of the country.

If you read the article, his other comments are about non-violent protest and peace, so I have no idea what his intention was. But he should understand what the phrase "free Palestine from the river to the sea" means.
 

Hubologist

Member
Nov 1, 2017
1,119
Was this a trend in his reporting / online behaviour? The immediacy of his firing could suggest a pattern. I don't follow the guy at all, so I don't know how relevant he is in general or have a clue about his role on CNN.

From a clueless outsider's POV, it seems understandable that his use of the phrase ruffled feathers, but I don't understand why it's firable if it truly was a one-off. It seems his doubling-down sealed his fate.
 

Cub3h

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
438
If you're willing to call out the disgusting dog whistles from the far right, then this one needs to be called out as well.

There's a big leap from advocating for a Palestinian state to claiming it should be "From the river to the sea", as this would include all of pre-67 Israel as well. The phrase is additionally loaded by referencing the "drive the Jews into the sea" slogan that was used by some in '48.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,123
Brooklyn, NY
A free Palestine from the river to the sea implies that Israel will no longer exist. So he is either calling for the destruction of Israel or advocating that they change the name of the country.

If you read the article, his other comments are about non-violent protest and peace but he should know what the wording "free Palestine from the river to the sea" means.

self-hating Jew here: Israel as it currently exists is by definition a Jewish ethnostate, so a binational state that abandoned Jewish ethnonationalism would by definition not be Israel as it currently exists. If the only alternative you can imagine to Jewish ethnonationalism is the forcible expulsion or genocide of Israeli Jews (which is what is implied by the phrase "destruction of Israel"), maybe that that's more on you than on Hill.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,466
If you're willing to call out the disgusting dog whistles from the far right, then this one needs to be called out as well.
Yep. People claiming this was just a case of getting fired for criticizing Israel are dead fucking wrong. If you intimate that the answer is to eradicate Israel, you're doing so willfully and should have to deal with the repercussions of doing so. He's an idiot for using that phrase, and CNN are well within their rights to not have someone like that on their payroll.
 

Deleted member 2145

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
29,223
self-hating Jew here: Israel as it currently exists is by definition a Jewish ethnostate, so a binational state that abandoned Jewish ethnonationalism would by definition not be Israel as it currently exists. If the only alternative you can imagine to Jewish ethnonationalism is the forcible expulsion or genocide of Israeli Jews (which is what is implied by the phrase "destruction of Israel"), maybe that that's more on you than on Hill.

I mean, the phrase he used is essentially the sanitized version of drive the Jews into the sea

to call it problematic is putting it lightly
 

base_two

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,813
Was this a trend in his reporting / online behaviour? The immediacy of his firing could suggest a pattern. I don't follow the guy at all, so I don't know how relevant he is in general or have a clue about his role on CNN.

From a clueless outsider's POV, it seems understandable that his use of the phrase ruffled feathers, but I don't understand why it's firable if it truly was a one-off. It seems his doubling-down sealed his fate.

Marc Lamont Hill is heavily pro-Palestinian and and definitely can be considered a social activist for the "Free Palestine" movement. So yes, his support for this issue is not new. But he's progressively gotten aggressive with his language on this.
 
Last edited:

Cocaloch

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
4,562
Where the Fenians Sleep
Yep. People claiming this was just a case of getting fired for criticizing Israel are dead fucking wrong. If you intimate that the answer is to eradicate Israel, you're doing so willfully and should have to deal with the repercussions of doing so. He's an idiot for using that phrase, and CNN are well within their rights to not have someone like that on their payroll.

What's wrong with saying Israel should not exist exactly? It's not the sane thing as saying Jewish people should not be in the area.
 
Last edited:

Powdered Egg

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
17,070
Should people start boycotting CNN or what? need to put the pressure on at this point.
All these angry Liberals should at least have boycotted when they handed Trump billions in advertising and a platform for his lackeys. I forgot why I started boycotting but I took their homepage out of my favorites and stopped giving them clicks years ago.
 

demondance

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,808
White nationalists get to say openly racist shit all the time, lie all the time, and we're supposed to give them the benefit of the doubt. The most blatant calls for violence are chalked up to misunderstandings unless they outright say "kill all n-----s" and even then they get the kid gloves.

BDS does not get anywhere close to the same amount of credulity from the press as actual open racists do.
 

Cocaloch

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
4,562
Where the Fenians Sleep
Yep. People claiming this was just a case of getting fired for criticizing Israel are dead fucking wrong. If you intimate that the answer is to eradicate Israel, you're doing so willfully and should have to deal with the repercussions of doing so. He's an idiot for using that phrase, and CNN are well within their rights to not have someone like that on their payroll.

What's wrong with saying Israel should not exist exactly? It's not the same thing as saying Jewish people can't live in Palestine.

I would avoid such charged language, but given the reality of the situation it's much less of a problem than Israeli nationaliam.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Was this a trend in his reporting / online behaviour? The immediacy of his firing could suggest a pattern. I don't follow the guy at all, so I don't know how relevant he is in general or have a clue about his role on CNN.

From a clueless outsider's POV, it seems understandable that his use of the phrase ruffled feathers, but I don't understand why it's firable if it truly was a one-off. It seems his doubling-down sealed his fate.
Given that he's an on-air personality, the implications of using it make it an easy call for CNN to just cut him. The most charitable reading possible is that he's dumb/clueless about just how awful the implications of using the phrase are. Which, as an on-air talent on Live TV, is still a really bad look because it's going to raise questions about whether they can trust you with a live mic.
 

demondance

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,808
It's sad world where we have to defend CNN because the president has beef with them

The president (and the right in general) has beef with them, and not MSNBC, and certainly not any actual leftist outlets, precisely because they're flexible on all this stuff. Because they already let people like Corey Lewandowski in, pack their ranks with Republicans, and happily aired countless hours of Trump speeches during the election, often uninterrupted by their own personalities for long stretches.

It's like how social democrats are historically seen as a much more pressing threat to the right than full blown communists. If you want to truly dominate the culture you have to attack the center, and keep attacking them no matter how many concessions they give your side.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,466
What's wrong with saying Israel should not exist exactly? It's not the sane thing as saying Jewish people can't live in Palestine.

I would avoid such charged language, but given the reality of the situation it's much less of a problem than Israeli nationaliam.
There's a world of difference between saying something shouldn't exist and saying that something that does exist should be eradicated.
 

Terminus

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,874
Fuck this

Fuck everything about this

And fuck Seth Mandel in particular
 
Last edited: