Marc Lamont Hill and CNN hypocrisy

[Epic Beard Man]

I am a consistent listener of CNN but since the firing of professor Marc Lamont Hill, CNN has demonstrated that it caves in to what it perceives as pressure in coddling the views of the ADL, which has rendered CNN itself hypocritical.

From the outset I will say I agree 100% with Marc Lamont Hill’s comment on a free Palestine from “the river to the sea.” Of course he means a democratic one state solution where Palestinians can be free to live throughout the land and in all areas. For those that are interested in Mr. Hill’s comment on being fired for those six words see the following video:

It is a long video but it clears a lot of things up. What I disliked about the move by the ADL and CNN’s decision to fire him is the fact that it perpetuates the stereotype promoted by white nationalists on Jewish political influence. I highly encourage all to look at the video as he explains everything.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I am a consistent listener of CNN but since the firing of professor Marc Lamont Hill, CNN has demonstrated that it caves in to what it perceives as pressure in coddling the views of the ADL, which has rendered CNN itself hypocritical.

From the outset I will say I agree 100% with Marc Lamont Hill’s comment on a free Palestine from “the river to the sea.” Of course he means a democratic one state solution where Palestinians can be free to live throughout the land and in all areas. For those that are interested in Mr. Hill’s comment on being fired for those six words see the following video:

It is a long video but it clears a lot of things up. What I disliked about the move by the ADL and CNN’s decision to fire him is the fact that it perpetuates the stereotype promoted by white nationalists on Jewish political influence.

He has been let go by CNN but not by Temple University, so he still has his teaching position there despite quoting from the Hamas Covenant in his speech. I have not seen the whole speech. I personally do not get my news from CNN or Fox directly and go through other vendors: euronews, bbc, cfr among others. I am not really that much into stupid and insipid arguments that substitute for reporting. Firefox and CNN are entertainment giants which only became possible when the FCC stopped requiring fair and balanced reporting. They are jokes, although in CNN's defense it does have contacts worldwide and is a source of information despite being stuck as an entertainer.

 

[YmirGF]

You know, the world is really going crazy when you can't even quote a famous line from the Charter of a terrorist organization on live TV. It is SO unfair. I would say that a large majority of Mr. Hill's supporters probably cannot tell you the significance of the quote, at all and therein lies the real problem.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

People still bother wasting their time on CNN?

Between CNN, MSNBC and Fox News, CNN was the most moderate of them. I have no idea why some people hate it so much.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Firefox

 

[Brickjectivity]

Foxnews not Firefox. Firefox is an internet browser, not an entertainment outlet. Sorry about that typo.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Very disappointing news. The Zionist lobby has way too much power in the US.

 

[David1967]

I am a consistent listener of CNN but since the firing of professor Marc Lamont Hill, CNN has demonstrated that it caves in to what it perceives as pressure in coddling the views of the ADL, which has rendered CNN itself hypocritical.

From the outset I will say I agree 100% with Marc Lamont Hill’s comment on a free Palestine from “the river to the sea.” Of course he means a democratic one state solution where Palestinians can be free to live throughout the land and in all areas. For those that are interested in Mr. Hill’s comment on being fired for those six words see the following video:

It is a long video but it clears a lot of things up. What I disliked about the move by the ADL and CNN’s decision to fire him is the fact that it perpetuates the stereotype promoted by white nationalists on Jewish political influence. I highly encourage all to look at the video as he explains everything.

There are controversial opinions shared on all the news networks about loads of subjects without even raising an eyebrow. Why is the subject of Palestine so taboo and off limits? I see no reason for this man being fired for simply sharing his point of view.

 

[Curious George]

I am a consistent listener of CNN but since the firing of professor Marc Lamont Hill, CNN has demonstrated that it caves in to what it perceives as pressure in coddling the views of the ADL, which has rendered CNN itself hypocritical.

From the outset I will say I agree 100% with Marc Lamont Hill’s comment on a free Palestine from “the river to the sea.” Of course he means a democratic one state solution where Palestinians can be free to live throughout the land and in all areas. For those that are interested in Mr. Hill’s comment on being fired for those six words see the following video:

It is a long video but it clears a lot of things up. What I disliked about the move by the ADL and CNN’s decision to fire him is the fact that it perpetuates the stereotype promoted by white nationalists on Jewish political influence. I highly encourage all to look at the video as he explains everything.

Given his speech:

And his extensive study of the region, i find it hard to imagine he did not realize the significance of those words to Palestinian resistance groups.

He not only supports non-violent resistance but also violent resistance. Those violent resistance groups do call for genocide.

While I agree that Marc Lamont Hill's vision for the region does not end in anti-Semitism, it supports that anti-Semitism in order to achieve that end.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

He has been let go by CNN but not by Temple University, so he still has his teaching position there despite quoting from the Hamas Covenant in his speech. I have not seen the whole speech. I personally do not get my news from CNN or Fox directly and go through other vendors: euronews, bbc, cfr among others. I am not really that much into stupid and insipid arguments that substitute for reporting. Firefox and CNN are entertainment giants which only became possible when the FCC stopped requiring fair and balanced reporting. They are jokes, although in CNN's defense it does have contacts worldwide and is a source of information despite being stuck as an entertainer.

Ok.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

There are controversial opinions shared on all the news networks about loads of subjects without even raising an eyebrow. Why is the subject of Palestine so taboo and off limits? I see no reason for this man being fired for simply sharing his point of view.

Exactly and there have been CNN correspondents who have made worse comments regarding the Palestinian/Israeli region and they're still there. A very good video on the issue:

I never like to quote a white nationalist but one by the name of Kevin Alfred Strom once said:

"To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?"

I find such a quote pertinent in the case of Mr. Hill

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Given his speech:

And his extensive study of the region, i find it hard to imagine he did not realize the significance of those words to Palestinian resistance groups.

He not only supports non-violent resistance but also violent resistance. Those violent resistance groups do call for genocide.

While I agree that Marc Lamont Hill's vision for the region does not end in anti-Semitism, it supports that anti-Semitism in order to achieve that end.

Well perhaps his knowledge concerning the actual phrase "From the river to the sea" was apparent but decided to turn that common phrase of Hamas into something positive in relation to his idea of a one state solution. now, that is the best case scenario. The worse case is perhaps he was unaware of the significance of the phrase. If you looked at the video Marc Lamont Hill when discussing violent resistance was in relation to Palestinians defending themselves which I believe any creature that wants to live free has a right to. Hill advocates for peaceful protest but if someone is under attack, they have every right to defend themselves is what he was talking about.

 

[Curious George]

Well perhaps his knowledge concerning the actual phrase "From the river to the sea" was apparent but decided to turn that common phrase of Hamas into something positive in relation to his idea of a one state solution. now, that is the best case scenario. The worse case is perhaps he was unaware of the significance of the phrase. If you looked at the video Marc Lamont Hill when discussing violent resistance was in relation to Palestinians defending themselves which I believe any creature that wants to live free has a right to. Hill advocates for peaceful protest but if someone is under attack, they have every right to defend themselves is what he was talking about.

I think that he and I might have different notions of defending oneself. I imagine that he believes violent resistance movements are defending themselves. Given his speech, I think he was supportive of Hamas when he closed with that statement. He is far too intelligent to think he wouldn't have to be clear in his intention to recast such a phrase.

I do not think he intends anti-Semitism. He intends to support anti-zionism movements and looks past the fact that those movements are also anti-Semitic.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I think that he and I might have different notions of defending oneself. I imagine that he believes violent resistance movements are defending themselves. Given his speech, I think he was supportive of Hamas when he closed with that statement. He is far too intelligent to think he wouldn't have to be clear in his intention to recast such a phrase.

I do not think he intends anti-Semitism. He intends to support anti-zionism movements and looks past the fact that those movements are also anti-Semitic.

It would behoove you to look at the video in the OP. If you choose to dismiss Mr. Hill's rejection of Hamas then that is on you.

 

[Curious George]

It would behoove you to look at the video in the OP. If you choose to dismiss Mr. Hill's rejection of Hamas then that is on you.

I watched the complete video in the OP.

 

[David1967]

Exactly and there have been CNN correspondents who have made worse comments regarding the Palestinian/Israeli region and they're still there. A very good video on the issue:

I never like to quote a white nationalist but one by the name of Kevin Alfred Strom once said:

"To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?"

I find such a quote pertinent in the case of Mr. Hill

Very well said.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I watched the complete video in the OP.

Then you know Hill is not pushing the narrative

There is no reason why you or the ADL can misconstrue what Hill is saying and like I said before any kneejerk reaction that allocates critique of the Israeli government as anti-Semitic furthers the white nationalist rhetoric that “Jews run the American media.”

 

[Curious George]

Then you know Hill is not pushing the narrative

There is no reason why you or the ADL can misconstrue what Hill is saying and like I said before any kneejerk reaction that allocates critique of the Israeli government as anti-Semitic furthers the white nationalist rhetoric that “Jews run the American media.”

Do you think this posting does anything to help discredit my point?

Again, he obviously "support every organization that is trying to help us resist." How can you not see that he does in fact support organizations that advocate anti-Semitism. Granted, he does it in the name of anti-zionism and does not seem to be anti-Semitic himself.

This is not a knee-jerk reaction.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Do you think this posting does anything to help discredit my point?

Again, he obviously "support every organization that is trying to help us resist." How can you not see that he does in fact support organizations that advocate anti-Semitism. Granted, he does it in the name of anti-zionism and does not seem to be anti-Semitic himself.

This is not a knee-jerk reaction.

You have no point. He exclusively said he does not support Hamas however he supports defending oneself no if you want to allocate defense with extremist within the Palestinian community go ahead, but he isn't. I am exclusively anti-zionist myself. I do not believe in the mythological belief that grants exclusive rights to people at the expense over another because it was said so in a book. Hill is an academic and is arguing from the position of oppression and occupation in relation to what African-Americans go through here in America I think Hill makes a very good point. But if you disagree we leave it at that but Hill is not Anti-Semitic not in the slightest hence the video.

 

[Curious George]

You have no point. He exclusively said he does not support Hamas however he supports defending oneself no if you want to allocate defense with extremist within the Palestinian community go ahead, but he isn't. I am exclusively anti-zionist myself. I do not believe in the mythological belief that grants exclusive rights to people at the expense over another because it was said so in a book. Hill is an academic and is arguing from the position of oppression and occupation in relation to what African-Americans go through here in America I think Hill makes a very good point. But if you disagree we leave it at that but Hill is not Anti-Semitic not in the slightest hence the video.

Where did he say je does not support Hamas? I understand Hill is an academic. The issue is not about his anti-zionism. The issue is about the organizations he supports with that anti-zionism.