The magazine also said in its mail that while the organisation encourages free expression and constructive political debate, it has a zero tolerance policy towards hate speech.
Ironic that you would talk about zero sense of context when siding with the people ignoring crucial context.
Mia Khalifa was NOT talking about terrorists. She was talking about the oppressed people of Palestine who film the atrocities of the Israeli apartheid government. She didn’t mention Hamas and since they’re not usually the ones filming THEIR atrocities, it’s clear that she wasn’t referring to them either. Especially when you add her own clarification to the equation:
I just want to make it clear that this statement in no way shape or form is [inciting] spread of violence," she said. “I specifically said freedom fighters because that’s what the Palestinian citizens are… fighting for freedom every day.”
Yeah, it was worded imprecisely enough to make misinterpretation possible, which is always a bad move when discussing contentious issues no matter your intention.
Definitely wasn’t bad enough that she deserved being immediately fired, cancelled and defamed as a terrorism sympathiser, though.
Yeah I’ll agree with that. It was exceptionally poor wording and it comes down to the benefit of the doubt if you believe she worded it poorly vs … yeah. But the deserves the benefit of the doubt.
She could have just started with “My heart goes to Israeli victims” or stuff like that, before tagging “Free Palestine” at the end. That would fly without a hurdle.
So she’s not allowed to express solidarity with the Palestinian victims of Israeli oppression without also mentioning the Israeli victims of Hamas terrorism?
Are people not allowed to express solidarity with Israeli victims without also mentioning Palestinian victims either?
It might be a fact that many people see it that way, but that would just mean that many people are wrong. Many people believe all sorts of ridiculous lies and distortions of reality.
I have laid out compelling arguments based on the real world context of what’s happening, what her words are most likely to mean given that context, even explained which part was misunderstood and what the most rational explanation for that was.
I’ve done part or all of that at least a handful of times in replies throughout the comments of this post. I have also conceded that it might have been an ill-advised way of saying things because a public figure being less than 100% clear about a statement regarding anything contentious can and most often WILL open the door to misinterpretations, whether honest or wilfully manipulative.
That’s as close to “you are wrong, I am right” as a fiberglass canoe is to a shoddily made origami boat.
It was a very poor choice of wording to say freedom fighters to refer to civilians. It was just as poor to mention videos without any information whatsoever on the contents of the videos. Perhaps this is one giant misunderstanding.
Either way, a statement referring to a video from freedom fighters in the region right now without any context immediately brings to mind the carnage from the terrorist attack.
Ironic that you would talk about zero sense of context when siding with the people ignoring crucial context.
Mia Khalifa was NOT talking about terrorists. She was talking about the oppressed people of Palestine who film the atrocities of the Israeli apartheid government. She didn’t mention Hamas and since they’re not usually the ones filming THEIR atrocities, it’s clear that she wasn’t referring to them either. Especially when you add her own clarification to the equation:
It was still a bad post, at least based on how it reads to the average unknowing person.
Yeah, it was worded imprecisely enough to make misinterpretation possible, which is always a bad move when discussing contentious issues no matter your intention.
Definitely wasn’t bad enough that she deserved being immediately fired, cancelled and defamed as a terrorism sympathiser, though.
Yeah I’ll agree with that. It was exceptionally poor wording and it comes down to the benefit of the doubt if you believe she worded it poorly vs … yeah. But the deserves the benefit of the doubt.
She could have just started with “My heart goes to Israeli victims” or stuff like that, before tagging “Free Palestine” at the end. That would fly without a hurdle.
So she’s not allowed to express solidarity with the Palestinian victims of Israeli oppression without also mentioning the Israeli victims of Hamas terrorism?
Are people not allowed to express solidarity with Israeli victims without also mentioning Palestinian victims either?
Did I ever mentionned “not allowed”? I said mentionning killer’s family on a victim’s funeral is A LITTLE un-diplomatic sir
Except that’s not in any way close to analogous to the situation.
well, that’s totally how many people see it. That’s a fact.
It might be a fact that many people see it that way, but that would just mean that many people are wrong. Many people believe all sorts of ridiculous lies and distortions of reality.
¯_(ツ)_/¯ You don’t provide compelling arguments neither, you just say “You are wrong, I am right”
I only point out that it was pretty bold tweet given the circumstances
I have laid out compelling arguments based on the real world context of what’s happening, what her words are most likely to mean given that context, even explained which part was misunderstood and what the most rational explanation for that was.
I’ve done part or all of that at least a handful of times in replies throughout the comments of this post. I have also conceded that it might have been an ill-advised way of saying things because a public figure being less than 100% clear about a statement regarding anything contentious can and most often WILL open the door to misinterpretations, whether honest or wilfully manipulative.
That’s as close to “you are wrong, I am right” as a fiberglass canoe is to a shoddily made origami boat.
Except in this instance the killer’s family is tied up in the corner of the funeral home actively being murdered by the victim’s uncle
It was a very poor choice of wording to say freedom fighters to refer to civilians. It was just as poor to mention videos without any information whatsoever on the contents of the videos. Perhaps this is one giant misunderstanding.
Either way, a statement referring to a video from freedom fighters in the region right now without any context immediately brings to mind the carnage from the terrorist attack.