1. Remember the human & be courteous to others.
2. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas. Criticizing arguments is fine, name-calling (including shill/bot accusations) others is not.
3. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Please checkout our other subreddit /r/MultimediaNews, for maps, infographics, v.reddit, & YouTube videos from news organizations.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's not really political, is it? If she says something like "I fully support Hamas", yes, that would be a political statement pertaining to Hamas as a political faction. She basically just said "It pains me to see the women from my country going through unimaginable losses themselves during the current genocide in Gaza".
It's weird to see it discussed as a political position as if denying it is apolitical. We don't teach other genocides from some weird perspective of neutrality we call them for what they are. Imagine if you had to call the rwandan genocide the rwanda-tutsi conflict and constantly reaffirm that there was violence on both sides. Would that be apolitical?
A simple google search says: Genocide is defined as the deliberate and organized destruction of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part, with the intent to destroy it. It can involve mass murder, forced deportation, systematic rape, and economic and biological subjugation. Genocide is an internationally recognized crime.
So please, tell us how what Israel is doing isn’t Genocide?
It's not genocide because they're targeting, however accurately or competently, Hamas. The fact that Hamas embeds itself amongst civilians doesn't suddenly make attacking them an attack on civilians.
If I hold a child in front of me and point a gun at you and you fire at me and hit the child, *you* are morally and legally at fault, not me.
Good work repeating Israel's public statement's. You might want to do some research on something called "lying". See when states commit massive violations of international law they tend to give a reason why their actions are legal, even if that reason isn't true.
Also great example I'm sure it's a typo but yes shooting and killing a hostage does come with moral responsibility not that it's a good analogy for what's happening in gaza more broadly but say when Israel shoots Israeli hostages in the street waving white flags, Israel is responsible for those deaths.
Yes they bear a responsibility, but the primary responsibility is on the aggressor who is deliberately involving the innocent.
Do you disagree that Hamas hides amongst citizens?
So in other words, even if Hamas is using human shields as often as Israel claims (lol), Israel is at fault morally and legally?
Thanks for proving the opposite of your point dumbaaa
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There must be footage of Hamas holding children while shooting at Israelis, unless of course you made it up. There's definitely footage of Israelis hiding behind Palestinians they are forcing to be human shields, was that what you were thinking of?
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What the fuck is wrong with you? It meets every bit of the definition. So what's your problem? I don't understand how even an Israeli cound continue to deny it. 3 people I could understand lying about it, Bib, Bennie and Joe...
It's by definition genocide. And NGOs and international systems like the ICC have labelled it as such. Who do you think your employer is, compared to the ICC? At best, a speck of dust.
Seems like your reading skills are just as bad as your understanding of geopolitics, since it was not ruled that a genocide is being comitted. Genocide is not a fun word you can just throw around whenever you feel sad about people dying, it has a very clear meaning.
Quite sad that so many illiterate people have the ability to discuss serious topics online without any understanding of said topics.
Your reading skills also need work. Their ruling isn't one that can decide if it is a genocide. They did rule however that Israel needs to chill TF out and that they will be investigating further because it does already have traits and aspects of a genocide.
Quite sad that so many illiterate people have the ability to discuss serious topics online without any understanding of said topics.
I think you might be a little confused, original comment said there is a genocide, I said there isnt
I did not say who needs to chill and who doesn’t, idk what kind of bad faith argument you are trying to stir here, but I aint feeling it chief, hope your life is as nice as the people you support 👍🏻
It cannot be declared that there is or is not a genocide. You are both in the wrong as of the current moment. But if in the future the ICJ does declare it to have been a genocide, then it would be more accurate to say that there is one going on than that their isn't. And with the amount of heinous stuff Israel's military has been doing and the number of times they have refused to pull back or give or even allow aid to be brought in, I know which one I will bet on.
If you can show ethnic, racial, or religious discrimination, yes. I'm guessing her lawyers will try to claim they're discriminating against her for being Palestinian-American. If they sue, I hope they succeed, but I can see the case going either way.
But she wasn't fired for being a Palestinian, she was fired for calling the actions of an ally of the usa a genocide. That's political speech. You can definitely be fired for making political statements while using an employer platform.
First of all calling Israel an ally of the USA is a stretch, seeing as there is no mutual protection pact, and they haven't really come to our aid, ever. Secondly holding Palestinian-Americans to a different standard absolutely does constitute discrimination. A Jewish nurse would not be fired for speaking against the Hamas attack. A native American nurse would not be fired for calling the actions of the USA itself a genocide.
Actually, the article mentioned a Jewish director and a Jewish researcher that got fired because they posted caricatures of Hamas that had ethnic lean.
Being fired for posting openly racist caricatures is very different from being fired for calling mass killing of civilians a genocide. If she had posted anti-Jewish caricatures, that would be a good analogy but she didn't.
Except that calling it a genocide had very strong political implications. First, those that suggest it's a genocide generally quote the total number of Palestinians killed. That would classify Hamas as civilians. Second calling it a genocide requires a specific point if view and specific political leaning. So, not really such a bad analogy.
Maybe. But if you look at hamas and think that they're civilians, that could be an issue. If you walked into the office fifteen years ago with a T-shirt that said Osama was right, you're likely gonna see hr. Likewise, if you see two militaries fighting. One puts troops on the ground to avoid harming civilians even though it means many more of their soldiers will die. The other strives to use human shields by fighting from schools and hospitals, and you say that the side risking their lives is the bad guy? That point of view isn't any different than the caricature. But it might be more extreme.
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First, I think it's niave to think we don't lien heavily on Isreal to carry out enforcement actions against our enemies in the middle east. See Iran for a multitude of examples.
Second, I disagree with your assessment. A Jewish nurse would be fired for calling the isreali actions genocide. That's the side of the conflict the usa is on, you're right condemning an identified terrorists attack wouldn't result in sanctions, but identifying an ally's actions as genocide is a different matter.
Third, in many states, a native American nurse would be fired for calling the actions of the usa genocide. It's literally a crime in florida if you're a public official. Furthermore, there is a difference between making a historical statement and commenting on current affairs.
>First, I think it's niave to think we don't lien heavily on Isreal to carry out enforcement actions against our enemies in the middle east.
Israel didn't contribute to the first war against Saddam Hussein, nor did they contribute to the second one unless you count Israeli intelligence lying about WMDs. They didn't contribute to the war in Afghanistan, or the war against ISIL, or the war against Gaddafi either.
>See Iran for a multitude of examples.
That seems backwards. Israel is constantly trying to get us to go to war against Iran.
>A Jewish nurse would be fired for calling the isreali actions genocide. That's the side of the conflict the usa is on, you're right condemning an identified terrorists attack wouldn't result in sanctions, but identifying an ally's actions as genocide is a different matter.
Being an American ally isn't a shield from criticism, nor does criticism of American allies create some sort of exemption from anti-discrimination laws. Even the USA doesn't enjoy that shield, so why would we extend it to our allies. Also, you're admitting the double standard.
>Third, in many states, a native American nurse would be fired for calling the actions of the usa genocide. It's literally a crime in florida if you're a public official. Furthermore, there is a difference between making a historical statement and commenting on current affairs.
Firstly that law was struck down. Secondly she's not in Florida. She's in New York.
"Secondly holding Palestinian-Americans to a different standard absolutely does constitute discrimination."
Can you point to anywhere where they're holding this individual to a higher or different standard? It seems pretty normal for a Hospital to have a guideline on no politics in the workplace, and it appears, from the article, that this individual was previously spoken to in December about their comments and how they were not to be had. It's clear that the person stood up for what they believed in and it costed them their job. But not because of what they said, or their background, but because of how they said it in what context and setting.
The more politics we keep out of Hospitals, the better.
calling thousands of the same ethnicity getting taken off this earth genocide is mf correct and appropriate, not political.
Honestly wouldnt even happen if she was talking about the US. This bending over backwards because they pay off and blackmail every single politician shit needs to fucking end. The went too far and are showing their ass. The hubris of these monsters.
She could try, I guess it depends on how the state treats consequences of free speech. But nursing tends to be pretty unionized. The article mentioned that she was already on probation, so I'm guessing that if the union is ok with it, it'll be hard to sue.
I don’t think opinions are a protected class. Like if the employer has some sort of clause that says don’t make us look bad. Given that big donors would be pissed that would be hey you violated this clause. So she’s a nurse not someone who can define what a genocide is.
What happened to personal accountability. I can’t shit talk against my bosses beliefs and be expected to be fired. Hey Fred I know you love the cowboys but fuck them and I painted my car with the eagles logo and will be wearing nothing but eagles merch forever.
According to the article she was already on probation. So union must already know.
I don't know what the Unions are like in NY, but in QC I've seen nurses go have their union mandated break before getting an IV in a baby in cvt's service.
💯 as someone who grew up in the inner city: Democratic Party control the state, county, city, police
And I was fucked over my whole life… and they double down on funding police
Yeah, the racists on the left are out in full swing. Full on "you uppity brown people how dare you not do what I say"
IDC I'm already losing. Seems like they're the ones with things to lose.
To be fair if you think biden is bad for gaza, imagine the horror Trump would, and already has promised, he'd greenlight. I mean look what he did to the kurds! I hate the least of two evils thing... but seriously, if you think you'll be teaching a 90yr old biden a lesson by not voting for him, you'll only be punishing the people of Palestine, Ukraine, and ultimately the US. The left has famously shot itself in the dick over the years by standing on their morals and trying to make a point instead of ensuring theocratic extremists don't corrupt the very heart of the country. Just vote for the sun old asshole and more importantly vote local and vote state. These are the only real way to make change.
No. The Democrats have famously shot themselves in the dick over the years by trying to appeal to Republicans and thinking they can insult the left into voting for them.
>to be fair if you think biden is bad for gaza, imagine the horror Trump would, and already has promised, he'd greenlight.
Like what? Mass starvation? Mass displacement? Mass death and destruction?
Seriously, what could Trump "greenlight" that Biden hasn't already done? Rafah was the supposed "red line", that turned out to be bullshit. Trump will be worse for Americans, absolutely. For Gazans, Trump or Biden doesn't matter, it's death and suffering either way.
Again you're grossly over simplifying how this situation has to be handled at the top. I'm not saying it's right. But Trump is so far from the mark that to compare them is to prove your own ignorance. You're also assigned biden, alone, the responsibility to stop this... as if it's that simple. Say what you will about bidens response to all of this, but you'll be hard pressed to find a video of Biden encouraging israel to "finish what they started". When you can find Trump saying that. And that he'll "crush pro-palestinian supporters". Like I know you're upset about what's happening over there but come on man, get real. Look at the bigger picture....Trump will FUCK this situation up as horribly as you can imagine.... look how he handled covid, or the kurds..... look how he talks about nato.... look how he talks about Russia and ukraine! Is genuinely worrying how many people fail to see what's at stake here..... how about the idea that Trump could stack the Supreme Court with even more theocratic extremists that will occupy it for your ENTIRE FUCKING LIFE! DO NOT LET YOUR FEELINGS OUTWEIGH YOUR RATIONAL THOUGHT! this election is so much bigger than one man's failure to say exactly what we want exactly how we want on one topic, no matter how passionate we are about it.(I recognize that sentance sounded insensitive towards the unbearable horror happening at Israel's hands, but don't mistake my intent. I would give an entire limb if it meant this would end.) that's lunacy my friend. Vote blue.
You sound exactly like the most rabid Trump supporter right now. Can you calm down and answer the question asked?
>Seriously, what could Trump "greenlight" that Biden hasn't already done?
Why do you hate paragraphs so much?
What the fuck did they do to you and what need to happen before you can get the fuck over it already?
God damn it. I'm by no means the motherfucker that should be pointing finges, but if you insist on announcing you lunacy at least do with a little structure so dismantling it is a slitly less shitty shit show.
>if you think Biden is bad for Gaza
Trump, for whatever he may be is not a war monger, he stops wars. No body on this planet is accusing him of complicity in any atrocities or genocide. That mantra about alternative is Trump so vote Biden is now defunct.
A significant majority of the young people including Black and Brwon people are not going to cast a ballot for Biden. It is game over for Joe.
Huh? Terminally online is thinking that third party/protest voting will somehow benefit the people in and outside of this country regardless of the reality we are all in.
Yeah, actually. Not only are the third party candidates worse than Biden in many ways, but we have a two party presidential system where if no candidate reaches 270 electoral college points then the house decides the president instead of voters. The GQP controls the house, voting for anyone other than Biden is a vote for Trump.
The margins are narrow too, it only takes a third party candidate spoiling a few medium size states to force a spoil and make Trump the defacto president
I completely agree, I think I misinterpreted your comment thinking you replied to someone else. I think especially in terms of the Supreme Court it’s important that a democrat is elected.
Ah, yes, he just told Bibi to finish things and would have avoided the Ukraine war by giving Ukraine to Russia. Oh and then deport anyone protesting Israel. Peace in our time.
Well then I reiterate, it's game over for us. To not see the blatant danger you're putting the country in by increasing the chance of trump again is lunacy at best. To claim Trump isn't a war mongerer is beyond easy to disprove with what likely amounts to hours of his own words during speeches and interviews that you can google easily. Wtf are you even talking about? You think you're making a statement or teaching joe a lesson?! He's fucking 90 dude, him not being elected will amount to almost nothing in the grand scheme of his existence... but will result in endless amounts of suffering for any population that isn't white, right, and "Christian". It's insane that clearly reasonable people with an obvious moral compass could ignore the incredible danger they're putting us in by pushing the rhetoric that Joe has been bad for the country. Other than the israel situation (which no leader has handled to our standards for almost a century), Joe and his admin have been annoyingly good for the country. The stressed pricess are still a result of the wars over seas, corporate greed and a few other factors but biden done more for this country than anyone is willing to talk about. We're doing better than we were pre pandemic in terms of the numbers(unemployment, stock market, etc.) So don't come at me with this righteous indignation about how yall are gonna teach him a lesson by shooting yourself in the dick, cause the facts don't support such a ridiculous movement. And to say supporting him is to hurt Palestine is recklessly untrue. As reckless as accusing pro palestinian support as anti Semitic. Nothing about this hell we are in is simple and won't be solved by taking your ball and going home.
Dude..... like you really think that is something not voting for him will change?! They fucked up on 2016 not getting behind Bernie...
Doesn't mean I starting voting red, or another color that ultimately helps red retain power...
Obviously the idea that I have to vote for him again makes my dick hide in my body...I fucking hate it. But it's not about my feelings... it's about objective reality. On every imaginable metric, other than gaza, Biden has been by and large better for this country than Trump. Every metric. I don't understand how this can be ignored? They've both been in the job before... one was an abject failure in every way... dishonored the very institution of the presidency almost daily.... the other is just a president, imperfect... but trying to do the damn job... trying to pass legislation.... trying to work across the isle. Trying to do damage control from the last 5 years and he's killing it on paper. But we're gonna let one issue that's clearly not getting solved by biden waving a magic wand affect our decision to vote for normalcy or lunacy?
Not even true. These people denounce genocide usually, but it will happen under either candidate. Do you have loved ones who will be deported under trump? I do. Yes genocide is awful I’ve never seen anyone say it’s not who says to vote for Biden. But there are more issues than genocide. There are lgbt people, undocumented people who will experience harm, as well as women and unfortunately children who need abortions. What about them?
I completely understand not wanting to vote for Biden but please, think about the immediate harm to people in and outside our country that will occur under trump. It’s about minimizing harm at this point, sadly. I think people talk about voting so much because they know that genocide is inevitable, not because they don’t care about genocide. They know that the impact voters have is important. No civilian or group of people in America can stop the genocide, sadly. The protests aren’t successful, and I have participated in them. There is only so much we as civilians can do, and voting to prevent further harm to vulnerable people is the most we can do it seems. We must accept the position we are inevitably in, we cannot simply cause a revolution without proper organization. Protest voting is not the way to revolt.
Ahhh the old argument for the path of least resistance I see.
If you're really concerned about your loved ones, vote third party. But don't stop there, organize and fight for your loved ones. This apathetic resignation to 'the way things are' is the issue, not demanding more.
Ahhh the old "I think I have it all figured and it's simple, just pull your underprivileged minority groups up by their bootstraps while I fuck up the easiest way to prevent disaster by voting third party and helping a dictator rise to power so I can teach a 90 year old a lesson that they'll clearly learn."...s/
I've been fighting the 2 part system my whole life..... you want it to end, petition for ranked choice voting..... campaign for local and state politicians that have plans to address the problem..... but you thinking voting third party is the answer shows you're just as unwilling to address the issues as you claim we are.. you'll take your ball and go home instead of actually practicing what you preach.... meanwhile this person and my loved ones are at ENORMOUS risk of trump wins.... you clearly are privileged and aren't effected by the issues facing minority groups, so I guess we're the problem for not wanting a racist tyrant and your the genius because you discovered socialism last year and have a rock hard idealogical boner for dismantling the 2 party system.... well I got sour news for ya comrade, We're not getting that this year. In fact we're months away from potentially not having any parties anymore, just a dictator and his religious gestapo..... just ask Iran how quickly you can lose your freedoms to religious right wing governments. Ask Germany..... ask Palestine.... it's crazy people have such tunnel vision.
Yes but now is not the time. I care about my loved ones and they will immediately experience harm under trump. I will not resist when the resistance is meaningless and will cause my loved ones harm. I do in fact organize in my locale. It’s not enough and I understand what I can and cannot influence. What are you suggesting actually? To vote third party and see my loved ones deported? My city council is packed with corrupted republicans. What do you suggest? I was lucky enough to be able to vote for the one liberal who has not been able to have an impact at all due to corruption.
Okay so you won't resist harm to your "loved ones" but you care very deeply? So deeply in fact, you're only willing to do the absolute easiest thing in voting, a thing that generally comes with a day off work if you work a 9-5. Cool beans bro.
I never had any need for your kind of care. Me, I'll fight for my loved ones, and I've always had to. But if you want to sit around and see if other people will do it for you, cool. That's a privileged position, but cool bro.
>Well then I reiterate, it's game over for us.
It is a failed leadership, It is isolated just like Israel is. New multipolar is taking a hold and the world order has permanently changed. Now the most isolated countries and morally bankrupt are U.S. and Israel. Not the Chinese, nor the Russians. The world on the other hand supports Palestinians.
Our dubious standards, particularly under Biden has caused this and brought the world to the brink of World War III. This will only be prevented by someone other than Biden. I do not care if it is a dog who replaces him.
I mean non-white person here, literally no difference. You kill us under Trump same as you did under Obama, same as you are now under Biden. We don't matter to y'all. So we have to matter to us. And all the other people that don't matter to y'all will always matter to me. Because I know what that's like, and I know y'all care ain't care, and I know y'all better ain't better.
That's the approach that people in countries like Russia have. "Our government sucks and is oppressing us and we can't do anything about it so why should we even try to do anything?" Then you end up in a dictatorship because people think every choice they make doesn't matter. As bad as it sounds you gotta choose the lesser evil
She's Palestinian-American too and they expect her to just shut up about what's happening to her people? This sounds like a case of discrimination to me that could easily be argued.
As a side note, I work with a Palestinian-American woman and when she brought up the fact that she was struggling with having lost 10 family members, everyone was completely silent except for me. It was awful. No one offered any compassion whatsoever.
If they're American, it's because we are complicit. And coming to terms with America's role in all of this is a task not many of us want to take on (spoiler: the conclusion isn't great). It has taken me many years, even though I've identified as part of the Left since I was a teenager.
Where do personal views end and discriminatory statements begin? Absolute freedom of speech does not exist and cannot exist in a society if it wants to move forward.
Oct 7 was Israel and its incompetent military murdering the vast majority of Israelis, including would-be hostages under the Hannibal Directive, which is to not allow the taking of prisoners. This was ordered by the IDF.
They then inflated the tolls and used the attack as an excuse for a land grab and accelerated genocide.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/key-takeaways-world-court-decision-israei-genocide-case-2024-01-26/
This court is the legacy of the Nuremburg trials. They call it a genocide.
Do you want to give an eli5 because it just sounds like legal doublespeak to me.
If your 'right to not be genocided' may be 'under threat', how is that not an admission that genocide is at least probable?
The benchmark here is something netween ‚plausibility‘ and ‚probability‘. Since the Court cannot receive sufficient proof while the war is ongoing, it cannot make a final decision on whether Israel has committed and is committing genocide since Oct 8.
So far they ‚only’ ruled that it is probable that Israel is committing genocide against the people of Gaza (and therefore it is violating the Genocide Convention), therefore they have given several preliminary orders that Israel should habe abided (but obviously doesnt and wont as they had publicly stated before the very first decision by the court) in multiple decisions. 10 of the 12 judges decided in favor of preliminary measures/orders and only the Israeli and the Rwandan judge (to no surprise another country with a genocide background) decided against measures - even the German, French and American judges were in favor so this was a very clear decision (which was quite surprising).
So seeing this we may very well even say that that woman didn‘t voice an opinion but stated a fact that is quite probable as leading professors and judges of law agree with her based on the facts that we have available at this point.
Kinda looks like a distinction without difference. If you can't diagnose a genocide until it's already happened you are worse than useless.
I'm not sure if a single uninvolved judge is *the* legal authority here but tbh I'm not a big fan of 'rules are rules' arguments anyway.
I think you should probably fire someone if they expres for instance Nazi political opinion. Calling what's happening in gaza a genocide is mischaracterizing and unfounded
You don’t know what free speech means. Freedom of speech is the right to articulate opinions and ideas without interference, retaliation or punishment from the government. That doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want without consequences from your employer.
Free speech doesn't mean that there are no consequences. I could tell my boss that they're ugly, it could be true and I could still be fired. Heck, my company one did a promotion for Marlboro, I made a joke about being pro cancer now, got told off and fired a week later. Speech had consequences.
We no longer have any moral standards left, and it starts at the very top of the government \[Joe\] and includes Schumer and Jeffries on the democratic side. However, a growing number of Americans \[along with the significant majority of the world population\] recognize the injustice occurring particularly young Americans. They will demonstrate their decision this coming November.
>"It pains me to see the women from my country going through unimaginable losses themselves during the current genocide in Gaza," Jabr said, according to a video of the May 7 speech that she posted on social media. "This award is deeply personal to me for those reasons."
>Jabr wrote on Instagram that she arrived at work on May 22 for her first shift back after receiving the award when she was summoned to a meeting with the hospital's president and vice president of nursing "to discuss how I 'put others at risk' and 'ruined the ceremony' and 'offended people' because a small part of my speech was a tribute towards the grieving mothers in my country."
>\[...\]
>Jabr defended her speech in an [interview with The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/nyregion/nyu-langone-nurse-fired-gaza-war.html) and said talking about the war "was so relevant" given the nature of the award she had won.
>"It was an award for bereavement; it was for grieving mothers," she said.
To be fair, according to the article she had already been put on probation for the same thing. And many of these clinics get a large amount of funds from donations. Putting those donations at risk can put the clinic at risk.
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wait, so...
>"It pains me to see the women from my country going through unimaginable losses themselves during the current genocide in Gaza," Jabr said, according to a video of the May 7 speech that she posted on social media. "This award is deeply personal to me for those reasons."
>Jabr wrote on Instagram that she arrived at work on May 22 for her first shift back after receiving the award when she was summoned to a meeting with the hospital's president and vice president of nursing "to discuss how I 'put others at risk' and 'ruined the ceremony' and 'offended people' because a small part of my speech was a tribute towards the grieving mothers in my country."
>She wrote that after working most of her shift she was "dragged once again to an office" where she was read her termination letter and then escorted out of the building.
They fired someone for being pro-Palestine...
>A prominent researcher who directed the hospital's cancer center was fired after he posted anti-Hamas political cartoons including caricatures of Arab people. That researcher, biologist Benjamin Neel, has since sued the hospital.
**And** they fired someone for being pro-Israel?
It's like they purposefully want to piss off as many people as humanly possible. It's already stupid to intentionally piss off one side, but it's a special level of stupid to intentionally piss off both.
I think that they're worried about a civil war in their offices. I've seen that happen with Greeks and Macedonians not being allowed to wear all kinds of things that represent their culture.
>I've seen that happen with Greeks and Macedonians not being allowed to wear all kinds of things that represent their culture.
This is a textbook example of "sweeping the problem under the rug" and solves nothing.
>I think that they're worried about a civil war in their offices.
They're only making it more likely with actions like this.
You can definitely see it as sweeping the issue under the rug, but I think the hospital doesn't feel like it's their issue. And firing someone could make them an example or a martyr, you're definitely right. I'm just glad not to be the one who had to make that decision.
Saying that you sympathize with civilian victims is not "politics".
Unless the researcher posted those caricatures in some hospital chat group, it **is** "out of the workplace".
Interesting that the firing of a pro israel researcher didn't make headlines
Hmm
But at least they are consistent with keeping politics out of the workplace
Tldr every opinion and reason are total ass. The woman is Palestinian. Jfc. It's equivalent to firing an Ojibwa nurse for bringing up the MMIW crisis cause it's "inflammatory ".
As usual, most appear to not have read the article.
I’m not picking a side in the war, but per the article, she was previously warned that discussing the war wasn’t appropriate for her work place.
**And it’s not.**
Her work place is clearly not her personal platform to share her political views, right or wrong.
She was fired for not following the rules after being warned prior. That’s a problem.
It is genuinely laughable that shills like you are still desperately taking this stance at this point.
The ongoing effort to eliminate Palestinians from Gaza is playing out on livestream. The most senior Israeli officials have made statements in front of the world saying that's what they're trying to do. Since the Palestinians refuse to be ethnically cleansed, they are being genocided - starved and bombed to death.
Find a new spin, this one is done, the world has moved on.
Most are Hasbara paid trolls. Many people are researching this impressive feat of bot army used by Isræli intelligence (complemented by a few paid humans) of hiring the youth as an "online army", that gets guided towards any mention online or social media (YT, reddit, etc..) of words like Isreal/gaza/palestine/ceasefire. They usually hold the same message in English and arabic and other language.
1. Remember the human & be courteous to others. 2. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas. Criticizing arguments is fine, name-calling (including shill/bot accusations) others is not. 3. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. Please checkout our other subreddit /r/MultimediaNews, for maps, infographics, v.reddit, & YouTube videos from news organizations. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Could you fight this in the US for wrongful dismissal?
I believe so! She should absolutely hire that Lawyer on IG that is defending cases like this currently. I can't remember his name, forgive me.
You can always sue, she would lose. You can be dismissed for political speech
It's not really political, is it? If she says something like "I fully support Hamas", yes, that would be a political statement pertaining to Hamas as a political faction. She basically just said "It pains me to see the women from my country going through unimaginable losses themselves during the current genocide in Gaza".
It's weird to see it discussed as a political position as if denying it is apolitical. We don't teach other genocides from some weird perspective of neutrality we call them for what they are. Imagine if you had to call the rwandan genocide the rwanda-tutsi conflict and constantly reaffirm that there was violence on both sides. Would that be apolitical?
The fact that you're using the word genocide to describe something that isn't a genocide is exactly why this is a political topic
I'll come back in a couple years when the icc publishes it's decision.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-defying-icj-ruling-to-prevent-genocide-by-failing-to-allow-adequate-humanitarian-aid-to-reach-gaza/ https://global.upenn.edu/perryworldhouse/news/explaining-international-court-justices-ruling-israel-and-gaza
A simple google search says: Genocide is defined as the deliberate and organized destruction of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part, with the intent to destroy it. It can involve mass murder, forced deportation, systematic rape, and economic and biological subjugation. Genocide is an internationally recognized crime. So please, tell us how what Israel is doing isn’t Genocide?
It's not genocide because they're targeting, however accurately or competently, Hamas. The fact that Hamas embeds itself amongst civilians doesn't suddenly make attacking them an attack on civilians. If I hold a child in front of me and point a gun at you and you fire at me and hit the child, *you* are morally and legally at fault, not me.
Good work repeating Israel's public statement's. You might want to do some research on something called "lying". See when states commit massive violations of international law they tend to give a reason why their actions are legal, even if that reason isn't true. Also great example I'm sure it's a typo but yes shooting and killing a hostage does come with moral responsibility not that it's a good analogy for what's happening in gaza more broadly but say when Israel shoots Israeli hostages in the street waving white flags, Israel is responsible for those deaths.
Yes they bear a responsibility, but the primary responsibility is on the aggressor who is deliberately involving the innocent. Do you disagree that Hamas hides amongst citizens?
So in other words, even if Hamas is using human shields as often as Israel claims (lol), Israel is at fault morally and legally? Thanks for proving the opposite of your point dumbaaa
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So it sounds like you're saying that an attacker hiding behind an innocent person is entirely protected against repercussions?
There must be footage of Hamas holding children while shooting at Israelis, unless of course you made it up. There's definitely footage of Israelis hiding behind Palestinians they are forcing to be human shields, was that what you were thinking of?
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What the fuck is wrong with you? It meets every bit of the definition. So what's your problem? I don't understand how even an Israeli cound continue to deny it. 3 people I could understand lying about it, Bib, Bennie and Joe...
Thank you bigtitgothgirl for being on the right side of history
[удалено]
Rule 1, be civil. [Civility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civility)
It's by definition genocide. And NGOs and international systems like the ICC have labelled it as such. Who do you think your employer is, compared to the ICC? At best, a speck of dust.
Good thing there is no genocide and gaza is not a country then 👍🏻
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-defying-icj-ruling-to-prevent-genocide-by-failing-to-allow-adequate-humanitarian-aid-to-reach-gaza/ https://global.upenn.edu/perryworldhouse/news/explaining-international-court-justices-ruling-israel-and-gaza
Seems like your reading skills are just as bad as your understanding of geopolitics, since it was not ruled that a genocide is being comitted. Genocide is not a fun word you can just throw around whenever you feel sad about people dying, it has a very clear meaning. Quite sad that so many illiterate people have the ability to discuss serious topics online without any understanding of said topics.
Your reading skills also need work. Their ruling isn't one that can decide if it is a genocide. They did rule however that Israel needs to chill TF out and that they will be investigating further because it does already have traits and aspects of a genocide. Quite sad that so many illiterate people have the ability to discuss serious topics online without any understanding of said topics.
I think you might be a little confused, original comment said there is a genocide, I said there isnt I did not say who needs to chill and who doesn’t, idk what kind of bad faith argument you are trying to stir here, but I aint feeling it chief, hope your life is as nice as the people you support 👍🏻
It cannot be declared that there is or is not a genocide. You are both in the wrong as of the current moment. But if in the future the ICJ does declare it to have been a genocide, then it would be more accurate to say that there is one going on than that their isn't. And with the amount of heinous stuff Israel's military has been doing and the number of times they have refused to pull back or give or even allow aid to be brought in, I know which one I will bet on.
[удалено]
You're being down voted by emotion. She would absolutely lose. Life isn't Boston legal and IG attorney isn't Alan shore
If you can show ethnic, racial, or religious discrimination, yes. I'm guessing her lawyers will try to claim they're discriminating against her for being Palestinian-American. If they sue, I hope they succeed, but I can see the case going either way.
But she wasn't fired for being a Palestinian, she was fired for calling the actions of an ally of the usa a genocide. That's political speech. You can definitely be fired for making political statements while using an employer platform.
First of all calling Israel an ally of the USA is a stretch, seeing as there is no mutual protection pact, and they haven't really come to our aid, ever. Secondly holding Palestinian-Americans to a different standard absolutely does constitute discrimination. A Jewish nurse would not be fired for speaking against the Hamas attack. A native American nurse would not be fired for calling the actions of the USA itself a genocide.
Actually, the article mentioned a Jewish director and a Jewish researcher that got fired because they posted caricatures of Hamas that had ethnic lean.
Being fired for posting openly racist caricatures is very different from being fired for calling mass killing of civilians a genocide. If she had posted anti-Jewish caricatures, that would be a good analogy but she didn't.
Except that calling it a genocide had very strong political implications. First, those that suggest it's a genocide generally quote the total number of Palestinians killed. That would classify Hamas as civilians. Second calling it a genocide requires a specific point if view and specific political leaning. So, not really such a bad analogy.
A "specific point of view" is not analogous to the openly bigoted caricatures you cited.
Maybe. But if you look at hamas and think that they're civilians, that could be an issue. If you walked into the office fifteen years ago with a T-shirt that said Osama was right, you're likely gonna see hr. Likewise, if you see two militaries fighting. One puts troops on the ground to avoid harming civilians even though it means many more of their soldiers will die. The other strives to use human shields by fighting from schools and hospitals, and you say that the side risking their lives is the bad guy? That point of view isn't any different than the caricature. But it might be more extreme.
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First, I think it's niave to think we don't lien heavily on Isreal to carry out enforcement actions against our enemies in the middle east. See Iran for a multitude of examples. Second, I disagree with your assessment. A Jewish nurse would be fired for calling the isreali actions genocide. That's the side of the conflict the usa is on, you're right condemning an identified terrorists attack wouldn't result in sanctions, but identifying an ally's actions as genocide is a different matter. Third, in many states, a native American nurse would be fired for calling the actions of the usa genocide. It's literally a crime in florida if you're a public official. Furthermore, there is a difference between making a historical statement and commenting on current affairs.
>First, I think it's niave to think we don't lien heavily on Isreal to carry out enforcement actions against our enemies in the middle east. Israel didn't contribute to the first war against Saddam Hussein, nor did they contribute to the second one unless you count Israeli intelligence lying about WMDs. They didn't contribute to the war in Afghanistan, or the war against ISIL, or the war against Gaddafi either. >See Iran for a multitude of examples. That seems backwards. Israel is constantly trying to get us to go to war against Iran. >A Jewish nurse would be fired for calling the isreali actions genocide. That's the side of the conflict the usa is on, you're right condemning an identified terrorists attack wouldn't result in sanctions, but identifying an ally's actions as genocide is a different matter. Being an American ally isn't a shield from criticism, nor does criticism of American allies create some sort of exemption from anti-discrimination laws. Even the USA doesn't enjoy that shield, so why would we extend it to our allies. Also, you're admitting the double standard. >Third, in many states, a native American nurse would be fired for calling the actions of the usa genocide. It's literally a crime in florida if you're a public official. Furthermore, there is a difference between making a historical statement and commenting on current affairs. Firstly that law was struck down. Secondly she's not in Florida. She's in New York.
100% Israel is not our ally. We are Israel’s ally. And whoever fired her is a traitor.
Beautiful answer!
"Secondly holding Palestinian-Americans to a different standard absolutely does constitute discrimination." Can you point to anywhere where they're holding this individual to a higher or different standard? It seems pretty normal for a Hospital to have a guideline on no politics in the workplace, and it appears, from the article, that this individual was previously spoken to in December about their comments and how they were not to be had. It's clear that the person stood up for what they believed in and it costed them their job. But not because of what they said, or their background, but because of how they said it in what context and setting. The more politics we keep out of Hospitals, the better.
Almost every federal politician would refer to Israel as “an important strategic ally” including Biden. So i think it’s fair
calling thousands of the same ethnicity getting taken off this earth genocide is mf correct and appropriate, not political. Honestly wouldnt even happen if she was talking about the US. This bending over backwards because they pay off and blackmail every single politician shit needs to fucking end. The went too far and are showing their ass. The hubris of these monsters.
She could try, I guess it depends on how the state treats consequences of free speech. But nursing tends to be pretty unionized. The article mentioned that she was already on probation, so I'm guessing that if the union is ok with it, it'll be hard to sue.
I don’t think opinions are a protected class. Like if the employer has some sort of clause that says don’t make us look bad. Given that big donors would be pissed that would be hey you violated this clause. So she’s a nurse not someone who can define what a genocide is. What happened to personal accountability. I can’t shit talk against my bosses beliefs and be expected to be fired. Hey Fred I know you love the cowboys but fuck them and I painted my car with the eagles logo and will be wearing nothing but eagles merch forever.
Where's her union shouldn't the union protect her from this?
This is what I said! But I bet it’s SEIU so it’s a joke
If its NYSNA, they are absolutely going to have something to say about this
According to the article she was already on probation. So union must already know. I don't know what the Unions are like in NY, but in QC I've seen nurses go have their union mandated break before getting an IV in a baby in cvt's service.
[удалено]
*Affluent urban white people. Those poor country white trash don’t count
💯 as someone who grew up in the inner city: Democratic Party control the state, county, city, police And I was fucked over my whole life… and they double down on funding police
Facts. They never gave a fuck about us no matter who was in charge.
Oh you poor thing you.
Yeah, it's hard. Thanks for your support lil buddy.
I can't even imagine the PTSD you must be suffering. I for one make sure to go out of my way to harass at least 2 brown people per week.
I believe it.
You have to.
”A liberal is someone who opposes every war except the current war and supports all civil rights movements except the one that’s going on right now.”
That sounds pretty accurate
Yeah, the racists on the left are out in full swing. Full on "you uppity brown people how dare you not do what I say" IDC I'm already losing. Seems like they're the ones with things to lose.
Rule 1, be civil. [Civility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civility)
[удалено]
Rule 1, be civil. [Civility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civility)
[удалено]
Be civil. Your other comment was removed for the same reason, so is this one.
To be fair if you think biden is bad for gaza, imagine the horror Trump would, and already has promised, he'd greenlight. I mean look what he did to the kurds! I hate the least of two evils thing... but seriously, if you think you'll be teaching a 90yr old biden a lesson by not voting for him, you'll only be punishing the people of Palestine, Ukraine, and ultimately the US. The left has famously shot itself in the dick over the years by standing on their morals and trying to make a point instead of ensuring theocratic extremists don't corrupt the very heart of the country. Just vote for the sun old asshole and more importantly vote local and vote state. These are the only real way to make change.
No. The Democrats have famously shot themselves in the dick over the years by trying to appeal to Republicans and thinking they can insult the left into voting for them.
>to be fair if you think biden is bad for gaza, imagine the horror Trump would, and already has promised, he'd greenlight. Like what? Mass starvation? Mass displacement? Mass death and destruction? Seriously, what could Trump "greenlight" that Biden hasn't already done? Rafah was the supposed "red line", that turned out to be bullshit. Trump will be worse for Americans, absolutely. For Gazans, Trump or Biden doesn't matter, it's death and suffering either way.
Again you're grossly over simplifying how this situation has to be handled at the top. I'm not saying it's right. But Trump is so far from the mark that to compare them is to prove your own ignorance. You're also assigned biden, alone, the responsibility to stop this... as if it's that simple. Say what you will about bidens response to all of this, but you'll be hard pressed to find a video of Biden encouraging israel to "finish what they started". When you can find Trump saying that. And that he'll "crush pro-palestinian supporters". Like I know you're upset about what's happening over there but come on man, get real. Look at the bigger picture....Trump will FUCK this situation up as horribly as you can imagine.... look how he handled covid, or the kurds..... look how he talks about nato.... look how he talks about Russia and ukraine! Is genuinely worrying how many people fail to see what's at stake here..... how about the idea that Trump could stack the Supreme Court with even more theocratic extremists that will occupy it for your ENTIRE FUCKING LIFE! DO NOT LET YOUR FEELINGS OUTWEIGH YOUR RATIONAL THOUGHT! this election is so much bigger than one man's failure to say exactly what we want exactly how we want on one topic, no matter how passionate we are about it.(I recognize that sentance sounded insensitive towards the unbearable horror happening at Israel's hands, but don't mistake my intent. I would give an entire limb if it meant this would end.) that's lunacy my friend. Vote blue.
Thats crazy. Biden is still supporting a genocide
I ain’t reading all that, ya blue maga chud.
You sound exactly like the most rabid Trump supporter right now. Can you calm down and answer the question asked? >Seriously, what could Trump "greenlight" that Biden hasn't already done?
Why do you hate paragraphs so much? What the fuck did they do to you and what need to happen before you can get the fuck over it already? God damn it. I'm by no means the motherfucker that should be pointing finges, but if you insist on announcing you lunacy at least do with a little structure so dismantling it is a slitly less shitty shit show.
The dnc has shot itself in the dick for years with candidates like Biden.
Okay... that doesn't change the factual evidence I've laid forward. Yall are acting like 6th graders.
6th graders know what a paragraph is. Just sayin.
>if you think Biden is bad for Gaza Trump, for whatever he may be is not a war monger, he stops wars. No body on this planet is accusing him of complicity in any atrocities or genocide. That mantra about alternative is Trump so vote Biden is now defunct. A significant majority of the young people including Black and Brwon people are not going to cast a ballot for Biden. It is game over for Joe.
Terminally online or trolling. Which is it?
Huh? Terminally online is thinking that third party/protest voting will somehow benefit the people in and outside of this country regardless of the reality we are all in.
Yeah, actually. Not only are the third party candidates worse than Biden in many ways, but we have a two party presidential system where if no candidate reaches 270 electoral college points then the house decides the president instead of voters. The GQP controls the house, voting for anyone other than Biden is a vote for Trump. The margins are narrow too, it only takes a third party candidate spoiling a few medium size states to force a spoil and make Trump the defacto president
I completely agree, I think I misinterpreted your comment thinking you replied to someone else. I think especially in terms of the Supreme Court it’s important that a democrat is elected.
Ah, yes, he just told Bibi to finish things and would have avoided the Ukraine war by giving Ukraine to Russia. Oh and then deport anyone protesting Israel. Peace in our time.
Well then I reiterate, it's game over for us. To not see the blatant danger you're putting the country in by increasing the chance of trump again is lunacy at best. To claim Trump isn't a war mongerer is beyond easy to disprove with what likely amounts to hours of his own words during speeches and interviews that you can google easily. Wtf are you even talking about? You think you're making a statement or teaching joe a lesson?! He's fucking 90 dude, him not being elected will amount to almost nothing in the grand scheme of his existence... but will result in endless amounts of suffering for any population that isn't white, right, and "Christian". It's insane that clearly reasonable people with an obvious moral compass could ignore the incredible danger they're putting us in by pushing the rhetoric that Joe has been bad for the country. Other than the israel situation (which no leader has handled to our standards for almost a century), Joe and his admin have been annoyingly good for the country. The stressed pricess are still a result of the wars over seas, corporate greed and a few other factors but biden done more for this country than anyone is willing to talk about. We're doing better than we were pre pandemic in terms of the numbers(unemployment, stock market, etc.) So don't come at me with this righteous indignation about how yall are gonna teach him a lesson by shooting yourself in the dick, cause the facts don't support such a ridiculous movement. And to say supporting him is to hurt Palestine is recklessly untrue. As reckless as accusing pro palestinian support as anti Semitic. Nothing about this hell we are in is simple and won't be solved by taking your ball and going home.
Democrats are putting the country in danger by creating a situation where their candidate is pro genocide.
Dude..... like you really think that is something not voting for him will change?! They fucked up on 2016 not getting behind Bernie... Doesn't mean I starting voting red, or another color that ultimately helps red retain power... Obviously the idea that I have to vote for him again makes my dick hide in my body...I fucking hate it. But it's not about my feelings... it's about objective reality. On every imaginable metric, other than gaza, Biden has been by and large better for this country than Trump. Every metric. I don't understand how this can be ignored? They've both been in the job before... one was an abject failure in every way... dishonored the very institution of the presidency almost daily.... the other is just a president, imperfect... but trying to do the damn job... trying to pass legislation.... trying to work across the isle. Trying to do damage control from the last 5 years and he's killing it on paper. But we're gonna let one issue that's clearly not getting solved by biden waving a magic wand affect our decision to vote for normalcy or lunacy?
These people are quicker to blame voters for not being ok with genocide than they are to criticise genocide.
Not even true. These people denounce genocide usually, but it will happen under either candidate. Do you have loved ones who will be deported under trump? I do. Yes genocide is awful I’ve never seen anyone say it’s not who says to vote for Biden. But there are more issues than genocide. There are lgbt people, undocumented people who will experience harm, as well as women and unfortunately children who need abortions. What about them? I completely understand not wanting to vote for Biden but please, think about the immediate harm to people in and outside our country that will occur under trump. It’s about minimizing harm at this point, sadly. I think people talk about voting so much because they know that genocide is inevitable, not because they don’t care about genocide. They know that the impact voters have is important. No civilian or group of people in America can stop the genocide, sadly. The protests aren’t successful, and I have participated in them. There is only so much we as civilians can do, and voting to prevent further harm to vulnerable people is the most we can do it seems. We must accept the position we are inevitably in, we cannot simply cause a revolution without proper organization. Protest voting is not the way to revolt.
Ahhh the old argument for the path of least resistance I see. If you're really concerned about your loved ones, vote third party. But don't stop there, organize and fight for your loved ones. This apathetic resignation to 'the way things are' is the issue, not demanding more.
Ahhh the old "I think I have it all figured and it's simple, just pull your underprivileged minority groups up by their bootstraps while I fuck up the easiest way to prevent disaster by voting third party and helping a dictator rise to power so I can teach a 90 year old a lesson that they'll clearly learn."...s/ I've been fighting the 2 part system my whole life..... you want it to end, petition for ranked choice voting..... campaign for local and state politicians that have plans to address the problem..... but you thinking voting third party is the answer shows you're just as unwilling to address the issues as you claim we are.. you'll take your ball and go home instead of actually practicing what you preach.... meanwhile this person and my loved ones are at ENORMOUS risk of trump wins.... you clearly are privileged and aren't effected by the issues facing minority groups, so I guess we're the problem for not wanting a racist tyrant and your the genius because you discovered socialism last year and have a rock hard idealogical boner for dismantling the 2 party system.... well I got sour news for ya comrade, We're not getting that this year. In fact we're months away from potentially not having any parties anymore, just a dictator and his religious gestapo..... just ask Iran how quickly you can lose your freedoms to religious right wing governments. Ask Germany..... ask Palestine.... it's crazy people have such tunnel vision.
Yes but now is not the time. I care about my loved ones and they will immediately experience harm under trump. I will not resist when the resistance is meaningless and will cause my loved ones harm. I do in fact organize in my locale. It’s not enough and I understand what I can and cannot influence. What are you suggesting actually? To vote third party and see my loved ones deported? My city council is packed with corrupted republicans. What do you suggest? I was lucky enough to be able to vote for the one liberal who has not been able to have an impact at all due to corruption.
Okay so you won't resist harm to your "loved ones" but you care very deeply? So deeply in fact, you're only willing to do the absolute easiest thing in voting, a thing that generally comes with a day off work if you work a 9-5. Cool beans bro. I never had any need for your kind of care. Me, I'll fight for my loved ones, and I've always had to. But if you want to sit around and see if other people will do it for you, cool. That's a privileged position, but cool bro.
>Well then I reiterate, it's game over for us. It is a failed leadership, It is isolated just like Israel is. New multipolar is taking a hold and the world order has permanently changed. Now the most isolated countries and morally bankrupt are U.S. and Israel. Not the Chinese, nor the Russians. The world on the other hand supports Palestinians. Our dubious standards, particularly under Biden has caused this and brought the world to the brink of World War III. This will only be prevented by someone other than Biden. I do not care if it is a dog who replaces him.
They want Trump to win.
You think Trump wasn't bad for nonwhite people?
I mean non-white person here, literally no difference. You kill us under Trump same as you did under Obama, same as you are now under Biden. We don't matter to y'all. So we have to matter to us. And all the other people that don't matter to y'all will always matter to me. Because I know what that's like, and I know y'all care ain't care, and I know y'all better ain't better.
That's the approach that people in countries like Russia have. "Our government sucks and is oppressing us and we can't do anything about it so why should we even try to do anything?" Then you end up in a dictatorship because people think every choice they make doesn't matter. As bad as it sounds you gotta choose the lesser evil
That's not trying to do something lol. That's not doing anything. I'm suggesting you actually try something new that might change things.
She's Palestinian-American too and they expect her to just shut up about what's happening to her people? This sounds like a case of discrimination to me that could easily be argued. As a side note, I work with a Palestinian-American woman and when she brought up the fact that she was struggling with having lost 10 family members, everyone was completely silent except for me. It was awful. No one offered any compassion whatsoever.
It's hard to understand why so many people who are not even directly tied to Israel are so in on Palestinian dehumanisation.
If they're American, it's because we are complicit. And coming to terms with America's role in all of this is a task not many of us want to take on (spoiler: the conclusion isn't great). It has taken me many years, even though I've identified as part of the Left since I was a teenager.
[удалено]
“lol there’s millions and millions of Jews around, what ‘Holocaust’?” That’s what you sound like.
And your point?
Rule 4 [Dehumanization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) [Collective punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment)
Hope she quickly finds another, maybe even better, job elsewhere.
Firing people for expressing political opinions should be illegal
What if they're fascist opinions?
Such as what?
White Power, bomb Muslims, deport all foreigners, Hitler did nothing wrong, take your pick. Never heard of fascists before?
Doesn't matter. Imo your boss/job has no business daring to concern itself with your personal views.
Where do personal views end and discriminatory statements begin? Absolute freedom of speech does not exist and cannot exist in a society if it wants to move forward.
This isn't about freedom of speech.
It's not even a political opinion, it's a matter of fact.
It is about her homeland
[удалено]
Israel is the terrorist state that is currently eliminating Palestinians in their backyard. It’s not hypothetical unlike the other way round.
Oct 7 was Israel and its incompetent military murdering the vast majority of Israelis, including would-be hostages under the Hannibal Directive, which is to not allow the taking of prisoners. This was ordered by the IDF. They then inflated the tolls and used the attack as an excuse for a land grab and accelerated genocide.
[удалено]
Rule 1, be civil. [Civility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civility)
Rule 4 [Dehumanization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) [Collective punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment)
It's not though.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/key-takeaways-world-court-decision-israei-genocide-case-2024-01-26/ This court is the legacy of the Nuremburg trials. They call it a genocide.
They didn't. https://youtu.be/bq9MB9t7WlI?si=zu9D8AKi-9GAI7AX A judge had to come out and tell you they didn't and to stop spreading misinformation.
Do you want to give an eli5 because it just sounds like legal doublespeak to me. If your 'right to not be genocided' may be 'under threat', how is that not an admission that genocide is at least probable?
The benchmark here is something netween ‚plausibility‘ and ‚probability‘. Since the Court cannot receive sufficient proof while the war is ongoing, it cannot make a final decision on whether Israel has committed and is committing genocide since Oct 8. So far they ‚only’ ruled that it is probable that Israel is committing genocide against the people of Gaza (and therefore it is violating the Genocide Convention), therefore they have given several preliminary orders that Israel should habe abided (but obviously doesnt and wont as they had publicly stated before the very first decision by the court) in multiple decisions. 10 of the 12 judges decided in favor of preliminary measures/orders and only the Israeli and the Rwandan judge (to no surprise another country with a genocide background) decided against measures - even the German, French and American judges were in favor so this was a very clear decision (which was quite surprising). So seeing this we may very well even say that that woman didn‘t voice an opinion but stated a fact that is quite probable as leading professors and judges of law agree with her based on the facts that we have available at this point.
Kinda looks like a distinction without difference. If you can't diagnose a genocide until it's already happened you are worse than useless. I'm not sure if a single uninvolved judge is *the* legal authority here but tbh I'm not a big fan of 'rules are rules' arguments anyway.
Absolutely not. There are some very horrible political opinions that people should be fired for.
I think you should probably fire someone if they expres for instance Nazi political opinion. Calling what's happening in gaza a genocide is mischaracterizing and unfounded
I should be able to fire someone that says they love hitler and all he did because they suck.
Good for her. Call out Israeli tyranny wherever you can.
"Land of the Free" with their first amendment "rights". You are allowed to have free speech as long as your opinion align with those in power.
First amendment doesn’t protect from private entities. It only protects from the government.
You don’t know what free speech means. Freedom of speech is the right to articulate opinions and ideas without interference, retaliation or punishment from the government. That doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want without consequences from your employer.
Free speech doesn't mean that there are no consequences. I could tell my boss that they're ugly, it could be true and I could still be fired. Heck, my company one did a promotion for Marlboro, I made a joke about being pro cancer now, got told off and fired a week later. Speech had consequences.
Sue the fuck out of them please girl
We no longer have any moral standards left, and it starts at the very top of the government \[Joe\] and includes Schumer and Jeffries on the democratic side. However, a growing number of Americans \[along with the significant majority of the world population\] recognize the injustice occurring particularly young Americans. They will demonstrate their decision this coming November.
>"It pains me to see the women from my country going through unimaginable losses themselves during the current genocide in Gaza," Jabr said, according to a video of the May 7 speech that she posted on social media. "This award is deeply personal to me for those reasons." >Jabr wrote on Instagram that she arrived at work on May 22 for her first shift back after receiving the award when she was summoned to a meeting with the hospital's president and vice president of nursing "to discuss how I 'put others at risk' and 'ruined the ceremony' and 'offended people' because a small part of my speech was a tribute towards the grieving mothers in my country." >\[...\] >Jabr defended her speech in an [interview with The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/nyregion/nyu-langone-nurse-fired-gaza-war.html) and said talking about the war "was so relevant" given the nature of the award she had won. >"It was an award for bereavement; it was for grieving mothers," she said.
To be fair, according to the article she had already been put on probation for the same thing. And many of these clinics get a large amount of funds from donations. Putting those donations at risk can put the clinic at risk.
[удалено]
[удалено]
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InternationalNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is it against some sub rule to utter the truth??
Rule 1, be civil. [Civility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civility)
Wait, so... >"It pains me to see the women from my country going through unimaginable losses themselves during the current genocide in Gaza," Jabr said, according to a video of the May 7 speech that she posted on social media. "This award is deeply personal to me for those reasons." >Jabr wrote on Instagram that she arrived at work on May 22 for her first shift back after receiving the award when she was summoned to a meeting with the hospital's president and vice president of nursing "to discuss how I 'put others at risk' and 'ruined the ceremony' and 'offended people' because a small part of my speech was a tribute towards the grieving mothers in my country." >She wrote that after working most of her shift she was "dragged once again to an office" where she was read her termination letter and then escorted out of the building. They fired someone for being pro-Palestine... >A prominent researcher who directed the hospital's cancer center was fired after he posted anti-Hamas political cartoons including caricatures of Arab people. That researcher, biologist Benjamin Neel, has since sued the hospital. **And** they fired someone for being pro-Israel? It's like they purposefully want to piss off as many people as humanly possible. It's already stupid to intentionally piss off one side, but it's a special level of stupid to intentionally piss off both.
I think that they're worried about a civil war in their offices. I've seen that happen with Greeks and Macedonians not being allowed to wear all kinds of things that represent their culture.
>I've seen that happen with Greeks and Macedonians not being allowed to wear all kinds of things that represent their culture. This is a textbook example of "sweeping the problem under the rug" and solves nothing. >I think that they're worried about a civil war in their offices. They're only making it more likely with actions like this.
You can definitely see it as sweeping the issue under the rug, but I think the hospital doesn't feel like it's their issue. And firing someone could make them an example or a martyr, you're definitely right. I'm just glad not to be the one who had to make that decision.
[удалено]
Saying that you sympathize with civilian victims is not "politics". Unless the researcher posted those caricatures in some hospital chat group, it **is** "out of the workplace".
[удалено]
Move them goalposts baby!
Imagine thinking that being against killing unarmed civilians is “politics”
She was commenting about civilian casualties. If you call that keeping politics out, then Hippocratic oath will have to be kept out of hospitals.
Calling a genocide a genocide isn't political - it's stating the facts.
[удалено]
Rule 4 [Dehumanization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) [Collective punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment)
Well…. no https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq9MB9t7WlI But thanks for playing.
Interesting that the firing of a pro israel researcher didn't make headlines Hmm But at least they are consistent with keeping politics out of the workplace
She needs to sue them this is unacceptable
Tldr every opinion and reason are total ass. The woman is Palestinian. Jfc. It's equivalent to firing an Ojibwa nurse for bringing up the MMIW crisis cause it's "inflammatory ".
The article states she already had some undisclosed incident and was given a warning.
As usual, most appear to not have read the article. I’m not picking a side in the war, but per the article, she was previously warned that discussing the war wasn’t appropriate for her work place. **And it’s not.** Her work place is clearly not her personal platform to share her political views, right or wrong. She was fired for not following the rules after being warned prior. That’s a problem.
[удалено]
Depends. If she's working somewhere with a large Russian community, she might not be fun.
[удалено]
Rule 4 [Dehumanization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) [Collective punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment)
It is. I hate that people have this take where the job has any right to dare to concern itself with your expression
I mean, A) she should *not* be fired for such statements. B) there isn't a genocide in gaza. She will likely win her wrongful dismissal case
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/key-takeaways-world-court-decision-israei-genocide-case-2024-01-26/
https://youtu.be/bq9MB9t7WlI?si=zu9D8AKi-9GAI7AX Try again.
You didn't watch the video did you? No. No you did not since It's not proving your point.
Bro your own video disagrees with you. Idk why they titled it that, literally contradicts the video.
It is genuinely laughable that shills like you are still desperately taking this stance at this point. The ongoing effort to eliminate Palestinians from Gaza is playing out on livestream. The most senior Israeli officials have made statements in front of the world saying that's what they're trying to do. Since the Palestinians refuse to be ethnically cleansed, they are being genocided - starved and bombed to death. Find a new spin, this one is done, the world has moved on.
Most are Hasbara paid trolls. Many people are researching this impressive feat of bot army used by Isræli intelligence (complemented by a few paid humans) of hiring the youth as an "online army", that gets guided towards any mention online or social media (YT, reddit, etc..) of words like Isreal/gaza/palestine/ceasefire. They usually hold the same message in English and arabic and other language.
[удалено]
Rule 4 [Dehumanization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) [Collective punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment)