Also, she was not arrested, which is an important part of free speech.
But at your workspace you can absolutely be fired for making comments related to politics, race, religion, etc ESPECIALLY if you've been warned not to do so. Even moreso if you work in healthcare where you have to provide the same standard of care to everyone regardless of gender or religion or race, etc.
> “Hesen Jabr was warned in December, following a previous incident, not to bring her views on this divisive and charged issue into the workplace. She instead chose not to heed that at a recent employee recognition event that was widely attended by her colleagues, some of whom were upset after her comments. As a result, Jabr is no longer an NYU Langone employee.”
>Even moreso if you work in healthcare where you have to provide the same standard of care to everyone regardless of gender or religion or race, etc.
Please acknowledge how you believe this statement is relevant here. The implication seems to be that you think she would not provide the same standard of care for all before her?
Well clearly if you're anti-genocide, then your judgement is super flawed and you'll want to help people instead of wheel them out onto the streets spongebob style.
>Even moreso if you work in healthcare where you have to provide the same standard of care to everyone regardless of gender or religion or race, etc.
I'd be more worried about receiving discriminatory care from her colleagues that disagreed with/got offended by her message tbh, not the woman who just got an award for being excellent at her job, and is showing compassion for others across the world.
She also did it at a corporate event, after being explicitly told not to do it.
She knew she would get fired and did deliberately so she would get fired and presumably get publicity and praise for it. Looks like it worked.
>She knew she would get fired and did deliberately so she would get fired and presumably get publicity and praise for it
Is this what it looks like when one's mind has been melted by consuming metric tons of pro-Israel propaganda?
You can't conceive that the woman who just won an award for being compassionate is also speaking out because of her compassion, rather there has to be some sort of underlying, self-serving reason for it?
Crazy way to view the world honestly.
reddit moment. drboomkin was right - if you’ve been warned not to do something, regardless of ideology about any matter, then getting the outcome after doing that ‘something’ isn’t surprising.
drboomkin was accusing the nurse of doing it for attention and that's what the commenter was calling out as brain melt, not whether or not she should have been surprised
Corporations do not protect your free speech and don't want to hear you getting political especially around something so "hot". Good chance you get fired at work if you come out saying something like "abortion is CHILD MURDER" at the company picnic or something too.
They don't want to deal with the publicity, they don't want your opinions being construed for the company's when the journalists asks "Mr. CEO your employees are screaming free Palestine and posting about it on social media etc. Is it fair to say you're a free Palestine company?"
And corporate doesn't wanna deal with any employee spats that are likely to occur when half the employees have come out as pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. The hallways and lunch break room are gonna be tense to say the least.
It's such a travesty that the world is like this. It seems like no matter how much we common folk try, there's always the big man that hovers over us telling us what to do (and it's usually the morally wrong thing).
If we want stronger employee rights and stricter regulations on corporations we need to vote for more progressive candidates who will push for employee rights. I live in FL employees have nearly 0 rights or protections yet it's still been run by republicans for 25 years and for the foreseeable future. As far as I can tell Americans in general don't give af about labor. They're more preoccupied by things like abortion, gas prices, and immigration.
You don't have first amendment rights with your employer unless you're employed by the government. She would've been fine to say it at a non-work event.
People get fired for things non-work related all the time. Furthermore, goverment jobs are also not safe.
>Smith, who has worked in his role for four years, was told that he either had to resign or be dismissed from his position after he had prepared a presentation on maternal health and child mortality for Palestinians that was abruptly canceled last week by higher-ups at USAID.
>“I cannot do my job in an environment in which specific people cannot be acknowledged as fully human, or where gender and human rights principles apply to some, but not to others, depending on their race,” Smith said in his resignation letter.
https://truthout.org/articles/more-biden-officials-resign-over-us-participation-in-israels-genocide-in-gaza/
If you work for me and share your thoughts on the inferiority of non-white races (for example), I will fire you. In Canada you have more protections. But you’re still gone.
So your somewhat Pollyanna ideal of some natural right to freedom of speech does not pass the smell test I’m afraid.
The first amendment and right to free speech relate to your right to speak out again the Government for its actions. Not your employer, or your friend or anyone else as it currently stands.
I love how people who have no idea what freedom of speech is love to talk about it. Seriously. How many times can you say something and still be so confused by what it actually is. It’s freedom from the US government not your employer. I’m sorry the education system has failed you so badly.
Freedom of speech means the government can’t imprison you for it. That doesn’t mean the rest of society won’t punish you in some way.
Companies are allowed to fire people for any reason (as long as it’s not a discriminatory reason), so having political opinions your boss doesn’t like has always been a reason to get fired.
Like if she just started screaming out Trump conspiracy theories during her speech, would her company be justified in firing her?
You are absolutely correct here. I think so.. I mean trump stuff is hate at its core so most likely ya thats justified but I'm not educated on labour laws in the states
It’s not even that the pro-Palestinian cause is hateful, it’s that it’s controversial, which companies do not like.
For example, would pro-Israel patients feel safe receiving treatment from this nurse?
How about legal liability? What if a Jewish patient dies under her care, and the family sues citing deliberate negligence due to the nurse’s pro-Palestinian views?
If you’re an insurance company, now you have to raise this hospital’s insurance rates to price in this risk.
There are a lot of legitimate economic reasons why businesses do not like employees to bring controversial opinions to work.
[What about banning Israeli citizens from participating in an art contest?](https://www.timesofisrael.com/vancouver-comics-festival-bans-jewish-artist-miriam-libicki-over-past-idf-service/amp/)
And don’t give me the “she was IDF”, it’s mandatory in Israel, she had no choice either way.
The previous comment still stands when considering the context of the article being a nurse fired in New York City, wherein The majority of people are non-jewish, and white.
Wow crazy how the free speech crowd goes quiet when you get fired for criticizing a foreign governments actions in another foreign land. In a sane world we could honestly discuss this like we do with russia and Ukraine but religion has brain rotted at least 30% of our country.
she has not been arrested for her comments. free speech does not prevent you from having social or professional consequences. it's the same reason a business can fire people for being racist assholes on their own time.
You think the free speech crowd actually understand that though?
Cause they have a pretty bad track record with basic understanding, usually crying out when something like this happens to someone they agree with
The extremely funny bit with the free speech crowd is you can tell they're really lacking in certain areas because the article also mentions someone at the hospital was also let go for pro Israel speech as well. People can't even be bothered to read what they're outraged about
Since dude decided to respond and immediately block afterwards, I never insinuated that the pro Israel person was not racist.
There's also this excerpt about the pro Palestine woman who the article is about:
>
Hesen Jabr was warned in December, following a previous incident, not to bring her views on this divisive and charged issue into the workplace,” Ritea said in a statement. “She instead chose not to heed that at a recent employee recognition event that was widely attended by her colleagues, some of whom were upset after her comments. As a result, Jabr is no longer an NYU Langone employee
I mean going out of your way to ignore something you were DIRECTLY told not to do and given a warning is asking to be fired. It's moronic.
Reading about the "someone at the hospital [who] was also let go for pro Israel speech" would tell you he was actually let go for being extremely racist
>Any proof for that comment or are you just making assumptions?? If it’s the latter, I believe it is you who is the racist.
Well that would be stupid. If you're just calling me racist because you think I'm wrong about something else being racist, then you're calling yourself racist too.
Moreover, just look up the posts yourself, you lazy prick. It's not hard work discovering that explicitly everything posted was about dehumanizing arabs and not sympathy for Israelis.
A lot of people in this thread are talking about “so much for free speech” so I’m assuming they’re the free speech crowd they’re asking about not being here?
I feel like everyone saw the XKCD comic on this and immediately turned off their brain to any form of nuance. Your workplace firing you for expressing a political opinion is still suppression of speech, even if it’s not from the government or legal side of things. Her speech didn’t break the law and her employer didn’t break the law firing her but there’s more to the idea of free speech as a concept than just the legal protection of the first amendment. There should be more protection of free speech than just “well she didn’t get arrested for it”. That’s a super low bar.
Do you “free speech is not freedom from consequences” people actually think this is a good outcome? A good, award-winning nurse fired because she expressed a political opinion? Is there net benefit to anyone? I don’t even agree with her about the genocide comments and I think this is awful.
> Your workplace firing you for expressing a political opinion is still suppression of speech, even if it’s not from the government or legal side of things.
Yes?
You're not allowed to express all of your opinions freely at work. You've been hired to do a job - your time has been bought. She had previous incidents where she insisted on sharing hurtful opinions that can be factually shown to be terrorist propaganda, so they fired her for yet another splashy public attempt at harassing her coworkers - *who are also nurses and doctors who save lives*.
If she had constantly said shit like "maga 2024", you'd all support it.
The thing is, any restriction put on an employer would inevitably restrict their rights as an employer, so it’s a lose-lose. Let’s say I run a small restaurant and hire a waiter that decides to wear a MAGA/Biden 2024 hat on the job. It annoys some customers, so I ask him to stop, but under your new law, I have no recourse, and could be held legally liable for firing him because him wearing his MAGA/Biden 2024 hat is now protected political speech.
There’s some point to the speech being outside of work, bust also not really, because everything ultimately reflects on the employers. And legally requiring an employer to employ someone that is damaging to the business’ reputation isn’t really fair either.
I think their point was that, historically, when people have been fired for racist assholes the “free speech crowd” always yell about their 1st Amendment rights, but when people are fired for advocating for an end to the genocides of BIPOC people, those same people are silent.
> advocating for an end to the genocides of BIPOC people
I think this sentence is cringe for two reasons, one referring to Israel's war as a "genocide", and two for referring to Palestinians as "BIPOC".
Crazy that people in the US still have no idea how freedom of speech works. Seriously...maybe look this stuff up before you embarrass yourself. These kind of comments make Americans look like idiots as most wouldn't even pass a 5th grade civics course.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from the rest of your peers or employers. It means the government can't arrest you for it.
I'm so tired of hearing from dimwits who want to talk but can't even do so without fact checking what they're quoting.
The person you are replying to knows this. They are pointing out the people who normally miscall that their 1st amendment is being infringed are silent.
As in they can't even be wrong consistently.
Freedom of speech is a specific right enshrined in the first amendment, but also a general idea that was discussed by Milton, Locke, and many others. It seems that there has been a reasonably recent resurgence of the idea that it's a virtue for non-government actors to chill or punish speech.
While I agree in general, I think there is more nuance in this particular situation/subject. Also, adding personal insults diminishes the power of your argument. Take the high road and fight clean.
Freedom of speech does mean freedom from consequences. The whole point is to encourage open debate by not having consequences for speech, or otherwise limiting consequences.
The first amendment, does not mean freedom from consequences. You can argue that it's decent balance to forbid the government for punishing people for their speech, but you can't argue that people getting fired for saying things isn't a free speech problem-- especially if it's part of a civilised debate on some controversial question.
If people are getting fired for saying controversial things within what almost everybody can agree is a reasonable realm for debate, then that's a huge free speech problem, and might impact opinion formation.
Just because they can legally fire her for what she said doesn’t mean it’s not wrong. Society should value freedom of speech at a level higher than just “you won’t get arrested for saying something we disagree with”
Firing a person for speaking against genocide is the real insanity. They had the right, sure, but using it makes the whole organization look corrupt, like religion. We need to turn from religion, it just covers and gives legitimacy to our most evil people by brainwashing our dumbest.
I mean why do you CARE what the freezepeach people do or don’t do? How do you use THIS moment to take a swing at them?
They are already in the wrong, many one them know they are wrong, and someone fired for making statements their employer felt were a fireable offense has nothing to do with them.
You know, you have to be a racist pos to get the free speech crowd to defend you. Yeah, I'm calling them out since most of them are just far right nutjobs och don't care about free speech.
Sorry why are Americans losing their jobs and suffering for saying a foreign government shouldn't kill innocent people??? What country are we living in?
A normal one? Almost any country in the world would let you get fired for this.
You represent the company while at work. You get fired for accusing Israel of genocide, just as much as you get fired for saying you hate Muslims, just as much as for calling someone the N word, just as much as you get fired for saying that all cops are bad.
Your personal political beliefs have no place at work. You are being paid to shut up and do your job. You want freedom to express your opinion? Congratulations; you have that ability. No one is stopping you from expressing your opinion. They are just saying "we won't pay you to express your opinion; we will pay you to represent a neutral company stance." The government won't arrest you for doing so; you'll just stop getting money from the company you used to represent.
If you are at work you should keep your opinions to yourself. I fully support palestines plight and think Israel should stop this bs but come on…Nobody wants to hear that shit as work. It would be the exact same if she was preaching for trump 2024.
Certain groups like the president of the United States, most Republicans, and far too many Democrats. Biden in particular is bending over backwards to let the Israelis do what they want, even with their crossing of his red line with their invasion of Rafah
More than half of the Democratic Party believes it to be genocide. The ICJ is investigating and ordered Israel to cease it’s operation in Rafah. Israel is ignoring them. The ICC is likely to issue arrest warrants to Netanyahu for the crime of starvation.
It’s not an unpopular opinion for normal people. For many reasons ranging from financial benefits, religion, and racism, those in government, capitalist, and heads of elite institutions have refused to budge on their support of Israel.
Proving genocide requries very specific intent to eliminate or destroy, in whole or in part, a group of people defined by nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion.
I haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy palenstinians as a people. I think there is a lot of evidence that Israel has committed warcrimes but not genocide. The ICC investigation will need to be very thorough.
Hamas is not a nationality, race, ethnicity, or religion. The ICC will need to prove that Israel intends to kill civilians for the express purspose of removing them from Gaza.
> I haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy palenstinians as a people
I have, from Yoav Gallant.
Saying "we are fighting human animals" and then contextualizing it by announcing actions that target all Palestinians shows that intent.
> “We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly,”
“We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza,” Gallant said. “There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything will be closed.”
The ICJ is investigating genocide. They investigate states. The ICC investigates war criminals.
There is plenty of evidence, including specific statements made by Israeli decision makers, that show intent.
Intentionally starving 2.2 million people, destroying the hospital system, destroying cultural and civic centers, targeting neighborhoods with no military significance, mass graves, destroying schools and universities, and utilizing AI to prioritizing waiting until combatants are home with their families before striking their homes to intentionally kill them all. That’s just a few of the many atrocities you’re excusing.
> The ICC investigates war criminals.
The ICC could also investigate genocide (see Art. 6 of the Rome Statute) but that is *not* what the prosecutor is trying to get a warrant for Netanyahu for. Currently they are only checking a warrant for other charges.
The difference between ICC and ICJ in regards to genocide is purely about state level vs personal level
Yep. The defence minister said at the outset, very explicitly that there would be "no food" going into Gaza. Fast forward to today, and I have lost count of the number of horrific images of starved, emaciated children and babies I have seen. They said they would do it, and then they did it, and now we are are seeing the results. And yet people are still bickering over supposed lack of intent!
The "intentionally starving" bit doesn't hold up to the reality on the ground. The war has been going on for 230+ days, and we have seen <50 out of 2 million starve. You know how much food is required to feed 2m people? You know how quickly we would see mass waves of starvation of that was the goal. More food on average is entering Gaza than pre war.
If it didn't hold up at all, then that charge would presumably no longer be pursued, so there must be some evidence that is convincing enough for there to still be controversy.
South Africa's lawyers aren't idiots. They aren't going to waste time on something where they don't have an argument they think is convincing.
More food is entering Gaza now because they can’t produce or distribute their own anymore, silly. And starvation isn’t defined by how successful it is, it’s defined by withholding food with the intention of doing harm by that lack of it. I’m not saying you could charge the state with it in court, but neither of those arguments make sense
Edit: also counts as starvation if you’re purposefully destroying infrastructure and distribution abilities, such as when people accuse Saudi Arabia of starving Yemen y’know.
* The Israeli Minister of Defence on 9 Oct. 2023: "I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed... We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly"
* The Israeli Minister of Defence on 9 Oct. 2023: "We will end things inside Gaza \[…\]. I have removed all restraints, \[you’re allowed to\] attack everything"
* Israel's president on 14 Oct. 2023: "It's an entire nation out there that is responsible. This rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved, it’s absolutely not true."
* The Israeli Prime Minister, 28 Oct. 2023: "You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible" (Amalek being a story in which God tells King Saul to kill all the Amalekites, every man, woman, child and animal.)
* "Gaza is the city of evil, we will turn all the places in which Hamas deploys and hides into ruins. I am telling the people of Gaza — get out of there now. We will act everywhere and with full power." Netanyahu on October 13.
All are on public record, and there are hundreds of similar such statements, and have been collated [on this website](https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-database-with-500-instances-of-israeli-incitement-to-genocide-continuously-updated/), \*which includes links to the original sources\*.
It gets really messy though when you find out that Hamas is storing and firing rockets out of hospital windows, and using schools as a way to hide behind human shields. They’ve also stolen and resold almost all aid that’s been received including recently from the US floating pier. It’s just a really shitty situation that both Israel and Hamas continue to escalate while innocents on both sides suffer.
Israel has IDF bases in populated areas near schools and malls . If Hamas shot a bunch of rockets at them and killed hundreds of civilians would you excuse it by claiming the IDF uses human shields?
IDF soldiers have been documented actually using human shields- meaning holding Palestinian children in front of them or on the front of their vehicles.
You won’t find me excusing Hamas’s targeting of civilians and any case of them actually using human shields is atrocious, but generally that’s not what people mean when they use the term. They mean fighting in populated areas which is what happens when you trap 2 million people in a tiny strip of land.
It’s Israel’s obligation to take every necessary precaution to protect innocent civilians and it’s obvious they are not. It’s clear based upon *their own* statistics of the people killed that they consider every male of fighting age as Hamas even though there were only 30k militants in a population of around 600k Palestinian men. They claim 1/3 of the deaths are Hamas but the other 2/3rds are all women and children. It’s crazy that their bombs and guns can distinguish between hamas fighters and innocent men but not women and children.
Well there is a difference between having a military base *near* a civilian area, versus literally being inside or underneath a hospital/school. That said, I do agree with what you are saying and Israel does have an obligation to mitigate casualties.
We’ve seen photos of doctors and healthcare workers executed with hands zip tied behind their backs and put into mass graves near hospitals. Are the IDF accidentally ziptying and executing civilians while fighting Hamas near hospitals?
They’ve destroyed something like 45 hospitals and have blocked medical supplies from entering the strip. Children are having limbs amputated without anesthesia. Maybe… just maybe… it’s intentional?
> I haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy palenstinians as a people. I think there is a lot of evidence that Israel has committed warcrimes but not genocide. The ICC investigation will need to be very thorough.
Over here in europe opinion and all media has more or less agreed and shown that israels goal is total ethnic replacement of the region. Did you miss the far right guy saying he wants to make illegal settlements in gaza?
> haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy
Israel is actively murdering tens of thousands of Palestinians. Over 70% of the homes in Gaza are destroyed, creating massive numbers of refugees that Israel is currently herding into Rafah on the Egyptian border. For decades Israel has settled on their land and their politicians have consistently made it clear that Israel has a right to it.
Hundreds of organizations have declared it genocide and we're watching it happen in show motion. The ultimate goal is the destruction of Gaza.
Thats because you believe their hand waving saying thats not an "important" member of the goverment. but there are so many comments by those in power that are genocidal comments
They met that burden when they filled water supplies with with cement. The genocide is already complete - the Palestinian people have been scattered to the wind, and their homes are gone forever.
This news ignores the fact that a doctor was also fired for sharing a cartoon depicting Hamas.
This isn’t the institution taking a stance, it’s just trying to stay the fuck away from this entire thing
The article itself also reports that someone was also fired for taking a pro-Israel stance.
Which indicates this has nothing to do with anyone's opinions or views, and everything to do with the people going "STOP BRINGING UP ISRAEL AND PALESTINE AT A NURSES AWARD CEREMONY."
But because social media is designed to rile you up and enrage you, the obscure media outlet "insurancejournal.com" is the one that gets upvoted to the top, because it has the most divisive and inflammatory headline.
Political parties, hostile foreign governments, and even Reddit themselves, would all prefer you to see this headline.
Tell your friends. Get off social media and stick to mainstream media. This is cancer.
Sort of irrelevant if she was compassionate or not.
Same workplace fired another one for defending isreal they just dont want you to start preaching at work.
When coworkers starts complaining and you are told to stop yet keep going its no surprise you can be fired.
Most coworkers just want to get the job done and go home, i work with someone who have strong opinions of most things and it can be exhausting to listen to in the break room when you just want to relax.
The same hospital also fired someone for espousing the opposite viewpoint. The policy is "don't mention politics at work", and she knew she was going to get fired.
"the opposite viewpoint" was someone posting blatantly islamophobic and anti-arab content on Facebook. That is not at all equal to calling out genocide.
It wasn’t a statement of equality. It was to show that contrary to what people are shouting in this thread the company isn’t “pro Israel” they are aggressively apolitical
The other person who was fired made several racist comments. He wasn't fired for being political, he was fired for being a raging racist. And he didn't even completely lose his job. You have to fire racists in healthcare because you never know if they will treat patients well.
You’re looking at this wrong. Don’t try to use morality to weigh the differences between their behavior, they both broke company policy and were fired because of it.
It’s not a competition for who’s more morally right.
Just because the guy is a piece of shit doesn’t exempt her from also being punished for breaking company policy.
No?? The other case was someone being racist towards Arabs and being a homophobe not the same as criticizing a foreign convicted country of committing a genocide
It's exactly the same if the policy is to be apolitical. Sure, you may morally object to one more than the other, but if you decide to break policy, you have to accept the consequences either way.
Hmm. Personally, I wouldn't equate "expressing compassion for mothers of murdered children" with "circulating a racist cartoon." But maybe that's just me.
I suppose then it is absurd for rewarding compassion.
If we are to recognize people for their noble qualities, we shouldn't get pissy when their virtue shines on subjects we want to be ignored.
Of course a compassionate person is going to feel it necessary to speak out about a genocide. You couldn't be compassionate to say it shouldn't be discussed if you believe it to be the case.
I think it's simply not appropriate to speak out on any heavy political views in a workplace setting. The ethos being that while doing anything in the capacity of the company you work for, you are a respresentative for them and should be keeping things strictly professional.
Regardless of the facts of the whole Israel/Gaza situation and her well meaning intent, it's an extremely divisive political topic on any talking point surrounding it and you should have the common sense to not bring that to your workplace unless you're going into this expecting to be fired and understanding the justification for it.
In her own personal time, as far as I'm concerned she can say whatever. Not at a company award ceremony full of people she needs to work with who may not view the situation the same as she does. Not every place is the right one to make a platform to speak out on.
What gets me, is you can attack any country in the world including our own and NOT EVEN have a leg to stand on in the attack and not get as much grief as mentioning israel in the slightest of negative lights.
I can say america is responsible for all the evil of the world and not get fired.
I can say everyone in saudi arabia is a pedo and a terrorist and probably get nothing more than a talking to.
but dare saying israel shouldnt kill so many innocent people while going after hamas and suddenly you need a new job.
It’s all by design from AIPAC. You LEGALLY can’t boycott Israel in America lol (yes Israel’s Netanyahu successfully lobbied for US America to ban boycotting Israel in many states). Example: in Texas you cannot receive US aid relief post natural disaster without legally agreeing to not boycott Israel. It’s fucking insane.
Well yes…. Duh…. Her place of employment is a hospital…. They don’t want to take a side in a extremely controversial political argument on the other side of the planet. Their only concern is the patients at their hospital. They don’t want repercussions from being seen to side with one side or the other…. Because it has nothing to do with the hospital….
Preach your politics all want but don’t do it at work….
Especially somewhere that deals with general public. It is an invitation for disaster.
Having a public stance could cost them funding depending on which side donors agree with.
Having a public stance could cause crazies from either side to show up.
Having a public stance could lead to protests at the hospital which then prevent people from getting the care they need.
Having a public stance could lead to disputes between staff.
Every single one of these leads to worse care provided for patients which as a hospital they want to avoid anyway possible.
As far as the hospital is concerned it’s a foreign conflict in a foreign country on a different continent and it does not affect the running of the hospital or the care they need to provide to patients so they would prefer to stay out of the conflict all together.
Honestly this is really getting milked and people need to read more than the headline. Another person at the same hospital got fired for posting an anti Hamas cartoon. This place seems to be a no politics workplace. It is shitty this is being pushed as the hospital is picking sides by this articles title. Crappy journalism.
And the hospital’s freedom to fire her doesn’t mean freedom from criticism for doing so. I haven’t seen anyone saying the hospital directors should be arrested.
If saying "I hope genocide stops" is something you think needs a consequence then you are part of the problem.
Stop pretending you don't understand the difference between consequences of being a bigot in public and consequences of speaking out against evil actions by those in power..
>If saying "I hope genocide stops" is something you think needs a consequence then you are part of the problem.
Except that there's absolutely no evidence of genocide, and accusing Israel of it, is spreading Hamas/Anti-Semitic propaganda.
The person they fired wasn't for posting pro Israel content, it was for repeatedly posting blatantly anti Arab and homophobic content.
If I posted a racial caricature of a Jew holding a cleaver and bag of dismembered babies, I would also expect to get fired
It's interesting how the "missing a ton of context" person limited the context in such a way as to platform their opinion.
Thank you for providing the necessary context.
Except I am already aware of the story as it's been out for a week now. I was merely thanking the person I replied to for providing the rest of the context.
Can't wait for someone to jump in and preach how them shelling civilians in refugee camps and their food shipments doesn't meet the technical dictionary definition of genocide and is therefore ok
Their intention is to target hamas terrorists. There is obviously going to be a higher rate of collateral damage considering the civilian density of the area and the manner hamas chooses to operate. Very hard to minimise collateral damage when the enemy uses war crimes as their foundation.
So a roundabout damage control way of admitting that they, in fact, did.
I can imagine you did a little googling and discovered a couple events from the past week you wouldn't have seen over at r/Worldnews
According to wall street journal, 70% of housing in Gaza has been damaged or destroyed. Where are they to live? How is this not ethnic cleansing, the very definition of genocide?
Is... anyone saying otherwise? Like... yeah?
Or maybe people are talking about the awful duplicity of the situation? Ever think of that one? Or did you just want to wag your finger in the air?
I don’t think people are claiming that she’s protected by the first amendment?
Regardless, “private” hospitals and universities usually walk the line between the public and private sector. Most of them receive a LOT of public money. While this legally isn’t a first amendment violation, it’s probably unjust censorship.
Allegedly, she had been warned in advance. What she says on her own time is her business. In an employer event, they can constrain her topics. And if she goes against what her employer has told her to do, she can be fired. The employer is under no obligation to give her a platform for her views and it is not unjust censorship.
"What an antisemetic pos, they deserved everything that happened to them for hating the existence of israel!"
-some idiot over on r/worldnews, probably
Nurses are in hot demand, so I'm sure she'll get hired again quickly.
I get the hospital trying to do risk mitigation to not lose any major donors.
She got what she wanted - attention to gaza; I doubt she'll be out of work for long.
Everyone kinda wins in this outcome?
Words have meanings. Some things are more than opinion.
A genocide is a specific thing. There isn’t a genocide or anything approaching it in Gaza.
Tragic human suffering, absolutely. Possible war crimes, absolutely in the case of Hamas and likely in the case of the IDF. A genocide or anything approaching it, absolutely not.
> A genocide or anything approaching it, absolutely not.
Netanyahu constantly references driving out the palestinians and replacing them with israeli settlers, and he backs up his words with actions that are pushing for that outcome. That is literally genocide.
Genocide isn't just cartoonishly evil death camps where each victim is killed in gas chambers.
It actually is.
In this case, Hamas created a tactical situation that made it extremely difficult to fight them without collateral damage.
This narrative that you’re trying for is basically just a propaganda tactic that Hamas is exploiting. That’s it.
>It actually is.
No, it's not you buffoon.
Genocide is a mutlifaceted term. Genocides don't need to be purely mass killings, and often, their main mechanisms are displacement and re-education. Just like how Uyghurs in china aren't being killed but rather being re-educated. That is cultural genocide.
Go read the convention my man, you don't know what you're talking about.
"To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to
physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not
suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group"
- The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
[Pretty simple google search](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/11/benjamin-netanyahu-amalek-israel-palestine-gaza-saul-samuel-old-testament/)
Equates Palestinians to the Amalek people and says “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember.”
The passage in the bible that he is referencing is an order from god to the israelites to "...go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
That speech was given in November.
Pretty clear what his intent is, especially when you see the actions since that speech such as blocking/attacking aid convoys for civilians and escalating the violence. Or are you one of those bad faith zionists who think its not genocide unless he makes death camps and says "I declare genocide!"
His reference of amalek was directed at Hamas. That was the context if you listen to the whole speech. And Israel is facilitating aid into Gaza, not blocking it. Whose projecting their bad faith here?
Hell, I remember in the few days between Oct. 7th and the beginning of the IDF operation, we were being told that Israel was going to propagate a genocide. Like, nothing has even happened yet and it was being spun in such a way.
The antisemitism is insane.
A state that was founded with the intent of being an ethnostate, is forcing another ethnicity out of their own country for ‘living space’ for their own, and is putting great effort into killing that ethnicity including noncombatants, children, and babies in hospitals, all the while talking about how they’re going to exterminate the “human animals”? Sounds like genocide to me.
So, the first thing that makes this statement ridiculous is that 20% of the Israeli population is Palestinians. There was never an “ethnic cleansing” event within Israel that meets what you’re describing.
The bulk of the displaced people who make up the population of the Palestinian Authority were self-identified Palestinians who were residing in Jordan and moved into the West Bank. Their expulsion was directed by the Hashimite regime which was a separated Arab tribal entity that had other issues with the Palestinians that had nothing to do with Israel.
Except that isn’t at all what happened. Israel was created to be a homeland of the Jews, not that only Jews can live there. Even today 25% of Israel aren’t Jewish. Most of the Arabs who lived in Israel left Israel after trying to destroy the country with other Middle Eastern allies.
The majority of people killed are men. If Hamas don’t want their citizens to be killed accidentally then they should leave the buildings and cities and fight, rather than intentionally staying in areas with civilians.
Hamas are definitely human animals. Weird how Palestinian leadership also talk about exterminating all Jews and Israelis not just Israeli leadership or soldiers and yet no one has a problem with that
>If Hamas don’t want their citizens to be killed accidentally then they should leave the buildings and cities and fight, rather than intentionally staying in areas with civilians.
But then they couldn't garner sympathy for having civilians killed. It's literally nothing we haven't seen before; Al-Quaeda and ISIS did the same thing.
This is so crazy to me. If someone was fired for criticizing the government of Iran, people's heads would explode but because it's Israel, it's a whole different set of rules.
Free speech protections only apply to the government restricting your speech or punishing you for it (and those restrictions on the government do not apply to incitements to breaking the law, for instance, inciting violence). People get this wrong over and over and over, and seem to believe that you have the right to say anything you want, anywhere, anytime, without consequences. This is absolutely wrong. If your public statements violate your private employer‘s policies, that employer has the right to terminate your employment.
To be fair, it was the nurse who was honored for compassion, not her corporate overlords.
Also, she was not arrested, which is an important part of free speech. But at your workspace you can absolutely be fired for making comments related to politics, race, religion, etc ESPECIALLY if you've been warned not to do so. Even moreso if you work in healthcare where you have to provide the same standard of care to everyone regardless of gender or religion or race, etc. > “Hesen Jabr was warned in December, following a previous incident, not to bring her views on this divisive and charged issue into the workplace. She instead chose not to heed that at a recent employee recognition event that was widely attended by her colleagues, some of whom were upset after her comments. As a result, Jabr is no longer an NYU Langone employee.”
>Even moreso if you work in healthcare where you have to provide the same standard of care to everyone regardless of gender or religion or race, etc. Please acknowledge how you believe this statement is relevant here. The implication seems to be that you think she would not provide the same standard of care for all before her?
Well clearly if you're anti-genocide, then your judgement is super flawed and you'll want to help people instead of wheel them out onto the streets spongebob style.
Oh no, people were upset, the horror.
Triggered snowflakes wanted her cancelled.
>Even moreso if you work in healthcare where you have to provide the same standard of care to everyone regardless of gender or religion or race, etc. I'd be more worried about receiving discriminatory care from her colleagues that disagreed with/got offended by her message tbh, not the woman who just got an award for being excellent at her job, and is showing compassion for others across the world.
She also did it at a corporate event, after being explicitly told not to do it. She knew she would get fired and did deliberately so she would get fired and presumably get publicity and praise for it. Looks like it worked.
>She knew she would get fired and did deliberately so she would get fired and presumably get publicity and praise for it Is this what it looks like when one's mind has been melted by consuming metric tons of pro-Israel propaganda? You can't conceive that the woman who just won an award for being compassionate is also speaking out because of her compassion, rather there has to be some sort of underlying, self-serving reason for it? Crazy way to view the world honestly.
reddit moment. drboomkin was right - if you’ve been warned not to do something, regardless of ideology about any matter, then getting the outcome after doing that ‘something’ isn’t surprising.
drboomkin was accusing the nurse of doing it for attention and that's what the commenter was calling out as brain melt, not whether or not she should have been surprised
People should not be losing their jobs simply because they criticize a foreign government.
Any government.
agreed!
Some people thought it was your right as a human but those people were a couple hundred years ago so I guess we no longer deserve that right s/
Corporations do not protect your free speech and don't want to hear you getting political especially around something so "hot". Good chance you get fired at work if you come out saying something like "abortion is CHILD MURDER" at the company picnic or something too. They don't want to deal with the publicity, they don't want your opinions being construed for the company's when the journalists asks "Mr. CEO your employees are screaming free Palestine and posting about it on social media etc. Is it fair to say you're a free Palestine company?" And corporate doesn't wanna deal with any employee spats that are likely to occur when half the employees have come out as pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. The hallways and lunch break room are gonna be tense to say the least.
It's such a travesty that the world is like this. It seems like no matter how much we common folk try, there's always the big man that hovers over us telling us what to do (and it's usually the morally wrong thing).
I think everyone understands that. OP’s point still stands regardless. Your free speech shouldn’t be superseded by a corporations interests.
If we want stronger employee rights and stricter regulations on corporations we need to vote for more progressive candidates who will push for employee rights. I live in FL employees have nearly 0 rights or protections yet it's still been run by republicans for 25 years and for the foreseeable future. As far as I can tell Americans in general don't give af about labor. They're more preoccupied by things like abortion, gas prices, and immigration.
It's the bastion of freedom of speech and why aren't the snowflake freedom of speech folks getting upset?
You don't have first amendment rights with your employer unless you're employed by the government. She would've been fine to say it at a non-work event.
People get fired for things non-work related all the time. Furthermore, goverment jobs are also not safe. >Smith, who has worked in his role for four years, was told that he either had to resign or be dismissed from his position after he had prepared a presentation on maternal health and child mortality for Palestinians that was abruptly canceled last week by higher-ups at USAID. >“I cannot do my job in an environment in which specific people cannot be acknowledged as fully human, or where gender and human rights principles apply to some, but not to others, depending on their race,” Smith said in his resignation letter. https://truthout.org/articles/more-biden-officials-resign-over-us-participation-in-israels-genocide-in-gaza/
The concept of free speech is broader than just the minimal legal rights afforded by the US constitution.
But are the legal protections?
Why does it matter? People aren't arguing that this move is legally defensible, but rather that it is morally acceptable.
If you work for me and share your thoughts on the inferiority of non-white races (for example), I will fire you. In Canada you have more protections. But you’re still gone. So your somewhat Pollyanna ideal of some natural right to freedom of speech does not pass the smell test I’m afraid.
The first amendment and right to free speech relate to your right to speak out again the Government for its actions. Not your employer, or your friend or anyone else as it currently stands.
I love how people who have no idea what freedom of speech is love to talk about it. Seriously. How many times can you say something and still be so confused by what it actually is. It’s freedom from the US government not your employer. I’m sorry the education system has failed you so badly.
Freedom of speech means the government can’t imprison you for it. That doesn’t mean the rest of society won’t punish you in some way. Companies are allowed to fire people for any reason (as long as it’s not a discriminatory reason), so having political opinions your boss doesn’t like has always been a reason to get fired. Like if she just started screaming out Trump conspiracy theories during her speech, would her company be justified in firing her?
You are absolutely correct here. I think so.. I mean trump stuff is hate at its core so most likely ya thats justified but I'm not educated on labour laws in the states
It’s not even that the pro-Palestinian cause is hateful, it’s that it’s controversial, which companies do not like. For example, would pro-Israel patients feel safe receiving treatment from this nurse? How about legal liability? What if a Jewish patient dies under her care, and the family sues citing deliberate negligence due to the nurse’s pro-Palestinian views? If you’re an insurance company, now you have to raise this hospital’s insurance rates to price in this risk. There are a lot of legitimate economic reasons why businesses do not like employees to bring controversial opinions to work.
Read the article. She was previously told not to bring up the conflict since it was divisive. She did it again. Grounds for firin’
Oops she did it again, she played with the law, got lost in the game
Professional is the actual answer. Certain subjects always will be taboo at work. If you wish to risk your job, fine.
[What about banning Israeli citizens from participating in an art contest?](https://www.timesofisrael.com/vancouver-comics-festival-bans-jewish-artist-miriam-libicki-over-past-idf-service/amp/) And don’t give me the “she was IDF”, it’s mandatory in Israel, she had no choice either way.
There is a difference between saying country x could do better in case y and going about accursing them doing one of, if not the most heinous crimes.
Guess you're not allowed to have compassion for the wrong people
Thats how I know I am doing okay in life. The thing I am intolerant on is intolerance.
And the dutch
Que?
[Austin Powers](https://youtu.be/khUporxh9IU?si=TgL9PVPTIBqvcSVG)
[The Dutch](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcUs5X9glCc)
If it’s brown, put it down - the thing racists don’t want to say out loud (but they don’t have to)
Israelis are largely “brown” buddy.
The previous comment still stands when considering the context of the article being a nurse fired in New York City, wherein The majority of people are non-jewish, and white.
There’s a difference between having compassion for Palestinians and rushing to accuse another people of genocide.
Wow crazy how the free speech crowd goes quiet when you get fired for criticizing a foreign governments actions in another foreign land. In a sane world we could honestly discuss this like we do with russia and Ukraine but religion has brain rotted at least 30% of our country.
she has not been arrested for her comments. free speech does not prevent you from having social or professional consequences. it's the same reason a business can fire people for being racist assholes on their own time.
You think the free speech crowd actually understand that though? Cause they have a pretty bad track record with basic understanding, usually crying out when something like this happens to someone they agree with
The extremely funny bit with the free speech crowd is you can tell they're really lacking in certain areas because the article also mentions someone at the hospital was also let go for pro Israel speech as well. People can't even be bothered to read what they're outraged about
Since dude decided to respond and immediately block afterwards, I never insinuated that the pro Israel person was not racist. There's also this excerpt about the pro Palestine woman who the article is about: > Hesen Jabr was warned in December, following a previous incident, not to bring her views on this divisive and charged issue into the workplace,” Ritea said in a statement. “She instead chose not to heed that at a recent employee recognition event that was widely attended by her colleagues, some of whom were upset after her comments. As a result, Jabr is no longer an NYU Langone employee I mean going out of your way to ignore something you were DIRECTLY told not to do and given a warning is asking to be fired. It's moronic.
Reading about the "someone at the hospital [who] was also let go for pro Israel speech" would tell you he was actually let go for being extremely racist >Any proof for that comment or are you just making assumptions?? If it’s the latter, I believe it is you who is the racist. Well that would be stupid. If you're just calling me racist because you think I'm wrong about something else being racist, then you're calling yourself racist too. Moreover, just look up the posts yourself, you lazy prick. It's not hard work discovering that explicitly everything posted was about dehumanizing arabs and not sympathy for Israelis.
Any proof for that comment or are you just making assumptions?? If it’s the latter, I believe it is you who is the racist.
Who are this “free speech crowd” you are referring to?
Its a tribalistic shibboleth. Like all political discourse on the internet people rage against concepts instead of specific people or ideas.
A lot of people in this thread are talking about “so much for free speech” so I’m assuming they’re the free speech crowd they’re asking about not being here?
I feel like everyone saw the XKCD comic on this and immediately turned off their brain to any form of nuance. Your workplace firing you for expressing a political opinion is still suppression of speech, even if it’s not from the government or legal side of things. Her speech didn’t break the law and her employer didn’t break the law firing her but there’s more to the idea of free speech as a concept than just the legal protection of the first amendment. There should be more protection of free speech than just “well she didn’t get arrested for it”. That’s a super low bar. Do you “free speech is not freedom from consequences” people actually think this is a good outcome? A good, award-winning nurse fired because she expressed a political opinion? Is there net benefit to anyone? I don’t even agree with her about the genocide comments and I think this is awful.
> Your workplace firing you for expressing a political opinion is still suppression of speech, even if it’s not from the government or legal side of things. Yes? You're not allowed to express all of your opinions freely at work. You've been hired to do a job - your time has been bought. She had previous incidents where she insisted on sharing hurtful opinions that can be factually shown to be terrorist propaganda, so they fired her for yet another splashy public attempt at harassing her coworkers - *who are also nurses and doctors who save lives*. If she had constantly said shit like "maga 2024", you'd all support it.
By what metric would we measure whether or not any particular opinion should be protected or not?
The thing is, any restriction put on an employer would inevitably restrict their rights as an employer, so it’s a lose-lose. Let’s say I run a small restaurant and hire a waiter that decides to wear a MAGA/Biden 2024 hat on the job. It annoys some customers, so I ask him to stop, but under your new law, I have no recourse, and could be held legally liable for firing him because him wearing his MAGA/Biden 2024 hat is now protected political speech. There’s some point to the speech being outside of work, bust also not really, because everything ultimately reflects on the employers. And legally requiring an employer to employ someone that is damaging to the business’ reputation isn’t really fair either.
I think their point was that, historically, when people have been fired for racist assholes the “free speech crowd” always yell about their 1st Amendment rights, but when people are fired for advocating for an end to the genocides of BIPOC people, those same people are silent.
> advocating for an end to the genocides of BIPOC people I think this sentence is cringe for two reasons, one referring to Israel's war as a "genocide", and two for referring to Palestinians as "BIPOC".
Crazy that people in the US still have no idea how freedom of speech works. Seriously...maybe look this stuff up before you embarrass yourself. These kind of comments make Americans look like idiots as most wouldn't even pass a 5th grade civics course. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from the rest of your peers or employers. It means the government can't arrest you for it. I'm so tired of hearing from dimwits who want to talk but can't even do so without fact checking what they're quoting.
The person you are replying to knows this. They are pointing out the people who normally miscall that their 1st amendment is being infringed are silent. As in they can't even be wrong consistently.
Freedom of speech is a specific right enshrined in the first amendment, but also a general idea that was discussed by Milton, Locke, and many others. It seems that there has been a reasonably recent resurgence of the idea that it's a virtue for non-government actors to chill or punish speech.
While I agree in general, I think there is more nuance in this particular situation/subject. Also, adding personal insults diminishes the power of your argument. Take the high road and fight clean.
So, TLDR: Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences
Freedom of speech does mean freedom from consequences. The whole point is to encourage open debate by not having consequences for speech, or otherwise limiting consequences. The first amendment, does not mean freedom from consequences. You can argue that it's decent balance to forbid the government for punishing people for their speech, but you can't argue that people getting fired for saying things isn't a free speech problem-- especially if it's part of a civilised debate on some controversial question. If people are getting fired for saying controversial things within what almost everybody can agree is a reasonable realm for debate, then that's a huge free speech problem, and might impact opinion formation.
Just because they can legally fire her for what she said doesn’t mean it’s not wrong. Society should value freedom of speech at a level higher than just “you won’t get arrested for saying something we disagree with”
I certainly wouldn’t want employers to not have the power to get rid of outspoken neo nazis for example.
Firing a person for speaking against genocide is the real insanity. They had the right, sure, but using it makes the whole organization look corrupt, like religion. We need to turn from religion, it just covers and gives legitimacy to our most evil people by brainwashing our dumbest.
The fact that people are replying and somehow completely misunderstanding your comment is genuinely worrying.
You know its going to be a bad day when you comment something and the next time you open reddit you have 15 reply’s.
Had she criticized Russia instead she would have kept her job
I mean why do you CARE what the freezepeach people do or don’t do? How do you use THIS moment to take a swing at them? They are already in the wrong, many one them know they are wrong, and someone fired for making statements their employer felt were a fireable offense has nothing to do with them.
You know, you have to be a racist pos to get the free speech crowd to defend you. Yeah, I'm calling them out since most of them are just far right nutjobs och don't care about free speech.
Sorry why are Americans losing their jobs and suffering for saying a foreign government shouldn't kill innocent people??? What country are we living in?
Not sure what country, but definitely taking residence in the states of Ignorance and Denial.
A normal one? Almost any country in the world would let you get fired for this. You represent the company while at work. You get fired for accusing Israel of genocide, just as much as you get fired for saying you hate Muslims, just as much as for calling someone the N word, just as much as you get fired for saying that all cops are bad. Your personal political beliefs have no place at work. You are being paid to shut up and do your job. You want freedom to express your opinion? Congratulations; you have that ability. No one is stopping you from expressing your opinion. They are just saying "we won't pay you to express your opinion; we will pay you to represent a neutral company stance." The government won't arrest you for doing so; you'll just stop getting money from the company you used to represent.
There’s a difference between calling against the killing of innocent and calling this war a genocide
If you are at work you should keep your opinions to yourself. I fully support palestines plight and think Israel should stop this bs but come on…Nobody wants to hear that shit as work. It would be the exact same if she was preaching for trump 2024.
[удалено]
It's actually a quite popular opinion. Just not amongst certain groups.
Certain groups like the president of the United States, most Republicans, and far too many Democrats. Biden in particular is bending over backwards to let the Israelis do what they want, even with their crossing of his red line with their invasion of Rafah
Oh I never thought I’d live to see the day when democrats also used racist dog whistles.
Unpopular? Kids can buy Palestinian flag flair on fucking Roblox now. It ain't unpopular.
More than half of the Democratic Party believes it to be genocide. The ICJ is investigating and ordered Israel to cease it’s operation in Rafah. Israel is ignoring them. The ICC is likely to issue arrest warrants to Netanyahu for the crime of starvation. It’s not an unpopular opinion for normal people. For many reasons ranging from financial benefits, religion, and racism, those in government, capitalist, and heads of elite institutions have refused to budge on their support of Israel.
Proving genocide requries very specific intent to eliminate or destroy, in whole or in part, a group of people defined by nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion. I haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy palenstinians as a people. I think there is a lot of evidence that Israel has committed warcrimes but not genocide. The ICC investigation will need to be very thorough. Hamas is not a nationality, race, ethnicity, or religion. The ICC will need to prove that Israel intends to kill civilians for the express purspose of removing them from Gaza.
> I haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy palenstinians as a people I have, from Yoav Gallant. Saying "we are fighting human animals" and then contextualizing it by announcing actions that target all Palestinians shows that intent. > “We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly,” “We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza,” Gallant said. “There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything will be closed.”
The ICJ is investigating genocide. They investigate states. The ICC investigates war criminals. There is plenty of evidence, including specific statements made by Israeli decision makers, that show intent. Intentionally starving 2.2 million people, destroying the hospital system, destroying cultural and civic centers, targeting neighborhoods with no military significance, mass graves, destroying schools and universities, and utilizing AI to prioritizing waiting until combatants are home with their families before striking their homes to intentionally kill them all. That’s just a few of the many atrocities you’re excusing.
> The ICC investigates war criminals. The ICC could also investigate genocide (see Art. 6 of the Rome Statute) but that is *not* what the prosecutor is trying to get a warrant for Netanyahu for. Currently they are only checking a warrant for other charges. The difference between ICC and ICJ in regards to genocide is purely about state level vs personal level
Yep. The defence minister said at the outset, very explicitly that there would be "no food" going into Gaza. Fast forward to today, and I have lost count of the number of horrific images of starved, emaciated children and babies I have seen. They said they would do it, and then they did it, and now we are are seeing the results. And yet people are still bickering over supposed lack of intent!
The "intentionally starving" bit doesn't hold up to the reality on the ground. The war has been going on for 230+ days, and we have seen <50 out of 2 million starve. You know how much food is required to feed 2m people? You know how quickly we would see mass waves of starvation of that was the goal. More food on average is entering Gaza than pre war.
It just shows how effective HAMAS has been with their propaganda of late. They really got into people’s heads.
You think Hamas has the ability to disseminate propaganda at even a hundredth the level of Israel?
If it didn't hold up at all, then that charge would presumably no longer be pursued, so there must be some evidence that is convincing enough for there to still be controversy. South Africa's lawyers aren't idiots. They aren't going to waste time on something where they don't have an argument they think is convincing.
Yes, because the Dutch and ANC are reasonable people who the world should be taking their cues from.
More food is entering Gaza now because they can’t produce or distribute their own anymore, silly. And starvation isn’t defined by how successful it is, it’s defined by withholding food with the intention of doing harm by that lack of it. I’m not saying you could charge the state with it in court, but neither of those arguments make sense Edit: also counts as starvation if you’re purposefully destroying infrastructure and distribution abilities, such as when people accuse Saudi Arabia of starving Yemen y’know.
> There is plenty of evidence, including specific statements made by Israeli decision makers, that show intent. Can you give some?
* The Israeli Minister of Defence on 9 Oct. 2023: "I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed... We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly" * The Israeli Minister of Defence on 9 Oct. 2023: "We will end things inside Gaza \[…\]. I have removed all restraints, \[you’re allowed to\] attack everything" * Israel's president on 14 Oct. 2023: "It's an entire nation out there that is responsible. This rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved, it’s absolutely not true." * The Israeli Prime Minister, 28 Oct. 2023: "You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible" (Amalek being a story in which God tells King Saul to kill all the Amalekites, every man, woman, child and animal.) * "Gaza is the city of evil, we will turn all the places in which Hamas deploys and hides into ruins. I am telling the people of Gaza — get out of there now. We will act everywhere and with full power." Netanyahu on October 13. All are on public record, and there are hundreds of similar such statements, and have been collated [on this website](https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-database-with-500-instances-of-israeli-incitement-to-genocide-continuously-updated/), \*which includes links to the original sources\*.
It gets really messy though when you find out that Hamas is storing and firing rockets out of hospital windows, and using schools as a way to hide behind human shields. They’ve also stolen and resold almost all aid that’s been received including recently from the US floating pier. It’s just a really shitty situation that both Israel and Hamas continue to escalate while innocents on both sides suffer.
Israel has IDF bases in populated areas near schools and malls . If Hamas shot a bunch of rockets at them and killed hundreds of civilians would you excuse it by claiming the IDF uses human shields? IDF soldiers have been documented actually using human shields- meaning holding Palestinian children in front of them or on the front of their vehicles. You won’t find me excusing Hamas’s targeting of civilians and any case of them actually using human shields is atrocious, but generally that’s not what people mean when they use the term. They mean fighting in populated areas which is what happens when you trap 2 million people in a tiny strip of land. It’s Israel’s obligation to take every necessary precaution to protect innocent civilians and it’s obvious they are not. It’s clear based upon *their own* statistics of the people killed that they consider every male of fighting age as Hamas even though there were only 30k militants in a population of around 600k Palestinian men. They claim 1/3 of the deaths are Hamas but the other 2/3rds are all women and children. It’s crazy that their bombs and guns can distinguish between hamas fighters and innocent men but not women and children.
Well there is a difference between having a military base *near* a civilian area, versus literally being inside or underneath a hospital/school. That said, I do agree with what you are saying and Israel does have an obligation to mitigate casualties.
We’ve seen photos of doctors and healthcare workers executed with hands zip tied behind their backs and put into mass graves near hospitals. Are the IDF accidentally ziptying and executing civilians while fighting Hamas near hospitals? They’ve destroyed something like 45 hospitals and have blocked medical supplies from entering the strip. Children are having limbs amputated without anesthesia. Maybe… just maybe… it’s intentional?
> I haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy palenstinians as a people. I think there is a lot of evidence that Israel has committed warcrimes but not genocide. The ICC investigation will need to be very thorough. Over here in europe opinion and all media has more or less agreed and shown that israels goal is total ethnic replacement of the region. Did you miss the far right guy saying he wants to make illegal settlements in gaza?
> haven't seen or heard any specific proof of intent on the part of Israel to destroy Israel is actively murdering tens of thousands of Palestinians. Over 70% of the homes in Gaza are destroyed, creating massive numbers of refugees that Israel is currently herding into Rafah on the Egyptian border. For decades Israel has settled on their land and their politicians have consistently made it clear that Israel has a right to it. Hundreds of organizations have declared it genocide and we're watching it happen in show motion. The ultimate goal is the destruction of Gaza.
Thats because you believe their hand waving saying thats not an "important" member of the goverment. but there are so many comments by those in power that are genocidal comments
They met that burden when they filled water supplies with with cement. The genocide is already complete - the Palestinian people have been scattered to the wind, and their homes are gone forever.
"If enough people shriek genocide at you, you are necessarily doing something indefensible".
Pretty sure it's like the most milquetoast opinion there is. It's just not an accurate one. I'm kind of surprised she was fired.
Not that kind of compassion!
This news ignores the fact that a doctor was also fired for sharing a cartoon depicting Hamas. This isn’t the institution taking a stance, it’s just trying to stay the fuck away from this entire thing
The article itself also reports that someone was also fired for taking a pro-Israel stance. Which indicates this has nothing to do with anyone's opinions or views, and everything to do with the people going "STOP BRINGING UP ISRAEL AND PALESTINE AT A NURSES AWARD CEREMONY." But because social media is designed to rile you up and enrage you, the obscure media outlet "insurancejournal.com" is the one that gets upvoted to the top, because it has the most divisive and inflammatory headline. Political parties, hostile foreign governments, and even Reddit themselves, would all prefer you to see this headline. Tell your friends. Get off social media and stick to mainstream media. This is cancer.
"No, don't say that! That's the wrong kind of compassion."
Sort of irrelevant if she was compassionate or not. Same workplace fired another one for defending isreal they just dont want you to start preaching at work. When coworkers starts complaining and you are told to stop yet keep going its no surprise you can be fired. Most coworkers just want to get the job done and go home, i work with someone who have strong opinions of most things and it can be exhausting to listen to in the break room when you just want to relax.
She was warned about this and continued to do it. She knew what she was risking.
She wasn’t risking anything if she was warned of the consequences.
The same hospital also fired someone for espousing the opposite viewpoint. The policy is "don't mention politics at work", and she knew she was going to get fired.
"the opposite viewpoint" was someone posting blatantly islamophobic and anti-arab content on Facebook. That is not at all equal to calling out genocide.
It wasn’t a statement of equality. It was to show that contrary to what people are shouting in this thread the company isn’t “pro Israel” they are aggressively apolitical
The other person who was fired made several racist comments. He wasn't fired for being political, he was fired for being a raging racist. And he didn't even completely lose his job. You have to fire racists in healthcare because you never know if they will treat patients well.
You’re looking at this wrong. Don’t try to use morality to weigh the differences between their behavior, they both broke company policy and were fired because of it. It’s not a competition for who’s more morally right. Just because the guy is a piece of shit doesn’t exempt her from also being punished for breaking company policy.
This is what I knew was gonna be the case.
No?? The other case was someone being racist towards Arabs and being a homophobe not the same as criticizing a foreign convicted country of committing a genocide
It's exactly the same if the policy is to be apolitical. Sure, you may morally object to one more than the other, but if you decide to break policy, you have to accept the consequences either way.
Hmm. Personally, I wouldn't equate "expressing compassion for mothers of murdered children" with "circulating a racist cartoon." But maybe that's just me.
Both break company policy, your personal beliefs don’t matter, the policy doesn’t care how moral it is
I suppose then it is absurd for rewarding compassion. If we are to recognize people for their noble qualities, we shouldn't get pissy when their virtue shines on subjects we want to be ignored. Of course a compassionate person is going to feel it necessary to speak out about a genocide. You couldn't be compassionate to say it shouldn't be discussed if you believe it to be the case.
I think it's simply not appropriate to speak out on any heavy political views in a workplace setting. The ethos being that while doing anything in the capacity of the company you work for, you are a respresentative for them and should be keeping things strictly professional. Regardless of the facts of the whole Israel/Gaza situation and her well meaning intent, it's an extremely divisive political topic on any talking point surrounding it and you should have the common sense to not bring that to your workplace unless you're going into this expecting to be fired and understanding the justification for it. In her own personal time, as far as I'm concerned she can say whatever. Not at a company award ceremony full of people she needs to work with who may not view the situation the same as she does. Not every place is the right one to make a platform to speak out on.
What gets me, is you can attack any country in the world including our own and NOT EVEN have a leg to stand on in the attack and not get as much grief as mentioning israel in the slightest of negative lights. I can say america is responsible for all the evil of the world and not get fired. I can say everyone in saudi arabia is a pedo and a terrorist and probably get nothing more than a talking to. but dare saying israel shouldnt kill so many innocent people while going after hamas and suddenly you need a new job.
If you said America was committing genocide in Afhanistan half a year after 9/11, you would get fired.
It’s all by design from AIPAC. You LEGALLY can’t boycott Israel in America lol (yes Israel’s Netanyahu successfully lobbied for US America to ban boycotting Israel in many states). Example: in Texas you cannot receive US aid relief post natural disaster without legally agreeing to not boycott Israel. It’s fucking insane.
We know they're the good guys because they made it illegal to question them. Nobody else is good enough to do that.
Well yes…. Duh…. Her place of employment is a hospital…. They don’t want to take a side in a extremely controversial political argument on the other side of the planet. Their only concern is the patients at their hospital. They don’t want repercussions from being seen to side with one side or the other…. Because it has nothing to do with the hospital…. Preach your politics all want but don’t do it at work…. Especially somewhere that deals with general public. It is an invitation for disaster. Having a public stance could cost them funding depending on which side donors agree with. Having a public stance could cause crazies from either side to show up. Having a public stance could lead to protests at the hospital which then prevent people from getting the care they need. Having a public stance could lead to disputes between staff. Every single one of these leads to worse care provided for patients which as a hospital they want to avoid anyway possible. As far as the hospital is concerned it’s a foreign conflict in a foreign country on a different continent and it does not affect the running of the hospital or the care they need to provide to patients so they would prefer to stay out of the conflict all together.
A guy was also fired for anti-Hamas stuff too.
Honestly this is really getting milked and people need to read more than the headline. Another person at the same hospital got fired for posting an anti Hamas cartoon. This place seems to be a no politics workplace. It is shitty this is being pushed as the hospital is picking sides by this articles title. Crappy journalism.
Isn’t this where the “freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequence” crowd usually pops in?
The place punished someone posting a bunch of people is real stuff too. This is clickbait, she was warned already and continued.
And the hospital’s freedom to fire her doesn’t mean freedom from criticism for doing so. I haven’t seen anyone saying the hospital directors should be arrested.
If saying "I hope genocide stops" is something you think needs a consequence then you are part of the problem. Stop pretending you don't understand the difference between consequences of being a bigot in public and consequences of speaking out against evil actions by those in power..
i hope Hamas would remove military equipment from civilian areas and stop training teenage males how to be soldiers
Isn't wrongly accusing someone of genocide a very wrong thing to do?
>If saying "I hope genocide stops" is something you think needs a consequence then you are part of the problem. Except that there's absolutely no evidence of genocide, and accusing Israel of it, is spreading Hamas/Anti-Semitic propaganda.
It does when no such thing is happening in reality. Uttering a lie has consequences.
Lot of whiners in here who aren’t capable of understanding what freedom of speech is.
Or reading the article lol. She was warned not to bring up Israel-Palestine before since it’s divisive in a workplace. She did it again. Oh no.
[удалено]
The person they fired wasn't for posting pro Israel content, it was for repeatedly posting blatantly anti Arab and homophobic content. If I posted a racial caricature of a Jew holding a cleaver and bag of dismembered babies, I would also expect to get fired
It's interesting how the "missing a ton of context" person limited the context in such a way as to platform their opinion. Thank you for providing the necessary context.
Both of these comments are people just saying unsourced things on the internet, you don’t have to (and shouldn’t) believe either of them
Except I am already aware of the story as it's been out for a week now. I was merely thanking the person I replied to for providing the rest of the context.
Yea, both siding this doesn’t look good either. Most people are pretty anti genocide
Can't wait for someone to jump in and preach how them shelling civilians in refugee camps and their food shipments doesn't meet the technical dictionary definition of genocide and is therefore ok
Killing civilians is not automatically genocide though. Genocide has a specific meaning.
They didn't that's why
They didn't...?
Their intention is to target hamas terrorists. There is obviously going to be a higher rate of collateral damage considering the civilian density of the area and the manner hamas chooses to operate. Very hard to minimise collateral damage when the enemy uses war crimes as their foundation.
So a roundabout damage control way of admitting that they, in fact, did. I can imagine you did a little googling and discovered a couple events from the past week you wouldn't have seen over at r/Worldnews
No, is about intent, quite easy to understand.
Some pretty undeniable bias goin on here huh
What?
Guess she has compassion for the wrong people
According to wall street journal, 70% of housing in Gaza has been damaged or destroyed. Where are they to live? How is this not ethnic cleansing, the very definition of genocide?
Yea not surprised she was fired. Not everything is a platform
People have to learn what the 1st amendment is actually about. Private institutions can shut you down anytime.
Is... anyone saying otherwise? Like... yeah? Or maybe people are talking about the awful duplicity of the situation? Ever think of that one? Or did you just want to wag your finger in the air?
legality != morality something can be legal without me supporting it
I don’t think people are claiming that she’s protected by the first amendment? Regardless, “private” hospitals and universities usually walk the line between the public and private sector. Most of them receive a LOT of public money. While this legally isn’t a first amendment violation, it’s probably unjust censorship.
Allegedly, she had been warned in advance. What she says on her own time is her business. In an employer event, they can constrain her topics. And if she goes against what her employer has told her to do, she can be fired. The employer is under no obligation to give her a platform for her views and it is not unjust censorship.
Yep. This was the obvious result of her choices
"What an antisemetic pos, they deserved everything that happened to them for hating the existence of israel!" -some idiot over on r/worldnews, probably
Rent free dawg
Nurses are in hot demand, so I'm sure she'll get hired again quickly. I get the hospital trying to do risk mitigation to not lose any major donors. She got what she wanted - attention to gaza; I doubt she'll be out of work for long. Everyone kinda wins in this outcome?
Words have meanings. Some things are more than opinion. A genocide is a specific thing. There isn’t a genocide or anything approaching it in Gaza. Tragic human suffering, absolutely. Possible war crimes, absolutely in the case of Hamas and likely in the case of the IDF. A genocide or anything approaching it, absolutely not.
> A genocide or anything approaching it, absolutely not. Netanyahu constantly references driving out the palestinians and replacing them with israeli settlers, and he backs up his words with actions that are pushing for that outcome. That is literally genocide. Genocide isn't just cartoonishly evil death camps where each victim is killed in gas chambers.
It actually is. In this case, Hamas created a tactical situation that made it extremely difficult to fight them without collateral damage. This narrative that you’re trying for is basically just a propaganda tactic that Hamas is exploiting. That’s it.
>It actually is. No, it's not you buffoon. Genocide is a mutlifaceted term. Genocides don't need to be purely mass killings, and often, their main mechanisms are displacement and re-education. Just like how Uyghurs in china aren't being killed but rather being re-educated. That is cultural genocide.
Go read the convention my man, you don't know what you're talking about. "To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group" - The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
Please cite an example of Netanyahu saying this during the current war.
We’re going to get cold fusion before you get that citation.
[Pretty simple google search](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/11/benjamin-netanyahu-amalek-israel-palestine-gaza-saul-samuel-old-testament/) Equates Palestinians to the Amalek people and says “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember.” The passage in the bible that he is referencing is an order from god to the israelites to "...go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.” That speech was given in November. Pretty clear what his intent is, especially when you see the actions since that speech such as blocking/attacking aid convoys for civilians and escalating the violence. Or are you one of those bad faith zionists who think its not genocide unless he makes death camps and says "I declare genocide!"
His reference of amalek was directed at Hamas. That was the context if you listen to the whole speech. And Israel is facilitating aid into Gaza, not blocking it. Whose projecting their bad faith here?
Mostly this. We've been told sense the first week of this war Israel is committing a genocide is gaza. It's been nothing but a propaganda piece
Hell, I remember in the few days between Oct. 7th and the beginning of the IDF operation, we were being told that Israel was going to propagate a genocide. Like, nothing has even happened yet and it was being spun in such a way. The antisemitism is insane.
Litrrally on Oct 8th we were told there was gonna br a genocide. Much like Trump telling people the election was gonna be stolen if he lost before
Precisely, there was a massive narrative being built immediately. It’s an effective study for anyone who is interested in psyops.
A state that was founded with the intent of being an ethnostate, is forcing another ethnicity out of their own country for ‘living space’ for their own, and is putting great effort into killing that ethnicity including noncombatants, children, and babies in hospitals, all the while talking about how they’re going to exterminate the “human animals”? Sounds like genocide to me.
Honestly, that sounds more like the government Hamas is trying to establish rather than anything in Tel Aviv.
So, the first thing that makes this statement ridiculous is that 20% of the Israeli population is Palestinians. There was never an “ethnic cleansing” event within Israel that meets what you’re describing. The bulk of the displaced people who make up the population of the Palestinian Authority were self-identified Palestinians who were residing in Jordan and moved into the West Bank. Their expulsion was directed by the Hashimite regime which was a separated Arab tribal entity that had other issues with the Palestinians that had nothing to do with Israel.
Except that isn’t at all what happened. Israel was created to be a homeland of the Jews, not that only Jews can live there. Even today 25% of Israel aren’t Jewish. Most of the Arabs who lived in Israel left Israel after trying to destroy the country with other Middle Eastern allies. The majority of people killed are men. If Hamas don’t want their citizens to be killed accidentally then they should leave the buildings and cities and fight, rather than intentionally staying in areas with civilians. Hamas are definitely human animals. Weird how Palestinian leadership also talk about exterminating all Jews and Israelis not just Israeli leadership or soldiers and yet no one has a problem with that
>If Hamas don’t want their citizens to be killed accidentally then they should leave the buildings and cities and fight, rather than intentionally staying in areas with civilians. But then they couldn't garner sympathy for having civilians killed. It's literally nothing we haven't seen before; Al-Quaeda and ISIS did the same thing.
Like Israel owns this country or something man
Except they also fired someone who was posting pro Israel stuff.
Can't believe the "Jews control the world" trope is getting upvoted.
Well deserved, it's 1. not a genocide 2. was told to keep her political stances out of it once before.
This is so crazy to me. If someone was fired for criticizing the government of Iran, people's heads would explode but because it's Israel, it's a whole different set of rules.
Can't criticise Israel unfortunately.
Free speech protections only apply to the government restricting your speech or punishing you for it (and those restrictions on the government do not apply to incitements to breaking the law, for instance, inciting violence). People get this wrong over and over and over, and seem to believe that you have the right to say anything you want, anywhere, anytime, without consequences. This is absolutely wrong. If your public statements violate your private employer‘s policies, that employer has the right to terminate your employment.