Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion via
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion via
The Jewish people have one tiny place in the world where they are responsible for their own fate. thinks that this one tiny place is one tiny place too many. He is VERY SORRY if he used the wrong words in order to make his position clear.
“Rather than hearing a political solution, many heard a dog-whistle that conjured a long and deep history of violence against Jewish people. Although this was the furthest thing from my intent.”
This is a good apology and would have saved his CNN contributorship (rightfully so). Should put this particular fracas in the rearview.
Thank you, for this: "Rather than hearing a political solution, many heard a dog-whistle that conjured a long and deep history of violence against Jewish people. For that, I am deeply sorry."
Daily News | Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion
Of course he apologized. Now all of y’all running around talking about how this was a “game changer”...
1. Israel ≠ Israeli gov 2. Criticizing Israeli gov over its treatment of Palestinians ≠ anti-semitism 3. I criticize the gov exactly because I love Israel 4. Hill's phrase choice was poor; he apologized; let's move on & support his call for a one state
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion via
Good piece, I’m not even convinced that Dr. Hill needed to apologize. He’s a noted rights activist who probably didn’t fully know the history of the phrase. Let’s focus on actual antisemitism. There’s a lot of it right now.
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion
That said, 's apology this afternoon strikes the right note, and crucially shows that he has listened and taken Jewish concerns seriously (rather than dismissing them as bad faith). It's much better than his initial Twitter response.
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion
I also spoke with someone familiar with anti-Israel activism (as a former activist), that the reference often implies ethnic cleansing of Jews in addition to the destruction of the state. Unclear to what degree Hill knew this connotation. His apology
Was Marc Hill advocating the violent destruction of Israel? His language seemed to suggest it, but in an apology for that language he says no
Marc Lamont Hill: I’m sorry my word choices caused harm | Opinion #SAHElaw
I do not agree with those who conflate being pro-Palestinian rights with being anti-Semitic. I nevertheless applaud this piece from , which is one of the clearest demonstrations of responsible civil discourse I've seen in a while
"At the time, I believed that these demands made in the speech sufficiently reflected my belief in radical change within Israel, not a desire for its destruction."
Marc Lamont Hill apologizes.