Emory University put Umaymah Mohammad through ‘one of the most dehumanizing’ experiences of her life as a new front opens in the silencing of pro-Palestinian voices
You are not being reasonable or arguing in good faith if you have to lie about the subject to prove your point. I don’t need a language lesson from someone who does not have the capability to even entertain that their reading is wrong or to try to see the point the other side is making
You are now lying about the article. She objected because she was being put in a position where she could have to work with that professor in medical school. This objection is why she was suspended
I am lying about the article by… directly quoting the reason for the suspension written in the article. The objection is not why she was suspended. The singling out of a professor is why. I quoted the specific reason she was suspended.
You quoted the part of the article where the author deliberately muddles the reason so that it can be viewed like the school suspended her for her objection.
It is the school who is in the wrong. You are blatantly lying about their reframing.
I think the school IS wrong, but again you are accusing me of lying when I quoted the exact part of the article that states why she was suspended.
BUT she was not suspended because she refused to work with or for the IDF. That is a bs title.
I stand by this even if you add the word “objected” to it. Because thats not why she was suspended. No matter how many times you try to assert this.
I explain how I read the title, how many people would read that title. If you state that you object to being forced to work with IDF soldiers in the title, one would assume the story involves some detail of a situation where you were forced to work with IDF soldiers. When it turns out this was just a made up hypothetical, it is not a lie to point that out and call it BS.
IDF soldiers can come and work in America. And if they work in your medical school, you could have to work with them.
If you need to invent this narrative to make your point, your point fails to stand on its own.
You’re even lying about a fictional example I gave you. In that example I found a rock in my soup. Plain and simple. There’s a bowl on the table full of soup and in that soup I have identified a rock. If I attempt to eat that soup as is there is a chance I will eat a rock. The food inspector is shutting that place down. No one is taking you seriously.
The rock in this example is “being forced to work with IDF soldiers”. There is no rock in the soup, just something that resembles one in the restaurant. There is not even a second visible rock. No one has forced you to eat rocks.
This is what it sounds like when you have a situation where the medical student objects to working with IDF soldiers when we have no proof she is being put in that position.
And by the way, I have not watched the interview and I guess you have not either. We don’t actually know if it is true that she has stated that “objects to working with IDF soldiers”.
That professor, she continued, “participated in aiding and abetting a genocide, in aiding and abetting the destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza and the murder of over 400 healthcare workers, and is now back at Emory so-called ‘teaching’ medical students and residents how to take care of patients”.
It’s possible that it could just be the author’s words summarizing the above as “objecting to working with IDF soldiers”
I’m ignoring the rest of your rant as it’s just attacking me because I’m not pro-Palestinian enough for you. Apparently agreeing that the school is in the wrong is somehow still pro-genocide. Maybe if you can accept the fact that blindly accepting every content just because it paints Palestinians in a good light or Israel in a bad light is not a mindset, we can finally have a real conversation.
Let me put it to you this way. See if you can answer these questions.
Do you believe this author to have a pro-israel or pro-palestine bias? I am not asking about her objectivity. You can have a bias but still be an objective journalist. I have no reason to believe she is not at least trying to maintain objectivity.
If there existed other IDF soldiers at this university, do you think the author would have mentioned it in the article or left it out?
If there was verifiable details that the student was put in a position to work with IDF soldiers, do you think the author would have mentioned it in the article or left it out?
The end result is the author trying to make you believe that a university suspended a student for objecting to a hypothetical nonexistant situation that is not currently happening. When in reality, the stated reason for her suspension is also in the article and different from what the title is suggesting. That’s misinformation. It’s misinformation regardless of whether it is pro-Israel or pro-Palestine.
I pointed this out and people agree with me. If this view was pro-genocide, you think the people in Lemmy would vote it to the top?
You’re not pro-Palestinian. You’re a fascist. You managed to fool a number of unsuspecting people and you thought I would be an easy mark too.
Now you’ve tried to walk it back. You say you’re against the university while still going after the student as if this is some neutral objective viewpoint from nowhere. You bullshit in your argument and ignore what’s inconvenient in my argument. But you can’t bring yourself to stop lying.
This is the truth that is supported by the article:
A Palestinian American medical student objected to working alongside IDF soldiers. The university suspended her
At the same time, Mohammad told her Democracy Now! interviewer: “One of the professors of medicine we have at Emory recently went to serve as a volunteer medic” in the IDF. That professor, she continued, “participated in aiding and abetting a genocide, in aiding and abetting the destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza and the murder of over 400 healthcare workers, and is now back at Emory so-called ‘teaching’ medical students and residents how to take care of patients”.
The professor is the IDF solider. She objects to working with IDF soldiers. I object to pretending you are arguing in good faith.
Fuck off fascist!
Here’s your moment of zen.
Is Timothy Pratt pro-Palestinian? Let’s look at how he chose to end his article.
Back at Emory, Brown, Mohammad’s doctoral adviser, said she was proud of her student. “She’s doing what she’s supposed to do – holding her field accountable to its stated ideals,” Brown said, adding: “She will be Dr Mohammad, one way or the other.”
Yes. And that’s part of how he wrote an article that is true. He has a viewpoint from somewhere.
You are not being reasonable or arguing in good faith if you have to lie about the subject to prove your point. I don’t need a language lesson from someone who does not have the capability to even entertain that their reading is wrong or to try to see the point the other side is making
I am lying about the article by… directly quoting the reason for the suspension written in the article. The objection is not why she was suspended. The singling out of a professor is why. I quoted the specific reason she was suspended.
You quoted the part of the article where the author deliberately muddles the reason so that it can be viewed like the school suspended her for her objection.
I think the school IS wrong, but again you are accusing me of lying when I quoted the exact part of the article that states why she was suspended.
I stand by this even if you add the word “objected” to it. Because thats not why she was suspended. No matter how many times you try to assert this.
I explain how I read the title, how many people would read that title. If you state that you object to being forced to work with IDF soldiers in the title, one would assume the story involves some detail of a situation where you were forced to work with IDF soldiers. When it turns out this was just a made up hypothetical, it is not a lie to point that out and call it BS.
If you need to invent this narrative to make your point, your point fails to stand on its own.
The rock in this example is “being forced to work with IDF soldiers”. There is no rock in the soup, just something that resembles one in the restaurant. There is not even a second visible rock. No one has forced you to eat rocks.
This is what it sounds like when you have a situation where the medical student objects to working with IDF soldiers when we have no proof she is being put in that position.
And by the way, I have not watched the interview and I guess you have not either. We don’t actually know if it is true that she has stated that “objects to working with IDF soldiers”.
It’s possible that it could just be the author’s words summarizing the above as “objecting to working with IDF soldiers”
I’m ignoring the rest of your rant as it’s just attacking me because I’m not pro-Palestinian enough for you. Apparently agreeing that the school is in the wrong is somehow still pro-genocide. Maybe if you can accept the fact that blindly accepting every content just because it paints Palestinians in a good light or Israel in a bad light is not a mindset, we can finally have a real conversation.
Let me put it to you this way. See if you can answer these questions.
The end result is the author trying to make you believe that a university suspended a student for objecting to a hypothetical nonexistant situation that is not currently happening. When in reality, the stated reason for her suspension is also in the article and different from what the title is suggesting. That’s misinformation. It’s misinformation regardless of whether it is pro-Israel or pro-Palestine.
I pointed this out and people agree with me. If this view was pro-genocide, you think the people in Lemmy would vote it to the top?
You’re not pro-Palestinian. You’re a fascist. You managed to fool a number of unsuspecting people and you thought I would be an easy mark too.
Now you’ve tried to walk it back. You say you’re against the university while still going after the student as if this is some neutral objective viewpoint from nowhere. You bullshit in your argument and ignore what’s inconvenient in my argument. But you can’t bring yourself to stop lying.
This is the truth that is supported by the article:
The professor is the IDF solider. She objects to working with IDF soldiers. I object to pretending you are arguing in good faith.
Fuck off fascist!
Here’s your moment of zen.
Is Timothy Pratt pro-Palestinian? Let’s look at how he chose to end his article.
Yes. And that’s part of how he wrote an article that is true. He has a viewpoint from somewhere.