|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 21:19:08 GMT
You really can't make this stuff up. nypost.com/2024/01/15/metro/pro-palestinian-protesters-target-nycs-memorial-sloan-kettering-cancer-center/Anti-Israel protesters target NYC cancer hospital for ‘complicity in genocide’ Jan. 15, 2024 Excerpts Thousands of anti-Israel protesters descended on Manhattan to demand a cease-fire in Gaza on Monday, with some even targeting a respected hospital for cancer patients over its alleged “complicity in genocide.” The protesters shouted “Shame!” at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center while patients received treatment on the Upper East Side before targeting a Starbucks and a McDonald’s restaurant they reportedly accused of making “meals for genocide.” “Make sure they hear you. They’re in the window,” an organizer said on a bullhorn outside Sloan Kettering, according to footage posted on social media. Someone in the crowd beat a drum as scores chanted: “MSK [Memorial Sloan Kettering] shame on you, you support genocide, too.” The demonstrators took time during the event, advertised as a “Flood Manhattan for Gaza MLK Day march for healthcare,” to berate those at the cancer center, which is also a pediatric hospital. During the march from Union Square to Grace Mansion, protesters also targeted Mt. Sinai Medical Center at 98th Street for “supporting Zionism” and “genocide.” End Excerpts Gosh, everyone knows that it is very tasteful to protest against cancer patients and doctors, as well as children in a pediatric hospital.
|
|
|
Post by jeffersoncody on Jan 16, 2024 21:36:04 GMT
It's disgracful, these pro-Palestine, Hamas enabling protestors are the scum of the earth. Did you hear about this marsatax? David Teeger dismissal cuts across South African politics
Pro-Israel comments from former Under-19 captain draw Cricket South Africa into choppy waters By Firdose Moonda
Way I see it, this boy is a very courageous youngster. David Teeger's removal as South Africa's Under-19 captain, a week before the home age-group World Cup being held here, has popped the cork on the connection between sport and politics at a high-octane moment for the country.
Officially, Teeger was stood down over concerns for his and other players' safety after he expressed views in support of the Israeli army at an awards ceremony in October last year. Complaints against him dedicating his Rising Star trophy to "the young soldiers in Israel" were lodged by the Palestinian Solidarity Alliance (PSA) and several stakeholders in South African cricket, including sponsors, clubs and concerned citizens, who demanded his removal from the national team. CSA appointed an independent advocate, Wim Trengrove, to determine whether Teeger had breached their code of conduct and it was found that he had not. But the story did not end there.
Since Teeger's comments, the South African government has taken Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on a charge of genocide, and pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli demonstrations have taken place countrywide. In almost all instances, these protests have been peaceful, including at Newlands on January 3 on the first day of the New Year's Test between South Africa and India, and a mass march on January 13, though there have been occasional instances of police involvement. Several sources confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that they expect picketing at the Under-19 World Cup to be organised, non-violent and outside the stadium, with no access to the players. The PSA confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that they have applied for the right to protest and expect no objections. CSA's official reason for Teeger's removal as captain, however, was to mitigate the risk of "conflict or even violence" during the tournament. CSA's CEO Pholetsi Moseki told ESPNcricinfo that the decision had been taken to "lower the temperature", even though a recently concluded Under-19 triangular series between South Africa, India and Afghanistan was played at a club ground in Johannesburg, Old Edwardians, without any obvious security concerns.
Instead, it seems there is an ideological reason for Teeger's removal, which is not so serious that he cannot be part of the squad but serious enough that he is considered not fit to lead it. When Trengrove was appointed, on November 26, it was to determine whether Teeger's acceptance speech had breached the code of conduct of either CSA or his provincial team, Lions. His report referenced Teeger's constitutional right to freedom of expression, and concluded that he had not participated in any unbecoming or detrimental conduct. On December 7, CSA confirmed that Trengrove's findings had been "received, considered, and accepted" and Teeger was cleared to continue as Under-19 captain. Five weeks later, that changed.
In the time since, South Africa presented their arguments to the ICJ. On the same day as their submission, CSA's board met and, the following day, it was announced that Teeger would be removed as captain, citing the security threat. That rationale was immediately met with suspicion. "It was political" were the words used by the Afrikaans weekly Rapport on their front-page lead, while a spokesperson for the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) criticised the move as "shameful".
In Teeger's response to Trengrove, submitted in November last year, he had stated: " My personal and honestly held view is that Israel and its soldiers have not committed genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity." His view, he added, was "held by many people and democratic governments around the world", and could not be construed as support for genocide, "because in my view Israel is innocent of all these allegations".
On Tuesday last week, South Africa's sports minister Zizi Kodwa addressed the Under-19 team, handed over the national flag and in a seemingly impromptu speech said: "Whatever you do now, you are no longer yourselves. You are ambassadors for South Africa." It's not unthinkable that, with the knowledge of the ICJ case and Kodwa's words, CSA was forced to consider whether Teeger would be the best captain for the national Under-19 side in the current circumstances. One could imagine a similar upshot if, say, an England captain had been stood down for making homophobic statements, given the UK's stated advocacy for LGBTQI+ rights. It has been learnt that Teeger was asked to stand down last week and refused. He has also privately rejected requests for a retraction or an apology for his statements. At a CSA board meeting on Thursday night, it was decided to remove Teeger as captain and the message was communicated to the team on Friday morning. Where CSA messed up - not for the first time - was with their messaging and timing. Instead of communicating the debate around Teeger as captain, they issued a statement on security threats that appears to be disingenuous, and have since refused to comment further despite it leading to damaging accusations of anti-Semitism. They could and should have been honest about the reasons behind their decision, for themselves and for Teeger.
Far from turning the spotlight away from Teeger, it has now been shone directly onto him. At the age of just 19, he has become - at least in some circles - the face of an issue that ought to be way beyond the remit of a national captain of any age. Ultimately, there is a duty of care that CSA has failed to discharge in allowing this row to escalate in such a fashion. Teeger is young, and hopes to forge a long career in cricket. This does not preclude his statements from scrutiny beyond the boundary, but he does not deserve to be the symbol of this situation. www.espncricinfo.com/story/david-teeger-dismissal-cuts-across-south-african-politics-1416791
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 21:45:50 GMT
These people hate the West as much as they hate Israel. That's why they vandalize an American veterans cemetery in Los Angeles, demonstrate outside California's Disneyland, disrupt a Christmas tree lighting at New York's Rockefeller Center, block traffic on New York's Brooklyn Bridge, protest at the 9/11 memorial in New York, try to breach the White House in DC, disrupt the UK's Armistice Day (called Veteran's Day in the US) remembrance ceremonies in London, and, now, protest against cancer patients and doctors at New York's Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 21:49:24 GMT
It's disgracful, these pro-Palestine, Hamas enabling protestors are the scum of the earth. Did you hear about this marsatax? David Teeger dismissal cuts across South African politics
Pro-Israel comments from former Under-19 captain draw Cricket South Africa into choppy waters By Firdose Moonda
Way I see it, this boy is a very courageous youngster. David Teeger's removal as South Africa's Under-19 captain, a week before the home age-group World Cup being held here, has popped the cork on the connection between sport and politics at a high-octane moment for the country.
Officially, Teeger was stood down over concerns for his and other players' safety after he expressed views in support of the Israeli army at an awards ceremony in October last year. Complaints against him dedicating his Rising Star trophy to "the young soldiers in Israel" were lodged by the Palestinian Solidarity Alliance (PSA) and several stakeholders in South African cricket, including sponsors, clubs and concerned citizens, who demanded his removal from the national team. CSA appointed an independent advocate, Wim Trengrove, to determine whether Teeger had breached their code of conduct and it was found that he had not. But the story did not end there.
Since Teeger's comments, the South African government has taken Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on a charge of genocide, and pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli demonstrations have taken place countrywide. In almost all instances, these protests have been peaceful, including at Newlands on January 3 on the first day of the New Year's Test between South Africa and India, and a mass march on January 13, though there have been occasional instances of police involvement. Several sources confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that they expect picketing at the Under-19 World Cup to be organised, non-violent and outside the stadium, with no access to the players. The PSA confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that they have applied for the right to protest and expect no objections. CSA's official reason for Teeger's removal as captain, however, was to mitigate the risk of "conflict or even violence" during the tournament. CSA's CEO Pholetsi Moseki told ESPNcricinfo that the decision had been taken to "lower the temperature", even though a recently concluded Under-19 triangular series between South Africa, India and Afghanistan was played at a club ground in Johannesburg, Old Edwardians, without any obvious security concerns.
Instead, it seems there is an ideological reason for Teeger's removal, which is not so serious that he cannot be part of the squad but serious enough that he is considered not fit to lead it. When Trengrove was appointed, on November 26, it was to determine whether Teeger's acceptance speech had breached the code of conduct of either CSA or his provincial team, Lions. His report referenced Teeger's constitutional right to freedom of expression, and concluded that he had not participated in any unbecoming or detrimental conduct. On December 7, CSA confirmed that Trengrove's findings had been "received, considered, and accepted" and Teeger was cleared to continue as Under-19 captain. Five weeks later, that changed.
In the time since, South Africa presented their arguments to the ICJ. On the same day as their submission, CSA's board met and, the following day, it was announced that Teeger would be removed as captain, citing the security threat. That rationale was immediately met with suspicion. "It was political" were the words used by the Afrikaans weekly Rapport on their front-page lead, while a spokesperson for the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) criticised the move as "shameful".
In Teeger's response to Trengrove, submitted in November last year, he had stated: " My personal and honestly held view is that Israel and its soldiers have not committed genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity." His view, he added, was "held by many people and democratic governments around the world", and could not be construed as support for genocide, "because in my view Israel is innocent of all these allegations".
On Tuesday last week, South Africa's sports minister Zizi Kodwa addressed the Under-19 team, handed over the national flag and in a seemingly impromptu speech said: "Whatever you do now, you are no longer yourselves. You are ambassadors for South Africa." It's not unthinkable that, with the knowledge of the ICJ case and Kodwa's words, CSA was forced to consider whether Teeger would be the best captain for the national Under-19 side in the current circumstances. One could imagine a similar upshot if, say, an England captain had been stood down for making homophobic statements, given the UK's stated advocacy for LGBTQI+ rights. It has been learnt that Teeger was asked to stand down last week and refused. He has also privately rejected requests for a retraction or an apology for his statements. At a CSA board meeting on Thursday night, it was decided to remove Teeger as captain and the message was communicated to the team on Friday morning. Where CSA messed up - not for the first time - was with their messaging and timing. Instead of communicating the debate around Teeger as captain, they issued a statement on security threats that appears to be disingenuous, and have since refused to comment further despite it leading to damaging accusations of anti-Semitism. They could and should have been honest about the reasons behind their decision, for themselves and for Teeger.
Far from turning the spotlight away from Teeger, it has now been shone directly onto him. At the age of just 19, he has become - at least in some circles - the face of an issue that ought to be way beyond the remit of a national captain of any age. Ultimately, there is a duty of care that CSA has failed to discharge in allowing this row to escalate in such a fashion. Teeger is young, and hopes to forge a long career in cricket. This does not preclude his statements from scrutiny beyond the boundary, but he does not deserve to be the symbol of this situation. www.espncricinfo.com/story/david-teeger-dismissal-cuts-across-south-african-politics-1416791Yes, I heard about it. Thanks for posting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2024 21:58:14 GMT
I'll admit to being mildly curious how someone born in 1945 knows how it feels to perceive Nazi Germany in 1939.
The article doesn't look great, though I maintain the situation over there is worse. It doesn't specify why they targeted the hospital either. I'd be curious to learn why, as recently protesters in Toronto were criticized for targeting a Jewish owned business Indigo (which I've never known to be a Jewish business, just a business) because its CEO recruits Canadians to fight for the IDF. So, unfortunately I cannot help but wonder who's really the target here; all those poor hospital patients + old women and their little dogs too, or, say, someone on the board of directors or the property owners who're involved in something the public does not know about.
Notice in the first sentence of the article they're referred to as "anti-Israel protesters" although the criticism is "complicity in genocide". So, I'd be curious to hear from the organizers of the demonstration what they're targeting and why, because it seems a little too low-reaching fruit to present critics of Israel as obstructionists of caring for patients with cancer. Protests and demonstrations tend to have a point, so why this? I don't want critical thinking to get lost in the shuffle here. Even the article quotes someone as shouting “MSK shame on you, you support genocide, too”. Are we wondering why? Right or wrong, these accusations don't just fall out of thin air.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 22:18:41 GMT
I'll admit to being mildly curious how someone born in 1945 knows how it feels to perceive Nazi Germany in 1939. The article doesn't look great, though I maintain the situation over there is worse. It doesn't specify why they targeted the hospital either. I'd be curious to learn why, as recently protesters in Toronto were criticized for targeting a Jewish owned business Indigo (which I've never known to be a Jewish business, just a business) because its CEO recruits Canadians to fight for the IDF. So, unfortunately I cannot help but wonder who's really the target here; all those poor hospital patients + old women and their little dogs too, or, say, someone on the board of directors or the property owners who're involved in something the public does not know about. Notice in the first sentence of the article they're referred to as "anti-Israel protesters" although the criticism is "complicity in genocide". So, I'd be curious to hear from the organizers of the demonstration what they're targeting and why, because it seems a little too low-reaching fruit to present critics of Israel as obstructionists of caring for patients with cancer. Protests and demonstrations tend to have a point, so why this? I don't want critical thinking to get lost in the shuffle here. Even the article quotes someone as shouting “MSK shame on you, you support genocide, too”. Are we wondering why? Right or wrong, these accusations don't just fall out of thin air. One article speculates that it's because Sloan-Kettering has cooperated with Rambam Medical Center in Haifa, Israel (presumably on medical research). www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/pro-palestinian-protesters-shout-shame-at-complicit-nyc-cancer-center/Another article reports that it's because Sloan-Kettering has accepted money from "Zionist" billionaires: An organizer for the pro-Palestine group Within Our Lifetime attempted to explain their rhetoric on X, accusing the hospital of accepting money from pro-Israel billionaires. "Sloan Kettering accepted a 400 million dollar donation from billionaire Zionist Ken Griffin, the largest in their history. This was after he threatened pro-Palestine student activists at Harvard with revoked job offers. Our medical institutions are not innocent bystanders." www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12967767/Thousands-anti-Israel-protesters-swarm-NYC-cancer-hospital-accusing-complicity-genocide-patients-receive-urgent-care-witness-says-thought-1939-Germany.htmlWhatever the reason, protesting against cancer patients and children in a pediatric hospital is a wonderful precedent, and I hope we see more of it in the future. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2024 22:25:52 GMT
I'll admit to being mildly curious how someone born in 1945 knows how it feels to perceive Nazi Germany in 1939. The article doesn't look great, though I maintain the situation over there is worse. It doesn't specify why they targeted the hospital either. I'd be curious to learn why, as recently protesters in Toronto were criticized for targeting a Jewish owned business Indigo (which I've never known to be a Jewish business, just a business) because its CEO recruits Canadians to fight for the IDF. So, unfortunately I cannot help but wonder who's really the target here; all those poor hospital patients + old women and their little dogs too, or, say, someone on the board of directors or the property owners who're involved in something the public does not know about. Notice in the first sentence of the article they're referred to as "anti-Israel protesters" although the criticism is "complicity in genocide". So, I'd be curious to hear from the organizers of the demonstration what they're targeting and why, because it seems a little too low-reaching fruit to present critics of Israel as obstructionists of caring for patients with cancer. Protests and demonstrations tend to have a point, so why this? I don't want critical thinking to get lost in the shuffle here. Even the article quotes someone as shouting “MSK shame on you, you support genocide, too”. Are we wondering why? Right or wrong, these accusations don't just fall out of thin air. One article speculates that it's because Sloan-Kettering has cooperated with Rambam Medical Center in Haifa, Israel (presumably on medical research). www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/pro-palestinian-protesters-shout-shame-at-complicit-nyc-cancer-center/Another article reports that it's because Sloan-Kettering has accepted money from "Zionist" billionaires: An organizer for the pro-Palestine group Within Our Lifetime attempted to explain their rhetoric on X, accusing the hospital of accepting money from pro-Israel billionaires. "Sloan Kettering accepted a 400 million dollar donation from billionaire Zionist Ken Griffin, the largest in their history. This was after he threatened pro-Palestine student activists at Harvard with revoked job offers. Our medical institutions are not innocent bystanders." www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12967767/Thousands-anti-Israel-protesters-swarm-NYC-cancer-hospital-accusing-complicity-genocide-patients-receive-urgent-care-witness-says-thought-1939-Germany.htmlWhatever the reason, protesting against cancer patients and children in a pediatric hospital is a wonderful precedent, and I hope we see more of it in the future. LOL Interesting speculations. I figured there'd be a reason other than pro-Palestinian protester's utter distain for treating children with cancer.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 22:41:48 GMT
Interesting speculations. I figured there'd be a reason other than pro-Palestinian protester's utter distain for treating children with cancer. They are idiotic reasons. These protesters are doing things to offend the very people they want to persuade.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2024 22:47:33 GMT
Interesting speculations. I figured there'd be a reason other than pro-Palestinian protester's utter distain for treating children with cancer. They are idiotic reasons. These protesters are doing things to offend the very people they want to persuade. Maybe the idea is to disrupt instead of putting the opinions of people they want to persuade on a pedestal. It's difficult to say without leaning into the phrase itself, but who do you mean by "the very people they want to persuade"?
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 22:56:07 GMT
They are idiotic reasons. These protesters are doing things to offend the very people they want to persuade. Maybe the idea is to disrupt instead of putting the opinions of people they want to persuade on a pedestal. It's difficult to say without leaning into the phrase itself, but who do you mean by "the very people they want to persuade"? The US government has influence on the government of Israel. If I were a pro-Palestinian protester, I would be urging Americans to telephone, email, and so forth, our politicians to get them to persuade Israel to agree to a ceasefire. I would not want us to go out of our way to offend Americans or other Westerners.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2024 23:10:22 GMT
Maybe the idea is to disrupt instead of putting the opinions of people they want to persuade on a pedestal. It's difficult to say without leaning into the phrase itself, but who do you mean by "the very people they want to persuade"? The US government has influence on the government of Israel. If I were a pro-Palestinian protester, I would be urging Americans to telephone, email, and so forth, our politicians to get them to persuade Israel to agree to a ceasefire. I would not want us to go out of our way to offend Americans or other Westerners. Do you think the US government were the audience this was intended to reach? I'd have thought maybe the NYC Mayor, and the reason would be to force a reaction. I'm not so sure the point is a specific demand as much as it is to push back against the assumption that things are normal. I'm speculating of course. With or without Israel in the mix, protesting in general is an interesting subject because it expects one to go through certain channels to achieve a result. Consider MLK and the ordeal in Alabama. Could you see letters and phone calls budging that situation? I actually agree with you that that would be my instinct to do, but I think we're socialized to overestimate its chances of working.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Jan 16, 2024 23:44:43 GMT
The US government has influence on the government of Israel. If I were a pro-Palestinian protester, I would be urging Americans to telephone, email, and so forth, our politicians to get them to persuade Israel to agree to a ceasefire. I would not want us to go out of our way to offend Americans or other Westerners. Do you think the US government were the audience this was intended to reach? I'd have thought maybe the NYC Mayor, and the reason would be to force a reaction. I'm not so sure the point is a specific demand as much as it is to push back against the assumption that things are normal. I'm speculating of course. With or without Israel in the mix, protesting in general is an interesting subject because it expects one to go through certain channels to achieve a result. Consider MLK and the ordeal in Alabama. Could you see letters and phone calls budging that situation? I actually agree with you that that would be my instinct to do, but I think we're socialized to overestimate its chances of working. Do you think the US government were the audience this was intended to reach?
Of course I am only speculating. But the protesters carry signs demanding a ceasefire, and the only party that might be able to convince Israel to accept a ceasefire is the US government. (By the way, I personally am against a ceasefire. I want Israel to completely destroy Hamas.) With or without Israel in the mix, protesting in general is an interesting subject because it expects one to go through certain channels to achieve a result. Consider MLK and the ordeal in Alabama. Could you see letters and phone calls budging that situation?Yes. It was before my time. But, from what I understand, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, Americans repeatedly saw peaceful protesters marching against Jim Crow and being brutally attacked by the police using water hoses and billy clubs. This gradually changed the attitude of the American people, as well as that of President Johnson. The result was laws against Jim Crow and in favor of voting rights for blacks.
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jan 17, 2024 0:04:19 GMT
THIS will show those cancer patients!
:-/
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Jan 17, 2024 0:09:43 GMT
These people continue to demonstrate that they are shitbags. It's only one side's supporters doing this.
What do they think they are accomplishing? Do they think harassing or beating up American Jews or disrupting people's lives is going to make people across the world stop fighting? How fucking dumb are they?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2024 0:18:41 GMT
Do you think the US government were the audience this was intended to reach? I'd have thought maybe the NYC Mayor, and the reason would be to force a reaction. I'm not so sure the point is a specific demand as much as it is to push back against the assumption that things are normal. I'm speculating of course. With or without Israel in the mix, protesting in general is an interesting subject because it expects one to go through certain channels to achieve a result. Consider MLK and the ordeal in Alabama. Could you see letters and phone calls budging that situation? I actually agree with you that that would be my instinct to do, but I think we're socialized to overestimate its chances of working. Do you think the US government were the audience this was intended to reach?
Of course I am only speculating. But the protesters carry signs demanding a ceasefire, and the only party that might be able to convince Israel to accept a ceasefire is the US government. (By the way, I personally am against a ceasefire. I want Israel to completely destroy Hamas.) With or without Israel in the mix, protesting in general is an interesting subject because it expects one to go through certain channels to achieve a result. Consider MLK and the ordeal in Alabama. Could you see letters and phone calls budging that situation?Yes. It was before my time. But, from what I understand, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, Americans repeatedly saw peaceful protesters marching against Jim Crow and being brutally attacked by the police using water hoses and billy clubs. This gradually changed the attitude of the American people, as well as that of President Johnson. The result was laws against Jim Crow and in favor of voting rights for blacks. I read an MLK letter not long ago for a project. He referenced disruptive action being necessary for dialogue. Without disruptive action, you're really just protesting in designated sanctioned spaces where politicians can ignore you. Protesting elsewhere disrupts the flow of things and that's when politicians and law enforcement have to notice. Provoking the reaction seemed like the point of those marches with MLK. I don't know much. Like you it was before my time, but I sure reckon it was not phone calls and letters to the governors that did it. I'll have to check again but I believe Birmingham was refusing a Supreme Court decision that recognized desegregation in schools as unconstitutional, but they stuck to it. Point is I've my doubts phone calls and letters are enough when even the supreme court isn't always enough. The letter I refer to is actually MLK writing from jail and letting fellow men of the cloth know that they've got a lot of nerve criticizing him and other protesters for being outside agitators but not the conditions that created the need for those protests in the first place. Sorry. I think it's an interesting topic. Lets just say I have my doubts about the effectiveness of letters and phone calls, despite it being my initial reaction to say that's the way.
|
|