CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill was invited to speak at the United Nations recently and made what seems to me some very resonable claims. He said:
[justice requires] a free Palestine, from the river to the sea
And now he is no longer a commentator at CNN since he was fired over the comments. But why is this such a radical thing to say? Why is saying Palestine should be free deserving of so much controversy, while it’s taken for granted that Jews have a right to their own state?
From Fox News:
Anne Bayefsky, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and President of Human Rights Voices, told Fox News that Hill’s speech was an “especially obscene U.N. moment that reveals the true nature of the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish animus of the modern United Nations.”
Because somehow it’s anti-Jewish to want people to have the right of self determination. Somehow it’s okay, in this lady’s mind, that you can advocate for an Israeli state, but not a Palestinian state. Somehow the state founded on terrorism, forced evictions and political pressure is okay, but the idea that a people who have been in that area for more than a thousand years, and still have deeds to their stolen houses aren’t allowed to exercise self determination.
I know we harp a lot on the double standard at play here, but it’s just so annoying and obvious. The slightest criticism of Israel is called being antisemitic or anti-Jewish, self determination of Palestinians is considered antisemetic pro Hamas propaganda, but being against Jewish self determination is basically another Holocaust.
As the late Joseph Sobran said
An anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews. Now it means a man who is hated by Jews.
It might also intrigue you that CNN who fired Hill ceo’s is Jeffrey Zucker, who himself is Jewish.