Protests are intended to change the actions of your own elected officials - sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, but that is why protest lies at the heart of democracy. Protests might make little difference to Hamas or Netanyahu directly, but pressure from other nation's politicians can - whatever side of the political divide you are on.
www.pbs.org
schakowsky.house.gov
Was Mr Fell and Mr Ghoole (not sure of his spelling) there in your time? Really vindictive bastards.
Quite a debate going on in the US over the latest legislation to tackle antisemitism and the fears (from both sides of the political divide) that is a threat to free speech:
House passes bill to expand definition of antisemitism amid growing campus protests over Gaza war
The legislation would broaden the legal definition of antisemitism to include the "targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity."
Some of the concerns from Dem and Rep lawmakers.
Schakowsky Statement on H.R.6090
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky (IL-09) released the following statement after voting against H.R.6090:
Some very genuine concerns that it impinges on First Amendment rights. Watching some people tie themselves in cognitive knots does show the fragility of free speech and the danger of politicization. On one hand, we have the people who demanded laws against hate speech with the intent of attacking the 'bigots' on the right - they were warned that these same powers could equally be used against them. Now, many are complaining about this legislation - perhaps they should have listened.
On the other hand, some on the right who complained that the 'woke' left was trying to take away their freedom of speech are now gleefully doing exactly the same, the hypocritical fucks. Free speech should never be a left/right issue or only supported when it suits your political views - you either believe in it or you do not.
Was going to drop this on the 'how the media works thread' but it seems to fit here with the discussion about protests.
That is the potential slippery slope - it is not clearly defined and open to interpretation and misuse. The other problem is that, in the US, free speech is highly protected - you have the right to speech that others deem racist, homophobic, sexist etc. This legislation - and similar 'hate speech' laws - seek to undermine that.
These articles offer a better description of the bill and how it is an indirect attempt to curtail speech:
Yes Mr Fell, Lingard, Druce, Day, Bleasdale, Grall, Loffler, Clog and big Bertha big tits. AKA Sister Gabriel
) movement.
I've not seen anybody on here support Hamas so, as per, you're rattling soggy shit about whilst pretending to be the voice of neutrality.
Not at all, like i said nobody is supporting hamas, 99.99999% of demonstrators arent either.
I dislike lazy and/or inaccurate posts delivered with certainty, posts which are ad hominem and posts which put distraction ahead of debate.
Naah just explaining why we end up butting heads.
I absolutely dont agree with him, Ive been firmly on the side of the Palestinian cause for many years.
