Listen: Marc Lamont, Marc Lamont Hill, Israel discussed on Steve Dahl
"Ben Shapiro show. So Marc Lamont hill CNN commentator. He went to the UN a couple of days ago, and he said, something blatantly anti semitic in media news. Marc Lamont hill has now been fired from CNN. He was fired for the reason because he went in front of the UN in front of a bunch of genocidal, anti Jewish anti semitic countries. And he said from the river to the Palestine will be free. Okay. That is a HAMAs slogan. The slogan is that Israel will be fully destroyed. And that all these years in the area. We'll be killed or expelled into the sea. That is literally what that means. This is not a dog whistle. This is just saying stuff out loud as a dog whistle. That's not making a vague reference. Marc Lamont hill tried to claim no I was just saying human rights for everyone. Really? That's why you in front of me unjustified terrorism against Israelis. I mean, he literally did this. And then he went out and spouted a slogan that receives wild applause from the Iranians from the Palestinians from everyone who wants to see the union pushed into the sea. So hell did all of this? And it sparked immediate backlash why because it is a HAMAs slogan. Eventually Lamont hill. Then then tweeted out, he's not he's not anti semitic said, I do not support anti-semitism killing Jewish people or any of the other things attributed to my speech. We didn't attributed to your speech. You said it is not attributed. It's just anti-semitism. And he said what I meant by riverton see was not a call to destroy anything or anyone who was a call for Justice, both in Israel, and in the West, Bank, Gaza speech. Very clearly, and specifically said those things actually this week should not clearly and specifically say any of those things is just a blatant attempt to rewrite all of this stuff. I mean, this is what he actually said at the UN conference to western mythology. Black resistance to American apartheid. Do not completely threw non-violence rather slave revolts in self defense and tactics otherwise divergent from Dr king or Mahatma Gandhi or equally important to preserving safety and attaining freedom if we are to operate and true solidarity with the Palestinian people, we must allow the Palestinian people same range of opportunity and political possibility his talking about slave revolts. And he's comparing that to Palestinians committing acts of terror in defending it, so all of this is just a lie and so CNN fired him. Now this race a lot of questions from people about whether he ought to be fired. Here is the rule on whether you ought to be fired because we've had several situations in which commentators have said things or tweeted things, and then they were fired. So I ended the Roseanne firing the reside offended the Roseanne firing at the time is because I said that NBC did not have evidence that she was a quote, unquote racist. And then she said something about Valerie Jarrett that was on its face racist. She is the character NBC does not have to take a million dollar loss. In order to keep promoting show that is going to get destroyed in the ratings that is not the responsibility once the core business. She said something unacceptable, and it was new material that's about Sarah Jong who's a columnist for the New York Times that she should not. In fact, be fired. The reason was not because she hadn't said terrible things in the past. It was because people dug up old stuff she'd said in the past the New York Times had hired her knowing all that stuff was there. And so there was no new information being presented to the New York Times. It was just a social media mobbing in the same way. I defended James gone, right? Who had a bunch of all bad tweets bad jokes about pedophilia and such? And I said Disney knew about this at the time. This is just a social media mobbing. So my basic rule is private companies. First of all have right to do whatever they want number two. If you from the brand of the company, the company has a responsibility to shareholders to take you out number three. The question is whether a new piece of information has been emergent, or whether this is just ginned up outrage about a piece of old Twitter. Marc Lamont hill. Did something new. We knew the Marc Lamont hill did all this stuff years ago. If for example, people said, you know, Marc Lamont hill back in two thousand eight defended Louis Farrakhan, you should be fired. Probably not probably not. I don't like Marc Lamont hill. I think he's terrible. But probably not. But this is a new thing that he did a new piece of information, so CNN not only have a rights fire him. This is a piece of open anti-semitism. Now, I have to tell you. It's unbelievable. Believable. How exactly the folks on the left have covered the Marc Lamont hill statements, and it just demonstrates that for the left as long as you say and smack things about Israel. We pretend that it's not anti semitic. Hey, the actual headline from the Washington Post was this CNN fires Marc Lamont hill in Waco, Vermont's criticizing Israel and calling for a free Palestine that is not why they fired him. They fired him because what he said was anti semitic. It wasn't that. He was criticizing Israel and calling free free Palestine if you actually want to quote, the entire phrase hoped the entire phrase, this is just an outright lie. There are people who are in favor of a two-state solution who say, yeah, we want a free Palestine, you know, who it'd be among those people members of the Israeli cabinet who have called for two state solution for nine thirty years is not going to happen, by the way because the Palestinians don't want a two state solution. But that's not Lamont hill. Say he's had free Palestine from the river to the sea the river, meaning the Jordan river, the meaning the Mediterranean Sea. You know, what's in the middle of their. That would be Israel right there. So he's talking about the complete destruction of the state of Israel. Let's say blatantly anti semitic statements, and the Washington Post covers it as though it's just controversial not really it's mostly just controversial medic person come on. And the hill does the exact same thing. So the hills headline was suggested something like. Suggested exactly the same thing that it was just a controversial statement, the Marc Lamont hill hadn't done anything truly terrible and said anything anti semitic. It was just you know, a little weird. It was just a little weird. Again, the the willingness of so many on the left to overlook anti-semitism coming from the left by saying, well, it's not just anti Israel. It just shows you that. When people say, I'm not answer medic. I'm just anti Israel. Maybe that's true. But there has not yet been an anti Semite who is not anti Israel. Here's here's the headline from the hill. CNN cuts ties with Marc Lamont hill after Israel comments. They didn't people make comments on Israel all the time on CNN. That is not exactly what happened. Now. Contrast. This media coverage of Marc Lamont hill comments with the media coverage of Tucker Carlson, and you can see the double standard is the same Washington Post. That said Michael hill was only being criticized for being anti Israel that Washington Post claimed yesterday the media critic Eric that Tucker Carlson of Fox News was a Neo Nazi favorites. What proof do they have the Tucker Carlson is a Neo Nazi or is complicit with Neo Nazis or is working within Nazis. They're only proof is an article from BuzzFeed. Talking about how the daily Stormer which is a Neo Nazi website run by a piece of crap named Andrew anglin feature articles about Tucker Carlson like two hundred and sixty five times when Paul said, where's the host like handing, for example forever. Parents Trump's talking points Carlson has consistently pursued storylines and polemical themes that police racists Carlson hypes alleged crimes and dislocation caused by immigration. He demands the US elites defend the cliche. The diversity is our greatest strength. He circulates bogus material about South Africa's alleged injustices against white farmers any cheers Trump's hardline immigration policies. Okay. How any of those things are are Neo Nazi material is beyond me. But that didn't stop Eric from basically labeling Tucker Carlson complicit and working with Neo Nazis for saying things that are basically conservative slash populist, and then lumping, so let's just get this straight. Marc Lamont hill says the Jews should be killed between the Reverend see when you say free Palestine from the river to the sea. You're talking about a union Ryan area called Palestine were no Jews live, and the destruction of the Jewish state as an entity that according to the wash. Post is just controversial anti-israeli commentary Tucker Carlson, however for saying that he disapproves illegal immigration and wonders whether diversity is in fact strength, or whether we have to have some common set of shared values that makes them Neo Nazi. The media bias when it comes to the the accounts of particular viewpoints is truly astonishing truly truly astonishing injustice. Second. I wanna talk about a couple of controversies with regard to Twitter, but first let's talk about a game. You simply cannot win credit cards that you've been racking up that credit card debt. And now, you look at that schedule of payments, and you see that."