500
Mia Khalifa fired from Playboy for her pro-Hamas posts after the Israel attack
(www.businesstoday.in)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
500 points (89.6% liked)
Not The Onion
12304 readers
301 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This smells really fishy. They quote her directly when it comes to her taking the side of Palestinians in general (aka, the oppressed population) but when it comes to her supposed support of Hamas in particular, all there is in the article is a paraphrase of THEIR version, not a direct quote.
Sounds like a political hit job.
There’s this idea going around that directly quoting the thing a person got cancelled for is spreading whatever hate they were spreading.
The obvious side effect of such a practice is that people who get silenced never get their side of the story told.
I find that sketchy as well
Actually, it turned out that the article DOES directly quote what she was cancelled for. It was just that the article made it sound like she'd declared her undying loyalty to Hamas when in actual fact she hadn't even mentioned them. I'm just gonna copy a comment of mine from earlier today explaining the whole thing:
That's all. If you're very inattentive or deliberately misinterpreting her words, you'd think that she was endorsing Hamas as "freedom fighters".
But if you DO pay attention and know anything, you'll notice that she never mentions Hamas and know that Hamas aren't usually the ones filming any of their atrocities. Add her clarification from a few days later and it's clear that she did NOT endorse Hamas and is the victim of character assassination because she had the temerity to speak up against the apartheid regime:
And what bullshit would that be? Anything that would be a fireable offense?
That's not rhetorical or sealioning btw. I'm genuinely asking since I'm not familiar with her at all other than clears throat some of her early work several years ago..
I don't know so I won't speak to that, and no judgement of right or wrong here, but this is the US. Anything is or can be a fireable offense so long as it's not one of a few specific protected things. In almost every state. So making a post on social media pretty much regardless of content can be a fireable offense if the company deems it so.
Just because it's technically allowed doesn't mean it's not reprehensible treatment of a mostly blameless person, though. I'm not sure it even IS technically allowed, actually. She might have a good libel and wrongful termination/breach of contract case..
As I said, no judgement from me one way or another. Also we have no way of knowing what kind of contract she had or whether there was some kind of morality clause. Maybe this violated it. Maybe not.
All I was saying was that, whether right or wrong, employment can be terminated pretty much anywhere in the United States for any reason as long as it's not a protected thing, which this almost certainly is not. So saying something is or isn't a fireable offense probably needs some context. Because anything could be a fireable offense if the company thinks it is.
You're right, I should have been more clear about expressing what I actually meant in the first place. I meant should but said would lol
I don't think a reputable publication would post hate speech verbatim, even if it's from someone else. There might be an archive somewhere?
Not true. They post hate speech from right wing politicians verbatim all the time.
As for the tweets being somewhere else, it seems that it's this:
To the inattentive and/or wilfully misinterpreting, that might come off as an endorsement of Hamas as "freedom fighters", but note that she doesn't mention Hamas by name and that Hamas aren't usually the ones filming any of their atrocities.
Add her clarification from a few days later and it's clear she's talking about regular people filming the atrocities of the Israeli oppressors and isn't referring to terrorism at all, unless you define it broadly enough to include the Israeli state terrorism:
As I suspected, she didn't do what they said she did. She just had the temerity to speak up against the apartheid regime.
I tried to read all her Tweets despite not having a Twitter account and yes, none of them mention Hamas or support Hamas. She's just telling people to tear down the wall.
Apparently, that's only okay in Berlin and other places. Clearly tearing down the siege wall surrounding Gaza or the apartheid wall that has plagued Palestinians and ruined their agricultural lands for years and years is a big no-no.
Down with the goddamn fucking walls.
Not to mention thousands being forced to go through military checkpoints to reach the nearest schools and hospitals, if they're lucky enough to even be allowed to pass.
Tweet deleted, but referenced in this news source
I believe the use of the term "freedom fighters" is the point of contention.
She meant freedom fighters, not necessarily Hamas. She seems to have also clarified in another tweet what she meant by that.
Yes this exact quote is featured two posts up in the thread