NewDayRocks

My comment is that the title is blatantly false.

It's already a stretch to say volunteering medical services for the IDF makes you a soldier, and yes it's a lie to say she was forced to "work" with soldiers.

But, let's give you the benefit and say is just semantics and the first part is accurate (it's not)

The title is STILL blatantly false because the school did NOT suspend her for refusing to work with this professor. The (arguably unjustified) suspension is unrelated.

What a strange hill to die on.

No where in the article does it say they work at the same faculty. You simply do not know this to be true.

She called him out publicly for volunteering for a foreign military currently enacting a genocide. It's a big stretch to call that "outing" or "public harassment".

And nowhere does the headline claim something different.

Except the headline does not say this.

Any reasonable person reading the headline would think the university is forcing her to work with the IDF and suspended her for refusing.

But like you just made my point for me, she was suspended for the calling out part.

I don't agree she should have been suspended, but the headline is 100 percent false.

He's a Professor at her medical faculty. That means she has to work with him to get her degree.

Maybe this is an English issue, but generally students learn from, not work with their teachers. But again, the article does not actually mention he is her professor, only that they are at the same school. We don't know that they have any interaction at this school.

She refused to do that.

The university suspended her.

Except that's not why she was suspended. They suspended her for giving an interview where she calls out the professor for volunteering to provide medical services for the IDF. Since she was leading the campus protests, this was considered targeted harassment.

The title is wrong and misleading. A more accurate title would be "University student suspended for outing a pro-Israel professor in interview", but i guess truth doesn't get clicks.

So I had a teacher in HS that worked at NASA. Was I working alongside NASA scientists when I was 15?

Furthermore, the article never specified that she was HIS student. They may have never interacted at all.

I can accept she doesn't want to be affiliated in any way with Israel (good luck with that), but the title puts two sentences together where the first is false and the second is unrelated.

A Palestinian American medical student objected to working alongside IDF soldiers. The university suspended her

The title says working alongside IDF soldiers. It's not implying anything.

I like how you ignore the second sentence though to make a false point

Is the title implying or not implying that her suspension is related to the fact that objected to working alongside IDF?

Explain to me how being a student is considered "working alongside" with a professor simply because they are both at the same school?

To everyone not reading this article: "working along side IDF soldiers" in this case means being a student at a university where one professor had volunteered for a short stint to be a medic for the IDF (because, you know, Oct 7 happened)

She got suspended because she outed him (though not by name directly) in an interview and opened him up to possible harassment. The suspension is questionable and we can debate the limits of free speech in this case.

BUT she was not suspended because she refused to work with or for the IDF. That is a bs title.

It helps that when the left are in power things run normally, quietly, boring, so that three same news items can run daily.

With this administration every day is a new law being broken.

This argument isn't even relevant because the premise that Trump was just a little worse than Harris is incredibly disingenuous.

You might have a point if the two were really that close, but the reality is that Kamala was just not as left as you'd like her to be.

It is the Russian way

You just move to a county with actual Healthcare as part of your retirement. Won't even need 5 mil.

Kamala reached out to Republican war criminal elites

You could just say Republicans. She reached out to the highest ranking Republicans with name recognition she could to have them speak to their base. The base that isn't going to listen to her directly and will not care about no name republican politicians.

The point is she tried to get disenfranchised R voters to switch over, the same thing Bernie is doing. One gets upvoted the other gets crucified.

I'm glad he is doing this because i agree with this strategy, but can someone explain to me why the online political strategists (in this case lemmy) seem to approve Bernie reaching across the aisle but seem appalled when Kamala tried to do the same?