• Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Could you fucking stop spamming this garbage propaganda?

    Everyone except the filthy Zionists knew that Pro-Palestinian rhetoric is covered by the freedom of speech.

    Essentially this article is Zionists complaining that “we have to respect other people? But mooom I don’t want to”

    Fuck off and breathe in a a cactus

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      Everyone except the filthy Zionists knew that Pro-Palestinian rhetoric is covered by the freedom of speech.

      1. Pro palestine and anti-zionism are different concepts

      2. This is the UK where we don’t have a fetishised version of free speech

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Pro palestine and anti-zionism are different concepts

        My point exactly. This was Pro-Palestinian rhetoric, which is now being painted as Anti-Zionist rhetoric, for obvious reasons.

        From the article:

        An employment tribunal in the UK has concluded that holding the belief that Israel’s actions against Palestinians amount to apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide are “worthy of respect in a democratic society”.

        That’s Pro-Palestinian beliefs.

        This is the UK where we don’t have a fetishised version of free speech

        I’m Finnish, not American.

    • StarlightDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      It is also worded in such a way as to compare it to the Forstater judgement because Kath Viner has to work in transphobia to every part of the Guardian