Bari, Did you know Michelle Goldberg at the NYT? In her 10/20 editorial she said that she went to bed believing Israel bombed a hospital and now she is not sure. She is not a stupid woman. Why immediately trust Hamas without evidence, but when strong evidence to the contrary shows up she says she is not sure who to trust. Just curious if you have insight as to her thinking.
I am listening to the podcast of experiences in Israel on 10/7, having a difficult time of it.
I decided it was time to understand The Free Press and where it came from, deciding to revisit Bari’s resignation letter to The New York Times. Read it here: https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter
And so here we are, in fact witnessing not only the horrors brought about by barbarians, but Bari’s prescient notion of where media was going.
The podcast has me screaming inside: Israel cannot move fast enough to end this abomination, and I have no sense of mercy about it.
Bari - This episode of Honestly was hard to listen to but we'll worth making the effort to better understand the horror of October 7. Thank you for all you have done to cover this awful conflict.
Bari, what would be your advice to pro-Israel millennial and Gen Z American Jews on social media? How can they best participate in the conversation? It is so sad to see Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow posts shared around to condone Hamas's terrorism and support "resistance at any cost". I'm seeing numerous Instagram posts shared by non-Jews to argue that Jewish people stand in solidarity with Palestine (and against Israel). So, what is the most effective way contribute to the free marketplace of ideas when it is turning increasingly hostile and using token "cool Jews" to promote antisemitic rhetoric?
FREE SPEECH? Like how a court slapped a gag order on the leading contender for the Republican party just because he was critical of the obviously biased judge? Of course, this isn't the first time they violated his right to free speech. But this is not about politics, is it? No, it's about FREE SPEECH DURING TIME OF WAR? You mean like how every major media outlet - AP, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, and even the one that I thought was the least biased, Reuters, ALL blamed Israel for the destruction of a hospital in Gaza - with not one shred of evidence. World leaders picked up the "official state-run media misinformation" and repeated it and that led to major riots and people dying. Tell me again, who is expressing "...such noxious views"? Tell me again about the need for FREE SPEECH IN TIME OF WAR. How did the world come to the point where we have to agree with Trotsky: “Tell me anyway--Maybe I can find the truth by comparing the lies". Yeah, tell me anyway.
Nazi Germany forced Albert Einstein to flee to the US and the US was given a treasure. The N.Y. Times forced Bari Weiss to flee and journalism was given a treasure. TFP, Strength!
Re conversation with M Walzer: This is not the way to conduct a war. He ties himself in knots: the rooftop scenario, attacking an asymmetrical enemy, caring not to harm civilians who will turn around and kill Israelis. Instead we should ask what price will Hamas pay for war crimes. This interview misses the big picture. Israel is surrounded by enemies who what Jews exterminated. Sooner or later Israel and its allies are facing world war. Radical Islamic regimes want Israel exterminated.
Re free speech: "First Amendment jurisprudence does not protect all speech. Tearing down posters in order to prevent others from seeing them, as some did at NYU, does not fall under its protections. And the government is empowered to restrict expression that has a tight and direct causal connection to specific harm." Seems as if the protesters on campus fit the bill of what's not allowed in 1A. What does from the river to the sea mean? Isn't that what Hamas' charter calls for? Pretty obvious.
It is not illegal at all (go back and read both the First Amendment and the Civil Rights Act - there is no provision to protect political beliefs - witness the withdrawals of professorships for conservative professors) - hiring decisions in a law firm are based on Judgment and the student whose offer was withdrawn demonstrated a complete lack of judgment. Ideas have consequences.
I disagree that in order to be just a war must be declared by a lawful authority. What about the resistance to a lawful authority that is humanely illegitimate, ie Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc?
U are cherry picking. There are true crimes, but where is the United outrage over Sudan? How about Iran killing protestors? How about Hamas storing weapons in schools or stealing aide supplies. U seem awfully focused on a story about Israelis and not others. I have said there are unlimited atrocities worldwide. But I still stand by the organization has been corrupted and selective in what they point out. U don’t agree with me, fine, your choice.
Before his passing, I spent a morning w General Paul Tibbetts, pilot of the Ebola Gay. Among many interesting things he said was “Don’t try to make me the symbol of the morality of war”.
For years, we've been seeing professors and scientists and authors cancelled because some tweet or comment infuriated this or that touchy group. Where were the free speech advocates then, hiding under a rock? Suddenly we have cries on campuses to kill Jews, and out come the cries of "It's free speech and must be protected!"
News flash: Freedom of speech means the government can't throw you in jail or confiscate your publications. It doesn't mean freedom of hate speech, anywhere, anytime.
These so-called protestors are intimidating and even terrorizing Jewish students. This is hate speech and frankly in some cases, hate crimes such as the Stanford instructor who told Jewish students to raise their hands, and go stand in corner, then harassed them as "colonizers." I believe he was suspended. What about being prosecuted for abusing his authority as a hate crime? I'm sure some of these students were traumatized; I would have been.
I believe people have a right to speak but not to persecute whatever group they dislike or hate or disagree with. And if there's any group I'd like to cancel, it's hypocrites, like those who only support free speech when it calls for mass murder.
There is a difference between allowing the free speech and thinking there are not consequences for using free speech irresponsibly. Let them speak but those of us who disagree should take the opportunity to withdraw job offers and to reduce our support for places that condone unbalanced responses. Words should have consequences for too long we’ve let a small band of activists to define limits of speech.
Free speech is ok for anti-semites, but it's not ok for the American public (and elected officials) to question the 2020 Presidential election vote? SMH
Bari, Did you know Michelle Goldberg at the NYT? In her 10/20 editorial she said that she went to bed believing Israel bombed a hospital and now she is not sure. She is not a stupid woman. Why immediately trust Hamas without evidence, but when strong evidence to the contrary shows up she says she is not sure who to trust. Just curious if you have insight as to her thinking.
I am listening to the podcast of experiences in Israel on 10/7, having a difficult time of it.
I decided it was time to understand The Free Press and where it came from, deciding to revisit Bari’s resignation letter to The New York Times. Read it here: https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter
And so here we are, in fact witnessing not only the horrors brought about by barbarians, but Bari’s prescient notion of where media was going.
The podcast has me screaming inside: Israel cannot move fast enough to end this abomination, and I have no sense of mercy about it.
Bari - This episode of Honestly was hard to listen to but we'll worth making the effort to better understand the horror of October 7. Thank you for all you have done to cover this awful conflict.
A person using a mask is a ???
Bari, what would be your advice to pro-Israel millennial and Gen Z American Jews on social media? How can they best participate in the conversation? It is so sad to see Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow posts shared around to condone Hamas's terrorism and support "resistance at any cost". I'm seeing numerous Instagram posts shared by non-Jews to argue that Jewish people stand in solidarity with Palestine (and against Israel). So, what is the most effective way contribute to the free marketplace of ideas when it is turning increasingly hostile and using token "cool Jews" to promote antisemitic rhetoric?
FREE SPEECH? Like how a court slapped a gag order on the leading contender for the Republican party just because he was critical of the obviously biased judge? Of course, this isn't the first time they violated his right to free speech. But this is not about politics, is it? No, it's about FREE SPEECH DURING TIME OF WAR? You mean like how every major media outlet - AP, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, and even the one that I thought was the least biased, Reuters, ALL blamed Israel for the destruction of a hospital in Gaza - with not one shred of evidence. World leaders picked up the "official state-run media misinformation" and repeated it and that led to major riots and people dying. Tell me again, who is expressing "...such noxious views"? Tell me again about the need for FREE SPEECH IN TIME OF WAR. How did the world come to the point where we have to agree with Trotsky: “Tell me anyway--Maybe I can find the truth by comparing the lies". Yeah, tell me anyway.
Nazi Germany forced Albert Einstein to flee to the US and the US was given a treasure. The N.Y. Times forced Bari Weiss to flee and journalism was given a treasure. TFP, Strength!
Re conversation with M Walzer: This is not the way to conduct a war. He ties himself in knots: the rooftop scenario, attacking an asymmetrical enemy, caring not to harm civilians who will turn around and kill Israelis. Instead we should ask what price will Hamas pay for war crimes. This interview misses the big picture. Israel is surrounded by enemies who what Jews exterminated. Sooner or later Israel and its allies are facing world war. Radical Islamic regimes want Israel exterminated.
Re free speech: "First Amendment jurisprudence does not protect all speech. Tearing down posters in order to prevent others from seeing them, as some did at NYU, does not fall under its protections. And the government is empowered to restrict expression that has a tight and direct causal connection to specific harm." Seems as if the protesters on campus fit the bill of what's not allowed in 1A. What does from the river to the sea mean? Isn't that what Hamas' charter calls for? Pretty obvious.
I'll file this speech argument under, the chickens have come home to roost file.
Also, where those Pussy Hats and the Me Too people when you really needed them.
It is not illegal at all (go back and read both the First Amendment and the Civil Rights Act - there is no provision to protect political beliefs - witness the withdrawals of professorships for conservative professors) - hiring decisions in a law firm are based on Judgment and the student whose offer was withdrawn demonstrated a complete lack of judgment. Ideas have consequences.
I disagree that in order to be just a war must be declared by a lawful authority. What about the resistance to a lawful authority that is humanely illegitimate, ie Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc?
U are cherry picking. There are true crimes, but where is the United outrage over Sudan? How about Iran killing protestors? How about Hamas storing weapons in schools or stealing aide supplies. U seem awfully focused on a story about Israelis and not others. I have said there are unlimited atrocities worldwide. But I still stand by the organization has been corrupted and selective in what they point out. U don’t agree with me, fine, your choice.
Before his passing, I spent a morning w General Paul Tibbetts, pilot of the Ebola Gay. Among many interesting things he said was “Don’t try to make me the symbol of the morality of war”.
For years, we've been seeing professors and scientists and authors cancelled because some tweet or comment infuriated this or that touchy group. Where were the free speech advocates then, hiding under a rock? Suddenly we have cries on campuses to kill Jews, and out come the cries of "It's free speech and must be protected!"
News flash: Freedom of speech means the government can't throw you in jail or confiscate your publications. It doesn't mean freedom of hate speech, anywhere, anytime.
These so-called protestors are intimidating and even terrorizing Jewish students. This is hate speech and frankly in some cases, hate crimes such as the Stanford instructor who told Jewish students to raise their hands, and go stand in corner, then harassed them as "colonizers." I believe he was suspended. What about being prosecuted for abusing his authority as a hate crime? I'm sure some of these students were traumatized; I would have been.
I believe people have a right to speak but not to persecute whatever group they dislike or hate or disagree with. And if there's any group I'd like to cancel, it's hypocrites, like those who only support free speech when it calls for mass murder.
There is a difference between allowing the free speech and thinking there are not consequences for using free speech irresponsibly. Let them speak but those of us who disagree should take the opportunity to withdraw job offers and to reduce our support for places that condone unbalanced responses. Words should have consequences for too long we’ve let a small band of activists to define limits of speech.
However, withdrawing job offers based on an applicant's beliefs is discrimination, and therefore illegal.
Free speech is ok for anti-semites, but it's not ok for the American public (and elected officials) to question the 2020 Presidential election vote? SMH