More strange and/or foul reactions
-
@jon-nyc said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
@Horace said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
"Pro Russia" is a tribal strawman anyway, obviously.
Ok, replace with “support pro-Russia policies”. The point stands.
It's not much of a point if the policy is intended to be pro-USA.
-
@jon-nyc said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
That seems nonsensical. But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt if you’d like to explain. Maybe I’m missing something.
You can be specific about the pro-Russia policies you're referring to. If their intent is to support the usa, with an incidental side effect of being advantageous to Russia as compared to an opposing policy, then a framing that the policy is pro-russia, would be rhetorically disingenuous.
-
Your implications serve your technically standing point, but they are not a generally accepted interpretation of how that language works. If a policy drafted by a politician is said to be "pro-something or other", the intent will fairly be inferred. Your point stands, as long as we limit the audience to people who don't make the common assumptions that topple it. Fair enough.
-
Like the lady from Apple, time to update the resume.
-
@taiwan_girl said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
the lady from Apple
Is no longer employed there.
How is that pendant any different from wearing a swastika?
-
What I don't understand is why they post this stuff. Is it really worth risking your career over an internet post? Are they so oblivious of opinions outside their bubble that they fail to see how offensive this stuff is to a majority of people?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
What I don't understand is why they post this stuff. Is it really worth risking your career over an internet post? Are they so oblivious of opinions outside their bubble that they fail to see how offensive this stuff is to a majority of people?
Exactly. If you look at my FB profile, you'll see a remarkable amount of silliness. NO politics, nothing controversial. I chose my username so that patients would have a hard(er) time finding me, and if they did, there's no "there" there.
The lack of judgment in these cases makes you question their overall judgment.
ETA: Also, when at work, it was rare that we had any kind of discussion bordering on politics. When you spend 5 hours at the OR table doing heart surgery, it's best to just get along, 'cos it won't be the last time you spend 5 hours with that person.
-
Except the Holocaust never happened, in these people’s minds. So this is the biggest attack on Jews in 300 years!
-
@LuFins-Dad said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
Except the Holocaust never happened, in these people’s minds. So this is the biggest attack on Jews in 300 years!
Also, what we're seeing is much more like Germany in 1933 than in 1940-45.
-
This current situation is nothing like the holocaust, or WW2 for that matter. It's a completely different type of conflict.
-
@jon-nyc said in More strange and/or foul reactions:
Serious question, I’d like all to weigh in.
If publicly pushing the ‘river to sea’ message should render her unemployable as she’s a threat to Jewish patients, what about a physician who advocates the Jolly solution on their social media?
I don't think it's fair to call this the Jolly solution, but people should not be advocating mass killings of civilians. I'd say people who talk about the Palestinian people, not Hamas, as being sub-human or similar should be treated much the same way as those describing the Jews in this way.