Shortly before CNN publicly announced that they’d fired him as a commentator, Temple University prof Marc Lamont Hill was attempting to explain on Twitter that just because he said all that anti-Israel, anti-Semitic stuff doesn’t mean he’s anti-Israel or anti-Semitic:
Yesterday, I gave a speech at the UN in which I critiqued Israel’s polices and practices toward Palestinians. It’s baffling how people are not responding to the critique, but instead responding to things I didn’t actually say.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
In my speech, I talked about the need to return to the pre-1967 borders, to give full rights to Palestinian citizens of Israel, and to allow right of return. No part of this is a call to destroy Israel. It’s absurd on its face.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
I believe in full rights for all citizens. I believe in safety for all citizens. I believe in self-determination for all citizens. This is not an anti-Semitic position.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
While I have my own beliefs about one vs two state solutions (I prefer one), it is not my job as an outsider to decide for Palestinians or Israelis. Regardless of the resolution, however, Palestinians cannot be denied freedom, self-determination, or human rights.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
Unfortunately, we are in a moment where any critique of the Israeli government is called anti-Semitic. Any call for Palestinian freedom is seen as an attempt to diminish Israel freedom. This does not have to be, nor should it be, the case.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
I concluded my remarks with a call to free Palestine from river to sea. This means that all areas of historic Palestine —e.g., West Bank, Gaza, Israel— must be spaces of freedom, safety, and peace for Palestinians.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
Yeah … that’s not what it means.
Anyone who studies the region, or the history of Palestinian nationalism, knows that “river to sea” has been, and continues to be, a phrase used by many factions, ideologies, movements, and politicians.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
Notably, all those factions, ideologies, movements, and politicians have anti-Semitism in common.
The phrase dates back to at least the middle of the British Mandate and has never been the exclusive province of a particular ideological camp. The idea that this is a Hamas phrase is simply untrue.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
Hamas must’ve missed that memo.
It’s also ABSURD and illogical to suggest that a speech that explicitly called for redrawing borders and granting full citizenship for Palestinians IN Israel was also calling for its destruction. People either didn’t listen to the speech or they’re being dishonest.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
You called for the destruction of Israel. That is not criticism that's violence.
— Michael C (@LAdfsaddict) November 29, 2018
I did not. I have not. And I would not. https://t.co/2Imr32XWws
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
You did. You have. And you would. https://t.co/RspkNQSbJ1
— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) November 30, 2018
Yep to all three.
You literally did so at a debate we had in Germantown, Marc. I have the receipts. Your dehumanization, dismissal of, and condescension toward Jews has got to stop. Hopefully the collective outrage at your remarks will lead to some soul searching on your part. https://t.co/ddAcMN7lmt
— Chloé S. Valdary ? (@cvaldary) November 29, 2018
But let him be clear:
I normally would ignore the current drama, but it’s actually important to me that I’m clear and understood. As a matter of principle.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
And as a matter of principle, he believes in wiping Israel off the map.
I support Palestinian freedom. I support Palestinian self-determination. I am deeply critical of Israeli policy and practice.
I do not support anti-Semitism, killing Jewish people, or any of the other things attributed to my speech. I have spent my life fighting these things.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) November 29, 2018
Did his life begin recently? Because this doesn’t exactly scream “Crusader Against Anti-Semitism”:
"I do not support anti-Semitism, killing Jewish people, or any of the other things attributed to my speech. I have spent my life fighting these things.” – Marc Lamont Hill pic.twitter.com/lJdbiyE71s
— Cameron Gray (@Cameron_Gray) November 29, 2018
Or does Hill expect us to believe that he didn’t realize what Farrakhan stood and continues to stand for? Actually, that might be exactly what he expects us to believe:
During an appearance on Fox News in 2008, Hill said he couldn't be sure if Farrakhan was an "anti-semite" and that Farrakhan's quote calling Judaism a "gutter religion" had been taken "out of context" pic.twitter.com/HGT8qrXO2k
— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) October 19, 2018
Wow. Based on that, we never would’ve guessed that Dr. Hill’s been fighting anti-Semitism all these years. That must be what’s made his fight so effective.
Don’t make fun. He clearly has anti-semitism in a headlock right here. https://t.co/tFrmOSU3xv
— Adam Trahan (@AdamTrahan) November 30, 2018
Dr. Hill’s such a swell guy.
The guy meets with Farrakhan AND wants people to believe his tweet wasn’t antisemitic. His ignorance defense just became absurd.
— POTTER ON POLITICS (@PotterOnPoltics) November 30, 2018
And insulting
— Cameron Gray (@Cameron_Gray) November 30, 2018
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member