Also, if you don't sit on someone's neck, you don't have to worry about being shaken off. If you don't benefit from or justify oppression, you have nothing to fear from the uprising against it.
It's when you want to eat the cake and still have it when things get "complex", like posting walls of text that amount to "no, I don't" in context.
> like posting walls of text that amount to "no, I don't" in context.
Claudine Gay never said "no" in that part of her testimony. She described "there is only one solution intifada revolution" and "globalize the intifada" as "thoughtless, reckless and hateful language" and "hateful speech" which is "personally abhorrent to me", but didn't give a clearcut answer to the question of whether it is "indeed a call for violent armed resistance against the state of Israel, including violence against civilians and the genocide of Jews".
ELISE STEFANIK: So, based upon your testimony, you understand that this call for intifada is to commit genocide against the Jewish people in Israel and globally, correct?
CLAUDINE GAY: I will say again that type of hateful speech is personally abhorrent to me.
If she thinks itβs so hateful, why are you trying to excuse it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intifada
Also, if you don't sit on someone's neck, you don't have to worry about being shaken off. If you don't benefit from or justify oppression, you have nothing to fear from the uprising against it.
It's when you want to eat the cake and still have it when things get "complex", like posting walls of text that amount to "no, I don't" in context.