"The single greatest threat to free speech at this point in time is Israel and its supporters" - American political scientist Professor John Mearsheimer.
Why should you expect in general that someone who agrees with you on one issue also agrees with you on other issues? The idea that Israel is the greatest threat to free speech at this point in time is as offensive to some people as the idea that Russia is fighting a just war in Ukraine is to some other people.
Their message seems to suggest that the claim is worth more because of who it is attributed to. Without Mearsheimer's name, it's just an utterly generic observation.
The attribution would make sense if Mearsheimer had actually said something novel, or if his association somehow made the statement more credible.
Mearsheimer says many reasonable things, but would you really want to cite him as an authority on any topic given his track record of spouting utter nonsense?
The darkness is always where the light is again found.
The people who caused this situation are burning all their bridges on this. There will be a turnaround.
If boycotts are allowed against Israel, we'll probably see the other side of the coin. How demonstrations and boycotts are promoted by foreign powers.
It's incredible that a foreign country has so much power over US politicians.
"The single greatest threat to free speech at this point in time is Israel and its supporters" - American political scientist Professor John Mearsheimer.
If you cite John Mearsheimer, people will assume that you're also a zigger who subscribes to his view that Russia is fighting a just war in Ukraine.
If that isn't the case, you might want to find a less discredited source for your anti-Israel quotes.
Why should you expect in general that someone who agrees with you on one issue also agrees with you on other issues? The idea that Israel is the greatest threat to free speech at this point in time is as offensive to some people as the idea that Russia is fighting a just war in Ukraine is to some other people.
Their message seems to suggest that the claim is worth more because of who it is attributed to. Without Mearsheimer's name, it's just an utterly generic observation.
The attribution would make sense if Mearsheimer had actually said something novel, or if his association somehow made the statement more credible.
I agree with Mearsheimer on his US-Iran war takes, but I also agree that regarding Ukraine-Russia war he has no idea what he is talking about.
World is not black and white.
Mearsheimer says many reasonable things, but would you really want to cite him as an authority on any topic given his track record of spouting utter nonsense?
Mearsheimer can go stuff himself.
[flagged]
The country has gone batshit crazy. I've lost all hope for the future. This one wasn't even Republicans only. Scary stuff.
The darkness is always where the light is again found. The people who caused this situation are burning all their bridges on this. There will be a turnaround.
I like how you think
[flagged]