We have maneuvered the world into a place where if you speak out against Israel, in almost any way and in any forum, the “anti-Semite” label is instantly attached. It’s a neat trick and corners many people, in many walks of life, into silence.
I was outspoken in favor of Israel’s right to defend itself from any and all attacks. This is not what I had in mind.
I spoke out months and months ago that they were not engaged in genocide, because I didn’t think we were there yet.
Times change. Starvation should not be a tool of war, especially against non-combatants. Speaking out against such things should not be considered anti-Semitic, only anti-genocide, anti-starvation, pro-child, pro-human.
The “war,” such that it existed in a state vs proxy state terrorist organization manner, is effectively over. One side has killed the leadership of the other and effectively silenced their weapons. Sadly, they have chosen not to release all the hostages they kidnapped, dead or alive, and this allows a pretense for continued fighting.
I have said from the outset that this should be a minimum for the curtailment of hostilities. But, it seems larger goals are now driving the narrative, and free people should be allowed to speak out about those policies and politics without fear of reprisal or losing their job.
Lineker felt he had a fairly unique bully pulpit from which to speak and he used it. They say freedom isn’t free, because it often comes at great cost. In this instance, he appears to have accepted the cost and I, for one, will not vilify him for using his voice in an attempt to protect innocents and make wider historical and political corollaries. In fact, I applaud him for it.
The BBC, regardless of its journalistic excellence, is, at its heart, an arm of the politics of Britain. As such, it will occasionally have its thumb on the scale of justice. Lineker and the BBC were clearly on different sides of that scale, but the thumb is on the hand that feeds, and he has thus been shown the door.
I have a feeling both sides can live with the outcome and both sides will feel vindication. However, the one thing that concerns me most about this whole thing is how many people on here are championing the right and duty of the company to fire an employee for speaking out on a matter of morality and compassion.
Yes, such speech may have been “extracurricular” as far as his T&C, but I prefer to admire the man for being willing to speak out for those whose platform never really existed…or has been blown to smithereens…and having the willingness to put so much on the line to do it.
We are often very, very slow to speak out against power for the fear such power projects. However, that power is often extraordinarily quick to respond, often with devastating, pre-planned attacks. It can be chilling in both its swiftness and effectiveness, which is all part of the design of the response, in order to deter others.
Thankfully, there are still some ready to pay the price while the rest stay silent, out of fear and economic necessity.
Freedom? It’s your choice, as are your views on his ability to host MOTD, and whether the new format is better. After all, the BBC would rather have you discussing that than Lineker and your views on his firing.