The Council on American Islamic Relations said the allegation was that the teacher had remarked, “I do not negotiate with terrorists,” when the Palestinian American student asked for a seat change.
Recent U.S. incidents involving children include the attempted drowning of a 3-year-old Palestinian American girl in Texas and the fatal stabbing of a 6-year-old Palestinian American boy in Illinois.
Other incidents include the stabbing of a Palestinian American man in Texas, the beating of a Muslim man in New York, a violent mob attack on pro-Palestinian protesters in California and the shooting of three Palestinian American students in Vermont.
Just gonna add here that Reuter’s downgrading of the word “terrorist” to “extremist” is a load of BS.
Reuter’s has zero credibility left after falsely reporting the Tel Aviv soccer fans attacking people in Amsterdam as a pogrom against Jews.
Absolute scum of the earth, if they said the sky was blue I wouldn’t believe them.
This is kind of unrelated, but I lost trust in reuters when they did an “investigative piece” on a scientist claiming he was “harassed” by patients, which was basically a hit piece on an entire illness (everyone with it). The “harassment” in question was people asking for data to be released on a study that led to disability benefits being removed. Low and behold, once the data was released (after a multiyear court battle) it was found to be very manipulated and the study went down the trash. (Study was funded by the disability insurance obviously).
Reuters never reported on the fact a court found those allegations “harassment” were “without proof”, at best, “grossly exaggerated” and done “with malicious intentions”. Or the fact the reanlyses of the data used in that study came to the opposite conclusions.
investigative piece
if a wire service disseminates opinions they then get reported as facts.
They have a single job and stepping out of their lane makes them worse than useless.
Also, their webpages usually break Wayback machine archiving, so they can absolutely fuck off right down the memory hole imo
I expect the teacher will get their presidential pardon soon.
Civil war is inches away. It might be a decade or two, but it’s also at any point almost from here on out. Prepare and organize.
She said “I don’t negotiate with terrorists”. People say that all the time as a joke. I’m not sure if the kid being Palestinian is the reason she said that.
Yes. They say that sort of thing as a joke to their friends, not to a child who they have a shitload of power over. Especially not a child who just wants to sit somewhere else.
What the fuck is wrong with you? I sure as fuck hope you aren’t in any position where you have to interact with children on a regular basis.
Yeah, I can’t envision a context that would make this an appropriate thing to say.
It’s obviously not appropriate to say to a student, but it also happens to be a colloquial expression used quite often as a generic joke response to exactly those types of requests.
That phrase alone means almost nothing since it’s used much more widely than it appears on the surface. The context is inappropriate, but that doesn’t mean the phrase was at all intended that way.
If the child were white would we be having this same conversation as it is? If the teacher was saying it to a friend outside work instead, would it be different?
If the child were white would we be having this same conversation as it is?
That’s the point, though: even if it wasn’t MOTIVATED by prejudice towards Palestinians (and let’s be honest, it probably was), not being careful about perpetuating the stereotype is in itself careless victimization at best.
I’m worried you haven’t brainstormed enough hypotheticals where this isn’t offensive. What if the teacher had their Bluetooth in and they were talking to a real terrorist? Or what if the kid’s name is Terrorists? You feel pretty foolish now, don’t you?
Excellent points. I will now wear the hat of shame. 😄
If the child were white would we be having this same conversation as it is?
Would you say the same thing if this was a black kid and the teacher refused to let them move because they were being too uppity?
Divorcing atrocities from context is a great way to deny they happen.
Depends, are we using the same phrase that’s been separated from its origin in colloquial use? Because that’s the distinction I’m making. That the phrase usage itself being tied to the racial aspect here is flimsy specifically because the phrase is widely used outside of that racial context.
So if we remove the specific thing that links the phrase here to be so bad, the racial link, would the situation be viewed differently? I don’t think it would be nearly the same. The usage in the context of teacher/student is obviously bad, it’s not an appropriate location for the phrase in any context, but that has nothing to do with the race of the student. Without more context to show it should be related, like previous racist comments from the teacher, simply assuming it is related just taints objective analysis of the situation.
Calling a Palestinian child a terrorist isn’t fucking colloquial. Why would you even suggest such a thing? What a bigoted fucking thing to say. There’s nothing flimsy here at all.
Pretending like it isn’t bigoted by divorcing it from context is fucking stupid. Without context, calling a child a monkey is fine. With context, calling a black child a monkey is bigoted as fuck. And I’m sure you’re not stupid, so you know that and are just trying to excuse what this awful racist teacher did.
Or do you call black children monkeys because calling a white child a monkey isn’t racist?
I think calling a black child a monkey without that being part of an established pattern or without reason would be racist, sure.
But if a whole kindergarten class was acting crazy, and a teacher said they were acting like moneys, and that class happened to have a black child in it, I wouldn’t think they were racist for calling that black child a monkey.
And if a news story ran that had the headline, “racist teacher calls black child a monkey,” and those were the facts presented, I’d call it rage bait.
So the question of whether this child was singled out and called a terrorist with racial intent, or we just have a teacher using a normal phrase with no racial intent seems a relevant point.
Where do you people come from where “I don’t negotiate with terrorists” is a normal phrase that teachers say to children?
I don’t even know any adults who have said something like that to each other in years.
The kid wouldn’t even have gotten the reference because they were born many years after Bush was in office.
You are internally ignoring my point, notably that the racial aspect you want to focus on may not be related AT ALL to the usage of the phrase.
You are assuming that race is related, and it might be, but the phrase is used all the time without actual terrorism being involved, so blindly assuming it is means you instantly discount alternative scenarios without considering them. Just because there appears to be a link on the sirface, that doesn’t mean there actually is.
No point in trying to discuss it further since you clearly aren’t actually trying to have a real conversation about it.
I am not ignoring your point, I am just disagreeing with it. But your idea that people who disagree with you don’t want to discuss things with you is noted.
You’re right, but some classrooms have actual terrorism. The students will scream, throw chairs, stab pencils, etc if they don’t get their way.
And in many cases the teachers can’t do anything. The principal may very well not give a damn at all and require the teachers to not only deal with it, but not report it.
I’ve seen this happen.
These people have never worked with kids. Ask any teacher, kids are terrorists. Probably shouldn’t say it to their face though.
