January 7, 2024
The internet has gone insane. Divergent opinions concerning the war on Gaza have resulted not only in outrageous opinions being vented, but in questionable actions being taken.
‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3028”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3028”); } }); }); }
Let’s face it: the internet has become the public’s id. The most vile and repugnant ideas are happily expressed, sometimes openly and proudly. One has to wonder: just what are these people thinking? Intelligence and education are not barriers.
Organizations like Stopantisemitism,org have been set up to fight an exponential increase on online antisemitism. Some of their work is commendable. They do expose dangerous examples of recent antisemitism.
However, some of their work is sloppy. On this page, one can see a report on Robert Sterkeson, only to see an image of the inflammatory Baptist preacher Stephen Anderson, with an SS cap Photoshopped on his head.
‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270365559-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3035”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3035”); } }); }); }
Now some members of the Jewish community are upset with Pastor Anderson — for various reasons — but Anderson is not Robert Sterkeson, and he never served in the SS.
And then there is the case of Rick Steves. Rick Steves may be hyper-liberal, but he is not antisemitic. Stopantisemitism.org, in my opinion, twisted Steve’s comments.
Stopantisemitism.org on X (Twitter) also gathers information from social media and asks people to identify the culprits so they can be fired…and then gloats about it.
Some of the comments were vile. But some did not merit being fired. In one case, a young woman is exposed for merely wearing a pro-Palestinian sweatshirt, and her identity is given out. Was that last status necessary? The girl was not on X. She was merely walking around with a political sweatshirt. Was it dumb? Yes! Did it need to be exposed internationally? No!
A lot of Stopantisemitism.org’s actions can be justified. Yet I fear it may backfire. What if someone doxxed those who work at Stopantisemitism.org?
Indeed, one Jewish man may have been counter-“doxxed,” and it is not pretty.
‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268078422-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3027”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3027”); } }); }); } if (publir_show_ads) { document.write(“
His name is Yoel Ackerman. He reported pro-Palestinian activity on his campus and is now being threatened with expulsion.
A Jewish law student is facing expulsion at Rutgers University for allegedly “doxxing” a pair of student “Hamas supporters” after they either shared or endorsed a video denying atrocities that happened on Oct. 7, a new lawsuit claims. …
The two students accused Ackerman of “doxing” them – which means exposing personal information about a person — and defaming them by referring to them as “Hamas supporters” because of the inflammatory video they shared that questioned the atrocities of Oct. 7, the lawsuit says.
First, I am not so sure that what Mr. Ackerman did was doxxing, which usually includes reporting people to employers (to get them fired) or publicly listing their private addresses. So the headline may be erroneous.
Neither am I privy to all the details of the controversy — and the news reports are biased one way or the other. But Mr. Ackerman was upset by this “atrocity denial.” The Jewish Journal has a more complete version of events that may exonerate Ackerman, but the media are all over the place. It is a study on media bias.
However, the original story of October 7 has, indeed, been questioned even by some Israelis. I myself have no doubt that atrocities occurred. But some Israelis have noted that some of the victims were the result of Israeli friendly fire, and the practice of Israeli armed forces to prevent hostages being taken, even if it means they are killed in the process. Remember that Israel exercises a degree of censorship during its wars, and even when admitted, it is done so obliquely, as this story (an Israeli source) hints at.
Casualties fell as a result of friendly fire on October 7, but the IDF believes that beyond the operational investigations of the events, it would not be morally sound to investigate these incidents due to the immense and complex quantity of them that took place in the kibbutzim and southern Israeli communities due to the challenging situations the soldiers were in at the time.
Incidents occurred. A fudging admission of friendly fire?
It is claimed that Mr. Ackerman was bullied because he reported atrocity denial to the university. In this particular case, I am more partial to Mr. Ackerman’s side. I suspect more went on.
Yet ABC7 in New York reports this ridiculous synopsis.
His lawyers have filed a lawsuit against the university, stating that the law student is being punished for allowing a culture at the school that makes life uncomfortable for Jewish students.
Uncomfortable?!
If you want to see discomfort, just look at a female liberal arts major taking a test in a mandatory calculus class, after she was drinking the night before.
This is ridiculous. Either Mr. Ackerman was being actionably harassed or he was not. Comfort is not the issue. I suspect that the problem rose to the level of harassment.
Here is more info on the problem:
The first-year Orthodox Jewish law student is facing discipline after he shared messages, including their names and photographs, with the Jewish Law School Association.
The Jewish community is fighting back, with everything at its disposal, against antisemitism. Some of those “outed,” or “doxxed,” claim that this is a suppression of free speech.
I am perplexed here.
I applaud that Jews are uniting against antisemitism, but some (not all) of Stopantisemitism.org’s actions are over the top.
Stopantisemitism.org likes to expose people who tear down the posters of kidnapped Israelis. I agree that that is despicable. But what if the other side puts up posters of dead children in Gaza to blame Israel? A few Jews might be upset with those, and might tear them down. Would they appreciate it if they were doxxed?
This is nasty business.
Should people have their lives and livelihoods destroyed because they are doxxed for being against the Jewish state, and think it was a historical mistake? It is claimed that denying the Jews a right to self-determination in Israel is inherently antisemitic. Is one anti-Welsh because he thinks Welsh independence is wrong? Yet anti-Zionism is now considered inherently antisemitic. Is one anti-Spanish if he thinks the Basque country should be free, or anti-Basque if he disagrees? What about Texas independence or Southern independence?
Mind you, I am in favor of Israel. I think Zionism is great. But are counter-opinions forbidden on social media, under penalty of losing employment? I hope Israel destroys Hamas, but some commenters don’t even want to allow the term “Palestinian.”
This is a war without courtesy. Every jot, tittle, and opinion is contested.
There was a time, before social media, when ideas were free to discuss. I guess the rule of thumb is to think forty years ahead before one posts anything. And remember that if you dox them, they can dox you.
Image via Pexels.
If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com
FOLLOW US ON
Comments are closed.