I have not seen one review or discussion that “destroys” tanehisi coates. He said Israel is an apartheid state based on what he witnessed in the West Bank. I have not seen one person dispute the conditions in the West Bank he described. Not one. He said most Americans don’t actually know the conditions in Israel because they are told that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. He says he felt lied to about the conditions he saw in the West Bank and he thinks most Americans don’t know about those conditions. Finally he said most Americans don’t know about those conditions because the American media doesn’t have on Palestinians to present their story of the conditions. So the public has no idea. Again those were his main points and I have yet to see anyone even address them. Let alone destroy those points.
One can admit Trump was right about a number of things - Mlim immigration, the border, and Iran - without abandoning an intense concern for his pathology.
These guys spent 8 minutes supposedly discussing ta nehisi Coates and they didn’t once address anything Coates has said about Israel. They discussed some guy’s reaction to Coates. They discuss Coates only went there for 10 days. They discuss the cbs interview. Then they go on to say he is racist against white people but they never show one thing he said or wrote. Not one thing. Ta nehisi Coates grew up poor and went Howard university but didn’t graduate. How is that ivory tower?
So to say ta nehisi Coates goes around the world declaring Jim Crow is everywhere or that his political writing career was focused on finding Jim Crow in everything and that’s why he thinks that describes Israel is a lie. It’s not destroying him. Instead of addressing what ta nehisi has said and wrote about Israel, his critics seem to attack his presumed ideology, or his presumed ignorance, or his presumed arrogance. But they don’t actually directly address what he has said or wrote at least I have not seen it.
You should talk to Abigail Schrier about her recent piece in the Free Press.
Dana Carvey level impressions! Amazing!
Very interesting.
I have not seen one review or discussion that “destroys” tanehisi coates. He said Israel is an apartheid state based on what he witnessed in the West Bank. I have not seen one person dispute the conditions in the West Bank he described. Not one. He said most Americans don’t actually know the conditions in Israel because they are told that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. He says he felt lied to about the conditions he saw in the West Bank and he thinks most Americans don’t know about those conditions. Finally he said most Americans don’t know about those conditions because the American media doesn’t have on Palestinians to present their story of the conditions. So the public has no idea. Again those were his main points and I have yet to see anyone even address them. Let alone destroy those points.
John Mcwhorter.
Thhhhhhankkkk youuuu
So disappointed to watch Glenn Lowry’s take on this book.
One can admit Trump was right about a number of things - Mlim immigration, the border, and Iran - without abandoning an intense concern for his pathology.
These guys spent 8 minutes supposedly discussing ta nehisi Coates and they didn’t once address anything Coates has said about Israel. They discussed some guy’s reaction to Coates. They discuss Coates only went there for 10 days. They discuss the cbs interview. Then they go on to say he is racist against white people but they never show one thing he said or wrote. Not one thing. Ta nehisi Coates grew up poor and went Howard university but didn’t graduate. How is that ivory tower?
Im one of those democrats who switched parties.
So to say ta nehisi Coates goes around the world declaring Jim Crow is everywhere or that his political writing career was focused on finding Jim Crow in everything and that’s why he thinks that describes Israel is a lie. It’s not destroying him.
Instead of addressing what ta nehisi has said and wrote about Israel, his critics seem to attack his presumed ideology, or his presumed ignorance, or his presumed arrogance. But they don’t actually directly address what he has said or wrote at least I have not seen it.
Y'all do know people see and hear what republicans say right??
Ami you're not funny at all, especially when you imitate famouse people