University of Southern California said Asna Tabassum, valedictorian for the class of 2024, will not be allowed to make a speech, citing 'security' concerns

The University of Southern California has cancelled a scheduled commencement speech by Asna Tabassum, citing unnamed security concerns after her selection as valedictorian was met with a wave of online attacks directed at her pro-Palestinian views.

“I am not surprised by those who attempt to propagate hatred. I am surprised that my own university - my home for four years - has abandoned me,” Tabassum said in a statement shared online.

On 6 April, USC announced that Tabassum was selected as valedictorian, a student with the highest academic achievements in her year, for the graduating class of 2024.

After the announcement was published on social media, Tabassum began receiving online attacks from an account named, “We Are Tov”, a group that describes itself as “dedicated to combating antisemitism”.

The university released a statement on Monday, saying that Tabassum would retain her position as valedictorian, but would not be allowed to give her commencement speech. The school said that the move was made to maintain safety on campus.

  • qevlarr@lemmy.world
    62·
    3 months ago

    No, they mean fuck Israel. It can only exist as a Jewish state because all non-Jews have been stripped of their rights. Make it a secular state with equal rights for everyone, or allow the Palestinians their own state with no Israeli occupation. The current situation is straight up apartheid

      • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
        3·
        3 months ago

        Israeli’s Supreme Court ruled that Israeli nationality is not a thing. Israel is a Jewish state since 2018, and Israeli Arabs are second class citizens.

        This link was one of the sources from yours: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/7/31/17623978/israel-jewish-nation-state-law-bill-explained-apartheid-netanyahu-democracy

        The law does three big things:

        1. It states that “the right to exercise national self-determination” in Israel is “unique to the Jewish people.”
        2. It establishes Hebrew as Israel’s official language, and downgrades Arabic — a language widely spoken by Arab Israelis — to a “special status.”
        3. It establishes “Jewish settlement as a national value” and mandates that the state “will labor to encourage and promote its establishment and development.”

        If only Jewish people have the right to self-determination, then all Israeli citizens do not have the same rights.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          11·
          3 months ago

          You’re misunderstanding the conversation.

          The comment I responded to said “they were stripped of their rights.” That’s simply not true. It is true that they are stripped of their nationality, and in that, I agree with you that the rights are not the same.

          Israeli citizens have the same state rights in regards to government voting and state services.

          • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
            2·
            3 months ago

            You’re basically saying “those aren’t the rights I was talking about”.

            They do not have the right to self-determination since 2018, thus they do not have the same rights. Several of the rights of non-Jews were stripped away with the 2018 law. Not all of them, but some very significant ones.

            They have similar rights, and share many of the same rights, but Jewish people have more rights than non-Jews in Israel. Not just in practice, but per the law.

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              11·
              3 months ago

              No, I’m saying the comment that claimed they are “stripped of their rights” is false. You’ve cited a difference in the law that I recognize, and disagree with. There are no limitations in their participation in government or government services. If there were, I’d agree their rights were “stripped.”

              There’s imbalance for sure. Being accurate allows people to recognize the problems and address them. Being sensational creates ignorance.

              • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
                2·
                3 months ago

                I think you are misunderstanding, “stripped of their rights” does not necessarily mean they lose all rights, or certain rights in particular, it simply that they lose some rights. They lost some rights, therefore they have been stripped of their rights.

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  11·
                  3 months ago

                  So we should say all Americans have been stripped of their rights, because women cannot access life-saving medical care in the event of a complication of a late-term pregnancy?

                  C’mon. You’re arguing semantics to justify sensationalism. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms that you could aim at the Israeli government. Selecting choice words to exaggerate only obscures the point, fuels outrage, and perpetuates ignorance.

                  In a time when we can’t trust most news sources, it’s become more important to be accurate than ever.

                  • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
                    2·
                    3 months ago

                    So we should say all Americans have been stripped of their rights, because women cannot access life-saving medical care in the event of a complication of a late-term pregnancy?

                    We can say that all American cis women have been stripped of their rights, yes. However more accurately this would be on a state by state basis.

                    We are arguing semantics, but you’re the one justifying a sensationalist response to an accurate statement.