This is her objection.
No it's not. That is what the article says, yes. That is not what the source interview (which i pointed you to, twice) says.
She did not mention anything about working with IDF soldiers in the entire interview. Let me repeat that to you for the 1000th time. She just plains never talks about this.
That quote you keep using is not her objection to working with IDF soldiers. It is her complaint that pro-Palestine supporters are being punished for their beliefs, but a professor can work with the IDF for 6 months, and come back to work without any consequences. She is saying the treatment is unequal. Once again, she is not objecting to working with this professor if she had to. She is objecting to the unequal treatment of pro-Palestinian vs pro-Israel supporters.
My claim at the very top of this post is that the title is wrong. Turns out I was right in every possible way. Not only was the title wrong, but so is the article.
I didn't attack the student. I didn't give an opinion on her. I am attacking the author and The Guardian for being misleading.
I'd ask you to reflect and ask yourself, what would it take to change your mind, how much proof you would need before you accept valid criticism of the author...
but we both know won't.
