Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

Summary: Katie Couric spoke with Wael Ghonim, Google's Middle East and North Africa marketing manager, on whether or not he feels Google will rehire him after his role in sparking Egypt's uprising.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Google
54

Katie Couric spoke with Wael Ghonim, Google's Middle East and North Africa marketing manager, on whether or not he feels Google will rehire him after his role in sparking Egypt's uprising. Here's the clip and Charles Cooper's take.

Topic: Google

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

54 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Not that he was any factor at all in the uprising but...

    if i were google i wouldnt want to be anywhere near this thing. theres so many ways this could go sideways on them if the muslim brotherhood takes over and turn this into another afghanistan. somehow public hangings and stonings and cutting off womens private parts doesnt go so well with their "do no evil" motto. it's just bad business to be near this...
    Johnny Vegas
    • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

      @Johnny Vegas You are deeply misinformed. Or maybe your hate that made you spread the FUD
      NaderBelaid
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @NaderBelaid okay then inform us because human rights groups do back his statements.
        slickjim
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @Peter Perry Do you have links to support your claim????
        The only thing that support such claims are the American biased media
        NaderBelaid
      • Are you denying that the muslim brotherhood is a terrorist organization?

        Seriously? Because they don't. They are proud of their terrorism and their assasinations. They are open about their desire to have the entire world ruled by fundementalist sharia law. That's where you get the choice between converting to islam or being killed for not being a muslim. Or being a female one that doesnt cover herself from head to toe, or wants to be educated or even just learn to read. You women out there like the sound of that? How about getting your privates cut off so you cant enjoy sex for the rest of your life? Sound good? Guess what girls, your dad has to pass you off to one of his sick twisted friends for marriage at the ripe old age of 9 or 10 because you have to be married by the time you have your first period. Doesn't every one want that for their daughter? Did you know that Egypt is a hotspot for Cristian women getting raped by muslims? Thats right because by muslim law not only doesn't the testimony of a female not count for as much as the testimony of a male but the testimony of a non muslim doesnt count for as much as the testimony of a muslim so they can get away with it scott free. Okay there's just a tiny taste of the FUD free truth for you without the media whitewash. There's plenty more fun facts about the muslim brotherhood for those who care to see...
        Johnny Vegas
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @Johnny Vegas You failed to provide one single fact to all what your saying. If you want to state your opinion as a fact you need to provide facts that support your claim. Otherwise, what your saying is simply a biased opinion that has nothing to do with the facts. C'mon, You can do better then that, right? Or you didn't find anything on the web that can support your biased opinion?

        "getting your privates cut off so you cant enjoy sex for the rest of your life"
        Just from where did you get this crap???
        NaderBelaid
      • So, exactly what is the truth?

        You can't just state that someone is mistaken or misinformed if you don't retort with the "real facts".

        So, come on, what is the real truth?
        adornoe
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @adornoe
        Sure you can. It is basic "burden of proof", a concept taught in intro logic classes. Classes your replies in such threads as the one on Hiroshima, where you steadfastly ignored the definition of the word "revisionist", make it clear you have never taken.
        DeusXMachina
      • Deux: Back with his garbage...

        Look, we're not here to argue about logic or the teaching of logic. We're here for some basic back and forth, and some discussions don't require deep logic in order to get at the truth or the facts.

        Some things are a lot simpler than some would try to make them. That's something that, hopefully, sounds logical to you.

        And, hey, in that Hiroshima discussion, you still didn't make sense, and your logic was woefully lacking.

        ;)
        adornoe
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @adornoe
        I made perfect sense.
        1) Revise mans to change
        2) My version is how the history has been taught since the 40s
        3) Therefore, my version is NOT revisionist.

        Simple enough for you?

        As to this issue, you claim the OP can't do something he clearly can. Who is not making sense, again?
        DeusXMachina
      • Deux: When you live in Bizzarro-land, then, of course, you'll make sense...

        <i>I made perfect sense.</i><br><br><br><br>Yeah, but, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, and Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il and Hitler, also believe that they made sense. In an inside-out world, you'd fit right in. <br><br><i>1) Revise mans to change</i><br><br>Yeah, so? <br><br><i>2) My version is how the history has been taught since the 40s</i><br><br>That depends on where you studied YOUR history and who taught you that history.<br><br><i>3) Therefore, my version is NOT revisionist.</i><br><br>When you live in a bubble, and your environment is the only one you've known for your whole life, then of course, everything in that world will make perfect sense to you, and everything else is "revisionist" and wrong. <br><br><i>Simple enough for you?</i><br><br>Nothing is as simple as it might first appear. And that's where you have a hard time recognizing and accepting that, the world is not as cut and dried as what you have been taught. <br><br><i>As to this issue, you claim the OP can't do something he clearly can. Who is not making sense, again? </i><br><br>Asking for the simple facts is not the same as asking for something that can't be produced. I challenged someone to produce the set of facts that would back up his assertions, and it doesn't have to go into the realm of "deep logical analysis". The facts exist or they don't, and assertions can either be backed up or not. It's simple common sense, and being facetious and annoying, like you are being, isn't going to change anything.
        adornoe
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @adornoe

        As predicted, you were incapable of following a simple logical argument. If history has been taught that way in the majority of the world, since the event took place, stating it is NOT revising anything. Period.
        DeusXMachina
      • Deux: Nice try, but still illogical and still lacking common sense..

        <i>As predicted, you were incapable of following a simple logical argument.</i>

        Nonsense!

        That somebody dares to disagree with your alternate reality world is not the same as "predicting". You could expect the same kind of response from most people that disagree with your worldview, and thus, it wouldn't be something out of the ordinary. What is out of the ordinary is your viewpoints and your attempts to sound "more logical", while you're just another one of those lefties trying to win the argument with nonsense.


        <i>If history has been taught that way in the majority of the world, since the event took place, stating it is NOT revising anything.</i>

        Historical events are mostly recounted by those that witnessed them, and oftentimes, they are also told with the personal views or politics of the people who are doing the retelling. Thus, you are always going to have many different versions of the history, and, the versions that are chosen for teaching can be very dependent upon the ideological preferences from teachers and professors. School districts often make decisions about what books and what versions to include in their curriculum, and many of those decisions are politically motivated. Why tell the history of Ronald Reagan, as an example, from the perspective of a conservative, when a liberal school or liberal district could opt to get their version of that history from the perspective of a liberal historian?

        That's part of the common sense that escapes you because you're too busy trying to come up with "deep logical analysis" into simple everyday situations.

        Look, forget "logical analysis" and concentrate on simple common sense. You'll actually learn more, and you might end up not being so annoying.
        adornoe
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @adornoe<br>Nonsense? The empirical evidence is directly above.<br><br>Revise means to change<br>No change was made<br>Therefore there was no revision.<br><br>It is a basic syllogism. They were detailed by the ancient Greeks, particularly Aristotle, 2400 years ago. One learns them in the first week of logic 101.<br><br>FAIL.
        DeusXMachina
      • Deux: Still lacking common sense...

        <i>Nonsense? The empirical evidence is directly above.</i><br><br>Yes! Nonsense!<br><br>Forget that garbage about empirical evidence, and go with the simplest analysis, that being common sense.<br><br>Common sense doesn't delve into the "deep analysis" of situations when the simple facts will suffice. <br><br>The problem in question was about the true history, and like I've already pointed out, the recording of history is dependent upon who the winners are, who the witnesses are, and the ideological leanings of those recording the history. <br><br>That is simple and straightforward, and no deep logical analysis is going to change that. <br><br><i>Revise means to change</i><br><br>I'll bet you had to use deep logical analysis to arrive at that conclusion. <br><br><i>No change was made</i><br><br>When there have been different versions of historical events, then, you would be wrong.<br><br><i>Therefore there was no revision.</i><br><br>Since the original premise has some problems with it, then the conclusions would have the same problems. It's like global warming "science", where, if the data is faulty, and the models start out being faulty, then, of course, the conclusions will be "garbage". GIGO!<br><br><i>It is a basic syllogism.</i><br><br>And, the logic would still be applicable with GIGO, where faulty premises yield faulty results. <br><br><i>They were developed by the ancient Greeks 3000 years ago. One learns them in the first week of logic 101.</i><br><br>Yeah, sure. But, when one also fails to use common sense, the logic won't matter. You're not using that simple common sense, and you want to over-complicate matters with your "logic 101". You need to get out more, and get out of the classroom, and into the real world, where you might get to learn the real facts of life. <br><br>FAIL.
        adornoe
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @adornoe

        As per your usual, you did not address a SINGLE point of fact or logic in the OP.
        You merely bloviate.

        Fail.
        DeusXMachina
      • Deux: As usual, unable to understand common sense...

        <i>As per your usual,</i><br><br>Yes, as per my usual, I used simple common sense to destroy your usual nonsense.<br><br><i>you did not address a SINGLE point of fact or logic in the OP.</i><br><br>Why are you now concerned about the "fact or logic in the OP"?<br><br>Every one of your points, or lack thereof, is what you and I have been addressing. Since you really didn't have any coherent or real points that mattered, they were very easy to bat away. You just jumped in to a part of the discussion to try to derail the discussion into another discussion which occurred months ago. If you want to win that old discussion, just go back to that one and enter your latest nonsense at the end there, and I promise that I won't even bother to retort. Meanwhile, since this discussion is kind of still current, I'll keep batting away all of your nonsense. But, I promise, a month from now, you can come back here and have the last word in this discussion, and I won't care. You can pretend that your "logic 101" won the day again.<br><br><i>You merely bloviate.</i><br><br>Meanwhile, you never did make any points that would've even interested any of the other readers/posters in this forum. The only thing you're good at is making a nuisance of yourself and pretending that, you're high and mighty with your "college logic 101". That's arrogance to the max and proves someone like you to not even be able to use everyday "common sense" to understand or to make coherent arguments. You need to relive your life, where perhaps you then will have forgotten that "college superiority complex", and that "college logic 101", and will have learned to not over-complicate matters. <br><br>By the way, there is a real world, and the alternate reality world. You need to go out more to meet the real world.
        adornoe
      • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

        @adornoe
        Your simply stating it des not make it so. It is quite clear to anyone who reads this where the truth lies. You live in a fantasy world, as all your posts on multiple threads make clear.
        DeusXMachina
    • RE: Wael Ghonim: I'll go back to Google if I'm not fired

      @Johnny Vegas

      [i]...if the muslim brotherhood takes over...[/i]

      Highly unlikely.
      none none
      • I agree, though Google will higher him back as the &quot;PR&quot;

        associated with this will good. Should they not rehire him, Google may be viewd apon as "anti-Egyptian Democrocy" and could hurt them in reference to sales of advertising.
        Tim Cook