Microsoft fires engineers over AI protest at 50th-anniversary event

midian182

Posts: 10,634   +141
Staff member
In context: Microsoft has fired the two employees involved in a protest during the company's recent 50th-anniversary celebration. The termination was attributed to misconduct, as stated in an internal email. Both individuals had previously sent mass emails to thousands of employees, urging the company to end its contracts with the Israeli government. One employee was let go by Microsoft Canada, while the second had already submitted his resignation prior to the demonstration.

One of the employees, Ibtihal Aboussad, interrupted a presentation by Mustafa Suleyman, Microsoft's head of AI, during the anniversary event. Following the incident, she sent an email to various internal distribution lists expressing opposition to the company's involvement with the Israeli military, reaching hundreds or thousands of Microsoft employees, including CEO Satya Nadella, finance chief Amy Hood, and company president Brad Smith.

In the email, she claimed that Microsoft's AI technology was being used in ways that violated human rights and stated, "I did not sign up to write code that violates human rights." Aboussad also urged colleagues to sign the "No Azure for Apartheid" petition demanding Microsoft sever ties with the Israeli military.

Unsurprisingly, Microsoft was not pleased with Aboussad's actions. The company responded by stating that Aboussad's actions – both the disruption and her internal communication – were deliberate violations of company policy.

Microsoft emphasized that concerns about corporate ethics or business decisions should be raised through appropriate internal channels, such as a direct manager or Global Employee Relations. The internal memo described her behavior as "intentionally disruptive" and aimed at drawing attention at the expense of the event's purpose.

"The only appropriate response to such misconduct was the immediate termination of employment," the internal communication said.

A second employee, Vaniya Agrawal, engaged in a similar action on the same day, interrupting a speech by CEO Satya Nadella at a different company event. Agrawal had also sent emails to other employees and leadership criticizing the company's technology partnerships, calling Microsoft a "digital weapons manufacturer that powers surveillance, apartheid, and genocide."

Agrawal said she intended to resign from Microsoft on April 11, but the company told her on Monday that it had decided to make her resignation effective immediately.

On both accounts, the company said that as their misconduct was designed to gain notoriety and cause maximum disruption to the events, the only appropriate response was immediate cessation of their employment.

The protests came during the same week that the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement called on people to cancel their Game Pass subscriptions, avoid Microsoft video game properties such as Minecraft and Call of Duty, and boycott all Microsoft Gaming and Xbox-branded products to protest the company's business dealings with the Israeli military.

Permalink to story:

 
How so-called educated people could think their lives would not change after such behaviour is a mystery to the rest of the world. Now they learned the hard way that slagging your employer in public carries a price. Problem is this is going to follow them around for a long time. Sigh ... 🙄
 
Little too late for the employees to be feeling guilty. They fed the beast, they'll have to live with knowing that. They were paid Microsoft money for doing Microsoft things. They might have considered the fact that their job was to empower that culture and help it flourish, before signing their employment contract.

Did they think they were interviewing for Patagonia or something? A little personal accountability can enable significant personal growth.
 
How so-called educated people could think their lives would not change after such behaviour is a mystery to the rest of the world. Now they learned the hard way that slagging your employer in public carries a price. Problem is this is going to follow them around for a long time. Sigh ... 🙄
We are continuously reminded that educated =! intelligent. The people who bring their personal politics into the workplace got way too comfy over the last decade of having their way with HR department and the media, now that they don't have the shield they used to, they stick out like a sore thumb whenever they do it.
 
I'm waiting for a comment about sending her to El Salvador. What a bunch of people without values... Good sheeple, you were trained well... Afraid to speak up over loosing your job, lol...
 
How so-called educated people could think their lives would not change after such behaviour is a mystery to the rest of the world. Now they learned the hard way that slagging your employer in public carries a price. Problem is this is going to follow them around for a long time. Sigh ... 🙄
I keep seeing this standard comment. It feels fake.

Why do you "assume" that they care? The person is clearly not concerned about the consequences of losing their job and future earnings, because they are prioritizing a moral stand against something that they strongly believe in. A conscious decision driven by conviction, not a naive oversight about the repercussions. You're pretending and framing it as if the issue is something random, like the loss of a parking space or something, to trivialize her issue with what Microsoft is doing.

Your comment feels fake.
 
That wasn't "AI protest" at all - 'Palestinian' terrorists supporters disrupted the event with pro-terrorism sloganeering.
It would have been grotesque not to fire terrorists supporters immediately.
Labeling protesters as Palestinian terrorist supporters for "pro terrorism sloganeering" is a manipulative tactic to shut down legitimate criticism and humanitarian concerns.

Most people protesting the slaughter in Gaza, the killing of children, had never given Hamas much thought before October 7. But the propaganda logic is, they're not protesting against the indiscriminative killing of children and civilians, schools, hospitals, no f-ing way, they're protesting because after October 7 they suddenly developed this strong love for a group that they never heard of before.

Zero mentions of what they are actually protesting about.

Their protest comes from seeing civilian carnage, not some random support for Hamas. Labeling them pro Hamas is a deliberate, manipulative move to discredit their message and avoid talking about what they are actually protesting, which is war crimes and the slaughter of civilians.

This tactic is to demonize anyone who has an issue with these killings. Expressing support for Palestinians, criticizing Israel, gets twisted into being support for terrorism.
 
Labeling protesters as Palestinian terrorist supporters for "pro terrorism sloganeering" is a manipulative tactic to shut down legitimate criticism and humanitarian concerns.

Most people protesting the slaughter in Gaza, the killing of children, had never given Hamas much thought before October 7. But the propaganda logic is, they're not protesting against the indiscriminative killing of children and civilians, schools, hospitals, no f-ing way, they're protesting because after October 7 they suddenly developed this strong love for a group that they never heard of before.

Zero mentions of what they are actually protesting about.

Their protest comes from seeing civilian carnage, not some random support for Hamas. Labeling them pro Hamas is a deliberate, manipulative move to discredit their message and avoid talking about what they are actually protesting, which is war crimes and the slaughter of civilians.

This tactic is to demonize anyone who has an issue with these killings. Expressing support for Palestinians, criticizing Israel, gets twisted into being support for terrorism.
There is a time and place for opinions like that. If she truly had those concerns, she should have raised them to her boss, RESIGNED, then gone on to protest, etc…

By hijacking an event, she simply became a jerk…

As for protesting the treatment of Hamas… how about protesting Hamas’ treatment of Israeli civilians? October 7th was the date that HAMAS kidnapped and killed civilians… the resulting response really shouldn’t be what gets protested…
 
There is a time and place for opinions like that. If she truly had those concerns, she should have raised them to her boss, RESIGNED, then gone on to protest, etc…

By hijacking an event, she simply became a jerk…

As for protesting the treatment of Hamas… how about protesting Hamas’ treatment of Israeli civilians? October 7th was the date that HAMAS kidnapped and killed civilians… the resulting response really shouldn’t be what gets protested…
How about writing what happened on 6th of October and on 5th and so on...?
"the resulting response really shouldn’t be what gets protested…" - I have no words for that...
EDIT: or maybe I have. Let's say some oppressor kills your family, and in response you kill his family and all of his neighbors. And - as it "the West" doing right now - you're celebrating that you killed the oppressors and say that neighbors that were killed should blame being killed on the oppressor.
 
Last edited:
How about writing what happened on 6th of October and on 5th and so on
Sure - how far back do you want to go? Back to when Hamas broke NUMEROUS ceasefires to rain rockets on Israeli citizens?

How about further - back to 1948 when, after Israel was granted independence, they were attacked by virtually every Arab nation - who refused to allow any Jews to remain and destroyed every synagogue in their territory - but when Israel offered to allow the Palestinians to leave - NONE of the Arab nations accepted them…

While Israel is not blameless here - Netanyahu should probably be in prison, Hamas are the aggressors here!

They shelter among civilians and use mosques and schools as their bases - then act outraged when Israel bombs them…
 
There is a time and place for opinions like that. If she truly had those concerns, she should have raised them to her boss, RESIGNED, then gone on to protest, etc…

By hijacking an event, she simply became a jerk…

As for protesting the treatment of Hamas… how about protesting Hamas’ treatment of Israeli civilians? October 7th was the date that HAMAS kidnapped and killed civilians… the resulting response really shouldn’t be what gets protested…

I don't know if you are just trying to twist the narrative, but she obviously wants to make her protest as public as humanly possible. You think she's being a jerk, because it goes against your side.

And again, the protest is not about the treatment of Hamas. (Twisting it to make it seems as if not about children and civilians getting slaughter, but rather a random love for Hamas.) The people protesting are reacting to the sheer scale of civilian slaughter in Gaza, particularly the killing of children. Again, labeling these protests as "pro-Hamas" is a deliberate tactic to discredit humanitarian concerns and shut down criticism of Israel's actions.

Now if we talk about October 7, it's something that was clearly allowed to happen (you would have to look into that). And Israel response has gone far beyond targeting not targeting Hamas but ethnic cleansing. Killing tens of thouosands of civilians, destroying civilian infrastructure, hospitals, universities, homes, mosques, churches, etc.

Targeting killing of aid workers, journalists, or civilians in safe zones (Hind Rajab).

You have statements from Israeli officials expressing pride in Gaza's ruins (May Golan) or advocating for war crimes (Shimon Riklin).

Using tactics like "humanitarian camouflage" to legitimize violence against civilians.
 
Hamas' rockets killed around 40 civilians in the last 20 years - around the number of Palestinians killed by IDF in Gaza yesterday...

Israel was granted independence... any idea why Palestine was not? Maybe that have something to do with the number of Palestinian Arabs that was 2x number of Jews, but Jews got 55% of the land? It was a great, great offer, why those stupid Palestinians and their Arab friends got angry...

"They shelter among civilians and use mosques and schools as their bases - then act outraged when Israel bombs them…" - If a shooter went to the school, you would blame the children after bombing the school?

You know why US is not bombing schools when there is a shooter, because there are no Palestinians there...
 
Sure - how far back do you want to go? Back to when Hamas broke NUMEROUS ceasefires to rain rockets on Israeli citizens?

How about further - back to 1948 when, after Israel was granted independence, they were attacked by virtually every Arab nation - who refused to allow any Jews to remain and destroyed every synagogue in their territory - but when Israel offered to allow the Palestinians to leave - NONE of the Arab nations accepted them…

While Israel is not blameless here - Netanyahu should probably be in prison, Hamas are the aggressors here!

They shelter among civilians and use mosques and schools as their bases - then act outraged when Israel bombs them…

Hamas actually offered long term ceasefires multiple times, which Israel rejected, even assassinating Hamas military head Ahmed Jabari in 2012 specifically because he was advancing a permanent truce deal. Israel, not Hamas, broke the Jan 2025 ceasefire by refusing to proceed to Phase Two, blocking aid, and launching a massive attack on March 18 after Netanyahu stalled negotiations. Blaming Hamas is a reversal of documented facts.

And about 1948, that's the heavily romanticized Exodus version of history. The reality is the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of 750,000 Palestinians, expelled at gunpoint from their homes to make way for a settler colonial project. You have Palestinians whose grandparents were forced out and cannot return, while others from Brooklyn NY get automatic citizenship. Framing Israel as merely defending itself after independence ignores the planned displacement of the indigenous population.

Acknowledging Netanyahu is corrupt doesn't negate the fundamental nature of the conflict. Israel is an apartheid state enforcing a brutal siege on Gaza since 2007, with stated goals extending to ethnic cleansing and land theft. Focusing solely on Hamas ignores the decades of occupation and systemic violence that form the context. The scale and nature of Israel's response after Oct 7, including targeting civilians and infrastructure, cannot be simplistically waved away by labeling Hamas the sole aggressor.

The human shields claim is a standard Israeli talking point, used politically, not legally. There's no credible evidence Hamas forces civilians to shield military targets. And what would be the point if Israel is going to bomb targets regardless.

Israel itself uses "humanitarian camouflage," labeling civilians as shields to justify attacks, and there are plenty of examples of Israel using Palestinians as human shields. Dismissing Palestinian outrage as fake when tens of thousands are killed, hospitals bombed, and families wiped out is just another way to dehumanize them and deflect from the reality of the destruction Israel inflicts.
 
It's fine to protest but how far do you go when it seems like you're a threat to the company with outbursts like that? Some say she is just making a point to the public but there are other ways of doing it. MS has an obligation to protect their employees and assets. Outbursts like that in a meeting shows an erratic behavior, anger, and you don't know what she's capable of doing within the company if she stayed on. Something happens and MS will have to answer as to why they did not be pro-active.

It's always the case, something bad has to happen before it's prevented again when it could have been prevented prior.
 
Last edited:
Israel was granted independence... any idea why Palestine was not? Maybe that have something to do with the number of Palestinian Arabs that was 2x number of Jews, but Jews got 55% of the land? It was a great, great offer, why those stupid Palestinians and their Arab friends got angry...
Maybe because they lived in Jordan, Egypt, Syria or Lebanon… and were refused admittance to those countries by their leaders (wonder why?)… there are over 400 million people in the area - Israel has jurisdiction over a tiny percentage - and are the only one that is truly democratic… not to mention the only one that allows Jews ..

People call Israel an “Apartheid state”, yet every other country in the Middle East treats Jews like vermin…
 
Maybe because they lived in Jordan, Egypt, Syria or Lebanon… and were refused admittance to those countries by their leaders (wonder why?)… there are over 400 million people in the area - Israel has jurisdiction over a tiny percentage - and are the only one that is truly democratic… not to mention the only one that allows Jews ..

People call Israel an “Apartheid state”, yet every other country in the Middle East treats Jews like vermin…

The Palestinians didn't start in Jordan, Egypt, Syria, or Lebanon. They were the native population living in Palestine for centuries. Muslims, Christians, and Jews together. 750,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed and expelled at gunpoint from their homes and villages, in 1948. They ended up in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt as refugees fleeing this expulsion.

Calling Israel the only democracy ignores the reality of it being an apartheid state. A state that maintains an occupation, runs separate legal systems for different populations in the same territory (military courts for Palestinians with 99%+ conviction rates vs. civilian courts for settlers), holds thousands in administrative detention without trial, and blockades millions in an open air prison isn't a democracy. The idea it's the only place that allows Jews is also false, the Palestinian Jews lived alongside Muslims and Christians for centuries before the Zionist project displaced them.

Israel functions as an apartheid state based on its own policies towards Palestinians. The blockade, the settlements, the unequal rights, the displacement, the military occupation. You don't excuse one country's human rights violations by pointing to another's. That's pure deflection to avoid scrutiny of Israel's behavior

Israel's geographic size or the total population of the region is also irrelevant. The issue is how Israel treats the millions of Palestinians living under its direct or indirect control.
 
The Palestinians didn't start in Jordan, Egypt, Syria, or Lebanon. They were the native population living in Palestine for centuries. Muslims, Christians, and Jews together. 750,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed and expelled at gunpoint from their homes and villages, in 1948. They ended up in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt as refugees fleeing this expulsion.
I don't think you understand what "ethnically cleansed" means... they were not killed... they were expelled - just as the Jews from all of the surrounding Arab nations were (not to mention having their homes, synagogues blown up)....

There is no question that Muslim Arabs are not treated as well as they should be in Israel - but I'd still rather be one of them in Israel than a Jew living in any other Middle-Eastern country!
Calling Israel the only democracy ignores the reality of it being an apartheid state. A state that maintains an occupation, runs separate legal systems for different populations in the same territory (military courts for Palestinians with 99%+ conviction rates vs. civilian courts for settlers), holds thousands in administrative detention without trial, and blockades millions in an open air prison isn't a democracy. The idea it's the only place that allows Jews is also false, the Palestinian Jews lived alongside Muslims and Christians for centuries before the Zionist project displaced them.
No it doesn't... true, in reality, all citizens are not treated equally - but that's simply a reality of their being a WAR going on between the 2 peoples for almost a century. Ask poor black people how they're treated in the US and you'll find little difference... At least there's a reason for the former!
Israel functions as an apartheid state based on its own policies towards Palestinians. The blockade, the settlements, the unequal rights, the displacement, the military occupation. You don't excuse one country's human rights violations by pointing to another's. That's pure deflection to avoid scrutiny of Israel's behavior

Israel's geographic size or the total population of the region is also irrelevant. The issue is how Israel treats the millions of Palestinians living under its direct or indirect control.
The reason you can "deflect" is simple. These "Palestinians" are being funded by the rest of the Muslim world - funded by people who's policy is to sweep the Jews into the sea and exterminate them.

How about they spend some of that money providing land/homes for their displaced brethren?
 
I don't think you understand what "ethnically cleansed" means... they were not killed... they were expelled - just as the Jews from all of the surrounding Arab nations were (not to mention having their homes, synagogues blown up)....

There is no question that Muslim Arabs are not treated as well as they should be in Israel - but I'd still rather be one of them in Israel than a Jew living in any other Middle-Eastern country!

No it doesn't... true, in reality, all citizens are not treated equally - but that's simply a reality of their being a WAR going on between the 2 peoples for almost a century. Ask poor black people how they're treated in the US and you'll find little difference... At least there's a reason for the former!

The reason you can "deflect" is simple. These "Palestinians" are being funded by the rest of the Muslim world - funded by people who's policy is to sweep the Jews into the sea and exterminate them.

How about they spend some of that money providing land/homes for their displaced brethren?

1. Ethnic cleansing includes mass expulsion aimed at creating an ethnically homogenous area, often with violence and killing to achieve that goal. The UN defines it as "rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area." The Nakba involved the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians at gunpoint, precisely fitting this definition. Trying to narrow it to only mean mass killing is incorrect.

2. Like I said, Jewish, Chrisitans, Muslims all lived in peace before the documented ethnic cleansing of Palestinians carried out by the Zionist project to establish and maintain Israel. Which requires a Jewish majority, and the suppression of anything that interferes with that.

3. Saying Palestinians are merely not treated as well as they should be is a massive understatement. We're talking about an apartheid state, a brutal decades long occupation, a siege designed to make life unlivable, settlers kicking people out of homes with army backing, military courts with 99%+ conviction rates, administrative detention without trial, and systemic dehumanization. Comparing this to the hypothetical fate of a Jew in another country is irrelevant and another deflection. The conditions imposed by Israel on Palestinians must be judged on their own horrific merits.

4. Attributing a unified policy of "sweeping Jews into the sea" to the entire "Muslim world" funding Palestinians is a propaganda trope. Many Arab states have officially offered normalization in exchange for a Palestinian state on 1967 borders. Meanwhile, you have prominent Israelis calling for war crimes, boasting about destruction, and dehumanizing Palestinians (Shimon Riklin, May Golan, Yoav Gallant).

5. The issue isn't finding Palestinians new land funded by others. The issue is that Palestinians were expelled from their own land and homes in Palestine during the Nakba and continue to face displacement through settlements and demolitions. Their demand isn't for charity resettlement elsewhere, it's for their right to return or, at minimum, an end to the occupation and siege preventing self determination on what little land remains. Suggesting others should house them essentially validates the original displacement.

Your argument deflects from Israel's documented actions, (The occupation, the blockade, the settlements, the violence) by blaming external actors and invoking inflammatory rhetoric, ignoring the historical context.
 
Back