Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 903 posts

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#121

Post by dlubarov »

Are you saying that changes on Israel's part could cause Hamas to stop their aggression? That seems very unlikely - Hamas doesn't even pretend to be open to peaceful coexistence with Israel. Their best offer was a 10-year ceasefire in exchange for 1967 borders.

Or that it could lead to Gazans overthrowing Hamas? It's possible, but it would take a violent rebellion since Hamas doesn't hold elections, and realistically it would probably take generations for sentiment to change. It would be hard for Israelis to just accept that they will be attacked for generations, with increasing sophistication (mainly thanks to Iran's support), with no response.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#122

Post by aaomidi »

salawat wrote: post #108
aaomidi wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children have always been treated differently because they are fully and absolutely dependent on their care givers. A puppy and a grown dog don’t actually apply here because we’re talking about humans and not dogs. It’s not even appropriate to make that comparison here.

You anthroprocentric chauvinist. Just because you've firmly categorized everything else as "an inferior being" with a lesser claim to remaining alive doesn't mean that's actually the case. It just means you're selfishly unconcerned with the consequences of collateral damage up until it might be something that could figure out a way to waltz over and bite back.

Actually, I haven’t. I said that the comparison of a human child to a dog is not appropriate. Considering that exact language (e.g. “they are animals”) has helped perpetuate a genocide of Palestinians.

I’m not entirely sure if you’re even disagreeing with me here tbh.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#123

Post by throwaway55479 »

whats_a_quasar wrote: post #78

This post was flagged, but I don't think it should have been and I hope it stays up. I have been grateful that HN hasn't had the same level of animosity about the conflict in Gaza as other places on the internet. But this news article is about a core issue in tech, and should be discussed on HN. The whole world now uses social media to communicate, which means that when there's a war, partisans of both sides will be…

That is "the beauty" of this conflict (if something this heinous could ever have a beautiful side): It poses many interesting technical challenges. But, quite understandably, people everywhere (including HN) are fast to move the "warring" right onto our screens (hence the flagging).

So, as you mentioned, algorithmic feeds is one of them. There are many others like how to create temporary infrastructure for such a besieged, war-torn city [0].

I suppose many would say, "This goes for all wars, what is special about this one?" Well, I would argue this is a "special conflict". It is one of (if not THE) longest-running military occupation in the world [1], where, coincidentally, the US spends its largest tax-payers-funded foreign aid [2].

Edit: And because many are now commemorating the birth of Jesus Christ, it is worth recalling that it is also special for being that birth's place (spiritually, if not literally).

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38673300

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_occupations

[2] https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/which-countries-receive-...

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#124

Post by hutzlibu »

riku_iki wrote: post #117
hutzlibu wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the mother should just shut up and accept that her children are not to be spoken about? How about on the other hand, the IDF does care again, where their bombs explode? "Israel's defense minister said he has "released all restraints" on the Israel Defense Forces' troops in their fight " https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-wa...

> So the mother should just shut up and accept that her children are not to be spoken about? for sake of mutual peace and future every human should think hard before talking on sensitive topics. But humans can't, so we butcher each other instead for thousands of years.

You are seriously demanding of a mother who lost her children to shut up? Would you demand the same of an israeli Mother?

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#125

Post by Chris2048 »

rottencupcakes wrote: post #41
DeIlliad wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given your stance, if a murderer runs in your house then you'll understand when the police break the door down and kill you and everyone inside right?

If a murderer lives in your house for decades and you knew they were a murderer and were plotting more murders but you did nothing to root them out yourself, maybe you’re an accessory. It probably doesn’t justify the death penalty, but it also doesn’t help.

So you are saying the ~14,000 women and children killed are accessories, b/c they failed to personally expel Hamas? Do you believe "There are no innocent Palestinians"?

It's also funny how the label "murderer" works, apparently not applying to Israel. Can we at least hold Israel to account for the extrajudicial assassinations conducted by Mossad?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_assassinations

"Mossad had assassinated Salameh. However, the blast also killed four innocent bystanders, including a British student and a German nun, and injured 18 other people in the vicinity. Immediately following the operation the three Mossad officers fled without trace, as well as up to 14 other agents believed to have been involved in the operation" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossad_assassinations_followin...

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#127

Post by dlubarov »

sschueller wrote: post #34
deadbabe wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The target is Hamas. Some innocents are dying, but the intent isn’t to deliberately kill them. And there is no evidence any of those other criteria are even happening.

There is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fP-J8m-BF0 , NY Times: Visual Evidence Shows Israel Dropped Bombs Where It Ordered Gaza Civilians to Go

So there are two explanations

1) Israel asked civilians to move south to be relatively safer, some important Hamas officers moved south along with them, and Israel targeted them.

2) The strikes weren't about Hamas officers, but just a deliberate killing of civilians.

If you're saying this is evidence of genocide, that means you're discounting (1) and assuming (2)? Why?

I'm not condoning (1), which suggests IDF is prioritizing its concerns (expediency etc) over civilian lives, but that clearly doesn't meet the definition of genocide.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#128

Post by catlover76 »

riku_iki wrote: post #101
hutzlibu wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know that? I know that many people fall into this pattern, but like I said, we lack the concrete examples in this case.

We had plenty of Palestinian protests in my area before and after recent Hamas attack. I never seen them condemning Hamas, only Israel.

What moral significance does that have? Most of the same people who do nothing but bring out the "but they didn't condemn Hamas" trope have never cared about what the IDF has done to Palestinian civilians. Does that mean the rest of us should not care about Hamas crime or ignore its victims? Of course not, right?

You can't seriously believe that responding to criticism of the undeniable indiscriminate slaughter of civilians with "but a lot of the people protesting our actions have never indicated they condemned the attack against us" appears to the rest of us as a reasonable or credible moral claim.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#129

Post by catlover76 »

hutzlibu wrote: post #97
mustafa_pasi wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, actually it is not. Stop with this dehumanization of Palestinians. They are human beings. They are not worth less than you just because they are on the other side of the fence.

Well yes, but what if they support the initial terror attacks? Massacring dance festival attendants and people in their homes is not self defence, it is terrorism.

> Well yes, but what if they support the initial terror attacks?

Even steel manning your position and assuming most of the women and children being killed (and worse) by Israel cheered the attacks (which we have no evidence is true) , no, actually, you aren't justified in massacring people just because they took pleasure in an evil thing that happened to you.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#130

Post by C6JEsQeQa5fCjE »

deadbabe wrote: post #30
sschueller wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People have somehow been convinced a small amount of civilians being killed relative to the whole population is somehow a “genocide”" Per UN definition[1]: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: - Killing members of the group; - Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members…

The target is Hamas. Some innocents are dying, but the intent isn’t to deliberately kill them. And there is no evidence any of those other criteria are even happening.

> Some innocents are dying

It is estimated that about 70% of killed people (which has gone over 20000 recently) are women and children. Those are not Hamas fighters. Even if you assume that every adult male that has been killed was a Hamas fighter (which is obviously not going to be the case), that is still 70% of people who are killed by IDF being innocent civilians.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-palestini...

> the intent isn’t to deliberately kill them. And there is no evidence any of those other criteria are even happening

On the contrary, even the mere evidence in form of public statements by the leaders of Israel strongly suggests intent to harm civilians. The statements suggest that they are pursuing revenge on the whole Gaza strip, and aiming to inflict as many casualties as they can get away with.

- Prime Minister Netanyahu pledged to reduce parts of Gaza “to rubble” and invoked the people of Amalek, the foe that God ordered the ancient Israelites to genocide in the Bible, in a recent speech. [1]

- Defense minister Yoav Gallant called for a “complete siege” on Gaza and stated that “we are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.” [1]

- Army spokesperson Daniel Hagari said forces would turn Gaza into a “city of tents” and admitted that Israel’s “emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy” in dropping hundreds of tons of bombs on Gaza. [1]

- Ariel Kallner, a member of parliament from Netanyahu’s Likud party, wrote on X after the Hamas attack: “Right now, one goal: Nakba! A Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of 48. Nakba in Gaza and Nakba to anyone who dares to join!” [2]

- Giora Eiland, a reservist major general and former head of the Israeli National Security Council, wrote in a popular Hebrew-language newspaper, “The State of Israel has no choice but to turn Gaza into a place that is temporarily or permanently impossible to live in.” Elsewhere, he specified that “Israel needs to create a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, compelling tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands to seek refuge in Egypt or the Gulf” and indeed that Israel must demand that “The entire population of Gaza will either move to Egypt or move to the Gulf.” Finally, he said that “Gaza will become a place where no human being can exist.” [2]

- “Human animals must be treated as such. There will be no electricity and no water [in Gaza], there will only be destruction. You wanted hell, you will get hell.”, IDF general Ghassan Aliyan [3]

- Revital Gotliv, a Parliament member from Netanyahu’s ruling Likud party, called for Israel to use nuclear weapons in Gaza: “It’s time for a doomsday weapon. Shooting powerful missiles without limit. Not flattening a neighborhood. Crushing and flattening Gaza.” [1]

- Galit Distel Atbaryan, also of Likud, posted on X in Hebrew that Israelis should invest their energy in one thing: “Erasing all of Gaza from the face of the earth” and forcing the “Gazan monsters” either to flee the strip to Egypt or to face their death. [1]

[1] https://www.vox.com/world-politics/2023/11/13/23954731/genoc...

[2] https://www.vox.com/world-politics/23933707/israel-palestine...

[3] https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/cogat-chief-add...

Post reply on HN