[flagged]
[deleted]
Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
251–260 of 903 posts
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly I agree with this. It seems like the best summary of how most people treat free speech is basically: "If my side is the underdog, talk about how important it is and complain that we're being censored, and if my side is winning, talk about how it's not necessary and those people can go elsewhere" It was extremely obvious when Twitter was bought by Musk and the rules changed to favour far right wing content and r…
I agree that it's sad you agree with this.
No matter what people say it's a private company and they can censor or use your data anyway they wish. If you don't like it go elsewhere.
I hate that idea but I accept it. If I didn't accept this then I am in favor of random political entities dictating what is accept content.
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#253[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure it's possible to look at what Israel is doing and say it's not terror. So, charitably, I guess you're saying the IDF is not an organization?
It is possible. Now what? IDF is a real military with rules of engagement and target selection. If you say indiscriminate bombing, no this is not. WW2 and Korean War was.
If this isn't an example of indiscriminate bombing, that's only because Israel is explicitly targeting civilians.
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#255[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chomsky: 'if “they” do it, it’s terrorism; if “we” do it, it’s counterterrorism. That’s a historical universal.'
I don't remember the incident where Israel killed 1200 Palestinians on a music festival with unmarked troops. I'm sure Chomsky would find some justification for that too, but that's why the only thing I care about he did is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy - from there it's all been downhill, especially in the last few years. Before that it was at least from time to time worth thinking about.
> I don't remember the incident where Israel killed 1200 Palestinians on a music festival with unmarked troops.
You mean 364 on festival?
The final death toll from the 7th October attack is now thought to be 695 Israeli civilians, including 36 children, as well as 373 security forces and 71 foreigners, giving a total of 1,139.
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chomsky: 'if “they” do it, it’s terrorism; if “we” do it, it’s counterterrorism. That’s a historical universal.'
I don't remember the incident where Israel killed 1200 Palestinians on a music festival with unmarked troops. I'm sure Chomsky would find some justification for that too, but that's why the only thing I care about he did is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy - from there it's all been downhill, especially in the last few years. Before that it was at least from time to time worth thinking about.
that’s the cool part about being the hegemon: you get to wear uniforms while doing your atrocities, and you have tanks and planes and ambassadors wielding real power at the UN to prevent consequences.
Just like the US killing hundreds of thousands of people in the firebombing campaigns of Japan was probably a war-crime. We wore uniforms while doing it. What are you gonna do about it? You already lost the war, not like you have any leverage.
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#258Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#259Not only Meta, but Reddit, Google as well
Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
But you would have more moral justification to limit spreading their hate and propaganda which this was about. Also, it seems you are shadowbanned. You might want to reread and reflect some of your comments and then contact dang.
> But you would have more moral justification to limit spreading their hate and propaganda which this was about.
Absolutely not. There's no moral justification for murder.