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

751–760 of 903 posts

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

#751

Post by smsm42 »

danenania wrote: post #610
faeriechangling wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problem taking down "From the river to the sea" type content so long as we also take down Greater Israel type content.

Having social media companies attempting to guess at the intention behind ambiguous phrases seems like a bad idea. Some people are certainly implying support for genocide when they say "from the river to the sea", while others are not. Same for "Greater Israel". The only sane place to draw the line imo is at explicit support for hatred or violence. Even that standard can be fuzzy, but if there's a reasonable doubt ab…

[flagged]

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

#752

Post by smsm42 »

throw310822 wrote: post #619
lelanthran wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately, wishing for the ceasing-of-existence of an apartheid state is considered justified by most of the world. Any reason other than hyperbole that you consider Israel to be an apartheid state, as compared to the rest of the Arab countries?

It's absolutely pointless for us to discuss once again why Israel is considered to be practicing apartheid. It has been established by the major human rights organisations: among which Amnesty International, Human Right Watch, and in Israel, B'Tselem. That's all we need to know, if you don't agree contest those and their findings- which you can consult online.

It's indeed pointless, because it is a lie, always was a lie and continues being a lie. Naming the names of some of the far-left groups doesn't make it less of a lie. Arabs in Israel are integrated, have representation in the Knesset and full legal, electoral and all other rights. Talking about "apartheid" is nonsense, which is obvious to anybody who knows what this word means and what legal policies actually exist in Israel.

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

#753

Post by cf1241290841 »

underdeserver wrote: post #622
cf1241290841 wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are wrong on both parts. Cognitive / Narrative warfare has become part of standard doctrine for most major militaries. Earlier discussion about "corporate" spin offs from the intelligence sector. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34803779 Looking how many countries backed the current Israeli government for how long despite targeting the civilian population, as well as stuff like OP on most major platfo…

Hyperlocal public opinion bot campaigns in third world countries are different from swaying public opinion in the west. I would not say any governments other than the US government "back" the Israeli government. The most the Israelis get is a cold neutrality, and an occasional abstention instead of yea vote in the many UN general assembly votes against Israel.

>I would not say any governments other than the US government "back" the Israeli government.

The situation in Germany is really bad. Openly illegal bad. It seems to be similar in large parts of the EU, despite countries like Ireland showing some backbone. Ruling politicians are using "obviously illegal means" (according to court ruling after court ruling) to silence and prosecute opposition to crimes against humanity. Going as far as police dragging away people with signs pointing to statements from UN officials.

Its "Neighboring countries should be worried" levels of bad here. I told what is happening here to an old friend who did his time in the Swiss military as an analyst and i am unable to contact him since.

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

#754

Post by verulito »

faeriechangling wrote: post #490
mgraczyk wrote: post #336

Interestingly if you read the actual report from HRW, it sounds like most of the material they are referring too was legitimately taken down because it supported violence, according to Meta's policies. For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many, so it was taken down. In other cases the content praised attacks by Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organization by the US go…

I have no problem taking down "From the river to the sea" type content so long as we also take down Greater Israel type content.

Having (Jewish) Israeli, pre-Israeli, and pre-pre-Israli heritage, I don't personally find "From the River to the Sea" offensive but I do find it non-constructive and insensitive. Globalize the intifada otoh is awful.

I follow this topic daily, on twitter, in telegram (both Israeli and Arab groups), and among the thousands of Jews I know across the world on FB (from anti-Zionist Jews to Orthodox). This is the first time I've ever seen the phrase "Greater Israel" mentioned. I'll go research it now but it strikes me as a manufactured obscurity, while "From the River to the Sea" is prevasive.

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

#755

Post by alternative_a »

smsm42 wrote: post #749
alternative_a wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, the phrase "from the river to the [sea]" is considered hateful by many, so it was taken down. That’s convenient. Zionism, the ideology and its propaganda, “is considered hateful by many” too. Actually, that happy slogan of “from this body of water to that other body of water is all our precious” is shared by both parties. Israel’s flag even has it diagrammed in case you missed the slogans. The two blue…

Yes, it is convenient for potential victims of genocide that calling for genocide of those people is considered calling for genocide. It's also true. "From the river to the sea" is calling for the genocide of Israel population. It was known before, and Hamas proudly demonstrated it just now, there can not be any misunderstanding what they meant. The lines on the flag have zero to do with rivers, it's a symbolic repre…

Let me see how this works:

For Palestinians to say the want to be “free from river to sea” means the “genocide of Israelis”. But, amazingly but unsurprisingly, for Israelis to say they want to be “free of Palestinians” (who happen to currently be in part in the area “from river to sea”) it does not mean “genocide of Palestinians”. This must be Schroedinger’s genocide. Now you see it now you don’t. Amazing.

A conversation somewhere in the area between river and the sea. That oh so special place on earth that is worth having a world war over. “How long o lord?” Seriously lord.

Here it goes:

- Palestinians say they want to be free from river to the sea!

- Hah, really? The nerve. Why can’t they just go to some Arab country or maybe America?

- They say they are not Arab, they are Palestinian.

- Hah. Nationalism is a sickness.

- Agreed.

- I can’t believe they want to kill us all.

- How you figure?

- Well, they ain’t gonna be “free” while we’re here. That can’t possibly work.

- Hmm.

- And they know that we know that they know.

- Aha.

- Yeah, so obviously, they want to kill us all. A genocide.

- Ingrates.

- Animals!

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

#756

Post by [deleted] »

smsm42 wrote: post #750
faeriechangling wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problem taking down "From the river to the sea" type content so long as we also take down Greater Israel type content.

I don't remember a single instance of a mass protest on campus or in the streets, in US or in Europe or in Israel, where the protestors would demand that Israel occupies Egypt, Iraq and Syria, throw their population into the sea (or into the desert) and establish a Judaic theocracy on the freshly liberated land. I can believe that whatever is meant by "Greater Israel" among 8 billions of people would be some that sup…

[deleted]

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

#757

Post by Aerbil313 »

drawkward wrote: post #687
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony of banning the phrase, "From the river to the sea" is that in almost every Israeli school, there are maps on the wall that show Israel extending from the river to the sea.[0] Greater Israel, extending from the river to the sea, with the Palestinians as stateless people with no rights, is a de facto reality, and has been for 56 years now. 0. This is a typical map. The only indication that there is any Palest…

Furthermore, a soverign Israel "from the river to the sea" was a founding tenet of Israel's Likud party, of which Netanyahu is a member. It is no longer an explicit goal of Likud.

Furthermore, the Israeli flag itself is the Star of David (representing Israeli land) between two blue lines which are the river and the sea. It has always been Israel’s slogan and aim, “from the river to the sea”.

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

#758

Post by Aerbil313 »

smsm42 wrote: post #752
throw310822 wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absolutely pointless for us to discuss once again why Israel is considered to be practicing apartheid. It has been established by the major human rights organisations: among which Amnesty International, Human Right Watch, and in Israel, B'Tselem. That's all we need to know, if you don't agree contest those and their findings- which you can consult online.

It's indeed pointless, because it is a lie, always was a lie and continues being a lie. Naming the names of some of the far-left groups doesn't make it less of a lie. Arabs in Israel are integrated, have representation in the Knesset and full legal, electoral and all other rights. Talking about "apartheid" is nonsense, which is obvious to anybody who knows what this word means and what legal policies actually exist i…

If this[1] is not apartheid, then nothing is. Separate parks with locked doors for children of different religion, the key given to Jewish moms.

1: Raw video by The Guardian, not even much commentary, see with your own eyes: https://youtu.be/ksnLom8OD9E?si=aYvcLqcLQK960fbx

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

#759

Post by belorn »

abeppu wrote: post #353
ThinkBeat wrote: post #317

This is something people have to relearn over and over again. A lot of the people who are not upset with Meta limiting opinions and content related to the war in Gaza¹. Were gloating and happy when Meta limited opinions and content from right wing politicians² not so long ago. Once you invite censorship for content you dont like, how can you expect it wont bite you in the ass later on. This is why freedom of speech i…

While I agree that one's views on censorship should not be based on whether one agrees or disagrees with the views presently impacted, I don't think your comparisons are reasonable for multiple reasons: - Stalin and Hitler were _state_ censorship, where the state itself (and its heavy-handed use of force) were used to silence dissent. Meta is not a state, and Meta is not itself using force. - When Niemöller says "the…

I don't think the question will land on the issue if people have a right to spread false information. Instead the big question will be if people have a right to decide which information is false and which is not. If people do not have this right, and we instead want a small elected people to have a exclusive right to define which information is false, then what form of process should those people be elected.

A common argument of anti-censorship advocacy is to only allow censorship if a court of law has agrees to it, and then only if that law is identical in every country. Only then do we have a direct link between elected people who has mandate to define what is true and what is false.

With the covid chemical in question one should ask why the person who suggested horse drugs was not charged and found guilty in the country where they reside. Why did the law allow people to provide harmful medical advice in time of a pandemic?

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

#760

Post by Aerbil313 »

bjourne wrote: post #706
ajmurmann wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three of those are religions and one of those is an ethnicity as well. One of those also has seen almost constant persecution during history. It's concerning that this needs to be pointed out

That's a lame excuse as if one writes "Fuck Druze" or "Fuck Yazids" Twitter does not add a warning. Besides, Christians have certainly been persecuted in Muslim countries and Muslims are certainly persecuted in Western countries.

Please show an example of Christians being persecuted in Muslim countries. Muslims did not/do not try to convert Christians and Jews as they are considered ahlul-kitab/people of the book under Islamic law.
Post reply on HN