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

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#791

Post by anigbrowl »

barnesto wrote: post #691
anigbrowl wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the policeman involved in the original incident should be investigated Oh give it a rest. We saw him kill the man, he can sit a cell and prepare for his trial like any other killer. If you don't like what people int he media say find different commentators or stop listening to pundits altogether. I am sick to the back teeth of people complaining about 'the mainstream media', when Fox News and Sinclair broadcasting ar…

The investigation lead to an arrest today. That's how the system works. And it worked in this case. Where was your rage for Justine Damond? Shot by Officer Mohamed Noor from the passenger seat of his police cruiser, across his partner. Where were the riots? Also, when people complain about MSM they are including Fox and Sinclair. It's all corrupted and meant to drive a narrative instead of presenting objective views…

It's amazing to me how the system can send 4 cops to take someone into custody immediately over an alleged passing of a fake $20 bill, but when there's video of a homicide taking place despite the pleas of the victim and the intervention of bystanders, and more video shows that the initial report submitted by the cops in question was a lie, everything has to slow right down while we wring our hands over the rights of the cops.

Also, when people complain about MSM they are including Fox and Sinclair.

Please don't insult my intelligence again.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#792

Post by Valgrim »

dpoochieni wrote: post #779
wpietri wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the whole reason we have public education is that democracy requires a knowledgeable voter base. When social media companies were just starting out, I get why they weren't fretting about societal effects. But even if we go by business metrics, a collapse of democracy would probably be bad for their businesses. It's past time for social media companies to take responsibility for their negative externalities. And…

Public education and knowledgeable voter base in the same sentence, what a joke.

Maybe this is a US-specific problem? I'm not American and the public education system is actually doing a great job in most developed countries.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#793

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

jameslk wrote: post #663
creaghpatr wrote: post #292

The White House twitter account has issued a response: https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1266367168603721728?s=... This* Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, @Twitter has determined that it will allow terrorists, dictators, and foreign propagandists to abuse its platform. *Referring to an attached picture of a Khamenei tweet about Palestine

Where's the violence though? Or are they applying the stereotypical western misunderstanding of jihad = violence/terrorism? https://news.gallup.com/poll/7333/jihad-holy-war-internal-sp...

When people risk being killed during a jihad, it kinda implies that a text does not refer to a greater jihad aimed at improving one's soul.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#794

Post by bgorman »

Objectively - how is this advocating for violence? I have not been following this deeply but it seems like there is already serious violence occurring where dozens of people have been charged with probable felonies and buildings have been set on fire? Isn't it the responsibility of the local government to protect private property? It certainly seems like the situation is out of hand when a police station is burned to the ground.

The National guard has been dispatched in similar situations e.g. Rodney King riots. Ostensibly the reason for the deployment is to "ensure peace"

I understand Trump walks a thin line, but in my opinion he is very skilled at never literally advocating for violence or overtly racist actions.

I absolutely do not condone excessive force against anyone, but I fail to understand how this specific tweet is glorifying violence. I'm just trying to understand

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#795

Post by oneplane »

meheleventyone wrote: post #736
082349872349872 wrote: post #110

One can also check easily-discoverable recent US military policy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23347453 to discover that those who think these things through don't condone "looting ⊃ shooting". Bonaparte was a fan of the "whiff of grape" https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_royaliste_du_13_v... but we all know how that ended.

Isn't it a long standing thing that the US Military use of force rules in warzones are generally more restrictive than the policies for use on their fellow citizens by police back home?

Doesn't that mostly have to do with the amount of training, responsibility, leadership etc. that comes with military hierarchy? It can still get pretty bad (coverup and/or violence wise), but it seems that at least they have some sense of the relationship between violent actions and their consequences.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#797

Post by oarsinsync »

dependenttypes wrote: post #752
ikeyany wrote: post #192

People are wondering "How far does this go? How can Twitter say this is not cool, but allow something like violent movies or games? Where's the line?" The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line. Is this supposed to be bad? I actually wish that our own PM had done the same. I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree. It seems that the US citizens are fine with state mandated violence a…

> It seems that the US citizens are fine with state mandated violence as long as it does not include them. Nothing happened regarding https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21018041 for example.

I don't think it's fair to paint this as unique to US citizens. I'd go as far as saying this is generally true across the world, with few people protesting state sanctioned violence abroad, and significantly more people protesting domestic state sanctioned violence.

I don't think that's unusual. I think it's normal that we care more about our own lives than we do others lives, we care more about people dying at home than we do abroad.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, but it is normal human behaviour. A good example of this is watching how peoples perceptions of this latest coronavirus unfolded.

There's too much going on in all of our lives to have time for every bad thing happening elsewhere. You pick your battles. That's ok. You still have to live your life for yourself at the end of the day, nobody else is going to live your life for you.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#798

Post by davidw »

dragonwriter wrote: post #270
umvi wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting That's an extremely literal interpretation of his words. Most people would interpret that phrase to mean "you better think twice before looting because I'm not going to sit idly by and let you do it" but in the form of a vaguely threatening, yet catchy rhyme.

> That's an extremely literal interpretation of his words Yes, which is better than a reasonable interpretation of his words would show them to be, because going beyond a mere literal reading to consider the deliberate historical reference and the implicit subtext makes the statement worse , not better.

He's fairly good at riding that line of plausible deniability.

Just yesterday, he retweeted a guy calling for Democrats to die. "Well, not literally of course"... wink wink.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#799

Post by Consultant32452 »

dijit wrote: post #201
ikeyany wrote: post #192

People are wondering "How far does this go? How can Twitter say this is not cool, but allow something like violent movies or games? Where's the line?" The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line.

We have laws in the UK that curtail speech like that, "Inciting violence" is a crime. Which I agree with to some extent, you're not innocent of a crime because you convinced a person to harm another, just because you were too cowardly to get your hands dirty yourself. But the US is rather famously not British, so I'm not sure if it's a relevant thing to add to the discussion.

Part of the issue is if you're hostile to the speaker, you can interpret a call for peace to mean a call for violence. Try to imagine for a moment, that this comment was not made by an evil racist orange man, but someone you like... maybe Ghandi. If Ghandi said: "Looting leads to shooting." Which interpretation would you more likely choose?

1. Please don't loot, it escalates violence and people will get killed

2. Let's kill all the looters

Whether it's Trump or Ghandi, we're imagining we know something about the internal state of the speaker's mind that we don't know.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#800

Post by dependenttypes »

Valgrim wrote: post #784
dependenttypes wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line. Is this supposed to be bad? I actually wish that our own PM had done the same. I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree. It seems that the US citizens are fine with state mandated violence a…

It is bad because the value of human life (even people you don't like) is infinitely greater than material goods. A looted store can be repared, restocked, rebuilt. A dead human stays dead forever and yields a mountain of grief around him. They are not comparable at all.

> It is bad because the value of human life (even people you don't like) is infinitely greater than material goods

The human life of the people looting your property is more important than the well-being of you and your family who will be in debt after that, I see.

Regardless, this seems to be your personal value, something that I (and most people that I know) do not seem to share - even the US constitution and laws do not seem to share it, after all it is legal to shoot someone invading your home. I have no grief to give to someone who died while trying to invade my home and loot my property. They are dead due to their own choices.

> A looted store can be repared, restocked, rebuilt

For free? It can be a lifetime's worth for some. Are you willing to pay it out of your own pockets? If there were enough people willing to do so I would support your statement, but that does not seem to be the case.

Post reply on HN