Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Israel Accuses Facebook Of Aiding Terrorists and Hampering Police Investigations (reuters.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the hating-hate-speech dept.

"The young generation in the Palestinian Authority suckles all of its incitement against Israel from Facebook and, in the end, goes and commits murders," Israel's Minister of Internal Security said Saturday. "Some of the blood of the victims of the recent attacks...is unfortunately on the hands of Mark Zuckerberg, because the police and security forces could have been told about the post of that vile murderer." Reuters calls the remarks "ramping up the pressure" as Israel prepares legislation which would allow it to order social media sites to remove posts it considered threatening. The security minister says Facebook currently "sets a very high bar for removing inciteful content and posts" and "sabotages the work of the Israeli police" by being uncooperative.

Facebook responded that there's "no room for content that promotes violence, direct threats, terrorist or hate speeches on our platform." BetaNews writes that "while Facebook waits for content to be reported before acting, Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked said that the site should be pro-active in seeking out offending content instead."

31 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. Israel abuses human rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The war crimes committed in Lebanon and Gaza are awful. I despise Hamas and Hezbollah; they cannot be justified. However, the use of cluster bombs in southern Lebanon is inexcusable. How about Israel submits their leaders for war crimes prosecution and then we'll talk?

    1. Re: Israel abuses human rights by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is one of the most one sided issues in modern history. Everything he said is 100 percent true. There was never palestinian arab identity and it was manufactured and nurtured with the express intent of eradicating Israel. They didn't even hide it. At the same time the arabs waged 2 full scale wars of aggression and the victors were 'required' to act in ways never dreamed about in the history of warfare. At the same time Israel has made deadly concession after deadly concession for naught agains a backdrop of ever increasing non-Jewish hostility. Empathy? For the arabs from the Jews? That's rich. You need to do a bit of investigation into the standard curriculum in gaza and the west bank schools.

    2. Re: Israel abuses human rights by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I want everyone to take a close look at the URL of this guy's citation of a "survey of respected Generals from around the world".

      www.high-level-military-group.org

      Can anyone else spot the clue that it's bogus?

      OK, now take a loot at the "In The Media" section from that website. Can you spot the single issue that appears to be the sole reason for this group of "respected Generals from around the world" to exist?

      http://www.high-level-military...

      You have to be able to know when you're being had.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re: Israel abuses human rights by CronoCloud · · Score: 4, Informative

      There was never palestinian arab identity and it was manufactured and nurtured with the express intent of eradicating Israel.

      Sure there was....Before WW2. Remember, the area we now call Israel was majority Palestinian before WW2. Then the brits basically just handed the region over to the remaining Jews of EUROPE...and ignored the Palestinian locals

      Yeah sure, the Brits and everyone else felt guilty about the Holocaust, but that was no excuse for the stupidity that has caused endless sorrow. The whole word would have been better off if the jews of Europe had been handed a piece of Arizona or Alaska and told to either shut the fuck up about Palestine or go back to post-war Europe where they were FROM.

    4. Re: Israel abuses human rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh well in that case cluster bombing civilians is OK because they didn't sign a treaty saying it's not OK.

    5. Re: Israel abuses human rights by CronoCloud · · Score: 2

      Their whois leads to domainsbyproxy so we can't find out what group is bankrolling the site. I can tell that it is not a US based organization since their PDF's use A4 page sizing.

    6. Re: Israel abuses human rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do you hate jews?

      Because they're doing similar to Palestine that the Nazis did to them, and have the audacity to scream "antisemitism" when anyone tries to call them on it.

    7. Re: Israel abuses human rights by jIyajbe · · Score: 2

      "Peace is not part of their vocabulary. Only Hate Israel, Destroy Israel."

      And this is an example of the harm done by generalizations and pre-judging people based on the group they a part of.

      In 2005, a Palestinian 12-year old boy was shot by an Israeli soldier who mistook his toy gun for a real weapon. Despite the best efforts of the Israeli physicians, he was declared brain dead a few days later. His parents--who had just lost their son to an Israeli soldier's mistake--decided against riot and anger; instead, they donated all of the boy's organs. The recipients were Israelis--with the parents' blessing.

      "I donâ(TM)t mind seeing the organs in an Israeli or a Palestinian. In our religion, God allows us to give organs to another person and it doesnâ(TM)t matter who the person is,â(TM) said Jamal al-Khatib, the boyâ(TM)s father, who added that he hoped the donations would send a message of peace to Israelis and Palestinians."

      http://imemc.org/article/14861...

      --
      "Don't blame the log for the fire." --Andrew Ratshin
    8. Re: Israel abuses human rights by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

      The Jews were fighting British forces as much as Arab, in the War for Independence. The British didn't hand over anything. That aside, it's been over 60 years. When will the Arabs realize they lost the war and get on with living? They were given Jordan, which is significantly larger than the 1948 borders of Israel. The West Bank was part of Jordan then, and between 1948 and 1967 there was not a single Jordanian civil war to create an autonomous "Palestinian" State. Only after Jordan lost the territory to Israel do we find that suddenly the "Palestinian" people need their own State.

      Arabs can't stand losing to Jews. There is absolutely nothing else of any consequence to explain the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Wars happen; some win and some lose. This has been the entire known history of humanity. Only Jews who win are expected to give in to the losers.

    9. Re: Israel abuses human rights by Dog-Cow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Really? The German Jewish population was decimated during WWII. The Arab population in the WB has increased by several hundred percent since 1967. Please explain how Israel is doing to the Arabs what the Germans did to the Jews.

      We'll wait, but we won't hold our breath.

    10. Re: Israel abuses human rights by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      What exactly is your helpful suggestion to me?

      I'm not the GP but let me offer you some advice.

      Pressure your government to put the border back to there the UN says it should be, back to the 1960s location. Stop all military action against Palestine, concentrate on defence from within your own borders only. Remove the blockade and allow Palestine to flourish.

      It will be hard for the first few years, but as Palestine recovers and people find they can build a prosperous life if they concentrate on living instead of fighting you, the violence will die down. Any other course of action is just going to perpetuate the cycle.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re: Israel abuses human rights by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      Google it. The university of Tel Aviv study is perhaps the most enlightening.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  2. Here's a novel idea by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you want the Palestinians to stop attacking Israelis a good step would be to stop the settlements, closely followed by not tearing down peoples' houses every time a family member commits a crime against an israeli. You are making the Palestinians not care any more. And when people don't care they will do anything.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re: Here's a novel idea by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Just ban religion. Everyone would get along much better if there weren't issues with Muslims, Jews, and Christians.

      The conflict has little to do with religion. Palestinians have historically been largely secular, and when Israel was founded about 20% of Palestinians were Christian (although many of them have since emigrated). The Israeli settlements are mostly populated and supported by secular Jews, including immigrants from Russia and Eastern Europe who came to Israel for economic opportunity, not religion.

    2. Re: Here's a novel idea by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Banning religion wouldn't solve anything. People would simply gravitate towards other ideologies which inevitably recreate the same conflicts. Look at the growing strife between the political right and political left. There have been numerous cases of violence from members of both sides of the isle at political rallies this election cycle. The same happens between football club fans in Europe from time to time as well.

      Humans are a tribal species and as long as there are multiple camps to which one can belong, we'll continue to find ourselves opposed to one and other, often with some amount of violence.

    3. Re:Here's a novel idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      So settlements is the excuse now? What was the Palestinians' excuse during the 1929 Safed Riots, or the 1929 Hebron Massacre, or the 1938 Tiberias Massacre, or the 1834 Safed Massacre, or the the 1517 Safed Massacre, or the 1838 attack on Safed, or the 1834 Hebron Massacre, or the 1660 Destruction of Safed, or the 1660 Destruction of Tiberias?

      All of those occurred before Israel was even formed. Between the formation of Israel and the first constructed settlement (1948-1967), there were an average of just over 3.2 attacks on civilians per year originating in the Jordan-controlled West Bank, ignoring the multiple actual wars that were started.

      When Israel entirely withdrew from all Gaza settlements in 2005, they were immediately met with an increase of violence, not less.

      So is there *any* reason to believe the Palestinians -- the same people who overwhelmingly support the government that holds this kind of shit at their schools -- would stop attacking civilians if the settlements are disbanded?

      Fuck no. The settlements are just a convenient excuse, not that the Palestinians need one to kill teh joos.

    4. Re: Here's a novel idea by Kohath · · Score: 2

      Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.

      Also extremely stupid (and/or entirely evil). How do you "ban" religion? What are you going to do to people who disobey your "ban"? Do you have some sort of camps in mind for them?

    5. Re: Here's a novel idea by CronoCloud · · Score: 3, Informative

      including immigrants from Russia and Eastern Europe who came to Israel for economic opportunity, not religion.

      And almost all those russian and Eastern European jews were Hasidic/Haredi/Orthodox, who swelled the numbers of Likud, who then sabotaged the peace process by doing everything they could do undermine Fatah.

      Then they could point to Hamas taking over as "see? All the Palestinians are terrorists who want to obliterate Israel, they elected Hamas!"

    6. Re: Here's a novel idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, 99% of all violence by political groups in the U.S. are and have always been from the left -- definitely from the 1960's on including all of the violence towards blacks in the 60's which was all from Democrats and KKK which was formed to be the militant arm of the Democratic Party in the South.

      Or as the Dilbert Zone's Scott Adams pointed out in his blog if you look at the statistics Democrats use guns overwhelmingly to kill each other and innocents while Republicans use them overwhelmingly for sport and to protect themselves from Democrats.

      If you look at the political leanings of mass shooters when they have a political persuasion over 90% have been Democrats.

      Basically, leftists have been and always are violent because their political beliefs feed their anger and their self-righteousness at being better than those on the right give so many leftists the conviction others deserve what they get. Just look at how badly Bernie Sanders supporters have been beating on very peaceful men and women at Trump rallies.

      You, the left is extremely violent compared to the right as defined on the U.S.

    7. Re:Here's a novel idea by St.Creed · · Score: 5, Interesting

      To discuss "The Palestinians" in the context of the ancient history is rather farfetched - under the Ottoman empire it is difficult to say whether the Palestinians identified themselves as Palestinians . Going into detail on your examples, Safed 1517 seems to be a case of anti-semitism during wartime, in the case of 1660 Tiberias/Safed it was the Druze who attacked, for reasons not immediately apparent. In modern times, Druze do not identify as Palestinians. Hebron 1834... was a case of a day of rape and pillage by an army after a 5 months siege, in which there were a grand total of 12 casualties. Calling that a massacre seems more a propaganda piece than a massacre. especially as the Arab population suffered over 500 casualties during that same day. But they don't really count in your examples, do they?

      The 1929 riots are more interesting. To quote wikipedia: "The Shaw Commission found that the fundamental cause of the violence "without which in our opinion disturbances either would not occurred or would not have been little more than a local riot, is the Arab feeling of animosity and hostility towards the Jews consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future."[ It also attributed the cause as being Arab fears of Jewish immigrants "not only as a menace to their livelihood but as a possible overlord of the future."

      With the benefit of hindsight we might say they had a point.

      When Israel entirely withdrew from all Gaza settlements in 2005, they were immediately met with an increase of violence, not less.

      Is that so strange? It is quite obvious to all involved why Israel withdrew: it would make it possible to stall peace negotiations for much longer, it would bottle the Palestines up in West Gaza, a much smaller area than the original plans show, and holding the settlements was politically impossible if Israel wanted to keep up relations with the rest of the world. This was realized by the Palestines as well.

      So is there *any* reason to believe the Palestinians -- the same people who overwhelmingly support the government that holds this kind of shit [youtube.com] at their schools -- would stop attacking civilians if the settlements are disbanded?

      There are loads of reasons to think that the attacks will *never* stop until the settlements are disbanded, for several reasons.
      1) the settlers are responsible for a lot of violence themselves. They are a huge part of the problem as they depend economically on the conflict. They do not want peace and do everything possible to stir up trouble. Shutting down the settlements would be a very small first step in normalizing the situation.
      2) the settlements use up a lot of water which is scarce in the area. They are connected by roads that the rest of the inhabitants are barred from even crossing, and occupy strategic areas with fertile lands.
      3) It is a visible reminder of the fact the population is controlled by outside soldiers.
      Removing the settlements won't stop the attacks on civilians (although it will stop attacks on settlements), but it is at least a start towards a solution.

      As for Hamas, yeah, they're wankers. It's not as if Israeli politicians are immune to the hatred though: rabbi Dov Lior (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_Lior) is at least as big a wanker as any member of Hamas.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    8. Re:Here's a novel idea by Rockoon · · Score: 2

      The Palestinians attacked Israelis as a matter of course long before any settlement existed.

      Ah yes that faithful day when Britain so charitably handed the equipment that just won WWII to the minority Israel population. How the Israeli's trembled in fear at only having the best military equipment ever made and used it to immediately and forcibly evict non-jews from what the U.N. decided was Jewish land. Israel has literally been resettling Palestinians since day #1.

      Its no surprise that the day the minority got military control they immediately started a campaign against the majority.

      Regardless of the past, Palestinian children are born into and condemned to live in an open air prison run by the Israelis and this has been true for more than a generation. Until this fact changes there is no moral refuge to be found in the ill deeds of the Palestinians, for their deeds are Israels doings.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    9. Re: Here's a novel idea by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.

      Without religion there's a good chance they'd make some kind of peace and get over it. Like Germany started a few world wars but now 70 years later it's pretty much all history. The conflicts that last centuries where one people hates the other usually involve religion, because shit like that is the main reason to hate persons that never did anything to you personally. Maybe my ancestors did some bad shit to your ancestors but inherited sin is bullshit. In Christianity and in general.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:Here's a novel idea by gzuckier · · Score: 2

      The Palestinians attacked Israelis as a matter of course long before any settlement existed.

      Ah yes that faithful day when Britain so charitably handed the equipment that just won WWII to the minority Israel population. How the Israeli's trembled in fear at only having the best military equipment ever made and used it to immediately and forcibly evict non-jews from what the U.N. decided was Jewish land. Israel has literally been resettling Palestinians since day #1. Its no surprise that the day the minority got military control they immediately started a campaign against the majority. Regardless of the past, Palestinian children are born into and condemned to live in an open air prison run by the Israelis and this has been true for more than a generation. Until this fact changes there is no moral refuge to be found in the ill deeds of the Palestinians, for their deeds are Israels doings.

      oh please, how old are you? as with any events which shaped history and thought, those who grew up in the current era have difficulty trying to replicate the thinking that prevailed before the events in question. in 1948, military victory of Israel was far from a sure thing, i fact arguably the smart money was betting they would be swamped. certainly, that was the thinking of the arab nations.
      and similarly in 1967. the idea that israel wanted territorial expansion is a fiction countering the fact that at the time, they weren't sure they would prevail then either. it was only after 1967 this image of the invulnerable israeli military took hold, not as a function of israel receiving " the equipment that just won WWII "

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  3. No justice, no peace. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    End the siege of Gaza.
    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2008/12/gaza-reduced-bare-survival-20081205/
    Give back the Palestinians their land as mandated in UN Resolution 242. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242
    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2008/08/trapped-collective-punishment-gaza-20080812/
    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2008/08/trapped-collective-punishment-gaza-20080812/
    Let Palestinians have the same rights as Israelis.End the first class citizen/second class citizen power structure. Free Palestinian children from jails. Injustice begets extremism and as long as Israelis play 'master race' over an oppressed peoples, this will never end. Give back the Palestinians their land, rights, and dignity.

    1. Re:No justice, no peace. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know Gaza borders on Egypt too, right? So why aren't you just trying to convince Egypt to support the Palestinians?

      Is it because you don't really care about Gazans and you just want a reason to hate Israel, or because you recognize that Egypt wants nothing to do with them because they're run by terrorists?

      You see, the people of Gaza are being held hostage by their own government. Unfortunately they have developed Stockholm Syndrome, so they keep electing terrorists to hold themselves hostage.

      It's not like Israel decided they hated Palestinians so they blockaded Gaza, forcing Gaza to lob rockets at them. In reality, Israel was tired of getting rockets lobbed at them, so they put up a blockade to prevent them from getting more rockets.

      The way to end the "siege" is to give up their weapons and release their hostages. If they stop trying to smuggle in rockets, there will no longer be a need for a blockade.

      dom

    2. Re:No justice, no peace. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

      The Egyptian border crossing is entirely controlled by Egypt. Israel has nothing to do with it. After that 100% falsehood, I am sure the rest of your words are similarly truth-free.

  4. Just go look for yourself by ITRambo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Israel is upset that Facebook didn't spy for them? State's have their own spy organizations that do that stuff. Get off your asses and go look for yourself to see what's posted. Why would any country expect a foreign organization to do their work for them? That's outlandish and pretty damn lazy.

  5. Re:Ah by CronoCloud · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No, they're not. They're just engaging in Aggresive apartheid.

    And the Palestinians are too STUPID and full of ANGER to try passive resistance, which plays right into the Theocrats and near fascists of Likud's hands

    That's right Palestians, every time you blow up a bus or whatever you let the Israels pull the Holocaust Martyr card. And the West, for good reason, still feels guilty about that.

  6. Re:On the other hand by johanw · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mostly on pressure from jews in the US who apparently have a huge voting and bribing capacity. The same mechanism that has prevented normal relations between the US and Cuba for decades.

  7. Am I missing something? by JThundley · · Score: 2

    Am I missing something from the summary? Israel's Minister of Internal Security said that a murder could have been prevented if Facebook told them about somebody's post, and now they're pushing for laws that make Facebook take down posts they don't like. How are the 2 related? How does the power to take down posts help them identify hateful posts?

  8. Bury this please by youngone · · Score: 2
    I'm kind of hoping this comment gets buried because of the flamewar in this thread, but here goes. I have no sympathy for Facebook really, but in my opinion they should respond in the same way ICANN responded in the next story down

    ICANN is neither "required or qualified" to pass judgment in such cases...

    Facebook is neither "required or qualified" to be pro-active in seeking out offending content...

    In other words, tell them to get stuffed. If Facebook engages with these arseholes, they'll always want more.