Where in the linked pdf is any evidence that the reported content was actually innocent?
If the content which Israel reported to meta was truly pro-terror, then surely there's no problem here - a nation who is the target of a terrorist group, can spend their taxes reducing pro-terror group content online. It's only a problem if, as the report alleges, the content was not pro-terror, but that's not actually evidenced anywhere
Human rights watch's report covers more individual examples.
To quote: "Of the 1,050 cases reviewed for this report, 1,049 involved peaceful content in support of Palestine that was censored or otherwise unduly suppressed, while one case involved removal of content in support of Israel."
This leak aims at looking at the bigger picture across all of Meta's 3 billion users.
Of course, Meta can chose examples of actually violating posts removed and show that as counter proof, or even posts that are violating that are not yet removed. But anyone familiar with how ML models work knows that false positives / false negatives exists.
Its the degree to which the ML models primarily censor almost any content related to Israel/Palestine, the systemic nature of targeting specific countries, such as Palestine, Egypt, Jordan, and the fact that per-capita, Israel is the country that most abuses the content enforcement system (3x more than any other country).
> Of course, Meta can chose examples of actually violating posts removed and show that are counter proof, or even posts that are violating that are not yet removed
No, meta don't need to prove anything to anyone.
It's you who alleges that the content should have stayed up, so what's your evidence?
You're telling me I need to go and read a HRW pdf instead? Okay where is that?
The report: https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/12/21/metas-broken-promises/...
Unfortunately links to individual posts can't be accessed as the posts themselves are removed. The HRW report is excellent as they documented this individual cases and recorded them.
Okay well you don't have any proof, any in general, I would consider it a good use of tax shekels to reduce the number of pro-hamas posts on social media. So until you can dig up any proof, I'm considering this whole post to be a nothing burger
Did you look at the article? This investigation directly corroborates existing reports from third parties like Human Rights Watch. There is even an intake form directly from the Israeli government calling for the censorship posts of posts at Meta. We even posted their phone and fax number in case anyone is interested in having a friendly chat with them.
All data collected is directly from Meta, and the whisteblowers themselves are open to sharing this data with any authority or court willing to look into this. Everything is well documented. Where and how the data was obtained is also documented as well.
Or alternatively, you can wait for the next leak.
google search for "human rights watch israel censorship" turned this up: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/media_2023/12/ip_met...
check "illustrative examples" section.
Wow, is almost like you're committed to obfuscation what Israel is doing. Couldn't possibly be that tho...
All 1049 posts were peaceful? The pdf mentions this was mostly after October 7th, a terrorist (as in, meant to induce fear by targeting civilians) attack which was live streamed on Facebook and posted repeatedly during that day.
I’m surprised the Israelis are so capable with intelligence, yet bungled this so much that not one post they pointed out was violent?
I’m happy to stand corrected, but when someone shows a perfect record in a data review I’m naturally suspicious.
EDIT: I’m confusing the linked PDF and HRW’s report. But I still have doubts about HRW’s numbers.
In this case it's being alleged that sending a thousand false takedown requests which were then acted on would not be a bungling, but rather a success.
This was my takeaway as well.
The pdf says there's a 95% accept rate on their takedown requests. They use that as evidence of censorship but, to me, that looks like evidence of judicious requests that meta agrees with.
Without data on what was taken down, there's no way to explain the difference. There's no reason not to make the entire dataset public (anonymized if you'd like but, since the content is implied to be benign, what's the harm in not?) and show some examples.
The implication that, because Israel submits the most requests that they must be acting in bad faith makes sense only of all countries had an equal amount of content generated that they'd like filtered. It's very easy for me to believe that Israel would have more content directed towards it that violated the Meta TOS.
Israel is not the target of a terrorist group. It is a terrorist state subjugating a trapped population to forced starvation and hunger. It's a second holocaust live streamed to your phone and you still think they are acting rationally.
Oppressed people have the right to violence just because they're brown doesn't make them "terrorists," that's actually quite the racist worldview.
> Israel is not the target of a terrorist group.
Most would disagree, not the least of which are people in that region. Hamas does not have many friends outside of Iran because most governments in the region see them as a destabilizing force. And they are. The
> It is a terrorist state subjugating a trapped population to forced starvation and hunger.
They are using tactics that, if put up to scrutiny in a trial in an international court of law, would probably be considered war crimes and crimes against humanity. The same would probably be true of Hamas' tactics on October 7th, 2023.
> Oppressed people have the right to violence just because they're brown doesn't make them "terrorists," that's actually quite the racist worldview.
Ultimately you have two Semitic peoples - Palestinians and Jews - who want to establish an ethnostate in what used to be Mandatory Palestine. Both have some ancestral title to at least some of the region. Quite a few Jewish subgroups, like Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews, would be considered "brown", to borrow your term.
The way forward will require both parties to recognize each other's right to at least some of the land. It's worth noting that this has not been, and still is not, a view held by either party's governments.
self determination, through-violence*
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_...
Would you say that this list is incorrect? Or that any attack on civilians in Israel is justified and thus not a terrorist attack?
Do you think Israel was created through peace or through zionist bombing attacks? Do you think only the brown bombers should be labelled terrorists?
You sound racist and like you're ok enabling the killing of children. As a doctor Tarek Loubani reported today "I've been to many wars, it has never felt like the war is against children"
Before the state of Israel, Jewish groups were bombing British mandate offices. Not civilians, and definitely not on purpose. But I’m trying to understand your logic. Attacking innocent civilians is legitimate if your goal is to establish a state?
And BTW, you don’t know me personally, ad hominem attacks just weaken your argument
Do you believe these events were terrorist attacks?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sunday_(1937)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balad_al-Shaykh_massacre
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=zzFlAAAAIBAJ&sjid=MIkN...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cast_Thy_Bread
Well yeah, the 30s and 40s were a horrible time of terror attacks from both groups against each other.
> Before the state of Israel, Jewish groups were bombing British mandate offices. Not civilians, and definitely not on purpose.
Why did you make this assertion?
And what makes them terrorist attacks?
No, you see, it's not terror when the bomb falls from a jet fighter or a drone /s.
Or when it's biological warfare on civilians for the purpose of depopulation either apparently.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cast_Thy_Bread
Is killing a child terrorism? Because israel has killed over 18000 in the last few years.
You didn’t answer my question
[flagged]
Again, ad hominem.
Let me teach you a little bit about Israel. 20% Arabs with same rights as Jews, with government representation. 50% of Jews in Israel come from Arab countries (they were ethnically cleansed from their home countries) so they are the exact color of Palestinians, if not even “brownier” (if the color is so important to you).
[flagged]
It seems like you reply aggressively and instinctively without proof or reason. Your mind is set on something but have you researched it?
Israel has more diversity than most European countries. All citizens have the same rights. Sexual orientation, gender, religion and race are protected by laws.
[flagged]
Hoping that I’ll influence at least one other person, probably not the people replying, but maybe the silent readers.
don't. you will be either downvoted to hell or flagged in case you will provide some external links that actually support what you say.
if you want to reach out to silent readers, go to reddit. there is no nonsense as flagged posts, people are more open minded to discussion and reach is much bigger.
here at this point of time it's sect of genocide witnesses.
"it's more open minded"
aka
All the major subreddits are brigaded by Israeli hasbara teams. Israel sentiment is in the fucking gutter because of you child-killing-defending freaks
You’re correct. It’s just a shame that every time a post about Israel devolves to anti Israeli circle jerk here.
This site prides itself on knowledgeable and civil discussion. Not when Israel is involved.
" knowledgeable and civil discussion" with long stick of moderation and flagged posts/downvotes for any not-popular opinions on any topic. a lot of people been passive aggressive due to be suppressed and unable to express their thoughts. nice reflection of what is going on in usa actually
[flagged]
yes. hamas is awful. op almost died in dolphinorium bombing which was done by hamas and killed 2 dozens of teens at disco.
[flagged]
it's funny that you wrote "heavily armed concentration camp". probably first concentration camp in history that is heavily armed and shooting rockets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphinarium_discotheque_bombi...
none of this is funny, freak.
[flagged]
Try to visit Israel. You would be positivity surprised.
[flagged]
[flagged]
I can fully grant the list as accurate and even undercounting the number of attacks that have happened.
It, frankly, pales in comparison to the number of civilians the IDF has killed and is currently killing. No amount of terrorist attacks can justify starving a population or dropping bombs on the tents of refuges.
Like, I'm sorry, but an attack in 2024 that injures 20 people and an attack in 2023 that kills 1000 is simply not comparable. There are literally 1000s dying weekly right now in gaza. The IDF is daily shooting starving children that go to the Israel's ran aid sites.
Israel does not have the right to commit genocide.
The OP said that Israel is not a target of terror attacks.
Yes, very good, OP's wrong and you're right.
Now, if you'd address the 8,000,000lb elephant in the room that would be great.
Sure, I don't agree with that assessment, but I get where it comes from.
I find the "what-about"ism somewhat tiring at this point. What Israel is currently doing is unconscionable.
This is really not unlike trying to criticize the war crimes committed during the Warsaw uprising or the actions of John Brown. Were they wrong? Yes. Were they understandable? Absolutely. Bringing them up whenever someone brings up the actions of the Nazis or the slave owners is what's problematic. It tries to strip away the humanity of people that are being slaughtered in order to justify the slaughtering.
I pointed out the error in his post, everybody else is “what-about”ing at me in response.
K.
Did you need to point out that error? You can see why we'd read your response as running cover for a state actively committing genocide, right?
Yeah I did. I have friends that lost family from these terror attacks. Twice while on a date with my wife at our local bar we had to flee because of a Palestinian started shooting random people in the street. I had the luck to have a birthday party cancelled at this location on this date https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphinarium_discotheque_bom...
So having a random person on the internet explicitly lying about these experiences and having other people upvoting him kind of grinds my gears.
Understandable.
Now, do you condemn the genocide? Because the problem here is that even though you've experienced a traumatic event, 1000s of Palestinians who never shot at or bombed your family are being shot at, bombed, and starved.
Do you acknowledge the Palestinian right to exist?
Of course I acknowledge their right to exist. I only wish it would be reciprocated, however, time and time again we were shown that this is not the case. Gaza was left alone on 2006, look what happened. They could’ve made an example of a prosperous territory and enabling trust. Instead they chose war death and terror.
I wish what happened wouldn’t have. On oct 7 and in Gaza. But people keep forgetting that we still have living hostages in tunnels under Gaza, and we can’t accept a militarized Gaza anymore.
For the last 2 years there are 2 principles that have not changed. Hamas should return the hostages and surrender its arms. The moment that happens the war is over. It could’ve happened 2 years ago and this thousands of deaths could’ve been avoided. But until that happens, the war continues.
So I don’t believe there’s genocide, as it precludes explicit desire. There’s war. And it will end the moment Hamas want it to.
>They could’ve made an example of a prosperous territory and enabling trust.
How do they create a prosperous territory? Israel destroyed Gaza's airport. Israel destroyed the foundations of Gaza's seaport. Israel maintains a maritime blockade of Gaza, so it's not like they can freely engage in trade with other sovereign territories. Israel maintains control over exploitation of Gaza's natural gas deposits.[1][2]
> But people keep forgetting that we still have living hostages in tunnels under Gaza, and we can’t accept a militarized Gaza anymore.
Even before Oct7, there were something like 350-500 Palestinians held in Israeli jails, charged with no crimes but indefinitely detained. They are functionally the same as hostages. Why should Gaza accept Israel holding hostages? Why should Palestine accept a militarized Israel? [3][4]
> Hamas should return the hostages and surrender its arms.
Israel should return its hostages and surrender its arms. And then the leadership should stand trial for genocide and crimes against humanity. We put some Hamas leaders on trial at the same time if you like, I'm fine with that, but the total disarmament of Israel and the prosecution of its leadership will likely be an overwhelming net good for the rest of humanity.
[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/6/21/palestines-forg...
[2] https://mondoweiss.net/2019/10/the-gas-fields-off-gaza-a-gif...
[3] https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2020/10/un-expert-ca...
[4] https://al-shabaka.org/briefs/the-prison-intifada-supporting...
There's no error in my post. "terrorism" is a political racist term mainly used to benefit white colonial powers and label freedom movements as below their oppressors.
I don't think brown people trying to save themselves from a concentration camp are terrorists, therefore the terrorist state of israel is not the target of a terrorist group. In fact how could they be when it is them that are invading Gaza for 40+ years.
I know you're not this stupid, you're just racist.
But you said that Israel is a terrorist state, so that isn’t political? Which is it?
[flagged]
This is whataboutism. Either address the parent comment or go away.
How is this whataboutism? He said that Israel is not a target of terror attacks. In response I provided a list of terror attacks against Israel, this is exactly on topic
You don't have to convince me that you don't get it. I believe you. I'm not here to change your mind. I'm calling what you say out for the benefit of others.
It's whataboutism because the statement also included that Israel is a terrorist state. By giving a list of attacks on Israel as a rebuttal, you are saying Israel is not a terrorist state because it's been attacked by Hamas. Do you see how silly that sounds? Since Hamas is a terrorist group for all of its viscousness, Israel must be as well, because the viciousness of Israel is more than 10 times that of Hamas.
In the words of the ancient Spartans: If