Class-Action Suit Against Facebook Over Pages Inciting Arabs to Kill Jews

[Bob]

Google allows it, FaceBook allows it, the use of their social media to allow terror and hate to spread..
http://cc.amazingcounters.com/counter.php?i=3190880&c=9572953

Being complicit, being culpable, these organizations are allowed to "get away with it", lacking social moral and civil responsibility..

Will they ever be cited for their actions against humanity?

Probably not.. Can we say the face of Evil is really present and fostered by these "social media" purveyors of hate?

Here is a current bit of information about a person who says FACEBOOK, you are wrong..

It's time to legally go after "social media" organizations who really are NOT social but allowing CRIMINAL activity, using a lame "community policy" that death threats, incitement to kill others is PERFECTLY FINE BEHAVIOUR.. Class action suits ARE forming against them.

Their bottom line is $$$ and their billions made in the Phenomena of allowing people a place to act "disrespectul, hurtful and harmful to others.." can you say these social media sites ALLOW "mental rape" - those organizations are focusing on allowing HARM to persist.

So called "freedom of speech" stops when those social media sites are allowing the advocating (and there certainly IS a pattern of advocating) that "violence is OK"... advocating violence or harm to others is NOT OK.


============================


As of Thursday evening, some 10,000 Israelis had signed a petition, launched by Shurat HaDin-The Israel Law Center, indicating their desire to join a class-action suit against Facebook for acting as an accomplice to terror.

Shurat HaDin, an NGO whose mission is combating terrorism through “lawfare,” took up the case, following multiple complaints lodged by concerned users about the proliferation of pages in Arabic that call for the killing of Jews.

Since Facebook’s response has been blasé at best, with claims that "content is monitored" for adherence to certain “community standards,” and utterly ineffectual, since pages such as “Stab Israelis” have not been removed, Israel Law Center founder Nitsana Darshan-Leitner decided to take the social media giant to court.

Darshan-Leitner, listed this year by both Forbes and Israeli financial newspaper Globes as among Israel’s 50 most influential women, told The Algemeiner on Thursday evening that though freedom of expression is a democratic ideal, both morally and legally, “It cannot be without limits.”

Darshan-Leitner said that her organization had been thinking about how to confront the current wave of “knife terror” that has become a fad and a frenzy among young Palestinians and Israeli-Arabs, whose hearts and minds have been brainwashed with slogans about Israeli “desecration” of the Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Old City of Jerusalem.

“Usually, when considering how best to tackle terrorism, we go after the money behind it,” said Leitner, who is headed for the United States, where next week she will be bringing the lawsuit against Facebook before a San Francisco judge.

“But in this case, there is no real money trail, other than the funds spent by groups like the Islamic Movement in Israel, which pays women lots of cash to harass non-Muslims on the Temple Mount,” she explained, referring to the recently-banned Muslim women’s group, Murabitat, which was organized to keep Jews from praying on the Jordanian-Israeli administered Temple Mount.


“Something else is causing these young people to get up, grab knives and actually stab Israelis.

And that ‘something’ is incitement.”

No, said Darshan-Leitner, “Something else is causing these young people to get up, grab knives and actually stab Israelis.

And that ‘something’ is incitement.”

“This is nothing new in the Palestinian Authority or in Gaza,” she said. “But, typically, it has been disseminated through sermons in mosques, teachings in schools, speeches in public squares and on TV. Today, it is being spread like wildfire through social media networks.”

Neither is antisemitic rhetoric novel, according to Darshan-Leitner, even on social media. “What we are seeing today is a phenomenon with a different feel to it – with kids not only sharing their intention to become martyrs for Allah, and encouraging one another to do the same, but immediately acting on it.”

It is this particular, palpable danger that has been terrorizing the country for weeks that must now be stopped, she said.

“We thought that fighting it requires minimizing the incitement.

And this is why we are trying to get an injunction against Facebook to shut down those kind of pages and monitor the site to prevent other ones from appearing.”

But, given the massive traffic on Facebook, this might be a tall order, as Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nahshon hinted last Thursday, when telling The Algemeiner about his office’s attempts to get Facebook and Google, which owns YouTube, to remove incendiary material and prevent similar content from appearing in the future.

“It is not certain that removing such clips from social media will have an effect” on the current security situation in Israel, or on the Palestinian populace, he said. “Remember, social media sites cannot do anything of this sort in advance.

They react to what is reported by other users and then flagged. So, for every film they remove, another one crops up.”

Still, he was cautiously optimistic about a meeting he said was going to take place in Israel this week with a visiting Facebook bigwig to discuss this very issue.

When this discussion of the Foreign Ministry measure was put to Darshan-Leitner, she emitted a slightly sardonic laugh.

“All you have to do is open Facebook right now,” she said. “And you will be able to see that nothing whatsoever has been done.”

Furthermore, she added, “It is ridiculous to say that Facebook cannot monitor these things. Notice its millions of algorithms that know exactly what you like to wear and eat, who your friends are, what music you’re interested in, etc. How else do ads aimed specifically at you mysteriously appear in your feed and on the side of the page? If it’s got algorithms for consumer purposes, it can have algorithms for other purposes, as well.”

Whether the judge will rule in her favor, however, is a different question.

“That all depends on the weight the court puts on danger to human life versus the danger to freedom of speech,” she said, urging as many people as possible to join Shurat HaDin’s class-action suit.

(Source (http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/10/15/israeli-legal-eagle-to-file-class-action-suit-against-facebook-over-pages-inciting-arabs-to-kill-jews-interview/))

When Murder is allowed to advocated and supported by Facebook, it is time for it to be legally hit hard financially - everyone ever harmed by Facebook participating as a "Class Member" would bankrupt Facebook and the "committee" allowing the harm to persist. This can be done across the world. The amount setup in a fund for true anti-terrorism and social responsibility would be marvelous. It would transform the world in a good way, dealing with these "terrorist" sympathisers..


Thank you for taking the time to report something that you feel may violate our Community Standards. Reports like yours are an important part of making Facebook a safe and welcoming environment. We reviewed the post you reported and found it doesn't violate our Community Standards.

Please let us know if you see anything else that concerns you. We want to keep Facebook safe and welcoming for everyone.

[Bob]

A bit of the OPEN LETTER from Facebook's Head of Global Product Policy and the Vice President of Global Operations


Keeping you safe.

We have zero tolerance for any behavior that puts people in danger, whether someone is organizing or advocating real-world violence or bullying other people.

Requiring people to use their authentic identity on Facebook helps motivate all of us to act responsibly, since our names and reputations are visibly linked to our words and actions.

Encouraging respectful behavior. We ask people to consider their audience when sharing something that may offend others. We make it easy for everyone to decide who can see the content they share, and we have policies that prohibit sexually explicit, hateful, and violent content.


Consider the children who are on FaceBook.. FACEBOOK clearly has created an apparent environment of making people BELIEVE they are safe from VIOLENCE, from those who ADVOCATE MURDER against others..

Who wrote that policy statement in their open letter?

You can find out here: https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/?letter

Community? I think they need to understand what social responsibility means.. Don't you?

[Bob]

Who is Israeli lawyer Nitsana Darshan-Leitner?

She has won $1-billion in judgments against extremist groups -

Nitsana Darshan-Leitner fights terrorism with pen and paper.

The Israeli lawyer takes on cases against extremist organizations, engaging in a civil form of guerrilla warfare. Her battlefields: Israeli, European and North American courts.

The Tel Aviv-based mother of six sees her work as a vocation.

She was inspired to action by an incident that horrified Israel.

It was October 2000 and two Israeli reservists got lost. They ended up in Ramallah on the West Bank, where they were murdered by a mob.


“This mistake cost them their lives,” says Ms. Darshan-Leitner, who was due to speak (June 9, 2014) at the annual gala of Chabad Flamingo, a Jewish community centre and synagogue in Thornhill, north of Toronto, Canada.

She went on to help found Shurat HaDin, or Israel Law Centre, in 2003. The civil rights organization, which employs eight lawyers, aims to stop the flow of terror money by filing massive civil lawsuits.

It’s modeled on an Alabama law centre that shut down racist groups in the U.S. in this way. The pioneering Israeli organization has represented hundreds of victims.

It’s won more than $1-billion in judgments, frozen more than $600-million in terrorist assets and collected $120 million in payments.

FaceBook is in her and her organization's sights..

“Some take many years, it is a hard struggle,” she says. “Those who do defend themselves in court, for example, banks, hire the best and biggest law firms and we find ourselves up against very sophisticated legal teams.

“We see ourselves as the little fish that bites the big shark … We are winning the war.”


http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads/2014/12/Nitsana-head-shot-e1418650469165.jpg

[WhiteLove]

Class action law suites I think will become more and more dominant as people become more and more socially connected and socially aware online. When companies provide the vehicles for carrying out and mobilizing very destructive deeds in society, some kind of regulation needs to take place in order to support and protect humans spiritually and physically. I think that this is similar to making violance conditionally OK - when the leaders of nations act in this war/violance mentality, it is crossing the line of what is OK for a thriving peace making society. And it is the lack of laws that allow these governments to act in a state of war/violance, that is the vehicle in that case, in conjunction with the corrupt courts. So all of these anti peace vehicles must be contained and disabled in a peaceful and intelligent manner. That we can help achieve collectively in order to boost the peace making process.

[Bob]

Nitsana speaks up and shows that there IS A LAW tried and tested that allows for these "apparent terroristic supporting organizations" (like maybe those hiding in Ireland, thinking they can avoid prosecution) to be prosecuted in the US.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPnk7SOXN_c?t=29

It seems clear, FaceBook and the other terrorist sympathetic organizations who tried to "hide" internationally in a "favorable" country have no recourse but to stop fostering evil, don't you think?

https://www.facebook.com/facebookdublin - Dubin Ireland - from their page - something very revealing:



Facebook is where people come to make real connections with the people they care about. An important part of this is being able to express your true self.

seems they are expressing their "true self", aren't they? tragic..

[Bob]

FaceBook repeats that their community members "are safe" and their rights to safety are defended... hmmmm

Around 20,000 Israelis have backed the move in an online petition, but are not plaintiffs in the case, added the activist lawyer, whose group files legal actions it says are aimed at safeguarding Jewish rights.

One of the names on the list is that of US-Israeli Richard Lakin, put there by his family after he was shot and stabbed on a bus in East Jerusalem two weeks ago.

The 76-year-old succumbed to his wounds on Tuesday, making him the ninth Israeli to die in attacks since October 1.

His son Micah Avni Lakin told journalists his father was a keen user of social media.

"One of the things that comes out of the tragic, horrific event that happened to my father, is the need to rethink the way we look at social media,' he said.

"To be able to put on Facebook or Twitter specific instructions on how to slice somebody's chest straight open and cut their intestines, just like was done to my father... is just completely and utterly unacceptable," he told reporters, saying he had made the same point to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon during his recent visit.

FaceBook says" - 'Lawsuit without merit' -

"This lawsuit is without merit and we will defend ourselves vigorously," Facebook said in a statement to AFP.

"We want people to feel safe when using Facebook. There is no place for content encouraging violence, direct threats, terrorism or hate speech on Facebook," the statement said.

"We urge people to use our reporting tools if they find content that they believe violates our standards so we can investigate and take swift action."

Darshan-Leitner said she was confident the case would be a success.

Until now "people complaining about hate speech or incitement on Facebook could not prove that these incitements led (directly to) an imminent and realistic danger."

Fifty-six Palestinians and one Israeli Arab have been killed in the wave of violence, around half of whom are alleged attackers.

With no political movement appearing to spearhead the unrest, social media posts praising the attacks and encouraging them have been accused of stoking the violence.

One video, highlighted by Israel's ambassador to the UN, included a section showing the best spots on the body to stab someone in order to kill them.

The hashtag #Jerusalemintifada in Arabic has been widely shared online and videos of attacks and their aftermath are quickly uploaded.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has characterised the uprising as "Bin Laden meets (Facebook founder) Mark Zuckerberg".

Facebook has 30 days to respond to the claim.

[Bob]

“The Internet is a prime example of how terrorists can behave in a truly transnational
way; in response, States need to think and function in an equally transnational
manner.”

Interesting quote..

from:


https://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

When a social media organisation allows through "not acting" on threats of violence being made on their social media pages, aren't they criminal and worse, acting like the kingpins behind terror?

There is an issue: the terrorist message generalized is that violence is a legitimate way to effect political change. The individual "lone wolf" psychopath who's sociopathic behaviour demonstrates how they are trying copycat activity, jumping on global terror as a way to gain support.. (sic)

Individual Free Speech movements, established when there was ONLY a single soap box and a local crowd were for allowing a basic principle of an individual to be heard, and rightly, the group would then have an opportunity, LOCALLY to debate that person on the soapbox.

HOWEVER with newspapers in the earlier age, magazine "letters to the editor", and then social media organization appearing, the rights of everyone can be abused when the stewardship of the massive "guns" so to speak of the media are abused. When hypocritical organizational statements are made, and many many people report abuses, and the organizations continue to support the use of their organizations to support "terrorism" against others... people it seems should pay attention to the use of media to attempt to harm others..



Technology is one of the strategic factors driving the increasing use of the Internet by
terrorist organizations and their supporters for a wide range of purposes, including
recruitment, financing, propaganda, training, incitement to commit acts of terrorism,
and the gathering and dissemination of information for terrorist purposes.

While the many benefits of the Internet are self-evident, it may also be used to facilitate communication
within terrorist organizations and to transmit information on, as well as
material support for, planned acts of terrorism, all of which require specific technical
knowledge for the effective investigation of these offences.

It is a commonly accepted principle that, despite the heinous nature of their acts, alleged
terrorists should be afforded the same procedural safeguards under criminal law as any
other suspects. The defence of human rights is a core value of the United Nations and
a fundamental pillar of the rule-of-law approach to the fight against terrorism.

The PDF attached accordingly highlights the importance of respect for the principles
of human rights and fundamental freedoms at all times and, in particular, in the context
of the development and implementation of legal instruments related to countering
terrorism.

One of the primary uses of the Internet by terrorists is for the dissemination of propaganda.

Propaganda generally takes the form of multimedia communications providing ideological or practical instruction, explanations, justifications or promotion of terrorist activities.

Seeing Propaganda appear on Social Media is pretty easy to spot, IF ONE is willing to be IN-THE-MOMENT, and not getting into "past" atrocities or other emotionally spun speeches..

These may include virtual messages, presentations, magazines, treatises, audio and video files and video games developed by terrorist organizations or sympathizers.

Nevertheless, what constitutes terrorist propaganda, as opposed to legitimate advocacy of a viewpoint, is often a subjective assessment.

It is pretty clear where the big 3, Twitter, Facebook and Google stand on allowing terror, mental harm, and anquish, and out-and-out allowing violent threads/posts/blogs to persist.

Further, the dissemination of propaganda is generally not, in and of itself, a prohibited activity. Propaganda though is different than advocacy to commit a violent act, or to harm another..

Advocating harm and murder, or mental anguish, to "beat up" a victim or "kill them" (physically or their ability to live in peace, and conduct a living for instance), or cause others to attempt to do so is unconscionable. This is where legislation will be focused. Dealing with the supporters, typically the response is, "you need to have a thick skin and ignore it"..

Apparently kids are not ignoring it, and people ARE dying from the incitement which is being allowed.


The fundamental threat posed by terrorist propaganda relates to the manner in
which it is used and the intent with which it is disseminated.

Terrorist propaganda distributed via the Internet covers a range of objectives and audiences.

It may be tailored,inter alia, to potential or actual supporters or opponents of an organization or shared
extremist belief, to direct or indirect victims of acts of terrorism or to the international
community or a subset thereof.

Propaganda aimed at potential or actual supporters may
be focused on recruitment, radicalization and incitement to terrorism, through messages
conveying pride, accomplishment and dedication to an extremist goal.

It may also be used to demonstrate the effective execution of terrorist attacks to those who have provided
financial support.

Other objectives of terrorist propaganda may include the use of
psychological manipulation to undermine an individual’s belief in certain collective social values,
or to propagate a sense of heightened anxiety, fear or panic in a population or
subset of the population.

This may be achieved through the dissemination of disinformation,
rumours, threats of violence or images relating to provocative acts of violence. The
intended audience may include direct viewers of content, as well as those affected by
potential publicity generated by such material.

With respect to the wider international
community, the goal is often to convey a desire to achieve noble political ends.

Have you seen that done? Pretty hard to miss it, if you can take a step back, get back into the MOMENT (PRESENT TIME) and see for yourself what is happening and who is pulling the strings for whatever sociopathic or narcissistic behaviour suits them..

[Bob]

Can FaceBook be brought up on charges legally by UK law? Yes.

In the United Kingdom, section 59 of the Terrorism Act 2000 makes it an offence to incite another person to commit an act of terrorism wholly or partly outside the United Kingdom, when the act would, if committed in England and Wales, constitute an offence specified in the section (e.g. murder, wounding with intent, explosions or endangering life by damaging property).

By FaceBook continuing to ALLOW TERRORISTIC acts to be posted freely, advocating and inciting crimes of violence, murder, the world will see no doubt that they are CULPABLE, and in these cases of "violating" local anti-terror laws.. Trying to escape prosecution by being in Ireland, apparently will not work.

ref: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/59

ref: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/contents

** the rights of the UK government to SEIZE and CONFISCATE ALL OF FACEBOOK'S RECORDS is noted in the legislation.. Meaning ALL MEMBERS of FACEBOOK, their PRIVATE information will be made available to investigators who will shut down FACEBOOK for facilitating terroristic activity.

[Bob]

If one wanted to see the "seeds being planted", connect the dots.. look at the bigger picture..

Legislation is happening, in many Countries to deal with the social media phenomenon - the point being used is "social media terroristic uses"... certain members being given a "pass", making of the death threats by those members using the social media AND the social media moderators/controllers NOT stopping that, the corporate "published policy doctrines" being in conflict with what is happening (documents say they are responsible, protecting the membership when instead they are allowing terroristic uses of their "service" to persist)...

This is a SETUP - a setup for the authorities in numerous Countries, to obtain the records, all the documents, emails, and determine the networks of those using the Social Media..

Wake up folks what is happening - see the bigger picture..

A VERY small list of Countries who are going after social media "services", the list is DRAMATICALLY GROWING


Jordan
Turkey
China
United Kingdom


Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton - "Hillary Clinton wants to shut down terrorists’ social media accounts." Her emphasis was that the Social Media groups (Google, Facebook and Twitter) need to shut down the accounts NOW.. 19th Nov 2015

Instead, social media is saying FK YOU, they will keep their bottom $$ coming in by the controversy being made, by the targeted advertisements that FaceBook for instance creates based on the probing user profile that they lure people into "telling the world about themselves"..

What this has invited, is a crackdown coming.. not only the class action suits, by the confiscation of ASSETS of the social media companies, the legal justification by LAWS IN PLACE and have been in place for many years now, those media sites that don't enforce "community safety".. will be harming MANY members who aren't terrorists, who just want to have a good time sharing recipe's, photos, and thoughtful community activity..

WHAT is this SETUP? A way to get those records of ALL members.. are those media sites complicit? Maybe some of the kingpins in the organization, who are in-charge of "community" safety maybe? Maybe the founders? Could the reach go back all the way into the pockets of the founders of those social media sites? Quite possibly, as there are plenty of cited legal examples of organisations assets being seized by the authorities, when for instance it has been shown that their organizations were used to drug traffic..

The newer "social terrorist" use of the social media, the allowance of members to harm others, induce fear or terror, as well as directly inciting violence (those posts being allowed to stay up)...

It means total loss for those who use social media to share goodness, positivity, and upstat community values..

ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/11/22/hillary-clinton-wants-to-shut-down-terrorists-social-media-accounts-would-that-even-work/
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/08/how-isis-is-waging-a-war-of-ideas-through-social-media/

[Bob]

Define terrorism:

terrorism is defined as -


“the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate.."
"An anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons.."
"Terrorism is a criminal act that influences an audience beyond the immediate victim. The strategy of terrorists is to commit acts of violence that draws the attention of the local populace, the government, and the world to their cause. The terrorists plan their attack to obtain the greatest publicity.."


Social media is used by TERRORISTS, who are anti-social psychopaths. Social media IS being used by some great wonderful community oriented people.. (interesting polarity eh?)

LACK of proper community enforcement

Responding to a terrorist or their demands in social media will not happen. The proper "response" is to delete their ability to post, create or use the "soapbox" machine that social media creates.

Lack of proper screening of new members in social media, "open access", for bolstering social harm to the community being purveyed are some of the issues at hand. Facbook, Twitter, and Google Bloggers (the organizations) do not do the proper screening and/or maintenance of social responsibility.. when those organizations don't enforce, and er to the side of the terroristic behaviour, they themselves ARE culpable and supporting terrorism, and that activity is criminal, and socially wrong.

If people are demanding that we evolve, fostering social intelligence, (being smart about what is and isn't, not falling for psyops for instance), the organizations that are allowing misuse of social media will need to wake up and become ETHICAL, or they will be hit by legal suits, class actions, government seizures.. many will loose by their greed..


=====================

Watch very carefully on SOCIAL MEDIA to see when you 're being sucked into the TERRORIST's viewpoint. They will use persuasion to make them seem like they have your interests at heart.

THEY DO NOT.

Terrorists take great pains to foster a “Robin Hood” image in hope of swaying the general public’s point of view toward their cause. This sympathetic view of terrorism has become an integral part of their psychological warfare and has and is being countered when people KNOW what to look for in POSTS, VIDEO'S and their messages.

[Bob]

Specialist anti-terror groups worldwide:

(a non-inclusive list)


Mossad (Israel)
SEAL Team Six (US NAVY)
GSG-9 – Grenzschutzgruppe 9 (Germany)
Special Air Service (SAS) - Britain
Delta Force - (US Army)
Kaitsepolitseimet (KPOL or KAPO) - (Estonia)
SOC STAR (Singapore)
Osasto Karhu (Helsinki, Finland)
ONI (Sweden)
Lanceros (Columbian Army)
Brazilian Army’s 1st Special Forces Battalion (Brazil)
Joint Task Force-Two (JTF-2) (Canada)
Gruppo Intervento Speciale (GIS) - (Italy)
SPETSNAZ (Russia)
Agrupacion De Fuerzas Especiales Urbanas - (Colombia)
BBE – Bijzondere Bijstands Eenheid - (Netherlands)
Task Force 777 - (Egypt)
FSK – Forsvarets Spesialkommando - (Norway)
GIGN - (France)
MYK - (Greece)
Comandos Anfibios (COMANF) - (Brazil)
Cobras (Oman)
Mista’aravim - (Israel)
Sayeret Mat’kal (Israel - Headquarters: "Sirkin" air force/army base)
Speciaal Interventie Eskadron (Belgium)
TAG – Tactical Assault Group (Australia)
Special Assault Team, SAT(Japan)
Para Cammandos (India)
GROM - (Poland)
Rashtruya Rifles (India)
Special Protection Group (SSG) - (Sweden)
Yechida Meyuchedet Le’Milchama (Ya’Ma’M) - (Israel)
Kopassus (Indonesia)
Agrupacion De Fuerzas Especiales Urbanas (Colombia)
BBE – Bijzondere Bijstands Eenheid (Netherlands)



Terrorist activity on social media no doubt will be looked into by 'specialists' in one of the above "teams" within the organization with an attempt to "put a pin in it.."

HOWEVER when the problem comes from the Social Media Organizations themselves, quite possibly things may become a bit more "interesting", when the organizations' heads to whom the Special Forces follow orders say "correct this" now..

[PathWalker]

Greetings Bob,

Following the theme of this thread, I wish to provide a counter (contrarian) opinion, strange to get that from an Israeli though.

On the practical operative aspect:
1. Fighting incitement and hate in the internet is as futile as fighting pornography or controlling sex labor abuse.
2. Internet content cannot and should not be controlled. Even TPTB fail and failed (yet still trying).
3. People who are looking for hate and discrimination will find it.
4. Keep you friends close and enemies closer. It is better to have the haters on the open and track them.
5. Those who are actively interested in the Israeli-Arab conflict (both sides), reading those sites are one of the following:
5.1 Live or lived the conflict (I am)
5.2 Propaganda agents (both sides)
5.3 MSM
5.4 Hooked indoctrinated fanatics captured by the propaganda (both sides)
All together the conflict is regional, and marginal to world politics. The conflict is used to divide and conquer very successfully.

On the ideological aspect:
1. I promote free speech.
2. Labeling a terrorist or terror acts differ by time/culture/geography, and depends on your side of the conflict.
3. Haters and discriminators are there and will be there for good. Better accept their existence, and avoid than fight. Their goal and tool is conflict. You engage with them you encourage them.

On the spiritual aspect:
1. If you fight something, you contribute your energy to the conflict and polarity.
2. Haters and discriminators have a role in our path. If you face these issues and triggered (see my holocaust post here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?12633-A-look-beneath-the-Holocaust-Propaganda-...&p=907092&viewfull=1#post907092)). You still have to do spiritual work on these issues.
3. There is no absolute truth, there are many facets and interpretations. Releasing absolute truths thus accepting others, release psychological attachments.
4. For each action you take (even just breath), someone/something may get hurt (see the MSM political correctness drama). I wish to walk my talk rather rather debate useless cause.

[KiwiElf]

Hmmmm long overdue - and add YouTube to the list as well - we've all seen some truly disturbing and hateful stuff being "allowed" on there....

[Bob]

Wonderful hearing the opinions !

Understanding WHY it is OK to harm others in the view of some is important to know.

Understanding WHY it is NOT OK to harm others in the view of some is important to know.

Seeing the POLARITY should show WHY something is allowed to persist.

Those are the observations so far from the dots being presented.

My feeling is we always have a micro-view to a macro-view of points presented to us, and those challenges become opportunity to SOLVE (that is the keyword).

[Bob]

Social media tie-in and terror -

IS will influence Palestinians and Israeli Arabs

Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) will publish new research on the Islamic State militant group next week, the first comprehensive study in Hebrew of the organization, Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports.

The editors, Yoram Schweitzer and Omer Einav, believe that a full-scale military conflict with the organization is inevitable as it is too risky to allow the militant group to continue control large areas of land and an increasingly large number of people.

Schweitzer and Einav also believe that because IS a Sunni organization (as opposed to Hezbollah which is Shi'ite) as the group takes control of territory closer to Israel's border, it is likely to wield more influence on Israeli Arabs and Palestinians.

Schweitzer and Einav believe that the leader of IS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, will eventually be assassinated, however the decentralized formation of the organization means that it will be able to continue despite the loss.

The two researchers claim in their conclusion that the label “terrorist organization” is insufficient and that in fact the self-declared name of "Islamic State" is more accurate as it is a better explanation of the organization's aims and achievements.

[Constance]

The onion called it 12 years ago:

Epigenetics. Think of all mothers with unborn children who are reading about this or experiencing the violence themselves....


32058