Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Is Twitter Aiding and Abetting Terrorism?

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the xerox-is-next-and-then-faber-castell dept.

Social Networks 315

wiredmikey writes with word (and the following extract from a CNN report) that "Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, director of the Shurat HaDin Israel Law Center, sent a letter to Twitter on Thursday asserting that the company is violating U.S. law by allowing groups such as Hezbollah and al Qaeda affiliate al-Shabaab to use its popular online network. ... In her letter, Darshan-Leitner noted that Hezbollah and al-Shabaab are officially designated as terrorist organizations under U.S. law. She also cited a 2010 Supreme Court case — Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project — which upheld a key provision of the Patriot Act prohibiting material support to groups designated as terrorist outfits."

cancel ×

315 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I tell you this: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545358)

twitter does aid and abet frosty puss.

Re:I tell you this: (5, Interesting)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545720)

"We in Israel really MUST insist that you Americans institute a censorship regime!"

That has to be the single most amusing phrase ever to appear unironically in the Paper of Record: Twitter terrorism. And, of course, the authority cited for this menacing trend is that ubiquitous sham community calling itself âoeterrorism experts,â

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/20/the_u_s_government_targets_twitter_terrorism/singleton/?mobile.html [salon.com]

Re:I tell you this: (-1, Troll)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545842)

That's why Western civilizations must be fair in influencing the geopolitics of the Middle East -

Nuke 'em, from Egypt to Israel all the way to Pakistan. God damn, those fuckers are annoying. Now we, the world powers America, the EU, Russia, and China can party like rockstars for another half-century!

Re:I tell you this: (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545732)

If Israel has a problem with this then they should buy Twitter. I'd like to see Israel boycott Facebook, then Google, Wikipedia etc which they won't cause they are all owned by Jews.

http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/jewishp/internet/jews_behind_internet.htm [radioislam.org]

Can't argue that Nitsana is wrong (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545364)

*Can* argue wether that law is overly broad and vague though.

Re:Can't argue that Nitsana is wrong (0, Flamebait)

siddesu (698447) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545826)

You can't argue that the gun isn't to blame for the death of the person who got shot with it in much the same way.

Re:Can't argue that Nitsana is wrong (3, Insightful)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545920)

You can't argue that the gun isn't to blame for the death of the person who got shot with it in much the same way.

A gun has no will, therefore can have no blame.

Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545376)

Terrorists use the air to transmit sound messages.

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (1)

MichaelKristopeit423 (2018892) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545426)

is slashdot aiding and abetting terrorism?

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (0, Troll)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545688)

Bvh rg rh, gsviv ziv grnvh blf xzm hvmw z nvhhztv vmxibkgvw zmw kvlkov droo nlw rg wldm zh tryyvirhs li z giloo. Gsrh rh kviuvxg uli hlnvlmv gibrmt gl gizmhnrg z nvhhztv gl zmlgsvi hvxivgob.

Bvh R fhvw zm vzhb xrksvi, yfg rg kilevh z klrmg.

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (0)

MichaelKristopeit423 (2018892) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545788)

101001010 010100 010 110100101010 10110110 1010101010 1001011010100101 010100100010 01010 10100010101010 01 0110101110101 0101011110100100101 0101001001 0101010

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545490)

crap don't tell the Israeli's!

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545630)

Terrorists use the air to transmit sound messages.

The terrorists air is not under US jurisdiction. The US government or US companies can choose who they want to provide a service to.

Twitter will probably not do anything until pushed -- and why do anything? If the organisations don't advocate terrorism on twitter but use it for other communication it could be a good thing -- getting some insight and so on.

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (1)

tqft (619476) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545868)

"The terrorists air is not under US jurisdiction"
NDAA says different. However fucked up the legislation is.

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (2)

lorenlal (164133) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545874)

:

Twitter will probably not do anything until pushed -- and why do anything? If the organizations don't advocate terrorism on twitter but use it for other communication it could be a good thing -- getting some insight and so on.

Although I doubt that their message (even if innocent) would fall under "good." I'll certainly agree with your point. If the posters violate the TOS, or if their posts somehow do violate laws, then Twitter is already perfectly aware of how to handle that. It just sounds to me that this particular "legal outfit" is feeling pretty smug about their little Twitter notice here.

We can all see the content of these posts. I can't read it since I'm a stereotype American... But there are plenty of people who can. I seriously doubt that these groups would put any sensitive info out there like, "OK everyone! Firebomb this store at 5:30!" They may use it to find like-minded individuals, but I'm rather amused by the idea of letting that feed go and using the followers list as a feed to add to the watch list.

Seriously Shurat HaDin, just chill out and use social media like the rest of us who think... It's a data-mine for stupidity and personal info.

Re:Is the air aiding and abetting terrorism? (4, Funny)

siddesu (698447) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545832)

This is why most anti-terrorist strategies read as if their first, blacked-out paragraph begins with "Imagine a spherical terrorist in vacuum".

you might as well ask (5, Insightful)

thephydes (727739) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545382)

if the internet providers are aiding and abetting terrorism, or the phone system operators, or encrypted radio manufacturers, or SMS users etc etc

Re:you might as well ask (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545554)

It *has* been asked and most would argue ISPs are common carriers. They are required infrastructure and in my view should not be held liable for data crossing those networks, just like telco networks. There is a difference between verizon the network/telco and verizon the store selling contracts. I think verizon can not be held responsible if someone uses their network to phone Cuba and do business. Verizon the store can be held liable for selling a phone contract to cuba.

Twitter is not infra... they are a store. If they sell their services to cuba or terrorist organizations, they should be held liable. (Free is just a low price)

Re:you might as well (NOT common carriers)... (4, Insightful)

neurocutie (677249) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545620)

No, actually ISPs are NOT common carriers (yet). They are defined as "information services". Apparently ISPs actually *want* not to be common carriers because it means they can grab more money from customers, shape, throttle and generally violate net neutrality in ways that a common carrier would not be allowed to do.

Apparently ISPs would rather take the risk and be exposed (liable) for what its customers do in exchange for the freedoms (and abuses) that come with NOT being common carriers. But all it might take is an actual terrorist event where an ISP *is* held accountable, for ISPs to retreat back to common carrier status. Of course, they probably figure that they have Congress in their pockets so that that would never happen (i.e. they want their cake and eat it too... they want the protections of common carrier status, its non-liable features, but without the constraints that would limit their revenue generating power)

Re:you might as well (NOT common carriers)... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545770)

Apparently ISPs actually *want* not to be common carriers because it means they can grab more money from customers, shape, throttle and generally violate net neutrality in ways that a common carrier would not be allowed to do.

Even the ones that don't want to bone you probably don't want to be common carriers because they would have issues even running caching proxies.

Re:you might as well (NOT common carriers)... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545880)

Caches and proxies are minor matters of technical understanding and legalese. The bottom line is that we're long past the point where ISP's *should* be considered common carriers, with all that entails (less ability to screw with our access, and less liability for what we do with it). And for many practical purposes, the legal system does treat them like common carriers. Prosecutors rarely charge ISPs with aiding crimes, even though so many crimes are aided by the ISP just by the internet's pervasive nature. It's about time the letter of the law caught up with reality on this one.

Re:you might as well ask (4, Informative)

drwho (4190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545978)

Perhaps what is unclear to many is what comes along with being a common carrier. In the US, Common Carriers get (some) immunity from antitrust law. They are also able to acquire property rights by eminent domain. In exchange, they have an obligation to serve every person. That is not to say that the customers do not have to pay, but rather that the common carrier does not have the freedom to pick which customers it serves, whereas other businesses can (unless their denial of service is due to a reason covered under anti-discrimination law). Rates and policies of a common carrier are heavily regulated by governments. Common carriers are created by legislation, enacted where economic forces of the era require a controlled market in order for the service to be feasible. Common carriers have been in defense, transportation and communication, such as AT&T and USPS. In many countries, these functions become part of the government. In some ways, it can be argued that government itself is a common carrier, and that common carriers are governments.

ISPs which are not communications companies are not common carriers. Where it gets tricky is situations where a common carrier owns an ISP but claims it is a separate business and therefore not subject to the rules of common carriage. This is plainly not true in many areas where telephone companies are the only broadband available, via DSL. In other cases, there is a duopoly of broadband, through The Phone Company and The Cable Company, which rely on their Common Carrier status in related, but separate niches in order to provide services which compete. In my opinion, these are still the result of their Common Carrier status so they should be treated as such until there is a way to facilitate true competition (again) in the ISP market.

I am not a lawyer, and don't have a degree in economics or government, but I have studied all three fields at a prestigious university. I do not consider myself an expert, but rather, thoughtful and informed.

Re:you might as well ask (key: SUPPORT) (1)

neurocutie (677249) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545642)

the keyword here is SUPPORT. Phones, mail services, SMS, etc are all fee-for-service and therefore if a terrorist uses them, he/she pays. No special "support". However Twitter (and Facebook, Gmail, etc) are FREE services, which means that the service is GIVING them a service, hence SUPPORT. If the group is identifyable, then Twitter could be liable.

If Twitter wanted to argue this, they might have to show they the services aren't really free but just paid for by everyone (including the terrorists) in other ways, hence no "support" from Twitter. Still might not be enough, might not pass the test...

Re:you might as well ask (key: SUPPORT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545742)

"However Twitter (and Facebook, Gmail, etc) are FREE services"

No, you still have to pay for ISP usage and/or electricity usage and for a computer/laptop, etc...

Paper can be used to aid terrorism since they can use it to communicate, and paper is cheap too.

and what if a church gave food to the needy around its neighborhood and one of the people it was giving free food just so happens to be a terrorist.

What if some promotional band gave away free flashlights and a terrorist used it for the wrong reasons.

Just because something is given for free and is then misused doesn't mean the person who gave it away should be liable.

Re:you might as well ask (key: SUPPORT) (1)

neurocutie (677249) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545942)

"However Twitter (and Facebook, Gmail, etc) are FREE services"

No, you still have to pay for ISP usage and/or electricity usage and for a computer/laptop, etc...

Paper can be used to aid terrorism since they can use it to communicate, and paper is cheap too.

and what if a church gave food to the needy around its neighborhood and one of the people it was giving free food just so happens to be a terrorist.

What if some promotional band gave away free flashlights and a terrorist used it for the wrong reasons.

Just because something is given for free and is then misused doesn't mean the person who gave it away should be liable.

Twitter etal is FREE as far as Twitter doesn't charge the user for that service. ISP costs are completely irrelevant to the issue, which concerns whether Twitter (not the ISP, power co. etc) is supporting terrorism.

Also you are say *should* (not be liable), what we are discussing is what the law says, not what should be. And yes, if a church is giving away free food, and terrorist happen to benefit, the church *could* be charged for supporting terrorism, UNDER the LAW. "should" is an entirely different issue... a fairly nuanced one, as is the definition of a "terrorist".

please note that I don't agree with this law, certainly not as written, but then I don't agree with a lot of the recent "anti-terrorist" laws as written, but I (mostly we the people), don't count...

Re:you might as well ask (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545680)

Well known already, and governments(along with the courts) already take ISP's to task for it. Unless there's a very specific reason not to. Here in canadaland for example, hezbollah actually hosts servers, but they're not shut down. The reasoning most people have behind this is because CSIS has taps on them. And it makes it nice and easy to run an open tap on them all the time and back fish them for information. Since they're a direct danger to Canada.

The real problem is, various organizations like google, and their satellite companies like blogger, YT, etc, host such information and when presented with proof of such don't do anything about it. Some people will have heard of the "YT smackdown" and all that, along with the "blogger smackdown" to remove terror supporting sites. And these will be up for weeks or months. It only gets worse when these guys are using adsense, and continue to do so in violation of the ToS, and they don't seem to have a problem with this. But seem to have a problem with anti-jihadi sites like jawareport doing the same thing, and yank their funding.

Re:you might as well ask (1)

Edgester (105351) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545772)

if the internet providers are aiding and abetting terrorism, or the phone system operators, or encrypted radio manufacturers, or SMS users etc etc

Yes, but some or all of those are already being monitored by the government. I wonder if this is a ploy to get more government access to Twitter's database.

Phones (4, Funny)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545384)

What, you mean like cell phones do?

Re:Phones (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545520)

What, you mean like cell phones do?

Cell phones have been used in terrorist attacks. In certain parts of Afghanistan cell phone towers have been shut down with the concept in mind that it's disrupting terrorist communication, now the Taliban forces the cell phone towers to be shut down basically to remind everyone in Afghanistan they're still around.

Throw away phones are just that, one time use, throw away phones. There is no background check to buy one, you simply need cash. As much as there is no real easy way to determine what a throw away phone is being used for, there is no possible way to know what a twitter account is being used for, or for that matter a Facebook account or any other social network account. Hell for all i know, Myspace could be a pool of terrorists networking with glittery animated .gifs. No one else is using it.

It's a slippery slope with what seems to be censorship at the end. Shutting social networks down for the safety of the population doesn't seem to be too outside the realm of some of our government officials.

Re:Phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545572)

DAMMIT! I missed the sarcasm catch! Turn that sarcasm detector off for just a few seconds and things like this slip right by. Sorry.

Re:Phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545560)

But the internet is still sorta new and newish things are scary and all that.

Monkey rhetoric (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545396)

Either you're with us or you're with the terrists!

Isn't it known that Twitter supports terrorists? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545416)

I thought it was well known that Twitter support terrorist organizations [huffingtonpost.com] .

Oh, wait, they don't mean that type of terrorist, they meant "Muslims?" Oh, sorry, my bad.

Re:Isn't it known that Twitter supports terrorists (3, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545878)

Keep in mind that this was an Israeli think tank that started this. Israelis, the same folks that seem to think that terrorism isn't an acceptable response to their crimes against humanity, and aren't willing to accept any less radical responses either.

It's worth noting that they're dealing with the Second Intifada, as in not the first one. During which time they could have put this all the bed by behaving like adults and actually addressing the problems, and instead they opted to engage in some pretty sick acts.

Re:Isn't it known that Twitter supports terrorists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545940)

That's because Zionists are born with their heads planted firmly in their asses. It's a miracle on the level of a burning bush that they can dress themselves and breathe with their heads that far up their rectum.

Maybe they really are the chosen people...

uhr... (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545428)

So the terrorists are broadcasting their messages on twitter.. and they maybe have followers or something? Do they maybe want a you tube channel also?

These guys are bright, I say let them be heard.

Re:uhr... (1)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545718)

So the terrorists are broadcasting their messages on twitter.. and they maybe have followers or something?

Not exactly. The account for Al-Shabaab hasn't twitted yet [twitter.com] (may be they're using Direct Messages). I hope that Israeli organization is proud of itself. That Twitter account was probably the only lead the CIA had on Al-Shabaab.

And the Twitter account for Hezbollah is private, only has two followers, and seems to be under the name of some Jewish guy.
https://twitter.com/#!/Hezbollah [twitter.com]

I guess Twitter could always shut down that Hezbollah account on the grounds that impersonating a terrorist organization you're not affiliated with is a direct violation of their terms of services, but I don't see them shutting down that first account, especially if it's being monitored by government officials.

Even for mere drug dealers in the US, phone companies are usually told by the government not to shut down accounts for non-payment if there is an active tap on their line.

Re:uhr... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545924)

"Even for mere drug dealers in the US, phone companies are usually told by the government not to shut down accounts for non-payment if there is an active tap on their line."

So if you are a drug dealer, just stop paying your phone bill and if it still works for 2 months you are being monitored?
Way to make it obvious.

In a word...yes. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545436)

But who enabled Twitter? The INTERNET. Who enabled the Internet? The government.

Ergo, the government is spreading terrorism. That's right. They planned it all starting four decades ago.

We're through the Looking Glass here people.

Re:In a word...yes. (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545500)

Let the GCHQ and NSA enjoy their network.
Stop making the freedom fighters think about the need to go dark and let them feel safe on the net.
Every ip, voice print, email, image, video posted is useful.

Re:In a word...yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545794)

What about the CVP:QRS-MDB(AF4)?

How shall the world burn?

So basically.. (4, Funny)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545438)

Now you'll have to check a box labeled "I am not a member of a terrorist organization" when you sign up.

Don't Laugh! I was stopped by the RCMP and asked.. (4, Funny)

kawabago (551139) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545496)

I was on a motorcycle trip through the Atlantic Provinces and the RCMP pulled me over and asked, "Are you a member of a criminal motorcycle gang?" "No." "Ok, you can go."

Re:Don't Laugh! I was stopped by the RCMP and aske (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545912)

I was helping my mother-in-law fill out the application for a US visa, and there's a hilarious section of questions of the form: Have you sold any children into sex slavery? Are you a Nazi? Have you forcibly harvested anybody's organs to sell on the black market? I'm sure the number of slave-trading kidney-stealing Nazis they catch makes up for completely wasting my (and hundreds of thousands of other people's) time.

Re:Don't Laugh! I was stopped by the RCMP and aske (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545994)

At most it's good for piling on a perjury charge.

Remember that they got capone on tax evasion, not racketeering.

Re:So basically.. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545806)

Like when you apply for a US visa. No kidding - that is what they ask on the application form. They also want to know if you were involved in crimes against humanity during WW2 - again, no kidding. Fortunately I am an honest terrorist and crimes-against-humanity-committer, so I always answer yes to those questions.

The stupidity of some bureaucrats is staggering.

Why? (2)

Bravoc (771258) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545454)

Is a "civil right organization" in Israel, telling a US company that it is violating US law?

Re:Why? (0)

tftp (111690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545622)

[why] Is a "civil right organization" in Israel, telling a US company that it is violating US law?

It's a standard operating practice for civil rights organizations these days, all over the world. Sea Shepherds, for example, will catch you on sea and throw acid in your face if they think you are nasty.

Re:Why? (1)

ckaminski (82854) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545776)

Urine is not the same thing as hydrochloric acid.

Re:Why? (1)

tftp (111690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545892)

The [butyric acid] has also been used as a noxious, nausea-inducing repellent by anti-whaling protesters to disrupt Japanese whaling crews (link [wikipedia.org] )

I don't know if they used any human waste; they are already using violence and chemical weapons, and that should be enough to hang them for crimes against humans.

It's a sad story all along. I don't believe whaling is necessary; however the SOBs from SSCS don't give me a choice - I will never support them. SSCS is also pushing Japan against the wall, and Japan is understandably pushing back. The original bone of contention - the whales - is being forgotten, replaced by "you broke my boat" and "you injured my sailors." SSCS are professional trolls of high seas.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545964)

Let me remind you of Niven's Law:

No cause is so noble that it won't attract fuggheads.

Ignore the people whose behavior you don't support, or protest it separately, but don't let them shape your attitude towards whaling. It's not that it isn't necessary, it's that it's not conducive to good stewardship of the oceans.

But they are certainly provoking Japan, to the point where Japan loses support because they break some other line. Or maybe they're just hoping Japan realizes that it's not worth the price and finds some way to surrender while satisfying their own honor.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545958)

This is why you shoot anyone who approaches your boat too closely.

In other news... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545696)

A civil rights organization in Israel is violating US law. I suspect every body in the US is committing three felonies a day. And with megatons of righteous indignation we, the world's pre eminent extraterritorialists have expanded our writ to cover the globe. Everybody on the planet is in violation of US law.

Political logic (3, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545466)

Phone companies and Internet companies and all companies that enable communications including paper manufacturers and pen manufacturers aid and abet terrorism.

To defeat terrorism, we /must/ defeat all forms of communication at all costs.

Please turn in your legal pads to the dean's bonfire pit right after chapel.

--
BMO

Re:Political logic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545648)

you're a sad, sad human being.

Re:Political logic (-1, Offtopic)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545814)

I don't really care what you think.

You can skip over my posts if you want. See, there's this thing that if you actually log in, you can set me as "foe" and you won't see my posts at all if you set your "foe points" correctly.

In short, either get an account or fuck off and stop being a whiny little cunt.

--
BMO

Whatever happened to the passport thing? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545468)

Whatever happened on that Israeli passport fraud? I remember they clones European and US passports, they went to Dubai, killed someone, Interpol was given the evidence to catch them, Mossad head practically confirmed it with a smug 'ooo-yeh' style comment but whatever happened to that?

It seems that Interpol should have had more success catching them by now?

And whatever happened to the attack by Israel against civilian ships in International waters killing 8 unarmed people? We should have them in court by now surely? If they're courts abide by the laws, we should be able to arrest the army commanders involved?

And the time they bombed a UN School? Any arrests?

Or when they shot a little girl in the head several times for walking on the road next to a border post? Prosecutions?

I don't know what this Israeli Law Center is, but perhaps they can help get these crimes (war crimes, piracy, murder, even extensive Israeli terrorism) prosecuted?

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (3, Insightful)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545504)

Don't forget that Israeli Jews commonly spit on young girls who aren't dressed "modestly" and call them whores as they walk to school.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/american-girl-8-is-target-of-ultra-orthodox-jews-in-israel/1?csp=obinsite [usatoday.com]

I fail to see how Jews are any different from Muslims.

Ya, and don't forget... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545550)

that Muslims blow people up for being Jewish.

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545610)

Don't forget that Israeli Jews commonly spit on young girls who aren't dressed "modestly" and call them whores as they walk to school.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/american-girl-8-is-target-of-ultra-orthodox-jews-in-israel/1?csp=obinsite [usatoday.com]

I fail to see how Jews are any different from Muslims.

Or the fundamentalist Christians, for that matter.

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545668)

As bad as the fundamentalist Christians are, I've never seen them worry too much about dressing "modestly" and run around calling people who don't meet their standards "whores". They usually seem to get into more political issues like pushing for teaching Creationism in schools, pushing for more wars to bring Christianity to Islamic nations, etc., but meet one on the street and you won't be able to tell by the way they're dressed that they're any different from anyone else. Just don't try to hug one of their girls because she'll insist on giving you some weird "side hug".

Of course, there are those wackos from Fred Phelps' church, but that's only a handful of really off-the-wall people, a few dozen at most in a nation of 310+ million. These Orthodox Jews are a large part of Israel, and a very strong political force in that nation.

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545790)

As bad as the fundamentalist Christians are, I've never seen them worry too much about dressing "modestly" and run around calling people who don't meet their standards "whores". [...] Of course, there are those wackos from Fred Phelps' church, but that's only a handful of really off-the-wall people, a few dozen at most in a nation of 310+ million.

Unless they're the same people who shot abortion doctors, or indeed called women whores for going to abortion clinics (with signs and with words) then there's at least a few handfuls. And if there's those few handfuls out in the open...

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (5, Informative)

Rinikusu (28164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545796)

You aren't looking hard enough. The fundamentalist church I went to growing up required women to wear full length dresses, no make-up was allowed, and generally kept their heads covered with a scarf when in public (but that part wasn't really enforced), amongst other asinine restrictions regarding separation of genders, etc. In some of our "cousin" churches, they "make marriage vows" that explicitly state that they accept that their husbands may beat them into submission, and that they understand that's God's will and the like. Granted, I grew up in rural Tennessee, but this was pretty common through that area amongst the Pentacostal family of churches. When people say "American Taliban", I've seen it first hand.

Didn't they kill Rachel Corrie? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545676)

Spitting on an American girl? Dude, they ran over an American girl with a bulldozer for protesting the Israeli bulldozing of homes.

I mean spitting is b-a-d m-kay, but they killed thousands upon thousands of Gazan's and Lebanese, and the girl who was spat on may be American, but they've killed quite a few of those too.

But hey, yeh the spitting, yeh, bad.

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (4, Informative)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545802)

Don't forget that Israeli Jews commonly spit on young girls who aren't dressed "modestly" and call them whores as they walk to school.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/american-girl-8-is-target-of-ultra-orthodox-jews-in-israel/1?csp=obinsite [usatoday.com]

I fail to see how Jews are any different from Muslims.

I think you're confusing a fraction of Israel's 10% Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, with the broader community of Jews. As far as I know, the behavior to which you're referring is abhorred by a majority of Israeli Jews.

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545864)

I think you're confusing a fraction of Israel's 10% Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, with the broader community of Jews. As far as I know, the behavior to which you're referring is abhorred by a majority of Israeli Jews.

But it's acceptable to paint the Muslim community with a broad brush based on the views and actions of a very, very small minority?

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545962)

I think you're confusing a fraction of Israel's 10% Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, with the broader community of Jews. As far as I know, the behavior to which you're referring is abhorred by a majority of Israeli Jews.

But it's acceptable to paint the Muslim community with a broad brush based on the views and actions of a very, very small minority?

Is it such a small minority? After all, where's the hue and cry when a non muslim is the target of this tiny minority? Until Islam comes out as a majority force against this type of behavior, yes, the entire religion will be painted with that broad brush.

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (2)

cowwoc2001 (976892) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545840)

Uh... I'd hate to let facts get in the way of your ranting, but there is wide-spread protest against this behavior by Jews. Many of the protestors are Orthodox Jews no less. The Chief Rabbi of Israel has even come out publicly condemning this behavior.

Sources:
http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=249899 [jpost.com]
http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=251169 [jpost.com]

When is the last time the majority of Muslims staged a public protest against the repression of women or terrorism?

Re:Whatever happened to the passport thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545954)

The difference is that this is a small portion of Israelis. The Israelis state as well as the prime minister have strongly denounced these individuals. Thousands of Israelis including the prime minister and the cabinet showed up to protest these actions.

You didn't even read to the bottom of the article.

Just ban everything and stay indoors and hide... (4, Funny)

VinylRecords (1292374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545470)

Terrorists use twitter? Okay. Easily solution. Just ban Twitter. I mean a smart person would let the 'terrorists' congregate in the open and see if any of those fish lead you to a bigger fish or a whale but I guess just shutting Twitter down saves a lot of paperwork.

Oh wait...terrorists are now using cell phones? Better ban those as well. Lord knows that we can't possibly let the terrorists win so we all must do our part and stop using phones of any kind. Anyone caught using a cell phone should of course be sent to Gitmo and heavily surfboarded*.

Hang on now...terrorists are driving cars and using roads? Better outlaw cars and remove the roads and transportation systems. If my memory serves me correctly, the 9/11 hijackers drove to the airport that day. So by security theater logic, if there were no roads or cars that....no 9/11 happens. If only we had been prepared that day.

Terrorists are using glasses to see better? Better create an entire government division to enforce and strictly regulate corrective vision dealers. Not a licensed corrective lens dealer? Then you're going to jail as part of the war on terror.

*alternate non-torture version of waterboarding where you just beat someone in the head with a surfboard.

Re:Just ban everything and stay indoors and hide.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545640)

Terrorists use Israeli territory sometimes so obviously Israel aids terrorists.

Re:Just ban everything and stay indoors and hide.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545658)

no one said anything about banning twitter? way to warp reality to suit your desire to rant on some tinfoil hat shit.

go smoke your dinner and leave the discussion to those who care to think.

Re:Ban Sand (3, Funny)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545944)

Fuck it, ban sand. They live their lives in sand, it must do bad things for people. Hell, ban brown people, they persecute white people. Actually, last time I was in France I noticed a certain disdain, better ban all of the Romance language countries, obviously they hate us. Germanic languages apparently too, because they were anti-American. We had a world war over that.

The only thing left for me to say is: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

material support? (1)

TWX (665546) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545476)

I see no materials. I see them not limiting users except maybe Cuba and Iran per explicit rules, but a service not requiring too much personal information would have a hard time keeping any semianonymous group off. Slashdot would have the same problem for example.

Re:material support? (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545534)

Under the law, individuals face up to 15 years in prison for providing "material support" to FTOs, even if their work is intended to promote peaceful, lawful objectives. "Material support" is defined to include any "service," "training," "expert advice or assistance" or "personnel."

Is _____ aiding and abetting terrorism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545488)

Cell phone text messaging?

Classified ads?

Walkie-talkies?

Shortwave radio broadcasts

Spam?

Slashdot posts?

Re:Is _____ aiding and abetting terrorism? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545660)

Or if they have any IQ.

Flikr and embed the messages with steanography in the photos.

Homeland Stupidity would not even look there. the CIA might, but it seems they are no longer our anti terror arm.

Re:Is _____ aiding and abetting terrorism? (2)

sidthegeek (626567) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545896)

They'll hide the messages in photos of Julian Assange and trollface comics. Then, when the government tries to take down the photos, Anonymous will splatter the Internet with the images, and the Streisand effect will have been used to aid and abet terrorism. The MPAA will use this to their advantage, and we'll enter the 2nd Dark Ages.

Real nice plan, buddy.

Just more eyeballs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545498)

The odd thing about free social media is that -- from a commerce perspective -- they do not provide ANY services to us freeloading users. We are the product they sell to advertisers. is it a crime to sell Hezbollah eyeballs?

No, YOU shut up (5, Funny)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545514)

Ms. Darshan-Leitner, had such laws been in effect prior to the establishment of the state of Israel, it is rather likely that the organizations which requested American aid and support for the establishment of the state of Israel would have been forbidden from doing so. And perhaps, then, the state of Israel would not have been established. Now that it has, how about you stop trying to take away the American freedom which assisted your nation into coming into being.

(tl;dr: Go fuck yourself)

and twitter is to know which accounts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545524)

Since it would be difficult to convince terrorists to declare themselves a terrorist in some drop down menu, twitter would need to maintain some definition either created by twitter or given to them by the government.

Is starbucks aiding if they sell a terrorist a cup of coffee before he boards a plane, after the security check?

Fuck the CIA (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545528)

My enemies are those that do me harm.

So be it.

God says...
C:\LoseThos\www.losethos.com\text\PILGRIM.TXT

, and the arbours where
he delighted to be; and here they tarried and slept.

{385} Now I beheld in my dream that they talked more in their sleep
at this time than ever they did in all their journey; and being in
a muse thereabout, the gardener said even to me, Wherefore musest
thou at the matter? It is the nature of the fruit of the grapes
of these vineyards to go down so sweetly as to cause the lips of
them that are asleep to speak.

{386} So I saw that when they awoke, they addressed themselv

Re:Fuck the CIA (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545986)

above post is proof that the terrorists are relaying messages over slashdot AC comments.

this post is too.

So how would I comply with this law? (4, Insightful)

jc42 (318812) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545530)

Let's suppose I have a web site that lets people post messages to a discussion. How would I go about discovering which of them are "terrorists" according to the US government's definition, so I can exclude them? None of the "terrorist" organizations seem to have posted their membership list online.

Unless I can determine who is a member of any organization, I'll have to consider such laws as "secret laws" designed to trick me into unknowingly committing a crime. And I'll have to consider the legislative body that passed such laws my clear enemy.

One obvious conjecture is that the intent of the law was to punish anyone who hosts a public forum on any topic. After all, it means that any organization can ask one member to join my forum, and then report me to the US government. I see no defense against this other than shutting down all public forums.

Re:So how would I comply with this law? (0, Flamebait)

cowwoc2001 (976892) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545906)

It's not difficult to notice Facebook pages or Twitter accounts broadcasting pro Al-Qaeda or Hezbollah messages. Heck, half the time they link to the official web pages of those terrorist groups. Take that and combine it with the fact that trusted organizations should be able to flag suspected accounts and it shouldn't take much for an ISP to act on it.

If the RIAA can flag *songs* to be removed, why is it so unthinkable that trusted organizations should be able to flag *terrorists*? If you believe that you've been unfairly flagged, provide counter-proof to the ISP and/or take it up in court. If you're on a terrorist list, getting delisted from Twitter is the least of your problems.

Any little bit we can do to help rid the world of these extremists the better.

The TSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545552)

should also be banned from using Facebook.

Short Answer (1)

TheUser0x58 (733947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545584)

No

Copyright Infringement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545612)

Just spreading their message is fine... once these Twitter users start infringing on copyrights, then they are supporting terrorism and will feel the full force of the US legal system!

Any network can be used (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545646)

Right now in World of Warcraft or any other MMO there are terrorists plotting attacks in hidden areas of the world. Probably in the deep run tram. Any social medium they can get their hand on can be used to send messages. Twitter might be the easiest to use.

yes!.... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545652)

Nuke it from orbit... do it now!

Don't take away our intelligence tools (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545666)

Problem: Terrorists don't want to identify themselves and their supporters to us in an easily parseble format along with pictures and data such as their hobbies and interests.

Solution: Encourage them to use social networks.

Double standard? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545700)

Israel should also be a terrorist organization after all they invade sovereign nations and mistreat anyone who isn't jewish... there.

Go ahead call me a troll but you know it is true.

Freedom is aiding terrorists (5, Insightful)

introcept (1381101) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545778)

It should be stamped out ASAP

Great... (5, Insightful)

lightknight (213164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545792)

So, you offer instead to block them from using this service, and drive them underground, where they would be harder to 'monitor'?

At least this way you have an idea what their arguments are for their cause, and can easily offer a counter-argument (to their current or would-be followers). Offering a counter-argument for something you have no knowledge of, and whose members / followers are not readily identified / reached is a challenge to say the least.

You have two ways of heading off potential problems -> allow an open forum where anyone can say whatever they want (no wiretapping necessary) but you have to put up with people saying things you disagree with / hate / consider morally objectionable, or have a closed one, where you have to wiretap the populace to ensure that the opinions / groups you disagree with aren't starting something. An open forum to air grievances / differing opinions, of course, tends to make a government last longer, and costs a lot less than wiretapping everything while providing better results.

Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will scatter; strike the wrong shepherd, however, and a thousand shepherds will rise in his place. Suppression tends to work like that, like ablative armor. It works excellently at first, but through constant use begins to degrade and fail asymptotically. The US is over-quota for shepherds (they've reached their bag limit), so to speak, and are seeing the pendulum swing the other way. Yet, they insist on pushing even harder, apparently unaware of this trade-off effect.

Arrest the Globalists and banksters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545810)

Quit screwing around. Arrest the Globalists and banksters.

No more freedom house, NED, United Nations Treaties, no more psychopathic unconstitutional bullshit, no more bailouts for the suicide banksters, no more FBI assisted terrorist false flags.

We've fucking SEEN SOMETHING, and SAID SOMETHING over and over and over, now fucking DO SOMETHING!

Is Israel really America's daddy? (3, Insightful)

compucomp2 (1776668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38545822)

Sure looks like it here. An Israeli organization is telling the American legal system to crack down, through Twitter, on terrorist organizations which are only minor threats to the US (and in the case of Shabab, not even a threat to Israel).

It's routine for the Americans to insist on other countries to do things for them, but they're now tolerating a Israel telling them to do something for Israel's benefit?

Twitter is not rfc3514 compliant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545848)

(no slashdot filter thing, i don't have a comment long enough to need both a subject and a body)

Jesus! The Stupidity! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545858)

who cares. would you rather be killed by aterrorist or see some damn fool thing posted or tweeted by a terorist? Jesus! The Stupidity!

Screw you, Israel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38545884)

Is anyone else tired of seeing the US jerk like a puppet to the various demands
of Israel ?

I sure as hell am.

The US needs to cut these pushy Jews loose and let them sink or swim
without US aid.

Oh by the way, most of the terrorism directed at the US is because the US helps Israel. Are they worth this price ?

I submit that they are decidedly not worth this price and never have been worth it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>