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!

Legislators Call On Twitter To Ban Hamas

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the sticks-and-stones dept.

Twitter 486

An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from The Hill: "The past week's violence in Gaza has rekindled calls for Twitter to shutter the accounts of U.S.-labeled terror groups such as Hamas. Seven House Republicans asked the FBI in September to demand that Twitter take down the accounts of U.S.-designated terrorist groups, such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Somalia's al Shabaab. The letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller was spearheaded by Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas), who said Wednesday that the recent events vindicated the request. 'Allowing foreign terrorist organizations like Hamas to operate on Twitter is enabling the enemy,' [Poe said] 'Failure to block access arms them with the ability to freely spread their violent propaganda and mobilize in their War on Israel.'"

cancel ×

486 comments

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

War on Israel! War on Israel! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086449)

huh? hamburger.

Bullshit (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086455)

What bullshit...
I'm an Israeli citizen and I oppose Hamas in every possible way (they frickin' shot rockets at me and my family just a week ago!)

But terminating their officials' Twitter accounts will do nothing to help the cause.
The only effect will be that they'll start communicating in other channels - which will make it more difficult to spy on their future intentions.

If you really want to do something against Hamas in Twitter - don't follow them!

(BTW, the captcha "i" looks like an 8)

Re:Bullshit (5, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | about 2 years ago | (#42086481)

The only effect will be that they'll start communicating in other channels - which will make it more difficult to spy on their future intentions.

Twitter is not a useful source of learning about Hamas's "future intentions". There's nothing secret or unexpected there. It's one of several channels for distributing propaganda, that are also distributed in other ways. It's ridiculous to think that Western governments are dependent on #hamas to keep abreast with developments.

Furthermore, I suspect that the Twitter account is managed by Hamas's international representatives, who don't always have a good relationship with Hamas leadership inside Gaza, so it's all the less useful for predicting conflict with Israel.

Re:Bullshit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086533)

Natan "iamproudtobeajew" Epstein, eh?

Re:Bullshit (5, Insightful)

the grace of R'hllor (530051) | about 2 years ago | (#42086585)

They fire rockets at you and your family and blow up buses, and you fire tanks and bombs into fully built-up and barricaded (by you) residential areas (effectively an open-air prison or, if you will, a ghetto) without letting people flee. In my outsiders' view, that makes you both pretty much equally shitty.

I'm wondering what an Israeli perspective on this is. Do you see a separation between Palestinians and Hamas? Are Israeli actually still striving for actual peace (rather than defeat of Palestinians) or is it a matter of time until the ethnic cleansing starts, or... what?

Because as I said, from here, both parties look equally and homogeneously shitty, with the Palestinians being the underdogs. Usually in such a situation, I'm very wrong, and I'd like to know if I am, and how so.

Re:Bullshit (2, Informative)

CRCulver (715279) | about 2 years ago | (#42086613)

and you fire tanks and bombs into fully built-up and barricaded (by you) residential areas (effectively an open-air prison or, if you will, a ghetto) without letting people flee

Gaza does not share a border solely with Israel. If the Palestinians are not able to flee, it is because Egypt has chosen to keep its border closed.

Re:Bullshit (3, Insightful)

the grace of R'hllor (530051) | about 2 years ago | (#42086709)

Because the people living in Israel are somehow Egypt's problem? No, if the people in Gaza aren't able to flee, it's because they're living in a prison. And, technically, by their own government. The parallel to ghetto's, specifically the Warsaw Ghetto, is not exactly fiction. The suffering in the Warsaw Ghetto was much, much greater, but the people inside it are in a very similar situation.

Re:Bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086837)

Just trying to get back to '67 borders, you know, when Gaza was part of Egypt...

Re:Bullshit (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086775)

Just like if Mexicans aren't able to flee their countries drug wars it's the US's problem? Yeah... when you look at it that way...

Re:Bullshit (5, Insightful)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#42086927)

Their country's drug war is financed by American dollars and American mafia through American banks, aided by American prohibition and official corruption on both sides. America's war business is a big source of many problems everywhere south of the Rio Grande. Don't even try to deny it.

Re:Bullshit (4, Informative)

Dan667 (564390) | about 2 years ago | (#42086673)

most of this conflict is israel attempting to steal Palestinian land.

Re:Bullshit (5, Insightful)

pla (258480) | about 2 years ago | (#42086739)

most of this conflict is israel attempting to steal Palestinian land.

Most of modern history in the Middle East results from the UN sticking its fingers where they don't belong, randomly stealing a big chunk of land considered sacred to the natives, and giving it to Israel. "Aww, those mean Germans tried to eradicate you? Here, let's throw a dart at this map and give you... Hmm, yeah, I think I have a call on the other line, good luck with that new home".

Gee, wonder why they all hate us. Oh, right, for our "freedoms" - Like the freedom to not have someone randomly kick us out of our homes and give them to our ancient enemies.

Re:Bullshit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086779)

Tough titties. It's a tough neighbourhood, and sometimes the little kids have to do what the big kids say.

Don't like it? Tell the Egyptians and Jordanians to open their borders.

Re:Bullshit (5, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about 2 years ago | (#42086773)

The ignorance of what happened less than a decade ago is astounding. We keep hearing about a two state solution, Gaza was the two state solution. Squabbling at the UN aside, even Israel officially recognized the Gaza boarder as an international one at least at one point, I think they still do.

About 8 years ago the Israeli's pulled out and left the region to the Palestinian authority to manage. Those idiots attacked with rockets almost as soon as the last Israeli left. At the time it was not an "open-air prison" that happened later after the Palestinians proved that if allowed access to any resources they'd weaponize them and attack Israel.

What exactly would you do if after in the interest of peace you gave someone some land and then they used it as a platform to try and attack you from? I know what I would do; and it looks allot like what Israel has done to Gaza in recent years.

Re:Bullshit (4, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#42086845)

I'm wondering what an Israeli perspective on this is.

I'm sure Israelis have as wide a variety of views on their nation's troubles as any other nation's population does.

Re:Bullshit (1)

berashith (222128) | about 2 years ago | (#42086905)

So much of this is where I get interested. There is a giant equality in the shitty actions. There is also a giant blending of Hamas and Palestinians ( as you asked ) when the population elected a government that is dedicated to the destruction of another government. It is also interesting to me that the Israelis blame Hamas for setting up rocket launchers and ammunition depots in the middle of population centers, when it doesnt seem that there is much space that isnt covered by people.

The two state solution seems like a good idea, except that one state absolutely refuses to acknowledge that the other has any right to exist, at all, anywhere. Then Israel refuses to speak with the rational political side in the West Bank, which doesnt give a lot of credence to their interest in peace. Committing further action to prevent talks doesnt look that good either.

Most Israelis have other concerns (4, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#42086987)

I have quite a few Israeli friends; most are concerned with civil and social issues, not with military issues, and I am told that is basically what politics in Israel are like. There were major protests in Israel last year; they were over the price of food, the rent, etc. Israel is not terribly different from other countries: the people are mostly concerned with things that immediately affect them like the cost of living.

Of course, most able-bodied Israelis serve in the army. Here, for example, is an Israeli soldier's view of what it was like in West Bank:

http://www.bostonreview.net/BR37.4/oded_naaman_israeli_defense_forces_palestinians_occupation.php [bostonreview.net]

For what it's worth, I met many Israelis at an academic conference this past summer. I also met Egyptians, and my Iranian coworker was there with me. We all had dinner together, and there was no tension, no arguing about politics, none of that -- most of these people thought the situation was absurd and that the violence was unnecessary (the Iranian recently finished her immigration paperwork and will soon be a US citizen; the Egyptians were glad to have not been in Egypt during the revolution).

Re:Bullshit (1)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#42086627)

Thanks for a voice of sanity. You know who I find unpleasant and behind much of the problems on the planet? Right wing fundamentalist politicians - but I'm still glad they have the chance to espouse their views, that way I know who they are, what they think and can understand why they're so dangerous.

Propaganda (5, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#42086469)

Is free-speech the last i heard.

Twitter can of course take it down on their own as they dont have to adhere to the US Constitution in this matter, but our government should NOT be involved in requesting that a individuals ( or group ) speech to be curtailed.

Yes, i realize they are not Americans and may not have that right in their home country, but an American governmental agency asking bothers me greatly.

Re:Propaganda (1, Interesting)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 2 years ago | (#42086493)

The U.S. courts generally accept that enemy propaganda isn't protected by the 1st Amendment during war.

The U.S. is now in perpetual war. And the President / State Dept. / Congress say who the enemies are.

And who said being in perpetual war isn't fun???

Re:Propaganda (2)

ewanm89 (1052822) | about 2 years ago | (#42086537)

Sorry, there has been no deceleration of war declared, emergency powers for use in war have not been legally activated. Technically speaking the US is currently in a state of peace.

Re:Propaganda (4, Insightful)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#42086579)

An excellent point. Congress has allowed this facade of undeclared war to go on for decades, really since the Korean War. It needs to stop. American troops should not be sent overseas to fight and die without a formal declaration ofwar. It's wrong.

Re:Propaganda (5, Interesting)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#42086625)

They wouldn't even declare the 9/11 attack itself an act of war because that would mess up all the insurance policies which have act-of-war escape clauses.

Re:Propaganda (2)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#42086635)

America has always been not at war with $country.

Re:Propaganda (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086745)

American troops should not be sent overseas to fight and die without a formal declaration ofwar. It's wrong.

There is no military draft in the US.

People who join the military are chumps and losers, and they MADE THE CHOICE
to risk their lives. As far as I am concerned they are living off my tax dollars and not
benefiting me one little bit, but actually they are fomenting hatred for the US in many different parts of the world
by exporting violence to countries which have not even attacked the US.

Support the troops when the troops are engaged in wars of aggression against countries which
have not attacked the US ? Only a fool wouldn't see how misguided the idea of supporting
the troops when they are making enemies for America, world wide. Fuck the troops, most of
them are lowlife losers who couldn't even get a job as a clerk in a convenience store.

Re:Propaganda (2)

dreamchaser (49529) | about 2 years ago | (#42086825)

While there has been no war declaration, the US is indeed in a 'limited' State of Emergency, one started by Bush and renewed by Obama:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_emergency#United_States [wikipedia.org]

Unfortunately that gives the US Government a lot of latitude in what they do to 'protect' us from the 'terrorists'

Re:Propaganda (3, Insightful)

professionalfurryele (877225) | about 2 years ago | (#42086567)

And at the moment we are at war with Eurasia. By at the moment I of course mean we have always been at war with Eurasia.

Re:Propaganda (2)

CRCulver (715279) | about 2 years ago | (#42086511)

Twitter can of course take it down on their own as they dont have to adhere to the US Constitution in this matter, but our government should NOT be involved in requesting that a individuals ( or group ) speech to be curtailed.

For groups designated as terrorist organization, "free speech" doesn't apply. It is illegal to provide a channel for such groups to communicate. Governments are not targeting the content of their speech per se (Hamas could be tweeting about cute little puppies and they would still be shut down) but rather are trying to disrupt these groups' ability to coordinate in any way.

Such strictures are nothing new. When the Soviet Union was around, importing Soviet publications into the US involved jumping through some hoops. Courts have mainly ruled that an inviable right to free speech does not extend to persons outside the United States anyway.

Re:Propaganda (1)

CRCulver (715279) | about 2 years ago | (#42086525)

Courts have mainly ruled that an inviable right to free speech does not extend to persons outside the United States anyway.

I meant to write "an inviolable right".

Re:Propaganda (4, Insightful)

mrbester (200927) | about 2 years ago | (#42086747)

This would be US courts who only have jurisdiction over acts on US soil affecting US citizens would it?

The constitution is an odd thing in that as written it applies to everybody with particular emphasis for US citizens. As such it is not only a base for how law and rights are appled in US but is also meant to be the template for how US treats anybody as an extension and espousal of fundamental rights to all; you have the right to free speech and are obligated to extend that freedom to everybody else. Why should you have that right yet deny it to others?

Re:Propaganda (0)

mrbester (200927) | about 2 years ago | (#42086757)

appled ? Stoopid auto correct. Try using words in your dictionary next time.

Re:Propaganda (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#42086867)

This would be US courts who only have jurisdiction over acts on US soil affecting US citizens would it?

The constitution is an odd thing in that as written it applies to everybody with particular emphasis for US citizens. As such it is not only a base for how law and rights are appled in US but is also meant to be the template for how US treats anybody as an extension and espousal of fundamental rights to all; you have the right to free speech and are obligated to extend that freedom to everybody else. Why should you have that right yet deny it to others?

Yes, it really irks/alarms me that many of the people who profess to be the most patriotic don't actually subscribe to the principles the country was founded on.

Re:Propaganda (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086763)

Fuck you, Culver, you fascist right wing piece of shit.

Re:Propaganda (5, Insightful)

pla (258480) | about 2 years ago | (#42086781)

For groups designated as terrorist organization, "free speech" doesn't apply. It is illegal to provide a channel for such groups to communicate.

And how did it become illegal? Congress passed a law saying so.

But, funny thing about that, because "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press".

Who broke the law here? Not Twitter, not random spokesperson probably living in Western Europe, not even Hamas (well, not for their Twitter activity, anyway) - But the US Fucking Congress has broken the law by making such a law!


Of course, for the constitution to have any teeth, people would need to care, and no one does. So, would you like to join me for some liquid bread before the gladiatorial games this evening, Citizen?

Re:Propaganda (4, Insightful)

ewanm89 (1052822) | about 2 years ago | (#42086529)

If the US legislators are allowed to spout this kind of drivel then so is Hamas. I propose that if they try to force the issue the accounts of legislator and any US agency involved also be banned.

Re:Propaganda (1)

cellocgw (617879) | about 2 years ago | (#42086849)

Exactly this. Those repubs (and dems to a large extent) still cling to their modern version of a world-wide Monroe Doctrine. They might as well go ahead and call it the "USA Imperative of Divine Right Rule"

Ok, sorry for ranting on such a beautiful Sunday morning.

Re:Propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086531)

The GOP at least cannot outright order it.

I miss the fiscally conservative, socially liberal party.

I think we didn't have clothes then.

We have a choice I don't want any of them can stand apart?

projectile coordination, a new form of free speech (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | about 2 years ago | (#42086581)

that idea amuses me

your honor, I was exercising free speech when I notified my Hamas buddies I was launching that mortar

So Hilter had the right ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086607)

to have his hate speeches broadcast in American?

Absurd.

Re:So Hilter had the right ... (2)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#42086657)

No, the magic of radio waves made it possible and the US government had no way to stop it, whether the US thought he had any "right" to do so is irrelevant. New technology usually trumps individual states from controlling what people can and can't hear or say. This is a bad thing if you presume the public in general will always believe what they hear - which, it turns out, they don't. German propaganda broadcasts to the UK during WWII were generally a source of amusement for the British public.

Re:So Hilter had the right ... (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 2 years ago | (#42086937)

No, the magic of radio waves made it possible and the US government had no way to stop it, whether the US thought he had any "right" to do so is irrelevant. New technology usually trumps individual states from controlling what people can and can't hear or say. This is a bad thing if you presume the public in general will always believe what they hear - which, it turns out, they don't. German propaganda broadcasts to the UK during WWII were generally a source of amusement for the British public.

Lord Hawhaw was a comedian?

--

Some chicken; some neck.

Re:So Hilter had the right ... (1)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#42086981)

A lot of people certainly looked at him that way, in the same way a lot of US troops listened in to Hanoi Hannah's broadcasts for fun during the Vietnam war.

Re:Propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086629)

Free speech is a universal human right, so they do have it.

you can't just ban groups (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086471)

Even if enacted, it will do nothing. They can use a different name or such, Also, we are all for free speech, as long as it our free speech, not the free speech of others. Furthermore, being on Twitter probably allows for more productive intelligence gathering, for better or for worse.

Meanwhile, it just continues the hate and distrust and racism and anti-muslim sentiment.

Whatever happened to freedom of speech? (4, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | about 2 years ago | (#42086477)

I thought that that freedom [of speech] extended to those you might not necessarily agree with as well, right?

I'm sure there are those who'd label the USA as a country of terror...not that I agree with them, but how about that basic freedom of speech?

Re:Whatever happened to freedom of speech? (2)

alphatel (1450715) | about 2 years ago | (#42086503)

It was the shot heard round the world, the start of the censored revolution.

The word: "Terrorist" (4, Insightful)

Severus Snape (2376318) | about 2 years ago | (#42086479)

Definition of the word being, "A person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims." [oxforddictionaries.com]

And the definition of terrorism. "Violence committed or threatened by a group to intimidate or coerce a population, as for military or political purposes." [thefreedictionary.com]

The FBI should consider updating their list of "designated terrorist groups".

Re:The word: "Terrorist" (1)

Severus Snape (2376318) | about 2 years ago | (#42086495)

I realise I should have used the definition from both words from the same place, the definitions however are pretty similar no matter where you look.

Re:The word: "Terrorist" (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086587)

Terrorism has been refined to mean 'anyone who opposes the US government'

Re:The word: "Terrorist" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086853)

So, Rush Limbaugh?

Re:The word: "Terrorist" (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#42086883)

Terrorism has been refined to mean 'anyone who opposes the US government'

Rather, "opposes anything the US government does".

Way to kick an own-goal... (3, Insightful)

beaverdownunder (1822050) | about 2 years ago | (#42086483)

Cyber-democracy doesn't work if government's can arbitrarily censor participants.

In their own words, doing what they want would be "letting the terrorists win".

Re:Way to kick an own-goal... (1)

beaverdownunder (1822050) | about 2 years ago | (#42086499)

Pardon my embarrassing abuse of an apostrophe... it's been a long night =/

Free Speech (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086485)

Yes, we want free speech, but only if it says something we approve of.

Re:Free Speech (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 2 years ago | (#42086497)

And who 'decides' who the 'enemy' is?

Re:Free Speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086603)

And who 'decides' who the 'enemy' is?

We do. Who "we" happens to be depends on which side of any particular conflict or disagreement you're on. The US has some weight to throw at Twitter since it is a US company. Iran, and I believe North Korea, have stated their intentions to block outside propaganda by forming their own internets. India, Pakistan and others have tried to force companies like Twitter, Facebook, et al, to self censor some of their content that can be seen in their respective countries.

Re:Free Speech (4, Insightful)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 2 years ago | (#42086707)

I am a U.S. citizen, born and raised here. My country allowed the crack epidemic here to happen in order to finance their little wars. Untold U.S. lives were lost to crack whille Col. Oliver North posed for the camera and spoke of patriotism. The North Vietnamese were branded the 'enemy', war profiteering abounded. Haliburton. The list goes on, mostly rich guys get richer while they tell us who the enemy is this week.

Now once you go down that slippery slope of censorship, then you become no better than the leaders of those countries you named. The 'enemy' then becomes 'us'.

Can they ban Donald Trump, too? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086491)

Can they ban Donald Trump, too?

I wondered about Banana Hammocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086505)

It's early in the morning Sunday where I am reading this and I thought the title said something about Banana Hammocks

What about other 'labeled terror groups' ? (4, Insightful)

Alain Williams (2972) | about 2 years ago | (#42086507)

So should Twitter also ban groups labeled as terrorists by other groups ? Eg: should we ban the Israeli government because Hamas thinks that they are terrorising them ? I think not. Twitter would be uniwse to accede to to this and put itself at the center of someone else's fight.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Re:What about other 'labeled terror groups' ? (1)

Trepidity (597) | about 2 years ago | (#42086967)

While true in principle, if it came down to any kind of legal action, it'd probably be the U.S. list of terrorist groups that would be relevant, since Twitter's a U.S. company.

Hamas (2, Informative)

br00tus (528477) | about 2 years ago | (#42086547)

Hamas was elected to govern Gaza. The Israelis have had Gaza under siege for years, preventing food etc. from coming in, and they're now bombing the hell out of it. I guess the US government moving to silence their voices would just be the icing on the cake - after all, the US is directly/indirectly financing the shelling of Gaza as well.

Of course, one thing that caused Hamas to grow was US and Israeli financing. The US and Israel were always more scared of secular, left-leaning pan-Arab movements like the PLO - during the Cold War, and after the Cold War as well. Hamas is very much a creation of Israeli financing. Now Israel and the US deem this organization they helped create terrorist. Just like Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda and the Taliban were seen as heroic, fighting against the secular Afghanis who were Russian-sympathetic in the 1970s and 1980s. Rambo even went to fight along with the heroic mujahideen, fighting against secular Afghanis and their Russian allies. When the US army occupied Saudi Arabia for a decade, they suddenly found Saudi patriots like Osama and 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers didn't like their country occupied by a foreign military. So they went from freedom fighters to terrorists in a blink as well. Of course the US withdrew its military from Saudi Arabia within two years of 9/11 - the US is essentially just a bully, and will always run from those who will actually stand and fight against it (Vietnamese, Saudis etc.)

Re:Hamas (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086923)

Rambo is fictional. Sorta like all your facts.

Re:Hamas (2)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#42086951)

Hamas was elected to govern Gaza.

We're big fans of democracy... so long as we get to say who gets elected.

I am reminded. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086549)

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Re:I am reminded. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086671)

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Unfortunately, today's US government - the one that continues to strip basic freedoms from its citizens (and anyone else it can get its hands on) including speech, assembly, privacy, due process and other rights, under the guise of "security" - would go out of its way to prevent you from saying that. They may even attempt to do it via a secret letter from a secret court preventing you from even acknowledging that your rights were oppressed or even that you received the letter. Our founding fathers would be ashamed of many of our government's actions.

Re:I am reminded. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086841)

Our founding fathers would be ashamed of many of our government's actions.

Our founding fathers would be labeled terrorists and sent to Guantanamo Bay.

But don't worry, all this thrashing around by the US is a prelude to the end of the US
as a world power. If you doubt what I say, read "Hegemony or Survival" by Chomsky.

Ironic (3, Insightful)

SilenceBE (1439827) | about 2 years ago | (#42086555)

I've read the articles vertically - which I mostly do with American reporting about Israel as it so unbelievable one sided - and I noticed some parts that they mention "Anti-Americanism". The only part that is missing is freedom fries. The ironic thing is that this kind of one side view that really fuels Anti-Americanism in a lot of Arab states and even within my Arab friends that in no way I would describe as "extremists", "terrorist", or that typical bullshit. Even very moderate or even intellectuel bright people in that group tend to create more and more anti American feelings.

You can pat yourself on the back en think that ridiculous claim that the hatred comes from the "hatred of your freedom", but is really these kind of signals that creates more extremism. The ironic thing is that the border of this "freedom" stops in what America likes and don't like.

I know the Israelian [wikipedia.org] lobby is very powerful in the states and there goes a lot of money round, but it baffles me that there are not that many critical voices within the US.

So what about state terrorism ? Shouldn't the IDF also be banned then since they also use social media for their propaganda ? One's terrorist is another persons freedom fighter.

Re:Ironic (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 2 years ago | (#42086615)

I know the Israelian lobby is very powerful in the states and there goes a lot of money round, but it baffles me that there are not that many critical voices within the US.

For the most part, the only people who care about foreign affairs are those with a vested interest. There just aren't enough people with enough money who give a shit about the other side of that conflict to make any real noise about it. Occasionally an american girl gets run over with a bulldozer or something like that and then we get a ltitle more coverage, because she's american not because of the injustices she was protesting. But that's about it.

We have lost the war (3, Insightful)

Nyder (754090) | about 2 years ago | (#42086573)

It's apparent the terrorist won.

Such a small group of people have managed to drastically change the polices of the USA in a way no politicians could ever do.

Look, we are scared of them tweeting, how could they not have won?

   

Re:We have lost the war (1, Insightful)

Dan667 (564390) | about 2 years ago | (#42086715)

the republicans believe that the US needs an enemy so they invented terrorism as a huge problem. Their policy is failure and has done more harm than good.

Re:We have lost the war (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086925)

Wow you are young. This shit has been going on in earnest since the 1940s. Although on a smaller scale much earlier. Hmmm, who held both houses and the presidency the most since then? Basically what you are saying that the all the "bad" policies where enacted under Republican majorities? Or they had so much influence as the minority they were able to pass all the "bad" bills? What? Grow up, start reading about history and I don't mean the revisionist bullshit written about it today. Get books and read them from the 40s,50s,60s,70s, etc. Then go back even further. After you have done that and you still proclaim your above statement, I will call you a liar because you didn't read and understand any history that has led us to this point.

Re:We have lost the war (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 2 years ago | (#42086749)

It's apparent the terrorist won.

Such a small group of people have managed to drastically change the polices of the USA in a way no politicians could ever do.

Look, we are scared of them tweeting, how could they not have won?

 

Yes, it's amazing what happens when a cowardly 535 + 9 + 1 piss their pants.

I guess they "won" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086621)

So the hamas has won the war against isreal and the US of A. How can you tell, all their enemies are "frightened" of hearing of them. They shake in their boots. They are arming their families with weapons, they are siliencing their critics, Gee, let me see, Where did hamas start, who funded them, and who is giving them the freedom of the "underground" when they are banned from "twitter", . Thats so pathetic, and scarred into peeing your pants,, I believe that it would happen. Nice brave republicans.

Free speech and such (1)

fa2k (881632) | about 2 years ago | (#42086623)

OK, then people from the US (or anywhere else) can't say they have Free Speech any more. I was reluctantly fine with redefining free speech as free political speech, so you could exclude things like slander and the DVD CSS codes etc. Now we can only talk about how bad the restrictions are and compare countries.

Additionally, it's not particularly brilliant of Hamas to rely on a company from an allied of their enemy to disseminate information

Can someone explain (4, Insightful)

Swampash (1131503) | about 2 years ago | (#42086631)

why the USA blindly jumps to the defense of Israel for everything all the time? I mean... Israel comes across as Tommy DeVito as played by Joe Pesci in Goodfellas. Crazy little guy on a hair trigger who keeps fucking everything up for everyone. And the USA without fail jumps in with WE STAND WITH THE CRAZY LITTLE NATION ON A HAIR TRIGGER.

I don't get it.

Re:Can someone explain (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#42086771)

Because of evangelicals. They believe a holy war will preceed the second coming of christ, and so they do everything in their power to start one. There is absolutely nothing rational about our policy towards Israel.

Re:Can someone explain (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 2 years ago | (#42086879)

If you build your house next to the ocean, and it gets wiped out by, say a tidal wave or hurricane, maybe you should have built more inland, away from the water enough to be safe.

Why did the Jewish people choose to build their house where all their neighbors hate them? I'm asking a simplified, serious question. There's plenty of good land to be had in the world, Australia comes to mind, oceanfront land there too. If I lived where everyone around me wants to kill me, I'd move, and let the people there find a new group to hate and kill, probably themselves or nearest neighbor. Israel's choice of location has never made sense to me.

Re:Can someone explain (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#42086983)

Because the magical man in the sky told them to.

Re:Can someone explain (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#42086917)

Because of evangelicals. They believe a holy war will preceed the second coming of christ, and so they do everything in their power to start one.

'Cause, you know, God can't do it without their help.

I agree that it's mostly the religious right. Contrary to popular opinion, the Elders of Zion don't actually run the USA.

Re:Can someone explain (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086881)

why the USA blindly jumps to the defense of Israel for everything all the time?

Lots of American Jews have inserted themselves into places of influence, via their
money and power. And they have used their influence to manipulate US policy,
to the detriment of the US in general. It truly is an example of the tail wagging the dog.

However, Jews who understand the world outside the US know this is bound to result in a rebound
effect. I am one of those Jews. I do not support the actions of Israel and I know that brute force will sooner
or later be met with a greater force which will result in destruction.

If the UN was not emasculated it would be time for the UN to step in and declare martial law
in Israel and the neighboring areas, and bring peace or death to those who would be in favor of
more violence.

Um... No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086663)

The goverment can not ask this.
If we won't respect our own laws.. Why in the fuck would anyone else on the planet?

Flat out goverment censorship. I don't care who you're doing it to.

Twitter can do it on their own if they wish to. They are a private company and are not bound by the rules of free speech. The goverment needs to fuck off tho.

But then again.. Just one of the many problems our goverment has now. Gotta stick its nose into everyones business. And fuck it up.

As a Practical Matter (1)

tjstork (137384) | about 2 years ago | (#42086681)

Letting Hamas and other terrorist organizations use Twitter keeps them in reach. Do you really want them to make their own, harder to find, twitter. At least this way, everyone can know what they are thinking.

Republitards (2)

bzipitidoo (647217) | about 2 years ago | (#42086685)

Way to go, Republicans. Look stupid again. Make Texas and America look bad, again.

The people behind this out of order demand are all Republicans. And the leader, this Ted Poe, is from Texas. I don't want the US to be a one party nation, but the Republicans seem suicidally intent on cornering the market on stupidity. Royal courts used to have fools. Helped the monarchy avoid really stupid moves. Court fools had a good deal of license, but no real power. I would prefer that the Republicans behave like a serious party, and quit making auditions for this vacant post that shouldn't be needed, now that we have dozens of editorial cartoonists, Saturday Night Live's tradition of mocking candidates and debates, and comedy news such as the Daily Show.

But if Republicans continue to be unable to help it, unable to comprehend that such a demand tramples upon the 1st Amendment and that they ought to be ashamed of themselves, it's time for them to be pushed aside. We haven't had a big party shift since the Whigs waffled on slavery and self destructed in the 1850s. The 4 Whig Presidents, ending with Millard Fillmore, are among our lowest rated presidents. The last really good Republican president we had was not Reagan, it was Eisenhower. Time for some fresh blood.

Re:Republitards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086909)

...Make Texas ... look bad, again

again? When has texas NOT looked bad?

Re:Republitards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086985)

What about Gerald Ford? He was a rather decent guy who didn't plunge the US into some stupid war.

Re:Republitards (1)

briniel (916290) | about 2 years ago | (#42086991)

Nice try blaming the Republicans but the political deck was stacked a long time ago. The Clinton's and Obama are both right of Reagan. Our entire government is right center, ask anyone who has a view from outside the United States. The Democratic voters are today's "court fools".

Only two options (1)

m0s3m8n (1335861) | about 2 years ago | (#42086701)

First off, while I seldom agree with the left, we are not at war with the Palestinians, so we should not be censoring anything. With that said, the world only has two options; keep the status quo and prevent a hot war in the Middle East (maybe) or leave the combatants alone, which will inevitably lead to nuclear war. Hamas and radical Islam (I am looking at you Iran) are bent on the destruction of Israel, and Israel will defend itself to the end. When Islamic clerics begin to preach peace with Israel, I will eat these words. Of course there is the possibility that the Israelis will simply give up and move away - sure they will.

A plurality of MCs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086717)

Can't touch this!

Israel should do it (2)

amightywind (691887) | about 2 years ago | (#42086723)

I think we should let the Israelis ban Hamas. All of them.

Hamas == monsters (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086731)

They are cruel, brutal bloodthirsty beasts who purportedly call themselves human.

They are masters of the art of 'al taqqiyah' (Islamically-sanctioned lying to advance the cause of Islam) -- deceit to trick people into letting them assume positions of power. They masqueraded as a benign political party, won elections, then promptly abolished all free elections as 'un-Islamic', and then started throwing people they didn't like off buildings.

However, being Islamists, they are arrogant and stupid, and think with their dicks, and like to brag and bluster. They should be allowed to keep sprouting their propaganda, because at least we know that when they're spewing their poisonous filth, that they're trying to do 'al taqqiyah' or sneak or worm their way into power somewhere.

Short of eliminating these khanzir Islamist pigs completely (my preferred final solution), they need to be watched very, very closely and our welfare is not served by muting them.

Re:Hamas == monsters (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086767)

Sounds unbelievably close to U. S. "Christian" fundamentalists/Republicans.

Hamas is the enemy of Israel and the West (1, Funny)

benjfowler (239527) | about 2 years ago | (#42086803)

The West, collectively is big enough to take on Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Arab countries all at the same time.

Why doesn't somebody simply call a general mobilization, and round up every political Islamist in the region, and put them up against a wall? We'd solve about a dozen problems at a stroke.

Re:Hamas is the enemy of Israel and the West (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086887)

And when we're finished with that, lets's proceed with:
- non-christians
- buyers of non-american products
- copyright violators
- gays and lesbians
- asians
- south-americans
There is a nice song about this: Political science by Randy Newman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iiv-6fMKyY

Re:Hamas is the enemy of Israel and the West (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086949)

Let's do a crusade and let history repeat itself!
Do people never learn?

Is this the thread (0)

gelfling (6534) | about 2 years ago | (#42086847)

Where all the freshly scrubbed white liberal middle class college kids who are totally in favor of peace love free weed Marxism and gay marriage call for a new holocaust against the Jews in the name of peace and tolerance?

Awesome.

Lets be visually clear about this mentality (1)

3seas (184403) | about 2 years ago | (#42086901)

Wikileaks releases a great deal of classified information. The government claims the act is aiding the enemy while at the same time getting a judge to say its ok for the government to continue treating the now public information as though its still secret.

In sum, head in sand while claiming violation of head in sand.

So it seems the government, the referenced legislators really don't want to understand reality. Here reality is not putting your head in the sand but rather realizing twitter simply does not work in such a way to enable identifing all past, present and future twitter accounts of those the government claims are on their terrorist list.

Besides, don't you think with all the monitoring the military, CIA, FBI, HLS of the internet social medias, they would want to monitor such accounts?

It is very clear they do not want to observe reality but rather see only what they want to see and claim what they want to claim.
And isn't it interesting how their vision is with blood colored military industrial complex supporting tunnel vision glasses.

Legislators need civics course (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086943)

Educated Americans know that the only appropriate response to offensive speech is more speech.

Ban All Terrorist Entities, Including Israel & (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086969)

To be fair, if Twitter is to ban terrorist entities, then Twitter should ban all terrorist entities, including Israel and the U.S. (... assuming a workable definition of terrorism is the brutal, random killing of innocent people)

Israel = Terrorist (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42086993)

Israel is a TERRORIST state! They deserve everything Hamas gives them. Not to mention that Hamas is the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED government of the Palestinians. The US needs to stop supporting Israel and make those a-holes negotiate a settlement!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>