Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 10 (since 2010-06-15 16:07:12)

Showing comments 10 - 1
Page:

  • Liberal Democrats casually smear the Muslim Brotherhood
    • Let's not smear them for things they haven't done, no, but let's also analyze and criticize them in the same way we would similar elements in our own country. They're a legitimate political organization, but so is the U.S. Republican party.

  • Preparing for 'Internet terror to strike'
  • 'NYT' Public Editor lets Bronner off the hook
  • Israeli Minister joins call for removal of pro-Palestinian Facebook page
    • One more update, from CNN (link to edition.cnn.com):

      "The page... began as a call for peaceful protest, even though it used a term that has been associated with violence in the past. In addition, the administrators initially removed comments that promoted violence," the company statement said. "However, after the publicity of the page, more comments deteriorated to direct calls for violence. Eventually, the administrators also participated in these calls. After administrators of the page received repeated warnings about posts that violated our policies, we removed the page.

      "We continue to believe that people on Facebook should be able to express their opinions, and we don't typically take down content that speaks out against countries, religions, political entities, or ideas. However, we monitor pages that are reported to us and when they degrade to direct calls for violence or expressions of hate -- as occurred in this case -- we have and will continue to take them down," Facebook said.

    • Just a note to all: Today, Facebook took down a page calling for a Third Intifada - unfortunately, it's not the same page I referenced in my post, and therefore, I didn't actually have a chance to see it before it was taken down (and can't comment on whether or not there was *actual incitement to violence* on the page): link to haaretz.com.

      That said, there are two points to discuss further:
      -Can online speech actually constitute incitement? And, given that the vast majority of the page's members are likely Diaspora Palestinians (given the low Internet access rates in Gaza, and low Facebook numbers overall in Palestine), does that make a difference in addressing the question?

    • Yes - my update as of right now is that *a* Facebook page calling for a Third Intifada was removed today, but that that page is NOT the one I mentioned in this post, therefore I (unfortunately) can't comment on any of its content.

  • Report from ground zero
    • I'm not equating the two, just saying that the Progressive left isn't somehow immune to tension between types of folks who show up.

    • Is that a Confederate flag on that fellow's shirt?

      I'm honestly horrified by all of this. It's also strange for me to see these people in New York (they must have taken the overnight Greyhound, right? These can't possibly all be New Yorkers!?).

    • Really? Every single time I go to a march for Palestine, somebody ends up shouting religious statements of some variety (from the downright icky to the simple "God is great"). Those usually bring about some dissent.

  • From birthright to boycott
    • I really appreciate this. One "failure" of the BDS movement is the lack of comprehensive, clear, information. In an ideal world, those interested in boycotting would do their own research and practice principled boycott on their own terms. In reality, however, it sometimes takes a lot of digging before one is able to find detailed information on a certain product ("Yes to Carrots!," an Israeli company which hides the name Israel on its products, is a great example of this...I didn't find a single thing online, and had to write my own blog post).

      Though I many not agree with some of the ideas of your partial boycott, I think the Boycott Toolkit is very helpful and may lead others to join up.

Showing comments 10 - 1
Page: