I am expelled from FB for 30 days for telling the truth!

June 19, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Am I wrong? Am I referring to the Jews as a race, as a biology or even as a people? Quite the opposite, I point at people who, for some reason, operate within racially exclusive Jewish political groups and are primarily committed to the interests of one tribal group.

I think the FB robot better be re-programmed in accordance with The Wandering Who’s findings.

Gilad’s Being in Time can be ordered on Amazon.co.uk  & Amazon.com  and on Gilad’s site  here.

Advertisements

Lionel Nation – More Calls for the Internet Kill Switch and Suspending the First Amendment

March 26, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

 

Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ Release Shows Vast Spying Capacity of CIA

[ Ed. note – Do you get the feeling the people running the US government aren’t sane? It has been a day of amazing revelations. ]

Apple, Samsung, Microsoft: WikiLeaks blows lid on scale of CIA’s hacking arsenal

RT

The major takeaway from the latest WikiLeaks dump centers around the terrifying, ‘all-seeing-eye’ surveillance project codenamed ‘Weeping Angel.’ The CIA appears to have taken espionage to a whole new level if WikiLeaks’ initial analysis is accurate.

According to the preliminary release, the CIA has the capability to hack, record and even control everyday technology used by billions of people around the world.

These include smartphones, tablets, smart TVs and even vehicles with remote control navigation systems.

On these devices themselves, the CIA can allegedly hack into some of the world’s most heavily encrypted social media and communications platforms such as WhatsApp, Weibo, Confide, Signal and Telegram before any encryption can even be applied.

For example, WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption means that only the direct participants in a conversation can read messages; not even WhatsApp is capable of reading them.

The CIA, however, was able to hack into individual private WhatsApp messages before encryption could even be applied.

Continued here

Here are a few tweets that have been posted on the subject:

is proof that the CIA is spying on us. There is zero on-the-record evidence that Russia is. Deep state controls U.S. “news.”

FLASHBACK: CIA admits to spying on Senate staffers https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/cia-admits-spying-senate-staffers?CMP=share_btn_tw 

Photo published for CIA admits to spying on Senate staffers

CIA admits to spying on Senate staffers

John Brennan issues apology after acknowledging that agency spied on Senate intelligence committee’s staff members

theguardian.com

The CIA is out here hacking our phones, computers, Smart TVs, gaming consoles, etc. & what are the liberals shrieking about? RUSSIA.

The media HATES Wikileaks because they have impeccable credibility & a virtually spotless record.

As for the media…. 😄 

 Watson’s observation about the media is rather on target. The following, written by writer Ted Kaplan, was published today at Slate:

Tuesday’s WikiLeaks release exposing thousands of detailed documents on CIA hacking tools is an unbridled attack on U.S. intelligence operations with little or no public benefit.

It is of no benefit to know the government can eavesdrop on us through our TV sets or smart phones? A rather astounding assertion to say the least.

Sweeping UK Spy bill Dubbed ‘Snoopers’ Charter’ Becomes Law

By Jill Lawless

LONDON (AP) — In Britain, Big Brother just got bigger.

After months of wrangling, Parliament has passed a contentious new snooping law that gives authorities – from police and spies to food regulators, fire officials and tax inspectors – powers to look at the internet browsing records of everyone in the country.

The law requires telecoms companies to keep records of all users’ web activity for a year, creating databases of personal information that the firms worry could be vulnerable to leaks and hackers.

Civil liberties groups say the law establishes mass surveillance of British citizens, following innocent internet users from the office to the living room and the bedroom.

Tim Berners-Lee, the computer scientist credited with inventing World Wide Web, tweeted news of the law’s passage with the words: “Dark, dark days.”

The Investigatory Powers Bill – dubbed the “snoopers’ charter” by critics – was passed by Parliament this month after more than a year of debate and amendments. It will become law when it receives the formality of royal assent next week. But big questions remain about how it will work, and the government acknowledges it could be 12 months before internet firms have to start storing the records.

“It won’t happen in a big bang next week,” Home Office official Chris Mills told a meeting of internet service providers on Thursday. “It will be a phased program of the introduction of the measures over a year or so.”

The government says the new law “ensures powers are fit for the digital age,” replacing a patchwork of often outdated rules and giving law-enforcement agencies the tools to fight terrorism and serious crime.

In a move taken by few other nations, it requires telecommunications companies to store for a year the web histories known as internet connection records – a list of websites each person has visited and the apps and messaging services they used, though not the individual pages they looked at or the messages they sent.

The government has called that information the modern equivalent of an itemized phone bill. But critics say it’s more like a personal diary.

Julian Huppert, a former Liberal Democrat lawmaker who opposed the bill, said it “creates a very intrusive database.”

“People may have been to the Depression Alliance website, or a marriage guidance website, or an abortion provider’s website, or all sorts of things which are very personal and private,” he said.

Officials won’t need a warrant to access the data, and the list of bodies that can see it includes not just the police and intelligence services, but government departments, revenue and customs officials and even the Food Standards Agency.

“My worry is partly about their access,” Huppert said. “But it’s much more deeply about the prospects for either hacking or people selling information on.”

James Blessing, chairman of the Internet Services Providers Association, said the industry has “significant questions” on how the law will work – including “how to keep the vast new data sets secure.”

He warned that if the law is not implemented in a “proportionate, considered way, there is a real danger the U.K. could lose its status as a world-leading digital economy.”

Some aspects of the new law remain clouded by secrecy. Not all internet companies will have to comply – only those that are asked to by the government. The government won’t say who is on that list, and the firms involved are forbidden from telling their customers.

Service providers are also concerned by the law’s provision that firms can be asked to remove encryption to let spies access communications. Internet companies say that could weaken the security of online shopping, banking and a host of other activities that rely on encryption.

The new law also makes official – and legal – British spies’ ability to hack into devices and harvest vast amounts of bulk online data, much of it from outside the U.K. In doing so, it both acknowledges and sets limits on the secretive mass-snooping schemes exposed by former U.S. National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

The government says the law incorporates protections against intrusion, including an investigatory powers commissioner to oversee the system, and judges to scrutinize government-approved warrants to hack into electronic devices or look at the content of communications.

David Anderson, a lawyer who serves as Britain’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said the new law “creates powerful new safeguards” and “achieves world-leading standards of transparency by putting on a detailed statutory basis all the powers which police and intelligence agencies already use.”

Privacy groups battled to stop the new legislation, and now say they will challenge it in court. But public opposition has been muted, in part because the bill’s passage through Parliament has been overshadowed by Britain’s vote to leave the European Union and the upheaval that has followed.

Renate Samson, chief executive of the group Big Brother Watch, said it would take time for the full implications of the law to become clear to the public.

“We now live in a digital world. We are digital citizens,” Samson said. “We have no choice about whether or not we engage online.

“This bill has fundamentally changed how we are able to privately and securely communicate with one another, communicate with business, communicate with government and live an online life. And that’s a real, profound concern.”

Russia’s Air Force cuts off mercenary-terrorists’ communication lines with Turkey’s intelligence agency MIT

Syrian Free Press
putin-syria-fighter-jets-vs-mit

Russian Fighter Jets Cut Off Terrorists’ Communication Lines with Turkish Intelligence Agency

The Russian air force targeted and destroyed the telecommunication towers in Northern Syria near the borders with Turkey and cut off the terrorists’ internet and lines of communication with Turkey’s MIT intelligence agency.

According to a report by al-Mayadeen news channel, the Russian warplanes smashed two telecommunication towers at the Syrian-Turkish borders, disconnecting the terrorists’ contacts with the Turkish intelligence agency.

mit_turkiye

Other sources said the terrorists who have be caught off hand are now thinking of ways to reestablish their contacts with Turkey.

Earlier reports said that the European satellite operators give terrorists, specially the ISIL (ISIS, IS, Daesh) members, an opportunity to upload propaganda, exchange information and possibly even prepare terrorist attacks.

The ISIL members located in Syria and Iraq are gaining access to the Internet using opportunities offered by European satellite operators, Spiegel online wrote last year.

The communication is reported to be carried out via satellites of European companies Avanti Communications headquartered in the UK and Eutelsat in France.

eutelsat_

According to the magazine, there are thousands of devices in Syria and Iraq, which enable terrorists to use the satellite Internet. Theoretically, everyone who wants to get online can do so only by using the satellite technology, as the telecommunications infrastructure in the country is destroyed.

However, for ordinary people living in the cities captured by the ISIL militants it is almost impossible. ISIL is controlling Internet access and prohibits private individuals from buying the required devices. Only members of the terrorist group have the right to use the Internet, others are being threatened with severe punishment.

As reported by the magazine, the devices are being exported to Syria through Turkey.

Turkey Replaces Al-Nusra Front with Turkmen gang


SOURCES:
Fars News
Sputnik News
Submitted by Cem Ertür 
War Press Info Network at :
https://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/russia-vs-mit/
~

Israeli Official Called for World Internet Censorship in January…’Hate Speech’ Controls Announced by Social Media Giants Today

Posted on May 31, 2016

erdan

Israeli Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan

[ Ed. note – If you’re a critic of Israel and suddenly one day find your Facebook page or Twitter account deleted…well…there may be a reason for that…

Below are two articles, the first published in January in the Times of Israel concerning efforts to put together an “international coalition” to force social media companies to delete posts containing “hate” or “incitement”…the otherpublished today, at RT, on an agreement reached between four US tech giants and the EU Commission to “tackle the spread of illegal hate speech online.”

“This is a perfectly logical and just project,” said a spokesperson for Israeli Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan as quoted in the Times of Israel article. “If a hotel was being used as a venue for a hate group, we would demand that the hotel break its contract, and we would lean on other hotels to abstain from hosting them, so that the hate group would not be able to hold its event. This is no different.”

The article includes links to material allegedly posted by Hamas officials or individual Palestinian activists, including an anatomical chart designed to show which parts of the body to aim for in order to fatally stab someone, but as one commenter here notes, postings of this nature are “tiny in comparison to the volume of material going up on the Internet, and there are already more than sufficient methods in place to deal with such incidents and get them removed.

This would indeed seem the case at least if we go by the many reports we hear of Facebook posts getting deleted or videos pulled from YouTube. The above-mentioned commenter additionally opines:

Although the Israelis are attempting to disguise the project as a counter to Palestinians posting “violence promoting material” on the Internet, it is clear that the extension of this “coalition” has a far wider scope.

Zionists not only are out to destroy the BDS movement, but it seems they are aiming to kill freedom of speech on the Internet as well, or at least any free speech critical of Israel. How close are they to succeeding?

“There is a clear distinction between freedom of expression and conduct that incites violence and hate,” says Karen White, a Twitter official quoted in the RT story. She additionally insists that the company is “committed to letting the Tweets flow”.

But as an article in Bloomberg recently noted,

“Pressure is on from governments from Israel to Germany to step up the fight against hate speech as Internet platforms become center stage for everything from political activism to promoting terror.”

One thing you may note as well from the article below is that the terror attacks in Europe now conveniently seem to be providing justification for the new measures. ]

***

Israel Eyes World Coalition to Force Social Media Platforms to Block Incitement

By David Shamah | January 19, 2016

Israel is aiming to build an international coalition to force the world’s leading social media giants to prevent their platforms from being abused to peddle incitement to terrorism.

The move, which was unveiled by Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan at Sunday’s cabinet meeting, aims at requiring Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, and other social networks to take greater responsibility for such content.

While some experts consider the idea unworkable — arguing that the terms of service of such platforms protect them from any legal threat, and that the preventative measures Erdan wants to see introduced are not possible technologically, others say a coalition pushing for change could be effective, and certainly stands more of a chance than an effort led by Israel alone.

The social media giants “make millions but claim they are not responsible for content, and that they only provide a platform,” a spokesperson for Erdan told The Times of Israel. “That is not going to wash. We are planning to put a stop to this irresponsibility, and we are going to do it as part of an international coalition that has had enough of this behavior as well.”

On Sunday, Erdan introduced the idea of building an international legal coalition to take action against social media platforms if they do not proactively prevent the use of their systems to upload videos, songs, photos, and other content that inspire would-be terrorists to pick up knives, guns, rocks, and other weapons to attack Israelis.

At the weekly cabinet meeting, Erdan presented ministers with an “index of incitement,” showing a correlation between instances of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic content posted by Palestinians, and the level of violence by Palestinians against Israelis.

Innumerable posts, videos and tweets have extolled the virtues of attacking Israelis in the ongoing terror wave, with terror groups andprivate individualsposting incitement, songs hailing the terrorists, and instructional videos telling them how best to attack. In several cases, attackers have posted their own messages ahead of such attacks.

There were numerous things Israel could do to combat the phenomenon, said Erdan. In a statement Sunday, Erdan said that he “intended to methodically expose the Palestinian culture of incitement among relevant communities around the world.”

Among Erdan’s proposals for action: Linking a reduction in incitement to assistance provided by Israel or other parties to the Palestinian Authority; publicizing the link between incitement, both by individual Palestinians and the Authority itself, to violence against Israelis; and developing legislation in Israel and abroad to prosecute social media platforms for failing to keep calls for violence and hateful materials off their platforms.

Erdan’s plan, said his spokesperson, calls for developing legislation in conjunction with European countries, most of which “are very interested in this idea. The legislation would have common features, such as defining what constitutes incitement and what the responsibilities of social networks regarding it are. Companies that do not comply will find themselves hauled into court, paying a penalty.”

The participating countries would be part of a loose coalition that would keep an eye on content and where it was being posted, and members of the coalition would work to demand that the platforms remove the content that was posted in any of their countries at the request of members.

“This is a perfectly logical and just project,” Erdan’s spokesperson said. “If a hotel was being used as a venue for a hate group, we would demand that the hotel break its contract, and we would lean on other hotels to abstain from hosting them, so that the hate group would not be able to hold its event. This is no different.”

Erdan’s proposal came weeks after the son of a Jerusalem man killed in a terror attack urged lawmakers to do more to quash social media incitement. Richard Lakin, a US-born teacher and peace activist, was shot and seriously wounded on October 13, and died of his injuries two weeks later. His son, Micah Avni, has been campaigning against social media incitement, with Lakin named as lead plaintiff in a 20,000-complainant-strong lawsuit against Facebook.

At a Knesset hearing in November, Avni argued that social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, virtually inhabited by millions of people every day, should be thought of as countries or continents. It would follow, he said, that it is necessary to regulate social media in the same way that nations regulate other areas such as finance, transportation, communication, broadcast, healthcare, and food.

LAWYERS RESPOND

Reaction to Erdan proposal from attorneys who spoke to The Times of Israel was mixed. One attorney involved in the highest echelons of the Internet business in Israel asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of her position. She said the terms of service of social media platforms protect them from prosecution.

“The point of social media platforms is to provide a forum for users to express themselves,” said the attorney. “We wouldn’t want them to micromanage every bit of data that we post, and we probably don’t want the admins at Facebook and Twitter reading or looking at all the images we post, either,” she added.

“In addition, this would be next to impossible to pull off technologically,” the attorney continued. “How would the site know when something negative was uploaded? And even if such a law were passed, the platform might decide that it is just not worth the trouble to do business in the country where they are being prosecuted – like Israel – and just shut off access to their platform altogether. Is that what we really want?”

Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of the Israel Law Center disagreed, however. Actually, she said, “that is exactly why Erdan is seeking a coalition.”

It turns out that Israel already has in place the legislation needed to prosecute Facebook and other social media sites for anti-Semitic content; a law that allows Israel to prosecute anti-Semites who threaten the existence or welfare of the Jewish people has been on the books for decades. That law, she said, could be used to prosecute social media networks that do not do enough to prevent anti-Israel or anti-Jewish incitement.

But if Israel goes it alone, “then they might decide to cut off ties with us,” said Darshan-Leitner. “That is why Erdan is seeking to build this international coalition. There’s safety in numbers; if Facebook et al. know they are going to have to face the music in a dozen countries, they will be much more amenable to being proactive on this matter than if they were just contending with Israel.”

Darshan-Leitner said she thinks Erdan’s idea will succeed. “While we are perhaps the biggest sufferers of Arab incitement, we are not the only ones. The Europeans, after all, have in recent years been given devastating tastes of what that incitement can lead to — in the terror attacks in Marseille, Paris, Toulouse; in the stream of Muslims in Sweden identifying with IS, and many other incidents and attacks, large and small.

“This is not about freedom of speech,” said Darshan-Leitner. “It’s long ago been established that yelling ‘fire’ in a movie theater is a prosecutable offense. You are free to say what you want, but when what you say leads to damages – much less murder – that’s a different story altogether.”

Twitter and Youtube could not be reached for comment for this piece. In a statement, Facebook said that “we regularly work with safety organisations and policy makers around the world to ensure that people know how to keep safe when using Facebook. There is no place for content encouraging violence, direct threats, terrorism or hate speech on our platform.

“This is a community of over 1.5 billion people, including more than 4 million people in Israel, with clear rules. We have a set of Community Standards to help people understand what is allowed on Facebook, and we urge people to use our reporting tools if they find content that they believe violates these standards, so we can investigate and take swift action. We look forward to continuing dialogue with the government about these issues,” the statement added.

***

Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and YouTube Adopt EU Hate Speech Rules

RT | 31 May, 2016 20:01

US tech giants have signed an agreement with the European Commission to tackle the spread of illegal hate speech online that requires them to address complaints within 24 hours.

Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, and YouTube adopted the code of conduct on Tuesday, committing to crackdown on the use of online hate speech swiftly by putting in place internal procedures to respond to the majority of notifications of abuse within 24 hours and remove the offending content if necessary.

The guidelines are aimed at combatting the use of social media by terrorists, according to a joint statement issued by the EC and the IT companies.

“The recent terror attacks have reminded us of the urgent need to address illegal online hate speech. Social media is unfortunately one of the tools that terrorist groups use to radicalize young people and racists use to spread violence and hatred,” said Vĕra Jourová, EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality.

The IT companies also agreed to educate their users about the types of content banned under their rules and to encourage them to flag material violating the “code of conduct.”

The measures are based on the Framework Decision on Combating Racism and Xenophobia, which criminalizes public incitement to violence or hatred and forms the legal basis for defining online content as illegal.

The European Court of Human Rights distinguishes between content that “offends, shocks, or disturbs the State or any sector of the population” and content genuinely intended to incite people to violence or hatred.

All of the companies said “hate speech” has no place on their platforms and promised to continue to take measures to combat it.

Twitter’s Head of Public Policy for Europe, Karen White, said the microblogging site remains “committed to letting the Tweets flow”.

“There is a clear distinction between freedom of expression and conduct that incites violence and hate.

“In tandem with actioning hateful conduct that breaches Twitter’s Rules, we also leverage the platform’s incredible capabilities to empower positive voices, to challenge prejudice and to tackle the deeper root causes of intolerance,” she said.

Microsoft noted that it had recently announced additional steps to specifically prohibit the posting of terrorist content.

Twitter, Facebook, and Google were sued by a French Jewish youth group this month after only a small number of posts containing hate speech that they had flagged were deleted, and only after a lengthy period – an average 15 days in the case of YouTube and Twitter.

However, two civil society groups involved in the discussions announced on Tuesday that they would not take part in future talks after they were excluded from final negotiations.

European Digital Rights (EDRi) and Access Now say they do not have confidence in the “ill considered” code of conduct, saying that there had been a lack of transparency and public input during the creation of the document.

The groups claim that the “‘code of conduct’ downgrades the law to a second-class status, behind the ‘leading role’ of private companies that are being asked to arbitrarily implement their terms of service.”

They have also pointed out the possibility that the agreement could be in breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

In addition, concerns are being raised that the agreement could damage freedom of expression by allowing private companies to define what constitutes hate speech and what does not.

Zionists Push for Multi-National Firing Squad Aimed at Internet ‘Hate Speech’

Posted on June 1, 2016

firingsquad

By Richard Edmondson

The European Commission has reached an agreement with four major Internet tech companies on the terms of a “code of conduct” governing “illegal hate speech” on social media platforms. The companies are Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft.

The announcement was made May 31 and comes just four months after a high-ranking Israeli official called for an “international coalition” to force social media outlets to eliminate “hate” or “incitement” in user posts and threatening legal action against those who fail to comply.

“By signing this code of conduct, the IT companies commit to continuing their efforts to tackle illegal hate speech online,” says the European Commission’s formal announcement. “This will include the continued development of internal procedures and staff training to guarantee that they review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.”

“Hateful conduct has no place on Twitter and we will continue to tackle this issue head on alongside our partners in industry and civil society,” said Karen White, Twitter’s Head of Public Policy for Europe.

“We remain committed to letting the Tweets flow. However, there is a clear distinction between freedom of expression and conduct that incites violence and hate,” she added.

The Code of Conduct adopts the definition of hate speech incorporated into aFramework Decision on racism that had been previously adopted in 2008. Under that framework, “public incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined on the basis of race, colour, descent, religion or belief, or national or ethnic origin” would be considered a criminal offense, as would “publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes…when the conduct is carried out in a manner likely to incite violence or hatred” against such a group or individual.

It is impossible to glean from the EC press release what part Israel or its European lobbies may have played in advocating for the new measures, but we do know that at a cabinet meeting in January, Gilad Erdan, Israeli Public Security Minister, discussed plans to form an “international legal coalition” of countries with the objective of pressuring social media companies to remove “incitement” from their platforms.

erdan

Israeli Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan

Erdan’s views on the matter are discussed in a January 19, 2016Times of Israel article that even names three of the four companies–Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube–who signed on to the European Commission’s code of conduct this week. The coalition would “take action against social media platforms if they do not proactively prevent the use of their systems to upload videos, songs, photos, and other content that inspire would-be terrorists to pick up knives, guns, rocks, and other weapons to attack Israelis,” says the report.

Apparently under the scheme envisioned by Erdan, one does not actually need to advocate an act of violence to be guilty of an offense; one might simply post a song, video or photo that might conceivably “inspire” someone else. The ultimate goal would be “developing legislation in Israel and abroad to prosecute social media platforms for failing to keep calls for violence and hateful materials off their platforms,” as the article puts it.

The Internet companies “make millions but claim they are not responsible for content, and that they only provide a platform,” commented an Erdan spokesperson quoted in the story. “That is not going to wash. We are planning to put a stop to this irresponsibility, and we are going to do it as part of an international coalition that has had enough of this behavior as well.”

The spokesperson described unnamed European countries as being “very interested in this idea,” and went on to add:

“The legislation would have common features, such as defining what constitutes incitement and what the responsibilities of social networks regarding it are. Companies that do not comply will find themselves hauled into court, paying a penalty.”

The article also includes links to material allegedly posted by Hamas officials or individual Palestinian activists, including an anatomical chart designed to show which parts of the body to aim for in order to fatally stab someone, but as one commenter here notes, postings of this nature are “tiny in comparison to the volume of material going up on the Internet, and there are already more than sufficient methods in place to deal with such incidents and get them removed.”

That would seem to be the case judging by the sheer number of reports we hear of Facebook pages getting deleted or videos being pulled from YouTube. However, a study published by a French Jewish group, the UEJF, or Jewish Students Union of France, alleges that more than 90 percent of posts they viewed as objectionable on Twitter and YouTube remained online an average of 15 days after requests for removal had been filed. Facebook is said to have been somewhat more obliging to the demands, deleting a third of the posts.

According to Bloomberg, the study was conducted by UEJF in conjunction with two other groups, SOS Racisme and SOS Homophobie, and a lawsuit against Twitter, Facebook and Google was filed in a Paris court earlier this month.

According to the report, the content still online includes a comment on Facebook saying that “homosexuals are disgusting;” a YouTube video that uses a derogatory term for black people and said “go back home you apes;” and a Twitter post that applauded the Brussels attacks and stated “Death to the Jews.”

Conveniently, the terror attacks in Europe seem to be providing a good bit of the justification for the measures. The attacks are cited in both the Times of Israel report and the European Commission’s press release as well.

“The recent terror attacks have reminded us of the urgent need to address illegal online hate speech,” said Vera Jourová, EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality. “Social media is unfortunately one of the tools that terrorist groups use to radicalise young people and racist use to spread violence and hatred.”

“While we are perhaps the biggest sufferers of Arab incitement, we are not the only ones,” said Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of the Israel Law Center. “The Europeans, after all, have in recent years been given devastating tastes of what that incitement can lead to — in the terror attacks in Marseille, Paris, Toulouse; in the stream of Muslims in Sweden identifying with IS, and many other incidents and attacks, large and small.”

The Times of Israel article notes that Israel already has on its books “the legislation needed to prosecute Facebook and other social media sites for anti-Semitic content,” but as Darshan-Leitner points out the big companies could simply cut off services to the Jewish state should it attempt enforcement on its on.

“That is why Erdan is seeking to build this international coalition. There’s safety in numbers; if Facebook et al. know they are going to have to face the music in a dozen countries, they will be much more amenable to being proactive on this matter than if they were just contending with Israel.”

The code of conduct agreed to this week provides a mechanism of “self-enforcement,” as it were, under which the companies will be “taking the lead” insofar as reviewing notifications of material deemed objectionable–an exercise that in all likelihood will require the hiring of additional employees–and deleting those which presumably cross the line. Just exactly where “the line” will be seems to be rather subjective, however.

For now this determination is left to the companies–surely a disappointment to the hardliners in Israel–but that could change. A few more terrorist attacks in Europe and we could well see the emergence of an EU-wide censorship regime imposed on social media, a regime whose regulations pro-Israel lobbies likely would have a large hand in crafting.

This could of course supply a motive for a false flag attack–a tactic Israel has not been averse to using in the past.

%d bloggers like this: