I am Palestinian. Here’s how Israel silences us on social media

From your link

>Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon.

So while maybe it isn’t “unless they involve technology” is is still claimed in your guidelines that they are mostly banned.

Astroturfed by the Israeli social media mafia.

You can downvote this but it is well documented that the government unit that does this exists and the patterns are evident here.

The ability to shape opinions of voters and funding should be seen as a kind of influence. In the US context, perhaps the plight of Palestinian victims of property theft will influence some ethical capitalists to scale back their uncritical moral or financial support to Israeli nationalist organizations.

Everybody has influence of the Israel-Palestine matter because the conflict exists only thanks to the spin Israel gives to it. They do what they do- and profit from it- because the public opinion in the Western countries (USA in particular) allows them to. That's why it's so important to them to keep shaping that opinion, and that's why it's so important to change it.

> Zuckerberg can't influence the Israel-Palestine context one bit

He can! $100B is enough to buy god knows how much Kalashnikovs, and ammunition.

> The President of the United States and Congress barely have any influence over what goes on between Israel and Palestine.

They could, they just always, in recent decades, choose to use it in very nearly the same way, with very slight variations.

I mean, the Congress and the Preident together could, on the one hand, declare war on Palestine (either the widely-but-not-US-recognized State of Palestine, or Hamas, or both) on some pretext and radically change the context.

Or, on the other side, they could recognize and arm the State of Palestine, stop all aid and arms sales to Israel, stop vetoing every Security Council resolution that Israel doesn’t like, and sign a defense pact with the State of Palestine.

They don’t do those things because they don’t choose to, but that’s not a lack of power but a lack of sufficient interest and desire in changing the outcome.

There is no Israeli/ Palestinian conflict. There is nothing to solve. There is a country that is slowly expanding in territory it doesn't have a right to, with some resistance from the original population.

This is a crime. Why do they do it? Because it's convenient and nobody stops them. Why nobody stops them? Because they've convinced the world that "there is a conflict", that "it's complicated", that "they're antisemites and they want to kill us all".

That's it. Weapons are just a tool. What enables Israel to keep occupying land and persecute Palestinians is just what people think of the whole thing. As long as people think "it's complicated", "Palestinians are just backwards antisemites", Israel will have a free hand in doing what they're doing. That's why convincing people is fundamental: and Israel knows very well, and that's why they censor as much information as possible.

We probably have different views on this, but I consider who murders the first people as the instigator. That combined with lying about being attacked and the documented execution of Egyptian prisoners doesn't make me want to give credence to your point of view.

Also when France and the UK declared war on Germany, it had already occupied Poland using armed forces, so I feel like your comparison is a little tenuous.

My understanding of the six day war is not good, I'll admit that, it's based on some very vague memories of my history class in school and on some late night Wikipedia reading, but I am very confident that Israel doesn't have the moral high ground to the level of certainty that your original post implies.

(Also I would have liked that before accusing me of not reading my source, maybe you'd considered that even though we've read the same words we might get to different conclusions, and that's fine)