bluefishinit

I don't think the Times Of Israel is an unbiased source. This isn't trustworthy reporting.

The original post is from the Times Of Israel. It's literally propaganda, we can at least discuss the content no?

Full article: https://archive.is/ySRjm

Having access to first party reporting from Palestinians has effectively defeated Israel’s propaganda machine for younger generations in the west.

It was an illegal strike:

> An Israeli airstrike carried out within Syria without its consent would be in contravention of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits a state from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other state... Unless Israel were able to justify any airstrike as an act of self-defense, it would be in violation of international law.

This is in retaliation for Israel bombing the Iranian embassy in Damascus:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_bombing_of_the_Iranian...

X has an account called Canary Mission that doxxes students, professionals and random people in the street for speaking out against Israel.

They’re also thought to be behind the real life intimidation campaign featuring people dressed in bird costumes:

https://forward.com/news/407127/a-new-wave-of-hardline-anti-...

I think we'll be seeing a lot more of this. It's a massive brand liability to have an association with Israel and there's an unknown potential for future damage.

4 day work weeks are the way to go. When I have 3 consecutive days to relax I'm 100% more recharged then when I have two. It's not even close.

I don't follow you. Osama Bin Laden said that the bombing of the WTC was in retaliation for Israel bombing Beirut:

> God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers but after the situation became unbearable and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed - when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the US sixth fleet.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/oct/30/alqaida.septem...

Zionists did that and generally destabilized the entire region:

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iraq-jews-attacks-zionist...

That's not true at all. Nakba was an ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Palestinians. Voluntary Jewish immigration at behest of Zionist urging to Israel is not the same thing.

Resistance against occupation.

No. There are such a thing as war crimes and Israel has documented themselves committing them nearly continuously since October 7th.

Gaza was under complete blockade from Israel (after it was occupied by it). That's not an environment you can create reliable governance since it wasn't allowed to be a sovereign state.

Obviously they should!

Interesting how quickly this was addressed and redacted vs. the fabricated rape propaganda that Israel has been spreading about Oct 7th. Just as with this case, a family member said that there was no rape. The difference is that The New York Times ran the Israel propaganda as fact.

I get paid according to the value I create, it doesn't matter where I live.

People aren't fools. They know that TikTok is being put into this position by the US government. You can go on any social media platform right now and see how outraged TikTok users are. This is going to have incredible political blowback from the younger generations and there won't be any "lawyering" around that. Even if the ban doesn't go through, a lot of damage has already been done.

TikTok's users will know who to blame: the US government. There would have been no problem at all before this bill got pushed through (if passed).

> What’s more, divestiture would require Beijing’s approval. Last year, the Chinese government said it opposed a forced sale.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/house-passes-tiktok-...

Opposing this ban isn't "malicious intent" lots of people think it's an infringement upon their rights for the US government to decide what they can and cannot see.

It's not useful though. I actually think it's very cool that TikTok got a bunch of young people to contact their representatives. If this ban goes through, the political blowback is going to be extreme. It will be like the Streisand effect x100,000,000.

That's not a "botnet" though, advertising does the same thing. We don't call the people buying things they've been marketed a "botnet".

This level of censorship isn't good, it's very bad. It's also concerning the speed at which the government mobilized to do this. It's a rapid crackdown on free speech and individual freedom.

I get to choose the apps I use and certainly can (and do) take who owns them into consideration.

Yes, I am. I should get to use any app, under any ownership that I choose. This is a violation of my rights.

The users who want to use that app, should get to use that app. If there's content on the app that breaks the law, that content can be addressed directly. This thankfully will be a very politically costly move if they pull it off. Millions of people will be pissed, and they will be right to be.

I don't think any website or app should be banned just because the owner is accused of having an agenda (foreign or domestic owned). That's not society having "no order", it's basic freedom of speech and personal liberty.

I disagree. It looks like they're fighting for the rights of US citizens. If you were one of the millions of people who use and like the app, you might feel the same way.