One of the most chilling maps I've ever seen is the one of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory. It looks like a cell using lysosomes to kill prey.
HN should just ban controversial topics. Every time, these threads just devolve into mass flagging and downvoting and many times its usually one-sided depending on the majority view. Not interesting and not fun at all.
If you familiarize yourself with the past explanations that I just linked to, you'll see that this is explained in detail. If, after that, you have a question that isn't answered there, I'd be happy to give it a try.
Given that HN is regularly read (and commented on) by some of the top minds in world IT, I personally feel it would be a travesty simply not to mention some of the biggest issues and topics facing the world today.
I personally feel there's nothing more important than engaging those high profile and influential minds on these big issues if we have any hope of solving or at least improving them.
The site guidelines explicitly ask you not to post like this. If you have specific concerns about astroturfing or similar abuses, please email hn@ycombinator.com so we can investigate. If you're just making up garden-variety internet insinuation about this stuff, that's off topic on HN. Either way, please don't post like this again.
While I have no issue with controversial posts on HN - high profile, influential tech minds have zero influence over the Israel-Palestine matter. The same is true for many controversial topics.
The President of the United States and Congress barely have any influence over what goes on between Israel and Palestine.
Zuckerberg can't influence the Israel-Palestine context one bit, and he has $100 billion in wealth and controls the world's largest social network. He can't make the slightest of difference, no matter what he believes or wishes were. Zuckerberg is entirely powerless. The same goes for Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Brin, Page, Ellison, Musk and on down the list.
So the 'influential' people on HN? Whatever is less than zero ability to influence this topic, that's the power they possess.
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.
> 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.
Israel is an apartheid state. Stealing land and declaring a "jewish state" is no less criminal or insane than what isis / islamic state tried to do.
Anti-zionism is not equal to anti-semitism.
Just like I can criticize the USA without hating Americans, or criticize Iran without discriminating against muslims.
I agree that some of Israel's actions in the west bank are better not done and palestinians should have a right for self determination.
However, the statement that Israel steals land is false. Israel has never stolen land from anyone.
The previous owners of the west bank were the Jordanians and the previous owners of the Gaza Strip were the Eygptians, who lost this land in a war they initiated.
Like in every conflict in the world, crimes are comitted by both parties. During the 90s and early 00s suicide bombers kill thousands of Israelis - that's the reason Israel built a wall around the west bank.
If you saying that Israel is not stealing Palestinian land, then you are simply ignoring a very well established and already proved fact. Instead of me trying to explain it, I would rather give you one piece information provided by a recognized Israeli source:
> the Jordanians [..] the Egyptians [..] a war they initiated.
Sorry to be an armchair commenter here, but I think this opinion is not highly agreed upon by internet sources in easy reach. Wikipedia at least suggests that the first strikes came from Israel's side[1].
> On 5 June, Israel launched a series of airstrikes against Egyptian airfields, initially claiming that it had been attacked by Egypt, but later stating that the airstrikes were preemptive.
Thanks for the comment, but I doubt you read the whole article.
Saying that Israel started the war is akin to saying Britain and France started WW2 by declaring war on Germany.
They did decrlare war and initiated the first hostile act, but virtually no one considers the UK and france as responsible for the start of WW2, there were many events that led to the declaration of war that show beyond doubt that the Nazis were delibaretely acting aggressively and left no choice for UK and France, but to continue diplomacy by "other means".
Same goes in the case of the 67' war - if a country would have started a naval blockade on the US would it be considered an act of war? sure it would.
Prior to the 1967 war, Eygpt closed the Straits of Tiran, effectively blocking Israel from half of the world.
Just to put things in perspective - 90% of Israeli oil passed through the Straits of Tiran. So this was a really big deal as all the Israeli economy was dependent on the straits being open for commerce.
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)
>Stealing land and declaring a "jewish state" is no less criminal or insane than what isis / islamic state tried to do.
The most famous commentary on the Torah (Rashi) begins when the question of why the Torah begins with the story of Creation and not with the first law the Jews were given
Rashi says:
"For should the peoples of the world say to Israel, “You are robbers, because you took by force the lands of the seven nations of Canaan”, Israel may reply to them, “All the earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He; He created it and gave it to whom He pleased. When He willed He gave it to them, and when He willed He took it from them and gave it to us”
https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Genesis.1.1?lang=en
Although this submission was posted earlier, the thread is so wretched as to be unsalvageable. Therefore the discussion moved to a repost:
The blackout Palestinians are facing on social media - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27645282 - June 2021 (231 comments)
You'll find that HN is going to be only too happy to silence this as well.
One of the most chilling maps I've ever seen is the one of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory. It looks like a cell using lysosomes to kill prey.
https://i.imgur.com/v1lNHEY.jpg
@dang Care to weigh in on this submission? Seems to be a lot of flagging/vouching going on.
HN should just ban controversial topics. Every time, these threads just devolve into mass flagging and downvoting and many times its usually one-sided depending on the majority view. Not interesting and not fun at all.
Political posts are banned unless they involve technology
Using technology to silence people is technology
Pretty much everything involves technology today. What was that famous quote? "Software will eat the world" or something like this?
That's not accurate. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and these past explanations:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902490
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so....
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.
If you familiarize yourself with the past explanations that I just linked to, you'll see that this is explained in detail. If, after that, you have a question that isn't answered there, I'd be happy to give it a try.
Given that HN is regularly read (and commented on) by some of the top minds in world IT, I personally feel it would be a travesty simply not to mention some of the biggest issues and topics facing the world today.
I personally feel there's nothing more important than engaging those high profile and influential minds on these big issues if we have any hope of solving or at least improving them.
Anything critical of Israel is persistently [Flagged] to death.
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 site guidelines explicitly ask you not to post like this. If you have specific concerns about astroturfing or similar abuses, please email hn@ycombinator.com so we can investigate. If you're just making up garden-variety internet insinuation about this stuff, that's off topic on HN. Either way, please don't post like this again.
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
While I have no issue with controversial posts on HN - high profile, influential tech minds have zero influence over the Israel-Palestine matter. The same is true for many controversial topics.
The President of the United States and Congress barely have any influence over what goes on between Israel and Palestine.
Zuckerberg can't influence the Israel-Palestine context one bit, and he has $100 billion in wealth and controls the world's largest social network. He can't make the slightest of difference, no matter what he believes or wishes were. Zuckerberg is entirely powerless. The same goes for Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Brin, Page, Ellison, Musk and on down the list.
So the 'influential' people on HN? Whatever is less than zero ability to influence this topic, that's the power they possess.
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.
By way of technology alone? Careful what you wish for, you might get it!
We've seen that lies and manipulation can distort reality too much already. Platforms need to be honest to be constructive.
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.
The top minds in IT are not going to solve the Israel/Palistinian conflict, any more than politicians and statesmen will prove whether P = NP.
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.
The problem is seen in other platforms though - who decides?
That's not a viable option, as I've explained many times. If you (or anyone) want to read some of those explanations, many are here:
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
I've already seen something interesting just in the primary post content, notwithstanding any comments.
Israel is an apartheid state. Stealing land and declaring a "jewish state" is no less criminal or insane than what isis / islamic state tried to do.
Anti-zionism is not equal to anti-semitism. Just like I can criticize the USA without hating Americans, or criticize Iran without discriminating against muslims.
I agree that some of Israel's actions in the west bank are better not done and palestinians should have a right for self determination.
However, the statement that Israel steals land is false. Israel has never stolen land from anyone. The previous owners of the west bank were the Jordanians and the previous owners of the Gaza Strip were the Eygptians, who lost this land in a war they initiated.
Like in every conflict in the world, crimes are comitted by both parties. During the 90s and early 00s suicide bombers kill thousands of Israelis - that's the reason Israel built a wall around the west bank.
If you saying that Israel is not stealing Palestinian land, then you are simply ignoring a very well established and already proved fact. Instead of me trying to explain it, I would rather give you one piece information provided by a recognized Israeli source:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/opinion/.pr...
Hope, you will get a better sense of the truth.
Peace!
> the Jordanians [..] the Egyptians [..] a war they initiated.
Sorry to be an armchair commenter here, but I think this opinion is not highly agreed upon by internet sources in easy reach. Wikipedia at least suggests that the first strikes came from Israel's side[1].
> On 5 June, Israel launched a series of airstrikes against Egyptian airfields, initially claiming that it had been attacked by Egypt, but later stating that the airstrikes were preemptive.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War
Thanks for the comment, but I doubt you read the whole article.
Saying that Israel started the war is akin to saying Britain and France started WW2 by declaring war on Germany.
They did decrlare war and initiated the first hostile act, but virtually no one considers the UK and france as responsible for the start of WW2, there were many events that led to the declaration of war that show beyond doubt that the Nazis were delibaretely acting aggressively and left no choice for UK and France, but to continue diplomacy by "other means".
Same goes in the case of the 67' war - if a country would have started a naval blockade on the US would it be considered an act of war? sure it would.
Prior to the 1967 war, Eygpt closed the Straits of Tiran, effectively blocking Israel from half of the world.
Just to put things in perspective - 90% of Israeli oil passed through the Straits of Tiran. So this was a really big deal as all the Israeli economy was dependent on the straits being open for commerce.
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)
>Stealing land and declaring a "jewish state" is no less criminal or insane than what isis / islamic state tried to do.
The most famous commentary on the Torah (Rashi) begins when the question of why the Torah begins with the story of Creation and not with the first law the Jews were given
Rashi says: "For should the peoples of the world say to Israel, “You are robbers, because you took by force the lands of the seven nations of Canaan”, Israel may reply to them, “All the earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He; He created it and gave it to whom He pleased. When He willed He gave it to them, and when He willed He took it from them and gave it to us” https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Genesis.1.1?lang=en