Israeli Law firm threatens to sue twitter for allowing Hezbollah, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 30-12-2011 @ 10:31 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL
technolog.msnbc.msn.com...



An Israeli law center said Thursday it is threatening to sue Twitter unless the social network cuts off access to groups, including Hezbollah, that are considered terrorist organizations by the United States. The law center, Shurat HaDin, describes itself as being "dedicated to enforcing basic human rights through the legal system," and says it has represented "victims of terrorism in courtrooms around the world." In a letter to San Francisco-based Twitter, attorney and Shurat HaDin executive director Nitsana Darshan-Leitner wrote that "it has come to our attention that Twitter, Inc. provides social media and associated services" to such groups as Hezbollah and the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Al-Shabaab — labeled as "foreign terrorist organizations" (or FTOs) by the United States.


So this Israeli law firm is trying to infringe on the rights of other people? Seems to me that this is racism or intimidation or something. This is the USA and you cannot limit freedom. Where do these quacks come from?

Also look at the comments on the bottom section:



DeathbyenzyteExpand Comment Comment collapsed by the community So,now we are supposed to start giving up our rights to placate the Jews? It's bad enough we act like their pet,now we're gonna start chopping away at our very Constitution to better serve Israel's needs? Even the Vatican (1965) caved in because they didn't like hearing how they killed Jesus.Who the hell do these people think they are? <1% of our population is Jewish,yet 33% of our Supreme Court is......hmmm AMERICAN SPRING 4/20/12!!!!!!!!! WE WILL NOT GO TO WAR FOR ISRAEL!!! * 68 votes #1.5 - Thu Dec 29, 2011 8:35 PM EST


68 + votes but eventually collapsed because he was speaking the truth


reply posted on 30-12-2011 @ 10:53 AM by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


That’s really quite interesting I can understand how this might be perceived as a American company giving support to a group deemed to be terrorist’s yet it is also a suppression of freedom of speech to deny them access to social networking sites. I do wonder however, who is to say that that the face behind the twitter name “Hezbollah” does not belong to a 15 year old kid having a laugh, I am sure twitter will have a way of verifying accounts, but verifying a terrorists account am not so sure.

Regardless in my opinion groups designated as terrorists should not be allowed access to websites such as Twitter and Facebook.

But that’s just me.....


reply posted on 30-12-2011 @ 11:02 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


What bout the jewish defense league whom commit terrorist actions, they are also on twitter. Should their account be also checked?

The point is that you just cant single out one account for any reason, it would be discriminatory. If they wanted to do that, they should check all the twitter users, each and every single one of them.



reply posted on 30-12-2011 @ 11:30 AM by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I think that any group that is a designated as a terrorist organisation under American law should not receive any support from any American company, even if that support comes in the form of a Twitter account. This is tantamount to adding the enemy and as such it is not justifiable for a American company to provide any kind of support to that organisation that has been designated as a terrorist.

If the Jewish defence league was to be designated as a terrorist organisation then I would be saying the exact same thing, they should not be granted with a Twitter account. The point however is mute because under American law they are not a terrorist group, specifically they do not appear on the US State Departments list of foreign terrorist organisations as set out in accordance with section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which is important in relation to this thread as the OP makes reference to one such group. You can argue all you want about whether or not specific Jewish groups should be on that list or the domestic equivalent however it is my opinion that any group that is deemed to be a terrorist by the state should not receive any support form that state, including, but not limited to, any businesses that is based in said state.


reply posted on 30-12-2011 @ 05:06 PM by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Well I think if these companies are providing assistance to these groups directly then yes they should also be held to the same standard as I would hold twitter to in this case. However if it is the case that they have no control of the distribution of their products and can prove this then I would have to say they should not. For example if a Iphone is found in the hands of a terrorist, unless apple knew the Iphone was going to a terrorist then they have no case to answer to. If however they were knowingly supplying terrorists with phones then they should have to justify this to a court in my view.

I think if you want to move onto the English language your just starting to get silly.


reply posted on 30-12-2011 @ 10:42 PM by rogerstigers
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


and, given this hypothetical, are the phone companies, or twitter, in this case, supposed to do background checks and live monitoring of all the communications out there? When did private businesses get the responsibility of enforcing law?


reply posted on 2-1-2012 @ 11:49 AM by rogerstigers
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
No they should not be conducting in-depth back ground checks on all their customers, if however it is clear that they are providing their service to a group that has been deemed to be a terrorist organisation then they should be answerable in a court of law. For example Twitter should not allow the user name “Hezbollah” or variations of it as this are clearly supporting a terrorist organisation.

I can’t help but think this thread is getting a little bit silly in asking questions like this and asking me if I think the people who invented the English language are aiding terrorists (a really stupid question). It’s frustrating when I give a clear response to a post stating my opinion only to be subjecting so such childish questioning. If you have a different opinion to me then that is fine, explain your reasoning behind it, back it up with some facts, then we can discuss it but please do not persist with the line of pointless questioning that does nothing to challenge my view.


I don't view it as childish. It is a valid debate on the limits of restricting personal freedoms and mandates on busineses.

I don't think that it is at all "aiding the enemy" because someone has a username with Hezbollah in it. Neither is is feasible to block people using #Hezbollah, etc., in their tweets. That would amount to a news blackout, which would hurt both sides.

Next thing you know, people will be saying that restaurants or grocery stores that sell food to people associated with Hezbollah are "aiding the enemy".


reply posted on 3-1-2012 @ 04:35 AM by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by xuenchen


Unfortunately I'm not laughing and am sure you aren't either as that was sarcasm!

See the dangerous precedent is starts? Well, the bomb device rig for the 03/11/04 Madrid strike was initiated and activated using and employing a cell phone trigger when called the phone lights the fuse to the battery, battery to charge wires, to central box and back to battery to complete the circuit and BOOM!
edit on 3-1-2012 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

Pages:     ^^TOP^^