What's new

From Beirut, This Is Paris: In A World That Doesn't Care About Arab Lives

? Going to have to clarify your post, i'm not sure what 5 or 10 citizens of 'christendom' (do you mean the west?) you are referring to murdered in the ME nor how that is relevant to the paris attacks.

English is not my language, so i'll try: you presumed death by terrorism is a ''normal'' day to day occurrence in the M.E, so it's not news worthy. Terrorism in Christendom does not happen, so it becomes news worthy.

As you've asserted that it's a normal day in the M.E, then why did Christendom declare war on ISIS when THEIR citizens were caught up in the M.E by the butchers? Before then, Muslims were being slaughtered and Christendom forces did nothing. They only acted when one of their own was butchered. So what does that tell you?
 
.
English is not my language, so i'll try: you presumed death by terrorism is a ''normal'' day to day occurrence in the M.E, so it's not news worthy. Terrorism in Christendom does not happen, so it becomes news worthy.

As you've asserted that it's a normal day in the M.E, then why did Christendom declare war on ISIS when THEIR citizens were caught up in the M.E by the butchers? Before then, Muslims were being slaughtered and Christendom forces did nothing. They only acted when one of their own was butchered. So what does that tell you?

If you are referring to Paris, that definitely is not in the Middle East.

Well for Europe they aren't exactly masters at projecting power, Libya showed their limits.

They also have their own interests, one of which is not getting caught up in another middle-east quagmire.

That's also a goal of Russia and the US, which is why you don't see boots on the ground.

Both countries have their own interests in the region, neither of which is primarily protection of Syrian civilians (though the same can be said of Assad. The Kurds are probably the cleanest 'faction' in the conflict, because their primary goal is protecting their own people!

As for acting, it remains to be seen how this changes things. So far France has bombed some abandoned Daesh bases in Raqqah, and used emergency powers against extremism at home. The bulk of the fight against Daesh is still carried out by the various domestic middle-eastern forces along with Russian and American support, as it has been.

Also, we really don't identify first with Christendom (ultron not withstanding), its more shared interests, culture and historical ties. Calling us 'the West' (even if inaccurate as it implies
one monolith bloc) would be more accurate than christendom, because our alliance extends out of a shared political and cultural interests, among which the spreading of christendom is very low on the list.

Religion does not influence policy to any significant extent.


As for the outcry? I'd suppose because France is a long-time ally, culturally similar, and the fame of the city attacked.

Outrage is a natural extension of human grieving, and it is only human for there to be differing levels for someone who is seen as a 'close friend' and someone seen as a stranger. Just replace friend with cultural and political ties,
 
.
If you are referring to Paris, that definitely is not in the Middle East.

No! my message was about 250,000+ dead muslims and no action was taken. When the Christendom hostages were murdered by ISIS then action was taken. The life of Muslim is worthless in the eyes of Christendom.

Anon is a Hindu name. Are your origins Indian?

Well for Europe they aren't exactly masters at projecting power, Libya showed their limits.

Libya and Iraq are exactly how they wanted it to be. Chaos and cheap oil and no one to challenge the dollar by ''thinking'' of bringing back gold sovereigns as Gadaffi was.

They also have their own interests, one of which is not getting caught up in another middle-east quagmire.

Christendom armies will be going in the M.E to occupy Muslim lands. We suspect the invasion will take place after the US elections, but.... The way things are going it may be as soon as 2016 and Allah knows best! But one thing is for sure CHRISTENDOM ARMIES are going into M.E!

Both countries have their own interests in the region, neither of which is primarily protection of Syrian civilians (though the same can be said of Assad. The Kurds are probably the cleanest 'faction' in the conflict, because their primary goal is protecting their own people!

As a non-Arab we know how ''CLEANEST'' faction Akrad are. Their primary goal is to create Kurdistan and the rest is propaganda. Rusia dropped a few bombs in a month are so and ISIS are on the verge of defeat. Amrika is complaining that Rusia is targeting civilians in Shaam. Does anyone really believe Amrika lies that it cares about ISIS controlled areas??? Amrika and Christendom airforces have been ''bombing'' something and did nothing. ISIS are on the point of defeat because of Rusia.

So far France has bombed some abandoned Daesh bases in Raqqah, and used emergency powers against extremism at home. The bulk of the fight against Daesh is still carried out by the various domestic middle-eastern forces along with Russian and American support, as it has been.

Why are the Francs bombing empty bases? Emergency powers? Do you actually even hear yourself, dear friend? You don't need special powers to deal with criminals, murderers. Why don't you call it scaremongering!

Outrage is a natural extension of human grieving, and it is only human for there to be differing levels for someone who is seen as a 'close friend' and someone seen as a stranger. Just replace friend with cultural and political ties,

Like i said one life is worth more than other.
 
.
No! my message was about 250,000+ dead muslims and no action was taken. When the Christendom hostages were murdered by ISIS then action was taken. The life of Muslim is worthless in the eyes of Christendom.
Except action was taken, first again Assad who massacred his people, then against ISIS who did worse. We have built a coalition (SDF) against ISIS, and this is before these paris attacks happened, months if not years in the making. Beyond that we will criticize Assad and ISIS in every public forum, but the problem isn't of a nature where we will risk our troops where we would just as likely be called crusaders as liberators.

Anon is a Hindu name. Are your origins Indian?
huh, first i've heard of that, and no anon in my username is short for 'anonymous'.


Christendom armies will be going in the M.E to occupy Muslim lands. We suspect the invasion will take place after the US elections, but.... The way things are going it may be as soon as 2016 and Allah knows best! But one thing is for sure CHRISTENDOM ARMIES are going into M.E!

Just curious, where do you see 'christendom' occupying?

From my pov we aren't going to have troops touch Syria or Iraq with a 10 foot pole. We will bomb ISIS to rubble and help the SDF dismantle the daesh though. Oh yeah, and spec ops on the ground to coordinate.


As a non-Arab we know how ''CLEANEST'' faction Akrad are. Their primary goal is to create Kurdistan and the rest is propaganda.
I assume Akrad means Kurd?

Yes that is their primary goal, and that is probably the most well intentioned goal in the conflict, as they don't intend to inflict genocide or are trying to stay in power by any means necessary or been hijacked by extremist elements.

No side doesn't have blood on their hands, but by all accounts i've read, they have the least.

Rusia dropped a few bombs in a month are so and ISIS are on the verge of defeat.

dropping bombs doesn't bring any faction to the verge of defeat,they are a force multiplier. The best airforce in the world can't take land, ground troops have to do that, and its been the SDF along with American support that have really taken the fight to ISIS.

Amrika is complaining that Rusia is targeting civilians in Shaam. Does anyone really believe Amrika lies that it cares about ISIS controlled areas??? Amrika and Christendom airforces have been ''bombing'' something and did nothing. ISIS are on the point of defeat because of Rusia.
that's wholly unsupported and discounts American efforts with the SDF.

Plus you aren't making sense, both Russia and the US have been bombing and nothing else. US has been bombing ISIS in support of SDF, Russia has been bombing mostly the rebels and just calling them all ISIS.

map-russian-airstrikes-in-syria-are-helping-isis-and-assad.jpg


Russian%2BAirstrikes%2B4-15%2BNOV-01%2B%25281%2529.jpg





Why are the Francs bombing empty bases?
My guess? they don't want to kill civilians. They can't add much to what the US and Russia are doing anyways, this is just to sate the populace back home and show hollande is doing something.

Emergency powers? Do you actually even hear yourself, dear friend? You don't need special powers to deal with criminals, murderers. Why don't you call it scaremongering!
Yes you do need special powers invoked to deal with these suspects the way France has.

France has declared a state of emergency, this gives extra powers to security services, which is why you see so many raids in France.

Like i said one life is worth more than other.

Well sure, in the same way that you value a close friend's life over a complete stranger's.

Its the same concept.
 
Last edited:
.
The recent attacks in Paris have understandably led to an outpouring of grief from across the world.

But should we be concerned at how society measures death in different ways.

We live in a technological age where we are able to garner information from a range of news sources within minutes of incidents taking place. It has made it more and more difficult for governments and media organisations to essentially ‘control’ what can and cannot be seen.

So, when an attack happens it is quite easy for the average person to see for him or herself other people’s reactions.

On Thursday a double suicide attack in Beirut killed 40 people. A day later gunmen went on the rampage in Paris.

The latter was a bigger and more important event. Not just because of the numbers killed but because it happened in Paris.

Even if less than ten people had been killed in Paris, the killings would be more important to us, our media and our political leaders.

Death and destruction in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq is a common occurrence and they are used to it. We are not.

Those who die in these areas are sadly living in the wrong place.

But why do we continue to measure death in these ways?

These are common arguments you are likely to hear in many Muslim communities.

Yes, we as Muslims condemn the actions of terrorists but at the same time we will use the opportunity to highlight how Muslims are also being killed in far flung corners of the earth.

I heard this argument almost immediately from Muslims on social media and in WhatsApp group forums.

I have to say I was not comfortable about some people were completely flippant over non-Muslims being killed.


Promoted stories

But should they be made to feel guilty for saying this?

If you live in the west then you must face the fact that any death and killing taking place here should be mourned more than one elsewhere in the world.

If you want to show your loyalty not just to this country but also to western society you must condemn and then stay silent on any event suggesting that such deaths are linked to state sponsored terrorism.


This weekend the conversation privately amongst Muslims is one that draws parallels between barbaric terrorism on the streets of Paris and an airstrike that ‘mistakenly’ kills civilians.

Earlier this year a report claimed that US led airstrikes in Syria had killed over 400 civilians.

We are not permitted to draw such parallels. To do so in the current political climate seems to suggest you are being sympathetic to terrorists.

In fact you can well be labelled an ‘Islamist’ for even suggesting to draw parallels.

But you are not though. You are clearly stating a fact.

We mourn the loss of people we can in some way relate to but we do not mourn the loss of lives we have no connection with.

As Muslims we are also guilty of this very ignorance too. We are quick to point out Muslim deaths but not those of non-Muslims.


Being a good Muslim for some means they care for other Muslims more than all human beings.

And we are almost proud to admit this contradiction.

Our war on terror: Why western lives are more important than third world lives (From Asian Image)
 
.
first again Assad who massacred his people,

When? The so called ''red line'' of using chemical weapons. Nothing happened! He's still barrel-bombing and the UN states it's a war crime. Google it! McCain was there to bolster the support and left them to die. They did not get weapons and the FSA even said this. ''Weapons falling into wrong hands''.

I will not go back and forth as it's a waste of time and nothing will come of it. My point was made by you, lives are worth more in certain parts of the World. Whether you use the argument of culture, (race, religion) it means the same. Muslim lives don't mean nothing to Christendom and you've accepted that without coming out openly and you should not try to insult peoples intelligence as actions speak louder than words. It is understandable like you said, of similarities in culture, etc to have more grief for the same kind. If you still continue to reject this then how many of your people condemned the terrorism targeted against Muslims? How many of you even know a terrorist act took place in Lubnan only 24 hrs earlier? If not, then why not? Was their an outpouring of grief, if not, why not?

Christendom calls it terrorism when a bomb goes off when they're targeted. However, when a bomb goes off in the Muslim World it's never called a terrorist act. Why not?

We ACCEPT you don't see us as equals and you have to ACCEPT our wishes of not interfering in our business and staying out of our countries. This also means stop propping-up dictators, Arab monarchs and ginrals in Pakistan. Please just leave us alone!

that's wholly unsupported and discounts American efforts with the SDF.

Amrkan lies caught red handed, so much for trusting Amrkan State Dept. Bunch of LIARS!

US State Department caught lying about Russia targeting hospitals and civilian infrastructure in Syria : conspiracy

huh, first i've heard of that, and no anon in my username is short for 'anonymous'.

Ok. Are your origins Indian?

Yes you do need special powers invoked to deal with these suspects the way France has.

France has declared a state of emergency, this gives extra powers to security services, which is why you see so many raids in France

Is there an uprising going on in Franc? NO! There is no insurrection going on like we do in Pakistan. The only difference is we got on with our lives and don't MILK it for propaganda purposes!

Well sure, in the same way that you value a close friend's life over a complete stranger's.

Its the same concept.

Why couldn't you just admit Christendom lives mean more than Muslims, as I said? Thank you and finally!

The recent attacks in Paris have understandably led to an outpouring of grief from across the world.

But should we be concerned at how society measures death in different ways.

We live in a technological age where we are able to garner information from a range of news sources within minutes of incidents taking place. It has made it more and more difficult for governments and media organisations to essentially ‘control’ what can and cannot be seen.

So, when an attack happens it is quite easy for the average person to see for him or herself other people’s reactions.

On Thursday a double suicide attack in Beirut killed 40 people. A day later gunmen went on the rampage in Paris.

The latter was a bigger and more important event. Not just because of the numbers killed but because it happened in Paris.

Even if less than ten people had been killed in Paris, the killings would be more important to us, our media and our political leaders.

Death and destruction in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq is a common occurrence and they are used to it. We are not.

Those who die in these areas are sadly living in the wrong place.

But why do we continue to measure death in these ways?

These are common arguments you are likely to hear in many Muslim communities.

Yes, we as Muslims condemn the actions of terrorists but at the same time we will use the opportunity to highlight how Muslims are also being killed in far flung corners of the earth.

I heard this argument almost immediately from Muslims on social media and in WhatsApp group forums.

I have to say I was not comfortable about some people were completely flippant over non-Muslims being killed.


Promoted stories

But should they be made to feel guilty for saying this?

If you live in the west then you must face the fact that any death and killing taking place here should be mourned more than one elsewhere in the world.

If you want to show your loyalty not just to this country but also to western society you must condemn and then stay silent on any event suggesting that such deaths are linked to state sponsored terrorism.


This weekend the conversation privately amongst Muslims is one that draws parallels between barbaric terrorism on the streets of Paris and an airstrike that ‘mistakenly’ kills civilians.

Earlier this year a report claimed that US led airstrikes in Syria had killed over 400 civilians.

We are not permitted to draw such parallels. To do so in the current political climate seems to suggest you are being sympathetic to terrorists.

In fact you can well be labelled an ‘Islamist’ for even suggesting to draw parallels.

But you are not though. You are clearly stating a fact.

We mourn the loss of people we can in some way relate to but we do not mourn the loss of lives we have no connection with.

As Muslims we are also guilty of this very ignorance too. We are quick to point out Muslim deaths but not those of non-Muslims.


Being a good Muslim for some means they care for other Muslims more than all human beings.

And we are almost proud to admit this contradiction.

Our war on terror: Why western lives are more important than third world lives (From Asian Image)


Bhai, so what does that tell you? You are write we living here don't want to compare blood, but don't come here and DEMAND us to condemn your terrorist acts and yet your Christendom people say nothing for our dead! As if our dead don't mean anything!

Although, I don't blame them for thinking this when we ALLOW foreign country to bomb our country and kill our people with drones and when they kills civilians it's called ''COLLATERAL DAMAGE''! Christendom man can walk into Pakistan and gun down two Pakistanis and walk out of the country! Please tell me if a Pakistani diplomat or not can do that in Christendom country and walk free?

We give them the impression that our lives are cheap! Our ginral was selling our people for $1m like cattle. They are not cheap to the grieving loved ones.
 
.
@Azad-Kashmiri

The systemic atrocity of Afghanistan's occupation | Ross Caputi | World news | The Guardian

The death of innocent civilians is nothing new in Afghanistan, but these 16 victims, nine of whom were children, were allegedly murdered by a rogue soldier, rather than the usual killers – drone attacks, air strikes and stray bullets. This incident has elicited rage among Afghans and westerners alike. But why are westerners not equally outraged when drone attacks kill entire families?

Drone attacks that kill civilians usually fall into our category of "collateral damage", because the dead civilians weren't specifically targeted, and we treat this category as an unfortunate consequence of war, not murder. Afghans see little difference – rightly so, in my opinion, because their loved ones are dead because of the conscious actions of Nato forces.

This distinction between collateral damage and murder seems to come down to the question of intent. Thomas Aquinas was one of the first to hone in on this distinction with his doctrine of double effect, which is still used today to justify collateral damage. It is believed in the west that some innocent death is excusable in war, as long as the deaths are not intended, and even if those deaths are foreseeable. But if civilian deaths are foreseeable in a course of action, and we take that action anyway, did we not intend them? I doubt Afghans would feel much consolation knowing that their family members were not directly targeted; rather, we just expected that our actions would kill a few people and it happened to be their family members – an unfortunate side-effect of war.

Yet, western audiences feel reassured knowing that most of the civilian deaths in Afghanistan were not intended; and they only become outraged when marines and soldiers clearly target civilians and kill women and children, urinate on their bodies, and plunder their body parts as trophies. From Abu Ghraib, to Fallujah, to Haditha, and now to Panjwai, US forces have committed massacres against civilians. These incidents stand out in the western mind, but to Afghans and Iraqis, they are no different from the daily slaughter of civilians by drones, air strikes, depleted uranium and stray bullets.

Tell a mother from Fallujah whose children have been horribly deformed by uranium weapons that her childrens' suffering was unintended, even though thehealth effects of uranium-based weapons are well-known. Tell the survivors of drone attacks that their dead family members were not targeted, and that their deaths were an unfortunate consequence of war. Is their pain any different from the father whose entire family was murdered in this most recent atrocity? If collateral damage is foreseeable, if it is really a fact of war, as most believe it is, is it not a crime to engage in war when it will inevitably kill innocents?

Is there really a morally significant difference between murder and collateral damage?

The consequentialist will argue that the good results outweigh the bad, that democracy, freedom and the liberation of Afghan women will improve the lives of Afghans so much that the deaths of a few are justified. This is an easy judgment for westerners to make from the comforts of their own homes; but it stinks of the same patriarchy and arrogance of the white man's burden that justified colonialism for so many years. Has anyone consulted Afghans and asked them if they think the good that the west has promised will come of this occupation is worth the lives of their family members?

The occupation of Afghanistan is an "atrocity-producing situation", as was the occupation of Iraq, and we have signed Afghans and Iraqis up for this against their will.

The nature of these occupations fosters atrocity. The invented enemy, the lack of a battlefield void of civilians, the supposed moral superiority of the occupiers, the obscure goals of the mission, the methods of training that prepare soldiers for occupation, and the methods of warfare all make the murder of civilians unavoidable. In modern warfare, 90% of the casualties are civilian, but this is a reality that the west likes to ignore.

rosscaputiiraq_220.jpg

Ross Caputi during the second siege of Fallujah, Iraq, in 2004 Ross Caputi/Public domain
In my own experience, soldiers and marines face an unbearable quantum of pressure and responsibility, and this inevitably leads to atrocity. When I was deployed to Iraq in 2004, with 1st Battalion 8th Marines, we faced conflicting expectations from our leaders who wanted dispassionate obedience, from our society back home who wanted a Hollywood-style victory and a happy ending, from our families who wanted us to put their needs first, from our comrades-in-arms who wanted our loyalty, and from ourselves as we struggled to hold onto our humanity. As much we wanted to please everyone, we couldn't. We were only human, asked to bear inhuman burdens, and the result was inhumane behavior.

We often toyed with the ideas of suicide and homicide, and joked about them. We laughed at the possibilities that someday, we might end up homeless on the streets, or shooting bystanders from a bell tower somewhere. We knew these possibilities were real, and we were frightened by them. "Ah, the glory of it all," we laughed. It was dark humor that made the dark reality that many of us really were on the verge of killing ourselves or someone else easier to bear.

However, in occupied territory, violence that might otherwise be turned inwards, sometimes gets expressed outwards. In Fallujah, I witnessed all our frustrations, our loneliness, our grief, our confusion, hate, fear and rage being unleashed on Fallujah – and Fallujans paid dearly. I witnessed good people do horrible things. Almost anyone in such a situation would have become just as ruthless. Some of my closest friends mutilated dead bodies, looted from the pockets of dead resistance fighters, destroyed homes, and killed civilians.

Incidents such as what happened in Panjwai on Sunday cannot be chalked up to the actions of "one bad apple". Incidents like this one are the product of an immoral and inhuman occupation. The atrocities will not end until the occupation ends. When will we give up the illusion that war can be conducted humanely?

These guys are not muslim but they have courage to speak the truth and to expose the lies and double standard of western government


[video]

[video]

[video]
 
.
When? The so called ''red line'' of using chemical weapons. Nothing happened! He's still barrel-bombing and the UN states it's a war crime. Google it! McCain was there to bolster the support and left them to die. They did not get weapons and the FSA even said this. ''Weapons falling into wrong hands''.

Assad gave up his chemical weapons... Syria Gives Up Chemical Weapons ... But A War Rages On : Parallels : NPR

Anyways i think i've proven we did do something.





I will not go back and forth as it's a waste of time and nothing will come of it. My point was made by you, lives are worth more in certain parts of the World. Whether you use the argument of culture, (race, religion) it means the same. Muslim lives don't mean nothing to Christendom and you've accepted that without coming out openly and you should not try to insult peoples intelligence as actions speak louder than words. It is understandable like you said, of similarities in culture, etc to have more grief for the same kind. If you still continue to reject this then how many of your people condemned the terrorism targeted against Muslims? How many of you even know a terrorist act took place in Lubnan only 24 hrs earlier? If not, then why not? Was their an outpouring of grief, if not, why not?

It sounds like you only believe in absolute 100% caring and absolute 100% disdain, when in fact there are emotions and levels of commitment in between.

Christendom calls it terrorism when a bomb goes off when they're targeted. However, when a bomb goes off in the Muslim World it's never called a terrorist act. Why not?
Your premise is false Lebanon detains 7 Syrian, 2 Lebanese terror suspects - The Washington Post

We ACCEPT you don't see us as equals and you have to ACCEPT our wishes of not interfering in our business and staying out of our countries. This also means stop propping-up dictators, Arab monarchs and ginrals in Pakistan. Please just leave us alone!

So do you not see anyone outside your family as an equal then? Because this is what you are implying about yourself if you cannot see that caring more about certain people doesn't mean you see everyone else as less than equal.



Amrkan lies caught red handed, so much for trusting Amrkan State Dept. Bunch of LIARS!

US State Department caught lying about Russia targeting hospitals and civilian infrastructure in Syria : conspiracy

RT is not a credible source it is basically Russian fox news, except owned by the government.

How The Truth Is Made At Russia Today - BuzzFeed News

The difference between real journalism and Russia Today » The Spectator

RT - RationalWiki

If you insist on using it, corroborate it with multiple sources (make sure pressTV isn't one of them).

Ok. Are your origins Indian?
American, I assume you are Pakistani?

Is there an uprising going on in Franc? NO! There is no insurrection going on like we do in Pakistan. The only difference is we got on with our lives and don't MILK it for propaganda purposes!
Sounds like you are used to it, well we aren't, its a big deal here, as it is in Europe. An attack of this scale along with some terrorists still being at large and the possibility of additional attacks absolutely calls for a state of emergency.


Why couldn't you just admit Christendom lives mean more than Muslims, as I said? Thank you and finally!

Wait so you basically just wanted to say we are human? Because that is a natural human feeling, and nothing unique to any person or society.

Besides there is a difference between placing higher value on the lives of those closer to you, and placing no value of those outside of your circle.

:shrug:
 
.

Dear Mark Zuckerberg,

You don’t know me.

My name is Ruth Daniel and I am from Manchester in the UK and I work most of my time in sites of conflict and post conflict. I am am a cultural producer and activist and spend most of my time working with creativity to make change across the world. I was shocked and appalled this week, that after the Beirut attacks, you did nothing on FB, but after the Paris attacks you decided to enable a function, where the French flag became a cover photo for users on their profile picture. I think this is both racist and propagates the West’s construct of a war on terror.

I decided I wanted to ask you why you had chosen the French flag and why you didn’t enable the other flags for the other atrocities that are taking place on a daily basis across the world.

I decided I wanted to contact you on FB to ask you these questions, but I quickly discovered that there is no way to contact anyone at FB. There is no ‘contact us’ or a mechanism to write a complaint or issue around the wider running of Facebook. There is no mechanism for you to answer what I consider to be a serious issue with FB. This is worrying.

It would appear that supporting an atrocity that has happened in France, carried out by exactly the same people that carried out the attacks in Lebanon, says one thing, that people of colour’s lives don’t matter as much as the lives of white people in the eyes of FB.

I would like to challenge FB to show that it is not racist, or propagating the West’s concept of a war on terror by supporting the other people in the world who face massive conflict in their everyday lives. The woman who are shot because they wear a hijab, the people who live in occupied territories, the people who can not move freely across the world.

For me, the war on terror is a construct of the west, conflict is all around us. For me the idea that we are just subjects of terror, is unfair. We are also inflicting terror. The airstrikes that France has inflicted today are evidence of that - an eye for an eye - in which children will die.

37 people were killed in Lebanon last week.
75 - 100 innocent people die every month in Palestine.
250 innocent people die every month in Syria.

Mark Zuckerberg, I would ask you to enable the Palestinian flag to be an option to have as a cover on profile pictures. And until you do that, to me, Facebook is racist and is in a dangerous game of supporting the war on terror, which may mean that you have contributed to confidence of the French government to conduct brutal airstrikes on Syria today.

So Mark Zuckerberg, will you show the world you are not supporting racist ideologies and the war on terror to your user-base of billions of citizens across the world, by enabling the Palestinian flag (and others) on Facebook?

Best,
Ruth
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom