Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

The White House twitter account has issued a response: https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1266367168603721728?s=...

This* Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, @Twitter has determined that it will allow terrorists, dictators, and foreign propagandists to abuse its platform.

*Referring to an attached picture of a Khamenei tweet about Palestine

That's amazing. Of all the horrific thing people post to Twitter all day long, a vague statement about Palestinian independence is the "best" whataboutist comparison Trump could find to match his own threat to open fire on the country he is sworn to defend.

whataboutism on his part

I don't think the Khomenni tweet is a valid comparison to Trumps (for other reasons) but lets be honest — This tweet is anything but a "vague statement about Palestinian independence", since it directly references and advocates for Jihad and Martyrdom.

> Of all the horrific thing people post to Twitter all day long, a vague statement about Palestinian independence is the "best" whataboutist comparison Trump could find

You're thinking the best example is the one that should obviously be removed. But that's not what he's after, because then they'd just remove it. What he wants is something it would be maximally contentious for them to remove.

I think Twitter user @HoarseWisperer summed it up quite well:

    I’m not sure “They aren’t letting us act like *other*
    warlords.” is as strong an argument as you think.

but "jihad" and "martyrdom" are the same things we talk about when we pump up our soldiers to fight in our wars. what's the difference between that and how we talk in the US about what an honor it is to lay one's life down for his country?

every country and every army in the world tells it's soldiers that sacrificing their lives for the sake of the war they are fighting is honorable and noble and that their families, friends, and nations are proud of them for doing so. how is that so much different than telling soldiers they will be rewarded in heaven for being martyrs? For those who are religious, if you sacrifice your life for the greater good (for the good side in a war between good and evil), isn't that a good deed? and don't good deeds get you into heaven?

Oh, I agree. That's totally fair. In fact, I agree with everything you wrote.

I was just taking issue with describing the Khomenni quote as a "vague statement about Palestinian independence" when it's very clearly a direct call-to-arms. Whether or not that call-to-arms is justified (or not) is orthogonal to the point I was making.

Silencing of one side allows for faster indoctrination to the opposite.

It's not the same thing because you're focusing on the wrong part.

People don't have a problem with pumping up people to prepare to die for their country.

People have a problem with the target of their actions being civilians.

You may agree or disagree with that being problemtic, but that is what you should be engaging with.

Where's the violence though? Or are they applying the stereotypical western misunderstanding of jihad = violence/terrorism?

https://news.gallup.com/poll/7333/jihad-holy-war-internal-sp...

How about this? https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1265440342892929025?...

That should be hidden by default too.

When people risk being killed during a jihad, it kinda implies that a text does not refer to a greater jihad aimed at improving one's soul.

>Kathleen Mary Griffin is an American comedian and actor who has starred in television comedy specials and has released comedy albums.

Framed it quite well. A good summary should note if there is significant complexity involved in the statement, not take a biased framing of the situation, and give no indication that they have done it.

Right, which is why "improving one's soul" isn't the only meaning of jihad. This is pointed out in the article I linked.

> The word jihad comes from the Arabic jahada, which is perhaps best translated as "struggle," "effort," or "striving."

This can also be verified with a dictionary or encyclopedia.

> Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.

> Jihad, also spelled jehad, in Islam, a meritorious struggle or effort. The exact meaning of the term jihād depends on context; it has often been erroneously translated in the West as “holy war.” Jihad, particularly in the religious and ethical realm, primarily refers to the human struggle to promote what is right and to prevent what is wrong

We can twist the word to focus on violence to accommodate some political objective, but that wouldn't be accurate.

When the tweet in question also talks about Palestinian independence, it's not talking about "internal jihad". It's talking about violence. And when it talks about "even if death", it's talking about being killed when engaged in violence, not about when engaged in peaceful resistance.

but the Israeli army targets and kills far more civilians than Hamas and related groups do (just look at how many civilians were killed during the Friday protests the past few years).