Israeli chess players quit tournament after organisers refused to display occupation’s flag

2 comments

1. As we approach 2 years of Genocide enabled & assisted by the West (apart from some noble exemptions) for PROFITS and 680,000 Palestinians (The Lancet) have been slaughtered by the Illegal Israeli occupation force by my calculations drawing from original FT figures it is plausible that the occupation force economy has been hit now by half a trillion.
   So let’s escalate BDS & international
   pressure politically, culturally & economically then hopefully Checkmate.
   ☮️⚖️Free Palestine 🆘

   Loading...

   Reply

   1. There are recent reports I have seen to the effect that:

      1. In the USA there is a bi-partisan amendment being proposed in a forthcoming bill (can’t remember whether it’s the finance bill or the defence bill) by two elected politicians (again, I can’t recall whether they are from the Senate or the HoR) 1 Democrat, 1 Republican (New York and New Jersey, I think) to the effect of making it a criminal offence to organise boycotts of Israel.

      With a $1million fine or 20 years in gaol. This in the past two weeks.

      2. Meanwhile, in the past few days I have also seen a report which suggests that legislation is being drawn up to also make it a criminal offence to criticise Israel.

      I’m not sure whether the second report is related to the first one or if it’s an interpretation of the first report.

      The point being that it is not inconceivable for the UK to follow suit in the present climate.

      On a related note, someone of my acquaintance who has contacts in the USA informs me that a lot of people are ditching comment on Social Media because saying anything could well cost them their livelihood.

      An observation which started to make sense of something in this article……

      https://www.councilestatemedia.uk/p/nothing-about-charlie-kirks-alleged

      …..about the Charlie Kirk murder.

      If you scroll down the article, there is an insert containing a statement from a chat site called Discord about the use of its chat facilities by the current individual said to be responsible for the assassination.

      Part of the statement is highlighted and is mainly about Discord stating there is no evidence that its chat site was used to plan this event.

      However, the most interesting part commences immediately after the part of the statement which has been highlighted:

      “We have removed the suspects account for violating our off platform behaviour policy”

      Think about that.

      Firsly; what behaviour are they talking about here? Is it the allegation of the suspects involvement in Kirks murder, which has yet to be tested with evidence and proven at a time when the investigation is still active?

      Is it some other behaviour?

      Secondly; what off-platform behaviours get your SM account suspended? Who gets to decide? Is there a terms and conditions document listing any and all activities which a subscriber engages in when they are not using the platform, which will get you kicked off the platform?

      Is there an online process – a form perhaps, or a dedicated telephone line – where people can dob someone in? Is there a due process system for testing such allegations using evidence? What appeals process, if any, exist?

      Is it permanent? Do you get reinstated if you are found not guilty of whatever behaviour transgresses the contract?

      Finally; at what point did social media platforms acquire the power to decide on what is and is not acceptable activities for subscribers when they are not using the platform?

      Clearly this is not limited to SM platforms when people are too scared to comment or speak freely about anything in case they lose their job, bank account, university place, or are jailed.

      Loading...

      Reply