Deadly fatwahs; Are they acceptable at USPOL ?

[moon]

Perfectly clear and adequate responses have been given.

Your inability to comprehend is not my problem.

Matt

The response only deals with the US government and site members. It is therefore inadequate, as any reasonable observer would interpret.
However, thank you for your input, Larson, limited though it may have been.

Traveler;

but there is a difference between advocating the assisination and lobbying/advocating that our government orchestrate it

And where would you suggest that members seek this distinction in the forum rules ?

[Steve]

Originally Posted by moon

And yes, it's a deadly fatwah. That's the term for publicly calling for the death of an individual, such as you've openly done.

Maybe you don't know as much about them as you'd like us to think. I can't issue a fatwah...

[ThorHammer]

Originally Posted by moon

The response only deals with the US government and site members. It is therefore inadequate, as any reasonable observer would interpret.
However, thank you for your input, Larson, limited though it may have been.

That is because the server that this forum "lives" on is in the United States, and therefore has to conform to US laws.

[moon]

Which ones in particular ? If you don't know, please don't pad out an answer. It's a specialised question, as it's plain to see.

Steve;

I can't issue a fatwah...

You just go through motions then Steve ?

[iamwhatiseem]

First of all I don't believe Steve in that thread was calling for a "Fatwa"
That would be hard for him to do, not being an Islamic cleric or for that matter a Muslim.

[moon]

A deadly fatwah is a call for assassination. It's just a foreign word. The question isn't affected by that; does USPOL policy allow calls for assassination or not ? Does it permit calls for the death of specific individuals or does it not ? If it does, must those calls only be directed at foreigners ? Can we call for the assassination of foreigners within America ?

Nobody is trying to corner Steve. It's a question of the law and site policy.

[iamwhatiseem]

Originally Posted by moon

A deadly fatwah is a call for assassination. It's just a foreign word. The question isn't affected by that; does USPOL policy allow calls for assassination or not ? Does it permit calls for the death of specific individuals or does it not ? If it does, must those calls only be directed at foreigners ? Can we call for the assassination of foreigners within America ?

Nobody is trying to corner Steve. It's a question of the law and site policy.

I don't see where he called for an assassination.
It appears to me he believes that he should be considered a military target...that is an opinion on foreign policy...not saying "one of us oughta go kill this guy".

[Steve]

Originally Posted by moon

Which ones in particular ? If you don't know, please don't pad out an answer. It's a specialised question, as it's plain to see.

Steve;


You just go through motions then Steve ?

The requirements for issuing a fatwah seem pretty specific...

[Steve]

Originally Posted by moon

A deadly fatwah is a call for assassination. It's just a foreign word. The question isn't affected by that; does USPOL policy allow calls for assassination or not ? Does it permit calls for the death of specific individuals or does it not ? If it does, must those calls only be directed at foreigners ? Can we call for the assassination of foreigners within America ?

Nobody is trying to corner Steve. It's a question of the law and site policy.

Here ya' go:

A fatwa is issued by a recognized religious authority in Islam.

Definition: A fatwa is an Islamic religious ruling, a scholarly opinion on a matter of Islamic law.

I am not a recognized religious authority in Islam.

A fatwa, according to the definition, does not necessarily have to do with killing anybody.

Whine all you want, but you'll not only be wrong, but you'll be wrong and whiney...

Source: Fun With Islam

[moon]

Existing threads aside, doesn't it jar with anybody that there are specific rules, apparently, banning calls for physically harming the US President, members of the existing government administration and site members yet anybody else is fair game ?
Shouldn't it be considered a breach of ordinary decency, and certainly site etiquette, to clamour for anybody's death ? Is assassination an acceptable political tool ? Is murder ?

[MattLarson]

Originally Posted by moon

Existing threads aside, doesn't it jar with anybody that there are specific rules, apparently, banning calls for physically harming the US President, members of the existing government administration and site members yet anybody else is fair game ?
Shouldn't it be considered a breach of ordinary decency, and certainly site etiquette, to clamour for anybody's death ? Is assassination an acceptable political tool ? Is murder ?

Sigh.

The rules are left as open as possible, on purpose, because we try to lean on the side of free speech whenever possible.

Yes, calling for someone's assassination is highly offensive. It is, IMHO, a reflection on the poster.

But there are many issues that people find offensive, moon. For instance, some people probably find many of your pro-Hamas posts offensive. Should we censor you on that basis? Of course not.

The reason we don't permit calls for violence against US officials is very simple - we are bound by law not to allow that. It is just that simple.

I'd be for allowing such calls, if we could - but we just don't have that choice.

So we've opted for the least restrictive rule possible.

As for other members, it should be obvious why we don't permit such calls for violence against them.

Matt

[moon]

Larson;

Yes, calling for someone's assassination is highly offensive. It is, IMHO, a reflection on the poster.

But there are many issues that people find offensive, moon. For instance, some people probably find many of your pro-Hamas posts offensive. Should we censor you on that basis? Of course not.

That's an absurd comparison. Hamas are a democratically-elected government. This is a political site and the views of democratically-elected governments are its bread-and-butter. Calls for assassination don't belong here. They might be found in sadistic and sub-normal sites of ill-repute but there can be NO justification in promoting murder in civilised discussion.

Your 'blame the poster' excuse is a cop-out and I venture that the cop-out is caused by the inadequacies of the existing rule. Having a rule which prevents direct insult between members is not 'censorship' and neither is having a rule which specifically deterred would-be assassins and promoters of torture and murder.
The lines should be redrawn. Barack Obama's campaign manager, as a loose example, is neither a member here nor a member of the government. Neither is Chelsea Clinton. Nor McCain's millionairess wife. How would calls for their assassination be dealt with ?

[Si modo]

Originally Posted by moon

Larson;


That's an absurd comparison. Hamas are a democratically-elected government. This is a political site and the views of democratically-elected governments are its bread-and-butter. Calls for assassination don't belong here. They might be found in sadistic and sub-normal sites of ill-repute but there can be NO justification in promoting murder in civilised discussion.

Your 'blame the poster' excuse is a cop-out and I venture that the cop-out is caused by the inadequacies of the existing rule. Having a rule which prevents direct insult between members is not 'censorship' and neither is having a rule which specifically deterred would-be assassins and promoters of torture and murder.
The lines should be redrawn. Barack Obama's campaign manager, as a loose example, is neither a member here nor a member of the government. Neither is Bill Clinton. How would calls for their assassination be dealt with ?

Moon, instead of making many of us cringe with your relentless whining, you could just purchase a domain, start your own forum, and as you would own that forum, you can make any rules that suit you.

This one is owned by a different person. I suppose you could make an offer to the owner, but if he doesn't want to sell, it would be cheaper to start your own. You can also accept the consequences of your rules at your own forum.

Seriously, stop the whining, please. It's cringeworthy when another tells someone what to do with their own forum or property.

[Steve]

This is all just so fucking funny...

[MattLarson]

Originally Posted by moon

Larson;


That's an absurd comparison. Hamas are a democratically-elected government. This is a political site and the views of democratically-elected governments are its bread-and-butter. Calls for assassination don't belong here. They might be found in sadistic and sub-normal sites of ill-repute but there can be NO justification in promoting murder in civilised discussion.

Your 'blame the poster' excuse is a cop-out and I venture that the cop-out is caused by the inadequacies of the existing rule.

What "cop-out"? For fuck's sake, I agree with you about the inappropriate nature of calls for murder. I guess you're so wrapped up in finding ways to be insulting that you don't even bother to read what I write.

I don't, however, see a need to place a rule censoring odious speech. I think that sort of thing will be self-censoring as the other members who read such posts will make the poster understand the unwelcome nature of such posts.