The magazine also said in its mail that while the organisation encourages free expression and constructive political debate, it has a zero tolerance policy towards hate speech.
Consider the following fictional situation:
A news story comes out detailing a terrible tragedy where some people were stuck in a collapsed mine for months and that they had to eat one of their dead to survive. A horrible situation by all accounts. One of the miners is later interviewed and they mention how bad it was to have to eat someone. Someone then posts online saying this: "Next time it won't taste so bad if you add some salt and pepper."
Is the person who made the post condoning cannibalism? Of course not. Was the comment in poor taste? Absolutely. (Pun not intended)
"I just want to make it clear that this statement in no way shape or form is [inciting] spread of violence," she said. "I specifically said freedom fighters because that's what the Palestinian citizens are... fighting for freedom every day.
I just want to make it clear that this statement in no way shape or form is [inciting] spread of violence," she said. "I specifically said freedom fighters because that's what the Palestinian citizens are... fighting for freedom every day.
Hamas as an organization doesn't represent the Palestine people as whole, and an individual Hamas fighter even less so.
While your typical Palestine farmer might not be too fond of all the killing and murdering done by Hamas terrorists, atleast they're killing and murdering the people they perceive to be most at fault for the situation they're living in. Nobody can say, with a straight face, that there's not atleast a kernel of truth behind that belief.
Still - indiscriminately killing innocent civilians is not the way.