[Report] Advocating Violence in Turkey-Syria Thread

[Vistulange]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=473245&p=36314056#p36314056

The thread is a clusterfuck of nonsense and so on, but this crosses my line. I'm Turkish, and I have lost friends to actions of the PKK, and have missed some bombings by mere minutes.

[Starblaydia]

Addressed.

[Vistulange]

viewtopic.php?p=36321140#p36321140

And another. Not entirely sure about this one, but I still thought I'd ask for an opinion.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Saiwania suggesting massacring people again

viewtopic.php?p=36321990#p36321990

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

Saiwania suggesting massacring people again

viewtopic.php?p=36321990#p36321990

It is not like what you think,I'm against terrorism, people shouldn't die

[Lamoni]

Addressed

[Lamoni]

Saiwania suggesting massacring people again

viewtopic.php?p=36321990#p36321990

Addressed

[Farnhamia]

Not advocating violence in this case, but I didn't want to make a separate thread and clutter up the moderation forum with subjects from the same thread.

Political nicknaming? I thought "Receipt" was a typo at first, but he's done it a second time.

viewtopic.php?p=36322346#p36322346

---

Despite this notion of "mistrust," the US is perhaps the one country that has the most allies in the world.

As I've said in a previous post: You criticise Erdoğan and his party for running contrary to US interests, but be wary: Tomorrow Erdoğan may just decide that the Kurds are better allies for him in the domestic sphere, ditch the MHP, and immediately become cozy with the Western sphere once more. The notion that Erdoğan is some overly nationalist Islamist as a matter of principle is, well, blatantly false. Erdoğan is an incredibly realistic and pragmatic politician who will flip-flop in accordance with what will allow him to politically survive and grow stronger.

Again, some knowledge of Turkish politics would help you greatly.

It's not exactly wise to be an enemy of the powerful nation on Earth, so it makes perfect sense nations that stand no chance against us in a fight (read: 98% of the world) find being our ally is more beneficial. Just sayin'.

And you act like it matters what Receipt's personal politics are. It doesn't. That kind of populism is unpredictable and a liability. Whether his kissing ass or not is irrelevant; he can't be trusted, so he has to go.

[Risottia]

Same thread, looks flamish to me.

I just feel sorry for your lack of education.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

Same thread, looks flamish to me.

I just feel sorry for your lack of education.

People burning flags and its supporters are uneducated.I'm sorry if you're broken, but that's the truth.

Full text of my article

That's the point. Turkey deserves disrespect.

No legitimate state deserves to be burned.I just feel sorry for your lack of education.

[Farnhamia]

Same thread, looks flamish to me.

People burning flags and its supporters are uneducated.I'm sorry if you're broken, but that's the truth.

Full text of my article

No legitimate state deserves to be burned.I just feel sorry for your lack of education.

Doesn't matter, you still flamed someone. You get warned for the reported post and for the "I'm sorry if you're broken, but that's the truth" remark.

*** Warned for flaming ***

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

Uncensored death video Shared ! Please check the shipment

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/world/middleeast/syria-kurds-shot-video.html

Turkish backed Arab fighters just shot two Kurdish prisoners dead in an execution styled killing with their hands tied behind their back.

This is just sickening

[Farnhamia]

Uncensored death video Shared ! Please check the shipment

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/world/middleeast/syria-kurds-shot-video.html

Turkish backed Arab fighters just shot two Kurdish prisoners dead in an execution styled killing with their hands tied behind their back.

This is just sickening

Addressed

And I had better not see anything that even looks vaguely like gloating out of you.

[Thermodolia]

Question. Since the link violates NS rules shouldn’t it be redacted from the reported post?

[Lamoni]

I took care of it.

[Torrocca]

Kinda unsure on this, but it feels a lot like malicious quote editing, especially given how much it changes the context of my post:

We see who is friendly, who is enemy,I hope the terrorists in Syria surrender,Hero Turkish army will not harm those who surrender.

Putting this here since it creates less clutter than making a new thread.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

https://www.france24.com/en/20191012-thousands-protest-in-europe-against-turkey-s-syria-offensive

Antifa supporting a pro-Kurdish rally? I thought they'd be happy to piss all over a US ally.

Possible armed terrorist organization propaganda and terrorism promotion

I dont think I will argue a stupid ''neo-Kemalist''

Insult Discourse

[Audioslavia]

I dont think I will argue a stupid ''neo-Kemalist''

Dealt with here

(Image)
(Image)

Possible armed terrorist organization propaganda and terrorism promotion

Tit-for-tat reporting isn't clever. Don't bother.

This is also a *** warning for quote editing *** to you, Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum. I highly suggest you read the rules before continuing to post.

[Torrocca]

I dont think I will argue a stupid ''neo-Kemalist''

Dealt with here

Possible armed terrorist organization propaganda and terrorism promotion

Tit-for-tat reporting isn't clever. Don't bother.

This is also a *** warning for quote editing *** to you, Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum. I highly suggest you read the rules before continuing to post.

Thanks, Audio.

[Vistulange]

Turkey bombs a convoy of journalists and other civilians - at least ten dead.

Turkey has no right to do this. If you want to debate the legitimacy of the Kurdish land, then fine, but the only other possible logical owner of the land is Syria, not Turkey. Turkey should be sent running back to their own borders, the Kurds should get and keep their own state and Assad should go back to fighting the rebels in his own borders.

The US backing out caused this of course, and I have mixed feelings about that, but ultimately no matter the catalyst, Turkey must die.

Not sure if calling for the "death" of a country is kosher.

[Saiwania]

Addressed

As commanded, I've fulfilled the week long sanction placed against me and more beyond that. However, I wish to contest this ban after the fact- just in case I'm in the right on this. Given that this was the thread from where I was banned, this should be the correct place where I may try overturning this mark on my record.

I don't trust the Getting Help Request page given that most of what I use is the forum side and any proceedings should be public from my perspective. I request that the record of a week long ban against me be rescinded in full, should I be found to have not broken any rules technically speaking.

I'm challenging my ban on 2 main grounds:

1. The post doesn't constitute an "Advocation of Death" because notice how the offending post in question makes no direct mention of death or killing.

Rather- it was a policy position and thus a political opinion which I took. Plenty of countries have a death penalty, thus in and of itself- being in favor of that isn't against the rules here if that can be included as mainstream political opinion.

It doesn't sufficiently cross the line into rule breaking in my view. The post was in coded language and its entire point is to keep me out of trouble while still allowing myself to express my genuine conscience, as much as is possible around here. Obviously if it were allowed, I'd post how I really want. But I didn't cross the line, the norm for me is to post on a whim and edit it until what I write is "finalized" more or less. Only the final version of my post made after 5 minutes or so after creation, should be considered as valid to make judgements against- which applied in this case.

The only allusions to advocating death are the terms "Duterte, permanent manner, no quarter, harsh action", and my last question regarding why the Kurds want to keep the ISIS fighters in custody if they're such a security risk. None of it inherently means wanting death or violence however. Rather, it is people's interpretations of what I write that colors it as that, rather than any inherent quality the written post has- such as if I directly broke the rule as opposed to indirectly.

People did the equivalent of jumping to the conclusion that I mean "killing any members of ISIS" when I could just as easily mean exiling them to a more remote location according to a different interpretation. I was purposely vague and sufficiently so, in my view. Dogwhistling isn't inherently against any of the rules here to my knowledge from my reading of those rules.

If there is no solid proof that the post inherently means I'm saying "kill the ISIS prisoners" then the post shouldn't be considered an Advocation of Death.

2. The post doesn't constitute Trolling because by any reasonable standard, people here aren't going to be offended over what happens to actual war criminals.

The members of ISIS in question, can't realistically expect to be afforded the same as a proper military that did observe some basic laws of warfare, after having lost. What they did has consequences if they didn't win. If ISIS didn't give their opponents any trial when they had power, chances are neither are the victors going to give them a trial. Also, this is the real world, which is harsh. People don't treat escaping fugitives with kid gloves. At most prisons, the people in guard towers are armed for a reason. Guards in that part of the world aren't going to care enough to chase after any escapees. Given the context that the post was about the war in Syria's impact on the ISIS prisons, it shouldn't constitute as trolling in my view- given that the aim of the post wasn't only to offend people.

Which assurdedly probably wouldn't happen given that members of the Nazi party were arguably more humane during World War II than how ISIS conducted their war. I was speaking truth to power and telling it like it is, from my perspective.

Should my arguments fail to persuade, I will take it under advisement that the rules that were applied in this case, are applied on a zero tolerance basis and that no extraneous factors or circumstances can spare me from getting sanctioned if I keep going with the most permissive interpretation of the rules rather than the most restrictive to be on the safer side. I do realize that in effect, I have to be politically correct around here. The intention might be to not ban any specific opinions or viewpoints, but there is still the fact that certain things can't be expressed here without so many mental gymnastics as for it to not be worth it.

Any opinions I have on how rediculous and absurd some of the rules here are, ultimately don't matter. It is whether I sufficiently broke the written language of those rules or not from any angle.

[Farnhamia]

Addressed

As commanded, I've fulfilled the week long sanction placed against me and more beyond that. However, I wish to contest this ban after the fact- just in case I'm in the right on this. Given that this was the thread from where I was banned, this should be the correct place where I may try overturning this mark on my record.

I don't trust the Getting Help Request page given that most of what I use is the forum side and any proceedings should be public from my perspective. I request that the record of a week long ban against me be rescinded in full, should I be found to have not broken any rules technically speaking.

I'm challenging my ban on 2 main grounds:

1. The post doesn't constitute an "Advocation of Death" because notice how the offending post in question makes no direct mention of death or killing.

Rather- it was a policy position and thus a political opinion which I took. Plenty of countries have a death penalty, thus in and of itself- being in favor of that isn't against the rules here if that can be included as mainstream political opinion.

It doesn't sufficiently cross the line into rule breaking in my view. The post was in coded language and its entire point is to keep me out of trouble while still allowing myself to express my genuine conscience, as much as is possible around here. Obviously if it were allowed, I'd post how I really want. But I didn't cross the line, the norm for me is to post on a whim and edit it until what I write is "finalized" more or less. Only the final version of my post made after 5 minutes or so after creation, should be considered as valid to make judgements against- which applied in this case.

The only allusions to advocating death are the terms "Duterte, permanent manner, no quarter, harsh action", and my last question regarding why the Kurds want to keep the ISIS fighters in custody if they're such a security risk. None of it inherently means wanting death or violence however. Rather, it is people's interpretations of what I write that colors it as that, rather than any inherent quality the written post has- such as if I directly broke the rule as opposed to indirectly.

People did the equivalent of jumping to the conclusion that I mean "killing any members of ISIS" when I could just as easily mean exiling them to a more remote location according to a different interpretation. I was purposely vague and sufficiently so, in my view. Dogwhistling isn't inherently against any of the rules here to my knowledge from my reading of those rules.

If there is no solid proof that the post inherently means I'm saying "kill the ISIS prisoners" then the post shouldn't be considered an Advocation of Death.

2. The post doesn't constitute Trolling because by any reasonable standard, people here aren't going to be offended over what happens to actual war criminals.

The members of ISIS in question, can't realistically expect to be afforded the same as a proper military that did observe some basic laws of warfare, after having lost. What they did has consequences if they didn't win. If ISIS didn't give their opponents any trial when they had power, chances are neither are the victors going to give them a trial. Also, this is the real world, which is harsh. People don't treat escaping fugitives with kid gloves. At most prisons, the people in guard towers are armed for a reason. Guards in that part of the world aren't going to care enough to chase after any escapees. Given the context that the post was about the war in Syria's impact on the ISIS prisons, it shouldn't constitute as trolling in my view- given that the aim of the post wasn't only to offend people.

Which assurdedly probably wouldn't happen given that members of the Nazi party were arguably more humane during World War II than how ISIS conducted their war. I was speaking truth to power and telling it like it is, from my perspective.

Should my arguments fail to persuade, I will take it under advisement that the rules that were applied in this case, are applied on a zero tolerance basis and that no extraneous factors or circumstances can spare me from getting sanctioned if I keep going with the most permissive interpretation of the rules rather than the most restrictive to be on the safer side. I do realize that in effect, I have to be politically correct around here. The intention might be to not ban any specific opinions or viewpoints, but there is still the fact that certain things can't be expressed here without so many mental gymnastics as for it to not be worth it.

Any opinions I have on how rediculous and absurd some of the rules here are, ultimately don't matter. It is whether I sufficiently broke the written language of those rules or not from any angle.

Your post, with the main offensive parts underlined:

There is tons of concern about the ISIS prisoners escaping, so I was thinking- why not simply forget about any of their human rights? We can be more like Duterte on this.

If we're under the assumption that the majority of them will just go back to the battlefield if given the chance, it is better they're resolved in a permanent manner sooner than later if this is the case. Their own conduct in war after all, merits no quarter being given. This can arguably be done quickly if they're in custody, but not if the Kurds wait too long to take harsh action.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/11/middleea ... index.html

A possible attempted escape that was prevented but will be allowed if Turkey gets to them. For what purpose are these people even being kept around?

President Duterte has been famous in his treatment of drug dealers, by no reasonable standard can "be more like Duterte" not be construed as call for their execution. So, too, how does one permanently resolve people save by killing them? You even argue for the resolution happening while they're still in custody.

As for your claim that no one (here) will care about harsh treatment of war criminals, you misread the community here because you were reported and banned.

Any mental gymnastics you put yourself through are simply your attempts to find a way around the rules. You've been here long enough to know what will fly and what won't. If this is becoming a hardship for you, no one is holding a gun to your head to keep you here.

Appeal denied.