RSS
Language Matters: Why Meta Should Not End Ban on the Word ‘Shaheed’
3D-printed images of the logos of Facebook and parent company Meta Platforms are seen on a laptop keyboard in this illustration taken on November 2, 2021. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic
Picture this: Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, the mastermind of the deadly October 7 attack on Israel, is killed. Arabic Facebook feeds are filled with posts showing Hamas flags and terrorists with AK-47s at his funeral, and the captions read: “Thousands mourn the shaheed [martyr] Yahya Sinwar.”
In a few months, such sickening posts may be considered neutral content across the social media platforms of Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.
That’s because Meta’s oversight board urged the social media giant this week to lift its ban on the Arabic word “shaheed,” or “martyr” in English, suggesting the word can carry a non-glorifying meaning.
But the loaded term is commonly used in the context of Palestinian and Arab violence against Jews, in Israel or abroad.
That’s how Hezbollah’s al-Manar TV described Lebanese arch-terrorist Imad Mughniyeh, who was responsible for the bombing of Israeli and Jewish targets in Buenos Aires in the 1990s. And it’s how Iranian Press TV recently referred to the “martyrdom” of Hamas’ no.3, Marwan Issa, who was killed by Israel in Gaza.
So the board’s recommendation — which Meta should outright reject — could potentially lead to the mass whitewashing of terrorism online, with dangerous ramifications for Jews’ safety worldwide.
A year ago, the oversight board announced that it had accepted a request from Meta for “a policy advisory opinion on its approach to moderating the Arabic term ‘shaheed,’ when used to refer to individuals it classifies as dangerous, including terrorists.”
Meta currently removes any posts using the word “shaheed” in reference to people it designates on its list of “dangerous organizations and individuals,” which includes members of Islamist terrorist groups like Hamas. The reason is that the company presently views the word as constituting praise for these banned entities.
In its March 26 report, the board concluded that this approach is “overbroad” and harms “freedom of expression” because the word may have neutral meanings:
The word “shaheed” is sometimes used by extremists to praise or glorify people who have died while committing violent terrorist acts. However, Meta’s response to this threat must also be guided by respect for all human rights, including freedom of expression.
Meta’s approach also fails to consider the various meanings of “shaheed,” many of which are not intended to glorify or convey approval, and lead all too often to Arabic speakers and speakers (many of them Muslim) of other languages having posts removed, without that removal serving the purposes of the Dangerous Organizations and Individuals policy.
Admittedly, the term “shaheed” is used loosely to designate not only those who died as part of a global Jihad, but also innocent victims of accidents or other calamities.
That being said, legitimizing the word in the name of the latter may result in problematic scenarios pertaining to the former.
For example, if the term isn’t considered as glorifying, it can be attached to the name of Hamas leader Sinwar once he is killed, as shown above.
This may be the case if the post doesn’t include additional “signals of violence,” such as weapons. But the AK-47s in Sinwar’s example don’t matter because the report adds that “even when those signals are present, the content may still benefit from the ‘reporting on, neutrally discussing or condemning’ exceptions” — which may legitimize posts by propaganda news outlets.
Sadly, this slippery slope isn’t only linguistic. Permitting the word “shaheed” in such a context may go viral, risking the welfare of Jews in Israel and abroad, both online and offline.
When weighing freedom of expression against safety in the coming 60 days until it responds to the board, Meta should remember one simple truth: the mere fact it requested a thorough review of its policy on the word “shaheed” proves how powerful it is to millions of users.
Would the company ask for an in-depth analysis of a neutral word?
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Language Matters: Why Meta Should Not End Ban on the Word ‘Shaheed’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hamas Warns Against Cooperation with US Relief Efforts In Bid to Restore Grip on Gaza

Hamas terrorists carry grenade launchers at the funeral of Marwan Issa, a senior Hamas deputy military commander who was killed in an Israeli airstrike during the conflict between Israel and Hamas, in the central Gaza Strip, Feb. 7, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed
The Hamas-run Interior Ministry in Gaza has warned residents not to cooperate with the US- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, as the terror group seeks to reassert its grip on the enclave amid mounting international pressure to accept a US-brokered ceasefire.
“It is strictly forbidden to deal with, work for, or provide any form of assistance or cover to the American organization (GHF) or its local or foreign agents,” the Interior Ministry said in a statement Thursday.
“Legal action will be taken against anyone proven to be involved in cooperation with this organization, including the imposition of the maximum penalties stipulated in the applicable national laws,” the statement warns.
The GHF released a statement in response to Hamas’ warnings, saying the organization has delivered millions of meals “safely and without interference.”
“This statement from the Hamas-controlled Interior Ministry confirms what we’ve known all along: Hamas is losing control,” the GHF said.
The GHF began distributing food packages in Gaza in late May, implementing a new aid delivery model aimed at preventing the diversion of supplies by Hamas, as Israel continues its defensive military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group.
The initiative has drawn criticism from the UN and international organizations, some of which have claimed that Jerusalem is causing starvation in the war-torn enclave.
Israel has vehemently denied such accusations, noting that, until its recently imposed blockade, it had provided significant humanitarian aid in the enclave throughout the war.
Israeli officials have also said much of the aid that flows into Gaza is stolen by Hamas, which uses it for terrorist operations and sells the rest at high prices to Gazan civilians.
According to their reports, the organization has delivered over 56 million meals to Palestinians in just one month.
Hamas’s latest threat comes amid growing international pressure to accept a US-backed ceasefire plan proposed by President Donald Trump, which sets a 60-day timeline to finalize the details leading to a full resolution of the conflict.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump announced that Israel has agreed to the “necessary conditions” to finalize a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza, though Israel has not confirmed this claim.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to meet with Trump next week in Washington, DC — his third visit in less than six months — as they work to finalize the terms of the ceasefire agreement.
Even though Trump hasn’t provided details on the proposed truce, he said Washington would “work with all parties to end the war” during the 60-day period.
“I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,” he wrote in a social media post.
Since the start of the war, ceasefire talks between Jerusalem and Hamas have repeatedly failed to yield enduring results.
Israeli officials have previously said they will only agree to end the war if Hamas surrenders, disarms, and goes into exile — a demand the terror group has firmly rejected.
“I am telling you — there will be no Hamas,” Netanyahu said during a speech Wednesday.
For its part, Hamas has said it is willing to release the remaining 50 hostages — fewer than half of whom are believed to be alive — in exchange for a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the war.
While the terrorist group said it is “ready and serious” to reach a deal that would end the war, it has yet to accept this latest proposal.
In a statement, the group said it aims to reach an agreement that “guarantees an end to the aggression, the withdrawal [of Israeli forces], and urgent relief for our people in the Gaza Strip.”
According to media reports, the proposed 60-day ceasefire would include a partial Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, a surge in humanitarian aid, and the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas, with US and mediator assurances on advancing talks to end the war — though it remains unclear how many hostages would be freed.
For Israel, the key to any deal is the release of most, if not all, hostages still held in Gaza, as well as the disarmament of Hamas, while the terror group is seeking assurances to end the war as it tries to reassert control over the war-torn enclave.
The post Hamas Warns Against Cooperation with US Relief Efforts In Bid to Restore Grip on Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
UK Lawmakers Move to Designate Palestine Action as Terrorist Group Following RAF Vandalism Protest

Police block a street as pro-Palestinian demonstrators gather to protest British Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s plans to proscribe the “Palestine Action” group in the coming weeks, in London, Britain, June 23, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Jaimi Joy
British lawmakers voted Wednesday to designate Palestine Action as a terrorist organization, following the group’s recent vandalizing of two military aircraft at a Royal Air Force base in protest of the government’s support for Israel.
Last month, members of the UK-based anti-Israel group Palestine Action broke into RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, a county west of London, and vandalized two Voyager aircraft used for military transport and refueling — the latest in a series of destructive acts carried out by the organization.
Palestine Action has regularly targeted British sites connected to Israeli defense firm Elbit Systems as well as other companies in Britain linked to Israel since the start of the conflict in Gaza in 2023.
Under British law, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has the authority to ban an organization if it is believed to commit, promote, or otherwise be involved in acts of terrorism.
Passed overwhelmingly by a vote of 385 to 26 in the lower chamber — the House of Commons — the measure is now set to be reviewed by the upper chamber, the House of Lords, on Thursday.
If approved, the ban would take effect within days, making it a crime to belong to or support Palestine Action and placing the group on the same legal footing as Al Qaeda, Hamas, and the Islamic State under UK law.
Palestine Action, which claims that Britain is an “active participant” in the Gaza conflict due to its military support for Israel, condemned the ban as “an unhinged reaction” and announced plans to challenge it in court — similar to the legal challenges currently being mounted by Hamas.
Under the Terrorism Act 2000, belonging to a proscribed group is a criminal offense punishable by up to 14 years in prison or a fine, while wearing clothing or displaying items supporting such a group can lead to up to six months in prison and/or a fine of up to £5,000.
Palestine Action claimed responsibility for the recent attack, in which two of its activists sprayed red paint into the turbine engines of two Airbus Voyager aircraft and used crowbars to inflict additional damage.
According to the group, the red paint — also sprayed across the runway — was meant to symbolize “Palestinian bloodshed.” A Palestine Liberation Organization flag was also left at the scene.
On Thursday, local authorities arrested four members of the group, aged between 22 and 35, who were charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK, as well as conspiracy to commit criminal damage.
Palestine Action said this latest attack was carried out as a protest against the planes’ role in supporting what the group called Israel’s “genocide” in Gaza.
At the time of the attack, Cooper condemned the group’s actions, stating that their behavior had grown increasingly aggressive and resulted in millions of pounds in damages.
“The disgraceful attack on Brize Norton … is the latest in a long history of unacceptable criminal damage committed by Palestine Action,” Cooper said in a written statement.
“The UK’s defense enterprise is vital to the nation’s national security and this government will not tolerate those that put that security at risk,” she continued.
The post UK Lawmakers Move to Designate Palestine Action as Terrorist Group Following RAF Vandalism Protest first appeared on Algemeiner.com.