100+ Meta employees, including Head of AI Policy, confirmed as ex-IDF - The Grayzone
thegrayzone.com
Meta’s recruitment of vast numbers of former Israeli soldiers raises serious questions about the tech giant’s commitment to free speech – and provides a peek into a biased content moderation process that’s been heavily censoring pro-Palestinian accounts amid the Israeli siege of Gaza. This article was originally published by ¡Do Not Panic! More than one hundred former Israeli spies and IDF soldiers work for tech giant Meta, including its head of AI policy, who served in the IDF under an Israeli […]

Shira Anderson, an American international rights lawyer, is Meta’s AI policy chief who voluntarily enlisted for the IDF in 2009 under a program which enables non-Israeli Jews who aren’t eligible for military conscription to join the Israeli army.

With AI a critical emerging technology for tech giants and militaries, Anderson’s role at Meta is an important one. She develops the legal guidance, policies and public relations talking points concerning AI issues and regulation for all of Meta’s key areas, including its product, public policy and government affairs teams.

At Meta, Anderson, who is based in Meta’s Washington DC office, is in familiar company. More than one hundred former Israeli spies and IDF soldiers are employed by the company, my new investigation shows, many of whom worked for Israel’s spy agency Unit 8200.

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
    224·
    10 days ago

    You’re explicitly endorsing terrorism

    I am not endorsing Israel nor violence against civilians. I am endorsing the right of Palestinian armed resistance against occupation soldiers

        • shortrounddev@lemmy.worldEnglish
          616·
          10 days ago

          Active duty IDF soldiers? Or former IDF soldiers; because you’re trying to “out” former military Israeli civilians who happen to work for facebook.

          Do you believe that it is right to target any former member of the Israeli military, who is now a civilian, with violence?

          • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
            194·
            10 days ago

            The term reservist means the Israeli army can actively summon them for combat. As Israel has done for the genocide in Gaza.

            Unless these soldiers decide to leave occupied Palestine they are not ex-soldiers because they are actively occupying and can be summoned for combat.

            If you are talking about the ex-IDF soldiers at Facebook, they are not valid military targets if they are not occupying Palestine. Though they should face a court of law if they are using their position for Israel.

            • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
              27·
              10 days ago

              Attacking reservists who are not activated violates the Geneva Convention and is nearly universally considered - including by Palestine, which has signed the Geneva Convention - to be a war crime.

              This includes civilians - which deactivated reservists are - in occupied areas.

              Ukraine is similarly not allowed to attack occupying Russians in Crimea who moved there after 2014, despite the fact all male Russians had military service.

              Israel uses the exact same argumentation to kill “combat-aged” men - that is to say, male Palestinians who look 14 or older.

              Also, being an occupying civilian during a conflict does not allow an opposing party to arrest them. They are afforded various protections, especially by the 4th Geneva Comvention.

              • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
                92·
                10 days ago

                You should look up why the UN does not classify Hamas as a terrorist organisation and educate yourself on the right of armed resistance for people under occupation.

                What Israel says is irrelevant. They are the occupier and have no right to anything except moving out of Palestine as soon as possible.

                • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
                  24·
                  10 days ago

                  I do not care about what Hamas is or isn’t, nor do I care what Israel says it is or isn’t.

                  Hamas is bound by Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol 1 of the 4th Geneva Conventions:

                  Article 1:

                  (4) The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination.

                  Article 2:

                  In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

                  The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

                  Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

                  Palestine is generally considered to be under alien occupation and therefore falls under this protocol.

                  And what is a combatant?

                  Article 44:

                  (1) Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.

                  Article 43:

                  (2) Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.

                  And a civilian?

                  Article 50

                  (1) A civilian is any person who does not belong to one of the categories of persons referred to in Article 4 A (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Convention and in Article 43 of this Protocol. In case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to be a civilian.

                  (Note: article 4 A goes into more detail as to who can become a POW. Basically anyone who is armed or accompanies the army during conflict.)

                  From those articles it clearly follows that reservists who are not activated are civilians.

                  It does not necessarily follow that Hamas is a terrorist organization, nor have I ever claimed it was. The right to armed resistance is still bound by international law such as this protocol.

                  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
                    51·
                    10 days ago

                    Israel is out there bombing hospitals by calling them Hamas . Witholding food by calling it Hamas. And all the signatures to the Geneva Convention are on board with it.

                    The Geneva Conventions are a meme document which holds zero value and should never be quoted by anyone trying to make a serious argument.

                    It also does not apply to Gaza which is ran by Hamas.

                    If you think Israeli occupation soldiers can apply for civilian status while they are on role call for genocide duty I am not sure what to tell you.

                    The Palestinian People have the right to resistance by all means available at their disposal

                  • lud@lemm.ee
                    21·
                    10 days ago

                    It’s very clear sometimes who wants suffering and who actually wants peace.