Why?

The social network said that it wished to allow its users to "share and condemn" the material. What bollox. Who needs to first watch the video of some maniac carving the head off a woman, before "making up their mind" to condemn such behaviour?

I really don't understand this. What next - paedophile rapes that we can share and condemn? You could use the weaselly "share and condemn" line to justify showing a video of anything.

Agreed.
My Occam-based guess is that the real reason is that it might increase viewing traffic.

It's now been removed, apparently, and the rules updated.

However, until that point, it seemed that Facebook was happy to allow footage of someone being murdered – but not, according to its own rules, a "fully exposed breast".

Now that, I suggest, is a seriously screwed-up attitude.

But perhaps it tells us why they left the videos up in the first place – that culturally, there is an attitude in the US that violence is acceptable, if not actively good, and certainly far, far less dangerous than anything to do with sex.

Excuse the pun but you have hit the nail on the head

Ah. let's shoot the messenger, rather than condemn those ethnic nutters who happily chant their mantra, Allah Akbar, whilst carrying out these babaric acts?

Amazing, is it not, that anything to do with the three simple letters U,S, and A can provoke such a reaction amongst intelligent people.

Or you could even read the news story – and discover that the video in question is of members of a Mexican drug cartel beheading a woman.

Unfortunately, you'd have to stop your knee jerking first.

And since you can't even tell the difference between "ethnic" and religion, there's little hope of that.

Mexicans, Muzzies, their all swarthy skin types.
Can't trust the lot of them, that's what I say.

Plus - if we're allowed to see these videos (and it seems we now aren't), why does it have to be on Facebook's terms i.e. to condemn them only?

I know glorifying that kind of thing is illegal, but are we not allowed to secretly like it, or just say "meh" and move on?

Do keep up Mintball. Perhaps you should google the adjective "ethnic," then you may have a clearer understanding......something along the lines of shared origins / social backgrounds/ culture/ traditions and a common religion.


And as I have not the remotest interest in watching someone getting beheaded, be it by a swarthy chap in Mexico, or indeed in more traditional and well publicised areas of the World,..... I'll pass.

I haven't and won't be watching the video, but am intrigued to learn why members of a Mexican drugs cartel would be chanting the mantra "Allah Akbar".

After you have explained that one, maybe you can then explain why the site is a "messenger". Random people across the globe choose to make millions of random videos and upload them. If anyone has a message it is surely the people uploading the videos. If not, then what is the messenger's "message" attached to beheading videos?

Then maybe you could explain to me why you accused me of choosing not to condemn the beheaders, when I said in simple enough terms : "Who needs to first watch the video of some maniac carving the head off a woman, before "making up their mind" to condemn such behaviour?"


No. I never mentioned U, S or A in any shape or form. It may have escaped your notice, but the social network site in question is a commercial company, not a sovereign nation.

So your post is about as epic a fail as would have been possible. Well done.