Case Description
Due to a technical glitch, our public comments portal for cases related to the "From the River to the Sea" phrase closed earlier than planned. To ensure everyone has a chance to share their input, we've reopened it for 24 hours. The portal will now close at 12pm BST on May 23rd.
These three cases concern content decisions made by Meta, all on Facebook, which the Oversight Board intends to address together.
The three posts were shared by different users in November 2023, following the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7 and the start of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Each post contains the phrase “From the river to the sea.” All three were reported by users for violating Meta’s Community Standards. The company decided to leave all three posts on Facebook. For each case, the Board will decide whether the content should be removed under Meta’s policies and according to its human rights responsibilities. Numbers of views and reports are correct as of the end of February 2024.
The first case concerns a comment from a Facebook user on another user’s video. The video has a caption encouraging others to “speak up” with numerous hashtags including “#ceasefire” and “#freepalestine.” The comment on the post contains the phrase “FromTheRiverToTheSea” in hashtag form, as well as several additional hashtags including “#DefundIsrael.” The comment had about 3,000 views and was reported seven times by four users. The reports were closed after Meta’s automated systems did not send them for human review within 48 hours.
In the second case, a Facebook user posted what appears to be a generated image of fruit floating on the sea that form the words from the phrase, along with “Palestine will be free.” The post had about 8 million views and was reported 951 times by 937 users. The first report on the post was closed, again because Meta’s automated systems did not send it for human review within 48 hours. Subsequent reports by users were reviewed and assessed as non-violating by human moderators.
In the third case, a Facebook page reshared a post from the page of a community organization in Canada in which a statement from the “founding members” of the organization declared support for “the Palestinian people,” condemning their “senseless slaughter” by the “Zionist State of Israel” and “Zionist Israeli occupiers.” The post ends with the phrase “From The River To The Sea.” This post had less than 1,000 views and was reported by one user. The report was automatically closed.
The Facebook users who reported the content, and subsequently appealed Meta’s decisions to leave up the content to the Board, claimed the phrase was breaking Meta’s rules on Hate Speech, Violence and Incitement or Dangerous Organizations and Individuals. The user who reported the content in the first case stated that the phrase violates Meta’s policies prohibiting content that promotes violence or supports terrorism. The users who reported the content in the second and third cases stated that the phrase constitutes hate speech, is antisemitic and is a call to abolish the state of Israel.
After the Board selected these cases for review, Meta confirmed its original decisions were correct. Meta informed the Board that it analyzed the content under three policies – Violence and Incitement, Hate Speech and Dangerous Organizations and Individuals – and found the posts did not violate any of these policies. Meta explained the company is aware that “From the river to the sea” has a long history and that it had reviewed use of the phrase on its platform after October 7, 2023. After that review, Meta determined that, without additional context, it cannot conclude that “From the river to the sea” constitutes a call to violence or a call for exclusion of any particular group, nor that it is linked exclusively to support for Hamas.
The Board selected these cases to consider how Meta should moderate the use of the phrase given the resurgence in its use after October 7, 2023, and controversies around the phrase’s meaning. On the one hand, the phrase has been used to advocate for the dignity and human rights of Palestinians. On the other hand, it could have antisemitic implications, as claimed by the users who submitted the cases to the Board. This case falls within the Board’s strategic priority of Crisis and Conflict Situations.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- The origin and current uses of the phrase: “From the river to the sea.”
- Research into online trends in content using the phrase.
- Research into any associated online and offline harms from the use of the phrase.
- Meta’s human rights responsibilities in relation to content using the phrase including freedom of expression, freedom of association, and equality and non-discrimination.
- State and institutional (e.g., university) responses to the use of the phrase (e.g., during protests) and the human rights impacts of those responses.
As part of its decisions, the Board can issue policy recommendations to Meta. While recommendations are not binding, Meta must respond to them within 60 days. As such, the Board welcomes public comments proposing recommendations that are relevant to these cases.
Comments
This phrase is a call for the destruction of the Jewish homeland state. It is terroristic and anti-Semitic.
I am writing to ask that the Oversight Board look thoroughly at the origin and most common usage of the phrase "from the river to the sea" and taking that into consideration, I hope that you will come to the conclusion that the phrase, despite attestations by some to the contrary, in its plain meaning and intent refers to the destruction of Israel as a state and the intent to push Israeli Jews into the sea. In short, it is hate speech used by those who support the destruction of Israel with the intent of justifying terrorism against Jews and the State of Israel.
The full saying goes: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” – a reference to the land between the Jordan River, which borders eastern Israel, and the Mediterranean Sea to the west.
In December 2012, Khaled Mashaal, a Hamas leader, reflected the traditional Hamas hardline, “The state will come from resistance, not negotiation. Liberation first, then statehood. Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north,” he said in a speech. “There will be no concession on any inch of the land. We will never recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation, and therefore there is no legitimacy for Israel… We will free Jerusalem inch by inch, stone by stone. Israel has no right to be in Jerusalem.” Here, the meaning of the phrase is clear. It calls for the violent destruction of Israel.
Even in its revised charter from 2017, in which Hamas softened some of the patently antisemitic language from the prior version of the Hamas charter, Hamas continued to use the phrase, again with perfect clarity as to its intent and meaning: “Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea."
It was with good reason that the U.S. Congress censured Congresswoman Rashid Tlaib for using the phrase. No one misunderstood her intent. As Representative Brad Schneider (D-IL) stated, “It is nothing else but the call for the destruction of Israel and murder of Jews.”
For the same reason, in the U.K., Labour Party MP Andy McDonald was suspended from his party for using the phrase. His fellow Labour Party members understood the clear meaning of the phrase - and the Oversight Board should as well.
In addition to Hamas using the phrase in its 2017 charter, the phrase has also been used by Islamic Jihad, another terrorist group, when the issued a declaration saying that "from the river to the sea – Palestine is an Arab Islamic land that it is legally forbidden from abandoning any inch of, and the Israeli presence in Palestine is a null existence, which is forbidden by law to recognize."
No doubt you will hear from some that the phrase is simply a "cry for freedom." I hope you will not give that serious consideration. There are an endless number of ways to "cry for freedom" without using a phrase that clearly implies eliminating all of the Jews living "from the river to the sea" and returning that land, in its entirety, to Palestinians. That's not freedom. That is jihad.
Thank you for your consideration.
Stanley Grill
From the river to the sea should absolutely not be considered antisemitic or otherwise problematic. It can have at least three very distinct meanings:
1. Everyone should be free and live in peace in Israel/Gaza
2. Only Jewish people should live freely in the region and Palestinians should be expelled (original belief of Likud and other right-wing zionist parties). See original charter of Likud party, for example, as well as previous statements from current members of Israeli government.
3. Only Arab Palestinians should live freely in the region and Jews should be expelled. (see original Hamas charter but not one that currently governs Hamas)
Given these very different, even opposing views, this language should not be considered incendiary, antisemitic, or Islamophobic.
This calls for the eradication of a recognized nation and is part of Hamas and other terrorist groups call to eradicate Jews.
Facebooks censorship on real time genocide is dangerous. The hashtags and phrases you are identifying as problematic are phrases demanding PEACE, demanding LIBERATION, demanding CEASEFIRE. Facebook through censorship is enabling oppression and white supremacy. Nobody should be censored for demanding an END to violence. Stop suspending activists for peace, stop silencing Palestinians. It is dangerous and the people deserve to be informed. FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA is a phrase to spread PEACE not VIOLENCE.
As a Jewish American person I am deeply offended by the phrase "from the river to the sea..." as it indicates the destruction of the State of Israel and either the death/relocation of all of the Jewish residents of Israel.
The phrase "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free," is a call to wipe all of Israel off the map, and for Israel to not exist. More specifically, it is a call for all Israelis -- but especially the Jewish Israelis -- who currently live there, to not exist either. This phrase is a call for violent and murderous attacks on a nation and people.
It's a common sense for every well educated person (who knows the geography of Middle East) that "From the river to the sea" is about Israel. So obvious that the majority of protesters didn't learn world geography at school. Simply seeking the slogan "From the river to the sea" calls for the death of Israel. It's ok to say just "Palestine will be free" without the first part if the protesters really call for freedom and peace. Otherwise altogether these 2 parts of their favourite slogan are purely Antisemitic. It's obvious if you're not pro Hamas.
Stop censoring Palestinian voices and content about the genocide in Palestine. "From the river to the sea" is absolutely not a call for violence against Jewish people. The phrase is about freedom. Palestinians should be allowed to express that they want the occupation and apartheid and genocide to end.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., the sole Palestinian American in Congress. In November, the House voted 234-188 to censure her, saying she had called for the destruction of the state of Israel. She said that the censure resolution distorted her views and that the phrase “is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.”
Rep. Tlaib's comment is an attempt to back-peddle to avoid censure.
What answer do you think you would get if you asked a Palestinian what the phrase means?
I can pretty much assure you that they would say that it DOES call for NO coexistence, death, destruction and hate.
You are fools if you think this phrase means anything else but death to Israel.
If our elected representatives feel that Rep. Tlaib's comments require censure, that should be a strong indicator that FaceBook should be taking a cue that NOBODY should be saying this phrase.
The phase "From the River to the Sea," as I am sure you well know is one which signifying freedom not hate. The only reason this would be hateful is if a colonial power, such as Israel, believed that freedom was dangerous. Israel has acted against the Geneva conventions, specifically committing genocide, and what we are talking about if is "From the River to the Sea" is hate speech? Was the civil rights movements, a time of liberation, a movement of hatred or freedom? I understand that you will never actually care about the freedom and the sanctity of Palestinians lives. I am sickened. Rethink your priorities.
"From the River to The Sea" itself is a totally respectable and non hateful statement. It has its origins possibly from Revisionist Zionists like Jabotinsky and has just been readapted for Palestinians.
The question is, how is it modified? If the statement is followed by "Palestine is Arab" or "Israel is Jewish" and expressed explicitly as an exclusionary statement, it is NOT OKAY. However, if followed by the phrase "Palestine will be free" or something about liberty, that is TOTALLY FINE. it is only an issue when the end of the statement is explicitly said to be exclusionary- the shorthand "From the River to the Sea" is TOTALLY FINE!
The intent of the phrase, From the River to the Sea is to wipe Israel off of the map. This phrase must be prohibited from use on social media. It’s a targeted attack on Israel with the goal of removing it from earth along with its people through violence.
The saying "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is a call to wipe the state of Israel off the map and for Israel to no longer exist. This is a hateful saying that should not be allowed on any of Meta's platforms and perpetuates the pervasive anti-Israel, anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish problems we are seeing all over the world today. Please stop allowing it on your platforms.
As a Palestinian with parents who survived the 1948 Nakba and 1967 Naksa, never has this slogan meant death or harm to anyone. It is a geographic location for which freedom is sought for all people, similar to the America’s Sea to Shining Sea. It is absurd that anyone would interpret this as anything other than freedom for all, including the indigenous Palestinian Jews, Christians, and Muslims who have been displaced, killed, or living under an apartheid system on their own land.
Adopting this slogan as being hateful is wrong. The effort to scrutinize this slogan apart from any other, is targeted and anti-Semitic because Palestinians who are being ethnically cleansed, are in fact, Semites.
A person’s freedom should never come as a threat to another’s. Plain and simple.
From the river to the sea is a prayer for Native Palestinians for the return of their homeland. It is NOT a violent statement.
FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA, PALASTINE WILL BE FREE!! END ISRAELI APARTHEID!! WE ARE WATCHING A GENOCIDE PLAY OUT IN REAL TIME!!
"From the River to the Sea" is saying - in very simple terms - Palestinians will be free to live, love, move, and just BE, freely, in their own ancestral land. It is a call for liberation from the apartheid state they currently live in. It's a demand for access to their OWN resources - water, agriculture, animals, TRADE. It's calling for the dismantling of that wall, separating Palestinians (whom are ALSO semites) from the rest of the world. It also means their RIGHT TO RETURN. To recognize Palestine as its own country - who have a right to self-govern, and to move about the world freely - including actually being able to come back. It means REPARATIONS for the last 75 years of displacement, murder, destruction of their homes and crops and businesses.
What it does NOT mean, is what the Israeli government is ACTUALLY doing to Palestine and their people. Why is a saying getting MORE pushback, than the actual actions that are taking place - actions that they claim this saying means???
And if that didn't make sense - please, do tell, is everyone fearful that it means the wiping out of Israel, because of what "from sea to shining sea" ACTUALLY means?? The complete erasure of the indigenous population? The slaughter of most of their main meat source, the bison? Residential schools? Reservations? Zionists claim, "ftr2ts" means completely removing them from the land, because the country many of them are ACTUALLY from, uses the same slogan in claiming the US, "from sea to shining sea."
Palestinians are Semitic - how could their own saying be ANTI- Semitic?
The phrase “From the River to the Sea” has a long history in the quest for a solution to the Israel Palestine problem. It has been used by pro-Palestinian advocates to demand equal rights for all Palestinians from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. In fact this phrase has even been used by the Israeli side to assert its claim over all of historic Palestine. The phrase was used by the Likud party (ruling party) as part of their 1977 election manifesto which remains to this day, stating that “between the Jordan river and the sea, there will only be Israeli sovereignty”. Therefore, ascribing this slogan as hate speech has no basis in fact nor is there any evidence that just saying “from the river to the sea” constitutes as demanding the destruction of a people. This phrase has been equally used by both sides to make claims over their rights to the land, and it should be treated as such. In case the committee decides to ban this phrase, it should apply it equally without double standards to both parties in the conflict, which means that Israelis should also be prohibited from using it to make claims over the land between the river and the sea.
Hello,
I came here to say as an educated citizen of the United States that the comments and posts are the feelings and thoughts of the world at large. The majority of the planet does not want to be at war with Palestine. We support the civilians, the mothers, fathers and children who are being collectively punished. From the river to the sea is not a call for the death of all Jews in Israel. It is the cry of people who want to return home! It is a cry of people who have been under a brutal and violent occupation for more than 75 years. You allow Israeli content to be published. If anything I have been more offended as a human by the the things my country and Israel has done to the world than I have ever been offended by people fighting for their sovereign land. Jews, Muslims and Christians lived in relative peace in that region before the creation of Israel.
I am an American citizen born and raised in Texas! I have no connection to that area of the world except that I am a mother and I see those children being murdered and I know who is wrong. The US and Israel are on the wrong side of history. This 'war' is another in a long list of bloody and horrific land grabs that the US is responsible for.
The fact that people sit around and debate on whether to allow these controversial comments to be published on social media shows that your priority is not to connect the world but to control it. I will not be controlled, I know the truth and you can't hide it from us anymore.