Page 1 of 18 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 175

Thread: Facebook, Twitter Censor Thread

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default Facebook, Twitter Censor Thread

    Spencer: Facebook, Twitter Censor DHFC’s Jihad Watch

    Those who rely on the Big Lie can’t bear the truth being told.

    3.8.2017
    Commentary
    Truth Revolt
    4
    AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to Facebook
    7Share to Twitter
    Share to Google+
    Share to More
    6Share to Print





    The facts at hand presumably speak for themselves, but a trifle more vulgarly, I suspect, than facts even usually do.
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 2, 2017: 16,683
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 2, 2017: 1,051
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 6, 2017: 12,882
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 7, 2017: 1,880
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 7, 2017: 23,783
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 7, 2017: 1,718
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 8, 2017: 18,926
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 8, 2017: 1,091
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 9, 2017: 11,914
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 9, 2017: 974
    And then the very next day:
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 10, 2017: 2,923
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 10, 2017: 295
    The dropoff has continued:
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 20, 2017: 3,408
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 20, 2017: 416
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, February 27, 2017: 2,369
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, February 27, 2017: 329
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, March 2, 2017: 1,645
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, March 2, 2017: 206
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Facebook, March 6, 2017: 1,948
    Referrals to Jihad Watch from Twitter, March 6, 2017: 261
    Did thousands of people who used to click on Jihad Watch articles from Facebook and Twitter suddenly on February 10 lose interest? Of course not. This is what happened: Facebook and Twitter are censoring Jihad Watch as “hate speech,” in accord with assurances they recently gave to the European Union that they would stop tolerating such speech.
    Now, I do not accept and will never accept the idea that reporting on jihad activity and Sharia oppression constitutes “hate speech,” but that is, of course, the longstanding claim of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and Muslim groups in the West, and has been uncritically adopted by the Left, with which Facebook and Twitter are so firmly aligned.
    In reality, what constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment. The label itself is a tool in the hands of the powerful, enabling them to control the discourse and silence dissenters to their agenda. That is ultimately what this is about: the purveyors of the Big Lie always have to shut down those who tell the truth, because they are aware that their whole enterprise rests on a lie and is deeply threatened by the truth. They can only put their lie across by constant repetition and relentless persecution of those who tell the truth. The truth-tellers, in contrast, need not resort to censorship against the liars, for they are confident that the truth, if given a fair hearing, will be obvious and compelling.
    The good news in all this is that despite this choking-off of referrals from Facebook and Twitter, Jihad Watch’s overall readership is growing. Apparently many people who used to come to the site from Facebook and Twitter are finding different avenues. That is very important in general: free people must not accept this censorship, which is a desperate lashing-out of a discredited and weakening political and media elite against an inexorably growing populist revolution. If Facebook and Twitter shut out the truth, then we have to, in large numbers, shut out Facebook and Twitter.
    That is certainly what I am going to do: while each Jihad Watch post automatically goes up on Facebook and Twitter (for as long as that will last), I will never personally go to either one again.
    And despite the ever-decreasing platform for those who dissent from the socialist, globalist, internationalist agenda of these sinister and authoritarian elites, there is every reason to be confident. They have all the money and all the power and all the platforms, and even so, Brexit was voted in, Trump was elected, and much, much more is to come. There is, after all, one weapon they do not have on their side, and that is why, for all their intermediate success, they are doomed to failure: that weapon is, of course, the truth.
    From FrontPage Mag
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default



    Language warning!
    Last edited by Lenno; 03-08-2017 at 08:56 AM.
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default Language warning

    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    AFDI: Appeal filed challenging federal statute authorizing censorship by Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube

    March 7, 2017 12:59 pm By Robert Spencer 10 Comments
    As I explained here, since February 10 Facebook and Twitter have been choking off access to Jihad Watch such that total referrals from the two are down by about 20,000 every day, although our overall readership has gone up: Jihad Watch readers are not so easily deterred. Nonetheless, the Facebook/Twitter action against Jihad Watch is just part of their larger and ongoing effort to close off access to voices that dissent from the line favored by the political and media elites. This is a serious freedom of speech issue in the United States, and we are challenging them in court. Here is the latest on that free speech initiative.

    “Appeal Filed Challenging Federal Statute Authorizing Censorship by Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube,” American Freedom Law Center, March 6, 2017:
    Today, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed its opening brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in a federal lawsuit challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment. Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship and discriminatory business practices free from legal challenge.
    The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Jihad Watch. Geller and Spencer, along with the organizations they run, are often subject to censorship and discrimination by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube because of Geller’s and Spencer’s beliefs and views, which Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube consider expression that is offensive to Muslims. Such discrimination, which is largely religion-based in that these California businesses are favoring adherents of Islam over those who are not, is prohibited in many states, but particularly in California by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which is broadly construed to prohibit all forms of discrimination.
    Section 230 immunizes Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from civil liability for any action taken to “restrict access to or availability of material that” that they consider “to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.” Consequently, these social media giants can discriminate with impunity.
    The district court dismissed the complaint, claiming that Geller, Spencer, and their organizations lack standing to pursue their First Amendment challenge. The district court did not address the serious First Amendment concerns raised by the lawsuit. As such, the court did not rule on the merits.
    In its decision on standing, the district court noted that the challengers “allege two forms of injury: an ‘inability to express certain views’ because of discriminatory censorship by private social-media companies and an ‘economic injury’ that flows from the companies’ removal of Plaintiffs’ online content.” The court, therefore, “assume[d]” that “Plaintiffs have . . . plausibly alleged an injury in fact.” However, it ultimately concluded that because this is an immunity statute, the Attorney General has no “enforcement” authority. Therefore, the plaintiffs could not show that their injury is “fairly traceable” to the Attorney General or that it could be redressed by the court. Consequently, the court refused to exercise its jurisdiction to decide the case.
    Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, issued the following statement:
    “The district court is mistaken. There is no dispute that section 230 confers broad powers of censorship upon Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube officials, who can silence constitutionally protected speech and engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity by virtue of this power conferred by the federal government.”
    Muise continued,
    “As a result, section 230 is a federal statute that alters the legal relations between our clients and Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, resulting in the withdrawal of legal protection against discrimination by private actors. Per Supreme Court precedent, such laws violate the Constitution. In Romer v. Evans, for example, the Supreme Court struck down on constitutional grounds a law that withdrew specific legal protection from the injuries caused by discrimination against homosexuals, including discrimination caused by private parties. There is no basis for a federal court to refuse to decide our First Amendment challenge to this federal law.”
    David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added:
    “Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government. We are hopeful that the D.C. Circuit will reverse the lower court’s decision, which essentially stands for the proposition that there are certain statutes that are ‘above the law’ and thus beyond constitutional challenge. That is a dangerous precedent.”
    Yerushalmi added:
    “It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West. Its leading proponents are the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of Islamist activist groups in the West and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which co-sponsored, with support from Obama and then-Secretary of State Clinton, a U.N. resolution which called on all nations to ban speech that could promote mere hostility to Islam. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we will continue our fight to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.”
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    Definitive Proof: Conservatives Can't Trust Snopes Anymore

    Should we create a website that debunks popular Snopes myths?

    3.8.2017
    News
    M.J. Randolph


    Recently, these remarks by Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson caused liberals to break out into hives:
    That’s what America is about. A land of dreams and opportunity. There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they, too, had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.
    Did you catch the horribly offensive thing he said? He called slaves "immigrants." Yesterday, TruthRevolt's Trey Sanchez described the hysteria this caused.
    Actor Samuel L. Jackson tweeted, "OK!! Ben Carson....I can't! Immigrants ? In the bottom of SLAVE SHIPS??!! MUTHAFUKKA PLEASE!!!#dickheadedtom." Whoopi Goldberg said “Were the slaves really thinking about the American dream? No, because they were thinking, ‘What the hell just happened?!’” The NAACP tweeted, "Immigrants???"
    But Sanchez also pointed out that President Barack Obama used the same language to describe slaves waaaaaaaay back in 2012:
    “Certainly, it wasn’t easy for those of African heritage who had not come here voluntarily and yet in their own way were immigrants themselves," he said.
    JustOneMinute gave another historical example:
    John Kennedy, a name still familiar to Democrats and progressives, wrote a pamphlet in 1958 titled "A Nation Of Immigrants". Later (8/4/1963) it became a NY Times guest editorial. In his usage, everyone (except Native Americans) is an immigrant from somewhere else.
    Snopes, a popular online debunking site that many presume to be objective but which is actually leftist, tackled this issue... in a post called, "Did Ben Carson Liken Slavery to Immigration?"
    Ever wonder who's fact checking the fact checkers? Because Snopes came down with a "guilty" verdict on Carson, in a condescending post that included an explanation of what an "immigrant" is. Gee, thanks, Snopes. Did you also helpfully provide the historical context about Kennedy, Obama, and others who did the same thing? No, you just scolded a black man for not being sensitive to racial issues and called it a day.
    JustOneMinute goes on to say, "Maybe Ben Carson is more familiar than the Snopes team with the viewpoint adopted by JFK and echoed through the years down to Obama."
    You think?
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    BBC Reports Child Porn to Facebook, Facebook Reports BBC to Police

    Zuckerberg's network a safe haven for pedophiles?

    This has been scrubbed from site
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    More oppression chic: Facebook marks International Women’s Day with image of girl in hijab

    March 8, 2017 12:55 pm By Robert Spencer 1 Comment
    This is great. Facebook hereby signals its virtue: it is standing with Muslim women and presumably against Donald Trump and racist, redneck yahoos everywhere. But where is Facebook’s concern for Aqsa Parvez, whose Muslim father choked her to death with her hijab after she refused to wear it? Or Aqsa and Amina Muse Ali, a […]
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    58,711

    Default

    Special Report: Twitter Bans Criticizing Bill Gates

    https://www.infowars.com/live-specia...ng-bill-gates/
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
    John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir of Enfield (1875-1940): Author and Diplomat

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •