January 29, 2016

Facebook's Community (double) Standards target conservatives, including Canadians

Harry KhachatrianRebel Blogger

When German chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard asking Facebook CEO and social justice aficionado Mark Zuckerberg to actively censor “racist post," we were assured that such vaguely defined terms wouldn’t be extended to censor conservatives.

These ranged from “Don't worry, it will only be limited to within Germany” to “It won't be used to censor conservatives and other disagreeing opinions, just to filter hateful racism."

That of course was all hogwash.

Facebook has in-fact named itself the chief combatant in the authoritarian Left’s crusade against free speech and truth.

A week ago, the Facebook page "Justin Trudeau Not" made a post highlighting the Canadian Prime Minister’s reluctance to address radical Islam, while lecturing Canadians on what it means to be “Canadian”.

It contrasted Trudeau’s immediate condemnation of a pepper spray attack against Muslims in Vancouver with his complete refusal to address a firearm attack by Muslims in Calgary.

The post was deemed to be a "violation of community standards” and was hastily deleted by Facebook.

If you thought that was just a one-off, a complete random act of censorship by Facebook, think again.

Last Friday, January 22nd, the very same Facebook page published a meme criticizing the western world’s Syrian Muslim refugee policy.

Citing a study by the Institute for National Security Studies, the meme stated that 450 out of 452 of suicide bombings in 2015 had been carried out by Muslims – yes, that's 99.6%.

Drawing from this statistic, the meme suggested that the growing mass Muslim refugee intake is probably not a great idea:

In essence, the post was arguing a position – one that goes against the grain of political correctness – and supporting it with facts.

Some would call this engaging in political discourse. Others, including our white knight, Mark Zuckerberg, would call this a dangerous and destructive act of “hate speech”, encumbered with microaggressions.

Hence, the post was yanked by Facebook the same day:

Moreover, a subsequent message warned the group that future posts of the same theme would lead to a permanent page ban.

Facebook has made it clear that contradictory views and positions are not welcome on their pages, even though their Community Standards state:

“Our mission is to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected."

Their actions against "Justin Trudeau Not" suggest otherwise -- especially while posts and pages like the following remain live and active on Facebook:

Facebook’s Community Standards also state that Facebook removes “hate speech," which includes content that directly attacks people based on their race, religion, and other factors.

They continue:

“People can use Facebook to challenge ideas, institutions, and practices. Such discussion can promote debate and greater understanding.”

Okay, so diverting back to the censored post, the question is – does this “directly attack people based on race or religion?” Or is it a rather an act of political discourse, an opposition to the mainstream position on the issue of the Syrian Muslim refugee crisis.

I would strongly argue that it’s the latter.

First, the post states a statistic: That 99.6% of suicide bombers in 2015 turned out to be followers of the "religion of peace." If stating uncomfortable or narrative-shattering truths is now deemed censorable "hate speech," than we can forget about having political debates all together.

Second, the post sarcastically states “but bringing in Muslim refugees is none of my business”. Well, yes. Based on the statistic provided, the simple fact is that engaging in mass refugee intakes – like Germany has -- will undoubtedly expose us to risks that otherwise would not be there.

That meme wasn't an attack on anybody.

It was a plea for our national security.  



“Miss Me Yet?” The Harper t-shirt & bumpersticker you asked for!
BUY NOW only from TheRebel.media:

JOIN TheRebel.media FREE for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

Liberal MP Mauril Bélanger is trying again to make our national anthem gender neutral.
SIGN OUR PETITION to reject these changes at SaveOCanada.ca




You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-01-30 03:26:03 -0500
Michael Mann some Islamic ahole used to threaten to slice peoples throats on Sun News posts on FB , i and many others reported him and they said he did not violate their standards, yet my fiance gets crap and blocked for posting adoptable dogs and i get blocked for 3 days for saying someone is racist? I would laugh my head off if Zuckerberg was ever attacked by the fanatics.
commented 2016-01-30 03:24:05 -0500
Michael CBC is paid for by taxpayers, they have no right to ban anyone idiot. And abusive comments are different than a different opinion. Sorry to say, and as usual you ignore the hypocrisy of the left like a good fool. You will be silenced one day as well by them.
commented 2016-01-30 03:20:54 -0500
Michael Mann you have not made any actual arguments, just lies and your opinion.
commented 2016-01-29 16:24:10 -0500

Criminally liable speech? Such as from Terry?
commented 2016-01-29 16:21:42 -0500

You are so disingenuous. Intelligent discussion to you really means – something that you agree with. I have made many opposing arguments regarding things that Ezra has posted and various articles – you only seem to come out when I am attacking someone’s blatant idiocy.
commented 2016-01-29 15:51:51 -0500
“If The Rebel was all about free speech like they claim and so unlike the CBC – people like Terry would still be posting here. He was banned.”

At what point did I claim that theRebel did not filter out criminally liable speech? Why are you bringing up this topic with me?
commented 2016-01-29 15:47:28 -0500
“and that clearly your brain doesn’t have the capacity to understand it. "

Case in point.
commented 2016-01-29 15:46:05 -0500
Michael said, " you wish that I would leave The Rebel"

No, Michael, I would rather you post comments that challenge the content of the article or people posts without the insults and hate. I would rather you foster intelligent discussion … but if you cannot do that, then yes, I would rather you leave.
commented 2016-01-29 15:45:52 -0500

The only example that my comment provided is one of fact and that clearly your brain doesn’t have the capacity to understand it.

If The Rebel was all about free speech like they claim and so unlike the CBC – people like Terry would still be posting here. He was banned.
commented 2016-01-29 15:42:34 -0500
Look, Michael, you come on to an article from the first comment spewing insults and hate at everyone and offer no logical or intelligent discourse. What type of reply do you expect? Damn, you are a dullard. Stop the insults and treat people here like they are human beings with a differing opinion than yours and you will receive intelligent discourse treating you as a human being with a differing opinion. i.e. you get back what you dish out.
commented 2016-01-29 15:42:34 -0500

I like engaging with crazies like you – so that’s why I do so. On the other hand, you wish that I would leave The Rebel, so you never have to read my comments again.
commented 2016-01-29 15:40:42 -0500

If I was a real man what? Would you meet up in person?
commented 2016-01-29 15:39:34 -0500
Michael ignorantly comment (no seeing the stupidity of his remark), “Well you sure focus a lot of your time on someone you claim no one cares about.”

And you too, simpleton fool.
commented 2016-01-29 15:38:22 -0500
Michael Mann said, “You are too stupid to realize that if I was posting as someone else – than The Rebel banned a previous user name, thus The Rebel is not about free speech.”

The perfect example of a comment from the mind of a simpleton.
commented 2016-01-29 15:36:25 -0500

Well you sure focus a lot of your time on someone you claim no one cares about.
commented 2016-01-29 15:36:01 -0500
Michael mann said, “Facebook really isn’t for batshit crazy conservatives like you and Peter.”

Being called “batshit crazy” by a someone like you is no insult at all. Now if you were a real man …
commented 2016-01-29 15:35:33 -0500

Bravo and many other conservatives uses filthy language and yet they are still posting – are you beginning to see the hypocrisy yet or is your head too far up your ass?
commented 2016-01-29 15:32:19 -0500
DAN MANCUSO, you are right of course. It was wishful thinking on my part to think that it would affect his bottom line.
However, I really don’t care if it does or not, I will not be a part of censoring free speech.
I can live a very comfortable life without Facebook and Facebook can continue on with their communist ways all it wants with no help from me.
commented 2016-01-29 15:26:22 -0500
MICHAEL MANN, the rebel removed your posts duh Silva because of your filthy language, they did not ban you, and you post as Michael Mann because everyone on here thought you were a stupid lefty and continually told you so. You thought you could post under a different name and no one would recognize you, but a skunk can not change it’s smell, and you still smell.
commented 2016-01-29 15:24:44 -0500
Michael Mann said, “Delete your account Peter – no one will give a shit or miss you.”

And you as well, Michael, are an insignificant insect that no one even cares about now, even if you do have a Facebook account.
commented 2016-01-29 15:15:37 -0500
I’m not so sure that deleting your FB page will make that much of a difference to Zuckerberg’s bottom line, considering the small number of people with enough integrity to do so as compared to all the sheep who far outnumber the good guys.
Also, look at all the various NAZI censoring tactics of CBC et al – if you stop commenting and challenging them altogether out of a sense of frustration and/or futility, they will have achieved their bonehead consensus of like-minded drones, in lefty/liberal homogeneity commenting exactly how CBC and the rest of the Media Party wants them to comment – in essence you’re helping them win!
The game is set up for us to lose…because we can’t win – that One Worlder/Agenda 21 juggernaut is rolling over us in every imaginable way…the last gasp of hope, rear-action of THEREBEL notwithstanding…
commented 2016-01-29 15:02:17 -0500

You are too stupid to realize that if I was posting as someone else – than The Rebel banned a previous user name, thus The Rebel is not about free speech.
commented 2016-01-29 15:00:00 -0500

You are delusional if you think they will miss you or lose revenue over this. Most Facebook users would actually be glad that you are gone. Facebook really isn’t for batshit crazy conservatives like you and Peter.
commented 2016-01-29 14:57:49 -0500

What the hell are you talking about? You are the one getting upset over…wait for it….comedy by a character that doesn’t actually exist. Maybe you should remove the pickle from your asshole and let comedians do their job – there is always someone who will find them funny even if you don’t.
commented 2016-01-29 14:36:22 -0500
I deleted my Facebook page (two of them in fact, one was a business page) two weeks ago. I the section where they ask why I was deleting, I stated that I would not be associated with an organization that is against or bans and censors free speech.
Zuckerf^ck will start missing Peter and all the others that delete their pages, when he finds his revenue starting to tank.
I for one do not give a sweet fiddlers f^ck whether or not he misses my page or not, I will not support a communist organization that bans free speech.
Yeah even jerks like duh Silva who posts as Michael Mann are entitled to their free speech, but we are also entitled to call you a slim ball that lives in a dark hole.
commented 2016-01-29 14:24:32 -0500
Michael Mann, Then stop believing the fiction the stupid twat spouts. I bet you believe everything that stupid twat Justin says too. Remember, he’s all for transparency. As long as it’s Conservative transparency. Not anyone eles’s.
commented 2016-01-29 14:11:13 -0500

No, it was comedians doing comedy regardless if you found it funny or not. There is in fact a difference. Marg Delahunty isn’t a real person.
commented 2016-01-29 14:08:36 -0500
Zuckerberg, zuck my zrick.
commented 2016-01-29 14:06:53 -0500
The Left like to argue, that as a corporation gets bigger, so too does it’s responsibility to the public. I’d suggest, that FB and Twitter are SO huge they can / should fall under Freedom of Press, which puts them in a position to face legal action for their conduct, private enterprise or not! They need to be challenged in court. Preferably in the US.
commented 2016-01-29 13:52:29 -0500
Richard. That is the Bill Watcott case. Truth is not a defense in a court of law.
I suspect this is why Ezra’s lawyer didn’t argue Truth in his case, brought by the Muslim law student. However, I’m of the view that was a mistake. It’s conceding. To make Truth count, like Free Speech, one must continue arguing it! The judge simply called Ezra a liar, even though the truth of his remarks was never argued. Think about it. If truth doesn’t count, than neither do lies, rendering both irrelevant. This was an activist decision, simply to make Ezra look bad. We know how shallow the Left are. If a judge says he’s a liar, then it MUST be true!! (nya nya!! – tongue sticking out).

But few in the larger public knew about the Watcott case. Ezra’s is much higher profile, and if the judge wanted to rely on that position, he should’ve let her, and let the world see, and outrage fly! Might as well, since they’ll find against him anyways, he might as well use it to inform the public and expose our judiciary for what it has become. I hope he’s appealing and will consider arguing Truth going forward.