Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Uncategorized

BREAKING: Facebook Claims It Will Not Censor Pro-Life, Anti-Islam Content Unless It Attacks Specific People

Published

on

Facebook is clearly feeling the pressure from conservatives concerned about the censoring of content, following Sen. Ted Cruz grilling Mark Zuckerberg before the Senate about right-leaning commentators including Diamond and Silk who have been banned.

Regardless of whether or not that censorship will continue (and we will continue to vigilantly report on cases and signs of it), Facebook Leadership is making public overtures to conservatives to try to win favor.

Facebook head of global policy management Monika Bickert appeared on conservative writer Ben Domenech’s show on The Federalist Radio Hour to talk about how Facebook decides what to censor.

“You have all these different factions of those places as well. I will tell you that on my team we have a broad variety of views and experience but we also maintain relationships with groups outside the company that have very frequent input into our policy,” Bickert said.

Trending: Drug Cartel Beheads 13-Year Old Girl After Murdering Her Grandmother In Alabama

“So, a few weeks ago we were deciding should we redefine our policy about photos of fetuses. It sounds like a horrible area, but frankly this is something that is political speech to many people and it’s something that we do see on our service so we do reach out to pro-life groups, to pro-choice groups, we understood how this speech was important to them or upsetting to them, and then we reached a policy consensus and that consensus was that speech was going to be allowed on Facebook unless somebody is sharing it to…with sadistic commentary or celebrating violence, but we really do try hard to get views from broad perspectives,” Bickert said.

Domenech asked Bickert what defines hate speech.

“That’s right, and it’s not perfect, we know that, and hate speech is probably our most difficult policy in terms of drawing a line that will make sense to everybody globally. We’ve got all these different people in different parts of the world who see these issues very differently know that where we draw the line won’t please everybody. But what we try to focus on is where speech is explicitly attacking people. That starts to feel different that people criticizing their religion or homosexuality. You’re right, we do hear very frequently, in fact there was a news story that we say maybe a week ago that was about criticizing islams. we were asked why we weren’t removing this as many people were viewing it has offensive hate speech. That speech is okay on facebook. It might make people uncomfortable they don’t have to look at it. They can also engage in counter speech. They can saw “You don’t understand Islam? You’re getting it wrong and that’s fine. Just draw the line where it is attacks on people,” Bickert said.

“People are going to come from different backgrounds and whether its political bias their views on what kind of nudity should be shared on Facebook, they are going to have very different perspectives. My team’s job is to take that out of the process and we do that by having very granular standard. These standard are so granular it means that we aren’t always going to get it right,” Bickert added.

Big League Politics led the way on reporting on Facebook’s shuttering and bias against pro-Trump groups, and Facebook Leadership appeared willing to address our concerns, agreeing to discuss the matter with me before a Buzzfeed reporter contacted them about it and they backed out of our conversation.

We will continue to monitor this situation.

Here is Cruz’s interrogation of Zuckerberg. Enjoy.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Snowflakes

Democrat Congressman BLOCKS U.S. Veterans After Saying Strzok Deserves Purple Heart

Published

on

After receiving massive blowback and criticism for proclaiming that disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok deserves a purple heart, Congressman Steve Cohen, a Democrat who represents Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District, has decided to block Veterans who are responding to his ignorant remarks on Twitter.

During Strzok’s Congressional testimony on Thursday, Rep. Cohen sparked outrage when he told disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok that he should be awarded a Purple Heart.

“If I could give you a Purple Heart, I would. You deserve one. This has been an attack on you, in a way to attack Mr. Mueller, in the investigation that is to get at Russia collusion involved in our election,” Rep. Cohen said.
Cohen’s belief that Strzok deserves a Purple Heart, one of the highest military decorations that is awarded in the name of the US president to members of the military who are wounded or killed in any action against an enemy of the United States, quickly sparked outrage online by people who knew better than to make such a disrespectful and insulting comparison.

After receiving a lot of backlash the day following the testimony, Cohen said he now regrets what he said. “I regret using the term ‘Purple Heart.’ I used it metaphorically, not literally. I never thought literally it should be given to Agent Strzok.”

Instead of apologizing to Veterans who fought and risked their lives for our country, Rep. Cohen is using the block feature on Twitter so that Veterans and other critics can’t respond to Rep. Cohen.

Rep. Cohen has blocked so many veterans that a Twitter user created a Twitter page for all of the people, mostly veterans, who have been blacked by Cohen.

Hundreds of users took to Twitter on Saturday morning to explain why they are blocked by Rep. Cohen with the hashtag #HeBlockedMeToo.

 

“I wish my four surgeries to rebuild me were metaphoric. You owe us an apology, not a clarification of the words you used,” one U.S. Veteran tweeted.

One user tweeted, “I told him the story of how my uncle got his Purple Heart in Vietnam & died from Agent Orange. Told him he owed Veterans a very public apology. He blocked me.”

Despite these heartfelt messages from twitter users whose family members received the Purple Heart and veterans who were wounded in war, Rep. Cohen has continued to block people, blocking
Generals, Colonels, members of Congress and wounded Veterans.

US Army veteran Mark Footerman, who is also a fellow for Hill Vets, an organization that encourages veterans to create global impact tweeted, “Member of Congress, Rep. Cohen, has blocked me, an Army veteran, for criticizing his deeply disturbing statement that Peter Strzok deserves a Purple Heart because he has sat through a tough congressional hearing.”

A female combat veteran tweeted, “I was blocked but @RepCohen is a coward…this female Marine Veteran will call TN Rep Steve Cohen a coward all day @RepCohen is a coward #RepCohenIsACowardlyDemrat Democrats can’t handle the truth.”

James T, A US Air Force Veteran tweeted, “Funny, I just checked and I’m blocked too and I’ve never tweeted about him or to him. Maybe he blocks all veterans. What an ass.”

A wounded combat veteran tweeted, “This is what happens when a wounded vet stands up to a Congressman who wants to give a Purple Heart to lying, narcissistic cheater. Apparently, he [Rep.Cohen] hates Veterans.”

One user who said they only created Twitter so that they could reply to Cohen’s outrageous comments said they were immediately blocked by the Congressman. “I joined Twitter so that my voice would get through to @RepCohen. Looks like it did. He blocked me 1 hour and 30 min after I created my Twitter account.”

Cohen’s belief that Strzok deserves a Purple Heart, one of the highest military decorations that is awarded in the name of the US president to members of the military who are wounded or killed in any action against an enemy of the United States, quickly sparked outrage online by people who knew better than to make such a disrespectful and insulting comparison.

Not only was Rep. Cohen’s statement a slap in the face to all service men and women who have fought and served for the United States, but his intentional blocking of Veterans suggests that he has no respect or consideration for US veterans. On top of being anti-Veteran, anti-American, and anti-free speech, Rep. Cohen’s actions may have him in direct violation of the law. In May, a federal district court judge ruled that President Trump can’t block people from following his Twitter account. According to the judge, elected officials who block tweets with differing opinions constitutes viewpoint discrimination, which violates the First Amendment.

Thus, if President Trump cannot block twitter users who have opposing views, neither can Rep. Cohen, who is also an elected US politician.

Rep. Cohen’s office did not reply with a request for comment as to why the Democrat Congressman is intentionally blocking US veterans and Conservatives on Twitter.

Here is a collection of tweets from other US veterans and twitter users who also took to social media to ask why they had been blocked by Rep.Cohen.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×

Thanks for sharing!

We invite you to become a Big League Politics insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to a friend