Connect with us

Tech

Facebook Confirms It Is Big Brother, Argues in Court ‘There Is No Privacy’ on Its Platform

Tech giants like Facebook are openly contemptuous of their users’ rights.

Published

on

An ongoing class-action lawsuit over a Cambridge Analytica scandal has forced Facebook to admit the obvious publicly: it is an entity hostile toward their users’ basic rights.

“There is no invasion of privacy at all, because there is no privacy,” Facebook attorney Orin Snyder admitted in court last week, according to a Law360 blog.

Snyder also made a curious claim that Facebook is a “digital town square” where users voluntarily surrender their private information to the tech giant.

Trending: Feckless Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler Admits ANTIFA Rioters Aren’t “Peaceful Protestors” As Mayhem Continues

“You have to closely guard something to have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” Snyder said.

take our poll - story continues below

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria challenged Facebook’s argument and its Orwellian implications.

“What you are saying now sounds contrary to the message that Facebook itself disseminates about privacy,” Chhabria said, according to a Law.com blog.

On the same day, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wast telling his shareholders that his social media entity is planning to become a “privacy-focused social platform,” in a remarkable display of double-speak. He had made a similar pronouncement in a Facebook note from March.

“I believe we should be working towards a world where people can speak privately and live freely knowing that their information will only be seen by who they want to see it and won’t all stick around forever,” Zuckerberg wrote.

“If we can help move the world in this direction, I will be proud of the difference we’ve made,” he added.

Zuckerberg must be hoping that the public isn’t paying attention to what his lawyers are saying in court. Civil liberties activists are not buying his lip service.

“Zuckerberg has been the sole leader of Facebook for its entire 15 years of existence,” the watchdog group Fight for the Future wrote in a blog criticizing Facebook’s abusive practices.

“In that time, there has been no attempt to move away from a business model reliant on violating user privacy. Facebook’s current business practices are fundamentally at odds with democracy and human rights,” they added.

While Facebook may argue that it is a “digital town square” in an attempt to avoid legal culpability for its privacy violations, that is very similar to the argument being used by reformers hoping Facebook is re-classified as a utility so that the U.S.-based corporation has to abide by the Bill of Rights of the Constitution without exception.

Zuckerberg may get more than he bargained for if their legal theories hold up in the court of law, as Facebook and similar Big Tech behemoths like Twitter and Google are under heavier scrutiny than ever before.

Tech

Twitter Targets Alternative Video Platform Bitchute as Big Tech’s Censorship Crackdown Intensifies

Big Tech wants to cripple the free flow of information.

Published

on

The social media giant Twitter is targeting Bitchute, the alternative video service that allows for content to be shared freely on the platform, with Draconian censorship.

Independent journalist Tim Pool made the discovery in a Twitter post:

This may have been done at the behest of ANTIFA-style organization, Hope Not Hate, which lobbies Big Tech to censor their political enemies.

“Major social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter should ban the sharing of Bitchute links on their platform, thereby significantly reducing the impact of this extreme and dangerous material,” Hope Not Hate wrote in their blog about Bitchute.

In addition to calling for Draconian censorship against Bitchute on social media platforms, they also call for Bitchute to be slapped with criminal repercussions for permitting free speech on their platform.

“Law enforcement investigate Bitchute for distribution of content that breaks British law, including terrorism legislation,” Hope Not Hate wrote. “The Government should introduce an Online Harms Bill that includes meaningful consequences for bespoke platforms such as Bitchute that host, promote or distribute terrorism, extremist and hateful content.”

Bitchute has grown in influence for hosting videos that have been driven off of major platforms. A viral video of front-line doctors urging for the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 was scrubbed from YouTube but can still be accessed on Bitchute.

The Bitchute links to banned videos from the courageous medical whistleblowers have been posted many different times onto Twitter:

Twitter will not allow users to access these videos without providing the following warning:

As Twitter targets Bitchute for allowing freedom of speech on their monopoly platform, they are actively allowing pedophiles to discuss their lustful desires for children.

Big League Politics has reported on how Twitter explicitly amended their terms of service so pedophiles are allowed on the platform to talk about how they want to rape kids, with child nudity being permissible in certain instances:

Social media giant Twitter has quietly amended their terms of service to allow for “discussions related to… attraction towards minors” to be allowed on their platform.

“Discussions related to child sexual exploitation as a phenomenon or attraction towards minors are permitted, provided they don’t promote or glorify child sexual exploitation in any way,” reads Twitter’s terms of service.

Twitter allow noted that they would allow for nude depictions of children on their platform in certain instances.

“Artistic depictions of nude minors in a non-sexualized context or setting may be permitted in a limited number of scenarios e.g., works by internationally renowned artists that feature minors,” they added.

Twitter’s pro-pedo policy may have been implemented at the behest of Dr. James Cantor, who describes himself as a proud Jewish homosexual. Cantor is a leading researcher and advocate for pedophiles, who he refers to as minor-attracted persons.

Cantor wrote a letter in Jan. 2018 to John Starr, who works as Director of Trust and Safety with Twitter, with other university academics. The letter urged Twitter to allow pedophiles to network and discuss their attraction to children on the monolithic social media platform.

“Many of us have worked with a group of such non-offending pedophiles, also known as anti-contact MAPs (Minor-Attracted Persons), in a peer support network called Virtuous Pedophiles (@virpeds), as well as in other support networks,” they wrote in their letter.

“Recently, a prominent member of Virtuous Pedophiles, who goes by the pseudonym Ender Wiggin (@enderphile2), had his account permanently suspended by Twitter. At least one other member of the same network, Šimon Falko (@simgiran), also had his account permanently suspended around the same time, and a number of other accounts of non-offending, anti-contact MAPs have since been permanently or temporarily suspended,” they added.

They argued that denying pedophiles a place on the social media platform may lead to these so-called virtuous pedophiles acting on their impulses to sexually victimize kids.

The values of these tech giants do not align with American values. If these hostile actors refuse to abide by American values, they ought to lose their Section 230 privileges under the Communications Decency Act.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending