Connect with us

Tech

Facebook Sends Enforcer to Indian Man’s House, Asks If He Really Posted Political Content

Published

on

Facebook Sends Enforcer To Residence India

An Indian man says Facebook sent representatives to his physical home to verify whether he posted certain political content on the platform, highlighting more concerns about privacy and freedom of speech.

A man living in New Delhi, India, who says he made political posts on the platform, claims he had a representative from Facebook show up at his residence to ask questions about the post. It is believed the company took this action as part of its ongoing fight against “fake news,” and that it is the first known instance of Facebook appearing at someone’s physical address to determine the veracity of posts.

Top legal experts in India seem to consider the possible invasion of privacy unprecedented, and believe it could open Facebook to legal recourse.

Trending: Judge Amy Coney Barrett Recently Approved Democrat COVID-19 Lockdown Policies

News 18 reported:

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • 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.

“This action, if true, clearly infringes upon the privacy of a user. Sending a representative to physically verify a user is a blatant invasion of his or her privacy space. Only the state can act like this under proper laws,” Pavan Duggal, the country’s top cyber law expert and a senior Supreme Court advocate, told IANS.

Facebook, Duggal said, can at best discontinue a Page, Group or delete the post, or remove the user from its platform as it has done so in the past. When it comes to those who wants to run political ads on Facebook, the company verifies residency of advertisers either by physical verification (by sending someone to the address provided) or by sending a code in the post.

The article also notes that Duggal considers the move a “gross violation,” and “unwarranted under the ambit of the Information Technology Act, 2000,” quoting Duggal as saying “In such a scenario, the user can sue Facebook and even the government for allowing such activities under its nose that infringes on the privacy of a user.”

As Facebook attempts to stamp out fake news in India, which is the world’s largest democracy, the country quickly approaches an important election on April 11.

Tech

ORWELLIAN: Twitter Censors Big League Politics Article About Joe Biden Attacking 17-Year-Old Kyle Rittenhouse

Big Tech does not want the truth to get out.

Published

on

Twitter has censored a Big League Politics article detailing a statement made by the Joe Biden campaign attacking 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot two communists dead and shot another in the bicep in Kenosha, Wisc. and faces murder charges as a result.

The monolithic social media platform informed the BLP Twitter account on Wednesday that they are censoring a nearly 3-week-old article titled, “Joe Biden Smears American Hero Kyle Rittenhouse,” claiming that it glorifies violence.

The notice can be seen here:

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • 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.

Twitter is not the only platform to censor BLP articles in an attempt to suppress the truth from the masses. Facebook also has BLP in their cross hairs, using a truth commission of fake news hacks to serve as their so-called fact checkers.

Facebook once tried to censor content published by BLP to expose the bizarre and unexplained circumstances surrounding the mysterious death of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein in a Manhattan jail cell:

Facebook’s new ministry of truth, led by disreputable fact checking operations like Lead Stories, has been initiated to stifle independent voices on the social media giant, but they have been caught and forced to backtrack after trying to suppress news about camera malfunctions near Jeffrey Epstein’s cell during his mysterious death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City last month.

“There were no media reports that a camera monitoring Epstein’s cell area malfunctioned in the hours before the accused sex traffickers death on Saturday August 10, 2019,” claimed Duke, the 26-year veteran of CNN who co-founded Lead Stories, in a blatant deception within the bogus fact check of the story that initially broke on Big League Politics.

Duke’s analysis was false because Big League Politics referenced a media report by digital media specialist Michael Coudrey that he initially refused to acknowledge in his phony fact check.

The phony fact checkers also targeted another BLP article to suppress the truth about Democrat tyrants in Virginia usurping unlawful authority against the 1st Amendment of the Constitution:

Last week, Big League Politics reported on a bill introduced in the Virginia legislature that would effectively criminalize dissent against government officials.

Virginia House Bill 1627 was introduced by Democrat Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne to protect government officials from so-called harassment caused by “indecent language” transmitted over a “computer or computer network.”

The full language reads as follows: “If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.”

The legislation applies the above provision directly to “the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”

Because of the intentionally nebulous and vague nature of the terminology in the legislation, the legislation constitutes a blanket ban of criticism on public officials. A judge, likely appointed by the government officials in question, would determine what constitutes harassment as well as what constitutes “obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language.”

In short, the egregiously unconstitutional bill would make free speech dependent on rulings by biased government appointees, and cause a chilling effect on those who wish to speak out against public officials. This is the type of intolerable act that the Founding Fathers waged a revolutionary war to put to an end.

The Orwellian truth commission set up by Facebook found fault with the report and took measures to prevent it from being disseminated widely on the platform. They had their hired goons at Politifact flag the story as fake news in order to restrict the story from being shared and prevent social media users from knowing the truth about what is happening in Virginia.

Politifact claims that the legislation “spells out criminal penalties for harassment of or threats made to certain state officials. It does not affect ordinary free speech.” This is an assessment that is at best embarrassingly naive, but more likely the cognizant disinformation from a guilty and complicit agent of Big Brother.

The Orwellian push by Silicon Valley corporations is intensifying before the election. They must lose their Section 230 subsidies under the federal government for their heinous and anti-American business practices against free speech.

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


Trending