As Big Tech’s war on free speech rages on, the lines between digital communication and its real-world implications are becoming blurrier by the minute. When the top players in Big Tech have a political ax to grind, their practice of “deplatforming” becomes the censorship of the modern world.
Facebook, the social media behemoth upon which much of the world has come to depend for communication and the spread of ideas, is perhaps the biggest offender in the fight for truly free speech.
As we have frequently reported in the past, Facebook is no friend to liberty-minded thoughtcriminals who fight for sanity and a return to traditional values. Even posting a simple Bible verse that dares to touch a leftist sacred cow will suspend your account and land you in “Facebook jail,” as many unfortunate individuals have discovered.
In a recent update to their Community Standards, however, Facebook kicked their opposition up a notch and declared certain individuals and organizations fair game for death threats and “calls for high-severity violence.”
The policy later appeared to have been changed again, but not before it was first brought to light by those to whom this disturbing policy change would have applied, namely Paul Joseph Watson and Laura Loomer.
Both Loomer and Watson were famously banned from Facebook along with several other “Dangerous Figures” who are permanently prohibited from using the social network. At the time of their respective reports, the policy read as follows:
Do not post:
Threats that could lead to death (and other forms of high-severity violence) of any target(s), where threat is defined as any of the following:
- Statements of intent to commit high-severity violence
-
Calls for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organisation or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organisations Policy)
-
Including content where no target is specified but a symbol represents the target and/or includes a visual of an armament to represent violence
-
Statements advocating for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organisation or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organisations Policy)
-
Aspirational or conditional statements to commit high-severity violence (unless the target is an organisation or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organisations Policy)
“Do not post: Threats that could lead to death… (unless the target is an organization or individual covered in [Facebook’s] Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy…” In other words, threats that could lead to death are perfectly fine if the target is someone Facebook says deserves it.
Very shortly after Loomer and Watson called Facebook out on their shocking policy, however, the highlighted clause allowing for threats and incitement was deleted without any official announcement.
Paul Joseph Watson reports:
“Dangerous individuals” includes me, because this was the designation under which I was banned by Facebook back in May.
Facebook literally put in place a policy that allowed death threats to be sent to people Facebook doesn’t like, which is completely illegal in virtually all developed countries.
Following a backlash, Facebook has completely deleted the section that allowed violence to be incited against “dangerous individuals”.
They now claim their language was “imprecise,” which is the Orwellian understatement of the century.
Facebook's RESPONSE for their policy change that had APPROVED violence against @PrisonPlanet and others?
It was "Imprecise."
"The language we previously used to describe our policies against violence and incitement was imprecise." https://t.co/ywZwggHbIp pic.twitter.com/QEWQSi35ti
— NewsChute (@NewsChute) July 10, 2019
While Loomer and Watson’s reports indicate that a list with names of individuals (including their own) and organizations exists, at the time of this writing Facebook only offers their policy on Dangerous Individuals and Organizations, which reads:
In an effort to prevent and disrupt real-world harm, we do not allow any organizations or individuals that proclaim a violent mission or are engaged in violence, from having a presence on Facebook. This includes organizations or individuals involved in the following:
Terrorist activity
Organized hate
Mass or serial murder
Human trafficking
Organized violence or criminal activity
We also remove content that expresses support or praise for groups, leaders, or individuals involved in these activities.
In a statement to The Daily Caller, Facebook denied having such a hideous policy:
“We don’t allow credible threats of violence against anyone,” company spokeswoman Ruchika Budhraja told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “We do allow some speech that calls for certain forms of violence, such as calls for the death penalty for criminals or support for military action against terrorists.”
Given the marked discrepancy between Ms. Budhraja’s explanation and the actual text of the policy as it briefly appeared, it’s no wonder Facebook quietly changed their policy once again. Now, the policy reads:
The fact that Facebook would give itself the right to break international laws and allow for actual death threats and incitement against select targets should cause any sane person to shudder.
It is no secret that Elizabeth Johnston, the Activist Mommy, who has received countless threats of violence on Facebook and Facebook-owned Instagram, could easily also have found herself on the list of those Facebook deemed deserving of such threats.
We all know that the left isn’t afraid to embrace violence to further its agenda—now Facebook wants to protect them in doing so.
If you appreciate the work we are doing to fight the leftist assault on our values, please consider a small donation to help us continue. Thank you so much!
