Facebook bans all praise of ‘white nationalism’ & ‘white separatism’

CAP

Facebook has announced that it will ban content relating to ‘white nationalism’ and ‘white separatism’ from its platform. The nature of the content that will be banned raises some free speech concerns.

Facebook’s hate speech policies already forbid any content praising or promoting “white supremacy.” The company has, until now, drawn a distinction between this content and “white nationalism” and “white separatism,” much to the ire of civil rights activists, who argue that the terms are interchangeable.

“Going forward,” the company announced in a blog post on Wednesday, “while people will still be able to demonstrate pride in their ethnic heritage, we will not tolerate praise or support for white nationalism and separatism.”

As of next week, users attempting to post such content will be redirected to Life After Hate, a nonprofit staffed by former extremists that seek to turn young people away from white supremacy. The new policy will apply to both Facebook and Instagram.

White nationalism and white separatism are hazy concepts. Facebook initially considered them in the same category of Basque separatism in Spain, the Zionist movement, or Malcolm X-style black separatism. However, the latest decision seems to place explicitly white movements into a category of their own.

Enforcing the ban will likely prove controversial, especially in the United States where Facebook has been accused of a pervasive anti-conservative bias. Phrases like “I am a proud white nationalist” and “Immigration is tearing this country apart; white separatism is the only answer” will now be banned, the company told Motherboard. Less explicit and “coded”references will be removed on a case-by-case basis, an opaque policy that will surely draw accusations of misuse.

Behind the scenes, most of the content sifting will be done using artificial intelligence and machine learning, Facebook said on Wednesday.

Facebook’s clampdown on the extreme right comes less than two weeks after gunman Brenton Tarrant murdered 50 worshippers at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. Tarrant livestreamed his rampage on Facebook, and the social media giant was criticized for failing to take down reposts of the video quick enough in the days afterward.

Tarrant’s murder spree, inspired by a blend of white supremacist and fascist ideologies, prompted New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Arden to issue a “global call” to fight the “ideology” of racism, particularly online.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

GOOGLE Helping Beijing Build ‘Global Digital Dictatorship’…

By Gordon G. Chang

Google’s decision to help China is paving the way for Beijing’s ‘digital dictatorship.’ Ultimately, Washington must make a political decision to criminalize such collaboration.

General Joseph Dunford, America’s top military officer, has announced he will be meeting with Google representatives this week to talk about the company’s assistance to China’s People’s Liberation Army.

Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, first stoked the controversy over Google on March 14 during his appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee. “The work that Google is doing in China is indirectly benefiting the Chinese military,” he said.

“We watch with great concern when industry partners work in China knowing that there is that indirect benefit,” he added later. “Frankly, ‘indirect’ maybe not be a full characterization of the way it really is. It’s more of a direct benefit to the Chinese military.”

Google issued a firm denial in response to Dunford’s comments. “We are not working with the Chinese military,” a spokesperson said. “We are working with the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense, in many areas including cybersecurity, recruiting and healthcare.”

But Dunford is correct. The denial, even if technically accurate, is nonetheless misleading. Google maintains arrangements that it either knows or should know directly benefit the Chinese military.

For instance, in December 2017 the company announced the formation of the Google AI China Center in Beijing.

Due to Chinese ruler Xi Jinping’s announced policy of “civil-military fusion,” there is no longer any meaningful distinction between civil and military research, especially in areas like AI that Xi has determined China must dominate. As Bob Work, once U.S. deputy defense secretary, said of the new facility in the Chinese capital, “Anything that’s going on in that center is going to be used by the military.”

Similarly, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan sounded the alarm at that Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on March 14. “The fusion of commercial business with military is significant,” he said. “The technology that is developed in the civil world transfers to the military world. It’s a direct pipeline. Not only is there a transfer, there’s also systematic theft of U.S. technology that facilitates even faster development of emerging technology.”

Dunford, in comments last Thursday, pointed to the requirement of having Communist Party cells in companies. The cells, he said, will lead to the transfer of intellectual property to the Chinese military.

The Daily Beast asked Google if its AI China Center hosts a Communist Party cell but has not received a reply.

Google’s AI center in Beijing is not the only project of concern. “Google is partnering with several state entities for various projects to expedite their research,” Bandon Weichert, a national security analyst specializing in emerging technology, told The Daily Beast.

The company is already participating in AI research at Tsinghua University, one of China’s two premier institutions, and is cooperating with Peking University, the other top institution, and the University of Science and Technology of China.

SPAIN: MIGRANTS GANG RAPE 12-YEAR-OLD, LET HER FRIEND GO BECAUSE SHE’S MUSLIM

Spain: Migrants Gang Rape 12-Year-Old, Let Her Friend Go Because She's Muslim

Residents accuse local mayor of covering up the attack

 | Infowars.com – MARCH 27, 2019

A group of migrants in Spain subjected a 12-year-old girl to a brutal gang rape but let her friend go because she was a Muslim, with residents complaining that the Mayor of the town helped cover up the incident.

The incident occurred on March 18th last year but full details only just came to light in a report by Spanish newspaper El Mundo.

According to the report, the attack in Azuqueca de Henares began when the 12-year-old girl was playing with several friends in the Lavadero de Azuqueca park just after 1pm in the afternoon.

A group of Moroccan youths and one Nigerian then arrived, some of whom were known to the victim.

The youths then kidnapped the girl and one of her friends, taking them to an abandoned building nearby. After a discussion in Arabic that lasted several minutes, the perpetrators decided to let her friend go free because she was “North African” and a Muslim.

The youths then took the Spanish girl to a bathroom, knocked her down, undressed her, held down her hands and feet, covered her mouth and then began to anally rape her one by one.

https://bit.tube/play?hash=QmWJ3q9KWQ5xF6WDTYp5EVQpXJ8jtgeesTLGLYHPqdGfhi&channel=251530

At least 5 different individuals took part in the attack, according to the victim, one of whom was 18-years-old and therefore legally an adult.

The girl screamed out as she was then raped vaginally. Her friends who were outside attempted to intervene but were threatened to stay away by one of the suspects who was carrying a stick.

“Anyone who comes in doesn’t come out,” he told the girls.

The attack lasted a full 45 minutes before the victim was allowed to leave.

Three of the youths involved in the attack received 3 years of “confinement,” while one of the adults involved received “preventive detention”. Another adult involved in the attack is still at large.

Local municipal groups wrote a letter condemning Mayor Jose Luis Blanco, who they accused of helping to cover up the full details of the incident. No official details were released about the incident, with the newspaper learning of it via pupils at the local school.

Washington told Ukraine to end probe into George Soros-funded group during 2016 US election – report

Screen Shot 2019-03-27 at 10.34.24 AM

An NGO co-funded by George Soros was spared prosecution in 2016 after the US urged Ukraine to drop a corruption probe targeting the group, the Hill reported, pointing to potential shenanigans during the US presidential election.

Bankrolled by the Obama administration and Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros, the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC) was under investigation as part of a larger probe by Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office into the misallocation of $4.4 million in US funds to fight corruption in the eastern European country.

As the 2016 presidential race heated up back in the United States, the US Embassy in Kiev gave Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Yuri Lutsenko “a list of people whom we should not prosecute” as part of the probe, the Hill reported. Ultimately, no action was taken against AntAC.

Lutsenko told the paper that he believes the embassy wanted the probe nixed because it could have exposed the Democrats to a potential scandal during the 2016 election.

A State Department official who spoke with the Hill said that while the request to nix the probe was unusual, Washington feared that AntAC was being targeted as retribution for the group’s advocacy for anti-corruption reforms in Ukraine.

AntAC wasn’t just the benefactor of well-connected patrons – at the time it was also collaborating with FBI agents to uncover then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s business dealings in Ukraine. Manafort later became a high-profile target of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into alleged Russian collusion, and was sentenced to seven-and-a-half years in prison for tax fraud and other financial crimes.

Lutsenko divulged in an interview with the Hill last week that he has opened an investigation into whether Ukrainian officials leaked financial records during the 2016 US presidential campaign in an effort to sway the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

While AntAC may have failed to help the FBI find the Russia collusion smoking gun, the group’s activities constitute yet another link between the anti-climactic Russiagate probe and Soros, a Democrat mega-donor who bet big on Hillary Clinton taking the White House in 2016.

In 2017, the billionaire philanthropist siphoned money into a new group, the Democracy Integrity Project, which later partnered with Fusion GPS to create the now-infamous Steele dossier.

Spokespersons for AntAC and the Soros umbrella group Open Society Foundations declined to comment on the Hill’s scoop.

Ironically, the prosecutor general who had preceded Lutsenko, Viktor Shokin, resigned under pressure from Washington – which accused Shokin of corruption.

Virtuous US officials continue to make similar demands of Ukraine’s justice system. Earlier this month, Washington urged the Ukrainian government to fire its special anti-corruption prosecutor, again over accusations of administrative abuse.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

WATCH: USC STUDENTS REACT TO MUELLER’S TRUMP-RUSSIA CONCLUSIONS

Watch: USC Students React to Mueller's Trump-Russia Conclusions

Even in one of the most liberal areas of the country, the collusion myth is dead

Infowars.com – MARCH 26, 2019

Austen Fletcher of Fleccas Talks interviewed students on the University of Southern California campus to find out if they’re happy the Mueller report concluded President Trump did not collude with Russia to steal the 2016 election.

The majority of students felt Mueller’s findings were positive for America and that those who pushed the false narrative are now exposed as fake news.

With an already decaying trust in mainstream media, the public’s increasing skepticism will presumably help Trump lock-in a 2020 election victory.

Screen Shot 2019-03-27 at 10.07.13 AM

NOT A SINGLE SENATE DEMOCRAT VOTES “FOR” GREEN NEW DEAL

Not A Single Senate Democrat Votes "For" Green New Deal

Instead of voicing their support for the most ludicrous proposal in socialist history, 43 Democrats decided to take the easy way out

By Tyler Durden

How embarrassing is the green new deal?

So embarrassing that when Senate majority leader McConnell tried to force the Democratic party’s presidential contenders into an embarrassing vote over the berserk, MMT-inducing climate-change proposal (which Republicans are confident that even sober liberal will oppose), not a single Democrat voted for it. Instead, in the vote which was blocked late on Tuesday with a vote of 0-57, 43 Democrats voted merely “present”, including the Senate’s half-dozen presidential candidates, to sidestep the GOP maneuver and, as Bloomberg put it, “buy time to build their campaign positions.”

The vote was the first of many attempts by Republicans to force (socialist, MMT) supporters of the Green New Deal to come into the spotlight and suffer the public scrutiny. The proposal – mostly a collection of goals for mitigating climate change rather than a fully formed plan of action – which according to some would cost north of $100 trillion and would require the launch of helicopter money, also known as “MMT”, has been a favorite target for criticism by McConnell and Republicans ever since freshman Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts rolled it out in February.

“I could not be more glad that the American people will have the opportunity to learn precisely where each one of their senators stand on this radical, top-down, socialist makeover of the entire U.S. economy, McConnell said before the vote.

Alas, that opportunity was denied because instead of voicing their support for the most ludicrous proposal in socialist history, 43 Democrats decided to take the easy way out.

Even the six Democratic presidential contenders, including Cory Booker of New Jersey, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, all voted present.

At this point, the candidates for the Democratic nomination generally haven’t spelled out specific proposals. Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey has called the Green New Deal “bold,” and Senator Kamala Harris of California has said it’s “an investment” worth the cost. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota described it somewhat less enthusiastically, as an “aspiration” to act on climate change.

Fresh off what has been dubbed the best day in Trump’s presidency, on Tuesday Trump, no longer the subject of Russia collusion conspiracy theories, met with Senate Republicans at the Capitol, and according to Lindsey Graham the president told them regarding the Green New Deal, “make sure you don’t kill it too much because I want to run against it” in 2020.

Well, so far so good. In an attempt to save face with progressives, Adam Green, a co-founder of the grassroots Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said McConnell was trying to force some “no” votes at a time when Democrats are still reviewing the plan. Voting “present” shows that Democrats aren’t going to hamper things with an early dissent, he said.

While the “present” votes were to be expected, what came as a surprise is that three Democrats voted with Republicans against the resolution including Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Doug Jones of Alabama, who faces a tough re-election campaign next year in a deep-red state. Independent Angus King of Maine, a member of the Democratic caucus, also voted against the measure.

The challenge for Democrats looking ahead to next year’s campaigns is to avoid having their support for a still-evolving climate proposal tarred by Republican efforts to portray it as an extremist agenda that would do away with hamburgers and airplane travel.

“It’s one thing to be on the campaign trail and say here is what I believe in and fill in the details,” said Democratic strategist Rodell Mollineau, who was a top aide to former Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid. “It’s another thing to go on record and let other people fill in the details for you.”

As Bloomberg notes, “the Green New Deal has more than 100 congressional Democrats as co-sponsors, including the six senators running for president. While Democrats are united on the need for significant action to stem climate change, they don’t agree on specific proposals.” As a result, McConnell introduced his own version, drawing on the language of the Democratic measure.

Top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer tried to shield Democrats from having to expose splits between moderates and progressives on the issue. He dismissed the vote as “gotcha politics” intended by Republicans to distract from the fact that they don’t have their own plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

“Republicans want to force this political stunt to distract from the fact that they neither have a plan nor a sense of urgency to deal with the threat of climate change,” he said.

Following tonight’s Senate vote, Democrats plan to introduce a resolution in the House this week that calls for the U.S. to remain part of the Paris Climate Accord and requires the Trump administration to create a plan to meet its emission reduction goal, according to a senior Democratic aide. As a reminder, in 2017 Trump announced that he intends to pull out of the Paris agreement, under which the U.S. pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26 percent from 2005 levels by 2025.

While Senate Democrats weren’t under any real pressure from outside progressive groups to vote for the Green New Deal at this point, they will be in due course.

Meanwhile, capitalizing on the ultra-liberal faction within the Democratic Party, the GOP’s message focuses on the botched February rollout of the proposal, which included the release of documents from Ocasio-Cortez’s office promising economic security even for those “unwilling to work,” and suggesting the eventual elimination of air travel and “farting cows.”

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑