Facebook Censors Pro Trump and Negative Hillary News

The establishment protector of “PC” purity strikes again. By definition, Free Speech IS political. For reasons that only a hard core Hillary sycophant could understand, the mere posting or sharing of online reports on the 2016 Election Race is now blocked. Such a Facebook policy to disrupt political content goes to the heart of the Corporatocracy assault on open and uncensored political discourse. Little Mark Zuckerberg operates as the front and gatekeeper for the power elites who seek to manage, filter and remove information that does not fit into their plan for globalism.

What other reason can a pro Trump page and personal timeline be tagged and prevented from posting content using an URL address from political news site? Read the Facebook block posting notice?

As a security precaution you can't take this action because your computer may be infected with a virus or a malicious browser extension.

You can learn more about malicious software here

If you think you're seeing this by mistake, please let us know.

Folks this mildly veiled explanation is a scam just as much as every email you receive asking for money. There is no virus or malware on our end. The same blocking notice is received using different computers with various browsers. Welcome to the Newspeak from an arrogant enabler of social media political acceptability.

This may not seem a very big deal in the big scheme of things, but what will happen when Trump is also blocked from the Republican nomination and only Hillary Clinton is left standing and negative news and accounts of her criminality are prevented from being distributed across the range of popular web services?

Over several decades, access to the web has grown and become an integral part of communicating with friends and acquaintances. Email has provided the basic means to keep in touch. However, the explosion of social posting services could easily support the position that if Facebook does not like your content, just hit the road and go to a different service.

This is exactly the danger of public companies setting their own rules to ban people and subject matter that conflicts or even annoys the dramatically intolerant sensibilities of the authoritarian left. Is it not overdue and time to demand that the First Amendment applies to ANY company that deems to go public and operate under the protection of regulatory agencies?

Politics is the language of culture and business. The Corporatocracy effectively owns and controls most of the means used by society to communicate, discuss and organize around particular causes and concerns.

Most individuals are not able to roll out an advertising campaign to gain traction in the public arena. Trump; has the money, will and talent to attract earned media and populist favor by going directly to the people. Nonetheless, in the Facebook asylum of progressive disorder, the mere appearance of an America First philosophy and economic nationalism is far too dangerous for the millions of Facebook viewers to read.

Friends this conduct is called censorship.

When your high grade and current antivirus and anti-malware programs give your computer a clear bill of health, what will the next excuse that Facebook will give to block posting from sites and accounts that contain messages that might hurt the Hildebeast?

Public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. Yet, when such a company is based entirely on the good will of the public who makes up the membership for their service, a prudent manager would never place the business in harm’s way of a populist backlash against selective, arbitrary and capricious suppression of free speech.

People, the globalists are running the planet under a “terms of service” agreement that runs by, our one and only, set of rules that treat customers as obedient subjects to the technocratic matrix of manipulation and coerced conformity.

Facebook is right in the middle of this system of mass capitulation. In case you never read or heard, of the Reddit post - Mark Zuckerberg is Jacob Greenberg is grandson of David Rockefeller? or the Before this is News item - Mark Zuckerberg is David Rockefeller’s Grandson I Thought Everyone Knew. Did You? Facebook Started With $500 Million From The C.I.A., give a look.

The accuracy or proof of such assertions is not the point. The clear right to ask the questions should be well within the bounds of free inquiry, investigation and reporting.

But would Facebook ban the account of the poster for having the chutzpah for pointing out that, ODDLY MARK ZUCKERBERG’S REAL NAME IS JACOB GREENBERG! SO HE VIOLATES FACEBOOK POLICIES! ?

Ok, you may not think much of these examples, so put on your thinking cap and explain away the “so called” benign motivations of Facebook employees admit they are willing to manipulate social media to prevent a Donald Trump presidency.

“Facebook may be denying that it won't influence the election in 2016, but in a recent poll Facebook employees admitted they thought Facebook should have a role in preventing a Trump presidency.

According to Gizmodo, last month, some Facebook employees used a company poll to ask Zuckerberg whether the company should try “to help prevent President Trump in 2017.”

And here is the point that should be so disturbing to every person willing to engage in the political arena of ideas and information.

“Believing that Facebook has a responsibility to influence the 2016 election is very concerning.

It shows that Facebook employees are willing to censor opinions they don't agree with in the name of social justice.

If you've ever been suspended from Facebook for something extremely mild, this probably explains why.”

Hey, Trump posts are entirely appropriate on the 2016 Election Race Facebook page. If MailChimp, Twitter and Hootsuite posts are allowed to appear, but I am banned from adding a URL source, the Facebook service is discriminatory.

Violation of my Constitutional Bill of Rights will not stand. The globalist attack on the free exchange of political views is evident for all to see.

James Hall – April 27, 2016

Subscription sign-up for the BATR RealPolitik Newsletter

Discuss or comment about this essay on the BATR Forum