Facebook Admits it is a Publisher, not a Free-Speech Platform. That’s Important Because Publishers are not Protected from Lawsuits.

Legal protection from prosecution for Internet platforms is predicated upon their behavior as platforms for free speech, and their abstention from acting as private publishers. Facebook claims it acts as a platform, but in recent court documents, it admits that it is a publisher, opening itself up to liability for the material it publishes. Internet journalist, Laura Loomer, filed a defamation lawsuit against Facebook after the social media giant shut down her account and branded her a “dangerous individual trafficking in hate.” Facebook’s court document states, “Under well-established law, neither Facebook nor any other publisher can be liable for failing to publish someone else’s message.” Chadwick Moore summed it up by saying, “Facebook just admitted in a federal document that they are, indeed, a publisher, not a platform, and they are demanding First Amendment protections from Laura Loomer’s defamation lawsuit…. This means, Mark Zuckerberg lied to Congress.” Loomer recently wrote on Telegram, “according to Facebook, Trump supporters are more dangerous than ISIS.” She then added “Facebook banned me and labeled me a ‘dangerous individual,’ but they are creating pages for ISIS terrorists.” -GEG

Facebook admitted in court that it is a private publisher, not a free platform, proving its conservative critics correct.

Conservative pundit Chadwick Moore tweeted an article by tech blog ReclaimTheNet, writing, “Facebook just admitted in a federal document that they are, indeed, a publisher, not a platform, and they are demanding First Amendment protections from Laura Loomer’s defamation lawsuit.” The upshot: “This means, Mark Zuckerberg lied to Congress.”

The lie in question was when Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told congress that “We’re a tech company, not a publisher.”

The lawsuit was brought by controversial provocateur Laura Loomer for having been deplatformed by Big Tech because she was “a dangerous individual trafficking in hate.”

In the motion, Facebook said that “to the extent Ms. Loomer’s claim targets Facebook’s decision to deactivate her accounts, it is also deficient. Under well-established law, neither Facebook nor any other publisher can be liable for failing to publish someone else’s message.”
Read full article here…




Psychologist, Dr. Robert Epstein, Says Big Tech Can ‘Shift Upwards of 15 Million Votes with No One Knowing They Have Been Manipulated’


Dr. Epstein, a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, responded to the Project Veritas sting video, which shows Google executive Jen Gennai proclaiming the tech giant she works for is determined to prevent the re-election of Donald Trump, by saying that it confirms that Google could influence votes and is willing to do so. Epstein estimated that Big Tech could sway 15 million votes because Google and Facebook are unregulated at this time.

Tuesday on Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” psychologist
Dr. Robert Epstein explained how a recently released Project Veritas undercover video,
which shows Google executive Jen Gennai proclaiming the tech giant she
works for is determined to prevent the re-election of Donald Trump,
verified what he has concluded from his research.

Epstein, a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for
Behavioral Research and Technology, told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson it
confirmed that Google could influence votes and is willing to do so.

“I’m not surprised in the least,” Epstein said. “It confirms in
glowing terms, or in very ugly terms if you want to look at it that way,
that Google not only has the power to shift opinions and votes on a
massive scale but they exercise this power. This is what I measure in my
research. So, I can tell you fairly precisely how many votes they can
shift. I can tell you fairly precisely how many votes they shifted in
2018.”

Carlson asked Epstein how that wasn’t “hacking” an election, to which
Epstein said there was no regulation preventing it and estimated Big
Tech could sway 15 million votes.

Read full article here…




Facebook to Identify ‘Hate Speech’ Suspects to French Courts


Facebook has agreed to provide the names of French users who are suspected of using so-called hate speech on its platform to the courts when requested. Before this mandate, Facebook only provided identification information for terrorism or cases of violence. The European Commission defines illegal hate speech as public conduct that incites violence or hatred to groups of people defined by characteristics such as race, religion, and ethnic origin. One critic said that hate speech is no longer considered part of freedom of speech, it’s now on the same level as terrorism.  The policy could spread to other European countries.

Facebook has agreed to give the
names of French users who are suspected of using hate speech on its
platform to the courts when requested.

The deal is believed to be the first of its kind in the world.

In
the past, the tech giant has revealed IP addresses and other forms of
identification to French judges – but only in cases relating to
terrorism and violent acts.

Cedric O, French minister for digital affairs, called the deal “huge news”.

Illegal
hate speech is defined by the European Commission as public conduct
that incites violence or hatred to groups of people defined by
characteristics such as race, religion, and ethnic origin.

Read full article here…

Additional source:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/same-level-as-terrorism-facebook-to-give-info-of-hate-speech-suspects-to-french-courts




Facebook Plans to Launch New ‘Libra’ Cryptocurrency, Backed by 28 Companies, Including VISA, MasterCard and PayPal


Visa, Uber, Mastercard, PayPal and Stripe will invest approximately $10 million each in a consortium to back Facebook’s new cryptocurrency, Libra. The goal of the new cryptocurrency is to create a new payment system for purchases on Facebook and across the Internet, as Facebook has 2.4 billion members who are active each month. There are reports that the investors will run nodes and will have full access to Facebook users’ financial data.

It is unknown whether Facebook’s future cryptocurrency will ultimately function more like anonymous cash, or more like a traceable credit card transaction. In the wake of the cultural breakdown that is developing, disruptive technology of this magnitude must be evaluated instead of Facebook’s “move fast and break things” approach.


Social media giant Facebook is expected to reveal its new digital
cryptocurrency next week, backed by Visa, Mastercard, Uber, and others.

The Wall Street Journal reports
that social media giant Facebook plans to reveal its new Libra digital
cryptocurrency next week with backing from over a dozen other companies.
Visa and Mastercard are reportedly quite invested in the currency while
other Silicon Valley firms such as PayPal, Uber, Stripe, and
Booking.com are fully supporting the currency.

Each of these firms will invest around$10 million to fund further
development of the currency and become part of the Libra Association.
The association will act as an independent group which will govern the
coin independently from Facebook. The involvement of Visa and Mastercard
is interesting as cryptocurrency can act as a viable alternative to the
services offered by these firms and could be direct competition, some
have suggested that the firm’s involvement is an attempt to keep track
of Facebook’s currency, while others have implied alternative
motivations.

Byrne and Storm lawyer Preston Byrne suggested that the firm’s
involvement is due to the greater access they can gain to Facebook’s
user data.

Read full article here…

List of 28 investors: VISA, MasterCard, Pay U, PayPal, Stripe, Andreessen Horowitz, Creative Destruction Lab, Thrive Capital, Ribbit Capital, Union Square Ventures, Coinbase, Xapo, Anchorage, Bison Trails, Women’s World Bank, Kiva, Mercy Corps, Facebook, Calibra, Iliad, Vodaphone, FarFetch, Ebay, Mercado Libre, Uber, Lyft, Spotify and Bookings Holdings. 

https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/06/14/facebooks-cryptocurrency-partners-revealed-we-obtained-the-entire-list-of-inaugural-backers/

Additional source:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/libra-launch-facebook-trying-become-virtual-country




Facebook to Search Users’ Data to Call Out ‘Hate Agents’ and Ban Them from the Platform


A leaked document shows that Facebook is tracking and monitoring users’ online and offline behavior to determine whether they should be designated as a “hate agent” and banned from the platform. Facebook’s “Hate Agent Policy Review” document reveals many “signals” to identify so-called hate agents, including praising the wrong individual, interviewing them, or appearing at events alongside them. Tattoos of “hate symbols or hate slogans” and possessing “hate paraphernalia” are also signals. Facebook will categorize people as a hate agent for “statements made in private but later made public,” and the company has shown that it will publicize private information on their users to assist the media in hitjobs on regular American citizens. Mainstream media competes with online personalities for an audience and will likely support Facebook’s new policy. Facebook will search users’ histories over the past two years.

Facebook monitors the offline behavior of its users to determine if
they should be categorized as a “Hate Agent,” according to a document
provided exclusively to Breitbart News by a source within the social
media giant.

The document, titled “Hate Agent Policy Review” outlines a series of
“signals” that Facebook uses to determine if someone ought to be
categorized as a “hate agent” and banned from the platform.

Those signals include a wide range of on- and off-platform behavior.
If you praise the wrong individual, interview them, or appear at events
alongside them, Facebook may categorize you as a “hate agent.”

Facebook may also categorize you as a hate agent if you self-identify
with or advocate for a “Designated Hateful Ideology,” if you associate
with a “Designated Hate Entity” (one of the examples cited by Facebook
as a “hate entity” includes Islam critic Tommy Robinson), or if you have
“tattoos of hate symbols or hate slogans.” (The document cites no
examples of these, but the media and “anti-racism” advocacy groups
increasingly label innocuous items as “hate symbols,” including a cartoon frog and the “OK” hand sign.)

Facebook will also categorize you as a hate agent for possession of
“hate paraphernalia,” although the document provides no examples of what
falls into this category.

The document also says Facebook will categorize you as a hate agent
for “statements made in private but later made public.” Of course,
Facebook holds vast amounts of information on what you say in public and in private — and as we saw with the Daily Beast doxing story, the platform will publicize private information on their users to assist the media in hitjobs on regular American citizens.

Breitbart News has already covered some of the individuals that
Facebook placed on its list of potential “hate agents.” Paul Joseph
Watson eventually was categorized as “hateful” and banned from the
platform, in part, according to the document, because he praised Tommy
Robinson and interviewed him on his YouTube channel. Star conservative
pundit Candace Owens and conservative author and terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel were also on the list, as were British politicians Carl Benjamin and Anne Marie Waters.

The Benjamin addition reveals that Facebook may categorize you as a
hate agent merely for speaking neutrally about individuals and
organizations that the social network considers hateful. In the
document, Facebook tags Benjamin with a “hate agent” signal for “neutral
representation of John Kinsman, member of Proud Boys” on October 21
last year.

Facebook also accuses Benjamin, a classical liberal and critic of
identity politics, as “representing the ideology of an ethnostate” for a
post in which he calls out an actual advocate of an ethnostate.

In addition to the more unorthodox signals that Facebook uses to
determine if its users are “hate agents,” there is also, predictably,
“hate speech.” Facebook divides hate speech into three tiers depending on severity and considers attacks on a person’s “immigration status” to be hate speech.

Read full article here…




Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google Amassing a “Lobbying Army” to Fight Potential Investigations


Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google have reportedly amassed a “lobbying army” in preparation for the upcoming anti-trust investigations and calls to break the Silicon Valley tech monopolies. The four technology giants have spent a combined $55 million on lobbying in 2018, doubling their previous record $27.4 million spent in 2016. Currently, the four tech titans have amassed 238 lobbyists. Big Tech’s lobbying influence extends to calls with members of Congress, advertising, funding of think-tanks, and efforts to influence President Donald Trump.

Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google have reportedly amassed a
“lobbying army” as they prepare to deal with an increasing amount of
antitrust investigations and calls to break up the Silicon Valley
Masters of the Universe.

Although America’s largest tech companies have historically stayed
away from lobbying Congress, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google have transformed into some of the largest influencers in Washington, D.C.

The four technology giants have spent a combined $55 million on
lobbying in 2018, doubling their previous record $27.4 million spent in
2016, and some of the tech companies are spending at an even higher rate
this year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The tech companies’ rapid hiring of lobbyists arises as the House
Judiciary Committee announced that it will start a “top-to-bottom”
investigation of America’s largest tech giants, the Donald Trump
Department of Justice (DOJ) said it will investigate Google for potential antitrust violations, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has reportedly started asking Amazon’s rivals about the e-commerce giant’s business practices.

Big Tech’s rapidly growing influence puts
these companies at relative parity with traditional lobbying
powerhouses such as the defense, automobile, and banking industries.

The four tech companies have reportedly amassed 238 lobbyists for the
first quarter of 2019, both in-house and contracted lobbyists; roughly
75 percent of the lobbyists come from government offices or political
campaigns.

Big Tech’s lobbying influence extends to calls with members of
Congress, advertising, funding of think-tanks, and efforts to influence
President Donald Trump, who has occasionally criticized Big Tech’s
censorship of conservatives and even Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’ ownership of
the establishment Washington Post.

Breitbart News has reported that
Google has donated to conservative think-tanks and publications such as
the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Competitive Enterprise
Institute (CEI), the National Review, the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union (ACU). Many of these institutions, such as the National Review and
CEI have been critical of calls to rein-in Big Tech’s dominant status
and censorship of conservative and alternative viewpoints.

Sheila Krumholz, the executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, told the New York Times that these companies have ramped up their lobbying efforts.

Krumholz said, “They are no longer upstarts dipping a toe in lobbying. They have both feet in.”

Big Tech also has rapidly picked up former high-level congressional staffers to increase their influence on Capitol Hill.

Facebook hired Catlin O’Neill, who worked as Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s
(D-CA) chief of staff, and who now works as the company’s American
director of public policy for the social media giant. Pelosi reportedly
received nearly $43,000 in total donations during the 2018 midterm cycle
from employees and political action committees (PACs) of the Big Tech
companies, each of which ranks among her top sources of campaign cash.
Pelosi has typically served as a champion of Big Tech companies.

Read full article here…




House Democrats and the DOJ Announce an Anti-Trust Investigation into Big Tech


The Democrat-led House Judiciary Committee is planning a review of Facebook and Google to determine if the tech giants are stifling competition and harming consumers. Several days earlier, Trump’s Department of Justice announced it was preparing an antitrust probe against Google’s search engine and business model. [Facebook and Google are strong supporters of the Democrat Party’ agenda, so it is unrealistic to expect anything to come from their investigation except a slight slap on the wrist and a whitewash. The Department of Justice is no different except in rhetoric. We shall see.] –GEG

House Democrats are planning a review of Facebook and Google to
determine if the tech giants are stifling competition and harming
consumers, The Washington Post reported Monday.

The probe, which was announced
by Democratic Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island, is expected to be
far-reaching and comes as Democrats and Republicans are walloping
Silicon Valley. The investigation will not focus on any one company,
Cicilline told reporters.

“In
a lot of ways, there was a reluctance in the early days of the Internet
to interfere,” he said. “It was creating so much value in the lives of
people that [some felt] you should get out of the way and allow it to
flourish.” Amazon and Apple could potentially figure into the probe at
some point, Cicilline added.

Facebook, Amazon, and Apple did not respond to WaPo’s request for comment, and Google declined comment. (RELATED: Trump’s DOJ Prepares An Anti-Trust Investigation Into Google’s Business Practic: REPORT)

The investigation comes several days
after a Wall Street Journal report noted that the Department of Justice
is preparing an antitrust probe against Google’s search engine and
business model. It would be the first such investigation since the
Federal Trade Commission conducted a probe of Google but closed it in
2013 without taking action.

Read full article here…




Facebook Co-Founder, Chris Hughes, Says the Government Should Break It Up and Implement Speech Rules


YOURCOMMENTSHERE

The last time I saw Mark Zuckerberg was in the summer of 2017, several months before the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke. We met at Facebook’s
Menlo Park, Calif., office and drove to his house, in a quiet, leafy
neighborhood. We spent an hour or two together while his toddler
daughter cruised around. We talked politics mostly, a little about Facebook, a bit about our families. When the shadows grew long, I had to head out. I hugged his wife, Priscilla, and said goodbye to Mark.

Since then, Mark’s personal reputation and the reputation of Facebook have taken a nose-dive. The company’s mistakes — the sloppy privacy practices that dropped tens of millions of users’ data into a political consulting firm’s lap;the slow response to Russian agents, violent rhetoric and fake news; and the unbounded drive to capture ever more of our time and attention — dominate the headlines. It’s been 15 years since I co-founded Facebook at Harvard, and I haven’t worked at the company in a decade. But I feel a sense of anger and responsibility.

Mark is still the same person I watched hug his parents as they left our dorm’s common room at the beginning of our
sophomore year. He is the same person who procrastinated studying for
tests, fell in love with his future wife while in line for the bathroom
at a party and slept on a mattress on the floor in a small apartment
years after he could have afforded much more. In other words, he’s
human. But it’s his very humanity that makes his unchecked power so
problematic.

Mark’s influence is staggering, far beyond that of anyone else in the private sector or in government. He controls three core communications platforms — Facebook,
Instagram and WhatsApp — that billions of people use every day.
Facebook’s board works more like an advisory committee than an overseer,
because Mark controls around 60 percent of voting shares.
Mark alone can decide how to configure Facebook’s algorithms to
determine what people see in their News Feeds, what privacy settings
they can use and even which messages get delivered. He sets the rules
for how to distinguish violent and incendiary speech from the merely
offensive, and he can choose to shut down a competitor by acquiring,
blocking or copying it.

Read full article here…




Facebook and Instagram Blacklist Prominent Conservatives Including InfoWars’ Paul Joseph Watson


Instagram and its parent company, Facebook, banned a number of conservative personalities from its platforms, including Infowars host Alex Jones, Infowars contributor and YouTube star Paul Joseph Watson, journalist and activist Laura Loomer, and Milo Yiannopoulos. Louis Farrakhan was also banned at the same time. Facebook and Instagram promised to remove any Infowars videos, radio segments, and articles posted by another account or page. Any Groups related to the banned figures or Facebook Events promoting them will also be removed. Critics say that this sets a chilling precedent for free speech, it is a formula for censoring not just websites and personalities, but their supporters, and that Facebook is openly punishing and rewarding users for their political opinions.

The Masters of the Universe at Facebook have banned multiple conservative personalities from both Facebook and Instagram, including Infowars host Alex Jones, Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer, and Milo Yiannopoulos.

The Atlantic reports
that Instagram and its parent company Facebook has banned a number of
conservative personalities from its platforms, including Infowars host
Alex Jones, Infowars contributor and YouTube star Paul Joseph Watson,
journalist and activist Laura Loomer, and Milo Yiannopoulos. Louis
Farrakhan was notably also banned from the platforms at the same time.

Paul Joseph Watson confirmed his ban, claiming he has not broken
Facebook’s rules, and commenting, “In an authoritarian society
controlled by a handful of Silicon Valley giants, all dissent must be
purged.”

Read full article here…

Additional Source:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/05/facebook-and-instagram-now-banning-associates-of-alex-jones-and-those-that-post-too-many-infowars-articles/




Facebook Bans All ‘Praise, Support, and Representation of White Nationalism and Separatism’ Following the New Zealand Shooting Event


Facebook announced they’ll be banning all “praise, support, and representation of white nationalism and white separatism” on Facebook and Instagram. Other race-based nationalist and separatist movements will not be banned. The government of Australia is threatening to pass laws that would jail social media executives if they fail to quickly remove ‘extremist’ material from their platforms, b ut the definition of extremist is expected to be biased in favor of collectivist ideology. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also threatened to force social media companies to ban “hateful” and “extremist” content. -GEG

Facebook
on Wednesday announced they’ll be banning all “praise, support and
representation of white nationalism and white separatism” on Facebook
and Instagram but will still allow other race-based nationalist and
separatist movements.

Facebook had said previously
they were against banning white nationalism and white separatism
because they felt that under the same rules they’d also have to ban
Zionism and black separatism.

Facebook’s statement reads:

Today we’re announcing a ban on praise, support and representation of white nationalism and white separatism on Facebook and Instagram, which we’ll start enforcing next week. It’s clear that these concepts are deeply linked to organized hate groups and have no place on our services.

Our policies have long prohibited hateful treatment of people based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity or religion — and that has always included white supremacy. We didn’t originally apply the same rationale to expressions of white nationalism and white separatism because we were thinking about broader concepts of nationalism and separatism — things like American pride and Basque separatism, which are an important part of people’s identity.

But over the past three months our conversations with members of civil society and academics who are experts in race relations around the world have confirmed that white nationalism and white separatism cannot be meaningfully separated from white supremacy and organized hate groups. Our own review of hate figures and organizations – as defined by our Dangerous Individuals & Organizations policy – further revealed the overlap between white nationalism and white separatism and white supremacy. Going forward, while people will still be able to demonstrate pride in their ethnic heritage, we will not tolerate praise or support for white nationalism and white separatism.

We also need to get better and faster at finding and removing hate from our platforms. Over the past few years we have improved our ability to use machine learning and artificial intelligence to find material from terrorist groups. Last fall, we started using similar tools to extend our efforts to a range of hate groups globally, including white supremacists. We’re making progress, but we know we have a lot more work to do.

Our efforts to combat hate don’t stop here. As part of today’s announcement, we’ll also start connecting people who search for terms associated with white supremacy to resources focused on helping people leave behind hate groups. People searching for these terms will be directed to Life After Hate, an organization founded by former violent extremists that provides crisis intervention, education, support groups and outreach.

Unfortunately,
there will always be people who try to game our systems to spread hate.
Our challenge is to stay ahead by continuing to improve our
technologies, evolve our policies and work with experts who can bolster
our own efforts. We are deeply committed and will share updates as this
process moves forward.

VICE reported
Wednesday that the new policy “doesn’t change the company’s existing
policies on separatist and nationalist movements more generally; content
relating to Black separatist movements and the Basque separatist
movement, for example, will still be allowed.”

Independent journalist Nick Monroe noted this is the first time he’s seen a “race-based social media policy.”

Read full article here…




Leaked Facebook Documents Show Discrimination Against Conservatives and Intent to Influence Elections


A Facebook employee leaked documents to James O’Keefe at Project Veritas that shows how the tech giant discriminates against conservatives through technological means and behavior modification. The ‘Troll Twilight Zone’ was intended to demoralize conservatives and influence important elections.

Danny Ben-David, a software engineer, wrote “Action Deboost Live Distribution” code for Facebook that suppresses distribution of a live feed by disabling features to share the video and to shut down interactive notifications, while removing live feed boost. The system converts the live video to text and machine learning identifies certain words that trigger ‘deboosting’. 
.
Additional documents show that Seij Yamamoto, a data science manager for Facebook, aims to shut down conservative “trolls” who use memes for ridicule by targeting the language of the right. He promotes the ‘Troll Twilight Zone’ that drastically limits bandwidth, logs out automatically, and “magically” fails to upload comments and posts.  The methods are designed to demoralize the conservative user.  He wrote that his Troll Twilight Zone feature will be triggered “leading up to important elections” indicating that Facebook is influencing elections against conservatives. Yamamoto proposed regulating behavior through peer pressure and fear of social rejection by notifying the friend network when a user has been suspended from the platform.




Facebook Deleted Disabled Veteran’s Page Without Warning – After Collecting $300,000 in Advertising Fees

Brian Kolfage, who lost two legs and his right hand in combat while in the Air Force in 2004, was the administrator of the Right Wing News page on Facebook, which had more than 3 million followers.  Right Wing News sought to put an end to social media censorship, but was ironically removed by Facebook just weeks ahead of the midterm elections.  Kolfage’s other Facebook page, Military Grade Coffee, which sold coffee and contributed to veterans’ organizations, was also deleted.  He says his income as a father and husband is threatened, especially since he recently paid Facebook over $300,000 for advertising.  He is considering legal action. 

Facebook blacklisted the conservative news page run by disabled Air Force veteran Brian Kolfage with no warning or explanation — after he reportedly spent more than $300,000 on Facebook advertising.

On his new website which aims to put an end to social media censorship, Air Force veteran and triple-amputee Brian Kolfage explains who he is and the challenges he’s facing stating:  “I’m a veteran of The United States Air Force. I was severely wounded in Combat, on 9/11/2004 while serving in Iraq I lost both my legs entirely and my right hand. I’m the most severely wounded US Airman to survive.”

Kolfage continued: “I’m not a ‘conservative.’ I’m not a ‘liberal.’ I’m an American, with deep beliefs in what our country stands for. I proved this by vowing to protect and fighting for America greatest tenant: Free Speech. Many Americans have fought for these political freedoms … freedom of speech … and every American has enjoyed those freedoms… UNTIL TODAY. October 11th Facebook shut down thousands of Facebook accounts for their political opinions stating that they don’t have a ‘legitimate political argument’. STOP SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP NOW!”

Kolfage was the administrator of a number of Facebook pages, notably the pages Right Wing News and Military Grade Coffee, both of which were deleted recently as Facebook attempts to crack down on what it considers “misinformation” on the platform. Right Wing News had more than 3 million followers at the time of its blacklisting by Facebook.

In another Facebook post, Kolfage stated: “Facebook lied, they shut down my page because it was conservative, powerful, and the elections are in 2 weeks. We have MAJOR support flowing in all the way from the top of the Trump administration. Get ready!” Kolfage later said: “I’m not a ‘conservative.’ I’m not a ‘liberal.’ I’m an American, with deep beliefs in what our country stands for. I proved this by fighting for America, knowing I may not return home. My life was spared, but I paid for freedom with one arm and both my legs. I’ve given limbs, I’ve stared death in the face first hand. I’ve seen my legs blown to pieces and lost friends. Losing my limbs meant comparatively little to me because I gave it fighting for what I believed in; I believed America was the greatest country because we had freedom … and I’ve seen what oppression looks like. My sacrifices are nothing compared to what previous generations made in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam.”

Kolfage stated that he has invested a large amount of money into Facebook’s advertising system and his pages are one of the key ways that he earns money to support his family: “My income as a father and husband is threatened. This isn’t the right to free speech I gave my legs and arm to defend. Three limbs wasn’t enough for some… now my livelihood is gone with it. Facebook took down our Facebook page, cutting off all contact we had with the millions of people who signed up to follow us, the millions of people who liked what we were sharing online. We had a coveted, verified blue check mark, 3.5 Million fans, and I invested over $300,000 in ads at Facebook’s own request, nearly begging us to spend spend spend just to reach our fans… whom they kept making more difficult to reach with every passing year.”

Read full article here…