‘ADOLF’ ZUCKERBERG’S FOURTH REICH: THE PSEUDO-HITLER AND HIS QUASI-AUSCHWITZ MODEL

Mark Zuckerberg is the CEO of ‘Facebook’. There is enough written about him including his dodgy-dealings. His social media platform ‘Facebook’ is a republic, Communist or Fascist, totalitarian, autocratic, it is without doubt a most reviled place. Most of those that are its clients are subjected to its rules, or ‘Community Standards’ and those provisos are completely out-of-touch with the real world. In fact, Zuckerberg is running a pogrom, as a Jew he should be ashamed and understand why he has become a universal pariah, a despicable prodigy of historically bad events.

It was announced some time ago that ‘Facebook’ evicts a million users a day for violations of its policies. I’m sure that there is good reason to oust users, particularly child abusers and terrorists, criminal acts do not fall within ‘free-speech’ mandates. Free-speech in the real world is clearly defined and broad. No homophobia, racism, ablism et al and most sensible people understand those parameters. Criticising government or individuals for their actions is allowed. If a cop kills a woman, it is fair to call him a ‘filthy bastard,’ and if a serial killer is put to death by the state, it is fair to say ‘fucking good job’.

Television and newspapers carry many articles that derive comments from the watchers and readers and they can voice their opinions quite openly without intervention from the authorities. Not everyone will agree with other’s sentiments, however, that is what makes-up the very fabric of society and there is nothing illegal about it. When the state intervenes to repress free-speech then we go down-the-road of censorship which opens-up another channel that leads to persecution of minorities. Zuckerberg, intentionally or unwittingly has turned ‘Facebook’ into a modern-day concentration camp. It targets a particular group of people and uses flimsy excuses to exact punishment on them.

‘Facebook’s’ administrators, or those that moderate the comments and posts have given online hate a new meaning. Not content with chastising those blatant flouters, (I presume that have broken the Community Standards code) they have set-out to find what isn’t there. Their overzealousness may be a reflection of their poor knowledge-base or poor education, whatever it is, they are a menace. If Zuckerberg does not know what is taking place on his website (which I doubt is true) then he ought to resign. His minions are running amok, and in particular targetting the vegan community. Within that community there is many ethnic people, yet they have no protection as a vegan, albeit we all have human rights, something ‘Facebook’ fails to acknowledge.

Hate-speech is clearly defined in law. No one is allowed to say nasty things about anyone’s sexuality, religion, disability or colour. We understand the law and should abide by it. Having an opinion on something outside of that category is quite different. We may see in the media a salacious story involving Matt Hancock or Boris Johnson involved in sleazy extra marital affairs. From what I’ve seen on social media, both of them are being pilloried for their excesses. To call them ‘dirty cheating fuckers’ is not hate-speech. It may be rude, that’s all. If I want to disparage the Royal family, by calling them scroungers and old bastards, it may be crass and gratuitous, but it does not fall within the realm of hate-speech, even if I do hate them. There is no law in place to prevent me having an opinion.

Why then does ‘Facebook’ militate against vegans having an opinion on the various images they show and criticise? I am currently suspended for 30 days (again) because ‘Facebook’ deemed my post ‘Bullying’! The person in question I have never met or interacted with via comments. She regularly posts images of animals she has killed and boasts about it. I’ve shown the images and put my spin on the images. It is my opinion. I haven’t called for her death per se, I may have demonised her with invective, that is free-speech. This is not about me though. Other vegans have been suspended for innocuous comments, apropos: ”plastic is killing the planet”. Come on, what is that about! Marilyn Birk, 30 days for her enquiry to a provocative comment: ”how would you like to be suffocated”? She wasn’t threatening anyone, yet ‘FB’ SS bastards thought otherwise, in their cesspit of dullness! Others for sharing or condemning various images. Currently, Sonja Chardonnens-Haldimann is suspended. It seems the knives are out for her, having only just completed 30 days, she finds herself once again serving 30 days.

She showed a meme, an old meme that has been around for yonks. There are many similar memes yet the Gestapo moderators decided she was advocating violence. I don’t know who let these thick cunts have a little power, but they need to be reigned-in. Films and books carry suggestive images relevant to the content, nobody suggests it is incitement to kill or maim. Most of the tenuous reasons used to suspend vegans are quite frankly, bogus. Without being paranoid, it appears that there is an agenda in progress to oppress vegan content thereby censoring their input. It’s nothing new, I was booted several years ago, and I was convinced then as I am now that the Gestapo administrators are having their strings pulled by either the hunting lobby or the meat/dairy industry. There is a lot of money to be made from animal exploitation and ‘Facebook’ promotes it, work it out!

Let’s be brutally honest, vegans embarrass and humiliate carnists and in doing so attract adversity. That’s okay, we don’t mind, it’s all par-for-the-course. I love it, triggering animal abusers is what it’s about. At least we play fair, not so the bastard carnist shitehawks. What is happening on ‘Facebook’ is the worst aspects of complete-control, enacted by so-called socialist Zuckerberg, a person of Jewish descent. All vegan Jews should disown him, he is Hitler in this time and his cronies are gassing vegans in the same way that billions of pigs are subjected to the horrors of gassing in the extermination camps. This ‘Facebook’ is the equivalent of Auschwitz and vegans are having the breath sucked from them, we are slowly being gassed, the chambers are in full-swing and Zuckerberg’s SS thugs are hunting for victims.

NB I’m sure Zuckerberg’s SS stooges would ban me for posting this blurb, citing ‘bullying or harassment’ yet it is opinion on the antics of him and his staff, it is a critique and fair comment and is allowed under free-speech laws, and not subject to the self-serving, arbitrary, dictatorial shit of The Führer Zuckerberg and his draconian censorship.

‘FACEBOOK’ AND ‘TWITTER’ CENSORSHIP

This month saw my exclusion from Fakebook’ and ‘Shitter’. Well yes, that’s quite derogatory, however, they are without doubt sleazy big-tech monoliths. It goes-without-saying that they have billions of users and for that they earn billions from those users, who don’t receive a penny of the easy-come revenue. Rather, the users are treated with contempt, often given penalties for infringing terms and conditions, with no-right-of-reply.

High-profile incidents have included Donald Trump, whose ‘tweets’ during the election were suppressed because the information was false, apparently, and eventually his account was suspended and then deleted. It’s not whether Donald Trump is likeable or if his views are liked, that led to his downfall, it’s the ‘leftie’ politics of ‘Fakebook’s’ Zuckerburg and ‘Shitter’s’ Dorsey. If they don’t like certain politics, it does not remain on their sites.

Their sites are not publishers, who have an expectation put upon them to print facts. That is not always the case and if they get it wrong, they can be sued for libel. Platforms are free-speech outlets where the standard is not so high. Hence there is always a free-for-all whenever a topic is in the limelight, especially that of a superinjuction, the guessing and outing of who it may be is without parallel and no one gives a fuck about libel.

To boot Trump from ‘Shitter’ while defending Iran’s Ali Khameni’s call for genocide is pure hypocrisy. The same ‘Shitter’ that allowed (and defended) its right to allow child sexual abuse by the perpetrator. Despite pleas from the victim and his family, ‘Shitter’ allowed the images to remain, stating it didn’t break the terms and conditions. Also, the images received 167,000 retweets (by who?) and ‘Shitter’ shoved adverts inbetween them! It’s no wonder they are being sued for $500,000,000. Let’s hope they have to pay-up.

‘Fakebook’ itself has been under scrutiny by the UK government and ‘Fakebook‘ is being sued by the US government and 48 states. The US government and more than 40 states have sued ‘Fakebook‘ for illegally crushing competitors and demanded the company undo its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp. Morally, both ‘Shitter’ and ‘Fakebook’ are bankrupt, that may be how big-tech operates, but it’s strange that they impose morality upon users who do no more than express an opinion.

On January the 6th, I received a 30-day restriction from ‘Fakebook’. What’s curious is I didn’t do anything. Replying to a long-winded piece of carnist crap on one of my posts, I got no further than writing the response. The algorithims of ‘Fakebook’ are so fast it is like living in the future. I didn’t send the comment as the illustration will show. The user’s name is highlighted blue and only changes to black once sent. Even so, what world do we live in where we cannot use an expletive?

Of course, ‘Fakebook’ does not respond, I doubt any human sees the replies and if they do, they are useless individuals. Other issues I have been restricted for are showing nudity or sexually explicit content. One image showed a male hunter with his finger on his nipple. That cost me three days. Another was a documentary on starving children in Africa. ‘Fakebook’ should donate clothing to the children so that when documentary makers arrive, the children will be fully clothed. That cost me 7 days.

‘Shitter’ is no better than its equally dismal competitor ‘Fakebook’ when it comes to incomprehensible decisions. After having a ‘header-image’ for over a year on my page -a pig with the throat cut- ‘Shitter’ informed me that my page was locked until I removed the image as it broke the rules. I replaced the image with an equally distressing image. Images, I might add, that can be shown elsewhere on ‘Shitter’.

Also, I challenged their decision to ‘lock’ my account because I suggested someone should swear an affidavit. I didn’t remove the tweet and my account was ‘unlocked’ anyway.

I was ‘locked’ for suggesting on another user’s page that a person that posted a dire comment should be given the ‘Darwin Award’ with a suitable expletive. Considering some of the invective I’ve seen on ‘Shitter’ I’d say my tweet was tame.

Let’s be quite clear here, I use social media to campaign for animal rights. I do not do ‘hello, just woke up, sun is shining, be round later for a chin-wag’. I also use social media to post from this website to advertise my site. Personally, fuck ‘Fakebook’ and ‘Shitter’ and their touchy-feely, nonsensical decisions. I have joined ‘gab’ and ’tillor’ as alternatives to the others. However, if my site 150billionandrising.com ever becomes big, then I won’t have the time for social media. Often I take a sabbatical away from social media, if only to give myself a break from wading through all the old bollocks that infests those sites They are not the be-all-and-end-all of the internet.