Jamie Glazov Suspended from Facebook over ‘9 Steps to Best Counter Jihad’ Article

Breitbart ^ | 11 Sep 2018 | Lucas Nolan

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Canadian columnist and host of the Glazov Gang, Jamie Glazov, was suspended from Facebook on September 11 — a day dedicated to remembering the 9/11 terrorist attacks — after he posted an article he wrote about how to counter Jihad.

Jamie Glazov a Canadian columnist and host of the Glazov Gang, was suspended from Facebook for 30 days on September 11, after posting an article titled “9 Steps to Best Counter Jihad.” Glazov posted a screenshot of the article link in which Facebook claims it broke the platform’s community standards.

Glazov commented to Breitbart News, saying: ““First I was banned for reporting a member of the Religion of Peace threatening me. Now I am banned, on 9/11 mind you, for daring to give suggestions on how we can stop another 9/11. It is against Facebook’s ‘community standards’ to try to stop Jihadist attacks on Americans. This is really getting surreal in the creepiest and most harrowing Stalinist sense.”

[rey]

While I disagree with Facebook’s position, it is a private business. Freedom of speech really does not apply. They can set the rules, just like Jim does here. It’s his site and he can and does exclude many things, most I agree with and some I don’t. It’s his baby.

[Little Ray]

If I understand FB correctly, somebody has to report you to get banned in FB.
So Glazov and friends probably have trolls visiting their pages frequently and reporting ‘abuse’ for every single post.
And all it takes is one of those reports hitting a sympathetic reviewer, and you’re banned.

[Rusty0604]

Thanks, I just shared that article on Facebook.

[eyeamok]

Welcome to the Twilight Zone!!

Facebook, the Jihadi’s Choice.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Facebook is larger than most world governments.

It is more akin to a nation-state than it is to a “private business.”

Plus, they have engaged in bait-and-switch by allowing competing viewpoints to prevent the growth of rivals, then censoring those viewpoints as a crucial election approaches.

It’s called illegal election meddling.

[chief lee runamok]

“Ayoub said: “I will break your mouth.””

I might have to borrow that line.

[alstewartfan]

This treasonous POS Zuckerberg is as homicidal as Soros. One sick dude.

[Leaning Right]

> While I disagree with Facebook’s position, it is a private business. <

I’m not saying it’s true here...but is there some point when a business becomes so big that it becomes essentially a public utility?

[Paladin2]

FaceBook needs to be called out as a Robber Baron much like Standard Oil was treated in the early 1900’s.

Maybe Trump could reenact Teddy R.’s plays as a Trust Buster.

[DarthVader]

That is why you must be careful who you friend. I mark many as spam and block.

[Will88]

FR is not comparable to Facebook. FR is far more like a Facebook page that has thousands of followers.

And all the telecoms and cell providers are private companies, as well as most electric utilities. Can they deny service if they object to the political stances of customers?

[Bonemaker]

“While I disagree with Facebook’s position, it is a private business. “

The bastards have abused it. Turn ‘em into public utilities and see how they like that.

[simpson96]

Wouldn’t want anyone countering murderous jihads, now would we?

[Petrosius]

While I disagree with Facebook’s position, it is a private business. Freedom of speech really does not apply. They can set the rules, just like Jim does here. It’s his site and he can and does exclude many things, most I agree with and some I don’t. It’s his baby.

Except that Facebook has achieved such a market dominance that it has become a natural monopoly. As such, it needs to be declared as a public utility and offer its services as a common carrier.

[I want the USA back]

If some bearded savage had posted “9 steps to conquer those infidels” it would be promoted and plastered all over fb.

[Lurkinanloomin]

Fecebook does not want the truth about Islam to be widely known.

[Windflier]

Freedom of speech really does not apply. They can set the rules, just like Jim does here.

But Jim is up front about the mission of Free Republic, and has made it known from day one, that this is a conservative site that will not provide a platform for left-liberal views.

Facebook claims to be non partisan, and claims their 'community standards' are enforced evenly and fairly across the boards.

It's a complete lie, and a total misrepresentation of what they really are - which is nothing short of a global information powerhouse that promotes liberal thought and ideology - while simultaneously suppressing conservative opinion and activism.

[DiogenesLamp]

Jamie Glazov Suspended from Facebook over ‘9 Steps to Best Counter Jihad’ Article

So as to be silenced to the millions of potential audience members that might have heard him through the communications system known as "facebook."

Well he should just build his own facebook.

[Liz]

While I disagree with Facebook’s position, it is a private business......

Wrong.....Facebook and virtually all he social media are publicly-held companies.
They sold investors a bill of goods about their companies and are now reneging on the investing contract.

It is entirely possible that these activities and social media's exclusionary practices may have violated federal laws that may include, but not be limited, to:

<><> Title 18 U.S.C. §1341, Mail Fraud, 18 U.S.C.§1001, Presenting a False Document to an Agent of the US Government for funding (may involve several felonies and could include forgery);

<><> 18 U.S.C.§1027 False statements and concealment of facts in relation to documents required by ERISA enacted 1974 and other possible offenses including civil and/or criminal RICO violations.

<><> 18 U.S.C. §§1961-68 (RICO Act)18 U.S.C. §1001 (making false Statements to Agents of the US Government,

<><> 18 U.S.C. §241(Conspiracies Against Civil Rights). Violation of Civil Rights under Color of law and conspiracy. Conspiring with others to violate 4th amendment rights.

<><> Possibly full investigations centering on RICO conspiracies under 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) could be warranted because (1) the persons (2) were employed by or associated with a public enterprise (3) that engaged in or affected interstate commerce and that (4) the persons operated or managed the enterprise (5) through a “pattern” (6) of racketeering activity, and (7) the taxpayers were injured by reason of the “pattern” of racketeering activity.

<><> Alleged Offenses could include Violation of Rights – which prohibits in relevant part, “two or more persons (from conspiring) to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District

<><> Title 18 U.S.C. §2 41 – Conspiracy Against Constitutional mandates in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of having so exercised the same . . .” See, 18 U.S.C. §241.

Taxpayers should demand the following agencies commence investigations at once:
<><> FBI — Wire Fraud Division
<><> IRS-Fraud Unit
<><> Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General,
<><> Department of Commerce’s Office of Inspector General.
<><> DOJ’s Criminal Division— Public Integrity Section
<><> DOJ Criminal Division—Organized Crime and Gang Section.

=======================================

Call President Trump: Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414

US CONGRESS SWITCHBOARD: (202) 224-3121

U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Comment Line: 202-353-1555
Switchboard: 202-514-2000