Facebook to monitor hate speech, ok with terrorism

[MMKM]

It's good to know Mark Sucker Berg has his priorities straight. After the Paris attacks and San Bernardino, he made no public statement of support. However he felt it necessary to speak out against Donald Trump and assure Muslims that Facebook will be a safe haven against "backlash" hate speech. So it sounds like Facebook will work to protect Muslims against hate speech on Facebook.

While they do that, here are a few groups and pages that Facebook doesn't seem too concerned about:

Jihadi John (page) 9065 likes
Islamic Terrorism (page) 1595 likes
Sharia Law (page) 482 likes
Bin Laden Family (page) 370 likes
Jihad is the Best (group) 300 members
Jihad in our Hearts (group) 300 members
Jihad Weapons (group) 330 members
America is Burning (group) 834 members

These are just a small fraction of the terror support groups and pages on Facebook. The list is virtually endless (these are a few of the most egregious that I found in 5 minutes). Many groups are public and all written in Arabic. Here's a question; if I have a small website and a terror group organized on it, am I criminally liable for aiding a terrorist plot? I guess even some websites are "too big to fail" these days.....

[Akrazotile]

Facebook is for the mindless masses anyway. Fvck em.

[ROCSteady]

Honestly at this point in time, who gives a shit? There's most likely Aryan Nation and New Black Panther party groups still open too

We're all backwards hypocrites, some just to a more magnified degree

[Spurs m8]

Yep, thats it mate.

We are living more and more in a matrix of bullshit, the world is so corrupt and ****ed and is skyrocketing to a worse place.

Can't trust anything, most media forms control the masses and have brainwashed them into stupid zombies with shit priorities and weak thoughts - all disguised as being a caring human, while bombs go off every day.

Zuckerface is a ****ing criminal.

**** this planet.

Cheers

[DonDadda59]

I'm sure it helps the Federales identify and track potential terrorist/sympathizers.

Who would be stupid enough to join a public group titled 'Jihad is the Best' or 'Islamic Terrorism'? :oldlol:



:facepalm



Honestly at this point in time, who gives a shit? There's most likely Aryan Nation and New Black Panther party groups still open too

We're all backwards hypocrites, some just to a more magnified degree

:applause:

The Army of God, a Christian terrorist group responsible for many abortion clinic/planned parenthood killings, bombings, etc has a public website where they praise their members for the murders and other atrocities they commit.

Freedom of speech.

IMO, better they do it out in the open than in the shadows.

[TonyMontana]

It has little to do with "hate speech" or "terrorism"

That's just what they do to veil their anti-white agenda.

You can be guaranteed if the "terrorist" were a bunch of blue eyed german/swedish guys then the media, facebook, all this shit would be calling for their heads rather than trying to come up countless excuse.

Their classification of "hate speech" will also be good ol Jim posting something like "We should not let muslims into our country".

Meanwhile young refugee Abdul who posts "We must kill, conquer, and pillage the people of _____(insert Western nation here) in the name of Allah!" will not be considered hate speech.

[DonDadda59]

It has little to do with "hate speech" or "terrorism"

That's just what they do to veil their anti-white agenda.

You can be guaranteed if the "terrorist" were a bunch of blue eyed german/swedish guys then the media, facebook, all this shit would be calling for their heads rather than trying to come up countless excuse.

Their classification of "hate speech" will also be good ol Jim posting something like "We should not let muslims into our country".

Meanwhile young refugee Abdul who posts "We must kill, conquer, and pillage the people of _____(insert Western nation here) in the name of Allah!" will not be considered hate speech.

Yeah, I remember when the media was all over these blue-eyed devils (http://www.armyofgod.com/) :rolleyes:

[MMKM]

I'm sure it helps the Federales identify and track potential terrorist/sympathizers.

Who would be stupid enough to join a public group titled 'Jihad is the Best' or 'Islamic Terrorism'? :oldlol:



:facepalm




:applause:

The Army of God, a Christian terrorist group responsible for many abortion clinic/planned parenthood killings, bombings, etc has a public website where they praise their members for the murders and other atrocities they commit.

Freedom of speech.

IMO, better they do it out in the open than in the shadows.

How would it help them track anyone? Did you have to show your birth certificate or give your social security to join Facebook? Freedom of speech? I guess that only applies for pro terror speech, because if you put down a Muslim Facebook is going to be all over it.

[ROCSteady]

:applause:

The Army of God, a Christian terrorist group responsible for many abortion clinic/planned parenthood killings, bombings, etc has a public website where they praise their members for the murders and other atrocities they commit.

Freedom of speech.

IMO, better they do it out in the open than in the shadows.

I was gunna type, there must be some wack Christian bombers out there who are open about their hatred and organize on Facebook, you just gave specifics so yes, there is nothing shocking about this policy or idea to have these groups up on Facebook.

I also agree that its better for this kind of stuff to become public knowledge that your average user van be privy to and for Intel of whatever agency to monitor

[Akrazotile]

I'm sure it helps the Federales identify and track potential terrorist/sympathizers.

Who would be stupid enough to join a public group titled 'Jihad is the Best' or 'Islamic Terrorism'? :oldlol:



:facepalm




:applause:

The Army of God, a Christian terrorist group responsible for many abortion clinic/planned parenthood killings, bombings, etc has a public website where they praise their members for the murders and other atrocities they commit.

Freedom of speech.

IMO, better they do it out in the open than in the shadows.



This is a good point. Let extremists of any kind out themselves. OTOH If it could be demonstrated that shutting their web shit down made it legitimately harder for them to network and coordinate then itd have to be looked at, but realistically it probably wouldnt. Might as well let them leave an IP trail on all their extremist activities.

[Jameerthefear]

How would it help them track anyone? Did you have to show your birth certificate or give your social security to join Facebook? Freedom of speech? I guess that only applies for pro terror speech, because if you put down a Muslim Facebook is going to be all over it.
what? do u really think the only way to track someone is if they publically broadcast who they are :roll:

[Akrazotile]

It has little to do with "hate speech" or "terrorism"

That's just what they do to veil their anti-white agenda.

You can be guaranteed if the "terrorist" were a bunch of blue eyed german/swedish guys then the media, facebook, all this shit would be calling for their heads rather than trying to come up countless excuse.

Their classification of "hate speech" will also be good ol Jim posting something like "We should not let muslims into our country".

Meanwhile young refugee Abdul who posts "We must kill, conquer, and pillage the people of _____(insert Western nation here) in the name of Allah!" will not be considered hate speech.


I know this is a popular idea in some circles but IMO it really misses the point. The medias first and foremost concern is making money as a business. They dont care who gets torn down or propped up in that regard.

The logistics of covering stories on minority groups are different from those of the dominant group. The public itself sees minorities as vulnerable, disadvantaged, special needs, etc. and are much more wary of the "big bad media establishment" picking on them. Whereas how they cover a story about majority groups is not seen as important, because the public perception really does not jeopardize dominant majorities regardless.

They simply have to be more delicate, more lopsided, and more deceptive when covering minority issues or else theyll face consumer backlash. Liberals and minorities are a huge consumer segment. These people dont want honest journalism, they want protective journalism. People in the media have bills to pay, they have to make their customers happy.

[MMKM]

Hey hey....any of you guys ever heard of a Tor browser? It's a free download, takes about 5 minutes. How about a little black box to scramble your IP for $99? How about the concept of using someone else's name on Facebook? Do you really think allowing terrorism supporters to conspire on Facebook makes them easier to identify? All it does is allow them to openly spread their propaganda, recruit and organize.

[MMKM]

what? do u really think the only way to track someone is if they publically broadcast who they are :roll:

Explain to me how they track someone. Go ahead I'll wait.

[DonDadda59]

How would it help them track anyone? Did you have to show your birth certificate or give your social security to join Facebook? Freedom of speech? I guess that only applies for pro terror speech, because if you put down a Muslim Facebook is going to be all over it.

IP tracking. I'm sure the NSA/FBI/Homeland Security has top of the line tracking software and methods.


I was gunna type, there must be some wack Christian bombers out there who are open about their hatred and organize on Facebook, you just gave specifics so yes, there is nothing shocking about this policy or idea to have these groups up on Facebook.

I also agree that its better for this kind of stuff to become public knowledge that your average user van be privy to and for Intel of whatever agency to monitor

Yup. One of their members, Eric Rudolph (https://www.google.com/search?site=&source=hp&q=Eric+Rudolph&oq=Eric+Rudolph&gs_l=hp.3..0i131j0l9.141559.146737.0.147025.15.11. 1.3.3.0.423.1611.4j4j0j1j1.10.0....0...1c.1.64.hp. .2.13.1268.0.WjWzF7yedZ8) is one of the most infamous domestic terrorists in U.S. History and was responsible for the Olympic bombings in Atlanta back in '96, among other terrorist bombing campaigns across the Southern United States... Their site is still up, praising him and the other terrorist murderers in their organization.

It's not like pro-jihad groups are getting some special treatment on the internet, when you have actual terror groups... homegrown terror groups whose members have committed terrorist acts against U.S. citizens are free to post whatever they want on the interwebz.

[Jameerthefear]

Hey hey....any of you guys ever heard of a Tor browser? It's a free download, takes about 5 minutes. How about a little black box to scramble your IP for $99? How about the concept of using someone else's name on Facebook? Do you really think allowing terrorism supporters to conspire on Facebook makes them easier to identify? All it does is allow them to openly spread their propaganda, recruit and organize.
>thinking tor is safe in 2015
>thinking everyone knows how to scramble their IP

put the memes away

[MMKM]

Jesus Christ if one more person says IP tracking....like it isn't the easiest thing in the world in 2015 to scramble your IP. By itself, without any additional hardware Tor is 100% unbreakable. It cannot be unscrambled you can surf the web with complete anonymity. It would be EASY for a terror cell to have a Facebook group and communicate with zero chance of ever being identified. You guys don't get it.

[Akrazotile]

Hey hey....any of you guys ever heard of a Tor browser? It's a free download, takes about 5 minutes. How about a little black box to scramble your IP for $99? How about the concept of using someone else's name on Facebook? Do you really think allowing terrorism supporters to conspire on Facebook makes them easier to identify? All it does is allow them to openly spread their propaganda, recruit and organize.


Im sure the govt does have ways of keeping tabs on these people. Plus, sometimes these idiots are actually dumb enough to post "hey, cant wait to attack ____ tomorrow!" IMO its better for everyone to see whats going on with these people than to have them operating more secretly than they alrdy do.

But I still agree with you on the fact that facebook's witch hunting for anti-islam comments is absolutely :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[TonyMontana]

I know this is a popular idea in some circles but IMO it really misses the point. The medias first and foremost concern is making money as a business. They dont care who gets torn down or propped up in that regard.

The logistics of covering stories on minority groups are different from those of the dominant group. The public itself sees minorities as vulnerable, disadvantaged, special needs, etc. and are much more wary of the "big bad media establishment" picking on them. Whereas how they cover a story about majority groups is not seen as important, because the public perception really does not jeopardize dominant majorities regardless.

They simply have to be more delicate, more lopsided, and more deceptive when covering minority issues or else theyll face consumer backlash. Liberals and minorities are a huge consumer segment. These people dont want honest journalism, they want protective journalism. People in the media have bills to pay, they have to make their customers happy.

Tell that to the whites in South Africa who are "minorities".

Mainstream media and newspapers take the same anti-white stance, no matter whether whites are a majority or minority.

[MMKM]

>thinking tor is safe in 2015
>thinking everyone knows how to scramble their IP

put the memes away

Terrorists go online and learn how to make bombs from scratch. You don't think they can figure out how to scramble an IP?

There isn't a face palm big enough

[Jameerthefear]

Terrorists go online and learn how to make bombs from scratch. You don't think they can figure out how to scramble an IP?

There isn't a face palm big enough
you know how shit usually gets taken down? human error. ONE mistake can take a whole group down. i don't trust tor 100%. you have to think it, somehow, has been compromised. if you run any plugin, like javascript etc. your ass is grass. there's even code on sites that can reveal u these days.
if facebook is taken down, guess what, they'll go somewhere else.

[Akrazotile]

Tell that to the whites in South Africa who are "minorities".

Mainstream media and newspapers take the same anti-white stance, no matter whether whites are a majority or minority.


Well, I meant a minority share of power/wealth.

I agree about the blatant inconsistency in how things are covered. But I disagree about it being a specific agenda that is being pushed, rather than simply a reaction to the dynamics of public capriciousness.

[MMKM]

you know how shit usually gets taken down? human error. ONE mistake can take a whole group down. i don't trust tor 100%. you have to think it, somehow, has been compromised. if you run any plugin, like javascript etc. your ass is grass. there's even code on sites that can reveal u these days.
if facebook is taken down, guess what, they'll go somewhere else.

Let's say hypothetically that we take them off all major social media platforms. Good or bad for the war on terror and why?

One of the assumptions I think everyone is making, and wrongly so is that we are monitoring all of the social media activity so tightly that if someone slips up or makes a mistake, we will catch it. That is absolutely false. The former head of the FBI said this week that the FBI and CIA are heavily under staffed, and that Facebook and Amazon have far better tracking capabilities for user data than the FBI or CIA. We all assume that our government is all knowing and all seeing. That couldn't be farther from reality. Social media platforms are so massive, the chances are that terror groups using them will conspire freely and get away with it. It empowers them more than it trips them up.

[fiddy]

you know how shit usually gets taken down? human error. ONE mistake can take a whole group down. i don't trust tor 100%. you have to think it, somehow, has been compromised. if you run any plugin, like javascript etc. your ass is grass. there's even code on sites that can reveal u these days.
if facebook is taken down, guess what, they'll go somewhere else.
Why is your goofy ass using tor in the first place?


Let's say hypothetically that we take them off all major social media platforms. Good or bad for the war on terror and why?

One of the assumptions I think everyone is making, and wrongly so is that we are monitoring all of the social media activity so tightly that if someone slips up or makes a mistake, we will catch it. That is absolutely false. The former head of the FBI said this week that the FBI and CIA are heavily under staffed, and that Facebook and Amazon have far better tracking capabilities for user data than the FBI or CIA. We all assume that our government is all knowing and all seeing. That couldn't be farther from reality. Social media platforms are so massive, the chances are that terror groups using them will conspire freely and get away with it. It empowers them more than it trips them up.
What about the NSA?

[MMKM]

Why is your goofy ass using tor in the first place?


What about the NSA?

Goes for them too, everyone here has a men in black delusion about our government. We are miserably under staffed and the private sector has better technology. That's why this whole argument about tracking all of the terrorists on social media falls on its face. Social media is 10x as big as our capability to monitor it.

[fiddy]

Goes for them too, everyone here has a men in black delusion about our government. We are miserably under staffed and the private sector has better technology. That's why this whole argument about tracking all of the terrorists on social media falls on its face. Social media is 10x as big as our capability to monitor it.
I think you're underestimating them, they obviously have the capacity to mass spy on lots of people.

[MMKM]

I think you're underestimating them, they obviously have the capacity to mass spy on lots of people.

No they don't. In fact the department of defense has 74 employees who are on the terror watch list. They can't even keep their own house clean. We overestimate our intelligence agencies greatly

[fiddy]

No they don't. In fact the department of defense has 74 employees who are on the terror watch list. They can't even keep their own house clean. We overestimate our intelligence agencies greatly


http://gizmodo.com/the-nsa-is-collecting-phone-records-of-millions-of-amer-511565570

:confusedshrug:

[Akrazotile]

No they don't. In fact the department of defense has 74 employees who are on the terror watch list. They can't even keep their own house clean. We overestimate our intelligence agencies greatly


:biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

[MMKM]

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/12/07/friendly-reminder-at-least-72-dhs-employees-are-on-the-terror-watch-list-n2089621

Yeah I really believe we can monitor terror activity on every major social media platform :oldlol: DOD can't even monitor their own employees. But sure, let the terrorists congregate on Facebook that's a great idea

[Mrofir]

You guys are so smart. Sho sho smart. Yesh you are


Remember that thing where you could make your FB pic a French flag automatically?


Play Call of Duty and please don't go outside or interact with real people.

[DonDadda59]

http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/12/07/friendly-reminder-at-least-72-dhs-employees-are-on-the-terror-watch-list-n2089621

Yeah I really believe we can monitor terror activity on every major social media platform :oldlol: DOD can't even monitor their own employees. But sure, let the terrorists congregate on Facebook that's a great idea

Not even close to being true:

http://www.govexec.com/federal-news/fedblog/2015/12/no-72-dhs-employees-are-not-terrorism-watch-list/124303/

http://www.networkworld.com/article/3012393/security/congressman-incorrectly-claimed-72-people-on-terrorist-watch-list-work-for-dhs.html

Also, Terror plots foiled in the U.S. post 9/11 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United _States_post-9/11)

NSA surveillance program foils 50 terror plots (2013) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/officials-surveillance-programs-foiled-more-than-50-terrorist-plots/2013/06/18/d657cb56-d83e-11e2-9df4-895344c13c30_story.html)

[MMKM]

Not even close to being true:

http://www.govexec.com/federal-news/fedblog/2015/12/no-72-dhs-employees-are-not-terrorism-watch-list/124303/

http://www.networkworld.com/article/3012393/security/congressman-incorrectly-claimed-72-people-on-terrorist-watch-list-work-for-dhs.html

Also, Terror plots foiled in the U.S. post 9/11 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United _States_post-9/11)

NSA surveillance program foils 50 terror plots (2013) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/officials-surveillance-programs-foiled-more-than-50-terrorist-plots/2013/06/18/d657cb56-d83e-11e2-9df4-895344c13c30_story.html)

Sure it is.

[DonDadda59]

Sure it is.

:lol

Clearly... it's not. Rep. Lynch obviously got the facts mixed up or he was given some poor information.

[MMKM]

:lol

Clearly... it's not. Rep. Lynch obviously got the facts mixed up or he was given some poor information.

So you give me some links with the good things the NSA has accomplished and that means they are equipped to monitor all major social media platforms without dropping the ball? Sorry. That reminds me of the basketball mixtape highlight videos for high school players. Everyone looks good on a mix tape. That's because they don't include all your missed lay ups and air balls. Defense department is not equipped with the manpower or technology to surveill all major social media. That's why terrorist propagandists have no business being on it; because we aren't as on top of things as we think we are, and we can't monitor everything, it's too massive.

[DonDadda59]

So you give me some links with the good things the NSA has accomplished and that means they are equipped to monitor all major social media platforms without dropping the ball? Sorry. That reminds me of the basketball mixtape highlight videos for high school players. Everyone looks good on a mix tape. That's because they don't include all your missed lay ups and air balls. Defense department is not equipped with the manpower or technology to surveill all major social media. That's why terrorist propagandists have no business being on it; because we aren't as on top of things as we think we are, and we can't monitor everything, it's too massive.

You been hibernating this whole decade, bruh? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)) :confusedshrug:

"The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including Microsoft in 2007, Yahoo! in 2008, Google in 2009, Facebook in 2009, Paltalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, AOL in 2011, Skype in 2011 and Apple in 2012"

[falc39]

Not even close to being true:

NSA surveillance program foils 50 terror plots (2013) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/officials-surveillance-programs-foiled-more-than-50-terrorist-plots/2013/06/18/d657cb56-d83e-11e2-9df4-895344c13c30_story.html)

Those numbers have been completely debunked:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/2/nsa-chief-figures-foiled-terror-plots-misleading/?page=all

The NSA was lying and inflating their numbers.

[MMKM]

You been hibernating this whole decade, bruh? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)) :confusedshrug:

"The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including Microsoft in 2007, Yahoo! in 2008, Google in 2009, Facebook in 2009, Paltalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, AOL in 2011, Skype in 2011 and Apple in 2012"

I dunno maybe you're right...its late and I've been drinking so I'm going to bed. I'll read your link tomorrow. Still not convinced it's strategically wise or necessary to have terrorist cheerleaders on Facebook, I don't get how that helps us surveill anybody, but maybe there's a use for it. My thought process is, it's better to choke off all their social platforms for mass recruitment and propaganda. But I'll admit it does round them up more into one place. I dunno it's a toss up for me I guess. But it doesn't sit well with me and I think Zuckerberg is a dick. Good night to all

[dude77]

:facepalm zuckerberg the ultimate cuck .. disgusting

[falc39]

I dunno maybe you're right...its late and I've been drinking so I'm going to bed. I'll read your link tomorrow. Still not convinced it's strategically wise or necessary to have terrorist cheerleaders on Facebook, I don't get how that helps us surveill anybody, but maybe there's a use for it. My thought process is, it's better to choke off all their social platforms for mass recruitment and propaganda. But I'll admit it does round them up more into one place. I dunno it's a toss up for me I guess. But it doesn't sit well with me and I think Zuckerberg is a dick. Good night to all

Despite what others have tried to make you believe in this thread, mass surevilance has been utterly ineffective when it comes to stopping terror plots. Two days ago, Rand Paul correctly pointed out that France, which has much more invasive mass surveillance laws, failed to stop the highly coordinated attacks that killed well over 100 people in Paris.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/dec/08/rand-paul/rand-paul-largely-correct-french-electronic-survei/

[imdaman99]

It's easier to track the terrorists if you let them make a profile on fb. Is it fool-proof? No. But odds are Zuckerberg was told not to delete these groups. Track them in case any of them originated from the US.