Is it ok to point out that illegal aliens commit crimes?
In the world of Facebook, evidently, that’s an issue.
Excerpted from John Binder’s article at breitbart.com (What? Did you expect to see this in mainstream media?):
Angel Mom Mary Ann Mendoza, who heads the Angel Families organization, has had her posts raising awareness about illegal immigrant crime removed from Facebook as “hate speech.”
Mendoza’s son, 32-year-old police officer Brandon Mendoza, was killed in May 2014 by a drunk illegal alien who was driving the wrong way down a highway in Mesa, Arizona.
This week, Mendoza had two of her Facebook posts from her personal page removed, with the tech platform claiming that she had violated the “Community Standards on hate speech.”
That must have been some hateful pair of posts, right? I mean, this is an “angel mom” – the mother of a child whose death was caused by an illegal, so she really must have gone over the line to get facebook to remove what she said.
Well, here, again from Mr. Binder’s article, are the two posts in question. You decide what line she crossed:
Wait a minute. That’s it? That’s what got booted from facebook? Criticism of Nancy Pelosi based on a Reuters article, and her opinion – fully evidenced by statistics, incidentally – that illegal aliens commit a great deal of crime? Can someone show me the “hate speech” component of these posts?
What does that tell you about Facebook? What does it tell you about the politics of this social media giant; politics that censor out opinions it doesn’t like so that we can’t see them, by fraudulently calling them “hate speech”?
And if you think this is just an anomaly of some kind, be assured it is not. Other social media giants – Google immediately comes to mind – do exactly the same thing. All the time – as regularly chronicled on this blog over the years.
I’ll finish with something else you’ve seen here before: it is time – long past time – for legislation regulating the Facebooks, Googles, etc. of the internet, to insure that their immense power is not directed to promote one side of political thought while quashing the other.
If we can have anti-trust laws because corporations got too big and powerful, and we can break up AT&T, we can – and should – bring this all-too-big, all-too-powerful influencer of people back to the real world.
How? By requiring that they not exploit their huge power to censor the flow of information.
It can’t happen too soon.
