Social media “community standards” don’t allow “content” that encourages hatred against protected groups.

  1. As in hate speech laws1 *2, it is not allowed to say anything negative about a “protected group” aka “minority3
  2. It is irrelevant if the disallowed “content” is factually true (#TrueSpeech).
  3. It is ok to encourage hate against an unprotected group4

“Community standards”5 are just  another version of the #PCGagOrder re-formulated6. Community standards are another WRITTEN PROOF of repression of #TrueSpeech with PesseKodex12.1’s restrictions

“Encouraging hatred” is interpreted very widely[12].  with typical PC dishonesty.   Negative facts might encourage “hatred” against “protected groups” aka “minorities”. The #PCGagOrder is officially enforced by YouTube and FaceBook. Forbidden to say anything negative about minorities, to avoid stirring up prejudices.   This #PCGagOrder is enforced by Hate speech laws, and social media.

“We also don’t allow any content that encourages hatred of another person or group of people based on their membership in a protected group”

That interview was one of fourteen videos that YouTube banned from the E. Michael Jones channel on YouTube in June. As with other thirteen, the only explanation YouTube gave was that the video violated its rules concerning hate speech, I.e., “We also don’t allow any content that encourages hatred of another person or group of people based on their membership in a protected group.” YouTube’s notice did not identify the offending hate speech or the “protected group.Source

See our comments


Hate Speech |FACEBOOK

We do not allow hate speech on Facebook because it creates an environment of intimidation and exclusion and in some cases may promote real-world violence.

We define hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability.

White, heterosexual, male, able bodied, legal  are not protected characteristics. One may, this, call these people deplorables, call for “Kill Whitey night”, “kill all white men”, “all men are rapists” all is not hate speech. “Kill all infidels”, no problem. Muslims calling for violence against gays, that is a problem of victim status ranking &&ln

We also provide some protections for immigration status.

Legal residency is not a protected status. Thus it is ok to say Eastern Germany is too white, or call the indigenous citizens “racists”, “bigots”,

We define attack as violent or dehumanizing speech, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation. We separate attacks into three tiers of severity, as described below.

So it is not possible to suggest to repatriate  illegal immigrants, or return legal immigrants at the end of their legal stay. Speaking about black or Muslim crime, be it single cases of crime or aggregate statistics that show high crime rate,  or low work ethics is “dehumanizing speech,  statements of inferiority”.9

Facebook Says ‘Death To Jews’ Group Falls Within Community Standards 10

Facebook Still Championing Blasphemy Laws 11*12*14*15

Killing Free Speech in France, Germany and on the Internet 16*17*18*19

14. Violence and Graphic Content|FaceBook

Do not post:

  • Videos of dying, wounded, or dead people if they contain
  • Dismemberment unless in a medical setting
  • Visible internal organs; partially decomposed bodies
  • Charred or burning people unless in the context of cremation or self-immolation when that action is a form of political speech or newsworthy
  • Victims of cannibalism
  • Throat-slitting

This is YouTube’s and Facebook’s additional Gag order. Make sure people don’t get a visceral feeling for the cruelty of minority crime and mayhem. It must be hidden from adults that explicitly wish such information. The “throat slitting” taboo is probably to combat Islamophobia. We write about this here>>

YouTube follows Amazon, blacklists ‘Killing Europe’ Islam documentary

“YouTube Follows Amazon, Censors ‘Killing Europe’ Islam Documentary,” by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart, August 6, 2019:

YouTube blacklisted Killing Europe, a documentary about Islam and mass immigration in Europe that had previously been hosted on the platform for over a year, just days after Amazon Prime made the same decision.

Unlike Amazon, which said it censored the documentary due to “quality” concerns, YouTube accused the documentary — a critical examination of immigration in Europe — of violating its “hate speech” policy.

The documentary is a mix of on-the-ground footage and interviews, including interviews with ex-Muslims, British politicians, and victims of the notorious Rotherham rape epidemic.

“This is America, not Canada and not Europe — we’re supposed to have free speech,” said director Michael Hansen in a video message to his subscribers. “So why is it that they’re working so hard to [pull] my movies down?”

Supporters of the documentary have since uploaded it to BitChute, a decentralized free-speech oriented YouTube competitor.

YouTube’s takedown message to Hansen is as follows:

Hi WeAre138 Productions,

Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our hate speech policy. We’ve removed the following content from YouTube:

Killing Europe (short version)

We know that this might be disappointing, but it’s important to us that YouTube is a safe place for all. IF content breaks our rules, we remove it. If you think we’ve made a mistake, you can appeal and we’ll take another look. Keep reading for more details.

How your content violated the policy

Content glorifying or inciting violence against another person or group of people is not allowed on YouTube. We also don’t allow any content that encourages hatred of another person or group of people based on their membership in a protected group….

Hateful Conduct policy (Twitter)

Twitter’s mission is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information, and to express their opinions and beliefs without barriers. Free expression is a human right – we believe that everyone has a voice, and the right to use it. Our role is to serve the public conversation, which requires representation of a diverse range of perspectives.

Blatant lies. Perspectives that violate the #PCGagOrder, tell #TrueSpeech about “minority” crime, “racist” perspectives, are not part of their diverse range of perspectives.

We recognise that if people experience abuse on Twitter, it can jeopardize their ability to express themselves. Research has shown

Evidence would be nice. A Billion dollar company cannot present basic scientific citations, as does. What research? Details? Evidence?

that some groups of people are disproportionately targeted with abuse online. This includes; women, people of color, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual individuals, marginalized and historically underrepresented communities.

Evidence? Maybe it is a consequence of definitons of abuse.  Note that abuse of not historically underrepresented people  is permissible, not considered abuse and is usually not subject to complaints and sanctions. “Kill all white men” is usually not even considered abuse.

For those who identity with multiple underrepresented groups, abuse may be more common, more severe in nature and have a higher impact on those targeted.

We are committed to combating abuse motivated by hatred, prejudice or intolerance, particularly abuse that seeks to silence the voices of those who have been historically marginalized. For this reason, we prohibit behavior that targets individuals with abuse based on protected category.

Targeting individuals with abuse is OK for those who are not protected category. 20


  1. Hate speech is speech that violates PesseKodex12.1’s restrictions. Hate speech laws enforce #TrueSpeech restrictions upon everyone, under penalty of the law. This is why “Kill the [South African White] Boer” or “kill all white men”[22,23,24,25] is not hate speech, while “My daughter was raped by a Pakistani Muslim” is hate speech. In dishonest PC fashion, “Hate Speech” has nothing to do with what the normal person understands as hate.
  2. This is why “Kill the [South African White] Boer” or “kill all white men”[22,23,24,25] is not hate speech, while “My daughter was raped by a Pakistani Muslim” is hate speech. In dishonest PC fashion, “Hate Speech” has nothing to do with what the normal person understands as hate.
  3. some of the confusion about “majority minority”, about minorities that are in numerical majority, can be avoided by this term “protected group”.
  4. “White Kills Black” is Fit to Print.
  5. It would be interesting to compare community standards, and their interpretations, from 8 years ago, when social networks still subscribed to free speech and #TrueSpeech
  6. Racism taboo ⇔ PC gag order [⇔ PresseKodex12.1 ⇔ Stylebook ethics] (are all equivalent) The root cause of our societal lies, dishonesties, subsequent misunderstandings, and deadly policy mistakes * *, is any one of these: the racism taboo or …
  7. The root cause of our societal lies, dishonesties, subsequent misunderstandings, and deadly policy mistakes * *, is any one of these: the racism taboo or
  8. Other title attempts

      • “Protected groups” shielded from “hate speech” and #TrueSpeech by social media community standards
      • Social media community standards shield protected groups from “hate speech” and #TrueSpeech
      • No “hate speech” against “protected groups”. YouTube community standards repress #TrueSpeech
      • No “hate speech” against “protected groups”.  #TrueSpeech violates social media “community standards”
      • Protected groups shielded from “hate speech” and #TrueSpeech by social media community standards
      • No “hate speech” against “protected groups”.  Social media “community standards” prevent #TrueSpeech
      • Social media “community standards” don’t allow “hate speech” against protected groups.
      • Social media “community standards” don’t allow “content” that encourages hatred against protected groups.

    1. James Watson’s Inquisition #2:
      James D. Watson, perhaps the most distinguished living American scientist, has now been kicked to the curb by the Cold Spring Harbor genetics laboratory he rescued and rebuilt over the last 40 years for making politically (but not scientifically) incorrect statements about African IQs.
    2. James Watson Racist:
      Nobel James Watson Top 20 most influential Americans of all times, top 100 Person of all times, was socially and scientifically destroyed for a well meaning comment about race differences
    3. William Shockley, inventor of transistor, was racist:
      Physics Nobel laureate William Shockley, inventor of the transistor and (probably) the founder of Silicon Valley [10] pointed “out that to blame all the failures of black people on racism was a misdiagnosis of the problem” [12]. Shockley was reviled for suggesting various well meant “racist” research projects to the National Academy of Science [12].

  9. Social networking website Facebook has stated that a group created by anti-Semitic users entitled, “Death to zionst [sic] baby killer israeli jews” falls within its Community Standards guidelines, despite inciting hatred and violence against a particular race.

    Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner originally reported the news, stating: “A Facebook page calling for the death of Israeli Jews does not violate the social network’s “community standards,” according to multiple messages sent by Facebook in response to user complaints.”

  10. Billoo herself, according to Jihad Watch, “In tweets that remain publicly available… has expressed her support for an Islamic caliphate and Sharia law. She also claims, in multiple tweets, that ISIS is on the same moral plane as American and Israeli soldiers, adding that ‘our troops are engaged in terrorism'”.

    Also in January, Facebook removed ads promoting a “Britain First” petition against the redevelopment and expansion of a mosque in the UK, on a Facebook page called Political Gamers UK. “Britain First” announced it would sue the social media giant for “political discrimination”.

  11. The latest two instances of Facebook censorship were far from unique. In 2018, some of the publicized incidents of Facebook censorship included:

    • The news website Voice of Europe reported that it had been repeatedly censored and suspended for posting articles that contained content reflecting the critical stance of Central and Eastern European politicians against migration. An example is a book review of former Czech President Vaclav Klaus’s Europe All Inclusive, in which he said: “The migrant influx is comparable to the barbarian invasions of Europe.” According to Voice of Europe, “We’ve now decided we will not post all our news on Facebook anymore, because we don’t want to lose our page.”
    • German Catholic historian and author Dr. Michael Hesemann had his comments on the historic role of Islam in Europe deleted because they supposedly did not correspond to Facebook “community standards”. Hesemann had written, “Islam always plays only one role in the 1700-year-old history of the Christian Occident: the role of the sword of Damocles which hung above us, the threat of barbarism against which
    • *13

      • Frontpage Magazine editor Jamie Glazov was banned from Facebook for 30 days for posting screenshots of a Muslim’s threats to him. Facebook also banned him for 30 days on another occasion, for writing an article on the 17th anniversary of 9/11 on how to best prevent future 9/11s, “9 Steps to Successfully Counter Jihad.” (Most recently, another social media giant, Twitter, warned Glazov that his new book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us , is in violation of Pakistan’s penal code, according to which Glazov is apparently “defiling the Holy Quran”. For the moment, Twitter has not taken any action, but it shows the extent to which social media is willing to take sharia laws into consideration).

      • Facebook closed down Australian imam Mohammad Tawhidi’s Facebook page “after he made a post mocking the terrorist group Hamas, and speaking in sarcastic terms about ‘peaceful Palestinian protests'”.
      • Facebook permanently banned the entire European branch of the anti-migration youth movement, Generation Identity, from Facebook. It deleted the movement’s pages for containing “extremist content”.
      • Facebook censored a post critical of Islam’s treatment of gays as “hate speech” and banned the editor of the website behind the post, Politicalite, for 30 days.

    • French authorities are already in the process of setting an extremely public example of what can happen to those who use their freedom of speech on the internet. Marine Le Pen, leader of the National Rally Party, was recently ordered to stand trial and could face a maximum sentence of three years in prison and a fine of 75,000 euros ($85,000) for circulating “violent messages that incite terrorism or pornography or seriously harm human dignity”. In 2015, she had tweeted images of atrocities committed by ISIS in Syria and Iraq to show what ISIS was doing.

      If Facebook’s agreement with France is replicated by other European countries, whatever is left of free speech in Europe, especially on the internet, is likely to dry up fast.

    • In early July, France’s National Assembly adopted a draft bill designed to curtail online hate speech. The draft bill gives social media platforms 24 hours to remove “hateful content” or risk fines of up to 4% percent of their global revenue. The bill has gone to the French Senate and could become law after parliament’s summer recess. If it does, France will be the second country in Europe after Germany to pass a law that directly makes a social media company censor its users on behalf of the state.

    • Also in early July, in Germany — where the censorship law, known as NetzDG, also requires Facebook to remove content within 24 hours or face fines of up to 50 million euros — the Federal Office of Justice imposed a €2 million regulatory fine on Facebook “for the incomplete information provided in its published report [the publication of its transparency report for the first half of 2018 required under NetzDG] on the number of complaints received about unlawful content. This provides the general public with a distorted image both of the amount of unlawful content and of the social network’s response”.

    • According to Germany’s Federal Office of Justice, Facebook does not inform its users sufficiently of the option to report “criminal content” in the specific “NetzDG reporting form”:

      1. Antiwhite discrimination is compulsory: “White kills Black” is fit to print…
      2. Unequal Rights #3, Black and Leftist Privilege:
        Minorities and the Left can spew murderous hate with little consequences
      3. Unequal Rights #2:
        Unequal rights for the races, black privilege. Media quotes show what Leftists, Blacks, Minority can do with impunity
      4. Unequal treatment, unequal rights :
        Black caucus, La Raza, Black Lives Matter, “no beer for racists”, affirmative action, cultural appropriation, antifa violence, and dozens of more examples of unequal rights.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *