Mark Zukerberg Reveals He Was Part of U.S. Gov’t Black Op During COVID Tyranny to Censor Dissent on the Internet

Vindicated: Facebook’s Zuckerberg Regrets Collusion with Government on CovidJUSTIN HARTAUG 27 


READ IN APP Mark Zuckerberg’s August 26, 2024, letter to Congress offers a long-awaited acknowledgment of what many of us at Rational Ground—and across the nation—have known all along: Facebook was an active participant in the systematic censorship of American voices during the COVID pandemic.Rational Ground by Justin Hart is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Upgrade to paidIn his letter to Chairman Jim Jordan, Zuckerberg admits that “government pressure was wrong” and expresses regret for not being “more outspoken about it” at the time.



But let’s be clear—this is no minor regret. Facebook, a platform that touts itself as a modern-day digital town square, was complicit in silencing American citizens. This wasn’t just a passive response to government pressure. Facebook actively enforced policies that stifled discussion, flagged dissenting opinions as “misinformation,” and crippled debate during one of the most critical periods in recent history.Zuckerberg now claims, “with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we wouldn’t make [those choices] today.” But where was that judgment when we needed it most? For months, senior officials from the Biden Administration, including the White House, pressured social media companies like Facebook to censor COVID content—content that ranged from humor and satire to serious debates about policy.This wasn’t about protecting public health. This was about controlling the narrative, ensuring that only one perspective—often one that aligned with flawed or incomplete data—was allowed to reach the public. The result? Millions of Americans were deprived of critical information and perspectives that could have shaped public understanding and policy.Everything Changed on July 15th, 2021On July 15th, 2021, the mask was ripped off. In a press briefing, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki admitted that senior White House staff were “in regular touch” with Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms regarding COVID posts. More egregiously, the Surgeon General’s office was “flagging problematic posts for Facebook” that spread what the administration deemed “disinformation.”This wasn’t just coordination—it was collusion. The government wasn’t just advising these platforms; they were actively steering the censorship of Americans. They even released a blacklist of so-called “super-disseminators” of COVID “disinformation.” We’re talking about doctors, scientists, and everyday citizens whose only crime was questioning the dominant narrative.These actions represent a gross violation of the principles on which our country was founded. Freedom of speech isn’t just a footnote in American democracy—it’s a pillar. Yet, in the name of “public safety,” this administration weaponized social media platforms to suppress dissent and silence critics. Facebook and Twitter, companies that were built on the ideals of free expression, became tools of government censorship.The Damage Is Done, but the Proof Is HereZuckerberg’s letter is too little, too late. The damage has been done. Lives were impacted, businesses shuttered, and children were forced into isolation—all while reasonable discussions about COVID policies were being suppressed. But what’s more, this letter provides clear proof of what we fought against in our lawsuit: the unlawful collusion between the government and social media companies to suppress free speech.While we’re not currently pursuing our lawsuit, these revelations vindicate everything we’ve been fighting for. They demonstrate beyond a doubt that the censorship efforts during the pandemic were not just real—they were orchestrated at the highest levels of power. And though the lawsuit is paused, we may yet resurrect it in the future.That’s one of the reasons why we built the AI ChatGPT bought for Rational Ground. To be the collective mind and repository of everything we went through and everything we can use to fight in case they rear their ugly hat again.Subscribers have unlimited full access to the tool here.At Rational Ground, we’ve been documenting these issues for years. We’ve exposed the coordinated efforts between government agencies and Big Tech to stifle dissenting voices. In our article, [“Facebook Files: Rep. Jordan Revelations”], we highlighted just how deep this collaboration ran. And in our piece, [“Breaking: FOIA Emails Reveal CDC and Big Tech Collaboration“], we showcased the direct involvement of the CDC in shaping what information was allowed to be shared.These revelations affirm that our fight was justified. The principles of free speech and open debate must be upheld, even in times of crisis. As we move forward, we remain vigilant. And while the lawsuit may be on hold, we will continue to pursue every avenue to ensure that these wrongs are addressed.You’re currently a free subscriber to Rational Ground by Justin Hart. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.Upgrade to paid LIKE
COMMENT
RESTACK © 2024 COVID Reason
3953 Corte Mar de Hierba, San Diego, CA 92130 
Vindicated: Facebook’s Zuckerberg Regrets Collusion with Government on CovidJUSTIN HARTAUG 27 


 Mark Zuckerberg’s August 26, 2024, letter to Congress offers a long-awaited acknowledgment of what many of us at Rational Ground—and across the nation—have known all along: Facebook was an active participant in the systematic censorship of American voices during the COVID pandemic.Rational Ground by Justin Hart is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Upgrade to paidIn his letter to Chairman Jim Jordan, Zuckerberg admits that “government pressure was wrong” and expresses regret for not being “more outspoken about it” at the time.



But let’s be clear—this is no minor regret. Facebook, a platform that touts itself as a modern-day digital town square, was complicit in silencing American citizens. This wasn’t just a passive response to government pressure. Facebook actively enforced policies that stifled discussion, flagged dissenting opinions as “misinformation,” and crippled debate during one of the most critical periods in recent history.Zuckerberg now claims, “with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we wouldn’t make [those choices] today.” But where was that judgment when we needed it most? For months, senior officials from the Biden Administration, including the White House, pressured social media companies like Facebook to censor COVID content—content that ranged from humor and satire to serious debates about policy.This wasn’t about protecting public health. This was about controlling the narrative, ensuring that only one perspective—often one that aligned with flawed or incomplete data—was allowed to reach the public. The result? Millions of Americans were deprived of critical information and perspectives that could have shaped public understanding and policy.Everything Changed on July 15th, 2021On July 15th, 2021, the mask was ripped off. In a press briefing, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki admitted that senior White House staff were “in regular touch” with Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms regarding COVID posts. More egregiously, the Surgeon General’s office was “flagging problematic posts for Facebook” that spread what the administration deemed “disinformation.”This wasn’t just coordination—it was collusion. The government wasn’t just advising these platforms; they were actively steering the censorship of Americans. They even released a blacklist of so-called “super-disseminators” of COVID “disinformation.” We’re talking about doctors, scientists, and everyday citizens whose only crime was questioning the dominant narrative.These actions represent a gross violation of the principles on which our country was founded. Freedom of speech isn’t just a footnote in American democracy—it’s a pillar. Yet, in the name of “public safety,” this administration weaponized social media platforms to suppress dissent and silence critics. Facebook and Twitter, companies that were built on the ideals of free expression, became tools of government censorship.The Damage Is Done, but the Proof Is HereZuckerberg’s letter is too little, too late. The damage has been done. Lives were impacted, businesses shuttered, and children were forced into isolation—all while reasonable discussions about COVID policies were being suppressed. But what’s more, this letter provides clear proof of what we fought against in our lawsuit: the unlawful collusion between the government and social media companies to suppress free speech.While we’re not currently pursuing our lawsuit, these revelations vindicate everything we’ve been fighting for. They demonstrate beyond a doubt that the censorship efforts during the pandemic were not just real—they were orchestrated at the highest levels of power. And though the lawsuit is paused, we may yet resurrect it in the future.That’s one of the reasons why we built the AI ChatGPT bought for Rational Ground. To be the collective mind and repository of everything we went through and everything we can use to fight in case they rear their ugly hat again.Subscribers have unlimited full access to the tool here.At Rational Ground, we’ve been documenting these issues for years. We’ve exposed the coordinated efforts between government agencies and Big Tech to stifle dissenting voices. In our article, [“Facebook Files: Rep. Jordan Revelations”], we highlighted just how deep this collaboration ran. And in our piece, [“Breaking: FOIA Emails Reveal CDC and Big Tech Collaboration“], we showcased the direct involvement of the CDC in shaping what information was allowed to be shared.These revelations affirm that our fight was justified. The principles of free speech and open debate must be upheld, even in times of crisis. As we move forward, we remain vigilant. And while the lawsuit may be on hold, we will continue to pursue every avenue to ensure that these wrongs are addressed.You’re currently a free subscriber to Rational Ground by Justin Hart. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.Upgrade to paid LIKE
COMMENT
RESTACK © 2024 COVID Reason
3953 Corte Mar de Hierba, San Diego, CA 92130 

Justice Facebook Style — Punishment Clear, Accusations Hazy

Justice Facebook Style — Punishment Clear, Accusations Hazy
Globalists, up until 20 years ago, dominated and controlled most mass media in North America and Britain. They could suppress or demonize free speech supporters, White nationalists and Revisionists. Their soap opera news, which wasn’t news, but approved “good guys” versus “bad guys” (us) misinformed the public as the media sought to shape or make news, not report it
Then, came the Internet and all sorts of new features — Facebook, Twitter, You Tube. Suddenly, all sorts of voices could be heard. The control freaks of anti-White globalism are still trying to shove the genie back into the bottle.
Here’s just a tiny example of the censorship Zuckerberg (is he Irish?) at Facebook invokes to try to hinder free expression.
Free speech supporters should start demanding measures, such as:
1. Media like Facebook that possess a virtual monopoly should be treated like public utilities. They must serve everyone, without restriction, UNLESS as actual crime is being committed on line.
2. Creative supporters of free speech must develop  their own platforms and technology to circumvent the censorship. This is what GAB has done to counter thought control at Twitter.
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION
Blocks
Facebook has policies to stop behavior that other people may find annoying or abusive. If your account is blocked, you will still be able to log on to Facebook, but you may not be able to use features.
Our security systems are currently blocking you from doing something on Facebook, such as posting or sharing. This block is temporary and can last up to 30 days, depending on the reason for the block.
We understand that you may have had good intentions or may have not known about our policies on acceptable behavior, and we also understand that this block can be frustrating. To help keep Facebook open and welcoming, we try to prevent people from unintentionally misusing Facebook, even if you felt that what you did was acceptable.
We may block people from doing something on Facebook when:
  • Something you posted or shared seems suspicious or abusive to our security systems. This can last up to a few days.
  • Messages or friend requests you sent were marked unwelcome. This can last up to a few days.
  • You’ve done something that doesn’t follow our Community Standards. This can last up to 30 days
To avoid blocks like this in the future, you can:
  • Review our Community Standards to understand what kind of sharing is allowed on Facebook.
  • Only message people you already know.
  • Only send friend requests to people you know.

Facebook’s War on Freedom of Speech

Facebook’s War on Freedom of Speech

by Douglas Murray
February 5, 2016 at 5:00 am

Facebook’s War on Freedom of Speech

 

  • Facebook is now removing speech that presumably almost everybody might decide is racist — along with speech that only someone at Facebook decides is “racist.”
  • The sinister reality of a society in which the expression of majority opinion is being turned into a crime has already been seen across Europe. Just last week came reports of Dutch citizens being visited by the police and warned about posting anti-mass-immigration sentiments on social media.
  • In lieu of violence, speech is one of the best ways for people to vent their feelings and frustrations. Remove the right to speak about your frustrations and only violence is left.
  • The lid is being put on the pressure cooker at precisely the moment that the heat is being turned up. A true “initiative for civil courage” would explain to both Merkel and Zuckerberg that their policy can have only one possible result.

It was only a few weeks ago that Facebook was forced to back down when caught permitting anti-Israel postings, but censoring equivalent anti-Palestinian postings.
Now one of the most sinister stories of the past year was hardly even reported. In September, German Chancellor Angela Merkel met Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook at a UN development summit in New York. As they sat down, Chancellor Merkel’s microphone, still on,recorded Merkel asking Zuckerberg what could be done to stop anti-immigration postings being written on Facebook. She asked if it was something he was working on, and he assured her it was.
At the time, perhaps the most revealing aspect of this exchange was that the German Chancellor — at the very moment that her country was going through one of the most significant events in its post-war history — should have been spending any time worrying about how to stop public dislike of her policies being vented on social media. But now it appears that the discussion yielded consequential results.
Last month, Facebook launched what it called an “Initiative for civil courage online,” the aim of which, it claims, is to remove “hate speech” from Facebook — specifically by removing comments that “promote xenophobia.” Facebook is working with a unit of the publisher Bertelsmann, which aims to identify and then erase “racist” posts from the site. The work is intended particularly to focus on Facebook users in Germany. At the launch of the new initiative, Facebook’s chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, explained that, “Hate speech has no place in our society — not even on the internet.” She went to say that, “Facebook is not a place for the dissemination of hate speech or incitement to violence.” Of course, Facebook can do what it likes on its own website. What is troubling is what this organization of effort and muddled thinking reveals about what is going on in Europe.

The mass movement of millions of people — from across Africa, the Middle East and further afield — into Europe has happened in record time and is a huge event in its history. As events in Paris, Cologne and Sweden have shown, it is also by no means a series of events only with positive connotations.
As well as being fearful of the security implications of allowing in millions of people whose identities, beliefs and intentions are unknown and — in such large numbers — unknowable, many Europeans are deeply concerned that this movement heralds an irreversible alteration in the fabric of their society. Many Europeans do not want to become a melting pot for the Middle East and Africa, but want to retain something of their own identities and traditions. Apparently, it is not just a minority who feel concern about this. Poll after poll shows a significant majority of the public in each and every European country opposed to immigration at anything like the current rate.
The sinister thing about what Facebook is doing is that it is now removing speech that presumably almost everybody might consider racist — along with speech that only someone at Facebook decides is “racist.”
And it just so happens to turn out that, lo and behold, this idea of “racist” speech appears to include anything critical of the EU’s current catastrophic immigration policy.


By deciding that “xenophobic” comment in reaction to the crisis is also “racist,” Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people (who, it must be stressed, are opposed to Chancellor Merkel’s policies) into “racist” views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as “racist.” This is a policy that will do its part in pushing Europe into a disastrous future.


Because even if some of the speech Facebook is so scared of is in some way “xenophobic,” there are deep questions as to why such speech should be banned. In lieu of violence, speech is one of the best ways for people to vent their feelings and frustrations. Remove the right to speak about your frustrations, and only violence is left. Weimar Germany — to give just one example — was replete with hate-speech laws intended to limit speech the state did not like. These laws did nothing whatsoever to limit the rise of extremism; it only made martyrs out of those it pursued, and persuaded an even larger number of people that the time for talking was over.


The sinister reality of a society in which the expression of majority opinion is being turned into a crime has already been seen across Europe. Just last week, reports from the Netherlands told of Dutch citizens being visited by the police and warned about posting anti-mass-immigration sentiments on Twitter and other social media.


In this toxic mix, Facebook has now — knowingly or unknowingly — played its part. The lid is being put on the pressure cooker at precisely the moment that the heat is being turned up. A true “initiative for civil courage” would explain to both Merkel and Zuckerberg that their policy can have only one possible result.

Douglas Murray, a British writer, journalist and commentator, is based in London, England.