Connect with us

Facebook Or Hate Book?



Facebook, the six-year old social networking site that helps more than 350 million friends, families, colleagues, and companies keep in touch, is fast becoming the online home to another type of social network: anti-gay hate groups.

Fast-forming, often created by people who post false profiles just to gain the ability to create their hate group, anti-gay hate groups on Facebook are filled with claims of religiosity, or just plain unadulterated ignorance, bigotry, and hate. Facebook management has been criticized for their slow response and poor monitoring of new groups and content, despite the fact that these groups violate Facebook’s “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities,” its Terms of Service (TOS) which states,

“You will not post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic, or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.”


“You will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful, misleading, malicious, or discriminatory.”

And yet, despite many, many attempts to report these groups, they still exist. Facebook, it seems, all but refuses to remove them.

Eighteenth century Parisian writer and philosopher Voltaire is (mistakenly) credited to have said,

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Those days are long gone. The rest of Western Society has evolved. In 2008, the New York Times ran an article titled, “Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S.

In O’Reilly, a well-respected tech blog, discussing Facebook’s “Holocaust denial and racist ‘white pride’ groups,” Caitlyn Martin writes,

“The Facebook pages in question do appear to violate the laws of at least 15 nations and the European Union as a whole. Despite clear prohibitions against hate and illegal, misleading or discriminatory activity Facebook continues to allow and indeed defend pages that violate it’s own terms.”

But here in the U.S., surprisingly, “free speech,” codified in our Bill Of Rights as part of the First Amendment to the Constitution, is not especially well-understood. For example, former-Governor Sarah Palin, famous for so many misstatements, exhibited her ignorance during the 2008 presidential campaign, stating,

“If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations,” Palin told host Chris Plante, “then I don’t know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.”

Glenn Greenwald reminded Palin, and us, what our “First Amendment rights” are:

“The First Amendment is actually not that complicated. It can be read from start to finish in about 10 seconds. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn’t have anything to do with whether you’re free to say things without being criticized, or whether you can comment on blogs without being edited, or whether people can bar you from their private planes because they don’t like what you’ve said.

“If anything, Palin has this exactly backwards, since one thing that the First Amendment does actually guarantee is a free press. Thus, when the press criticizes a political candidate and a Governor such as Palin, that is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.”

But when someone claims they can write or post whatever they want, on Facebook, Twitter, or a blog, they may be unaware that there actually are limits. And those limits can be dictated by the platform or website’s owners, like Facebook. Once an organization adopts service rules, it becomes their responsibility to administer them fairly and evenly and consistently. And Facebook has neglected to do so, despite numerous reports and requests.

In a litigious society such as ours, where libel and slander cases are often merely opportunities for financial gain, it’s amazing Facebook executives, who employ more than one thousand people and had revenue in excess of $300 million in 2008, have been so slow to react.

There are dozens, at least, of active anti-gay hate groups. Some have just a few members, some have a few hundred. Some, thousands.

Some, like “WE DONT WANT TO LEARN ABOUT NO LESBIAN’S OR GAYS AT SCHOOL!!!” offer this as their official description:

“beeing gay is an sickness, the goverment should use time to show them the right path, instead of just accepting it!!
give a lesbian girl some time with an boy,let her get to know him,let her use some time with him,sexually and the same thing with the boy and SEE THE DIFFERENCE!!
beeing gay, is just an confusion that has been created in the mind of the human, because HUMANS are afraid of the unknown!”

That’s verbatim, spelling errors and stupidity unedited.

Then there’s “Death Note,” a group with 575 members. It’s purpose?

“if you want 2 kill s 1 join this group
y3ni if u hate gays ; boyaas or anything like that just come here and write his/her name on the post and with 40 seconds the person will die of a heartattack

u can change the time and type of death as you like”

I started to make a list of the anti-gay hate groups, but realized that there were just too many. “HELP US REPORT HOMOPHOBIC HATE GROUPS ON FACEBOOK” has an excellent list, most of which are still active, which means Facebook isn’t doing much, if anything, to shut these groups down, again, despite that these groups violate Facebook’s own TOS.

Here’s a partial list — only a small spattering — of anti-gay hate groups:

I’m against gay marriage, and I will not keep quiet about it!

Keep Queers Out of America


I Bet I Can Find 1,000,000 People Who Are Anti Gay Rights


I hate Faggots

people who hate fags

GAY ? news flash : we fuckin’ hate you !!

Kill All Gays

join if you hate homosexuals


AnTi GaYs!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You may choose to dismiss these as tiny, or inconsequential, but I would disagree. Despite their obvious stupidity, inability to gather a large base, or spell, they empower their members to feel comfortable with their hate. And that’s dangerous, because hate breeds more hate. It multiplies, exponentially.

Facebook anti-gay hate groups simply embolden their readers and members to “come out” from any societal suggestions that hate is wrong. Even prominent members of mainstream groups like the GOP, and right-wing bloggers have taken to likening “political correctness” to “a war on Judeo-Christianty” and “Shariah law.” Shorter version: It’s OK to publicly spew your hate.

Because the net effect of their actions breeds acceptability of hatred toward the LGBTQ community, I believe groups like the National Organization for Marriage can be labeled hate groups. I believe working to ban same-sex marriage is a hate crime.

Also dangerous is a group like “Ban Same-Sex Marriage.” I first came upon it and for a split-second wondered if it were fair to include it here. I mean, I spend my days, and nights, working to advance civil rights and marriage equality, so of course a group like, “Ban Same-Sex Marriage” is anathema to my work and my life. But can you call it a “hate group” on the same plane as, for example, “Kill All Gays” if they are (“merely”) advocating banning same-sex marriage? Well, yes, you can.

But the group “Ban Same-Sex Marriage” is even worse. They pretend to be a Christian forum for discussing banning same-sex marriage:

“Well, being a Christian, I believe that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a wife, as described in the Bible. Therefore, same-sex marriage is an affront to the Bible and Godly standing, and therefore should not be allowed to stand.”

Blah, blah, blah, heard it a million times before.

But then, in their rules, they include this:

“This group only refers to the United States. Not the world, not foreign countries, not anywhere else. We as Americans cannot pass foreign laws on other nations and impose our will on them. However, in this nation, we can stop homosexuality right now. All framers of debate should keep this in mind when posting. We may make arguments about homsexuality [sic] as it applies to the world, but as for banning same-sex marriage, we are only talking about the U.S.A.”

Catch that?

“we can stop homosexuality right now.”


So, this group, shrouded in the bible, well-written, and well-populated (1786 members as of this writing) wants to “stop homosexuality right now.” Not just “Ban Same-Sex Marriage,” but “stop homosexuality right now.”

What to do?

Well, first, visit all these sites, and the ones on “Get these anti-gay groups off facebook!” and click the link in the bottom left-hand corner that says, “Report Group.”

Second, tell all your friends, your neighbors, your family. Share this post with them. Repost it on Facebook, Twitter, email it, etc.

Third, join the following Facebook groups, and ask your friends and family to also. There is strength in numbers.

Petition to Remove All Anti-Gay Groups

Report Gay Hate on Facebook

Stop gay hate speech on facebook

Get these anti-gay groups off facebook! (Great site!)

And finally, take solace knowing that over 20,000 have joined the group, “Ban the “GAY EXTERMINATORS” from Facebook.”

Success! Facebook shut down most of these anti-gay hate groups just hours after this post was published! Read, “Facebook Or Hate Book? Facebook Shuts Down Anti-Gay Hate Groups!

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


‘Stop Bringing Up Nazis and Hitler’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Smacked Down by Democrats



U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was strongly criticized by two Democratic Congressmen after the Georgia Republican’s remarks about “Ukrainian Nazis” and her attempts to paint Ukrainians as Nazis.

“Stop bringing up Nazis and Hitler,” U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) urged, after Greene’s remarks suggesting there is a large Nazi problem in Ukraine, during a House Oversight Committee hearing. “The only people who know about Nazis and Hitler are the 10 million people and their families who lost their loved ones, generations of people who were wiped out. It is enough of this disgusting behavior, using Nazis as propaganda. You want to talk about Nazis, get yourself over to the Holocaust Museum. You go see what Nazis did. It’s despicable that we use that and we allow it and we sit here like somehow it’s regular.”

Moskowitz began by telling the Committee his “grandparents escaped the Holocaust.”

“So my grandmother was part of the Kindertransport out of Germany. Her parents were killed in Auschwitz. My grandfather, her husband escaped Poland, from the pogroms,” he continued.

READ MORE: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

“There are no concentration camps in Ukraine. They’re not taking babies and shooting them in the air ’cause they’re Jewish. There’s no gas chambers. There’s no ovens. They’re not railing people in, they’re not ripping gold out of people’s mouth. They’re not taking stuff out of their home. They’re not trying to erase a people. They’re Ukrainians.”

Greene’s remarks over the weekend had caused anger.

“It’s antisemitic to make Israeli aid contingent on funding Ukrainian Nazis,” Congresswoman Greene declared Sunday from her official government social media account, as legislation to support Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan moved to the top of Speaker Mike Johnson’s priority list in the wake of Iran’s attack on Israel. Her implication appeared to be Ukrainians are Nazis – a Putin talking point.

Greene on Wednesday spent several minutes again implying there are many Nazis in Ukraine, as she was refuted by a top scholar, Yale professor of history Timothy Snyder. Dr. Snyder is the author of a dozen books, including two on Nazis and the Holocaust, and is an expert on the Holocaust, Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and serves on the Council on Foreign Relations.

Responding to Greene’s remarks, Snyder told the lawmakers, “no far-right party has ever crossed three percent” in a Ukrainian election.

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

Greene was also criticized by U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL), who called her out for her “hypocrisy” and reminded her that in 2022 she “spoke at event led by white supremacists.”

That event was hosted by white supremacist Nick Fuentes:

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Big Journalism Fail’: Mainstream Media Blasted Over Coverage of Historic Trump Trial

Continue Reading


‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure



After Democratic House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin blasted Republican Chairman Jim Comer, declaring “somebody needs therapy here” during a heated verbal brawl Wednesday afternoon, U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) mockingly urged committee members to come together to “begin Comer’s therapy session.”

In a viral three-minute walkthrough of the discredited far-right wing chairman’s efforts, including making false claims and use, as Moskowitz noted, Russian disinformation to try to build a case against President Joe Biden, the Florida Democrat appeared to put the final nail in the impeachment coffin.

Moskowitz told the committee members Chairman Comer has to “face the fact that he was taken by the Russians,” and “was used by the Russians.” He also noted the committee has “already lost” Comer “to Russian propaganda.”

“I mean, we got to build a forcefield around the Chairman to make sure we don’t lose him to Chinese propaganda as well.”

READ MORE: ‘Big Journalism Fail’: Mainstream Media Blasted Over Coverage of Historic Trump Trial

Moskowitz made clear, through his well-known wit, that Comer “no longer has impeachment” as an option to use against President Biden.

The video has gone viral, with over 175,000 views in just over one hour.

Read the transcript of Moskowitz’s remarks and watch the video below or at this link.

“Let me start by saying, obviously Chairman Comer’s not here, but I think in light of what we witnessed earlier, I think it’s important that together as a committee that we begin, Chairman Comer’s therapy session, right. You know, a member of the other side wanted to confirm what the title of the hearing was, right, Chinese propaganda. Well, we know the title of the hearing certainly isn’t about impeachment anymore. And Chairman Comer has suffered tremendous loss, and we all know in our life, what it’s like to suffer tremendous loss. There’s all sorts of different stages of grief and that’s the loss obviously, of his of his impeachment hearing. And everyone deals with that in different ways and sometimes it takes time to grieve and struggle and and fill that hole that void that now exists now that he no longer has impeachment.”

“The only way we as a committee are going to help Chairman Comer get better is we have to get to the root cause. Right? So for today’s therapy session, okay, I want to talk about denial. Right? The denial that the impeachment hearings are over, and the denial, obviously, that he started with the 1023 form, which was Russian disinformation. And so, you know, Chairman Comer’s psychology teaches us that, you know, someone might be like him, using denial as a defense mechanism. And signs include that you refuse to talk about the problem. You find ways to justify your behavior, you blame other people or outside forces for causing the problem. You persist in your behavior by consequences. You promise to address the problem, maybe in the future, or you avoid thinking about the problem. And so in addition to these signs that Chairman comer has been displaying, as we saw at the beginning, he also might be feeling hopeless or helpless.”

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

“I just want the chairman to know that we’re pulling for him. We really we really are. I know, I know. It’s been hard to become someone who was used by the Russians. But the good news is, is that he’s this hearing today on Chinese propaganda, because we’ve already lost him to Russian propaganda. I mean, we got to build a forcefield around the chairman to make sure we don’t lose him to Chinese propaganda, as well.”

“In fact, you can see behind me, these are quotes from the chairman, Chairman Comer. Every single solitary time and there are hundreds more that he went on TV in interviews and talked about this 1023 form, which was all Russian disinformation. But we gotta make the Chairman understand that it’s going to be okay. We will get him through this, but he’s got to recognize, gotta recognize that denial is not just a river in Egypt. He’s gonna have to face the fact that he was taken by the Russians.”

Continue Reading


‘Big Journalism Fail’: Mainstream Media Blasted Over Coverage of Historic Trump Trial



The media’s ability to shape public opinion is well-documented, and by the end of the second day of the first criminal trial in history of a former U.S. president critics are slamming the content, framing, and focus of mainstream media organizations. The biggest concerns: refusing to cover the former president’s apparent inability to stay awake in court, too much identifying information of potential and chosen jurors, and even subtle descriptions that can be used to feed into false perceptions the trial is “unfair” or, as the ex-president likes to say, a “scam.”

Overnight, CNN’s Oliver Darcy’s “Reliable Sources” newsletter blasted mainstream media outlets that “strangely show little interest in reporting on Donald Trump’s courtroom naps.”

“Imagine, for a moment, if President Joe Biden were to be caught openly sleeping at an important hearing,” Darcy posits. Trump was caught “nodding” off repeatedly several times over the first two days of trial (there is not trial Wednesdays). “Then imagine it were to occur at another important hearing the next day. Not only would right-wing media outlets like Fox News run wild with coverage questioning his fitness for office, mainstream news organizations would no doubt also treat the snooze fest as a serious news story. But, for some unknown reason, Donald Trump falling asleep at his historic criminal trial in New York (as he apparently did, again, on Tuesday) has been met with a rather muted response.”

READ MORE: SCOTUS Justices Appear to Want to Toss Obstruction Charges Against Some J6 Defendants: Experts

Noting, “It’s important,” Darcy asks, “why has much of the press fallen asleep at the wheel?” and serves up some examples – or lack thereof.

“ABC News and NBC News didn’t even bother mentioning it on their evening newscasts and many major outlets haven’t even filed straight stories on it. To be frank, if not for The NYT’s Maggie Haberman reporting on the matter Tuesday, it’s unclear whether the public — which is relying on news organizations to be its eyes and ears in the courtroom, given cameras are barred — would know about it.”

“It’s all the more bizarre given that Trump has made attacking ‘sleepy Joe’ a central tenet of his campaign, framing the president as lacking the stamina to serve in the nation’s highest office. Which is to say, the fact that Trump is the one apparently unable to stay awake in his own criminal trial isn’t a trivial story.”

Jennifer Schulze, a media critic who was a Chicago Sun-Times executive producer, WGN news director, and adjunct college professor of journalism, pointing to Darcy’s criticism, calls it “a big journalism fail.”

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

The ex-president is facing 34 felony counts for falsification of business records when he paid hush money to an adult film actress then allegedly tried to cover it up, which some say is election interference.

New York State Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan is overseeing the Trump trial, and ordered the identities of all jurors and prospective jurors to remain anonymous. Trump has a proven track record of alleged attempts to intimidate witnesses, judges, prosecutors, and others involved in his trials.

Some are concerned the media went too far in posting and publishing some possibly identifying information internet sleuths could use to piece together their names.

“There is seriously far, far too much identifying information about prospective jurors, several of whom are now empaneled, coming out in the press,” warned attorney and author Luppe B. Luppen.

Here’s how Fox News host Jesse Watters used that information to target one empaneled juror, while attempting to discredit the trial.

Fox News’ Sean Hannity went after “Juror Number One,” who is the foreperson.

It is not just Fox News targeting jurors.

Even The New York Times’ coverage of jurors drew the ire of critics.

READ MORE: ‘Your Client Is a Criminal Defendant’: Judge Denies Trump Request to Skip Trial for SCOTUS

Here’s how The Times’ Jonah Bromwich reported on the jury foreperson:

“The foreperson who was just selected — that’s juror one, the de facto leader of the group who will likely help steer deliberations — works in sales and enjoys the outdoors. He is originally from Ireland, but will help decide the former American president’s fate.”

University of Wisconsin—Madison professor of political science, who has a Ph.D. in Government, criticized the Times’ reporting.

“100% certain if the foreperson were native born, they would not have written this sentence and used the formulation of ‘former president’ subtly implying the foreperson from Ireland is somehow not a real American.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.



Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.