Updated: Aug 1, 2021
One Country’s Internet, Information Space is Part of National Sovereignty
National sovereignty on information space is part of national territories however when foreign tech giants, especially the US SNS companies like Facebook's control of other countries’ inner information space is a kind of foreign invasion and occupation. It will only result US-centrist mass purge, oppression, defamation and disinformation ops against their so called ‘adversaries.’ We already witnessed mass purge, violations of freedom of expression, black ops, double standards, politically biased censorship on the Nazi Facebook and on other US tech giants which are in systematic coordination with US intelligence agencies.
National sovereignty on mass communication space must not be politically infiltrated or monopolized by foreign companies as long as US tech giants are engaging in its own US global imperialist endeavours and silencing different voices of different countries. It’s totally unacceptable, outrageous and global opposition against US imperialism and its US tech giants will be more radicalized and continue until the final defeat of the US empire. Thus, every country should develop their own versions of Facebook and Yahoo to protect their own information space as part of national sovereignty. Our Facebook mistakenly regards itself as internet super sovereign state which can own and control other sovereign states’ internet, information space as its own US-Facebook territories.
Misdeeds of Facebook on the Concept of Internet / Information Space and National Sovereignty
Facebook’s double standards, manipulation of US and foreign public opinions and mass purge of different voices by various systematic oppressions are good examples and proofs of its self-contradictions. When Facebook and Twitter did mass purge on August 19, 2019 amidst of the still ongoing anti-extradition bill color revolution, Beijing accurately criticized the politically biased US imperialist offense on SNS internet space.
“Twitter and Facebook abused the freedom of the press when they chose to crack down on accounts originating from the Chinese mainland revealing violence in protests in Hong Kong,” a Wednesday op-ed in the state-run People’s Daily reads, claiming that the U.S. State Department uses Twitter as a tool to “interfere in other countries’ internal affairs.” (1)
China Hits Back After Twitter and Facebook Block Pro-Beijing Content
Both US and China have their own developed SNS companies and engaging in the similar well known censorship activities. This incident indicated that China clearly knows that the question of ‘who decides it?’ is still unsolvable while we lack genuinely independent third party or legitimate authority to fully regulate this information space within one country to protect its citizens from any US tech companies’ manipulation, censorship and monopoly. As the result, those tech giants are acting like SNS police themselves against domestic and even foreign users.
In other words, it is an inevitable nature of its one-sidedness and unfairness of Facebook censorship. Facebook became a police state in internet which including foreign states outside of Silicon Valley. Undoubtedly, it’s a menace to anyone who opposes their US domestic and foreign policy that Facebook promotes.
This problematic nature is undeniable even for one of their pro US foreign policy partners in Western mainstream media, Forbes:
As with Twitter, Facebook specifically claimed the activity was state-sponsored. "Although the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities," the platform said in its disclosure, "our investigation found links to individuals associated with the Chinese government."
Credit where it's due. This is an exceptionally fast and forthright response from both platforms and should be applauded as such.
In my initial report, I suggested that what Twitter (and Facebook) does next will be watched with interest—it is clear that promoted tweets from state media outlets at times of popular unrest go to the very heart of the free speech versus propaganda debate. Well, they have acted and the question has been answered.
The other question I raised is the one of "who decides?" Does it fall to the social media platforms themselves to set the rules, or is some form of regulation? (2)
Facebook And Twitter Uncover Huge Chinese State Operation Targeting Hong Kong Protesters
What we should understand here is how they justify their politically biased censorship. What kinds of narratives and terms they use to deceive public from realizing their biased censorship?
Facebook’s public figure Nathaniel Gleicher, Head of Cybersecurity Policy is at least responsible for all of this. He himself gave us the answer however no victims referred to his remarks. Nathaniel Gleicher used to be a member of the notorious NSC and neoconservative think tank CSIS. Thus undoubtedly his political stance is pro US imperialism.
His LinkedIn page shows his career was quite frequently separated by job transfers as an expert.
Senior Associate, Strategic Technologies Program Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Jan 2016 – Present · 4 years 4 months
Director for Cybersecurity Policy
May 2013 – Oct 2015, 2 years 6 months Washington, DC
Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior
What we can see from his statements?
Many excuses and claims commonly used in its lazy templates without actual proofs to back those claims :
A number of deceptive tactics (fake accounts; disseminate their content; drive people to off-platform news sites; the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities; links to individuals associated with the Chinese government; we don’t want our services to be used to manipulate people)
‘We’re taking down these Pages, Groups and accounts based on their behavior, not the content they posted.’ (4)
Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior From China
The main question unsolved in his two major articles on mass purges in 2019 is that there is no proof of fake account false flag claims which commonly used by trolls and US backed plants in every country. Nathaniel Gleicher as a very ambitious law and computer student, his articles did not provide any proof to back his templated claims. His screenshot posts from those deleted pages shown are generally just political opposition to US foreign interventions in their own countries. Nathaniel Gleicher himself wrote that ‘not the content they posted’ yet he only showed the content as if proofs of the false claims. It has nothing to do with any legitimate evidence of being fake accounts.
‘Fake account’ accusation (Inauthenticity false accusation) is one of major Facebook censorship tools and terms to false flag political opponents without any evidence provided.
Facebook Censorship Template for Press
Title: Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior From ___
Today, we removed _ Pages, _ Groups and _ Facebook accounts involved in coordinated inauthentic behavior as part of a small network that originated in ___ and focused on ___. The individuals behind this campaign engaged in a number of deceptive tactics, including the use of fake accounts — some of which had been already disabled by our automated systems — to manage Pages posing as news organizations, post in Groups, disseminate their content, and also drive people to off-platform news sites. They frequently posted about local political news and issues including topics like ___ in ___. Although the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities, our investigation found links to individuals associated with the ___ government.
Presence on Facebook: _ Facebook accounts, _ Pages and _ Groups.
Followers: About _ accounts followed one or more of these Pages and about _ accounts joined at least one of these Groups.
Based on a tip shared by Twitter about activity they found on their platform, we conducted an internal investigation into suspected coordinated inauthentic behavior in the region and identified this activity. We will continue monitoring and will take action if we find additional violations. We’ve shared our analysis with law enforcement and industry partners.
We’re constantly working to detect and stop this type of activity because we don’t want our services to be used to manipulate people. We’re taking down these Pages, Groups and accounts based on their behavior, not the content they posted.
As with all of these takedowns, the people behind this activity coordinated with one another and used fake accounts to misrepresent themselves, and that was the basis for our action.
We are making progress rooting out this abuse, but as we’ve said before, it’s an ongoing challenge. We’re committed to continually improving to stay ahead. That means building better technology, hiring more people and working more closely with law enforcement, security experts and other companies.
Below is a sample of the content posted by some of these Pages:
English Captions attached.
This template was used on the mass purge of Chinese accounts on August 19, 2019. The point is that the inauthentic use of fake accounts is actually done by Facebook censorship team themselves. I can tell their own inauthentic use of internet space and real fake account ops.
Before this anti-China mass purge and black operation, the same guy Nathaniel Gleicher did the exactly the same on July 25, 2019 and used first time the same template to justify the unjustifiable oppression against Thai, Russian, Ukrainian and Honduran users who just oppose US foreign interventions in their home lands,
Template (against Thailand, Russia, Ukraine and Honduras)
Title: Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior in ______, ______, ______and _______
In the past week, we removed multiple Pages, Groups and accounts that were involved in coordinated inauthentic behavior on Facebook and Instagram. We found four separate, unconnected operations that originated in______, ______, ______ and ______. We didn’t find any links between the campaigns we’ve removed, but all created networks of accounts to mislead others about who they were and what they were doing.
We’re constantly working to detect and stop this type of activity because we don’t want our services to be used to manipulate people. We’re taking down these Pages, Groups and accounts based on their behavior, not the content they posted. In each of these cases, the people behind this activity coordinated with one another and used fake accounts to misrepresent themselves, and that was the basis for our action. We have shared information about our analysis with law enforcement, policymakers and industry partners.
We are making progress rooting out this abuse, but as we’ve said before, it’s an ongoing challenge. We’re committed to continually improving to stay ahead. That means building better technology, hiring more people and working more closely with law enforcement, security experts and other companies.
What We’ve Found So Far
We removed _ Facebook accounts and _ Facebook Pages for engaging in coordinated inauthentic behavior that originated in ____ and focused primarily on ____ and ___. The people behind this small network used fake accounts to create fictitious personas and run Pages, increase engagement, disseminate content, and also to drive people to off-platform blogs posing as news outlets. They also frequently shared divisive narratives and comments on topics including ___ politics, geopolitical issues like __ -___ relations, protests in ____, and criticism of democracy activists in ____. Although the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities, our review found that some of this activity was linked to an individual based in _____ associated with_________, a _____ government-funded journal based in ____.
Presence on Facebook: __ accounts and __ Pages.
Followers: About ____ accounts followed one or more of these Pages.
Advertising: Less than $_ spent on Facebook ads paid for in __.
We identified these accounts through an internal investigation into suspected ____-linked coordinated inauthentic behavior. Our investigation benefited from information shared by local civil society organizations.
Below is a sample of the content posted by some of these Pages:
English captions attached to it.
Facebook’s pretence of righteous stance
Nathaniel Gleicher’s laziest, templated false statement again did not provide any evidence to back the claim itself. Only words of false accusations without any actual proof provided. There are many funniest truths for this.
1. That is Facebook who manipulating people at home and even abroad by purging opponents. (manipulate people)
2. That is Facebook who engaging in the coordinated inauthentic behavior against different voices and users by stealing privacy (building better technology, hiring more people and working more closely with law enforcement, security experts and other companies). This is a function of intelligence agency not a normal function of any private online service provider.
3. That is Facebook advertisement teams who increase engagement, disseminate content, and also to drive people to off-platform blogs posing as news outlets.
4. That is Facebook censorship teams who are the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities.
A question unsolved is that if they were fake people or not. However the main issue is that Facebook’s pretence of righteous stance itself. Their primary concern is that political correctness. Nathaniel Gleicher learned the knowledge and skill of deception of the public at schools. This template is a sheer proof of it.
Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior in Thailand, Russia, Ukraine and Honduras
A number of deceptive tactics used by Facebook censorship team (fake accounts; disseminate their content; drive people to off-platform news sites; the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities; links to individuals associated with the US government; they want their services to be used to manipulate people of targeted countries)
It’s funny that disseminate their content is almost done by any users, user companies and organizations.
It’s ordinary that drive people to off-platform news sites. It is also almost done by any users, user companies and organisations.
It’s no surprise that accounts which link to individuals associated with the US government or any other governments are on the Facebook platform as obvious like the Donald Trump Facebook page, Carrie Lam page and other governmental officers, politicians and their page hidden moderators.
The question unsolved by Nathaniel Gleicher’s irresponsible articles is that those were really fake accounts? Fake people? Did they actually try concealing their identities for so called inauthentic behaviour? No evidence provided by Nathaniel Gleicher. What we read is only one-sided statement without any proof.
Creating and Using Fake Accounts Against Dissident Users is Facebook Themselves
Facebook is cultivating US backed terrorist fake accounts.
Fact: Terrorists are trafficking looted antiquities with impunity on Facebook
Networks of criminals are trading priceless Middle Eastern antiquities—from entire Roman mosaics to full Pharaonic coffins—on Facebook, and there are no rules to stop them. The Athar Project, a group of volunteer anthropologists, have released a new report based on their monitoring of 95 Arabic-language Facebook groups where individuals in conflict zones like Syria, Yemen and Libya offer artifacts for sale, including to US buyers. According to their network analysis, one of the most important individuals in the trafficking network is based in Michigan City, Indiana.
The researchers identified several extremist groups, some fighting in Syria and others connected to Al Qaeda or ISIS, that benefitted from these sales. Some managers of the private Facebook groups, for instance, require new members seeking access to pay a tax on the sales generated by their participation. The organizers use the same Arabic term for the tax, khums, that was used by ISIS to profit from antiques trafficking during its brief existence as a state. (7)
QARTZ reported the unspeakable Facebook crime with proofs on July 3, 2019. OMG, This is a true and real Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior! And the terrorists, the people behind this activity attempted to conceal their identities! See how Facebook Nathaniel Gleicher responded to the inquiry from QZ. The answer was no reply! This is a typical US and Facebook double standard to protect their own assets.
The company did not reply to a request for comment about its policies on the trafficking of cultural artifacts by suspected terrorists on its platform.
Participants in the groups also traded knowledge. In one example, members posted Google Earth screenshots of archaeological sites and offered pointers on how best to loot them. Members used Facebook Stories to post images of the antiquities that would be erased in 24 hours, and Facebook’s encrypted chat to communicate. The report says there is reason to believe some of these transactions are conducted on Facebook payments, noting that” admins seeking a khums tax are not going to have the same in-person exchange of goods that the buyer and seller will engage in. Therefore, this payment is likely carried out through a digital transaction. (8)
Facebook is using fake and secret agent accounts to monitor and oppress its dissident accounts. Even the researchers found that links to individuals associated with the US government by identifying the US backed terrorist organizations.
Al-Azm works with a network of people on the ground in Syria to track antiquities theft, and those sources have helped link Facebook postings to real individuals. In several cases, antiquities photographed within Syria or spotted on weapons-trading forums later resurfaced in Facebook’s antiquities trading groups. (9)
At least one prominent American antiquities dealer was found to be Facebook friends with a Syrian organizer who manages four of these Facebook groups. Paul wouldn’t share the American’s identity but said she reported it to the authorities. (10)
This is a sheer Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior! She concealed her American identity to engage in the illegal antique smuggling on Facebook. And our SNS thought police Nathaniel Gleicher did not take it down as he did to Chinese, Thai, Russian and Honduran users in the months. It proved that Facebook’s censorship is completely biased and unfair to users. Furthermore their practice in pretence of protecting community security and national security is outrageously self-contradicted like this. We learned the awful truth behind the Facebook administration to back terrorist smuggling online here. The official narrative is quite opposite from the truth.
Terrorists are trafficking looted antiquities with impunity on Facebook
Extremely biased Facebook Censorship teams even block and disable real people’s accounts for childish retaliation
FACT: Workers at Israeli surveillance firm NSO sue Facebook for blocking private accounts
A group of employees from Israeli surveillance firm NSO Group filed a lawsuit against Facebook Inc on Tuesday, saying the social media giant had unfairly blocked their private accounts when it sued NSO last month. (11)
Reuters reported this incident on November 26, 2019. It continues,
Messaging service WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook, had accused NSO in its own legal action filed in California last month of helping government spies break into the phones of roughly 1,400 users across four continents in a hacking spree whose targets included diplomats, political dissidents, journalists and senior government officials.
The NSO employees said their Facebook and Instagram accounts, and also those of former workers and family members, had been blocked. They petitioned the Tel Aviv District Court to order Facebook to unblock the accounts, which they claim was done abruptly and without notice.
Facebook said in a statement that it had disabled “relevant accounts” after attributing a “sophisticated cyber-attack” to NSO Group and its employees. Those actions “continue to be necessary for security reasons, including preventing additional attacks,” the company said. (12)
Workers at Israeli surveillance firm NSO sue Facebook for blocking private accounts
Again, there is no proof provided to back the Facebook=WhatsApp=Instagram claim on NSO. For US and Facebook, everyone is guilty until proven innocent. The lawsuit is still ongoing amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. The question is which one is really threatening our social security and human rights on SNS? The answer is clear that it’s Facebook that invading our privacy. Their mighty censorship can make truth upside down?
Another awful testimony was made by NSO founder Shalev Hulio, reported by Tech Crunch on April 4, 2020,
Facebook’s WhatsApp is in the midst of a lawsuit against Israeli mobile surveillance outfit NSO Group. But before complaining about the company’s methods, Facebook seems to have wanted to use them for its own purposes, according to testimony from NSO founder Shalev Hulio.
Last year brought news of an exploit that could be used to install one of NSO’s spyware packages, Pegasus, on devices using WhatsApp. The latter sued the former over it, saying that over a hundred human rights activists, journalists and others were targeted using the method.
Last year also saw Facebook finally shut down Onavo, the VPN app it purchased in 2013 and developed into a backdoor method of collecting all manner of data about its users — but not as much as they’d have liked, according to Hulio. In a document filed with the court yesterday he states that Facebook in 2017 asked NSO Group for help collecting data on iOS devices resistant to the usual tricks:
In October 2017, NSO was approached by two Facebook representatives who asked to purchase the right to use certain capabilities of Pegasus, the same NSO software discussed in Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
The Facebook representatives stated that Facebook was concerned that its method for gathering user data through Onavo Protect was less effective on Apple devices than on Android devices. The Facebook representatives also stated that Facebook wanted to use purported capabilities of Pegasus to monitor users on Apple devices and were willing to pay for the ability to monitor Onavo Protect users. Facebook proposed to pay NSO a monthly fee for each Onavo Protect user.
The report further pointed out that the unspeakable self-contradiction of Facebook-WhatsApp-Instagram on this spy software purchase dispute.
NSO declined, as it claims to only provide its software to governments for law enforcement purposes. But there is a certain irony to Facebook wanting to employ against its users the very software it would later decry being employed against its users.
This Israel case is also a perfect example of the disgusting pretence of righteous stance of Facebook which is the world number one privacy data thieve and the most notorious violator of human rights online. It already turned out that originally Facebook wanted to purchase the spy software from NSO and then Facebook-WhatsApp-Instagram false flagged NSO after they refused their purchase. Thus, it is a typical US false flag operation against anyone who opposes their greedy requirements. (13)
Before suing NSO Group, Facebook allegedly sought their software to better spy on users
1. International Case Complaints
Tony Cartalucci (Anthony Cartalucci) Case:
The notorious US regime change tool Atlantic Counsel and its infowar project The Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) published a statement on the mass purge of Thai, Russian, Ukrainian and Honduran users on July 26, 2019 with the title Facebook Takes Down Inauthentic Pages with Connections to Thailand.
Facebook shared details of some of the assets with the DFRLab a few hours prior to the takedown. An initial investigation into the pages revealed that the pages boosted hostile narratives and positioned themselves as “alternative media” that countered Western stances on international issues, with a particular emphasis on Thailand.
The assets misrepresented themselves and attempted to conceal their provenance. The pages had a link to a small cadre of external websites, including one with a clear connection to the Russian government.
With its charter from the Russian Academy of Sciences (IVRAN), New Eastern Outlook is a clear affiliate of the Russian government, so the anti-Western sentiment conveyed by the content spread by its network is therefore not surprising. It’s unclear, however, if the other external websites have any link to Russia. The Cartalucci persona, meanwhile, while clearly coordinating with these websites and pages, may simply be an individual in Thailand espousing anti-Western views.
The DFRLab did not have access to the full set of pages from the takedown, but the pages provided by Facebook had audiences ranging from about 600 to more than 15,000 users. This suggested a moderate-to-low reach for the network, as the DFRLab would consider a threshold of 50,000 as constituting high reach.
Finally, while the set made Anthony Cartalucci an easy starting point for research, opportunities remain in examining the online footprint of other authors featured on the external websites. There may also be other websites that fall under the broader sway of the network.
Iain Robertson is Deputy Managing Editor with @DFRLab and is based in Washington, DC.
Kanishk Karan is Research Assistant with @DFRLab.
Ayushman Kaul is a Research Assistant with @DFRLab and is based in India.
Facebook Takes Down Inauthentic Pages with Connections to Thailand
Pages removed from Facebook and Instagram pushed anti-U.S. narratives
Facebook donates Atlantic Counsel (Headquartered in Washington D.C.; 2016-) which has strong ties with US government, and its The Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab), a violent device against so called ‘adversaries’ of their imperialist agenda online. This is also an example of their extreme self-deception on this issue while they themselves have links to US and UK governments. As their biased conclusion wrote, ‘espousing anti-Western views’ is a crime for those pro-Western imperialist evangelists. It’s nether democracy nor freedom of expression at all. They themselves are far from the political neutrality. Again, there is no proof shown to back the Facebook’s false accusation against Mr. Cartalucci. EXPOSING DISINFORMATION is their official rhetoric for their censorship and thought police operations on internet.
They revealed that they were inquired about them before the take down. Atlantic Counsel and its infowar project The Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) are beneficial from donations of Facebook and UK government as reported by REUTERS on August 8, 2018. Titled, U.S. think tank's tiny lab helps Facebook battle fake social media.
The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab is based in a 12-foot-by-12-foot office in the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the nearly 60-year-old Council http://www.atlanticcouncil.org, a think tank devoted to studying serious and at times obscure international issues.
Facebook is using the group to enhance its investigations of foreign interference. Last week, the company said it took down 32 suspicious pages and accounts that purported to be run by leftists and minority activists. While some U.S. officials said they were likely the work of Russian agents, Facebook said it did not know for sure.
Facebook admitted while they were required by authorities to take accounts and pages down, they themselves did not sure if it’s actually run by foreign agent or not. In other words, their decision was not based on facts but bias and political accusations. It continues,
With scores of its own cybersecurity professionals and $40 billion in annual revenue in 2017, Facebook might not seem in need of outside help.
But the lab and Atlantic Council bring geopolitical expertise and allow Facebook to distance itself from sensitive pronouncements. On last week’s call with reporters, Alex Stamos, Facebook’s chief security officer, said the company should not be expected to identify or blame specific governments for all the campaigns it detects.
“Companies like ours don’t have the necessary information to evaluate the relationship between political motivations that we infer about an adversary and the political goals of a nation-state,” said Stamos, who is leaving the company this month for a post at Stanford University. Instead, he said Facebook would stick to amassing digital evidence and turning it over to authorities and researchers.
Facebook donated an undisclosed amount to the lab in May that was enough, said Graham Brookie, who runs the lab, to vault the company to the top of the Atlantic Council’s donor list, alongside the British government.
Facebook employees said privately over the past several months that Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg wants to outsource many of the most sensitive political decisions, leaving fact-checking to media groups and geopolitics to think tanks. The more he succeeds, the fewer complications for Facebook’s expansion, the smaller its payroll, and the more plausible its positioning as a neutral platform. Facebook did not respond to a request for comment. (15)
U.S. think tank's tiny lab helps Facebook battle fake social media
Cooperation with fake news media and western imperialist think tanks on fact check and geopolitics is just a cover for Facebook’s own political stance, bias and double standards. The main purpose is to make Facebook look like neutral, creating its false image of political neutrality.
Tony Cartalucci (Anthony Cartalucci) complained against all of them after the mass purge with the title Banned From Facebook and Twitter! on July 25, 2019.
I have received and am grateful for a lot of support since Facebook/Twitter/Reuters' coordinated smear/censorship campaign. I've also more than doubled my website's viewership - because as is often the case - the harder you try to silence someone or something, the more attention you attract. So I hope Facebook, Twitter, Reuters and many others continue working hard to "silence" me and others - because it helps prove everything being said is true about the West's hypocrisy and habit of hiding behind principles like "human rights," "free speech," and "democracy" when in fact trampling them all - it also helps people notice my work and decide for themselves if what is said about me by serial liars and hypocrites is true or not. July 25, 2019 (LD) - Facebook and Twitter joined forces to investigate and delete my accounts. This includes my Facebook page, as well as my Land Destroyer Twitter account, my Thai-centric AltThaiNews account, my personal Twitter account @TonyCartalucci and my LocalOrg account discussing solutions and technology.
About Fake Account allegation,
…… Tony Cartalucci is my pen name and a form of anonymity - it is not a "fictitious persona." I write in a country where US-backed political agitators - referred to as "democracy activists" in the Reuters article - regularly use deadly violence against their opponents. And if writing under a pen name or anonymously is grounds for expulsion from both Facebook and Twitter, what is The Economist still doing on either platform? The Economist's articles are all admittedly written anonymously. The Reuters article and those citing it and celebrating censorship are engaged in the now familiar tactics of smearing targeted individuals to justify otherwise indefensible censorship. I am associated with New Eastern Outlook. They regularly publish my articles, as do hundreds of other alternative media websites around the world. What I perhaps noticed most were all the so-called "democracy activists" in Thailand - taking time from complaining about Bangkok "censoring" them - to celebrate Facebook and Twitter's censorship - including Thailand's Human Rights Watch senior researcher, Sunai Phasuk who gloated on Twitter that my "information operation" was finally "ended." (16)
Banned From Facebook and Twitter!
Managing SNS accounts is a burden and he can spend more valuable time on his remarkable writing on US imperialist misdeeds in Thailand and around the world. July of 2019 was a beginning of mass purge. My Flicker account, IMDb account and pages were also systematically taken down while I already shared with millions of people about what US government and its puppets have done at home and abroad. Their main concern was and still is about the ongoing trade war with China and Hong Kong colour riots they funded and supported firmly.
As he wrote, Tony Cartalucci (Anthony Cartalucci) is just a pen name of the journalist based in Thailand where US paid death squads are real threats to anyone who opposes US imperialist views and policies. Using a pen name does not mean the author does not exist in real world. On the contrary, there are millions of pen names or nick names or animated or sock pocket users allowed in Facebook and Twitter. This case is also a typical political oppression on international dissidents outside of US.
I'm on VK because despite the US-UK claiming Russia is controlled by an authoritarian regime - Russia's VK is one of the few spaces left you can exercise free speech when criticizing the US or UK. I was never a big deal and especially not on social media. The only thing these people accomplished was exposing their hypocrisy and attracting attention to me. My blog's traffic has quadrupled. People are going to wonder why the head of Human Rights Watch in Thailand was celebrating Facebook/Twitter censorship... Thank you 21st Century Wire for the support. This whole thing is way out of control. CNN, Daily Beast, local pro-Western agitators including HRW, authors at "Bangkok Post" and "Khaosod" are clamouring and circling over my accounts being banned. Since I know I'm just one person who spends about 5 hours max a week on political writing/commenting the fact they've gone ballistic like this says more about their growing weakness than my "disinformation operation." Information space for a nation is fast becoming as important to protect as physical territory. US corporations like Facebook, Twitter, and Google monopolizing communication abroad is not unlike US troops occupying territory abroad... The NATO/Atlantic Council propaganda front DFR Lab claims it was contacted by Facebook before it took down mine and NEO's Facebook pages. What's most striking is the profound ignorance and poorly constructed assumptions made throughout their "analysis" of my pages as well as the insidious nature they try to assign to cross posting content which everyone everywhere does - AFP and others for example make money by having other newspapers around the globe repost their articles! This is why they have to delete us off the networks they still control - because competing intellectually and in the arena of facts and logic is out of the question for them. Ever wonder what is really behind Facebook's "digital currency" Libra? Just as Facebook works with governments and corporate interests to control the flow of information, Libra will allow Facebook and its backers to control money in the digital realm. - Anthony Cartalucci
On November 4, 2020, one of his enemies Khaosod English published an article below:
Using a real name to publish articles online is basic responsibility and necessary to avoid any false persona allegations. And it's the safest way to protect authors' families online.
2. Hong Kong Local Case Complaints
HKG Pao Case:
HKG Pao is one of net media which labelled as ‘pro-Beijing’ camp in Hong Kong. And it has various names and pages (Silent Majority for Hong Kong; We Support Carrie Lam; We Support HK; We Are All Chinese) run by the same company located in Lai Chi Kok and owned by ex- Radio Television Hong Kong worker, CHOW Yung, Robert.
In fact, HKG Pao as the former name Market Legend Limited was funded by one of notorious oligarchs of developers, Martin Lee Ka-Shing and his Henderson Land Development Company Limited. The Stand News reported it on May 12, 2015.