Hong Kong Intelligence Report #29 Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior of Nazi-FACEBOOK Censorship

Updated: Aug 1

#HongKong #Intelligence #Report #香港情報分析 #OSINT

FILE PHOTO:Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour of Nazi-FACEBOOK Censorship .  Composite ©Ryota Nakanishi
FILE PHOTO: Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour of Nazi-FACEBOOK Censorship . Composite ©Ryota Nakanishi

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)

READ MORE:

China Hits Back After Twitter and Facebook Block Pro-Beijing Content

https://fortune.com/2019/08/22/china-twitter-facebook-hong-kong-accounts/

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)


READ MORE:

Facebook And Twitter Uncover Huge Chinese State Operation Targeting Hong Kong Protesters

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/08/19/twitter-and-facebook-slap-down-chinese-states-deceptive-propaganda-machine/#63bdce5d6bb9

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

National Security Council, The White House

May 2013 Oct 2015, 2 years 6 months Washington, DC


(3)


FILE PHOTO: A screenshot of LinkedIn page of Nathaniel Gleicher Head of Cybersecurity Policy at Facebook.  Screenshot ©Ryota Nakanishi
FILE PHOTO: A screenshot of LinkedIn page of N. Gleicher. Screenshot ©Ryota Nakanishi

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)

READ MORE:

Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior From China

https://about.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-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:

Samples

English Captions attached.


(5)

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.


(6)

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.

READ MORE:

Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior in Thailand, Russia, Ukraine and Honduras

https://about.fb.com/news/2019/07/removing-cib-thailand-russia-ukraine-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 othe