H&R Block,Tax Firms Shared Tens of Millions of Taxpayers Info with Google, Facebook

An accountant who shared personal tax information would find themselves facing criminal charges. Will the largest tax preparation firms be held accountable? Since the Dems are reporting this and are not known for their special concern for individual rights, one must figure it suits their agenda to take these companies out. That is how the swamp works. So hang on, here we go:

Three large tax preparation firms sent “extraordinarily sensitive” information on tens of millions of taxpayers to Facebook parent company Meta over the course of at least two years, a group of congressional Democrats reported Wednesday.

Their report urges federal agencies to investigate and potentially go to court over the wealth of information that H&R Block, TaxAct and TaxSlayer shared with the social media giant.

In a letter to the heads of the IRS, the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission and the IRS watchdog, seven lawmakers say their findings “reveal a shocking breach of taxpayer privacy by tax prep companies and by Big Tech firms.”

That data came to Meta through its Pixel code, which the tax firms installed on their websites to gather information on how to improve their own marketing campaigns.

The program collected information on taxpayers’ filing status, income, refund amounts, names of dependents, approximate federal tax owed, which buttons were clicked on the tax preparers’ websites and the names of text entry forms that the taxpayer navigated, the report states.

The letter to federal agencies was signed by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).

Read more

If you puzzled over why the Dems had a knot in their knickers I have the silver lining to why the Dems have an interest in this matter. Not known for their detailed attention to individual freedoms, here is the clincher.

P.S. Thanks McCarthy, the funding for this “try-out” was in the infamous Inflation Reduction Act. This would have the government prepare you taxes and who knows what else.

The Democrats say their report serves as an argument for the creation of an electronic free-file system for submitting tax returns that would be run by the government, which the IRS is piloting.

The IRS plans to launch a pilot program for the 2024 filing season to test a “direct file” system and help the federal government decide whether to move forward with potentially implementing it in the future.

The very best in the swamp.

Facebook ‘whistleblower’ plant wants to fool the GOP at hearing

When former Facebook Haugen  a “whistle blower” is represented by Jen Psaki’s PR firm and Eric Ciaramella’s legal team you are definitely on the Dems page.

Isn’t it amazing how a Facebook “whistleblower” can appear on 60 Minutes, Facebook has a worldwide outage, “whistleblower” gets a congressional hearing, and Facebook agrees to censor more after the hearing – All in 48 hours.

Isn’t it amazing she now moves on to the E.U. to shop her censorship wares? What a coincidence. 

When the Dems and the GOP appear on the same page on a subject, Houston, we have a problem.

 

REVEALED: Facebook "whistleblower" was part of team that censored Hunter Biden laptop storyhttps://t.co/79LLSVfJhS

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) October 5, 2021

The Facebook civic integrity team that leftist activist whistleblower Frances Haugen was a member of, worked to counter misinformation about the 2020 election.

Which in October of last year meant making the decision to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story and the New York Post’s reporting on it.

…Along with mentioning that Frances Haugen is represented by White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s PR firm, and is traveling to Europe soon to testify for the EU parliament.

Her views on free speech aside, the issue is worth exploring deeper.

On Tuesday, Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before a Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Consumer Protection about the situation inside the company.

Read more

 

Glen Greenwald at Substack has a good read on this as well:

And that is Facebook’s only real political problem: not that they are too powerful but that they are not using that power to censor enough content from the internet that offends the sensibilities and beliefs of Democratic Party leaders and their liberal followers, who now control the White House, the entire executive branch and both houses of Congress. Haugen herself, now guided by long-time Obama operative Bill Burton, has made explicitly clear that her grievance with her former employer is its refusal to censor more of what she regards as “hate, violence and misinformation.” In a 60 Minutes interview on Sunday night, Haugen summarized her complaint about CEO Mark Zuckerberg this way: he “has allowed choices to be made where the side effects of those choices are that hateful and polarizing content gets more distribution and more reach.” Haugen, gushed The New York Times’ censorship-desperate tech unit as she testified on Tuesday, is “calling for regulation of the technology and business model that amplifies hate and she’s not shy about comparing Facebook to tobacco.”

Agitating for more online censorship has been a leading priority for the Democratic Party ever since they blamed social media platforms (along with WikiLeaks, Russia, Jill Stein, James Comey, The New York Times, and Bernie Bros) for the 2016 defeat of the rightful heir to the White House throne, Hillary Clinton. And this craving for censorship has been elevated into an even more urgent priority for their corporate media allies, due to the same belief that Facebook helped elect Trump but also because free speech on social media prevents them from maintaining a stranglehold on the flow of information by allowing ordinary, uncredentialed serfs to challenge, question and dispute their decrees or build a large audience that they cannot control.

…A Pew survey from August shows that Democrats now overwhelmingly support internet censorship not only by tech giants but also by the government which their party now controls. In the name of “restricting misinformation,” more than 3/4 of Democrats want tech companies “to restrict false info online, even if it limits freedom of information,” and just under 2/3 of Democrats want the U.S. Government to control that flow of information over the internet.

Read more

Best of the swamp today.

For the best in news push the button

 

Will the government internet ‘kill switch’ going to be used?

 

 

At 3pm ET on June 2, 2019 it appears that Google Cloud (affecting Gmail, YouTube, SnapChat, Instagram, Twitter and Facebook among others) mysteriously (and almost unprecedently) went offline. Was this the trial run?

This brought to mind Obama’s Executive Order just in case you think this is a tin foil hat thing. Congress had big plans too.

Incident began at 2019-06-02 12:25 (all times are US/Pacific).

Jun 02, 20 12:25 We are investigating an issue with Google Compute Engine. We will provide more information by Sunday, 2019-06-02 12:45 US/Pacific.

One Google insider explains (via YCombinator):

I work on Google Cloud (but disclaimer, I’m on vacation and so not much use to you!).

We’re having what appears to be a serious networking outage. It’s disrupting everything, including unfortunately the tooling we usually use to communicate across the company about outages.

There are backup plans, of course, but I wanted to at least come here to say: you’re not crazy, nothing is lost (to those concerns downthread), but there is serious packet loss at the least. You’ll have to wait for someone actually involved in the incident to say more.

The internet is having a very bad day… Zero Hedge  and more of the details and a tip of the hat.

 

 

 

If you think this couldn’t happen, check back at what Obama and Congress had in mind a few years ago.

Presidential powers over the Internet and telecommunications were laid out in a U.S. Senate bill in 2009, which proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet. But that legislation was not included in the Cybersecurity Act of 2012. I caught some discussion of this at the time, and the rationale was that  “misinformation” may need to be curtailed. Where did I hear that before? Anyone still wondering where we are headed with this? Think the Dems won’t try this again?

President Obama signed an executive order the week of July 12, 2012 that could give him control over the web in times of emergency.

According to The Verge, critics of the order are concerned with Section 5.2, which is a lengthy part outlining how telecommunications and the Internet are controlled. It states that the Secretary of Homeland Security will “oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment” of national security and emergency preparedness measures on all systems, including private “non-military communications networks.” According to The Verge, critics say this gives Obama the on/off switch to the Web.

The order, known as the, “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions,” exists to hand over full control of communications and the internet to certain government authorities in times of natural disaster and security emergencies.

The wording for the executive order is of course lengthy and uses politician language, but the part worth pointing out is in section 5.2. It is in this section that the order states that Homeland Security will be able to monitor and control all non-military forms of communications in times of extreme measures, which is essentially giving the White House the on/off switch to the internet, according to some critics.

You can read more about the executive order, which still at the time still had 30 days before it became a law, over at CNET and The Verge. If you want to check out the order in its entirety, go to the White House press page.

Bonus:

Executive Order — National Defense Resources Preparedness

In a nutshell, it’s the blueprint for Peacetime Martial Law and it gives the president the power to take just about anything deemed necessary for “National Defense”, whatever they decide that is. It’s peacetime, because as the title of the order says, it’s for “Preparedness”.

Quote:

Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness

 

A very good day in the swamp.

Facebook Took Down Trump Campaign Ad For “Organized Hate” Violation

 

We sure are getting the election season off to a good start. Does anyone really think that the Trump reelection campaign had in mind to use a Nazi symbol? After Trump has done more for Israel than any President in recent memory? Just an excuse,

Another salvo coming Trump’s way. Zero Hedge picked up this story and I am sure it put the left wing knickers in a knot as they are doing their best to de-platform them with Google in their cross-hairs regarding ad revenue. So here is one for them:

CNN just confirmed a report initially published by the NY Daily News that Facebook removed a Trump 2020 campaign ad over violations of its “organized hate” policy.

Facebook has taken down multiple Trump reelection campaign ads citing policy violation against organized hate.

Spox tells @NBCNews "our policy prohibits using a banned hate group's symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol”

— Sally Shin (@sallyshin) June 18, 2020

Apparently, Facebook deemed that the red upside down triangle is associated with the holocaust after a far-left group posing as a ‘human rights’ organization accused Trump of “campaigning for the 2020 election using a Nazi concentration camp symbol”.

The President of the United States is campaigning for reelection using a Nazi concentration camp symbol.

Nazis used the red triangle to mark political prisoners and people who rescued Jews.

Trump & the RNC are using it to smear millions of protestors.

Their masks are off. pic.twitter.com/UzmzDaRBup

— Bend the Arc: Jewish Action (@jewishaction) June 18, 2020

The Washington Post’s inquiry appears to have prompted Facebook to censor the post, according to a company spokesman who spoke with WaPo.

A red inverted triangle was first used in the 1930s to identify Communists, and was applied as well to Social Democrats, liberals, Freemasons and other members of opposition parties. The badge forced on Jewish political prisoners, by contrast, featured a yellow triangle overlaid by a red triangle.

In response to queries from The Washington Post, Facebook on Thursday afternoon deactivated ads that included the inverted red triangle.

The red symbol appeared in paid posts sponsored by Trump and Vice President Pence, as well as by the “Team Trump” campaign page. It was featured alongside text warning of “Dangerous MOBS of far-left groups” and asking users to sign a petition about antifa, a loose collection of anti-fascist activists whom the Trump administration has sought to link to recent violence, despite arrest records that show their involvement is trivial.

“We removed these posts and ads for violating our policy against organized hate,” said Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesman. “Our policy prohibits using a banned hate group’s symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol.”

However, the Trump campaign (which was quoted in the WaPo article), responded with clear examples of Antifa merchandise bearing the upside down red triangle in question, which one of Trump’s campaign reps described as “an antifa symbol”.

Read more at the  Zero Hedge

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

 

 

Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg BRAGS About Blocking Pro-Life Ads In Irish Elections

 

This week Mark Zuckerberg bragged about banning pro-life ads from American groups during the Irish elections.  So he talks to governments in power and “they” decide what ads should be out there? The best part of it?

The company decided it would be the best thing to do. After talking to the Irish government.

Facebook is now out telling us that they now are in charge of what we read, not just here America, but around the world.

Why isn’t this a headline news story?.

It has been well documented he has been going after Conservatives, Where is the GOP? Zuckerberg has not shame.

 

 

Need a refresher? Here is from Project Veritas back in February.

BREAKING: Facebook Insider Leaks Docs; Explains "Deboosting," "Troll Report," & Political Targeting in Video Interview (FULL –> https://t.co/UdR4D6OkaK) pic.twitter.com/1lQlpvq8sT

— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) February 27, 2019

The link below explains exactly how YouTube interfered with the Irish Election.

 

Be sure and visit  WhatFingerNews  A great site for all the news.

Project Veritas: BLACKLISTED: LEAKED YOUTUBE DOC APPEARS TO SHOW ELECTION INTERFERENCE-   CLICK HERE

Our Rights. Do most of us even understand them?

Our Rights

Do most of us even understand them?

By Mustang

A common complaint today is that one or another social media platform have banned someone because they, in some way, violated platform standards of conduct.  At least, that’s the allegation; but I have to ask: Um … so?

Perhaps it is true that social media standards are draconian, and they may even be politically biased.  We may not like these so-called standards, but there is another argument.  Given what we know about human behavior on social media, some of which is out-right cowardly and vulgar, most of which we would never tolerate from anyone in person, and some of which is clearly dangerous to public safety, what is wrong with an attempt by social media to enforce well-mannered and lawful dialogue?  

Hasn’t it been true in the past that terrorists have used social media to communicate their plans and aspirations? Aren’t there predators on these platforms, people who bully and harass others?  Aren’t there some people who are unable to construct simple sentences without using the “F-bomb”?  I’m trying to imagine how many of us would host an afternoon party at our homes and then put up with such nonsense from one of our guests.  Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t put up with it more than a nanosecond.

Beyond this, there is the inane argument that social platforms are denying its clients their first amendment right to self-expression (no matter how inappropriate those expressions may be).  Well, a short review of the First Amendment is in order. The Constitution and its amendments only apply to government’s behavior toward us … it does not protect behavior between private persons. 

In other words, there is no right to free speech when someone is standing in our living rooms making an ass of him or herself —and should I toss an offensive person out the door, they have no right to have me arrested, or drag me into a civil court, for doing so.  I’m thinking we ought to stop using the “first amendment” argument: it is silly.

I often wonder if social media platforms aren’t part of the reason our society has become so fractured—so, my final argument, allowing that Facebook or Twitter is not a government entity, is that if people are offended because social media restricts their speech or behavior, they can always cancel their accounts—which, as best as I can tell offers us access to their platforms free of charge.  We do have choices, right?  We could, for example, reduce our profanity, curtail the tendency to be rude or obnoxious to people we have never even met, and we could seek ways of expressing our political proclivities other than shouting at one another.

What say you?

Facebook Censors Bible Verse “John 3:16” and “The Resurrection of Jesus Christ”

Pastor Andrew says his posts with “John 3:16” and painting “The Resurrection of Jesus Christ” were banned by Facebook. The tweet with a copy of the painting is no longer in my re-tweets.

How soon before the government acts? Silly of me. Tons of money flows to the Senators to keep the swamp happy. How long are we going to put up with this? We know conservatives have been banned, shadow banned and the like, including members of Congress and now they move on to religion? Let’s not forget that Zuckerberg installed the SPLC to monitoring sites.

I recall when FB first game out, it was a way for friends and families to stay in touch.  Now it has turned into a nightmare for many.

Pastor Andrew has lost close to 5 million readers a month since Facebook changed their algorithm.

Southern Poverty Law Center secretly policing content for YouTube

The Southern Poverty Law Center is assisting YouTube in policing content on their platform, The Daily Caller has learned.

The left-wing nonprofit — which has more recently come under fire for labeling legitimate conservative organizations as “hate groups” — is one of the more than 100 nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and government agencies in YouTube’s “Trusted Flaggers” program, a source with knowledge of the arrangement told TheDC.

The new Southern Poverty Law Center report on The Patriot Movement and how they inspire Hate Groups and Militias.

Here is their map to their so-called “Hate Groups” –  Hate Map

Here is a list of the various groups including Christian identities – Catholics and Oath Keepers: SPLC Groups Monitored

But let’s look at the money:

Facebook PAC donation to senators

Ahead of more testimony from Zuckerberg today, why not check out the contributions that senators on the Judiciary and Commerce, Science and Transportation committees have received for their campaigns from Facebook’s PAC since it started making political donations in the 2012 election cycle.

A popular pastor said, “Facebook is blocking almost everyone from seeing John 3:16, ‘The Old Rugged Cross,’ the resurrection of Jesus Christ and my other posts.” Pastor Steven Andrew has a sizeable audience, with 467,000 people liking his page. Yet, Facebook showed these posts to only hundreds of people each. (The number will be higher with media coverage.)

Andrew said, ‘I am being silenced by Facebook. Christianity is being silenced!”

“These posts are filled with God’s forgiveness and truth, which are the greatest message of love,” he said.

Andrew is called the “Facebook pastor” and spent thousands of dollars with Facebook advertising to build up the followers. Before the censoring, he reached 5 to 8 million people per month, with an average post going to 30,000 to 60,000 people. Some posts reached a million people. However, after Facebook said they were cracking down on fake news in 2016, they shadowbanned Andrew, blocking about 5 million people per month.

“Christianity is not fake news,” he said.

Andrew contacted Facebook about the censoring earlier, but they did nothing. He also requested Facebook remove the fake accounts impersonating him that scam followers for money, but Facebook refused. There are over 70 impersonating accounts.

Andrew said, “Facebook caused a loss millions of dollars in donations and the ability to grow my website traffic.”

Because of this Andrew is building a new social network called USA.Life so people can share freely about life, liberty and happiness. “There is no censoring of Christianity and our American rights at USA.Life,” he said. Andrew is a Silicon Valley internet leader, who has run multi-million dollar Fortune 500 initiative.

H/Ts: Standard Newswire

Gateway Pundit

Facebook hearing – the dog and pony show and the donations that were behind it

 

I watched a good portion of the Zuckerberg hearing. I came away from it thinking it was a dog and pony show. Most of the Senators were poorly lacking in having any real understanding of technology. They no doubt had their staff produce questions that were basically sound, then Zuckerberg would simply act as if he didn’t understand their question with the blank star and ask them to clarify. This of course left the Senators looking stupid. “How many categories of information do you collect?” “I don’t understand the question.”  People decide what is out there by what they place on their page.” Then he goes to his talking points of script. I can’t imagine the House hearing today. Why have almost 50 Senators asking questions, why not a handful that understand technology. But then again, all should be happy. He was very happy to support government regulation and would work with the Senators on it. One thing we did learn is that FB is working with the Special Counsel. But of course. Yes, we indeed want the thought police. Just like we have with YouTube. A previous post:

Southern Poverty Law Center secretly policing content for YouTube

The Southern Poverty Law Center is assisting YouTube in policing content on their platform, The Daily Caller has learned.

The left-wing nonprofit — which has more recently come under fire for labeling legitimate conservative organizations as “hate groups” — is one of the more than 100 nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and government agencies in YouTube’s “Trusted Flaggers” program, a source with knowledge of the arrangement told TheDC.

 

But let’s look at the money:

Facebook PAC donation to senators

Ahead of more testimony from Zuckerberg today, why not check out the contributions that senators on the Judiciary and Commerce, Science and Transportation committees have received for their campaigns from Facebook’s PAC since it started making political donations in the 2012 election cycle.

The totals are based on an NBC review of data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

Check out the full interactive here. (Scroll down a good way on the page)

Here is a bit of analysis:

A MapLight analysis of contributions found that the ubiquitous social network and its employees have given more than $3.1 million in campaign contributions to federal candidates during the last decade.

Facebook donors gave more than $265,000 to members of the Senate Commerce panel, while senators on the Judiciary committee reported $284,600 during the decade. House committee members received about $323,800 from the company and its employees. Rep. Anna Eshoo, a Silicon Valley Democrat whose district is adjacent to the sprawling Facebook headquarters, received $51,050 in Facebook-related donations.

Trump, received $4,815 from eight Facebook employees. (Brave souls- wonder if they are still working)

Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon who ran unsuccessfully for the 2016 GOP nomination and who currently is Trump’s housing secretary, ranked last among presidential candidates favored by Facebook donors, receiving only $250. H/T: Fast Company

Via Free Beacon:

Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s chief operating officer, has maxed out political donations to a number of Democratic candidates including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) this cycle, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

In addition to the donations, Sandberg appeared in the hacked emails of John Podesta, the former chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

A pdf file discovered by the Free Beacon that was attached to one of the emails  spoke of ‘discreet conversations’ about forming ‘working relationships’ between the Clinton campaign and the likes of Facebook and Apple. That memo referenced the work being done for the Clinton campaign by a group linked to Eric Schmidt, the former chief executive of Alphabet, Google’s parent company.

Facebook told USA Today that it is important for the tech giant to “develop relationships with elected officials” when questioned on the company’s PAC contributions that have been given to members of the committees questioning Zuckerberg.

New York Times ‘angel’ Mexican Billionaire becomes 2nd largest investor

If we thought that the NY Times had a penchant for the Progressives, we need only to learn who the “Angel” is that is coming along to prop up the floundering Times.Now Mexico has a direct mouthpiece. All the news that is unfit to print is how I look at it. Why is it that those who have so much are determined that the rest of us poor suckers here in America are expected to carry their imposed weight of their destructive policies? Here we go

Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim, the world’s second-wealthiest person, is now reportedly the “largest investor” in the New York Times after doubling his ownership stake in the company. According to a Bloomberg report, Slim exercised “options to acquire 15.9 million shares.

As Breitbart News has documented, the Times has been one of President Barack Obama’s most ferocious defenders on amnesty issues. It has, for instance, “asserted, even though the numbers prove otherwise, that it was ‘delusional’” to think Obama’s “DACA program lured more illegal immigrants to America,” mocked “its own Republican columnist for criticizing Obama’s potential Caesarism,” and “maligned opponents of Obama’s executive action, who have emphasized that granting millions of work permits to illegal immigrants would make it more difficult for American workers, of all races and backgrounds, to get jobs, as ‘nativists.’”

Slim, a fierce advocate for amnesty legislation, has reportedly “introduced a campaign to integrate about half a million” DREAMers into the U.S. workforce. And Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, who also started the pro-amnesty FWD.us lobbying group, pushed for comprehensive amnesty legislation at Slim’s charity event in Mexico last year.

More at Breitbart

Mother puts Suicide Belt on her child – U.S. backed Fatah

US-Backed Fatah Posts Picture On Official Facebook Page Of Mother Putting Her Child In A Suicide Belt… screams the headline. Fatah-the Palestine “moderate” party

 “Why me and not you?” the child innocently asks his
mother, who answers that she will continue to have more children “for the sake
of Palestine”:

How in the world can we possibly understand these people? What society has ever embraced the sending of their children out to blow themselves up? Why this post today? Because the present regime remains clueless about what these people are all about. If there is any reason to vote for Romney, this is one. Reality check… its time to let him go. Apparently Facebook does not need to take this one down. Just the Navy Seals.

Via PMW:

The Facebook page for Fatah in Lebanon has posted this picture of a mother dressing her young son with a suicide belt. Palestinian Media Watch has documented the on going glorification of violence and Martyrdom by the PA. This picture was posted on the Fatah Facebook page together with an imaginary conversation between the son who is being sent to his death and the mother encouraging it. “Why me and not you?” the child innocently asks his mother, who answers that she will continue to have more children “for the sake of Palestine”:

“My mother dressed me in a strange belt (i.e., a suicide belt). I asked her: ‘What is this, mother?’ She said: ‘I will put it on you and you will go to your death!’ I said to her: ‘Mother, what have I done that you want me to die?’ She shed a tear that hurt my heart and said: ‘The homeland needs you, son. Go and blow up the sons of Zion.’ I said to her: ‘Why me and not you?’ She said: ‘I will stay in order to give birth to more children for the sake of Palestine.’ I kissed her hand and said to her: ‘Keep it up, mother, for you and for Palestine I will kill the impure and the damned.’”

[Fatah-Lebanon’s Facebook page, posted Sept. 3, 2012, accessed Oct. 28, 2012]

The Facebook page states that it is “the official page of Fatah’s Information and Culture Commission in Lebanon,” and is linked to from the official website of the Fatah Information and Culture Commission (www.fatahmedia.ps).

H/T: Weasel Zippers