Ron Paul Posts Criticism of Censorship on Social Media Shortly Before Facebook Blocks Him

We have been discussing the chilling crackdown on free speech that has been building for years in the United States. This effort has accelerated in the aftermath of the Capitol riot including the shutdown sites like Parler.  Now former Texas congressman Ron Paul, 85, has been blocked from using his Facebook page for unspecified violations of “community standards.” Paul’s last posting was linked to an article on the “shocking” increase of censorship on social media. Facebook then proceeded to block him under the same undefined “community standards” policy.

Paul, a libertarian leader and former presidential candidate, has been an outspoken critics of foreign wars and an advocate for civil liberties for decades.  He wrote:

“With no explanation other than ‘repeatedly going against our community standards,’ @Facebook has blocked me from managing my page. Never have we received notice of violating community standards in the past and nowhere is the offending post identified.”

His son is Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) tweeted, “Facebook now considers advocating for liberty to be sedition. Where will it end?”

Even before the riot, Democrats were calling for blacklists and retaliation against anyone deemed to be “complicit” with the Trump Administration. We have been discussing the rising threats against Trump supporters, lawyers, and officials in recent weeks from Democratic members are calling for blacklists to the Lincoln Project leading a a national effort to harass and abuse any lawyers representing the Republican party or President Trump. Others are calling for banning those “complicit” from college campuses while still others are demanding a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to “hold Trump and his enablers accountable for the crimes they have committed.” Daily Beast editor-at-large Rick Wilson has added his own call for “humiliation,” “incarceration” and even ritualistic suicides for Trump supporters in an unhinged, vulgar column.

After the riots, the big tech companies moved to ban and block sites and individuals, including Parler which is the primary alternative to Twitter.  Also, a top Forbes editor Randall Lane warned any company that they will be investigated if they hire any former Trump officials.

The riots are being used as a license to rollback on free speech and retaliate against conservatives.  In the meantime, the silence of academics and many in the media is deafening. Many of those who have spoken for years about the dark period of McCarthyism and blacklisting are either supporting this censorship or remaining silent in the face of it. Now that conservatives are the targets, speech controls and blacklists appear understandable or even commendable.

The move against Paul, a long champion of free speech, shows how raw and comprehensive this crackdown has become. It shows how the threat to free speech has changed. It is like having a state media without state control. These companies are moving in unison but not necessarily with direct collusion. The riot was immediately taken as a green light to move against a huge variety of sites and individuals.  As we have seen in Europe, such censorship becomes an insatiable appetite for greater and greater speech control.  Even Germany’s Angela Merkel (who has a long history of anti-free speech actions) has criticized Twitter’s actions as inimical to free speech.  Yet, most law professors and media figures in the United States remain silent.

244 thoughts on “Ron Paul Posts Criticism of Censorship on Social Media Shortly Before Facebook Blocks Him”

  1. Boycott their advertisers. Everyone. Make it clear to these guys and to everyone you can that you are done buying anything from their sponsors. They don’t want us. We will spend our money on everybody but you and your financial backers.

  2. Pingback: Auribus Arrectis
  3. Free Speech Champion Turley..

    Happy To Host Q’anon Conspiracies..

    But Mainstream Views Deleted From Threads

    Since the U.S. Capitol was invaded last week, these comment threads have been packed with far-right conspiracy theories; most notably the lie that Antifa infiltraters committed most of the violence. So many of these lies are posted by Turley’s blog troll, our main content provider. About 70% of the posts each day are from said troll who uses so many names that occasional readers can’t possibly keep track.

    The Professor uses said troll to keep these threads a safe place for Trump supporters. If not for the troll, liberal commenters would easily win any debates that might develop. That was always the case before the troll was hired. Therefore the troll is tasked with keeping these threads cluttered with stupid, repetitive nonsense appealing to the far-right yahoos Turley seeks to influence.

    Efforts to post intelligent views from mainstream media that conflict with Turley’s columns are met with hostility. The blog troll responds with perverted smears and distracting videos. But even these efforts can fall short when determined liberals keep posting. When it comes to stand-offs of this nature, the nominal moderater will simply delete the mainstream posts. ‘No one should ever try to counter-program the troll’, is the message one should take.

    Turley repeatedly features himself as a ‘champion of free speech’. But ‘free speech on this blog is accorded to only far-right commenters. Liberals will be harassed and smeared by Turley’s troll.

      1. If he’s not going to allow them, he shouldn’t let them be posted in the first place. But it’s silly to allow them and then require Darren to go through all of the comments to delete them.

        Whoever wants to can post under ever-changing names. There’s not much difference between that and anonymous posts.

        1. There are ways to handle the problem. Among the ways one can make each name and icon to have one operable email address. However, totally anonymous comments increase traffic. At the same time they decrease the value of the comment section.

            1. Anonymous, if we add up the value you add to the comment section we would be around zero. I am not trying to start a fight but believe if you had to stay with a fixed name your comments would be more productive. Don’t you agree?

              Just look at the number of comments you make every day and how many actually have any value. Try it yourself and see how many responses have a significant comment and how many don’t.

              1. Many people contribute anonymously.

                If you don’t like anonymous comments, then don’t read them. Scrolling is easy. If an anonymous comments bother you so much, then you obviously don’t have a rich and satisfying life.

                1. Anonymous, I responded to Mary not you. You responded to me. I don’t bother with most of your comments because they add nothing. I would prefer the opposite. Most of the time you are fighting with others like it seems you want to do with me with your ending insult. Too many of your comments seem to follow the same pattern. Even comments to you by other anonymous figures follow that pattern so one wonders.

                  I’m not a big poster and only post on a few of Turley’s op-eds, but I note you are always there even though I am just scanning. You can do as you please. That is your business but I have a right to voice my opinion as well without being insulted.

                  1. Repeating:

                    Many people contribute anonymously.

                    If you don’t like anonymous comments, then don’t read them. Scrolling is easy.

                    You weren’t “insulted.” The sentence in the response, above, is an “if-then” construct. If the shoe doesn’t fit, then it doesn’t fit. It’s not an insult at all. That you would take it so personally makes one wonder, though…

                    Have a good day, Ron.

                    1. I made my comment which is legitimate. You responded,”If an anonymous comments bother you so much, then you obviously don’t have a rich and satisfying life.”

                      That is most definitely an insult. You can continue to insult and fight with people as you wish, but I am not going to be one of them that responds to your insulting tone..

                    2. Ron is apparently thin-skinned, to which I say: Buck up, buddy. It’s a rough and tumble world — and you’re letting anonymous comments get to you? Gotta let things roll off…

                  2. “Anonymous, I responded to Mary not you. You responded to me.”

                    This is the way that the comments section of a blog works. Anyone can respond to anyone else.

                    1. You are something else anonymous. I understand that you can interject and respond at will. I just wanted to make it clear my discussion was with Mary not with you . You interjected which is your right and you became insulting which you can do but that is not the way adults generally act and one of the reasons I previously stayed clear of you. I come here for a quick change of pace not a new lifestyle which you seem to have blogging incessantly non-stop.

                      Now you are calling me thin skinned. You might think that based on the way you act, as the thin skinned person you are, but I am not affected by such rudeness of behavior. If I want I can dish it out as well but I note you are already under attack by others for your attitude that doesn’t belong on a blog of this nature. I’ll try and act normal like so many others try to do. You are free to do as you please and I will permit you to have the last word along with what appears to be your typical insult.

                    2. “such rudeness of behavior. ”

                      Ron, do you know why Anonymous the Stupid acts that way? Anonymous the Stupid is posting on every blog posting Turley makes and is posting most of the day insulting everyone. There is barely enough time for Anonymous the Stupid to actually learn anything. Do you know why Anonymous the Stupid acts that way? Because he is Anonymous the Stupid. It is as simple as that.

                  3. “If an anonymous comments bother you so much, then you obviously don’t have a rich and satisfying life.”

                    Strike that:

                    If an anonymous comment bothers one so much, then one obviously doesn’t have a rich and satisfying life.

                    If the shoe fits, wear it — and if not, discard it. You decide.

  4. ** Fact check by PolitiFact: Pants on Fire **

    No, the Capitol insurrection was not staged by antifa – › jan › jonathan-wichmann › no-ca…

    Claim: “The DC looting was staged” by antifa

    Claimed by: Jonathan Wichmann

    Fact check by PolitiFact: Pants on Fire

      1. Anonymous the Stupid frequently uses left wing fact check sites that do not provide reliable stories. Mostly they are total spin on hot issues. Sometimes they change the actual question enough that they can say “false” when the appropriate answer to the questions being asked is “yes”.

        Wichmann may or may not have provided a reasonably accurate story but Politifact didn’t either.

        What PF writes, lump’s Trump with people that likely should not be lumped with Trump and could be lumped with Antifa. We don’t have the data but strong evidence exists that at least one person was identified as an Antifa member. There is evidence that points to him communicating with another.

        “There is no credible evidence that the crowd was infiltrated or led by antifa activists in disguise.” That depends on what he terms credible. The same could be same for Trump supporters even though I believe Trump supporters were there.

        PF also didn’t delve into the timing issue. PF said: “The mob that broke windows inside and outside the Capitol and violently pushed past police moved to the building ***after*** a rally earlier that morning where Trump spoke to the group. Some have said that Trump was still speaking at the onset of the incident. That is an important question of timing.

        I don’t know what happened and neither does PF. There is good reason to believe Trump supporters and Antifa were both there as that is what generally happens when Trump protestors protest.

        Anonymous doesn’t think rather uses leftist others to formulate what he writes . Do you know why he is so poorly informed? Because he is Anonymous the Stupid.

        1. Allan the Stupid (S. Meyer) projects his own stupidity onto others. Do you know why? Because he’s a troll.

          1. Allan clearly feels threatened by Anonymous and others on the left. Poor boy — emphasis on ‘boy.’

  5. Rather than repealing Section 230, why not add a legal requirement that the providers may not restrict speech unless it falls within one of the judicially recognised exceptions to the 1st Amendment. This would put the providers on the same footing as the government when it comes to restricting speech.

  6. Congresswoman Lauren Boebert, who has bragged about her desire to carry a weapon on Capital Hill is currently in a standoff with Capitol Police at the newly installed metal detectors outside the doors to the House Chamber.


    Acton Institute’s Rev. Robert Sirico: Reject ‘moral relativism’ over the Capitol riot

    Rev. Robert Sirico, the president and co-founder of the Acton Institute, discussed how Christians should respond to the Capitol riot in a segment of EWTN’s The World Over dedicated to “political protests and lawlessness.”

    “Why are we seeing more frequent, violent political protests here in the U.S., and what needs to be done about this rioting?” host Raymond Arroyo asked his guests, Rev. Sirico and Catholic League President Bill Donohue.

    “We need to be outraged – morally outraged – by what we saw in D.C.” for “the same reason that we were morally outraged by what we saw in Seattle, and Portland, and Minneapolis,” said Rev. Sirico. “We can’t be tempted to a kind of moral relativism.”

    Vandalizing the Capitol is “not that much morally different than the violation a coffee shop, or a grocery store, or a retailer,” he said during the 22-minute-long segment. Both acts violate “private property, which is sacred.”

    Donohue regularly returned to the ways political figures on the far-Left sanitized this summer’s riots over the murder of George Floyd. Rev. Sirico said that political ideologues cannot give people of faith “permission to lower our own moral standards.”

    Instead, Rev. Sirico encouraged Christians to keep their eyes on the prize. “We’re trying to build a society that is virtuous, a society that is good, where there can be cooperation,” he said. “Are conservatives now going to” begin “promoting this kind of division – which is exactly what Marxism wants?” he asked.

    Rev. Sirico and Raymond Arroyo said that Christians must detoxify our personal relationships of politically motivated animosity. “I think we need to begin recognizing that there is a division in this country, and the only way out of it is for us to listen to each other and not throw things at each other,” said Rev. Sirico. “We need to begin a new conversation.” Raymond Arroyo agreed that Americans have to “get away from seeing everyone through a partisan lens.”

    Engaging in honest, robust dialogue with those who disagree with us will reveal how much we have in common. The ringleaders of riots consist of “a smaller group of irresponsible, ideological people who are bent on destruction, bent on violence, and those people need to be isolated and identified. Those thoughts, those principles, those politics need to be identified and [exorcised] from the body politic,” Rev. Sirico said.

    “We need to be ruthless with our principles and our ideas, and gentle with our neighbors.”

    -Designed to meet needs of historically underserved communities and promote Unity

    WASHINGTON, DC – The Party today announced its new Enlightenment Camp program, which was adopted as part of the historic domestic terrorism legislation enacted by President Biden earlier this week. The Program is designed to develop the next generation of Party members, especially among underserved communities.

    Enlightenment Camps will be organized into Villages, which provide a welcoming environment to all youths, irrespective of the ill-conceived ideologies of their parents. Village members will receive training on core Party values, learn to identify and combat reactionary elements, and develop the skills needed to serve as the next generation of Party members.

    “Far too many of today’s youth remain trapped in traditional two-parent households where they are steeped in the dangerous remnants of our divisive heteronormative past. As a result, they have been underserved by the Party’s social services organizations,” said Audrey Lord, the newly-named Overgroupleader for the Enlightenment Camp program. “ Enlightenment Camps will level the playing field and allow them to reach their full potential as Party members,” Lord added.

    “My time at the founding Village opened my eyes to a world of possibilities. Our Gender Coach was amazing, and I had the opportunity to build new bonds that will help me serve the Party in the years to come,” said Justin Blanchette of Lee’s Summit, Missouri. “I now have the confidence to help my birth parents overcome their resistance to change and incorporate my learnings as part of their everyday lives. I’m really looking forward to returning to my Village in the Spring.”

    Graduates of the Enlightenment Camps program will be eligible to join the Youth Cadet Training Corps (YCTC), which is being established to train young adults to support domestic peacekeeping efforts being carried out by National Guard units nationwide.

    Blog moderators and readers will recognize that the foregoing is intended as satire to foster discussion on important issues relating to the role of the government, the rule of law, and free speech.

  9. Last week’s massive social media purges – starting with President Trump’s permanent ban from Twitter and other outlets – was shocking and chilling, particularly to those of us who value free expression and the free exchange of ideas. The justifications given for the silencing of wide swaths of public opinion made no sense and the process was anything but transparent. Nowhere in President Trump’s two “offending” Tweets, for example, was a call for violence expressed explicitly or implicitly. It was a classic example of sentence first, verdict later.

    Many Americans viewed this assault on social media accounts as a liberal or Democrat attack on conservatives and Republicans, but they are missing the point. The narrowing of allowable opinion in the virtual public square is no conspiracy against conservatives. As progressives like Glenn Greenwald have pointed out, this is a wider assault on any opinion that veers from the acceptable parameters of the mainstream elite, which is made up of both Democrats and Republicans.

    Yes, this is partly an attempt to erase the Trump movement from the pages of history, but it is also an attempt to silence any criticism of the emerging political consensus in the coming Biden era that may come from progressive or antiwar circles.

    After all, a look at Biden’s incoming “experts” shows that they will be the same failed neoconservative interventionists who gave us weekly kill lists, endless drone attacks and coups overseas, and even US government killing of American citizens abroad. Progressives who complain about this “back to the future” foreign policy are also sure to find their voices silenced.

    Those who continue to argue that the social media companies are purely private ventures acting independent of US government interests are ignoring reality. The corporatist merger of “private” US social media companies with US government foreign policy goals has a long history and is deeply steeped in the hyper-interventionism of the Obama/Biden era.

    “Big Tech” long ago partnered with the Obama/Biden/Clinton State Department to lend their tools to US “soft power” goals overseas. Whether it was ongoing regime change attempts against Iran, the 2009 coup in Honduras, the disastrous US-led coup in Ukraine, “Arab Spring,” the destruction of Syria and Libya, and so many more, the big US tech firms were happy to partner up with the State Department and US intelligence to provide the tools to empower those the US wanted to seize power and to silence those out of favor.

    In short, US government elites have been partnering with “Big Tech” overseas for years to decide who has the right to speak and who must be silenced. What has changed now is that this deployment of “soft power” in the service of Washington’s hard power has come home to roost.

    So what is to be done? Even pro-free speech alternative social media outlets are under attack from the Big Tech/government Leviathan. There are no easy solutions. But we must think back to the dissidents in the era of Soviet tyranny. They had no Internet. They had no social media. They had no ability to communicate with thousands and millions of like-minded, freedom lovers. Yet they used incredible creativity in the face of incredible adversity to continue pushing their ideas. Because no army – not even Big Tech partnered with Big Government – can stop an idea whose time has come. And Liberty is that idea. We must move forward with creativity and confidence!

    1. Olly; Like your post.
      I suggest that 39 states quickly recall their congressmen & senators who will not stand up for our constitution, American civil rights.
      That we can also write a declaration of independence from communist china, and make a special plebiscite to all branches of federal and state govts.
      Unfortunately, The US will fall; Eschatology will replace all our current concerns.
      THE END sad

      1. THE END sad

        This ending was always coming. Fortunately we know what it’s supposed to look like and this ending means we are now at a new beginning. How we get there and how long it will take is the unknown.


    Michael Steele, the GOP’s one and only Black chairman, sees the party tethered to Trump (and toxic to minority voters) for the foreseeable future.

    They’re not gonna take the White House at 2024. Who’s voting for them? Where do you, how do you get 8 million more votes four years from now? If Donald Trump is still sitting there on the sidelines, bringing in everything that you do. I mean Republicans right now can’t even say the damn election is over and that they lost and Joe Biden is the next president without fear of the ire of Donald Trump. So how do they then go into our community and the Black community? Into Hispanic communities or any community and go, “Just ignore the last four years. That we’re just, we were just kidding. You know, don’t tell Trump, I said that.” I mean, you know this idea that it all just suddenly, like, cleanses itself and goes away and we start fresh in two years in the ’22 cycle in four years in 24, it’s not happening. Donald Trump won’t let it happen. Leadership requires trust and it starts by you trusting the American people. Right. And the way you demonstrate that trust is how you lead them.

    Edited from: “The Next Four Years”, an Amazon original podcast

      1. “ I’m just one voice here right now but trust me, if you do this to 75 million Americans, try to put us in jail, you’re going to have to hire 175 million to guard us.”


        1. If you think that you’ve got 75 million people who support this mayhem, you’re clearly not the brightest bulb.

          Trump got a little over 72,000,000 votes. So let’s start with that.

          There were a limited number of people who stormed the Capitol.

          Let’s start with them.

          Too many spoiled, entitled, crazy, angry Americans.

          Get over yourselves.

Leave a Reply