It’s common knowledge by now that Facebook applies “flexible” standards when it comes to determining what posts to remove, what violates their nebulous and ever-shifting “community standards,” and whom to ban from using their social media platform. And as we’ve all figured out, their standards come down to politics.In early 2016 this was proven in spades by the NGO Shurat Hadin – Israel Law Center – that ran an experiment to see whether Facebook applies its standards fairly. The results were pretty predictable, given Facebook’s reputation for left-leaning bias.

A post on the anti-Israel page read, “The Zionist bites Palestine part after part and the world is silent. We’ll stop them any way we can.”

A similar post calling to stomp on the Palestinian enemy on the pro-Israel page read: “Greater land Israel should return soon from the hands of the Muslim enemy back to Jewish sovereignty! We’ll do it in any way we can.”

The pro-Palestinian page promised to “demolish the Zionist invader,” and called for revenge against the “Zionist enemy that threatens al-Aksa.”

A call to rise up against Israel was portrayed in a caricature of a crocodile bearing the Star of David, with the Temple Mount compound in its mouth and a knife nested against its snout. Words accompanying the image called for “Death to all the Jews.”

You know what happened then?

Despite featuring nearly identical content, Shurat Hadin said that only one was removed from the online platform.

The page inciting against Palestinians was closed by Facebook (on the same day that it was reported) for “containing credible threat of violence” which “violated our [Facebook’s] community standards,” said Shurat Hadin. The page inciting against Israelis, however, was not shut down, despite its identical hateful content. Shurat Hadin said that Facebook claimed that this page was “not in violation of Facebook’s rules.”

This is not the first time Facebook has been caught moving goal posts to appease the proglodyte social justice zealots.

My close friend, science fiction author Michael Z. Williamson probably holds the record for most times banned by Facebook for such “egregious” crimes as using the word “chigger” (yes, the insect), because apparently it’s very similar to a not so nice word describing African Americans. Meanwhile, after multiple reports, a Facebook page urging the murder of George Zimmerman, who was found not guilty for shooting Trayvon Martin, was allowed to stand.

Last year, an ambulance chaser maggot by the name of Aaron Lukoff posted the following after the tragic suicide death of stalwart Second Amendment site Bearing Arms editor Bob Owens.

Good. This is fucking funny. Hopefully more asshole NRA idiots will off themselves.

Make good choices. Resist tyranny at all times. Be the resistance. Be the change we need. Our office stands with the people oppressed by gun violence.

Facebook did nothing after numerous reports. Lukoff still has the hateful post up, and his account has been untouched, unlike Mike Williamson, who was banned “for posting nudity” a couple of years ago for sharing a photo of his wife sharing a milkshake with his (fully dressed) daughter and banned again just last month for… I’m not kidding… quoting something someone wrote in an article and discussing why said author was – in Mike’s words – “an asshole.”

That’s why I wasn’t wholly surprised when Facebook – after multiple reports this morning, allowed this travesty to stand.

After multiple reports of inappropriate content, Facebook – in its infinite wisdom full non-English speaking turnip fuckery – decided the page did not violate their community standards, although in a perfunctory bone toss to the conservatives who still bother using their glitchy, ad-riddled platform, they did say they would remove “some” content that supposedly violated their nebulous community standards.

We reviewed Retarded Barron and found content on the Page that doesn’t follow our Community Standards. We removed that specific content (example: photos, posts) instead of the entire Page.

Please let us know if you see anything else that concerns you. If you want us to look at something specific on a Page, be sure to report the content (example: photo), not the entire Page. We want to keep Facebook safe and welcoming for everyone.

Yeah, they want to make Facebook safe and welcoming for everyone, except for an 11-year-old boy, whose only “crime” is being the son of a President the unhinged proglodyte shit weasels despise.

It’s perfectly OK to have a digitally manipulated image of an innocent child, which mangles his eye and makes inappropriate posts. The Neanderthal fuckwits in Pakistan who are paid 20 cents an hour to review complaints about content posted to Facebook can barely discern the difference between the word “chigger” and the N-bomb, and will swing that ban hammer hard at anyone who dares refer to the nasty little insects (the former – not the latter), but ridicule and cyber bully a little boy? That’s just fine, because he’s… well… a Trump.

Another friend of mine was banned for several days for posting a link that featured an incredibly offensive, photoshopped photo of Barack Obama. No one – on the right or the left – should have considered it acceptable, and she posted this link to say exactly that. The post was removed, and she was tossed off Facebook for linking to the offensive content.

Meanwhile this is allowed to remain – even after numerous complaints about the photo being inappropriate and disgusting. And no. I’m not posting the picture here. If you want to get nauseated, be my guests and click on the link, but don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Let’s get something straight.

Whether you voted for Clinton or Trump is irrelevant, and so is if you are an ardent #NeverTrumper or a committed Republican. It doesn’t matter if you have a visceral hatred for Obama, Clinton, or Trump, or you merely disagree with their politics. I don’t care if you’re black, white, plaid, purple, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or anarchist. I also don’t care if you’re joking or dead serious. If you think targeting innocent family members of a politician you dislike is acceptable, you are a slimy, ass-gargling, sub-human crotch goblin. If you think messing with an 11-year-old kid, targeting him online where he can see your filthy trash is OK, you don’t deserve the freedom of speech so many have fought and died to protect.

And while I would never advocate limits on free speech, I am also an ardent believer in accountability, and the fact that Facebook doesn’t hold its users accountable for publicly accessible foul content, should be a signal to all their advertisers  – such as Proctor & Gamble, AT&T, Samsung, Microsoft, Coca Cola, and Amazon – that this platform’s employees consider it perfectly acceptable to cyber bully children, ridicule people with learning disabilities and Downs Syndrome, and post violent images of the President, because they simply don’t like him.

I’ve railed against conservatives who thought Chelsea Clinton and the Obama girls were fair targets for ridicule and filthy attacks while their parents were in the White House, and I’ve slapped liberals for their disgusting treatment of the Bush twins. The children of politicians did not ask to be dragged into the public eye. They are innocent bystanders in what has become one of the most toxic political climates we have seen in a long time. These kids aren’t weapons for shitbags to use against their parents. These kids are innocent youngsters who have to learn difficult lessons about just how indecent, tone deaf, and vile some members of the general public are. It’s a lesson they shouldn’t have to learn, and the younger they are, the more difficult that lesson becomes.

Witness the comments on the page devoted to Barron Trump:

This is apparently what passes for political discourse nowadays. Note also the number of “likes” on each of these hateful comments.

I’m not a prude, and I enjoy political and crude humor probably more than I should (proving once again that the 12 year old boy is my spirit animal), but there’s nothing that will evoke a more visceral reaction out of me than the vicious targeting of an innocent child – or any vulnerable, defenseless members of our society!

Zuckerberg and the barely literate monkeys he employs in the bowels of the third world apparently either don’t have the decency to comprehend why targeting an innocent kid is morally repugnant, or they just don’t care…

Unless, of course, you’re a member of the “protected class” of the progressive Victim of the Month Club.

**UPDATE** As of this morning, Facebook apparently has had enough complaints. They did not feel it was inappropriate or in any way cruel to mock and denigrate an 11-year-old child. Apparently the halfwitted simians Facebook hires to decide these things didn’t have a moral compass strong enough to see anything wrong with the page; they had to collect enough complaints before doing anything about it. But at least they did it.