Facebook bans ‘dangerous individuals’ cited for hate speech

This combination of pictures created on May 02, 2019 shows (from left) right-wing British provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, commentator Alex Jones, and Louis Farrakhan. (AFP)
Updated 03 May 2019
Follow

Facebook bans ‘dangerous individuals’ cited for hate speech

  • Facebook said the newly banned accounts violated its policy against dangerous individuals and organizations
  • Critics praised the move but said there is more to be done on both Facebook and Instagram

SAN FRANCISCO, US: After years of pressure to crack down on hate and bigotry, Facebook has banned Louis Farrakhan, Alex Jones and other extremists, saying they violated its ban on “dangerous individuals.”
The company also removed right-wing personalities Paul Nehlen, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson and Laura Loomer, along with Jones’ site, Infowars, which often posts conspiracy theories. The latest bans apply to both Facebook’s main service and to Instagram and extend to fan pages and other related accounts.
Decried as censorship by several of those who got the ax, the move signals a renewed effort by the social media giant to remove people and groups promoting objectionable material such as hate, racism and anti-Semitism.
Removing some of the best-known figures of the US political extreme takes away an important virtual megaphone that Facebook has provided the likes of Jones, Yiannopoulos and others over the years. But it does not address what might be done with lesser known figures and those who stay on the margins of what Facebook’s policies allow.
Critics praised the move but said there is more to be done on both Facebook and Instagram.
“We know that there are still white supremacists and other extremist figures who are actively using both platforms to spread their hatred and bigotry,” said Keegan Hankes, senior research analyst for the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups in the US
Dipayan Ghosh, a former Facebook executive and an Internet policy expert at Harvard, said the ban isn’t as big a step as Facebook appears to be painting it — it’s just enforcing its existing policy.
“There will always be more purveyors of hate speech that try to come on these platforms,” he said. “Will advocates have to push year after year just to get (a handful of) individuals off? At this rate it seems likely. And this doesn’t address the problem of what happens at the margins.”
Facebook has previously suspended Jones from its flagship service temporarily; this suspension is permanent and includes Instagram. Twitter has also banned Loomer, Jones and Yiannopoulos, though Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam long known for provocative comments widely considered anti-Semitic, still had an account Thursday. So did Watson, who rose to popularity as editor-at-large at Infowars and has nearly a million followers on the site.
Facebook said the newly banned accounts violated its policy against dangerous individuals and organizations. The company says it has always banned people or groups that proclaim a violent or hateful mission or are engaged in acts of hate or violence, regardless of political ideology.
It added that when it bans someone under this policy, the company said it also prohibits anyone else from praising or supporting them.
For years, social media companies have been under pressure from civil rights groups and other activists to clamp down on hate speech on their services. Following the deadly white nationalist protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, Google, Facebook and PayPal began banishing extremist groups and individuals who identified as or supported white supremacists.
A year later, widespread bans of Jones and Infowars reflected a more aggressive enforcement of policies against hate speech. But Facebook instituted only a 30-day suspension (though Twitter banned him permanently).
It is not clear what events led to Thursday’s announcement. In a statement, Facebook merely said, “The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today.”
Last month, it extended its ban on hate speech to prohibit the promotion and support of white nationalism and white separatism. It had previously allowed such material even though it has long banned white supremacists.
Asked to comment on the bans, Yiannopoulos emailed only “You’re next.”
Jones reacted angrily Thursday during a live stream of his show on his Infowars website.
“They didn’t just ban me. They just defamed us. Why did Zuckerberg even do this?” Jones said, referring to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
Jones called himself a victim of “racketeering” by “cartels.”
“There’s a new world now, man, where they’re banning everybody and then they tell Congress nobody is getting banned,” he said.
Watson, meanwhile, tweeted that he was not given a reason and that he “broke none of their rules.”
“Hopefully, other prominent conservatives will speak out about me being banned, knowing that they are next if we don’t pressure the Trump administration to take action,” he wrote.
Farrakhan, Nehlen and Loomer did not immediately return messages for comment.
Harvard’s Ghosh said kicking off individuals with big followings, such as Jones, goes against Facebook’s commercial interest.
“As soon as they kick Alex Jones or Laura Loomer off their platform, it immediately ticks of a huge number of people,” he said.


Western media refute Trump’s claims Iran possesses Tomahawk missiles

Updated 10 March 2026
Follow

Western media refute Trump’s claims Iran possesses Tomahawk missiles

  • Speaking to journalists, Trump suggested Tehran used US-made cruise missile in school attack that killed over 170, calling the weapon ‘very generic’
  • CNN, Sky News and analysts said that ‘neither Israel nor Iran use Tomahawk missiles,’ urged accurate identification to ensure credibility in public discourse

LONDON: Western media outlets and defense analysts have pushed back against claims by US President Donald Trump that Iran possesses Tomahawk cruise missiles, after he raised the possibility while discussing a recent strike on an Iranian school that has drawn international scrutiny.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Trump suggested Iran may have used Tomahawks in the attack, calling the weapon “very generic” and implying that multiple countries, including Iran, could have access to the system.

However, journalists and weapons experts swiftly disputed that assertion. They noted that Tomahawk missiles are US-manufactured cruise missile systems that Washington supplies only to a small number of close allies, primarily the UK and Australia. There is no credible evidence that Iran has ever obtained the weapon.

CNN anchor Erin Burnett referenced an investigation by correspondent Isobel Yeong that concluded “neither Israel nor Iran use Tomahawk missiles, according to experts.” Sky News and other Western outlets also challenged Trump’s remarks.

Analysts pointed out that Iran has developed its own domestic cruise missile systems, such as the Soumar and Hoveyzeh, which are believed to be based partly on older Soviet-era designs.

While these systems resemble cruise missiles in concept, experts say they differ significantly from the Tomahawk in design, propulsion configuration and operational characteristics.

While Iran has made substantial advances in ballistic and domestically produced cruise missiles over the past two decades, defense analysts said there is no verified evidence that Tehran holds the American-made system.

The episode reflects a broader pattern in which statements about military technology are rapidly scrutinized by open-source investigators and defense experts.

Experts say the distinction is important: accurately identifying the type of missile used in a strike can provide clues about the likely actor responsible, the launch platform involved and the broader geopolitical consequences of a strike.

Analysts also say that accurate identification of military systems remains essential for avoiding misinformation and for maintaining credibility in public discourse surrounding regional security.

Despite the growing body of evidence, the precise circumstances of the school attack nonetheless remain unclear, with investigators hampered by a lack of weapons fragments and limited access to the site.

Norway-based rights group Hengaw said the school was holding its morning session at the time of the reported attack and had at least 168 children and 14 teachers.

Trump said the US was continuing to investigate the incident. “Whatever the report shows, I’m willing to live with that report,” he said.