Watching Mark Zuckerberg testify before Congress was simply jaw-dropping

Watching Mark Zuckerberg testify before Congress was simply jaw-dropping.

1. Senator Graham asked Zuckerberg to name Facebook’s competitors and he refused to answer – “name any competitors, is there an alternative to Facebook?”

He refused to name several social networks, including PatrioticSpace – because he knows that will be the beginning of the end of Facebook!

https://patrioticspace.us

No More fascistbook

take our poll - story continues below

Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?

  • Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Conservative Firing Line updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Col Rob Maness Takes on 2nd Amendment Hater Rep Eric Swalwell

2. Zuckerberg said: “I started Facebook when I was in college” and 14 years later he still says, “So we have made a lot of mistakes in running the company. I think it’s pretty much impossible, I believe, to start a company in your dorm room and then grow it to be at the scale that we’re at now without making some mistakes.”

WOW – what a lame and bogus excuse – he’s essentially saying “I’m still just a little baby” and therefore not responsible for any mistakes in running perhaps the most intrusive company in the world that violates everyone’s privacy, manipulates everyone’s newsfeed, and uses AI (artificial intelligence) to track and monitor everything people do.

3. Mark Zuckerberg avoided owning up to anything and completely ducks any “Yes or “No” question. Why? Because as Senator Sullivan said to Zuckerberg: “You have a lot of lobbyists. Every lobbyist in town is involved in this hearing.”

4. Facebook found out about the Cambridge Analytica breach in December 2015. Yet when asked why Facebook decided at that time not to notify the 87 million members whose data was breached, he said, “I don’t remember a conversation like that.”

5. While testifying, Zuckerberg took every opportunity to plug Facebook using “AI” to monitor everything that Facebook members do – EVERYTHING – this is the OPPOSITE of PRIVACY. And they already do this – Facebook members have no privacy – NONE.

6. He lied countless times about deleting a Facebook account. Finally in his last response he admitted: “If you’ve shared content with someone else then we can’t guarantee . .”

Let me explain this gray area – your content doesn’t delete as long as any friends you’ve shared with are still on Facebook and have your content in their newsfeed.

7. Zuckerberg defends “Messenger Kids” while being questioned about this Facebook application that is for 6 -12 year old children. UGH! This may be his WORST IDEA. Getting 6-year-olds hooked on Facebook – with all due respect, this guy is just plain wrong. Kids deserve a better future – not an early addiction to the poison and manipulation of Facebook.

Summary:

In my opinion, Zuckerberg’s entire testimony was based on avoiding the truth and declining to answer any question directly. A billionaire and he can’t even put his tie on nicely. I was impressed with the quality of the questioning by most of our Congressional leaders – granted, some were much more tech savvy than others.

Related:

If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.  And be sure to check out our new MeWe page here.

If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon.

And if you’re as concerned about online censorship as we are, go here and order this book:

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

 

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.