Our problems with Facebook continue: They say I have shared a post that may be considered "insensitive or cruel" (WITH UPDATE 4/1/2017)

Bet the Pope has no trouble posting on FACEBOOK and his "insensitive or cruel" opposition to the use of safe voluntary methods of family planning including the right to abortions makes me wonder at the consistency of the criteria FACEBOOK uses to make its judgments. Of course FACEBOOK has such a right as a private service provider, but one can only point out that the diversity of views expressed by FACEBOOK users must include those which encompass family planning, whose availability helps avoid such "insensitive or cruel" moments in a woman's life when faced with an unwanted pregnancy which could have so easily been avoided with modern contraception. Go figure, FACEBOOK.

Donald A. Collins, President of ISAF, Washington DC

RE: Facebook

Following 17 Facebook blocks since 1 December 2015.

For the attention of Mark Zuckerberg, Chairman, Chief Executive and Co-Founder of Facebook:

31 December 2016

Dear Facebook,

This morning I couldn't gain access to your website without first getting past the following notice:

Your post was reported

Someone you've shared this post with reported it to us for review.

We've reviewed the post and found that it follows the Facebook Community standards, but may be considered insensitive or cruel. You may want to consider removing the post or limiting the audience you share posts like this with.

Please can you tell me what post I should review?

Yours faithfully,

Lola Heavey
Webmaster
Network for Church Monitoring

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Related blog post: Facebook's 17th block against our Church and State website since 1 December 2015 (WITH UPDATE - DAY 7 15/12/2016) This is a link to my blog post of 9 December. "Glad you compiled this odious record of mistaken blockage. What possesses the site? Surely after multiple postings they must know your content is neither lewd nor extreme," writes Don Collins, President of the International Services Assistance Fund, Washington, DC. Don often sends us material to publish on our Church and State website.

Facebook UK Managing Director Steve Hatch

Our 90 Honorary Associates include Nobel laureates Philip W. Anderson and the late Sir Harold Kroto. This month 19 notable scholars from around the world have given Declan permission to add their names to our list of associates.

UPDATE 4 January: Facebook still have not identified the post I shared that they say may be considered "insensitive or cruel". They never responded to any of the previous 17 block appeals I made this past year so I am not surprised really; in fact, to the best of our knowledge, Facebook UK Managing Director Steve Hatch never replied to Shadow Home Office Minister Lyn Brown (see her letter above). Perhaps the post Facebook is referring to is our Article of the Week that has received 1/2 million social recommends and 654 comments to date:



Cardinal Burke: Gay couples shouldn’t be invited to family gatherings if children are present

There can be no doubt that it is "insensitive or cruel" to say that gay couples shouldn't be invited to family gatherings if children are present. But I didn't say that. Cardinal Raymond Burke did!

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

This is the first article on our Church and State website with 1/2 million social recommends

Cardinal Burke: Gay couples shouldn’t be invited to family gatherings if children are present

654 comments

19 December: Google freeze our stats at 1pm on 18 December 2016 after we exceed 1/4 million hits in six days and despite Facebook's 17th block since 1 December 2015

Letter before action against Mail Boxes Etc. (UK) Ltd: Breach of contract[Information Commissioner's Office Case Reference Number RFA0651773]

Declan is still waiting to hear from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) about the stop they put to correspondence being issued to us because of the postcode on the mailbox we rent from Mail Boxes Etc. (UK) Ltd (MBE). This morning the Information Commissioner's Office came back to us stating:

Royal Mail has advised in their e-mail of 22 November 2016 that PAF (Postcode Address File) is a list of addresses and does not contain any personal data.

This means that you cannot be identified from your address on PAF.

The Data Protection Act does not apply to the issue you have raised because it does not concern your personal data.

This means that our dispute with MBE is exclusively contractual. Are we going to be forced to file our claim against MBE in the Central London County Court on 3 January 2017? That all depends on how HMRC respond to Declan's email to its chief executive on 29 November, which is posted to my updated blog post below.

29 November: Will it take the Independent Police Complaints Commission to protect our address with HM Revenue and Customs? (WITH UPDATE 20/12/2016)

Google freeze our stats at 1pm on 18 December 2016 after we exceed 1/4 million hits in six days and despite Facebook's 17th block since 1 December 2015

For the first time ever Google have stopped reporting on daily traffic to our Church and State website. They froze our stats at 1pm yesterday:



Actually, at 8.38pm yesterday, for example, we had 631 visitors in the previous 30 minutes:



We have no idea how many hits we had yesterday, but this screenshot shows that we had exceeded 1/4 million hits in the previous six days (12-17 December) notwithstanding Facebook's 17th block against our Church and State website since 1 December 2015 (9-14 December):

RE: Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

Paragraph 12 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

12. It is important to underscore that the discriminatory surveillance suffered by the Applicant and his wife is not an isolated event. Rather, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of surveillance by law enforcement officials in the UK that has been well-documented by international and domestic human rights bodies. For example, GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) specialises in the "4 D's": deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive. It has been branded by the press as the spy agency's "deception unit". Though its existence was secret until 2014, JTRIG has developed a distinctive profile in the public understanding, after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the unit had engaged in "dirty tricks" like deploying sexual "honey traps" designed to discredit targets, launching denial-of-service attacks to shut down Internet chat rooms, pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks and generally warping discourse online. Previous reporting on GCHQ established its focus on what it regards as political radicalism. Beyond JTRIG's targeting of Anonymous, other parts of GCHQ targeted political activists and groups deemed to be "radical", even monitoring human rights NGOs. The President of the London-based Privacy International, Simon Davies, asks: "If spying on human rights NGOs isn't off limits for GCHQ, then what is?"

Citizenfour Official Trailer 1 (2014) - Edward Snowden Documentary HD



JOIN THE CONVERSATION #CITIZENFOUR

From a fascinating excerpt from Glenn Greenwald's book "No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State":

All of the evidence highlights the implicit bargain that is offered to citizens: pose no challenge and you have nothing to worry about. Mind your own business, and support or at least tolerate what we do, and you'll be fine. Put differently, you must refrain from provoking the authority that wields surveillance powers if you wish to be deemed free of wrongdoing.

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

About Church and State

Letter from our Chairman

Help Support Church and State

Please consider donating to Church and State!
All proceeds from the sale of these e-books are used to keep the Church and State website up and running.



Purchase straight from Amazon's Kindle Store:

From the Dissident Left: A Collection of Essays 2004-2013 for $4.67

The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy for $6.64

American Democracy and the Vatican: Population Growth and National Security for $4.99

The Pope and the New Apocalypse: The Holy War Against Family Planning for $2.99

Mail Boxes Etc. UK: Declan writes to the Information Commissioner's Office in a last desperate attempt to try and resolve the issue of our registered office address without a court order (WITH UPDATE 19/12/2016)

Unbelievable.

Donald A. Collins, President of ISAF, Washington DC

RE: Mail Boxes Etc. (UK) Ltd (MBE)

Complaint about MBE under the Data Protection Act 1998.

To the Information Commissioner's Office:

12 December 2016

Dear Casework Team,

I refer to the below email from Royal Mail in respect of the new postcode on my mailbox which prevents me from receiving mail from Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC). Please note that my problem is not with Royal Mail but with Mail Boxes Etc (UK) Ltd (MBE).

Royal Mail have subsequently made it clear that their hands are tied and that they were merely following instructions on 21 October 2016 when they changed the postcode on the mailbox I rent from MBE Kings Cross from N1 9JY to N1 9FQ. Consequently, HMRC have continued their stop on any correspondence being issued automatically to me because the building number of my mailbox at 254 Pentonville Road does not show on Royal Mail records under postcode N1 9JY.

In response to my letter before claim (please see attachment), MBE changed the address on their website to N1 9FQ. However, this postcode has subsequently been rejected by Companies House because they only accept the postcode N1 9JY for a building name or number on Pentonville Road; the postcode N1 9FQ is unique to the MBE business name. Royal Mail have told me that they would be happy to have 254 Pentonville Road listed on the postcode N1 9JY, but that they must receive this instruction from MBE.

The Retail Ombudsman cannot investigate a business-to-business context. However, this matter is also relevant to the Data Protection Act 1998 as principle 4 states that "personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date". I am considering court action and, given the problems with my mail from HMRC, time is of the essence. By way of alternative dispute resolution, can you still consider my concern as I did not receive a satisfactory response to the issue raised with MBE?

With reference to the below email from Royal Mail, please note that I cannot add my business name to the new MBE address as an alias identifier for the simple reason that N1 9FQ is not recognised by Companies House.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

UPDATE 19 December: Declan sent the email above to the ICO on 12 December. We are waiting to hear back from them. Depending on how HMRC respond to Declan's email to its chief executive on 29 November (see link below), we may not be able to wait much longer without issuing court proceedings against MBE for breach of contract. Currently we are paying for a registered office address with MBE Kings Cross that Companies House will not accept as amended by MBE on 21 October, meaning we cannot register an address for the company with HMRC that HMRC will not render invalid with their "automatic data cleanse" every 6-12 weeks, according to HMRC themselves on 19 October. You couldn't make it up!

29 November: Will it take the Independent Police Complaints Commission to protect our address with HM Revenue and Customs?

The blocks on access to our Church and State website continue unabated (WITH UPDATE 14/1/2017)

UK Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

Latest block on access to our website: 11.21am

Our 87 Honorary Associates include Nobel laureates Philip W. Anderson and the late Sir Harold Kroto; in the past few days, ten notable scholars from around the world have given Declan permission to add their names to the list. Nonetheless, we are currently experiencing Facebook's 17th block against our Church and State website since 1 December 2015 (this is a link to my previous blog post of 9 December). "Glad you compiled this odious record of mistaken blockage. What possesses the site? Surely after multiple postings they must know your content is neither lewd nor extreme," writes Don Collins, President of the International Services Assistance Fund, Washington, DC.

Don often sends us material to publish on our Church and State website. 70% of our hits are from Americans.

Meanwhile, the unprecedented double-barrelled attack on our Church and State website also continues unabated (SiteGround is paid $1,000 per year to host our site and manage the server):

1. Our Facebook likes/shares plugin has been showing zeros to fluctuating degrees on category pages throughout the site since 19 August (the first article here has 499,100 recommends and 632 comments; it can be viewed here):



2. I have been blogging non-access to the site since 26 July with all sorts of graphics:

1st 26 July 2016, 9.34pm
2nd 27 July 2016, 12.10pm
3rd 27 July 2016, 5.55pm
4th 28 July 2016, 11.44pm
5th 29 July 2016, 12.29pm
6th 30 July 2016, 3.58pm
7th 31 July 2016, 7.03pm
8th 2 August 2016, 10.23pm
9th 3 August 2016, 1.05pm
10th 7 August 2016, 10.49am
11th 8 August 2016, 11.38am
12th 14 August 2016, 2.02pm
13th 16 August 2016, 8.56pm
14th 18 August 2016, 10.48pm
15th 18 August 2016, 11.14pm
16th 20 August 2016, 6.04pm
17th 21 August 2016, 2.35pm
18th 25 August 2016, 3.07pm
19th 30 August 2016, 8.10pm
20th 31 August 2016, 1.10am
21st 2 September 2016, 8.44pm
22nd 10 September 2016, 11.51pm
23rd 11 September 2016, 3.46am
24th 15 September 2016, 3.47pm
25th 16 September 2016, 3.45pm
26th 19 September 2016, 4.50am
27th 19 September 2016, 12.15pm
28th 20 September 2016, 4.39pm
29th 22 September 2016, 10.43pm
30th 23 September 2016, 10.32am
31st 23 September 2016, 8.53pm
32nd 25 September 2016, 5.54pm
33rd 29 September 2016, 3.09pm
34th 3 October 2016, 11.32pm
35th 5 October 2016, 11.56pm
36th 6 October 2016, 2.06pm
37th 7 October 2016, 12.57pm
38th 7 October 2016, 10.31pm
39th 8 October 2016, 12.05am
40th 9 October 2016, 12.02am
41st 10 October 2016, 10.39am
42nd 10 October 2016, 11.18am
43rd 13 October 2016, 8.32pm
44th 14 October 2016, 5.10pm
45th 14 October 2016, 6.51pm
46th 16 October 2016, 2.14am
47th 18 October 2016, 6.09pm
48th 19 October 2016, 7.39pm
49th 23 October 2016, 8.55pm
50th 9 November 2016, 9.24am
51st 16 November 2016, 10.46pm
52nd 18 November 2016, 1.27pm
53rd 25 November 2016, 9.27pm
54th 27 November 2016, 3.40pm
55th 27 November 2016, 7.51pm
56th 28 November 2016, 1.11pm
57th 1 December 2016, 8.58pm
58th 5 December 2016, 6.01pm
59th 7 December 2016, 4.19pm
60th 8 December 2016, 10.42pm
61st 9 December 2016, 6.16pm
62nd 11 December 2016, 8.39pm
63rd 12 December 2016, 1.31pm
64th 12 December 2016, 10.37pm
65th 13 December 2016, 11.21am (see graphic above)

UPDATES

66th 13 December 2016, 12.55pm
67th 13 December 2016, 8.28pm
68th 14 December 2016, 1.25pm
69th 15 December 2016, 2.39pm
70th 16 December 2016, 3.49pm
71st 17 December 2016, 6.53pm
72nd 18 December 2016, 2.40pm
73rd 18 December 2016, 5.01pm
74th 20 December 2016, 12.19am
75th 21 December 2016, 1.28pm
76th 22 December 2016, 12.43pm
77th 22 December 2016, 11.21pm
78th 23 December 2016, 6.41am
79th 23 December 2016, 8.35am
80th 23 December 2016, 9.51am
81st 24 December 2016, 8.41pm
82nd 26 December 2016, 6.15am
83rd 26 December 2016, 1.37pm
84th 27 December 2016, 2.12pm
85th 27 December 2016, 11.08pm
86th 28 December 2016, 2.32pm
87th 28 December 2016, 5.24pm
88th 30 December 2016, 10.10am
89th 31 December 2016, 11.41pm
90th 2 January 2017, 2.53pm
91st 3 January 2017, 6.25am
92nd 3 January 2017, 2.04pm
93rd 3 January 2017, 7.18pm
94th 3 January 2017, 8.52pm
95th 4 January 2017, 5.59am
96th 4 January 2017, 9.42am
97th 5 January 2017, 11.38pm
98th 6 January 2017, 2.10am
99th 8 January 2017, 3.29pm
100th 8 January 2017, 7.07pm
101st 8 January 2017, 10.20pm
102nd 9 January 2017, 3.46am
103rd 9 January 2017, 4.05pm
104th 12 January 2017, 1.15pm
105th 12 January 2017, 3.26pm
106th 14 January 2017, 12.47am
107th 14 January 2017, 6.34am
108th 14 January 2017, 9.14pm

All the blocks above have been registered by SiteGround.

RE: Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

Paragraph 12 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

12. It is important to underscore that the discriminatory surveillance suffered by the Applicant and his wife is not an isolated event. Rather, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of surveillance by law enforcement officials in the UK that has been well-documented by international and domestic human rights bodies. For example, GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) specialises in the "4 D's": deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive. It has been branded by the press as the spy agency's "deception unit". Though its existence was secret until 2014, JTRIG has developed a distinctive profile in the public understanding, after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the unit had engaged in "dirty tricks" like deploying sexual "honey traps" designed to discredit targets, launching denial-of-service attacks to shut down Internet chat rooms, pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks and generally warping discourse online. Previous reporting on GCHQ established its focus on what it regards as political radicalism. Beyond JTRIG's targeting of Anonymous, other parts of GCHQ targeted political activists and groups deemed to be "radical", even monitoring human rights NGOs. President of the London-based Privacy International Simon Davies: "If spying on human rights NGOs isn't off limits for GCHQ, then what is?"

Citizenfour Official Trailer 1 (2014) - Edward Snowden Documentary HD



JOIN THE CONVERSATION #CITIZENFOUR

From a fascinating excerpt from Glenn Greenwald's book "No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State":

All of the evidence highlights the implicit bargain that is offered to citizens: pose no challenge and you have nothing to worry about. Mind your own business, and support or at least tolerate what we do, and you'll be fine. Put differently, you must refrain from provoking the authority that wields surveillance powers if you wish to be deemed free of wrongdoing.

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

About Church and State

Letter from our Chairman

Help Support Church and State

Please consider donating to Church and State!
All proceeds from the sale of these e-books are used to keep the Church and State website up and running.



Purchase straight from Amazon's Kindle Store:

From the Dissident Left: A Collection of Essays 2004-2013 for $4.67

The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy for $6.64

American Democracy and the Vatican: Population Growth and National Security for $4.99

The Pope and the New Apocalypse: The Holy War Against Family Planning for $2.99

Facebook's 17th block against our Church and State website since 1 December 2015 (WITH UPDATE - DAY 7 15/12/2016)

Glad you compiled this odious record of mistaken blockage. What possesses the site? Surely after multiple postings they must know your content is neither lewd nor extreme.

Donald A. Collins, President of ISAF, Washington DC

We are calling this Facebook's 17th block since 1 December 2015 - in the video above they even call it a block themselves. This evening Facebook stopped me from posting to groups without first passing through a time-consuming security check for every post I wish to make, and this for an undisclosed period of time and without any stated reason. Normally they block me from joining and posting to groups. These blocks have been extended seemingly for the fun of it, and to date have run up to six days at a time. I only post to groups articles that I have published on our Church and State website. I also only post to groups that are specific to an article's subject and that I am well familiar with; in fact, I am extremely careful on Facebook but it hasn't made a blind bit of difference for over a year now. Facebook did not respond to any of my previous sixteen appeals, so I'm not expecting a response to my appeal this evening. It reads:

For the attention of Mark Zuckerberg, Chairman, Chief Executive and Co-Founder of Facebook

9 December 2016

Dear Facebook,

I wish to appeal your decision this evening to stop me from posting to groups without first passing through a time-consuming security check for every post I wish to make (called by Facebook a "block"), and this for an undisclosed period of time and without any stated reason.

I have not posted to groups at all today, and yesterday I only posted to groups that are specific to an article's subject and that I am well familiar with.

I have made a video of the security check I must pass through to post to groups; it can be viewed at https://youtu.be/RHBslHY0gtk. In this instance, I tried to post an article titled "Freedom Of Expression And Religion: Salman Rushdie’s Critics" to an atheist group I actively participate in almost on a daily basis.

This is Facebook's 17th block since 1 December 2015.

1st 1-4 December 2015 (4 days)
2nd 5-7 December 2015 (3 days)
3rd 6-9 January 2016 (4 days)
4th 12-15 January 2016 (4 days)
5th 20-22 January 2016 (3 days)
6th 13-16 February 2016 (4 days)
7th 23-26 March 2016 (4 days)
8th 20-23 May 2016 (4 days)
9th 25-30 May 2016 (6 days)
10th 1-3 July 2016 (3 days)
11th 7-8 September 2016 (2 days)
12th 21-22 September 2016 (3 days)
13th 27-28 September 2016 (2 days)
14th 29 September - 3 October 2016 (5 days)
15th 4-5 October 2016 (2 days)
16th 18-23 October 2016 (6 days)
17th 9 December 2016 (ongoing)

Facebook has not responded to any of my previous 16 appeals, notwithstanding that I only ever post to groups that are specific to an article's subject and that I am well familiar with. I also only post to groups articles that I have already published on our Church and State website.

"Surely after multiple postings [Facebook] must know your content is neither lewd nor extreme," writes Don Collins, President of the International Services Assistance Fund, Washington, DC. Don often sends us material to publish on our Church and State website.

Please note that we currently have 77 Honorary Associates from around the world, including two Nobel prize winners.

Yours faithfully,

Lola Heavey
Webmaster
Network for Church Monitoring

"Let me recommend an important web site - churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

2 October: Complaint to Facebook Chairman, Chief Executive and Co-Founder Mark Zuckerberg on day 4 of Facebook's 14th block since 1 December 2015

RE: Facebook

Draft paragraph 42 of Declan's next updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

42. On 13 August 2011, then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone wrote to Facebook on the Applicant's behalf, asking that they explain why the Applicant's wife had been barred. The bar was subsequently lifted; however, since 1 December 2015, Facebook has blocked the Applicant's wife from posting to pages and/or groups on seventeen separate occasions, and up to six days at a time. On 22 December 2015, Shadow Home Office Minister Lyn Brown made an enquiry on the Applicant's behalf to Steve Hatch, the Managing Director of Facebook UK, asking if he could offer an explanation as to the terms and conditions the Applicant's wife was alleged to have broken twice previously. To the best of the Applicant's knowledge, Mr Hatch did not respond to this letter. The Applicant's wife only ever posts to groups that are specific to an article's subject and that she is well familiar with, and she only ever posts articles that she has already published on the Church and State website. Nonetheless, Facebook has not acknowledged or responded to any of the Applicant's wife's seventeen appeals since 1 December 2015. Each of the following blocks are well accounted for in the Applicant's wife's N4CM blog:

1st 1-4 December 2015 (4 days)
2nd 5-7 December 2015 (3 days)
3rd 6-9 January 2016 (4 days)
4th 12-15 January 2016 (4 days)
5th 20-22 January 2016 (3 days)
6th 13-16 February 2016 (4 days)
7th 23-26 March 2016 (4 days)
8th 20-23 May 2016 (4 days)
9th 25-30 May 2016 (6 days)
10th 1-3 July 2016 (3 days)
11th 7-8 September 2016 (2 days)
12th 21-22 September 2016 (3 days)
13th 27-28 September 2016 (2 days)
14th 29 September - 3 October 2016 (5 days)
15th 4-5 October 2016 (2 days)
16th 18-23 October 2016 (6 days)
17th 9-14 December 2016 (6 days)

UPDATE - DAY 7 15 December (2.46pm): Facebook upped the ante the day before yesterday on their 17th block since 1 December 2015 by preventing us from posting articles anywhere, even having gone through their security check. The unprecedented block below states: "You can't post this because it has a blocked link." Nonetheless, it appears today that the double block has been lifted, meaning this 17th block records as our third 6-day block this year. No reply to my appeal above. I have just updated my next blog post from two days ago, The blocks on access to our Church and State website continue unabated. I updated the blog post with the 69th block on access to our site since 26 July this afternoon.

Facebook UK Managing Director Steve Hatch

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty