Connect with us


Messi Must Turn Full Heel after Spanish Media Demanded That He Apologize for Getting A Red card.



[Source] Marca also published an overnight article with the headline “Messi: You should apologize” Respected Spanish newspaper wrote that this was not what is expected from a captain and that he should apologize. “

After a savage fight in the final seconds of a thrilling Super Cup final against Athletic Bilbao, the Argentine received his marching orders.

As Barcelona searched desperately for an equalizer. Messi became frustrated when Asier Villalibre tried to stop his run.

I understand that soccer in Europe and South America is a world we cannot even imagine. They make even the most dedicated sports fans look weak. An apology? This is the fuck! Messi should go all heel and print out the article. Marca, play sports once “whatsports“. Do you get angry from time to time? You shouldn’t just punch a guy in the head. We all agree with that. He was given a red card and could be suspended for 12 matches. 12 This is Messi, the greatest player in the world, along with Ronaldo. It’s okay to let someone like this get away with things, but you shouldn’t expect an apology. It wouldn’t matter if he were not a captain.

Messi should go all-in on the heel. We all know that he said he wanted Barcelona to be his next home, most recently in the summer.

Even Barcelona fans marched to Camp Nou demanding that he return.

When he was playing for Argentina, he even got involved with an opposing coach.

It’s a wonderful thing. Although he isn’t Harden-esque, he still shows up and plays and isn’t fat. He should be a full heel. Another step is the red card. He must now go Conor McGregor to refuse to apologize

What about Atletico Bilbao blowing a trumpet to celebrate the win?


View this post on Instagram


A post shared by Sam’s Army Podcast (@samsarmy)

This is what we need more of. What happens when you win? You can have a player learn an instrument and then go wild. Imagine Mahomes getting out a guitar to start playing after winning Super Bowl. It would be amazing. It would be awesome.

Hi. I am Muhammad Mubeen Hassan. I am SEO Expat and Wordpress Websites Developer &  Blogger. 30 years old. I help entrepreneurs become go-to in their industry. And, I like helping the next one in line. You can follow my journey on my blog, for list Click Here If you need any post so you can email me on my this Email:  

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply


The Facebook Oversight Board upholds Trump ban, But how for how long?



The board urged Facebook to re-examine its decision and issue a revised conclusion after six months.

The Facebook Oversight Board has voted against the reinstatement of accounts belonging to former President Donald Trump Wednesday, upholding the company’s decision to ban his account following The Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol.

The board also directed Facebook, however, to revisit the decision “to be able to justify and determine the proportionate response, and to issue the new conclusion within six months.”

“It was inappropriate to Facebook to impose an indefinite and non-standard penalty of a suspended indefinitely,” this decision states. “Facebook’s standard penalties include taking down the content in violation and imposing a time-bound duration in suspension or shutting down the account and the page.”

The board noted two posts from January. 6 that “severely infringed” Facebook’s guidelines. In one of his posts, he expressed his gratitude to those demonstrating at the Capitol by declaring they were “very exceptional.” In another post, he called the protesters “great Patriots” and said he would “remember this day for all time.” Both of the comments, the board determined, violated Facebook’s guidelines against glorifying violence.

“At the moment of Ms. Trump’s comments, there was an evident immediate danger of injury, and his declarations of support for the people involved in the riots justified the violence of those involved,” the board wrote.

The board also criticized Facebook for issuing the “indefinite” suspension, which the panel noted is not in Facebook’s policies. “In applying a vague, unproven penalty, and then referring the issue for the Board to decide, Facebook seeks to avoid its obligations,” the board wrote in a letter to Facebook’s critics who have made similar arguments. Similar.

In a conference call with reporters after the announcement, the board’s chairman Michael McConnell, who serves as the director for the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, criticized Facebook for “apparently believing for what board members would take action what it would have done if they had not.”

“We do not police with a broader view of social media and tackling the world’s problems,” McConnell said. “Our primary responsibility is holding the powerful company, Facebook, accountable for making clear constant, and transparent choices without fear or favor to those with power in the political realm.”

McConnell said there’s a “substantial chance” that the Facebook board will be requested to review the Facebook decision in six months’ time.

“We wrote at the beginning of January that we believed our decision was both necessary and appropriate, and we’re happy that the board has acknowledged that the extraordinary circumstances justify the unusual step we adopted.” Facebook vice president of global affairs, as well as communications Nick Clegg, said in a written statement. “We are now evaluating the board’s decision and deciding the best action, which is transparent and proportional. In the meantime, Mr. Trump’s accounts are still suspended.”

The board’s decision contained a variety of suggestions for Facebook, calling for more transparency in its decisions. The first suggestion was that the political content of “highly prominent individuals” should be swiftly transferred to experienced, skilled human reviewers who are acquainted with the content and language. The staff members should be “insulated from economic and political influence and undue influences,” the board suggests.

The board also asks Facebook to clarify in its policies how it comes to these decisions, what it stores and distributes information, and what its strike and sanctions procedures are, and include more details in its transparency reports regularly. Facebook should “undertake an extensive examination” of how its presence and design have been a factor in the spread of false information about electoral fraud. The board stated: “This should be an open examination of the policy and design decisions that Facebook has made which could let its platform be used to extort.”

Ultimately, the board stressed that the decision was not solely about Trump. However, it was for everyone in an “ad-hockery” in Facebook’s guidelines in the manner McConnell said.

“Anyone concerned about Facebook’s exaggerated concentration of power must be happy with this announcement by the Oversight Board telling Facebook that they can’t invent new rules without a written document whenever they want,” board chair Helle Thorning-Schmidt who was the former Danish Premier, spoke to reporters.

However, this decision could have significant consequences for Trump. After his abrupt removal of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, Trump has lost access to his most potent weapon – social media. Although he’s still a frequent guest appearance on Fox News and has given prominent speeches at Republican events, his profile has decreased significantly since leaving the presidency. The decision of the board to exclude Trump from the platform at most for a while is a severe challenge to the legitimacy of Trump’s plan of running for the presidency in 2024. It also raises the possibility that Facebook could be forced to investigate other global leaders who violate its policies.

Although many have dismissed the Oversight Board as a Facebook PR stunt, there’s no doubt that an extended suspension could impact the coming races in the U.S. and abroad. If polls are and they are to be believed, Trump is still the preferred candidate to become the Republican presidential candidate within the next four years. Facebook has tried to show its political neutrality throughout the years and may soon find itself preventing a prominent contender for an American president from using the site. At the same time, everyone else is granted access to Facebook’s three billion users and its hyper-targeted advertising tools. Even if Trump does not run for the next election, his deplatforming efforts could hinder his ability to be the role of kingmaker in Republican politics at large.

The repercussions of the board’s decision or inability to make it — were overwhelming. “Instead of dealing with the primary problems with its platform, the company took advantage of this fragile moment in our history to convince us of the fanciful story of this oversight committee. I don’t believe it. They’re now kicking the can further down the road once more,” said Media Matters for America president Angelo Carusone.

“Unless Facebook permanently bans Trump immediately, we’ll have this spectacular sideshow for six months.”

The decision to keep the ban also confirms the unsubstantiated claim made by circles of Right-wing circles that Facebook has been biased toward conservatives for years. “Facebook’s decision to keep its ban on President Donald Trump is extremely disappointing. It’s evident that Mark Zuckerberg views himself as the ultimate arbiter of freedom of speech,” Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn stated in an announcement.

The board’s decision is close to advise from the vast majority of civil rights groups and certain ex-Facebook employees who advocated against the possibility of letting Trump come back to Facebook in their comments to the committee. “There is no doubt that there could be some close calls with a policy that allows for the de-platforming of leaders from political parties under extreme situations,” read one letter that was signed by several academics, including Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former security chief and the current director at the Stanford Internet Observatory. “This is not one of the cases.”

Continue Reading


%d bloggers like this: