Previous Post
Next Post


According to a variety of press reports, Facebook’s founder and CEO is worried about threats from “unstable website users.” Gee, wonder why. In response, he’s now protected by a phalanx of 16 armed guards 24 hours a day. Yes, we’re talking about the same hypocritical weasel who’s gradually banishing all mention of guns from his social network behemoth. The same Obama administration sycophant who likely colluded with the White House in the recent private sale ad ban. Not that the People of the Gun — those who pay attention to these things — will be shocked at all by any of this . . .

It’s the same age-old elitism – guns for me, but not for thee. The Zuckerberg news is of a piece with people like Michael Bloomberg, Diane Feinstein, Mark Kelly, Gabby Giffords, and Shannon Watts. Those whose existence is so important — so vital to our society — that their personal safety and those of their loved ones justifies armed self defense, even as they advocate that yours and mine be rolled back or eliminated.

Fortunately, we still have the Second Amendment which enshrines the civil right of all Americans to keep and bear arms. For now, anyway.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. “[Bloomberg’s] standing there with 12 bodyguards, telling you that you shouldn’t have a gun to protect you, while he has 12 guys protecting him! As if his life counts, but yours is not important? If guns are not important and nobody should have a gun to protect himself, why does Bloomberg have 12 bodyguards? Why doesn’t he stand there with 12 rabbis? Why do they have guns? Instead of guns they should have pastrami sandwiches.”

    — Jackie Mason

    • Sadly, that is exactly what the likes of Zuckerberg and Bloomberg think: that their lives are more important than the lives of everyday people.

      Regardless of how many millions or billions of dollars that they can claim on their balance sheet, they still put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.

    • Just be sure to avoid noticing that he is one of God’s Chosen Ones and somehow believes in strict gun control for the average citizen. That would be anti-Semitic.
      It’s just another coincidence. Just ask the ADL who will try to ruin anyone who tries to make this absurd connection.

      • Being Jewish has nothing to do with him being an asshole and being an asshole has nothing to do with him being Jewish.

        • Fuck the Jews. Honestly. What a nasty culture.

          I know that individual Jews can be brilliant, amazing humans.Most of my friends are Jews. I dated a Jewish girl for almost a decade, at one point. I know that Farago is a Jew. What I hate is their culture, the implanted, implicit sacredotalism that claims condescending dominion over anything. The rabbi who feels like he ought to get in your business. Fuck them.

        • Umm, hate to tell you Matt, but there is a reason why the Jews have some of that attitude. Jew are what, less than 1%:of the world population, and yet look at the top of the field in any discipline; science, art, finance, philosophy, politics; you will find Jews are represented as a large percentage of that group.

          Jews may very well be created directly by G-d, for they definitely function at a level of accomplishment most people could only dream about.

          Without the Jewish contributions to civilization over the millenia, we, as the human race, would be in a more savage and brutish place.

          The best example of this contribution by Jews is of course, Jesus the Christ.

  2. Maybe the bodyguards are unarmed, instead annihilating attackers by a lethal combination of Martial Tai Chi, Bagua, and Krav Maga?

  3. The hilarious part is that Zuckerturd thinks that bodyguards will stop anyone who seriously wants him dead. Close protection works for psychos, not people who actually have an idea of what they are doing. (The sorts of people he’s recently pissed off.)

    • My Google-Fu skills are limited, but I would certainly like to see someone collect the statistics on what percentage of firearm related attacks on politicians or celebrities or uber-rich folks in the last quarter century or so were actually committed by conservatives or Libertarians, as opposed to left or far-left zealots. I have a suspicion that they may be mostly limited to abortion clinics.

        • That is disingenuous. And also, “the left” is too linear and incomplete a metric for even determining motivation for assassination anyways. Left of what, and how do Nationalists, Muslims, Christians and just plain crazy people fall on that kind of spectrum? Could you, for example, characterize a Anti-Abolitionist Southern Democrat like John Wilkes Booth as “on the left”?

        • Ironically Guy Faukes was a Catholic conservative who wanted to reestablish the primacy of the crown…… The libtards love them some Guy Faukes.

      • I don’t think any “Libertarians” have bombed any clinics or killed/attempted to kill any doctors – it runs counter to the entire philosophy. I would hazard a guess that not even “Conservatives” could be included in that, unless you are implying those of the religious variety, as opposed to say, fiscal conservatives.

        • I’m a Libertarian, and I’m Pro-life. I think people should (for the most part) be left to do whatever they please with their lives, their property, and their bodies, up to the limit at which their actions negatively and without consent impact the lives, property and bodies of another person. Humans pre-birth have the right to not be killed and their bodies sold for parts, the same as you or I do.

          If you don’t think it’s possible to be libertarian and also anti-abortion, look into Dr. Ron Paul.

        • There’s a bit of a difference between disagreeing with the practice of abortion and wanting to see it ended, and committing violence to that end. BDub didn’t say being anti-abortion was counter to libertarian philosophy, only that killing people to further an anti-abortion agenda (or any other agenda, really) was.

        • I’m a Libertarian and to join the party I have to agree to the party’s “non-aggression” principles.

          Libertarians believe the initiation of violence is immoral and that people should only engage in activities via mutual consent – not via force.

    • Anyone who would want to KILL someone regarding facebook IS a psycho. Or is there some other group of people he’s pissed off that I am forgetting?

  4. This can’t be accurate. Mark and his family live in San Francisco, which as anybody can tell you (Ms. Feinstein and or Ms. Pelosi, for example) is a giant gun free zone. Also, by city ordinance, all guns must be locked away, with trigger locks. Should be nothing for Mark to worry about, except maybe some aggressive pan handlers (or maybe Kanye). Sounds like Mr. Z may be just a tad paranoid.

    • If he lives in Ssan Francisco, then all of his body guards must be retired LEOs who can carry pursuant to LEOSA. San Francisco does not issue concealed carry permits to mere civilians. A couple of sheriffs back (can’t remember his name, Mike (Irish something) prided himself on his refusal to issue ANY CCWs. The last sheriff (recently voted out of office) had issued two, one of which was to a reserve deputy, while the COP had issued two others, one also to a reserve deputy. The other two were issued to employees of the Sheriff and the SFPD, respectively.

      • The members of his detail look like ex cops or military. That big beefy look. Although he does have one rather attractive youngish woman.

      • One can maintain residence in one place while working in another under a state-wide permit. Additionally security guards / bodyguards can get difference licenses.

  5. “Guns for me but not for thee!” is the leftist elitist mantra. They are important, after all.

    By the way, if you have a Facebook account, you are wrong and you need to fix yourself.

  6. What’s the big deal? It’s not as if they are trying to get Zuck to sell their weapons on FB right?
    Do the goons, I mean guards all have concealed permits in impossible-to-get-a-concealed-permit San Fran? That’s the privilege question.

    • Even if his goons got impossible-to-obtain concealed handgun licenses in San Francisco County, they would be worthless in many other states. I have a hunch that all of the armed guards are “retired” law enforcement officers carrying under LEOSA.

      • I would guess California has a licensing scheme for armed security guards, which wouldn’t necessarily mean the guys would need to be covered by LEOSA?

        That being said, I doubt he’s farming out the work to Securitas. I would wager his hired help comes from one of the numerous “executive protection” firms littering California that do business protecting pretty people. So they are probably properly licensed security pros who probably have LE & .mil experience.

        Must suck though to protect all these douchebags.

  7. I have to imagine that a high-end armed guard has to cost on the order of $100k per year. Thus, Zuckerberg is shelling out something like $1.6 million per year on armed guards.

    Hmm. Someone with a dump truck load of money can hire their own private army to do their bidding. It’s almost like the Framers recognized the potential for such people to hire private armies and force their mindset upon us. If only there were some way to counterbalance that potential for tyranny …

    • I’m guessing that some if that security is probably required by his insurance.

      The real question is this – If I ran an armed security service, could I advertise my services on a Facebook page and not get censored?

    • “Best investigative reporting on the planet. But go ahead, read the New York Times if you want. They get lucky sometimes.”

    • I prefer page three for reporting myself. The boobs are just as big but much more pleasant to look at.

  8. Why do any of his bodyguards need a gun? Can’t they just call the police if something happens, I mean, that’s probably at least a dozen cell phones between them right…probably even have GPS and speed dial too?

  9. He also allows videos of drug cartel executions, and ISIS recruiting propaganda on his site, but bans 100% lawful transactions of firearms.

    Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

    • I’m sure if they did, he’d be OK with it, since it would concern his well-being. But everybody else? Feh!

  10. I live a block away from his SF home. He may have more than a dozen bodyguards but they rotate. Friend lives right next door to him ( knows all the guards and they are very nice to her ) and says she can tell when he’s home as there are three SUVs out front instead of the customary two.
    I always thought it was ok as maybe it might make the neighborhood safer but my van was broken into within sight of one of the guards.
    Screw him and his “guns for me but not for thee” hypocracy.

  11. I think it would be funny if one of the 16 goons had an ND and shot Zuck by accident….errrr….how do we know it would not be on purpose?

  12. If Hillary gets nominated I am getting ready for this very question to get asked.

    As for z diddy who cares leave him to his fifedom.

  13. AH one of the perks of wealth. A gun for me but not for thee. Doesn’t zuckerboy hunt too now?

  14. The Leftist utopia: little people are disarmed and they have a phalanx of legionnaires.
    Little people are packed into a train, they have a private jet.

  15. Isnt there a whitehouse petition website? Me thinks this would be a good candidate for a petition to argue for potus stripping zuck’s guards of their leosa carry when working for him. That could be fun

  16. Bodyguards — the new billionaire status symbol. Because Ferraris and Patek Phillippes are tres declasee.

    • Egads man. Unless it’s a 250 GT California, or a 355 Sport Scaglietti, Ferraris are rather plebian. Entry level for a new one is $190K. That’s a week’s work, or less. And Patek Phillipe? Other than the Super Complication (one of one at $24MM) they’re generally rather pedestrian too, at around $150K for the vast majority of the range.

      You really must plug into what the 0.1% are indulging themselves with. $100K is a night at a club, not an ostentatious display of wealth. 😉

  17. Another elitist whose life is more important than is yours or mine. I call BS on the hypocrites!

  18. “Zuckerberg news is of a piece with people like Michael Bloomberg, Diane Feinstein,”

    Wow Ted Nugent was right! Jew Jew Jew

  19. 23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

    5 “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries[a] wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

  20. Legal gun sale negotiations are protected commercial speech. If the White House colluded with Zuckerberg to ban it from Facebook, wouldn’t that be a 1st Amendment violation?

  21. Socratease, you don’t understand how the First Amendment works.

    Read up on it before spewing your ignorant fallacious bullshit.

Comments are closed.