Attempts on my FB access

This is the third time I get this kind of extra verification:

The first two times I filled in, I got returned to a normal FB login, and each time, as after the first login, I was thrust onto an extra verification.

It may be mentioned that FB France is managed by moderators who are Qataris, and that I've lately showed myself critical against Islam.*

The government continued to censor or ban print and social media religious material it considered objectionable. In June the government deported an Arabic-speaking evangelical Christian pastor after interrogating him for three days on charges of leading a place of worship without authorization and inviting non-Christians to his church. Conversion to another religion from Islam is defined by the law as apostasy and illegal, although there have been no recorded punishments for apostasy since the country’s independence in 1971

Source:

2019 Report on International Religious Freedom: Qatar
US Department of State
https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/qatar

It may also be mentioned, I contacted the son of Katarina Taikon, whose mother's autobiography i enjoyed, explaining why I, while supporting Gypsy Rights, am a Fascist and why that doesn't equal Nazi. It's possible that a certain campaign to stamp me as a Nazi or my Fascist alignment as a racist (including anti-gypsy) one is not very amused by this initiative on my part./HGL

PS, Fixed, but the guy didn't answer. I'm still a fan of his mother, though./HGL

PPS, if you didn't get it, it's the access that's fixed./HGL

* A certain Muslim attitude about polemics from non-Muslims, specifically against Islam is calling it "maligning" ... now the true religion is certainly in one sense maligned by any polemics against it, but this is not always due to an intent of misrepresenting. I think some Protestants have also pretended I maligned the Deformation, on their view "Reformation" ... by showing it is opposed to an implication of Matthew 28:20. Oh, I misrepresent the intention of the Reformers, Luther never intended to create a new church ... the problem is, they agree that the Church that eventually came out of Luther, namely Lutherans, and a few more, that came out of him indirectly, are new. And Matthew 28:20 requires for there to be a true Church that's from "AD 33" (exact year somewhat disputed), that's not a pure abstraction and that's still there. A Conclavist doesn't agree that the papacy of Vatican in Exile is a new papacy, we say it's the old papacy that got a fresh start after a 32 year long pause (a record long sedevacancy). We say that it's the popes currently in the Vatican who are very recent transformers comparable to the Deformers (one proposed year of limit being 1958). Again, a Vatican-II-ist may tactically pretend I'm "maligning" the Vatican because of my convictions about it ... but would be less eager to openly consider my intent as that of maligning./HGL