Things the main stream press decided to hide (part 3)


2022 in review: Issues ignored version

Twitter was in contact with multiple government agencies

Federales sought action on narratives on Ukraine and COVID

The Daily Wire points out how it was not just the FBI that directed Twitter to restrict topics, ban people, publish lies, and promote the Biden position on Ukraine and COVID.

Journalist Matt Taibbi released a new installment of “The Twitter Files” Saturday afternoon that showed that the FBI was not the only government agency that was in regular contact with Twitter about content on the platform.

Taibbi said that the State Department, Department of Defense, and Central Intelligence Agency were also involved in contacting the platform about potential foreign propaganda on the platform.

Internal company emails showed that FBI agent Elvis Chan asked Twitter executives if he could invite an “OGA” — Other Government Agency — to an upcoming conference.

The email referred to a Twitter employee, whose name was redacted, and said that people from the employee’s “former employer,” which a Twitter executive acknowledged meant the CIA, were specifically inquiring about the invitation.

“The government was in constant contact not just with Twitter but with virtually every major tech firm,” Taibbi said. “These included Facebook, Microsoft, Verizon, Reddit, even Pinterest, and many others. Industry players also held regular meetings without government.”

The new Twitter Files release also showed that FBI officials helped put the company in contact with local law enforcement officials to deal with issues.

Taibbi said that the FBI was “clearly tailoring” its searches on the platform to look for potential content violations that Twitter could take action on.

(Read more at the Daily Wire)

Banana-republic Biden here proves he will push us into a Democrat-dictatorship

Through this article, we see Biden:

  • Restricting free speech through the proxies of Twitter and the FBI, CIA, and NSA
  • Stepping into the role of the doctor as he restricts discussion of alternate medicines (such as hydrochloroquine and other medicines) for COVID
  • Silencing his opposition (while again by proxy) through banning people from platforms
  • Allowing only his approved narrative (never mind that it was a complete fabrication)

Therefore, the next time that I go on a rant regarding the fascism of Biden, don’t stop me. It does not constitute any exaggeration.

Breitbart names eighteen wasteful items in the $1.7 trillion spending bill

Here are the first six

Breitbart details eighteen insanely liberal projects that the $1.7 trillion splurge pushes (including further prosecution of 6 January detainees; LGBT projects; border security for Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia and Oman; and more).

The $1.7 trillion omnibus spending bill contains millions in wasteful spending, including $575 million for “reproductive health” where population growth “threatens biodiversity,” $11 million for LGBT-related projects, and millions more for border security for other countries.

Democrats are determined to pass the $1.7 trillion spending spree prior to Christmas following the Senate advancing the spending bill on Tuesday. The omnibus hit a snag mid-week due to Sen. Mike Lee’s (R-UT) Title 42 amendment, which lawmakers ultimately rejected.

The swamp quickly regained its footing, and the Senate passed the bill on Thursday in a 68-29 vote, despite conservatives in both chambers warning Republican colleagues to vote against the measure. Republican Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) is among those who has backed the warnings of House Republicans threatening to thwart the legislative efforts of GOP senators who voted in favor of the bill.

Eighteen Republican senators ended up voting with Democrats to pass the $1.7 government spending spree.

The 4,155-page monster contains billions in earmarks and millions more on wasteful projects unrelated to keeping the government up and running.

Here are some of the highlights.

  1. The bill contains $45 billion to Ukraine. This is in addition to the $66 million given by American taxpayers earlier this year, bringing the total to $111 billion.Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has stated that the blank check is simply not enough:

    “We are not in an easy situation. The enemy is increasing its army. Our people are braver and need more powerful weapons,” he said about the Ukrainian war. “We will pass it on from the boys to the Congress, to the president of the United States. We are grateful for their support, but it is not enough. It is a hint — it is not enough.”

  2. The bill also designates part of D.C. as Ukrainian Independence Park and, as Breitbart News reported, “allows for signs around the park that ‘include information on the importance of the independence, freedom, and sovereignty of Ukraine and the solidarity between the people of Ukraine and the United States.’”
  3. $11 million is allotted for LGBT-themed projects. This includes $1.2 million to San Diego Community College for “centers to support LGBT students,” $3 million for the American LGBTQ+ Museum in New York City, $750,000 for the “TransLatin@ Coalition” to provide “workforce development programs and supportive services for Transgender, Gender nonconforming and Intersex (TGI) immigrant women in Los Angeles,” and $105,000 going toward what has been described as a “mentoring program for LGBT youth in the greater Pittsburg area.” Another $856,000 is allotted for an “LGBT Center” in New York as well.
  4. The bill designates tens of millions for “necessary expenses associated with the restoration of Pacific salmon populations, $65,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2024.” The words “salmon” or “salmonoid” are mentioned 48 times throughout the bill.
  5. The bill includes over half a billion, $575 million, to be used for “family planning” or “reproductive health.” This includes areas where lawmakers say population growth “threatens biodiversity.” The bill states in part, “That of the funds appropriated under title III of this Act, not less than $575,000,000 should be made available for family planning/reproductive health, including in areas where population growth threatens biodiversity or endangered species.”
  6. 19 earmarks totaling $60 million are set aside for RINO Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). This includes $500,000 for the “Restoring Indigenous Safety and Empowerment (RISE) Tribal Domestic Violence Shelter for Helping Ourselves Prevent Emergencies.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

The six items I included are aggrivating. The eighteen cited by Breitbart are maddening

The six items that I list include enough idiocy to be aggrivating. The eighteen things mentioned by Breitbart could drive one to madness. However, to consider the degree of insanity inclosed in over 4,000 pages that had to be voted on within a matter of days, then a new level of craziness gets involved. Therefore, I find myself agreeing with Representative Dan Crenshaw as he uses a Townhall article to explain his vote against the $17 trillion omnibus bill.

Republican Congressman Dan Crenshaw is detailing why he voted against the $1.7 trillion omnibus package on Friday, paving the way for President Joe Biden’s signature after the monster legislation was passed in the U.S. Senate. He’s also calling claims lawmakers didn’t have enough time to read the legislation an “excuse” for voting against it, arguing there are much better reasons why the bill should have been opposed. 

(Read more at Townhall)

Hence, I agree with Representative Crenshaw for this time and thank him for his “no” vote.


Liberal repression of the news (continued)

Biden’s social media defunds another company

Why has PayPal cancelled the Free Speech Union?

Britain’s Spectator allows an op-ed commentary on PayPal’s cancelation of the account of the Free Speech Union.

I thought one of the benefits of being cancelled – I lost five positions in quick succession at the beginning of 2018 – is that it immunises you from being cancelled again. After all, what more dirt could be thrown at me? The offence archaeologists did such a thorough job four years ago, sifting through everything I’d said or written dating back to 1987, that there was nothing left to dig up. But it turns out that was naive. Last week I got cancelled again.

The instrument of my downfall was PayPal, the technology company that supports online money transfers and operates as a payment processor for online businesses, auction sites and so on. At around 2 p.m. last Thursday I received an email from PayPal informing me that the company was ‘initiating closure’ of my personal account because I was ‘in violation’ of its ‘Acceptable Use Policy’. I looked up that policy and it covers a multitude of sins, but no clue was offered as to which one I’d committed. ‘If you have money in your PayPal balance, we’ll hold it for up to 180 days,’ it said. That was a bit annoying because I have over £600 in the account, but it wasn’t the end of the world. I mainly use it for receiving payments from European magazines I write for occasionally.

Then it got serious. Within a few minutes of contacting me, PayPal sent the same message to the Daily Sceptic, the news publishing website I’ve been running for two-and-a-half years, and the Free Speech Union, the organisation I set up in 2020 to defend people threatened with cancellation. In both cases, PayPal was shutting down the accounts for the same reason – breaching the Acceptable Use Policy. No further details. To give you a sense of how serious this is, about a quarter of the Daily Sceptic’s donor revenue is processed by PayPal and about a third of the Free Speech Union’s 9,500 members pay their dues via PayPal.

‘So what?’ you might think. Just email all those people and advise them to use a different payment processor. I’ll do that, obviously, but it’s inevitable that some won’t bother – some of them won’t even open the emails – and the resulting loss of revenue will be hugely disruptive. The Daily Sceptic has four people on the payroll and the Free Speech Union has 15 and they both operate on tight margins. I was relying on PayPal to deliver the service it promised to perform when I first signed up and which I’ve been paying for until now (1.5 per cent commission on every transaction). I had no idea it could just whisk the rug out from under you, with no notice and without having to provide any proper explanation. In my case, the excuse offered was obviously bogus. How could all three accounts be guilty of ‘violating’ the same policy within minutes of each other?

(Read more of the travails of being deplatformed from the Spectator)

From this, we know that this struggle has a global nature

This does not exist as a struggle between Democrats and Republicans. More possibly, it might consist of a struggle between socialists and freedom-minded people. It might also remain as a fight between the big-government people and the individualists. 

Biden’s election handlers seem to be up to their old tricks

Democrats “charity” voter-registration scheme

The Wall Street Journal shares an Op-Ed that points toward a nefarious bent within Democrat circles.

Senate Democrats plan to pass the Disclose Act, a bill they claim would force “dark money” groups into the light. Never mind the darkness that envelops their own epic voter-registration scam.

A New York Times article this week confirmed a political reality that Republicans have been slow to publicize: Democrats are openly abusing charities to stack voter rolls in their favor. The Times story was ostensibly about “voter registration” groups worried that donors weren’t giving enough to “democracy-related” programs this midterm cycle. Read closely and you notice the story is entirely about Democrats, confirming a longstanding scheme by which foundations and private donors funnel tax-exempt dollars into “charities” that microtarget and register Democratic voters.

(Read more at the Wall Street Journal)

And, according to Joe, we can trust Democrats to not cheat again

And who wouldn’t trust this crew when they have failed at everything, but continue to do nothing but blame the other side?

Biden’s FBI goes full Gestapo against pro-life speaker

FBI raids home of Catholic pro-life speaker and author with guns drawn as his terrified kids watch

Lifesitenews reports that a Catholic speaker was raided by the FBI with guns drawn in front of the speaker’s children.

A well-known pro-life author, sidewalk counselor, and father of seven was the latest victim of a U.S. Department of Justice-sponsored SWAT raid and arrest — for supposed “FACE Act” violations — at his rural home as his children looked on “screaming.”

Mark Houck is the founder and president of The King’s Men, which promotes healing for victims of pornography addiction and promotes Christian virtues among men in the United States and Europe.

According to his wife Ryan-Marie, who spoke with LifeSiteNews, he also drives two hours south to Philadelphia every Wednesday to sidewalk counsel for six to eight hours at two different abortion centers.

Ryan-Marie, who is a homeschooling mother, described how the SWAT team of 25 to 30 FBI agents swarmed their property with around 15 vehicles at 7:05 a.m. this morning. Having quickly surrounded the house with rifles in firing position, “they started pounding on the door and yelling for us to open it.”

Before opening the door, she explained, her husband tried to calm them, saying, “‘Please, I’m going to open the door, but, please, my children are in the home. I have seven babies in the house.’ But they just kept pounding and screaming,” she said.

When he opened the door, “they had big, huge rifles pointed at Mark and pointed at me and kind of pointed throughout the house,” Ryan-Marie described.

When they came in, they ordered the kids to stay upstairs. “Our staircase is open, so [the kids] were all at the top of the stairs which faces the front door, and I was on the stairs as well, coming down.”

“The kids were all just screaming. It was all just very scary and traumatic,” she explained.

After asking them why they were at the house, the agents said they were there to arrest Mark. When Ryan-Marie asked for their warrant, “they said that they were going to take him whether they had a warrant or not.”

(Read the full story at Lifesitenews)

Aren’t you glad we have the “Great Unifier” in charge?

Aren’t you glad that devoutly-Catholic Joe is in charge of the FBI?

An admission by a member of the press on media bias

A liberal reporter claims Republicans shouldn’t have a say on any issue

Townhall comments on the words of a CNN news reader who said the quiet part of silencing Republicans out loud.

Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones is fretting over CNN’s makeover of distancing itself from being an extreme left-leading outlet. 

Titled “CNN ‘hewing toward the center’ is not necessarily good for our democracy,” Jones fret that the network’s attempt of being less polarizing could be dangerous to the country. 

Jones also claimed that “the other side shouldn’t be given a voice” on certain topics, especially when it comes to former President Trump.

His piece bashed a recent story in the Chicago Tribune which touched on CNN’s move to becoming less polarizing amid its new CEO Chris Licht stepping in. 

The Chicago paper boldly stated that most issues have two sides, however when it comes “to the antics of former President Donald Trump,” the Right shouldn’t be allowed to report on it. 

“Here’s the problem: All Americans aren’t reasonable enough or willing to accept what’s true… and it isn’t just a small minority of those who aren’t willing to accept things such as the 2020 presidential election, the authenticity of our elections and other bedrocks of our democracy. For the editorial board to wrap up the issue by briefly mentioning the ‘antics of former President Donald Trump’ seems overly dismissive and not nearly as comprehensive of what’s truly at stake here,” Jones said. 

“Perhaps it’s Pollyannaish to hope that CNN can retrofit itself in a country where each political side believes the other is living in a kind of dangerous alternate reality,” according to the Tribune. 

(Read at Townhall to get several paragraphs of excuses for this bias)

This shouts “Don’t trust Democrats in the press” as loud as anything

That is, this is the loudest shout from the Democrat press to ignore them since they tried to bury the Hunter laptop.

Democrat media outlets now deny previous “fact checks”

The Washington Post botches a fact-check to cover for Democrats’ abortion extremism

The Washington Examiner exposes the poor job done in “fact checking” done by liberal outlets like the Washington Post who now have lowered their standards to the level where they deny having previously “fact checked” for Democrats.

So often, the “fact-checking” industry in the establishment media serves as an organ of the Democratic Party.

Even then, the Washington Post may have made it a bit too obvious.

Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post decided to fact-check claims by Republicans that Democrats support abortion “until the moment of birth,” citing comments from both Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters, who used that phrase. It’s not a particularly difficult fact to check, given that Democrats do support keeping abortion legal at any point in pregnancy and frequently decline or refuse to name a single abortion restriction they would ever support.

But Kessler decided instead to fact-check a claim that was never made.

Kessler says that the “GOP attacks are disingenuous at best” because “they imply that late-term abortions are common.” He then proceeds to “fact check” how many late-term abortions are performed in the United States. In his verdict, Kessler concludes, “The campaign rhetoric suggests such late-term abortions happen frequently. The truth is that they do not.”

But again, this is the claim he was supposedly “fact-checking.” Kessler fabricated a strawman claim to give him an article that is more favorable to Democrats. He knows that Democrats oppose all abortion restrictions — everyone knows it because they keep saying so — and their stance is out-of-touch with most people’s views on the issue. So he decided to make the issue about the frequency of late-term abortions, which he concludes is at least 10,000 per year.

Speaking of which, that 10,000-a-year number also gives the lie to the claim that late-term abortion is “extremely rare.” It is much more common, for example, than deaths from AR-15s or other so-called “assault weapons.” All rifles combined, AR-15s included, accounted for only 364 gun homicides in 2019. (There were 10,258 total gun homicides in 2019, which is almost as many late-term abortions as Kessler decided are “extremely rare.”)

According to the Washington Post’s own police shooting database, there have been 7,768 people shot and killed by police since 2015. That hasn’t stopped the Democrats and their allies in the media from claiming that it is an epidemic. The Black Lives Matter movement is given national reverence by liberals, including Kessler’s paper, even though only 1,689 of those victims were black and, of that group, only 144 in the last eight years were unarmed. So police misconduct and shootings with so-called “assault weapons” are both considerably rarer than late-term abortions, which Kessler declared “extremely rare” at 10,000 per year.

Would Kessler ever claim that Democrats are out of line on gun control or police shootings? Of course, he wouldn’t. Today’s Democratic Party is essentially a political arm of the legacy media corporations.

(Read at Washington Examiner how this type of bias would not be tolerated against the left)

If the main stream press does not want to be seen as just an arm of the Democrat party, why do this?

Why make abortion the focus when the real story is a failing president? Then why pull the focus from abortion when Democrats’ radical stance becomes so evident?

More news that the main stream media doesn’t tell: promotion of LGBTQ+ agenda items

Hilliard City School District promotes an “LGBTQ+ resource guide” with instructions on sex work and abortions

The Washington Free Beacon provides a case where liberals provided minors with information on getting abortions and working in the sex industry (sounds like multiple counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor to me).

Teachers in an Ohio school district are wearing name badges that students can scan with their phones to access an “LGBTQ+ resource guide,” which includes instructions on how to get abortions and “organize like a sex worker.”

Hilliard City School District participates in the National Education Association’s “I’m Here” program, which encourages teachers to wear the badge. The group says the program is supposed to educate teachers on how to respond to LGBT students. But a Washington Free Beacon review found that the QR code takes students to resources that describe abortion as the removal of “pregnancy tissue,” encourage gender transitioning without parental consent, and promote sex work.

Public schools around the country are coming under fire for teaching age-inappropriate lessons to students. Parents in Idaho, for example, caught the state government this month offering “porn literacy” to students. A parent sued a Maine school district for offering books with “sexually graphic material, including descriptions of queer sex,” the Free Beacon reported in July.

The teachers’ badges have sparked outrage among parents in Hilliard City, ABC 6 reported earlier this month.

“The badge has a QR code that once scanned takes you to a website that has extremely inappropriate information, and as a parent that crosses the line,” Hilliard City parent Lisa Chaffee said.

Hilliard City superintendent Dave Stewart said the badges only concern “adult learning,” though the website from the QR code provides resources aimed at K-12 students. After backlash from parents, the district advised teachers to cover the QR code on the back of the badge, according to a statement from Stewart.

One link from the online guide encourages children to seek LGBT resources without their parents’ approval.

(Read at the Washington Free Beacon about the links concerning protections in Texas for LGBT issues)

So, what holds a more important place in your heart than children? With that answered, why doesn’t the press report on this?

If the press really wants to grab our attention, why not show how the LGBTQ+ community has targeted our children through liberal teachers?

One more exchange that would have been repeated daily had the liberal/conservative or male/female or race roles been reversed

John Kennedy spends over four minutes clarifying points that a nominee would rather obscure

In the following video taken from the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on 7 September 2022, Senator John Kennedy illustrates how people who sign a document should know what they sign. That is, because a judicial nominee had co-written a document titled “Mandate for Change,” maybe she should not be so surprised she now finds herself denying what the publication advocated.


Where is the outcry?

Do you remember the outcry at the White House and the press when both assumed that horse-mounted border agents were whipping illegal aliens?

When it turned out that the agents were using the reigns to direct the horses, the cry did not subside

Reuters reported with a full throated cry in a 20 September 2021 article on the White House reaction to the imagined mistreatment of illegal aliens.

 The White House on Monday criticized the use of horse reins to threaten Haitian migrants after images circulated of a U.S. border guard on horseback charging at migrants near a riverside camp in Texas.

The mostly Haitian migrants in recent days have been crossing back and forth between Ciudad Acuna in Mexico and the sprawling camp across the border in Del Rio to buy food and water, which was in short supply on the U.S. side.

Reuters witnesses saw mounted officers wearing cowboy hats blocking the paths of migrants, and one officer unfurling a cord resembling a lariat, which he swung near a migrant’s face.

A video showing a border guard apparently threatening migrants with the cords was shared on social media.

“I don’t think anyone seeing that footage would think it was acceptable or appropriate,” White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters.

“I don’t have the full context. I can’t imagine what context would make that appropriate,” she added.

Some on social media commented that the image of fleeing Black men chased by white officers on horseback had echoes of the historical injustices suffered by Black people in the United States.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz said the incident was being investigated to make sure there was not an “unacceptable” response by law enforcement. He said officers were operating in a difficult environment, trying to ensure the safety of the migrants while searching for potential smugglers.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said the long reins are used by mounted officials to “ensure control of the horse.”

“But we are going to investigate the facts,” he said during a news conference in Del Rio.

The camp under a bridge spanning the Rio Grande has become the latest flashpoint for U.S. authorities seeking to stem a flow of migrants fleeing gang violence, extreme poverty and natural disasters in their home countries.

The camp was a temporary home to more than 12,000 migrants, though Texas Governor Greg Abbott said the number reached as high as 16,000 on Saturday. Many had traveled from as far south as Chile, hoping to apply for asylum in the United States.

On Monday, as temperatures soared to 104 degrees Fahrenheit (40 Celsius), migrants complained about continued shortages of food and water in the camp. Some of those crossing back into the U.S. could be seen balancing large bags of ice on their heads as they waded through the water.

During the day hundreds of migrants had returned to the Mexico side, including families with young children, hoisting backpacks, suitcases and belongings in plastic bags above their heads.

“This treatment they are giving is racism, because of the color of our skin,” said Maxon Prudhomme, a Haitian migrant on the banks of the Rio Grande in Mexico.

 The White House on Monday criticized the use of horse reins to threaten Haitian migrants after images circulated of a U.S. border guard on horseback charging at migrants near a riverside camp in Texas.

The mostly Haitian migrants in recent days have been crossing back and forth between Ciudad Acuna in Mexico and the sprawling camp across the border in Del Rio to buy food and water, which was in short supply on the U.S. side.

Reuters witnesses saw mounted officers wearing cowboy hats blocking the paths of migrants, and one officer unfurling a cord resembling a lariat, which he swung near a migrant’s face.

A video showing a border guard apparently threatening migrants with the cords was shared on social media.

“I don’t think anyone seeing that footage would think it was acceptable or appropriate,” White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters.

“I don’t have the full context. I can’t imagine what context would make that appropriate,” she added.

Some on social media commented that the image of fleeing Black men chased by white officers on horseback had echoes of the historical injustices suffered by Black people in the United States.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz said the incident was being investigated to make sure there was not an “unacceptable” response by law enforcement. He said officers were operating in a difficult environment, trying to ensure the safety of the migrants while searching for potential smugglers.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said the long reins are used by mounted officials to “ensure control of the horse.”

“But we are going to investigate the facts,” he said during a news conference in Del Rio.

The camp under a bridge spanning the Rio Grande has become the latest flashpoint for U.S. authorities seeking to stem a flow of migrants fleeing gang violence, extreme poverty and natural disasters in their home countries.

The camp was a temporary home to more than 12,000 migrants, though Texas Governor Greg Abbott said the number reached as high as 16,000 on Saturday. Many had traveled from as far south as Chile, hoping to apply for asylum in the United States.

On Monday, as temperatures soared to 104 degrees Fahrenheit (40 Celsius), migrants complained about continued shortages of food and water in the camp. Some of those crossing back into the U.S. could be seen balancing large bags of ice on their heads as they waded through the water.

During the day hundreds of migrants had returned to the Mexico side, including families with young children, hoisting backpacks, suitcases and belongings in plastic bags above their heads.

“This treatment they are giving is racism, because of the color of our skin,” said Maxon Prudhomme, a Haitian migrant on the banks of the Rio Grande in Mexico.

(Read more of this original, slanted article at Reuters)

Rather than taking the stance of the article writer (sympathetic to the illegal aliens and hostile to the law), remember these things

When reading the above article, it would be good to remember the following items:

  • Despite the fact that Joe Biden has openly invited illegal immigration, neither he nor the other Democrats have changed the law. Illegal immigration is still illegal and these Haitians that the article mentions so lovingly are criminals.
  • As a law enforcement official, it is the job of a Border Agent to stop illegal acts (especially smuggling, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration). That, in part, was what these agents were about during this event.
  • Horses are domesticated work animals. As such, they need direction. One means of providing that direction is to twirl reigns on one side or another of the horse’s head (causing the horse to move in the opposite direction).
  • Listed among the complaints, you hear of “whip like.” However, you don’t hear of “trampled” or “maimed” or “killed.” These horses were well controlled by their riders.

Oh, and never mind that the photographer (not a videographer, as claimed in this article) debunked the claims also.

However, with freedom under assault in Canada, the White House backs Trudeau and remains silent

Ottowa Police Horses Trample Demonstrators

National Review provides details of how Trudeau’s forces swooped in and trampled the rights of Canadian protesters.

Canadian law enforcement is reaching the final stages of its push to clear out anti-Covid-mandate protesters from Ottawa’s Parliament Hill, advancing toward the main stage — the heart of the trucker convoy — this morning. The full-scale press against the convoy began on Friday morning, with large numbers of militarized police units in full riot gear surrounding the protest and methodically pushing inwards, dismantling encampments and making arrests as they went.

Yesterday’s push was met with minimal violence from protesters inside the convoy. While truckers and their allies lined up and linked arms in an effort to stop the encroachments, law enforcement made relatively easy work of overpowering the physical resistance, and there were no visible attacks on police outside of some shoving during struggles at the front line. (Although today, the Ottawa police reported that “one protester launched a gas canister and was arrested” this morning).

But police in Ottawa were seen at times engaging in aggressive crowd-dispersal tactics, and have drawn criticism from some corners for their use of horses, batons, and pepper spray in yesterday’s sweep of the protest encampments. Toronto Sun columnist Joe Warmington called the tactics “grotesque,” pointing to a number of instances of police aggression caught on film throughout the day. “Trudeau must be asked to answer why [it was] necessary to make the front of the parliament [look] like a civil war Friday,” Warmington wrote. “It is true the protesters were a nuisance, but it wasn’t them who were violent.”

In simple visual terms, the armored cars, riot units, and armed officers perched on the roofs of surrounding buildings appeared out of proportion against the largely peaceful encampments from which the most notable offense over the course of the past three weeks has been loud and sustained honking.

Ottawa – Canadian law enforcement is reaching the final stages of its push to clear out anti-Covid-mandate protesters from Ottawa’s Parliament Hill, advancing toward the main stage — the heart of the trucker convoy — this morning. The full-scale press against the convoy began on Friday morning, with large numbers of militarized police units in full riot gear surrounding the protest and methodically pushing inwards, dismantling encampments and making arrests as they went.

Yesterday’s push was met with minimal violence from protesters inside the convoy. While truckers and their allies lined up and linked arms in an effort to stop the encroachments, law enforcement made relatively easy work of overpowering the physical resistance, and there were no visible attacks on police outside of some shoving during struggles at the front line. (Although today, the Ottawa police reported that “one protester launched a gas canister and was arrested” this morning).

But police in Ottawa were seen at times engaging in aggressive crowd-dispersal tactics, and have drawn criticism from some corners for their use of horses, batons, and pepper spray in yesterday’s sweep of the protest encampments. Toronto Sun columnist Joe Warmington called the tactics “grotesque,” pointing to a number of instances of police aggression caught on film throughout the day. “Trudeau must be asked to answer why [it was] necessary to make the front of the parliament [look] like a civil war Friday,” Warmington wrote. “It is true the protesters were a nuisance, but it wasn’t them who were violent.”

In simple visual terms, the armored cars, riot units, and armed officers perched on the roofs of surrounding buildings appeared out of proportion against the largely peaceful encampments from which the most notable offense over the course of the past three weeks has been loud and sustained honking.

Footage also captured several examples of what appeared to be overzealous policing tactics against the protesters. (These tactics, it’s worth noting, were only made possible by Trudeau’s invocation of the Emergencies Act, which the interim Ottawa police chief credited for “the work we are doing today” on Friday.) Police smashed the windows of RVs and trucks, breaking in to remove protesters holed up inside and searching the cars afterwards. Protesters were beaten and pepper sprayed, as seen in at least one widely circulated video clip that appeared to show (from multiple different angles) an officer repeatedly beating a seemingly unarmed woman on the ground with the butt of his gun.

At one juncture, police on horseback rode their horses directly into the crowd, trampling at least two protesters underfoot. One of the protesters appeared to be handicapped and was knocked off a motorized scooter by one of the police horses.

(Read more at National Review)

As opposed to the situation at the American border, remember these facts

When you consider this article, remember these facts:

  • These were legal residents of Canada. Most were vaccinated and, therefore, compliant with the government’s demands. They just wanted to voice their concern over the government’s policy.
  • The beat-down by police was unwarranted.

Watch out. If Biden is not condemning this, he is encouraging it and waiting to do it to America.

If Biden’s and Trudeau’s Far Left is ready to do this to truly peaceful protesters (who hugged the police, fed one another, had bouncy houses, and displayed other peaceful proofs — as opposed to the Black Lives Matter folks who burned businesses, killed people, and resisted the law), what will both do to us?


Censorship in Joe Biden’s America

Biden’s Microsoft influencers want to destroy online privacy

Breitbart reported in a 25 February 2021 article how Microsoft leadership has pushed to create a system of tracing content around the Internet that could destroy online anonymity and even shut down computers of those who convey unapproved messages.

MicrosoftAgainst stiff competition, the alliance of tech and media giants has devised a plan that may constitute Big Tech’s most brazen power-grab yet.

According to Microsoft’s press release, it has partnered with several other organizations to form the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA).

Put simply, the purpose of this organization is to devise a system whereby all content on the internet can be traced back to its author.

The press release states that it will develop these specifications for “common asset types and formats,” meaning videos, documents, audio, and images.

Whether it’s a meme, an audio remix, or a written article, the goal is to ensure that when content reaches the internet, it will come attached with a set of signals allowing its provenance — meaning authorship — can be detected.

Consider the companies that have signed on to this initiative. Leading the pack is Microsoft, which operates Word, Paint, Notepad, Edge, and the Office Suite. If you create a .doc or a .jpg, a Microsoft service is probably involved in some capacity.

Then there’s Adobe, the company behind Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, and Premiere Pro, as well as several other market-leading applications for publishing photos, videos, and documents.

There’s also Truepic, a company that has developed technology to track the provenance of photos from the very moment they are captured on a smartphone.

Finally, there’s Intel, which dominates the market in laptop and desktop central processing units (CPUs). The CPU is responsible for processing virtually all information on computers. Whether you’re typing a sentence or taking a screenshot, it’s the CPU that is processing that data.

Accessing the CPU is the ultimate form of digital surveillance. Even if you’re disconnected from the internet, the CPU still sees what your computer is doing.

The combination of these forces creates the potential to track and de-anonymize information from the moment it is created on a computer. Signals could be attached to information to ensure it is censored and suppressed wherever it travels online. Even if someone else is sharing the information, it could be suppressed simply because of its point of origin. And, of course, the signals could be used to identify the creators of dissident content.

Nowhere in Microsoft’s press release is there any indication that these are not the ultimate goals.

And, in fact, the press release gives several indications that these are precisely the ultimate goals.

According to Microsoft, the coalition was created for a single purpose: to stop the spread of “disinformation” — which, in modern establishment journo-speak, means information that challenges establishment narratives. Disinformation, based on how the word is used today, might as well be called dissident information.

According to Microsoft’s press release, the coalition has been established “to address the prevalence of disinformation, misinformation and online content fraud through developing technical standards for certifying the source and history or provenance of media content.”

Naturally, the mainstream media, which is most threatened by dissident information, is heavily involved. The precursor to this coalition, Project Origin, included the New York Times, the BBC, CBC, and Radio Canada.

Project Origin’s mission statement declares:

Misinformation is a growing threat to the integrity of the information eco-system. Having a provable source of origin for media, and knowing that it has not been tampered with en-route, will help to maintain confidence in news from trusted providers.

The goal has been stated up front. The establishment media wants to trace the origin of all digital content so that “trusted providers” can be distinguished from non-trusted providers.

We all know what this means by now. The difference is that instead of doing it via the censorship of online social media platforms and search engines, they are now going to do it at the level of offline software and hardware, most likely down to the most fundamental unit of computer hardware – the CPU.

In other words, there will be nowhere to hide.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Let’s be frank. The “misinformation” they mention would include conservative thought.

As during the election, the cyber giants want to block any information that disproves their narrative. Photos, videos, and written testimony will not be allowed.

House Democrats try to censor free political speech with HR 1

The Washington Examiner discusses the censorship potential of HR1, the “For the People Act,” which displays the potential to threaten the First Amendment guarantees to free speech and free association.

FirstAmendmentThe Orwellian H.R. 1 “For the People Act” threatens the very existence of our First Amendment right to speak and associate freely.

The bill proposes a radical expansion of government control over political speech, including provisions that would force 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations to disclose their donors, force private digital companies to release customer lists, and broaden the definition of a lobbyist to include even the most basic political action.

Democrats are calling this an anti-corruption bill. It’s not. The H.R. 1 “For the People Act” is one of the most brazen assaults on free speech we’ve seen in decades. Passing this legislation would have a devastating and permanent chilling effect on political speech.

Political donations and speech are classified as protected speech under the First Amendment. There is no constitutional requirement for the source of that speech to reveal itself. In today’s hyper-polarized political climate, linking your identifying information to political speech comes with very serious risks.

We all know the business of politics is ugly. The public face of an organization or a set of values is made vulnerable to online harassment at best, and physical harm at worst. Putting yourself out there is dangerous. That’s why votes are kept private, charity donations can be made anonymously, and reporters enjoy the right to keep their sources anonymous.

A reasonable expectation of privacy for political speech exists to protect our safety. It’s been less than five years since conservative groups were targeted and persecuted by Lois Lerner and the IRS, and since then, the political climate has only become more toxic.

In the past few years, Americans watched in horror as a madman attempted to assassinate members of Congress during a baseball practice. They watched high school students wearing MAGA hats go viral online, resulting in death threats, doxxing, and bomb threats called into their school. Social media predators released the locations of the students’ parents’ workplaces in hopes the deranged would show up to do them harm.

Americans watched congressional Democrats drag the reputation of public servants like Brett Kavanaugh through the mud in front of his loved ones and the world. They watched a Democratic socialist threaten to bring a gun to a MAGA event in Trump International Hotel, tweeting, “I am coming with a gun and I expect to get numerous bloodstained MAGA hats as trophies.”

The list goes on. Search the Internet for “Trump supporters beat up” and watch the results come pouring in.

This is what civic engagement looks like in 2019. People hack into your phone, they show up at your house, they leave horrific messages and images in your children’s social media feeds, and attempt to run your business out of town. Do you honestly think the average family would subject itself to this level of scrutiny and peril for a $100 donation or a Facebook ad? It’s just not worth it.

Our Founding Fathers understood the importance of anonymity in a free society. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay composed the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym Publius. Judge Robert Yates defended the ratification of the Bill of Rights using the pseudonym Brutus.

This right has been protected throughout our history. In 1958, the Supreme Court ruled the state of Alabama could not publicize the membership rolls of the NAACP. They knew that without the NAACP v. Alabama decision, thousands of black Americans would have been targeted by hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan.

Now, Democrats have decided they have a right to your privacy.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will tell you that grassroots organizations like FreedomWorks oppose H.R. 1 because we don’t want to lose donations. I hate to break it to you, but if America reaches a point where citizens cannot express political views without fearing for their lives, the FreedomWorks balance sheet will be the least of our worries.

Free speech is what separates the United States from third-world juntas.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

As I suggested in the last bullet point of yesterday’s mention of HR1, the “For the People Act” can be interpreted to kill a number of freedoms

As I mentioned yesterday, questioning election officials on their practices could (under HR1) be interpreted as harassing those officials. Under other clauses of HR1, it seems that we also lose our right to speak freely or associate freely within this Democrat junta (pronounced “hoon-ta” to those not familiar to the language commonly used in banana republics).

If you disagree with my calling this a junta, then please explain the presence of the National Guard and the construction of the barbed-wire fence around the capitol since the installation of Joe Biden.

More shades of 1984 as Twitter bans accounts for going against the preferred narrative on NATO

Reuters repeats the party line in a 25 February 2021 article on the banning of accounts that went against the preferred narrative (bolding was introduced by me for emphasis).

TwitterFlashTwitter said on Tuesday it had taken down 373 accounts which it said had ties to Russia, Armenia and Iran and had breached its platform manipulation policies.

The company said it had taken down 238 accounts operating from Iran for various violations of its policies.

Twitter said 100 accounts with Russian ties were removed for amplifying narratives that undermined faith in NATO and targeted the United States and the European Union.

Russia’s foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Moscow planned to look into the grounds for Twitter blocking the accounts, TASS news agency reported.

Twitter also said 35 accounts with ties to Armenia were taken down, adding that they had been created to target Azerbaijan.

“The 373 associated accounts across the four networks were permanently suspended from Twitter for violations of our platform manipulation policies,” the company said in a blog post.

(Read more at Reuters)

Can the de-platforming of Fox, Newsmax, and One America News Network be far behind?

If you read the next article, then you will see that this de-platforming may be closer than you think.

Congressional Democrats bully cable providers to drop Fox, Newsmax, OANN

The Washington Times reported in a 23 February 2021 article on how Democrat Representatives Eshoo and McNerney wrote a letter questioning why cable companies would broadcast Fox, Newsmax, and OANN.

Democrats, for the past four years, were absolutely horrified by President Donald J. Trump’s pending authoritarianism and assault on this nation’s First Amendment rights.

The Washington Post lamented: “Trump keeps threatening the freedom of speech.” The Atlantic wrote of “Trump’s warped definition of free speech,” and USA Today opined: “Trump 2020 plan: New threats to press freedom and trust in media pillars of our democracy.”

Now, after winning full control of the legislative branch and the White House, Democrats are wielding their newfound power to limit free speech in ways the former president never dreamed.

Two Democratic members of Congress wrote a letter Monday to the chief executive officers of the country’s largest television providers, bullying them into purging Fox News, Newsmax and One America News Network from their cable lineups on the basis of them promoting “misinformation and conspiracy theories.”

EshooMcNernyDemocratic Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney want these cable providers to apply some newfound “moral or ethical principles … related to journalistic integrity,” in determining what content they should allow to be disseminated on their platforms.

They’re demanding these providers explain the steps they took following the Nov. 3 election and up to the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riot “to monitor, respond to, and reduce the spread of disinformation, including the encouragement or incitement of violence by channels your company disseminates to millions of Americans.”

They want detail on each step and when it was taken, including any adverse actions against the channels Fox, Newsmax and OANN.

The same people who spent four years claiming to be worried about authoritarian rule are absolutely committed to using their newfound power to silence dissenting voices. I dare you: Name something — anything — former President Trump did that more seriously endangers freedom of press than this.

Yet, the mainstream media and Silicon Valley are in agreement — cheering on this authoritarian rule.

Alex Stamos, the former chief security officer for Facebook, suggested on CNN that AT&TComcast and other cable providers should rethink their carriage of right-wing outlets like Fox News and Newsmax because of the “disinformation” being spewed by them. The Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan echoed similar thoughts.

The Post’s Eugene Robinson and journalist Katie Couric have both openly questioned how one can “deprogram” Trump supporters.

On Wednesday, The House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold a hearing titled “Fanning the Flames: Disinformation and Extremism in the Media.”

Their claim is “the spread of disinformation and extremism by traditional news media presents a tangible and destabilizing threat” and that “some broadcasters’ and cable networks’ increasing reliance on conspiracy theories and misleading or patently false information raises questions about their devotion to journalistic integrity.”

Journalist Glenn Greenwald warned: “Democrats’ justification for silencing their adversaries online and in media — ‘they are spreading fake news and inciting extremism’ — is what despots everywhere say.”

He continued: “Since when is it the role of the U.S. government to arbitrate and enforce precepts of ‘journalistic integrity’? Unless you believe in the right of the government to regulate and control what the press says — a power which the First Amendment explicitly prohibits — how can anyone be comfortable with members of Congress arrogating unto themselves the power to dictate what media outlets are permitted to report and control how they discuss and analyze the news of the day?”

(Read more at the Washington Times)

Since Democrats are chomping at the bit to implement socialism, who would think they would act like socialist dictators?

Who would think there would be no difference between Maduro, Pol Pot, and Pelosi? Since they all come from the same mold, this is not unimaginable.

Free speech in Joe Biden’s America

Twitter bans

  1. President Trump

CNN gloats after Twitter banned President Trump from their platform.

PresidentTrumpTwitter has suspended President Trump from its platform, the company said Friday evening.

“After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter said.

“In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action.”

Twitter’s decision followed two tweets by Trump Friday afternoon that would end up being his last. The tweets violated the company’s policy against glorification of violence, Twitter said, and “these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks.”

The first tweet was about Trump’s supporters.

“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

The second indicated Trump did not plan to attend Joe Biden’s inauguration.

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

Twitter said the tweet concerning inauguration could be viewed as a further statement that the election was not legitimate. It also said that the tweet could be interpreted as Trump saying that the inauguration would be a “safe” target for violence because he would not be attending.

Trump’s other statement about American patriots suggested that “he plans to continue to support, empower, and shield those who believe he won the election,” Twitter said.

Twitter’s ban specifically addresses “the @realDonaldTrump account,” not Trump personally.

Twitter will enforce its policy against ban evasions to ensure that Trump does not circumvent his personal account’s suspension, the company told CNN.

“If it is clear that another account is being used for the purposes of evading a ban, it is also subject to suspension,” Twitter said in a statement. “For government accounts, such as @POTUS and @WhiteHouse, we will not suspend those accounts but will take action to limit their use. However, these accounts will be transitioned over to the new administration in due course and will not be suspended by Twitter unless absolutely necessary to alleviate real-world harm.”

Twitter’s policy would also prohibit Trump from directing a third party to operate a Twitter account on his behalf.
Trump sought to test Twitter’s ban evasion policy at roughly 8:30 pm ET Friday evening, when he or someone acting on his behalf published four tweets from the @POTUS account.

“As I have been saying for a long time, Twitter has gone further and further in banning free speech, and tonight, Twitter employees have coordinated with the Democrats and the Radical Left in removing my account from their platform, to silence me,” Trump tweeted.

The tweets disappeared almost instantly.

Twitter told CNN that the Trump campaign’s account has also been permanently banned. Before @TeamTrump was suspended, it had been seen sharing the same four-tweet thread that Trump had attempted to post from the @POTUS account.

(Read more liberal drivel at )

If you want a real laugh, go to the Twitter thread where Twitter explains why they don’t ban anarchists in India

opIndia comments on how Twitter put itself above Indian law.

Twitter has decided to brazen it out and put its own rules above Indian laws and refused to withhold or suspend accounts that have been accused of inciting violence in the country. In a series of tweets and a blog, Twitter tried to explain its stand on not taking action against provocative tweets by certain verified individuals.

Twitter cited freedom of speech and expression as per the Indian Constitution for news media entities, journalists, activists and politicians for refusing to take action against the offending accounts.


(Read more at opIndia)

  1. Trump campaign account

    MSN likewise gloats over the cancelling of the Trump campaign account.

    The Trump campaign’s Twitter account has been locked on Thursday, after sharing a video calling Joe Biden a “liar” and referencing a New York Post report on Hunter Biden, the Democratic nominee’s son. On Wednesday, Twitter blocked users from sharing the Post’s report the younger Biden introduced his dad, while vice president, to a “top executive” at a Ukrainian energy company, before pressuring Ukrainian lawmakers to fire a prosecutor looking into the company a year later.

    “This is election interference, plain and simple,” Tim Murtaugh, communications director for the Trump campaign, told TheWrap. “For Twitter to lock the main account of the campaign of the president of the United States is a breathtaking level of political meddling and nothing short of an attempt to rig the election. Joe Biden’s Silicon Valley pals are aggressively blocking negative news stories about their guy and preventing voters from accessing important information. This is like something from communist China or Cuba, not the United States of America.”

    The @TeamTrump handle has 2.2 million followers on Twitter.

    To unlock the account, a Twitter rep told TheWrap that the Trump campaign “may be required to delete” the tweet for violating its policy on hacked material and sharing  private information.

    Twitter pointed to the hacked materials policy, which says users cannot “directly distribute content obtained through hacking that contains private information,” on Wednesday when it blocked users from sharing the New York Post report. The platform, when users went to share the story, sent a warning the story was “potentially harmful” and could not be posted. As many pointed out afterwards, this policy, if applied consistently, would appear to make a number of investigative reporting stories unfit to share on Twitter.

    Backing up for a moment, the Post shared a trove of emails it said belonged to the younger Biden on Wednesday. Among them was a 2015 “message of appreciation” from Vadym Pozharskyi — an adviser to the board of Burisma, the energy company that paid Hunter Biden a reported $50,000 a month — thanking him for an introduction to then-VP Joe Biden.

    The New York Post said, “Less than eight months after Pozharskyi thanked Hunter Biden for the introduction to his dad, the then-vice president admittedly pressured Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk into getting rid of Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin by threatening to withhold a $1 billion U.S. loan guarantee during a December 2015 trip to Kiev.”

    The Post said the emails were from a computer that had been dropped off at a Delaware computer repair shop last year. The shop owner made a copy of the hard drive and gave it to the attorney for Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and current lawyer for President Trump. Ex-Trump adviser Steve Bannon informed the Post about the hard drive last month, and Giuliani shared a copy of it last Sunday, according to the report.

    Joe Biden’s camp pushed back on the report afterwards, saying the meeting did not happen.

    “The New York Post never asked the Biden campaign about the critical elements of this story,” Biden rep Andrew Bates told Politico. “They certainly never raised that Rudy Guiliani — whose discredited conspiracy theories and alliance with figures connected to Russian intelligence have been widely reported — claimed to have such materials. Moreover, we have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.”

    The @TeamTrump account wasn’t the only Trump-tied account to get locked. White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s account was locked on Wednesday for sharing the Post report; her account was restored on Thursday morning after deleting the tweet, with McEnany telling Fox News that Twitter essentially had her at “gunpoint.” 

    (Read this at MSN)

    What is a little censorship when it comes to burning the Constitution?

    What part of this silencing of political speech is Constitutional?

    1. Trump digital director

      The Sun reports that Twitter also banned the Trump digital director.

      Trump Digital Director

      The Trump campaign account then tweeted the same content tweeted by Trump, prompting Twitter to then suspend that account as well, as Twitter’s rules do not allow for a person who has been banned to circumvent a ban through another account.

      In the now-deleted @POTUS tweets, Trump claimed that “Twitter employees have coordinated with the Democrats and the Radical Left in removing my account from their platform, to silence me” and the “75,000,000 great patriots who voted for me.”

      Trump said he predicted that Twitter would try to silence him and that the company would not exist for long if it were not for Section 230, which protects websites from lawsuits if users post illegal content.

      The president said he has been negotiation with “various other sites” and would have a “big announcement soon,” and possibly build his own platform.

      “We will not be SILENCED! Twitter is not about FREE SPEECH,” Trump tweeted.

      “They are all about promoting a Radical Left platform where some of the most viscous people in the world are allowed to speak freely.”

      While Twitter deleted those tweets, it did not suspend the @POTUS account, which Trump did not use to share his more controversial thoughts.


      The social media giant also played a game of whack-a-mole as it moved to suspend accounts of Trump allies he used to get his message out after the @POTUS tweets were deleted.

      Next to be suspended was the Trump 2020 campaign Twitter account which tweeted the president’s words.

      The campaign’s digital director Gary Coby soon followed after appeared to change his username to Donald J. Trump and in a tweet.

      He then handle over to the president’s Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, who was has been tweeting on behalf of Trump following his suspension in the wake of the Capitol Hill riot.

      Trump loyalists, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and attorney Sidney Powell have also permanently banned by Twitter.

      YouTube account for Steve Bannon’s ‘War Room’ podcast was “terminated for a violation of YouTube’s Terms of Service”.

      The president’s @realDonaldTrump account states: “Account suspended. Twitter suspends accounts which violate the Twitter Rules.”

      In a tweet on Friday evening, Twitter Safety wrote: “After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

      (Read more at The Sun)

      While I agree that conservatives will, in the long run, not be silenced — this does not help

      While we may be able to set up our own networks on Parler and other platforms and Twitter can allow itself to become a liberal echo chamber by banning conservatives, we still need to learn to talk to the sensible among the liberals and convince them.

      1. Dan Bongino

        Legal Insurrection reports that Dan Bongino left Twitter after it locked him out of his account.

        Dan-BonginoConservative commentator Dan Bongino has announced that he is leaving Twitter for good after his account was suspended for sharing the video of President Trump telling DC protesters to go home.

        Social media censorship and bans have increased in recent days, as even Trump was locked out of multiple accounts.

        Bongino is one of the first high-profile conservatives to call it quits with Twitter.

        The Washington Examiner reports:

        EXCLUSIVE: Dan Bongino leaves Twitter after he’s locked out of account and says he’s moving exclusively to Parler

        Conservative commentator Dan Bongino is leaving Twitter, saying, “F— these a–holes” after his account was locked.

        “I’m leaving the platform permanently for Parler. I’ll post my final tweet and message for Twitter tomorrow when the 12-hour lockdown ends,” he told the Washington Examiner. “F— these a–holes.”

        Bongino has a massive following on Twitter, reaching nearly 3 million followers. He will jump to Parler, which was founded in 2018 and has been lauded as a platform that protects free speech.

        He was blocked from his account for violating Twitter’s rules regarding “civic integrity” for posting a video President Trump released yesterday on his social media accounts asking for protesters to go home after they stormed the Capitol, and it included claims the “election was stolen.”

        You can find Bongino on Parler here.

        Other conservatives in media commented.

        Byron York of the Washington Examiner:

        Rich Sementa of the Mark Levin show:

        (Read more, including Levin’s tweets, at Legal Insurrection)

        Considering all the Democrats who got on the floors of Congress in 2016 and claimed the election was stolen

        Considering all the Democrats who got on the floors of Congress in 2016 and claimed the election was stolen, we know that Twitter‘s excuses are a lie.

        1. Project Veritas

          The New York Post also reports that Twitter blocked investigative reporting group Project Veritas.

          ProjectVeritasTwitter on Thursday yanked the account of conservative activist group Project Veritas over “repeated violations” of the company’s rules on sharing other people’s private information, after they posted leaked footage of communications between Facebook executives.

          A Twitter spokesperson said the @Project_Veritas account was permanently suspended for breaching its “private information policy.”

          The ban came after the group had posted leaked clips on Wednesday from a meeting with Facebook executives where they discuss development of censorship tools.

          “We have a system that is able to freeze commenting on threads in cases where our systems are detecting that there may be a thread that has hate speech or violence, sort of in the comments,” Vice President of Integrity Guy Rosen can be seen explaining in the footage.

          In a second video posted by Project Veritas, one of its staffers is seen confronting Rosen about his remarks outside his home as he returned from a jog.

          “When you talk about freezing comments containing hate speech, what do you mean by that?” the Veritas staffer standing on the sidewalk asks Rosen as he enters his home. “How do you define ‘hate speech?’ Is it just speech that you hate?” he continues in the seconds-long interaction.

          The numbers on the exec’s home address were visible in the clip, but the street name was not. License plates on surrounding cars are blurred.

          The account of Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe was also temporarily locked on Thursday for violating the same policy, the Twitter spokesperson said.

          O’Keefe told The Wrap he was “wrestling” with whether to delete the tweets flagged by Twitter in order to regain access to his personal account.

          “What I’m trying to understand is, what about what we did is quote ‘posting private information’?” O’Keefe told the outlet.

          “Reporters with microphones [and] cameras engage in reporting activities on the streets all the time in residential communities, so I’m trying to understand what Twitter considers violating their rules against posting private information. Does Twitter consider reporting information the public has a right to know private information? This is quite the Rubicon we’re crossing if Twitter wants to ban this particular piece of information.”

          In a statement to The Post, O’Keefe said that “Twitter claimed the video published private information, which is false.”

          “Twitter invited Project Veritas to, and we did, appeal that decision with Twitter. In an apparent act of retaliation for daring to question their authority, Twitter responded to our appeal by suspending our account, continuing to tell us that Project Veritas could delete the tweet and have our account reinstated.”

          (Read more at )

          Was this done because Project Veritas was conservative or because they exposed the hypocrisy of multiple politicians?

          Project Veritas has been known for exposing both Republican (Mauro Garza) and Democrat (Ilhan Omar) politicians. So maybe the swamp doesn’t like Project Veritas.

          1. QAnon accounts

            The Associated Press reports that Twitter has suspended 70,000 “QAnon” accounts (considering there is no one QAnon group and that it is a loose-knit amalgamation of people trading conspiracy theories, this would seem a challenge to find them).

            The Associated Press reports that Twitter has suspended 70,000 “QAnon” accounts (considering there is no one QAnon group and that it is a loose-knit amalgamation of people trading conspiracy theories, this would seem a challenge to find them).

            Twitter says it has suspended more than 70,000 accounts associated with the far right QAnon conspiracy theory following last week’s U.S. Capitol riot.

            The social media company said Tuesday that given the events last week in Washington, D.C., where a mob of pro-Trump loyalists tried to violently storm the Capitol building, it was taking action against online behavior “that has the potential to lead to offline harm.”

            In many cases, a single individual operated numerous accounts, driving up the total number of affected accounts, the company said in a blog post.

            “These accounts were engaged in sharing harmful QAnon-associated content at scale and were primarily dedicated to the propagation of this conspiracy theory across the service,” the company said.

            Twitter’s sweeping purge of QAnon accounts, which began Friday, is part of a wider crackdown that also includes its decision to ban President Donald Trump from the service over worries about further incitement to violence.

            The suspensions mean some Twitter users will lose followers, in some cases by the thousands, the company said.

            The QAnon conspiracy theory is centered on the baseless belief that Trump is waging a secret campaign against “deep state” enemies and a child sex trafficking ring run by satanic pedophiles and cannibals. Twitter has previously tried to crack down on QAnon, removing more than 7,000 accounts in July.

            (Read more to see Twitter’s lackluster excuses at the Associated Press)

            At one time, the First Amendment was for unpopular ideas

            At one time, the First Amendment was for unpopular ideas — for the ideas that were out of the main stream. At one time, people said, “I disagree with what you say, but will fight to the death for your right to say your ideas.”

            1. MyPillow

              The Minneapolis Post reports that the MyPillow corporate Twitter account has been suspended.

              @MyPillowUSA down. The Star Tribune’s Stephen Montemayor reports: “Twitter banned MyPillow’s company account on Monday after founder Mike Lindell commandeered it to post several missives targeting Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, one week after Lindell was permanently banned from the platform himself. … An archived version of the Chaska-based company’s Twitter page shows several posts attacking Dorsey that appear to be written by Lindell, in a stark departure from previous tweets promoting beach towels and bath mats. … In one post Monday afternoon, MyPillow’s account tweeted: ‘Jack Dorsey is trying to cancel me (Mike Lindell) out! We are extremely busy and hiring as fast as we can to handle all the shipping! Jack will be found out and should be put in prison when all is revealed!’

              (Read more about Minneapolis at the Minneapolis Post)

              I hope that this works as a promotional for MyPillow

              Often, things that were done to cause harm do the exact opposite. I hope that this is one of the cases.

              1. MyPillow CEO, Mike Lindell

                Politico points out that MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s account has been suspended.

                Twitter has pulled the plug on the account of MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell.

                A spokesperson for Twitter said, “This account was suspended for repeated violations of our civic integrity policy.” Twitter confirmed late Monday that the ban on the entrepreneur from Minnesota is a permanent one.

                The ban is the latest in a series of disciplinary actions taken by Twitter that include, most notably, the banning of former President Donald Trump in an effort to reduce the spread of blatant political lies and punish those who incited violence, particularly in connection with the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol. Lindell has been a vocal backer of Trump, and reports surfaced earlier this month that he suggested the president declare martial law in the wake of what he saw as widespread election fraud.

                Among other things, Lindell alleged that the voting machine companies Smartmatic and Dominion Voting Systems were part of a conspiracy to rig the election against Trump. Upon threat of lawsuit from Dominion, Lindell told the New York Times: “I would really welcome them to sue me because I have all the evidence against them.”

                Lindell is known to be considering a possible run for governor of Minnesota in 2022. The ban from Twitter would complicate his effort to reach voters.

                (Read more at Politico)

                One thing is certain, I admire his strength of belief

                Having seen a number of his testimonies (not just the ads, but also his testimonials about his faith in Christ and his recovery from a past life), from that, I have nothing but support for him.

                1. General Michael Flynn

                  Breitbart tells us that General Michael Flynn‘s account has been suspended.

                  FlynnThe Twitter accounts of retired Lt. Gen Michael Flynn and his attorney, Sidney Powell, were both blacklisted today.

                  According to the Hill, the bans are permanent.

                  A Twitter spokesperson told the Hill that the accounts were banned due to their connections to the QAnon movement.

                  “We’ve been clear that we will take strong enforcement action on behavior that has the potential to lead to offline harm, and given the renewed potential for violence surrounding this type of behavior in the coming days, we will permanently suspend accounts that are solely dedicated to sharing QAnon content,” said the spokesperson.

                  This comes amid an unprecedented round of censorship that has targeted President Trump and other high-profile allies of the administration.

                  Facebook and Instagram have indefinitely banned President Trump, leading to widespread alarm from even non-political and liberal figures like Glenn Greenwald and celebrity Emily Ratajkowski.

                  Democrats, including former first lady Michelle Obama, have been urging Big Tech companies to make the bans permanent.

                  Flynn served as National Security Advisor for a brief period at the start of the Trump administration before being subject to a multi-year legal battle to clear his name after he was accused of making false statements to the FBI.

                  Flynn was pardoned by President Trump in November 2020, after the Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss all federal charges against the decorated former Lieutenant General.

                  Both Flynn and Powell had met with President Trump over the past few months to discuss the election result.

                  (Read more at Breitbart)

                  Will Twitter make patriotism an event that gets you banned?

                  Will Twitter remove every America-loving account? Will they remove the accounts of those who served?

                  1. Sydney Powell

                    NBC News tells us that Sydney Powell‘s account has been suspended.

                    Twitter on Friday removed the accounts of Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell and other high-profile supporters of President Donald Trump who promoted the QAnon conspiracy theory.

                    The permanent bans are among the highest profile that the company has instituted as part of its efforts to crack down on misinformation and calls for violence.

                    Flynn and Powell both met with Trump at the White House in recent weeks as part of efforts to overturn the presidential election results. They are also high-profile figures in the QAnon community, and Flynn even took an “oath” to the conspiracy theory last year.

                    “The accounts have been suspended in line with our policy on Coordinated Harmful Activity,” a Twitter spokesperson told NBC News. “We’ve been clear that we will take strong enforcement action on behavior that has the potential to lead to offline harm, and given the renewed potential for violence surrounding this type of behavior in the coming days, we will permanently suspend accounts that are solely dedicated to sharing QAnon content.”

                    (Read more at NBC News)

                    Will Twitter make a lawful defense an event that gets you banned?

                    Will Twitter remove every defense lawyer’s account?

                    1. Jim Hoft

                      Forbes points out how the Gateway Pundit’s founder, Jim Hoft, has lost his account.

                      JimHoftJim Hoft, founder and editor of the far-right publication The Gateway Pundit, was suspended from Twitter Saturday evening for violating the platform’s rules. The account, @gatewaypundit, no longer has a presence on Twitter, save for a message that indicates the account has been suspended. Prior to the suspension, the @gatewaypundit account had more than 375,000 followers.

                      A spokesperson for Twitter said, “The account was permanently suspended for repeated violations of our civic integrity policy.” The policy restricts users on the platform from sharing information that undermines elections and other civic processes, including sharing misinformation regarding the outcome of elections.

                      Hoft and his publication have been widely criticized for spreading false information, including promoting conspiracy theories regarding the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. A recent study published by The German Marshall Fund of the United States found that The Gateway Pundit was the leading single source of misinformation shared by verified accounts on Twitter in 2020. In 2019, Wikipedia deprecated The Gateway Pundit, removing its qualifications to serve as a source of legitimate information. The community cited “falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and intentionally misleading stories” that appear on The Gateway Pundit as the reason for the decision.

                      Recently, Hoft’s publication came under fire for sharing a video that it claimed contained proof of voter fraud being committed in Detroit. The video purported to show the delivery of absentee ballots several hours after the deadline for those ballots to be received. The report has already been widely debunked by local publications in Detroit.

                      The Gateway Pundit has previously been criticized for spreading misinformation, including falsely identifying the perpetrators of mass shootingspromoting conspiracy theories about school shooting eventsmade false claims about voter fraud and election tampering.

                      (Read more at Forbes)

                      Will Twitter make a conservative journalism an event that gets you banned?

                      Will Twitter remove every conservative journalist’s account?

                      1. Wayne Allyn Root

                        The New York Post reports that conservative talk show host Wayne Allyn Root has lost his account.

                        Twitter has permanently suspended the accounts of Jim Hoft, the founder and editor-in-chief of the right-wing blog Gateway Pundit, and conservative radio host Wayne Allyn Root.

                        A spokesperson for the social media giant told The Post in a statement Monday that both Hoft and Root’s accounts were permanently barred “for repeated violations of our civic integrity policy.”

                        Under the policy, users “may not use Twitter’s services for the purpose of manipulating or interfering in elections or other civic processes.”

                        It was not clear exactly which posts triggered the suspensions, but both Hoft and Root were among those who have posted claims of election fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

                        Former President Donald Trump was permanently suspended from Twitter last month for “risk of further incitement of violence,” following the Jan. 6 riot at the US Capitol.

                        “I am in shock,” Root told Fox News of his suspension. “It appears to be a permanent ban. Although I don’t know. Twitter never warned me…And never sent any communication saying I’ve been suspended or banned. I simply tried to tweet yesterday afternoon and could not. But unlike a previous suspension… My followers suddenly said zero.”

                        Root said he has reached out to Twitter to find out exactly why he was suspended.

                        (Read more at New York Post)

                        Will Twitter make a conservative commentary an event that gets you banned?

                        Will Twitter remove all conservative comments? They are on their way to becoming a liberal echo chamber.

                        1. Shiva Ayyadurai

                          The Washington Times reports that perennial candidate Shiva Ayyadurai has lost his account.

                          Former U.S. Senate candidate Shiva Ayyadurai‘s Twitter account has been suspended.

                          “Account suspended. Twitter suspends accounts which violate the Twitter Rules,” his account read on Friday.

                          In an email Ayyadurai blamed the suspension, which he said occurred on Monday, on actions by Democratic Secretary of State William Galvin and other state election officials.

                          (Read more at Washington Times)

                          Will Twitter start banning stupid politicians? Why haven’t they banned AOC?

                          Will Twitter remove ineffective politicians? This could decimate the Democrats if they applied it evenly.

                          1. Catholic World Report

                            Catholic Culture reports that Catholic World Report was banned from Twitter for correctly reporting on the birth sex of Rachel Levine, President Biden’s nominee as Assistant Secretary of Health.

                            Twitter suspended the account of Catholic World Report after the online magazine posted a story referring to Rachel Levine, President Biden’s nominee as Assistant Secretary of Health, as a biological male. Twitter said that the news story violated the services “rules against hateful conduct.” Carl Olson, editor of Catholic World Report, remarked: “Twitter is clearly indicating that unless CWR and other outlets jump through arbitrary and constantly-changing rhetorical and ideological hoops, they cannot use Twitter.”

                            (Read more at Catholic Culture)

                            Will Twitter start banning all religious discussion?

                            Will Twitter remove religious discussion? Will they remove New Age gurus? Will they remove atheists?

                            1. Steve Bannon

                              The Hill reports that Steve Bannon was banned from Twitter for calling for Anthony Fauci’s head to be on a spike.

                              Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon‘s Twitter account was suspended Thursday after allegedly calling for the nation’s leading infectious diseases expert Anthony Fauci‘s head “on pikes” on his podcast.

                              His podcast Twitter account @WarRoomPandemic was suspended after the statement went live.

                              In an email sent to The Hill, Twitter said Bannon’s account was suspended for violating “our policy on the glorification of violence.”

                              Twitter added that it has policies in place to address explicit threats of violence and other forms of online abuse or harassment and hateful conduct.

                              Bannon’s allegedly violent comments on his “War Room” YouTube podcast Thursday come as the nation has yet to see a decided victor in the presidential race against President Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden.

                              His words about Fauci came after he suggested firing the nation’s leading epidemiologist on the White House coronavirus task force, as well as calls to fire FBI Director Christopher Wray.

                              “Second term kicks off with firing Wray, firing Fauci, no, I actually want to go a step farther, but the president is a kind-hearted man and a good man,” said Bannon.

                              He added, “I’d actually like to go back to the old times of Tudor England. I’d put their heads on pikes, right, I’d put them at the two corners of the White House as a warning to federal bureaucrats, you either get with the program or you’re gone.”

                              (Read more at The Hill)

                              Will Twitter start banning all instances of hyperbole?

                              During the impeachment trial, when the lying Democrats were shown to have said the same thing in (most times) the same type of setting. Their excuse was that they were engaging in hyperbole. Will Twitter now ban these Democrats?

                              1. LiveAction

                                LiveAction reports that it was banned from Twitter while the abortion industry was allowed to smear pro-lifers.

                                While Twitter continues its censorship of ads from Live Action and founder Lila Rose, the tech giant is running ads from a group which finances abortion facilities while smearing pro-life organizations. Live Action News has previously documented Twitter’s double standard, banning Live Action from advertising while permitting pro-abortion groups like EMILY’s List, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and Planned Parenthood to purchase ads that push a pro-abortion message. Adding to that, a relatively new group called Equity Forward has recently been allowed to unleash a litany of promoted Twitter ads attacking pro-life groups such as the Susan B. Anthony List, Students for Life of America, and Americans United for Life.Pro-abortion-Equity-Forward-attacks-prolife-groups-in-Twitter-ads

                                On its website, Equity Forward claims to consist of a “staff of researchers, lawyers and communications professionals…” to ensure “transparency and accountability among anti-reproductive health groups and individuals who are actively working to deny people access to services such as birth control and abortion.” However, they currently list only one staffer — Senior Adviser Mary Alice Carter — who is linked to Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and other pro-abortion groups.

                                • Former interim vice president for communications at Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
                                • Worked for Physicians for Reproductive Health, the National Institute for Reproductive Health and NARAL Pro-Choice New York.

                                (Read more at LiveAction)

                                Will Twitter cut back the abortionists the way they restrict pro-lifers?

                                Will Twitter cut back the abortionists the way they restrict pro-lifers? Or will it be business as usual?

                                1. Focus on the Family

                                  Todd Starnes reports that Focus on the Family was banned from Twitter for correctly reporting on the birth sex of Rachel Levine, President Biden’s nominee as Assistant Secretary of Health.

                                  Focus on the Family was slapped with Big Tech censorship after the conservative organization questioned President Biden’s transgender pick for assistant health secretary, Pennsylvania Health Secretary Rachel Levine.

                                  “We were pointing people to an article we had done questioning Dr. Levine’s qualifications, and in that tweet we mention that Dr. Levine is a biological male who is transgendered to female and Twitter hit us with hate speech,” Focus on the Family President Jim Daly told the “Todd Starnes Show” Thursday.

                                  Host Todd Starnes pointed out that he has been banned from LinkedIn, also accused of hate speech.

                                  “It makes no sense because we’re just simply conveying the facts of the story, just like you guys were doing,” Starnes said.

                                  “We were just trying to make a point of what may be driving some of the philosophical basis for the doctor’s decisions, etc. and questioning whether the judgment of that doctor was solid because … she was the one who took her mother out of a nursing home and then knowing the order that she was putting COVID-positive patients into those nursing homes in Pennsylvania,” Daly said.

                                  (Read more at Todd Starnes)

                                  Will Twitter start banning all religious discussion?

                                  Will Twitter remove religious discussion? Will they remove New Age gurus? Will they remove atheists?

                                  1. Alex Jones

                                    CNBC reports that Alex Jones was banned from Twitter for his abusive behavior.

                                    Twitter has permanently banned the accounts of right-wing conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones and InfoWars for violating the company’s abusive behavior policies, the company said Thursday.

                                    The ban appears to be related to a heated exchange between Jones and a CNN reporter Wednesday, which Jones live-streamed on the Twitter-owned video service Periscope. Jones ranted at the reporter, as well as Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, following back-to-back congressional hearings where Dorsey addressed online election interference, as well as accusations of political bias and conservative censorship on the platform.

                                    “We took this action based on new reports of Tweets and videos posted yesterday that violate our abusive behavior policy, in addition to the accounts’ past violations,” the company said in a series of tweets. “We wanted to be open about this action given the broad interest in this case.”

                                    The ban comes weeks after Jones’ accounts were removed or suspended by other major tech companies including AppleFacebook and YouTube. Twitter had initially declined to take disciplinary action against Jones, saying the accounts had not violated community guidelines, but later suspended him from posting on his accounts for a period of seven days.

                                    Accounts for Jones and Infowars were also banned from Periscope. Jones will not be able to recreate his presence on the sites under another account.

                                    (Read more at CNBC)

                                    Truthfully, Alex Jones has always been too nutty for me

                                    However, hasn’t uncomfortable speech been the type of speech worth protecting?

                                    1. InfoWars

                                      NPR reports that Infowars was banned from Twitter for abuse.

                                      Twitter on Thursday said it has “permanently suspended” conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and his InfoWars outlet, citing “new reports of Tweets and videos posted yesterday that violate our abusive behavior policy.”

                                      Last month, YouTube, Apple, Facebook and Spotify banned Jones’ main platforms over concerns about his content. But Twitter only suspended some of his privileges, a move that drew criticism.

                                      On Wednesday, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio tussled with Jones after Jones confronted and touched him outside a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

                                      And at a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey faced questions amid criticism from Republicans that big tech companies suppress conservatives online.

                                      Dorsey denied that Twitter is politically selective. He tweeted: “I want to start by making something clear: we don’t consider political viewpoints, perspectives, or party affiliation in any of our policies or enforcement decisions. Period. Impartiality is our guiding principle.”

                                      But on Thursday, Twitter announced in a tweet: “Today, we permanently suspended @realalexjones and @infowars from Twitter and Periscope. We took this action based on new reports of Tweets and videos posted yesterday that violate our abusive behavior policy, in addition to the accounts’ past violations.”

                                      (Read more at NPR)

                                      Several Infowars hosts have been good sources of information

                                      Nonetheless, it seems that Twitter feels like punishing through association.

                                      Maybe this is a good time to ban Twitter.

                                      1. “Gosnell” filmmaker Ann McElhinney

                                        Unreported Story Society reports that Gosnell film director Ann McElhinney was banned from Twitter.

                                        In the latest sweep of conservative Twitter accounts, the Gosnell filmmakers, Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer, have had their organization’s account banned from the social media site.

                                        “They came for Trump, they came for us, and next they are coming for you,” said Phelim McAleer.  “They are erasing conservative thought from Twitter.  If this doesn’t shock you, I don’t know what will.”

                                        The Ann & Phelim Scoop handle was removed from Twitter on Monday allegedly due to “platform manipulation and spam.”  Since the creation of the account in 2019, the account has never received any communication from Twitter that their content fell outside of Twitter’s acceptable use policies.

                                        Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney are known for their podcast The Ann and Phelim Scoop, their film GOSNELL, their documentary Fracknation, the ObamaGate Movie, and their plays Ferguson, and FBI Lovebirds: Undercovers.  McAleer and McElhinney are New York Times bestselling authors who live in Venice, California.

                                        (Read more at Unreported Story Society)

                                        Has Twitter banned other film directors?

                                        Somehow, I don’t think so.

                                        1. “Gosnell” filmmaker Phelim McAleer

                                          LifeNews reports that Gosnell film director Phelim McAleer was banned from Twitter.

                                          “Gosnell” filmmakers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer temporarily were kicked off Twitter on Monday amid growing online censorship of conservative voices.

                                          Their account @AP_Scoop since has been reinstated, but McAleer and McElhinney said people need to keep fighting back against censorship by “tech tyrants.”

                                          “This is a complete eradication of conservative thought on social media,” McElhinney said in a video posted online. “You have to fight back … and speak out against this censorship by these tech tyrants.”

                                          On Monday, McAleer and McElhinney said they received an email from Twitter informing them that their account was suspended. Twitter accused them of “violating our rules against platform manipulation and spam.”

                                          “Note that if you attempt to evade a permanent suspension by creating new accounts, we will suspend your new accounts,” the email continued.

                                          A few hours later, the social media platform reinstated their account, but the filmmaker said they lost followers.

                                          “What on earth is happening at Twitter? In less than a few hours we’ve been: 1. Banned 2. Reinstated 3. And now it says we have no followers,” they wrote Monday night.

                                          (Read more at LifeNews)

                                          Has Twitter banned other film directors?

                                          I really don’t think so.

                                          1. Sci-Hub

                                            The Verge reports that Sci-Hub was banned from Twitter.

                                            Twitter has suspended the account of Sci-Hub, a website that provides free access to paywalled academic papers. The account was being used by Sci-Hub’s founder to collect statements of support from the scientific community during an ongoing court case in India.


                                            Journal articles are often costly to access, and many researchers and writers use services like Sci-Hub to bypass those costs. Publishers are unhappy about their content being distributed for free and argue that the site infringes on their copyright.

                                            In December, academic publishers Elsevier, Wiley, and the American Chemical Society filed a suit with the Delhi High Court, asking Indian internet service providers to block Sci-Hub and similar site Libgen. The court rejected the publishers’ requests that the sites be blocked immediately, instead declaring it an “issue of public importance” and allowing time for the scientific community to weigh in.

                                            Sci-Hub founder Alexandra Elbakyan had been using Twitter to gather and archive responses from Indian researchers, who argue that Sci-Hub is critical to their work. It’s unclear if the suspension is directly related to the court case, but “it happened right after Indian scientists revolted against Elsevier and other academic publishers after Sci-Hub posted on Twitter about the danger of being blocked,” Elbakyan told TorrentFreak. Twitter did not immediately respond to The Verge’s request for comment.

                                            (Read more at The Verge)

                                            Democrats claim to be pro-science. What gives?

                                            Here, the true colors of Democrats come out.

                                            It will get worse

                                            Facebook’s ieftist oversight board member leaves to join radical Biden regime

                                            100PercentFedUp reports in a 9 February 2021 article that is moving from Facebook oppression to Biden’s Department of “Justice.”

                                            Pamela Karlan will serve as principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice’s Civil Division after spending less than a year on the Facebook board set up in 2019 to review the social media behemoth’s content policing decisions.

                                            “Working with my colleagues on the Oversight Board to build a fairer and more effective approach to content moderation has been an honor. The Board has a critical role to play in holding Facebook to account, and I will continue to watch their work with great admiration,” she said in the board’s release. 

                                            The board, funded by Facebook, started accepting cases for consideration in October and has received over 180,000 appeals, adjudicating less than twelve. It’s currently reviewing Facebook’s ban of former President Donald Trump’s account.

                                            “Pam Karlan’s legal and civil rights expertise played an important part in shaping the Board and we’re grateful for her contributions. The Trustees and Board members congratulate Pam on her new role and wish her the very best,” said board spokesperson John Taylor in a statement emailed to The Epoch Times.

                                            She took leave from the team in the fall to aid Biden’s transition and wasn’t involved in any of the adjudications the Facebook board conducted, Taylor told Politico.

                                            In 2019, she testified at Trump’s first impeachment trial, making a quip at the expense of his son, for which she later apologized. During one public appearance she joked that she “had to cross the street” to avoid sharing the street side with Trump’s Washington hotel.

                                            Karlan’s journey fits a pattern of revolving doors between Facebook and Democrat administrations.

                                            In 2013-2014, she served as deputy assistant Attorney General for Voting Rights in the Civil Rights Division. In 2009, The New York Times presented her as the favorite potential Supreme Court pick of “the left.”

                                            On November 26, Alan Duke, co-founder of “Lead Stories,” issued a “False information” fact check violation on four of our top conservative Facebook pages, including our 100 Percent Fed Up Facebook page with almost 1.7 million followers.

                                            The “fake news” violation was for an article I wrote (See article HERE) about Adam Rahuba, a self-described Antifa leader, who was banned from Twitter after he threatened President Trump and his followers.

                                            (Read more at 100PercentFedUp)

                                            Looks like Biden has followed the Obama model to the “T.”

                                            Although Bumbling Joe made a show of calling for unity during his inaugural address, just about everything he has done after that has seemed to have the goal of dividing us. Hidin’ Biden has:

                                            Asked us to While for his friends, he
                                            1. Stay at home due to COVID-19
                                            2. Get vaccinated to work and do interstate travel
                                            3. Consider the people who attended the 6 January rally as domestic terrorists
                                            4. Just accept the job losses that come with his assuault on our oil/gas
                                            5. Forgive him for campaigning on forgiving college loans
                                            1. Opened the borders
                                            2. Released illegal aliens without COVID testing
                                            3. Called Antifa an “idea
                                            4. Offered green cards and citizenship to illegal aliens
                                            5. Called for health care for illegal aliens

                                            Free speech, online forums (especially Twitter), and Biden’s America

                                            California man sues Twitter, AOC over ‘pain and suffering’ caused by Trump ban

                                            The New York Post provides a 15 January 2021 article that cites a suit brought by a California man against Twitter.

                                            TwitsThe notoriously litigious, self-described California sex addict best known for suing Twitch over masturbation injuries allegedly caused by the video streaming platform’s “scantily clad gamers” has a new target — this time filing a lawsuit against Twitter, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rep. Ilhan Omar over the “overbearing pain and suffering” caused by the social media giant’s ban of President Trump.

                                            In an 11-page legal document filed Tuesday in the Northern District of California, Erik Estavillo argues that he is entitled to $88.7 million in compensation, the reinstatement of Trump’s account and a retaliatory ban of both AOC and Omar, who he says use the platform to “promote eastern communist philosophies.”

                                            Estavillo, who is representing himself in the case, claims in the filing to have run for Congress himself last year and says that due to a variety of ailments — which include depression, agoraphobia, Crohn’s disease and OCD — he has “no friends” and relies on social media as his only way of participating in political discourse.

                                            “The Americans with Disabilities Act should protect him from such egregious behavior on the part of Twitter,” according to the lawsuit. “He has nowhere else to voice his first amendment rights to free speech.”

                                            The crux of his legal claim appears to center around the idea that being on Twitter is comparable to living in a “company town,” such as Pullman, Illinois, or Hershey, Pennsylvania, that he physically cannot leave. The suit cites case law from the 1946 ruling in Marsh v. Alabama.

                                            In an exclusive statement to The Post, Estavillo said he is a Democrat and supported Bernie Sanders in last year’s primary election, but sees this lawsuit as a way to protect the American people’s First Amendment rights online.

                                            “We are not China and we shouldn’t aspire to be,” he said. “Let’s do what’s right so we can all sleep well at the end of the day.”

                                            Estavillo also says he’s planning to file more lawsuits against other social media companies that have since given Trump the boot.

                                            On the flipside, the lawsuit also argues that AOC and Omar’s incendiary posting style and public personas have damaged his “psyche” — and that they should be banned from the platform as a result.

                                            Among the many claims meant to demonstrate why the pair of “Squad” members should have their accounts purged, Estavillo appears to contend that one reason is AOC’s reluctance to date him.

                                            “AOC even has a white boyfriend but would never think of dating a Mexican like the plaintiff,” the suit reads. “They’re hypocrites.”

                                            Estavillo says that line was simply meant to “highlight that I believe not everyone is who they say they are.”

                                            He also notes that in a recent Twitch appearance, Omar’s computer system appeared “highly expensive,” something that “most poor and disenfranchised people can’t afford, even before the COVID-19 pandemic.”

                                            Representatives for Ocasio-Cortez and Omar did not immediately respond to a request for comment — though Omar tweeted Tuesday, “Bless their heart” in response to news of the suit. A spokesperson for Twitter told The Post the company had “no comment at this time.”

                                            (Read more at the New York Post)

                                            Lawsuits like these would only be entered in California

                                            Surely no self-respecting Texan would bother to enter such a lawsuit. This only makes light of the situations faced by other (more challenged) Twitter users.

                                            Child sex abuse survivor sues Twitter for refusing to remove child porn images of him

                                            Life Site News reports on a lawsuit brought by a child sex abuse survivor (now 16) against Twitter for publishing porn images of him on its platform.

                                            The National Center on Sexual Exploitation Law Center (NCOSE), The Haba Law Firm, and The Matiasic Firm jointly filed a federal lawsuit against Twitter on behalf of a minor who was trafficked on the social media platform that boasts more than 330 million users.

                                            The plaintiff, John Doe, a minor, was harmed by Twitter’s distribution of material depicting his sexual abuse and by Twitter’s knowing refusal to remove the images of his sexual abuse (child pornography) when notified by the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s parents. The case, John Doe v. Twitter, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

                                            At age 16, Plaintiff John Doe was horrified to find out sexually graphic videos of himself — made at age 13 under duress by sex traffickers — had been posted to Twitter. Both John Doe and his mother, Jane Doe, contacted the authorities and Twitter. Using Twitter’s reporting system, which according to its policies is designed to catch and stop illegal material like child sexual abuse material (CSAM) from being distributed, the Doe family verified that John Doe was a minor and the videos needed to be taken down immediately.

                                            “As John Doe’s situation makes clear, Twitter is not committed to removing child sex abuse material from its platform. Even worse, Twitter contributes to and profits from the sexual exploitation of countless individuals because of its harmful practices and platform design,” said Peter Gentala, senior legal counsel for the National Center on Sexual Exploitation Law Center. “Despite its public expressions to the contrary, Twitter is swarming with uploaded child pornography and Twitter management does little or nothing to prevent it.”

                                            Instead of the videos being removed, Twitter did nothing, even reporting back to John Doe that the video in question did not in fact violate any of their policies. This lack of care and proper attention resulted in the CSAM of John Doe accumulating more than 167,000 views before direct involvement from a law enforcement officer caused Twitter to remove the child pornography material. John Doe is now suing Twitter for its involvement in and profiting from his sexual exploitation, which violates the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act and various other protections afforded by law.

                                            “All of these views could have been prevented by Twitter, but it inexplicably refused to remove Doe’s videos despite clear proof that he is a minor. No child or parent should have to endure this egregious violation of their rights by a technology company,” said Lisa Haba, partner at The Haba Law Firm.

                                            “Twitter clearly needs to properly address the egregious issues of exploitation and abuse happening throughout its platform. We hope that John Doe receives some measure of justice and that this lawsuit will pave the way for other survivors to seek justice,” Gentala said.

                                            The National Center on Sexual Exploitation Law Center offers survivors of pornography-related abuse a way to seek justice.

                                            (Read more at Life Site News)

                                            I do not care what community Twitter considers itself a member of, circulating child porn is not acceptable

                                            The top brass at Twitter need to be held accountable for this. They need to see the inside of a prison cell with a “child molester” sign around their neck.

                                            British Columbia billionaire is given the green light to sue Twitter over ‘Pizzagate’ tweets

                                            The CBC tells us how Canadian courts have opened the floodgates for British Columbian citizens to sue Twitter.

                                            FrankGiustraWest Vancouver billionaire Frank Giustra has been given the go-ahead to sue Twitter in a B.C. courtroom over the social media giant’s publication of a series of tweets tying him to baseless conspiracy theories involving pedophile rings and Bill and Hillary Clinton.

                                            In a ruling released Thursday, Justice Elliott Myers found that Giustra’s history and presence in British Columbia, combined with the possibility the tweets may have been seen by as many as 500,000 B.C. Twitter users, meant a B.C. court should have jurisdiction over the case.

                                            It’s a victory not only for Giustra — whose philanthropic activities have earned him membership in both the Orders of Canada and B.C. — but for Canadian plaintiffs trying to hold U.S.-based internet platforms responsible for border-crossing content.

                                            ‘I believe that words do matter’

                                            In a statement, Giustra said he was looking forward to pursuing the case in the province where he built his reputation as the founder of Lionsgate Entertainment.

                                            “I hope this lawsuit will help raise public awareness of the real harm to society if social media platforms are not held responsible for the content posted and published on their sites,” Giustra said.

                                            “I believe that words do matter, and recent events have demonstrated that hate speech can incite violence with deadly consequences.”

                                            Giustra filed the defamation lawsuit in April 2019, seeking an order to force Twitter to remove tweets he claimed painted him as “corrupt” and “criminal.”

                                            He claimed he was targeted by a group who vilified him “for political purposes” in relation to the 2016 U.S. election and his work in support of the Clinton Foundation.

                                            The online attacks allegedly included death threats and links to “pizzagate” — a “false, discredited and malicious conspiracy theory in which [Giustra] was labelled as a ‘pedophile,'” the claim stated.

                                            Thorny questions

                                            Twitter has not filed a response to Giustra’s claim itself — applying instead to have the case tossed because of jurisdiction.

                                            The California-based company said it does not do business in B.C. and that Giustra was only relying on his B.C. roots to file the case in Canada because it would be a non-starter in the U.S., where the First Amendment protects free speech.

                                            The company claimed he would have been mostly affected in the U.S. where he spends much of his time, owns extensive property and has substantial interests in the entertainment industry — meaning B.C. is only tangentially connected to the matter.

                                            In essence, Myers said, Twitter claimed it was only a platform for others to post comment, and couldn’t be expected to face defamation cases every place people felt aggrieved.

                                            The judge said the case presented some difficult — if timely — questions.

                                            “This case illustrates the jurisdictional difficulties with internet defamation where the publication of the defamatory comments takes place in multiple countries where the plaintiff has a reputation to protect,” Myers wrote.

                                            “The presumption is that a defendant should be sued in only one jurisdiction for an alleged wrong, but that is not a simple goal to achieve fairly for internet defamation.”

                                            ‘Strong ties to the province’

                                            Myers found Giustra’s connection to B.C. undeniable.

                                            “There can be no dispute that Mr. Giustra has a significant reputation in British Columbia. He also has strong ties to the province,” he wrote.

                                            “The fact that he has a reputation in or connections to other jurisdictions does not detract from that.”

                                            The judge said Giustra had also done what he needed to do to show his reputation in B.C. might have been affected.

                                            (Read more at the CBC)

                                            In the U.S., the courts have had a habit of protecting Twitter

                                            Earlier, courts tossed out suits (one by Mac Isaac, the computer shop owner associated with the Hunter Biden laptop and another by Representative Nunes) against Twitter.

                                            Hopefully, this will start a reversal of fortunes for the woke corporation.

                                            Parler sues Amazon for kicking it off the Internet

                                            The Verge reports on a lawsuit brought by a Parler against Amazon for kicking it off of the Internet.

                                            ParlerThe creators of social network Parler have sued Amazon for ending a web hosting agreement after last week’s riot at the US Capitol. Parler claims Amazon Web Services severed ties to stop Parler from competing with the larger social platform Twitter, and it’s asking a court to stop Amazon from shutting down its account — arguing that an extended shutdown would be like “pulling the plug on a hospital patient on life support.”

                                            Parler bills itself as a more permissive alternative to Facebook and Twitter, particularly as those sites have cracked down on President Donald Trump and his supporters for seeking to violently overturn the US election results. That stance has earned backlash from digital infrastructure companies. Apple and Google removed the Parler app from their stores, limiting its reach. Amazon dealt an even more fatal blow when it kicked Parler off AWS, taking the site down altogether.

                                            The lawsuit sheds some light on Amazon’s rationale for banning Parler. In an email, Amazon’s moderation team says it is “troubled” by repeated policy violations. The email cites 98 posts that incite violence. It includes screenshots of a call to hang “traitors,” as well as an exhortation to “start systematicly assasinating [sic]” liberal leaders, supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement, and others in January — with a note that “I already have a news worthy event planned.” Amazon said publicly that it “cannot provide services to a customer that is unable to effectively identify and remove content that encourages or incites violence against others.”

                                            AWS is the world’s largest cloud service provider, controlling approximately one-third of the market, followed by competitors like Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure. Parler argues that getting kicked off AWS was a “death knell” for the site, since it’s been unable to find another host. And it claims Amazon made the call to protect Twitter, since the two companies signed a multiyear deal for web services last year. It also says it was banned because of “political animus.”

                                            Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union have questioned the power of infrastructure providers to suppress speech online. “It’s understandable that no company would want to be associated with the repellant speech that is now rampant,” ACLU attorney Ben Wizner told New York Times reporter Davey Alba. Nonetheless, “there will be times when large majorities of people want to repel speech that is genuinely important. So I think we should encourage, in a broad sense, companies like Amazon to embrace neutrality principles.”

                                            As a private company, however, Amazon has broad legal latitude to cut off customers. It’s also not necessarily responsible for Parler’s difficulty in finding a new host. While the suit says AWS’s public statements about moderation have “made Parler a pariah,” activists were already pressuring companies to cut ties with the site.

                                            An Amazon spokesperson told The Verge that there was “no merit” to the suit’s claims. “AWS provides technology and services to customers across the political spectrum, and we respect Parler’s right to determine for itself what content it will allow. However, it is clear that there is significant content on Parler that encourages and incites violence against others, and that Parler is unable or unwilling to promptly identify and remove this content, which is a violation of our terms of service,” said the spokesperson. “We made our concerns known to Parler over a number of weeks and during that time we saw a significant increase in this type of dangerous content, not a decrease, which led to our suspension of their services Sunday evening.”

                                            Parler’s lawsuit echoes a similar complaint by Gab, another social network favored by far-right figures. Gab sued Google in 2017 for kicking it off the Play Store, claiming it amounted to anti-competitive behavior. However, it dropped the suit after Google allowed it to resubmit the app for review.

                                            (Go to The Verge for the papers detailing the suit against Amazon)

                                            Since Parler should have been protected by Section 230, the deplatforming of Parler should be reason enough for Republicans to fix the Twitter/Google/Facebook/Instagram situation once they regain power

                                            If Google Play Store and Apple Play Store can insist that Parler impose leftist censoring or lose their spot in their stores, that sounds like the collusion of a cartel. If Google and Apple can get with Amazon and remove Parler from the Internet, it seems they used their government-like power (derived by being given access directly from the U.S. government then in charge of the Internet) to deny a free-speech forum access to the Internet.

                                            Poland: The center of online free speech

                                            Breitbart points out how Poland might become the center of online free speech.

                                            Poland'sFreedomActAgainstBigTechCensorshipPoland’s new Freedom Act against Big Tech censorship will see members of the public automatically notified of “shadowbans” and empowered to overturn restrictions if their speech online is lawful.

                                            Speaking exclusively to Breitbart News, Deputy Minister of Justice Sebastian Kaleta, who is spearheading the new legislation, confirmed that “every time an algorithm is used to limit reach, the user will be informed if and why his reach is being limited.”

                                            The Polish government has previously confirmed that its new laws against tech censorship will give Polish citizens a statutory right to appeal against bans and content removal if their speech was lawful under the Polish constitution, with a new Free Speech Board able to order tech firms to restore removed accounts and content on pain of huge fines.

                                            Some tech censorship is more insidious, however, with Silicon Valley drastically curtailing some users’ reach and ability to build a following — sometimes openly, sometimes not — through so-called “shadowbans”, without ever outright banning them or deleting content.

                                            Kaleta told Breitbart London that “the process of using algorithms to suppress particular views, as long as they do not break Polish law, [will] be regulated” and that “if social media platforms break this law, they will be fined.”

                                            Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government in Hungary has also confirmed that it will be taking action to prevent the shadowbanning of “Christian, conservative, [and] right-wing” voices online.

                                            While some right-wingers have been reluctant to call on elected officials to secure their right to speak freely on platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube because they are “private companies”, Kaleta was clear that, for the Law and Justice Party (PiS) government in Poland, the provision of state protection of people’s right to freedom of expression online was merely part of the “civilisational process”.

                                            “Since we have laws regarding banking, telecommunications, the armaments industry, and many other fields, we should also regulate Big Tech,” he insisted, pointing out that social media platforms “provide a concrete service, that is the ability to communicate on a large scale” and compared them to public utilities like telephone companies.

                                            “The owners of social media companies are not running just any business. The Big Tech companies are now monopolies,” he said.

                                            “I mean, imagine if Alexander Graham Bell were to decide who can speak through the telephone and Thomas Edison decided where lightbulbs were to be used?” he asked.

                                            (Read this at Breitbart)

                                            Odd that a government that has been under the jackbooted heel of communists now stands up against Fascist Twitter

                                            The Polish, who have lived under the boot of the real “Russians, Russians, Russians” now is a better source of free speech than Jack Dorsey will ever dream of being. Fascist thug that he is.

                                            Totalitarianism in Joe Biden’s America

                                            Totalitarianism in coronavirus management

                                            A doctor speaks on the totalitarianism of government in coronavirus management

                                            Life Site News reported on the pressure applied by governmental and corporations against practicing doctors when it comes to the coronavirus.

                                            Following a September 2020 interview with LifeSite’s Jim hale, Dr. Leland Stillman this time speaks out against the “dark collusion of government actors … and corporations,” which is stifling dissent among medical doctors and scientists, as it pertains to pandemic policies.

                                            Back in September, the young doctor had spoken out against forced vaccinations. Stillman had noted that a COVID-19 vaccine must not be made mandatory, and that forcing people to inject it only “serves certain special interests.”

                                            In this new interview, he noted how several doctors are even being targeted and punished financially and personally if they do not obey the COVID “orthodoxy” of the medical and government authorities. Stillman described this suppression of dissent in the medical community as reaching “a level of totalitarianism that even Orwell and Huxley would have struggled to envision.”

                                            Also, the young doctor connected the dots on this “dark collusion” between government officials, medical authorities, and tech corporations, tying in the massive censorship in recent months.

                                            Especially with the lack of social connections and foot traffic due to lockdowns, small businesses and even individuals face a very serious threat of disappearing.

                                            “If Google or Amazon can de-platform you, or if Shopify can shut down your online store front, then all of a sudden you could see just about everyone in society disappear from the public eye overnight, because they have an opinion that may contradict what the mainstream media narrative is.”

                                            Moreover, Stillman said that throughout his entire education and experience as a medical doctor, the notion of lockdowns to solve a pandemic crisis was never a factor. “No one before COVID, that I know of, seriously considered lockdowns to be effective,” he stated.

                                            (Read the closing point by Life Site News at their site)

                                            Since the virus is so small and the gaps in the masks are relatively large, I have heard from doctors that many masks are useless

                                            In light of the small size of the virus and the large gaps in the masks, I have heard from doctors that many masks are effectively useless. However, the government seems to be seeking compliance and not solutions. Therefore, the government requires masks.

                                            Likewise, if doctors find better ways (or run across flaw in the government-approved ways), why not let them speak?

                                            The building of totalitarianism by making the military pledge allegiance to Democrats

                                            Fox News personality Tucker Carlson discusses the building of totalitarianism under the guise of security.

                                            Our capital city is currently under military occupation. By Inauguration Day, there are expected to be more than 26,000 armed federal troops in Washington. No living American has seen a moment like the one we’re watching now.

                                            For comparison, Lyndon Johnson sent a total of 13,600 federal troops and D.C. Army National Guardsmen to quell the race riots in Washington that followed the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. Those riots injured hundreds of people and killed at least 13. In 1864, as the Civil War raged on the other side of the Potomac and Americans died every day in large numbers on the battlefield, there were fewer federal troops protecting Washington, D.C., than there are right now.

                                            But according to our leaders, the so-called “insurrection” of Jan. 6 was much worse than any of that. So in response, they have assembled the largest military presence in Washington in all of American history during peacetime. It’s truly a national force, with Guardsmen from every state in the Union as well as Puerto Rico. The question is, why?

                                            For decades, Washington, D.C., had the highest per-capita law enforcement presence in the country and one of the highest in the world. There was no need to fly in troops from Alaska to keep the city safe. But keeping the city safe is hardly the point of this exercise. The murder rate in the District of Columbia has risen with terrifying speed over the last six months. Men, women and children have been shot to death in the streets, but no one in charge seems to care about that or even notice. So no matter what they are telling you, those 26,000 federal troops are not there for your safety.

                                            Instead, unmistakably, the Democratic Party is using those troops to send the rest of us a message about power: “We’re in charge now. We run this nation, from Honolulu to our colony in the Caribbean and everywhere in between, very much including where you and your family live. Do not question us men with guns. We control the Pentagon.” And indeed, they do.

                                            Republicans have spent years ignoring the leftward drift of our officer corps, but we can’t ignore it now. The mask is off our military leadership. The very same generals who howled at the idea of deploying American troops to stop an invasion of our southern border sent tens of thousands of soldiers with rifles to Washington purely as a show of force on behalf of the political party they support. Once they did that, they allowed Democratic politicians to degrade and politicize the military itself.

                                            Democrats in Congress demanded that the troops sent to Washington this week submit to a political purity test — “ideological vetting, as they put it — to make certain that every soldier professed loyalty to the new regime. Not loyalty to our country, not loyalty to our Constitution, but loyalty to the aims of a specific political party. Nothing like that has ever happened in America and just a few months ago, it would have been unimaginable. Suddenly it’s compulsory.

                                            Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., has even gone so far as to say that every White man in this country is a potential murderer, that every White man in America should be under suspicion — purely on the basis of being White and male — of planning a presidential assassination.

                                            On Nov. 5, 2009, Army Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire on innocent people at Fort Hood, Texas. He shot 45 people and 13 of them died. When it emerged later that Hasan was an Islamic extremist and the Army had failed to notice his extremism or in any way protect the public from it, no one at the Pentagon was court-martialed. Instead, the rest of us sat through months of lectures about how we had no right to come to broader conclusions about what had happened at Fort Hood. Yes, the shootings were bad, though not — President Barack Obama made this clear at the time — an act of terrorism. But far worse than mass murder, we were told, would be the sin of drawing any connection between Nidal Hasan’s beliefs and the beliefs of anyone else in our country. Nidal Hasan was literally a lone gunman, not a stand-in for all Muslims.

                                            That’s what they told us. And by the way, it’s OK that they told us that. Most Americans are decent people who don’t blame entire groups for the crimes of a few. Bigotry is immoral and so is collective punishment. There is nothing more un-American than that. But collective punishment is now the official policy of the federal government, and it’s enforced by the Pentagon.

                                            In the meantime, you’ve got to wonder what the Guardsmen themselves think of all of this. Serving in the National Guard is not easy work. Guardsmen aren’t paid much. Some, you’ve got to imagine, are doing it for love of country. Now, they’ve been deployed to their country’s own capital city and they’ve been given orders to shoot their fellow Americans if necessary. That’s a lot to ask.

                                            Now, on top of all of that, they’ve been told that if they were born a certain way, if they’re White and male and therefore evil and dangerous, they themselves are under suspicion of being the enemy. They’re potential killers, assassins, betrayers of a nation.

                                            If you wanted to stoke an irreparable civil conflict, you would talk this way and you would keep talking that way. So where’s the pushback from our defenders? “Tucker Carlson Tonight” didn’t get any calls Monday from Republican senators begging to come on this show to talk about any of this. The Democratic Party is using the military of the United States as a political weapon. But Republicans in Congress just can’t be bothered to notice that.

                                            You’d also think officers at the Pentagon would be outraged by this, but as far as we know, not a single one has resigned in protest of conducting background checks on people because of their race or sex or their political views. We can’t say we know entirely why, but some clearly agree with all of this, and they’d like to see it accelerate.

                                            “I was Chief Prosecutor at Guantanamo for over 2 years,” a former Air Force colonel called Moe Davis announced on Twitter Monday, “and there’s far more evidence of Congressman Madison Cawthorn’s guilt than there was of guilt for 95+ percent [sic] of the detainees. It’s time we start a domestic war on sedition by American terrorists.”

                                            Once again: A career American military officer has called for “a domestic war on sedition by American terrorists”. According to Col. Moe Davis, 25-year-old wheelchair-bound Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C. — who was just elected by American voters to the United States Congress — and the millions of Americans who agree with him and voted Republican in November, must be subdued by force.

                                            Has Twitter seen Moe Davis’ tweet? Has the Secret Service? Do they care? Will a single one of Col. Moe Davis’ many allies in the Democratic Party denounce what he said or even tell him to cool it a little bit?

                                            And what about the news media? Reporters are perpetually on the hunt for what they describe as dangerous extremism. Have they noticed Col. Moe Davis on Twitter? Probably they have, but of course, they agree with him.

                                            On Monday, The Daily Beast, the home page of our highly credentialed but none-too-bright ruling class, ran a piece with this title: “Can U.S. Spy Agencies Stop White Terror?” Other countries, the story pointed out, have domestic spy agencies to fight extremists at home. So, of course, we need one right away. What the piece does not mention is that those other countries include China, North Korea, and Kazakhstan. Domestic spy agency is a not-very-subtle euphemism for secret police. That is what they’re calling for.

                                            So how long will this cycle go on? If you’re hoping America will revert to normal on Wednesday afternoon after Joe Biden is sworn in as president, you are an optimist. You probably assumed the quarantines and mandatory face coverings were temporary, too. Something awful has been unleashed on our country. Unchecked, it will inevitably lead to more awful things. Every action provokes a reaction. That is both physics and human nature.

                                            (Read the closing points at Fox News)

                                            With all of Joe’s contact with the Chinese, it seems he has learned something

                                            When Chinese students attempted to turn to democracy in Tiananmen Square in 1989, they got support from all the locals as they posted their complaints for all to read. However, when the Communist party bosses stopped negotiating with them, those same Communist party bosses brought in army units from areas that did not speak the same language as the students.


                                            Listen to the 8:29 point of the video where a Puerto Rican National Guard commander tells his soldiers (in Spanish) that they may have to fire upon extremists called “Proud Boys.” Watch a little beyond that to see soldiers being brought in from Alaska.

                                            Now that Obama has purged the officer corps of conservatives (as reflected by the tweet below), what more can we expect but a socialist revolution supported by the socialist army?

                                            The hiding of a totalitarian genesis in cryptic groups

                                            In the following video, Charlie Kirk quotes Parler messages purportedly created by Gunn (an assumedly founding member of the “Boogaloo Bois” (who led part of the incursion into the Capitol). In that quote, Gunn purportedly says, “Boogaloo Bois, associated with the Black Sons of Liberty, played an important part in the breach of the Capitol. Any moment used to throw a middle finger to tyranny should be capitalized upon. Yesterday, when presented with that opportunity, Bois  went to work to hype up the people.” And then he (Gunn) posted to twitter “We were not real MAGA. We were infiltrators.”

                                            Although searches of Twitter show that the Boogaloo Bois have gotten on message with the rest of the Democrats (and have deleted any message that would tie a left-wing group to the attack), they have not been able to control everything said about them. Additionally, who knows whether Parler will be able to show the messages that were formerly on it whenever it finally comes back up?

                                            That is, don’t think that the Boogaloo Bois are right-wing (as often labelled by Twitter people and the press). As noted in this slip of a tweet, the Boogaloo Bois have allied with BLM since the summer of 2020.

                                            Joe Biden’s America: 6 January 2021 edition

                                            Speaker Pelosi silences the voice of the minority

                                            One America News Network reports the imposition of new House rules governing speech of representatives.

                                            pelosi-job-covidAs newly re-elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi looks forward to the Democrats slim chances of retaining the House again in 2022, she’s using her most powerful weapon as speaker. The move comes with majority influence over the House Rules Committee to weaken the power of Republicans who make up the chamber’s minority.

                                            On Monday, Democrat House Rules Committee chairman Jim McGovern and Speaker Pelosi watched as the House passed the new rules package for the 117th Congress. The bill passed in a 217-to-206 vote and has taken heavy criticism from Republican lawmakers, who have gone so as far as to call provisions in the bill “Soviet style.”

                                            Two of the most criticized aspects of the package include alterations to the MTR or Motion to Recommit, which is a tool minority parties can use to push last minute changes to bills on the House floor before passage.

                                            Republicans will now have to send bills back to committees before passage, which will greatly limit Republican lawmakers abilities to advance the interests of their constituents on specific bills. It’s something that was highlighted by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on the House floor Monday.

                                            “You cannot pass a motion to recommit on the floor unless you have a majority of the people in the body to vote for it,” he stated. “Are you so afraid that you can’t hold people that you oughta’ take it away? ”

                                            Another rule change is new exemptions from PAYGO, or Pay As You Go, provisions. The rule previously kept lawmakers from spending more than the budget allowed by requiring spending cuts in other parts of the overall budget.

                                            However, the new rules offer an exception for PAYGO, but only for programs related to public health and climate change. This is specifically consequential as Democrat proposals like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal come with very large price tags.

                                            Republicans have said it’s a clear indication Democrats are trying to push through the Green New Deal and Medicare for all regardless of the cost.

                                            (Read more at One America News Network)

                                            What did you expect under Democrats? Free speech? Freedom of Association?

                                            From here on (or at least until there is enough of a revolution to throw out the socialists [aka Democrats]), we will have to provide civil disobedience to unconstitutional restrictions on our rights. If that means that I will need to defy the government to go to church, I will defy the government. If that means that I talk in ways not sanctioned by San Fran Nan, I will.

                                            Google Maps disabled direction requests for Washington D.C. as the Trump supporters converged

                                            As shown by the following tweets, Google Maps tried to make it hard for Trump supporters to make their way to the nation’s capitol.

                                            Police violate the rights of right-wingers who formerly supported the police

                                            Biz Pac Review goes through an instance where police have started burning bridges between themselves and their supporters.

                                            In a strange twist of fate, pro-Trump protesters at a “Mass Civil Disobedience Rally and March” in the left-wing sanctuary of Salem, Oregon, were caught on video this New Year’s Day chanting “f–k the blue” and stomping on “thin blue line” flags.

                                            Organized by Oregon Women for Trump, the protest against “ridiculous shutdowns of businesses, schools, people’s livelihoods, and the phony mask mandate” devolved into madness when armed left-wing Antifa/Black Lives Matter extremists showed up.

                                            According to reports from multiple witnesses, during the physical and verbal altercations that predictably ensued, the police kept focusing their attention on the pro-Trump protesters instead of the left-wing Antifa/BLM extremists.

                                            In one particularly jarring instance, a police officer warned a BLM extremist to not point a loaded paintball gun at him. Yet the officer said nothing about the extremist reportedly pointing the gun directly at a pro-Trump protester.

                                            Watch (*Graphic content/Language warning):

                                            During the protest, multiple Trump supporters were reportedly “charged at,” hit with sting balls and arrested, even as left-wing extremists like the paintball gun-wielding one above were apparently allowed to continue agitating and provoking them.

                                            See more footage from the otherwise reportedly peaceful protest below:

                                            Note what the guy said in the last video: “No more backing the blue!”

                                            See more footage from the protest below:

                                            What only exacerbated the boiling anger against the police was the stark contrast between how they chose to treat otherwise reportedly peaceful pro-Trump protesters and how they’ve repeatedly been seen treating violent Antifa/BLM extremists.

                                            Note: Unlike Antifa/BLM extremists, the pro-Trump protesters didn’t vandalize any businesses, start any fires or attack any police officers.

                                            “[T]here were no reports of injuries or property damage,” Portland station KOIN confirmed.

                                            Yet this is how they were treated … a fact that eventually led to the “no more backing the blue” sentiment seen earlier to explode into chants of “f–k the blue.”


                                            In a video published Saturday, classically liberal commentator Tim Pool noted that their behavior and rhetoric, or at least in regard to the police, is now equivalent to that of Antifa and BLM. However, he argued, they’re not wrong to feel this way.

                                            “These individuals, right-wing and conservative, being confronted by the police in this way for the first time was shocking to many of them, and now they’re saying many of the things we’ve heard from the left,” he said.

                                            “The police are losing what little support they had left, and boy is this a mistake [on their part]. There’s no longer an argument that cops are just trying to keep us safe.”

                                            (Read and watch more at Biz Pac Review)

                                            The police needs to provide equal enforcement of the law

                                            If a gun or two is allowed to be carried by those on the left, you can bet that there will be a push back for equal representation from the right. If those in power don’t allow us to legally provide our own self-protection, you can prepare yourself for civil disobedience in the realm of self protection.

                                            In contrast to those from Antifa and BLM, when those of us on the right employ civil disobedience — we do it in defense of rights ranging from self defense rights to our pursuit of happiness (known more succinctly during the time of Locke as pursuit of property). Antifa and BLM burn down businesses that people have put their life savings into. Right wingers just start punching back when government (cops, San Fran Nan, un-accountable ballot counters, etc.) push one step too far.

                                            What will be the results of these three insults?

                                            First, if you rightfully got mad about the election fraud, did you also get mad about other events?

                                            While it is right for you to get mad if Mitch McConnell kills debate on election fraud …

                                            MitchKillsDebateOver the past few months, this blog has called for its readers to pull away from Republicans if Mitch McConnell kills the debate on 6 January 2021.

                                            If the deep-state Republicans (also known as RINO’s or Republicans In Name Only) go along with Biden’s election fraud, they will be doing several things.

                                            1. They will be removing our voice of representation from government. When we cannot have free and fair elections (obviously without the force of fraud), we cannot have any say in our government.
                                            2. They will be further cementing the two-tiered justices system where elites get to violate the law while peons are expected to toe the line.
                                            3. They will be destroying the common citizen’s trust in the effectiveness of the vote.
                                            4. They will be creating a class of elites who rule over the peons who have no say in who becomes elite.

                                            If you got mad about voter fraud, then here are RINO’s to avoid in all future elections based on this denial of our vote

                                            Here are Republicans In Name Only who deserve no support at the ballot box in my opinion for their standing against investigating voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election:

                                            Secondly, did you also get as angry when Nancy limited the free speech rights of Representatives?

                                            Nancy Pelosi imposes transgender-friendly House rules for speech

                                            Breitbart quotes Representative Tom Cole regarding the elimination of “gendered terms” (father, mother, son, daughter, … ) from debate.

                                            pelosi-job-covidRepresentative and ranking member of the House Rules Committee Tom Cole (R-OK) issued a statement in response to the Nancy Pelosi’s proposed House Rules for the 117th Congress — including the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter” — calling the package “a blatant and cowardly assault on the voices and views of the Republican minority,” as well as “a dark day for the preservation of free and thoughtful debate.”

                                            “I am very disappointed by the proposed House Rules for the 117th Congress put forward by the Democratic majority,” said Rep. Cole in a statement responding to the rules for the 117th Congress, which were unveiled on Friday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern (D-MA).

                                            “This package is a blatant and cowardly assault on the voices and views of the Republican minority, which represents a growing number of seats in the House following the general election in November,” Cole continued.

                                            “Alarmingly, the package includes eliminating the longstanding motion to recommit in its current form and censoring opposing ideas,” the congressman added. “Clearly, this proves that Democrats are afraid of Republican ideas, and they cannot effectively defend their own points of view.”

                                            Cole went on to say that such proposals confirm that “Pelosi knows she is unable to rally and effectively lead her own slimmed down caucus.”

                                            “Rather than unify her own members, her solution is to punish and silence Republicans by overturning now-inconvenient precedents and traditions of the House,” said Cole, adding:

                                            In addition to limiting procedural tools historically available to the minority party in Congress for more than a century, I am very disturbed that the package attacks the right to free speech by creating an ethics violation for members and employees of the House who post or share things that others think are unfounded or inappropriate.

                                            Such a rule is rife with the possibility of abuse and likely to be enforced in a way that creates a double standard between the majority and minority. This is a dark day for the preservation of free and thoughtful debate in the institution and indeed, all members elected by the people and for the people.

                                            On Friday, Pelosi and McGovern unveiled the rules for the 117th Congress, which contain “future-focused” proposals, including the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter.”

                                            (Read more at Breitbart)

                                            If Nancy can force this on the House, she will try forcing it on the populace

                                            If you think that this power grab will remain limited to the U.S. House of Representatives if you do not act, you are wrong.

                                            Thirdly, did you get angry at the prostituting of the Congress through the opening words presented by Emanuel Cleaver?

                                            Not a prayer for unity, but a speech to Democrats over political correctness

                                            With a hat tip to Truth2Freedom, we heard by way of the New York Post how Representative Emanuel Cleaver opened the 117th Congress in a “prayer” that inspired the paper to focus on the last two words spoken. To whit, the New York Post begins their analysis with these paragraphs:

                                            emanuel-cleaverA House Democrat tasked with leading the body in an opening prayer for the new Congress has gendered the word “amen.”

                                            To close a prayer he delivered from the House chamber Sunday to mark the swearing in of the 117th Congress, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), an ordained minister, altered the traditional “amen” to say “amen and awoman.”

                                            (Read more of their pontifications at the New York Post)

                                            However, if you listen to or read the whole speech, you will find that Emanuel Cleaver is not praying to one God, but mentions several gods as he crafts a speech that:

                                            1. Lulls nominal Christians into complacency through the use of familiar phrases
                                            2. Further lulls them into complacency by using a noun generally assigned among Christians exclusively to God
                                            3. Adds more complacency by using phrases out of the Bible
                                            4. Asks for peace when Democrat allies Antifa and BLM are all about violence (and the leaders of the Democrat party have never denounced Antifa or BLM by name)
                                            5. Lands its first mocking blow by starting to say that this is all “in the name of the monotheistic god” Brahman (who, in the Hindu tradition, is not a monotheistic god)
                                            6. Next lands another mocking blow by acknowledging that the speech is to a “god known by many names, by many different things” (and, therefore, this speech in front of the party who booed God is not to any god at all)
                                            7. Of course, Emanuel ends this with “Amen” (which is a transliteration of the Hebrew word (אָמֵן) “a-meen” which means “may it be so.”) and then tacks on “a woman” (which is either a nod to Nancy Pelosi’s transgender-friendly rules or a violation of it).

                                            Let us pray.1

                                            Eternal God, marvelously, we bow before your throne of grace as we leave behind the politically and socially clamorous year of 2020. We gather now in this consequential chamber to inaugurate another chapter in our roller coaster representative government.2

                                            The members of this august body acknowledge your sacred supremacy and therefore confess that, without your favor and forbearance, we enter this new year relying dangerously on our own fallible natures.

                                            God, at a moment that many believe that the bright light of Democracy is beginning to dim, empower us with an extra dose of commitment to its principles.3 May we of the 117th Congress refuel the lamp of liberty so brimful that generations unborn will witness its undying flame.

                                            And may we model community healing, control our tribal tendencies, and quicken our spirit that we may feel thy priestly presence even in moments of heightened disagreement.4 May we so feel Your presence that our service here may not be-soil by any utterance or acts unworthy of this high office.

                                            Insert in our spirit a light so bright that we can see ourselves and our politics as we really are, soiled by selfishness, perverted by prejudice, and inveigled by ideology.

                                            Now, may the God who created the world and everything in it bless us and keep us. May the Lord make His face to shine upon us and be gracious to us.5 May the Lord lift up the light of His countenance upon us6 and give us peace, peace in our families, peace across this land, and dare I ask, O Lord, peace even in this chamber now and evermore. We ask it in the name of the monotheistic god, Brahman7, and god known by many names, by many different things8. Amen and a woman9.

                                            What can we gather from this speech?

                                            1. By leading with this line, this man is lying. This is not a prayer, but a speech.
                                            2. This Democrat overestimates the importance of the House in God’s scheme.
                                            3. By his reference to “a moment that many believe that the bright light of Democracy is beginning to dim,” even Democrats recognize that Biden’s election fraud dims the light of democracy.
                                            4. When Mr. Cleaver says “may we model community healing, control our tribal tendencies, and quicken our spirit that we may feel thy priestly presence even in moments of heightened disagreement,” does this mean that he will condemn members of Black Lives Matter if they beat or murder a white person or police officer? Or is he only preaching to Trump supporters who he imagines to be exclusively White (not Black or Hispanic)?
                                            5. Democrats have become adept at manipulating some nominal Christians by using words like “Lord.”
                                            6. Like Lucifer quoted and twisted the intent of scripture to Jesus in Matthew 4:1-11, this Democrat quoted and slightly changed the blessing of Numbers 6:25 when he said
                                              May the Lord make His face to shine upon” us
                                              (of course, the original blessing was directed outward to “you” — not inward to “us”).
                                            7. This Democrat also showed no love for monotheists, polytheists, or anyone in-between by mixing the traditions willy-nilly (since Brahman is a polytheistic god from the Hindu pantheon and the pronouns and nouns used to this point have been those used in Christian circles).
                                            8. When this Democrat calls (not prays) to “many different things,” it is evident that all of us have been played from the beginning of this prayer-like speech.
                                            9. Finally, considering that this Democrat has made this speech to godless Democrats, it was pointless to end the speech with “Amen.” Likewise, if any moderate Republican had ended his or her speech with “Amen and a woman,” he or she would have been roasted by Democrats for:
                                              • Genderizing “Amen”
                                              • Splitting it into only two genders
                                              • Pandering to the transgender community
                                              • Insulting Jews and Christians
                                              • Ignoring other faiths

                                            So, are you going to let yourself get played by the Democrats (or other politicians)?

                                            Starting in 1 Kings 18:21, Joshua implored the people of Israel:

                                            Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people did not answer him a word. Then Elijah said to the people, “I alone am left a prophet of the Lord , but Baal’s prophets are 450 men. Now let them give us two oxen; and let them choose one ox for themselves and cut it up, and place it on the wood, but put no fire under it; and I will prepare the other ox and lay it on the wood, and I will not put a fire under it. Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the Lord , and the God who answers by fire, He is God.” And all the people said, “ That is a good idea.”

                                            So Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, “Choose one ox for yourselves and prepare it first for you are many, and call on the name of your god, but put no fire under it. ” Then they took the ox which was given them and they prepared it and called on the name of Baal from morning until noon saying, “O Baal, answer us.” But there was no voice and no one answered. And they leaped about the altar which they made. It came about at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, “Call out with a loud voice, for he is a god; either he is occupied or gone aside, or is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and needs to be awakened.” So they cried with a loud voice and cut themselves according to their custom with swords and lances until the blood gushed out on them. When midday was past, they raved until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice; but there was no voice, no one answered, and no one paid attention.

                                            Then Elijah said to all the people, “Come near to me.” So all the people came near to him. And he repaired the altar of the Lord which had been torn down. Elijah took twelve stones according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the word of the Lord had come, saying, “Israel shall be your name.” So with the stones he built an altar in the name of the Lord , and he made a trench around the altar, large enough to hold two measures of seed. Then he arranged the wood and cut the ox in pieces and laid it on the wood. And he said, “Fill four pitchers with water and pour it on the burnt offering and on the wood.” And he said, “Do it a second time,” and they did it a second time. And he said, “Do it a third time,” and they did it a third time. The water flowed around the altar and he also filled the trench with water.

                                            At the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, Elijah the prophet came near and said, “O Lord , the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that You are God in Israel and that I am Your servant and I have done all these things at Your word. Answer me, O Lord , answer me, that this people may know that You, O Lord , are God, and that You have turned their heart back again.” Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. When all the people saw it, they fell on their faces; and they said, “The Lord , He is God; the Lord , He is God.” (1 Kings 18:21‭-‬39 NASB)

                                            In response to YouTube feed pulls, conservatives go to Rumble and Vimeo

                                            Lifesite feed pulled on YouTube. In response, they go to Rumble.

                                            Lifesite News reports that the dictators at Google have pulled the plug on the Lifesite feed. In response, Lifesite News pulled up stakes and moved to Rumble.

                                            LifeSiteNewsAs YouTube has suspended LifeSite’s channel for a week, based on accusations of “medical misinformation” within a video featuring comments by a medical doctor, LifeSite’s new videos will be available via Rumble or on The John-Henry Westen Show YouTube channel.

                                            Rumble is popular as an alternative to YouTube for many conservatives, including Dinesh D’Souza, Dan Bongino, Devin Nunes, and others, as it is free from Big Tech influence and is outside Google’s de facto monopoly (YouTube is part of Google).

                                            All of LifeSite’s videos and shows, including The Mother Miriam ShowThe Bishop Strickland Show, and many more, will available for viewing this week on LifeSite’s Rumble channel by clicking here.

                                            They will also be available on YouTube on The John-Henry Westen Show channel, which was not suspended. To find our videos on YouTube this week, like and click the notification bell on The John-Henry Westen Show channel by clicking here.

                                            The video that led to censorship from YouTube can also be found there.

                                            On November 18, YouTube had flagged another of LifeSite’s videos, The Mother Miriam Show. Despite being titled, “Catholic Christmas traditions to instill faith in your kids,” that video also received a warning of “medical misinformation.” YouTube then removed the video.

                                            With the warning on November 18, and yesterday’s strike, LifeSite has now been banned from uploading any videos by YouTube for a week.

                                            (Read more at Lifesite News)

                                            Although I don’t know the inner workings, my church steered from YouTube to Vimeo

                                            My church, Crossroads Baptist Church, steered away from using YouTube to using Vimeo for its online sermons and other streaming services. Because I am not in leadership, I cannot tell you why this decision was made; however, by reviewing the things done by YouTube to people of faith and conservatives, I can certify that their decision was a reasoned and sound one.