Skip to content

Global Censorship: Court Rules EU Govts Can Takedown Content Worldwide

Featured Story

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

The Ride Will Get Nasty From Here, NWO…

Facebook

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that EU governments can order Facebook to take down content worldwide after an Austrian politician was insulted online.

Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek, a leading figure in Austria’s left-progressive Greens Party, was branded a “lousy traitor of the people” and a “corrupt oaf”, among other things, in an Austrian news article concerning her party’s support for a minimum income for refugees which was shared on a Facebook user’s personal page, according to court documents.

The Green politician demanded Facebook Ireland, which manages Facebook in Europe, remove the post, and secured an Austrian court order commanding it when the U.S. subsidiary failed to comply — but was not satisfied when the social media giant only restricted the content in Austria.

Now the Court of Justice of the European Union has decreed that censorship orders issued by an EU state can apply globally, as EU law “does not preclude [a] host provider from being ordered to remove worldwide information disseminated via a social network platform”.

The EU judges rejected Facebook’s arguments that this would curb online free speech in third countries which do not allow the sort of state censorship which Glawischnig-Piesczek demanded.

They also ruled that EU does not “preclude a host provider which operates a social network platform from being ordered, in the context of an injunction, to seek and identify, among all the information disseminated by users of that platform, the information identical to the information that has been characterised as illegal” — i.e. other content repeating the “illegal information” about Glawischnig-Piesczek.

Breitbart London@BreitbartLondon

War on Free Speech: EU Demands Facebook and Google Censor ‘Illegal’ Speech in One Hour http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/02/eu-demands-facebook-google-censor-illegal-speech-one-hour/ …EU Demands Facebook and Google Censor ‘Illegal’ Speech in One HourThe EU has ordered social media firms to delete content they consider “illegal” with one hour, as they ramp up efforts to censor the internet.breitbart.com531:10 PM – Mar 2, 2018Twitter Ads info and privacy95 people are talking about this

“This judgment has major implications for online freedom of expression around the world,” warned Thomas Hughes, executive director of the ARTICLE 19 charitable organization, which “works for a world where all people everywhere can freely express themselves and actively engage in public life without fear of discrimination.”

“Compelling social media platforms like Facebook to automatically remove posts regardless of their context will infringe our right to free speech and restrict the information we see online,” Hughes complained.

“The judgment does not take into account the limitations of technology when it comes to automated filters.

“The ruling also means that a court in one EU member-state will be able to order the removal of social media posts in other countries, even if they are not considered unlawful there. This would set a dangerous precedent where the courts of one country can control what internet users in another country can see. This could be open to abuse, particularly by regimes with weak human rights records.”

Breitbart London@BreitbartLondon

FULL TEXT: The EU And Facebook’s New Online ‘Code Of Conduct’ Policing Free Speech http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/31/full-text-eu-facebooks-new-online-code-conduct-policing-free-speech/ … Source

View image on Twitter
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is free%2Bspeech.jpg

1312:30 PM – May 31, 2016Twitter Ads info and privacy51 people are talking about this

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

The problem with the acceptance and approval of any New World Order is that no government has ever offered, nor will it ever offer, real hope and peace for mankind. When a man turns to the government to provide worldwide peace and hope, he becomes disillusioned and enslaved by its false promises. History has proven time and again that no quasi-world empire has ever survived, simply because of its innate flaws of greed, corruption, and the quest for power.

Those who desire the ushering in of a New World Order, whether secular or religious, are in for a rude awakening. The truth is that false religious teachings cannot bring utopia into being, regardless of man’s creativity and ingenuity. Only heaven brings lasting peace and happiness. The Bible makes it very clear that all things associated with this life on earth with its sufferings, its decay, its discontent, and death will continue with this physical life (2 Corinthians 4:16Hebrews 9:27). It is also clear that all these things are completely unknown in the heavenly city (Revelation 21:3-7 and Revelation 22). They will be done away with. Yes, hope is needed. But it is the hope of heaven we need, not the false hope of a New World Order. The one hope for all believers lies only in heaven (John 14:1-4). It is not here on this earth.

Free speech is one of the pinnacles of a free society. But it’s often the first thing to go when a free society is in decline. Certain forms of unsavory speech are deemed as “hate” speech, and speech that doesn’t conform to the status quo is regarded as potentially terroristic speech. It’s a very slippery slope, but it’s how fascism creeps in and topples a nation. The United States is blessed to still maintain some level of free speech, as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. But certain elements of this precious liberty are being eroded, as is the freedom to bring up certain topics without serious backlash or ridicule…..

Every year, nearly half the world’s population uses Google. According to Internet Live Stats, Google processes over 40,000 search queries every second. In that same second, internet users view over 76,000 YouTube videos, a streaming service designed by Google.

Across the globe, there are now over two billion active android devices, a mobile operating system designed by Google. Google uses these services to track users and collect information about them.

It’s now a reality: Google has monopoly power over the flow of information. Google has control over the dissemination and manipulation of information around the world. Google algorithms can either suppress information or promote it.

Because of this, Google Inc. is susceptible to political and ideological censorship, affecting billions of users who use Google services annually. With this power, Google interferes with elections, business, and people’s livelihoods.

Leaked Google Memo: ‘American Tradition’ Of Free Speech Must Be Abandoned

There are industries and political agendas that influence Google, industries that will do whatever it takes to shut down truthful speech and manipulate how people think.

Google is not a neutral platform, so search results are engineered to highlight the viewpoints that matter most to Google executives and their cult culture.

Rich and influential people, emboldened by their special interests, practically lobby Google to push their agendas while suppressing any dissent or competition on the web. While some ideologies are popularized by Google, others are pushed to the shadows, de-monetized and mocked.

Google is under fire for censoring the conservative website PragerU. Very few organizations have the legal firepower to fight back against Google, but PragerU has taken Google to court. Google’s true intentions are being exposed to.

In a statement filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Google argues that government regulation would have “disastrous practical consequences.”

In their statement, Google makes it clear they do not want to be held to the standard of the First Amendment. 

Google refuses to change for its users; Google refuses to guarantee users an equal platform for freedom of speech. The anti-American behemoth refuses to enforce the First Amendment across their services because this “would undermine important content regulation.”

Google stated, “If they are bound by the same First Amendment rules that apply to the government, YouTube and other service providers would lose much of their ability to protect their users against offensive or objectionable content — including pornography, hate speech, personal attacks, and terrorist propaganda.”

Breaking: Google Just Scrubbed Natural Health Websites From Its Search Results; Whistleblower Explains How and Why

The U.S. should appoint a third-party judicial commission to review censorship cases

Google should still remain in control over its own content regulation, but the United States should appoint a third party commission to review Google’s actions when complaints of political, business and ideological censorship are brought forth.

With so much power over information and with mounting complaints of censorship coming against Google, it is imperative that a judicial review committee hold Google accountable when they are violating the free speech rights of people on the internet.

According to their legal statement, Google still believes their company can discriminate on the basis of political viewpoints because they “can’t be forced to change.”

What Google does not understand is that, with the proper legal oversight, their monopoly can be forced to operate more fairly, without engaging in anti-competitive practices that benefit their own agendas and the goals of their highly influential friends.

People and organizations that are censored by Google deserve the right to bring forth their case and have their voice be heard. Google can be forced to respect people’s First Amendment rights and can be legally required to correct their algorithms when they are using their technology to abuse content creators, advertisers, and search engine users. The rule of law should be upheld.

Message from Alexander: The only way to take power away from Google, is to stop using its products and services. Use the Vivaldi browser to access the internet and use DuckDuckGo.com to search for stuff. Source JOHN THYS/AFP/Getty Images

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

British government to decide how children can decorate their bedrooms

Families across the United Kingdom enjoy the ability to home educate without undue state intervention—freedom not found anywhere else in Europe. But for citizens of the country of Wales, this could soon change.

Although Wales is part of Great Britain, the English parliament has assigned general responsibility for controlling education to the Welsh National Council. Citing their obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Welsh Assembly is seeking to introduce significant restrictions on home education, including required home visits and other burdensome regulations.

Current Welsh guidelines allow state intervention in homeschooling when there is evidence that the child’s education is not “suitable.”

Troubling Trend

The Welsh regulations represent a trend throughout Great Britain. The English Department for Education recently announced its intention to seek a register of all “children not in school.” Scotland has announced its plans to “consult” on new home education guidelines with its local authorities this year. In the Isle of Man, a Crown dependency, the government is seeking to introduce a new education bill which includes draconian oversight of home-educated children.

The only jurisdiction of Great Britain to reject such a path in Northern Ireland. The local homeschooling community worked for several years to achieve guidelines that respect the rights of families to homeschool without undue burdens.

Earlier this year, then-Education Secretary for England Damian Hinds said that, while the planned register would include children getting a good education at home, it would also include those who are not getting an education. He stated that “as a government, we have a duty to protect our young people and do our utmost to make sure they are prepared for life in modern Britain.”

In Scotland, opponents recently defeated the government’s plan to implement state guardians for every child. Essentially, the headteacher or health visitor in each locality would have been tasked with looking after assigned children and interfering in family life.

Media reported that “campaigners opposed to the scheme told the court it would allow the named person to interfere in areas including what children watch on TV at home, their diet, and even how their bedroom is decorated.” You can read more here.

Restrictive Proposal

On the Isle of Man, a bill concerning home education is about to be considered by legislators. The bill would give the Department of Education the power to:

  • interview a child and assess his or her work
  • interview parents in order to obtain personal information
  • impose fines or jail sentences if parents do not comply or if children fail subjective evaluations by local authorities.

The homeschool regulations being considered in Wales are very similar.

Welsh families are challenging the draft guidance. They established a charity called Protecting Home Education Wales to engage counsel who could advise and provide a legal opinion. The charity successfully used a GoFundMe campaign to pay for the legal opinion, which was then submitted with our response and cover letter to all 60 Welsh Assembly members.

HSLDA Responds

Attorney for HSLDA’s Global Outreach, Mike Donnelly, has responded to the drafted guidance. Calling the guidance “concerning” and pointing out several flaws, Donnelly advised the Welsh education officials to go back to the drawing board. He wrote:

The first and most serious flaw relates to the failure of the Welsh government to consider other international human rights obligations and treaties which are as or more authoritative on the subject of children and education […] Second, the draft guidance operates with an unstated but heavily implied presupposition that parents are NOT providing a suitable education unless they can prove to the Welsh government that they are […] Finally, the guidance unnecessarily and overly stresses the importance of the local authority “seeing and speaking” with the child.

Welsh advocates raised numerous concerns themselves, pointing out that those in favor of such a strict monitoring scheme ignore the effects of such dramatic interventions in families who exhibit no evidence of problems. It is hard to overestimate the negative impact this would have on a family’s reasonable expectations of privacy, family life, and protection.

Protecting Families

Professor Eileen Munro, a former social worker who was commissioned to review child protection in England by Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove, wrote in her report, “Confidentiality in a preventive child welfare system”:

“Power corrupts” is a well-known truism, but there is no acknowledgment of the possible danger of increasing state power over families. There is no recognition of the fact that liberal societies have placed a high value on privacy and confidentiality precisely because they present an obstacle to the state. While the state sees this in a negative light, the individual values it as a protection of their freedom. The professional ethic of confidentiality is seen by the government as an obstructive barrier to be removed in implementing their monitoring and assessment programme, but this should remind us that the ethical principle is playing its rightful part as a protective barrier, defending the individual against excessive intrusion by the state.

HSLDA considers homeschoolers in other countries part of our “extended family.” Our mission is to make homeschooling possible, and we are doing all we can to support parents in Wales and other countries who need our help. Please keep these parents who are fighting hard for their children in your thoughts and prayers.

Taking Action

Protecting Home Education Freedom in Wales shared the legal advice it obtained with Children’s Commissioner Sally Holland. Ms. Sian Gwenllian AM, shadow minister for education and Welsh language, thanked them for “sending the useful legal advice” and further stated that it was important that the guidance on home education was legally correct. She added that as a member of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, she presented the information at a meeting with Holland. Source

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

In 1789, the United States Congress ratified the Bill of Rights which made ten amendments to the Constitution. James Madison and many of the founding fathers proposed the amendments because they believed the original Constitution did not adequately protect human liberty. The first and most well-known amendment protects the freedom of religion, speech, and the press, and the rights of assembly and petition. It states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (U.S. Bill of Rights). Freedom of speech essentially means having the right to speak without governmental restriction or censorship. 

The United States is very proud of the concept of freedom of speech because it makes it a unique nation in comparison to most nations throughout history. Under many other governments, people have been persecuted or punished for speaking freely if what they say does not align with the ideas of those in charge. In the United States, though, people have been encouraged to share their opinions and question the government when they feel change is necessary. However, recent debates over hate speech have caused Americans to question just how committed the nation is to the First Amendment and whether unlimited free speech is always a good thing. 

Many of the founding fathers’ ideas were greatly influenced by Christianity. Yet is freedom of speech biblical? At the beginning of the Bible, in the book of Genesis, we learn from the story of Adam and Eve that God has given people free will. God tells Adam and Eve, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:16–17). God warns them that their actions have consequences but still allows them to make a choice. Therefore, the Bible supports the idea that we have the freedom to say what we want to, but that what we say can have consequences. 

  • In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must, therefore, be shut down.
  • Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility, and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.
  • Except for the UN most definitely seeks to prohibit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the UN Global Compact on Migration, in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.
  • In contrast to the UN Global Migration Compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible: “Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, color, descent, gender or another identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labeled “hate”.
  • The new action plan plays straight into the OIC’s decades-long attempts to ban criticism of Islam as ‘hate speech’. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See, and the UN.

In January, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, tasked his Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, to“present a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis”. Speaking at a press conference about the UN’s challenges for 2019, Guterres maintained, “The biggest challenge that governments and institutions face today is to show that we care — and to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…

After this degenerates nap, he starts pointing fingers at the American people threatening to shut down free speech, know this Mr. Guterres, to the ungodly, it’s hate speech, to a Christian, its a GOD given right, StevieRay Hansen

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech.

“We need to enlist every segment of society in the battle for values that our world faces today – and, in particular, to tackle the rise of hate speech, xenophobia and intolerance. We hear troubling, hateful echoes of eras long past” Guterres said, “Poisonous views are penetrating political debates and polluting the mainstream. Let’s never forget the lessons of the 1930s. Hate speech and hate crimes are direct threats to human rights…”

Guterres added, “Words are not enough. We need to be effective in both asserting our universal values and in addressing the root causes of fear, mistrust, anxiety and anger. That is the key to bring people along in defence of those values that are under such grave threat today”.

In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must, therefore, be shut down. Not only that but — disingenuously — the UN is comparing dissent from its agendas with the rise of fascism and Nazism in the 1930s.

Now the action plan that Guterres spoke of in January is ready. On June 18, Guterres presented the United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech:

“Hate speech is…an attack on tolerance, inclusion, diversity and the very essence of our human rights norms and principles,” Guterres said. He also wrote in an article on the subject, “To those who insist on using fear to divide communities, we must say: diversity is a richness, never a threat…We must never forget, after all, that each of us is an “other” to someone, somewhere”.

According to the action plan, “Hate is moving into the mainstream – in liberal democracies and authoritarian systems alike. And with each broken norm, the pillars of our common humanity are weakened”. The UN sees for itself a crucial role: “As a matter of principle, the United Nations must confront hate speech at every turn. Silence can signal indifference to bigotry and intolerance…”.

Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility, and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

Except for the UN most definitely seeks to limit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

Whatever constitutes intolerance, xenophobia, racism or discrimination was naturally left undefined, making the provision a convenient catchall for governments who wish to defund media that dissent from current political orthodoxy on migration.

In contrast to the UN Global Migration Compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible:

“Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

The action plan, “aims to give to the United Nations the room and the resources to address hate speech, which poses a threat to United Nations principles, values, and programs. Measures taken will be in line with international human rights norms and standards, in particular, the right to freedom of opinion and expression. The objectives are twofold: Enhance UN efforts to address root causes and drivers of hate speech [and] enable effective UN responses to the impact of hate speech on societies”.

The UN makes it clear in the plan that it “will implement actions at global and country level, as well as enhance internal cooperation among relevant UN entities” to fight hate speech. It considers that “Tackling hate speech is the responsibility of all – governments, societies, the private sector” and it envisages “a new generation of digital citizens, empowered to recognize, reject and stand up to hate speech”. What a brave new world.

In the plan, the UN sets up a number of areas of priority. Initially, the UN will “need to know more to act effectively” and it will, therefore, let “relevant UN entities… recognize, monitor, collect data and analyze hate speech trends”. It will also seek to “adopt a common understanding of the root causes and drivers of hate speech in order to take relevant action to best address and/or mitigate its impact”. In addition, the UN will “identify and support actors who challenge hate speech”.

UN entities will also “implement human rights-centered measures which aim at countering retaliatory hate speech and escalation of violence” and “promote measures to ensure that the rights of victims are upheld, and their needs addressed, including through advocacy for remedies, access to justice and psychological counseling”.

Disturbingly, the UN plans to put pressure directly on media and influence children through education:

“The UN system should establish and strengthen partnerships with new and traditional media to address hate speech narratives and promote the values of tolerance, non-discrimination, pluralism, and freedom of opinion and expression” and “take action in formal and informal education to … promote the values and skills of Global Citizenship Education, and enhance Media and Information Literacy”.

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

The UN is acutely aware that it needs to leverage strategic partnerships with an array of global and local, governmental and private actors in order to reach its goal. “The UN should establish/strengthen partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including those working in the tech industry. Most of the meaningful action against hate speech will not be taken by the UN alone, but by governments, regional and multilateral organizations, private companies, media, religious and other civil society actors” the action plan notes. “UN entities,” it adds, “should also engage private sector actors, including social media companies, on steps they can take to support UN principles and action to address and counter hate speech, encouraging partnerships between government, industry and civil society”. The UN also says that “upon request” it will “provide support to Member States in the field of capacity building and policy development to address hate speech.”

The action plan also reveals that the first concrete initiative is already planned. It is an “international conference on Education for Prevention with focus on addressing and countering Hate Speech which would involve Ministers of Education”.

The new action plan plays straight into the decades-long attempts of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to ban criticism of Islam. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See, and the UN.

According to news reports, the plan was proposed by Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi at a session titled “Countering terrorism and other acts of violence based on religion or belief”.

“A particularly alarming development is the rise of Islamophobia which represents the recent manifestation of the age-old hatred that spawned anti-Semitism, racism, apartheid and many other forms of discrimination,” the ambassador saidin her speech. She added, “My Prime Minister Imran Khan has recently again called for urgent action to counter Islamophobia, which is today the most prevalent expression of racism and hatred against ‘the other’”.

“We are fully committed to support the UN’s strategy on hate speech,” said the Pakistani ambassador, “This is a moment for all of us to come together to reverse the tide of hate and bigotry that threatens to undermine social solidarity and peaceful co-existence.”

In 2017, Facebook’s Vice President of Public Policy, Joel Kaplan, reportedly agreed to requests from Pakistan’s Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan, to “remove fake accounts and explicit, hateful and provocative material that incites violence and terrorism” because “the entire Muslim Ummah was greatly disturbed and has serious concerns over the misuse of social media platforms to propagate blasphemous content”.

At the UN, Pakistan’s Ambassador Lodhi called for government interventions to fight hate speech, including national legislation, and reportedly “called for framing a more focused strategy to deal with the various expressions of Islamophobia. A ‘whole of government’ and a ‘whole of society’ approach was needed. In this regard, the Pakistani envoy urged the secretary-general to engage with a wide range of actors, including governments, civil society, and social media companies to take action and stop social media users from being funneled into online sources of radicalization”. Source

Technology can’t fix what’s broken, because what’s broken is our entire system, Only GOD Can….. The ultimate heresy in today’s world isn’t religious or political: it’s refusing to believe that technology can not only solve all our problems, but it will also do so painlessly and without any sacrifice.

The results from Tuesday’s elections are in and it’s now obvious: The Democratic Left’s takeover of Virginia — once home to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson — is now complete.

The party won control over both chambers of the Legislature, and with racist Democratic Gov. Ralph “Blackface Infanticide” Northam still in office as well, the Old Dominion is about to be completely transformed into an authoritarian, over-taxed, gun-regulated haven that would have made King George very proud.

Some political analysts say this transformation was a long time coming, that because northern Virginia has been an expanding suburb of Washington, D.C., where something like 90 percent of residents is Democrats, it was inevitable that the state would turn from purple to blue.

But others see a more sinister reason behind the transformation. 

The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft claims that suburban voters in Virginia have been robbed of any and all conservative content because it’s been stripped from news feeds on the country’s biggest social media platforms.

Facebook, Google, and Twitter have also limited or completely banned scores of Right-leaning blogs and news sites.

We don’t know if his assessment is accurate, of course, because again, Virginia has been a purple state for years and trending blue anyway, long before the social media behemoths began censoring his publication and ours. 

But overall, we can’t simply dismiss the assessment either. Given how much Americans rely on social media for interaction and information, limiting the political news content users see by punishing conservatives would certainly be a help to Democrats.

Get more news like this without being censored: Get the Natural News app for your mobile devices. Enjoy uncensored news, lab test results, videos, podcasts and more. Bypass all the unfair censorship by Google, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Get your daily news and videos directly from the source! Download here.

In fact, Hoft notes, “Democrats have a huge advantage over Republicans with their comrades in the news media, Hollywood, and academia. And, unlike 2016, on Tuesday the Democrats also have the tech giants to thank for their wins.”

We can’t argue with that.

Wealthy suburban voters and women helped drive Democrat Party wins in 2018, as well as the party’s takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives. If they are seeing less diversity in political content, wouldn’t that skew how they perceived Democrats and Republicans? 

Wouldn’t it influence the way they vote?

One noted researcher who has specifically studied the effects of biased social media on election outcomes certainly thinks so. (Related: It’s true: Google stole the 2018 midterm elections FOR Democrats by targeting select voters with “Go Vote” icon.)

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

Republicans had better get in the game

Researcher Dr. Robert Epstein, a San Diego-based Harvard Ph.D. who founded the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies, said in May his studies indicate that social media anti-conservative bias may have cost at least three Republicans their House seats in the 2018 election.

Breitbart noted further:

Epstein says that in the days leading up to the 2018 midterms, he was able to preserve “more than 47,000 election-related searches on Google, Bing, and Yahoo, along with the nearly 400,000 web pages to which the search results linked.”

Analysis of this data showed a clear pro-Democrat bias in election-related Google search results as compared to competing for search engines. Users performing Google searches related to the three congressional races the study focused on were significantly more likely to see pro-Democrat stories and links at the top of their results.

Epstein’s past studies have indicated that Google alone has the power to change a 50-50 split among divided voters into a 90-10 split in favor of Democrats, all without voters realizing they’ve been manipulated.

“I guarantee you that this past election was affected,” Epstein said of the 2018 races.

So again, it’s not clear how much anti-Republican social media bias had in completing Virginia’s transformation into a solid blue state.

But given what we know about the influence of social media, and how much younger voters in the region use it, we can safely deduce that it had some effect.

Republicans — and President Trump — had better find ways around the bias, especially now that platforms like Twitter are refusing political ads.

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

Free speech is one of the pinnacles of a free society. But it’s often the first thing to go when a free society is in decline. Certain forms of unsavory speech are deemed as “hate” speech, and speech that doesn’t conform to the status quo is regarded as potentially terroristic speech. It’s a very slippery slope, but it’s how fascism creeps in and topples a nation. The United States is blessed to still maintain some level of free speech, as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. But certain elements of this precious liberty are being eroded, as is the freedom to bring up certain topics without serious backlash or ridicule…..

Every year, nearly half the world’s population uses Google. According to Internet Live Stats, Google processes over 40,000 search queries every second. In that same second, internet users view over 76,000 YouTube videos, a streaming service designed by Google.

Across the globe, there are now over two billion active android devices, a mobile operating system designed by Google. Google uses these services to track users and collect information about them.

It’s now a reality: Google has monopoly power over the flow of information. Google has control over the dissemination and manipulation of information around the world. Google algorithms can either suppress information or promote it.

Sources include: NewsTarget TheGatewayPundit.com TheNationalSentinel.com USAToday.com Breitbart.com

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

People’s hearts are troubled, their minds are in a state of confusion, the Bible tells us a time of great delusion that will come upon the people, that time has arrived, the politicians must come up with more significant and more believable lies in order to bring on the antichrist, we have entered the doorstep Tribulation.

“Unless God has raised you up for this very thing, you will be worn out by the opposition of man and devils”…

HNewsWire Logo top Menu

StevieRay Hansen
Editor, HNewsWire.com

The Birth Pains Are Growing Stronger….

“Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants.”

My name is Steve Meyers and I need to share a vision and warning that the Lord showed me back in April 2007….

Many of you will ask why I waited so long to share the warning. I didn’t. I shared the story with everyone that would listen from pastors to friends to family to colleagues. Immediately following the initial vision, I called a close friend. I told him to sit down that I had something to tell him. I needed it documented as I knew this was supernatural and from God. As I witness events unfolding today, I need to share the vision again.

The risk of loss in trading futures and options on futures can be substantial. The author does not guarantee the accuracy of the above information, although it is believed that the sources are reliable and the information accurate. The author assumes no liability or responsibility for direct or indirect, special, consequential or incidental damages or for any other damages relating or arising out of any action taken as a result of any information or advice contained in this commentary. The author disclaims any express or implied liability or responsibility for any action taken, which is solely at the liability and responsibility of the user. Steve Meyers

The silencing of the American people before 2020?

“The human heart is an idol factory.”

The Un-Godly — Those That Suppress the Truth, the social media giants built multi-billion dollar empires by giving everyone a voice, but now that they have such a dominant position on the Internet they have decided that many prominent conservative voices should be completely silenced.

Our government has been overthrown. As evidenced by Trump’s capitulation on the border, his recent servitude to the GMO industry and his acquiescence to the warmongers, our President has been compromised. Our liberties are being eliminated one by one. Gun confiscation is next. The Constitution is gasping its last breaths. Our borders are destroyed and our culture has been turned upside down by every perversion known to man.

The Left, a broad term for Liberal Socialist Democrats that can only be explained fully by using the Bible explanation of the human race is as follows. A servant of Satan, because you are either saved or lost. This election has brought out the true nature of who you serve. Simply put, it’s Donald Trump, Conservatives, and Christians against the rest of the world. The Left’s Love applies only to those who believe as they do. They Love evil and commit Anarchy against those who love good. They are governed by lies and never tell the truth. On this Friday, Inaugural Day for the swearing-in of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States the Left wants to commit widespread Anarchy to shut down the swearing-in ceremony. Their goal of transforming America, which was founded in Judea Christian values into a Pagan Nation is almost complete. Their goal has always been the total removal of God from American society and the downfall of America. Donald Trump says he is a Presbyterian, but he left off the USA, an apostate church.

Everything done in dark will be brought to light, being biblically bankrupt will not exclude the elitist.

Let Me Make This Abundantly Clear. (I Am Apolitical) While I Have a General Distaste for Politicians No Matter the Party They Belong To, I Am Unashamedly Politically a Bible Believing Conservative Christian. I Have a Severe Distrust of Government. I Believe It Is the Most Inefficient and Ineffective Way to Accomplish Most Things. While I Strongly Disagree with Liberals/Progressives and Conservative on Most Political Issues, and While I Believe Liberals/Progressives and Most Politicians Are Terribly Misguided and Naive About What Big Government Will Eventually Result In, I Strive to Not Question Their Motives. at the Same Time, While I Find Myself in Agreement with Conservative Politicians on Some Issues, I Do Not Believe Electing Republicans Is the Answer to Everything. for Me, Very Sadly, the Main Difference Between Republicans and Democrats Is How Quickly They Want to Drive the Car Towards the Cliff. Simply Put, I Do Not Believe the Government Is the Solution for Everything. I Do Not Place Any Faith, Trust, or Hope in Any Politicians to Fix What Is Wrong with the World. “Come Lord Jesus!” (Revelation 22:20) StevieRay Hansen

Read More Censored News

Tagged Under: New World Order, Banks, tribulation, hnewswire StevieRay Hansen, HNewsWire, antichrist,digital gulag, antichrists, Apple, Bible, Big Tech, bigotry, Christian baker, Christianity, Christians, Colorado, Colorado Civil Rights Commission, conservatives, deep state, demonic assault, end of days, end times, Facebook, First Amendment, free speech, Google, hate groups, Hate speech,Electronic Prison, Birth Pains

Don't Miss

Steve-Quayle-Super-Pack
Christian-Journal-1

Latest News

Did Trump Actually Eliminate Federal Funding for Planned Parenthood with New Title X Rule?

By StevieRay Hansen | December 14, 2019

Another Broken Promise… While President Donald Trump was praised by many pro-life advocates after his Protect Life Rule in Title X earlier this year.  However,…

Read More

Our Elected Officials, Law Enforcement Agencies Are Leviathan Spirits, “Twisted”

By StevieRay Hansen | December 14, 2019

They are turning the people against each other, it’s actually demonic… Those who believe in a leviathan spirit use references to the creature described in…

Read More

The Progressives Have Threatened the Free Will of American People Once Again

By StevieRay Hansen | December 13, 2019

The Ringleader Progressive Democrat Nancy Pelosi and Her Band of Demon Knights (Dem — Governor Northam) Will Stop at Nothing in There Quest to Destroy…

Read More

Strange Things Are Happening In The Waters Along The West Coast

By StevieRay Hansen | December 13, 2019

The World Fish and Birds Are Starting To Disappear… SCIENTIST OVERVIEW OF WHY ALL THE NASA FLIGHTS ON WEST COAST UP AND OVER THE OCEAN…

Read More

Christian Music Has a Growing Gray Area!

By StevieRay Hansen | December 13, 2019

My intention is not to be unkind; but rather, to expose the demonic nature of so-called “Christian rock” and “Christian Hip Hop” music. The issue…

Read More

The FBI Teams Up With The Post Office To Get Your Fingerprints

By StevieRay Hansen | December 13, 2019

Politician Speak: Well in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into…

Read More

The Goal of the Media Is to Poison the Minds of the Masses, Godless Society

By StevieRay Hansen | December 13, 2019

God makes an interesting statement as He is reproving His people through the prophet Jeremiah.  In Jeremiah 6:15 God says that although His people should…

Read More

Not In God’s Plan, Impeachment Will Backfire Up-Date: Dec,13 at 12:01 AM

By StevieRay Hansen | December 13, 2019

Impeachment Ringleaders Quietly Panic As Moderate Democrats Bail… Update: According to the New York Times, Pelosi says she’s not going to push moderate Democrats to support the…

Read More

‘Celebriphilia’ Epidemic Sweeps Across America: Forget Knowledge & Wisdom, Listen to the Stars

By StevieRay Hansen | December 12, 2019

The phrase “reprobate mind” is found in Romans 1:28 in reference to those whom God has rejected as godless and wicked. They “suppress the truth by their…

Read More

America Is Dying! the Country’s Wound Is Incurable

By StevieRay Hansen | December 12, 2019

It Is Now in the Final Throes of a Terminal Disease. the Great Empire Is Crumbling!… This country has headed the way of all fallen…

Read More

StevieRay Hansen

In his riveting memoir, "A Long Journey Home", StevieRay Hansen will lead you through his incredible journey from homeless kid to multimillionaire oilman willing to give a helping hand to other throwaway kids. Available on Amazon.

1 Comment

  1. Blather on December 2, 2019 at 1:26 am

    Not in America. Maybe in a Demoncrap infested State but not the REPUBLIC of America.

Leave a Comment





A Long Journey Home Book Cover

A Long Journey Home

A book about a fourteen-year-old boy, the son of a Baptist pastor, thrown from his home at age 14. This boy, StevieRay, would later become a multimillionaire. Now he gives orphans a second chance at life.

Scroll To Top