As U.S. Founding Father Benjamin Franklin said, “Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants.” When a culture abuses its democratic power, the result is chaos and ruin. Either a democracy, guided by self-control and morality, keeps itself in check, or it crashes. When the crash happens, control falls to a non-democratic system, either willingly or by force. Cultures that drift from Christianity tend to drift from “true” democracy into other, democracy-flavored political schemes and, eventually, into subjection to tyranny…
In this very important story over at Activist Post titled “YouTube Just Purged 17,000 Channels For Hate Speech, Some Broke NO RULES AT ALL“, Steve Quayle left an absolutely crucial note while linking to the story: “You are watching the assassination of free speech in America in real-time!”
Since the first coronavirus cases were confirmed in the US, Alphabet’s YouTube has been repeatedly criticized for deleting popular videos questioning the wisdom of “lockdowns”, Dr. Fauci or other “science-backed” conventional wisdom – or simply using the outbreak as an excuse to censor more conservative content, something that has been a priority for YouTube since long before this all started.
YouTube, like Facebook and Twitter, insists it doesn’t delete conservative content, though a handful of Congressional hearings have been held to investigate these allegations, and President Trump is reportedly looking into the creation of a panel to combat censorship of conservatives on these popular platforms.
But while YouTube’s political motivation to target conservatives is fairly obvious – a large cross-section of the contemporary American left is staunchly pro-censorship when it comes to ideas they don’t agree with or believe to be “offensive” – the company’s motives in this latest scandal hint at a more sinister political agenda for Alphabet and its peers.
A journalist and human-rights advocate has discovered that YouTube is apparently censoring two Chinese-language phrases that are extremely offensive to the Communist Party.
Moved to investigate the suspicious mass-deletions, the Verge discovered that YouTube has indeed added these phrases to a spam filter that automatically deletes user comments containing the phrases, even if they’re used in a positive and politically irrelevant context.
As the Verge points out, the company’s reasons for censoring these phrases is “puzzling,” considering that YouTube is blocked in China (along with all other Google services).
It’s not clear why these phrases are being deleted, but it seems that they’ve been added to comment filters meant to automatically remove spam or offensive text. This is suggested by the fact that the comments are removed quickly (human moderation takes longer) and that they are removed even if the banned phrases are used positively (e.g., “The 五毛 are doing a fantastic job”).
Making the matter more puzzling is that YouTube is currently blocked in China, giving its parent company, Google, even less reason to censor comments critical of the CCP or apply moderation systems in accordance with Chinese censorship laws. We’ve reached out to Google for comment and will update this story when we hear more.
Even if there is a legitimate reason to be suspicious of comments containing these phrases, why would YT feel the need to remove them automatically, without even allowing an opportunity for human review?
The Verge said it has reached out to YouTube for comment. But as the publication also points out, Google has been “frequently criticized” for seeming to kowtow to the wishes of the CCP as the company’s leadership quietly negotiate the company’s return to China over the explicit objections of the company’s employees, and in contravention of the principles that prompted Google to pull out of China a decade ago.
Just remember this next time you see some Silicon Valley bigwig opining about the importance of the bilateral relationship with China, and Trump’s “politically motivated” persecution of China. Source ZeroHedge
Hours after Twitter slapped a CNN Fact-Check on a Tuesday tweet by President Trump claiming that mail-in-ballots will be “substantially fraudulent,” Trump lashed out – accusing Twitter of “now interfering in the 2020 Presidential Election” by “saying my statement on Mail-In Ballots, which will lead to massive corruption and fraud, is incorrect, based on fact-checking by Fake News CNN and the Amazon Washington Post.”
“Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH, and I, as President, will not allow it to happen!” he added.
In a statement emailed to Bloomberg, Trump reelection campaign manager Brad Parscale said that Twitter’s move to add fact-check links to the two tweets demonstrates the social network’s “clear political bias,” adding that “Partnering with the biased fake news media ‘fact checkers’ is only a smoke screen Twitter is using to try to lend their obvious political tactics some false credibility.”
* * *
Mere hours after Kara Swisher appeared on CNBC to call on Twitter to establish a panel of ‘content reviewers’ who can help the platform tag and remove “misinformation” – ie information that doesn’t neatly fit the narrative being pushed by one of Swisher’s employers, the New York Times – it looks like the company is taking a major step in that direction.
For the first time, Twitter has tagged tweets by President Trump as “misinformation”, and appended a link where readers can “get the facts” below the tweet’s primary text.
The tweet, sent earlier today by the president, was the latest in a series of missives opposing mail-in ballots, which the president has insisted would lead to widespread voter fraud.
According to Twitter spokesperson Katie Rosborough, who spoke to the Washington Post about the new policy, Trump’s tweets “contain potentially misleading information about voting processes and have been labeled to provide additional context around mail-in ballots.”
Evidence of widespread voter fraud in the US has yet to materialize, despite the fact that half the country seems to think that Russia somehow rigged the election in President Trump’s favor. To be sure, there have been isolated incidences of voter fraud in recent years that have given some experts reason for concern – though these have been completely ignored, as they don’t fit the narrative that the crime is “totally nonexistent”
But instead of allowing readers to reason this out for themselves (something that shouldn’t be all that difficult given the thousands of replies calling Trump a racist liar), Twitter is stepping in to play the role of arbiter of truth.
An opinion column published in today’s WSJ hinted at a notion that has become increasingly obvious in the Trump era: An absolute truth is an extremely rare thing. Even the NYT has allowed a defined, liberal perspective infect its reporting over the years, as the column’s writer argued, and if the media wants to regain the trust of the public, it’s time to acknowledge that it doesn’t have some kind of monopoly on the truth.
Twitter has reportedly considered affixing warning labels to Trump’s tweets in the past, though Dorsey has insisted that Twitter would never remove a tweet from Trump, as Swisher urged the company to do. However, apparently, a letter sent to Dorsey by the widower of a former intern in then-Congressman Joe Scarborough’s office begging the company to remove several Trump tweets – tweets that allegedly perpetuated a ‘conspiracy’ about the death of the man’s wife – pushed the company over the edge. Though notably those tweets haven’t been touched.
Now, will Twitter apply the same scrutiny to Joe Biden?
And on issues of science, upon which science will twitter rely?
Though the company hasn’t said much, we suspect this won’t be an isolated incident. Will twitter now go full-on CCP and hire a ‘propaganda board’ to review all content on the site? We imagine we’ll learn more about the company’s plans in the coming days. Source: ZeroHedge
Last night, President Trump slammed Twitter for tagging several of his tweets touting the alleged risks of mail-in ballots as ‘misinformation’, with the president accusing the social media giant of interfering in the 2020 election.
On Wednesday morning, Trump issued a couple more tweets claiming the federal government will “strongly regulate, or close them down” – referring to social media companies who suppress conservative voices in the name of protecting “the truth” (ie the progressive narrative that Silicon Valley tech giants have promised to perpetuate).
He also linked his accusations of bias with his opposition to mail-in ballots.
“We saw what they attempted to do, and failed, in 2016. We can’t let a more sophisticated version of that happen again. Just like we can’t let large scale Mail-In ballots take root in our Country,” Trump said in a series of tweets.
Weeks ago, anonymously sourced reports claimed that the White House was considering a panel to investigate anti-conservative bias on popular social media platforms and across Silicon Valley, an issue that has been explored in a series of Congressional hearings involving top officials at the biggest tech firms. Source: ZeroHedge
France’s Determination To End Free Speech Knows No Limits
On May 13, the French parliament adopted a law that requires online platforms such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram and Snapchat to remove reported “hateful content” within 24 hours and “terrorist content” within one hour. Failure to do so could result in exorbitant fines of up to €1.25 million or 4% of the platform’s global revenue in cases of repeated failure to remove the content.
The scope of online content deemed “hateful” under what is known as the “Avia law” (after the lawmaker who proposed it) is, as is common in European hate speech laws, very broadly demarcated and includes “incitement to hatred, or discriminatory insult, on the grounds of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or disability”.
“This law proposal aims to combat the spread of hate speech on the internet,” it is stated in the introduction to the Avia law.
“No one can dispute the exacerbation of hate speech in our society… the attack[s] on others for what they are, because of their origins, their religion, their sex or their sexual orientation… hints… [at] the darkest hours in our history… the fight against hatred, racism and anti-Semitism on the Internet is an objective of public interest that justifies…strong and effective provisions… this tool of openness [the internet] to the world, of access to information, to culture, to communication, can become a real hell for those who become the target of ‘haters’ or harassers hidden behind screens and pseudonyms. According to a survey carried out in May 2016, 58% of our fellow citizens consider the internet to be the main locus of hate speech. More than 70% say they have already been confronted with hate speech on social networks. For younger people in particular, cyber-harassment can be devastating…However… Few complaints are filed, few investigations are successful, few convictions are handed down – this creates a vicious circle…”
Having acknowledged that online “hatred” is tricky to prosecute under the existing laws because “few complaints are filed and few investigations are successful, few convictions are handed down”, but nevertheless determined that censorship is the panacea to the perceived problems, the French government decided to delegate the task of state censorship to the online platforms themselves. Private companies will now be obliged to act as thought police on behalf of the French state or face heavy fines. As in Germany, such legislation is bound to lead to online platforms exhibiting overzealousness in the removal or blocking of anything that might conceivably be perceived as “hateful” to avoid being fined.
The purpose of the law appears to have been twofold — not only to achieve the actual censorship of speech by the removal or blocking of online posts, but also the (inevitably) chilling effects of censorship on online debate in general. “People will think twice before crossing the red line if they know that there is a high likelihood that they will be held to account,” French Minister of Justice Nicole Belloubet said in what sounded ominous for a government representative to say in a country that still claims to be democratic.
From the beginning, when French President Emmanuel Macron first tasked the group led by Laetitia Avia with preparing the law, the proposal was met with criticism from a number of groups and organizations. France’s National Consultative Commission on Human Rights criticized the law proposal for increasing the risk of censorship, and La Quadrature du Net, an organization that works against censorship and surveillance online, warned that, “Short removal times and large fines for non-compliance further incentivize platforms to over-remove content”. The London-based free speech organization Article 19 commented that the law threatened free speech in France. According to Gabrielle Guillemin, Senior Legal Officer at Article 19:
“The Avia Law will effectively enable the French state to devolve online censorship to the dominant tech companies, who will be expected to act as judge and jury in determining what is ‘manifestly illegal’ content. The Law covers a wide range of content so this is not always going to be a straightforward decision.
“Given the timeframes by which companies have to respond, we can expect them to err on the side of caution when it comes to deciding whether content is legal or not. They will also have to resort to using filters that will inevitably lead to the over-removal of content.
“The French government has ignored the concerns raised by digital rights and free speech groups, and the result will be a chilling effect on online freedom of expression in France”.
The passed law was also met with disapproval in France. On May 22, Guillaume Roquette, editorial director of Le Figaro Magazine, wrote:
“Under the pretext of fighting ‘hateful’ content on the Internet, it [the Avia law] is setting up a system of censorship that is as effective as it is dangerous… ‘hate’ is the pretext systematically used by those who want to silence dissenting opinions.
“This text [law] is dangerous because, according to lawyer François Sureau, ‘it introduces criminal punishment… of the conscience’. It is dangerous…because it delegates the regulation of public debate… on the internet to American multinationals… A democracy worthy of its name should accept freedom of expression”.
Jean Yves Camus. from Charlie Hebdo, called the law “a placebo for fighting hate” and pointed out that the “hyper-focus on online hate” masks the real danger:
“It is not online hatred that killed Ilan Halimi, Sarah Halimi, Mireille Knoll, the victims of the Bataclan, Hyper Cacher and Charlie; it is an ideology called anti-Semitism and/or Islamism… Who determines what hatred is and its [distinction from] criticism? A Pandora’s box has just been opened… There is a risk of a slow but inexorable march towards a digital language hyper-normativized by political correctness, as defined by active minorities”.
“What is hate?” asked French writer Éric Zemmour rhetorically. “We do not know! You have the right not to love… you have the right to love, you have the right to hate. It’s a feeling… It cannot be judicialized, legislated.”
Nevertheless, that is what hate speech laws do, whether in the digital or the non-digital sphere. Asking private companies — or the government — to act as thought police does not belong in a state that claims to follow a democratic rule of law.
Unfortunately, the question is not whether France will be the last European country to introduce such censorship laws, but what other countries are next in line. Source: ZeroHedge
(Article by Stefan Stanford republished from AllNewsPipeline.com)
With one of the main intention’s of this ‘assassination of free speech‘ clearly been getting a ‘Democrat‘ president back into the White House as this new Western Journal story reports, the ending to Steve’s note while linking to the Activist Post story is one we should be greatly concerned about with the ‘freaks and misfits‘ of antifa now confirmed as pushing for Civil War and/or Revolution in America and ‘big tech‘ and ‘government‘ already implementing ‘social credit scores‘ in America: “Soon to be followed by ‘AI-Pogroms’ (assassinations) of individuals!”
As we had reported on ANP back on August 24th in this story titled “More Evidence Great Trouble Is Brewing: With The Seeds Of Chaos Being Sown, ‘Government’ Is Preparing To ‘Reap The Harvest’”, the Pentagon had predicted that all hell would break out in America by 2030. But with many experts now warning that we’re ‘way ahead of that schedule‘ with many far-leftists pushing for Civil War in America NOW, and those same Antifa terrorists ‘acting out violently to silence Conservatives‘ with the full support of Democrats in Congress as Susan Duclos reported in this new ANP story, America appears to be closing in upon a ‘breaking point‘ that may come much sooner than later.
Mainstream Media Won’t Tell You the TRUTH!
So we’ll be taking a look below at what historically has followed the ‘silencing‘ of many different groups of people throughout history, complete and total tyranny, and what we can do to prepare for, or better yet prevent, ‘what is to come‘ with leftists pushing violence into America largely based upon the lies being tossed about by ‘big tech’, the MSM and the ‘democrats‘ now defining ‘hate speech‘ as ‘anything that Democrats disagree with‘ as Breitbart reported in this September 3rd story that the Liberty Daily had linked to on Wednesday.
While Democrats, ‘big tech‘ and the slime stream media are happy to call any reports of the censorship of Conservatives ‘fake news‘, as this Western Journal story reports, anything at all that each of those groups say is highly suspect because they’re all planning on using that censorship to steal the 2020 election away from President Trump to install one of the ‘globalist puppets‘ running under the democratic party banner. From their story.:
The new book “Big Tech Tyrants” makes a powerful case for why Americans must be vigilant going into the 2020 election year, given Silicon Valley’s record of suppressing political speech, particularly from the conservative perspective.
“We know that the leftist leadership of the social media platform aims to influence elections going forward and certainly in 2020 — they have said as much publicly,” write co-authors Floyd Brown, publisher of The Western Journal, and Todd Cefaratti, political activist and senior consultant for Liftable Media, Inc.
Floyd Brown and Cefaratti also discuss many other instances of conservative sites facing suppression and outright censorship from Google and Twitter. The authors note that Google is responsible for more than 75 percent of search engine traffic in the U.S. and 90 percent on mobile devices.
One of the primary ways the company shows its bias against conservatives is in the search results people see. Brown and Cefaratti write, “in July 2016, with the presidential campaign in full swing, anybody who went to the Google search function and typed ‘presidential candidates,’ would have seen the top feature bar populated with three names: Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Jill Stein (Green Party).”
There was no mention of Donald Trump or Gary Johnson (the Libertarian Party candidate). Google was alerted and fixed the “technical bug.” Google’s autocompleting function also did not fill in negative stories about Hillary Clinton.
Brown and Cefaratti also turn their sights on the multiple instances Twitter shadow-banned conservatives, such as Republican National Committee chair Ronna McDaniel and House Freedom Caucus members Reps. Mark Meadows of North Carolina, Jim Jordan of Ohio, Devin Nunes of California and Matt Gaetz of Florida.
The authors argue it is time to hold big tech accountable and break up these companies to ensure competition.
The two contend, “True tyranny, the kind America has never really known … has always begun with a powerful authoritarian censoring of free speech.”
And as this story over at the Beacon For Freedom of Expression reports, “censorship has followed the free expressions of men and women like a shadow throughout history.” Reporting that ‘free speech‘ has been used to challenge political and religious authorities throughout history, they also report that governments are more than happy to crack down upon free speech with numerous examples available to us in recent history.
The first truth is that the will of God permeates and supersedes every aspect of life. It is God’s will that takes precedence over everything and everyone (Matthew 6:33). God’s plans and purposes are fixed, and His will is inviolable. He has purposed, He will bring to pass, and no government can thwart His will (Daniel 4:34-35). In fact, it is God who “sets up kings and deposes them” (Daniel 2:21) because “the Highest is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes” (Daniel 4:17). A clear understanding of this truth will help us to see that politics is merely a method God uses to accomplish His will. Even though evil men abuse their political power, meaning it for evil, God means it for good, working “all things together for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28).
The proper use of self-defense has to do with wisdom, understanding, and tact. In Luke 22:36, Jesus tells His remaining disciples, “If you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Jesus knew that now was the time when His followers would be threatened, and He upheld their right to self-defense.
My job is protecting children. It has taken me from big cities to rural outposts, from ghettos to penthouses, and from courtrooms, into demonic battlefields. But whatever the venue, the truth remains constant: Some humans intentionally hurt children. They commit unspeakable acts—for their pleasure, their profit, or both. StevieRay Hansen, CEO The 127 Faith Foundation
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)
Education is useless without the bible (Daniel Webster)
Usually, the Lord doth no great thing for or against his people, without giving warning of it before it comes.
John Wesley who said that what we tolerate in our generation, will be embraced by the next. Wesley is 100% correct! We are living in sick times.
Evil Exists So Spiritual Warfare Becomes Necessary!
- Corinthians 4:8-11 New King James Version (NKJV)
- We are hard-pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; 9. persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed— 10. always carrying about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body. 11. For we who live are always delivered to death for Jesus’ sake, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.
Satan has power over (LGBTQE-TRANS PEOPLE). The “sons of disobedience” referred to in Ephesians 2:2 are those who have not trusted Christ as Lord and Savior (cf. Acts 26:18; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Revelation 13:12). The demons are also under the rule of Satan (Matthew 12:24), and one of his titles is “prince of demons” (Matthew 9:34). Satan has a kingdom (Matthew 12:26) and a throne (Revelation 2:13). Satan is called a prince because he is a ruler and possesses the power to manifest evil in the world through influencing people and commanding demons.
HNewsWire- “All political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable.” Just look at some of our modern-day examples: torture is “enhanced interrogation techniques”; murder is “collateral damage”; the aggression initiation of war is a “pre-emptive strike”; the theft of taxpayers’ money is a “bailout”, and the theft of depositors’ money in a bank is a “haircut” or “bail-in”.In a blatant example of Newspeak, the New World Order controllers (through the psychiatric DSM V) have tried to rename pedophiles as “minor-attracted persons” and redefine pedophilia as “sexual orientation”. This makes no sense since sexual orientation has to do with gender, not age, with whether you are attracted to males or females, not how old they are. There are even organizations (like B4UAct.org) which are claiming that pedophiles are being unfairly stigmatized for their feelings!
Hunted by the Mob, Found by Christ
The gripping memoirs of the founder of HNewsWire. A binge-worthy afternoon read.
controllers are blood feasting pedophiles, parasitic monsters literally and predatorily feeding off the 8 million children gone missing each year around the world… “Pedophile” has reverberated throughout…Read More
PROTEST PATRIOT PRAYER… A “scoffer” is one who mocks Christ, ridicules the things of God, and opposes the gospel. Both Peter and Jude were writing…Read More
to “Save Lives & Save the Economy”… Several places in the Bible there are references to worthless persons (Deut. 13:13; Judg. 19:22; 20:13; 1 Sam. 25:17; 1…Read More
Over Vaccine Side Effects and Will Not Agree That His Family Should Be First in Line for the Vaccines, Yet He Somehow Finds the Nerve…Read More
Never Be Restored, You Will Need Permission to Move From One State to Another State in the Near Future… Not many people realize the freedoms…Read More
and Congressmen in America Will Start Tested Positive for the “Pestilent“ God Speaking Not Many Listen… Rep. Rodney Davis Tests Positive for Coronavirus Taylorville Rep.…Read More
would have us believe, God is not a pacifist. The Bible is filled with examples of God taking bloody vengeance on His enemies (Isaiah 63:3–6; 65:12; Deuteronomy…Read More
Pushing The Envelope on Closing Down Christianity, Newsom’s ‘Tyrannical’ Order Closing California Churches… California Church Prepares to Face 1,000 Misdemeanor Citations for Worshipping During Lockdown…Read More