On May 10, 1933 student groups at universities across Germany carried out a series of book burnings of works that the students and leading Nazi party members associated with an “un-German spirit.” Enthusiastic crowds witnessed the burning of books by Brecht, Einstein, Freud, Mann and Remarque, among many other well-known intellectuals, scientists and cultural figures.
Within the last 36 hours, the google gestapo has burned over 1100 of our digital books. Some were short stories, some were heart wrenching memoirs of abuse captured during interviews and some were poetic novels of justice and sovereignty.
This recent social media Purge that has tried to silence masses of independent journalists appears to be the largest attack on the first ammendment in the last century. The lurch toward totalitarian control of information is absolutely spine-chilling.
EXCLUSIVE – Kobach: The Gun Confiscation Crusade Begins
The next chapter of the Parkland, Florida, school shooting saga has begun. Anti-gun interest groups and politicians have used the Parkland shooting to launch what, until recently, they regarded as a distant dream — a wave of state legislation authorizing the confiscation of firearms.
Quietly, but quickly, a raft of identical gun confiscation bills have been filed by liberal politicians in states across the country. They are all copies of a ballot measure that passed in Washington State in November 2016. And that ballot measure was loosely based on a California gun confiscation law enacted in 2014 and a much older Connecticut law from 1999.
Sometimes dubbed “red flag laws,” they provide for “extreme risk protective orders” that direct police to confiscate all firearms and ammunition from any person who is targeted by such an order. At first glance, that might seem reasonable – nobody wants an unhinged psychopath who poses an “extreme risk” to others to possess a gun. But the laws are written so loosely that law enforcement can also seize the guns of ordinary citizens who have never broken the law.
These gun confiscation measures grossly violate the due process and Second Amendment rights of lawful gun owners. The constitutional problems are as follows:
One need not be a lawyer to see the multiple violations of due process in these laws. Even the ultra-liberal ACLU acknowledges that such confiscation laws threaten due process. Hopefully, when the legal challenges eventually occur, the judges will recognize the multiple constitutional problems.
The "Purge" Is Out Of Control, Congress Must Strip Social Media, YouTube Liability Immunity From Them Because They Are Not "Neutral" Public Forums
In January 2018, Senator Ted Cruz grilled representatives from Facebook, Twitter and Google's YouTube over their overt censorship of Independent and conservative users, providing multiple examples of that censorship, showing it was almost entirely enacted against those that lean right of the political aisle.
Cruz prefaced his direct and pointed questions by forcing these representatives to answer one simple question, which was "Do you consider your companies to be neutral public forums?" Despite attempts to not directly answer the question with a simple yes or no, two of the companies finally had to claim they were, and the third simply answered 'yes' before Cruz moved on to provide evidence that they were indeed censoring conservative content.
By the end of their interactions, Cruz stated the pattern he noted in the examples he offered was "highly disturbing" and then he highlighted his original question, then pointed out that "If you are a neutral public forum that does not allow for political editorializing and censorship, and if you are not a neutral public forum, the entire predicate for liability immunity under the CDA is claiming to be a neutral public forum, so you can't have it both ways.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides liability immunity for website owners, such as Google's YouTube, Twitter and Facebook, that publish content provided by others, whether it is commentary in discussion forums or comment sections, or Twitter feeds, or articles shared on a platform such as Facebook, or a video uploaded to YouTube.
Those services are offered immunity from liability only if they are a "neutral conduit," which is why Cruz specifically highlighted their claim with his beginning question before providing multiple examples of their decisions showing a disturbing "pattern" of censoring conservative opinion.
The reason that is so important is because Section 230 of the CDA does offer sites protection from liability enabling them to remove content, stating they can "restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected," but they preface that by stating it must be done "in good faith."
The censorship by big tech has not only continued unabated, but has increased exponentially since Senator Cruz issued his warning to Twitter, Facebook and Google/YouTube, as we have seen a massive #TwitterLockout, where under the guise of a "bot" purge," thousands upon thousands of "real people," were locked out of their Twitter accounts, and sure enough, the majority of them were conservatives.
Previously it had been reported, via undercover videos, that Twitter employees, were deliberately flagging content by conservatives that spoke of God, Guns, America first, the American flag, etc..... as potential bots, teaching their algorithms to label those people as "bots," in order to justify terminating their accounts.
That shows Twitter is deliberately targeting one specific ideological group, making it no longer a "neutral conduit" for content and information, instead making it biased to one particular ideology, which under the CDA, is justification to strip them of their liability immunity.
YouTube has been purging dozens of Independent Media content creators, as we have previously reported, with increasing intensity since the Parkland, Florida High school shooting. While YouTube claims many of those purged happened "mistakenly," more Independent Media creators are still being targeted and purged.
Via Verdict we see that Bombard’s Body Language, with 264,000 subscribers received a permanent ban, despite having had no prior "strikes" against its account, after analyzing the behavior of Florida school shooting survivors.
David Seaman Online with 161,900 subscribers was purged off of YouTube for his comments on the Florida shooting. Stranger than Fiction News with 150,000 was purged for questioning the official narrative regarding the Florida shooting. Blackstone Intelligence Network with 126,600 was purged after questioning the events documented by surviving students, the media and government officials. Destroying the Illusion has had his channel purged after being given three strikes in four days for sharing information “deemed too sensitive” relating to the Florida shooting. Charles Walton was purged from YouTube after making comments about shooting survivor and gun control advocate David Hogg and members of his family.
Via Breitbart we see that Mike Cernovich has had a video removed showing Antifa thugs chanting death threats, and Google banned political YouTuber Carl Benjamin, better known by his online pseudonym “Sargon of Akkad," and completely locked him out of all his Google accounts without warning. His access was restored after appeal.
On Friday, the Alex Jones channel, with over two million subscribers was blocked from putting up any new content and before that they were blocked from livestreaming the InfoWars shows. The channel habitually uploaded approximately 15-20 videos a day, and a look at the channel at 3pm, Saturday, March 3, 2018, shows nothing has been uploaded for 19 hours.
NGO: China Using 'Predictive Policing' to Put Thousands in Communist 'Education' Camps
The NGO Human Rights Watch revealed this week that China is using data compilation technology to enact “predictive policing” measures resulting in the arrest and disappearance of Chinese citizens to “political education camps” based on the potential that they may someday defy the government.
Xinjiang is home to at least one homegrown terrorist group, the separatist East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM). Beijing uses concerns over ETIM activities to target the Uighur minority en masse, confiscating “unauthorized” Qurans, imposing mandatory GPS tracking on all cars in Xinjiang, and detaining and threatening relatives of American Uighurs who choose to speak out on the repression.
According to HRW, which links to Mandarin-language government documents as proof, the IJOP is a mega-database collecting from CCTV cameras, internet monitoring systems, and the province’s many government checkpoints to build a profile of every single person living within its reach:
Targeted individuals first receive visits from government officials who gather more information, including “a range of data about their family, their ‘ideological situation,’ and relationships with neighbors.” Those who have family members detained or investigated for political behavior incompatible with the Communist Party reportedly receive extra scrutiny.
HRW found a document advising government officials that, following the home inspections, “who ought to be taken should be taken,” whether there is probable cause to believe they committed a crime against the state or not.