Showing posts with label war on constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war on constitution. Show all posts

Monday, September 30, 2024

Australian Bill Targets Harmful Misinformation Online but Hits Free Speech Around the World

('reasonably verifiable as false' that means they don't even have to prove something as false, just put forth a 'reasonable' argument that it may be and presto... censored.)

from CATO Institute

Last week, Australia dropped its revised Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2024, and it’s about two sandwiches short of a picnic. The bill appears to draw some of its inspiration from the EU’s Digital Services Act in terms of creating significant responsibilities and regulations. And if past is prologue, what happens in Australia doesn’t stay in Australia—such as when Australia passed its “link tax” bill, which taxed social media companies when users shared links to news articles. That link tax spread to Canada and has been actively considered in the United States. Canada is also considering replicating Australia’s eSafety Commission, despite various cases of significant censorial overreach.

But whatever the rationale or history here, this bill not only will restrict Australians’ free speech and access to different online services, but its influence may spread and threaten American speech as well.

Let’s first look at how the bill defines misinformation and disinformation, a challenge for any bill or organization in this field. The bill defines misinformation as content that is

  • “reasonably verifiable as false, misleading, or deceptive;” and
  • “is likely to cause or contribute to serious harm.”

The definition also carves out some space for satire and parody, professional news content, and “reasonable” dissemination of content for “academic, artistic, scientific, or religious” reasons. Disinformation uses the same definition and adds that there must be grounds to suspect that the content was shared with the intent to deceive others or otherwise involves inauthentic behavior.

read more here

Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024

from the government of Australia

On 19 September 2024, the Senate referred the provisions of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 (the bill) to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for report by 25 November 2024.  

Submissions close on the 30 September 2024.

The committee has received a large volume of material for this inquiry. The secretariat is processing this material as quickly as possible. Submissions will be loaded to the committee website in due course. 

About this inquiry: 
The bill proposes to amend the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and would make consequential amendments to other Acts to establish a new framework to safeguard against serious harms caused by misinformation or disinformation.   

The bill would provide the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) with new regulatory powers to require digital communications platform providers to take steps to manage the risk that misinformation and disinformation on digital communications platforms poses in Australia. These would include obligations on providers to assess and report on risks relating to misinformation and disinformation, to publish their policy in relation to managing misinformation and disinformation, and develop and publish a media literacy plan.   
 
The bill would also provide ACMA with new information gathering, record keeping, code registration and standard making powers to oversee digital communications platform providers. 

more info here

Free speech makes US ‘hard to govern’ – John Kerry

(Trump recently promised to silence all those voices calling for a cease-fire in Gaza. Jimmy Dore praised Elon Musk as a truth-teller who is being oppressed in Brazil for all that 'truth telling' he is doing regarding Lula. If you think for one minute that a Trump presidency will be better on our constitutional rights than a Harris administration, you are sadly mistaken. They all work for the same people at the WEF and they will pursue the same agenda.)

from RT

The freedom for individuals to choose their sources of information makes it difficult to govern effectively, former US Secretary of State John Kerry has said.

Speaking at a World Economic Forum (WEF) panel on Green Energy last week, Kerry criticized the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which protects freedom of speech and the press. 

“It’s really hard to govern today,” he remarked, arguing that social media poses challenges for building consensus in democracies.

“The referees we used to have to determine what is fact and what isn’t have kind of been eviscerated,” Kerry stated, adding that individuals now decide where to get their news.

“If people go to only one source… and they’re putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to simply hammering it out of existence,” added Kerry, who served as secretary of state under Barack Obama. 

As long as Democrats can “win ground” and “win the right to govern,” they will be “free to implement change,” the former senator stated.

“I think democracies are very challenged right now and have not proven they can move fast enough or big enough to address the challenges we face. To me, that is part of what this race, this election, is all about,” he added.

At another WEF event earlier this year, Wall Street Journal editor-in-chief Emma Tucker lamented the loss of the corporate media’s monopoly on information.

“We owned the news. We were the gatekeepers, and we very much owned the facts as well,” she said, noting that customers now have access to a broader array of sources...

read more here

Saturday, July 2, 2022

On July 4th Weekend NY Passes Firearm Law That Would Make King George Proud

Better clean up those social media accounts, prove to big boss man you got your mind right boy. Cus if not, trust me, this ain't the last constitutional right you will lose.

 

Thursday, June 23, 2022

SCOTUS Rules in Favor of Constitutional Rights - Gun Grabbers Gasp in Horror

The ruling was quite simple and I believe, correct. Six states place an arbitrary requirement on citizens to prove they are special in some way and thus entitled to constitutional rights that EVERYONE should have access to. The Supreme Court said that is not constitutional and they are correct. Now watch the gun grabber freak out.

Sunday, June 16, 2019

Skype Censors Your Communications Live in Real Time

edit: please check out Abdul's article on the situation. Has some extra info about the censorship and their terms and conditions statements. https://abzhuofficial.wordpress.com/2019/06/17/skype-censors-communications-live-in-real-time-nomadic-everyman-video-blog-entry-a-response-post/

--

I knew they recorded everything and sold it but I had no idea they could edit and censor your communications as they were happening. Scary shit when you then go read their terms of service and come to find out they feel they can censor you at any time for any reason they choose.

Wednesday, April 24, 2019

More Gov’t Hooks in Social Media: Facebook Hires Patriot Act Co-Author While Trump Jawbones Twitter CEO

by Whitney Webb from MintPress News

The U.S. government-social media nexus appears to be tightening. Earlier this week, President Donald Trump held a closed-door meeting with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. Just days prior, the other top social-media network, Facebook, hired Jennifer Newstead, a former legal adviser to Trump’s state department who had previously co-authored the controversial Patriot Act, known for its role in eroding American civil liberties following the September 11 attacks. 
 
Newstead’s hire was announced on Monday and she will now serve as Facebook’s general counsel. Newstead’s hire was announced in tandem with the hire of John Pinette, formerly of Google, Microsoft and Bill Gates’ “private innovation lab,” as Facebook’s new vice president of global communications.

Newstead mostly recently served as a legal adviser to the Trump administration’s state department, where she was involved in “overseeing work on all domestic and international legal issues affecting the conduct of U.S. foreign policy,” according to Facebook’s announcement. This included defending the U.S.’ unilateral imposition of sanctions on Iran in pursuit of regime change in Tehran at the International Criminal Court (ICC)...

[read more here]

Sunday, March 31, 2019

What's Behind Youtube's Hypocrisy on Violent Content Censorship?



It's a good question isn't it? You can watch CERTAIN gory violent terror attacks all day long on Youtube designed to shock you into a set of beliefs but God forbid you present an valid argument regarding a timely debate unfolding in congress right now. Well, a valid argument for the side of that debate Google doesn't share.


Thursday, March 21, 2019

Suddenly Christchurch Brings About Our Own Vichy Moment



In the fallout of the New Zealand shooting, all sorts are calling for Big Business Brother to further censor the internet. From TIME magazine to Lionel Nation to little Youtubers urging us to become fascists so we can defeat the fascists on behalf of the fascists who want control again.

There is a choice we have to make. Do we stand together in solidarity in support of freedom of expression or do we give in and post signs behind us that read "HAIL ANTS"

Whitney Webb article https://www.mintpressnews.com/16-years-iraq-us-become-nation-passive-neocons/256387/

To support my work you can contact me via email to get my snail mail address or you can help thru Patreon (till they shut that down like they did my Paypal account)

Patreon https://www.patreon.com/americaneveryman

 FOLLOW/CONTACT:

website: https://nomadiceveryman.blogspot.com/
BitChute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/americaneveryman/
Email: rscdesigns@tampabay.rr.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/willyloman1
Skype: americaneveryman

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Censorship and Arrests in Wake of Christchurch Attack

from OffGuardian

No matter the source of the violence, no matter the politics or casualties or the location, it seems the reaction of governments in the face of “terrorism” is virtually always the same – clamp down, hard, on individual rights.

This grand tradition goes back hundreds of years, from James I’s crackdown on Catholics after the Gunpowder Plot, through to the despot’s charter that is the Patriot Act, passed within six weeks of 9/11. Just last year, famously, gab.com was heavily targeted in the wake of the “Magabomber” (fake) bombings. (Our article predicted that further purges were on the horizon).

The pattern is established: The state will always – ALWAYS – use a crisis, real or invented, to enhance their power. Most of the time this is done at the cost of individual liberty.

The Christchurch mosque shootings are proving no exception to this rule. NZ police are currently threatening people with 10 years in prison for sharing the live-streamed footage, and other punishments just for owning a copy of the recording.
This crackdown is, simply put, crazy. You can’t charge people for owning a copy of a video that was live-streamed over the internet to millions of people, and you certainly can’t make it illegal to even watch the video. (Further, we as a people, must strongly resist the idea that being “objectionable” could ever be considered a crime. That is insane.)

In 2014 the Metropolitan police suggested the same thing of the ISIS video where James Foley is apparently beheaded. (That was dismissed as ridiculous by a lawyer in this article).

(NOTE: Why some violent videos are deemed “criminal” to even watch, and others aren’t, is an interesting question. Is it just control for control’s sake? Or something more sinister?)

Of course not a shooting goes by in the US that doesn’t result in an outraged chorus of people railing against the 2nd amendment, demanding their government take the dramatic step of removing civilian ownership of guns. (This is somewhat quieter under Trump, because not even the liberal establishment can seriously insist Trump is a fascist on the one-hand, and then insist he take away civilian guns with the other. They do their best though.)

New Zealand are already “tightening” their gun ownership laws.

But New Zealand are going further even than that – blocking sites and services that have literally no connection to the video – they are just alternative.

8chan is where the alleged gunman made his “announcement”, but 4chan was not involved. Both are banned in both Australia and New Zealand. Alternative video hosting sites Liveleak and BitChute have both been blocked, despite neither hosting the video. LiveLeak even released a statement saying they refused to host it. Dissenters, gab’s discussion platform, was also blocked. They have no connection to the arrested man, or the crime itself.

Even ZeroHedge are apparently blocked – their crime? Posting excerpts from the shooter’s “manifesto”...


[read more here]

Homeland Security chairman requests briefing from tech companies after spread of New Zealand footage

from The Hill

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee is requesting that tech companies brief Congress on their efforts to crack down on violent extremists following the livestreaming of last week’s massacre in New Zealand.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) sent letters to the chief executives of Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft saying that he was “deeply concerned” that the suspected attacker was able to livestream his killing spree on Facebook and that other companies struggled to suppress the footage in the hours that followed.

“You must do better. It is clear from the recent pattern of horrific mass violence and thwarted attempts at mass violence — here and abroad — that this is not merely an American issue but a global one. Your companies must prioritize responding to these toxic and violent ideologies with resources and attention,” Thompson wrote.

“If you are unwilling to do so, Congress must consider policies to ensure that terrorist content is not distributed on your platforms — including by studying the examples being set by other countries,” he added...

[read more here]

Thursday, November 22, 2018

How Caitlin Johnstone is Just Plain Wrong about "Conspiracy Theories"

by Scott Creighton

What do you do when there is an outbreak of a deadly virus wreaking havoc in your society, infecting and killing scores of the population and it's reaching epidemic proportions? You seek out and find patient zero for it is there and only there where you will find the cure in that unadulterated, pure, original strain of the threat.

You find that, you isolate it, you expose it and eventually you use it to inoculate the remaining population against the virus' offspring.

You do that not to avenge those who are already gone... but to save and protect those who remain.

The United States suffers from a sickness. A virus of sorts. And the only way to stop it's spread (as we all know it is spreading in many ways with many variants) is to find the source, the original source (patient zero) and from there start to heal.

We have heard for the better part of 16 years (though I personally only became aware of the true nature of the events of Sept. 11 2001 in late 2005) all the arguments Caitlin Johnstone recently cobbled together in an article she titled "Nothing In Any Conspiracy Theory Is As Bad As What’s Being Done Out In The Open"

The core of her now cliched argument can be summed up with this tweet she put out yesterday:
""I often get conspiracy buffs asking/telling me to write about this or that theory of 9/11 or the JFK assassination or whatever, and I’m just like, dude, have you seen the stuff they’re doing in broad daylight??" Caitlin Johnstone
It has been a long established cliche for so-called "alternative" writers and activists to distance themselves from the Truth Movement with this parroted talking point as it allows them to sit on the fence and not take a side one way or the other when it comes to any number of so-called "conspiracy theories" whether that be JFK or 9/11 or Amerithrax or the American Gladio campaign or election rigging or LIBOR or whatever.

I believe the first to employ this particularly vapid approach was Noam Chomsky when he used it to explain why he never delved his big brain into the murder of a seated president or the "New Pearl Harbor type event" of 2001.


Sunday, November 11, 2018

Thousand Oaks Shooting Story Gets Even Dumber

by Scott Creighton

The other day (Friday) I made a video and a post here talking about the anomalies surrounding the Borderline Bar and Grill shooting in Thousand Oaks California and I mentioned an Instagram post Ian David Long supposedly made "sometime around" the time of the shooting and how it perfectly played into the gun-grabbing narrative that we need some kind of new "mental hygiene" law set up to evaluate citizens based on things like their social media presence in order to determine whether or not they should be allowed the right to own weapons. I also mentioned new legislation being written to that end in the wake of the synagogue shooting that took place two weeks prior to this latest one.

"I hope people call me insane (two smiley face emojiis) would that just be a big ball of irony? Yeah... I'm insane, but the only thing you people do after these shootings is 'hopes and prayers'...or 'keep you in my thoughts'. Every time...and wonder why these keep happening... --(two smiley face emojis)."

Turns out, this story is even dumber and more ridiculous than I thought.