Tag Archives: censorship of free speech

George Soros, Open Society Foundations, Reddit

Note from Dr. Eowyn:

Deplorable Patriot was a moderator on a pro-Trump Sub-Reddit thread, “Great Awakening”, which was recently banned by Reddit. Happily, “Great Awakening” relocated the same day to VOAT (here and here) and 8chan, where Deplorable Patriot continues to serve as a moderator.

INTO THE RABBIT HOLE WE GO

We now know that George Soros and the Open Society Foundation have been linked with Reddit employees in a mission to suppress Trump support groups on Reddit.

Current director of policy at Reddit, Jessica Ashooh.

Jessica Ashooh is believed by some to be responsible for the account “arabscarab,” which has been leading the charge to shut down the Q Anon movement on the Reddit platform — The Great Awakening, the second-largest pro-Trump subreddit. Ashooh started working for Reddit after an executive stint at the George Soros-funded Atlantic Council, which is also reportedly funded by the Chinese.

We also have a D list Free Lance reporter, D list rating being a gift on my part.    Click link below tweet to see where he admits to being connected to the Clinton Foundation in the comment section.

Rob Rousseau:

“I don’t always love working at reddit but personally getting to shut down the qanon sub because they were getting too close to exposing the truth was pretty special.”

https://twitter.com/robrousseau/status/1040001793818865664

This is the same guy who said:

“I would rather my daughter dated a member of  MS-13 than a member of the Republican Party”

https://twitter.com/robrousseau/status/997190886009245696?lang=en

Here is additional information that I have discovered

Various techniques to attack Trump support groups have been discovered and made public in the recent past. That is a whole conversation on its own so I will not get into that. I would just like to add one more method to the list. It’s a tool to assist individuals with their effort to take down various subreddits and individuals. This tool is called the Soros Enhancement Suite (SES). Information to what is in SES is limited; access to the information is at a location on Reddit that is private — “Invite only”. I know of its existence because of the following screenshot.

This is what you will find on the page. Here is the link: https://www.reddit.com/r/TopMindsOfReddit/comments/9goxc5/request_for_feedback_ses_upgrades_and_release/

Request for feedback: SES upgrades and release planning from TopMindsOfReddit

Now we know that technology linked to Soros is actually a reality. We also know with absolute certainty that r/TopMindsOfReddit is promoting it. But who is using the technology? We’ve heard rumors that there are people who get paid to disrupt pro-Trump subreddits. These individuals often brag about what they are doing and how they receive payment from Soros. When we confront them, they claim they are “joking and it’s irony.” Whatever. The following screenshot is part of what I have discovered. What you see here is a ledger that dates back 8 months. It’s a pay ledger which shows payments and members who received payments. Notice the Open Society Bot. Bots are portable AI’s that can be programmed to do various tasks.

Here is the link to the ledger: https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenSocietyBot/wiki/ledger

Now we have have proof of transactions being made and some of the individuals paid. I should also tell you that if you read the page, top to bottom including all comments, you’ll see more than enough evidence to support my claims. This applies to all screenshots I’ve provided here.

You might ask, “What are they paid with?”. Let me introduce you to the “Sorosbux”.

This is what you will find on page.  Here is the link:

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/7s1wyk/introducing_sorosbux_a_centralized_decentralized/

Introducing SorosBux, a centralized decentralized pre-mined fiat cryptocurrency for all your shilling needs. from neoliberal

 Here is the page that links you to everything:

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/78b7z1/updates_regarding_ctr_payments_and_general/

In the comment section you will  find “If your payment is overdue, write an email to transactions@opensocietyfoundations.org.

Updates regarding CTR payments, and general reminders about getting paid from neoliberal

You will notice that it mentions to get a “waves” account to withdraw your funds. I followed their instructions and set up an online wallet. These are some of the various way to cash out at “Waves”.

Here is the link to set up a Waves account: https://waveswallet.io/

That about covers it.  There is definitely some there there.  I believe this says just about all you need to know.  This is what I was able to release.  I have a whole lot more information that takes us deeper into the rabbit hole.  Please have a good day.

Please feel free to leave any comments

Respectfully,

Deplorable Patriot

Please follow and like us:
0
 

When NPR Outs Inflated Gun Statistics, Facebook Shoots Them Down

Apparently, Facebook is an “equal opportunity” censor.

Recently, the liberal NPR put out a report revealing that government statistics on school shootings overshot the real situation by about two-thirds.

But when a Facebook user put the report out on his page, reaching 1,100 followers, Facebook was quick to take the post down as spam.

How touching: Fakebook is spreading the love.

Welcome to our world, NPR.

 

H/T: A Sweet Dose of Reality; Anne Berg

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Segregation by Censorship

In his recent FrontPage Mag article, “Fighting Political Segregation with a Digital First Amendment,” Daniel Greenfield argues in favor of passing legislation to protect free speech specifically on the Internet.

Using an argument that even a radical liberal could love, he compares the recent silencing of alternative and conservative opinions online to racial and economic segregation.

Greenfield is careful to point out that the Constitutional First Amendment is limited to protection against abuses by government, not private enterprises.

For this reason, he writes, “…when those enterprises have more power over speech than governments, when their scale is such that they can sweep away entire categories of ideas across the world with the press of a key, a digital First Amendment is needed to maintain the relevance of the Bill of Rights in a new technological era when government censorship is outsourced to corporate partners.”

You could, of course, point out that at this stage, governments are owned by the corporate partners they serve. And you’d be right.

Death, Incorporated. The Internet is a sprawling virtual continent that out-scales every country and corporate media monopoly on the planet in terms of influence and viewership. (Greenfield supports this with multiple statistics – just read the article.)

For the various behemoths currently profiting from this limitless opportunity to claim that they are “private companies” is like the bubonic plague calling itself a cold sore. Big tech can inflict a lot of death on a lot of opinions and facts with a few clicks.

Unforeseen consequences. Imagine yourself a citizen of such an unlikely place from the viewpoint of those who drafted the Constitution. They never foresaw it, but here you are.

You establish your virtual domain and quietly busy yourself furnishing it with windows and doors that open onto unique views. You furnish your domain with as many books and news sources as you can find on the subjects of your choosing and go to work drafting your own articles and essays, inviting comments from the outside world.

And suddenly, you have visitors: Messrs. Madison and Hamilton knock on your door with the intention of hearing what you have to say about something as arcane to them as the Internet: Crisis actors.

“What manner of masque or, to wit, black comedy are such actors engaged in?” asks Madison. Hamilton stands there with a puzzled expression.

Before you can answer, your windpipe is blocked by a sudden gust of ones and zeroes and you and your domain are sucked into the virtual back of the bus — to a dark outer dimension.

And you see at last what the Lords of the Internet intended for you all along: Disconnection. Isolation. Silence.

But as you blow away, you can see Madison and Hamilton down there shaking their capacious heads, wondering what the devil that was all about.

“It must be the return of ignorance and barbarism,” says Hamilton. “Witchcraft,” says Madison.

I agree with them, as I agree with Greenfield: What we need is a digital First Amendment to retain the relevance of the Bill of Rights.

Without it, everyone* will eventually be silenced.

~C.

*Even NPR, according to this article.

H/T: A Sweet Dose of Reality; Anne Berg

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Oxford University Press bans pigs and pork from children's books

Oxford University Press (OUP) is the largest university press in the world. Founded in 1480, OUP is the second-oldest university press, after that of Cambridge University Press. A department of the University of Oxford, OUP is governed by the Delegates of the Press — a group of 15 academics appointed by the Vice-Chancellor.
Given Oxford University Press’ prestige, it is all the more significant that the Press has seen fit to muzzle itself by banning all mention of pigs and pork from its children’s and school books, so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of Muslims.
Porky Pig
Katie Strick and Ben Wilkinson report for The Daily Mail that during a discussion about free speech and censorship following the Charlie Hebdo massacre, on the BBC Radio 4’s “Today” program on Jan. 12, 2015, the program’s presenter James Naughtie – whose writer wife Eleanor Updale is in talks with OUP over an educational book series – said:

“I’ve got a letter here that was sent out by OUP to an author doing something for young people. Among the things prohibited in the text that was commissioned by OUP was the following: Pigs plus sausages, or anything else which could be perceived as pork. Now, if a respectable publisher, tied to an academic institution, is saying you’ve got to write a book in which you cannot mention pigs because some people might be offended, it’s just ludicrous. It is just a joke.”

Of course, we know that the religious groups that ban the eating of pork are Judaism and Islam. However, since OUP’s policy banning pigs and pork is only recently instituted, one can assume that Muslims, not Jews, are the people whom the politically-correct spineless OUP Delegates of the Press fear offending. Indeed, a spokesman for the Jewish Leadership Council said: “Jewish law prohibits eating pork, not the mention of the word, or the animal from which it derives.”

Ironically, OUP’s asinine policy has already earned a denunciation from a prominent Muslim, UK Labour MP Khalid Mahmood, who calls the policy “absolute utter nonsense.”

There is no mention of the non-pig/pork policy on Oxford University Press’ writers’ guidelines web page.

The Daily Mail claims OUP says its guidelines exist because it needs to make its educational material available to as many people as possible. A spokesman said: “Many of the educational materials we publish in the UK are sold in more than 150 countries, and as such they need to consider a range of cultural differences and sensitivities. Our editorial guidelines are intended to help ensure that the resources that we produce can be disseminated to the widest possible audience.”

But Global News‘ Nicole Mortillaro reports that following media reports on OUP’s pig/pork banning, the Press issued a statement denying the allegations in a comment piece for The Guardian, titled “No, we haven’t banned books on pigs — but sensitivity is key in global publishing.” OUP’s primary publishing director Jane Harley wrote:

“In the UK, we take it for granted that we would not include references to sex, violence, or alcohol in our textbooks; to do so would be considered inappropriate and offensive to many. In order to make an impact around the world, there are other sensitivities that, although not necessarily obvious to some of us, are nonetheless extremely important to others.”

Harley’s statement is an artful effort at double-speak. No where did she explicitly deny that OUP bans pig and pork from its children’s books.

Westerners like the pusillanimous Oxford University Press imagine that they can purchase peace by appeasing Muslims. On the contrary, simpering cowardice has never stopped bullies. They just get emboldened and even more grandiose and bellicose.

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

British prime minister says 9/11 "truthers" are just like violent ISIS extremists


On September 24, 2014, Prime Minister David Cameron, the head of the government of the United Kingdom, gave a speech to the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
He warned world leaders at the UN that the Islamic State (IS/ISIS/ISIL) harbors “murderous plans to expand its borders well beyond Iraq and Syria… and to carry out terrorist atrocities right across the world.” Although the UN had reason to be wary about a new military campaign in the region because of memories of the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq as well as the long struggle that has played out over more than ten years in Afghanistan, Cameron insisted that should not deter the international community from doing what it takes to tackle the IS now, saying, “We need to act. We need to act now.” The British prime minister then pledged his country will join the U.S.-led coalition to thwart those murderous IS “terrorists” — not jihadists!
Echoing what Obama (and also George W. Bush), Cameron said (beg. at 3:47 mark in the video), “The root cause of this terrorist threat is a poisonous ideology of extremism. This has nothing to do with Islam, which is a peaceful religion which inspires countless acts of generosity every day.”
What is appalling about Cameron’s speech begins at around the 4:48 mark. Decrying those who doubt the official story we’d been given about the terrorist attacks on 9/11 (September 11, 2001) in the United States, and those on July 7, 2005 in London, the prime minster said about the deniers and skeptics:

“We know this worldview, the peddling of lies — that 9/11 was somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 London attacks was staged. The idea that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy . . . of an inevitable clash of civilizations.

We must be clear: To defeat the ideology of extremism, we need to deal with all forms of extremism, not just violent extremism. As governments, there are some obvious ways we can do this. We must ban preachers of hate from coming to our countries. We must proscribe organizations that incite terrorism against our people at home and abroad. We must work together to take down the legal online material like the recent videos of ISIS murdering hostages.  And we must stop the nonviolent extremists from inciting hatred and intolerance in our schools, our universities and, yes, even our prisons.

Of course, some would argue that this is not compatible with free speech and intellectual inquiry. But I ask you, would we sit back and allow right wing extremists, Nazis, or Ku Klux Klansmen to recruit on our university campuses? No! So we shouldn’t stand by and allow any form of non-violent extremism. We need to argue that promises of a global war on religion pitting Muslims against the rest of the world, they are nonsense. We need Muslims and their governments around the world to reclaim their religion from these sick terrorists, as so many are doing and quite rightly today…. And we need the strongest international focus on tackling this ideology, which is why here in the United Nations, United Kingdom is calling for a new special representative on extremism.

In other words, the prime minister of the UK does not differentiate between “violent extremists” like IS jihadists who murder and behead Christians and other innocent people, from “non-violent extremists” who disagree with the official view on 9/11 and 7/7. They are both “extremists” who must be dealt with severely.
The head of the government of the United Kingdom also makes no distinction between “right wing extremists” — whatever that means — and loathsome racists like Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan.
Mr. Cameron, are there no “left wing extremists”? Or do you mean to tell us that the left wing has only people of moderation, purity, and light? — like these angels below:

H/t Activist Post
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0