Judge rules cops who arrested man over parody Facebook page have qualified immunity

Free speech and what’s known as “qualified immunity,” as well as “overcriminalization” – expansion of the criminal code in the US to address even minor problems in society – is at the heart of a case that started in 2016 with a short-lived parody page Anthony Novak had set up on Facebook.

Novak was subsequently arrested and spent several days in jail – much longer than the lifespan of his page critical of the police in Parma, Ohio – a page that was up only 12 hours.

In addition, the police confiscated his phone and computer. His “crime” was the humor he was using to express his opinions about the local law enforcement: posts like one “advertising” free abortions performed in a police van, and an “event” under the motto, “Pedophile Reform.”

Some Facebook users complained – about ten of them according to court records – but that was enough for the police to go to the trouble of getting three warrants: to arrest Novak, search his apartment, and deal with Facebook. The charge was “using a computer to hinder police duties,” an accusation based on little-known (and in this case, a court eventually found, invoked incorrectly) state law.

Novak eventually had a jury trial that resulted in his acquittal. But he then went on to sue the officers who arrested him for violating his constitutional rights. However, the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit did not support his claims.

Keep reading

As America Implodes Over Roe V. Wade, Latest Pfizer Dump Reveals 100s of Pages of Severe Vaccine Reactions

If you have turned on your television, opened a web browser, or scrolled social media on your mobile device, you have likely seen the news about the leaked draft report from the Supreme Court about potentially overturning the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

Despite the leaked opinion being a draft — meaning it is not a decision yet — Politico ran with the headline, “EXCLUSIVE: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights.” In the last 48 hours, this report has set off a tailspin of uproar, protests, political rage, and even riots, yet inside the article, Politico admits that this decision is not final:

Deliberations on controversial cases have in the past been fluid. Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading, sometimes until just days before a decision is unveiled. The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months.

Nevertheless, America’s outrage has shifted from Ukraine and Elon Musk…. to abortion. The fact that abortion is an issue of the state at all, no matter which ‘side you are on,’ is Orwellian. Government has no more business paying for or advocating for abortions than they do stopping them.

Unfortunately, many people allow emotion to rule their logic and end up holding beliefs which are entirely contradictory. For example, since the covid vaccine has been approved by the FDA, many of the same folks who support a woman’s right to choose were completely resolute with taking away that right to choose when it came to taking the jab. The cognitive dissonance is rife.

Unfortunately, abortion is a reality, and society is slowly figuring out how to deal with it. But, the more the state attempts to interject their bias into this reality, the more skewed the situation becomes. Case in point: asking your rapist for permission to not have his baby or people singing about and celebrating the fact that they have had multiple abortions.

The fact of the matter is a society that treats the potential for life as disposable is a society in a crisis of conscience, and in need of self-reflection. However, the state’s involvement in the matter has only served to complicate the issue, prolong suffering, and, as the following example illustrates, serve as a massive distraction by keeping the masses fighting amongst each other.

While the left and the right devolve into hate-filled calls for death over their stance on abortion, the powers that be are likely laughing all the way to the bank, especially Pfizer.

As many may recall, Pfizer originally asked that the trial data for their coivd vaccine not be released for 75 years. Thankfully, sounder minds prevailed, and in January, after the FDA and Pfizer received massive backlash for delaying the release of that data, U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman ordered the agency to turn over 55,000 pages of vaccine trial data every month. On March 1, that first release came and not a single mainstream outlet reported on it.

We did.

Since then, there have been two more dumps, the most recent of which came out on the same day as the leaked SCOTUS documents. Coincidence?

This latest release can be found via the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency Documents database here or at the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) site here.

Keep reading

Bill Gates says “real invention” is needed to stop online election and medical “misinformation”

In an appearance on NBC’s Today show, Bill Gates was asked about online “misinformation” and what he thought about Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter in relation to that.

The discussion about misinformation started with host Savannah Guthrie saying: “When you look at how the US and the world responded to COVID-19, whether it’s masks or vaccines or shutdowns, closures, it’s become so political…It’s been so politicized.”

Gates responded: “Yeah, it’s unfortunate that we didn’t get trusted voices in both parties talking about the benefit of masks and vaccines so that it wasn’t a political issue.”

Guthrie then asked about misinformation, noting that it has “been a hallmark” of the pandemic.

“President Biden rather famously said last July that misinformation on social media is killing people. Do you agree?” she asked.
Gates said: “Absolutely…It’s terrible.”

Keep reading

Why Does YouTube Host This Channel That Teaches Kids About Porn And Abortion?

Amaze Org is a predatory YouTube channel that says it aims to “take the awkward” out of sex education for kids and boasts about its age-appropriate content for this digital generation of children. It has more than 220,000 subscribers and its free videos have a combined total of more than 60 million views.  

Why is YouTube allowing this organization to push its sexual agenda on kids? YouTube’s content policy clearly states, “Content that targets young minors and families but contains sexual themes, violence, obscene, or other mature themes not suitable for young audiences, is not allowed on YouTube.”

On Amaze Org’s about page, the organization says its mission is “to provide young adolescents around the globe with medically accurate, age-appropriate, affirming, and honest sex education they can access directly online.” They also provide curricula for schools, parents, and “allies.”

Their videos can be accessed on their website, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat. The topics covered in the videos are gender identity, sexuality, abortion, birth control, puberty, masturbation, pornography, abortion, and more. It’s all explicit and not appropriate for children.

Keep reading

Twitter Locks Out the Tennessee Star Over Factual Reporting

Twitter on Friday locked the Tennessee Star out of its account over reporting a factual story. 

The outlet reported on Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signing a bill into law making Ivermectin available over-the-counter. 

The article said that Lee signed SB 2188 into law after it was approved by a vast majority of both the Tennessee House and Senate.

“Lee signed SB 2188, approved by the State Senate, 66-20, and the State House, 22-6, which authorizes a pharmacist to provide ivermectin to patients 18 years of age or older, ‘pursuant to a valid collaborative pharmacy practice agreement containing a non-patient-specific prescriptive order and standardized procedures developed and executed by one or more authorized prescribers,’” the report read.

Twitter said the reporting may pose a risk to public health and thus, the outlet would be banned from posting anything for several hours.

“As a result, we’ve added a label to the above Tweet(s) and temporarily limited some of your account features,” the site said. “While in this state, you can still browse Twitter, but you’re limited to only sending Direct Messages to your followers – no Tweets, Retweets, follows or likes.” 

The Tennessee Star appealed the initial decision, then received another automated message saying the account could be locked for a week or more. 

Keep reading

Panicked CNN Guest Wonders “How We’re Going To Control The Channels Of Communications In This Country”

A CNN talking head declared Sunday that if Elon Musk is allowed to buy Twitter, the platform will have to be government regulated to prevent ‘discourse’ being open and free, and not subject to establishment controlled censorship.

While discussing the Musk take-over on CNN’s potato time with Brain Stelter, “media analyst” David Zurawik proclaimed that Musk is “dangerous” and shouldn’t be allowed to restore free speech on the platform.

Zurawik suggested that the U.S. look to Europe, which has recently brought in new laws to limit social media, and even threatened to ban Twitter if Musk doesn’t play ball.

“There’s a bigger problem here about how we’re going to control the channels of communications in this country,” Zurawik frothed, panicking at the notion of the likes of CNN not being able to dictate what Americans think.

“This is dangerous! We can’t think anymore in this country!” Zurawik whined, adding “I’m serious! We don’t have people in Congress who can make regulations, that can make it work.”

“I think we can look to the Western countries in Europe for how they are trying to limit it. But you need controls on this,” the talking slap head continued.

“You need regulation. You cannot let these guys control discourse in this country or we are headed to hell,” Zurawik further suggested.

“We are there,” he added, further claiming that “Trump opened the gates of hell and now they’re chasing us down.”

“We gave over what amounts to our airwaves or our internet waves to Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, and we are in so much trouble because those guys believe in making money,” he said.

Keep reading

YouTube to shift video flagging powers towards NGOs and Government Agencies

Starting in May, YouTube will not allow individuals in its controversial Trusted Flagger program, instead focusing “exclusively on key partnerships with a variety of NGOs and Government Agencies.”

The Trusted Flagger program began in 2012 as a communal volunteer effort to remove content that violates YouTube’s policies. It worked with NGO and government agencies as well as hand-picked individuals that were never publicly disclosed.

Those participating in the program have access to a variety of tools not available to ordinary users. For instance, they can flag multiple videos simultaneously, their reports are prioritized, and they get to understand how YouTube makes content removal decisions.

Last year, Tubefilter reported that individual flaggers had begun noticing a decline in their experience within the Trusted Flaggers program. Additionally, those who reached Google’s global director of information policy, government affairs, and public policy Derek Slater were reportedly told that the program would no longer be available to individuals.

Keep reading

YouTube CEO meets with group wanting curbs on Spanish-language “misinformation”

On Thursday, members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) met with YouTube’s CEO Susan Wojcicki to discuss Spanish-language “misinformation.”

In a press release, the CHC said addressing Spanish-language dis/misinformation was a priority as more Hispanics in the country are using social media to get information.

Chair of the CHC, Dr. Raul Ruiz said: “We appreciate Susan Wojcicki, YouTube CEO, for meeting with CHC Members today to answer our concerns on Spanish-language dis/misinformation. Lies cost lives, and the CHC continues to call for strengthened oversight and to push social media companies to bolster their infrastructure to combat dis/misinformation on their platforms. Addressing the rampant spread of Spanish-language dis/misinformation remains an urgent priority for the CHC as Hispanics across the country increasingly turn to social media for vital information.”

Member of the CHC, Rep. Darren Soto said: “In Florida, we’ve seen Spanish-language misinformation spread like wildfire and threaten our communities. With more and more people turning to social media to receive information, we must ensure that content is reviewed thoroughly before reaching mass audiences. As more and more bad actors purposely aim to spread lies to vulnerable populations, platforms like YouTube have a responsibility to prevent them from having the power to influence public opinion. I believe that our conversation with YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki was extremely productive, and I hope to see YouTube use ample resources to combat Spanish-language misinformation.”

Keep reading

Time writer knocks free speech as an ‘obsession of the mostly white, male members of the tech elite’ like Musk

In a Friday piece for Time magazine, the outlet’s national correspondent Charlotte Alter dismissed Elon Musk’s quest for free speech on Twitter as a white male “obsession,” and merely an entrepreneurial way to acquire influence and power in the world.

She also claimed that Musk’s idea of free speech is about the right to spread “disinformation” and has nothing to do with the Founding Fathers’ original intent.

Alter began her piece by insinuating that Musk should have put his $44 billion into something more worthwhile than what he sees as “free speech,” a phrase she put in scare quotes throughout the piece.

She wrote, “They say that something is worth what someone will pay for it. If that’s true, then protecting ‘free speech,’ which Elon Musk has cited as a central reason he agreed to buy Twitter for $44 billion this week, may be worth twice as much as solving America’s homelessness problem, and seven times as much as solving world hunger.”

She added, “It’s worth more (to him, at least) than educating every child in nearly 50 countries, more than the GDP of Serbia, Jordan, or Paraguay.”

The author then proceeded to wonder why a rich techie like Musk would even care about freedom of speech and how it “had become paramount concern of the techno-moral universe.”

She asked, “Why does Musk care so much about this? Why would a guy who has pushed the boundaries of electric-vehicle manufacturing and plumbed the limits of commercial space flight care about who can say what on Twitter?”

She then cited professor of communication at Stanford University Fred Turner for the answer, who agreed, “It does seem to be a dominant obsession with the most elite.” He stated, “[F]ree speech seems to be much more of an obsession among men,” and part of “the entrepreneurial push: I did it in business, I did it in space, and now I’m going to do it in the world.

Keep reading