Comment by tonytran2015: When heading Microsoft, B. Gate was adamant (around 2000) that old computer software could not be donated to poor countries for free due to Microsoft’s copyrights. Fortunately, M.Shuttleworth offered Ubuntu software for free instead. The Operating Systems by Microsoft on PC’s showed that “computer-virus” and “anti-virus” were a nice lucrative business.
No surprizes? The photo of Bill there shows him in his truer scamming light, shot from well circulated video footage of him rocking to and fro in court trying to fool the judge about what he didn’t understand about his monopolizing behaviour over MS. After that episode he rebranded himself as the philanthropist. Why would you trust this man with your health? EWR)
(I recommend you visit their site & peruse their news list … )
An investigation has revealed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are the primary funders of the UK’s Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, and that the Foundation also owns major shares in both Pfizer and BioNTech.
The Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) extended the emergency authorisation of the Pfizer / BioNTech mRNA jab in the UK to allow it to be given to children between the ages of 12 – 15 on the 4th June 2021.
YouTube has continued to enforce and expand its censorship of opposing views on its site — enforcing what it considers to be the truth on various issues. The latest subject is Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), who has been suspended from the site for expressing his opposition to Covid mandates. One does not have to agree with Paul on his view of Covid or mandates to see the danger of such corporate control over public discourse in the United States. However, politicians (including President Joe Biden) are calling for even greater censorship to silence those with opposing views on such subjects.
Rand posted a video on Sunday in which he lashed out at the calls for mandates and the “petty tyrants and bureaucrats” supporting them, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Joe Biden. He called for people to stand up against these efforts:
“It’s time for us to resist. They can’t arrest all of us. They can’t keep all of your kids home from school. … We don’t have to accept the mandates, lockdowns and harmful policies of the petty tyrants and bureaucrats. We can simply say no. Not again.
Nancy Pelosi, you will not arrest, or stop me or anyone on my staff from doing our jobs. We have either had Covid, had the vaccine, or been offered the vaccine. We will make our own health choices. We will not show you a passport. We will not wear a mask. We will not be forced into random screenings so you can continue your drunk with power reign over the Capitol.
“President Biden, we will not accept your agencies’ mandates or your reported moves towards a lockdown.”
Sen. Paul has been criticized for this and other statements on Covid but many agree with him. This is part of our political debate. People have a free speech right to oppose the mandates and question the science cited by the government. In this case, a corporation is preventing a major political figure from being able to use its platform to engage others on this subject. It is picking and choosing who can speak and what they can say. It has a right to do so as a private company but it is wrong to do so. It is a denial of free speech and we need to address the corporate control over political speech in the United States.
I have previously and repeatedly said that I believe people should be vaccinated. I and my family are vaccinated. However, I will not accept arguments that my public health concerns should negate the free speech rights of others, including Sen. Paul. I also do not accept that these corporations should hold such a strangle hold over public debate.
The rise of corporate censors has combined with a heavily pro-Biden media to create the fear of a de facto state media that controls information due to a shared ideology rather than state coercion. That concern has been magnified by demands from Democratic leaders for increased censorship, including censoring political speech, and now word that the Biden Administration has routinely been flagging material to be censored by Facebook.
This is why I have described myself as an Internet Originalist:
The alternative is “internet originalism” — no censorship. If social media companies returned to their original roles, there would be no slippery slope of political bias or opportunism; they would assume the same status as telephone companies. We do not need companies to protect us from harmful or “misleading” thoughts. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not approved speech.
If Pelosi demanded that Verizon or Sprint interrupt calls to stop people saying false or misleading things, the public would be outraged. Twitter serves the same communicative function between consenting parties; it simply allows thousands of people to participate in such digital exchanges. Those people do not sign up to exchange thoughts only to have Dorsey or some other internet overlord monitor their conversations and “protect” them from errant or harmful thoughts.
The assholes have dreamed up all sorts of ways of getting you to do things without making it look like they’re forcing you to do them (think vaccines). From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:
Joe Biden and the Republicans – without whom Joe Biden could not have done it – may have just outlawed cars that can’t be tracked without actually outlawing them, per se.Instead, they will be regulatedaway – the new trick in government’s dirty bag thereof.
It might have caused a ruckus to propose a law outlawing older vehicle without Onboard Diagnostic (OBD II) electronic data collection ports, GPS transponders or some other, similar means by which a vehicle can be externally tracked – using the pretext of keeping track of its mileage that way, so as to tax its owner that way. This being bad enough all by itself, being invasive enough all by itself. Instead of paying gas taxes anonymously at the pump whenever you fill up – possibly with cash – the federal government will tax you automatically and electronically by the mile, wherever you drive.
Which will also give the government – and the insurance mafia, which is also effectively the government, just ex officio but endowed with governmental power to make you do things or else – the power to monitor how you drive, since the same OBD data port/GPS that will be used to keep track of mileage can also keep track of how fast you drive as well as where and when you drive.
Everything about your drive will, in other words, be known unto them.
That is one of the many treasures hidden within the just-passed – by enabling Republicans, who provided the necessary support for the Democrats who confected it – “Infrastructure” bill. Which only has about 20 percent to do with building new roads and bridges or fixing the ones that exist and 80 percent to do with funding various projects that almost no one wishes to fund voluntarily, as by paying for them willingly. Things like Amtrack and related forms of government-controlled herd transit. Also “green” things such as electric car charging stands and of course electric cars, themselves that cost plenty of green – all of it to be extorted from the public that would otherwise never freely pay the cost of it.
Governments are trying to force consumer acceptance of government-specified products and technologies through regulations, taxes, and subsidies via markets to achieve non-market outcomes. Markets, however, are expressions of free choice and voluntary action, not coercion, and don’t work when buyers don’t get what they want, but what the government wants. From the Issues and Insights Editorial Board at issuesinsights.com:
In eight years, half of American car buyers will be forced to purchase overpriced, underperforming electric cars they don’t want, courtesy of the federal government and a compliant auto industry. That, at least, is what President Joe Biden announced at the White House on Thursday, and it’s just as we predicted in this space three months ago.
With a wave of his pen, Biden ordered that 50% of new cars and trucks sold by 2030 are to be electric. Since the auto companies already have their 2022 model year cars in production, that means they have less than eight years to figure out how to comply with the most massive, disruptive, and anti-consumer mandate ever to come out of Washington.
The automakers have only themselves to blame for that. As we noted in early May, they’d already caved to the green police and announced ambitious plans to electrify their fleets, even though consumers have little interest in buying battery-powered cars.
Despite massive taxpayer rebates handed out to electric car buyers, a multitude of subsidized recharging stations, and the constant talk about how electric automobiles will save the planet, sales of plug-ins accounted for a tiny 2% of all cars sold in the U.S. last year.
GM sold twice as many of its gas-guzzling Silverado pickups in 2020 as the combined sales of every company’s electric cars. Electric vehicles, in other words, are still very much a niche product. And for good reason. Owning one means hunting for recharging stations, waiting interminably for the battery to recharge, and confining yourself to short trips – shorter still if you have to turn on the A/C or the heater.
“There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.”– George Orwell 1984
“People will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people’s minds.”–Frank Zappa
Orwell and Zappa’s words of wisdom have never been truer than they are today. The level of untruth proliferated by the government, mainstream media, central bankers, military leaders, Big Tech, Big Pharma, Big Corp., and billionaire oligarchs has reached prolific heights. We are lost in a whirlwind of lies, destined to grow into a tornado of tragedy and ultimately result in acascadeof consequences.
Since theinstallationof the illegitimate dementia patient as president of this dying empire ofdebtby the Deep State (billionaire oligarchs, surveillance state agencies, military industrial complex, Silicon Valley censorship tyrants, corrupt bought off state politicians, Sorosinstalledbureaucrats, and…
… Facebook has introduced a new feature allowing users to request
critics, who say Facebook has far larger issues to focus on.
request mass prayers for anything from a job interview to personal
health. After a user creates their post, others can click a button
reading, “I prayed.” The feature began being tested in the US in December.
the Covid-19 pandemic, we’ve seen many faith and spirituality
communities using our services to connect, so we’re starting to explore
new tools to support them,” a statement from a Facebook spokesperson reads.
‘prayer tool’ was met with skepticism and mockery on social media,
where many critics blasted the company for focusing on the new feature
over numerous other issues, such as concerns over misinformation and
leaders have responded in mixed fashion to the feature, according to a
report from the Associated Press (AP). Some praised the new tool as an
innovative way to promote faith and connect religious communities, while
others dismissed it as meaningless compared to in-person gatherings,
and also expressed privacy concerns.
Facebook already uses personal information from users to better target ads, though it claims “prayer posts” will not be used in these algorithms.
“Is it wise to post everything about everyone for the whole world to see?” Father Bob Stec, pastor of St. Ambrose Catholic Parish in Brunswick, Ohio, told AP. “On
a good day, we would all be reflective and make wise choices. When we
are under stress or distress or in a difficult moment, it’s almost too
easy to reach out on Facebook to everyone.”
Egensteiner, of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s
Metropolitan New York Synod, called on Facebook to do more to battle “misinformation” posted to its platform, which he claims affects “religious communities and our efforts.”
has been under pressure from both Democrats and Republicans, with
liberal pundits and lawmakers claiming the company is not doing enough
to police “misinformation” related to Covid-19 and other
topics, and conservatives pointing to Facebook as one of multiple social
media companies that allegedly shadowban and flag conservatives pundits
far more than liberal ones.
Former president Donald Trump, who saw his social media
accounts purged following the January 6 riot at the US Capitol,
announced a lawsuit last month targeting Facebook, Twitter, and Google
over this alleged political bias…
Apple’s plan to scan every iPhone user’s photos, calling it an assault
on privacy. The company insisted its intention is only to root out child
published on the platform Github on Friday is signed by security and
privacy experts, cryptographers, researchers, academics, legal experts
and ordinary consumers, united in condemnation of Apple’s “privacy-invasive content scanning technology.”
If you have a @github
account, you can join me in co-signing the first letter uniting
security & privacy experts, researchers, professors, policy
advocates, and consumers against @Apple‘s planned moves against all of our privacy.https://t.co/QIb1TwJE0C
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) August 6, 2021
While acknowledging that efforts to combat child exploitation and abuse are “almost unquestionably well-intentioned,”
the signers say that Apple’s proposal to constantly monitor and scan
everyone’s photos – and alert authorities if its AI-driven algorithm
tags them as criminal – “introduces a backdoor that threatens to undermine fundamental privacy protections for all users of Apple products.”
warn that the technology has the potential to bypass any end-to-end
encryption that would normally safeguard the user’s privacy – something
Apple has long been promoting as a major feature of its software
Apple’s plan to roll out the scanning program in the US was
leaked on Thursday via the Financial Times. It immediately raised
eyebrows among cybersecurity researchers and privacy advocates –
including Snowden, who became a household name in 2013 after blowing the
whistle on the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance of
“No matter how well-intentioned [Apple] is rolling
out mass surveillance to the entire world with this. Make no mistake: if
they can scan for kiddie porn today, they can scan for anything
tomorrow,” he tweeted on Thursday night. “They turned a trillion dollars of devices into iNarcs – *without asking.*”
letter he shared contains quotes from the Electronic Frontier
Foundation (EFF), the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), and the
Open Privacy Research Society, as well as several prominent advocates
They all urged Apple to halt the deployment of the proposed technology “immediately” and reaffirm their commitment to user privacy and encryption.
know, it sounds nuts. But ten years ago I would have said “running a
local scanner on your device’s photo library even when photos aren’t
shared” sounds nuts. And yet here we are.
— Matthew Green (@matthew_d_green) August 6, 2021
by the content of an internal memo sent on Friday by vice-president for
software Sebastien Marineau-Mes, however, Apple is doubling down on the
project – and seeking to motivate employees with a letter of praise
insulting the critics.
“We’ve seen many
positive responses today. We know some people have misunderstandings,
and more than a few are worried about the implications, but we will
continue to explain and detail the features so people understand what
we’ve built,” Marineau-Mes wrote in the memo, which was reprinted by 9to5Mac on Friday.
then appends the note Apple received from Marita Rodriguez, an
executive with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
(NCMEC), saying he found it “incredibly motivating, and hope that you will as well.”
distributed an internal memo today which referred to pushback against
its new content surveillance measures as “the screeching voices of the
minority.” I have nothing to add. pic.twitter.com/6R9moiekyN
— Nadim Kobeissi (@kaepora) August 6, 2021
“We know that the days to come will be filled with the screeching voices of the minority. Our voices will be louder,” Rodriguez wrote, after saying that NCMEC is “SO PROUD” of everyone at Apple and “the incredible decisions you have made in the name of prioritizing child protection.”
Apple has previously defended the encrypted nature of its operating systems, famously going to court in 2016
to fight the FBI demand for a ‘backdoor’ to the iPhone of the suspect
in the San Bernardino, California terrorist shooting rampage. In its
legal briefs, the company said the US government was demanding something
they didn’t have and would be “too dangerous” for them to create.
The FBI later managed to unlock the phone,
reportedly using an Israeli spy tool, but found nothing of use. Last
month, it emerged that another Israeli spy tool, Pegasus, has been used
to hack tens of thousands of iPhones around the world – including those
of journalists, dissidents and even heads of state.
Unjected describes itself as a “platform for like-minded humans that support medical autonomy.” The dating app has been pitched as a ‘safe space’ of sorts for unvaccinated Americans looking to date without the pressure of being or not being inoculated against Covid-19. Critics, however, have viewed the app as a growing social-media platform for anti-vaxxers and a hotspot of Covid misinformation.
After the app was removed from Apple on Saturday, the company blasted the move as “censorship.”
“Apparently, we’re considered ‘too much’ for sharing our medical autonomy and freedom of choice,” the company said in a Saturday statement posted to Instagram.
The app remains on the Google Play store, but they acknowledge that the move by Apple may mean a website may be Unjected’s best option moving forward so that they are not reliant on app stores.
Other dating apps such as Tinder and Bumble have introduced features to encourage vaccinations, making Unjected stand out even more after launching in May.
But the boiling point for the platforms was reached after Unjected added a social feature that allowed more general postings. It was flagged by Google after Unjected’s moderators were accused of not doing enough to police misinformation on Covid-19 and the vaccines available.
In response to Google’s concerns, the social feed was removed, though co-founder Shelby Thompson wants to soon reintroduce it and the flagged posts.
“We’ve had to walk a censorship tightrope,” she said, according to Bloomberg News, which first reported Apple removed Unjected on Saturday after being contacted by a reporter about the app.
The app also includes lists of businesses that disagree with vaccine mandates.
Apple has already had issues with Unjected, initially denying approval for the app during its initial review process. Changes had to be made for it to get approval to be in compliance with the company’s strict policy on Covid-19 “misinformation,” but a spokesperson for Apple said updates to the app, as well as statements made to its thousands of users, have brought it back out of compliance.
“The developer has made statements externally to its users as well as updates to the app that once again bring it out of compliance,” the spokesperson said.
Apple argued that, because some phrases and words were initially flagged by the company in the app’s social feature, Unjected users began using different placeholder words and phrases to essentially promote the same conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines.
The new decision makes clear, the company said, that “if you attempt to cheat our system, your apps will be removed from the store.”
Thompson maintains, however, that Apple is merely looking for an excuse to censor Unjected, and even says the removal “violates our constitutional rights.”