Ocasio-Cortez’s Threats

Ocasio-Cortez All Angry And Shit

Newbie Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not a shy and retiring flower; nor is she prone to the basic humility expected of a freshman politician. No, she’s just another nasty Chola whose prone to threatening people.

First, it was Donald Trump Jr. being threatened by Ocasio-Cortez, and now it the CEO’s of Microsoft, Facebook, and Google receiving threats.

And, unlike the thoughtless threat against Donald Trump Jr., these threats are ideologically based and, hence, are more serious. Even more serious since they’re a direct attack on basic rights that are both constitutionally enumerated and set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Dear Mr. Nadella, Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Pichai,

We are writing to you today in light of the important role that your companies play as we prepare to take comprehensive action on climate Change. As Members of the House of Representatives, we have already begun our individual, committee, and caucus efforts to make this issue a top priority in the 116th Congress. That is why we were deeply disappointed to see that your companies were high-level sponsors of a conference this month in Washington D.C., known as LibertyCon, that included a session denying established science on climate change.

The past commitments of your companies to address climate change have been well documented. We are encouraged that each of you have pledged to reduce your carbon footprint and have committed other efforts like pursuing renewable energy. We need more of this commitment from corporate America. Disappointingly, though, the example you have set promoting sustainability and evidence-based science is compromised by your implicit support of the session organized at LibertyCon.

We understand that sponsorship of an event or conference is a common occurrence and that these sponsorships do not automatically indicate that the company endorses the variety of political viewpoints that may be presented at these events. However, given the magnitude and urgency of the climate crisis that we are now facing, we find it imperative to ensure that the Climate-related Views espoused at LibertyCon do not reflect the values of your companies going forward.

As you are well aware, the spreading of misinformation can be dangerous to our society. Today’s coordinated campaign to deny climate change, or to put a positive spin on its effects, is not unlike that of the tobacco companies which once sought to discredit their product’s link to cancer. Their propaganda kept the nation from addressing a public health crisis for years, leading to many preventable deaths. We cannot afford to make the same mistake again with Climate change. We must be resolute against granting this campaign any credibility, whether intentional or otherwise.

We look forward to hearing from you in the hope that we can continue to count on you as allies in the fight for a more sustainable future.

Now think about that. Ocasio-Cortez is “concerned ” that the three big tech firms were among the sponsors of an event that included among many other Libertarian and Libertarian-leaning sessions, one that spoke against the AGW position that she believes in. She concerned enough to write to the CEOs of those companies in order to make sure that they won’t do that again.

Essentially, the puta said to them, “Those are some nice stock prices you’ve got there. It’d be a shame if we subpoenaed you and something happened to it.” And she made sure to have Rep. Pingree involved to lend muscle to her implied threat of the loss of 10s of billions of dollars.

That, my fellow Americans, is the beginnings of tyranny. When a worthless politician is comfortable with threatening corporate leaders if they don’t make sure to never again lend support to any event or gathering that might include something that the politician doesn’t like, liberty and America are already moribund.

And, nor is this completely unfounded hyperbole or hysterics on my part. Ocasio-Cortez has already framed Global Warming as an existential threat that must be fought without limits.

Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?

This is our World War II.

Just pause a moment and think about her language and the belief structure it is evidence of. It’s the language of extremism and fanatical belief. And, it is the language that led to World War II; it was just couched in German instead of English. It’s the language used by those who have already accepted any moral cost for the sake of their cause.

Think about this carefully and act accordingly.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Socializing Sin

Socializing Sin By Social Media Platform
Socializing Sin By Platform

An oversimplification? Sure. It’s still fairly accurate though since one can, for the most part, sort the deadly sins by social media platform.  😈

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

Fighting Fascistbook

Fascistbook
Fighting Fascistbook Is Very Possible

Most people believe that there is no real way to fight against Facebook’s fascistic censoring of speech and opinion in its platform because Facebook aka Fascistbook is a private, corporate entity. Fortunately and surprisingly, this is NOT legally true and there is case law to back that up.

The US Supreme Court’s ruling in Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946) that when a corporation is, in essence the public square and functions as such, it must abide by the same restrictions as the State insofar as Constitutional law is concerned. And that Facebook is, in fact, operating in that manner is the held opinion of the SCOTUS, as stated in Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. _ (2017).

Social media allows users to gain access to information and communicate with one another on any subject that might come to mind. With one broad stroke, North Carolina bars access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge. Foreclosing access to social media altogether thus prevents users from engaging in the legitimate exercise of First Amendment rights.

— Justice Anthony Kennedy

The Court’s ruling in Packingham v. North Carolina is of particular importance because it eliminates the potentially countering issues brought up in Cyber Promotions, Inc. v. American Online, Inc., 948 F. Supp. 436 (E.D. Pa. 1996), though Facebook’s de facto monopoly and ubiquitousness might well do that already.

So yes, I do believe that we, the People have to capacity to fight Fascistbook and the other dangerously biased and tyrannical social media corporations that have become entrenched in society to the point of it not being completely ridiculous to think of them as utilities.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Jailed!

FB Jailed for "hate speech"
Yep! Facebook Has Jailed Me Again

Yes, it’s true; a few days ago I was jailed by Facebook again – another 30 days during which I cannot post, share, comment, or even “like” someone’s post. Above is the “Hate Speech” I wrote in reply to someone’s post calling for Australia to ban calls from India due to all the scammers constantly calling people there.

The funny part iss that the majority of those Indian scammers are breaking Indian laws when they call other countries. Most, due to maximization of profits, use VOIP to do it and using for VOIP for international calling is actually illegal in India…they want the rupies from it.

— jonolan
Facebook Comment

Now, I being reasonably normal and sensible, rather than rant and rave, I simply requested a review by FB’s monitors / admins. I figured that I just got caught by some algorithm.

Jalied - FB Say's Whites Violate Community StandardsYep Again! Facebook’s Employees Agree

But no! If, and it’s a nested series of if’s, Facebook actually does have people review alleged “Community Standards” violations and if those reviewers actually review the complaint instead of just pushing a button to agree with the algorithm, then those reviewers also believe that my comment constituted “Hate Speech” or that they could use the initial, computer-driven jailing as an excuse to silence me for 30 days.

OK, OK! Maybe it was just a particularly rabid Grammar Nazi. I did, after all, misspell “Rupees.”

Think about that. Read the comment I was jailed for again and think about what this means for people when operatives of the largest communication platform in the world can and do silence people at their whim and are utterly unaccountable for doing so. There is even an escalation process. Nor is their the capability for people to contact Facebook via any means other than their “support” portal.

Tags: | | | | | | | |

Your Privacy…

Your Privacy...Going Away FastYour Privacy…Going Away Fast

Yeah, with companies like Googly, Amazon, and Facebook, all of whom consider people to be product as least as much clients, your privacy isn’t so much in danger as already eradicated. This is especially true of Google and Facebook since their business model is literally predicated upon being able to sell your personal data and habits to third parties.

You Have No Right To Privacy; You Surrendered It
Not That You Have No Right To Privacy; You Surrendered It

Of course, the brouhaha over this “violation” of people’s privacy only exists because one of the third parties sold or gave the information that they gathered to entities that the Lamestream Media and the Liberal and Progressive enemies of we Deplorable hate. After all, nobody has either the right to- or expectation of privacy when one has already surrendered it willingly – nay, eagerly – to persons or companies who never made any secret of their using of it for their own purposes.

And please do remember that both the Obama and Clinton campaigns similarly mined data from Facebook users, albeit more openly when it came to the actual users. In all the cases though, their friends’ data was accessed without prior knowledge or consent, used to create profiles of those friends, and said profiles then used to target campaign strategies. And yet, when done by either Obama or Clinton this was either lauded, excused, or ignored by the very same sorts complaining now.

Tags: | | | | | | | |