Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 31, 2022 Author Share Posted January 31, 2022 Here is a vomit-worthy news story. Chinese President snubs Mark Zuckerberg's unborn child PAGESIX.COM President Xi Jinping said a terse "no" when Zuckerberg asked if the president would give the baby an honorary Chinese name. In short, Zuckerberg and his pregnant Chinese-origin wife were at a dinner with Xi Jinping, the Obamas, media and social media moguls, and people like that. Then, to get all touchy and feely, Zuckerberg--in Mandarin--right in front of the whole world, asked Xi Jinping if he would give Zuck's unborn baby girl and honorary Chinese name. Xi Jinping: "No." Talk about ass-kissing at the heights. Barf... I hate to go all Godwin's law on this, but let's transfer the time frame. Imagine being back in the 1930's, being a media head honcho and asking Hitler to give an honorary name to your unborn child. Who would do that to a kid? Even not knowing about the upcoming WWII, one could sense the danger in the air back then. Back to now. We already know about the bioweapon attack from China. And still Zuck wanted to saddle his unborn daughter with a legacy that could potentially cause her all kinds of problems in life just so he could kiss Xi Jinping's ass. So double barf... At least Xi Jinping had the good sense to say no. It's uncomely for a tyrant to get his ass kissed so blatantly in public. Make that triple barf... Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 31, 2022 Share Posted January 31, 2022 Moloch! --Brant 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 17, 2022 Author Share Posted September 17, 2022 Justice moves slow, but it moves. HUGE First Amendment Win For Texas, Ken Paxton and All Americans! HUGE First Amendment Win For Texas, Ken Paxton and All Americans! WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM Today in Federal Court, Attorney General Ken Paxton and the American people scored a huge victory regarding censorship and banning of individuals based on their viewpoint. The Gateway Pundit is also... This was always going end up in the Supreme Court, and now it is on the way for real. It does not look good for the social media giants, either. To quote the article: Quote The case before the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was regarding House Bill 20, which “generally prohibits large social media platforms from censoring people based on the viewpoint of its speaker.” Judge Andrew S. Oldham opined that while “the platforms urge us to hold that the statute is facially unconstitutional and hence cannot be applied to anyone at any time under any circumstances,”…”today, we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say.” This opinion could have massive implications both in the social media sphere, and beyond, such as the NFL players banned from wearing a Thin Blue Line Flag on their helmet after 5 police officers were killed in Dallas, TX in 2016. . . . This is a major victory in an ongoing battle over censorship and protections afforded to these tech oligarchs via Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. The lopsided bill offers liability protections for the “providers” but no reciprocation to the People to ensure that they aren’t discriminated against based on personal ideologies, despite the bill stating that “the Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.” . . . Justice Clarence Thomas has implied that social media platforms need to be treated as “common carriers”, much like your cell phone. Or. let's give Paxton some crowing luv, let him crow: Quote BREAKING: I just secured a MASSIVE VICTORY for the Constitution & Free Speech in fed court: #BigTech CANNOT censor the political voices of ANY Texan! The 5th Circuit “reject[s] the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 17, 2022 Author Share Posted September 17, 2022 This is how you do it. Lara Logan is promoting a "Threat Assessment" about the border. I'll probably write about that elsewhere. But here in the social media context, Lara openly says she does not use Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and others that openly promote human trafficking. She refuses to give them her sanction. Live At The VFW Hall In Houston: Laura Logan On The Missing Children Trafficked Across Border RUMBLE.COM Live At The VFW Hall In Houston: Laura Logan On The Missing Children Trafficked Across Border Lara sounds a lot more like Rand than many Randians. I admire this woman. If she can turn her own actions of rejecting giant companies that condone and benefit from trafficking children and others, mostly for sex, into a meme, that is going to be a bigger headache and threat for them than the legal measures in the previous post. I agree with her, too. Incidentally, Lara was CBS News journalist gang-raped in public in Egypt during the Arab Spring. Needless to say, she left CBS and washed her hands of the predator class. Listen to her. See if you can detect one ounce of victimhood in her demeanor. You won't find it. On the contrary, you sense a single woman pissed to the gills, extremely competent, and standing as an individual against the whole world if need be. Like Rand did... Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 3, 2022 Author Share Posted November 3, 2022 The following report is the start of an earthquake in the social media sphere. It got a splash a couple days ago, but it has receded into the background. Yet this is the beginning of the takedown of the social media social control complex. TRUTH COPSLeaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation by Ken Klippenstein and Lee Fang, October 31 2022 Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation THEINTERCEPT.COM Under the guise of counterterrorism, the government is accelerating pressure on social media companies to crack down on speech the feds deem disinformation. I'm going to simplify this to big picture only because it is too dense to be clear on a skim. You can read the details if you like, and, man, are there plenty details in the long-ass article. The gist is that the DHS (Department of Homeland Security), through CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency), has been holding regular meetings with major social media tech giants to tell them what to censor. And these meetings became super-geared toward interfering with elections. Seriously. The way they communicated was often with a nudge, nudge, wink, wink, but plenty of the meetings and communications have been clear and they have been many. The Intercept came up with smoking gun level communications (through leaks from lawsuits and other places) where the involved parties outright admit to this. That's the long and short of it. There are some interesting items and inferences, though. 1. President Trump was the one who signed CISA into law (in 2018). He created one of the weapons used against him in the 2020 election. 2. The Section 280 liability immunity now enjoyed by the social media tech giants cannot be used to stop investigations and lawsuits into this because the social media giants became directly involved with the government in censorship, which the government is prohibited to do. That means, once the dust settles, expect some massive, and add more massive to that, class action lawsuits against the tech giants. They committed crimes in collusion with CISA, they were co-conspirators and partners in crime, so to speak, and Section 280 does not exempt them from the crime nor from the civil liability that arises from such crime. 3. This will probably be used to dismantle Section 280 protection for tech giants altogether since it was so easy to abuse and was used as a tool to corrupt the government. Here's a video, which is interesting, not boring like the article is, where some of the details are given, including showing the Facebook portal for the government to provide censorship orientation--and it is still up. DHS Leak Proves Government Conspired With Big Tech To Subvert Elections, Censor News RUMBLE.COM DHS Leak Proves Government Conspired With Big Tech To Subvert Elections, Censor News Sign Up For Exclusive Episodes At https://timcast.com/ Merch - https://timcast.creator-spring.com... There's a whole lot more to this story, but it's easy to get lost in the details. Leave it to say many important people and politicians on both political sides, including constitutional scholars and so on, are all over this. Just keep the above overview in mind when you come across this stuff and things will be clear. As to the outcome, imagine a person subjected to strong radiation. They look and act normal for a while. But then they start to degrade. And then they fall apart and die. This investigation by the Intercept (which finally did something right for a change) is like such radiation for the tech giants, at least the parts of them that depend on liability immunity. They managed to get this news off the headlines right now, but the exposure has already happened. Nature will now take its course. I could not be more satisfied. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictlylogical Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: The following report is the start of an earthquake in the social media sphere. It got a splash a couple days ago, but it has receded into the background. Yet this is the beginning of the takedown of the social media social control complex. TRUTH COPSLeaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation by Ken Klippenstein and Lee Fang, October 31 2022 Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation THEINTERCEPT.COM Under the guise of counterterrorism, the government is accelerating... I'm going to simplify this to big picture only because it is too dense to be clear on a skim. You can read the details if you like, and, man, are there plenty details in the long-ass article. The gist is that the DHS (Department of Homeland Security), through CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency), has been holding regular meetings with major social media tech giants to tell them what to censor. And these meetings became super-geared toward interfering with elections. Seriously. The way they communicated was often with a nudge, nudge, wink, wink, but plenty of the meetings and communications have been clear and they have been many. The Intercept came up with smoking gun level communications (through leaks from lawsuits and other places) where the involved parties outright admit to this. That's the long and short of it. There are some interesting items and inferences, though. 1. President Trump was the one who signed CISA into law (in 2018). He created one of the weapons used against him in the 2020 election. 2. The Section 280 liability immunity now enjoyed by the social media tech giants cannot be used to stop investigations and lawsuits into this because the social media giants became directly involved with the government in censorship, which the government is prohibited to do. That means, once the dust settles, expect some massive, and add more massive to that, class action lawsuits against the tech giants. They committed crimes in collusion with CISA, they were co-conspirators and partners in crime, so to speak, and Section 280 does not exempt them from the crime nor from the civil liability that arises from such crime. 3. This will probably be used to dismantle Section 280 protection for tech giants altogether since it was so easy to abuse and was used as a tool to corrupt the government. Here's a video, which is interesting, not boring like the article is, where some of the details are given, including showing the Facebook portal for the government to provide censorship orientation--and it is still up. DHS Leak Proves Government Conspired With Big Tech To Subvert Elections, Censor News RUMBLE.COM DHS Leak Proves Government Conspired With Big Tech To Subvert Elections, Censor... There's a whole lot more to this story, but it's easy to get lost in the details. Leave it to say many important people and politicians on both political sides, including constitutional scholars and so on, are all over this. Just keep the above overview in mind when you come across this stuff and things will be clear. As to the outcome, imagine a person subjected to strong radiation. They look and act normal for a while. But then they start to degrade. And then they fall apart and die. This investigation by the Intercept (which finally did something right for a change) is like such radiation for the tech giants, at least the parts of them that depend on liability immunity. They managed to get this news off the headlines right now, but the exposure has already happened. Nature will now take its course. I could not be more satisfied. Michael What we should not do, is censor citizens’ free speech, whether political speech or not. Wherever you might be on a conspiracy theory spectrum… there is a real possibility of agents from foreign countries or institutions which are inimical to America its systems and culture, constantly working to erode them… China, global leftist ecoterrorist organizations, maybe some oligarchs etc. How does one approach purposeful propaganda and or lies from such agents.. some of whom may be planted on American soil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 3, 2022 Author Share Posted November 3, 2022 46 minutes ago, Strictlylogical said: How does one approach purposeful propaganda and or lies from such agents.. some of whom may be planted on American soil? SL, Shoot the bastards. Or you could ignore them and post your own views instead. I rarely use myself as an example, but for one example, look what I did regarding the Ukraine war. I let the propagandists and those who agree with them (usually innocently) express themselves fully. I rebut a lot, but even more than that, I present an entirely different view, over and over and over as I find news about it. I don't silence the propagandists and have no intention of that unless they abuse the forum. So far, no one has. Granted, I did silence one voice, but that was only because he felt he had to personally insult me with each post and would not give that habit up. I gave him several opportunities, told him clearly several times to knock it off, but he was wedded to insulting me as his only form of expression. So he had to go. However, he would have been a good propaganda adversary because his arguments, while lopsided, were in more depth than average. He would have made people think and that is the best thing of all. Who needs agreement or disagreement if it's blind? But, alas, he preferred the kindergarten playground where he's the bully instead of a discussion forum. I had no fear of him persuading anyone to become a pro-war advocate, or a stooge of the predator class or an embezzler, though. I trust people who think for themselves, which means OL people in particular. That's how I handle propaganda, even if it comes from foreign actors. There are better ways, I'm sure, but I'm happy with the results this way has turned out. Now that I've used myself and my awesomeness for your elucidation , notice the effect. How many people were swayed here on OL by the pro-Ukraine crony government people? I can't think of one. But how many people who were in the middle, or hadn't thought about it much, started analyzing things from a different lens than that of the propagandists, even though the propagandists had the entire fake news media and social media giants at their disposal, not to mention all that fucking oney Biden sent over there? I can assure you that many who come to OL are using their own brains, not mine (even though I blab a lot) and not those of the propagandists. That, to me, is the best result possible. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictlylogical Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 38 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: SL, Shoot the bastards. Or you could ignore them and post your own views instead. I rarely use myself as an example, but for one example, look what I did regarding the Ukraine war. I let the propagandists and those who agree with them (usually innocently) express themselves fully. I rebut a lot, but even more than that, I present an entirely different view, over and over and over as I find news about it. I don't silence the propagandists and have no intention of that unless they abuse the forum. So far, no one has. Granted, I did silence one voice, but that was only because he felt he had to personally insult me with each post and would not give that habit up. I gave him several opportunities, told him clearly several times to knock it off, but he was wedded to insulting me as his only form of expression. So he had to go. However, he would have been a good propaganda adversary because his arguments, while lopsided, were in more depth than average. He would have made people think and that is the best thing of all. Who needs agreement or disagreement if it's blind? But, alas, he preferred the kindergarten playground where he's the bully instead of a discussion forum. I had no fear of him persuading anyone to become a pro-war advocate, or a stooge of the predator class or an embezzler, though. I trust people who think for themselves, which means OL people in particular. That's how I handle propaganda, even if it comes from foreign actors. There are better ways, I'm sure, but I'm happy with the results this way has turned out. Now that I've used myself and my awesomeness for your elucidation , notice the effect. How many people were swayed here on OL by the pro-Ukraine crony government people? I can't think of one. But how many people who were in the middle, or hadn't thought about it much, started analyzing things from a different lens than that of the propagandists, even though the propagandists had the entire fake news media and social media giants at their disposal, not to mention all that fucking oney Biden sent over there? I can assure you that many who come to OL are using their own brains, not mine (even though I blab a lot) and not those of the propagandists. That, to me, is the best result possible. Michael Indeed good advice for regular citizens. As far as the governments’ proper role to protect individual rights and stand against initiation of force, I wonder about a proper response to actual foreign threats. We live in an age of sophisticated knowledge, psychological knowledge which can be wielded for ill. Surely a proper government is not beholden to protect foreign attacks … but tackling them while upholding what they should be upholding … absolute free speech within its valid domain… is more complicated. I see it more like 1. Investigate agents and their lies 2. Without compromising current informants or investigative positions… tell the citizens about the lies and why they are lies. 3. stop and/or expel agents and cut off “lie tunnels” 4. Hands off on all citizens free speech 5. Something else … to counteract the social or cultural or political infection but which does not violate any citizens individual rights… but what that could be I’m not sure… Given the near cultural and political collapse … something needs to change maybe it’s public education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 3, 2022 Author Share Posted November 3, 2022 SL, All of the above. Except allow all that needs to be done to be done privately. Fuck the government. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 3, 2022 Author Share Posted November 3, 2022 To be clear, the government needs to be concerned about physical problems like hacking and so on. Maybe data collection and transmission to the CCP like with TikTok. It does not need to be involved with propaganda. We can deal with that. If you want to see the tech giants stop censoring immediately, cancel their contracts with the Pentagon. And if you want to see normal media start presenting news more objectively, remove liability immunity from Big Pharma, which pays for most of it. Things would start straightening out faster than anyone could imagine. And get rid of federally funded schools. No more government indoctrinating kids. Any foreign propaganda influence in an environment like that would be nil. That's a Trump-like solution. Michael 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 Trump is the only person I know of who could get me to rethink my views about TikTok. Text: Quote If you get rid of TikTok, Facebook and Zuckerschmuck will double their business. I don’t want Facebook, who cheated in the last Election, doing better. They are a true Enemy of the People! I never thought of it from that angle. I might do something on TikTok just to stick it to Facebook, which I sporadically use for keeping an eye on things. But I probably won't use TikTok. I am still against that social media site. It's a CCP front and manipulation organization right out in the public. And they suck up your data with a virtual vacuum cleaner like no one. I want to mention something obvious, though. Most of the major O-Land groups outside of ARI and TAS do their thing on Facebook. It doesn't bother them that they are preaching Ayn Rand in the name of Mark Zuckerberg and the Deep State. If anyone wants to know why Objectivism does not take off, that there is a good indication of why. Free and convenient is more valuable in our subcommunity than principle ever was. The guiding rule in O-Land is that principles are for show and for talking about, nor for living in real life. Well... (they think): If a principle is not too inconvenient, one can live by it. Note, when I say "free and convenient," I am not talking about free human beings living in liberty and making their own choices as their right. I'm talking about a large farm of corralled human livestock, where the individuals get free stuff. Many, many modern-day O-Land people do not see this. The temptation of free stuff is too great for them to resist as they descend deeper and deeper down the stairway to a technological authoritarian hell. They will only see it once the trap is sprung. Then, like so many times in the past, they will cry for help as they are forced to submit their minds to the state, or they get imprisoned or killed off. I wonder where I have seen that social pattern before... Hmmmm?... Sad, but true. Objectivism as a movement has a long, long, long ways to go to become a major force. And the fault is not that of the evil altruistic world. It's inhouse and it's called hypocrisy. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 I think Trump was responding to a Bill before a House Committee that will clip the CCP wings of TikTok. The Bill was introduced by Mike Gallagher on March 5. H.R.7521 - To protect the national security of the United States from the threat posed by foreign adversary controlled applications, such as TikTok and any successor application or service and any other application or service developed or provided by ByteDance Ltd. or an entity under the control of ByteDance Ltd. TikTok is responding to this as a real threat and saying it is a bill to ban TikTok. It isn't. It is a ban on apps owned by the CCP. So, if the Bill is passed, to continue in the US, TikTok would have to sever financial and organizational ties to the CCP. (You can almost see the TikTok management going, gulp... They don't want to be shot. ) TikTok Starts Panicking, Begs Users to Contact Politicians to Stop Outright Ban REDSTATE.COM From the article: Quote TikTok is starting to panic as the prospect of a total ban on the Chinese-owned app edges closer. On Thursday, users of the app received pop-up messages asking users to "stop a TikTok shutdown" by contacting their local representative and asking they vote against pending legislation that could ban the app entirely. . . . If passed, it would require TikTok to divest from its Chinese parent company ByteDance or face a complete ban across app stores in the United States. It's good to see CCP toadies sweating. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 8 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: They will only see it once the trap is sprung. Incidentally, there is another thing in the face of O-Land right now and nobody uses it. It is right in their faces. One of the directors of Bitchute is a died-in-the-wool Objectivist, Amy Peikoff. The ex of Leanard Peikoff, fer chrissakes. An Objectivist for real. This is why I talk about Amy at times and support her. She is doing something coherent out in the real world. Bitchute is not an authoritarian crony corporatist Big Tech organization like Facebook, Google and the like. And it runs on torrent technology, which is the technology that underlies blockchain's presence on the Interneet and is freedom-oriented for real. (I sing Amy's praises knowing she probably doesn't like me.) Even though Bitchute is about video, there is plenty of discussion that goes on over there. And there are other pro-freedom social media sites that practice freedom, not just talk about it. To aspiring Objectivists who have groups on Facebook, I get it you don't want to own a private website since publicity for that takes a lot of technical study. OL is private, so I know what I am talking about. But why don't you move your groups to Bitchute and other freedom-oriented social media sites and get off of a Deep State authoritarian project? Do you need engraved invitations? Do you not want to practice your principles? Hell, I know why. You don't want to build a freedom movement. Building on Bitchute would require work. You want an audience that appears out of nowhere--an audience based on pre-engineered addiction algorithms like Facebook uses (a nasty form of hidden coercion)--and you can pretend you are doing something and are superior to the rest of mankind. That's a lot easier than learning how to promote things for real and convincing people. Note. I am not against Objectivism or an Objectivist movement. I am against phony-baloney garbage on a Deep State platform calling itself Objectivism. I mean, people can do what they want and call themselves what they want, but I see them for what they are. And I am not the only one. Does anyone need to have the following pointed out? I guess they do, so I will point it out. The Objectivist Newsletter, The Objectivist, and The Ayn Rand Letter did not run in a mainstream magazine or belong to a major project of a mainstream publisher. They did not partner with organizations funded by the government through CIA and Pentagon contracts. These three were private publications founded and run by the people who believed in their ideas. NBI was a private organization. Hellooooo... That's the Objectivism I was attracted to years ago. Not toadies or sheeple of the Deep State. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 10 Author Share Posted March 10 On 3/8/2024 at 9:20 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: To aspiring Objectivists who have groups on Facebook, I get it you don't want to own a private website since publicity for that takes a lot of technical study. OL is private, so I know what I am talking about. But why don't you move your groups to Bitchute and other freedom-oriented social media sites and get off of a Deep State authoritarian project? Do you need engraved invitations? Do you not want to practice your principles? When I wrote that, it never occurred to me the issue was worse than authoritarianism on Facebook and the like. Check this out. Yup. Not only is there the authoritarianism and Deep State problem with Facebook, Objectivists are setting up their communities right beside pedophiles on Facebook and calling that reason and capitalism. Well, at least they get their sites for free, huh? Ain't capitalism and reason grand? Why, if Ayn Rand were still alive, she herself would be on Facebook huh? Try this. Put the following image into your head. Mark Zuckerberg tells Xi Jinping--in public, at a White House state dinner--that he wants to name his upcoming newborn after Xi in honor of him. (This happened. See here if you don't believe me. It was all over the news at the time. Or, hell, see earlier in this very thread.) Now imagine Ayn Rand writing on Facebook. Go on, try. Can you imagine that? Can ya'? Can ya'? Instead of saving the world from an orgy of self-sacrifice, these Objectivist groups are saving elitist orgies to enjoy a world of child sacrifice. And authoritarian privilege to boot. I know I'm not winning any popularity contest by calling this out, but fuck it. Truth is truth. And hypocrisy is hypocrisy. I know where I stand. If I have to enable child rape in order to promote Ayn Rand's ideas, I ain't doing it. Michael EDIT: OK, OK. I'm not just going to bitch about this without giving a suggestion. For people who run Objectivist groups on Facebook, I suggest you migrate your groups over to X, or Bitchute, or even smaller open source venues like Minds. Or hell, people unsatisfied with them can start their own groups at these places. To me, X shows the most promise. Also, X is developing a search engine to rival Google, and a video capability the size of YouTube. It already has its own AI called Grok. X is going to keep functioning as a free platform with paid premium features. There are bumps on X, but nothing like the censorship and manipulation you get at the big tech social media sites. In my view, it is a perfect place to cultivate Objectivist groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 10 Author Share Posted March 10 On 3/8/2024 at 1:11 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Trump is the only person I know of who could get me to rethink my views about TikTok. Trump is not the only one against the banning of TikTok by Congress. So are Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, Vivek Ramaswamy and others of that persuasion. It's not all about a billionaire investor, Jeff Yass, who owns a huge stake in Bytedance, as the left-leaning press is touting. Yass is also embedded in Club for Growth, normally a RINO operation. But Trump made peace with them recently and is getting closer to Yass. (Yass was a good chunk of the money behind Vivek's presidential bid.) All that's true, but it's not the whole picture. An enormous number of young people, many voting age, are on TokTok. Huge huge numbers of them can't stand Biden and they are always making viral meme videos bashing Biden. So there's that, too. But the most intriguing thought on this--to my way of thinking--came from Scott Adams. He said people like Trump, Paul, Massie and Ramaswamy are very smart. So they will not just ignore the Chinese backdoor spying and data sucking the app is famous for. He wondered out loud why smart people would do that. Then he said he wondered if the CIA or other intelligence outfits have already infiltrated TikTok and turned it into an anti-CCP honeypot. And I thought, you know... I don't know for sure, but I lean toward Scott's logic on this. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 11 Author Share Posted March 11 On 3/10/2024 at 4:06 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Now imagine Ayn Rand writing on Facebook. Go on, try. Can you imagine that? Can ya'? Can ya'? I'm a little rough on O-Land these days, but not because I am against Rand or her ideas. It's because I love them. My entire worldview was informed by them. I have grown in different directions on some issues, but my roots are there. Watching O-Land walk into the gas ovens of Big Tech--just because it's free and the addictive algorithms make it easy to create an illusion of popularity (when an account can be canceled at any moment by the whims of backstage censors)--breaks my heart. Oh well... Gotta keep on keeping on. All authoritarians pass. The ideas of reason and freedom have to live on. I have no complaints about my role or station... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 13 Author Share Posted March 13 The House is not amused by the back door to the CCP in TikTok. They just passed a bill demanding Bytedance divest from it for it to continue in the US. House Passes Bill that Could Ban Chinese-Owned TikTok in America - 65 Members Vote No, Including 15 Republicans | The Gateway Pundit | by Cullen Linebarger WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM China may soon lose the ability to poison millions of young American minds with its social media app in the coming weeks if the House of Representatives gets its way. Either they are pissed. Or there is a greed factor on the spoils I am missing. Let's see what the Senate does. Biden said he will sign the law if it gets to him. So that makes me think the greed factor is the main driver. There will be lots of money around for everyone to embezzle in implementing the law. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 14 Author Share Posted March 14 The bill passed in the House is a huge bait-and-switch. Styx lays out some of the problems. The TikTok Ban Bill is Basically a Digital Patriot Act WWW.BITCHUTE.COM https://twitter.com/Styx666Official/status/1768070720783806662 MERCH PARTNERS: https://pumpkinfirecrafts.us http://biltongusa.com https://wickedneedleembroidery.bigcartel.com https://www.heritageheirloomseedcompany.com https://www.websterswares.com… Under this bill, the President will be able to ban whatever social media he wants. At his sole discretion. And all court cases have to be adjudicated in Washington DC, where the bench is made of left-wing fruitcakes and Predator Class toadies. Man, what a dilemma. Either accept a CCP spy application to run free on American kids, or allow the Deep State to control social media in a formal dictatorial way. The real target is Elon Musk's X and sites the government does not like. I'm with Styx. I hope the Senate jams this one up. Also, November can't come soon enough. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 SCOTUS is hearing oral arguments about Social Media getting censorship instructions from the government. Then this beauty popped. You have to hear it to believe it. Kentaji Brown Jackson has no business being on the bench in the United States of America. In Communist China or Cuba, maybe. But not in the USA. I wonder what the procedure is to impeach her. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 It should be to just keep releasing her statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now