patrick.net

https://metatron.substack.com/p/linkedin-still-censoring-facts




https://metatron.substack.com/p/debunking-the-lie-that-covid-vaccines

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/the-outlaw-saturday-june-1-2024-c

On Thursday, the Supreme Court delivered a nine to zero decision in favor of the despised-by-democrats National Rifle Association. Even more remarkably, the decision was penned by ultra-liberal, anti-gun Justice Sotomayor, who began the decision unqualifiedly favoring the guns rights group and slapping government overreach like this:

Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors. Petitioner National Rifle Association (NRA) plausibly alleges that respondent Maria Vullo did just that. As superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services, Vullo allegedly pressured regulated entities to help her stifle the NRA's pro-gun advocacy by threatening enforcement actions against those entities that refused to disassociate from the NRA and other gun-promotion advocacy groups.
Those allegations, if true, state a First Amendment claim.

In a case that rings distinctly familiar to we who have watched the unfolding saga of government threats against social media companies to force censorship of heterodox covid commentary, the Court admonished even implied threats by government actors against private actors, when the threats are really intended to suppress citizens’ free speech.

In this case, the New York Insurance commissioner leaned on private insurance companies like Lloyd’s of London, encouraging them to refuse to insure NRA members, and implicitly threatening that insurers could be swept into ongoing criminal investigations if they didn’t cooperate.

That’s a nice insurance company you have there; it would be a shame if anything bad happened to it.

Though the Court framed its unanimous decision as merely reiterating long-standing Supreme Court precedent, it was a clear shot across the federal government’s bow in the ongoing social media wars.

This case is a good reminder of why the Founders created the insular third branch of government. Many folks raise valid concerns about nine unelected Justices wielding power for life, but the Supreme Court does act as a last-ditch emergency brake during runaway electoral periods.

In other words, because each president has the chance to slowly change the ideological character of the Court, America is insulated from rapid shifts in the political composition of the executive and legislative branches. The Supreme Court always drags behind it a long tail of sanity from previous political periods, backstopping sudden changes in party power.

https://dailydeclaration.org.au/2024/05/31/covid-submissions-censored/

Among the 477 censored submissions was the Canberra Declaration’s lengthy report, which included whistleblower testimonies from Indigenous Australians who reported severe human rights abuses during the national COVID-19 vaccine rollout.

Almost 500 submissions to a key Senate inquiry into COVID-19 abuses have been censored by the committee overseeing the probe.

Opened in October last year, the COVID-19 Royal Commission Terms of Reference Inquiry had promised to “allow all affected stakeholders to be heard”.

However, months after the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee produced its report, 477 of the 559 submissions made by members of the public have not been made available on the committee’s official website.

The trove of hidden submissions represents 85 per cent of the volume received by the committee.

Over 30 per cent of the submissions have been concealed entirely, with even the name of the submitting organisation or individual labelled “confidential”. ...

Canberra Declaration co-founder Warwick Marsh has labelled the suppression of the documents “unprecedented”.

“I have been making submissions to parliamentary inquiries for over two decades, and in my experience, this censorship is unprecedented,” he told The Daily Declaration.

“It is an affront to all Australians that a committee tasked with probing the government abuses that took place during the Covid era would censor organisations like ours seeking to draw attention to those abuses.”

“Ironically, one of the abuses we decried was censorship itself,” Mr Marsh added. “What was in our submission that the committee wanted hidden from the public?”

Hangings are appropriate.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/contemptuous-thursday-june-13-2024

The mystery has been solved! I’ve finally gotten some feedback from Facebook over why I am close to being back in its high-tech social media jail: spam. After four years of posting free C&C roundups to Facebook, not selling anything, and delighting many thousands of Facebook followers, suddenly, in June 2024, the anonymous platform censors have concluded that my daily free roundup of corporate media news is — not misinformation this time — but is a disguise or an impersonation:




They are really clutching at straws these days. Onward.
""

I was trying to hit gab.ai from a local Peets coffee wifi access point, but it's blocked. I get redirected to this URL:

http://wired.meraki.com:8090/blocked.cgi?blocked_server=104.18.4.39%3A80&blocked_url=http%3A%2F%2Fgab.ai%2F

Gab.ai is up and functional, since I can see it from my phone.

Someone has decided that the public should not be able to see gab.ai

https://www.eugyppius.com/p/cologne-prosecutors-charge-twitter

Cologne prosecutors charge Twitter user for the crime of assembling a list of Covid-era insults that politicians and celebrities directed against the unvaccinated

Calling for people to be jabbed against their will? Totally legal in Germany. Pointing out that others have called for this? Potentially a violation of the criminal code.

Almost two years ago, on 26 July 2022, a German Twitter user known only as MicLiberal posted a thread that culminated in his criminal trial this week. His is but the latest in a long line of such prosecutions – the tactic our rulers increasingly favour to intimidate and harass those who use their freedom of expression in inconvenient ways.

MicLiberal committed his alleged offence as Germany was still awakening from months of hypervaccination insanity. Science authorities and politicians had spent the winter decrying the “tyranny of the unvaccinated,” demanding that “we have to take care of the unvaccinated, and … make vaccination compulsory,” firing people who protested institutional vaccine mandates on social media and denouncing the unvaccinated for ongoing virus restrictions and Covid deaths. Our neighbour, Austria, even went so far as to impose a specific lockdown on those who refused the Covid vaccines. Culturally and politically, those were the darkest months I have ever lived through; they changed my life forever and I will never forget them.

MicLiberal’s thread aimed only to memorialise some of the crazy things the vaccinators had said. It opened with this tweet:

We were complicit!

We marginalised, defamed, discredited, insulted and cancelled people. On behalf of science!

By popular demand, this brief thread with statements that should not be forgotten:

There ensued nothing but a series of citations, most of them wholly typical samples of vintage 2021/22 vaccinator rhetoric, much of it not even that remarkable. For example, MicLiberal included this statement from Andreas Berholz, deputy editor-in-chief of the widely read blog Der Volksverpetzer:

“Fact-check: The unvaccinated remained the main drivers of the pandemic.” ...

You might be wondering what crime MicLiberal can possibly have committed by drawing attention to these already-public statements. The most honest answer is that his thread achieved millions of views in a matter of days, and at a very awkward moment – precisely when everyone was beginning to regret all the illiberal and wildly intemperate things they had said in the depths of the virus craze. He had embarrassed some very vain and powerful people with their own incredibly stupid words, and today many are of the opinion that that ought to be a crime in and of itself.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/trustworthy-friday-june-14-2024-c

Yesterday, Platformer ran a terrific but widely-ignored story headlined, “The Stanford Internet Observatory is being dismantled.” And good riddance! They won’t stop trying, of course, but at least one six-legged, insectile group of crypto-fascists has been squashed.

During the 2020 election cycle, Stanford set up the bizarrely named “Observatory” as a public-private partnership, to root out social media misinformers and snitch on them to the government. In turn, the FBI would report any “election interferers” and “science deniers” to the platforms, for “voluntary” censorship or worse.

Academic snitches get legal stitches. After the Twitter files exposed the SIO’s role in censoring Americans, at least three groups of plaintiffs have sued Stanford, alleging its researchers illegally colluded with the federal government to censor speech. And the House Committee on Weaponization of the Federal Government is currently investigating the Orwellian research group.

https://notthebee.com/article/nbc-news-reporter-fired-for-sharing-straight-pride-meme

https://x.com/newstart_2024/status/1801618532821541329