Hungary Announces Investigation into Social Media Censorship in Europe

social media censorship

By Chris Tomlinson

Hungarian Justice Minister Judit Varga has announced that she will be starting an investigation into censorship of political views on social media in Hungary and across Europe.

The Hungarian minister made her announcement on social media platform Facebook over the weekend, saying she would be creating a “working group” within the ministry to “investigate the possibilities for a legal environment to ensure the transparency of social media service providers – both on EU and national level.”

“Originally their job would not be to influence societal processes and elections by censoring comments on an ideological basis, however, if they had done it once they shall accept the necessity of the regulation and follow the rules of democracy,” she added.

The announcement comes only a month after Emmanuel Macron’s government announced it would be taking the opposite view and would look to force search engines and social media networks to censor “hate speech” in France.

The measure, which was passed in early July, would see large fines for internet companies who do not remove offending material within a 24-hour period.

Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 9.59.19 AM

The European Union has also pushed for censorship of “hate speech” on social media in recent years, including proposing a similar law to the French legislation in September of last year.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government has also demanded social media companies remove “hate speech” and introduced fines of up to 50 million euros for companies which violate the policy.

Social media censorship has been a major issue in the United States with President Donald J. Trump looking to use various agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), to potentially regulate online censorship through an executive order.

A leaked draft of the executive order, entitled “Protecting Americans from Online Censorship,” would allow the FCC to change how social media companies are treated under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act which allows tech companies to censor lewd or questionable content.

Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 10.02.15 AM

Modesto, California Denies Permit for Straight Pride Parade

The City of Modesto won’t permit a straight pride parade to take place at a city park on August 24th.

By Richard Moorhead

The City of Modesto, California, has denied a permit for a planned Straight Pride Parade slated to take place in a city park on August 24th.

The event was being organized by the National Straight Pride Coalition.

In a twist many are calling indicative of the city’s double standards and selective approval process, Modesto has granted permission for a Gay Pride Festival to take place in the city. From the looks of it, the gay pride event receives a significant amount of city resources, a luxury the municipal government is unwilling to provide to the planned straight pride parade.

On their website, the National Straight Pride Coalition expresses their support for heterosexuality, God-ordained nuclear families, Western Civilization, Caucasians, Christianity and Nationalism.

The movement expresses a desire for “preventing the current and future generations of all races and colors from being destroyed by the inherent malevolence of the Homosexual Movement toward our founding principles.”

A city spokesman named Thomas Reeves claimed the city couldn’t approve the straight pride parade because of safety concerns. Modesto apparently wanted the National Straight Pride Coalition to obtain liability insurance for the event.

He said the event may end up receiving approval after all if it’s willing to move their desired location from Graceada Park to downtown Modesto. It remains to be seen if city is merely going through to motions to make it seem like the pride event received a fair process before shutting down their event, or intends to actually the straight pride organizers a chance to voice their views.

If Trump’s Rhetoric Caused El Paso Shooting, Obama’s Rhetoric Caused Synagogue Shootings

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 3.59.42 PM

By Jeff Dunetz

Saturday was a horrible day for America. Two mass shootings. Thirty-one people were killed and more than fifty injured.

Liberals and the mainstream media (yes I know that’s redundant) were quick to place blame for the mass shootings on President Trump’s rhetoric and his followers.  Perhaps the most hypocritical example was former VP Joe Biden’s speech that directly linked the anti-Trump interpretation of President Trump’s rhetoric to this past weekend’s shootings. If Biden really believes what he says, he should be slamming the anti-Jewish hatred spewed by Barack Obama, the president for whom he worked.

Biden should be asked,  “If President Trump’s words incited this week’s shootings shouldn’t you be blaming Barack Obama’s anti-Semitic words and actions for the recent Synagogue shooting’s in Pittsburgh and Poway?   The only answer is yes!

For example, President Obama’s July 31, 2015 phone call organized by the Anti-Israel group J Street and other progressive Jewish groups could be summed up in one sentence. Please help because those rich people are helping those warmongering Jews to fight this incredible Iran deal because they don’t like me and they want to start a war just like they did in Iraq.
In the 20-minute phone call Obama said over and over those opponents of the Iran deal come from the same “array of forces that got us into the Iraq war.” he identified those forces as a “bunch of billionaires who happily finance super PACs” are “putting the squeeze on members of Congress.”
Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 4.04.36 PM

The message was clear to the Jewish participants, William Daroff Senior Vice President for Public Policy & Director of the Washington office of The Jewish Federations of North America tweeted during the meeting “Jews are leading effort to kill #Irandeal. ‘Same people opposing the deal led us into Iraq war,’” and followed with “Canard: Jews got us into Iraq War.”

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 4.06.16 PM

In a meeting with a hand-picked list of Jewish leaders, Lee Rosenberg of AIPAC questioned Obama’s statement comparing people who object to the Iran deal with those who supported the invasion of Iraq because many anti-Semites claim the Jews pushed Bush into invading Iraq. Obama explained that Netanyahu supported the Iraq invasion (which is true). What the former-president left out was that the prime minister at the time was Ariel Sharon. Sharon strongly urged Bush not to invade Iraq.

Obama also forgot to mention that his vice president Joe Biden, both of his secretaries of state Kerry and Clinton, and his biggest ally in the Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid all supported the invasion of Iraq in Congress and now support his flawed Iran deal.

He even doubled down accusing the Jewish State of being a bunch of warmongers.  During an August 2015 speech at American University, Obama again tried to scapegoat the Jews, saying:

So this deal is not just the best choice among alternatives, this is the strongest nonproliferation agreement ever negotiated, and because this is such a strong deal, every nation in the world that has commented publicly, with the exception of the Israeli government, has expressed support.”

Yes, Israel opposed the deal, so did Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, UAE, Bangladesh and most of the other Sunni Muslim States vehemently opposed the JCPOA because of their fears that Shia Iran would use nukes to attack them. But Obama wanted to scapegoat the Jews, and the media was quiet.

Beginning with his first campaign for president, Obama surrounded himself with anti-Semites like General Merrel McPeak.  McPeak was the 2008 Obama for President Co-Chair who had an impressive resume of blaming our foreign policy on the “Jewish Lobby.”  Perhaps the best example of McPeak’s Antisemitism was when he was asked during an interview why there isn’t peace in the Middle East. He answered, “New York City. Miami. We have a large vote — vote, here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it.” (in other words, those pesky Jews, who control America’s policy on the Middle East).

One of his first presidential appointments was the anti-Semitic Chas Freeman who blamed his resignation on the evil Israel lobby (a nicer way of saying Jewish lobby). Actually, Chas, it was a lot less than an evil Israel lobby, much of it was the work of a few Jewish bloggers — one of whom was named The Lid who pointed out that you believed things like China was too gentle in putting down the Tiananmen Square protests, the Muslims discovered America and worse.

In 2015 former speaker Boehner invited two world leaders to speak to a joint session of congress. Both times the Speaker’s invitation was made on his own without first checking with the White House. The invitation of the Jewish leader Benjamin Netanyahu was criticized by Obaman; in fact, he encouraged his fellow Democrats to boycott the speech. The speech by the second world leader Pope Francis was celebrated despite the White House not being informed of the invite before it was made. The Catholic’s invitation wasn’t criticized only the Jew’s visit. I am not saying Netanyahu’s visit was criticized only because he is Jewish—I’m just pointing out a fact,

Obama denied Jewish ties to the Land of Israel which according to the State Department definition is anti-Semitic.  in his 2009 Cairo speech, Obama said Israel was only created because people felt guilty about the Holocaust.

America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied. Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and Antisemitsm in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today.

Obama showed the world that he honored Antisemitism. His first Presidential Medal of Freedom honorees was Bishop Desmond Tutu and Mary Robinson. The friendliest thing Bishop Desmond Tutu ever said about Jews was “People are scared in this country [the US], to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful.” He also said that “the Jews thought they had a monopoly on God.”

Tutu’s co-honoree Mary Robinson presided over the “World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance” that turned into a non-stop hate-fest against Jews and Israel. The conference was so anti-Semitic that Colin Powell, the Secretary of State at the time, walked out.

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 4.09.09 PM

During his presidency, Obama has allied himself with Al Sharpton who was a leader of the anti-Semitic pogrom in Crown Heights and incited the anti-Semitic firebombing of Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem. He sent his closest adviser, Valerie Jarrett, to keynote an anti-Semitic ISNA conference whose discussions included: how key Obama aides are “Israeli,” proving Jews “have control of the world,” and how the Holocaust is the punishment of Jews for being “serially disobedient to Allah.”

In 2010 Obama’s National Security Adviser, Gen. Jim Jones gave the keynote speech at a Washington Institute For Near East Policy and started it out with an anti-Semitic “joke,” teaching the crowd that Jews are just greedy merchants in the same vein as Shakespeare’s Shylock.

For his second Secretary of Defense Obama appointed Chuck Hagel who believed in the nefarious “worldwide Jewish conspiracy.” Hagel was once quoted as saying “The political reality is that…the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here.”

Obama once called Zbigniew Brzezinski someone I have learned an immense amount from”, and “one of our most outstanding scholars and thinkers. Back in back in 2007, Brzezinski schooled the future president on foreign policy. The former National Security Adviser to Jimmy Carter is a Judeophobic conspiracy theorist, who believes the Jews control U.S foreign policy and Congress.

Of the anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street movement, the President said, “We are on their side.”

Radical Islamists attacked the Kosher supermarket Hyper-Cacher (French for Super Kosher) in Paris on a Friday afternoon. The attack happened just before the Jewish Sabbath when they knew it would be crowded with Jews. Obama first insisted it was not an anti-Semitic act. And when the world leaders came together to march in Paris as a protest against the Charlie Hebdo shooting and the anti-Semitic Hyper-Cacher attack Obama was conspicuous in his absence.

During his last year as president, Obama’s State Department condemned Israel for allowing people to build houses on land on the western side of the Jordan River. But that’s only part of the story.  The property was legally purchased in 2009 by Dr. Irving and Cherna Moskowitz from a US Presbyterian Church. There were no complaints when the  Presbyterian Church owned it. Team Obama wasn’t objecting to the fact that houses were being built on that land back then. If the homes were intended for Christian or Muslim families, there would have been no issue.

As it is was with so many other cases during the Obama administration, the objection was based on that Jews were going to live in those buildings. There is no other faith in the world that the Obama administration objected to legally purchasing land or buildings then moving into the property they legally purchased.

Obama signed the bipartisan Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, which contained provisions fighting the anti-Semitic BDS movement,  but upon signing the bill, announced that he would not enforce the anti-BDS provisions

One of Obama’s last acts as president was abstaining on a UN Security Council resolution. That abstention was named by the Simon Weisenthal Center as the most anti-Semitic act of 2016:

US President Barack Obama’s “abstention” was actually an endorsement of an onerous, one-sided resolution that, among other items, defines Judaism’s holiest site as “occupied Palestinian territory” and encourages nations to undertake the boycott of goods made by Jews in east Jerusalem and the West Bank. Make no mistake. This new resolution – developed with the Obama administration’s knowledge and some say with its collusion – is much worse and more dangerous than the United Nation’s notorious 1975 “Zionism equals racism” resolution.

The list of Obama’s Antisemitism would be much longer if examples from the Obama administration’s own definition of how anti-Israel acts and statements could be considered anti-Semitic were added. Obama’s hatred of Jews met that definition also. But you get the idea.

NOT ONCE! Not once in all those (and other) cases where Obama and his team seemed to step over the line into Antisemitism territory were there questions from the media asking Obama if he had an issue with Jews. Not once did any of the mainstream media point out Obama’s possible anti-Semitism.  But they invent Trump’s racism. and if Joe Biden believes words create maniacs who want to kill people why was he silent with Obama?

Here’s the bottom line, I do not believe Obama’s anti-Semitic speech and/or actions motivated the shooting at the Pittsburgh or Poway Synagogue shootings. Nor do I think Bernie Sanders had anything to do with the shooting of Rep. Scalise at a GOP baseball practice, or that Elizabeth Warren motivated the Dayton shooting. And I certainly don’t believe the liberal line that President Trump incited this weekend’s horrible massacres.

But if liberal politicians, media talking heads and especially Joe Biden are blaming Trump’s words for the massacres in Dayton and Ohio, then it is just as legitimate to blame Obama for the horrible synagogue shootings in recent months.

WashPo: ‘Free Speech Makes It Difficult to Prosecute White Supremacy’

By Chris Menahan

The Washington Post lamented Thursday that the First Amendment makes it difficult to prosecute “white supremacists” for their political beliefs.

From The Washington Post, “Why free speech makes it difficult to prosecute white supremacy in America”

Federal authorities have used RICO many times to prosecute white prison gangs, but what got the members of organizations such as the Aryan Brotherhood locked up under the statute was not the racism they believed but the acts they committed: crimes including drug trafficking, murder, kidnapping and money laundering.

In the case of mass shootings by those who believe in white supremacy, such as the young white man who allegedly killed 22 people at a Walmart store in El Paso last weekend, prosecutors don’t need RICO to make a criminal case.

But if they wanted to use RICO to hold accountable the collective ideology that radicalized the shooter, they would need to prove that there was an organized enterprise involved with that ideology, that there was a traceable criminal conspiracy to commit violence and that there was a leader or leaders who instructed others to cause harm.

Without that, the collective ideology is not a conspiracy but hate speech. And in the United States, hate speech is not criminal. It’s a right protected by the First Amendment.

C’mon now, where’s your can-do attitude?

This is more like it:

But according to retired law professor G. Robert Blakey, who wrote the RICO statute and is considered the nation’s foremost authority on it, federal authorities should be using RICO to more rigorously investigate white extremist groups without violating free speech protections.

It wouldn’t be easy, he said, but there’s “no excuse” not to try.

Well said. The Bill of Rights is no reason not to start locking people up for their political beliefs!

Incidentally, the Post reported one day earlier how a Trump appointed prosecutor is “putting white supremacists in jail” by hitting them with archaic rioting charges for fighting with antifa (despite one California judge already throwing said rioting charges out for violating the First Amendment):

CAP

By the way, if you’re wondering who classifies as a “white supremacist” in modern America, just ask rapidly-rising Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren:

CAP

That’s all we need to hear, Liz! Lock him up! 

MSNBC’S JASON JOHNSON SAYS TUCKER CARLSON “BASICALLY SUPPORTS TERRORISM” – (THIS IS WHY THEY WANT OUR GUNS AMERICA!)

MSNBC's Jason Johnson Says Tucker Carlson "Basically Supports Terrorism"

Commentator truly jumps the shark.

By Paul Joseph Watson – AUGUST 9, 2019,

MSNBC regular Jason Johnson claimed that Fox News host Tucker Carlson “basically supports terrorism” during an appearance on Chris Hayes’ show last night.

Carlson has been under fire since he asserted earlier this week that America faces much bigger problems than “white supremacy.”

This angered Johnson, who brazenly suggested that Carlson supports the kind of domestic terrorism exemplified by the El Paso mass shooting.

“For the rest of news the media system, for everybody everybody else who is talking about it, we have to now frame this is as this is someone who basically supports terrorism,” said Johnson.

Johnson’s assertion that Tucker supports political violence is also rich given that he previously justified Antifa violence against police by claiming they were a protection force for white nationalists.

“I see Tucker Carlson as a guy who has repeatedly failed in television,” Johnson also remarked, an odd comment given that Carlson’s show routinely competes with Hannity’s Fox News show for the number one cable news broadcast in America.

CASTRO DOXXED TRUMP DONORS BECAUSE HE WANTS PEOPLE TO “THINK TWICE” ABOUT SUPPORTING PRESIDENT

Castro Doxxed Trump Donors Because He Wants People to "Think Twice" About Supporting President

“What I would like for them to do is think twice…,” he stated

By Kit Daniels – AUGUST 8, 2019

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) says he posted a list of Trump donors in San Antonio because he wants people to “think twice” about supporting the president.

During an Wednesday appearance on MSNBC with host Willie Geist, Castro had this to say:

Geist: Congressman, as you look at this list, I know you say you didn’t put their addresses out there. It’s easy to find them. These people undoubtedly are already being harassed online or perhaps face-to-face, in some cases, they could be. What do you say to those people this morning who say, ‘I made a campaign donation, and now I’m going to be harassed. I’m going to have people protesting outside my business or perhaps even my home?’ What do you say to them? Do you want them to repent for their support for Donald Trump, or what do you want from them?

Castro: Well, the first thing is that I don’t want anybody harassed or targeted…

Geist: But they will be, because you put their names in public.

Castro: Look, that was not my intention.

Geist: But that’s what will happen.

Castro: These things are public. No, what I would like for them to do is think twice about supporting a guy who is fueling hate in this country.

While it’s true the information was already publicly available, the public as a whole wasn’t even looking at the list until Castro very publicly shined a spotlight on it, given the resulting controversy.

It could be argued that there’s a difference between having your information listed in a phone book versus having it smacked on a bright, Interstate billboard.

Interestingly, six of the donors also gave money to Castro, according to the Daily Caller.

“The reports state that three people on the list who donated the maximum amount of $5,600 to the president also maxed out to Joaquin Castro’s congressional campaign, while another three individuals named donated to Julian Castro’s [his brother] mayoral campaign,” the outlet reported. Julian Castro is in the midst of a long-shot presidential campaign, which is being run by his twin brother.”

Fox News interviewed several of these donors.

“If he wants to play in Washington, he needs to move to Washington,” said one of the donors. “If he wants to play in San Antonio, he needs to at least be sensitive.”

“The rest of the community is sensitive. We’re sensitive to both Republican and Democrat views.”

“A lot of us here in San Antonio are independents,” he added.

(THIS IS WHY THEY WANT OUR GUNS AMERICA) – New Hollywood Movie Features Liberal Elites Hunting Conservatives for Sport

‘The Hunt’ is about elite liberals paying to hunt rural, conservative Americans in a safari park.

By Richard Moorhead

An upcoming Universal Pictures movie is receiving scrutiny from its own publisher for its graphic depiction of political violence against conservative Americans.

The Hunt is about elite liberals kidnapping conservatives and paying to hunt them in a safari-style theme park in Europe. Watch the trailer here:

It is worth nothing that the movie’s trailer doesn’t exactly imply the film’s premise encourages violence against Trump supporters. The liberals paying to kill conservatives are depicted in a clearly villainous fashion, sipping champagne on private planes as their explain their desire to terrorize rural country bumpkins, who see they as less than human beings.

The conservative ‘prey’ in the movie speak with exaggerated southern accents and other stereotypes commonly utilized by the political left to tar right-leaning Americans. Some of them speak of being proud gun owners.

Betty Gilpin stars as a heroine who seeks to rally the other kidnapped “conservatives” in order to escape the twisted theme park.

The release of such a politically contentious movie is being debated at Universal Pictures, the film’s publisher. After the wake of the politically-charged violence seen at Dayton and El Paso, Texas, Universal is said to be reconsidering its promotional strategy for the movie. ESPN already refused to air an ad for ‘The Hunt’ earlier this summer.

‘The Hunt’ is still slated for release on September 27th, but it’s probably possible it will get delayed or even cancelled as this point. The latter possibility is less likely, as the film’s $18 million budget has already been spent.

It’s unclear what kind of reception the film will receive from the broader public. It’s already been a contentious project in Hollywood, where media elites are presumably less than thrilled to see liberal globalists depicted as callous murderers.

 

FILM DEPICTS COP KILLERS AS FOLK HEROES ON THE RUN

Film Depicts Cop Killers as Folk Heroes on the Run

Lead couple described as a black Bonnie & Clyde

  – AUGUST 7, 2019

Hollywood is promoting a movie depicting a black couple on the run after killing a police officer during a routine traffic stop gone awry.

The unsettling opening of “Queen and Slim” sets the stage for the leading duo – described as a “black Bonnie and Clyde” – to be on the run from authorities.

“There’s going to be people on both sides in this narrative and hopefully most are on the right side of history and that we’re part of changing that narrative into a space that does justice for black people,” said director Melina Matsoukas. “The main theme is love and how in our community as black people that’s our best power to fight against injustice.”

During the lead duo’s odyssey throughout a Hollywood caricature of America’s deep south, Slim (Daniel Kaluuya) and Queen (Jodie Turner-Smith) meet characters seemingly inspired by their exploits.

“Y’all gave us something to believe in, we needed that for real,” said one character, with man asking “Y’all the new Black Panthers? Power to the people.”

The lead couple are later reassured by an older woman telling them “don’t worry, you’re safe here.”

CAP

The film’s November 27 release comes two months after a movie celebrating liberal elites killing stereotypical Trump supporters, called “The Hunt,” hits theaters.

TWITTER LOCKS MCCONNELL CAMPAIGN’S ACCOUNT FOR SHOWING LEFTISTS THREATENING VIOLENCE OUTSIDE HOME

Twitter Locks McConnell Campaign’s Account For Showing Leftists Threatening Violence Outside Home

Also allowed “Massacre Mitch” to trend

8/7/2019

Twitter forced Sen. Mitch McConnell’s campaign Team Mitch to remove video of leftists calling for violence outside the Senate Majority Leader’s home in Louisville, Kentucky on Monday, saying the footage violates the platform’s “violent threats policy.”

“This morning, Twitter locked our account for posting the video of real-world, violent threats made against Mitch McConnell,” McConnell’s campaign manager Kevin Golden said.

“We appealed and Twitter stood by their decision, saying our account will remain locked until we delete the video.”

The social media company also forced two other accounts to remove the video, including congressional staffer Ben Goldey and Daily Wire journalist Ryan Saavedra, despite the video’s obvious newsworthiness.

CAP

In the video, far-left Black Lives Matter activist complained that McConnell should be killed, either by murder or natural causes.

“Just stab the motherfucker in the heart, please,” Helm said of a hypothetical McConnell voodoo doll.

“One of those heart attacks where they can’t breath, and they’re holding their chest and they fall backwards,” she said. “He’s in there nursing his broken arm. He should have broken his raggedy, wrinkled-ass neck.”

Meanwhile, Twitter has allowed, and likely helped propagate, #MassacreMitch to trend after leftists blamed him for the two shootings in El Paso and Dayton last weekend.

Watch the disturbing video Twitter doesn’t want you to see below:

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑