REPORT: Tech Elite Building ‘Social Credit’ System Masters of The Universe to Track Everything You Do Zuckerscore: Points Control Your Freedom?

By Allum Bokhari

Fast Company has caught on to what Breitbart News has been highlighting for some time: that the Big Tech Masters of the Universe are developing systems to monitor and regulate personal behavior that closely **resemble China’s totalitarian “social credit” system.**

The “social credit” system assigns all Chinese citizens a “social credit score.” A citizen’s score drops if he engages in a range of disfavored activities, ranging from littering to supporting political dissidents.

Citizens whose score drops low enough can find themselves subject to strict punishment, including bans from the use of public transport, exclusion from top jobs, and prohibitions on their children attending top-rated schools.

This may sound alien and Orwellian, but as Fast Company notes, Silicon Valley is bringing a version of this grim reality to America.

Via Fast Company:

Many Westerners are disturbed by what they read about China’s social credit system. But such systems, it turns out, are not unique to China. A parallel system is developing in the United States, in part as the result of Silicon Valley and technology-industry user policies, and in part by surveillance of social media activity by private companies.

The articles goes on to note a range of ways in which western citizens are being systematically rated, and in some cases excluded, by corporate America. These include insurance companies scanning the social media feeds of applicants, an app called “PatronScan,” that logs the face and name of troublesome bar and restaurant clientele, and the growing tendency of services like Airbnb, Uber, and WhatsApp to ban users for arbitrary reasons.

The comparison to China’s social credit system is similar to the one this reporter made on Breitbart News Daily in June:

In China, they have what’s called a “social credit system” — in which, if you engage in behavior that the regime doesn’t like, they’ll assign you a score, and when it drops below a certain point, they’ll exclude you from certain basic services, like transportation, they might not let your kids go to good schools — all sorts of basic services, they’ll cut you off from.

We have a corporate version of this already evolving. So if you don’t do the things that Facebook approves of, they’re going to cut you off from their platform, which is now essential for maintaining a social network, building a business, running for office. We rely on Facebook and other social media platforms for so many things. Uber and Lyft will also ban you now — they’ve started to ban people for political viewpoints, so you think China is the only one that’s going to cut you off from transportation for having the wrong opinions — well, Western corporations are now doing that, too. Airbnb, Amazon, they’re all doing it.

One other comparison from the Fast Company article deserves note — the Chinese communist government’s partnership with tech platforms like Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter. Far from aiding dissidents, Chinese social media companies like Weibo and WeChat aid and abet the government in the persecution of its citizens.

That too, has eerie parallels with the West, where social media platforms have become a means of extra-judicial censorship for politicians. Because America has the First Amendment, politicians can’t pass laws suppressing speech or punishing dissidents against the established order — but they can, and frequently do, bully tech companies into doing their dirty work for them.

August 26, 2019 0

Hypocrisy: New York Times Alleges Conspiracy After Backing Boycotts of Conservative Media

By Joel B. Pollak

New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger alleged that his newspaper was the target of a vast right-wing conspiracy on Sunday — after the paper boosted an effort to shut down conservative media by encouraging boycotts since early 2017.

Last week, Breitbart News exposed a history of racist and antisemitic tweets by a Times politics editor, Tom Wright-Piersanti. The Times admitted Sunday, in a news article, that the tweets were racist and antisemitic — though it did not indicate what action, if any, it was taking against the editor. In a statement to newsroom staff, Sulzberger — who did not acknowledge that the tweets were racist and antisemitic — alleged that the Times had been the victim of “a coordinated campaign by President Trump’s allies to attack hundreds of journalists in retaliation for coverage of the administration.”

The Times‘ objection is rich, given that it boosted an effort by left-wing activists to shut down conservative media solely for their journalists’ coverage of the left and their editorial support for President Donald Trump.

In January 2017, the Times published an op-ed by an author named Pagan Kennedy, titled “How to Destroy the Business Model of Breitbart and Fake News.” The article was a puff piece boosting the efforts of Sleeping Giants (whose ringleader was later unmasked by the Daily Caller as advertising executive Matt Rivitz). The piece even reprinted instructions for helping the boycott. It concluded, admiringly: “[A] new consumer movement is rising, and activists believe that where votes failed, wallets may prevail. This struggle is about much more than ads on Breitbart News — it’s about using corporations as shields to protect vulnerable people from bullying and hate crimes.”

The Times is attempting to play the victim rather than applying the same standard toward hate speech in its own room that it applies to others. Sulzberger, who took over the paper in 2018, claims the Times has “high standards,” but in effect he is arguing that that Timesjournalists ought to be held to a lower standard — that it is unfair to report “on news organizations in the same way that news organizations report on elected officials and other public figures.”

Perhaps the most laughable claim in Sulzberger’s statement is that the Times‘ critics are “[u]nable to challenge the accuracy of our reporting.” This is a newspaper that chased the Russia collusion hoax for the better part of three years, and whose executive editor, Dean Banquet, recently described plans to build the next year of news around the idea that “racism and white supremacy” are “the foundation of all of the systems in the country.”

That is not journalism; that is propaganda. And for years the Times has been propagandizing against conservative media outlets, hoping to destroy them, even printing instructions to guide readers in the effort. Far from being a victim, the Times is one of the great bullies of the mainstream media. Scrutiny is long overdue.

August 26, 2019 0

NYT editor’s tweets mocking Jews, Indians amid newspaper’s ‘anti-racist’ drive

A politics editor at the New York Times faces charges of anti-Semitism and bigotry after a series of old insensitive tweets surfaced online. This comes after a similar scandal with its Washington editor and leaked editorial tapes.

Breitbart News uncovered the tweets in an investigation published on Thursday, detailing a litany of offensive and racially-charged remarks from senior staff editor Tom Wright-Piersanti, who has worked at the Gray Lady for a little over five years, according to his LinkedIn profile.

Before that, on New Year’s day in 2010, Wright-Piersanti said: “I was going to say ‘Crappy Jew Year,’ but one of my resolutions is to be less anti-Semitic. So… HAPPY Jew Year. You Jews.”

The tweet has since been deleted.

In another missive dated December 2009, the future Times editor posted a photo of a vehicle with what appears to be a menorah – associated with the religious holiday of Hanukkah – on its roof, and asked “Who called the Jew police?”

Though the “Jew police” tweet was still publicly viewable when Breitbart’s story first ran, it has also since mysteriously vanished from Wright-Piersanti’s Twitter page.

The apparently anti-Semitic comments prompted the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), one of the oldest Jewish political advocacy groups in the US, to demand for the editor’s swift termination, and a review of past stories he edited.

“The Zionist Organization of America urges the New York Times to immediately dismiss this individual and to undertake a review of all of the stories that he has edited for possible antisemitic bias,” a spokesperson for ZOA told Breitbart News.

In addition to members of the Jewish faith, Wright-Piersanti’s tweets often fixated on “Indians” as well, though it’s not always clear if he is referring to Native AmericRAans or people from India.

“There are four indian guys with mohawks in this one class, and each one is a douche in his own awful way,” he tweeted in December 2009.

I hate mohawk Indians.

A number of other posts singled out Indians for ridicule or insult as well, all of which remain public on Wright-Piersanti’s page at the time of publication.

In another deleted tweet, the Times editor mused “With asian babies, is it racist to say to the parents, ‘Aw, he looks just like you!’? What if you say it before you see any pictures?”

While the Times has not yet addressed the allegations publicly, Wright-Piersanti tweeted an apology on Thursday morning, after scrubbing a number of the offending tweets from his page, which he briefly set to private.

I have deleted tweets from a decade ago that are offensive. I am deeply sorry.

— Tom Wright-Piersanti (@tomwp) August 22, 2019

Following the publication of Brietbart’s investigation, Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, weighed in on the story, tweeting “Disgusting. But we shouldn’t expect any better from the New York Times. This is who they are.”

Earlier this month, the Times demoted its deputy Washington editor for “serious lapses in judgement” in the form of tweets criticized as ‘racist.’

NYT shifts from Russiagate to racism, insisting Orange Man Still Bad

Last week, a transcript of an internal town hall meeting surfaced, showing that the newspaper deliberately decided to shift its coverage of President Donald Trump from his supposed connections to Russia to “race and other divisions.”

August 23, 2019 0

Senate Probes Biden-Linked, Chinese Military-Boosting Tech Sale Grassley Compares to Uranium One

By Haris Alic

The Senate Finance Committee is probing the Obama administration’s 2015 decision to approve the sale of a U.S. company with insight into “military applications” to the Chinese government and an investment firm run by former Vice President Joe Biden’s youngest son, Hunter Biden.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the committee’s chairman, sent a letter to the Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin on Thursday requesting documents relating to the sale of Henniges, a Michigan-based automotive company, to Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) and Bohai Harvest RST (BHR). The latter was formed in 2013 by a merger between a subsidiary of the Bank of China and Rosemont Seneca, a firm started by Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz, the stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry.

Since AVIC was a subsidiary of the Chinese government and Henniges, the producer of “dual-use” anti-vibration technology with military application, the deal required approval from the Obama administration’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The panel — made up of representatives from 16 different federal bodies, including the departments of State, Treasury, and Defense — is required to review any transaction that could lead to a foreign person gaining control of an American business.

In question is whether CIFUS was influenced by Obama administration officials, most notedly Joe Biden and John Kerry, who had an interest in seeing the deal move forward.

“The direct involvement of Mr. Hunter Biden and Mr. Heinz in the acquisition of Henniges by the Chinese government creates a potential conflict of interest,” Grassley wrote.

The senator noted in his letter that AVIC’s bid for Henniges should have immediately set off alarm bells in the Obama White House. In 2007, AVIC “reportedly involved in stealing sensitive data regarding the Joint Strike Fighter program,” which it later “reportedly incorporated … into China’s J-20 and J‑31 aircraft.”

Even more troubling, however, is that bid was facilitated at the same time China was staking out a more adversarial role in global affairs. At the time, Beijing was suspected of undermining U.S. cybersecurity by underwriting hackers stealing governmental data. There was also simmering tension over disputes in the South China Sea.

Despite the threat to national security, the $600 million deal was approved by CIFUS, with AVIC purchasing 51 percent of the company and BHR taking ownership of the other 49 percent. Upon purchase, an industry newsletter stated the deal was the “biggest Chinese investment into US automotive manufacturing assets to date.”

In his letter to Mnuchin, Grassley compared the deal to the Uranium One scandal, which arose when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton approved the sale of a Canadian mining company to Rosatom, the state-owned Russian nuclear energy conglomerate. It later emerged that both investors in the company and Russian energy officials had donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation.

“As with the Uranium One transaction, there is cause for concern that potential conflicts of interest could have influenced CFIUS’ approval of the Henniges transaction,” Grassley wrote. “Accordingly, Congress and the public must fully understand the decision-making process that led to the Henniges approval and the extent to which CFIUS fully considered the transaction’s national security risks.”

This is not the first time that Hunter Biden’s ties to China have caused grief for his father’s political career. As Peter Schweizer, a senior contributor at Breitbart News, revealed in his bestselling book Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends, Hunter Biden signed the $1.5 billion deal creating BHR in 2013 only ten days after visiting China aboard Air Force Two with his father.

August 16, 2019 0

EXCLUSIVE: Google Leftists Condemn CPAC as ‘Circus Platform for Hate’ in Leaked Discussion

By Allum Bokhart

Breitbart News has obtained a leaked discussion from inside Google showing far-left employees celebrating the company’s decision not to sponsor 2019’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), one of the most prominent annual gathering of conservatives in the U.S.

The leaked discussion, which can be read in full below, took place in January 2019, a month before CPAC. In the discussion, multiple Google employees expressed their hostility towards the conference and Google’s previous sponsorship of it. Their posts include:

A Google employee describing CPAC as a “circus platform for hate” and stating that “no company should voluntarily align with it.”
A Google employee describing CPAC as a platform for “anti-queer politicians.”
An accusation from a Google employee that CPAC has “transgressed to attacking people’s rights.”
A general atmosphere of celebration around Google’s decision, announced in the discussion by then-senior director of U.S. public policy Adam Kovacevich, not to fund CPAC in 2019

Only one employee, recently-fired Google software engineer Mike Wacker, disagreed with the company’s decision not to fund the conference, suggesting Google CEO Sundar Pichai’s claims of political neutrality were becoming “empty words.”

“Google CEO Sundar Pichai has insisted time and time again that Google is a nonpartisan company, but more and more those words seem like empty words” wrote Wacker.

“Few things have alienated conservatives at Google as much as the CPAC debate, and the US public policy team’s decision here will only further that alienation. It’s clear that the demands of the dominant activist tribe matter more than principled pluralism at this company.”

Read the full leaked thread below:

Google and CPAC – Leaked Di… by Allum on Scribd

Breitbart News has previously published leaked material revealing the company’s intense internal struggle over its sponsorship of CPAC. On one side are Google’s radical far-left employees (EXCLUSIVE: Left-wing Google Employees Urge Company to Disavow CPAC Over ‘Ethnonationalism,’ ‘Hate’), and on the other is Google’s lobbying officials, who frame the funding of CPAC and other conservative institutions as a necessary evil to influence the conservative movement and protect the company from conservative regulation (LEAKED AUDIO: Google Discusses ‘Steering’ The Conservative Movement).

Google’s decision not to fund CPAC in 2019 will likely be perceived as a victory for the former group, although it might also be due to a perception that its sponsorship of the conference was not sufficient to influence it — as several left-wing employees pointed out in the leaked discussion thread, the fact that Google sponsored CPAC in 2018 did not stop the conference from inviting fired Google engineer James Damore — who filed a class-action lawsuit against his former company — to speak on a panel.

Google did not immediately reply to Breitbart News’ request for comment.

August 6, 2019 0

Of Course They Did

Mark Dice

Published on Aug 5, 2019

August 5, 2019 0

Politician Advocating ‘Gender Neutral’ Toilets for Kids Now Arrested for Child Sex Crimes

Screen Shot 2019-07-18 at 2.22.28 PM

By Warner Todd Huston

**A politician that puffed himself up as the “inclusive” representative for trying to push “gender neutral” bathrooms on children has now been arrested and charged with child sex crimes.**

The arrest really does confirm the suspicion that many people inevitably have that these extremist, left-wingers pushing the gay and transgender agendas are at heart sex criminals.

The incident occurred in Middlesborough, UK, where politician David Smith launched a campaign to push the gay/transgender bathroom agenda right after he was elected in Teeside, Yorkshire. Smith was a member of the Conservative Party, according to the BBC.

Before you get confused, the “Conservative Party” in the UK is not really conservative. It is a sham party, really. In fact, Brexit Party leader, Nigel Farage, recently told Breitbart News that the “Conservative Party” in the UK can’t be trusted because “they’re not really conservative.”

In any case, Smith has been charged with nine counts of sexual touching of a child, the BBC reported. He is due to appear in court to face charges on August 7.

For his part, Smith denies all charges.

“I completely reject these spurious allegations and removing myself from the party will ensure I can focus all my efforts on fighting to clear my name,” Smith said in a statement.

Still, he resigned from the party but refused to resign from his elected position. After all, he makes £6,378 to serve, so he doesn’t want to lose the cash.

He added, that he had “worked hard to ensure I serve the people of Coulby Newham.”

Smith also defended his gay agenda saying, “This is who I am as a person and a community activist. The allegations made against my character are nothing more than damaging lies and moving forward, I will seek to prove this is the case in a court of law.”

But, let’s face it. Don’t you assume that men who are pushing “gender neutral” bathrooms are really just trying to create a situation where they can legally be in the bathroom with little girls?

July 18, 2019 0

PEW RESEARCH: AVERAGE ILLEGAL ALIEN LIVED IN AMERICA FOR 15 YEARS

Of the roughly 11 to 22 million illegal aliens living in the U.S., the average illegal alien has lived in the country for 15 years — imposing an enormous financial burden on American taxpayers

By John Binder

The average illegal alien in the United States has lived in the country for 15 years, a new analysis finds.

The latest research by Pew Research Center reveals that, of the roughly 11 to 22 million illegal aliens living in the U.S., the average illegal alien has lived in the country for 15 years — imposing an enormous financial burden on American taxpayers.

In 2000, the average illegal alien lived in the U.S. for about 7.2 years. Today, the average time that an illegal alien lives in the country has more than doubled just two decades later.

“In 2017, only 20% of unauthorized immigrant adults lived in the U.S. for five years or less, down from 30% a decade earlier,” Pew analysts write. “About two-thirds of unauthorized immigrants have been in the U.S. for more than 10 years; a decade earlier, less than half had.”

In the U.S. workforce, there are at least 7.6 million illegal aliens holding American jobs that would have otherwise gone to American citizens and legal immigrants. This is more than double the number of illegal aliens who were in the U.S. workforce in 1995 when just 3.6 million held American jobs.

The research uncovers the level to which the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is overburdened with being tasked with deporting all 11 to 22 million illegal aliens — a job that is severely limited due to their lack of resources.

As Breitbart News reported, the cost of illegal aliens to American taxpayers over a lifetime is about $746.3 billion. Compare this to the cost of a single deportation, which is about $10,854 per illegal alien based on Fiscal Year 2016 totals.

Overall, deporting every illegal alien in the country would amount to a cost savings of about $622 billion over the course of a lifetime. This indicates that deporting illegal aliens is six times less costly than what it costs American taxpayers to currently subsidize the millions of illegal aliens living in the U.S.

The Trump administration has attempted to conduct mass deportations and ICE raids over the last month, though much of the operations have been allegedly plagued by leaks out of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), sources tell Breitbart News, that put ICE agents at risk and tip off illegal aliens and sanctuary cities.

July 15, 2019 0

Google SUED For Anti-Conservative, Anti-White Bias

James Allsup

June 14, 2019 0

Google staff keep ‘blacklist’ of conservative and ‘fringe’ sites – report

Google reportedly runs two “blacklists,” one allowing staff to remove “fringe” websites from search results and another for filtering out opinion articles, according to conservative news outlet the Daily Caller.

The lists allow Google employees –who CEO Sundar Pichai told Congress in December never “manually intervene on any particular search result”– to suppress certain addresses in a user’s search results.

The Daily Caller claims to have seen screenshots of the lists in question. Google did not address whether its staff deliberately weed out certain political content, but did say they are working to filter out “inappropriate” search results.

The first list, titled “webanswers_url_blacklist,” lets staff block specific web addresses from popping up in Google’s ‘featured snippets’ when a user asks a question. Many of the pages blocked are op-ed articles, which a user could mistake for straight news reporting. This list appears to target opinion pieces in general, regardless of their political bent.

Another list, which the Daily Caller suggests was compiled by algorithm, blanket blacklists a host of conservative and “fringe” sites from appearing in the ‘featured snippets.’ The American Spectator, Breitbart, The Gateway Pundit and the website of Bring Your Bible to School Day are among those included. Several progressive sites, including Consortium News and a blog called Breitbart Unmasked also reportedly made the list.

That Google would censor conservative or “fringe” content will come as no surprise to some. The company, along with a bevy of other Silicon Valley tech giants, has been accused of harboring a liberal bias for several years now, with new stories of favoritism surfacing regularly.

A recent study found that Google’s search algorithms display a “left-leaning ideological skew,” while video footage of an internal company meeting recorded after the 2016 election showed executives calling Donald Trump’s victory “deeply offensive” and talking about using AI to fight populism in future.

YouTube, a subsidiary of Google, implemented a blanket ban on “hateful” and “supremacist” videos last week. The ban, which came about after Vox journalist Carlos Maza led a campaign against conservative shock-jock Steven Crowder, swept away or demonetized thousands of videos critical of the social justice movement and several video reports on extremist movements by legitimate journalists.

‘This will not go well’: YouTube cracks down on pundits & journalists after policy change

Though the right has made the most noise about big tech’s alleged censorship efforts, a growing number of left-wing voices have been sounding the alarm too. Facebook has been perhaps most overt in clamping down on anti-establishment content across the political spectrum, but Google has also come under fire for changing its algorithms to de-rank left-wing, socialist, and anti-war websites.

Journalist Max Blumenthal called the tech giants’ clampdown part of “a wider war on dissident narratives in online media.”

June 13, 2019 0