Popular guerrilla news outlet marked as ‘spam’ that violates ‘community standards’
Infowars.com – MARCH 11, 2019
Facebook suddenly blocked the sharing of Zero Hedge articles on its platform Monday, claiming the outlet violates its community standards.
When a Zero Hedge article is linked on Facebook, instead of showing the content, a message pops up saying: “the link you tried to visit goes against our community standards.”
It’s unclear why Facebook decided to mark Zero Hedge as spam, as the platform has yet to issue a statement on the matter.
It’s possible Facebook has simply determined that Zero Hedge must be silenced due to its relentless coverage of Facebook’s many problems, including privacy violations, mass abandonment by younger users, systematic censorship, and shady government cooperation.
The move is nonetheless significant: even Infowars content can still be shared on Facebook despite being banned by nearly all major social media platforms, including Facebook.
Media Matters launched a new smear against Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Sunday compiling a bunch of out-of-context, heavily edited comments/jokes he made over a decade ago while on shock jock radio with Bubba the Love Sponge.
Carlson was employed by MSNBC at the time and it caused no controversy.
Bill Maher made similar comments in the past and was defended by the left:
Let's recall when Bill Maher said it was perfectly fine for a teacher to rape a 12-year-old resulting in two children, and he wasn't joking he defended it vehemently. Waiting for your video on this. #TuckerCarlson@TuckerCarlson Tucker Carlson pic.twitter.com/whly6UC3JU
Does anyone believe for a second these leftists give a s*** what Tucker Carlson said on shock jock radio with Bubba the Love Sponge so many years ago?
They want to take him down because he represents a threat to the establishment.
They don’t like the fact he stands up against the US war machine and speaks out against mass immigration.
They don’t like the fact he gives honest leftists like Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang a platform on national television.
That’s why some loser went through potentially hundreds of these old interviews and listened to them in their entirety just find some comments/jokes they could take out of context to attack him over.
They’re trying to destroy this man because of the threat he represents to the establishment and their billionaire globalist bosses. They can’t argue in favor of prog-globalism and defend brainwashing kids with transgender propaganda so they just dig up old comments they can misconstrue and take out of context.
A search of their archives shows they defended Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s defense of infanticide and didn’t even write about his blackface-KKK controversy (other than to attack one Fox News employee for suggesting Northam should “dig in” and not resign [which was also taken totally out of context]).
These dishonest hacks don’t give a damn about anything other than helping their globalist masters seize power.
Kudos to Tucker Carlson for refusing to issue a groveling apology and instead standing strong in the face of these dishonest smears.
On Sunday, democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper.
During the segment, Tapper spoke with Castro about the issue of reparations for descendants of slavery: “This is also dividing Democrats on the trail. You’ve said that there needs to be some kind of reparations to descendants of slaves to compensate for years of slavery and discrimination against African Americans in this country.”
Tapper then played a clip in which presidential rival Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) talks about Castro’s and Sen. Kamala Harris’ (D-CA) support for reparations:
What do they mean? I’m not sure anyone’s very clear. What I just said is that I think we must do everything that we can to address the massive level of disparity that exists in this country.
Tapper asked Castro: “So, what do you mean? Do you think that there should be actual monetary payments to descendants of slaves? Do support more like what Senator Sanders is talking about, policies such as child care and education that help those who are disadvantaged?”
Castro replied:
Well, you know, what I said was that I’ve long believed that this country should address slavery, the original sin of slavery, including by looking at reparations, and if I’m president, then I’m going to appoint a commission or task force to determine the best way to do that. There’s a tremendous amount of disagreement on how we would do that.
Castro then took a jab at Sanders, saying that he shouldn’t be arguing against an approach to reparations that might include “writing a big check” because that’s been the senator from Vermont’s position on health care and college tuition.
He concluded: “So, if under the Constitution, we compensate people because we take their property, why wouldn’t you compensate people who actually were property?”
The notion of somehow compensating the ancestors of American slaves has long been a topic of discussion among academics and political thinkers. However, the mechanics by which a reparations program would operate have challenged even the most diligent.
On an episode of “Point Taken” on PBS regarding reparations, libertarian commentator Kmele Foster stated bluntly: “I think the important things to consider are, who pays? How much do they pay? And who do they pay it to? These are impossibly difficult questions to actually reconcile and answer in a meaningful and just way.”
Even progressive author Ta-Nehisi Coates, in his 2014 thesis on “the case for reparations” published in The Atlantic, didn’t come to any conclusion as to how reparations should work, writing in part:
Perhaps no number can fully capture the multi-century plunder of black people in America. Perhaps the number is so large that it can’t be imagined, let alone calculated and dispensed. But I believe that wrestling publicly with these questions matters as much as—if not more than—the specific answers that might be produced. An America that asks what it owes its most vulnerable citizens is improved and humane. An America that looks away is ignoring not just the sins of the past but the sins of the present and the certain sins of the future. More important than any single check cut to any African American, the payment of reparations would represent America’s maturation out of the childhood myth of its innocence into a wisdom worthy of its founders.
Coates does refer to a bill from former Rep. John Conyers as the beginning of a potential solution: “A country curious about how reparations might actually work has an easy solution in [John] Conyers’s bill, now called HR 40, the Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act. We would support this bill, submit the question to study, and then assess the possible solutions.”
Former President Obama even commented on the non-feasibility of a reparations program:
As a practical matter, it is hard to think of any society in human history in which a majority population has said that as a consequence of historic wrongs, we are now going to take a big chunk of the nation’s resources over a long period of time to make that right.
Instead, Obama pointed toward progressive redistributionist programs as a means of reparations:
[I am] not so optimistic as to think you would ever be able to garner a majority of the American Congress that would make those kinds of investments above and beyond the kind of investments that could be made in a progressive program for lifting up all people.
As the Democratic presidential candidates gear up for a contentious primary season, they should be prepared to answer questions about reparations. With Julián Castro, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren already promoting the issue, it’s unlikely that it will fade silently into the night.
Film review site Rotten Tomatoes shows that only 36 percent of the audience liked Captain Marvel, compared to 81 percent of the professional critic class who liked it.
Rotten Tomatoes displays two scores for Captain Marvel–one aggregated from reviews of movies critics in different publications, and another from general user ratings.
The list of approved critics handed the new film a high 81 percent mark, but average viewers were less impressed, clocking in at only 36 percent liking the movie.
The film has already faced some controversy on Rotten Tomatoes. The movie-reviewing site shut down audience reviews until the film actually came out, citing their concern that trolls would rig the numbers.
Captain Marvel features the first female-led Marvel superhero, and the film is full of social justice themes.
Star Brie Larson claims her acting in the movie is her “activism” and declared the movie to be about “intersectional feminism.” Larson also kicked off promotion by complaining about movie critics being “overwhelmingly white male .”
Already, Hollywood and the media is circling the wagons around the movie. The Daily Beast accused critics of the movie of being “men’s rights activists and incels,” while a critic for the Wrap openly lauded the film for “evoking a riot grrrl-adjacent feeling.”
Not all professional critics were impressed, however. The Hollywood Reportergave the film a mediocre review, and an Indiewire review summed up the film, saying, “Neither a blast from the past, nor an inspiring glimpse into the future, at the end of the day it’s just another Marvel movie.”
A British rapper briefly identified as female in order to break a weightlifting record and prove a point about transgender athletes.
“I keep hearing about how biological men don’t have any physical strength advantage over women in 2019… So watch me DESTROY the British Women’s deadlift record without trying. P.S. I identified as a woman whilst lifting the weight. Don’t be a bigot,” Zuby Tweeted, attaching a video of himself breaking the record.
I keep hearing about how biological men don't have any physical strength advantage over women in 2019…
So watch me DESTROY the British Women's deadlift record without trying.
“A man can decide to be female, take hormones if required by whatever sporting organization is concerned, win everything in sight and perhaps earn a small fortune, and then reverse his decision and go back to making babies if he so desires,” she originally said. “It’s insane and it’s cheating. I am happy to address a transgender woman in whatever form she prefers, but I would not be happy to compete against her. It would not be fair.”
Zuby said that he only identifies as female while weightlifting. Given the new leftist rules on gender identity, one would suspect that Zuby has returned to identifying as male now that he has broken the records.
Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde claim direct messages aren’t monitored
By Dan Lyman Thursday, March 07, 2019
Twitter founder Jack Dorsey and chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde told podcast host Joe Rogan that direct messages on the social media site are not monitored — a claim challenged by investigative journalist James O’Keefe of Project Veritas.
When asked by Rogan if company employees “read direct messages,” Dorsey replied, “We don’t read direct messages.”
Gadde followed up, explaining that the only direct messages read by employees are those which have been reported to Twitter support.
Rogan pressed further, asking if it was possible for Twitter employees to intentionally peruse a user’s direct messages.
“I don’t think so,” Gadde replied.
However, according to multiple Twitter engineers who discussed the subject of direct messages with undercover Project Veritas journalists, Dorsey and Gadde may have been misleading with their answers, at best.
“There’s teams dedicated to it [reading direct messages],” said Clay Haynes, a senior network security engineer at Twitter. “I mean, we’re talking… at least three or four hundred people… they’re paid to look at dick pics.”
“It is creepy Big Brother.”
Pranay Singh, a direct messaging engineer, revealed that all content shared on the platform — including private messages — are stored on Twitter servers for analytical and advertising purposes.
“So all your sex messages and your dick pics are on my server now,” Singh said. “Everything. Anything you post online.”
“A machine is going to look at it. An algorithm will look at it, and they’ll make a virtual profile about you.”
Tom's Blog 