social media - The War on Guns

Montana Warns YouTube of Consequences for Acting as a Democrat Proxy to Censor Speech

Big Tech argues they deserve exemptions because they are not content providers. Acting as content deniers, suppressing anything that does not advance a state-approved “progressive” narrative, and facilitating the universal spread of that which does, effectively amounts to the same thing. [More]

How is removing legal content at the demand of Democrat politicians not a de facto First Amendment violation?

Sensitive, Aren’t We?

Oh, so that’s the reason.

I appealed the warning and gave as my reason:

This tweet documents photographic evidence that Hunter Biden has committed a second firearms-related felony that no one else in the media is covering.

That and I could find a million photos on Twitter that show more skin.

I’ll letcha know what they say.

UPDATE

I just noticed someone sent me a Facebook message yesterday:

Thanks for posting the Ammoland.com article on your fB Page on June 8 & 9th. I was curious if you received any notice from fB about it because I attempted to share it on my page and immediately noticed that it goes “against Community Guidelines” Really?!?!

As a result of sharing it, my #2A businesses have been issued a 28-day ban on Facebook.

I thought it was a well-documented and written article with citations, proof, and a reasonable argument.

Because there is no “Fact-Check” or notice on the post, it must be ok with it. However, just now, in writing this message, I tried to save the article here on fB, which issued two additional warnings that it was contraband.

Again though wanted to thank you for writing the article and the interesting observation and argument presented. I am curious if you have seen any additional follow-up or responses about your presentation. Somebody doesn’t want folks to ask the question.

That, of course, was the same Hunter Biden article, and no, FB never contacted me or took any kind of ban action against me. This and this are both still up with no warnings to me. I guess if they don’t let you know it makes exposing their censorship practices less likely.

Remember the first time they said I violated their “community standards”?

People lots bigger than me don’t want anyone to notice this. Unfortunately, I can’t create a Streisand Effect by myself.

Alternatively, Stop Helping Information Controllers Create Manipulative Narratives

Stop Making Killers Famous [More]

Agreed. Make the @$$holes notorious instead by exposing their collectivist natures. After all, no monster who does this can possibly believe in due process and equal protection, which automatically makes them enemies of freedom advocates (even though the collectivists will throw out terms like “right-wing” to conflate them with traditional culturists.)

What I don’t agree with is withholding their identities for reasons highlighted here. Doing so makes us rely entirely on politically beholden “authorities” and their media allies for an “official” narrative, with social media tech giants erasing any online tracks that might lead to different endpoints. That results in the public being deceived by lies claiming outrageous crap like “Robert ‘Bobby’ Crimo III confirmed to be raging Trump supporter.” Engineered public ignorance is then exploited to gin up demands for gun bans.

So no, I don’t agree that names should be suppressed. Had that effort been more thorough, we would not be able to see for ourselves the following information I have been warned may be considered “law enforcement sensitive” (although I don’t see why):

I suggest if you’re interested in these that you save what you want before someone tries to disappear them.

More, not fewer people should be aware of these because it is our right to investigate claims for ourselves. After all, if the government wanting to keep things under wraps was a showstopper, Gunwalker would still be a state secret.

I submit that suppression is more dangerous than any desire of budding maniacs for fame, there is no credible data showing the behavior of anyone so twisted and evil would be channeled into more benign pursuits, and the most effective thing those wishing to deter mass killers could do would be to stop providing them with unlimited unarmed-by-law victim pools.

I do not know who is behind the photo/video site (it is registered through a proxy) and note that it also contains a text link I won’t post here that is extremely racist, offensive, and vile. The home page also links to an essay by someone who has developed a similar reputation for himself.

I share Mike Vanderboegh’s contention that racism– judging a person’s worth by anything other than their ideology and conduct as an individual — reveals anyone doing so to be a collectivist, that is, my enemy. That said, the information I have linked to appears to be authentic. That’s something those with the inclination and ability to verify things wouldn’t be able to do if we didn’t know where to start if we followed the advice we started this post with that no one with real reach is going to listen to anyway.

You know, the “real reporters” all parroting the narrative…

And this just in from @pamnsc:

Uncovered information shows Highland Park shooter, Bobby Crimo has a very dark background with ties to Antifa and the Occult [More]

Whatever it turns out to be, we need those names and those arguing against that are being short-sighted and ceding a propaganda advantage to the enemy.