>>329022 I request permission to take a screenshot and spread this to Twitter and Facebook. This shit is serious. Can we get /pol/ for this? We might not be on the best of terms, but this affects their ability to spread redpills just as it affects #GamerGate's ability to spread information.

>>329023 >screenshot Maybe on r/KiA but as usual I'm a bit concerned about spreading Imageboard posts on non-Imageboards.

>>329024 We need to spread this as far and wide as possible, and I don't think we have the userbase to do it by ourselves. Hell, I'd even rent some Twitter bots to spread this if I had the money. The thing is, we need to break containment by any means necessary.

>>329022 Alternatives: twatter - wasn't there a question mark about Gab.ai? Or is it ok? League For Gamers - for gamers obviously, probably not normies. Anyone still use Voat? These 4 companies are the ones the EU Commission were doing a report on regarding hate speech. May just be that this announcement is to coincide with that, while it's in the news. Time will tell how effective this will be - also depends if it becomes a money drain.

>>329028 I believe people on /pol/ were talking about how Gab.ai is run/owned by a jew, so there's questions as to how impartial it can be.

>>329028 >Anyone still use Voat? Voat users are outraged at the owners for censoring shit last time I heard of them, so its probably R-I-P >>329025 I mean, feel free to share the information but I have certain anxiousness towards actually screencapping something in a Imageboard format.

>>329030 Well, Gab is allowing Pizzagate discussion,with no censorship. There's people mocking SJWs on there aswell, so it can't be any worse than say Imzy.

>>329033 Yeah it's probably just /pol/ being /pol/

>>329022 I'm the anon in OP's first image. When I wrote all that, the vision in my head was people from all political stripes trying to change our culture, something which will take decades. When it comes to the here and now – like the current fake news controversy and the newly announced silicon valley censor network – these battles are going to retain the character of being left vs right, with the usual amounts of respect given to the other side. This is why going back to the founding fathers feels essential to me. It's why John Stuart Mill is essential. People are willing to respect the Enlightenment period and the 19th century thinkers. Americans in particular absolutely revere the founding fathers. When you excerpt arguments from this era, people are willing to suspend their party affiliation. They will view these as arguments made in good faith. They are willing to be intellectually humble - that their beliefs might be wrong and need to be corrected. The overtones from this era just feel so weighty and monumentally important. Hopefully people will feel moved enough to vocally support a movement like this. This also represents a type of potential cultural movement that is very timeless. It can ride out the storms of daily political skirmishes, so to speak. That is to say, this potential movement won't have failed even if it doesn't change the current course of the "fake news controversy" or the current path towards a social network "censorship database". More than being timeless, these 18-19th century arguments for free speech and the figures behind them (the founding fathers, JSM, etc.) cannot be permanently marked with a particular group, a particular website, a particular political party or ideology. People can keep spreading images and excerpts a year from now (or two years from now, or a decade from now…) without the audience going "oh, this is just the dumb Republican side again", "this is just the Trump troll position again", "this is just the crazy alt-righter position again", or whatever. (The obvious contrast is with Gamergate… Consider how one would discuss ethics in journalism, video game censorship, progressive pushing, and so on. Here everything is much more "permanently marked" because the ideas and supporters are all from this era. This is a big reason why people will frequently go "oh, it's just the gator position again.") I liked the phrase 'cultural restoration' because it sounds like we're advocating to go back to the nation/culture that we were before. It suggests the idea that we collectively let our own house fall apart by not doing regular maintenance and now we need to do major renovation instead. ~~~ OK. So for those who read all that, those who are of like minds and want to join, those who want to see a big movement, let's also admit we're patting ourselves on the back a little bit and gain some perspective. Freedom of Speech in the sense of classical liberalism is being fought for (haphazardly) by tons of other people besides us, including certain youtubers, certain social media people, some journalists, some academics, and so on. In other words, many armies are already deployed on the map and we're a fresh new division. What are we bringing new to the table? It's probably creating and spreading viral content. I've also been suggesting that perhaps we should become the division of this vast army that distinguishes itself with purity towards the mission (in the sense of being timeless, apolitical). Like, Milo advocates for free speech in his own way, as does Dave Rubin, Sargon of Akkad, Christina Hoff Sommers, Dr. Jordan Peterson, etc. etc. but they are all people with multifaceted beliefs. These people have to spread their freedom of speech message while being permanently marked by every other political position they take. We could become the special forces unit that isn't easily cornered like that. We'd have to target people on all parts of the political spectrum equally. We'd have to keep other political beliefs at arms length. We would try to avoid making a brand that indulges in worship/alliances/favoritism towards particular people who already have their own brands (like the ones I just mentioned). Even if our movement can pick up steam quickly, I really do think the long term war will take decades. When I was a kid, I distinctly remember not just the phrase "I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It" and but also how rehearsed people would say it and repeat it, in a manner that emphasized how assumed it was. Today is 2-3 decades later, and you wouldn't bet a dollar on a random person believing it, especially a leftie. no bully please; I'm not trying to have a leaderfag tone with the last few paragraphs. It is just my food for thought.

>>329035 For fun I did a twitter search for the exact phrase "Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It" and counted the number of tweets between Nov 1st - Nov 30th. It's 751 tweets. with a little grep'ing of this html file, I could also easily produce a list of every twitter account that said it. That might be useful for doing something later I couldn't think of a good "opposite" search phrase to do as a comparison. If you search for "hate speech", it seemed like an endless number of results and I couldn't even reach Nov 28th before I gave up pressing "page down".

>>329023 Like >>329024 says, do it. For social media- this might be too large/long to be easily read (or hold people's attention) Summarize, use emotional language, explain how it directly affects them, and what they can do to help. /pol/ can help, but they are heavily shilled. I assume they already know, but start a thread there anyway. Then let it run it's course. Even if that thread dive-bombs, people will see it, and they will act. >>329025 Bots get blocked- even blocks that promote what I like I tend to block. You need warm bodies- people that can interact and talk. But yes, spread it however you can. Get on Tumblr, get on LiveLeak. Hell, get SJWs on board if you twist it to sound like Trump will use it! And mention it to people IRL. You'll be surprised how far it goes. >>329028 >twatter - wasn't there a question mark about Gab.ai? Or is it ok? Was the first time I heard of it (from the article), so I wasn't sure. LFG is kinda dead/slow IIRC, and Voat still needs to be pushed (it's style screams normalfag, but the dev is based IIRC) > These 4 companies are the ones the EU Commission were doing a report on regarding hate speech. May just be that this announcement is to coincide with that, while it's in the news. Time will tell how effective this will be - also depends if it becomes a money drain. IIRC, they made a similar demand last year and nothing happened (besides the already tightening noose). So unless the EU is throwing more money/law at it, I don't know. Then again, Italy might leave, and UK declared Article 50. So EU might become a non-issue. >>329033 IIRC, Imzy has been censoring things like Pizzagate, but I'm only going off one Tweet I vaguely remember. >>329035 Good work. You've also hit on some other points: - Know your target audience. The people who will be loudest about this are those who honor the constitution. Likewise, the words of founding fathers would have more of an affect on them than, say, a tween girl. Likewise, to get others on board, you might need to simplify the FFs words, or make historical comparisons to those who censored in the past. Our biggest assets that we can offer, as you said, is meme magic. Or rather, keep talking about it so others talk about it (see the beaver picture in the OP). Likewise, we need OC- all the Viv James content got people pulled in, and the infographs informed. We need infographs out the ASS. Get BoneGolem in here to teach others Infograph Making 101- then get to work. We have the short battle (kill the censorship database ASAP), and the long war (re-instilling free-speech into people. Including the lesson "You'll hear shit you don't like. Debate it or ignore it, never censor it."). We need to win both.

(polite sage for offtopic) >>329028 Voat is still active but it has maybe 5% of Reddit's userbase. Most normies won't touch it with all of the nazis around, groupthink is a real problem, and it still goes down when something gets popular. Reddit banning Pizzagate has brought people to Voat so it might be more active these days. >>329032 > Voat users are outraged at the owners for censoring shit last time I heard of them, so its probably R-I-P There is one troll called Amalek who shits up the place with Nazi propaganda and screams about censorship whenever another of his alts is banned. Everyone thinks he is paid to make the site look bad. If there was another censorship controversy, I have not heard of it.

https://twitter.com/RageGoldenEagle/status/806657927637598208 Raging Golden Eagle's latest vid. Related to the EU's begging side of it.

There's something else to add: Aside from any paranoia and desire to control people, there's a common factor among those with assumed power - money - and if not a desire to make more money, there's people within those spheres smart enough to know what is required to create opportunities to do so. The point of that is - some of those people are smart - some are business smart - and good at what they do - some are creatively good at what they do - but not in encompassing all. By that I mean that they know they cannot conceive of everything, and they understand that others have to be given the freedom to do so, else the underlying driving factor - money - dries up. That freedom also means the freedom to think. Take a look at Gookanon's Korea thread, regarding the SK gaming industry, as an example of what not to do. From a business standpoint, killing off a productive, financially successful industry is ludicrous. People with jobs boost the local and wider economy. It's the same from a political standpoint - a politician's life is far easier when people are preoccupied with work and leisure. It's not hard for a politician to realize that you can't tax an industry that's not there, or people not earning. Bureaucrats riding the gravy train can't oversee or regulate an industry that's not there either. Business and politicians pretty much go hand-in-hand - not here to argue that or spiral off into the rights or wrongs of it - it happens, yeh great. Who holds the power in that dynamic? Business - they're the ones with the financial clout. They can lobby and donate and no doubt throw in a few backhanders to prop up their own interests, but they know it's other people, that left to their own devices, will create more opportunities for future business than they can create themselves. Stifling peoples ability to communicate ideas will always have a knock-on effect on business. Restrictions will only go so far before money steps in and upends it.

>>329054 Restrictions will continue to go up until its impossible for competition to rise up. A monopoly has more money to give to politicians than multiple non-monopolies, since they are not forced to compete with others by adopting policies which could harm their profit margin, such as selling products for less or working towards better quality. When politicians and businesses let a new company entrance into the market, both lose. Where was I even going with this? I have a blank. Nevermind.

>>329055 >dubs I get what you mean, though it's worth mentioning another part of the business world with money that holds a lot of sway - investors. There are always people in the investment world (small and large) looking out for (new) ways to make money and new opportunities will always pop up that will attract them. Don't know how much a monopoly suits them, but some of them aren't exactly shrinking violets - risk-reward is the game they play - and they like to play it. Some political nonsense isn't going to stop them. With reference to the op, what I mean is new alternatives will always appear, and it's true that existing ones need to be pushed more. Also not not mentioned - and ties in with promoting alternatives - people's concern for their online privacy. Fagbook twatter google + microshaft aren't renowned for keeping users info private - they share a lot of info with 'partners' and 'affiliates' - it's as vague as that - so maybe pushing that meme would work - 'Is your personal data safe?' (with each company) sort of thing.

>>329057 >not not - not

>>329022 This is misinfo based on a bullshit clickbait article. Here is the real announcement that it's based on, it's video/image hashes (NOT text) of "violent terrorist imagery or terrorist recruitment videos or images that we have removed from our services". It has nothing to do with "hate speech", China, "fake news", censorship legislation, or any of the other bullshit that the article made up: >Partnering to Help Curb Spread of Online Terrorist Content http://archive.is/ZnGbY >Starting today, we commit to the creation of a shared industry database of “hashes” — unique digital “fingerprints” — for violent terrorist imagery or terrorist recruitment videos or images that we have removed from our services. By sharing this information with each other, we may use the shared hashes to help identify potential terrorist content on our respective hosted consumer platforms. We hope this collaboration will lead to greater efficiency as we continue to enforce our policies to help curb the pressing global issue of terrorist content online. >Our companies will begin sharing hashes of the most extreme and egregious terrorist images and videos we have removed from our services — content most likely to violate all of our respective companies’ content policies. Participating companies can add hashes of terrorist images or videos that are identified on one of our platforms to the database. Other participating companies can then use those hashes to identify such content on their services, review against their respective policies and definitions, and remove matching content as appropriate. >As we continue to collaborate and share best practices, each company will independently determine what image and video hashes to contribute to the shared database. No personally identifiable information will be shared, and matching content will not be automatically removed. Each company will continue to apply its own policies and definitions of terrorist content when deciding whether to remove content when a match to a shared hash is found. And each company will continue to apply its practice of transparency and review for any government requests, as well as retain its own appeal process for removal decisions and grievances. As part of this collaboration, we will all focus on how to involve additional companies in the future. You don't have to agree with this measure and I personally think censoring ISIS is a PR move that doesn't accomplish anything. You can worry it's a slippery slope to censoring other things. But the database has nothing to do with text (only images/videos), doesn't try to ban anything too nebulous like hate speech, doesn't even ban all pro-terrorist content (only recruitment and images/videos depicting violence), and is supposed to be for the "most egregious" videos/images that are against the rules of all three platforms. That article and post isn't about the reality, it's just a bunch of bullshit that does nothing but misinform people who care about censorship and make them look like scaremongering idiots if they spread it. Even if you want people to campaign against this database, that means informing people about what it actually is, not spreading misinformation like this. Personally I'd be more concerned with the UK's recent internet-surveillance legislation, that shit seems fucking insane.

>>329059 >Facebook says it so its true >Just ignore what actual EU officials are saying You should probably kill yourself.

>>329054 You have to seriously consider the possibility that there's a decadence in process and that the upper classes are okay with it because they prefer the country going to shit than they being replaced by a new elite that can out-compete them Check any history book, thats how empires go to shit: the ones at the top don't like the competition, and those that became rich off corruption don't want said corruption to ever end, even if it ends up destroying the country >Bureaucrats riding the gravy train can't oversee or regulate an industry that's not there either. They will move to regulate and tax other industries, you see that in a lot of latam countries that used to do well but thanks to socialism ended up with only one industry that brings home the money and gets taxed to hell to keep the bureaucracy alive >>329055 Also this >>329057 I work in tech, a lot of investors are going to other countries because silicon valley has become this huge mass of nepotism and rich assholes who can't deliver shit anymore >>329059 The patriot act was also about fighting terrorism and ended up being used to fuck innocent people instead

>>329060 The EU story is completely unrelated and is itself distorted, it has nothing to do with the database. It's only quoted as part of the same blog post to serve the author's narrative, the same way the author claims it's related to Chinese censorship somehow. It's like when an article brings up a story about some random person being SWATed in a story about GG.

>>329059 >You don't have to agree with this measure and I personally think censoring ISIS is a PR move that doesn't accomplish anything. You can worry it's a slippery slope to censoring other things. But the database has nothing to do with text (only images/videos), doesn't try to ban anything too nebulous like hate speech, doesn't even ban all pro-terrorist content (only recruitment and images/videos depicting violence), and is supposed to be for the "most egregious" videos/images that are against the rules of all three platforms. Not the OP, but I have several responses to your post overall. (spoiler: I don't want to argue any of your points. The OP should use your article or something like the reuters one: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-internet-extremism-database-idUSKBN13U2W8 The OP should be more careful how we advocate raising alarm. I'm glad that we have responses like yours to even us out, I probably should have done so myself! But in the name of keeping both sides motivated, I want to argue my points that we should be raising an alarm) 1. This is why I opined that the problem is cultural. The nation, collectively, should be so god damn uneasy about a censor network even when we want the stated purpose to happen (to streamline the process of matching extremist content). Even if we are okay with going ahead with the censor network! But we're not uneasy. This is how unvigilant we collectively are about free speech. It's the same with youtube demonetization, facebook's old manually edited newsfeed, twitter messing with trending hashtags, websites marked as fake news articles. None of this is stuff that the populace should demand be stopped. All of this stuff would play out A-OK in some versions of future history, but be fucking awful in other versions. The more uneasy the culture is about it, the happier scenarios we get because the companies involved don't want to fuck up. 2. As a more practical matter, why aren't people demanding more transparency about the censor network? How are "regular people" (i.e. plainly non-extremist) going to share the censored images for purposes of discussing the current threshold for extremism? To see what I mean, take for example the napalm girl photo that Facebook censored (this isn't 'extremist' content, so it wouldn't have been added to the censor network anyway, but I need an example). Regular people and news organizations circulated this photo to discuss Facebook's thresholds for violence. Regular people and news organizations conceivably could want discuss thresholds for extremist content by using such examples too. But if there's a censor network, maybe you wouldn't be able to Google the photo or retweet the photo. If you found the photo anyway and wrote an article about the threshold, maybe your article wouldn't should up on Google/Facebook/Twitter/Bing. 3. It's not clear to me what is going to happen with EU hate speech laws. Yes, this issue is not directly connected to the censor database - I understand the news story as well as you do. But as I have been arguing we want a movement that is about freedom of speech in general and not about one day-to-day skirmish. EU hate speech is a very nuanced question, I won't believe you if you say it is clearly settled one way or the other. Because it is nuanced, it isn't being asked publically and answered directly. Just a random list of why it's too nuanced for the current state of public discourse: -It involves the question of EU censorship affecting US users, either by EU mandate or via lazy compliance by Silicon Valley. -It involves the question of whether Facebook/Google/etc even WANT to protect the US's version of free speech, disregarding the question of laziness and being forced to. -Due to the current brinksmanship going between EU and Silicon Valley, the later seem to be trying be terse and coy about their responses to the ongoing EU demands. Silicon Valley is understandably trying to be maximally protective of their independence, but it is costing the public clarity about what's going to happen. 4. The risk of political censorship on any social website is not zero. Again, I'm not talking about about the extremist database. I gave a list of innocuous censorship activities in 1. that turned out to have concerns about political censorship. Then there's outright non-innocuous censorship, like Scott Adams style shadowbans, blatant reddit censorship, twitter selectively banning certain accounts (Milo, Ricky Vaughn). Also, thanks for reminding me about the UK internet tracking thing, I had forgotten.

ONLINE CENSORSHIP BILL JUST PASSED THE SENATE Senate Passes Major Portman-Murphy Counter-Propaganda Bill as Part of NDAA http://www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=3765A225-B773-4F57-B21A-A265F4B5692C https://twitter.com/Sam_seau/status/807375271926136832 > WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Rob Portman (R-OH) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) today announced that their Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act – legislation designed to help American allies counter foreign government propaganda from Russia, China, and other nations – has passed the Senate as part of the FY 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Conference Report. The bipartisan bill, which was introduced by Senators Portman and Murphy in March, will improve the ability of the United States to counter foreign propaganda and disinformation by establishing an interagency center housed at the State Department to coordinate and synchronize counter-propaganda efforts throughout the U.S. government. To support these efforts, the bill also creates a grant program for NGOs, think tanks, civil society and other experts outside government who are engaged in counter-propaganda related work. This will better leverage existing expertise and empower local communities to defend themselves from foreign manipulation. Great work guys- we didn't do anything. No one even knows this exists. No one even knows the tech companies are already gearing up for it. Sure it would have had to pass thanks to it being stabled to the back of the NDAA, but at least we've had people protesting before it was done- now we're on the back foot. I tried to look up the article on OneAngryGamer, but the site is down https://archive.is/6vpH3 - nice glimse of what we have to look forward to. Only hope now is for Trump to repeal it. Hope you know how to be truly anonymous online- because you'll fucking need it after this. I'm so fucking mad, I'll leave the other news in another post.

>>329077 http://www.publicdiplomacycouncil.org/sites/default/files/Portman-Murphy%20Counter%20Foreign%20Propaganda%20and%20Disinformation%20Act.pdf Initial analysis is as grim as you'd imagine. https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/807385495562878976 https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/807386022401036288 Since you're all too busy enjoying drama, the minute victories we're given, and not bothering to send emails, here's some tweets to help spread word.. It seems to be the one thing you still know how to do: https://twitter.com/WDFx2EU26/status/807380288435261440 https://twitter.com/AmericaFirst16/status/807383222275424256 https://twitter.com/mtranquilnight/status/807383001667616772 https://twitter.com/thatsickfilth/status/807382418739130369 https://twitter.com/ElderOfZionism/status/807381839765733380 https://twitter.com/Hawk_Hopper/status/807381837127544832 https://twitter.com/F_the_lying_MSM/status/807381767871205376 https://twitter.com/GeeJamesFL/status/807384214362583041 https://twitter.com/thatsickfilth/status/807386099492540416 https://twitter.com/flulrich/status/807385601972596736 https://twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/807384876919955456 https://twitter.com/P90xbogie/status/807384676482633728 https://twitter.com/JizzCannon/status/807386020446695425 https://twitter.com/NoMoreRomney/status/807386644567523328 Now if you idiots can manage a bit more, search "Contact Senator" and "Contact Representative". You know what? I bet you can't even manage that. Here: http://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/ http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/ Now if you manage to get off your lazy ass when you're done crying over shit's happened because of shit you didn't do, tell them you want this opposed. Tell everyone else you know. The US Government just declared it has a blank-check for whoever can brainwash civilians the best. All the work we've done, the first blood we drew on SJWs and the Alt-Right having a chance to educate people- all down the drain because it'll be banned. Anyone questioning media being arrested or blocked. I know you don't do emails anymore. Prove to me you can do something. Or are you going to let them win?

>>329077 I think this bill is just about monitoring and countering foreign propaganda. It's not about "online censorship". link: http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/fighting-back-new-bill-aims-to-counter-russian-disinformation archive: http://archive.is/Q6vyT You are jumping to conclusions just because of the word "propaganda".

>>329078 >The US Government just declared it has a blank-check for whoever can brainwash civilians the best. It didn't do anything of the sort. Government speech is not censorship, and it's not equal to brainwashing. We identify and refute foreign info all the time, especially from China and Russia. Brainwashing means suppression of the truth while pushing false or dishonest statements. That's not what the bill does, unless you can prove otherwise and not simply "insinuate wildly that the text of the bill is all double speak for brainwashing and censorship". To put it another way: suppose you were Congress and you were to write a bill that concerned itself with honestly exposing and counterclaiming foreign disinformation, how else would the bill be worded? I'm guessing that I would word it like this. This is a sign that your extraordinary claims are lacking the proverbial extraordinary evidence.

>>329078 Now if any of you are upset you're getting the drill-seargent treatment, it's because you fucking deserve it. You don't send emails. You only retweet drama. And you're arguing with shills and getting off topic. Even 6 months ago we would have ignored it, or called it out. We were fucking impenetrable. You've gotten fat and lazy. But here's one even you can do: https://apply.ptt.gov/yourstory/ Send Trump an email. The mad bastard actually WANTS to hear from people. So tell him everything about that bill (while you can), and we might just get rid of it. Otherwise- I hope you like Reddit. Because the whole Internet will become it- when they change public opinion by dog-pilling bot-posts approving/disapproving of everything.

>>329079 After a month of the media making "Fake News" a thing- and then claiming "Fake News" could have been set up by Russians to "Influence the Election". And Obama is now asking for a report from the FBI to say the election was rigged by Ruskies? After all the shit we've seen- how have you not learned the double-speak and lies and tactics? >>329080 From the PDF: https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/807386022401036288 Pays people to shill- thereby manipulating the public on what the majority opinion really is. https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/807386022401036288 Paid opinion pieces, to further manipulate what the majority is deemed. When you change people's opinion based on anything except the truth- it is propaganda.

>>329062 >I work in tech, a lot of investors are going to other countries because silicon valley has become this huge mass of nepotism and rich assholes who can't deliver shit anymore Yeh I wasn't being America-centric in mentioning investors. Silicon Valley lives in it's own bubble and when they get complacent and stop delivering, there's plenty of others around the world that can, and will, step up to deliver stuff that users will go for. Investment money will go there instead. (In regards to gaming, AAA devs already outsource to places like India because they know they'll get results. Contrast that to the recent cry by hipster devs calling to unionize gamedev, and make what is a creative process a 9-to-5 job. The work doesn't get done/takes too long, and/or the quality drops. Hipsters think work is something to fit round their social life. Investors will continue to go to places like India because they know the people there will deliver long into the future.)

To make matters work, FBI just got legal president to hack PCs and smartphones. https://archive.is/gioH6 http://thegoldwater.com/news/715-Federal-Agents-Allowed-To-Hack-Into-Phones-And-Computers-By-The-Rule-41-Alteration >>>/newsplus/45839 Yes they were doing it already- except now they have no reason to hide it. So they now know if you harbor Fake News opinions, even if you don't post online.

>>329078 /pol/ you don't run things.

>>329087 >So they now know if you harbor Fake News opinions, even if you don't post online. They wanted to see what my high score in Plants vs. Zombies 2? Because that's all they're going to find on my phone. Plaing mobile games makes one a terrorist, I suppose.

>>329089 >>329089 >>329059 >>329063 >>329079 >>329080 >>329089

Great vid from RagingGoldenEagle raising an interesting point: If their system uses hashes to detect "bad" content, then it's hilariously easy to game for anyone who's not an internet amateur. Infographs are fine- as long as when you know it's being censored you change a minor thing. So you can still show pictures and video. Text will be harder, since changing hashtags lessens it's effect. However, we must assume they'll use more than automated processing. Youtube Heroes could have been started up as training for the physical processing- thankfully it fell pretty hard, but that doesn't stop SJW signing up. But it's a minor plus still; keep breaking the safe-space and eventually they'll lose their shit (as SJW and puritans always do) and fuck over even the normalfags. Then they lose customers and have constant bad press. Don't rest on your ass- you should still fight this in every capacity- but it's not an impenetrable wall like it could have been.

>>329079 What about domestic propaganda?

Test

Guess who's funding Facebook's "fact checking"? https://twitter.com/deYook/status/809852188570816512 https://archive.is/7x4Ot > George Soros's Open Society Foundations will fund fact checking initiative > Hungarian businessman donated more than $25million to Clinton's campaign > Clinton super-donor Pierre Omidyar is also linked to the pilot project > He has given more than $30million to the Clintons and their charities in past > Facebook feature will flag 'disputed' stories to users before they share them > Stories are reported to 'third party checkers' which include ABC and Snopes I'll bet the disputed flag is only the first step. Either they'll slowly have disputed stories appear less and less on feeds, then claim "I guess people don't click them anymore"- or just outright ban anything they deem fake. Other relevant thread: >>>/gamergatehq/329096 Please repost this in GG bread's on /v/.

Facebook's secret rules for deletion https://archive.is/ym2g7 https://twitter.com/SZ_Intl/status/809702437913264128 Got leaked. Pretty nazi-like with a (superior) protected class, and everyone else.

>>329142 >Continent of origin: e.g. European or South American. Here, special risks are listed for the following terms: Asians (protected in the race category); American or Australian (protected in the national origin category) Wonderful, the Aussies can troll you, but if you troll them back you get banned for racism.

>>329077 https://archive.is/XgKV1 And it passed. Or fucking similar. Using Holidays As A Distraction,Obama Just Signed NDAA “Propaganda” Provision To Destroy Free Press

>>329177 And to tweet it, a source (the website above has not tweeted their own article): https://twitter.com/TLAVagabond/status/812775240363147264

2013, Obama administration repeals propaganda ban, making it possible for the government to spread propaganda through the news http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/ 2016, Obama administration pass a bill that will outlaw anyone debunking governemental propaganda, or anyone going against the false narrative of the day. Might help redpill people better.

>>329191 You can add to that Germany and their war on "fake news" on social media. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/12/facebook-fake-news-germany-threatens-new-law-big-fines/ Reminder that without the social media outcry, the cologne rape of 2015 would have never made the news since it was hidden by the government itself. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/cologne-police-ordered-to-remove-word-rape-from-reports-into-new-year-s-eve-sexual-assaults-a6972471.html

Similar to the thread topic; > The New York Times, Guardian, Wikipedia and The Economist are all testing a political discussion filtering system called Perspective API. Basically if it's not corporate talk, it's flagged. http://www.perspectiveapi.com/ Dig IMO.

Since this thread is for online censorship, I figured here would be good to post it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcTdlCtW2dA Short version is the guy lays out how Google, Facebook, and Twitter are censoring- and focusing on Google/Youtube since they are using two new tactics: - "Limited State". This tactics is done publicly. If a video doesn't violate the TOS, yet Youtube/Google feels it is still promoting their definition of hate speech- they'll take it down. The same applies to accounts. A major right wing figure recently had his youtube channel shut down with no email explaining why (like in all other cases). Rather than outright say "We reserve the right to remove a video for any reason"- which you'd expect any company would do to save their asses- they say "We reserve the right to remove a video that offends you." And by you- they mean SJWs and Left-leaning companies looking to advertise. - "Un-personing". This tactic is done in secret. Comments vanish quickly- almost within minutes. This is used to censor positive feedback, and leave the comment section of a video toxic, uninformative, or only with comments against the creator of the video. You can see this on Twitter with Trump's twitter account before and after election. Before the election the replies are mixed, after and only the hateful (but not logical) tweets are at the top. Good luck finding any positive comments in direct reply. As he says in the video; the end goal being that while you can send problematic information to all people who already believe it- how do you convert new people who are blocked from seeing it? Generation Z is being hailed as becoming very conservative, but how long will that last when they can't another voice in the room presenting the other side of cases and information? (((They))) know the power of the internet- and want to try censorship without calling it censorship. Not even "Pay no attention to the bigot behind the curtain"- just outright denial of ideals, beliefs, and evidence existing.

>>331022 Unfortunately, Metokur does exactly what Sarkessian does; presents the problem and doesn't attempt to even propose a solution. We certainly need to think of something effective and spread it to those against this (right wing, etc): - Platform Attack and Alternative Promotion (PAAP): Deride, Demote, and Destroy the reputation of "The Big 5" (Google, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit). Keep pointing out it's flaws to your peers (online and in real life), and promote other platforms. There are plenty of other video hosting sites that get no traffic (VidMe, WebmLand, SuperNerdLand etc). We don't need to champion one alternative to Youtube. In fact if we can divide it up, it's better as if it is targeted for a buyout/manipulation/DDOS then people can quickly hop to an alternative. Don't put the eggs all in one basket, and encourage competition between several video websites. As this gets bigger, advertisers will go to those websites, giving them more money allowing them to compete better with more features. We just need to make sure as these websites grow that nothing goes wrong. Twitter's alternative is Minds, and Voat for Reddit. Google is more of an issue. Startpage uses Google's results. Bing is fucking useless and owned by Microsoft- so it's the same deal. Metokur proposes a chinese search engine (since while they'll censor shit involving porn and China, they'll happily show Americans being fuck ups). Facebook is a trickier kettle of fish. It's used to communicate with friends- though in today's age there is no reason people can't just text or use other messaging platforms (I can only think of WhatsApp and I think they are pozzed. Can't remember). However, it's also used to feel good. To stroke the ego and have a celeb lifestyle (though this can also be said of Twitter). How do you have a platform where you make the user base "feel good" when you also want it to be able to show info where shit is fucked? Of course I'm not talking about converting a basic bitch or a jock- but we still need all hands to the pumps. - Financial Attack and Alternative Shilling (FAAS): We DisNod the Big 5. This one is difficult. However, with how many advertisers pulled out quietly in DisNod Ops, it has more power then we realize. The Big became more pozzed overtime partly due to emails and complaints of SJWs being offended. We know they are the minority, but as we saw with DisNod on Gaming outlets- 100 emails makes companies feel like there are many more who are about to drop them and just didn't take the time to complain (How many people actually offer feedback nowadays? If you take time to praise, you must really love/loathe what they did). So, you email companies showing your disgust at what one of the Big 5 are doing. The difficult part is doing it without being too political. "The marxists are controlling the internet" will be ignored. "I don't trust Google/etc as they have removed content that was not harmful." is much better. You don't care what was taken down, it was the fact it was taken down on flimsy reasoning. One guy emails like that- who cares. One hundred - that's more of a concern. One thousand - assuming we can get non-GamerGate but right wing people involved - and you'll have companies pulling out. An attack on the wallet combined with an attack on the brand while promoting new brands can be devastating. It would need to be constant however- not just a month long thing. It definitely needs to be combined with monthly/weekly email goals (Focusing on one advertiser over one of the big 4 per month/week creating a bigger glut of complaints rather than a steady stream which is easier to wave away). Now if saying you hate something can get a company to pull - why shouldn't saying you like something get them to work with them? Though rarely done (and something that should be done for the better gaming outlets IMO), telling a brand you like something else is what they want to hear. If you've emailed them, you must be a loyal customer right? And their fancy charts tell them that loyal customers must be a particular demographic. So you telling them you like X platform must mean more people of that demographic are using it as well. The only risk is coming across like a shill (i.e. like that platform paid you off to pretend to be Joe-public) rather than someone who likes the brand. With many emails from different people written in different ways however, this risk should be mitigated.

>>331023 - Informing Allies and Discussing Plans (IADP): Many antiSJW/Marxist/globalist are speaking out. Some just a single user who spread what others say, some are big E-Celebs in online political discussion who get a lot of attention. Thanks to the election we know they are the majority- and they can reason their arguments better than SJW. One side is intelligent, the other isn't. However, this intelligence is only useful if it is informed. You can't fight back if you don't know how your enemy is fighting you. So inform those figures of the new censorship tactics mention in the video, and let them know of some of the above ideas. The rallying cry of them saying "look what they're doing" is enough to cause the Big 5 panic as they are caught out- not to mention it helps the first half of PAAP without even needing to ask them. But combine that with them encouraging others to do the above, or proposing even more ways to fight back, and you have an amoeba that can adapt to any method of attack and self-preservation.

Google Memo Controversy Info: https://pastebin.com/DXQgEf2A Not an exhaustive list.

https://twitter.com/polNewsForever/status/894769565325860867 Plan from twitter. Short version: upload shit to their servers to clog it up and use Adblock on Jewtube. The latter everyone already does. The former really needs everyone to do it to be effective.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/tnqO5RUZvxE/ Based on the above vid, I'd propose these ops: - Download videos from Youtube that are bound to be condemned/banned/blocked/blaclisted/etc. - DisNod major Youtubers to switch to other services (be polite, explain your grievances, tell them you're dropping off youtube). If you can fuck over advertisers from video game reviewers, we might just convert people. - Disnod Google they had to pay out to advertisers because of bots clicking on ads. There's a thing going around where you can do similar (AdNauseum). However, some anons think AdNauseum is a scam that steals your data. Maybe it's a shill, maybe it's true, maybe there are alternatives. Research, research, research. - Get people off Youtube, the guy lists a bunch of services at the end of his video. If someone bitches when a channel they like is taken down (and unless that channel is a screaming lefty or it has 1mil+ subs) then recommend an alternative. You should also do the same for Twitter and Facebook. Don't forget- memes trickle down to mainstream. Mock Google & Youtube. - Boycott Youtube. I know GG doesn't boycott games, because it leaves it to open to backfire. So we just don't publicly call for one, and in our own individual circles discuss the game's flaws frankly. Similar can be done with Youtube. If a guy uploading a vid of himself babbling can get demonetized, then that's stuff even normalfags (that aren't left leaning) will mock. It sort of rolls into the above. If someone has a personal website or uses other non-youtube video platforms- watch them there instead. Likewise, stop using Youtube. Manually go into the channel of each user you like (and odds are that's the only way to see vids thanks to notifications), avoid being logged in, use true privacy measures like VPNs so Google cannot make data to sell to advertisers, or at the very least- use Adblock. The only other thing to do is mass-flag videos to make the service unbearable. On the one hand, I imagine SJW content is protected and personally looked over (if an SJW does get screwed, they're either too small and forgotten, or big enough to play the victim and get their consequences reversed). But perhaps a large enough amount of anons means something will slip through the cracks. Those same SJW videos get horrifically low ratings- so I think it's safe to say we are the majority. Now imagine those people who downvoted actually reported as well. The alternative I'm really sketchy on. Mass-flaging normal people. We want to appeal to normal people, and avoid an "You're with us or against us" mindset. However, if (due to larger numbers) the death of Youtube was accelerated (content is mass flagged until even normal users leave) then it would cause more of a stir. Gamergate and Trump revealed the SJW for what they were before public opinion on them could be molded. Likewise, if a service like this dies quicker, people can actually talk about "What went wrong" rather than "it's always been like that". Another analogy would be the Simpsons. It's not been cancelled because of pedigree and merchandise, but if it had dropped from Season 8's ratings to Season 20's- Fox would have killed it. tl;dr Accelerate what's happening to Youtube, but if people realize we're doing it- then SJW have a free pass to blame antiSJW for any dumb shit they do (on the grounds of a real event, rather than a fake one). Please post this/summarize this in the latest breads when you see them.

BlackPigeon did something on Youtube. MAJOR redpilling on a variety of topics (including how Youtube does jack-shit to ISIS vids while "problematic" but true analysis gets sandboxed, and some stuff about Europe). Halfchan also gets the blame for what we are doing again. In light of Google paying back 6 billion to advertisers they scammed with fake traffic, and they are using Ad Nauseum (it generates fake clicks to scam advertisers and analytics with fake data. Why block when you can fuck them over). Again, there is anons who say Ad Nauseum can't be trusted, but it could be a shill. Ask /tech/. AKA OP Goolag: >>>/tech/777548 There's also an account dedicated to finding censored/sandboxed videos: https://twitter.com/censoredlist

A bit more on the "using their censorship as a weapon" idea.

Sorry to keep posting this guy, but I'm subbed to him and he updates pretty regularly at Google happenings. https://www.bitchute.com/video/DLt0ch13oWc/ In this one he discusses if gov regulation is worth it (he claims it's a temp fix), and Google's likely next moves: They never back down or back-pedal when they fuck-up and censor (except when the EU called them out on being a Monopoly, then they panicked HARD), limited state, and they are happy to lose money now if they can gain money via getting the Democrats to win the next election. In other words, this is them trying to crack consensus for the next 4 years and feed false info. For academia, they're looking to branch out into creating curriculum for schools (and if you Google "European History" or "European Inventors", you can be sure whatever academia they create will make CommonCore look like calculus). The "next step" as Dave claims is heavier manipulation of search results. Documents on Google's search criteria for it's staff got leaked (and tells us what we already could see)- Google having the right to push their opinion as fact since they deem elements of history & science as "conspiracy theories" and making alternative news vanish. Push up websites they trust, and websites they hate down. He then recommends DuckDuckGo (which /tech/ still claims is a scam, or hell, maybe that was shilling). He then hammers the point home by reading pages of the censorship and alternation process in 1984.

So suffice to say- Archive everything Download every video

More evidence of Google not applying their rules equally. The Young Turks get a pass for swear-filled video, while a "problematic" channel saying fuck once gets demonetized. Or videos exposing muslim raping children at swimming pools- with sources. Or Youtube showing a music video having a white child hung hasn't had ads removed from it. https://vid.me/vezHh (can we get embeds for Vidme please?) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFg9t4SMAZg The first vid is heavy redpilling stuff. Share it around as widely as possible. (Share them the Vidme video rather than his youtube video. I don't imagine it'll last long). The second video is in reference to the first- a guy talking about how the Young Turks get away with advertiser un-friendly content. The second is an example of how Youtube protects left leaning channels. The first is an example of how Youtube protects Islamic Terror, Child Rapists, and Child Murderers. Google is begging for a Disnod (or rather, the people that advertise via Youtube). Work with /tech/ and use Ad Nauseum to hammer Google's data with false clicks & false info. >>>/tech/777548 Google needs to die. A simple boycott isn't enough- if everyone against them stopped using their service, they'd want it. They want to fire up and orchestrate the left and make those in the middle think there is only one way to go- all for the next election. Gab is suing them for anti-trust (something Google went apeshit last time they were accused of it by a think tank, and got them shut down), along with several women over not being paid equally (irony of ironies). White Twitter and Facebook are also up there- Google is priority 1 IMO. They've been at this for far longer (blocking problematic videos way back when Benghazi happened) Share every bad news story. Get others to stop using Youtube or Google. And for the love of god- if you do see adverts on Youtube or Google- find them on nauseating content they greenlight, and Disnod them into fucking ashes.

Computing Forever got kicked off Twitter. Keep an eye on his Youtube and Minds/Gab accounts. In more important news: Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft Join Forces With ADL to Create ‘Cyberhate Problem-Solving Lab’ http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/10/10/google-facebook-twitter-microsoft-join-forces-adl-end-cyberhate/ https://archive.fo/11eeR We need diggers on this now. We know it's gonna reach too far, but we need to know how far, and whose involved. Any dirt on ulterior motives or hypocrisy would be ideal to boot.

Dave Cullen still has a Twitter: https://twitter.com/DaveCullenCF/ Now onto the important shit. While exposing the NYTimes, Project Veritas discovers Youtube manipulates its front page on behalf of MSM. They make sure "legitimate" news groups get more exposure, and the Popular Feed is just curated to whatever Youtube staff want to succeed. Original Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0c1Bph1jrQ Dave's Summery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgpB8je5fhk https://vid.me/LuD5i This is also video related. To Spread the News (along with the videos): https://twitter.com/DaveCullenCF/status/918523656543842310 https://twitter.com/DaveCullenCF/status/918523760713584640 https://twitter.com/DaveCullenCF/status/918525974144155648 https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/918219872672321538 https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/918197083504566272 https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/918143869212078081 https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/918552567646441473 https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/918552570326585345 Pretty much everything on Project Veritas' and/or James O'Keef's timeline- and their replies.

Some older notes. https://www.twitter.com/YoutubeSandbox This account monitors vids sandboxed due to "Limited State" on Youtube. https://archive.is/19UB3 Harmful Opinions permabanned from both Youtube and Twitter. Can still be found on Facebook. Not sure if he's tried Minds or Vidme as alternatives. Anyone who saved his old vids would be greatly appreciated.

PolNewsNetwork on Twitter got banned, and their main website is now blank. Two or three backups went down as well. Currently MemeAlertNews and PolAlertNews are the accounts (the latter is a backup). They've been hit by Google in the past as well: https://twitter.com/MemeAlertNews/status/917726481622732801 Also #RussiaClinton was censored on Twitter: https://twitter.com/MemeAlertNews/status/920739811190861826

THE GREAT YOUTUBE PURGE HAS BEGUN Kinda. https://archive.is/RyJNg Found it via Twitter, so sorry it's on an even shittier part of Reddit. > I went to the youtube help forums to post about my problem and hopefully get a response. What I found on the forum was dozens of people with the same issue as me just posting within the last few hours. It seems over the weekend Youtube did something big and has deleted a ton of channels without sending any e-mails to people regarding why they were removed or how to recover them. All the links under "Links to similar cases within the last few hours of this post" need to be archived. No info yet if there is a pattern or not. IMO: A. A genuine glitch (fucking unlikely). B. Youtube's algorithms for deleting "bad" accounts hit to wide an area. C. Google testing how far they can push mass deletions before being noticed.

Twitter Purge has begun https://twitter.com/search?q=Twitter%20Purge&src=typd Can't archive due to it not showing the right thing. Seems many people have lost 200-300 followers in the last two hours. Maybe it's based on who I follow, but it seems to be all the (((problematic))) people. If you had/have a Twitter account, check if you still have it. Usually I'd say it was usual guff, but Youtube had it's own purge the other day where a bunch of accounts got shutdown with no emails. >>331290 Anyone have that screencap theorizing a "digital purge" after the election? (Has a picture of the Riddler with it) Because I think it might be happening.

PragerU Sues YouTube For Censoring Conservative Videos https://archive.is/hLsN1 https://twitter.com/OneAngryGamerHD/status/923114459450757120 All we can really do to support is send them info of Google's bullshit (if you know who they are), or sharing their story. Same with the GAB anti-trust suit.

Reports of Google deleting or blocking access to Google Docs (even the original creator) based on content. https://archive.is/3FXJ5 https://archive.is/oesTB https://archive.is/3UzJP https://archive.is/JbPjA The first guy is a hardcore marxist writing about E.Europe post-socialist parties (thought they would have been on his side, unless his argument was super bad, or he linked to "wrong think" sources- even if he was going to refute them in his writing). The second is a woman writing about wildlife crime (poaching I assume). In her tweet chain she says she contacted Google and got access back. Google blames an update that incorrectly labeled some docs as Abusive and automatically locked them. If this continues, expect to see shit like "Domestic Abuse Report deleted by Google because it included the word rape." Also, this means businesses have their balls in Google's hands if they use Gmail or Google Docs. If one employee does something evil (or code that is intentionally or accidentally sensitive flags them)- they can kill a business. Remember to avoid using Gmail (Use ProtonMail) and use AdNauseum whenever possible I work from home and my business uses Gmail, so I can't risk killing the businesses because my Jewtube account somehow links to my Gmail activity.

Twitter caught manipulating US Election, not Google https://twitter.com/issielapowsky/status/925727403632156672 https://archive.is/HrskN > Written remarks: In 2 mos before election Twitter also hid 25% of bot Tweets w PodestaEmail hashtag and 48% of tweets w DNC Leak hashtag Source: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-sedgett-110117.pdf Page can't archive, so download the PDF. Tweets worth RTing to spread the word: twitter.com/Nephanor/status/925753704195559429 twitter.com/Grummz/status/925775479717576704 twitter.com/getongab/status/925775738023768064

>>331311 Another Tweet worth spreading: twitter.com/getongab/status/925855545147326465 https://archive.is/B27Hq

>>331311 >>331313 And the second source Gab showed. Unfortunately, the original guy sources Buzzfeed. https://archive.is/nxAIk twitter.com/Kantrowitz/status/925820649184079873 https://archive.is/a3NkM

Net Neutrality vote "near thanksgiving". https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2017/11/fcc-net-neutrality-vote-arrive-just-thanksgiving-according-reports/43501/ https://archive.is/CvSvM It's been said a bunch of times already, but it's a bad choice either way. Some people are suggesting that since major websites like Google and other "content creators" are running the net into the ground- that letting the Net Neutrality vote fail would be "Digitally Assured Destruction" (DAD- inspired by MAD- Mutually assured destruction). There are several flaws IMO: - Losing the freedom and speed of the internet in any capacity is bad. Ignorance is the tool of our enemies. Truth (and the ability to spread it) is ours. - The ISPs may make deal with major companies so that they are minimally effected (The ISP doesn't want to go to war with Google- compared to working together so they can both make money. In other words the MAD makes them work alongside each other). - The ISPs may also aid in censorship. Unofficially throttling non-MSM news websites (which can easily be hand-waved by blaming the website for having poor servers), and making sure progressive content loads as quickly as possible. Imagine hearing about 8ch for the first time, but when you go to use it, it takes 5 or 10 mins to load a page, and a further 5 or 10 for each image or webm you click on. You're not gonna stick around. - Censorship makes it harder for us to organize and spread the truth. Along with much more serious /pol/ matters. - Google & Content Creators are a business, and can be fucked with by bad PR and DisNod. ISPs are more "faceless"- like your water company or electric company. Apart from bad prices, bad service, and poor customer service- they are much harder to mock and DisNod. We'd be trading away an enemy who has some marbles and is losing ground, for a new enemy that needs different tactics that we aren't used to. The best solution would be a much simpler law (ISPs cannot offer tiers of service promising better internet speeds) that is then oversaw by the FTC- rather than all in the hands of the FCC or ISPs. Google is shit scared of losing Net Neutrality (or maybe they're just acting nice for PR purposes), but I really do think DAD would be shooting ourselves in the foot.

ALL OF GAB'S TWEETS ARE GONE https://twitter.com/GetGEWD Search for them, and you can find people quoting/replying to tweets by them that don't exist. We need to shill for them on Twitter now. And keep RTing shit about Twitter and Google on there. It's what they did.

Sargon made a video rebuking Existential Comics and their little comic defending anitfa, and youtube deleted it because the tags said it was funny and apparently it wasn't. Like he says in the video, it's a sign of the times. It seems the left won't sit idly by while it continues to lose. The video was restored later: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv-4Pxe8Dz8 Download And Share >>331346 This is still important.

Jewtube might technically be breaking copyright laws. https://archive.is/Au7L1

DECEMBER 18th IS THE TWITTER PURGE https://archive.is/KGAys https://archive.is/gP9xw < Twitter will be using cookies to determine if you have gone to a site that they do not like and then ban you for it. [Pic 1 and 2] Twitter will not let you log in if you disable cookies. [Pic 3] Basically using cookies (sites that have a tweet button, maybe more) if you have been on a "bad" website, you get banned. Ideally this means they can cut off articles that they don't like (ban the author, ban the websites Twitter account, ban anyone who shares a link to it manually or visited the website). It also gives them more ammo to ban problematic accounts. I.e. if you do shit on Facebook that would get you banned on Twitter- they'll do it. Of course, with the sheer scale of users, it's bound to be an algorithm and it will overreach. Meanwhile, people who demand death to whites and republican politicians, actual terrorists, and pedo-sympathizers will be untouched. The best retaliation (IMO)- > Make sure all the people you're interested know about it. Actual people and not business/celeb accounts I mean. > Shill for GAB. Get people on there like in the early days of the exodus where folk made posts luring anons to 8ch. Also, use GAB more often. The site is slow as dicks for me but it's better than the alternative. It's a bit of an echochamber I will admit (which means at least some of them must be fakes trying to troll or crack consensus), but that's why they need more discussion with real people. Not liberals. > DisNod Twitter via their own platform. Twitter's stock exchange code is TWTR. So if you post "$TWTR" it acts like a hashtag for those who are following Twitter's stocks & shares. FILL IT with how pissed you are Twitter is censoring AND all the bullshit accounts they allow on there that should be banned under their own glorious rules. > DisNod Twitter the old fashioned way. If you see a promoted Tweet or advert- email the company and show it next to the pedos, muslims, and left-wing psychopaths. > If you haven't already, turn off all the personalization and data collection (though I imagine you would have already, or it doesn't do much). https://archive.is/OOL2q > Don't click hyperlinks to Twitter. Always copy and paste. And always post Twitter links without the https or www. > That is how the tracking works (similar stuff Imgur and Reddit use to detect is someone is asking for upvotes via another site). I have no doubt 8ch is on their list. And if it's not, it will be when they see what sort of accounts come from there. > Be prepared for a "slow purge". They could tear off the band-aid, or ban people in a trickle. > Partake in any anti-Twitter stuff. There's a group of people looking to mass block Jack (the website's owner who has his own account) but I doubt it's effectiveness https://archive.is/QT53O. Mass reporting Jack or Twitter support might send up more attention, but only they see it and it's not public. IMO, help anti-Twitter stuff trend and get those groups to use $TWTR in their tweets. This is not a flood, this is a crosspost from /v/, I hope it tricks the bot.

>>331385 Post from /v/: >Just when so many sjws are outed as sex offenders and etc >Twitter starts this <Surely just a coincidence Gave me an idea. You could start memeing that Twitter are doing this to track & silence people who out Hollywood sexual assaults. Throwing #MeToo combined with $TWTR with that implication is sure to cause some PR nightmares.

>>331385 >< Twitter will be using cookies to determine if you have gone to a site that they do not like and then ban you for it. [Pic 1 and 2] Twitter will not let you log in if you disable cookies. Which is why Cookie Controller has "Allow as 1st party only" option for sites. Then again, it's easier to kill the button itself with adblock. If it's a tracker, treat it accordingly.

>>329032 There are two things to consider when it comes to websites: Does it censor information? Is it a honeypot? voat seems fine on number 1, unknown on number 2 gabai is a jewish word and it means "collector" so pic related

> Germany Goes Full Internet Thought Police After the string of arrests for "hate-speech" online, they German government is pushing even further claiming they need to do more. They're going full China with an Anti-Hate Speech law to censor the Internet. https://archive.is/XIMiH > Germany will enforce a law called “NetzDG” that demands compliance from social media platforms and media sites like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit to swiftly remove “hate speech,” “fake news,” and material illegal in the country within 24 hours of a public report. > The law affects any platform with more than two million users, meaning that even websites like 4chan, which served 27.7 million monthly users in November 2017, fall under the law’s provisions. Even the Russian social network, VK, and the video game platform, Steam, are subject to compliance. Other sources claim companies that repeatedly fail to comply with the NetzDG may be fined up to fifty million Euros. This law could mean (if social media did enforce it), that someone complaining in Germany can strip content for the rest of the world. However it might just mean it's blocked in Germany, Dave claimed it could go either way- but seeing how Twitter & co operate, the worst scenario might be more likely. Major websites bow to Germany's definition of what is offensive (which they agree with anyway), rather than their users. And Germany demands the websites censor, rather than block parts of the website for their users, or monitor them. It's clear that on top of the German government wanting to stop dissent from within it's country, it also wants to stop people around the world saying things that make it look bad. Combine that with the EU army (Pesco) and it's clear the EU is making great strides to mold the world in it's own bomb-scarred image. Get #NetzDG trending, and share it around. Repackage it for normalfags (Germany demands the world does things the way it wants. I thought they lost WW2?), and spread the risks to more intelligent parties to make this more openly discussed. Even Yale has objected to this (https://archive.is/IBwaw) > In effect, the NetzDG conscripts social media companies into governmental service as content regulators. Social media platforms not only must monitor and review content, but also must interpret the German Code’s byzantine and sometimes ambiguous provisions. But unlike a true government agency, social media companies face steep penalties for under-enforcement. As a result, the NetzDG incentivizes intermediaries to overpolice speech—social media companies are more likely to remove demeaning content that could potentially violate the Criminal Code than risk a fifty-million-Euro fine; indeed, many of these transnational companies may even be duty-bound to U.S. shareholders to construe the speech categories broadly to avoid liability. > Overpolicing driven by risk aversion is further exacerbated by the sheer number of user-generated posts. The requirement that social media companies remove content within 24 hours encourages social networks to immediately remove content that appears to fall into proscribed categories of speech, leaving companies little time to consider questionable content. Dave Cullen's not on Twitter any more, but feel free to RT (or it's equivilant) on Gan and/or Minds: https://gab.ai/DaveCullen https://gab.ai/DaveCullen/posts/17383382 https://www.minds.com/davecullen https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/796052370055012352

Twitter caught red-handed admitting they censor conservatives & Trump supporters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64gTjdUrDFQ Make sure you RT all of this and show it to everyone Use Hooktube to download twitter videos, and http://downloadtwittervideo.com/ to download videos within tweets. Remember: Archives do NOT save the videos within tweets. The videos in archives are unplayable, and just a static image of the thumbnail/first frame. https://archive.is/9aEgN https://archive.is/o7ivy (article: https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/bozell-twitters-shadow-banning-most-sinister-threat-free-speech-history archive.is didn't lke this website for some reason- kept coughing out a network error) https://archive.is/10uZz (article: https://archive.is/dTUBN) https://archive.is/yDJpq (article: https://archive.is/yk0k4) https://archive.is/Gv29T (Image, since I can't embed & upload pics, I'll post it in a minute: https://archive.is/1F0r7) https://archive.is/S1Zid https://archive.is/ERV0u (Image, since I can't embed & upload pics, I'll post it in a minute: https://archive.is/aLet0) https://archive.is/Hb4Sm (article: https://archive.is/r1vkI) https://archive.is/RBg33 https://archive.is/iclmu (2nd and third tweets in the chain are also important) https://archive.is/5MKg1 https://archive.is/FSL4r (Video is in the embed and the youtube link at the top of the page) There's even more if you go to Project Veritas and James O'Keef's Twitter pages (as of Jan 11) twitter.com/Project_Veritas/ twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/ Get this info out however you can! Tag-jack (include unrelated popular trends), include the stock-code for Twitter ($TWTR), show it to people in real life- and most importantly- if you are banned from Twitter, make another account. They want shitty people to be gone? Overload them with it. Break their censorship block, and their safe-space. Only reason I'm here is thanks to an anon posting about fullchan on halfchan about a week or two after GG was banned from discussion. Censorship can be broken, and we know that normalfags are against SJW when properly motivated (i.e. when they've been lied to, or risk being under the boot). Don't run and hide to another place. Fuck Twitter up.

>>331496 And the two images. The first one posted in some shitposting discord actually alerted me to this story. Memes inform. Make them.

> Veritas Next Bombshell! Twitter Spys On Users' Sexual Activities < Project Veritas' James O'Keefe joins Alex Jones exclusively to report on the ripple effect created by the release of his most recent hidden camera video that exposes Twitter's blatant partisanship. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bl1U5ufIV4 https://archive.is/mfvPo O 'Keefe threatens Jack with the next big update on the story. The background shows it's the sex related- presumably Twitter employees hand around nudes & dickpics for fun or potentially blackmail. They even got talking to Jack himself. If you can't appeal to people on the conservative front, you can on the pervert and potential blackmail front. And whatever Jack says is gonna be damning. https://archive.is/Qu2Hm (Image: https://archive.is/NZVJe) Vertas proposes changing your avatar to show you know. https://archive.is/3vIDR Fox covers the story, O'Keefe mocks (the rest of) MSM for not doing so as well. https://archive.is/nTCYN (Image: https://archive.is/GYgfD) To change the story/distract/divide O'Keefe & Trump, etc; a few outlets have been running with "Trump wanted to hire James O 'Keefe to steal Obama's birth records!" when his book just says Trump "was confident Obama was born in the United States." There are many tweets by O'Keefe calling them out on this. https://archive.is/uK3bF (Image: https://archive.is/NPGsv) CNN asks O'Keefe about the comment they cooked up, his staff say he's happy to appear live on air. CNN keeps asking for digital/phone interview and think it somehow counts as denying the comment. https://archive.is/CDmV8 Twitter Engineer explains why they won't verify Julian Assange. https://archive.is/L1j2n How does Twitter decide who the "shitty people" are?

>>331499 Images to the above archives.

BREAKING: HUNDREDS of Twitter Employees Paid to View "Everything You Post," & Private "Sex Messages" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgyPpsX2B0g > Project Veritas has released undercover footage of Twitter Engineers and employees admitting that Twitter employees view"everything you post" on their servers, including private "sex messages," and "d*ck pics." The engineers also admit that Twitter analyzes this information to create a "virtual profile" of you which they sell to advertisers. The "sell to advertisers" part is what should be driven home. It's not just the people who run Twitter looking at your private shit, it's someone else they sell it to. That's far more invasive (and something people haven't been conditioned to accept so it's kept more quiet). Some choice quotes from their website: https://archive.is/SDL1F > Clay Haynes: “There’s teams dedicated to it… at least, three or four hundred people… they’re paid to look at d*ck pics.” > Pranay Singh, Twitter Engineer, Says “All your sex messages… d*ck pics… like, all the girls you’ve been f*cking around with, they’re are on my server now…” […] “All your illegitimate wives and, like, all the girls you’ve been f*cking around with, they’re are on my server now… I’m going to send it to your wife, she’s going use it in your divorce.” […] “So, what happens is like, you like, write something or post pictures on line, they never go away… Because even after you send them, people are like analyzing them, to see what you are interested in, to see what you are talking about. And they sell that data.” > “Everything you send is stored on my server… You can’t [delete it], it’s already on my server.” > Claims Twitter Stores Your Private Data to Sell to Advertisers, “They’ll make a virtual profile about you” > “You’re paying for the right to use our website with your data basically.” > “You leak way more information than you think… Like, if you go to Twitter for the first time, we have information about you.” > How Would You Protect People If This Power Fell Into the Wrong Hands? “You don’t,” Says Former Twitter Engineer Conrado Miranda, “There is no way.” > Haynes was asked if this type of private information could leak from Twitter, he had this to say: “Oh yeah, and it’s a genie out of the bottle kind of thing after that point. You know? Sure, I can fire them. Heck, I could probably even sue them, in some cases. But, the genie’s already out of the bottle. Like, how do actually recoup costs… you can’t calculate the cost or the damage of that.” < “Twitter is aggressively harvesting your personal information and tracking your every movement, selling your virtual dossier to the highest bidder ” says Project Veritas Founder James O’Keefe. “Even more alarming is that these Twitter employees don’t seem to think that they are the ‘biggest brother’ out there… We have more to come – stay tuned.” https://archive.is/mmr4v (Main Tweet to share) https://archive.is/exGZ3 https://archive.is/F5594 https://archive.is/BlJHR https://archive.is/5qHu4 https://archive.is/2uJcO ("The biggest takeaway from @JamesOKeefeIII & @Project_Veritas newest undercover video? Twitter employees say Facebook and Google are even worse than Twitter is.") https://archive.is/6aDrp (The question conjurs up the image of Twitter staff as perverts. Use it.) https://archive.is/PF3Z8 Remember to include $TWTR in your own posts!

> What Are You Waiting For? Speak Out! Youtube is going to get worse before it gets better. Share it to show how bad it is for conservatives (1 cent a day from monetization). Also, /pol/ may have found a way to basically install an SJW/AntiFA/(((Them))) detector in your browser: >>>/pol/11117015 https://archive.is/lG6LL Still early days, but here's hoping it pans out.

TOP PRIORITY. SOPA #7 or 8 I dunno > What the fuck is FOSTA? https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1865/text > "To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify that section 230 of such Act does not prohibit the enforcement against providers and users of interactive computer services of Federal and State criminal and civil law relating to sexual exploitation of children or sex trafficking, and for other purposes." In short, Section 230 would not apply when someone posts content that is child pornography or indicates human trafficking. The website owner must make greater strides to ensure such content never appears on their website, or be arrested. Hence the bills name: Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act. > What is Section 230? https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230 > "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" In short, it means a website owner is not responsible for what its users post. The basis for nearly every Internet protection law. Without this, even false-flags can shut down websites. Or normalfag websites will have heavy algorithms to make sure "bad" content is seen. As long as a state can argue it helps trafficking, it can be pulled. Everything is a Russian bot code, so why can't anything be a secret code to help traffickers. On normalfag websites. Or 8ch. > What we do? Despite the sticked message on the top of all boards, the ship nearly sailed. It has to go to the senate however. > What's the plan? https://archive.fo/WAl4u#selection-60869.0-60869.8 1. Use the two most pro-freedom and pro-internet senators to help us rally enough of the rest to oppose FOSTA. Both Rand Paul (R) and Ron Wyden (D) have a good track record when it comes to defending the internet from threats of censorship. Paul presents himself as a libertarian, so stopping an assualt on free speech like this is right up his alley. Double for Wyden, as he's easily the most outspoken senator on issues affecting the internet by a wide margin. Like the earlier anon posted, Wyden already knows what's up and is pushing hard against FOSTA already. And remember during the SOPA/PIPA debacle he was mounting the most opposition threatening a filibuster against it. As for getting other senators on board to oppose this, the strategy for convincing them should be to understand what the most important issues are to them and package your argument in a way that appeals to their concerns. Are they passionate about the human trafficing issue? Show them the statements from the groups in the EFF article. Do they talk tough on crime? Show them what the DOJ has had to say. Are they freaking out about supposed Russian super-hackers? Put a Russian super-hacker spin on the false flag scenario. Party line towers? Point them to Paul or Wyden. Most of you are probably worried about how most senators won't want to oppose this out of fear of being seen as "supporting child sex slavery" but that's where the actions on the second front come in. 2. Get as many ecelebs to help spread the truth about FOSTA as you can and make this bill as politically toxic as possible. More or less the same points apply here as they do in regards to talking to the senators. Present the issue in a way that shows how FOSTA negatively impacts their interests. I would argue that Youtubers talking about FOSTA will likely give us the most reach and traction, followed by Twitter. Get them to talk about why FOSTA is a bad bill for the internet and how to contact their senators. And don't limit yourself to right-leaning or even centrist or apolitical megaphones. If you see an opportunity to present FOSTA to a leftist eceleb in a way that you can rally them against it, DEFINITELY do so. It shouldn't be THAT difficult, since there are already some left-leaning and anti sex-trafficking groups that have spoken out against this, plus many leftists will immediately trust the EFF. The more people there are on social media calling out this bullshit for what it is, the harder it will be for the people pushing said bullshit to use women and children as a shield to hide their tyranny. And lastly, I have one more, very important thing to say. Even if we lose this battle and FOSTA becomes law, DON'T STOP FIGHTING BACK. Should the worst come to pass, it doesn't mean the end of the fight. It only means that the fight has shifted from stopping the bill to repealing the law. THE WAR DOESN'T END IF YOU LOSE THE BATTLE. THE WAR ONLY ENDS IF YOU GIVE IN AND STOP FIGHTING. Godspeed, anons.

White House Backs Bipartisan Effort to Hold Sex Trafficking Websites Like Backpage Accountable http://archive.is/s5dD0 >Video game trade group talks WH meeting, gun violence (Article also talks about the current FOSTA situation) http://archive.is/xBPC7 (Note that the article mentions that the DoJ actually endorses FOSTA, despite the concerns about the language. Seems the techdirt article is sloppy and gives the impression that the DoJ opposed the bill when it didn't. https://archive.fo/LjMMo) >Campaigners For SESTA See It As A First Step To Stomping Out Porn http://archive.is/Njwm8 >>331629 Additional: > When is the senate vote? (i.e. do we have time for infographs, etc)? It's not definitive yet. The first article is saying the vote will likely occur the week of March 12-16, but there's no way to be certain it might not happen earlier. I have no idea how long it takes to make good infographic. I wouldn't stop at just an infographic, either. I think it would be a good idea to also make something that can be printed on a 8.5*11 and be spread around like flyers, like with the "It's okay to be white." campaign /pol/ did a while back. Big tech can't shadowban meatspace. > Are there other freedom based senators? (Make a list, make it a calling/email goal) Rand Paul and Ron Wyden are the only ones I know for sure. Even then, people should still put pressure on their own senators to drop support on the bill. It's also worth pointing out the Wyden currently has placed the Senate equivalent of the bill, S.1693 SESTA on an indefinite hold. The same article () seems to imply that he can do the same to FOSTA, but I don't know for sure if that's the case, or how easily a hold like that can be overturned, if at all. If it can, Oregon anons should definitely push him to do so. > What E-celebs should we be targeting? (showing them that list of official bodies against it helps sway their stance) This is probably the trickiest part and something that needs to be discussed. More normalfag-friendly voices like Pewdiepie are probably best, but the information needs be delivered in a way that doesn't give the opposition any sympathy. Framing this bill as using human trafficking victims as political props, rather than fighting sex-trafficking, might not be a bad idea, for instance. The advantage we have here is that this bill could be applied to anyone regardless of political alignment, so if the other side is also calling this shit out, it will be harder for them to justify this bill. > "Multiple left-leaning groups including at least one or two groups that support sex-trafficking victims [are against it]" Who? Make a list, get their statements/quotes. Helps with the goal above. On it. I'm compiling some of the most prominent ones I can find right now. It might take me a little while to gather what I have and wrap things up neatly. Link me to the gghq topic in question. I'll dump what I have compiled when I've gathered what I can.

>>331629 >>331630 Here's some statements, excerpts, documents, screenshots, and archives I've dug up of some of the anti-trafficking groups that have spoken out against FOSTA. Reminder that even though some of these qoutes refer specifically to SESTA rather than FOSTA, SESTA was added to FOSTA as part of an amendment, so those statements will still apply in the same way. Freedom Network USA Freedom Network Urges Caution in Reforming the CDA (sestahearing-freedomnetwork.pdf) >The current legal framework encourages websites to report cases of possible trafficking to law enforcement. Responsible website administrators can, and do, provide important data and information to support criminal investigations. Reforming the CDA to include the threat of civil litigation could deter responsible website administrators from trying to identify and report trafficking. >It is important to note that responsible website administration can make trafficking more visible—which can lead to increased identification. There are many cases of victims being identified online—and little doubt that without this platform, they would have not been identified. Internet sites provide a digital footprint that law enforcement can use to investigate trafficking into the sex trade, and to locate trafficking victims. When websites are shut down, the sex trade is pushed underground and sex trafficking victims are forced into even more dangerous circumstances. Street-based sex workers report significantly higher levels of victimization, including physical and sexual violence. This means that trafficking victims face even more violence, are less likely to be identified, with less evidence of their victimization. Alexandra F. Levy (Proffesor at Notre Dame Law School - University of Notre Dame) (Via a letter addressed to reps Marsha Blackburn and Mike Doyle) (HHRG-115-IF16-20171130-SD011-U11.pdf) >Reports of sex trafficking have increased as the Internet has grown in size. While this correlation is often marshaled as evidence that the Internet has caused a rise in sex trafficking, it actually proves nothing of the sort. It may simply be the case that the Internet makes it easier to detect the crime. There is likewise no basis for the idea that the proliferation of intermediaries that host advertisements has prompted an increase in sex trafficking, and, conversely, no reason to believe that limiting them will reduce commercial sexual exploitation. FOSTA (and similar measures) may appear to target sex trafficking, but the reality is that they seek to suppress mechanisms through which sex trafficking is readily detected and reported. This is the exact opposite of what we need. How Section 230 Helps Sex Trafficking Victims (and SESTA Would Hurt Them) (Guest Blog Post) http://archive.is/kjuZE#selection-373.0-407.415 >In my recent article entitled The Virtues of Unvirtuous Spaces, I wrote: >Backpage’s usefulness to antitrafficking advocates is, in fact, fully compatible with a profit-seeking approach. This is because Backpage’s value to traffickers as a means of gaining more customers and its value to law enforcement as a means of accessing and recovering more victims rise and fall together. Put differently, traffickers and law enforcement assess the value of Backpage with reference to the same characteristics, namely, accessibility and visibility of ads. >While more visibility invites more business, it also increases the possibility that victims will be discovered by law enforcement, or anyone else looking for them. By extension, it also makes it more likely that the trafficker himself will be apprehended: exposure to customers necessarily means exposure to law enforcement. This is true with respect to both the number and content of the posts. Any attempts to evade law enforcement will likely reduce profits; if traffickers avoid posting pictures of their victims’ faces, for example, their chances of attracting customers—who value information about the provider’s appearance—also drop. >Section 230 doesn’t cause lawlessness. Rather, it creates a space in which many things — including lawless behavior — come to light. And it’s in that light that multitudes of organizations and people have taken proactive steps to usher victims to safety and apprehend their abusers. >SESTA wouldn’t make Backpage more accountable for what it does — it already is subject to the same criminal laws as the rest of us, and courts have held that its civil immunity is limited to its functions as a publisher. What SESTA would do is make Backpage accountable for what it reveals. This would ultimately force Backpage to turn off the light, which, of course wouldn’t reduce trafficking; it would just shuttle it out of view. And it’s especially dangerous to confuse a problem’s disappearance with its resolution when, as here, it’s visibility that often leads to victims’ recovery.

>>331632 >>331629 >>331630 Kristen DiAngelo (Executive Director: Sacramento Sex Workers Outreach Project) (Via a letter addressed to senators Bill Nelson John Thune) (sestahearing-sac-swop.pdf) >SESTA would do nothing to decrease sex trafficking; in fact, it would have the opposite effect. It would impede free speech and punish venues that allow trafficking victims to escape the streets. When trafficking victims are pushed off of online platforms and onto the streets, we become invisible to the outside world as well as to law enforcement, thus putting us in more danger of violence. >Let me be clear: I have never met a sex trafficking victim that was set free because an online venue disappeared, but have met victims who were made less safe when those venues were shut down. I've met victims who were put on a street corner and moved from city to city, making it harder for them to get help or get away. It makes no difference to a trafficker where his victim works—where it's a street corner, a bar, or an online forum—but it makes a world of difference to the victim herself. Traffickers only care that they get their money, not where they get it from. Sex Workers Outreach Project (SWOP) SWOP-USA stands in opposition of disguised internet censorship bill SESTA, S. 1963 https://archive.is/Mi61E#selection-2215.0-2215.583 (Via: Alex Andrews of NSWP and SWOP-Orlando) >Don’t let its name fool you: the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA, S. 1693) wouldn’t help punish sex traffickers. What the bill would do (PDF) is expose any person, organization, platform, or business that hosts third-party content on the Internet to the risk of overwhelming criminal and civil liability if sex traffickers use their services. For small Internet businesses, that could be fatal: with the possibility of devastating litigation costs hanging over their heads, we think that many entrepreneurs and investors will be deterred from building new businesses online.

>>331633 >>331629 >>331630 Hearing for H.R.1865 FOSTA, (Nov 30, 2017) EFF states in this article (Internet Censorship Bills Wouldn’t Help Catch Sex Traffickers: http://archive.is/VUGHu) that a Tennessee Bureau of Investigation special agent by the name of Russ Winkler voice his opposition to the SESTA/FOSTA package, accompanied by Derri Smith of End Slavery Tennessee as a witness. He explains how he uses online platforms—particularly Backpage—to fight online sex trafficking by conducting sting operations posing as johns. >"We've conducted operations and investigations involving numerous perpetrators and victims. The one constant we encounter in our investigations is use of online platforms like Backpage.com by buyers and sellers of underage sex." Video is roughly 2 hrs 21 mins in length. I need to get to bed and I've never editied or cut a video before, so if some can cut the clips from this video or identify the timestamps where these statement are made, it would help greatly.

>>331634 >>331629 >>331630 ACLU Official statement in opposition to FOSTA: https://archive.is/PaRh0 (Note: the page appears to link to the wrond document by mistake.) Tweet against FOSTA from gab.ai: https://archive.is/xtI7a House Liberty Caucus statement against FOSTA: https://archive.is/yhbZH Also, two infographics. First from EFF that explains the importance of CDA Section 230. Second is from an organization by the name of Reframe Health and Justice 2018 (www.reframehealthandjustice.com) that go into detail into the problems of the bill mainly from the perspective of advocates of sex-trafficking victims. Not very good attention grabbers, but seem to be decent for people who want to know more.

>>331635 >>331629 >>331630 Other EFF articles on SESTA/FOSTA: >Stop SESTA: Whose Voices Will SESTA Silence? https://archive.is/rgV0C >Sex Trafficking Experts Say SESTA Is the Wrong Solution https://archive.is/h1knN >FOSTA Would Be a Disaster for Online Communities https://archive.is/CSyhD Some normalfag friendly news sites that have voiced opposition against SESTA/FOSTA: >Reason: House Passes 'Anti Sex-Trafficking' Bill Opposed by Both DOJ and Trafficking Survivors https://archive.is/2uBQI >Injustice Today: Proposed Federal Trafficking Legislation Has Surprising Opponents: Advocates Who Work With Trafficking Victims https://archive.is/uvZlO >Slate: A Bill Intended to Stop Sex Trafficking Could Significantly Curtail Internet Freedom https://archive.is/iiMhQ >Washington Examiner: Congress' sex trafficking bills draw outrage from victims groups and privacy advocates https://archive.is/T0PXx >The Verge: A new bill to fight sex trafficking would destroy a core pillar of internet freedom https://archive.is/qbJeB (You know this bill is a disaster when even the fucking VERGE of all places is agreeing with us.) And some examples of left-leaning groups opposing FOSTA. (Trans Equality) https://archive.is/amVBb (AIDS United) https://archive.is/7gH2c (PACE Society‏) https://archive.is/BnpyG (MASWAN‏) https://archive.is/mtqkC (Kate D. Amano, an individual sex worker) https://archive.is/MkwWT #SurvivorsAgainstFOSTA seems like it would be a good hashtag to throw support behind. We could easily flip the narrative on the bill by proving that this would hurt sex-trafficking victims rather than hurt them.

Attached PDF is the DoJ letter expressing concerns about (but not opposing, as previously believed) the FOSTA/SESTA package. And these are some of the groups that are behind the push for SESTA/FOSTA: http://archive.is/FIvIV 1. Shared Hope International Arlington, VA 2. Rights4Girls Washington, DC 3. Covenant House International New York, NY 4. ECPAT USA Washington, DC 5. World Without Exploitation New York, NY 6. Mary Mazzio & I AM JANE DOE Community Boston, MA 7. Courtney’s House Washington, DC 8. Legal Momentum New York, NY 9. Equality Now New York, NY 10. National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) Washington, DC 11. My Life My Choice Boston, MA 12. Truckers Against Trafficking Englewood, CO 13. Sanctuary For Families New York, NY 14. Trafficking in America Task Force Gainesville, FL 15. CSA San Diego County El Cajon, CA 16. Villanova Law School Institute on Commercial Sexual Exploitation Villanova, PA 17. National Council of Jewish Women New York New York, NY 18. Dawn’s Place Philadelphia, PA 19. Child’s World America Villanova, PA 20. Freedom From Exploitation, Inc. San Diego, CA 21. Women’s Justice NOW New York, NY 22. Children’s Law Center of California

[Expand Post]

Sacramento, CA 23. Carole Landis Foundation For Social Action Haverford, PA 24. The Voices and Faces Project Chicago, IL 25. NH Traffick Free Coalition Milford, NH 26. The Samaritan Women Baltimore, MD 27. Free to Thrive San Diego, CA 28. Enough Is Enough Great Falls, VA 29. The Lynch Foundation for Children Ranchero Santa Fe, CA 30. Bags of Hope Ministries Boston, MA 31. Hope Ranch For Women Wichita, KS 32. Wings of Refuge Iowa Falls, IA 33. North Star Initiative Lititz, PA 34. Zoë Ministries Greenwood, DE 35. Abolition Ohio Dayton, OH 36. Arrow Child & Family Ministries Baltimore, MD 37. Consumer Watchdog Washington, DC 38. Airline Ambassadors International Arlington, VA 39. Journey Out Los Angeles, CA 40. The Ricky Martin Foundation San Juan, PR 41. Praesidium Partners Richmond, VA 42. Worthwhile Wear Silverdale, PA 43. Amirah Woburn, MA 44. Saved in America Oceanside, CA 45. Awaken Reno, NV 46. Ala Kuola Honolulu, HI 47. Glory House of Miami Miami, FL 48. Generate Hope San Diego, CA 49. Refuge for Women Las Vegas Las Vegas, NV 50. Girls Inc. Washington, DC 51. New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence Concord, NH 52. National Association of Counsel for Children Aurora, CO 53. New Hope Youth Ministries Russellville, AR 54. Living in Freedom Together Inc. Worcester, MA 55. Her Song Jacksonville Jacksonville, FL 56. Convo Church Reno, NV 57. The Daughter Project Perrysburg, OH 58. New Life Refuge Ministries Corpus Christy, TX 59. LifeWire Bellevue, WA 60. Hope Ranch for Women Wichita, KS 61. The Lighthouse Community Center Lynchburg, VA 62. Artworks for Freedom Washington, DC 63. Chicago Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation Chicago, IL 64. Stolen Youth Seattle, WA 65. Prevention Works Joint Task Force & Coalition Conyers, GA 66. Engedi Refuge Ministries Lynden, WA 67. True Justice International New Bern, NC 68. Girls with Grit Austin, TX 69. eWomenNetwork Dallas, TX 70. ExposeSexEdNow Charleston, SC 71. National Council of Jewish Women Washington, DC 72. TraffickStop Burleson, TX 73. Survivors for Solutions Denver, CO 74. Family Watch International Gilbert, AZ 75. American Family Association of Pennsylvania Franklin, PA 76. Christian Action League of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 77. Restored Hope Ministries Dallas, TX 78. In Our Backyard Redmond, OR 79. Universal Peace Federation Tarrytown, NY 80. International Athletes’ Abolition Mission Havelock, NC 81. Being a Voice Philadelphia, PA 82. iCare4, Inc. Evans, GA 83. Delaware Family Policy Council Dover, DE 84. Institute on Religion and Democracy Washington, DC 85. New Jersey Coalition Against Human Trafficking Shorthills, NJ 86. S.H.A.D.E. Movement Emeryville, CA 87. Florida Abolitionist Orlando, FL 88. The Refuge for DMST Austin, TX 89. Girls Against Porn & Human Trafficking/Men Against Porn Nashville, TN 90. Second Life Tennessee Chattanooga, TN 91. Leadership Conference of Women Religious Silver Spring, MD 92. Girls Educational & Mentoring Services (GEMS) New York, NY 93. Graham Windam Brooklyn, NY 94. National Council of Jewish Women—Essex County Livingston, NJ 95. SeraphimGLOBAL Arlington, VA 96. Protect Young Minds Richland, WA 97. Refuge City Richardson, TX 98. West Coast Children’s Clinic Oakland, CA 99. National Crittenton Foundation Portland, OR 100. National Decency Coalition Mount Juliet, TN 101. Beloved Haven Moyock, NC 102. Blue Ridge Fellows Roanoke, VA

How do we collate all this into an infograph?

imgur.com/gallery/LJAeNVY FOSTA is on the front page of Imgur (23rd March). Help deal with their shills, maybe give then advice on how to push back. Senator calling won't do shit (since they can just throw up their hands and say "It's already passed I can't do shit!"), so I'd say protests are the next step. Also, some websites are affected already. > The TDLR: is a bill written under the guise of stopping sex trafficking, has stripped away the protection of section 230 of the Communications act of 1934 which means companies that run web services will soon be responsible for the actions of their users, even if they are unaware of them, to the point of criminal charges that could result in up to 25 years in prison. This seems possibly to apply retroactively, meaning websites could be punished for stuff their users did, before this became a law. > Reddit started a massive purge of communities that revolve around pretty much anything that can end up being criminal. Guns, drugs, tobacco and alcohol advice on these topics, subreddits dedicated to talking about criminal activities (real or not) etc. Details can be seen here https://www.red*dit.com/r/announcements/comments/863xcj/new_addition_to_sitewide_rules_regarding_the_use/ The outrage in the community is extensive. > Craigslist has shut down its personals section and now redirects here https://www.craigslist.org/about/FOSTA when you click it. Their statement is short, and succinct. We need a presidential Veto at this stage. SOPA was rejected since it was well known, and toxic to support. Inform & Protest. Upload shit to government websites to get them shut down under their own law, anything!!

>>331673 Actually, we could hammer Twitter, Google (via Gmail) and Youtube by abusing this law and reporting it ourselves. They want to stay up to manipulate elections, so they pull strings to veto the law.

Hey, heard rumor from a friend that Twitter doesn't allow you to use Archive.is links in tweets and/or DMs to people. I don't have one, so I can't test it. There are still Archive.is links on Twitter, so it might be any new ones from now on are verboten. If so, might want to include screencaps of articles with the archive URL placed onto it.

For concerns of SESTA and FOSTA, #HaveAVoice is a tag being pushed to inform about it, and call for it not to be signed. #CLOUDAct is also relevant. https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2018/03/dear-president-trump-dont-sign-sesta-fosta-let-internet-haveavoice/

EU: ARTICLE 11 "LINK LICENSE" & ARTICLE 13 "COMPULSORY COPYRIGHT FILTER" •https://archive.is/FZmCa •Article 13 has passed its preliminary vote https://archive.fo/AWYU7 •There will be another vote come January, it is not over yet US: FOSTA-SESTA PASSED: BROAD CENSORSHIP LAW UNDER GUISE OF "FIGHTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING" •Violates "ex post facto" laws https://archive.fo/OsPBB#selection-123.0-145.267 •Signed into law: https://archive.is/AM3Om •Various organizations suing https://archive.fo/sN7iM •Lawsuit dismissed. Law's constitutionality was not addressed. Pending further action https://archive.is/Gpx9H A new course of action needs to be discussed. Remember the bunker

>>332324 whats the bunker?

>>331673 >This seems possibly to apply retroactively, meaning websites could be punished for stuff their users did, before this became a law. No, ex post facto Definition Latin for "from a thing done afterward." Overview Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes actions retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed. Two clauses in the United States Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws: Art 1, § 9 This prohibits Congress from passing any laws which apply ex post facto. Art. 1 § 10. This prohibits the states from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.

>>331673 >>332841 Scope What Constitutes Punishment In the often-cited case of Beazell v. Ohio, 269 U.S. 167 (1925), the Supreme Court defined the scope of the constitutional ex post facto restrictions: "It is settled, by decisions of this Court so well known that their citation may be dispensed with, that any statute which punishes as a crime an act previously committed, which was innocent when done, which makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission, or which deprives one charged with crime of any defense available according to law at the time when the act was committed, is prohibited as ex post facto." Courts have applied this standard to different parts of the criminal process. California Dep't of Corrections v. Morales, 514 US 499 (1995) takes the Beazell standard and applies it to the parole process. In Morales, California amended a law to state that the California Board of Prison Terms may defer parole hearings for up to three years for a prisoner convicted of more than one homicide offense. Respondent-defendant Morales was imprisoned before the law was amended, and he was subsequently affected by it when he applied for a parole hearing. In his lawsuit, he claimed that the amendment violated the ex post facto prohibition. The Supreme Court, in applying Beazell, held that an amendment which impacts someone currently imprisoned to a law does not violate ex post facto if the amendment does not increase the punishment attached to the respondent's crime. The Court held that here, the amendment did not impact Morales's sentence nor did it impact any substantive attempt to be granted parole. The Court found that a simple alteration of a prisoner's process of attaining parole does not violate ex post facto prohibitions. Retroactive Judicial Decisions At a minimum, ex post facto prohibits legislatures from passing laws which retroactively criminalize behavior. However, this prohibition does not attach as strictly to judicial decisions. Appellate courts sometimes announce a new rule of law, but will not apply it to the case in front of it, in order to attempt to comply with ex post facto prohibitions. Year and a Day Rule The Year and a Day Rule is a common law doctrine which states that a person cannot be convicted of homicide for a death that occurs more than a year and a day after his or her act(s) that allegedly caused the death. Rogers v. Tennessee, 532 U.S. 451 (2000) dealt with the doctrine. Defendant-petitioner Rogers had stabbed Bowdery, who died 15 months later. The trial court found Rogers guilty of murder. When Rogers appealed to the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals under the Year and a Day Rule, the appellate court upheld the conviction and abolished the Year and a Day Rule for Tennessee. Rogers ultimately appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming that the appellate court's action violated the ex post facto prohibition. The Supreme Court in Rogers found that ex post facto was not present here, as the appellate "court's decision was a routine exercise of common law decisionmaking that brought the law into conformity with reason and common sense." The Rogers court also referenced a previous Supreme Court decision, Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347 (1964), which held that "due process prohibits retroactive application of any judicial construction of a criminal statute that is unexpected and indefensible by reference to the law which has been expressed prior to the conduct in issue." Rogers, considering the holding in Bouie, held that the ex post facto prohibition applies only to legislative decisions, and that even if it were to apply to judicial decisions, the retroactive judicial repeal of the Year and a Day Rule is neither unexpected nor indefensible. from cornell