Archive for parler

Amazon Web Services

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 6, 2021 by andelino

We are all used to Amazon delivering packages to our doors and mailboxes. But did you know that Amazon also delivers virtually every filmed video in the United States to your screen?

According to an article at the American Prospect, Amazon Web Services (AWS) provides service to 32 percent of the Internet. However, the dominance of AWS expands further when examining digital video delivery in the United States.

“AWS is the back-end provider for Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Paramount+, Peacock, HBO Max, Discovery+, and of course, Amazon Prime. As of February of this year, that list includes the top six streaming services in the U.S. by subscribers; Discovery+, which is not on that list, is merging with HBO Max, and Paramount+ didn’t launch until March. Just from those top six, 558.8 million U.S. subscribers rely on AWS to get their streaming video. Yes, this is more people than live in the United States; that’s because, as you doubtless know, many people subscribe to more than one streaming service.”

Over 550 million streaming accounts in the U.S. are run by AWS. In addition, every major movie studio (Disney, Universal, Warner Bros., and Paramount) stream their new releases on services run by AWS. Even movie theaters receive their new releases via a cloud, which is run by, you guessed it, AWS.

Not only is movie distribution relying on Amazon Web Services for distribution and digital infrastructure, but over 1,600 television channels utilize AWS. That includes Fox, Viacom, CBS and the Discovery families of networks.

“If you are watching a filmed piece of entertainment on any screen at a theater, at home or on your phone through a digital direct-to-customer stream, on a television network, or on a streaming service, the odds are extremely likely that you’re making use of AWS.”

No matter which service you choose to use, Amazon has some amount of control in having it delivered to your screen: They have a phantom monopoly on the filmed media industry in the United States. This phantom monopoly should concern us all because Amazon has a track record of censoring content that does not align with its political agenda. Amazon has barely flexed its censorship muscles but has already shown what power it holds.

The most significant censorship by Amazon was the removal of Parler from its servers, giving the social media company only 24 hours’ notice on January 10. This was in conjunction with Apple and Google banning Parler from their app stores. Amazon claims Parler violated the service agreement by allowing violent content to be shared on its platform. The Amazon e-mail stated that it “cannot provide services to a customer that is unable to effectively identify and remove content that encourages or incites violence against others.”

After the January 6 protests, Parler did not ban content about election fraud, President Donald Trump or any other opinion. Other Big Tech companies banned President Trump and have since censored any content about election fraud, Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness, and the integrity of the 2020 presidential election. These opinions do not align with those of these tech giants.

While these Big Tech companies have blocked individuals or certain content, Amazon has the power to completely blot out websites at a whim. Thirty-two percent of the Internet is run on Amazon Web Services. That is a lot of power for a company that may decide your opinions “encourage or incite violence” or violate any of its vague service agreement clauses.

Another instance occurred when Amazon removed the documentary “Created Equal on Justice Clarence Thomas” from its streaming service with no warning or notice. According to the Wall Street Journal: Director Michael Pack said that Created Equal was doing well on Amazon, so it wasn’t pulled because no one wanted to see it. “For a while our film was, briefly, No. 1 in documentaries. And I think it’s still No. 25 or 30, so it’s been selling,” he said. Notably, he added, less-popular documentaries about Anita Hill and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg continue to be available for streaming on Amazon. “So why don’t they offer Created Equal? There’s obviously customer demand.”

Amazon has not given an explanation on why it suddenly decided to remove a documentary on a conservative minded Supreme Court justice (contractually it is not required to provide an explanation). But this is not the first time Amazon has removed content, as WSJ explained:

“If this episode sounds familiar, it’s because Amazon pulled a similar stunt last fall. Eli Steele’s What Killed Michael Brown?—a critique of liberal social policies that was written and narrated by his father, the race scholar Shelby Steele—was slated to stream on Amazon in October, then held up for reasons the company never fully explained.”

Amazon eventually relented and made the film available, but only after these pages weighed in and made a fuss. The documentary was picked up by the Daily Wire and is available to view on its website. This is an example of Amazon censoring content it directly controls. But as seen through the Parler example, it can remove the support servers for any of the businesses that use AWS.

While most of these streaming corporations lean left and allow unspeakably immoral content on their platform for millions of Americans to consume, it is doubtful any would allow their company to be destroyed for the sake of free speech. Amazon has enough leverage over the industry to cause universal censorship. This behavior has been manifest in another Amazon business line.

In addition to its dominance in the film industry, Amazon also controls 83 % of the book market. So what happens if the book you are selling does not align with Amazon’s opinions?

In early 2021, Amazon banned the book When Harry Became Sally, by conservative Ryan T. Anderson, which provides a different view on the transgender movement. The book was first released in 2018 and was one of the bestsellers on Amazon. The official Amazon policy states:

“We don’t sell certain content including content that we determine is hate speech, promotes the abuse or sexual exploitation of children, contains pornography, glorifies rape or pedophilia, advocates terrorism, or other material we deem inappropriate or offensive.”

Amazon sold the book in 2018, 2019 and 2020, but decided in 2021 that it is in violation of these guidelines. Three Republican senators wrote to Amazon asking for an explanation on the decision. Amazon responded by saying it has “chosen not to sell books that frame lgbtq+ identity as a mental illness.”

To add to the confusion, in May 2021 Amazon decided to keep selling Abigail Shrier’s book “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.” Nearly 500 Amazon employees have signed a petition to have the book removed. At least two Amazon employees have resigned in protest. In 2020, Amazon refused to allow paid promotions of Ms. Shrier’s book.

In addition to the books that challenge the radical-leftist view of transgenderism, Amazon also temporarily banned criticism of the reaction to Covid-19, as NBC News writes:

Last year, Amazon blocked the selling of a self-published e-book that claimed the harms of the coronavirus were overstated, but reversed its decision after Elon Musk tweeted that the company’s decision was “insane.”

Amazon has been so inconsistent and vague that its unpredictability only allows censorship to be easier in the future. Would Amazon ever leverage its dominance in the film and book industry to censor opposing opinions?

Amazon’s new CEO is left-leaning Andy Jassy, who was leading Amazon Web Services when it de-platformed Parler, he’s now over the entire company. Amazon has censored before, and it likely will again. The war over censorship is moving toward a climactic battle.

After the January 6 protests, Big Tech acted in a concerted manner to censor any news or opinions that claimed the riot was not a terrorist attack or insurrection. Michelle Obama wrote a letter to Big Tech CEO’s to censor Donald Trump and conservatives and they did her bidding. However, since the Biden administration has taken power, it has escalated to state-sponsored censorship.

The Wall Street Journal ran an article that quotes a letter from two Democrat representatives addressed to Amazon, Apple, Google and cable companies. It reported:

“The letter is a demand for more ideological censorship. Our country’s public discourse is plagued by misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories and lies,” write Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney. They quote a claim that right-wing media is “much more susceptible,” and demand to know why Amazon’s Fire TV carries certain conservative programs.

Since when have lawmakers asked private companies to censor their political opponents? On July 15, the New York Post reported that the Biden administration is compiling a list of posts for Facebook to censor: “White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the Biden administration is identifying ‘problematic’ posts for Facebook to censor because they contain ‘misinformation’ about Covid-19.”

Is Big Tech virtually another branch of the U.S. government? President Donald Trump is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google for censorship, claiming that the companies are acting as government agents, working hand-in-glove with the radical left. The battle over Big Tech censorship and free speech is ramping up.

Where is all of this leading? There will come a time in the future when free speech will be unavailable. The message coming from God’s work will disappear, like food disappearing in a famine. Amos also says that the “land is not able to bear all his words” (Amos 7:10). People in America will not be able to bear the message of warning and will seek to censor that message.

Besides the other tech giants, it is not hard to imagine how a company like Amazon, which has such a dominant influence on the Internet, film industry and online bookselling, could cause a famine of God’s Word.

That time is not here yet. God does deliver America from bitter affliction for a short period of time (2 Kings 14:26-27). What does this mean for you?

Watch and observe where Big Tech censorship is leading.

Suspend Twitter & Facebook

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , on January 14, 2021 by andelino

Time to “suspend” Twitter and Facebook by “Internet Service Providers” (ISP) across the country.

Twitter left every “sentient” American wondering how a company so “stupid” could become so powerful.

Twitter spent last year “silencing” anything that would help Trump, including accurate facts about Biden “pimping” out his debauched son to foreign countries for big bucks.

It then inaugurated this year by “booting” the president of the United States off Twitter, followed by “silencing” all of his supporters.

But Twitter wasn’t done. In connection with Uganda elections, Twitter issued a “proud” public policy statement about the absolute necessity of “free speech” on the internet, especially around elections.

If you’re thinking that what I just wrote is a joke from the inestimable Babylon Bee, it’s not. This is as real as can be.

For a little context, this started because Twitter and Facebook were doing in Uganda what they did in America: “using their immense power to put their jackboots on the scale to affect the election.”  

Uganda, unlike the “feckless” Republicans, was not going to allow it:

Twitter, as you saw, struck back. Once you’re done laughing about the insane ”hypocrisy” contained within those tweets, start thinking about the deeper implications of the above tweets. I’m not going to deny that Democrats are smart. They are.

Over the course of sixty years, accelerating in the last twenty years, and with “warp speed” in just the last four years, they have systematically moved themselves to the most powerful positions in every American institution, whether in politics, entertainment, education, the media, or the corporate world.

However, what we’re seeing on Twitter is a problem that sometimes happens to apex predators: “they get soft.” Having “vanquished” most of their competition, for the last twenty years, leftists have created a very peculiar “intellectual” world.

When it comes to “technology” and communications, they’ve gone all in, successfully. However, their other area of expertise has been “victim-hood.” They are all victims. Even “self-aware” whites are victims, burdened by their painful “toxicity and privilege.”

This mindset led to “safe spaces, trigger warnings”, and all the other ideas that started in academia and then followed graduates into the corporate and political worlds. For many years now, while leftists are perfectly happy to excoriate “Conservatives” and other “Deplorables” whenever possible, they have “insulated” themselves from all opposing ideas and criticism.

This has extended to politics. In 2016, after Hillary who lost “twice” the presidential elections, leftists didn’t engage in self-analysis. Instead, they “cried” about the Russia hoax for four years, long after even Mueller had “conceded” that neither Trump nor anyone close to him had “colluded” with the Russians.

To “win” the 2020 election, Democrats made zero effort to “convince” Americans that the Democrats had better ideas. Instead, they “locked” Americans in their homes, “destroyed” the economy, increase “dependence” on the government, a Democrat specialty, “locked” their candidate “Sniffy” Joe Biden in a basement, “silenced” any speech of which they disapproved, and “copied” other countries’ vote fraud activities to “steal the election.”

I’ll give Democrats props for achieving their goal, but they “cheated” themselves out of a necessary learning curve. Thus, by “greasing” their own path for so long, Democrats have assiduously trained themselves into the “stupidity” that comes with a complete lack of “insight and self-awareness.”

Incidentally, those Republican politicians and operatives “blaming” Trump and embracing a second “impeachment” are doing the same thing.

The Democrats’ recent success has also given them a healthy dose of “hubris.” If they were more conversant with the philosophy of old white men, such as the wisdom imparted in the Bible or reached by the ancient Greek philosophers, they would know that “stupidity” and “hubris” always end the same way: “badly.”

Proverbs 16:18 gets the last word. “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”

And that’s how you end up with quite possibly the funniest and most repulsive tweet ever: “Twitter preaching free speech purity to the poor benighted black folk in Uganda, even as it stands proudly on the First Amendment’s grave back at home.”

Its repulsive “condescension” is the real-world version of Ingrid Bergman’s character in this classic 1974 movie:

So, after the “Glorious Week Of Serial Purges” and concerted “defenestration” of Parler, this “2021 New Speak” obviously redefined the term “irony” as did the cartoon below.

Time for “Internet Service Providers” (ISP) across the country to block Twitter and Facebook and permanently shutdown these “basic human rights” violators.

 

Idaho Internet Provider Blocks Facebook, Twitter
Twitter’s shares fall, market cap plummets — and Jack becomes a figure of fun
Citing ‘censorship’ concerns, North Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
Twitter Says Internet Shutdowns ‘Violate Basic Human Rights’

How To Survive Big Tech

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 13, 2021 by andelino

The largest technology companies in the United States don’t like you very much. Conservatives will have their voices silenced just like the dissenters in China.

So, what should you do to survive “The Purge”

Social Media

Start by recognizing that you can’t fix the tech platforms that are bent on eradicating your “Social Media” point-of-views. You’ll have to go elsewhere or be exiled. So consider alternative social media platforms focusing on freedom of speech like Parler, Gab, MeWee, Rumble, etc.

Search Engines

Google kicked Parler off its app store because it disagreed with posts that users published. Weak, lame, silly, petty. Yeah, but it is what it is. You can’t fix Google, so avoid it.

DuckDuckGo is a fantastic search engine, they don’t track you, don’t sell your data and do not have the algorithmic political bias that Google does. Go HERE to see how to change the search engine you use from Google to ANYTHING else.

Another great search engine is Brave, a fast, private and secure web browser for PC, Mac and mobile. Download now to enjoy a faster ad-free browsing experience that saves data and battery life by blocking tracking software.

Tech Choices

Apple and Google kicked free speech company Parler off of its app store. If you have an iPhone or a Pixel, you’re financially supporting their actions.

While Samsung still uses Google’s Android OS, picking a phone not made by Apple or Google nets the monopolistic demons much less revenue than buying their phones.

You can also “de-Google” your Android phone to completely release you from Big Tech’s grasp:

The ultimate idea is to make sure you aren’t stuck on a single platform, with a single provider, on a single device. You must decentralize your communications so that you can get the information you need.

While luxuriating in Tahiti, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey made a shameful but bold decision: He removed thousands of conservative voices from his platform, including GrrrGraphics. You can follow GrrrGraphics on Gab with same ID @GRRRGRAPHICS.

Our mass violation? We were all pro-Trump. Dorsey “lied” and said we were promoting ”violence” while he allowed “hang Pence” messages to stay.

Not to be outdone, Jeff Bezos also “cleansed” the Twitter alternative, Parler, from his company’s cloud servers. Trump supporters are now being smeared as “terrorists” by the far left mega billionaires.

Throughout 2020, Facebook was busy “censoring” conservative voices on their platform. Mark Zuckerberg is good friends with China’s President Xi.

Zuckerberg speaks Chinese. He asked Xi to name his child. Zuckerberg clearly interfered with the election by refusing to allow any comments or links to Hunter’s notorious laptop. Facebook went the Hillary route of lying and said with zero proof that it was “Russian disinformation.”

Try using Google for any searches of conservative opinions and you’ll see page after page of leftist opinions stating why conservatives are wrong. Goggle does “evil” and it’s now nothing more than a “socialist propaganda arm” and not a search engine.

Many on the left claim it’s perfectly fine for these CEOs to burn conservative opinions. After all, they are private companies and can do whatever they want. Not exactly. They are publicly-held companies. Twitter’s stock got slammed the other day and rightfully so. Let’s hope the mega billionaires are all taken down a peg or two, but more importantly, we all need to point out the hypocrisy of the left for blatantly violating our First Amendment.

The lefty mega billionaires know their plans for us are unpopular. Their ideas don’t stand up in the marketplace of ideas, so they want to limit and control that marketplace.  They know this is not aligned with our Constitution, but they don’t care. They admire the “Chicoms” system more. Hence their naked display of reckless power.

They must be awfully “afraid” if they’re resorting to “silencing” millions of Americans.

Banning Conservatives From Existence Is a Bold and Dangerous Move
Facebook to Aggressively Remove All “Stop the Steal” Content
Ron Paul Says Facebook Blocked Him From Managing His Profile
The Outright Lies of Equality by Big Tech Organizations
The vilification and purge is not so much about Trump as it is about you

Ending Section 230  

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , on December 9, 2020 by andelino

Ending Section 230 will hurt free speech on the Internet
By Andrea Widburg

President Trump announced that he intended to veto the “National Defense Authorization Act” if it doesn’t include a provision deleting Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act.  Trump’s purpose is to clip the tech tyrants’ wings, something that badly needs doing. However, he’s going about it the wrong way and should rethink his announced plan.

Once upon a time, the internet was a place of freedom and creativity. The early internet companies offered platforms on which people could publish unmediated content. The companies were the equivalent of giant bulletin boards. No one expected them to police the content that people around the world placed on these bulletin board–like platforms.

Some of the first people to recognize the Internet’s promise were pornographers. The federal government had long regulated pornography on radio and television to protect minors from being exposed to it. In February 1996, Congress passed, and Bill Clinton signed, the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA). The CDA’s entire purpose was to criminalize knowingly exposing minors to internet pornography.

The CDA had a carve-out, however, for companies that only hosted other people’s content. Thus, the government could prosecute “XXX Pornography Company” for prohibited conduct, but it could not prosecute the company that provided the server on which XXX Pornography Co. operated. This carve-out is known as Section 230.  Its primary clause states:

“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.”

Section 230 means that YouTube can’t be prosecuted if a third party puts up child pornography videos, and, if you have a WordPress blog, WordPress is not criminally liable if you try to have others join you in sedition. However, under Section 230, if WordPress starts having a say in the content (e.g., de-platforming The Conservative Treehouse because it dislikes its politics), WordPress ceases being a neutral provider.

Put another way, the Act distinguishes between being a publisher, with content control, and being a bulletin board.

We older folks remember a time when the social media providers, the video platforms, the email services, and all the other companies that gave ordinary people a voice had no say at all in how the ordinary people chose to use that voice. However, we’ve also seen how big tech companies have become more involved in controlling third party content. They delete content, censor it, de-platform people, add editorial comments, and generally exert enormous control over what third parties place on their sites.

The big tech companies are no longer neutral bulletin boards.  They are now active editors.

Much of the tech companies’ editing energy is directed at silencing or otherwise marginalizing conservative voices, from President Trump on down. A Media Research Center poll showed that shockingly large numbers of Biden voters said they would have switched their votes to Trump if they’d known three news stories that the tech companies aggressively silenced: “Biden’s alleged sexual assault, Biden’s corrupt partnership with his son, and Trump’s successful Middle East peace initiatives.”

Since the election, the tech tyrants have continued to editorialize and censor conservative content. Sites such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, at a minimum, put warning labels on tweets, posts, or videos that do not conform to the Democrat view of the election (i.e., that Biden is the unquestioned “president-elect”). That’s at minimum. Frequently, people find their content deleted or that they’ve been de-platformed.

It’s no wonder, then, that Trump wants to clip the tech tyrants’ wings. His latest effort was a tweet in which he said that he would veto the National Defense Authorization Act unless it eliminated section 230:

“Therefore, if the very dangerous & unfair Section 230 is not completely terminated as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), I will be forced to unequivocally VETO the Bill when sent to the very beautiful Resolute desk. Take back America NOW. Thank you!” — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 2, 2020

Trump’s instincts are correct: the tech tyrants need to be reined in because, having taken control of the public square, they are systematically destroying the First Amendment. (Read more here.)

However, the answer is not to end Section 230. As it exists now, Section 230 protects smaller sites that openly host third-party content, such as BitChute, Parler, and Rumble. It no longer harms the tyrannical big sites, which have deep pockets and artificial intelligence to avoid Section 230’s reach. The big sites, therefore, agree with ending Section 230 because it will also destroy their competition.

The best approach is simply to say that, if the tech tyrants are going to act like publishers by editing content on their sites, they are no longer entitled to Section 230’s protections. They can then be sued and criminally prosecuted.

This video from “Styxhexenhammer666” provides more information about Trump’s tweet, which he still has time to correct:

%d bloggers like this: