“It got out of hand with the protesters,” the student explained. “They were banging on the walls, they were screaming ‘No peace, no peace,’ which, I took them at face value, that they didn’t want peace as they were trying to get in, and disrupt our meet and greet.”
Just like the modern media, fact-checkers are partisan hacks on a mission. Check some recent examples of the fine propagandist art of “fact-checking” to see these “arbiters of truth” in action...
The League of Women Voters took issue with the Roundtable inviting me to speak. Its local chapter president, Rosanne Winter, sent the Roundtable a letter expressing the group’s “strong disappointment,” and protesting my choice as a speaker. The Roundtable should select “respected speakers,” said the League, by which it clearly means only those who don’t disagree with the League.
If you put your iPhone to the ground, you’ll hear distant war drums beating. On a quiet day, you might also catch hints of Silicon Valley boardroom debates. They know trouble is on the horizon, and I’ll bet some of that crypto money tech company bigwigs are wondering how the heck they’re going to respond.
Well, when you weaponize the DOJ and FBI, aiming both at angry parents speaking out at school board meetings, you ought to expect some backlash.
In the late 1960s, my oldest brother brought our entire family to the attention of the FBI. He ran an underground newspaper in Flint, Michigan, that questioned authority and advocated for legalizing Marijuana and ending the Vietnam War. Unlike some radicals of the time, my brother was a veteran who loved America and shunned communism. But exercising free speech and questioning authority can bring trouble. As a little girl I was aware that my big brother was under scrutiny for criticism of government officials. My parents may not have agreed with all of his views, but they didn’t shield me from them.
Facebook has reportedly allowed millions of VIP users to violate its content rules without being punished
Facebook has become known in recent years for the ruthless enforcement of its internal content rules, to the point that posting anything on the site can sometimes feel like opening your mouth in Stalinist Russia—you never know if you're going to become an Unperson by saying the wrong thing. But the social media company has apparently allowed millions of users to skirt around those rules without being punished:
Those who relish the unyielding power of the state over the individual have had a good year. Lockdowns by tyrannical governors and state and local bureaucrats, along with expansive authority seized out of thin air by the CDC and other arms of the federal government, have made America almost unrecognizable as a bastion of freedom.
In October 2020, along with Professor Sunetra Gupta, we authored the Great Barrington Declaration, in which we argued for a ‘focused protection’ pandemic strategy. We called for better protection of older and other high-risk people, while arguing that children should be allowed to go to school and young adults should be free to live more normal lives. We understood that it might lead to vigorous and heated discussions, but we did not expect a multi-pronged propaganda campaign that gravely distorted our arguments and smeared us. We are just three public-health scientists, after all. So how and why did this slanderous counterattack emerge?
For too long, conservatives have blindly supported corporations. While trying to support “free markets” we might inadvertently be supporting corporatism, a form of economic totalitarianism where government and corporations collude to destroy individual rights.