When a pair of Women with a crush turn it into a hate campaign…

The trouble with crushes is sometimes when they don’t get the attention from the person that is the target of their desires they turn it into an out and out hate campaign against not only the person of desire but their family…

Yeah, it really is an issue with some women, the most notable recently Shannon Coulter of #GrabYourWallet fame.

They do say spurned attraction tends to turn into absolute unadulterated hatred towards another person and in this case she has a hatred towards President Donald Trump and his family to the extend that she operates a campaign attacking their business, their business interests and businesses and people that support them while at the same time trying to justify the use of some of these businesses or services while attacking other businesses owned by the very same people.  In fact she has to micmic the equally false “Grab her Pussy” theme with her campaign name “Grab Your Wallet”.

For example she attacks Amazon and Jeff Bezo’s but then claims that Washington Post is an Institution and thus should not be boycotted by her campaign followers because “58% of polled say it shouldn’t” which can be roughly translated to 58% of those that responded to one of her insane twitter polls pointed out that the Washington Post is well known for having a very liberal anti-Trump Bias and boycotting them would eradicate 80% of the news source that her followers actually have.

She also planned a boycott of Delta Airlines merely because a passenger had a pro-Trump rant and then backpeddled because many of her mentally ill followers use Delta Airlines and complained (I remember the whining in her twitter feeds at the time).

Further hypocrisy is her choice to boycott MillerCoors group yet ignores that Anheuser Busch not only does distribution for MillerCoors group but the company actually donated to the Trump Campaign which suggests that she partakes of Budweiser or one of the drinks made by them.

Similarly she chose to sit through every Celebrity Apprentice episode so that she could see which companies advertised so she could add them to the list of companies to boycott, though these companies don’t choose the advertising slots they want by the actual show but because of the number of viewers that the show attracts and the time of the day the advert will air, not because it happens to be Celebrity Apprentice.  What this indicates is that the show was doing particularly well to attract these advertisers.

The love has expanded into a blooming flower of hatred that targets not only the children of Donald Trump but their spouses, for example she targets Jared Kushner, his crime in her eyes, that he happened to work on a successful Presidential campaign. No other reason, simply for that while his Spouse, Ivanka Trump Kushner has been targeted simply for being his daughter even though she has regularly shown a very liberal leaning opinion.  Her crime, being a daughter of President Trump.

Meanwhile she again justifies not boycotting the source, as she alleges, of Fake News Facebook with a long winded explanation while not being honest in that most of her mentally ill followers as well as herself use Facebook.   What she doesn’t admit is much of the fake news propagated was actually anti-conservative fake news rather than anti-Hillary fake news, in fact all the stories that came through the feed were pro-Hillary.

It surprises me that she can’t be honest and admit that has a sexual fetish for the spray tan used by Donald trump and gets so aroused at the mention of him that she has to hide it with a tirade of hatred towards her.

We can all be sure that every time Donald Trump Tweets Shannon Coulter flicks her bean.




An Obamacare Story, How Obama Lost a Democrat Voter

This Sunday a friend related a story to me about how he became a Republican Voter and all due to Barack Obama.

I won’t use any names, he doesn’t want to be named because it involves a disabled family member, I’ll call him Stan.

“If you like your plan you can keep your plan”

Stan is a great guy, I always thought he was a democrat voter, I told him that I didn’t want to upset him but I thought Obama was a asshole that I was glad that Obamacare was being repealed that it was “Significantly Not As Described” and had been misrepresented by Barack Obama and the Democratic party until they got it passed and was done in an overtly partisan manner without working together with both sides of the political spectrum to make it something everyone would want to use.

It was after this that he said, “It was Obamacare and that bastard that turned me into a republican voter”, he went on to explain why.

Stan’s sister is disabled, not enough that she qualifies for disability but enough where she can only do a part time job that covers most of her living costs and everyone else in the family helps out to cover other costs.  She could pay her house rent and healthcare and she had a plan that worked.  It had low co-pay and deductible which worked for her because her disability required regular visits to clinics and doctors.

She thought that since Obama had told her that she would be able to keep her plan she never gave it a second thought. After all he did say “If you like your plan you can keep your plan”, he never gave it a second thought until the Affordable Care Act came into force and suddenly, within days she received a letter telling her that her plan was no longer allowed under the Act that it didn’t meet the requirements and was offered a plan that was four times the price of her original plan, huge deductible and massive co-pay’s that she just could not afford.

He felt that she had been betrayed, her income was low enough where she was placed on Medi-Cal (Medicaid)  but not only that she was told that she would not be allowed to sell on eBay. Stan would pick up items when he saw them at estate or yard sales in Los Angeles and let her sell them for him, though it was to keep her busy and give her a little extra cash so that she didn’t feel like she was dependent on everyone in the family.  The reasoning they gave was the gross income from eBay would take her over the minimum and she wouldn’t be allowed to be on Medi-Cal and would have to pay more than her total income including eBay just for healthcare over the month including the cost of the co-pay’s and the insurance premium.

Stan said that his sister’s health has gone downhill thanks to Obamacare, while she doesn’t have to pay a premium she’s getting close to 55 and has become terrified that if she dies that the money she has scrimped away to pay for a funeral will be taken by the state along with the little house, that her pagents (before they died)  had bought for her so that she wouldn’t have to pay a rent to anyone, would taken from family members.

I suggested that he takes a close look at how she is doing her taxes, she’s mentally active and she does her own taxes and the returns for family members but she may be treating her eBay income as just ‘other income’ and not deducting expenses associated with selling  such as shipping fee’s, fee’s paid to eBay and PayPal, packaging supplies and the cost of the item, even though Stan buys it he should treat it as a consignment with her and then, even though he lets her keep all the money from the sale or rather she takes her percentage and then he just deposits the check she writes him into her savings account (his name is on the account) instead of his own bank account, that it essentially transfers the bulk of the income to him and it becomes a deductible.  Since the savings account is in both their names the funds are not classed as income that he deposits into that account because he is the depositor and they can decide who declares the income from interest on whose account they wish though these days a normal bank account is neglible anyway.

Anyway enough of that tangent we slipped off in.

Either way,  it was this betrayal by Barack Obama who blatantly lied on camera to the people of the United States that made him turn his back and he said “Hillary Clinton made me feel uneasy”.  I laughed and agreed.

Good people were hurt by a lie a President made to sell a healthcare law where the main beneficiary’ s of the law were the Insurance companies who were able to eradicate many of their legacy plans that were relatively cheap and the Pharmaceutical Industry who immediately started increasing prices on medications because they could.

Sure more people are signed up for Health Insurance than there otherwise would be but that’s because if they don’t they are penalized by a law that has a punitive punishment for not having insurance that is an unfair burden on those that earn one or two thousand dollars a year more than the maximum allowed for Medicaid or assistance and even with the discounted prices that the Affordable Care Act offered still left them worse off than if they had the lower income and qualified for Medicaid and relied on government assistance.

Interestingly, those on welfare could have an income higher than the ceiling in some states and get free healthcare through medicaid.  How fair is that?  That a person can be better offer than those that are killing themselves working 40,50, 60 or more hours per week to keep a roof over their families head while others too lazy to work get a free ride with their apartment rent, their food, their lifestyle, and healthcare all provided for them.

It’s not fair, Obamacare was not fair and benefited those too lazy to work and punished those that can’t work and those that work their asses off because they don’t want to live off government handouts.

I look forward to a fairer replacement that doesn’t give a free ride to those that would rather commit crimes or march and protest every time a person is shot or march because they don’t get free education.

In fact talking of these people that want a free ride, they can take over working on farms picking crops from the illegals.  PROBLEM SOLVED!

Conservative or Liberal, Who’re the most interactive on Twitter?

An interesting question is, who are the the most interactive, in fact who is most likely to be responsive to another person’s tweet on twitter and what type of person are they?

Having been an ex-liberal I had many followers that were very regressive and as I transitioned from slightly left of center to being far more to the right of center than I was ever to the left I tended to notice a difference in the people I interacted with or didn’t interact with.


Yeah I really need to give a little background to the switch from the Left to the Right.  What drove it and why I transitioned from Liberal to Conservative faster than a Snowflake claiming to be Gender Fluid switching from Male to Female (sorry but it is the best analogy).

Way before the polls even opened, in fact way before the primaries I was getting rather irritated with those that were regressive around me.  They didn’t like that I enjoyed multiple points of view and got even more angry when I wouldn’t report anyone just because they had said something less than nice about a black person or something not nice about a gay person.

In fact I found that the regressive left are really paranoid, they have what I can only call a victim mentality.  They feel that they are the victim.  They also have the need to strange symbols to make themselves feel good.

It really irritated me,  yeah they irritate me rather easily, maybe it’s because I was raised to  pick yourself up, dust yourself down and get on with life and if something is not what you really wanted keep it to yourself and don’t whine or expect Tea and Sympathy to make me feel better.

So the best driver for making people swing to the right is Social Justice Warriors, the Black Lives Matters supporters and the Regressive Liberals that can’t deal with losing.

They couldn’t deal after Donald Trump was elected telling them to “Get Over It and Grow the Fuck Up”, nobody wants to hear that shit or read tweet after tweet.

I received so many direct messages demanding that “I get with the program and protest” to which I simply ignored them and carried on.  I had a mixture of followers and they didn’t like that I followed and was followed by several blatant Conservatives and some that were what they referred to as Alt-Right.

I soon found myself suspended from Twitter and it didn’t matter what I did the reason supplied just kept changing and I gave up trying and started using an account I had been using some code to respond to tweets from people that I followed.  It worked fine until Microsoft did their own version and people started to question the responses.  In fact I still write some of the tweets on that account in the manner of the bot but to keep that anonymity in case I get suspended on that account, it has already been locked by Twitter for pointing out to a regressive sexual deviant that anyone can look up his police record and that his multiple arrests are public domain and his twitter feed is littered with accusations from angry family members of those he abused, stalked, kidnapped.  They  forced me to remove that tweet but not the ones where I listed out the particulars of his arrest record, what gives?

The decision though was simple, when I lost the account with the mixture of Regressive and Conservative followers I decided that it saved me slowly unfollowing and/or blocking the regressive to make the feed from twitter more palatable.

Thinking about interactions

On the suspended account I have nigh on 2000 followers (it dwindled as I upset the regressive for the slightest reason) and there really was very little interaction.

I found the following traits with the Liberal Tweeters,

  • They like to play the follow-unfollow-refollow-unfollow-refollow until you follow them then they will unfollow because they have another follower.
  • Many of them are really attention whores.  They like the attention and build up huge follower bases simply because they want the attention and the ‘likes’ though they would keep their interactions to purely their buddies that were of the same attention seekers.
  • If you upset them, call them on something, they will happily pile on like school bullies and attack you trying desperately to prove how terrible a person you are.
  • They are more likely to hunt down your personal information, search for your employer and then try desperately to have you fired and will happily give out your personal information.
  • They will fall back on calling people a Bigot, White Supremacist, Racist, Bully, while doing the attacking.  In fact they will happily report a person for attacking them when they, the accuser, were the attacker.
  • They get angry if you choose to not follow them, even worse when they find they are blocked, and throw a tantrum getting others that follow you to send DM’s demanding to know why they had been blocked.
  • While they won’t even look at other’s tweet’s or care about them they include their followers in tweets linking to the tweet they want liked determined that you see it and keep doing it until you like it (or as I did, block their attention seeking asses).

So yes, they love the attention and they do get quite angry when you choose to unfollow them,  they will do anything to get a follower and get angry when they lose a follower.

They really do fit the description of Snowflake.  Yes, I mean a sensitive delicate little thing that is very fragile.

They are quite happy to be supportive openly of sexual offenders if it fits their agenda, i.e. they have the same political or social views, in fact I know of a Pederast that gets fawned over by extremely regressive SJW’s simply because he’s a white male that hates white people and despises the police and loves Black People.  In fact they attacked the victim of one of his stalking episodes where he openly published private photo’s that a Black Man that he had a crush on publishing photo’s of the victims children and giving their names out when the victim had kept his family private.  Yet it was the Victim that was attacked by the guys Black Lives Matters cronies when the victim published texts that the Deviant had sent to his phone, a number that the deviant had found using online searches and asking others to get for him and got the blame when the deviant at first claimed his account was hacked following by begging Twitter to delete his account followed by removing his account saying he would never return to twitter.  A week or so later he was back on and immediately started attacking Law enforcement and stalking the same victim.

They do like doing the attacking while they claim they don’t but they are in 9 out 10 cases that I witnessed the attacker who was then backed up by Twitter’s support system who would then suspend the victim when they responded back and referred to the person or person mentioning their background.

In the week or so that I have been focused on my subdued twitter account keeping it filled with content that politically I align with and content producers that enjoy.  My follower base is barely over 1% of the following that I had with the suspended more liberal account but I have found the following about Conservative and right leaning tweeters;

  • They are polite and they make their points based on facts
  • They interact and they don’t go out on an attack chasing someone unless that person deserves the attack
  • I don’t see the ‘white knighting’ or pile-on mentality that occurs with regressive accounts.
  • They are far more friendly
  • They have moral values.
  • They understand that not every view that someone holds can align with your own that these people are not monsters for not agreeing with a particular point.

I could go on with the list.  What I do see is that a few people that blocked me merely for being tweeted into a pile on,  I would find myself blocked before I had even seen this “pile-on” attacking and seeing their tweets and interactions they are not the attacker that regressive had claimed they simply had a point of view that differed from that of the SJW’s or Black Lives Matters and that the victim had merely blocked everyone that mentioned or pulled into this pile on even if they had not interacted or barely reacted.

Conservatives tend to focus on themselves and keep out of the whole thing.  I rarely see them make an attack on another twitter user and tend to be of an opinion that you can separate real life from twitter life, that these are two separate entities and people have a right to their private lives.

What do I take from these observations

The biggest item of note is that the identity of the aggressive party on Twitter is actually the ones claiming to be victims, the Liberal, Regressive, Social Justice Warrior.

The next item of note is that the Left are not Victims, they conspire against those they don’t agree with and will happily take awake a person’s income source as a way of hurting a person that they don’t like or they feel slighted by.

The last is that the Right and the Alt-Right are getting blamed for much of the attacks and for being things that they are not and the press and Left are happy to push this agenda.

Out of the two ends of the political spectrum it seems that the Left are the most hate filled.

I’ve also found comparing the two that the Conservative twitter users are more likely to “like” someone’s reply, they are more likely to interact with someone reply to a tweet and they politer and they base their argument more factually than the Liberal side who tend to be more “me, me, me” in their attitude looking for self gratification and attention from others, I would say that the best description is that they are “needy”.


No the word foreign today is not what the word foreign meant in the top the Electoral College

Some people need an education

I don’t mean that as an insult but there are some people that really have misunderstood the meaning  of the reference to ‘foreign interference’ in the application of the Electoral College as defined by several of the great statemen that oversaw the creation of the nation of the United States of America.


this term was not just a term used to refer to someone from another country but a person from another state, for example if you are from New Jersey, you are foreign to New York, you are not a citizen of that state and thus a foreigner.

the point of the term that many have been throwing up about a foreign interference was written about the ability of one state to remove the ability of another state to take part in the election of a president, by that I mean exactly what would happen with a popular vote, it would make the voice of smaller states totally silenced by two or three larger states, in this case effectively the states of California and New York could, with their populations, drown out the votes of almost every state.

The USA is a republic

For some reason people forget that the United States of America is a republic, we are a congruence of 50 states, some dependent territories and the District of Columbia. These states operate independently within the United States as if they are separate countries, which is why each country has it’s own state Capital’s and equivalent of House of Representatives and Senate.  The reason a governor is elected on popular vote is because there is no ability for ‘foreign’ intervention because the Gubernatorial election is secular to that state, similarly this is also why Federal election for Senators and Congress Representatives use the popular vote because these cannot be interfered with by the votes of those who are not citizens of the state they represent I.e. There is no foreign intervention possible with their vote and thus can be done using popular vote.

Even when the word foreign was taken as a literal statement referring to neighboring countries or dare we say it, the British Empire, interfering the electoral college meant that the foreign government would have to get a massive concentration of voters in every state to sway the vote but the term really is directed at ‘interstate interference’ because those states remain foreign to each other when it comes to government.

So to the idiots that keep going on about foreign interference to justify their narratives it is a straw man argument in fact it’s not just straw man it is clutching at straws to justify their need to blame someone, anyone for the failure of their chosen candidate to win the Presidential Election.

In fact if we were to proportionally represent the electoral college votes based on the states, their allocation and voting in each state Donald Trump would have still won, albeit by a smaller margin but would still have won with about 2.7% more college votes.  I wrote a piece weeks ago about this just after the election

What would happen if the Electoral College was allocated on Proportional representation in each state?

and also wrote about the electoral college

The Electoral College, why do we have it?




The EU demands that Social Media & Search Giants help them Stick their Heads In the Sand…

The EU has issued a demand that the big players in Social Media and Search like Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft all play to their rules and act swiftly.

Yes they want swift action over ‘hate speech’ and ‘unsavory’ or ‘unfavorable’ posts and stories concerning hate crime or acts of violence that appear to give an unfavorable light on immigrants.

What they really want is for the narrative to be changed to one that reflects what they want the people of Europe to hear.  They don’t want anyone to hear of hundreds of women being raped this new year by Muslim immigrants from Syria.  They don’t want the people of Europe to hear of the next terrorist attack by immigrants and they don’t want the people of Europe to find out that they may be the next victim of an attack by a group of terrorists that arrive in a country under the ‘guise of refugee.

This is blatantly like sticking your head in the sand because if you don’t see what’s going on you don’t know it is happening.  When your wife or daughter is raped this new year and it doesn’t appear in the news and nothing is heard about it then blame the EU bureaucrats who don’t want it being seen by the world like it was January 1st this year.   They don’t want Angela Merkel or any of the other regressive left leaders being embarassed by another year where hundreds of women are attacked, assaulted or raped by immigrants.

In fact this is instilling a totalitaritarian police state to the internet by the EU in the name of trying to avoid being seen as the hot bed of terrorism that it is quickly turning into.   Let Merkel and her cronies be like Nero while Rome burns.


How does an Allegedly FREE country pass the most wide span censorship and privacy invasion law in the World?

The most wide sweeping invasion of people’s privacy has passed into law after going through the lower and upper Houses of Parliament and has now been given assent by the Queen so what does the “Investigatory Powers Bill” mean for everyone in the UK?

This was a bill introduced by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary and was designed to legitimize the use by the government of surveillance powers to gather data about Citizens and residents of the United Kingdom.

The bill comes into force in 2017.  When the bill was written it was because of the need or fears that we were under a risk of attack and needed to delve into the activity of potential terrorists online.

It has since been dubbed the Snoopers charter because it allows some people in high enough positions that should not have free and easy access to our online activity just that.

But muh Privacy…..!

yes what does that mean for our privacy? Well first of all it means that tour online browsing activity is kept for 12 months, that includes all the stuff that you post and then delete because it was a dumb statement to make, it includes your browsing history too so no hiding that you like to watch online porn late at night while everyone else is asleep, the all seeing eye of the government know your fetishes now!

There are at upwards of 50 different government authorities that can access your browsing data and online activity.  This includes the expected ones from police and Miltiary to the Department of Health, the Tax Man and the Home Office.  So now you might get an audit if you boast of massive income online or during an audit they may throw up where you lied to online friends or not so friendly people that you had a fictional mammoth earnings when are really on minimum wage in real terms.

The claim is that pulling information together like this they can create a pretty damn good picture of your character as a person.

While some have claimed that it your responsibility to keep your browsing history for the year, it is your ISP that will have to maintain records of everything you have done online, Hmm, wonder if they know whether your came during the online porn session?

Privacy advocates have suggested switching to TOR routers or using a VPN but will that work, after all the data still may be recorded, even if it is encrypted or hidden and we can all be sure that if enough people use methods to mask their activity someone like Theresa May could or would create a further law making these privacy methods illegal.

You may get hacked by the Government!

Yes this law doesn’t just stop at simple snooping of browsing history held by the ISP’s, it extends to making it perfectly legal for the government to hack into your computer, your mobile device and home routers and they don’t have to inform you that they are doing so and don’t have to get a warrant to do so or prove reasonable need to do so.

Literally it allows the government to do something that most hackers or online criminals would go to jail for decades for, for acts that some have received life sentences yet the government can legally do to you.

Yes, that means that they can do what they want.  This is so far reaching that many despot’s running countries are looking at the same measures because it’s far more extensive than anything they have thought up.

The Government defends itself…

The government has tried to defend the bill by saying that only those that are suspected of doing something wrong will be targeted by the act but really is that a good enough defense of how wide sweeping this bill is.

You can’t get to see some acts online…

One of the other effects of this bill is that it includes controls on what you can and cannot view online.  Does this sound like China?

So while you are watching your online porn late at night you may find that suddenly the fetish that you love watching is no longer available.  This that like to see a woman having sex while “she’s on the rag” cannot view that in the UK, other acts are banned from being viewed.  In fact some porn websites are now making a special section just for UK viewers that only gives access to “allowed” content.

Some movies that show certain acts in scenes now have to be edited by the streaming agent under this law or not be viewable in the UK.

Finally 1994 has arrived in 2016.  You are no longer free to live your life how you desire, you are being watched and you must comply.


Freedom of Speech online

A lot has been said about Freedom of Speech especially on Social Media and is at the crux of many arguments, let’s look at all the bullshittery going on in the arguments.

This is really an extension to my last post and since Tech news drivel and boring or rather was drowned out and there really wasn’t anything exciting.

I’ve always said that when some people argue for freedom of speech they had a biased view of what Freedom of Speech should be.   Rather than it being for all they tend to feel that if the person or group trying to get a voice has agreeable points to them then they are pro free speech but if it doesn’t they they should be shut down.

Let’s get one thing straight right here, right now, I’m liberal leaning, I grew up in a household that always voted for the Labor party and if we couldn’t bring ourselves to vote for a left leaning candidate we didn’t vote at all, so don’t try the bullshittery claim that because I am demanding that we allow all points of view that I’m Alt-Right.

I’m bringing up the subject again because I witnessed an interaction between two liberals, one a SJW while the other is not and is like myself an advocate of Freedom of Speech, all speech.

The SJW was attacking someone because they were saying that people had the right to speech and we shouldn’t deny them their voice.   The SJW was vehemently against it saying that people that desire Freedom of Speech only desire it so they can attack others.  Ah they irony of the statement.

Scrolling back through the same SJW’s tweets I found that he had complained about a fellow SJW being suspended for attacking and making threats to someone on that I knew to being a Trump supporter and he was busy tweeting to Twitter about Twitter’s bias towards protecting the Alt-Right and that it was shameful yet the suspension was based on threats of physical violence.  Equally do you not see the irony of this.

When the same irony had been pointed out he stuck firmly to his argument that Freedom of Speech should not be there for people that go out and ‘troll’ people.  I dearly wanted to point out the hypocrisy of his argument but instead I’m writing this and I won’t mention the names of the three, or is it four parties if I include the suspended person.

What I am pointing out that we cannot suppress once entities voice online just because we don’t like the message and certainly not because they ‘voted’ differently from the way that we did or the view doesn’t coincide with our politics.

We must be honest with ourselves and learn to accept that others may say things we don’t like or don’t want to hear and then we can choose to block them online or if they are a journalist just not read their articles.

I did this with a shameless tech journalist that would regularly delve into the comment section for the publication they worked at and then copy and paste responses to the author of an article then call it his own even though he pliargarized the commenter’s writing word for word.   I spotted this activity several times and reported it the online publication but they literally responded by saying that it was fair for one of their journalists to utilize the comments to build an article of their own from those opinions, even though I argued back that copy and paste is not really building it’s taking another’s argument or statements and then calling them your own without mentioning it was sourced from the comment section.

There is nothing wrong with you censoring the incoming feed from others but it is wrong to demand or desire that the feeds be censored for all others.

Facebook are bowing to pressure to make it possible for the Chinese Government to censor  the people of China and to censor what they can see, how long before they start allowing every government the ability to censor news and feeds or have they already been doing this as many have suggested.  We know Facebook has always had the ability to re-order the posts you see and I have a friend that has complained that something he said was not responded to,  I pointed out that nobody has probably seen it because of how Facebook defaults their post ordering.   I’ve heard of people complaining that tweets are silenced or hidden from others and it seems that the only theme is that it is not of an opinion that matches that of the CEO of Twitter.    When will they admit it is purely censoring of dissenting opinions and punishing the person that wrote them.

I myself have been ‘carpeted’ for 12 hour periods, the reason, for telling someone something they didn’t like and then the person that received that critique had her friends and followers mass report me for daring to have an opinion that differs.  In fact she chose to escalate the the statements by making threats until I told her to ‘bleep off, die and make the world a better place’. Which I then deleted though she chose to use a photoshop when she posted the copy that added the words, badly, in the photoshop that embellished the statement.   After the 12 hours in which a friend on twitter watched her gloat that they had eradicated me, I was allowed back on.  Another person asked why I had not responded to their tweets and I explained without mentioning the person that I had been mass reported and then carpeted by Twitter only to be then carpeted again and put on another 12 hour lock out by Twitter for mentioning that I had been stopped from using Twitter.

How did I know that it was this tweet?  They made me delete it even though it never mentioned any person and I didn’t mention why.  So I was being observed and then was immediately censored to hide that they were denying people the right to say they were being censored.

How many posts are being hidden and how many people are being punished in this manner by Twitter?  I don’t know but I know that if my non-rule breaking tweets were targeted for this type of punishment and censoring then we can be assured that there are far more than we, and certainly I myself, care to imagine.

As a result of this action by twitter I ended up being less active on Twitter, refused to take anything other stand than middle of the road.  It means that I may get attacked from both sides but, and I’ll put it right out there, I may just mute you and leave you to get angry while I get on with life.  At some point I may just delete my twitter account alongside my facebook account and go my own way,  I’m an anti-social person, well maybe that’s wrong, I’m social but not in a continual hanging out friend fashion.  I do what I do and I don’t care if anyone else joins in or comes along for the ride.

Just remember though when you are asked to participate in an attempt to have someone removed from a social media platform purely because you don’t agree with what they say that you can no longer say you are all for freedom of speech, you can no longer complain when your freedom of speech is denied and you can no longer expect sympathy or empathy from me!

Whether your politics are to the extreme left or to the extreme right you have the right to your voice and nobody should be allowed to remove that voice whether others think so or not,  if you try and deny others you don’t deserve to have that voice either. Remember that!