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.




When your freedom of speech encroaches on others

There is much debate over how the internet has turned into a cesspool in the past year or two full of trolls and terrorist propaganda etc.   Demands for controls to stop such content from being allowed abound but at what point do we stop suppressing the voice of those we don’t agree with.

Many people get labeled “Troll” and the reason is simple, they have a point of a view that you don’t agree with.

I’ve seen so many point the finger and accuse a person of being a troll yet they are the ones attacking this person and accusing them of being a troll while all they were doing was stating their point.  In any other scenario this would be called debate but online it has become the accusation made by those that don’t want to hear a point of view that does not fit into their narrative or their accepted views.

In fact if we were to use the accepted terminology for what an internet troll is then we have to point the finger at the accuser and say “You’re the Troll” and sorry, it is not just the Conservatives that are “Trolls” it is the Liberals too.  In fact in many cases the liberals are far worse they will attack anyone that happens to have an opinion they don’t like and abuse them yet they’ll then point that finger and scream “I’ve been attacked by this Alt-Right Troll” even if the person happens to just be politically at a polar opposite or religious opposite.

Yes it seems that these two subjects are at the heart of almost all perceived Trolling but it doesn’t stop there and should we just stop all forms of online communication?  Should be banish all social media or censor every word that everyone says.

Is what you have to say any more vital, any more important, than that of another person?  Certainly for some they feel that they should have supreme right to open their mouths and  hurl abuse without repercussion and simultaneously feel that others should be denied their right to freedom of speech.  Take for example this not so fictitious person.  She writes for a website and stalks Twitter looking for targets that don’t agree with her political opinions,  she then attacks them.  She is an advocate of ‘free speech’ but it seems that for her that free speech is only for those that echo her sentiments and those that happen to have alternative views to her should be denied free speech and hounded off social media like Twitter.   This one woman has been at the heart of attempts to have people fired for daring to have differing views.

Now did Twitter treat this person in the same way that they did Milo Yiannopolous? Sadly no, she has been allowed to continue stalking and attacking others and cry foul during the attacks if they dare say anything that is in the slightest a personal attack on her.  Meanwhile Milo Yiannopolous was banished merely for making a statement about how someone looked, he never told people at any time to attack this person but was held accountable for the actions of others.  Funnily enough the target of his statement had made far worse statements previously and Twitter failed to take action against this twitter use for her hate filled tweets and pandered to her.

The same happens on all social media platforms there is a bias being used which does not give a fair balance when it comes to those that these platforms take action against.  Now we have all heard the same old excuse “They are Private Businesses and have the right to police the platform in the manner they choose” but by biasing the policing of their platform and allowing personal bias to be the basis for setting the bar when it comes to determining who has breached those terms of use.

Embrace freedom of speech

We should embrace freedom of speech and the speech of others, we should sit back and allow others their voice, even if we don’t subscribe to those same viewpoints we should allow those viewpoints to be voiced.

I believe that silencing words that we don’t want to hear is not any different from pushing our heads into the sand and pretending that all is well around us.  It is this same mentality that allows atrocities to happen again around the world.  After World War 2 we vowed that we would never allow those horrors of Death Camps to happen again, we would never allow max executions of our fellow man to take place (yes I said man and you feminists and SJW’s can grow up and shut up) just to silence others or eradicate those that one group finds offensive or abhorrent.  Sadly because we have chosen to close our eyes and pretend that it is not happening again we have allowed these atrocities to occur again time after time.

By not keeping the horrors fresh they occur time and again and each time when the world is alerted again to a repeat of them we end up horrified and yet it is we, man, that has allowed them to recur.

It is lack of freedom of speech or the silencing of voices that we find disagreeable that allows us to live in an echo chamber where we don’t see what we don’t want to see and it is this that gives that false sense of everything being okay when it is not.

The demands to silence ‘trolls’, to silence the ‘alt-right’, to silence ‘regressives’ is exactly what should never happen.  If we want to live in that bubble where everyone agrees and then be horrified when something terrible happens then go ahead and silence those that you don’t agree with but don’t demand that the social media platform eradicates them and removes their voice, you need to silence them by turning them off yourself,  I know it’s hard to sit and block thousands of people you don’t want to hear so that you are live in that secure little bubble but those that you demand are silenced for all equally have the right to their voice just as much as you have a right to your voice and you have no right to demand that they have their voice taken away.

I don’t agree with the opinions of the Alt-Right just as I don’t agree with the opinions of the Regressive Left but I don’t demand that either are silenced.

I don’t agree with animal rights groups on every subject and I don’t agree with gun rights lobby but I don’t want them to be silenced either.

Heck, I don’t even agree with that self absorbed shit Michael Moore who takes a stand on something just so that he can make a shit-eating documentary about it then moves on.  He’s a broken record of inanity but he has as much a right to his voice on social media as anyone else.

I’ve been targeted on social media with attempts to have me banished because I didn’t agree with the views of a person and they got a little angry and had their ‘followers’ mass report me.   They abused a system that should be there to protect the balance of voices on the internet and I strongly believe that if I had been conservative leaning I would have been kicked off Twitter simply because of a political leaning.

Social media companies need to focus on being the bastion of Freedom of Speech and not a tool of censorship and we as people to work to maintain the right of every person regardless of their views the same voice on the internet that we want for ourselves.

WTF! Facebook! You did exactly what we thought you would

Yes, looks like Facebook has decided the best way of dealing with the false flag of Fake News by saying “It’s up to the users to spot fake news and flag it for us”.

Yes, they’ve decided that we, the users, that were so called “swayed” by fake news to be the ones that identify the fake news for them!

The reason they gave was that we are the ones that would notice it more while that goes exactly against the whole theme of people being confused about what is real of fake.

Doesn’t that sound as dumb as can be but we know the real reason, the true reason is that when they looked at the cost of removing the instigators of ‘fake news stories’ and misleading headlines off Facebook they would lose 90% of their total traffic and much of their advertising income into the bargain.

I for one will never trust Facebook, not that I ever have, they were always the instigators of Fake news and they are going to continue instigating that same fake news and blaming everyone else.

There is nothing worse than a sociopath like Mark Zuckerberg who doesn’t give a crap about users all he cares about is his personal agenda both online and in real life.

Expect Twitter to follow suit and Google and Microsoft will equally follow suit.

Let’s face it, it’s the misleading click bait fake news headlines that get them the most money for advertising dollars.


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!

Are We more biased or tribalistic thanks to Social Media and the Internet?

One thing that seems to have become apparent this year is that there has been a far more vocal approach on social media when it comes to political side taking.  In fact it has become quite an us and them situation, they side takers determined to refute the opposing opinions in many cases not caring about checking the factuality of that opposing opinion.
Humans are pack animals,  it’s why we tend to socialize in gangs, groups or support particular teams.  It is inherent that we do that.  Some people will stand and deny that they are but then will put in a profile that they will block this type of person or that type of person or persons.  The reason being that they feel this type of person will not fit into their idea of who should be a member of their tribe.  The person may agree on many many things but unless they meet 100% of the required criteria they’re not going to be part of your gang (group or tribe).  
This tribalism has always been around, it’s been at the center of wars and genocides since pre-history.  It will continue to be around because it’s genetically programmed into humans just as it is in other pack animals, it’s a protective mechanism to group together.  
The 2012 Presidential election was the where we saw the use of Twitter and Facebook to spread political messages, Barack Obama’s campaign were masterful and utilized social networks while the Romney campaign just failed to realize the significance.  Jump forward four years to 2016 and you see both how all candidates managed to trigger the pack animal in people.   Bernie supporters clumped together, Trump supporters became a tribal pack and Clinton supporters amalgamated into a tribal pack too as did those supporting other candidates and boy it has become vicious.
In fact this presidential election has become such a hate filled campaign where, instead of everyone listening to the various points of view, it has become a case of mass misinformation, propagandizing and general hate.
I’m sure there are Liberals that will say that they have not been hate filled but they have been and the same goes for Conservatives.  Both sides have been as bad as the other and it’s made worse because people don’t want to listen.  They have this idea.  For example many of the Liberals that have been most vicious have been women or have decided that come hell or high water they want a woman president and these are the ones that have been most aggressive when it comes to eradicating those that don’t agree with them demanding that people mass report those that have said something that, at any other time, would not be a big deal.
I had one person contact me asking me to report someone because of some implied threat to President Obama.  I told them that if they think it is a threat they should contact by phoning the Secret Service and made a formal report and let them decide whether it is credible or not instead of trying to have someone suspended on Twitter for saying something that they don’t agree with.  The tweet was barely a threat and was barely coherent.  The person got angry when I wouldn’t join their mass report and accused me of not taking the safety of the President seriously!  All because I questioned their tribalistic demand to take out an enemy of their tribe.
In fact the tribalism has become so bad that news outlets, the TV, the Press and the online news  have all joined the tribalism trying to sway people’s opinions.  We expected it to be a little swaying but the bias has literally become excessive with out and out changing of facts or cutting news clippings to give a totally different viewpoint than the original clip had portrayed.
We hear people talk about the use of propaganda by Hitler and make comparison’s but really what the major media outlets are doing is no different and is being used to create a narrative that fits the particular cause they are protagonists for.  We saw CNN literally cut out a demand that Blacks go to the white neighbors and burn them down because it didn’t fit the narrative the news wanted to show.  Fox News have done similar things as have all media but this year has probably been the most blatant bias on all aspects and it is spreading and made worse by social media and even those that operate the main Social Media and even Search Engines have shown that they are not beyond using tools at their hands to bias the message to the masses.
Back in the earlier days of social media, especially in the case of Twitter it was seen as the protagonist of Freedom of Speech.  They were the voice of the people in countries and was a tool to pass messages to the masses.  2016, not so much.  Their CEO Jack Dorsey tried to claim that they were “The Peoples News Outlet”, this after silencing many that had made statements that he didn’t agree with and was scared of a backlash by some political groups so he banished those that were seen as the instigators.  
Either way how can Jack Dorsey claim one thing when his actions have proven a totally different stand point.  In fact now that I think about it, were these uprisings and Twitter’s involvement accidentally linked or has Twitter always been the tool of Neocon’s to foment uprisings to benefit a relatively small group.
Facebook is not blameless either, deliberate biasing of top stories to give dominance to the desired political party choice of Mark Zuckerberg, even though he denied it while members of the team he fired for doing it explicitly said they were told they had to do it.  Worse still the silencing of people that make statements that are not desirable by Facebook is just wrong.
These days we cannot trust the search engines,  Google have been known to search suggestions in their auto fill list to give a political bias of their desire.  Youtube similarly has targeted specifically those that highlight Liberals, Black Lives Matters and SJW’s for criticism demonetizing the video’s and it seems automatically unsubscribing those that follow them to reduce the volume of their message.  
It has become more and more appealing to look towards newer social platforms such as minds.com where those that are tired of not being able to speech without being silenced by those that disagree because they are not members of their pack or tribe and where people want to hear all views not just those that someone has decided is suitable for us.
In fact minds.com has taken off where other social media struggled because has turned into a place where people can use their minds, can think for themselves and can talk without fear of a mob attacking them.
Will we ever get the reset that the internet needs? Will we see elections that are not dirty biased and controlled by movements and corporations?  Very unlikely, what we can do is learn to step away from the tribal mentality, keep that for your favorite sports teams or for your country, and focus on communication.  Listening to others points of views is mentally growing. You don’t have to agree with what others say but you shouldn’t feel that you have some absolute right handed down by some deity to decide what others get to hear, read, or say.  I’m not vocalizing for those that think particular acts are okay but having different opinions on politics, social justice and TV shows are not good enough reasons to have another’s voice censored or muted simply because you and your crony’s don’t like that voice.  That’s what blocking their voice so that just you don’t hear it is for.  Don’t let others dictate what you can or cannot hear and don’t try and dictate what others hear.  Don’t become one of those pack members allowing others to dictate your opinions!
 Preserve that right that the founding fathers of the United States of America felt was so important that it became the first amendment of the Constitution that protects OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH!