If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Controversial Brazilian Supreme Court justice Justice Alexandre de Moraes has ordered the suspension of Elon Musk’s social media platform X in Brazil after Musk refused to appoint a legal representative in the country. The Attorney General Jorge Messias backed Moraes’ decision, threatening to impose a fine of R$ 50 thousand ($8,900 USD) daily to any citizen that attempts to bypass the ban (such as using VPNs) to access X. The decision marks a significant escalation in the ongoing conflict between Musk and the Brazilian judiciary after the social media platform refused to cave to Moraes’ demands to censor “misinformation,” and “hate speech” linked to critics of Brazil’s government led by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Moraes issued a threat to Musk and X CEO Linda Yaccarino on Wednesday, stating that X could face a shutdown in Brazil if it didn’t name a local representative within 24 hours. X had shut down its operations in Brazil following the censorship demands, to protect staff after Moraes threatened them with arrest. In response, X took to its official Global Government Affairs page late Thursday, claiming that it anticipated being shut down by de Moraes “simply because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents.” Following the ban, Elon Musk posted, “Free speech is the bedrock of democracy and an unelected pseudo-judge in Brazil is destroying it for political purposes.” The escalation is a troubling development for free speech, marking a significant escalation in governmental attempts to control online discourse. This order, which demands that X appoint a local legal representative and comply with censorship directives, represents a stark instance of government overreach. By targeting “misinformation” and “hate speech” specifically linked to government critics, the move suggests a politically motivated effort to stifle dissent—a core element of democratic societies. Further compounding these concerns are the threats of legal repercussions against X’s leadership, including arrests of staff, which exemplify a worrying use of legal intimidation to enforce compliance. This not only threatens the principle of free expression but also establishes a chilling effect across digital platforms, potentially leading them to self-censor to avoid similar fates. Brazil’s actions are also tapping into a dangerous international precedent, encouraging other governments to adopt similar restrictive measures against digital platforms. This could lead to a fragmented internet landscape where local government controls significantly hinder free speech across borders, undermining global digital freedoms. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Brazil: Supreme Court Judge Orders X To Be Banned, Threatens Citizens With Fines if They Use a VPN appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

A maverick antitrust scholar and celebrated free speech advocate has praised aspects of a monumental ruling on Big Tech while warning it still misses the target.  Matt Stoller, author of the bestselling book Goliath: The 100 -Year War Between Monopoly Power and Democracy, celebrated how a “shocking opinion” from the Third Circuit signaled “Big Tech's Free Ride” was ending. At the same time, Stoller warned that the court was wrong to treat Big Tech oligarchs as “speakers.”     The Third Circuit decision in Anderson v. TikTok held 47 U.S.C. § 230, or Sec. 230, does not apply to the algorithms tech firms use to determine what content is curated to users. Previous courts had held that Sec. 230 presented a broad “liability shield” for both what content a platform recommends and what content it censors. Stoller explained that “at the very least, this decision forces the issue” of what Sec. 230 actually means. The Supreme Court has yet to issue a ruling interpreting the meaning of the legislative provision, even though it was enacted 28 years ago.   Stoller cautioned, though, that rather than completely remove algorithms from Sec. 230’s protections, courts should instead view tech firms as distributors. This interpretation, Stoller explained, would recognize “an older pre-internet legal distinction between ‘publisher’ liability for speech, which is to say that author or publisher’s responsibility, and ‘distributor’ liability for speech, which is to say the bookstore, library, or newsstand’s role.” Stoller noted that this was the position taken by Judge Paul Matey, an appointee of then-President Donald Trump, who sought to interpret the statute according to its original meaning.  Stoller explained, “the fundamental issue here is not really whether big tech platforms should be regulated as speakers, as that’s a misconception of what they do. They don’t speak, they are middlemen. And hopefully, we will follow the logic of Matey’s opinion, and start to see the policy problem as what to do about that.” MRC Free Speech America Director Michael Morris elaborated, “Under Sec. 230, a platform should be treated as a distributor unless or until it goes beyond the enumerated list of acceptable justifications and begins censoring content. If it does go beyond this enumerated list, it then becomes a publisher.”    The Anderson ruling comes in ongoing litigation against the Big Tech firm TikTok and its parent company, communist Chinese government-controlled Bytedance. The suit was brought by the mother of a ten-year-old who died attempting the so-called “Blackout Challenge.”  This challenge, which TikTok promoted to the girl in its “For You Page,” encouraged viewers to intentionally asphyxiate themselves. Meanwhile, MRC Free Speech America’s CensorTrack database has documented 164 cases of TikTok censoring constitutionally-protected speech.   Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand they reiterate Sec. 230’s original meaning: When Big Tech censors political expression, they become publishers.

There’s no question in Roger Stone’s mind that former President Donald Trump has a chance of winning the 2024 election — regardless of the unprecedented hurdles he’s facing. “You’ve got intrepid opposition of the mainstream media, the continue to cover for Kamala Harris in terms of who she really is, what her real record is, her responsibility for the policies of the last three plus years that are destroying the country,” the legendary Republican campaign adviser tells Alex Stein of “Prime Time with Alex Stein.” However, “There’s a new political movement in the country” that he believes is “potentially a complete political realignment.” “The endorsement of Donald Trump by Robert F. Kennedy [Jr.] is a game changer. When you add Wonder Woman, Tulsi Gabbard, who I think is an extraordinary warrior against the deep state and the war machine, what you have here is potentially like 1932, like 1968,” Stone says, recalling the election of Reagan. “You have a real new realignment of Republicans, Libertarians, freethinkers, Independents, people who believe in capitalism, people who believe in freedom, people who are concerned about censorship, people who are concerned about war. This is a sea change. These announcements cap any upward momentum that Kamala Harris may have gotten from the convention,” he explains. Stone adds that he is “very optimistic about the energy surrounding the Trump reform movement” and “the America first movement.” His major concern lies in election integrity, though he’s hopeful as it’s “being worked on in a very smart and aggressive way.” “Is Donald Trump as popular as Ronald Reagan was in your personal opinion, Roger?” Stein asks Stone, curious. “Actually, I think he’s much more popular,” Stone says, telling Stein that Trump is the leader of “the non-elitist party of working people.” However, Stone has a warning if Trump doesn’t come out on top this election. “If we don’t win this election, we may not even have an election in four years. Not by our hand, but by theirs,” he says.Want more from Alex Stein?To enjoy more of Alex's culture jamming, comedic monologues, skits, and street segments, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Late last month, anti-Israel protest groups raged through Washington, D.C., to disrupt Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s official visit and speech to Congress. They ripped down American flags, burned them, and replaced them with Palestinian flags. They dumped maggots in the hotel where Netanyahu was staying. Among several instances of vandalizing federal property, they defaced the Columbus Memorial Fountain outside Union Station, spray-painting in big red letters, “Hamas is coming.” Yes, Hamas is indeed coming for Democrats, but not in the sadistic way that Hamas is coming for the Jewish people. They’re coming for Democrats through countless intermediary support groups because they know Democrats are most likely to give them what they want. Despite their best attempts to paint themselves as freedom-loving moderates during the Democratic National Convention, Democrats are and have always been the haven for extremists in American politics. It’s amazing how quickly Democrats get behind law and order when it suits their agenda. They tolerate chaos and destruction in the streets except when it hurts their public image. This is the party that has catered to elite universities across the nation over the past year that have encouraged and facilitated anti-Semitic student protests, encampments, and even the attempted takeover of administration buildings. Last week, a congressional report from the House Education and Workforce Committee revealed that out of the 22 anti-Israeli students at Columbia University who were arrested for breaking into and occupying a campus building, 18 of them remain in good standing with the school and will return to campus for the fall semester. Three are on interim suspensions, and one is on probation. Columbia initially said those 22 students would be expelled. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are also pro-Iran, a regime whose intentions toward Israel couldn’t be clearer. The Biden-Harris administration recently waived sanctions on Iran’s state-controlled media outlet, which airs a constant stream of anti-Jewish content. There were major anti-Israel protests at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, but Democrats weren’t about to let them steal the show or do anything to disrupt Kamala’s coronation. It’s amazing how quickly Democrats can get behind law and order when it suits their agenda. They tolerate chaos and destruction in the streets except when it hurts their public image. They built a giant fence-wall around their arena to keep the protesters at bay. What were they afraid of? The Chicago area has one of the largest Palestinian communities in America, and thousands of activists poured in from all over the country. What could possibly go wrong? Shamelessly pro-Palestinian The destruction in Washington, D.C., last month was a preview. Many business owners in downtown Chicago boarded up their windows. On day one of the DNC, the Hamas flag was proudly flown, just in case there is any doubt about whose side these protesters are on. One of the people waving the Hamas flag asked a Fox News reporter, “What’s wrong with October 7?” He proceeded to defend the terror attacks that mutilated, tortured, and killed 1,200 Israelis, including the elderly, women, children, and babies. Protesters then bashed their way through the perimeter fence outside the convention center. On day two, protesters charged the police line outside Israel’s Chicago consulate. Seventy-two people were arrested. On the same day that these protests began, Israel recovered the bodies of six dead Jewish hostages found in a hidden passage during a raid on part of the Hamas tunnel system in Gaza. There are still 71 hostages being held by Hamas, including eight Americans. The day before the convention began, Hamas took credit for a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. On day three of the DNC, Israel and Hezbollah traded cross-border missile strikes. In addition, the ongoing threat of an attack by Iran on Israel is always imminent, along with Iran’s developing nuke program. Earlier this month, a Palestinian man on the U.S. terror watch list was apprehended at the border in New Mexico. If Harris and Walz have any say in the matter, he probably has a house, free health care, and a driver’s license by now. Meanwhile, Biden defended the pro-Hamas protesters, saying that they “have a point.” What exactly is their point? That the October 7 terror attacks were justified given their context? America’s pro-Hamas crowd will align themselves with any group to support their terrorism. They will link arms with groups who claim to be for women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, abortion, even though none of those rights exist in Gaza. Leftists are so blinded by their own devotion to those issues that they’re willing to look the other way when it comes to support for anti-Semitism and terrorism. Secret meetings The Treasury Department under the Biden-Harris administration has stonewalled the congressional probe into nonprofit groups that are financially supporting pro-Hamas “illegal and anti-Semitic activities” across the United States over the past year. In May, the House requested suspicious activity reports on organizations including Students for Justice in Palestine and the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The Treasury Department has not handed over a single document. Last Wednesday, the House sent a letter to Secretary Janet Yellen threatening a subpoena. The week before the convention, Kamala Harris appointed Nasrina Bargzie to be head of Muslim outreach for her campaign. Bargzie has a history of less-than-favorable views toward Israel, including defending Students for Justice in Palestine, one of the radical groups under congressional investigation. Two weeks before the DNC, Harris also met with Layla Elabed, who is a co-founder of the Uncommitted National Movement. Her sister is Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). The Uncommitted National Movement is working to convince voters not to support Harris unless she backs anti-Israel polices. After their brief meeting, Elabed claimed that Harris is open to an embargo on arms for Israel, but Harris’ campaign immediately stepped in to bury that story. Harris’ campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, flew to Detroit ahead of the Chicago convention to meet privately with Abbas Alawieh, Elabed’s co-founder and partner. According to a Washington Post report, the Harris campaign provided “extra passes for staff and friends” of Uncommitted to attend the DNC and even gave them space to hold a news conference.And during her trip to Michigan two weeks before the convention began, Harris also met in secret with Abdullah Hammoud, the 34-year-old mayor of Dearborn, to appeal to the Detroit suburb’s largest population of Arab-Americans in the United States. Perhaps some kind of deal was struck in these meetings. Harris would keep her comments balanced about Israelis and Palestinians, and they would keep their people from burning down Chicago during her coronation. We don’t know if a deal like that was struck, but after emphasizing her support for Israel’s right to defend itself, Harris railed against Israel’s attacks in Gaza. Democrats historically have built coalitions of seemingly conflicting groups with overlapping interests, threading them together with some form of oppression identity. But why are Democrats so eager to tolerate anti-Israel groups that justify terrorism? Do you think Kamala Harris is really anti-Semitic when her husband is proudly Jewish? It boils down to the one thing that brings strange bedfellows together and breeds compromise: votes. Anti-Israel voters have one major point of leverage right now in the Democratic Party: They’re most heavily concentrated in Michigan, which is a crucial battleground state. Democrats simply cannot afford to lose the anti-Israel vote, even if it means turning a blind eye to the vast web of pro-Hamas organizations that showed up in Chicago. Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

The first Darkest Dungeon is one of the best roguelike games to date. It combines the turn-based tactics of Baldur's Gate 3 and XCOM 2 with the Lovecraftian horror of Dredge, Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth, and The Shrouded Isle, all brought together with a distinctive comic book art style. Its sequel, Darkest Dungeon 2, continues to build on its predecessor in new and interesting ways, the most impressive of which is the upcoming Kingdoms DLC, which has just been further detailed by the game's creator, Red Hook Studios. Continue reading Gritty RPG Darkest Dungeon 2 is about to turn into a strategy game MORE FROM PCGAMESN: The best tactical rpgs on PC, The best strategy games on PC, The best roguelike games on PC

It’s a years-long debate at this point, but it’s one that shows no signs of slowing down. I am of course talking about the feud between mouse and keyboard and controller players in FPS games. Aim assist is usually a big talking point within this fiery debate, and Call of Duty Black Ops 6 is stoking up the embers. In order to “get everyone on a level playing field,” the new CoD game has made a sweeping change to controller aim assist. Continue reading Black Ops 6 overhauls aim assist to create “a level playing field” MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Black Ops 6 release date, Best FPS games, New Warzone season

WATCH: Commie Kamala Harris Makes It VERY CLEAR She's Will Censor Social Media, Speech She Doesn't Like

Harris' CNN Interview Has Already Yielded Its 1st Fruit in Damaging New Ad From Team Trump-Vance

Image: The Verge A judge in Brazil has ordered the suspension of X after owner Elon Musk failed to designate a new legal representative for the country, according to reports from Bloomberg and local news outlet Poder360. Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes told the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) to limit access to X within 24 hours and has given Apple and Google five days to remove X from their mobile app stores. The country will also impose daily fines of $50,000 Brazilian real (~$8,900 USD) to people who try to access X through a virtual private network (VPN), as reported by Poder360. Earlier this month, Musk closed X’s offices in Brazil, saying de Moraes threatened to arrest the company’s legal representative for not... Continue reading…

The U.S. State Department approved a foreign military sale to Croatia of High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) for $390 million, the Pentagon said in a statement on Friday.