What in the tomfoolery was Tyrique thinking

The homeowners said they managed to extinguish the fire

That didn't stop Democrats and the media from acting as though literal Nazis drove Panzer tanks down 5th Avenue

'Publicly support Black Lives Matter and defund the police'

Although some movies and media depict ancient people as unclean, that's not entirely accurate. The ancients had hygiene practices, especially one of the most advanced civilizations, the Greeks. Despite not having showers, the Greeks learned how to stay clean with that they had. Ancient Greeks had hair dye, perfume, and flushing latrines. However, their ingredients, recipes... Source

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Democrats have come up with a fresh avenue to put pressure on social platforms in the name of combating “misinformation” – in this instance related to hurricanes Helene and Milton that recently hit North Carolina, Florida, and Georgia. Seven Congress members have written to several House committees – Judiciary, Oversight, and Energy and Commerce – asking that they investigate and organize hearings into the matter. We obtained a copy of the letter for you here. According to the signatories, what needs to be investigated at this level is the role of social sites “in the dissemination of misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and scams in the wake of natural disasters.” The platforms where this was allegedly happening to the extent of hindering rescue and recovery efforts named in the letter include X, Meta (Instagram and Facebook), TikTok, and Discord. “The severity of this issue is difficult to overstate,” write the Democrat lawmakers – and yet, the very dramatic tone of the letter suggests that it may indeed not be “difficult to overstate.” Either way, the missive goes into a number of examples of problems that are known to affect disaster area relief efforts, but this time, the members of the Senate choose to tie them tightly to the “role” of social media. Clearly, the intent here is to push for “adequate solutions.” These just happen to parrot the many times repeated criticism and demands coming from the same political corner, that seem to have become a “one-size-fits-all” tool to pressure for more censorship. The investigation demand includes looking into the alleged failure of social media to adequately address misinformation, the role of algorithms, specifically when “amplifying” what it designated as misinformation and scams, as well as the impact on public trust and disaster recovery of “misinformation.” Another point these lawmakers want investigated is what they see as failures to protect against scams and fraud – which they claim have not only proliferated on the named platforms but have also “targeted individuals at their most vulnerable, exacerbating the financial and emotional toll of the hurricanes.” Related: Democrat Congresswomen Tell Social Media Platforms to “Quickly and Decisively” Censor Hurricane “Misinformation” Just as one might be tempted to observe that this level of interest has never been afforded to the way censorship worked during the pandemic, election controversies, etc, these last years, by representatives of this political option – the letter goes into that, but not to, like, say, Mark Zuckerberg, repent and apologize. Quite the opposite. Write the lawmakers and dig in their heels: “The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s bipartisan investigation into misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic raised critical questions about the role of algorithms and ineffective content moderation on platforms such as Facebook and YouTube.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Democrats Target Social Media Over Hurricane “Misinformation” appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. As Congress turns its attention to Big Tech and its role in censoring online speech, concerns about the influence of government in shaping digital discourse are front and center. Lawmakers are probing the boundaries of government involvement in content moderation and questioning whether federal agencies have quietly steered private companies toward censorship. For an increasing number of lawmakers, it’s time to take a closer look at how far government influence over private platforms may extend—and what that means for free speech. In a two-day blitz, Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer opened inquiries on a critical front: How much influence has the government had over private tech companies’ content policies, and has that influence veered into outright censorship? On Thursday, Schmitt directed a line of questioning at Google, Meta, and TikTok, urging them to reveal if they’d been pressured into suppressing certain discussions, particularly around election integrity. We obtained a copy of the letter for you here. Then Comer’s committee trained its sights on NewsGuard, the taxpayer-funded “news-rating” service accused of favoring certain ideological viewpoints over others. Comer’s request was for any evidence of any cozy partnerships with government agencies and a breakdown of how NewsGuard decides what qualifies as “trusted” information. NewsGuard: The Taxpayer-Funded “Truth” Filter for America’s Young Minds NewsGuard, in theory, is supposed to act like a digital “nutrition label,” providing a way for users to discern reliable news from questionable sources. Yet critics argue that, in practice, NewsGuard’s role often seems more like that of an ideological filter. Chairman Comer pointed out that this taxpayer-funded organization seems remarkably consistent in giving conservative viewpoints a red warning light. With over 500 government grants dished out since 2016 to combat “misinformation,” many are questioning just how neutral NewsGuard’s approach can be. Comer’s concerns cut to the core: Why are we funneling taxpayer dollars into a service that may be one-sided in its approach to “misinformation?” And does the government’s role in NewsGuard’s funding make it a quiet backdoor for influencing public dialogue? With a deadline ticking on NewsGuard’s response, Comer’s line of questioning shines a light on what many see as a crucial issue for American free speech. Censorship by Proxy? Evidence Piles Up in Twitter Files and Murthy v. Missouri Evidence backing this scrutiny isn’t in short supply. The now-famous Twitter Files project, for one, provided a look into conversations between Twitter execs and federal agencies, suggesting a concerted effort to “manage” online discussions. Lawmakers say it’s an example of how government agencies, with just a few nudges here and there, effectively shape what’s allowed on platforms used by millions. In Murthy v. Missouri, the question of where “guidance” ends and outright censorship begins is set to test the boundaries of the First Amendment in court. Schmitt and Comer’s investigation hinges on the unsettling idea that, by enlisting private tech giants in its fight against “misinformation,” the government has managed to sidestep restrictions on censorship. When Big Tech steps in to mute discussions under government pressure, is it really a private decision anymore? If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Lawmakers Demand Answers on Feds’ Secret Influence Over Big Tech Speech Policing appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Uncut and Unfiltered: 2024 Is the Independent Media Election, Leaving Legacy Media in the Dust appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

The Democrats Are Infantilizing Women

Ballot Boxes Set On Fire in Oregon, Washington