I noticed that Amazon logo had disappeared from the “Battle for the Net” participants wall (1). The battle has been waged by the Free Press and other hard Left groups, supported by the seditious Internet giants, to keep intact the order FCC-15-24, passed by Obama’s FCC in 2015. That order purported to place the U.S. Internet under the Title II of the 1934 Telecommunications Act, in violation of the First Amendment and other Constitutional provisions.
The Amazon logo was on the wall on the day of the battle, July the 12th, and remained there for at least two weeks. As reported in WUWT, Amazon did not deny that it had permitted placing its logo on that wall, when asked by email on July the 13th. Amazon did not reply to the email at all.
I guess Amazon will not be the only one company, wishing not to have its logo on that wall. To discourage history re-writing, and to encourage shareholders to hold corporate insiders accountable, I post the original version of this Faux Net Neutrality Wall of Shame here.
Progressives openly plan to aid an enemy attacking the nation when they get an opportunity.
THE PROGRESSIVE RESPONSE TO (PREDICTABLE) EMERGENCIES: NATIONAL SECURITY CRISES AND DOMESTIC CRACKDOWNS IN THE TIME OF TRUMP
Moments of crisis, such as extremist violence or an international crisis, create windows for seizing power, enacting racist repression of entire communities, restricting civil liberties, cracking down on domestic opposition and going to war. [disgusting comparison is omitted] George W. Bush used 9/11. With Trump, Bannon and their allies in Congress, progressives must be prepared to fight back in the first hours and days of a national security crisis. (1)
Google and Facebook fund them, using shareholders’ money. (2)
Also, Sierra Club funds them using “charitable” money. The American Federation of Teachers and The National Education Association fund them using union dues.
All the following pictures and captions are from Desmogblog . Find one caption which is not an evidence of Sedition (as defined in 18 U.S. Code, § 2384). Continue reading The Left Acknowledged Seditious Conspiracy
This development is described completely differently in the different media:
The rebel alliance begins: Governors of New York, California, Washington form a coalition to fight climate change – according to FastCompany.
THE TREASONOUS SECESSION OF CLIMATE CONFEDERACY STATES . Prosecute Governor Brown for treason – according to FrontPageMag.
I find myself in the middle between these extremes. It is just another act of sedition by demonrats.
This is a summary of When Silicon Valley Went Off the Cliff, focusing on connections and parallels between the short lived “ban alarmism” and climate alarmism. From January 28 through February 8, a number of Silicon Valley and Washington state corporate executives participated in an attempt to topple President Trump, orchestrated by the Left after President Trump signed the original order, Executive Order No. 13769 Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States on January 27. WA Attorney General Bob Ferguson, one of the Attorneys General United for Clean Power, filed a stinky lawsuit against President Trump and succeeded to halt implementation of the Executive order. 129 corporations, who hold monopolies in Internet search, “social media,” TV and movie streaming, as well as other markets for speech and press, filed an Amici Brief supporting the rogue Attorney General against the President. Their reaction to the Executive order was so out of proportion that an analogy with climate alarmism immediately sprung to mind. Here, I do not recite the original Executive order because I expect that readers did not trust to the Fake Stream Media reporting about it.
Some of the social dynamics behind this overreaction are described in the essay When Silicon Valley Went Off the Cliff. This new low looks like a development of climate alarmism, compressed in time from 30 years to 10 days and happening on the scale of corporations instead of nations. Like a small scale experiment with societal instability, one might say. Continue reading Who leans left, falls left. The Dirty 129
This is an admission from NY Times on February 6: Democratic Party operatives and democratic attorney generals and governors do not know the differences between their roles. Per admission, democratic attorney generals and governors are Democratic Party operatives appointed to the positions where they benefit other Democratic Party operatives and Democratic Party donors:
“In interviews, more than a dozen Democratic attorneys general, governors and party operatives detailed a week of frenzied litigation, late-night and early-morning phone calls and text messages, and strategies devised on airplanes and at sporting events. All told, Democrats say, the legal onslaught against Mr. Trump was a crystallizing moment for the party’s attorneys general — and a model for how to stall or unwind the administration policies they find most offensive.”
“Mr. Schneiderman, a former state senator from Manhattan who is in his second term as attorney general, called the travel ban a ‘first test’ of the Democratic legal apparatus under Mr. Trump.” Continue reading Democratic Attorneys General and Other Party Operatives