Author: email@edwardulrich.com

Earlier today I wrote a post that explained why it I think it would be a bad idea for the government to be involved with mandating who private social media platforms must be allowed to use their services, but I do agree that major media companies should be fair with their practices anyway.

I think it should be made in the best interest of such companies to be fair to their users without needing the government to be involved in that process.  For example, new companies who are in fact fair to their users could arise as competition that would soon become popular in place of the companies who discriminate.

I think it is mostly a matter of activists keeping track of the companies who are unfair to their users and making sure that people are aware of those  companies, and it is also important for alternative companies to be promoted.

This video explains problems with the major internet content providers such as Google..

I think it is mostly a matter of people being made more aware of issues with the problem companies and informing them of effective alternatives.  For example, other search engines than Google exist that don’t track users, such as “DuckDuckGo.com.”

[Note:  March 8, 2020— I’ve always been a big fan of Infowars, they are a very important source of news.  I’ve learned much from them over the years.  I don’t always completely agree with what they say though, such as in this example.  Also note that I’ve revamped the text of this article to fix a few grammar errors.]

Strangely, the usually libertarian-minded media outlet Infowars.com has launched a petition advocating for the government to take control of social media companies to enforce “ending the practice of shadow banning and algorithm based censorship,” claiming that social media companies are now “deFacto becoming the internet and are forming monopolies.”

However, I don’t think allowing the government to meddle in the content of private internet companies would be a good idea at all.  Once the government would be given such authority, they would use it to enforce quotas of political correctness such as by using the guidelines of corrupt organizations like the “Southern Poverty Law Center” which makes phony accusations of racism at the instructions of the political Establishment.

Such legislation would be the same as letting the government mandate the content that book publishers print in books in order to force of content of every book to be accommodating to everyone.  The content on the internet is an infinite resource, and calling a social media company a “monopoly” is essentially the same as calling a book a monopoly just because it is popular.

Creating an online social media company is not any sort of an impossible task at all, so there is no reason to treat already existing ones as if they are monopolies.

Such potential legislation reminds me of a lawsuit that was filed in California a few years ago where a private Christian dating website was sued to accommodate dating for homosexuals.  Is that the sort of legislation that Infowars is advocating for?

 

Then what about “Net Neutrality” rules?

However, I do agree with having the government enforce net neutrality rules, because the actual physical broadband infrastructure of the internet is a finite resource where equal access to actual internet service by everybody should be protected.

Some people argue that even net neutrality rules are invasive and create a “backdoor” for government corruption into companies, however the government has backdoor access anyway through the CEOs and upper management of such companies being members of Establishment secret societies.

If net neutrality rules didn’t exist, then broadband companies would throttle and block the traffic of websites that have information critical of the political Establishment by claiming that the information violates the company’s definition of “political correctness,” no matter where the content actually originates from on the internet.

Essentially, having the government enforce “net neutrality” rules is like ensuring that everyone can have their books printed and everyone can have access to those books, while at the same time it is crucial that the government is not allowed to mandate the actual content of the individual books that are printed.

[Note:  March 13, 2020— The text of this article has been updated.]

A new CNN documentary entitled “The Trump Show: TV’s New Reality” which premiered on Friday night attempts to suggest that women are on the verge of being forced into sexual slavery under Donald Trump’s administration.

In the documentary, the producer of the television series “The Handmaid’s Tale” Bruce Miller ridiculously claims that he “continuously sees parallels between his show and the U.S. under Trump.”

“The Handmaid’s Tale” is a dystopian story about the United States being overthrown by a patriarchal government that enslaves women and forces them them to bear the children of their male masters.

I think The Handmaid’s Tale is actually an allegory about Islam, and it is likely that the people involved with the show mention Trump as some sort of an “inside joke” because he’s actually someone who is “protecting” people from the potential of such a situation happening.  That seems to be the most logical explanation, I can’t imagine how any rational person could think that the show is an accurate representation of “Trump’s America” or what it could become!  I think only an Islamic society would be able to degrade into a dystopia of that sort.

I think it’s likely that the author Margaret Atwood and others involved with the show aren’t willing to admit the story’s connection to Islam because they don’t want to deal with the potential of being attacked in retaliation for being involved with the story.

There are also Establishment media articles that try to deny the connection between Islam and the show while trying to reinforce its connection to Christianity, such as this dishonest “Atlantic” article that makes the following statements:

“.. Saudi Arabia, for example, might be an authoritarian theocracy—state law requires citizens to be Muslim and prohibits non-Muslim public worship—but it is not totalitarian ..” (However, in truth Saudi Arabia is absolutely totalitarian, and it is one of the most flagrant abusers of human rights in the world.)

“Even the Islamic State [ISIS], which does engage in sex slavery, otherwise diverges from the model of Gilead’s Christian fundamentalists.  Gilead’s biblical judgments often seem laughably arbitrary and primitive (noncompliance is punished with eye-gouging, for example).  ISIS is similarly comfortable with performative brutality, but it set up fairly complex and elaborate judicial and legal structures, including detailed tax codes and counterfeit statutes.”  (This statement actually tries to create the perception that ISIS’s “fairly complex and elaborate judicial and legal structures” somehow negates its horrifying behavior.)

Strangely, Russia has introduced a new class of cold-war type super nuclear weapons a few days after Vladimir Putin’s summit with Donald Trump.

Presumably the weapons have been developed at the instructions of the political Establishment to justify continuing the existence of NATO for supposedly protecting Europe from Russian attack, despite the fact that Europe depends on importing much of its energy from Russia anyway.

Even more significantly, Russia, Europe, the U.S., and essentially all of the rest of the world are actually covertly controlled by the same Illuminati global elite, which makes Russia’s new weapons systems be even more pointless.

I grew up watching the Saturday Night Live television show, and I often find it to be entertaining, however I notice that sometimes it tries to incorporate Establishment agendas into its skits.

For example, this skit is about a “men’s rights activist” who is attending a women’s get-together with his new girlfriend from Venezuela.  The joke is that she doesn’t understand that he’s actually an “anti-woman” activist..

Since the guy labels himself as a “men’s rights activist,” it shows that he apparently does view himself as favoring men’s rights over women’s rights, so I agree with the women about being put off by that.  The guy is in fact “anti-women” due to how his character is presented, but the actual views that he has aren’t typically anti-women despite often being accused of being that way.

The first issue that is mentioned is the one of “the right of men to make more money than women.”  The “wage gap” is often deceitfully portrayed as women statistically making much less money than men do when working the same jobs, but in fact men and women usually make the same amount of money when working the same jobs in Western countries, so there is definitely no reason to implement fascist (or even Communist) leftist government controls in businesses to force men and women to be paid the same!  I think being opposed to such controls being imposed is definitely the “correct” view.

.. But actually, his view “would” be the correct one if the writers didn’t also have him additionally say “If they are men”, which made his argument be that he thinks that only men should be paid more.  In that way they misrepresent the common augment against implementing invasive government controls to enforce “equal wages,” in order to make it seem sexist to allow businesses the right to pay people based only on their merit without “Big Brother” mandating everyone’s wages.

It’s also interesting that his girlfriend is from Venezuela, which is currently reeling from the effects of totalitarian Communism that has left many people so hungry that some are even resorting to eating rats, so she should in fact actually understand the arguments against the problems that are caused by extreme leftist government controls.

The next issue mentioned is the guy’s activism being responsible for closing down two “Planned Parenthood” clinics.  I personally have pro-choice views, but I think people should have the right to have pro-life views, of course.  Also many people are opposed to Planned Parenthood for a lot of reasons, including it being involved with behavior such as selling body parts from abortions.  I don’t think being opposed to abortions is “anti-women.”  Obviously many women are opposed to abortions as well.

While I was creating the post about the “men’s rights activist” SNL skit, I also thought of this one that I saw recently which is about an “Irish Dating Game,” which I think was also created to support Establishment agendas.

The joke is that people in Ireland supposedly have an “inbred” culture, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the skit has been created at the same time that the Establishment has been strongly advocating for filling the towns and cities of Ireland with Islamic migrants from the mid-East and Africa.  The Irish are often much more opposed to Establishment immigration agendas than people are in other countries of Europe.

Here is another reason for Europeans to be vegetarians.  The largest meat producers in Germany usually practice Islamic “Halal” slaughtering techniques, where the throats of the animals are cut while the animal is still conscious and alive, causing them to suffer greatly.

See a Voice of Europe article about the issue.

This video from PETA shows the horrible circumstances of Halal slaughters:

 The Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte claimed that Trump wished that Duterte’s deadly crackdown on drugs would succeed in a telephone call on Saturday, and Duterte said that he assured Trump that the Philippines would maintain its ties with America — reversing his prior hostility toward the U.S. when he called President Obama “a son of a whore.”  Duterte also said that Trump extended an invitation to him to visit New York and the White House next year.

Duterte had called for vigilante killings of suspected drug dealers in the Philippines when he was elected in May 2016, so far resulting in street executions of nearly 4,000 people without arrest or trial.

(See a Daily Mail article about the issue.)

It is reasonable to speculate that Trump may be much more controlled by the Establishment than most people realize.  Most of Trump’s agendas are entirely contrary to the long term plans of the global elite, however Trump is actually a member of that group as well.  Trump’s mostly unnecessary and divisive “gaffes” while campaigning are the biggest reason why so many people are currently opposed to his agendas, and Trump’s recent endorsement of Duterte’s homicidal policies toward his citizens is the first of Trump’s (perhaps intentional) major post-election gaffes, potentially as a part of a strategy of making his agendas seem unreasonable and unworkable.

(See an OpenMindedRealism article about that issue.)

Following is a summary of this CBN article: 

A mob of Muslims attacked and burned houses and businesses in a Coptic Christian village in Egypt when they heard rumors of an attempt to build a new church.  The closest church to the village of 2000 Christians is many miles away.

The residents were in the process of building a four-story building to be used as a community center, daycare, and nursing home when a group of Muslim radicals attacked on Friday at noon, November 25, following their Muslim prayers.  They came carrying gas canisters, automatic rifles, clubs, machetes, knives, and rocks, attacking the villagers and their houses.  They also cut off the power and water supply to the village and blocked the road so fire trucks could not enter the village.  Several homes and businesses were destroyed and four people were injured.

Muslims frequently violently attack Christians in Egypt [Note: And also in many other Islamic countries.]  Earlier a similar attack followed rumors that a kindergarten in a Christian Village would be turned into a church.

Following is a summary of this Daily Mail UK article: 

An Afghan immigrant has been arrested in Germany for the rape and murder of a 19 year old Medical student Maria Ladenburger, who is the daughter of a Senior EU official.  She was drowned after being raped in the University city of Freiburg, with her body found in the Dresiam river on October 16.  She had left a party in the early morning hours and was cycling home when she was attacked.

The suspect was arrested on Friday and has confessed to the murder.  A strand of his hair was found in a blackberry bush, and her scarf was also discovered on the riverbed.  CCTV footage in the area was examined which revealed the asylum seeker on a local tram with dyed hair color matching the strand that was found, which then matched the DNA of the strand.  The suspect had been taken in by a local family in the town of Freiburg.

Police are now trying to determine if another woman in the area was raped and murdered by the same migrant in the area in the beginning of November.