The future of social media, regulation and our rights in the electronic age…

This week’s shooting at Youtube was certainly a very tragic and sad event. Curiously, the media has not talked about it a lot, for reasons that are still unclear. Personally, to the contrary, I think that this very sad event presents us with a wonderful opportunity to reflect on the ways to take back control of the steering wheel of our numerous electronic platforms and devices.

So let me plunge right in by saying that Big Tech companies have gone way too far in the way they handle our personal information, in the way they are tracking us 24/7 and in the way they treat their «users». Since these companies are american ones, it is the responsibility of the U.S. government to make sure that they comply with the most basic values and principles of the United States. That is why I think that the time has come to give these Big Tech companies the status of public utilities, in the same category as the phone, the gas and the electricity. Electronic services have become so entrenched in our lives that now it is impossible for anyone to live and function without them. I know that President Trump is not keen on regulation. However, there are circumstances where regulation is the only solution. Social media and internet companies are absolutely incapable of minding their own stores. They don’t have the discipline, the clear-eye that is necessary to do that and most especially, until now, they had a de facto carte blanche to do whatever they wanted. This has got to stop. Presently, this is the far west in the world of electronics. Anything goes. Regulation seems to me like the only solution because, if we wait for these companies to come with some sort of arrangement, they never will.

There are two things absolutely essential for me that are in order to rule this problem. First of all, Big Tech companies would have to be obliged, by law, to conform their policies, behavior, contracts, platforms to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Their «Terms of Use» and «Privacy Policy» documents would have to say that explicitly. Presently, with the current arrangement, we have lost all privacy and our data is shared with anybody without our knowledge. Their documents, in their current form, could easily be renamed «Terms of Misuse» and «Invasion of your Privacy Policy». To start with, these documents are written in a legal language that is evasive for most people. It is gibberish for the common man so even if we actually read them, there is nothing we can understand. Most of the terms present in these contracts are vague, undefined and the language used in general remains meaningless for most of us who are not used to legal writing. What the common man needs is a document that can be read easily with precise terms and formulated in a way that make sure that the person understands what he/she agrees to. In the current situation, most of internet users have absolutely no idea to what they have agreed to by accepting the «Terms of Use» and «Privacy Policy». If they had understood what these contracts were really implying legally, maybe they would have decided not to use one or several of these platforms. To give just an example, there is always a paragraph in these documents that says that the company may share some information with «third parties». Well…could we have the list of these «third parties»? They are not mentioned by name, so how the hell are we supposed to agree on «terms of use» if we don’t know who will handle our information?

The other thing is what I would call the burden of proof. Presently, the burden of proof is on the shoulders or the «users». Users have to behave in a way that is more and more in line with political correctness, diversity and the agenda of the Left in general. Companies like Facebook, Twitter, Google/Youtube, Apple can terminate your account or your monetization at any time arbitrarily for any reason and you can’t appeal their decision. They have the absolute power over you…because their services are free. Users don’t pay for the service so they are at the complete mercy of these companies and their will. In a normal business relationship, the burden of proof is on the shoulders of the service provider, the company, and it has to please its clientele, which are called not «users» but «customers». The words we use are important. If you are a customer a service provider will have no other choice but to respect your rights and give you satisfaction if the company wants to keep your monthly fee coming in every month. That’s why it is imperative that we start paying for the use of these platforms. It is only this way that we will ever be respected. If millions of people give, let’s say, 25 dollars a month each for their Facebook, Google, Twitter or Apple accounts, it is unlikely that these corporations would suspend or terminate any accounts because there is language used that is not politically correct or opinions that are not approved. They would simply keep going and let the police handle the very heavy cases. Also, the status of public utilities given to these companies would also protect customers against arbitrary decisions to cancel or suspend accounts. Of course, they could still terminate accounts for non-payment but in order to terminate accounts for other reasons, it is reasonable to envision that would be required by law to present their case before a judge in a court of law in order to protect the rights of the customers. And obviously, everything that I have said above also apply to smartphones, since they connect to the internet and record a great quantity of information on theirs users.

You must have heard many times the popular expression that says that «he who pays calls the shots». It was true ten thousand years and it is still true today. Since a couple of years, we have seen a number of conservative voices, bloggers and activists being censored, de-platformed, demonetized, etc. It would never have happened if they had been customers instead of just «users» and, on top of that, it would never have been possible in the first place if the companies had been required, by law, to abide by the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as I have said above. How the protections granted by the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights could be extended to citizens living outside the U.S. will certainly be a very difficult and long legal challenge. Because, in the current situation, it is too easy for the totalitarian states of the world to use our Big Tech companies against us. We are defenseless since these corporations have adopted a business model that makes them perfect tools to attack and undermine our societies. Why should these Big Tech companies do dirty tricks on behalf of China, Russia, North Korea while they could defend and uphold our values and civilization instead? It is not the communists and the terrorists who are kicked out of social media. It is the conservatives and right-wingers. Don’t you see what is going on? I will leave you will a short video of Project Veritas, the fourth part of the Twitter series. It last only two minutes but it says it all.

Why right-wingers should bypass social media…

Instead of losing your time on social media, why don’t you encourage websites that put out good information? That’s what we, in the political right, have to do to bypass censorship. The simplest way to do it would be to write commentaries directly on the websites themselves and not on the facebook or twitter page of these websites. That being said, unfortunately, some websites don’t have an independent comment section that allows you to do so. On some websites, it is possible to publish a commentary but only if you login on some social media first. Web hosts who do that are missing the point. If web users have to login on social media to comment an article of yours, they are not on your platform, they are on the one social media they use. That’s why it is imperative that right-wing web hosts create their own independent comment section on their website, if the one they use links with some social media. This way, comments written and published will stay there as long as you wish. They will not disappear at the will of some censorship czars. By creating networks of blogs and sites that link to each other and by writing commentaries directly on them, we will effectively be able to bypass social media. We have to stop depending on these multinational corporations to express ourselves. The day patriots, nationalists and dissidents understand that, things will start to change. We need to create our own tools and networks. Forget about Facebook and Twitter. The answer is at the tip of our fingers. Concerning video uploading now, PewTube seems to be a nice alternative to Youtube censorship, at least for the moment. We will see how things evolve in the future. Here are an article and a video from Red Ice TV where these issues of censorship on Twitter are discussed and analysed. The Weekend Warrior video features a section on twitter policies starting at 21:50.

Twitter Will Remove Users with Whom They Do Not Agree

Retour de Boris Le Lay sur le web: Deux nouvelles vidéos

Après la décision de Youtube de clôturer le compte de Boris Le Lay, ce dernier a décidé de changer de plateforme pour diffuser ses vidéos. Le site PewTube a la prétention de ne pas censurer les vidéos qu’elle publie en fonction de leur contenu politique. Espérons qu’ils ne feront pas marche arrière. Compte tenu du niveau de censure auquel les patriotes sont confrontés, c’est certainement une plateforme qu’ils peuvent utiliser pour diffuser leurs idées, tant que celle-ci restera libre et ouverte. Voici donc deux nouvelles vidéos de Boris Le Lay, publiées sur PewTube, où il explique et commente son exclusion de YouTube.

Censure globale de Youtube, Twitter, Facebook

La censure islamo-gauchiste et les moyens de la contourner

Some tips of advice to political dissidents, resistants, right-wingers and alt-righters

As America’s Left is getting ready to take down Trump, or at least trying to do so, the timing is perfect for me to present some pieces of advice to patriots out there who might wonder how exactly it is possible to survive in the very dangerous world we live in. That a bunch of thugs are trying to take out the good guys is nothing new. It is a movie that we have seen before. So to all political dissidents, resistants, right-wingers, alt-righters, in other terms everyone who is trying to fight the monstrous beast that is devouring the human race at this time, here is what I have to say to you, to help you, if it is possible. I am providing these tips and recommendations not necessarily in order of importance but rather randomly. Also, due to the sensitive nature of these tips, I invite you to read between the lines. As with any good book, the most interesting stuff is always between the lines. Here we go.

1- Try to compartmentalize your life as much as possible. To avoid the very uncomfortable situation in which Henrik Palmgren and Lana Lokteff of Red Ice TV found themselves when their website was hacked recently, it is important that you separate, as much as possible, the four basic categories of your life: Your source of income, your political life, your sentimental life and your friendships. In the case of this nice couple who is running Red Ice TV, it is impossible for them to do otherwise since everything they do is mingled together. In effect, their political activity, which they do as a couple, is at the same time their main source of income. That’s a fundamental mistake that you, out there, who might be thinking about jumping in into the political landscape should avoid. A political activist should never expect to gain a salary from a political activity. It is wiser to have a job and keep it rather than to expect donations to pour in. Also, to depend on Youtube advertisement revenue to pay your bills is not very smart, as Youtube can pull the plug on you at any time. Regarding personal matters now, your sentimental life should remain outside both your job environment and your political engagement. To have a relationship at work has the tendency to complicate things greatly and it can put your job at jeopardy sometimes. You can have friends at work but make sure they never meet with your other friends that you might have at social clubs for example. I am bringing that up because the more your life is integrated into one big piece, the easier you are to be taken down. All your enemies have to do is to craft one single operation and you are out. On the other hand, if your life is compartmentalized, these same enemies now have to craft several smaller operations to destroy you. It represents more work and so more possibility for failure. In other terms, don’t make it too easy for our enemies to attack and destroy us. Compartmentalization puts barriers and safety mechanisms that will prevent a total destruction of your life.

2- Lose your illusions on social media. Social media platforms don’t care about you. They care about their profit and their reputation. Also, when you register on them, you have to understand that you are being reduced to the electronic trail that you leave. And for the Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc, of this world, that’s what you are, an electronic trail. So to contemplate the idea that these companies could and should respect your rights is rather grotesque. Users of social media can use these platforms as much as they want, for free… But wait a minute. Have you ever wondered why it is ‘free’? In this world, nothing is free. There is a price for everything. So the only logical conclusion to all this is that for social media, the content you upload on their platforms has a value that is, at least, equal to a monthly fee that you could provide. A residential phone line may costs around 20 to 30 dollars in Canada or the U.S. Now if you consider that with Facebook for example, you can reach your friends and contacts anywhere around the world, at any time, and as much as you want, and that service is supposed to be ‘free’? There is something that we don’t understand here. If social media platforms don’t charge us for the great service that they are providing, it can only mean that they make much more money differently. Spontaneously, you could say that they are maybe selling our data, or electronic trail, out there to the highest bidder. But there is worse. The data provided by the millions of users constitutes a gigantic data bank on persons. And that is absolutely invaluable. There are so many ways that this information can be exploited, against us most of the time. Some might even take control of the whole planet with that. It is a pity that, lured by the gratuitousness of their service, so many individuals have put literaly their whole lives on Facebook and Twitter.

3- Stop considering your appartment or house as a safe zone. We live in a very dangerous world. Everywhere is a theater of war. Anything can happen anytime, anywhere to anyone. You should not consider what you call ‘home’ as a safe place. We live surrounded by electronics. These devices can record all kinds of information about us and send them to third parties that we are not even aware of. This information then can be exploited against you by anyone who has the will and the capability. If it is not already the case, you should behave at ‘home’ the same way you behave in a public place. Recently, a woman in the Province of Quebec made a troubling discovery. She found that one of her neighbours was spying on her. He had installed cameras in the attic and through the walls. If it happened to her, it can happen to you. To see the complete story, if you read French, you can see this article.

4- Stop considering food products as safe by default. You should always be extremely careful about what you eat. Don’t take for granted that it is safe, whether you are at home, at the supermarket or at a restaurant. A lot of chemicals, vaccines, pesticides, hormones, etc, are added to food products in the non-organic food industry. Mega food corporations are in a business that is very profitable are every decisions they make is made for profit. You should make food choices that will favor your health and your safety, not you wallet. Everybody understand that grocery is expensive but you shouldn’t take any chances. Use your brain and if you have any doubts about certain products, don’t use them. Destroy them instead.

5- Our elites are not after the terrorists, they are after you. Sad but true. That’s why it is important to remind ourselves how difficult it is to be a political dissident in the West. The West is no longer free. It has become a new Soviet Union, disguised behind the numerous flags of the countries of Europe and North America. To a large extent, the terror threat has been fabricated in order to strip the populations of their rights and then seize their wealth. If you look at the history of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia, that’s exactly what happened. We are being told of a terror threat and so forth, but when it comes down to legislation on the matter, it is always citizens, patriots and nationalists who get hammered down the most. Recently, after giving 10.5 millions dollars to Omar Khadr, a terrorist, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada struck again. He gave another large portion of Canadian tax-payers’ money, 31.3 millions dollars to be precise, to three men of Middle East extraction suspected of terrorist activity. It speaks volumes about what is the real agenda of these elites and who is considered an ally and who a friend. So, in that context, it is important that you realize that you will meet considerable opposition and hostility if you choose to continue on the path of resistance and political dissidence. You have to expect to be put under surveillance, at least for a certain period of time. That surveillance may include the fact of being followed, recorded and filmed, at least for a while. Of course, all situations are different. There are significant variations from country to country, and between individuals. There are not two cases that are exactly similar. And the term ‘surveillance’ most be understood in a broad sense. In effect, during the time you are being ‘surveilled’, considerable pressure can be put on you using various techniques of harassment and intimidation. This harassment and intimidation has the obvious goal of trying to make you quit the path of resistance in favor of the herd. And here you have to make a choice. You have to decide whether you are man or a woman of conviction or not. You are the only one who can make that call.

As I am reflecting on the future that is looming for humankind, I can’t help but to think that we are heading toward destruction. The world is collapsing and unless there is a serious course correction in our values and in our behavior, it will be a complete catastrophe. Time is running out.

Conférence du National Policy Institute de 2016

Cette conférence intitulée « Become Who We Are » a été organisée par le National Policy Institute et a réuni plusieurs des plus éminents penseurs du mouvement politique Alt-Right. Le mouvement Alt-Right prône notamment l’arrêt de toute immigration, la fin de la mondialisation et développe une pensée politique où la race, l’identité et la nation tiennent une place importante. Il combat le multiculturalisme, le progressisme et l’influence de culture non-européennes comme les cultures juive et musulmane. Kevin McDonald, Jared Taylor et Richard Spencer y ont participé, pour ne nommer que quelques-uns. Elle a eu lieu le samedi 19 novembre et a été diffusée sur internet par le média alt-right Red Ice TV. Une conférence de presse y a été tenue, que l’on peut voir vers le milieu de la première partie. Notamment, la question de la liberté d’expression a été abordée lors de la conférence, puisque plusieurs porte-paroles du mouvement Alt-Right ont fait l’objet récemment de censure de la part de Twitter. Pour ma part, je ferais remarquer aux membres de ce mouvement que c’est une perte de temps d’utiliser ces plateformes dites des « médias sociaux ». En effet, elles sont contrôlées essentiellement par les mêmes forces qui contrôlent déjà la télévision, les journaux et la radio. Les patriotes et nationalistes de tous pays, qu’ils se disent Alt-Right ou non, doivent créer leurs propres médias et leurs propres plateformes au lieu de perdre leur temps sur Twitter et Facebook. En gros, je dirais que cette conférence a été très relevée et qu’elle incarne l’avenir. Le mouvement Alt-Right est à l’avant-garde de la pensée politique. Nous avons la chance de voir l’histoire s’écrire sous nos yeux. Profitons-en!

Kevin Freeman sur la censure de l’internet

L’analyste économique Kevin Freeman commente ici la perte de liberté de parole sur internet qui se produit depuis plusieurs mois déjà. Cela s’exprime de différentes façons, notamment par une sélection orientée du contenu que l’on retrouve sur les plateformes des médias sociaux, par des tactiques déployées par exemple par l’Open Society de George Soros mais aussi, malheureusement, par le transfert du contrôle de l’internet (ICANN) que l’Administration Obama se préparerait peut-être à faire ce mois-ci. Le Congrès a déclaré illégal l’attribution de sommes provenant du budget pour financer ce transfert mais selon Freeman, Obama voudrait quand même aller de l’avant. Il est évident que le transfert du contrôle de l’internet à une entité indépendante, privée, peut-être internationale, signifiera la mort de la liberté d’expression sur internet, puisque alors les propos tenus sur internet ne seront plus protégés par le Premier Amendement de la Constitution Américaine, comme c’est le cas présentement, en plus d’être défendus par les élus du Sénat et du Congrès. De plus, les membres du groupe, comité ou entité qui se verrait octroyé le contrôle de l’internet seraient évidemment, dès lors, la cible de tentatives de corruption, d’intimidation et d’influences venant des acteurs les plus néfastes de la planète, c’est l’évidence même. Celui qui contrôle le discours contrôle l’agenda. Alors que les gros médias ne présentent plus que des balivernes sans importance, nous devons tout faire pour garder l’internet démocratique et populaire. C’est sur internet que les patriotes du monde entier peuvent prendre la parole, défendre leur pays, leur culture, leur civilisation et s’organiser politiquement pour prendre le pouvoir bientôt, dans les décennies à venir. Un monde nouveau est en train de naître et on le voit grandir sur et grâce à internet. Les États-Unis doivent garder le contrôle d’internet à l’intérieur du gouvernement. Vous retrouverez l’entrevue avec Freeman au second segment.

Kevin Freeman sur Secure Freedom Radio

Quelques épisodes de FTR sur le dossier du fascisme technocratique

Ces quatre épisodes de l’émission For The Record de l’animateur radio Dave Emory présentent le problème de ce qu’il appelle le « fascisme technocratique ». Par le biais de médias qui ont l’air tout à fait « démocratiques » comme les médias sociaux, notamment Facebook, l’oligarchie mondialiste formée par la haute finance, les entreprises technologiques, les grandes fortunes, etc, augmente son niveau de contrôle sur les masses endormies, sans que cela paraisse. À l’aide de plusieurs exemples, Emory montre comment les transformations sociales amenées par les nouvelles technologies nous mèneront inévitablement vers un monde cauchemardesque.

FTR #867 Because They Can, Part 3: Fireside Rant about Technocratic Fascism as “Cyber-Crowleyism”

FTR #866 Because They Can, Part 2: More about Technocratic Fascism

FTR #859 Because They Can: Update on Technocratic Fascism

FTR #851 Technocratic Fascism and Post-Reaganoid Political Dementia: Update on the Adventures of Eddie the Friendly Spook

L’affaire Roberge et ses conséquences pour le renseignement québécois

L’affaire Roberge a porté un dur coup aux forces policières du Québec ces dernières semaines. Pour ceux qui ne le sauraient pas, rappelons que Benoît Roberge est ce policier du Service de Police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) qui aurait accepté des pots-de-vin d’organisations criminelles en échange de renseignements. Comme l’avait déclaré le directeur de la Police de Montréal, Marc Parent, à l’annonce de l’arrestation du policier: « On s’est senti trahi ». Et pour cause. Un enquêteur haut placé dans la structure hiérarchique de ce corps policier, qui vend des renseignements au crime organisé, quand on dans le métier et qu’on essaie de faire son travail, ça fait mal. On comprend donc le désarroi que peuvent ressentir les corps de police québécois. Mais je crois qu’il faut également prendre en considération le désarroi d’une autre catégorie de québécois: les citoyens en général. En effet, qui va parler à la police maintenant? Qui va partager de l’information avec les corps policiers en ayant en tête que l’agent à qui un citoyen s’adresse est peut-être un agent double pour une organisation criminelle? Par ailleurs, cette affaire fait ressortir aussi le problème des fameux « programmes de rapprochements » avec les communautés musulmanes. Ces programmes sont mis en place par des corps policiers ou des partis politiques pour, comme le nom l’indique, rapprocher des institutions occidentales de communautés islamiques ou même islamistes. Les deux groupes partagent du renseignement et essaient de mieux se comprendre et collaborer pour éviter des attaques terroristes. Ce n’est pas une mauvaise idée en soi mais néanmoins ces initiatives mettent les policiers dans des situations vulnérables où ils peuvent facilement être corrompus par des éléments du crime organisé arabo-musulman ou par des organisations terroristes et devenir ainsi des agents doubles pour ces groupes. Donc, je répète ma question, qui va parler aux policiers maintenant?

Cette problématique s’amplifie lorsque l’on considère la concentration du renseignement dans le monde moderne. Suite à l’invention de l’ordinateur et des banques de données, des caméras de surveillance et de tout l’appareillage de type « Big Brother » dont on est entouré, une masse incroyablement dense d’informations est stockée dans un nombre de lieux assez restreint et un nombre limité de personnes y ont accès. Pour donner un exemple classique, en Union Soviétique, pour surveiller la population, le KGB devait placer physiquement des espions dans chaque café, librairie, usine, etc. Les dissidents étaient détectés un à un de façon ardue. Ce n’est plus le cas aujourd’hui. Quelqu’un peut établir la liste de tous les dissidents ou citoyens jugés indésirables pour un quelconque groupe d’intérêts à partir d’un ordinateur. S’il a accès par exemple aux fichiers de la police ou même à la base de données de réseaux sociaux comme Facebook par exemple, c’est assez simple à faire. En somme, là où je veux en venir, est que loin d’avoir produit une société plus sécuritaire, la société de type Big Brother nous a en fait rendus tous plus vulnérables. Nous vivons maintenant dans un monde extrêmement dangereux. Le renseignement est tellement concentré qu’il suffit qu’une organisation criminelle ou terroriste ait un agent à l’intérieur de la machine pour produire un dommage irréparable. Si vous avez vu le dernier film de James Bond, Skyfall, vous vous souvenez peut-être de cette scène où le personnage du vilain se trouve dans une salle, entouré d’ordinateurs. Alors que James Bond est retenu prisonnier, le vilain lui déclare pouvoir, à volonté, accéder au système bancaire et le faire planter, prendre le contrôle d’un satellite, de la bourse, d’armements militaires, etc. Ça donne une idée du problème auquel nous sommes confrontés avec la concentration du renseignement. En permettant cette concentration, nous avons en fait rendu la tâche beaucoup plus facile aux organisations criminelles de prendre le contrôle des sociétés. Ils ont moins d’efforts à faire qu’auparavant. On ne connaît pas toutes les ramifications de l’opération d’agent double de Roberge mais une chose est sûre, il est possible que ce ne soit que la pointe de l’iceberg. Des indices s’accumulent sur les forces policières québécoises qui laissent croire à un certain degré de corruption et de désagrégation des bonnes moeurs déontologiques. Mentionnons par exemple le cas d’un autre « taupe » du SPVM, Ian Davidson, qui vendait des informations lui aussi au crime organisé, le cas de Claude Aubin, pour les mêmes raisons, le cas de ce citoyen de Trois-Rivières, Alexis Vadeboncoeur, qui a été battu apparemment sans raison par des agents de la Sûreté du Québec à Trois-Rivières, le cas similaire de Norbert Mestenapeo sur la Côte-Nord, l’arrestation gratuite du journaliste du Journal de Montréal Éric-Yvan Lemay, qui ressemblait davantage à une tentative d’intimidation et d’humiliation, le harcèlement et l’intimidation dont aurait été victime Jason Gabriel, un résident de Kanesatake, sont quelques exemples pouvant laisser croire qu’une certaine portion des forces policières québécoises a pu être tournée, à son insu, contre les citoyens. Les individus considérés dissidents ou marginaux peuvent ainsi facilement être transformés en terroristes ou en criminels lorsque les policiers chargés des enquêtes sont eux-mêmes, parfois, des criminels, des agents doubles ou corrompus.

Au final, l’affaire Roberge risque de faire autant de dommage au renseignement québécois que l’affaire Snowden a pu en faire au renseignement américain. Ce sont deux cas différents mais les conséquences au fond sont les mêmes: perte de confiance, sources de renseignement compromises, opérations sabotées, etc. Les opérations d’infiltration ou d’agents doubles à la Roberge ou Snowden réalisent le vieux rêve du communisme, à savoir détruire toute opposition en transformant tout citoyen en criminel potentiel. Je ne sais pas ce que vous en pensez mais moi, ça ne me rassure pas du tout.