Credit Card Nation: Why The Facebook Killer And The U.S. Congress Have A Great Deal In Common

Credit Card Nation: Why The Facebook Killer And The U.S. Congress Have A Great Deal In Common | Steve-Stephens-Photo-from-Cleveland-Police-460x329 | Economy & Business News Articles

Most Americans have seemingly convinced themselves that as a society we will never pay a great price for going into so much debt and that we will never pay a great price for the horrendous crimes against humanity that we are committing on a daily basis.  If you don’t understand what I am talking about, just keep reading the rest of this article.  Just as there are consequences for our actions individually, so there are also consequences for our actions as a society.  And although our national day of reckoning has been put off for quite some time, when it does finally arrive the pain is going to be absolutely unimaginable.

Just recently, I was astounded to learn that the total amount of credit card debt in the United States has crossed the trillion dollar mark.  It boggles my mind that so many Americans could be so foolish, because credit card debt is one of the worst forms of debt in existence, and financial experts all over the country have spent an extraordinary amount of time and energy trying to get this message across to people.

But even though people know that going into credit card debt is bad, they just keep on doing it anyway.  We have become a “buy now, pay later” society that gives very little consideration to long-term consequences.

On a national level, we are now nearly 20 trillion dollars in debt, and a historic showdown over government spending and debt threatens to absolutely paralyze the federal government at the end of this month.  At this point many believe that it will be virtually impossible for Congress to avoid a government shutdown on April 29th, and once it begins Donald Trump’s entire agenda will come to a complete and total crashing halt until the crisis is resolved.  The following comes from David Stockman

In the meanwhile, everything else — health care reform, tax cuts, infrastructure — will become backed-up in an endless queue of legislative impossibilities. Accordingly, there will be no big tax cut in 2017 or even next year. For all practical purposes Uncle Sam is broke and his elected managers are paralyzed.

The Treasury will be out of cash and up against a hard stop debt limit of $19.8 trillion in a matter of months. But long before that there will be a taste of the Shutdown Syndrome on April 28 owing to the accumulating number of “poison pill” “riders” to the CR.

These include the virtual certainty of riders to the House bill to “defund” Planned Parenthood and sanctuary cities. Other extraneous amendments will also possibly include funds demanded by the White House to start the Mexican Wall, enhance deportations and fund some of Trump’s $54 billion defense increase.

I am so glad that Stockman mentioned Planned Parenthood, because the decision whether or not to continue funding Planned Parenthood is going to be one of the central issues of this upcoming crisis.

Currently, the U.S. government gives Planned Parenthood roughly $500,000,000 a year.  By law, none of that money is supposed to be used to provide abortions, but everyone knows what the real deal is.

Some Planned Parenthood clinics do provide other services, but at the end of the day Planned Parenthood’s core business is abortion.  In fact, since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 they have killed far more babies than anyone else in the United States by a very wide margin.

And for decades, the U.S. government has been the number one source of funding for Planned Parenthood.  In fact, there are questions as to whether or not Planned Parenthood would be able to continue as a viable business without money from the federal government.

Over the years, when members of Congress have voted to shower Planned Parenthood with hundreds of millions of dollars a year, they have not done it in the heat of the moment.  Rather, their votes have been the result of cold, calculated decision-making processes.

In other words, the members of Congress that have been voting to keep funding Planned Parenthood year after year have the blood of millions of dead children on their hands, and there is very little difference between them and Facebook killer Steve Stephens.

When Stephens broadcast the cold-hearted murder of a 74-year-old man on Facebook on Sunday, he instantly became a worldwide celebrity.  And even though most people in the country have now seen his face, he continues to somehow elude authorities.

What Stephens has done is absolutely horrific, and when he is finally caught he will pay greatly for his crimes.

Just like Stephens, America is on the run today.  We keep thinking that we will never have to pay a price for the tens of millions of children that we have killed, and our government continues to fund the slaughtering of the innocents that goes on every single day in this nation.

But now Congress is going to be given one more chance to make the right decision.

The Republicans have control of the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives.  They have the power to defund Planned Parenthood, but it is going to take a tremendous amount of resolve.

That is because under the current rules it is going to take 60 votes to get a spending agreement through the Senate, and so the Republicans will need at least 8 Democratic votes to get any bill to Trump’s desk.

Sadly, the Democrats are pledging to stretch out a government shutdown indefinitely if Republicans try to defund Planned Parenthood.

So what will the Republicans do?  Well, they could change the rules in the Senate to require only a simple majority vote on spending bills, and that would essentially be the “thermonuclear option”.

Or they could give in, but if they do that it would likely mean that Planned Parenthood will never be defunded, because the Republicans will never have a better opportunity than they do right now.

And I have a feeling that is what is going to happen.  I have a feeling that the Republicans are going to give in at some point and agree to keep giving Planned Parenthood half a billion dollars a year.

If that is indeed what happens, both the Democrats and the Republicans that help pass such a bill will be cold-blooded killers just like Facebook killer Steve Stephens, only those Democrats and those Republicans will have far more blood on their hands than Stephens does.

Most people do not realize this, but without a doubt this is one of the most critical moments in modern American history.  And if the funding of Planned Parenthood continues, I have a feeling that is going to mean that our national day of reckoning is much closer than most people would dare to imagine.

If we do not stop what we are doing, someday our crimes will catch up to us, and the debt that we will owe at that point will be far beyond what we can bear to pay.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Credit Card Nation: Why The Facebook Killer And The U.S. Congress Have A Great Deal In Common appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Court Rules Facebook Can’t Challenge Demands for User Data (and Can’t Tell Users)

Court Rules Facebook Can’t Challenge Demands for User Data (and Can’t Tell Users) | facebook-exposed | Special Interests US News

By: The Daily Bell |

Facebook is not exactly the champion of user privacy, but at least in one case, the company did go to bat for its users. Facebook took New York law enforcement to court over secret warrants that allowed authorities to collect user data.

Unfortunately, Facebook just lost their case in the New York courts. The court ruled that only users themselves, not facebook, can challenge law enforcement demands for their data.

The only problem is, the court orders usually come with a gag order as well. Facebook is not allowed to tell their users that law enforcement is taking their data. And Facebook is not allowed to challenge these orders on behalf of their users.

So in true kangaroo court fashion, the only people able to challenge the government are those forbidden from being told that the government is investigating them. Well isn’t that convenient for prosecutors.

How are gag orders even Constitutional? You would think things like free speech and the right to know your accuser might cover that. But again, the government plays by no rules.

While the Court of Appeals acknowledged that the case “undoubtedly implicates novel and important substantive issues regarding the constitutional rights of privacy and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure,” the majority found that they were constrained by the current law that bars appeals by third parties.

The court said the only remedy for Facebook users is to sue for invasion of privacy after the fact.

Once we are done with you, you can go ahead and sue us. That’s how justice works, right?


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Court Rules Facebook Can’t Challenge Demands for User Data (and Can’t Tell Users) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Why News Becomes Viral News

Why News Becomes Viral News | social-media | Science & Technology Special Interests

It is not a secret that people do things that make them feel better or that provide an immediate reward. That is also the reason behind people sharing certain news on social networks and why those news reports become viral news.

More than 4 billion messages are shared daily on Facebook, 500 million on Twitter and 200 billion more sent by email.

In all this formidable flow of information, some issues are universal winners: viral topics and news, which are massively shared worldwide.

News virality and the desire to discover the reasons behind why people share certain news and not others was the subject of a study conducted by researchers who sought to deepen the knowledge about such a virality. They then began to scrutinize the brains of a few humans.

The result of this work showed that virality does not depend so much on the content of the news but on people themselves. What do people want to get out of sharing a news report or an image?

Apparently, people seek to “sell” to others news and information that will help strengthen their links to those people with whom they shared those news and images.

To understand the brain’s functioning in the face of viral news, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania conducted two experiments with 80 subjects who reported news from The New York Times, one of the oldest and more circulated newspapers in the United States.

In particular, they were shown health news from the New York newspaper, chosen among the most shared, according to the paper’s own records.

They let the subjects read the headline and a summary of the news and asked them if they would like to read it whole or share it publicly or privately with their Facebook friends.

Researchers observed that during the experiment the brain regions that correspond to two well-located mental processes were activated.

The first area was that which makes people think about themselves, which is understood as the benefit or image improvement that the subject thought would occur after sharing the news report.

“Evidence suggests that self-relevant issues are among the most frequent topics of conversation, especially in social media, and that revealing information about the self may be inherently rewarding,” the authors write in their study published in PNAS.

“Through this neural mechanism, the expectations of positive results on oneself by sharing news increase the perceived value of information exchange, which in turn increases the probability of sharing it,” they add. In other words, people share news reports not because they think it is relevant to their contacts but because they think they are aligned with their own version of reality and also because, perhaps, people will perceive them as smart or well-informed.

On the other hand, in these experiments they observed that the region in which the brain works to understand what the others are thinking was also put into operation.

As they explain in the study, whoever tries to share a story should consider what is in the minds of others, their knowledge, opinions and interests, to predict the possible reactions.

“This type of social cognition involves predictions about the mental states of others, for example, predicting what others can think and feel about shared information and who shares it,” they say.

Thus, by posting something on our wall we expose ourselves to the judgment of others by making a bet: this will please and help us to improve our common bonds and what they think about me.

In addition, the result of the experiment was that the news that most activated these regions of the brain coincided with the information that achieved the greatest impact on social networks, which were also shared thousands of times.

“People are interested in reading or sharing content that connects with their own experiences, or with their sense of who they are or who they want to be,” says Emily Falk, head of the work and director of the neuroscience laboratory, in a note from the University Of Pennsylvania.

She adds: “They share things that can improve their relationships, make them appear intelligent or empathetic or show them in a positive light.”

In the case of viral news, several phenomena that were previously known would work at the same time, as one of the most satisfying things is to share information about ourselves, both in social networks and in conventional interactions.

We also knew that the most persuasive people, those who get their message to others in a better way, are those who have the most developed ability to put themselves in the place of others, to venture what is in their mind.

The authors of the study recognize that what is personally relevant and useful to share among different subjects may be very different, but that “human societies are characterized by a set of basic common values ​​and social norms that drive behavior among individuals.”

Consequently, they conclude, it is not uncommon for many news to be perceived by many as valuable information, both for the personal image and for the sense of belonging to the group.

 


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Why News Becomes Viral News appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Facebook’s Zuckerberg Quotes Lincoln, Quietly Declares War On America! (VIDEO)

Facebook's Zuckerberg Quotes Lincoln, Quietly Declares War On America! (VIDEO) | zuckerberg-civil-war | Agenda 21 Globalism Government Government Control Losing Rights Multimedia New World Order Sleuth Journal Society United Nations

For several years now I’ve been tracking the increasingly bold actions and statements being put out by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and warning Americans of a pattern (of actions) that looked mighty suspicious to me. Well, here we are past February of 2017 and everything I’ve been suspecting about Zuckerberg is all coming to pass. In fact, it’s much worse than I thought.

Most Americans and people across the world forget that it wasn’t very long ago when Facebook didn’t even exist. Founded in 2004, back then no one had ever heard of Mark Zuckerberg. So given the developments of today we have to wonder who exactly is he, what country is he loyal to and who has assured him that he is above the rule of law. The reason I pose these questions is because Zuckerberg doesn’t seem loyal to any country. Or is he? This seemingly stateless young man is unique in that he exists to push for the ruling elite’s one world government. So apparently he DOES have a loyalty to a country. The one world so called new world order country.

That’s right. For anyone who wants to solve the Mark Zuckerberg conundrum, don’t kill yourself trying to figure this out. Instead, think of the globalist new world order plans as a separate nation run by civilians (think Obama’s private civilian “army”). This global “country” run by corrupt technocrats, banksters and bureaucrats as a whole thinks they have figured out a way to fool the planet into buying into their lies and eventually submitting to their unchallenged eternal global power.

The biggest threat to their plan is anyone who believes in freedom of the individual and anyone who believes in responsible small government or simply anyone who believes in the identity of their own country especially America. If you do believe in this know that Zuckerberg calls this “global isolationism“. In this shocking video (below) I demonstrate how Zuckerberg is now speaking and acting like a man ushering in an era of civil war against nation states, particularly America. He boldly pronounces America to be a thing of the past and in the way of the rising new world order.

WARNING: Facebook’s Zuckerberg Declares War On America!


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Facebook’s Zuckerberg Quotes Lincoln, Quietly Declares War On America! (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

People Denying the Facebook Live Torture was a Hate Crime are Everything That is Wrong with America

People Denying the Facebook Live Torture was a Hate Crime are Everything That is Wrong with America | hate-crime | Sleuth Journal

By now, you’ve probably seen or heard about the young man in Chicago whose torture was live-streamed on Facebook. I didn’t watch it. I couldn’t. I won’t post it, either, but you can find it here if you feel you should see it.

The basic facts are that 4 young people kidnapped an 18-year-old man with special needs, including schizophrenia and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

They used Facebook Live to broadcast their torture of the young man.

Video of the attack shows the victim cowering in a corner of a room, tied up with his mouth bound in plastic. An assailant slashes his sweatshirt with a knife. A woman streaming the abuse on Facebook Live repeatedly turns the camera back to herself. An attacker then takes a knife to the victim’s head, carving a patch off his scalp.

For the next 25 minutes, the abuse continues for the world to see. The victim is repeatedly kicked and punched, but his screams are apparently ignored.
The graphic footage has stunned the country, not just because of the abuse, but because of the comments made by some of the assailants.
“*F*ck Donald Trump!” one attacker shouted in the video. “F*ck white people!”
Antonetti , the prosecutor, said the victim was forced to yell “I love black people” and “*F*ck Donald Trump!”
 The kidnappers were all black and the victim was white.

Doesn’t this seem like a textbook hate crime to you?

How can there possibly have been any question about whether this crime was racially motivated?

The education system likes to preach that white people are always the bad guys. The media is filled with ridiculous statements about how other ethnicities can’t be racist against white people, but could it get any more obvious than in this attack?

Yet somehow, initially, officials were hesitant to name this a hate crime.

The Chicago Police Commander Kevin Duffin said:

“Although they are adults, they’re 18. Kids make stupid decisions — I shouldn’t call them kids; they’re legally adults, but they’re young adults, and they make stupid decisions,” Duffin said.

“That certainly will be part of whether or not … we seek a hate crime, to determine whether or not this is sincere or just stupid ranting and raving.” (source)

Left-wing media spokespeople denied it too.

It’s probably no surprise that the left-wing talking heads tried to spin the whole thing too.

The ever-moronic CNN host Don Lemon said:

“I don’t think it’s evil…I don’t think it’s evil. I think these are young people and I think they have bad home training. I say, who is raising these young people? I have no idea who’s raising these young people. Because no one I know on Earth who is 17 years old or 70 years old would ever think of treating another person like that. It is inhumane. And you wonder, at 18 years old, where is your parent? Where’s your guardian?” (source)

Democratic strategist Symone Sanders said:

“So this is sickening…But I’m going to say something that’s probably not very popular. We cannot callously go about classifying things as a hate crime. Motive here matters.

So, was this for hate of Donald Trump, for the president-elect for the things he has said? Or pure hate of white people? That matters because if we start going around and anytime someone says something or does something really egregious, really bad, and as sickening as this in connection with the president-elect, or Donald Trump, or even President Obama for that matter because of their political leanings, that is slippery territory.

That is not a hate crime. Hate crimes are because of a person’s racial ethnicity, their religion, their gender, their disability—your political leanings, because someone doesn’t like your political leanings, they do something bad to you, that is not a hate crime.” (source)

Right, Simone. God forbid we be “callous.”

I’m left wondering, how the heck do these people get ahold of microphones and national platforms?

Enough of a stink was raised and they were finally charged with a hate crime.

Anyway, after the massive outcry, the kidnappers were charged with a hate crime. CNN was quick to minimize this and say that really, this is a fluke and only a teeny little percentage of hate crimes are aimed at white people.

Let’s turn the tables for a moment. Go back to when President Obama was elected. Imagine if 4 white kids kidnapped a mentally handicapped black kid and did exactly the same thing as this awful event.

There would be cries of KKK. The ACLU and the NAACP and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would all simultaneously lose their marbles. Candlelight vigils would take place and you cannot convince me, ever, that it would not be called a hate crime.

People who deny this are everything that is wrong with America and everything that is causing racial division.

Racial equality doesn’t mean that you get a pass or a conviction based on the color of your skin.

It means your actions as a human being a judged, good or bad.

 

Article first appeared at DaisyLuther.com

The post People Denying the Facebook Live Torture was a Hate Crime are Everything That is Wrong with America appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

International Fact-Checking Network: New Worldwide Ministry of Truth?

International Fact-Checking Network: New Worldwide Ministry of Truth? | question-mark | Bill Gates Free Speech Internet Censorship New World Order Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News World News

Facebook is now using the International Fact-Checking Network to weed out fake news. But can we trust it when it’s funded by NWO agents like Soros and Gates?

The International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) is an organization that until recently you may have never heard of, but is now poised to make a powerful influence on your life. Why? The multi-billion dollar corporation and CIA data mining operation Facebook has decided to enlist the help of the International Fact-Checking Network in its quest to eliminate “fake news” (i.e. enact censorship through the backdoor). Those aware of the current psychological operations will know that the entire Russian propaganda and fake news themes are stealthy ways for the establishment to stifle dissent. They are whipping the public up into a frenzy about purported Russian hacking and Russian interference without a shred of credible evidence, all the while scaring people into thinking they need some “independent” arbiter (outside of themselves) to decipher and decide what is real and what is fake. It’s the ultimate perception grab; they want you to hand over your power and let your perception be dictated by them. Now, Facebook has announced it will be using the International Fact-Checking Network and other 3rd party fact-checking organizations to weed out all the fake news. Is the International Fact-Checking Network poised to become some kind of Ministry of Truth as Orwell wrote about? Who funds the organization and how does its check its facts?

Guess Who Funds the International Fact-Checking Network?

The IFCN openly states that it is hosted by the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, and that:

“… Poynter’s IFCN has received funding from the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation, the Duke Reporters’ Lab, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, the National Endowment for Democracy, the Omidyar Network, the Open Society Foundations and the Park Foundation.”

Readers of the The Freedom Articles will probably recognize some names here that are an integral part of the New World Order. These include Google (driving the transhumanist agenda), Bill Gates (who has cropped up in the last 3 years to support vaccines, GMOs, Common Core and other NWO initiatives), George Soros (master manipulator behind the Ukraine coup of 2014, Black Lives Matter and other movements to disrupt the law and socially engineer society) and Pierre Omidyar (current owner of PayPal connected to the Military Intelligence complex via Booz Allen Hamilton). Soros owns and funds a slew of treacherous NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) such as the National Endowment for Democracy and Open Society Foundations.

The ICFN’s Code of 5 Principles

The International Fact-Checking Network has come up with a code of 5 principles by which it operates. Facebook said it will only work with 3rd party fact-checkers that are signatories to this code of principles, and that once one of these organizations decides that a particular story is fake, it will be flagged as disputed and “there will be a link to the corresponding article explaining why. Stories that have been disputed may also appear lower in News Feed.” Here are the 5 principles:

  1. A COMMITMENT TO NONPARTISANSHIP AND FAIRNESS
    We fact-check claims using the same standard for every fact check. We do not concentrate our fact-checking on any one side. We follow the same process for every fact check and let the evidence dictate our conclusions. We do not advocate or take policy positions on the issues we fact-check.
  2. A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF SOURCES
    We want our readers to be able to verify our findings themselves. We provide all sources in enough detail that readers can replicate our work, except in cases where a source’s personal security could be compromised. In such cases, we provide as much detail as possible.
  3. A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF FUNDING & ORGANIZATION
    We are transparent about our funding sources. If we accept funding from other organizations, we ensure that funders have no influence over the conclusions we reach in our reports. We detail the professional background of all key figures in our organization and explain our organizational structure and legal status. We clearly indicate a way for readers to communicate with us.
  4. A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF METHODOLOGY
    We explain the methodology we use to select, research, write, edit, publish and correct our fact checks. We encourage readers to send us claims to fact-check and are transparent on why and how we fact-check.
  5. A COMMITMENT TO OPEN AND HONEST CORRECTIONS
    We publish our corrections policy and follow it scrupulously. We correct clearly and transparently in line with our corrections policy, seeking so far as possible to ensure that readers see the corrected version.

Facebook has made it a prerequisite to be a signatory on this code of principles to become a Facebook fact-checker. However, on the very same page below the code of principles, there is a list of organizations that have already joined. They include ABC News and The Washington Post Fact Checker – 2 MSM outlets. The Washington Post was the paper that started all the nonsense about Russian propaganda with its own fake news report based on the dodgy research of PropOrNot (a report it later retracted)! Politifact and Snopes are also on the list, and although they are not MSM, their reputations are already quite tarnished due to their past shoddy fact-checking.

International Fact-Checking Network: New Worldwide Ministry of Truth? | International-Fact-Checking-Network-Orwell-ministry-truth-479x319 | Bill Gates Free Speech Internet Censorship New World Order Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News World News

Will the International Fact-Checking Network become something akin to a worldwide Ministry of Truth as predicted by George Orwell in 1984?

How Can Fact-Checkers, No Matter How Well Intentioned, Ever Be the Arbiters of Truth?

Does the group of NWO funders behind Poynter give you the impression that the International Fact-Checking Network will be independent? And moreover, even if they were granted some kind of “editorial independence” by their funders, would they have the desire and ability to become arbiters of truth on massive and complex subjects like GMOs, the New World Order, geoengineering, worldwide pedophilia rings, conspiracy and Satanism? How are they going to “fact-check” statements like “GMOs are not dangerous to human health”, “vaccines are safe and effective”, “there is no worldwide Satanic pedophilia ring”, “chemtrails do not exist”, “Morgellons disease does not exist”, “black military operations oversee mind control programs on the public” and “an interconnected web of hybrid bloodlines rules the world from behind the scenes”? Since many current topics lead back to fundamental issues like these, how are they possibly going to shed any light on these vast topics?

How can anyone expect them to be experts in these fields? How are they going to be able to do anything other than parrot the standard narrative on these topics, which they will get from some form of the MSM or “mainstream science” – the very same sources which advocate toxic-laden vaccines and synthetic pharmaceutical drugs as good for your health? How are they are possibly going to have the scope, breadth and depth of vision and perception that comes from studying these topics in depth for decades as many in the Alternative Media have?

It’s Not About Left vs. Right; It’s About Free Speech vs. Censorship

Some commentators and journalists are making this issue into a left vs. right affair, claiming that the fact-checkers are left, liberal or progressive in their political leanings. While it’s true that Soros funds leftist movements, this whole issue is not really about left vs. right. It’s about free speech vs. censorship. The fact-checkers will of course have all sorts of biases in their viewpoints, which is why all opinions need to be fully aired so the truth can rise to the surface.

Imagine if everyone looked at every internet story – from the MSM and the Alternative Media alike – and asked with a critical eye: where’s your evidence and what are your sources? There would be no need for fact-checkers, because every reader would become a fact-checker. It would also destroy government lies right from the start (“the Russians are hacking us” and “the zika virus will kill you”), because they would never get a chance to take off.

The only way out of this is education. The only way people can know the truth is to read widely, inform themselves about the issues, discuss it over and over, get new perspectives, test things out in their own experience and make up their own mind. Blocking news stories and alternative perspectives will only hamper this (but then, censorship is the whole point of this exercise). Yes, hoax stories are annoying and clickbait headlines are irritating, but at some point, you have to trust that readers will begin to see through that crap and consciously choose which sites to read and which to shun. If a site keeps putting out lies and clickbait, at a certain point it will gain a negative reputation and get ostracized.

Collectively, we have to grow up and not expect or call for governments and other organizations like the International Fact-Checking Network to do our fact-checking for us. We have to do it ourselves. It is part of our spiritual journey to be able to mature to the point where we can discern truth from lies. When enough of us can do that, the world will know peace, for as Julian Assange says, if lies are used to start war, then truth can be used to start peace.

 

Sources:

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/fake-news-russian-propaganda-censorship/

*https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/news-feed-fyi-addressing-hoaxes-and-fake-news/

*http://www.poynter.org/about-the-international-fact-checking-network/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/bill-gates-vaccines-reduce-population-growth/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/common-core-surveillance-sexualization/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/soros-hack-top-10-machinations/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/ngos-choice-tool-subversion-nwo/

*http://www.politifactbias.com/

*https://ethicsalarms.com/2016/07/31/bye-bye-snopes-youre-dead-to-me-now/

The post International Fact-Checking Network: New Worldwide Ministry of Truth? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Look Who’s Really Behind Snopes, Facebook’s New “Fact Checkers” (VIDEO)

Look Who’s Really Behind Snopes, Facebook’s New “Fact Checkers” (VIDEO) | Snopes-1 | Internet Censorship Multimedia Science & Technology Sleuth Journal Special Interests

Since Facebook has hired Snopes.com as one of their new “fact checkers” to put an end to the spread of “fake news” across Facebook, wouldn’t this be a great time to meet the folks behind Snopes? Fasten your seatbelts for this one. How many times have you been talking to someone who rebutted something you said with a comment like, “But Snopes.com said that isn’t true,” or something to that effect, as if Snopes.com somehow is an authority on anything?

For folks to rely so heavily on what Snopes.com says, I can’t help but wonder how many people think Snopes.com consists of several floors in a Manhattan sky rise with dozens of employees working tirelessly around the clock to “fact check” everything that runs counter to the liberal ideology. Well, as you’re about to learn, nothing could be farther from the truth. In the video below, you’ll learn that the three employees that make up Snopes.com, are an embezzler, a hooker, and a dominatrix… and no… this is not a joke…

Fellowship of the Minds writes:

According to independent investigative journalist and former U.S. Navy officer and NSA employee Wayne Madsen, the fact-check website Snopes.com — which Facebook is using to combat so-called “fake news” — is a CIA operation.

Now, thanks to a report by the UK’s Daily Mail, we know Snopes not only peddles CIA propaganda, it is a sleazy outfit, run by an embezzler, a former hooker/porn star, and a dominatrix.

Reporting for Daily Mail, Dec. 21, 2016, Alana Goodman points out that Snopes.com will benefit from Facebook using the site as an arbiter of truth by determining what’s “fake news.” Now a DailyMail.com investigation has exposed Snopes.com’s sleazy underbelly.

(1) Owner is an embezzler

Owner and CEO David Mikkelson is accused by his former wife and Snopes‘ co-founder, Barbara Mikkelson, of embezzlement — using company money for prostitutes.

Look Who’s Really Behind Snopes, Facebook’s New “Fact Checkers” (VIDEO) | Snopes | Internet Censorship Multimedia Science & Technology Sleuth Journal Special Interests
The Mikkelsons founded Snopes in 1995. In 2015, their marriage ended in divorce, but both stayed on as co-owners of Snopes, which is registered under its legal name of Bardav, Inc. and were its sole board members. In the time since the couple split, David has run the company’s day-to-day operations, and authored a number of Snopes‘ “fact checks”.

Despite their divorce, the Mikkelsons are embroiled in a bitter and lengthy legal dispute, accusing each other of financial impropriety.

Barbara accuses David of embezzlement and “boondoggling” tax arrangements; David says Barbara took millions from their joint accounts and bought property in Las Vegas.

In court filings, Barbara, 57, accuses David, 56, of “raiding the corporate business Bardav bank account for his personal use and attorney fees” without consulting her:

Embezzling $98,000 from the company over the course of four years “which he expended upon himself and the prostitutes he hired”.

Embezzling nearly $10,000 from their business accounts between April and June of 2016 to pay for trips for him and his “girlfriend” — a 24-day “personal vacation” in India this year, and his girlfriend’s plane ticket to Buenos Aires. David and his attorneys countered that the India visit was a legitimate business trip for setting up a fact-checking website in India, and to get a sense of the culture. He said he went to Buenos Aires to attend an international fact-checking conference.

(2) Snopes’ Administrator is a hooker

Look Who’s Really Behind Snopes, Facebook’s New “Fact Checkers” (VIDEO) | Snopes-2 | Internet Censorship Multimedia Science & Technology Sleuth Journal Special Interests

Snopes’ “administrative assistant” is Elyssa Young, 47, whom David Mikkelson married last month in Washington state.

Young is a long-time “escort” — a euphemism for call girl or prostitute — and porn star who has worked for decades under the name “Erin O’Bryn”. Although Young lists her job as “administrative assistant at Snopes” on LinkedIn, her escort websites and Twitter accounts still appear to be active. Online reviews suggest that she was working in Las Vegas as an escort as recently as March 2015.

On her escort website, Young calls herself “an elite and discreet companion” who “understands that while pleasure and passion may be explored in the bedroom, it is hardly the only place. I only accept a very limited number of new lovers because I’m only seeking long term engagements.” For those “long term engagements,” Young request “donation for my time, companionship, and entertainment” — “non-negotiable” rates of $1,200 for a minimum four hours and $5,000 for 24 hours.

Although the Mikkelsons have denied that Snopes is politically partisan, David’s new wife has a background in politics. In 2004 in Hawaii, Elyssa Young ran for U.S. Congress as a Libertarian, during which she handed out ‘Re-Defeat Bush’ cards and condoms stamped with the slogan “Don’t get screwed again”. She wrote on her campaign website: “Let’s face it, I am an unlikely candidate. I fully admit that I am a courtesan.” In the end she pulled in 3% of the vote, losing the seat to Democratic incumbent Neil Abercrombie — a pal of Obama who, in 2011, admitted he couldn’t find Obama’s long-form birth certificate. (See also “Hawaii Dept. of Education can’t find Obama’s school records“)

(3) Snopes fact-checker is a dominatrix

Look Who’s Really Behind Snopes, Facebook’s New “Fact Checkers” (VIDEO) | Snopes-3 | Internet Censorship Multimedia Science & Technology Sleuth Journal Special Interests

One of Snopes‘ lead fact-checkers, Kim LaCapria, is a former sex-and-fetish blogger who went by the pseudonym “Vice Vixen”.

She described her blog as a lifestyle website “with a specific focus on naughtiness, sin, carnal pursuits, and general hedonism and bonne vivante-ery,” and regularly provided intimate advice and reviewed sex toys, including a vibrating wand that “drives boys mad” — “If you are doing something to your fella, and you apply this to the base of his cash-and-prizes while you carry on, he will scream and perhaps cry.”

LaCapria, aka Vice Vixen, also recommended one book with the review: “How to Tell A Naked Man What To Do seems like the perfect how-to for the dominatrix-in-waiting, or any girl looking to get in touch with her domme side. Mine, I wish I could shut her up sometimes, but there you go.” In others posts, LaCapria claimed to be “addicted to smutty HP [Harry Potter] fanfic.” Describing her day-off activities on another blog, she wrote that she “played scrabble, smoked pot, and posted to Snopes. That’s what I did on my day ‘on,’ too.”

David Mikkelson told the Dailymail.com that Snopes does not have a “standardized procedure” for fact-checking” since the nature of this material can vary widely” and that the process “involves multiple stages of editorial oversight, so no output is the result of a single person’s discretion.” He also said the company has no set requirements for fact-checkers because the variety of the work “would be difficult to encompass in any single blanket set of standards. Accordingly, our editorial staff is drawn from diverse backgrounds; some of them have degrees and/or professional experience in journalism, and some of them don’t.”

Financial details of Snopes.com disclosed in court papers show that the website is highly profitable:

In February 2016, it had gross advertising sales of $216,199 and a gross profit of $150,599.50.

Snopes’ expenses include:

$240,000 annual salary to David Mikkelson, in addition to $500,000 a year “draw on profits” to both David and Barbara in the divorce settlement. David is is seeking a pay rise to “2x or 3x” the $240,000, court documents show, although he was prepared to settle for $360,000.

$53,640 annual salary to Brooke, Binkowski, editor of Snopes.

Snopes has enabled the Mikkelsons’ accumulation of person wealth to the tune of:

A $205,000 home in Las Vegas

A $1,525,000 home in Calabasas, Los Angeles

Two savings accounts with $3,064,993

A cash account with $81,785

A stock account with $47,588

IRAs valued at $455,101

A a baseball card collection which was not valued.

To conclude, if you use Snopes for “fact-checking,” not only are you swallowing CIA and Democrat propaganda, you are contributing to the wealth of the sleazy Mikkelsons and staff.

H/t Mark McGrew and FOTM‘s Longknife 21


THE VOICE OF REASON is the pen name of Michael DePinto, a graduate of Capital University Law School, and an attorney in Florida. Having worked in the World Trade Center, along with other family and friends, Michael was baptized by fire into the world of politics on September 11, 2001. Michael’s political journey began with tuning in religiously to whatever the talking heads on television had to say, then Michael became a “Tea-Bagging” activist as his liberal friends on the Left would say, volunteering within the Jacksonville local Tea Party, and most recently Michael was sworn in as an attorney. Today, Michael is a major contributor to www.BeforeItsNews.com, he owns and operates www.thelastgreatstand.com, where Michael provides what is often very ‘colorful’ political commentary, ripe with sarcasm, no doubt the result of Michael’s frustration as he feels we are witnessing the end of the American Empire. The topics Michael most often weighs in on are: Martial Law, FEMA Camps, Jade Helm, Economic Issues, Government Corruption, and Government Conspiracy.

The post Look Who’s Really Behind Snopes, Facebook’s New “Fact Checkers” (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Facebook News Censoring Ministry of Truth

Facebook News Censoring Ministry of Truth | facebook1 | Internet Censorship Science & Technology Special Interests

In 1984, Orwell described Oceania’s Ministry of Peace involved in warmaking and Ministry of Truth concealing it. Unwanted material went down memory holes to “be whirled away (in) enormous furnaces…devoured by the flames,” he wrote.

“(T)here were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, and the other rubbed out of existence.”

No furnaces needed in America, no ceremonial book-burnings, censorship accomplished with electronic ease, social media a prime target, Facebook a willing accomplice.

It’s targeting unwanted truth-telling, wanting it censored or eliminated, claiming its fake news – media scoundrels featuring it, called “legitimate news outlets,” not affected.

A day ago, I posted this comment on my Facebook page: Note: my truth-telling is endangered by Facebook calling it fake news to censor me.

Most of my Facebook postings attract small numbers of likes, comments and/or shares. In a few hours, this remark drew 117 likes, around two dozen comments and 31 shares.

One responder named Ava Gardner, the famed actress long ago passed away, said “(t)he sick thing is that the government gets private companies to do their censorship for them…”

Facebook’s News Feed intends using so-called fact-checkers to censor unwanted hard truths. A preliminary list shows where this is going.

It includes the neocon/CIA connected Washington Post, AP News, Factcheck.org, Politifact, Snopes, and two anti-Russian Ukrainian groups among others – all biased against truth-telling on major issues.

Any material so-called fact-checkers disagree with gets reviewed by Facebook representatives, then sent to third-party checkers to decide what’s “fake” or “real” – First Amendment rights discarded entirely.

Perhaps only sanitized content acceptable to America’s deep state will be allowed once this assault on free expression is fully implemented – hard truths on major issues censored or deleted.

Facebook’s algorithm decides what’s featured and what’s not to assure sources it calls “legitimate news outlets” get top billing – notorious proliferators of fake news, truth and full disclosure on issues mattering most prohibited.

According to Facebook’s News Feed vice president Adam Mosseri, “(w)ere going to keep working on this problems for as long as it takes to get it right.”

Speech, media and academic freedoms are most important. Without them, all others are threatened.

Voltaire once said he might disagree with something said, but he’d “defend to the death (the) right to say it.”

The post Facebook News Censoring Ministry of Truth appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Facebook Ramps up its Censorship Campaign

Facebook Ramps up its Censorship Campaign | social-media-facebook-censorship | Free Speech Internet Censorship Science & Technology US News

(The Real Agenda News) Censorship on the world wide web is not new. Censorship on Facebook is not new either. Plenty of users have reported having their posts taken off their timelines.

What is new is the public attitude from the social media company to take matters into its own hands when it comes to deciding what is news and what is not, who can publish and who can’t.

Although Facebook was born as a tool for users to freely share information, photos and audio, among other things, its success and the opportunity it has provided for people to spread all kinds of content have become a problem for the Establishment, that until very recently exercised almost complete control over who published what, when and where, as well as who read, listened to and watched such information.

Facebook and other social networks such as Twitter, Google + and LinkedIn went from being traditional networking platforms to becoming filterless sources of information for millions if not billions of people around the world.

One can argue that social media became the most important pillar of internet freedom, until that freedom became a threat to the controllers, whose plan was to use social media as tools of control.

The Establishment and the media they controlled launched a direct attack on internet freedom by creating fake news and assigning the blame for those fake news on alternative media, which heavily depends on social media to spread its information.

Now, after labeling alternative media reports as “fake news” social media giants have begun to wage war on alternative media by censoring their content and starting a new campaign to actively and openly censoring news that challenges mainstream media and the status quo.

Twitter has allegedly threatened with closing the accounts of people for reporting on “controversial” topics. Youtube, a creature of Google, is now known for taking down videos that allegedly violate their terms. The same has been done by Google +.

These large social media giants have gone from using algorithms and other formulae to prevent certain content from being published to creating cadres of censors to almost fully automatizing the censorship they intend to impose.

On Thursday, Facebook finally specified how it will be and operate the tool to detect so called fake news. The announcement was made by company founder Mark Zuckerberg in his profile of the social network:

Today we’re making it easier to report hoaxes, and if many people report a story, then we’ll send it to third-party fact checking organizations. If the fact checkers agree a story is a hoax, you’ll see a flag on the story saying it has been disputed, and that story may be less likely to show up in News Feed.You’ll still be able to read and share the story, but you’ll now have more information about whether fact checkers believe it’s accurate. No one will be able to make a disputed story into an ad or promote it on our platform. We’ve also found that if people who read an article are significantly less likely to share it than people who just read the headline, that may be a sign it’s misleading. We’re going to start incorporating this signal into News Feed ranking.

These steps will help make spreading misinformation less profitable for spammers who make money by getting more people to visit their sites. And we’re also going to crack down on spammers who masquerade as well-known news organizations.

With this measure, which is part of the seven-point plan announced at the end of November, Facebook hands over the role of referee to a cadre of perpetually offended people and for now it appears to leave open the possibility of reading and sharing the story. But with conditions.

“We are going to repress these spammers who disguise themselves as famous news organizations,” Zuckerberg said.

This decision comes after the role that social networks have played in US elections.

It has been one of the electoral campaigns in which more lies have been circulated in recent history, mainly by mainstream media, which will undoubtedly continue to have complete liberty to publish their lies and disinformation on all social networks and news platforms, while alternative media will be censored because their reports contradict the official story.

Donald Trump, winner on Nov. 8, was the candidate who was attacked the most by mainstream media during the 2016 campaign.

Trump, as many other people who have no alternative ways to fight disinformation, made use of social media to fight fake news published by CNN, ABC, CBS, The New York Times, The Washington Post and many other Establishment-run publications.

Facebook’s move to actively censor news that are not part of the echo chamber and that do not regurgitate the official story is a new attempt by the Establishment to stop the bleeding faced by the mainstream media, whose credibility has reached single digits.

Traditional media have lost control and no longer dominate the narrative, so social media giants seek to impose a gag on dissenting reports that challenge the official story.

“I see Facebook as a technology company, but I recognize that we have more responsibility than just building the technology where information flows,” said Zuckerberg. “Although we do not write the news that you read and share, we recognize that we are more than just a news distributor,” said the founder of the social network.

Along with Facebook, Google announced a month ago that it would prevent sites that spread false news from using its online advertising service known as AdSense.

“From now on, we will restrict the publication of ads on pages whose primary purpose is to misrepresent or spread false information,” the company said in a statement.

AdSense, Google’s primary source of income, uses a combination of human and computer tools to decide what content must be labeled as  malicious, illegal, or hoaxes.

The post Facebook Ramps up its Censorship Campaign appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

George Soros Funding Facebook’s New “Fake News Fact Checking” Group (VIDEO)

George Soros Funding Facebook’s New “Fake News Fact Checking” Group (VIDEO) | george-soros-fake-news-facebook | Free Speech Internet Censorship Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News

By: The Voice of Reason |

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, or if you haven’t had any access to television, radio, or the Internet, then by now you’ve certainly heard all the fuss liberals and the mainstream media are making about what they are calling “fake news.” All we’ve heard about since Hillary’s shocking loss, is how “fake news” cannot be allowed to spread.

Just so there’s no confusion, reporting that “Michael Brown had his hands up in the international signal for surrender when he was shot” was NOT fake news. Also, just to be clear, it was NOT “fake news” to report that a YouTube video was the catalyst responsible for the deadly attacks on Benghazi.

The same goes for repeatedly telling the American public, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.” That too was NOT “fake news.” Lastly, who can forget the “possible black hole” CNN reported that might have opened up (in earth’s atmosphere), and been responsible for the disappearance of flight MH370?

In a world where down is now up, up is now down, and dogs and cats live together happily ever after, nothing needs to be done to curb the spread of any that nonsense, however there does need to be a speech police for Internet put in place to make sure crazy conservatives aren’t spreading anything that liberals might deem as “fake.” Who better to do that, than the completely unbiased George Soros, and one of his many far-left outfits right?

In the video below, I review several stories about George Soros that should scare the heck out of all Americans, not the least of which is how back in September Soros said that Western society must fall before One World Government can be established. That’s exactly who we need acting as the arbiter of free speech right?

And it gets worse…

Zero Hedge Reports:

Behind almost every liberal crusade of the past several decades, from the blocking of voter ID laws to the Syrian refugee crisis, there has been one man quietly pulling the puppet strings from the background: George Soros.  So imagine our complete shock when we discovered Soros to be the financing source behind Facebook’s “third-party fact checking” organization retained to flag, and thus eliminate, “fake news.”

Facebook posted the following press release to their website detailing their plans to use a “third-party fact checking organization,” known as The Poynter Institute, to flag “fake news.”  The role of the “fact checkers” will be to review news stories and flag anything they deem to be “fake” so that it can be deprioritized on Facebook’s news feed.

George Soros Funding Facebook’s New “Fake News Fact Checking” Group (VIDEO) | Soros-Facebook-1 | Free Speech Internet Censorship Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News

Of course, that raises any number of questions including what will be deemed to be “fake news (e.g. will dissenting opinions be deemed “fake”) and who exactly gets to oversee such a powerful position that basically has been given carte blanche to censor media outlets of their choosing?  Surely such an organization would have to be an extremely transparent, publicly funded, bi-partisan group, right?

Well, not so much apparently.  A quick review of Poynter’s website reveals that the organization is funded by the who’s who of leftist billionaires including George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, and Ebay founder Pierre Omidyar’s Omidyar Network.  Well that seem fairly bipartisan, right?

George Soros Funding Facebook’s New “Fake News Fact Checking” Group (VIDEO) | Soros-Facebook-2 | Free Speech Internet Censorship Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News

But don’t worry, Poynter would like to assure you that they’re committed to “nonpartisan and transparent fact-checking.”

George Soros Funding Facebook’s New “Fake News Fact Checking” Group (VIDEO) | Soros-Facebook-3 | Free Speech Internet Censorship Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News

Of course, as Fox News pointed out back in 2011, it was Poynter that taught a “journalism” class that urged journalists to downplay the threat of terrorist organizations by comparing death tolls of terrorist attacks to those associated with malaria and HIV/AIDS.

But to illustrate this point, the course references the number of people killed by various causes, implicitly suggesting journalists change the way they report on jihad-related deaths.

“Of the hundreds of murders that occur each day, journalists are far more likely to report on jihad-related incidents than other violence. As a result, news consumers have developed a skewed impression of the prevalence of jihad, relative to other forms of conflict. Context is essential in covering this global story in a way that does not amplify fears of jihad,” the course says.

The Poynter course estimates jihad groups have killed about 165,000 people over the past four decades, mostly in Iraq. It notes the biggest toll in the United States was the approximately 3,000 killed on Sept. 11, 2001.

“To give those numbers some context, the FBI reports that approximately 15,000 people in the U.S. are murdered each year. All around the world, more than half a million people are murdered annually, according to the World Health Organization,” the course says. “At its peak, jihad organizations have accounted for less than 2 percent of this toll — in most years, they account for well under 1 percent. (A half-million individuals die each year from nutritional deficiencies, more than 800,000 from malaria, and 2 million from HIV/AIDS.)”

Would that count as “advocating or taking a policy position” on an issue?

So congrats on choosing a “nonpartisan” fact checker, Mr. Zuckerberg.  We eagerly await the creation of a competitive social media outlet, one that promotes truly free and independent thought, which you have surely just spawned with the creation of your new “department of censorship.”


THE VOICE OF REASON is the pen name of Michael DePinto, a graduate of Capital University Law School, and an attorney in Florida. Having worked in the World Trade Center, along with other family and friends, Michael was baptized by fire into the world of politics on September 11, 2001. Michael’s political journey began with tuning in religiously to whatever the talking heads on television had to say, then Michael became a “Tea-Bagging” activist as his liberal friends on the Left would say, volunteering within the Jacksonville local Tea Party, and most recently Michael was sworn in as an attorney. Today, Michael is a major contributor to www.BeforeItsNews.com, he owns and operates www.thelastgreatstand.com, where Michael provides what is often very ‘colorful’ political commentary, ripe with sarcasm, no doubt the result of Michael’s frustration as he feels we are witnessing the end of the American Empire. The topics Michael most often weighs in on are: Martial Law, FEMA Camps, Jade Helm, Economic Issues, Government Corruption, and Government Conspiracy.

Save

The post George Soros Funding Facebook’s New “Fake News Fact Checking” Group (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS