• 2010 Credit Suit
• Liars & Cheats
• CreditFactors
• Fight Back!!!
• RESISTANCE
• TRADO
• News Releases
• Contact

Free speech & corporate censorship

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

$5,000 prize for best video on internet censorship

Get Outraged And Get Active About Internet Censorship

Paul Joseph Watson and Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
August 5, 2008

In response to increasing flagrant attempts to censor political websites, including Infowars and Prison Planet, not in Communist China, but in the U.S. and the UK, we are running a special contest with a top prize of $5,000 in order to encourage people to get active and educate others about the growing threats to Internet freedom.

As we reported yesterday, major transportation hubs like St. Pancras International, as well as libraries, big businesses, hospitals and other public outlets that offer wi-fi Internet, are blacklisting alternative news websites and making them completely inaccessible to their users.

On weekly basis we receive e mails from across the US and the UK from people who have attempted to visit our websites yet found them to be blocked by filtration software that lists them as “hate” or “violence”.

This precedent is merely the first indication of what is planned for the Internet over the next 5-10 years, with the traditional web becoming little more than a vast spy database that catalogues people’s every activity and bombards them with commercials, while those who comply with centralized control and regulation of content will be free to enjoy the new super-fast Internet 2, where DVD quality movies can be downloaded in seconds, but at the cost of the Internet losing its role as the last true outpost of freedom of speech.

The necessity to warn people of this agenda is no more pressing than now, and this is why we are launching a contest to create the most powerful video presentation detailing the growing cancer of Internet censorship.

Using the audio of Alex’s rant at approximately eight minutes into the second hour of the Alex Jones Show on Monday, August 4, this contest requires you create a video documenting the censorship of Prison Planet, Infowars, TruthNews, the Jones Report and other non-corporatized, alternative media websites. The video must be under 10 minutes and be posted on YouTube and a secondary video venue on the internet. Contest deadline is the 19th of August. Contest videos will also be cross-posted on Prison Planet and Infowars.

First Prize: $5,000

Second Prize: $1,000

Third Prize: $500

We are also running three other contests in a similar vein with additional prizes.

BEST TRUTH RISING TRAILER

Using video clips from Alex Jones’ latest documentary, Truth Rising: The 9/11 Chronicles, remix a new trailer for the documentary. This video must be posted by Sunday evening, August 10, and the winner will be declared Monday, August 11, during Alex’s show.

Winner of Truth Rising trailer contest will receive $1,000.

NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE ESSAY CONTEST

Like the original U.S. Declaration of Independence, the New Declaration of Independence will assert the right of the people to oppose tyrannical, oppressive government, and once again declare the right of all sovereign individuals to pursue “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Winner of the New Declaration of Independence will receive $2,000.

CRIMES OF THE NWO BILL OF PARTICULARS ESSAY CONTEST

In the third section of the original Declaration of Independence, there is a bill of particulars against the rule of George III, such as the imposition of standing armies among the people, taxation without representation, and obstruction of justice, etc. Our Bill of Particulars will charge the NWO with additional crimes against the people, thus establishing the global elite has no right to rule over us.

Winner of the Bill of Particulars Contest will receive $1,000.

RELATED: Censoring the Internet: A Collection of Essential Links

I’ve had surprisingly few problems with censorship in recent years, but I sure don’t understand why my sites rarely show up in Google searches anymore unless it’s a search for a specific name in one of my posts or you search for “scam” or “fraud.”

Of course my sites would be one of the first to be eliminated under the new “internet 2”.  I sure hope that people won’t let it happen.

And don’t I wish “someone” made vids about credit. 

Sunday, December 10, 2006

California Supreme Court rules to protect free speech

Calif. court ruling seeks to protect bloggers, Web publishers

In a victory for bloggers, newsgroup participants and other Web publishers, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday that individual Internet users cannot be held liable for republishing defamatory statements written by others.

The unanimous ruling appears to be the first to make clear that a 1996 law called the Communications Decency Act protects not only providers, but also users of online services who redistribute content. Earlier court rulings had established that Section 230 of that statute shields companies such as AOL and eBay from such liability, provided that they make good faith efforts to restrict access to material that could be considered “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.”

By passing that law, Congress “has comprehensively immunized republication by individual Internet users,” intending “to protect online freedom of expression and to encourage self-regulation,” the justices concluded in their majority opinion (click for PDF) penned by Associate Justice Carol Corrigan.

The justices acknowledged that “recognizing broad immunity for defamatory republications on the Internet has some troubling consequences.” But unless Congress revises the law, anyone who claims to be defamed by an Internet posting may seek damages only from the “original source of the statement,” they wrote.

That protection should not extend, however, to users who conspire with the originators of libelous content, Associate Justice Carlos Moreno wrote in a concurring opinion.

“One engaged in a tortious conspiracy with the original information content provider is hardly one of the neutral ‘intermediaries’ that Congress intended to absolve of liability,” he wrote, adding that he did not believe that sort of activity took place in the case at hand.

...

I haven’t heard of any webhosts changing their terms.

I recently checked out servers in the states again and found the same old terms:  your entire server gets shut down if you don’t comply with removing “defamatory” statements upon notice and usually they give you only a day or two and it’s NOT anything that’s negotiable—unless you’re paying them at least several thousand dollars a month.

The web hosting industry is about as pro corporate and anti free speech as it gets.  And as the dollar keeps falling, my server rental keeps going up.

Saturday, May 27, 2006

California court of appeals: online bloggers’ sources protected

That’s great news!  Experian claims that much of the information I’m seeking through discovery is confidential, trade secrets, etc. and since the so-called consumer lawyers share nothing and/or know nothing of substance, I depend on my own research and (ex) employees and contractors in the credit industry.

On request and sometimes on my own initiative, I copy the contents of emails with sensitive data to my notes and I permanently delete the e-mails before they’re backed up.  I don’t need to know WHO sends me info.

Not long ago I requested information about eOscar and I got some great documents and background.  It’s not important that I can’t authenticate it, what counts is that I know when the CRAs lie in their declarations and I know who to depose and which questions to ask in the depositions.  I’ll also include some of the documents to show the judge why the Experian objections regarding the scope of the depositions should be denied.

Apple loses court bid to identify source

By MAY WONG, AP Technology Writer Fri May 26, 7:21 PM ET

SAN JOSE, Calif. - A state appeals court on Friday rejected Apple Computer Inc.’s bid to identify the sources of leaked product information that appeared on Web sites, ruling that online reporters and bloggers are entitled to the same protections as traditional journalists.

“In no relevant respect do they appear to differ from a reporter or editor for a traditional business-oriented periodical who solicits or otherwise comes into possession of confidential internal information about a company,” Justice Conrad Rushing of the 6th District Court of Appeal wrote in a unanimous 69-page ruling.

“We decline the implicit invitation to embroil ourselves in questions of what constitutes ‘legitimate journalism,” he wrote. “The shield law is intended to protect the gathering and dissemination of news, and that is what petitioners did here.”

The online journalists are thus entitled to the protections provided under California’s shield law as well as the privacy protections for e-mails allowed under federal law, the court ruled.

Two years ago, Apple went to court seeking to identify the culprits behind the leak of confidential information about an unreleased product code-named as “Asteroid” to online media outlets.

Apple contended it was entitled to identify the sources — presumed in this case to be company employees — because the leak constituted a violation of trade secrets. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company subpoenaed the Internet service providers of three online journalists to turn over e-mail records aiming to uncover the possible sources.

A lower court last year ruled in Apple’s favor, but the Electronic Frontier Foundation, whose attorneys represent the online journalists of AppleInsider.com, PowerPage.org and MacNN.com appealed.

The appeals court based in San Jose sided with the civil liberties organization, overturning the lower court’s decision. The three-member appellate panel agreed not only with the group’s constitutional arguments but also the contention that Apple failed to exhaust other investigative options to root out the source before going to court and issuing subpoenas.

An Apple spokesman did not immediately return phone calls for comment.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation called the ruling “a huge win.”

“Today’s decision is a victory for the rights of journalists, whether online or offline, and for the public at large,” said the group’s staff attorney Kurt Opsahl, who argued the case before the appeals court last month.

It’s a huge victory.  I’ll still delete confidential e-mails, but hopefully more people with a conscience will share their knowledge and help expose the credit reporting and scoring scam.

Sunday, September 04, 2005

Capital One cashes in on Katrina and NBC censors anti Bush remark at fundraiser

How disgusting!

Fortunately, Kanye West had the guts to depart from the script.

Kanye West’s Torrent of Criticism, Live on NBC

“… West and Mike Myers had been paired up to appear about halfway through the show. Their assignment: Take turns reading a script describing the breach in the levees around New Orleans.

Myers: The landscape of the city has changed dramatically, tragically and perhaps irreversibly. There is now over 25 feet of water where there was once city streets and thriving neighborhoods.

(Myers throws to West, who looked extremely nervous in his super-preppy designer rugby shirt and white pants, which is not like the arrogant West and which, in retrospect, should have been a tip-off.)

West: I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, “They’re looting.” You see a white family, it says, “They’re looking for food.” And, you know, it’s been five days [waiting for federal help] because most of the people are black. And even for me to complain about it, I would be a hypocrite because I’ve tried to turn away from the TV because it’s too hard to watch. I’ve even been shopping before even giving a donation, so now I’m calling my business manager right now to see what is the biggest amount I can give, and just to imagine if I was down there, and those are my people down there. So anybody out there that wants to do anything that we can help—with the way America is set up to help the poor, the black people, the less well-off, as slow as possible. I mean, the Red Cross is doing everything they can. We already realize a lot of people that could help are at war right now, fighting another way—and they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us!

(West throws back to Myers, who is looking like a guy who stopped on the tarmac to tie his shoe and got hit in the back with the 8:30 to La Guardia.)

Myers: And subtle, but in many ways even more profoundly devastating, is the lasting damage to the survivors’ will to rebuild and remain in the area. The destruction of the spirit of the people of southern Louisiana and Mississippi may end up being the most tragic loss of all.

(And, because Myers is apparently as dumb as his Alfalfa hair, he throws it back to West.)

West: George Bush doesn’t care about black people!

....”

Have to admit that I had no idea who Kayne West is until today, but he sure is right.

From the LA Times article: The Show Didn’t Benefit by Censors

“As we enter the celebrity telethon phase of the Katrina tragedy, NBC’s “A Concert for Hurricane Relief” stands as a blueprint for its own kind of institutional failure.

By censoring Grammy-winning rapper Kanye West’s remarks critical of President Bush during its West Coast feed of the program Friday night, the network violated the most moving and essential moment in an otherwise sterile, self-serving corporate broadcast. ...”

“… The line NBC stopped us from hearing on the West Coast: “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” ...”

“… Whether we agree or disagree with West’s impassioned riff on media and government racism, the network’s relentless self-promotion was by far the more offensive part of the broadcast.

It started with a welcome from Bob Wright, the chief executive of NBC Universal, which was followed by thoughts from another chief executive, Capital One’s Richard D. Fairbank.

Why Fairbank?

Capital One “underwrote” the telethon, which makes you immediately ask: Was his appearance part of the underwriting deal? The fact that the question comes up at all shows you how wrong that move was. ...”

It is sickening. 

I’ve developed a serious dislike for the Rolling Stones because of the offensive Ameriquest commercials.  I can’t say that I’ve ever been a huge fan, but I liked many of their tunes.  Now I hear the Stones and I think Ameriquest and I find the music repulsive.

NBC not only censored this comment about Bush, but turned a fundraiser that’s supposed to help hurricane victims into an advertisement for Capital One—which no doubt will continue to exploit the poor people of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, deliberately and illegally ...

Part of the donations will end up in Capital One CEO Fairbank’s bank account.

The entire article:

Monday, July 18, 2005

The death of FREE press in America - Judith Miller’s Life Behind Bars

95% of the American press is nothing but a corporate and government mouth piece.  Judith Miller’s incarceration is putting a serious damper on what little “investigative” journalism exists.  No Watergate will ever be exposed again.

Keller On Judith Miller’s Life Behind Bars: Bad Food But Good Spirits

“… By Joe Strupp

Published: July 18, 2005 3:40 PM ET

NEW YORK As Judith Miller of The New York Times approaches the end of her second week in a Virginia jail, reports from behind bars reveal she is enduring stomach problems from jail food. She is also sharing a cell unit that had originally been designed to house just one person. Because of that, Miller had been forced to sleep on a mattress on the floor for a few days but now has her own bed.

“It has definitely dawned on her that this is really in jail—it is certainly no summer camp,” Times Executive Editor Bill Keller told E&P Monday. “The food has not agreed with her and we have been trying to impress on her that she needs to eat. We have been hammering that in.” ...”

I don’t know if foreign journalists can fill the void since the source needs to trust the reporter to keep his identity confidential.  What can the American government do to get a foreigner to disclose sources, short of invading his country?  Maybe American reporters need to leave the country to do anything but rewrite the corporate and government press releases?

Or maybe some other country needs to liberate us?