hate to spoil the party but the injunction in missouri v. biden is hardly a victory. it's like one of those journal articles where the data says that the shot killed everyone who took it, but the authors still conclude that more study is necessary since that's the only way they could get the journal to publish their findings.
"The following actions are NOT prohibited by this Preliminary Injunction:
(1) informing social-media companies of postings involving criminal activity or
criminal conspiracies;
(2) contacting and/or notifying social-media companies of national security threats,
extortion, or other threats posted on its platform
(3) contacting and/or notifying social-media companies about criminal efforts to
suppress voting, to provide illegal campaign contributions, of cyber-attacks against election
infrastructure, or foreign attempts to influence elections;
(4) informing social-media companies of threats that threaten the public safety or
security of the United States;
(5) exercising permissible public government speech promoting government policies
or views on matters of public concern;
(6) informing social-media companies of postings intending to mislead voters about
voting requirements and procedures;
(7) informing or communicating with social-media companies in an effort to detect,
prevent, or mitigate malicious cyber activity;
(8) communicating with social-media companies about deleting, removing,
suppressing, or reducing posts on social-media platforms that are not protected free speech by the
Free Speech Clause in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
now, define "criminal conspiracy," "threaten national security," or for the biggest laugh of all, "criminal efforts to suppress voting."
you could drive a pretty big truck through the holes in this.
ok now i'm gonna listen to you and manny g. rip the roof off :)
I see this decision as proof that the court system is not entirely corrupt. If it follows the Soviet logic, somebody will try to reign in the judge, there will be an appeal, etc. etc. Now. I cannot imagine the interested entities being deterred by a court decision anyway, they don't seem to care. But it is still a pleasant thing, a moral victory for right now, and time will tell!!
agreed, nymd. wherever the issue is a "hot" one, lower court rulings tend to skew toward plaintiff arguments as this gives the impression that power cares about "rights". they jerk around for a few years, lawyers cash in, until finally the supreme court zombies drag their sleepy asses off the couch, rub their rheumy eyes and say "grrrlllarrrrbllrrhhaaarrr....hey......you disturbed us for wha....?"
to my eyes this whole thing kinda smacks of "hmmmm, this politician is well past his "use by" date. he won't balk at us throwing him under the bus if we send him out there with an obvious dictatorial power grab that might otherwise destroy a more viable politicians' career. worth a try, eh? the people just might go for it-- seeing as how quite recently so many jumped on the jabwagon and happily ostracized total strangers along with their friends and family."
It looks like the new third rail is geoengineering - this might be the first time credit card companies have denied payment to a substack subscription:
"Visa is denying my Substack subscribers from subscribing because Substack is a "political organization." AMEX is declining as a "do not honor." The truth must be hurting these companies.....
8.1% of the payments I receive fail. I think the actual figure is lower because some of that 8.1% is repeated attempts by stripe to bill the same card and many people who have paymnet failures with one card try another one instead. I think a failure rate like that is normal in ecommerce but I'm not sure.
I did a quick look at the last 3 failed payments and all were from master card. I think this is just normal ...
so we will see this is just a mistake or if it's really censorship...
Thank you, Cindy! The world is pretty messed up but being afraid does us no good. I believe that we are not along in the world, and in every situation, there is hope!!
hate to spoil the party but the injunction in missouri v. biden is hardly a victory. it's like one of those journal articles where the data says that the shot killed everyone who took it, but the authors still conclude that more study is necessary since that's the only way they could get the journal to publish their findings.
"The following actions are NOT prohibited by this Preliminary Injunction:
(1) informing social-media companies of postings involving criminal activity or
criminal conspiracies;
(2) contacting and/or notifying social-media companies of national security threats,
extortion, or other threats posted on its platform
(3) contacting and/or notifying social-media companies about criminal efforts to
suppress voting, to provide illegal campaign contributions, of cyber-attacks against election
infrastructure, or foreign attempts to influence elections;
(4) informing social-media companies of threats that threaten the public safety or
security of the United States;
(5) exercising permissible public government speech promoting government policies
or views on matters of public concern;
(6) informing social-media companies of postings intending to mislead voters about
voting requirements and procedures;
(7) informing or communicating with social-media companies in an effort to detect,
prevent, or mitigate malicious cyber activity;
(8) communicating with social-media companies about deleting, removing,
suppressing, or reducing posts on social-media platforms that are not protected free speech by the
Free Speech Clause in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
now, define "criminal conspiracy," "threaten national security," or for the biggest laugh of all, "criminal efforts to suppress voting."
you could drive a pretty big truck through the holes in this.
ok now i'm gonna listen to you and manny g. rip the roof off :)
I see this decision as proof that the court system is not entirely corrupt. If it follows the Soviet logic, somebody will try to reign in the judge, there will be an appeal, etc. etc. Now. I cannot imagine the interested entities being deterred by a court decision anyway, they don't seem to care. But it is still a pleasant thing, a moral victory for right now, and time will tell!!
agreed, nymd. wherever the issue is a "hot" one, lower court rulings tend to skew toward plaintiff arguments as this gives the impression that power cares about "rights". they jerk around for a few years, lawyers cash in, until finally the supreme court zombies drag their sleepy asses off the couch, rub their rheumy eyes and say "grrrlllarrrrbllrrhhaaarrr....hey......you disturbed us for wha....?"
to my eyes this whole thing kinda smacks of "hmmmm, this politician is well past his "use by" date. he won't balk at us throwing him under the bus if we send him out there with an obvious dictatorial power grab that might otherwise destroy a more viable politicians' career. worth a try, eh? the people just might go for it-- seeing as how quite recently so many jumped on the jabwagon and happily ostracized total strangers along with their friends and family."
Thank you all for direct, useful, and urgently needed advice. Case in point: https://substack.com/profile/11209960-lickyvi/note/c-18265134
Another wonderful interview. Thank you both! I felt on common ground listening to this. Reinforcing....not sure how to put it, but thank you so much!
Thank you, Kelly!!! xoxo
It looks like the new third rail is geoengineering - this might be the first time credit card companies have denied payment to a substack subscription:
"Visa is denying my Substack subscribers from subscribing because Substack is a "political organization." AMEX is declining as a "do not honor." The truth must be hurting these companies.....
https://reinettesenumsfoghornexpress.substack.com/p/credit-card-companies-denying-my?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web
Tessa , I was first alerted to the geoengineering problem in your long interview with Nikki Florio . Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
I have seen this code, I assumed it was something on the side of the cardholder. I'll have to investigate on my end as well!
It is illegal to censor free speech of individuals, credit card companies...on social media... Case in point: https://substack.com/profile/11209960-lickyvi/note/c-18265134?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=6o9ns
AMD responded to my comment:
8.1% of the payments I receive fail. I think the actual figure is lower because some of that 8.1% is repeated attempts by stripe to bill the same card and many people who have paymnet failures with one card try another one instead. I think a failure rate like that is normal in ecommerce but I'm not sure.
I did a quick look at the last 3 failed payments and all were from master card. I think this is just normal ...
so we will see this is just a mistake or if it's really censorship...
Oh my goodness. I’m both looking forward to reading your article but also dreading the horror you will undoubtedly unveil
Thank you, Cindy! The world is pretty messed up but being afraid does us no good. I believe that we are not along in the world, and in every situation, there is hope!!
Oh my goodness. I hope you're not fearmongering during end times
The reality is, separation is an illusion and we are all one. (Ever wonder why karma, golden rule, law of abundance, conservation laws, etc. work?)
https://youtu.be/HkxpMX5UF5A
Robots are doing the bidding of Humans are hiding behind Robots