Friday, September 21, 2018

Banned by Crony Corporation Social Media Deep State Shills


SUING THE SOCIAL MEDIA FOR CENSORING SPEECH

N. Rockwell - Freedom of Speech

While some might consider my expressed views* on what happened last month to Alex Jones and www.InfoWars.com, namely, being "banned" [a term that reminds me of the evils of Apartheid] by nearly all the major social media during one 24 hour period, a conspiracy theory, I assert that the evidence does support the theory that these major corporate actors were acting in concert and that their actions violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)[1] and the 14th Amendment[2].  

I think anyone so "banned" by the Deep State Social Media Crony Corporations has good grounds to sue.

We are told that the "bannings" were not unlawful censorship since the banning entities are all private companies, not subject to the First Amendment’s injunction, “Congress shall make no ... abridging the freedom of speech...”

The First Point of Law to note is that the Supreme Court has applied the language of the First Amendment to not just Acts of Congress, but to any actions of the Federal Government, and, through the 14th Amendment, to the States as well.[3]

The Second Point of Law to note is that Internet Access is protected under the First Amendment,
In the 2017 case of Packingham v North Carolina the Supreme Court held that “a fundamental principle of the First Amendment is that all persons have access to places where they can speak...”[4]
The Third Point of Law to note is that the 14th Amendment provides that States may not make or enforce any law that abridges the rights of US citizens.  This includes, of course, the granting of the corporate franchise to private companies such that they may act in violation of our Fundamental Rights.

The Internet was initially established by the US Government and remains a public utility, although used by private persons to communicate and by publicly registered and traded companies to profit from our communications.

The social media corporations are in law “creatures of the state” existing by virtue of the grant of the corporate franchise which permits such entities privileges that are not applicable to purely private persons, including the limited liability privilege and the privilege of selling shares to the public as a joint stock company.

While these companies are to some degree “private” businesses, they act over the Internet public utility. They act “under color of law” and are therefore more akin to government agencies than to private actors.

That these entities engage in substantial commerce with the government, receiving tax funds for certain contracts including the providing of data about users to government, and benefiting from the use of the Internet public utility further substantiates their status as agents of government power.

As such, they must be bound by the restrictions of the First Amendment and cannot discriminate among their users on the basis of the content of the Speech which the users express over the Internet public utility.

When several of these quasi-private companies act in apparent concert to ban the Speech of a particular user they do so “under color of law” and in violation of the Freedom of Speech of both the speaker and those who seek to hear.  Both Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Association are restricted through the exercise of authority depending on government. This is unlawful.

The effect of the unlawful actions of the companies is to tortuously interfere with valuable commercial relationships, between the speaker and hearer, causing substantial financial harm and damages. I note, currently, Facebook still accepts ads from certain "banned" companies. But not from others.

Such unlawful acts, and the unlawful combination to engage in such acts, may violate the provisions of RICO.  The companies that are the most egregious banners include Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.  

Some of these same companies are "making pacts with the devil" by developing special government-censored versions of their services for Communist-controlled China, enabling that tyrannical regime to impose its social control system on the world's most populous country.

In the United States, the targeting of individuals because of the content of the Speech they seek to express over the Internet public utility can be seen as a type of commercial extortion forbidden under RICO.  Conspiracies to do so may provide the second “act of racketeering activity” to invoke RICO.

It is therefore my professional opinion, to a reasonable degree of professional certainty, that the "banned" individuals and companies have valid grounds to sue the social media companies that have "banned" them.

Such litigation could be started in the Federal District Court wherein the headquarters of any of the corporate actors might be located.

# # #

* As I wrote recently at Open Source Truth[5]:

Our Freedom of Speech is under a world wide web of attack.

While various authoritarian states make no effort to hide direct censorship of speech, the “advanced democracies” are more subtle. Germany, with no absolute constitutional protection for Free Speech, is contemplating empowering Internet Service Providers to refuse service to “hate groups.” At the same time the large international corporate controllers of the Internet, such as YouTube, Facebook and Google, are already escalating content controls to enforce “political correctness” – if you don’t follow the Party Line, you cannot be heard.

First they came for the Neo-Nazis and banned them from Facebook. No one protested. Then they came for Alex Jones and banned him from YouTube and Facebook. No one protested. Then they came for… You know the rest… they came for you and me, and no one was left to protest.

These supposed private Social Media Companies are actually exercising government authority. Just as much as if they had been the “private” Tax Farmers of Ancient Rome.

They are the privatized agents of Deep State control and censorship. They exercise this control on several levels. Each of these mega-corporations is, in fact and in law, “a creature of the state.” It is created by registration with government that gives it authorities (such as limited liability to third parties) which it could not exercise as a truly private association.

If the same Rule of Law that applies to truly private actors applied to government and its crony corporations, “content control” efforts would be understood to be exactly what they are: censorship. Real free market competition and technological progress would rapidly make the near-monopoly power of Google and Facebook irrelevant. If the same Rule of Law that ought to apply to Government Censorship – that there can be no such law – applied to the crony corporations, YouTube, Facebook etc. “private” censorship could not remain.



[2] No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” - 14th Amendment
[3]Beginning with Gitlow v. New York (1925), the Supreme Court applied the First Amendment to states—a process known as incorporation—through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
[4] Ibid. “In Packingham v. North Carolina (2017), the Supreme Court held that a North Carolina law prohibiting registered sex offenders from accessing various websites impermissibly restricted lawful speech in violation of the First Amendment. The Court held that ‘a fundamental principle of the First Amendment is that all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen, and then, after reflection, speak and listen once more.’”

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

Deep State Censorship and the Crony Corporate "Private" Media

Is Alex Jones the “Canary in the Coal Mine”?
The Deep State (Date) Mine
The Latest News:
YouTube Will Run Pro-Vax Messages
During
Vaccine Freedom of Choice Videos

The Deep State Wants to Provide
"Corrective Information" AKA Soviet Style Censorship
And They are Doing a Pretty Good Job of It!

Alex Jones was “de-platformed” -- banned -- over a 24 hour period on August 5/6, 2018 by the following “independent” corporate media” --
  1. YouTube/Google
  2. Facebook
  3. Apple
  4. Spottify
Perhaps thereby proving Alex Jones’ “conspiracy theories” by targeting him.

[ September 11, 2018 Update:  Twitter joined the rest of the crony corporate media in banning AJ a couple days ago.  AJ had just confronted a crony corporate shill CNN reporter (whose complaint to social media sites triggered the original Bannings) in the halls of Congress and live streamed the confrontation over Twitter's live stream platform. That powerful use of live truth apparently was deemed "harassment" by Twitter's controllers.

Since the start of the Bannings Alex Jones' website -- www.InfoWars.com -- has gained over 1,000 positions in global web site ranking, according to industry source Alexa. Just look:   https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/infowars.com.

To join the Friends of Alex Jones at the uncensored, blockchain-friendly alt to Facebook, Minds.com, go to:   https://www.minds.com/groups/profile/873597137366351872 ]



ORIGINAL BLOG POSTING

Facebook deletes unpopular/challenging/unacceptable ideas. They claim to have the “right” to do that:as  they are [allegedly] a private company. YouTube/Google remove anti vaccine and other unpopular-challenging corporate-control-averse and, at their whim, edit contrary thought with “corrective” intrusions.

They maintain that they have the “right” to do so because they are a[n] [allegedly] private company. They use our public airways, have massive contracts with public sources (that is, get paid with YOUR dollars by NSA and the like) and benefit from a government-maintained monopoly status. And what used to be the constitutional protection of our foundational concepts has vanished into an electrosmog haze of privatized tyranny and censorship. 

The government does not have to do a thing but sit idly by while its tax-subsidized, defense contract enhanced corporate “partners” do its dirty work in exactly the same way that hospitals and schools have institutionalized totally illegal vaccine mandates in violation of Informed Consent.


The First Amendment’s “Congress shall make no law...” censoring speech remains the law, but it is increasingly a “dead letter law.” This trick, where the Deep State pretends that the old freedoms remain, is itself an old trick.

Part of the trick is to create structures that seem to be protecting the freedoms while they actually destroy them. 

Control over most humans had been maintained for millennia through the use of religious and, later, political ideologies inevitably justifying the dominance of the few over the many, even when the controllers pretend to speak for, and protect, the “majority”.

But in more modern times the structure of bureaucracy itself has been redesigned to become, not just to serve, the control system. Consider, for, example, how the regulatory structure of the Deep State’s Military Draft was used in the USA during the 1960s and ‘70s to “channel” students into certain fields, such as science, engineering and weapons design, which were considered of benefit to the state. Now we see the same process at work with the incessant demands for ever more vaccines, and for forcing adults and children to receive all the vaccines that crony corporatist-tainted science can concoct without regard for either scientific validation or personal rights.

However, in 2009, during the Swine Flu Vax Panic, the would-be tyrants, who planned to vaccinate every American “starting with the volunteers” with unsafety tested vaccines (with the supply “stretched” by adding the adjuvant Squalene, at levels shown to cause irreversible infertility in Patents held by the US government) found themselves stymied by a population that refused to cooperate and who, in the millions, told their “representatives” so.  The plan collapsed and even the first responders were able to escape state vax mandates unharmed, though that took a law suit. There was no pandemic.

The incipient tyrants learned an important lesson from the power of our Push Back: overt Federal mandates will be resisted.

 That is when we began to see the authorities passing off the mandates to allegedly private actors for enforcement. While this privatizing of tyranny works to increase censorship and impose unlawful financial controls, the vax mandate gambit remains a primary example of this political process.

It is, as I said, an old trick.  Very old.

During the early centuries of the Roman Empire the old forms of the Roman Republic also remained, with annual Consular elections and traditional magistrates. But that state had in fact been turned over to the Imperator who had life and death power over all others. “I am the only free person in Rome.” said the Emperor Caligula. “I am the only game in town” says YouTube...

The ancient city had no room for liberty. Fustel de Coulanges, observed, in The Ancient City, “The city had been founded on a religion and constituted a church. Hence its strength; hence, also, its omnipotence and the absolute empire which it exercised over its members. In a society established on such principles, individual liberty could not exist. The citizen was subordinate in everything, and without any reserve, to the city; he belonged to it body and soul. The religion which had produced the state, and the state which supported the religion, sustained each other…”

That ancient order was supposedly overthrown in recent centuries by the great liberal (in its original sense) revolutions which established the primacy of individual freedom, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” – Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.

In 2017 I wrote about this issue in an article published on the news aggregation site, www.OpenSourceTruth.com , and warned that by privatizing censorship we were institutionalizing tyranny, allowing the Crony Corporate State to destroy our liberty.  Unfortunately, I was all too right.

It is reported that Marc Zuckerberg personally de-platformed Alex Jones on his own, but that hardly explains the rest of the de-platforming.

Unconstitutional Mandates "for the good of the Children."

When Governor Jerry Brownshirt of California signed SB277 into law in 2015 he gave California parents an unconstitutional choice between their child receiving the so-called “free public education” promised by the California Constitution, or, their family exercising the universal right to Informed Consent by interposing their conscientious objection to vaccines. The California governor violated basic norms of civilization. He enlisted not just the government’s schools, but even private and religious schools in his plan to force children to receive dozens of “unavoidably unsafe”, uninsurable vaccines.

The state pretends to recognize our traditional right to freedom of choice, but it actively seeks the complete elimination, the total abrogation of that right. Control over most humans had been maintained for millennia through the use of religious and, later, political ideologies inevitably justifying the dominance of the few over the many, even when the controllers pretend to speak for, and protect the “majority”.

This strict social control dominated human society for most of its existence through the use of what early freedom theorists such as the American abolitionist Lysandor Spooner saw as the great monopolies created by political power.. These included the monopolies over conscience embodied by state religions, over the bodies of certain people (e.g., chattel slavery; prisoners, war captives, caste system members, etc.), or the property rights of approximately half of the species (the legal “infirmities” of women, etc.) and over all property through royal claims to “own” the land and economic activities of a territory (feudalism and mercantilism).

But in more modern times the structure of bureaucracy itself has been redesigned to become, not just to serve, the control system. Consider, for, example, how the regulatory structure of the Military Draft was used in the USA during the 1960s and ‘70s to “channel” students into certain fields such as science, engineering and weapons design, which were considered of benefit to the state.

Now we see the same process at work with the incessant demands for ever more vaccines, and for forcing adults and children to receive all the vaccines that crony corporatist-tainted science can concoct without regard for either scientific validation, evidence of safety (both are required by law and totally lacking in the US!) or personal rights (protected by international and national law and totally ignored unless we, the owners of our bodies take the trouble to assert it correctly) .

However, in 2009, during the Swine Flu Vax Panic, the would-be tyrants, who planned to vaccinate every American “starting with the volunteers” with unsafety tested vaccines (with the supply “stretched” by adding the dangerous and equally unsafety tested adjuvant Squalene, at levels shown to cause irreversible infertility in Patents held by the US government!) found themselves stymied by a population that refused to cooperate and who, in the millions, told their “representatives” so.  Their mandate was announced to Congress by then Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius on September 15, 2009. Secretary Sebelius did not ASK Congress for approval of her plan.  She announced that the plan was already fully funded, that $4.5 BILLION dollars had been spent on the unsafety tested squalene adjuvant and billions more on the unproven vaccines.  She announced that 90,000 vaccine administration centers would be set up around the country and that the mercury-squalene-aluminum mix would be administered to every man, woman and child in the US starting with “those who want it first”. Listened and assented by its silence, maintaining the appearance and forms of governance, but, in reality surrendering that governance to the bureaucratic operatives of the Deep State, doing absolutely nothing to protect either the health or the bodies of the citizens they are, in fact, sworn to protect and the constitution they are sworn to protect and defend.

Popular outrage, mediated by internet tools available to share the information led to the collapse of the plan and even the first responders were able to escape state vaccine mandates unharmed, though that required a law suit. There was no mass vaccination so there was no pandemic. I am proud to have been, as a Trustee of the Natural Solutions Foundation, one of the architects of that mass refusal in which millions of people told these cowardly constitutional failures, “Don’t you dare!” And they didn’t because, with that mass opposition, they couldn’t.

The incipient tyrants learned an important lesson from the power of our Push Back: overt Federal mandates CAN  be resisted and, if the information is available, WILL be resisted.

That is when we began to see the authorities passing off the mandates to allegedly private actors for enforcement. Read on to see how this privatizing of tyranny works to increase censorship and impose unlawful financial controls. The vaccine mandates gambit remains a primary example of this tyrannical political process.

The CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) which approves vaccines is so completely corrupted by crony corporate interests that they actually had to change the rules to allow the conflicted members to vote nonetheless, or there would never be a quorum because they ALL have serious conflicts of interest. One example: Paul Offit, MD, a so-called “ethicist” and physician from a famous children’s hospital, was allowed to vote to “recommend” a vaccine in which he had a Patent interest; his vote netted him tens of millions of dollars in the first year of its “recommendation” alone. Meanwhile the US government, deeply involved in approving and disseminating vaccines, through mandates and sponsored propaganda, owns financial interests in over 50 vaccine Patents.

After the CDC “recommendation” is voted the privatization of the mandate starts, with some local governments issuing mandates, but with private hospitals requiring staff to be vaccinated, even staff members who never have patient contact.

Similarly, schools join in the rush to increase their vaccine levels (as higher vaccination rates translate into more Federal and State money for the institution) – in one particularly egregious example from 2007, Prince Georges County, Maryland revaccinated hundreds of children literally at gun point to prevent the loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars a month in Federal subsidies. The school system claimed it had lost the vaccination records of nearly a thousand children. This is, in fact, a less known form of human trafficking, selling children’s bodies for money to the agency of the State required by law to protect these same children, body and mind. Their vaccination-mandate-for-pay damages those same children, body and mind, while abrogating their fundamental rights. But the pay is great and maybe the basketball team sees some of it.

We now see a disturbing trend where private employers join the mandate madness although the businesses have nothing to do with health care. This trend is building despite the fact that the courts  have clearly held that people retain their right to Informed Consent even where governments are restricting religious and philosophical conscientious objections to vaccination.

Several years ago, an Administrative Judge in New Jersey held that it was illegal to fire a nurse for refusing vaccines for philosophical reasons while the people were permitted to assert a religious conscientious objection to refuse the injection.

As recently as 2013 the US Supreme Court upheld Informed Consent, stating, Even a “…diminished expectation of privacy does not diminish the… privacy interest in preventing a government agent from piercing the… skin. And though a blood test conducted in a medical setting by trained personnel is less intrusive than other bodily invasions, this Court has never retreated from its recognition that any compelled intrusion into the human body implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests…” Missouri v McNeely 133 SCt 1553.

As a side note, McNeely teaches us that unless you assert your right to Informed Consent, it will be deemed waived. Assert your conscientious objection to forced vaccination with the Advance Vaccine Directive card, http://tinyurl.com/AVDcard – an advance medical directive that must be respected by ethical health care professionals.

Our Freedom of Speech is under a world wide web of attack.

While various authoritarian states make no effort to hide direct censorship of speech, the “advanced democracies” are more subtle. Germany, with no absolute constitutional protection for Free Speech, is contemplating empowering Internet Service Providers to refuse service to “hate groups.” At the same time the large international corporate controllers of the Internet, such as YouTube, Facebook and Google, are already escalating content controls to enforce “political correctness” – if you don’t follow the Party Line, you cannot be heard.

First they came for the Neo-Nazis and banned them from Facebook. No one protested. Then they came for Alex Jones and banned him from YouTube and Facebook. Almost no one protested. Then they came for... You know the rest... they came for you and me, and no one was left to protest.

These supposed private Social Media Companies are actually exercising government authority. Just as much as if they had been the “private” Tax Farmers of Ancient Rome. They are the privatized agents of control and censorship. They exercise this control on several levels.

Each of these mega-corporations is, in fact and in law, “a creature of the state.” It is created by registration with government that gives it authorities (such as limited liability to third parties) which it could not exercise as a truly private association.

If the same Rule of Law that applies to truly private actors applied to government and its crony corporations, “content control” efforts would be understood to be exactly what they are: censorship. Real free market competition and technological progress would rapidly make the near-monopoly power of Google and Facebook irrelevant.

If the same Rule of Law that ought to apply to Government Censorship – that there can be no such law – applied to the crony corporations, YouTube, Facebook etc. “private” censorship could not remain.

What can you do about it?
  1. Assert your right to Informed Consent:   http://tinyurl.com/AVDcard
  2. Join the Health Freedom USA email list to continue to receive Dr. Rima’s Truth Reports, even when we are banned by the Social Media Giants. Do that here:   http://drrimatruthreports.com/action/step1/
  3. Patronize Alt Social Media such as the uncensored   Minds.com
  4. And don’t forget what Dr. Rima Recommends:   DrRimaRecommends.com
  5. Share this message!   http://drrimatruthreports.com/welcome-to-the-deep-state-data-mine/

Saturday, June 30, 2018

Will President Trump Divest the FDA?







Breaking Up the US FDA…
Will President Trump Divest the FDA?



Join the Health Freedom Newsletter Here: http://drrimatruthreports.com/action/step1/
Natural Remedies Access Act of 2018 Read the Bill Here
Share this Message with this Link http://drrimatruthreports.com/divesting-the-fda/
   
A current rumor on the Internet has it that President Trump wants to abolish or combine various US Federal Agencies to create a leaner, more efficient Federal Bureaucracy. [1]

Suggestions are bantering about Facebook, Minds and Twitter.

We no doubt each have our favorite agency to see “disappeared.”    Certainly, at least the second-most-hated agency is the FDA — the Food and Drug Administration, known to some of its detractors as the Fraud and Death Administration.  It is one of the most convoluted and omnipresent agencies in the bloated organization chart of the Federal Establishment. [2]


It’s been just over a decade since an official government study of the FDA proclaimed:

1) The FDA cannot fulfill its mission because its scientific base has eroded and its scientific organizational structure is weak... . 2) The FDA cannot fulfill its mission because its scientific workforce does not have sufficient capacity and capability... . 3) The FDA cannot fulfill its mission because its information technology (IT) infrastructure is inadequate... . 4) FDA does not have the capacity to ensure the safety of food for the nation... . 5) The development of medical products based on “new science” cannot be adequately regulated by the FDA... . 6) There is insufficient capacity in modeling risk assessment and analysis... . 7) The FDA science agenda lacks a coherent structure and vision, as well as effective coordination and prioritization... . 8) The FDA has substantial recruitment and retention challenges... . 9) The FDA has an inadequate and ineffective program for scientist performance... . 10) The FDA has not taken sufficient advantage of external and internal collaborations... . 11) The FDA lacks the information science capability and information infrastructure to fulfill is regulatory mandate... . 12) The FDA cannot provide the information infrastructure support to regulate products based on new science. [3]

The FDA is a failed agency…

…that, in Dr. Ron Paul’s memorable words, “engages in abuse of power.” He said, in effect, ‘Giving the FDA more power is giving it more power to abuse.’

Even the FDA’s own scientists are complaining about the corruption that pervades the agency — and this is not the first time conscientious scientists have raised these issues. [4]

Then we have the strange case of William W. Thompson, PhD., the whistle-blower in the CDC (an agency that acts in conjunction with the FDA) who exposed the shocking fact that the CDC knew the MMR vaccine was associated with elevated autism rates among especially black boys. [5] 

I believe that due to the (1)  FDA’s focus on the drug industry (80% of its funding comes from Big Pharma “user fees”) and (2)  its failure to protect the safety of the food supply, (3)  while engaging in international “harmonization” that degrades organic standards and allows ever-increasing levels of toxins (including antibiotic residues) in the food supply, the FDA is incapable of administering food regulations. 

The FDA’s prejudice against nutrient supplementation and traditional homeopathic and natural remedies means these advanced healthcare alternative competitors to pharmaceuticals are denigrated, marginalized and regulated against.

What is the answer?

What would, say, a businessman who became President do? 

I suspect it would be to tell FDA to, in the immortal words of John Galt, “Get out of the way.”

We need to engage market forces to stimulate advanced alternatives to a medical system that is now the major source of death in our society, according to a landmark peer-reviewed article by Dr. Gary Null. [6]

We need to divest the FDA of any authority over foods. Maybe then it can focus on the dangers of pharmaceuticals, including the un-insurable risks of mandatory “unavoidably unsafe” vaccination, as it was mandated by law in 1986 to do. Historically both the DEA and EPA were “spun-off” the FDA.

We need to free Foods (including nutrients, and natural and homeopathic remedies) from the deadly hands of the FDA.


Health Freedom Advocates have proposed the Natural Remedies Access Act
 which would protect foods, vitamins, homeopathics and other natural remedies from FDA’s fake science “risk/benefit” analysis which always leads to restricting access. [7] 


Read the Bill here:   http://drrimatruthreports.com/updating-the-fda-attack-on-homeopathy/#Bill

That’s a first step toward deregulating and divesting.

The details? I suppose we’ll have to leave that up to the CEO-in-Chief.

By Ralph Fucetola JD

This article was originally published at the Bolen Report: http://bolenreport.com/breaking-up-the-us-fda/

[1] “Merge the food-safety functions of the USDA, HHS, and FDA into a single agency within the Department of Agriculture.” https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1011087230968868865.html
[2] When I first called for divesting FDA of food authority: http://vitaminlawyerhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/11/divesting-fda-of-food-authority.html
[3] November 2007 Report of the Subcommittee on Science and Technology, “FDA Science and Mission at Risk.” http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/MedPrep/2010-FEB-22/Feb-24-Session-5-Cassell-FDA-Science.pdf
[4] http://www.naturalnews.com/z024910.html
[5] http://drrimatruthreports.com/emergency-cdc-whistleblower-to-cave-stop-him/ [6] http://www.webdc.com/pdfs/deathbymedicine.pdf
[7] Read the bill here: http://drrimatruthreports.com/updating-the-fda-attack-on-homeopathy/

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Voting Third Party - Only Vote Not Wasted!

Voting Third Party this November
Is the Only Vote Not Wasted!
Voting Third Party Furthers The Disruptive Agenda
Libertarians and Friends

Share with this short link:  https://tinyurl.com/vote3rdparty

Podcast version: https://youtu.be/S1_Et8qgXrI




Ben Shapiro, writing in the Daily Wire June 14, 2018, said he was shocked that FBI agents would interfere with American elections, and particularly in the 2016 presidential election.
"Buried in the Department of Justice Inspector General’s report – a report that found no political bias in the actions of the FBI during the Hillary investigation – is one massive bombshell: a text from FBI agent Peter Strzok to his lover, FBI agent Lisa Page. Here’s the insane exchange, circa August 2016: 
Page: "[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!"
Strzok: "No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it." 
WE’LL STOP IT? 
How in the world could an FBI agent – and not just an FBI agent, but a key, high-ranking FBI agent involved in both the Hillary Clinton investigation and the Russian election interference investigation – text this? And more importantly, how could the IG then find that no political bias was present in the actions of the FBI?" [1]
My comment posted at the Shapiro article was:
"While I doubt that Mr. Shapiro is really shocked, he does right by pointing to the FBI's interference in the election.  If you want a deep state "strong enough" to "guarantee security" you will get a deep state strong enough to "guide" the electoral process. We are not just witnessing deep state corruption in the FBI, we are seeing how all power corrupts. If you want a return to a free republic, both Republicans and Democrats in Congress must reassert "our representatives" control over the government. Or, failing that (and fail Congress will!) we the people must vote for third party candidates this November to send a clear message of rejection of the deep state takeover!"
That is the theme I take up here:  voting for the (G)OP or the Demoncrats is a vote for the Deep State. 

Such a vote is worse than wasted. It allows the "two" tax-eater party leaders to pretend to have public support.  The only vote that is not wasted is a vote for any third party candidate.  Only someone   willing to stand for Congress on a ticket other than the duopoly parties is someone we might be able to trust in Congress!

Continuing Donald Trump's disruptive impact on American politics requires a real shake-up of voting habits.

What impact will third party votes have on the way the ruling parties govern?

Historically, American third parties have often "set the agenda" for the governing coalitions, even though the "two party system" has been maintained as a structure in which the elites are able to contain their rivalries. There are numerous examples of significant policy changes, from the end of slavery through alcohol prohibition of the effect of third party movements throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries.  Independent campaigns, such as those of former governor George Wallace (the last independent candidate to win electoral votes in multiple states - 1968), connected businessman Ross Perot and politician John Anderson determined the scope of presidential politics throughout the second half of the 20th Century.

What impact will future third party votes have on election outcomes?

Let's look at Libertarian Party votes over the past three presidential elections. I addressed that in more detail [2] where I wrote,

"The recent trend in Libertarian Party [www.lp.org] Presidential Vote Results is clearly upward: [3]

          2008 - 523,715 - 0.40%
          2012 - 1,275,971 - 0.99%
          2016 - 4,488,914 - 3.28%

[Note that the 2016 total, when two former two term (G)OP governors carried the LP banner, was substantially larger than the 2.9 million vote difference between the two tax-eater parties.]"

Third party votes most likely prevented Hillary Clinton from becoming president.

During the 2017 off-year election LP candidates garnered anywhere from 1% to 45% of the votes cast in particular local elections [4]. As far back as the presidential election of 1972 the LP presidential candidate did receive an electoral vote in Virginia [5].

Voter participation (as a percent of VAP -- Voting Age Population ) peaked, interestingly in 1860, at 81% and has slowly declined to 2016's 55.5% (the lowest was 50.3% in 2000). [6] As the voting percentage has declined, in recent years, however, the percentage of people who regularly vote for third parties has grown. [7] This is confirmed by the above noted LP presidential votes over the past three cycles.

So the question becomes: what is a patriotic American to do when faced with the choices on the ballot this coming November?

Voting for either Democrats or Republicans just encourages the continuation of the current situation -- a Congress unable to reform the broken "progressive" entitlement programs that are leading us to ruin; unable to protect the peace, our security and especially our liberties.

The Federal Government still chooses to borrow about 40% of its bloated budget, policing the world to make it safe for Chinese commerce, while failing to provide safe roads, bridges and schools here in America.

While the deregulation "Trump Boom " may paper-over the fundamentals, for a while, we are still faced with extraordinary increases in the Federal Debt, which are themselves papered-over by the Federal Reserve buying nearly all new Treasury Bonds and inflating the money supply as a result. This Keynsian debt time bomb will blow up the boom, sooner or later. Especially since the President, in years past, had famously stated, "I love debt."

The two tax-eater parties need to fear a taxpayer revolt, again. Taxed Enough Already. That revolt is always expressed by refusing to vote for the duopoly parties. They do, indeed, watch the numbers carefully.

If even ten percent of voters started regularly voting third party, the duopoly would shudder.

If a third did so, it would collapse and the deadlock in DC would be replaced by new alliances and new approaches.

The power of disruptive politics has been proven by the Trump Presidency. Now it needs to move beyond Trump.

Your vote counts. But only if you don't vote Democan or Republicat.

It's TEA time again!

------

[1] https://www.dailywire.com/news/31856/bombshell-fbi-agent-said-hed-make-sure-trump-was-ben-shapiro

[2] http://tinyurl.com/ok2belibertarian

[3] http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Party_US_Presidential_Election_Results#2008_Presidential_Election

[4] https://www.lp.org/election-updates-for-november-2017/

[5] https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/map/historic.html#2008

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_third_party_performances_in_United_States_elections



Wednesday, May 30, 2018

Trump Signs Misnamed "Right to Try" Law

A LAW FOR WRONGS, NOT RIGHTS
"Thousands of terminally ill Americans will finally have hope, and the fighting chance, and I think it's going to better than a chance, that they will be cured, they will be helped, and be able to be with their families for a long time, or maybe just for a longer time." Donald J. Trump
President Trump signed the so-called Right to Try bill, S-204, passed by Congress, into law today.

The website for the 115th Congress describes the law with this official summary: [1]
"This bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to exempt, from specified requirements and restrictions under that Act and other laws, the provision of certain unapproved, investigational drugs to a terminally ill patient who has exhausted approved treatment options and is unable to participate in a clinical trial involving the drugs. The manufacturer or sponsor of an eligible investigational drug must report annually to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on any use of the drug in accordance with these provisions. The FDA shall post an annual summary report of such use on its website. The bill limits the liability of a sponsor, manufacturer, prescriber, or dispenser that provides, or declines to provide, an eligible investigational drug to an eligible patient in accordance with the bill."
The new law provides that any patient diagnosed with "a life-threatening disease or condition..." who has "exhausted approved [by whom?] treatment options..." as certified by a physician who is not compensated by a drug company, may benefit from the experimental treatment's exemption from FDA licensing.

The law also correctly requires, in section (1)(C) that the written Informed Consent of the patient or guardian be obtained.

Unfortunately the new law restricts its benefits only to pharmaceutical drugs that have already gone through FDA-approved Phase 1 testing or certain other procedures. This law does not apply to the many natural remedies or to medicines used in other countries. [2]

The law specifically exempts drug companies from liability for harm to the patient and provides that the FDA may not, in normal circumstances, use the outcome of the Right to Try to delay or deny drug approval. The law concludes with a Statement of the Sense of the Senate that the the law does not "establish a positive right to any party or individual..." and that any "use of experimental treatments under the criteria and procedure described in such section 561A involves an informed assumption of risk..."

Thus, what appears on first look as an act of compassion by Congress and the Administration, when viewed more closely, is a law made to protect drug companies without securing for Americans the Right to Try natural remedies that are not subject to FDA approval in the first place!

This new law does not expand Freedom of Choice and is at best a half-way measure that might benefit a few individuals. It does not address the excess power already possessed by an Agency of which former Congressman Ron Paul once said, to the effect, "the more power it has, the more power it has to abuse."
--------------------

Also posted at:  http://www.opensourcetruth.com/trump-signs-misnamed-right-to-try-law/

[1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/204
[2] There are other legal provisions which do allow some limited access to other remedies.  I have written about two of them here:
     Medical Foods:  http://vitaminlawyerhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2013/05/medical-foods-under-orphan-drug-act.html
     Personal Importation:  http://www.lifespirit.org/perimport.html

Wednesday, May 16, 2018

Will Blockchain Social Media Make Facebook and YouTube Obsolete?


Freedom Advocates Seeking Better Connections

Health Freedom, Vaccine Choice and other social reform advocates need to face the facts: it’s not just governments that seek to censor Internet expression. 

The “big boys” of the World Wide Web actively seek to restrict expressions of opinion that do not meet current “standards” of Political Correctness and Identity Politics[1].  It’s not just the “Great Firewall of China” that restricts worldwide political expression: the imposition of “community standards” by private companies simply as a cover to arbitrary, and maybe politically motivated, decisions by anonymous corporate hacks somewhere in some Internet boiler room out there... but, there may be a technical fix for this political problem.

Blockchain technology, which is the basis for Bitcoin and other crypto currencies, is a secure system of decentralized information distribution and verification.

The easiest way to think about blockchain is a massively distributed network that can’t be controlled by any entity and has no single point of failure. Every time there is a transaction or event in this network, every single node in the network is notified and updated. Each update is a “block” of data, creating a massively distributed ledger of data that is shared by every member of the network.[2]

Its business model is not like that of the centralized social media systems such as Facebook and YouTube, which rely on profiting from user-provided content. The new social media developing on the Blockchain, like Minds.com, Synero, Yoyow[3] or Steemit[4], recognize that the users are the content providers.

Though “the medium is the message” it is the content that is monetized. Currently companies like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram or Snapchat profit by selling advertising that appears along with user-generated content, offering “relevant” commercial information to the consumers of that user-generated content.

The corporate social media owners reap the advertising revenue reward while the volunteer content-makers create the value that the users seek. The Blockchain social media model proposes, instead, to reward the user-content-creators without the intermediation of corporate owners -- or at least with a much bigger share of the advertising pie.

In its purest form, such a network would lack a central body creating profit from the platform and therefore be unrestrained by the goal of appeasing advertisers. Like Bitcoin, it could be modelled on a system where those who invest most time and effort in the network have the greatest influence on its evolution.”[5]

The model proposed by the now-in-beta-testing Minds.com, for example, rewards user/contributors with a new crypto currency, the Minds Token, which can be used to boost postings, purchase at the Minds.com store, and, after the beta period, be converted to Bitcoin.

Minds.com founder Bill Ottman commented,

“I always knew that an open-source social network was inevitably going to emerge and become competitive with the top establishment social network... It also became clear that the mainstream social networks were not rewarding people — were not incentivizing people. They weren’t giving revenue opportunities. They’re restricting people’s reach — they’re spying on people! So it became sort of obvious that there’s a market requirement for this space that we’ve filled.”[6]

The economics of the social media is becoming a struggle between these two visions:

[1] Corporate advertising built on the intellectual efforts of (mainly) volunteer contributors, versus
[2] Decentralized systems where the advertising revenue is distributed, via the Blockchain, to the users.

At the same time, the propensity of the corporate sponsors to engage in “private” censorship of social media content is becoming of ever greater concern to the users of the media. After all, the purpose of engaging in the social media is to communicate ideas and information. That use is at odds with corporate censorship.

I’ve previously written about Privatizing Tyranny, the efforts of various governments to empower private entities in restricting the ideas which may be expressed openly.[7] Those private entities act “under color of law” as arms of government when blocking, down-throttling or down-grading the expression of certain ideas to which the governments object. If no one can see your comment your right to freedom of communication is meaningless.

Blockchain-mediated, decentralized social media are unable to be so manipulated. The would-be tyrants have no technical means to impose restrictions on such content.

This is a real threat to the centralized media, which appear to have been created, or at least boosted by government intelligence agencies (consider DARPA-connected, Facebook investor James Breyer).[8]  

Once the powerful financial link between the corporate overseers and the social media is broken by Blockchain decentralization, the ability of governments to use their corporate proxies to censor social media expression will begin to fade.

Will the Blockchain build a social media stronger than the controls even the most powerful of governments impose?  Does it matter to you as an advocate that you are being censored by government or by what claim to be “private” companies?

“Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram are prohibited by the Chinese government. Why does the Chinese government cut off its citizens' channels of communications with the outside world? What is it afraid of?” [9]

Freedom advocates must join in that question: “What are the huge social media corporations afraid of?” To ask this question is to answer it. They fear free people capable of asking that question!

The answer implies how we can Push Back and break free: boycott the “official” social media, whether directly government-affiliated as, for example, Yoyow may be[10], or whether corporate creatures of the state that pretend to be independent, like Facebook or YouTube. But boycotting is just the first step.

To be able to utilize the extraordinary power of the social media to protect freedom and effectuate change, you must patronize the Alt Social Media, and that means relying on the Blockchain for the privacy protection that it offers.

I’ve begun to shift my attention from Facebook and YouTube to Minds.com and other Blockchain Alt Social Media.  It is my attention that profits the centralized social media, so ultimately, it is my choice.

We each have that choice.



Ralph Fucetola JD is a retired lawyer, consultant – www.ProfessionalSafetyDossier.com – President of the Institute for Health Research – www.InHeRe.org – and VP of the Natural Solutions Foundation – www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org



[6] ibid Techworld
[10] ibid Bitconnect