Germany proposes ridiculous $53M penalty for “fake news” and “hate speech”

Image: Germany proposes ridiculous $53M penalty for “fake news” and “hate speech”
Source: NaturalNews.com
JD Heyes
March 21, 2017

One German official thinks that fake news and hate speech is so serious it ought to permanently bankrupt virtually anyone who is accused or convicted of either.

As reported by The Associated Press, German Justice Minister Heiko Maas – perhaps worried that there’s another Adolph Hitler waiting for the right moment to rebirth the Nazi Party via propaganda spread on social media – has proposed fines of up to 50 million euros, or about $53 million, for any social networking site that neglects to quickly police and remove anything deemed as “hate speech” or “fake news.”

While acknowledging that some social media sites have already begun cracking down on what they have described as hate speech, Maas said the effort isn’t satisfactory yet. He said research indicated that Twitter only deletes about one percent of so-called ‘illegal content’ that is flagged by users; he added that Facebook deletes about 39 percent of said content.

The AP noted further:

The proposal would require companies to provide a round-the-clock service for users to flag illegal content, which would have to be removed by the site within seven days. All copies of the content would also have to be deleted and social media companies would need to publish a quarterly report detailing how they have dealt with such material.

In addition, the proposal instructs social media sites to name someone specifically charged with taking down content and handling speech complaints, and if that person fails to do so quickly or adequately, he or she would then be subject to a personal fine of up to 5 million euros (about $5.3 million). (RELATED: Do College Students Hate Free Speech? Let’s Ask Them (Video))

Who would line up to take that job is anyone’s guess.

Oddly, Maas claimed his proposal would somehow not restrict the free speech protections already enshrined into German law, and it wouldn’t establish a “truth commission” of sorts to root out so-called fake news (which would include The New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and others, from time to time).

Always eager to please Left-wing speech cops, Facebook eagerly acquiesced. “We have clear rules against hate speech and are working hard to remove such content from our platform,” the company said in a statement, in response to the German proposal.

While reasonable people can agree that some speech obviously qualifies as hateful – such as derogatory remarks about race, ethnicity, religion, sex and so forth – other speech some people have arbitrarily labeled as “hate speech” simply because they disagree with what’s being said.

For instance, on many American college campuses, anything a conservative says is branded as hateful, bigoted and, some would argue, slanderous. President Donald J. Trump can’t say a word about enforcing immigration law without being branded a racist. And this reporter has been mislabeled as being “hateful” simply for taking a political position that liberals don’t like.

So, that’s what makes “hate speech protection” measures like this German proposal such a slippery slope: While advocates keep telling us out of one side of their mouths they aren’t trying to suppress speech, that’s usually the end result.

In this era, speech suppression is becoming a real thing and, ironically, it is occurring most rapidly in supposed “free speech zones” in democratic countries including the United States. In recent months, one survey of college-age Millennials by Yale University found that an incredible 51 percent of students surveyed were okay with their school enacting “speech codes” that regulate speech for both students and faculty.

Speech codes.

Worse, this generation of high schoolers is also conflicted about the First Amendment, with more than half saying speech should not be allowed if its “offensive.” (RELATED: Students Arrested For Handing Out Copies Of The Constitution)

But who gets to define what is and is not ‘offensive’? That’s the problem, isn’t it – when you put some person or some entity ‘in charge’ of deciding what people should and should not be offended by, then you put serious crimps on all speech.

That’s not what our founders intended. In fact, they adopted the First Amendment’s free-speech clause precisely because they wanted to protect speech some may find offensive.

Maas’ proposal might seem ridiculous now, but there is no doubt that the trend regarding free speech in Western democracies is one of suppression, not expansion. Frankly, it’s dangerous.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

WND.com

TheBlaze.com

Freedom.news

New Bill Allows Genetic Testing of Employees – #NewWorldNextWeek

Source: TheCorbettReport | MediaMonarchy
James Corbett | James Evan Pilatto
March 16, 2017

Welcome to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

Story #1: To Cut Climate Money, Fake Right Has To Find Where Fake Left Stashed It
http://bit.ly/2n2mJ1q
Judith Curry Explains Climate Modeling to the Layman
http://bit.ly/2n2h4Zr
EPA Deputy Accused Of Working With Monsanto To Kill Cancer Study
http://bit.ly/2nqDh4d
Monsatan On Trial For Roundup Cancer
http://bit.ly/2mvyLNc

Story #2: New Bill Would Let Companies Force Workers To Get Genetic Tests, Share Results
http://bit.ly/2mM7bgf

Story #3: Need a Pothole Fixed? Maybe a Portland Anarchist Can Help!
http://bit.ly/2mRRbuQ

Homeschoolers under attack by officials conducting unannounced visits

Image: Homeschoolers under attack by officials conducting unannounced visits

Source: NaturalNews.com
Thomas Dishaw
March 13, 2017

School officials in Paris, KY are attempting to overstep their boundaries by conducting unannounced visits to homeschooling families. According to the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), these visits are a clear violation of a state-wide agreement that was implemented to protect a family’s constitutional right to privacy.

The school officials claim they are only there to help the parents, but part of their plan to help involves demanding information from parents about attendance records and curriculum. They have even asked to meet the children to question them in some instances. One home school parent, Jenny Griffith, who received one of these visits said “I got the impression that district staff could become more difficult if I didn’t cooperate in answering their questions or bring out my child to meet them. I tried to handle the situation as civilly as possible, without adding any threat to them.” The officials also told her that the district intends on visiting every homeschooling family three times a year.

After being alerted of these visits, the HSLDA quickly got involved and warned parents of this threat to their fourth amendment rights. On the HSLDA website, they spell out for their members what their rights are and how they should handle the situation. According to Kentucky laws, a homeschool program operates as a private school. While private schools are required to keep attendance and scholarship records (i.e. report cards) in the same manner as the local public school, homeschooling parents do not need to open their homes and present these documents simply because a school official comes knocking

TJ Schmidt, a contact attorney for Kentucky through the HSLDA, also said that unless school officials receive some report or have some evidence that the parents are not educating their children, no further inquiry should be made. This agreement, known as the Best Practices Document, has been in place for more than 20 years. Schmidt also assured families that he and Cindy West, a local CHEK representative and veteran homeschooling mom in Bourbon County, have contacted the Paris Independent School District and are objecting to the visits on behalf of the parents. They expect the visits to cease but promise to monitor the situation. (RELATED: Get all the news Google is trying to hide at Censored.news.)

This is not the first time that the HSLDA has had to step in when dealing with a Kentucky school district. In 2015 homeschooling families in Gallatin County, KY received a packet from Roxann Booth, the director of pupil personnel, letting them know county officials would visit the home of every homeschool program through the coming school year. The packet also contained forms that requested detailed information not required by state law.

When the HSLDA was alerted about this violation Schmidt wrote a letter to Ms. Booth on behalf of the families informing her that the information requested went well beyond what is required under Kentucky law. And because home visits would violate each homeschooling individual’s privacy rights the HSLDA would legally challenge any attempt to carry out these visits. Within two weeks, every homeschooling family received a follow-up letter from Ms. Booth apologizing for the demands for additional information and the challenge to the legitimacy of their homeschool programs.

Public schools do not want any challenge to their plans to turn all of our children into politically correct social justice warriors with no ability to think for themselves. As we see from these examples, they know very well where the lines are but are more than willing to cross them until someone is brave enough to stand up and tell them that they refuse to conform.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

HSLDA.org

HSLDA.org

Offthegridnews.com

Deep State Neuroscientists Believe They Can Turn Off Free Will

Deep Brain Electrical Stimulation Shown to Improve Memory | 33rd ...
Source: TheMindUnleashed.com
Nathaniel Mauka
March 9, 2017

Neuroscientists have argued whether we even have free will, but now they want to turn it off.

The Libet Experiment

In the 1980s scientist Benjamin Libet conducted an experiment. He ‘discovered’ that what seems to be free will or the conscious choice to do or not do something is really just the observance of something that has already happened. This completely rocked the foundations of what most thought of as a prerequisite for being human, and the long-held religious view that free-will must always be honored.

Libet recorded people’s brainwaves as they made spontaneous finger movements while looking at a clock. The participants in the study were to tell researchers the time at which they decided to wave their fingers. Libet found that there were several milliseconds of preparatory brain activity prior to the time that people reported the conscious act of waving their fingers. His findings were taken as gospel that free will did not exist. Now we call this preparatory action of the brain the ‘readiness potential.’

What Libet’s experiment failed to consider though, was manifold. It is possible that people were only conscious of an action milliseconds after a subconscious realization. It is possible that they could not indicate their intent as fast as their physical bodies could carry it out – a delay in physical vs. mental activity that has been well documented, and it is also possible that the cognition of an anticipated event is cognized well before the actual event, because the entire causal field is changed by our consciousness, as evidenced by recent experiments in physics. This is called the observer effect as it refers to changes that the act of observation will make on a phenomenon being observed.

Libet implies that the conscious decision act is divorced from fee will, in that it is acted out nonconsciously, and that the subjective feeling of having made this decision is tagged on afterward – however – we already know from vast amounts of research from Jung and others, that we know a lot more than we consciously allow ourselves to honor.

Nonetheless, Libet’s experiment has weathered such criticism and the implications have been replicated with even more advanced equipment including the use of FMRI technology and the direct recording of neuronal activity using implanted electrodes.

How to Reprogram Or Eliminate Free Will

These studies all seem to point in the same, troubling conclusion: We don’t really have free will. So why then are neuroscientists trying to remove our free will?

A study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by researchers in Germany, has scientists backtracking on their original assumption that we have no free will.

The German researchers worked backwards in a way, from Libet’s experimental protocol, using a form of brain-computer integration to see whether participants could cancel a movement after the onset of the unconscious preparatory brain activity identified by Libet.

If they could, it would be a sign that humans can consciously intervene and “veto” processes that neuroscience has previously considered automatic and beyond willful control. There were more complex methods utilized including the use of colored lights, but in short, they found we could easily undo actions and “veto” them – a sign of undeniable free will.

A quote from the lead researcher, Dr. John-Dylan Haynes of Charité – Universitätsmedizin in Berlin, becomes telling in order to discover how neuroscientists working for the deep state could override our own free will,

“A person’s decisions are not at the mercy of unconscious and early brain waves. They are able to actively intervene in the decision-making process and interrupt a movement. Previously people have used the preparatory brain signals to argue against free will. Our study now shows that the freedom is much less limited than previously thought.”

These findings were supported by a French study which found that “nonconscious” preparatory brain activity identified by Libet is really just part of a fairly random ebb and flow of background neural activity, and that movements occur when this activity crosses a certain threshold.

And even more studies confirm what we all suspected regardless of early scientific findings – that we all act consciously, perhaps to different degrees, but certainly with free will.

When we form a vague intention to move, they explain, this mind-set feeds into the background ebb and flow of neural activity, but the specific decision to act only occurs when the neural activity passes a key threshold — and our all-important subjective feeling of deciding happens at this point or a brief instant afterward.

“All this leaves our common sense picture largely intact,” they write, meaning we can break a chain of events (determinism), but that also implies a certain responsibility for our actions.

The Cooperation of Subconscious and Conscious Awareness

All these studies do suggest, though, that our free will requires healthy partnerships between conscious and unconscious systems. In special circumstances like playing musical instruments, engaging in sports, or driving a car, we apparently recruit specialized unconscious agents with the ability to carry out certain acts quickly without conscious “permission.”

If these “unconscious” agents can be reprogrammed, then we can be controlled, essentially by “disabling” our free will – at least according to pedantic science.

Attempts to Destruct Free Will

Aside from using drugs like scopolamine, known to wipe our subconscious plates clean, so that new, possibly nefarious programming can be installed, and obvious mind control techniques admittedly researched by the CIA (with the help of Stanford Neuroscientists, and others) along with additional intelligence agencies of our government, there are subtle programming methods used every day in the form of subconscious messages in advertising. There are even cell phone apps meant to control the free will of the user. You can imagine what other technologies have been employed.

My advice? Use your free will to override unwanted subconscious programming. If it requires both conscious and ‘non’ conscious compliance, to remove free will, then we can at least interfere by utilizing our conscious awareness and removing tacit consent. That ought to keep the physicist busy for a while, at any rate, and the deep state wasting our tax dollars on more Mind Kontrol experiments.

Read More At: TheMindUnleashed.com

Spies Tell Lies, Spying Is Lying

Privacy

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
Jon Rappoport
March 9, 2017

In recent articles, I’ve highlighted items from the latest WikiLeaks data-dump of CIA files. For example:

The CIA’s use of other nations’ hacking tools, in order to give the impression that, when the CIA hacks into secret areas, it looks like other nations did the hacking.

All this is SOP for the CIA and intelligence agencies around the world.

Spies tell lies. A day without lying is a day without joy.

Spies play chess. “Well, when we leak THIS information to the press, they’ll emphasize the source of the leak (of course we know it’s a fake source we’ve chosen). But when we leak THAT information, the press will emphasize the content of the leak—which is what we want them to do in that case.”

Naïve people are shocked that the CIA could have fabricated the whole “Russia hacked the US election” story. But this is what the CIA does. This is another day at the office.

On the other hand, Russian intelligence could have hacked (influenced) the US election. And to put a further twist on it, Russia could have made that move, anticipating that US intelligence would discover it and go public with it. And then Russia would covertly launch a planned campaign to ridicule the CIA for claiming such an “absurdity.”

During the Cold War, several important KGB spies defected to the US. The CIA then proceeded to vet them, to find out whether they were genuine, or were sent here to seed the CIA with disinformation. As you can imagine, the whole business developed severe problems.

For example: “All right, yes, the KGB sent me to America to confuse you. But now I’m telling you the truth. I’m giving you actual secrets. And I want to stay here. I don’t want to go home. If I go home, the KGB will vet me to see whether I actually gave you real secrets…”

CIA: “Maybe we can triple this Russian. He’s now on our side, we think. So we send him back, claiming we couldn’t get anything useful out of him. But now he’s ours. So we give him a bunch of lies to tell his bosses about us, the CIA…”

In the end, nobody on either side knows what’s going on. But they play the game anyway.

The CIA is a reality-creator and a reality-destroyer. They pick and choose what to do in each situation. But it would be folly to imagine Agency people always do brilliant work. They mis-estimate blowback. They fail to handle blowback. They try to pick an outside scapegoat on whom to blame the blowback. They try to limit the blowback by defaming, discrediting, blackmailing, or killing people.

They rewrite history. They change sequences of events. They invent events that never happened. They blame people who don’t even exist. They present themselves as bumblers, to hide their more intelligent operations. They hold forums designed to show their work as superficial information-gathering, as if they were little more than a think-tank. They pretend to cooperate with Congress, while they spy on Congress.

Meanwhile, the press pretends to hold an innocent and respectful view of the CIA, dutifully reporting every piece of information that comes their way from the Agency. “Today, the CIA disclosed…” Disclosed? Or fabricated?

The CIA is perhaps the biggest fake news operation in the world. It exhales fake news as matter of course.

So naturally, it attracts men and women who have a bias in favor of fabricating. “Do…

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Spy Ops: Yes, your smart TV really is spying on you: Leaked docs reveal CIA secretly turned Samsung TVs into microphones that spy on your conversations

Image: Yes, your smart TV really is spying on you: Leaked docs reveal CIA secretly turned Samsung TVs into microphones that spy on your conversations
Source: NaturalNews.com
J.D. Heyes
March 9, 2017

For years Deep State insiders and others familiar with the federal government’s spy agencies have been sounding the alarm about the development of technology that enables constant, real-time electronic surveillance of anyone, anywhere, anytime (President Donald Trump, something to consider as you delve into who ordered it against you and why.)

Now, thanks to another whistleblower following in the footsteps for former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, WikiLeaks has provided the proof that these insiders weren’t kooks or conspiracy theorists – they were spot-on. (RELATED: Is Your TV Spying On You? For Millions Of Viewers, The Answer Is YES!)

According to a treasure trove of newly released documents known collectively as “Vault 7” in the “Year Zero” series, not only does the CIA conduct improper electronic surveillance, it does through using technology that can tap into smart TVs, iPhones, Android devices, and other wireless handheld technology.

“The increasing sophistication of surveillance techniques has drawn comparisons with George Orwell’s 1984, but ‘Weeping Angel,’ developed by the CIA’s Embedded Devices Branch (EDB), which infests smart TVs, transforming them into covert microphones, is surely its most emblematic realization,” said a press release from WikiLeaks.

“The attack against Samsung smart TVs was developed in cooperation with the United Kingdom’s MI5/BTSS. After infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a ‘Fake-Off’ mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In ‘Fake-Off’ mode the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server,” it added.

So in other words, even if you’ve turned your TV and devices “off,” the CIA’s technology, via wireless connections, can still transform them into listening devices, which records conversations and data and sends them to a remote CIA server for later downloading and analysis.

The government’s spy agencies, then, can literally steal any and all data they want, thereby giving them the power to create false narratives, phony email traffic, fake communiques and anything else they want in an effort to blackmail or destroy anyone they choose.

A journalist getting too close to Deep State activities? No problem – the CIA has the ability to bug their homes remotely, through smart devices, or steal their data and other information that may incriminate them, forcing them into silence.

A politician who opposes expansion of the Deep State’s power? No problem – just a few months’ worth of bugging his or her devices, and the nation’s premier spy agency has all it needs to coerce said problematic politician into playing ball.

“The CIA’s Mobile Devices Branch (MDB) developed numerous attacks to remotely hack and control popular smart phones,” said the Wikileaks press release. “Infected phones can be instructed to send the CIA the user’s geolocation, audio and text communications, as well as covertly activate the phone’s camera and microphone.” (RELATED: Amazon Echo devices spy on you in your own home… police are now trying to acquire those recordings.)

And even though iPhone held a minority share (14.5 percent) of the global market, a specialized CIA unit within the agency’s Mobile Development Branch produced malware that infects, controls and then extracts data from iPhones and other Apple products that are running iOS, like iPads and, presumably, iMacs and Macbook Pro laptops.

A similar unit is said to have targeted Google’s Android devices, which runs the vast majority of the world’s smart phones (about 85 percent, roughly).

“’Year Zero’ shows that as of 2016 the CIA had 24 ‘weaponized’ Android ‘zero days’ which it has developed itself and obtained from GCHQ, NSA and cyber arms contractors,” said the press release.

“These techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the ‘smart’ phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied.”

Feel violated yet? You should.

Read More at: NaturalNews.com
__________________________________________________________

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

WikiLeaks.org

NaturalNews.com

Newstarget.com