Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
HMSendeavour wrote:Bitchute had hosted, and still might, videos of the Christchurch massacre. If they're going to host that kind of video then they have no excuse to be banning 3-4 minute Hitler speeches and half an hour race realism videos or conference speeches by pro-white activists and academics. It's shameful what they're doing.
Maybe they're not going actively around looking for things to censor and only do so in response to an actual complaint being filed. I wouldn't be at all surprised if those Christchurch videos were censored.
Lamprecht wrote:Giving a heads up regarding BitChute as maybe someone else here has experienced this as well.
I have noticed that in the past few weeks a lot of videos are being quietly removed from BitChute. Videos that were on the platform for months if not years, videos that I watched literally days or weeks ago now show only the following message:This video has been blocked for breaching the Community Guidelines, and is currently unavailable.
I have seen this too often lately for it to be dismissed a coincidence. These are not copyright-infringing videos, just the sort of content that would be removed from YouTube or other websites for "Hate speech" etc.
There was some talk by a few BitChute content creators about videos being banned from specific countries (namely Australia and parts of Europe) two months ago. I would post those videos where it was being discussed but I just checked them out again and now all I'm getting a "404 - Page not found" error. At least one of those videos giving me this error is from an account that still exists and is posting videos pretty much every day. I can't think of any reason why he would have deleted the videos.
I also don't think this is country-specific. One of those deleted videos was from an Australian uploader and he was getting a message about a video saying it was blocked in his country. (Again, the video has disappeared so I am just going off of memory).
Shorter (smaller filesize) videos can be saved with the Wayback Machine here: http://web.archive.org/save/
But beware: I do not think this is foolproof. In one case (again, this could be a fluke) I archived a video and it worked, but I checked a few days later and both the BitChute video and the archived version of the page were taken down. Archive.today will not work for videos.
If there is a good video on BitChute that you want to make sure always exists, I would suggest you download the .mp4 file. There are free websites that offer this, just Google "bitchute video downloader" there are a bunch of them, or view the page source and find where the .mp4 file is embedded and save the URL there. If you want to back up a channel with a lot of videos on it then I do have a simple script that I made that can do this with little effort. It will work if you have a website that has enough storage space, just PM me and I will send you the scripts and explain how it works. It's rather crude because it's just for personal use, but it will take a user-inputted list of BitChute URLs, rip the .mp4, and transload them all into a folder. A table can also be generated with the video's filename (it will be whatever the BitChute link is) along with the video's title and description.
I would be surprised if BitChute manages to last a whole year from now just based on the financial situation. How could a website make enough money to offer free, endless video streaming without any advertisements? It doesn't add up. If it does get shut down for lack of funds I only hope that they will give some time in advance so that we can download the videos. I wouldn't count on it though.
That's why centralize platforms (such as Youtube and BitChute) sucks and I prefer decentralize plaforms...
Justice Dept. Case Against Google Is Said to Focus on Search Dominance - The decision to narrow the case to search could set off separate lawsuits from states over Google’s power in other business segments.
http://archive.fo/vk2SI | http://web.archive.org/web/202009222144 ... nance.html
https://rt.com/news/502987-us-iran-banks-sanctions/Washington has announced a new sanctions package against Iran, hitting the country’s financial sector and targeting 18 major banks. Tehran has branded the move a “crime against humanity” and an attempt to starve the country out.
The new sanctions were announced by the US Treasury Department on Thursday. The move was made to further “isolate the Iranian economy from the global financial system,” which the Treasury claimed is necessary to stop Tehran from advancing its alleged “malign agenda.”
Earlier in the day, the US Department of Justice announced seizure of 92 web domains allegedly used by Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to wage a disinformation campaign. Four of the websites were allegedly disguised as “genuine news outlets” directly targeted the US, while the remainder reached audiences in Western Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, the US officials claimed.
The US-oriented domains, identified as “newsstand7.com,” “usjournal.net,” “usjournal.us” and “twtoday.net” now display a message that they’ve been seized by the FBI.
There is no due process here, a reason does not actually need to be given. They can just say that they were somehow tied in with "terrorist" groups, what is anybody going to do about it? We have seen with the Russian meddling hysteria that all you have to do is label something "Russan interference" and nobody can defend against the censorship without being accused of ties to the Kremlin. They create a censorship apparatus under the pretense of a need to control odious things such as child pornography, illegal firearms sales, online drug dealing, and so on. After this happens, they can easily move on to the actual targets of the ADL and SPLC, which would be "Holocaust denial" and "neo-Nazi" websites. And then, one-by-one, they start taking down moderate conservatives.
The radical left in the USA has made no secret of the fact that they support censorship of what they call "Hate speech" or "disinformaton." We can already see that "Holocaust denial" laws exist and are enforced in many parts of Europe so when they push for this sort of thing in the United States it is not seen as unprecedented on the world stage. So-called "Holocaust denial" websites are a big target, people are afraid to defend them because they will be accused of being "anti-semitic deniers" themselves. An American school principal was fired for simply acknowledging the existence of "Holocaust deniers" but after a year he was reinstated, possibly because he did not actually question the narrative himself, apologized profusely, and was African-American so a "neo-Nazi" couldn't stick.
The massive tech oligarchs (which are all left-leaning and donate to the democrat party) are happy to censor the US president, although in this case it is a bit less overt.
For example: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 4413992961
They put a warning on the tweet that you have to click through to see it. In other instances, Trump will retweet someone else's post and they will ban the original account so that the post no longer shows up. CODOH has already been removed from these platforms.
What has just happened here is even worse than having your website removed from Google searches, or getting banned from YouTube, Facebook and Twitter. All of the links to the pages on these websites are now broken, forever. They can, of course, get a new domain name and go back to doing what they were doing but for a lot of websites such a blow is crushing.
I explained why I don't think this is that great of a strategy in another thread: viewtopic.php?p=99152#p99152
Lamprecht wrote:I don't agree with this "Section 230" approach, these big tech giants should be declared instead to be common carriers [or even natural monopolies] and thus cannot discriminate by political ideology. Your electricity company can't just turn off your power because you said Jews weren't gassed at Auschwitz.
The groundwork has been laid already, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommu ... ct_of_1996
Part of the provision says that you cannot be refused service by common carriers, especially phone companies - which at the time were providing internet services because everyone had dial-up - for your political or ideological beliefs.
Better than nothing though. If Trump gets a second term he'll have 4 years to figure this out if this method doesn't work. Trump also has the privilege of being able to shift the Overton window, although at this point I can't imagine that any conservative or pro-Trump internet user hasn't been personally disgusted by the ridiculous levels of censorship by these huge tech monopolies.
They begin by describing "holocaust denial":
"Denial" essentially means revisionism then. They then point out that revisionism has no intellectual merits:Holocaust Denial, the act of denying the Nazi genocide against Jews, manifests in an assortment of forms. It might include denial of the gas chambers, the capacity of the crematoria in the camps or it can include denial of the scale of the crime of the Holocaust itself. It is, in and of itself a form of antisemitic propaganda.
Nevertheless, when people are exposed to revisionist information and argument, they tend to find it convincing:This short briefing is not to evidence that the Holocaust happened; there is no legitimate debate. The Holocaust occurred. Six million Jews, alongside millions of other people, were murdered. As eminent Professor, Deborah E Lipstadt stresses, there is no ‘other side’ to the argument.
As this could not possibly be the result of people having exercised their rational faculties on the new information provided by revisionism, it can be safely attributed to anti-semitism. It thus follows that the only way to combat revisionism is through censorship:The idea that people can be educated against Holocaust denial, including online, has been proven to be partly false.
Other than the assumption of the infallibility of Deborah Lipstadt, despite her own changes of mind over the years, there is little to disagree with in the argument.If counter-speech and related campaigns fail in their objective to legitimately provide an alternative viewpoint which will be trusted by the user consuming harmful content, the only way to curb this hate and the consequences that flow from it is to remove it at its source.
One factor that I have noticed in the censorship community is the distinction between "revisionism" and "denial". It seems that they may themselves slowly be realising that something is wrong with the above analysis. I can agree here. The two terms tend to be names for the same thing - as per the first quote - but if people can leave revisionism alone to make its arguments and focus on censoring crude anti-semitic cartoons, "It didn't happen, but it should have" posts and the like, a meeting of minds is almost possible.
EtienneSC wrote:Holocaust Denial, the act of denying the Nazi genocide against Jews, manifests in an assortment of forms. It might include denial of the gas chambers, the capacity of the crematoria in the camps or it can include denial of the scale of the crime of the Holocaust itself. It is, in and of itself a form of antisemitic propaganda.
Thus, according to the Chosenites, failing to accept any & all of the official HolocaustTM commandments is 'denial', which 'in and of itself is a form of antisemitic propaganda'.
Except of course, any revisions made by official HolocaustTM high priests, which should be considered honest scholarship
The logic speaks for itself.
Mark Dice has a new video out updating us on the recent censorship by the big tech oligarchs. One news company even had its Twitter account banned for a week.
Not surprisingly, the ADL's Jonathan Greenblatt praised Twitter, in a Tweet which read;
"Excellent step by @Twitter, taking the necessary action that #StopHateforProfit demanded. A fitting end to a legacy of spewing hate and vitriol. President Trump incited the violent riots at the Capitol using social media & paid the price. #BanTrumpSaveDemocracy"
https://twitter.com/JGreenblattADL/stat ... 5813673985
JLAD Prove Me Wrong wrote:I'm a little surprised this hasn't been brought up yet, but Donald Trump was booted from Twitter yesterday.
I actually just brought that up in your Parler thread: viewtopic.php?p=100420#p100420
Twitter also censored the Ayatollah for questioning the Coronavirus vaccine:
Twitter strikes again: Iran’s supreme leader’s tweets about ‘untrustworthy’ UK & US vaccines deleted
https://www.rt.com/news/512002-iran-lea ... ter-covid/
Mark Dice also had a video from YouTube removed because he posted a video of Trump telling the protesters to be peaceful:
I'd be surprised if Mark Dice lasts more than 3 months on YouTube.
His Bitchute channel is worth subscribing to, and he also has a website with great content: https://theredelephants.com
70K QAnon Twitter accounts suspended in the wake of Capitol riot
http://archive.fo/Pe4Nx | http://web.archive.org/web/2020/https:/ ... pitol-riot
Twitter on Monday announced that it has banned over 70,000 accounts that share content surrounding the QAnon conspiracy theory in the wake of the riot that erupted at the Capitol last week.
Twitter said that “many” of the individuals impacted by the ban “held multiple accounts” that shared content surrounding the QAnon conspiracy theory, which baselessly claims that President Trump is working to expose elites in Democratic politics and institutions running underground child trafficking rings.
The now-banned accounts “were engaged in sharing harmful QAnon-associated content at scale and were primarily dedicated to the propagation of this conspiracy theory.”
The claim that these accounts are somehow linked to "QAnon" is nonsense. Any meme that is generally pro-Trump can be linked to "QAnon" somehow. YouTube and Facebook have already banned a bunch of accounts and content somehow linked to "QAnon." When these media monopolies say "QAnon conspiracy theorists" you should read it as "ordinary Trump supporters." There is no way to tell the difference and they don't even care and aren't trying to.
Social media website Parler has also been having issues, discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13316
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: HMSendeavour and 3 guests