Tag Archives: congress

Another Facebook purge?

This article is very different from anything we’ve written in the past. While our normal policy is to not write anything to which we are directly related, we have been forced to make an exception. Over the past month, I have uploaded three YouTube videos. The videos not only explain the apparent attack on the “War on Corruption” platform, it goes to detail the progressive censorship of my own account. Though I had hoped for a resolution, Facebook has adamantly refused to address any message I’ve sent to them. In fact, they’ve only increased the various forms of censorship to my account and my platform.

Censorship: Phase I

In the beginning, what Facebook had done was nothing more than a slight annoyance. With no explanation, not even a noted policy violation, I had found that my account had been blocked from commenting or replying to political pages. This means that I could not interact with any political figure, this immediately caught my attention. At this point and time, I was still able to comment, reply, and even post to other pages, groups, etc. At this time, I was oblivious to just how far Facebook would take this censorship.

Censorship: Phase II

After about a week of dealing with the original block, Facebook apparently decided that it was time to do additional blocks. Upon trying to post a comment to a group, which I had been able to do the previous day, I found that I had been restricted from doing so. As with the original block, no reason was given explaining why my account had been restricted. The censorship wouldn’t end here. If it did, this article wouldn’t exist. Within twenty-four hours of this new restriction, I was restricted from commenting and replying to all pages and groups. However, at this point and time, I was still able to post on the “WoC” page, though commenting and replying had now been restricted.

Censorship: Phase III

For the next few weeks, I progressively became agitated over the restriction. On top of running this media platform, I compose and sell music online. At this point and time, this had remained untouched by the nefarious goons of Facebook. However, War on Corruption had now been completely restricted from me. I could no longer post, comment, reply, or even send private messages from the platform’s page. It was, at this point that we decided to begin the process of removing WoC from Facebook completely. During this period, Facebook added yet another new restriction. Not only was I unable to post, comment, reply, or send PM’s, I now could no longer join or leave groups. Worst yet, Facebook wasn’t even finished playing this illegal form of censorship.

Censorship: Phase IV

With this, we are now up to date with the current situation. At this point, Facebook has removed my ability to post, comment, and reply from my personal profile. Furthermore, the page I have, to which I promote my side gig of music, has also been slammed by the social media giant. This means that, on two different platforms, Facebook has not only censored me, but they’ve even cut a form of my income: music. But it doesn’t end there. Out of our team of seven, five of us have been targeted in this exact same manner, all without reason or explanation. Though all of us have tried to appeal it, the results are the same. The appeal process itself has been restricted from all of us.

This means that while we have the option to appeal, should we attempt to do so it will fail to go through; Facebook will never even know that we’ve tried to fight it. As of now, our platform is being operated by two individuals of our team, the only two who have not been targeted with this illegal act. Meanwhile, I continue my search for a civil rights attorney. Not only for our team, but for the various other platforms, and individuals, targeted by Facebook.

Conclusion

With much discussion, we do have a lead into what instigated the censorship: I was critical of a specific political figure, one that Facebook supports. With their censorship, they’ve not only shown how far they will go to stop anybody who opposes their political views, they have demonstrated how far they will go to silence any journalist who speaks against those to which they support.

We aren’t writing this article to bring awareness to what is happening to our platform, we are writing this to warn other journalists, and truth seekers, of what Facebook is willing to do to silence them. We have full expectation that Facebook will shut us down. Since the time of the initial restriction, we have watched as our platform stats spiraled into oblivion. With this, we have absolutely no doubt that, much like our team, our platform is being shadow banned by the site.

During what many call the “purge,” Facebook wiped out over a dozen media platforms from their site. Among them: “Freedom Though Project,” who had well over a million followers. The habitual pattern of Facebook is to target independent media, why not? They can’t buy us off unlike the corporate giants of the media world. While Facebook continues to hold its position of being a “private” company, this is factually untrue. Facebook had ceased being a private company when they entered the public domain, the Stock Market. While this has many financial benefits for the site, it has a lot of legal disadvantages. Among them, violating constitutional rights.

Though we have no expectation of the platform surviving this, on Facebook at least, we have begun moving to other sites. Below, are links to our new locations. We hope to see you there just as we hope that Facebook will cease this unjust activity.

MeWe

Rumble

Flote

Minds

Parler

 

Journalism vs. Facebook

At this point, I’m not even going to pretend to be surprised that this article would eventually come. In fact, I doubt that anybody who reads it would be. Facebook is a company that has a notorious history of censoring people. Rather it be for political reasons, what they classify as “spam,” or simply cleaning house of freelance journalists, Facebook has long since established its guilt. However, for the company, this guilt has not come without a price. With multiple lawsuits, one would think the company would make a few policy changes.  This has not been the case. If anything, Facebook appears to be tightening the reigns on the very policies that have gotten them sued in the first place.

On my personal profile, I have multiple freelance journalists. You maybe wondering what we all have in common, why I would even mention them. The one common ground we all share is that all of our accounts have been, in some way, censored by Facebook. Furthermore, when conducting this censorship, we are given no explanation as to why.

Though Facebook has restricted my account, notice that they do not give an actual reason as to why.

On 10/20/2020,  the journalist/founder of the platform “Discuss Global,” received a message like the one photographed above. in less than twenty four hours, I also received a message indicating that my account had been “restricted.” According to Facebook’s message, I had violated a policy. However, as you can see above, there is no example of what policy was violated, nor is there a copy of the violating post/comment. For those who have been on the platform for awhile, may recall the “journalistic purge.” This purge was the mass removal of dozens of independent journalistic platforms. Among these, “Cop Block” “The Daily Haze,” and “The free thought project.” It is almost as though Facebook is attempting to take down any journalist who is critical of Trump, something that I have in common with the other targeted journalists on my “friends” list.

Though I am given the option to appeal, doing so only brings up this error. This same event occurred when other journalists attempted to appeal.

While Facebook has given us the ability to appeal this “violation,” you can see for yourself what that appeal process brings. While Facebook continues to violate the rights of independent journalists, who don’t share their political views, earlier this year, the social media giant lost a class action lawsuit. you can read here for more information into that.

It’s commonly stated that Facebook is the perfect example of how socialism works. If you speak out against anything they support, they silence you. Perhaps, with all the lawsuits, Facebook should consider looking into their own policies and how they’re enforced before violating the rights of anybody who speaks out against their political agendas. Although this can be prevented, it would require that people take a stance against the platform.

Disabled individuals targeted?

It goes without say that we should all be entitled to medical care. For some people, this form of care means life or death. However, in all the splendor joys that 2020 has already provided us, we are finding that, for many people, medical care is outright being denied. In fact, for specific groups of people, they aren’t even being allowed in the door before being asked to leave the facility. Why? It all boils down to the mask mandate. I understand that many people will disagree with this article. I also understand that I will most likely catch a lot of grief for writing it, however, I simply refuse to sit back and watch as specific groups of disabled people continue to be targeted, denied their basic right to medical. After all, we have already seen other rights be stripped away, we’ll get into that also.

Mask Mandate

First, and foremost, it is important to understand that the mask mandate is that: a mandate. Although many people will try to claim this to be law, it’s not. The difference in a mandate and law comes down to a variety of factors, how it came to be is among them. While state and federal laws get run through every government house known to man, the mandate had never undergone such a process. Basically, this makes it unenforceable by law enforcement, though they are attempting to enforce it anyway. The issue in them enforcing it can be chalked down into what the very definition of their occupation: to uphold and enforce the law.

Initially, the mask mandate was a suggestion. Never intended to be required, the government composed a list of “safety” procedures for people to follow, if they so wished. However, what we ended up seeing completely opposed this initial stance. In a progressively slow measure, this request grew into the mandate. Some of the “safety” guidelines are as follow:

  1. Stay at least six feet apart from one another. Apparently, we are facing the only known virus in history that has a travel distance of six feet.
  2. Wear a mask. This is something we are going to really get into shortly.
  3. Avoid large crowds. Goes back to the whole six feet portion.

Enforcement vs. your rights

In enforcing this potential violation to the constitution, as well as civil liberties, we have seen the outright measures our very own government are willing to take. In the past several months, we have seen churches forced into closing their doors and their ministers arrested upon refusing to do so. If you aren’t well versed in the Constitution yet, let’s just recap, shall we?

Under the first amendment, you have the right to free speech, the press, religion, and so on. In regards to religion, the amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Hence where their idea of enforcement now becomes a problem.

By forcing religious institutions into closing their doors, they directly violated the first amendment. Regardless of the reason as to why this was done, it changes nothing in regards to the result. To take it further, those who refused to cease practicing within their religious institutions, were simply arrested. Never, in the history of the United States, has a minister been arrested for refusing to terminate their religious practices; of course, this is no longer a truthful statement.

Within the mask mandate, there are exemptions that must be noted. It is these exemptions that have lead to this article. The exemptions within themselves aren’t the problem, it’s how businesses treat individuals who are exempted that has become the problem.

  1. pre-existing respiratory conditions.
  2. seizures
  3. sensory disorders, such as those associated with autism.

The above are only a few examples of things that are exempted. Regardless of this, corporations, and even medical facilities, are making blanket policies that force everybody, exempted or not, to wear these masks. Furthermore, for those who are exempted, there doesn’t appear to be any form of help with fighting these illegal policies. So, let’s go ahead and arm our disabled friends with a few pieces of legal information that may be of assistance.

The ADA

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is quickly becoming a critical law to know. Within this law, there are protections that could translate into the enforcement of these corporate policies, as well as the mandate itself though the mandate has exemptions for this very reason. The two titles that we are going to specifically focus on are II and III of the ADA.

Title II

“Title II applies to State and local government entities, and, in subtitle A, protects qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of disability in services, programs, and activities provided by State and local government entities. Title II extends the prohibition on discrimination established by section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 794, to all activities of State and local governments regardless of whether these entities receive Federal financial assistance.”

Title III

Title III focuses on private businesses (also known as public accommodations). All new construction and modifications must be accessible to individuals with disabilities. For existing facilities, barriers to services must be removed if it is readily achievable. Public accommodations include facilities such hotels, restaurants, bars, theaters, grocery stores, hardware stores, dry-cleaners, banks, professional offices of health care providers, lawyers, and accountants, hospitals, private bus or train stations, museums, libraries, zoos, amusement parks, places of education, day care centers, senior citizen centers, homeless shelters, gymnasiums, health spas, bowling alleys, and golf courses to name a few.

To read this in its entirety, please visit this link.

Essentially, these titles prevent corporations, etc. from denying disabled individuals services solely on the grounds of their disabilities. For those who are being denied, as we’ve recently seen, this act will quickly become your best friend in fighting these unjust policies.

The mandate has been met with such controversy that lawsuits are currently ongoing. States such as Ohio, Wisconsin, and Texas are just a few states to mention. Rather or not you are for, or against the mandate, one thing must be clear: For the disabled individuals who cannot wear such devices, life has become a much more difficult challenge than what was ever needed. Rather it requires a revocation, overhaul, or even clarification of the mandate, to resolve the issues that are apparently present, it is, without a doubt, that action must be taken.

What happens next?

It goes without say that inmates have a form of hierarchy. While those who are convicted of murdering police officers are generally at the top, those who harm women and children typically find themselves at the bottom. Recently, 25yo Darius Sessoms, decided to abruptly end the life of 5yo Cannon Hinnant, in front of his two sisters. The child, who was simply enjoying riding his bike, was tragically shot by the neighbor. Though the motive has yet to be released by the Wilson PD., the suspect was apparently friends with the family, having dinner and drinking a beer with the father the night proceeding the shooting. We have a grieving family, a deceased child, and a complete scumbag in custody. What happens now?

While the question may seem a bit obvious in that he would be granted a life sentence, we are going to discuss what prison will be like for Darius, as we said, he’s at the bottom of the inmate hierarchy. Upon being convicted, It’s very likely that Darius will sit in jail, in some cases, this can last for several weeks as he awaits transport. For him, this isn’t going to really matter, it’s not like he’s got a life outside the DOC system. During this time, sitting at the county jail, it wouldn’t be to farfetched to believe that something could potentially happen. Inmates within these facilities, have a habit of throwing their fists. As word regarding his conviction spreads, the number of inmates wanting to knock his teeth out will increase. In severe cases such as this, it’s not unheard of that the inmate be placed in solitary confinement as they await to be transported. Of course, while jail comes with it’s own risks, prison is where the real storm could be.

As you can imagine, prison has inmates of various crimes, many will never see the free world again. For a man such as Darius, these individuals will become his greatest threat. The general mentality of a “lifer” is this: “I am never leaving this place alive, I have nothing to lose.” But our would-be inmate, Darius, has plenty of time to figure this out. Upon arriving to the facility, he will go through the intake process. Just as he had in jail, he will get a “mugshot,” finger printed, clothing and various other items such as bedding, and finally he will get his very own ID card with his lovely photo on it. Once he completes the intake process, this is where things begin to change. Every prison has their own way of handing inmates once this process is completed. For this, I am going to detail what some of the facilities I worked at did.

Most likely, he won’t be put into general population, not immediately at least. Many facilities have an evaluation period, especially if the state has what they call an “intake facility.” An intake facility is a prison that is designed for new arrivals within the system. This means that every new offender, as DOC defines them, goes to this one facility prior to being relocated, if that is to be done. During this evaluation period, they are generally placed into a “maximum security” setting. What this means is they are locked down for twenty-three hours a day, aside from weekends when they are locked down for twenty-four hours. Every aspect of their life is controlled. Depending on the facility, they may get three showers a week, though some only do two. In order to leave the cell, they are cuffed and escorted by roughly two or more guards. If they opt-in for going outside (rec. time,) they get one hour. If the facility has cages, as they are generally called, the offender is uncuffed and allowed to walk around his own little piece of hell. If the facility has a secluded yard, they remain cuffed and closely monitored by officers. This process is generally a minimum of a month.

So, let’s say he’s passed that point and is now in general population. First and foremost, he will be placed into one of two categories: Medium security or Maximum security (which we explained in the previous paragraph.) The medium security yard gives the inmates much more freedom.  Though they remain supervised at all times, most long-term inmates have already figured out the advantages they have, especially if they are wanting to eliminate a child killer. If an inmate were to make this choice, it isn’t implausible that it would be carried out in the yard itself. If it’s monitored, why would they do this? Simple: There are hundreds, if not thousands of them at any given facility. Though officers walk the yard, there simply isn’t enough of them to cover every aspect of that location. By the time an officer would notice that a situation had taken place, those involved would had already fled the scene; as most of you can guess, there are very few, if any inmates, who are going to tell. Though it is likely to happen in front of one of the many cameras, most inmates, especially the “lifers,” have already learned how to circumvent that problem. After all, they have 24/7 to think up strategies on keeping various crimes hidden from the officers.

Presuming something like this happened, there are practices in place. Obviously, this scumbag would be taken to the medical ward and potentially transported to a nearby hospital, depending on the severity of his injuries. Upon returning, he will most likely be placed into protective custody. This means that he is removed from general population, placed into a maximum security unit, and becomes a thorn for some poor guard who is most likely already having a great day. This phase, protective custody, varies on a case-by-case level. While in this custody, an officer will conduct an investigation. They will question inmates, generally living in the same unit as the victim. They will then review camera photage. If the attack is on camera, great. If not, the case is generally left dormant, the victim eventually returned to general population, and the unknown suspect(s) gets to wait for another chance.

This article is all speculation, it isn’t saying that this will happen. However, this is a very real risk that Darius faces upon arriving at a facility. We wanted to present not just what this vile excuse for a man faces, but a little insight into how the prisons operate. The culture, the mentality, and so on, are completely different from that of the outside world. If you have worked in a facility previously, than you already know what it is that I’m talking about. Just as with any society, you have your “good” citizens. But, within this society, you also have your troublemakers. For a man, such as Darius, these are the people he will most likely come to fear. After all, as I have said, as far as the inmate hierarchy is concerned, he’s at the very bottom with the child predators.

If you want to read about a child predator, be sure to check out our previous article:

Sinclair hires sex offender, denies alleged comments made by him

 

Charges Filed Against Officer Rolfe Following Death of Rayshard Brooks. Police Protests Ensue.

Recently, Rayshard Brooks was killed by Officer Rolfe. Since that time, charges have been filed against the him. As a result, two different distracts in Atlanta have had their officers walk. Several other police stations will most likely have to cover these districts which will be nearly impossible for them to do.

When you watch the video in its entirety, you’ll see that Officer Rolfe had arrived at the scene following a report that Rayshard was asleep at the wheel of his car in a Wendy’s parking lot. When he arrived, the car was parked. Rayshard was asked several questions, given a sobriety test, and was found to be under the influence. Several times he asked the Officer to drive him to his sisters house. Without reading him his Miranda Rights, Officer Rolfe started to handcuff Rayshard and said that he was being “taken in,” due to the fact he was intoxicated. Rayshard and Rolfe got into a scuffle and Rayshard took Rolfe’s taser, ran off, and then pointed it at him. Rolfe shot him.

According to the police, Officer Rolfe was following protocol because a weapon was involved and was aimed at him. Now, as to why he didn’t give Rayshard a ride to his sister’s house remains unanswered. A lot of questions are left unanswered. Which has led us to where we are now.

The Districts in Atlanta that no longer have Police Stations are going through what the police call “the Blue Flu.” This means that there’s a massive strike the police are showing in protest due to the fact that charges have been filed against Officer Rolfe.

Police have always operated under what’s known as “Blue Brotherhood.” There are other terms used such as “Blue Wall of Silence”, “Blue Code’, and “Blue Shield.” This all boils down to there a rule that police officers are to never report each other. This includes misconducts and any type of crime, including police brutality. So, when charges were officially filed against Officer Rolfe, the two districts in Atlanta where the police stations have been shut down in protest are following the Blue Brotherhood.

The city of Atlanta is under fire more than ever. The police versus the public is at an all time high, and there won’t be any winners by the end. Either Officer Rolfe is found innocent and then faces a very public backlash, or he’s found guilty which could lead to more Blue Flu’s in Atlanta.

What would have happened if Officer Rolfe had driven Rayshard to his sister’s house? What would have happened if Rayshard hadn’t taken Rolfe’s taser and pointed it at him? These are just two of many questions that will sadly, remain unanswered.

You can watch the video of the arrest linked below. Please know that the video is graphic. Credit to the YouTube Channel: 11Alive

Video

Editorial commentary

Law enforcement has one fundamental job: uphold the law. While many questions have been raised regarding the officer not simply taking the man out, it does in fact, have a rather simplistic answer. Rashard was found in a parking lot, intoxicated, and passed out. Because he was behind the wheel, any officer would know that this man had clearly driven there drunk, placing himself, and the general public, in potential danger.

Once Rashard removed the officer’s weapon, he created an entirely new situation. While a taser is classified as “less than lethal,” for the officer it could mean death. If he had been shot with the weapon, it would had completely immobilized this cop. It would had given Rashard enough time to grab his service weapon, potentially murdering the cop. The debate regarding rather or not the officer was justified, comes down to this: yes. The officer followed protocol, protecting his life.

Milwaukee medical professional mows down protestors

With national protests occuring on a daily basis, it’s not to farfetched that some rather interesting stories would arise. Today, in Milwaukee, we stumbled upon one of these stories. A cardiovascular physician assistant, identified as Emily Novicki, was accused of runing over several “peaceful protestors.” In her tweet, a woman going by “Alexis.” Says:

Today in Milwaukee! This woman hit 2 peaceful protestors, injuring them and came within 2 feet of hitting a child. This was as they peacefully marched. She drove into the crowd. Police were shown multiple videos & she was still let go. TWITTER LETS MAKE SURE SHE LOSES HER JOB. 🥳

However, the events, as explained by the BLM protestor, is not what actually took place. As I began searching through evidence, I found a slightly different story. I attempted to reach out to Emily only to find her Facebook had been deleted, more on that shortly. Based upon the evidence, which included a video, the alleged peaceful protestors had surrounded the young woman’s car. At this point they jad begun chanting, even tapping her car with a sign. It is alleged that this is when Emily ran through them. But was she in the right for doing so?

We have already seen, in recent weeks, what happens when protestors encircle a vehicle. Recently, a Fed-Ex driver was forced to flee in his semi as they attempted to vandalize his equipment; this is just one example, of course. It isn’t to hard to believe that this woman would had been in fear for, not only her safety, but her life.

Following this event, Emily had apparantly deleted her Facebook. From what I was able to obtain, one of the protestors began sharing her workplace information, and her social media account, on Twitter. In doing this, she opened the young medical professional to harassment, threats, and so fourth. It is presumed that this is what lead to her deleting the account.

A peaceful protest is exactly as it claims to be: peaceful. Blocking somebody from leaving the area is not a peaceful demonstration, that is an act of aggression. While I would never condone using a car for a weapon, I can understand how terrorizing a situation like this must be.

While a false narrative spreads around on Twitter, I choose to present my findings, without bias. The situation comes down to this: had the protestors not surrounded her car, hit it with a sign, in what can be viewed as a clear act of intimidation, nobody would had been injured. The false narrative, placing complete blame on the woman, who appears to had been a victim, is absolutely ridiculous.

Protest safetly, protest smartfully.

Twitter account sparks outrage

As with any social media site, Twitter has a vast culture of thoughts, opinions, drama, and even the occasional racism. When things, such as racism, occur, it’s generally a matter of time before the flood gates open, unleashing a berage of hate toward the individual.

In a series of racially targeted speech, Twitter user, “tauralovesallpeople,” made a vast series of hateful tweets. The targets of her content, the black community, witnessed everything from a photo of the user in “black-face,” posts discussing how George Floyd deserved to die, and much more. While the black-face image was removed, she ultimately reposted it saying, “Got deleted, so I’m posting again. IT WAS A NOKE N***** RELAX.” Naturally, this created outrage.

Using a secondary account, now removed, this girl makes yet another racially targeted tweet.

So what is black-face? Black-face is the act of making your face look as though it has black skin. This act goes back decades and was commonly used as a method lf mocking, degrading, and insulting the black community.

Upon posting the image, for the second time, it is presumed that Twitter took a final stance on the situation. Upon looking for her two accounts, I quickly discovered that they had been terminated. This was most likely done as a result of violating their “terms of service.” Does it end here? Possibly not.

While Twitter has apparantly deleted her accounts, the young lady behind the posts could see herself in litigations. While something like this is generally civil, it is possible for the state to file criminal charges, all it takes is for somebody to file them. Furthermore, as we have seen with certain public officials, it’s also something that could return to haunt her later in life. In this situation, deleting her account was the best response. However, that doesn’t prevent her from creating another one at a later date.

Racism rises amongst COVID fears

Over the years, I have learned to never be surprised as to how low people will go. For this reason, I am not at all shocked by the fact the Native people are being slammed with an onslaught of racism. While this has been going on for sometime now, it is only now that I choose to address it.

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, it has been no secret that the reservations have been slammed. While much of this can be attributed to the lack of available medical supplies, the bigger problem is in how the Native Americans are generally treated. This brings up the very reason to which I write this article.

In a recent Facebook post, a New Mexico native man makes a rather serious allegation against one of their local Home Depot stores. In his post, “graywolf” accuses a Home Depot assistant manager, Sandra Rodriguez, of posting a racially based statement. The statement, which is shown below, reads as follows:

Go back to your nasty Rez with your diseases.

Sandra Rodriguez
Assistant Manager
Home Depot, Gallup NM

In his post, “Graywolf” is calling for people to call the corporate office. As a matter of fact, we are too. Pandemic or not, there is absolutely no excuse for this sort of behavior, especially when it stems from those working to serve the public in any capacity. During the past few months we have seen the best of society. However, we have also seen the worst aspects of it. If you are against this sort of behavior, and would like to help with “graywolf’s” campaign of reporting this woman, the information is below.

The Home Depot
Contact information
Main:
(505)726-2362

Corporate number 1 (800) 466-3337
The Home Depot/Customer service

COVID-19: Reality Check

For months now, we have seen abuse from the government unlike anything before. While most Americans are perfectly fine with the loss of their first, fourth, and even sixth amendment rights, some are beginning to wake up. As a result of this, social disobedience is quickly becoming a common trend. With so much confusion, who is in the right?

The introduction of COVID-19 introduced more than a new potential threat, it brought out mass fear and even hysteria. As the government began learning about the virus, they implimented some rather debatable “safety procedures.” Social distancing, masks, that sort of thing has now become common practice. However, many debate as to rather or not they went to far.

First amendment

Under the first amendment, all Americans are granted the freedom to practice their religions. What this means is the government has no legal grounds to interfere with this, or other, rights. However, since the COVID-19 situation began, we have seen that very ordeal unfold. In several cases, those who have dared to break the “law” of not going to church, were met with arrest. How is this possible? A simple loophole is all it takes, more on that later.

On social medias, such as Facebook and Youtube, those who are speaking out against the governments’ actions, are finding themselves censored, ability to post/comment blocked, or outright banned. In a controversial move, Facebook has gone as far as to form its own “Supreme court.” The intent of this is to determine what is, or is not, allowed on their site. However, this has lead to many conspiracy theories.

Fourth Amendment

Under the fourth amendment, all citizens have the right to be secure in their persons, homes, and property. At this point, we may as well just rule this one a dead right. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen what happens to those who dare to defy their government overlords. While initially, the “safety protocols” were mere suggestions, people have been brutally beaten and arrested by police. Their crime? Daring to run their businesses.

There are many articles discussing how the police have arrested business owners for literally committing no crime. By violating the “recomendations,” and being arrested for it, proves that these are not just suggestions. Furthermore, they demonstrate the more disturbing image at hand. It was Adolf Hitler who once said:

“The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” For many, this is what’s happening. Of course, when it’s a $1000+ fine for not wearing a suggestion on your face, it does seem plausible.

Sixth Amendment

The right to a speedy trial. Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you already know that this has been absent. Upon getting arrested, one could expect to sit in jail for an undetermined amount of time, with no courtdate. Why? Because the courts shutdown. While this is starting to change, it doesn’t change the fact that this right may had potentially been violated. Of course, this is just another cog in the political wheel.

What we have seen is nothing less than government operated terrorism on its people. Criminals are being released from jails/prisons over alleged COVID fears. However, people are being sent to jail simply for operating their own businesses. Places where facemasks are “mandatory,” don’t even care what you wear on your face. A person can walk aroumd with tissue paper on their face and have no problem.

From what I have seen, this os a game to strip citizens, using fear and false numbers, of their constitutional rights. The worst part of this, we are allowing it. When you really begin to dig into this, the contradictions become very apparant. This situation is no longer about protecting the people or preventing the spread of a virus, which has an approx 3% fatality rate globally. This is a war in which it is the government vs. the people.