Parler Is Back Online Thanks to Russian Tech Company
Social network Parler has partially returned with the help of a Russian-owned technology company, Reuters reported. The website and app were forced offline last week when host Amazon Web Services (AWS) suspended access.
Popular among right-wing extremists, Parler (not to be confused with "social talking app" Parlor) was also removed from Apple's App Store and the Google Play Store following Donald Trump's recent ban from most major social media platforms. In response to the AWS suspension, Parler CEO John Matze told users the network would be offline for up to a week as the application is "rebuilt from scratch." "We will try our best to move to a new provider right now as we have many competing for our business," he wrote in a tweeted statement.
The social network appears to have found that provider in DDos-Guard, an internet infrastructure services provider known for working with companies hosting controversial content, including 8kun (previously 8chan); it also supports Russian government sites, according to Reuters. DDoS-Guard's web page lists an address in Scotland, under the title Cognitive Cloud LP. But, as infrastructure expert Ronald Guilmette told the news outlet, it's actually owned by two men in Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Parler's Triumphant Return?
"Hello world, is this thing on?" Matze wrote on Friday, in the first update since the site relaunched. A note at the top of the page promises Parler will "resolve any challenge before us" and hopes to welcome users back "soon"—as early as February, if Matze has his way.
"I'm confident that by the end of the month, we'll be back up," the CEO told Fox News over the weekend. "Every day it changes wildly, but I feel confident now. We're making significant progress."
Conservative commentator and Parler investor Dan Bongino returned to the social network on Monday, promising that "We will NEVER stop fighting. NEVER. This fight is bigger than me, and it's bigger than Parler. If they're allowed to silence us, they can silence anyone. It stops now. Please stand with us in this fight for liberty, truth, and freedom."
The company's chief policy officer, Amy Peikoff, also took to the site on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, quoting the civil rights leader and suggesting that "this be the year that all of us, regardless of political belief, become extremists for freedom of expression and privacy."
"Our return is inevitable due to hard work, and persistence against all odds," Matze added. "Despite the threats and harassment not one Parler employee has quit. We are becoming closer and stronger as a team."
Biden Pushes Leftist Sexual Ethic With HHS Pick
In an obvious nod to the radical identitarian Left, Joe Biden named Pennsylvania’s Health Secretary “Rachel” Levine as his new assistant secretary of health. Levine, formerly known as Richard, openly identifies as “transgender” and has been a member of the ironically named “Equality Pennsylvania,” an LGBT activist organization. Clearly for conservatives, there are serious problems with putting a demonstrably mentally ill science denier in the nation’s top healthcare position.
Levine, a pediatrician, was appointed as PA’s physician general in 2017 by Democrat Governor Tom Wolf, making him one of the few openly “transgender” individuals in public office.
In announcing his choice, Biden made it clear that he was motivated primarily by an agenda to push the Left’s sexual “ethic” into being accepted and adopted nationally. He stated, “Dr. Rachel Levine will bring the steady leadership and essential expertise we need to get people through this pandemic — no matter their zip code, race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability — and meet the public health needs of our country in this critical moment and beyond. … She is a historic and deeply qualified choice to help lead our administration’s health efforts.”
This perfectly underscores the Democrats’ radical agenda, which seeks to undercut the very fabric of truth. Levine may be a skilled pediatrician, but he clearly is suffering from serious mental delusions. In the recent past, placing an individual with such a serious mental issue in such a position of authority would have been unthinkable. Yet today it is not only celebrated, but anyone who dares to object is vilified as a bigot.
How long before Democrats further attack Americans’ right to free speech and their religious liberty by proposing legislation to “protect” those demanding that everyone acquiesce to delusional demands for preferred pronouns? How long before those of us who dissent and believe in God-designed science are charged with engaging in “hate speech”? It’s already happened on social media. And it will be coming to the federal government.
As a footnote, The Washington Free Beacon reports that Levine is also a hypocrite: “Levine directed Pennsylvania nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients — even as she pulled her own mother out of a longterm-care facility over pandemic concerns.”
Black Lives Matter Goes After WHITE Reporter… They Didn’t Know The Camera Was LIVE!
Black Lives Matter is a national disgrace that has demonstrated over and over again that only SOME black lives matter – the ones they deem worthy. The movement’s actions clearly demonstrate that in their opinion some lives are simply more equal than others.
The movement was spawned by the Michael Brown shooting by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson. Built upon the mantra “Hands up, Don’t Shoot” that was later revealed to be one of the biggest lies of 2015. A Department of Justice investigation into the incident found the “Hands up, don’t Shoot” claim was not supported by the evidence. What the DOJ did find was the physical and forensic evidence supported Wilson’s account of events in that Brown reached into Wilson’s SUV and grabbed and punched the officer, tried to grab Wilson’s gun, and then, in the final moments of his life, charged at Wilson as Wilson shot him.
Yet the Brown family was granted $1.5 million dollars in a wrongful death lawsuit against the city of Ferguson and “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” has been used to perpetuate the execution of police in New York City, Dallas, Baton Rouge, and other places.
After a grand jury chose not to indict Officer Wilson, Brown’s stepfather incited protesters and rioters to “Burn this motherf—er down” and “Burn this b–ch down.” At least 14 people were injured and twelve buildings set on fire in the ensuing violence. Compensating people for legitimate harm done to them is one thing. Paying them $1.5 million for actions precipitated by Brown and inciting violence on his behalf raises serious questions.
Black Lives Matter continues to perpetuate the ideology that this is a race issue. As evidenced by cases like Kelly Thomas and more recently Justine Damond in Minneapolis this is a people issue, not a race one. It is a clear case of demanding that police and government officials be accountable for their actions at perhaps even a higher level than the average citizen. With great power, comes great responsibility.
Racism is ugly no matter what color does it. To choose to hate someone for their particular shade of melanin without knowing the character of the person you are judging is the height of ignorance. No one chooses their skin color. You do choose whether you will be a person of character and integrity.
Yet members of Black Lives Matter chose to assault a reporter from Fox News. He asked her a simple question, “Why are you protesting police and why are you here?” The woman screams at him at times almost incoherently, “Get the F*ck out of here! We don’t want you here! You are a white supremacist!”
All because he dared ask her what her premise was. It seems that when given a platform and the opportunity to factually present her case as to what the movement represents and WHY she felt so strongly about it? She reacted incoherently with emotion and anger making herself look like the racist individual rather than the person she was so violently flinging accusations at.
It seems she forgot the camera was rolling the entire time.
Racism is ugly no matter what color does it. To choose to hate someone for their particular shade of melanin without knowing the character of the person you are judging is the height of ignorance. No one chooses their skin color. You do choose whether you will be a person of character and integrity.
Why the Left Has to Suppress Free Speech
Let us begin with this fact: The left always suppresses speech. Since Vladimir Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917, there has been no example of the left in control and not crushing dissent.
That is one of the important differences between liberal and left: Liberalism and liberals believe in free speech.
(The present leftist threat to freedom in America, the greatest threat to freedom in American history, is made possible because liberals think they have more to fear from conservatives than from the left. Liberals do not understand that the left regards liberals as their useful idiots.)
The left controls universities. There is little or no dissent allowed at universities.
The left controls nearly every “news” medium. There is little or no dissent in the mainstream media—not in the “news” sections and not in the opinion sections.
The left controls Hollywood. No dissent is allowed in Hollywood.
That is why we have “cancel culture”—the silencing and firing of anyone who publicly dissents from the left, and even “publicly” is no longer necessary.
The National Association of Realtors has just announced that if you express dissenting views (on race, especially) in private, you may be fined and lose your membership in the organization—which effectively ends your career as a realtor.
So, we return to the opening question: Why does the left need to crush all dissent? This is a question made all the more stark because there is no parallel on the right: Conservatives do not shut down dissent or debate.
The answer, though the left will not acknowledge it, is the left fears dissent. And it does so for good reason. Leftism is essentially a giant balloon filled with nothing but hot air. Therefore, no matter how big the balloon—the Democratic Party, The New York Times, Yale University—all it takes is a mere pin to burst it.
Leftism is venerated by intellectuals. But there is little intellectual substance to leftism. It is a combination of doctrine and emotion. The proof? Those with intellectual depth do not stifle dissent; they welcome it.
That is why universities are so opposed to conservatives coming to speak on campus. One articulate conservative can undo years of left-wing indoctrination in a one-hour talk or Q&A. I know this from personal experience on campuses. You can, too.
Watch the speeches given by any conservatives allowed to speak on a campus—many of these talks are still on YouTube—and you will see large halls filled with students yearning to hear something other than left-wing pablum. Look at their faces, filled with rapt attention to ideas they never heard that are clearly having an impact.
Universities are entirely right to fear our coming to speak. We come with the pin that bursts their $50,000-a-year balloon.
That is also why it is so hard to get any of them to debate any of us. In 35 years of radio, I have never mistreated or bullied a guest. I was unfailingly polite to an icon of the left, Howard Zinn, the America-hating author of the America-hating “A People’s History of the United States.”
I even invited a UCLA political science professor and violinist, one of seven members of the Santa Monica Symphony Orchestra who refused to play when I conducted the orchestra in a Joseph Haydn symphony in the Disney Concert Hall—solely because I’m a conservative.
Despite his public letter, in which he accused me of holding “horribly bigoted positions” and wrote, “Please urge your friends to not attend this concert, which helps normalize bigotry in our community,” I nevertheless invited him on my national radio show. He agreed.
I had him in studio for an entire hour and treated him and his wife (who accompanied him) with great respect, despite my contempt for his false accusations and his advocacy of the cancel culture. Every American should hear that hour.
Unfortunately for the emotional and intellectual health of our society, he, Zinn, and a few others were anomalies. Of the 100 or so left-wing authors, professors, and columnists invited to appear on my show, almost none has responded in the affirmative. They prefer NPR, where they are never challenged.
The opposite, however, is not true: Every conservative intellectual I know says yes to every one of the (very few) left-wing invitations we receive. Of course, we are almost never invited. We regularly invite leftists. Leftists almost never invite us.
They claim it’s because we are not up to their intellectual level and they have no desire to waste their time. One would think that the opportunity to publicly show how vapid we conservatives really are would be too good to pass up.
Leftists do not debate us or appear as guests on our shows and prevent us from speaking whenever possible, because they (correctly) fear conservatives.
Race-baiters such as Ibram X. Kendi or Ta-Nehisi Coates or “White Fragility” author Robin DiAngelo would never debate Larry Elder, for example.
Why won’t they? Because they would be shown to be the intellectually shallow purveyors of hate they are. Deep down, they know it. Elder is one of many conservative black intellectuals who left-wing blacks (and whites) refuse to debate.
Now you know why the left suppresses free speech: because it has to. If there is free speech, there is dissent. And if there is dissent, there is no more left.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/01/19/why-the-left-has-to-suppress-free-speech
***************************************My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com TONGUE-TIED)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://john-ray.blogspot.com (FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment