FLASHBACK
Tag: freedom
CANADA: What are the major changes coming to Alberta’s Bill of Rights?
“One of the amendments we are making to the Bill of Rights is to reinforce the right of every Albertan to make their own choices regarding the medical treatments they receive. This includes ensuring that every individual in our province who has the mental capacity to do so will have the right to decide whether or not to receive a vaccination or other medical procedure,” she said. “In recent years, we’ve seen the challenges and hardship that can arise when that right to bodily autonomy is not adequately protected. It is my firm conviction that no Albertan should ever be subjected or pressured into accepting a medical treatment without their full consent.”
The changes also aim to strengthen property rights.
“This is a reaffirmation of your right to own and enjoy the property that you’ve worked so hard for. There will also be an amendment to make clear that in Alberta, we respect the right of individuals to legally acquire, keep and safely use firearms. For many Albertans, firearms are critical to their livelihood and way of life,” Smith continued. “I personally feel that law-abiding firearms owners have been unfairly targeted by our federal government for decades, and it is my hope that these amendments will better protect the rights of our farmers, ranchers, hunters and sports enthusiasts.”
The Premier concluded by saying that the amendments to Alberta’s Bill of Rights are more than legal changes and that, in her view, they reaffirm the province’s core values.
“They are about protecting our rights, our freedoms and our way of life. We are sending a clear message that in Alberta, the rights of individuals are paramount and that government must respect those rights at every turn. As your Premier, it is my duty and my honour to stand up for your rights. I believe deeply in the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility that have guided and built this province for generations,” she concluded.
You are responsible for your own safety
Women against gun ownership are irrational. Guns are called the ‘great equalizer’ because they allow the physically weak to protect themselves from the physically strong. Gun-control in USA originally started to keep guns out of the hands of blacks, who to this day have by far the highest murder rate in USA. American whites as a group have a lower violent crime rate than Europe. It’s no longer a secret that our ruling cabal hates white people and white culture. We are down but not out. At least learn how to protect yourself and then do it. Even the Dalai Lama supports this position. ABN
FLASHBACK: Vax injury ignored by ‘scientists’
Telegram caves — changes privacy policy to ‘discourage criminals’
The messaging app Telegram has said it will hand over users’ IP addresses and phone numbers to authorities who have search warrants or other valid legal requests.
The change to its terms of service and privacy policy “should discourage criminals”, CEO Pavel Durov said in a Telegram post on Monday.
“While 99.999% of Telegram users have nothing to do with crime, the 0.001% involved in illicit activities create a bad image for the entire platform, putting the interests of our almost billion users at risk,” he continued.
The announcement marks a significant reversal for Mr Durov, the platform’s Russian-born co-founder who was detained by French authorities last month at an airport just north of Paris.
“Telegram’s marketing as a platform that would resist government demands attracted people that wanted to feel safe sharing their political views in places like Russia, Belarus, and the Middle East,” Mr Scott-Railton said.
“Many are now scrutinizing Telegram’s announcement with a basic question in mind: does this mean the platform will start cooperating with authorities in repressive regimes?”
Telegram has not given much clarity on how the company will handle the demands from leaders of such regimes in the future, he added.
Cybersecurity experts say that while Telegram has removed some groups in the past, it has a far weaker system of moderating extremist and illegal content than competing social media companies and messenger apps.
Before the recent policy expansion, Telegram would only supply information on terror suspects, according to 404 Media.
The Administrative State is Unravelling — Peter St Onge
Kamala vs Kamala
FLASHBACK: Howo is not always wrong
Speech control is mind-control
This is an absurd example of brainwashed cops (not all cops are brainwashed) being stupid (not all cops are stupid). When you say someone is a ‘filthy migrant’ that person may well have been filthy (and it does not mean that all migrants are filthy). Furthermore, if someone spat on you isn’t the descriptor filthy about the least you would say about them? UK cops are trained to react to adjectives applied to migrants, but not the crime perpetrated against a citizen. I bet if she had spit on them, she would have been arrested and probably cussed out as well. Note the dead, glaring eyes of those three stupid cops; it’s an example of how mind-control gets deep into the brain. ABN
Continue reading “Speech control is mind-control”‘We need to get rid of the Monstrous institution called the European Union’ — Eva Vlaardingerbroek
Harris on Musk — ‘He has lost his privileges’
The twisted reasoning of a totalitarian. In USA, free speech is an inalienable right. A driver’s license is a ‘privilege’. Politicians are not our masters telling us what we can and cannot say. ABN
YouTube Has Removed 1 Million Videos About Covid, CEO Says
Her thoughtless spiel proves the value of free speech. She was dead wrong. Millions knew she was wrong and tried to warn but were censored out of fear, greed and darker motivations. Official covid trusted and authoritative information, as claimed by Wojcicki, was actually anti-science mind-control, which killed tens of millions worldwide. It’s one thing to say something stupid and wrong, people will figure it out eventually. It’s another thing—a much worse thing—to censor millions of people who were right. We figured that out too but it took a much long time than if we had not been censored. Censorship is mind-control done by people with dimmer minds than many of those they are censoring. A dim mind is prone to self-righteous control over others. It is fundamentally a parasitic mind-set. Culturally, free speech is the only thing that stops people of that ilk. That’s why we have laws protecting free speech and that’s why people of that ilk constantly undermine those laws or try to change them. ABN
Telegram founder Pavel Durov transferred from police custody to court after arrest in France
Paris CNN — Telegram founder Pavel Durov was released from police custody in France on Wednesday and transferred to court for questioning ahead of a possible indictment, prosecutors told CNN, days after his dramatic arrest at a Paris airport.
The Russian-born billionaire exited the anti-fraud office outside Paris in what appeared to be a police vehicle on Wednesday afternoon, according to a CNN producer there.
The Paris prosecutor’s office said he would now face “initial questioning and possible indictment” at a court in the French capital.
Durov, 39, was detained at Paris’s Bourget Airport on Saturday on a warrant related to Telegram’s lack of moderation. He was being investigated on charges relating to a host of crimes, including allegations that his platform was complicit in aiding fraudsters, drug traffickers and people spreading child pornography.
“You cannot make it safe against criminals and open for governments,” Durov told CNN in 2016. “It’s either secure or not secure.”
The issue comes down to the highlighted quote from Durov above. At first glance, it may seem reasonable for government, even an ideally good government, to control how criminals communicate electronically. Upon more thought, one wonders why should even an ideally good government presuppose this right of search, seizure, judgement and censorship against electronic communication? Isn’t it enough for even an ideally good government to pursue criminals as they have always been charged to do? That is, without summary search, seizure, judgement and censorship? Compounding factors are no one in their right mind trusts any real-world government with those over-the-top powers, and yet we all know they do it anyway, despite the law. So, should they alone have privacy in their communications, which they abuse against all of us, or should all of us have privacy in our communications which only some of us will abuse? ABN
American Buddhist Net 