As I understand it, each hostname is paid for. For instance there was that crapshow about thedonald.win/patriots.win hostnames and it's clear the mods pay for patriots.win.
Who pays for ga.win or how the win root DNS is built, I have no idea.
It's a catch-22 on the financial side.
Donations? Risk taking money from PACs and foreign agents and be accused of laundering or being a foreign agent for political interference.
Free? You are the product.
Ironically, there's no win scenario in the .win community.
the video was just someone talking with zero proof.
I hear you, I myself looked up the Saudi Sword Dance, and it happens to be a dance happening at major occasions, not only the change of ruler. As it turns out it is indeed used to renew the pledge of allegiance to the King, but then again, during "Trump's sword dance", the King was there too! So to me the "Trump is SA's ruler" reasoning seems to be 99% "bunk" and 1% "maybe true".
As a matter of exhausting possibilities, I tried to look up if another president had partaken in a sword dance on Saudi or other Muslim ground. Turns out, none did, and only James Madison got presented with a Tunisian saber during Thomas Jefferson's presidency, on American ground, according to The Hill.
Where in the video did you see evidence he made all these deals?
Nowhere. I just know about them off-hand and from quick web search:
- Serbia-Kosovo
- UAR-Israel
- Barhein-Israel
- Morocco-Israel
- Sudan-Israel
Maybe there are more (did NorKo and SK ever sign anything?), these at least I know made the news and can be easily looked up.
The broader issue to me (aside from the Serbia-Kosovo deal) is the interests from Muslim nations against Israel, relating to the issue of ownership of Jerusalem, and the wants of the Palestinian Muslim population which is allied with the various Muslim nations, said to be oppressed by Israel (while throwing bombs at Israel and shielding themselves with wives and children) and demanding the land be returned to them (which if you look at history before Islam, was never the Muslim Palestinians'). At least Trump managed to lead them to normalize relationship from country to country.
As Israel still is a prime target for wars (based on religious interests), I see this as a depressurization of a long-degrading situation the military industrial complex could take advantage of after the so-called endless wars actually end.
The fact he managed to broker so many peace deals between middle eastern countries and Israel is a miracle.
Some will be told he was being Jared Kushner's puppet, I'd say he closed doors for the military industrial complex to profit off of more endless wars.
It's been proven that people engage more on Social Media when there's conflict
Taking a page out of newspapers: war sells paper.
The pure removal of section 230 would be a disaster for this board. I believe I explained the real issue here well-enough. What we'd get with pure removal of section 230 is removal of anything that isn't an MSM outlet, and that's it.
Regarding the "lynch a cracka...", I was remembering this tweet which has since been "deleted" (don't know by whom), after "backlash". It is unclear whether it was "moderated" or not, my guess is not but that's only my guess.
Aside from that, Twitter has a clear anti-white bias in their algorithm, as has been demonstrated by several people on T_D, and others like Candace Owens, who got suspended for tweeting the same thing Sarah Jeong said and only replaced "white" with "Jewish". Twitter said it was "an error". https://www.newswars.com/candace-owens-swaps-white-for-jewish-in-sarah-jeong-tweet-gets-suspended/ Can we agree there is no call to action there?
Twitter also "temporarily" banned the pro-Life movie's account "Unplanned" and reinstated it after backlash...
This is scary: how many are banned for wrongthink that we don't hear about?
I agree FB can and shall delete content and eventually ban you should you break TOS.
Maybe my question then should be rephrased: should social media platform be able to delete content and ban people for TOS-compliant speech? I.e. there is nowhere in the TOS that forbids you from saying "abortion is murder" or "Lynch a cracka on your way to work". Yet one will get banned, the other won't, which appears as politically motivated "moderation".
You mention that the Constitution only applies against the government, and as such not on big tech (which are about to get a beating, as a lot of Biden's appointees are Big Tech agents).
The 2nd Amendment applies against the government too, yet the now famous 2008 case DC v. Heller has made precedent the spirit of the 2nd Amendment, that is the use of firearms for self-preservation against other citizens close to harming you to death.
What would it take to bring a 1st Amendment case against Big Tech to the Supreme Court to make precedent the spirit of the 1st Amendment? Is there any recourse?
"Ah no but it's more than that, it needs to be a pattern" - that woman with @Jack in front of Tim Pool on Joe Roegan's show (paraphrased).
As if there wasn't a pattern of pantifa advocating for violence and have still been kept up by Twatter.
All those NES/GES sites either try to sell you gold & silver and/or have a New Age theme to them.
I've been wondering why there were so many bots trying to sell "Trump Gold" on Parler, and the reason I'm reaching is that you are buying gold by selling your money, so they are buying your money by selling gold.
Why are they hoarding money? I have no confirmation on this. Investment in real estate looks like the most basic use they could make out of the small alleys they hit (targets are direct consumers instead of speculators), instead of trying to sell it off in a centralized place like on a stock market and risking crashing the price from oversupply.
Hard times create strong men.
I cannot say anymore without bordering on inciting violence, and I'd rather not be accused of such things.
I am of the belief violence is a tool used by good and evil alike. Good puts it at the back of the tool shed, hopes to never run out of other tools, and lets a sigh of relief when he runs out. Evil abuses it, only showing his lack of skill with the other tools, and in harming others, harms himself.
In portraying "violence" as evil, good has been pacified, leaving evil unmatched and overpowering good.
Q drop #4951
Shall we play a game?
[N]othing [C]an [S]top [W]hat [I]s [C]oming
NCSWIC
https://www.cisa.gov/safecom/NCSWIC?
Who stepped down today [forced]?
https://www.cisa.gov/bryan-s-ware?
More coming?
Why is this relevant?
How do you 'show' the public the truth?
How do you 'safeguard' US elections post-POTUS?
How do you 'remove' foreign interference and corruption and install US-owned voter ID law(s) and other safeguards?
It had to be this way.
Sometimes you must walk through the darkness before you see the light.
Q
post-POTUS
Was it the plan for him to step down anyway?
Its not super secure as computation to brute a hash function gets stronger and more available with the passing years, but Q deems it sufficient for the purpose of posting on 8kun.
Plausible deniability. If whoever Q is gets arrested: "Oh, I posted this? And you know that because of the tripcode? Nope, nope, you can't say the tripcode is enough to prove I did post that, my lawyer will tell you it's not secure enough to be proof."
Then you don't know what the difference between vigilantism and self-defense is.
One is a crime, the other is one of the most natural rights of life there are.
This sign is a warning against would-be intruders. Invasion of property is a direct threat, be prepared to face the consequences. Until then, we are good.
As long as there are no intruders, no criminals, then you don't have to take justice in your own hands. That makes the sign double-up as reducing the potential for vigilantism.