Again, I don't want to turn this into a gaming blog--it is mostly focused on news, but I feel it is important for parents to know things that are not being reported about Clash of Clans on most review sites. Primarily, Clash of Clans is unsafe for kids unless parents have control of the clan they are part of and Parents keep the clan "invite only" or "closed" to outsiders. Second, Clash of Clans is easily hacked.
I am writing this after about a month of play. I will continue playing, but we have closed our clan to any outsiders at this point. That said, I now know that my account could easily be taken by a stranger at any point and that unless you are a big time gaming YouTuber, your chances of them doing anything about it are slim.
First, Clash of Clans was having problems with global chat so they banned it. They also seem to prevent personal questions from being asked to some degree. (Any blocked out words can be rewritten to fool automatic censors.) This, however, does not prevent young children from giving out their name or location to others that might have built up trust with them in clan chat. Further, the "report" system is very bad. (1) Clan leaders cannot automatically delete offensive chat messages. When we were an open to all clan, we frequently had people join and talk about their body parts inappropriately or saying they wanted to "fack" someone and asking for phone numbers. The leader could kick these people out of the clan and report the messages, but the messages remained in chat for anyone to see--even people who joined after they were posted. A clan leader should have ultimate control over the clan chat and be able to instantly delete messages they report, but they do not. (2) Clash of clans allows its abbreviation: "COC" which is unfortunately a misspelling of an inappropriate word. Users take advantage of this and many descriptions and clan names talk about their "COC." Further, it seems to be relatively easy to fool the AI and clan names such as FitchBuckers exist, among many other inappropriate names that talk about all sorts of body parts and inappropriate things. In order to advance, you must randomly fight others and you (and your children) will eventually come across these clans and and even users. To the best of my knowledge, there is no way to report clan names or descriptions. (3) Reporting someone for inappropriate behavior can take up to two days. Clash of Clans then gives the player a temporary ban. Retaliation is real--even though the player does not know who reported him/her, they obviously know if they have been kicked out of a clan. If within two days they then get a temporary ban, it would not be hard to put two and two together. Further, if the clan is still open, they can join again. To the best of my knowledge Clash of Clans does not have a way of prohibiting specific players from joining.
In our case, one of these people rejoined our clan, changed our description (somehow) to read that it had been taken down by a moderator and got our Clan leader banned for spamming people with ads (which was completely untrue). Keep in mind that Clash of Clans supposedly spent two days investigating this person and their inappropriate message (we have 14 year old girls in our clan) was still posted for them to see if they wanted. Clash of Clans states the clan description was changed from inside the clan, but the only two people who have the power to do that did not do it. That means this person somehow was able to hack the system and allow it to think they had the authority to do so. This person, who was probably only slapped on the wrist with a two day suspension by Clash of Clans, has gone on to other clans and changed their description to the same thing he changed ours to. Even though we had not only reported this guy but also then reported the changes he made to our description, the person still had an active account the last I checked. There should be an easy way to determine if a person is reporting someone in retaliation--and these reports should be thoroughly checked before another player is banned. Apparently, they are not. If our leader gets banned again because of retaliation, it may be a permanent ban since she already has one unjust ban on her record.
Clash of Clans (owned by Supercell) is also unsafe as far as account recovery is concerned. It is reported that nearly 5% of the users have their accounts hacked. YouTube gamers and other online review sites that actually talk about this problem push using Supercell ID to "protect" your account. The only thing Supercell ID does is link all your Supercell accounts together on your phone and give you 50 free gems. Numerous players who user Supercell ID have their accounts hacked--telling you to use it is merely passing the blame on to the victim.
One Clash of Clans gamer repeatedly told fans to change your passwords frequently to prevent your account from being hacked. Again, this is blaming the user (instead of poor game security) and it also is completely pointless. Supercell does not use passwords at all.
The real problem is that Supercell makes it easy for bots to attack them. To get an account in your name, you simply have to say you lost access to your old e-mail and you don't even remember what that e-mail address was. Supercell will then ask you a series of questions, including questions about things you bought with real money.
Again, professional gamers (you can even donate to these people in-game) say, you simply have to make real purchases with money and don't lose those receipts and that will protect you. The problem is, again, that if you spend money on this game that will not prevent a hacker from taking over your account. You may be able to get it back, but there have been reports that this is not always easy and some negative reviews state the person had all the data, but still could not get the account. One person revealed that this is because bots can plant fake receipts in the account. Obviously, you would have no knowledge of these receipts, but the hackers would. Further, if the account was inactive for a month or so, a hacker took control of it, and then you tried to reclaim it, there would be no way for you to know the activity since that hacker took over and the last e-mail address you used would not be the same as the one the hacker is now using.
Also, one question you must answer is about the time your base was created. Again, anyone has access to your ID number by simply scanning through top player lists or even battling you, and anyone can view your base. The ID number and base itself can tell them approximately when your base was created, and in most cases this date is close enough to get the question "correct."
Most online businesses send an e-mail to your old account if you are reportedly changing it because you lost the e-mail. Clash of Clans does not take this security step. Nor do they send a text to a phone number you have on file to confirm you are making any e-mail or phone access changes. These are two easy security steps Supercell could use before changing any account information. Instead, they simply make the change if enough questions are answered correctly--in some cases, people have reported being able to change their accounts without providing any information.
Considering that people spend money on Clash of Clans, and yet can easily lose their accounts to hackers (1 in 20 people is too big of odds in my opinion), who then resell the accounts for large amounts of money, and your chances of recovering it are slim unless you are one of those gamers with millions of followers who advertise for Clash of Clans by playing it on YouTube, this game is completely unsafe.
If, for example, you have a family clan and a hacker takes over one of your accounts, takes over the clan, kicks you out , but leaves your kids in and sells it, this creates serious issues. As I said, I am going to continue playing for my kids' sake, but I do not think I would have let them join at all in the beginning if I knew all this ten years ago. Currently, I believe the only thing that offers some protection is if you create a clan for your family that is closed to everyone else. You will probably never be able to get all the bonuses and benefits (unless you have 50 people in your family), but it will create a much safer environment than allowing your kids to play alone and join someone else's clan. Further, if you allow your kids to play, understand that they may be assigned to fight one of many people who have inappropriate names and they will also be able to access inappropriate descriptions. There is no way to lock your children into your clan alone and therefore, if you are not watching, they could easily drop out and join any other clan where they would not be protected at all.
Although most of this is simple internet security, Clash of Clans is cartoony and looks like a kid friendly app. Unfortunately, it is a wolf in sheep's clothing and few of the review sites are talking about that.
Well, look at that, our modern scientists finally figured out what they knew right after the Spanish flu—lockdowns failed to stopCOVID-19 deaths and spread, and limiting gatherings might have increased COVID-19 deaths. Some scientists are also finally admitting that COVID-19boosters don’t help, either. Granted we have known for decades that mRNA shots are only effective for about 3 months in humans and we knew that although large numbers of antibodies were produced right after vaccination but those numbers did not effectively stop the virus after about 1 month—Guess what? we are working on our fourth booster one year on here in the West. With the serious side effects now finally being reported, we have to ask if these experimental non-vaccines that don't prevent you from getting or giving COVID-19 are worth it. I am not an alarmist or a conspiracy theorist. I never have been. But from the beginning, I have said and continue to say that what we are doing—lockdowns, masks, fake vaccines—is making the COVID-19 problem worse based on hundreds of years of science that we have thrown out the window—and now science is finally being able to publish the truth—albeit in a limited manner. Not that the world is listening--Kiribati just enacted lockdown and others are still in lockdown mode or just now coming out of it. The persons and countries who first suggested lockdowns should be made to pay the rest of the world for their un-scientific sins.
You want COVID-19 to go away, well, there is a simple answer—stop
testing. If we tested for flu as much as we tested for COVID-19, the numbers and
deaths from flu would be 10 times higher than what we have. But we don’t test everyone
who walks into a doctor’s office for flu or mandate everyone who shows up to
work with flu symptoms get tested for it before being allowed back to work. And
that is what is really killing our economy and supply chains and hospitals and
every other place. The problem is that the available jobs we have are being
falsely created temporarily to meet demand while people are out sick with COVID—whether
they are sick or not. Our actually job situation is in a much worse place than
what they are telling us. In addition, stopping testing will make COVID-19 and
the money and power that came with it disappear. April is the next spike, let’s see if the CDC
decides to relinquish its power over the world or not.
I knew all this was bunk from the beginning and questioned
why the CDC, which I completely trusted prior to March 2020, was lying or at
least misleading people from everything to the concentration of their bleach
water to masks—but I have lost too many friends because of their bunk to say I told
you so. Now, I know that a lot of people made money off of us—the poor who couldn’t
afford to rent out an entire hotel during lockdowns or throw a party on their
yachts or buy the best foods or get moved to the front of the health care line
and get a private room in a hospital. The problem is that they have done it at
the cost of our lives. I really don’t mind rich or privileged people having
more things or opportunities than me. But when those people are getting their
money by inflicting more suffering on the poor, I have a serious problem with
that. It takes great restraint to not curse them as more of my unvaccinated
friends are being denied medical care after getting COVID-19 from some hapless,vaccinated sheep who believed he or she could go out with COVID-19 symptomssince they received these fake “vaccines.” And frankly, I don’t really care if
you are vaccinated or not—if you are sick, whether its from “vaccine” side
effects or a minor cold—stay home. Also, keep in mind that mRNA vaccines were not used because they could be quickly developed- China developed 2 traditional vaccines in the same time it took us to pump mRNA and adenovirus vaccines out. They are being used because they are cheap. Name one time when something "cheap" worked as well or better than the real thing.
Several news agencies report that NATO is completely in agreement with our choice to invade: SEe for example, Fox, the Hill. Really? "Unanimity" means "agreement by all people involved." Croatia is in NATO. It's president has said that if the United States goes to war with Russia over Ukraine, Croatia will drop out of NATO. Now, although the Croatian president is not the Croatian's NATO contact, he has full control of the military--if he doesn't send troops and drops out of NATO that is what will happen. I suppose since Croatia will no longer be a member that would return the "total unanimity" but as of right now many nations see the United States as the aggressor here.
Keep in mind that way back when the first revolt broke out in Ukraine, the president that was ousted had been elected in a legal, U.N. supervised election... and the U.S. funded his removal. Since then, we have dumped billions into equipping and training our Ukrainian puppet government--will Americans ever get tired of this scenario that started with Korea and Vietnam? Hunter Biden, who was no longer employable in the U.S. because of his dishonorable "general" discharge from the military was given a cushy job in Ukraine because he was the vice-president's son. When Burisma was investigated, former Vice-President Biden said if Ukrainian officials didn't drop the charges, the U.S. would withhold aid... and then bragged about doing so on television. Last year, in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, when our government was printing money like there was no tomorrow--increasing inflation--we gave Ukraine, out of the goodness of the American people's hearts, more than half a billion dollars! This didn't go to the people of Ukraine, by the way, this went to their military, so they could attempt to retake the land Russia has refused to release: The parts of Ukraine that are populated by Russian citizens.
The biggest question should not be whether the other NATO member countries are willing to go to war over non-NATO Ukraine just to keep U.S. secret dealings there secret. After NATO's failure in Afghanistan, they were already questioning the alliance. The real question is are Americans willing to sacrifice their children to the war effort? Consider the fact we already have American troops on the ground "training" Ukrainian military--I don't think the current Administration cares what Americans, or any other European nation, wants.
The worst thing is that the Pentagon is not filled with time-tested military generals. No, it is filled with defense contractors all set to make money off any war. These are the people telling us we have to go to war with Russia...
NBC reported on how many people who came down with COVID-19 and had been vaccinated then died from COVID-19. Now, sceptic that I am, I crunched the numbers in the article, and... well the case fatality from COVID-19 among the vaccinated is about 1.1%. Then, I did a quick check by crunching the numbers of cases in the US and the case fatality from COVID-19 in general (over the past two years mind you--and doctors were killing them left and right in the beginning)... its 1.6%. So, if you get the vaccine, you are "drastically" reducing your chance of dying from COVID-19 by 0.5%.
Then I stumbled across this gem published by the CDC. Again, the title and a bunch of technical wording makes it seem as if your chance of dying from COVID-19 is lower if you are vaccinated. This is false. Crunch the numbers yourself. In the 569,000ish people who were not vaccinated and got COVID-19, 1.1% of them died. In the 45,000ish people who were vaccinated and caught COVID-19, 1.3% of them died. That's right--the fully vaccinated were MORE likely to die from getting COVID-19. I also note that while they talk about the "substantial" differences, they fail to mention "significant" differences. This is important. If the paper does not find significant results (and that word is not mentioned at all!!!!) its conclusions should not be trusted. That is the purpose of significance in a scientific study. Shame on the CDC (again) for publishing this piece of fake science.
Now, lets think about this. Countries in the EU are no longer allowing this or that vaccine because there is an increased risk of heart failure. According to Moderna's own information submitted to the FDA, there is an increase in other major organ issues too. And most mRNA vaccines in the past have also increased your chances of blood clots. I can't tell you how many obituaries of vaccinated people I have read that talk about them dying of stroke and then saying it is "unconnected" to their recent vaccination... For those of you who don't know, a stroke is basically a blood clot in the brain. I know personally of eight people who died "suddenly" within a few days of getting vaccinated and had no previous health issues. So your chance of dying or getting serious internal organ issues after being vaccinated are real.
Further, the vaccine will protect you from COVID-19 for less than 6 months. We have been doing mRNA vaccine research for 20 years and nothing they do has ever made it last very long. After that, your chance of getting COVID-19 doubles. I was wondering why new case numbers are climbing astronomically compared to last year despite the fact more than half the worldwide community is vaccinated.
I mean, we are used to getting flu vaccines every year--but they have always told us it was a different flu. They are trying to do that with COVID-19, too by pushing "variants." There are thousands of variants out there, but you only hear about one or two. Ironically, the vaccines are supposed to cover all these variants, but "might not" cover any new variants...
Are people willing to get 2 booster shots every year (or 3...or 4) for the rest of their lives when each shot puts their lives at risk? Keep in mind that unlike smallpox and polio, COVID-19 has MANY animal vectors who can get and give it: in other words, we can NEVER eradicate it.
On the other hand, the people who get it naturally have immunity for at least a year and most research is saying they think it will be lasting. Granted, this research was not done on people who got it after being vaccinated.
Here is some information with citations you can share if you want to know the truth about Dr. Fauci and his relationship with big pharma: in the 1980s, Dr. Fauci made an announcement that the FDA should fast track AZT trials for HIV. This shocked the FDA because they knew AZT had failed as a cancer treatment. The company that makes AZT stopped trials after 17 weeks because they stated it would be "unethical" to deny it to the placebo group. AZT caused people with HIV to be more sick, die sooner, and it accelerated HIV mutations into resistant strains. Currently, AZT is not recommended as a sole treatment for HIV, and when used in combination with other drugs 50% of the people who start it have to be pulled off it. Unfortunately, many of the people with HIV who suffered because they took AZT that had been recommended for general use by Dr. Fauci (instead of last resort emergency use as approved by the FDA) are now dead. Big pharma charge $8000 per month to every person who took AZT during its height.
After that, Dr. Fauci legally took kick-backs from pharmaceutical companies for developing and getting Interleukin-2 approved as another HIV drug. Fauci claimed he felt uncomfortable about taking the kickbacks and "donated them to charity." Still, despite Fauci's research showing Interleukin-2 helped fight HIV, four years later independent research showed Interleukin-2 was ineffective and detrimental to HIV patients because it weakened immune cells and made the ineffective.
Dr. Fauci continued to take kickbacks from big pharma and use funds donated to the NSAID/NIH to specifically support big pharma research. This creates questionable ethics cycles: for example in the current pandemic, Bill Gates invested in Moderna and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation has regularly donated money to NSAID which Dr. Fauci directed to Moderna research. Dr. Fauci became the gatekeeper between Moderna and the FDA (and here), and in an ironically similar situation to that during the AZT release, Moderna stopped placebo trials as soon as it received emergency use authorization (before determining statistically significant effectiveness or side effects) because it would be "unethical" to deny the vaccine to the placebo group.
During the 2014 Ebola "crisis," Dr. Fauci pushed for emergency use of Remdesivir, again this drug was found to be ineffective against Ebola after independent studies.
Dr. Fauci refuses to disclose his financial ties, but his net worth is apparently in the millions. When he completely flipflopped on masks, no one questioned him despite the NAS stating there was no scientific evidence that masks prevented asymptomatic spread (and that it was highly unlikely they did). With his past history of promoting bad drugs and flipflopping suddenly, why hasn't he been investigated?
Further, just as with AZT, Dr. Fauci again promoted Remdesivir as a COVID-19 treatment and pushed it through emergency use. Independent studies showed that people who took Remdesivir early showed no statistically significant benefit (however, Remdesivir patients suffered twice the number of side effects), were ignored. Further Remdesivir did not significantly reduce death rates or rates of serious disease even in the NIH funded study. When the WHO stated Remdesivir given to the sickest later in the course of the disease did not help them at all, WHO was attacked for not taking into account people who had been given the drug earlier. In fact, Fauci has criticized all studies that show Redmesivir is not clinically effective at treating COVID-19 and comes with serious side effects (as seen in the article above).
Although the past evidence is enough to raise question about Dr. Fauci's conduct, full research should be done, including his financial situation and how he has handled NIH funds and determined which companies get grants to perform research. At the least, the FDA should immediately cancel EUAs without independent research and full clinical trials because of the misinformation leading to deaths surrounding Dr. Fauci's previous research projects.
Yes, previously when mRNA vaccines were given to animals, they developed blood clots from the vaccines. Since none of the new vaccines, including the ones with adenovirus instead of mRNA, have been tested for safety and effectiveness in a random control trial that produced significant results, no one should believe they are getting a safe vaccine. Nor should anyone believe they are getting a well-tested, effective vaccine. Effectiveness could only be determined if during the trials 30,000 people had come down with COVID-19 (vaccinated + placebo groups). Fewer than 180 came down with it. Further, trials were stopped one week after people received their second shots. Moderna specifically stated that it was going to stop all placebo groups as soon as it got FDA approval. This destroys the experiment and any data that may now come from it and is one of the worst kinds of vaccine fraud.
So, when my friend's neighbor dies of a blood clot after getting the vaccine, my eyebrow raises. When European countries stop vaccines because of blood clots, I take notice. This fits with what we know about mRNA vaccines and it fits with a push to "get everyone vaccinated ASAP." Big guys have a lot of money invested in these vaccines, and with Facebook squelching all reports of adverse effects and VAERS - the nations data gathering system for vaccine side effects- not being talked about, it seems like they are trying to make as much as they can before the house of cards finishes collapsing.
The house of cards has already started to fall. Norway detected an unusual number of people who died from the vaccine. The EU has noted a spike in blood clots. The US noticed an uptick in allergic reactions and the FDA warned the vaccine makers about it. Still we plod on-- VACCINATE! VACCINATE! VACCINATE!
I have had a lot of vaccines in my life. I have never had my entire arm swell up nor have I had to miss a day of work because of them... granted the vaccines I have had spent decades being researched for safety and effectiveness before they were released.
In the US, you cannot sue a vaccine maker, but you can be reimbursed for medical expenses by the US government if you have an adverse reaction to a vaccine. The problem is that the COVID-19 vaccines are "experimental." They are not FDA approved--nor have they undergone the necessary trials to become FDA approved. Why would they need to? They were given emergency use status and the companies not only have no liability for their products but also are being promoted everywhere using Nazi propaganda techniques. They will never get FDA approval because they are neither safe nor effective. If they were safe and effective they would not have stopped the trials prior to achieving significant results that would have given them FDA approval.
It is one thing to have an experimental vaccine available for those in the population who wish to take it or participate in the experiment. It is quite another to force an experimental vaccine on everyone in the World. So far, it hasn't been forced on anyone. But the vaccination passports in development should scare us all. There are many diseases more deadly than COVID-19--why haven't we had passports for any of those? Finish testing the vaccine and have significant results. THEN countries can decide if they want to force it on people and provide them with "Vaccine passports."
This article should scare people. Facebook has forced the government of Australia to back down (and not the other way around). When a company can directly control legislation, there is a problem.
The biggest problem is that Facebook has grown too big and no government will now stand up to it because it can block government content, news content, and any user content it wants to block. That means we, the people, are the only ones left to stop them.
This shouldn't be difficult, but unfortunately, Facebook has designed and perfected its platform in such a way that it has not only become addictive, but also has become the sole mediator of what information you receive. They have done this to the point that now they can fill your feed with garbage advertising and you still will scroll through it.
So, it is time, we leave Facebook. Ideally, the majority of the world would quit in protest, but I have learned that ideals don't work for most. Even I would have a problem completely cutting it, and I frequently take week-long or month long breaks from it. So, the solution I propose is branching out. Dedicate one day of your week to exploring other social networks and forbid yourself from getting on FB for that one day.
If enough people migrate some of their time from FB, FB will feel it. In addition, you might find another network you like better than FB. In addition to Pinterest, LinkedIn, Goodreads, and Blogger (which I already use), here are some options I am planning to try: WT Social, Parler, Mastodon, MeWe, Ello, Steemit, and Diaspora.
I might also try VK, but I don't like that the Russian Government is now controlling it in the same way that I don't like how Facebook is being controlled by American politics and Zuckerberg's greed. For the same reason, a site from China like Sina Weibo is not appealing (in addition to the fact I have to use Google to translate the pages since my Chinese character recognition is minimal). I also don't like Discord because it limits your content only to those in your group and it is a very different medium than FB.
Bill Gates likes to think he is a genius and has revolutionary ideas on every subject from climate control to medicine to education. For years, those the subject of his generosity have seen it as a double edged sword--money given to them but which cannot be used to make things better because it can only be used to do what Bill Gates wants. What Bill Gates wants is rarely beneficial.
Bill Gates was raised in one of those privileged environments where his parents only accepted winning. As might be expected, this created a man who will win--even if he must cheat to do it.
So far, the media has treated Bill as if he is a genius who knows everything about everything. Bill's house of cards is collapsing, but it is doubtful that he will be the one blamed for his failures.
Consider virtual learning. Remember, Bill had made a heavy investment in this. Despite his previous New York educational failures, Cuomo turned to him to revolutionize Virtual Learning, believing as Bill Gates preached, that in-class learning was unnecessary.
Now, let's keep in mind that Bill Gates has never been overly fond of education and dropped out of Harvard after his second year. Bill Gates and Joe Biden also have one major thing in common--neither of them seem to care that plagiarism is illegal. Both of them have also managed to plagiarize without being panned for it. Bill Gates stole the API from CP/M to make MSDOS and Biden plagiarized his schoolwork among other things.
Well, as children have failed Bill Gates' Virtual Experiment and as he grew richer from their failure, we should immediately recognize him for the parasite he is and ignore anything else he tells us we should spend our money on--since he is not an unbiased academic but rather a person who will collect big bucks when we take his advice. However, since the news is not mentioning him in any of the articles that I have seen on the failure of his educational idea, I doubt people will make the connection that he was behind it on their own.
The Freedom of Speech is an American's first amendment right. In past years, "fact checkers" have sprung up everywhere. Now, originally THE fact checking organization was Snopes, but even they started to have problems. Fact checking organizations were, for the most part, harmless when it came to free speech. People still had the right to speak out and say what they believed and those reading or hearing their message were able to do their own fact checking using their preferred fact checking organization.
By freedom of speech, anyone should have the ability to say anything about anyone else, unless what they say is a direct threat to another person. For example, a person who says "I want to kill XXX" should be investigated. Detailed plans on how to kill yourself or others should also be removed.
The problem with this election is that the Democrats moved direct threats into a gray area. It started with COVID-19--no one, even scientists who have for centuries been openly debating ideas as a part of the scientific process, was allowed to publicly say anything different from the mainstream because it "might" put someone's lives at risk. The problem is that the CDC stopped putting out good information and started putting out garbage--even going against National Academy of Sciences advice on masks. Once this freedom of Speech was taken away without any formal protests, it moved to the next level.
Nancy Pelosi told FB and other social media to censor President Trump if he made ANY negative statements about her or other female Democrats because they would interpret that as direct attacks on women. This took away President Trump's freedom of speech, and as it has always been, once they took away someone's right to free speech they began to expand that power. FB and other agencies employed "fact checkers" that selectively silenced not only President Trump's voice, but also the voices of many Republicans. It is for this reason that I refused to vote for a single Democrat this year--a first to the best of my knowledge. I refuse to support a party that prohibits free Speech.
How can you run for a political office without being allowed to say anything inflammatory about the other side or good about the things you have done especially when the other side is allowed to tell whatever lies they want about you? This is one reason why the Democrats thought they would win by a landslide. The problem is they did not stop their Human Rights violations there.
The Democrats then petitioned to get the Green Party and Socialist Parties off the ballots in several states. In the case of Pennsylvania, the Green Party collected more than the required signatures in time (8,000+ when they only needed 5,000). The signature of the elected vice-president was not on an affidavit switching her out for the stand in vice president. Now, either this woman should have been allowed a chance to sign the paper or the stand in vice president should have gone on the ballot. Instead, the Democrats and the Democrat controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court refused to allow the Green Party Ballot Access. Ballot Access is already a trampled right in America. In Wisconsin, it was even worse. The Green Party filed a lawsuit 2 weeks after being told they could not be on the ballot there, and the judge threw it out because it wasn't filed in a "timely" manner. For most other things, you have at least 30 days to file against things. Michigan locked down, and when the Socialist Party asked to have the 30,000 required signatures reduced because of the difficulty of collecting during lockdown, they were denied this request. Democrats and Republicans in Michigan only had to get less than 12,000 signatures to be on the ballot.
American Political Third-Parties need equal access to ALL BALLOTS. There needs to be a federal law stating that (1) it is illegal to deny access to any party who has not previously appeared on a ballot and (2) all political parties must be subject to the SAME ballot laws. Unfortunately, Democrats were elected by their blind followers.
Unfortunately, Democrats are still blind to the fact that the Democrat party has decided to trample rights akin to China. Chinese people do not get to vote because they only have one party for whom they can vote. Democrats denying ballot access is a step in that direction. Chinese people do not have freedom of Speech. They are not allowed to say anything against the ruling party.
Now, before you argue that the Republicans are equally bad you should know (1) Republicans helped pay court fees so the Green Party could fight to get back on the ballot in court and (Republicans did not try to get Libertarians off the ballot until it was too late (i.e. they started the process after getting the idea from Democrats).
As long as people continue to support Republican and Democrat nominees and their myriad of laws against third parties, Americans will never get a choice. Third parties have been getting more and more of the vote and in some cases beating Democrat challengers. These partisan laws need to be removed from the books and equal ballot access needs to be required throughout the United States. Third-parties need to start at lower levels (which are even more difficult to get ballot access for). They need to challenge unfair discrimination in ballot access laws in court. It is not a coincidence that once third parties started getting significant numbers Democrats decided to remove them and Republicans followed suit.
Twitter banned the President's account for stating facts. The President's posts this year that have stated other facts have been removed.
For some reason, we don't want Russia posting truth about our candidates nor do we want our President posting facts about the opposing side. Hunter Biden got a job that paid $80,000 per year (among other jobs) because he was Joe Biden's son.
Former President Bush actually gave Hunter Biden a job on a Railroad safety board back during his Presidency. This was another job that Hunter himself stated he got because his dad was Joe Biden. Perhaps this is why Bush does not vote for or back President Trump. President Trump is allowing investigations into Epstein; Prince Andrew was buddies with Epstein, and Prince William backs Biden (whom presumably will stop the investigations).
Now, I will tell you right here that I did not vote for President Trump in the last election. I don't like President Trump's attitudes or most of his Twitter activity. But I do support free speech. And blocking the President from giving facts on an account that was followed by many, is wrong. Americans already are facing enormous Social Media censorship because Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats threatened them if they did not censor President Trump and his supporters. This is not the American way. We have free speech even if others do not like that speech as long as it doesn't put anyone in danger.
Whether you are an American or not, whether you are a Republican or not, you have to take a stand against this censorship, or YOUR VOICE might be the next one banned. Close your Twitter accounts in protest and find other outlets that allow free speech to use.
I have written a new book, filled with citations to help clear up the mystery surrounding all the COVID-19 misinformation. Here is the description:
The misinformation surrounding COVID-19 has possibly been the largest since the propaganda created in Nazi Germany. With even the CDC first telling everyone not to wear masks and now telling everyone to wear them, it can be extremely difficult to discover just what is right and what is wrong. Who do you trust? This book, filled with more than 300 cited references, was written to help you find the truth. It is a must-read if you are confused or if you want to find out if you have been able to sort through all the lies successfully. 30% of all the profits from the sale of this book will be divided equally and donated to a local YMCA and a summer camp that have been hit hard financially because of the COVID-19 business closures.
You can find the book on Amazon at the following links:
Full color version paperback: https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Big-Lie-COVID-19-Pandemic/dp/B08FP5V3JN/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&qid=1597677713&refinements=p_27%3AJennifer+J.+Reinoehl&s=books&sr=1-1&text=Jennifer+J.+Reinoehl
Color E-book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08G56JQVB
Black and white version paperback & black and white large print paperback--links to be posted within the next week or so.
I am also going to be running some Goodreads Giveaways and will post those links as soon as they are ready.
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."Oh, so he only claimed to "create" the Internet, not "invent" it. Snopes then goes on to try to prove that these two words are not really synonyms , that it was pulled out of context (Gore was answering a question about why he should be elected over his opponent), and that Gore was perfectly accurate in what he said because he had promoted the Internet throughout his time in Congress. In fact, many other websites and even some of the true Internet entrepreneurs are making this claim to support Gore. "Promote" and "create" are not synonyms in any way.
(The inventor of the World Wide Web is responsible for getting the Internet to take off--if you had to type 93.184.216.34 instead of simple names, you would find the experience to be a pain in the rear. I actually do remember accessing the Internet like this in the 80s and believe me, I did not spend long doing it. I happily went back to my favorite BBS'.)
