The United Nations is Responsible for Censorship, Cancel Culture

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
United Nations / Cancel Culture / Censorship
_____________________________

Wonder where social justice, censorship, and cancel culture originated from since these inflammatory and civil rights violations are not original to America? 

Then look no further than the United Nations. On their site for: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, anyone can read how the United Nations views human rights.

Article 29, Section 3

These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Anyone who is tied into the United Nations take over of the world via our governments through treaties and accords, private corporations using censorship, banning, and deplatforming of people and businesses, and training the citizenry from elementary school to believe in social justice is apart of the New World Order, planetary government, one world government scheme. 

Did you vote in the United Nations? Did you vote in Smart Technology? Strong Cities Initiatives? Or, even CFL light bulbs? 

All these different types of fads are driven by the United Nations' Agenda 21, 2030, Megaregions 2050.

Your elected officials are pushing you into a one-way street straight into world government. Check out HR 1111. If you speak up, corporations and governments are using Article 29, Section 3 to delete you from your digital existence. 

In the case of Congressional Candidate Laura Loomer, these entities without due process of law have banned her from social media, fundraising, even Uber, Lyft, food ordering and more. 

Section 230 exists because internet providers and platforms are considered utilities and therefore not allowed to restrict access to people based on any type of political, religious, or other affiliation. 

47 U.S. Code § 230 - Protection for private blocking

and screening of offensive material

(a) FindingsThe Congress finds the following:
(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.

(b) Policy It is the policy of the United States—
(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive computer services and other interactive media;
(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation;

(c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

(2) Civil liabilityNo provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1]

So where is censorship based on political views legal again? Nowhere. Where is deplatforming based on political views legal again? Nowhere. 

The social media platforms Americans paid for through development with their tax monies have taken censorship on themselves to promote and protect the United Nations' one world government power grab.  

It appears through their own words that the United Nations believes their mission, vision, and goals are above any single national law. Anyone who sides with the United Nations appears to be able to be above the law as well (e.g., Big Tech, Big Pharma, and the Military Industrial Complex of private contractors). 

Big Tech Censors

Alex Jones

Banned.video

Laura Loomer

Proud Boys

Roger Stone

Do we see a pattern here? 

Big Pharma Censors

Frontline Doctors

Dr. Simone Gold (fired from her job)

Anti-vaxxers

So anyone going against deceptive WHO recommendations is gone? 

And the Military Industrial Complex of private contractors are nothing more than mercenaries online as bots, spies, and bullies trying to keep the house of cards from falling down around them. Their no-bid contracts are gold. Taxpayer funded lottery for a small group of people feeding off Americans and people around the world like parasites. 

If you cross these terrorists, you end up arrested (Millie Weaver, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Julian Assange), or dead (Seth Rich, and anyone who has ever done business with the Clintons is seems like). 

The middle pyramid piece to total control and surveillance of the whole of humanity appears to be: the United Nations. Under the United Nations entities and corporations are allowed to lie under oath in front of Congress, cheat to create monopolies, and steal from the American people through information gathering, contracts, and tax breaks. 

As we know from the information sourced in the documentary Shadow Gate, by journalist Millie Weaver, that these private corporations steal our information and then create profiles in order to incite civil unrest. Private corporations, nonprofits, and others have also pushed their way into the classroom under Agenda 21's Common Core to indoctrinate generations of children into the cult of social justice that allows for this censorship and cancel culture to continue. 

If you do not agree with the United Nations, then you are control-alt-deleted from cyberspace, families, and friendships. 

This problem needs to be removed from our culture. American society is about free speech, freedom of expression, and fair play. The United Nations has reversed hundreds of years of the Enlightenment and taken humanity back to the Dark Ages. 

America needs to disengage itself from the United Nations. 

Stand up for freedom, the free market, and free ideas: Cancel our membership to the corrupt United Nations. 

Maybe then Americans can find the justice needed to combat these enemies foreign and domestic. 

Sources: Cornell Law, Shadow Gate, HR 1111, Regional Planning, 

Constitution? What Constitution?

Staff Writer, DL Mullan

Government / Education

___________________________________

Let’s Give Up on the Constitution, an article in the New York Times Op-ed section, by Louis Michael Seidman, who is a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University and he stated: 

As the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions. 

 Read the sign:

If you do not like how the country is run you need to either go live in North Korea and let us know how that turns out or start holding politicians accountable. 

No more laws for us and laws for them. No more insider trading or becoming a multimillionaire in office on an approximately $200K salary. No more spending money on campaigns for a political position that can never pay it all back. No more taking money from corporations. No more stealing money from Americans through the illegal use of the Internal Revenue Service. Just NO MORE.

If you do not adhere to the Constitution, then you get recalled or voted out of office. No more putting up with globalism or international laws that supersede our national sovereignty.

Also, if you had not noticed: our failed policies, politics, and laws are not about our Constitution or system of government. It is about the Hegelian dialectic. Problem-reaction-solution.

Someone toils in the night. Problems arise. The public is angry: Fix it! The government responds: We have the solution! But the government never tells the people that they caused the problem in the first place. The problem was created in order to affect social change. Change that would not have happened in the natural ebb and flow of the human experience.

This scenario is played day in and day out especially on the national news. Our immigration system is broken! People demonstrate in the streets. The government wants to reform the immigration laws of the nation... Problem is there was no problem to begin with. Only a certain amount of people want to change the laws to their favor for breaking the laws that now subject them to deportation.

It is not difficult to deduce. Someone wants to change society to fit their agenda and not within the confines of law. So a fictitious problem is created and anyone who sees through the scheme is vilified.

Which is where higher education institutions come into play. University instructors should be debating these issues but instead of teaching our heritage as positive solutions to current and made up problems, professors are screaming: The government is broken! The Constitution is evil! We must change our system! 

Change it to what? A rule under technocratic elitists who run corporations and the United Nations so then we no longer have guaranteed rights but now must live under the system of a one world government in which people have "privileges" instead? 

Obviously someone must be friends with a crack pipe and he is not alone. A professor at Texas' A&M believes the Constitution is not for anyone either as noted in an article on PrisonPlanet: 

Mary Margaret Penrose also admitted that she teaches students in her Constitutional law courses that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are obsolete. “Why do we keep such an allegiance to a Constitution that was driven by 18th Century concerns?” she asked.

This feigned argument begins here and there. From the disputed GW Bush rant that the "Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper" to politicians who act like the Constitution is not there to direct their activities and now constitutional law professors hating on our national document for problems not derived from the living testimony on how we as Americans should conduct ourselves and our government, these behaviors are a national embarrassment. 

It is a ruse to get Americans to doubt the veracity, hope, and fortitude of the founding documents of the United States. So that Americans will believe there is a problem where there is none. The manipulation is to make the American people leave the confines of their freedoms and rights for a more structured, surveillance state known as a one world government. For that, charges of sedition should be levied as well as tenures pulled for these professors, and perhaps charges for politicians as well.

If someone does not like the Constitution, there is the door. No one is keeping you here. These professors are way out of line and their respective institutions need to reign them in. These so-called professors should be fired from their positions, forthwith!

It appears that these university teachers do not know or understand how societies change over a long period of time, not just in 237 years, but longer. Educators need to comprehend the complex economic, political, and social engineering crises caused by a few despots who wish to accelerate human society and use some brainwashed mass lecturer who will decide to vomit libel sedition from his or her pulpit for the task. Hence the conclusion that educated people do not always mean smart.

The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence are not documents headed for the shredder. People who will not abide by their oaths of office are the problem. These government servants will not control corporations, banks, Wall Street, or industries that fill their political coffers. 

That is not the Constitution's fault. It is the fault of men. Men who believe greed is above the law. It is the fault of Americans who allow this behavior to continue. 

In essence, professors, the problems of the United States are your fault for not standing up against a government who walks on the very words you are supposed to hold so dear.

Source: The Western Center for Journalism, Amerikan Expose, About, Encyclopedia Brittanica