The problem with Parler

Mindy Robinson joins Parler and discovers that it’s just another gatekeeper-run ghetto to control conservatives escaping SJW-run social media.

Parler is collecting people’s phone numbers and driver’s licenses and it still doesn’t guarantee who you’re talking to is real or verified. The dangers of entering all your personal information in an app that could be hacked/sold/used for Doxxing hardly seems worth it.

Turns out, there’s a LOT more wrong and suspect about Parler than just that.

While Parler touts being the only true uncensored platform for free speech….it’s actually more flippant and stricter than Twitter or Facebook ever was. FCC rules? So I can’t say or do anything on Parler that I can’t say on daytime TV? Parler is also against anyone posting “rumors” or whatever the hell that could mean considering the inherent vagueness.

So much for free speech.

That’s “obscene?” Kind of weird maybe, but that’s super tame compared to what people post on any given Twitter thread. So clearly Parler has no intentions of actually being the platform for free speech. Wait a minute, if this is obscene and “unacceptable” on Parler than why wasn’t that imposter account of me taken down for talking sexually about my breasts as if they were me? Are they just making up rules and applying them wherever now?

Yes, actually they are. It’s in their own terms of service that they can change the rules and do whatever they want when they want. But at least it’s an alternative for those already banned on Twitter, right?

No. The terms of service for Parler are some of the strangest and most predatory that I’ve ever seen. If they get sued for something you post, frivolous or not YOU are the one responsible for paying their legal fees.

Even in the communist land of Facebook, I never once heard about someone being responsible for Zuckerberg’s legal fees over something they posted. I bet those kind of lawyers ain’t cheap either. People have been murdered live on Facebook and that never even happened.

By the way, if you even try to question the creator of Parler about these terms of service…he will delete your comments and dismantle your account. So much for transparency….

Parler also wants access to your contact lists from your email. If you do allow them access (presumably to find your friends) they then declare the right to store their contact info and use it for themselves.

Another interesting fact about Parler, is while it’s geared specifically toward conservatives…posts made on Parler do not show up on search engines like Twitter or Facebook does. This has the side effect of silencing conservatives and burying their content on the World Wide Web, which considering the sudden push for Parler right before the November election I find even more suspect.

This really isn’t that hard. Every time – EVERY SINGLE TIME – you see a nominally conservative person or institution or company suddenly become very popular and start being mentioned by the media in any context that doesn’t include the terms “Hitler”, “racist”, and “white supremacy”, it is a trap that has been custom-designed for you. FFS, stop falling for it every single damn time!

“Well, gee, I just really like this professor who occasionally says one or two things that everyone to the right of Jeb Bush already thinks. And that glowing profile in the New York Times makes it sound like he’s really making a difference. I need to get on board that train!”

Seriously, it’s not that hard. Learn to be discerning and stop running after every white van offering you candy.

As for Rumble, that’s right out. From SG:

Now Rumble wants a phone number if you wish to make a comment on a video. These guys just don’t get it.

They get it just fine. You simply don’t understand what they are.

UPDATE: CodeMonkeyZ exposes the Parler charade:

Since parler requires both front/back scans of drivers license or a passport scan to get verified, how was I impersonated as a “verified user”?  Ive never had a parler account. Ive never sent ID to parler.

Why am I verified on parler?

Parler is compromised.


Another gatekeeper

If UATV were growing this fast, even I would be suspicious of me.

I’ve been doing some more information gathering about #rumble as a platform because I couldn’t understand how Rumble went from being a small site in terms of getting 1 million site visits three months ago to getting over 60 million site visits in November, and I discovered that a lot of the same Conservative Inc/GOP establishment people who are on #parler are also on Rumble, and some of them have 500,000-800,000 subs on Rumble.

I can now definitively say that Rumble is the video-sharing site version of Parler. Rumble demands that you hand over your phone number just to be able to upload videos to their site, just like how Parler makes you hand over your phone number just to be able to use their site. Rumble’s biggest channels are members of the Conservative Inc/GOP Establishment and the subscriber accounts on their channels number in the hundreds of thousands, just like on Parler.

Time will tell if Rumble will start censoring Christians, conservatives, and trump supporters who are not part of the Conservative Inc/GOP Establishment/popular content creator crowd like Parler currently does, but so far it seems to me that Rumble is following the same path as Parler, which means that Rumble is probably a controlled opposition site like Parler is.

FFS, if you want free uploads, go to BitChute. This isn’t that hard. Stop being shepherded by the GOPe; they aren’t on your side.


There is nothing wrong with neutrality

First, read this statement from Black Rifle Coffee:

A Statement from CEO Evan Hafer on Black Rifle Coffee Company’s Mission

As a veteran-owned and operated coffee company, Black Rifle Coffee Company exists to serve premium coffee while supporting the veteran Community. At the core of Black Rifle Coffee’s values is to support and bring awareness to the millions of veterans who have proudly served our nation and we will not waver from that mission.

The Black Rifle brand is a symbol of service, of strength, and of goodness that has carried over from our military origins. It’s why we support active duty service members and veterans, prioritize veteran hiring, and advocate for individual liberty and personal responsibility.

We do not support legal advocacy efforts. We do not sponsor nor do we have a relationship with the 17-year-old facing charges in Kenosha, WI.

We believe in the integrity of the legal justice system, and support law enforcement officials.

We’re grateful for the continued support of the Black Rifle Coffee community and eager to continue serving those who serve.

-Evan Hafer, CEO/Founder

Now, as you probably know, I absolutely support The Hero Kyle Rittenhouse. And I also consider this to be a missed opportunity here for Black Rifle Coffee to take a stand in support of one of its supporters that would go over very, very well with its customers. If he’d been wearing an Arkhaven shirt, I’d have sent him ten more plus a baseball cap. But there is literally nothing wrong for a corporation to decline to not only leap into the cultural wars, but put itself at the pointiest edge of the spear in those wars.

Black Rifle didn’t cuck, it didn’t throw The Hero Kyle Rittenhouse under the bus, it didn’t disavow him, and it didn’t rush to make a donation to BLM in order to purchase a hall pass from the enemy. It just pointed out, correctly, that it was being unfairly attacked for something it didn’t do that was unrelated to its mission. Save your rhetorical fire for enemies, deserters, cucks, and traitors, don’t waste it on neutrals. Ignore them, because there are no shortage of better targets out there.

TL,DR: If you like the coffee, then drink it. There is no reason to boycott them. But then, there is no reason to go out of your way to support them either. They’ve made it clear that they won’t stand up for anyone, so you don’t need to stand up for them.

As for me, I don’t drink Black Rifle Coffee and I don’t care about Black Rifle Coffee. Here is an idea: instead of getting all enthusiastic about individuals and institutions that you imagine might maybe perhaps be on your side and getting repeatedly disappointed when you learn otherwise, why not simply focus on supporting those who actually are?

I truly do not understand this apparent desire to constantly hare off after everyone and everything that happens to make what might possibly be a sympathetic noise.


UPDATE: All right, if enough of you BRC supporters are genuinely pissed off about this, let me know and I’ll contact an Italian company I know. I wouldn’t mind having an excuse to produce a custom Italian coffee line, especially since Nespresso doesn’t seem inclined to bring back Canella anytime soon.

UPDATE: Upon further review, I was wrong. Black Rifle Coffee is a false front, it is not politically neutral and its failure to back The Hero Kyle Rittenhouse cannot be reasonably ascribed to simple corporate neutrality. They appear to be parasites in patriot clothing successfully preying on the veteran community. The CEO is an Obama donor. An ActBlue donor. And it gets worse, as demonstrated in this glowing profile by CBS News:

To Hafer and Best, honoring patriots means honoring immigrants….


So, what do we call it?

 Neon Revolt, whose opinion regarding Black Rifle Coffee is pretty similar to mine, considers this comment from one of his readers to be a fair take. And I don’t disagree:

People are mad at black rifle coffee because they want right-leaning companies to go all in for the right just like the left leaning companies go all in for the left.

If you’re on the right it never feels like you get a hearty endorsement from any such company… At best you get neutrality and at worst you get disavowed.

Or to put in another way: everybody fears the left-wing mob but nobody fears the right-wing. Right-wingers are starving for someone to have their back. That is why the reaction is so strong.

Fair enough. And even if you don’t consider BRC’s actions a betrayal, they have at least demonstrated that they don’t merit any particular support from patriots or 2nd Amendment activists despite their posturing and pretensions.

Trust not in marketing.

Anyhow, I’ve already made contact with an Italian private label coffee producer and arranged for them to provide me with a box of samples. (There is no downside here.) If it’s genuinely good, we can consider what the next steps might be. Of course, we’ll have to figure out what we’re going to call it…. 


Tucker has the evidence

 And yet, Mr. Cuckerson continues to deny the incontrovertible:

On Friday night Tucker Carlson doubled down and denied there was any proof of vote switching during the 2020 presidential election. Tucker Carlson told his audience there is no evidence of votes being switched. But we sent him at least one video on the voter fraud we revealed with the help of several IT specialists, auditors and accountants.

This is ridiculous. There is conclusive documentary evidence of vote switching during the 2020 presidential election sitting right on YouTube. I suggest you download it before YouTube deletes it. This video was recorded on a phone camera filming CNN as Donald Trump’s Pennsylvania vote totals drop from 1,690,589 to 1,670,631 at the same time Joe Biden’s vote total rises from 1,252,537 to 1,272,495 in just 35 seconds.

That’s is clear and conclusive evidence of precisely 19,958 votes being switched from Trump to Biden during the 2020 presidential election.


Why is Tucker cucking?

Tucker Carlson is not dumb enough to fail to understand what “evidence” is or how it is properly presented. Is he under pressure from his superiors at Fox News? Or is he simply afraid of being jettisoned in the event Biden is successful in his attempt to steal the election?

“On Sunday night, we texted her after watching one of her segments. What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history, millions of votes stolen in a day. Democracy destroyed. The end of our centuries-old system of self-government — not a small thing,” Carlson said, noting he did not initially dismiss “any” of her claims.

He added that he believes his show was the most “open-minded show on television,” noting he’s covered evidence of UFOs.

“We took Sidney Powell seriously. We had no intention of fighting with her. We’ve always respected her work. We simply wanted to see the details. How could you not want to see them? So, we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would’ve given her the whole hour. We would’ve given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention. That’s a big story. But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of requests — polite requests. Not a page,” Carlson, whose program is regularly top-rated among prime-time shows, said.

“When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they told us Powell has never given them any evidence either. Nor did she provide any today at the press conference,” Carlson continued, though he agreed electronic voting was dangerous. “But she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.”

What is ridiculous about Carlson’s statements is that one cannot reasonably be expected to provide the sort of evidence that is required to be conclusive in a press conference in front of a bunch of journalists who are totally incapable of understanding it. As both Powell and Giuliani have stated, they have the evidence and will be providing it in the appropriate venues. They have even described, in some detail, what that evidence is.

The statistical evidence is literally right in front of everyone. FFS, I knew there was voter fraud in Hennepin County by simply looking at the documentary evidence of the vote totals; it is unlikely to the point of complete impossibility for Joe Biden to have won 25.2 percent more votes than the average of votes won by Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton in three elections at the same time Donald Trump won 13.6 percent more votes than the average won by himself, Mitt Romney, and John McCain.

Hey Tucker, here is the evidence. Now, decide if you’re henceforth going to be known as Tucker Carlson or Tucker Cuckerson.

Meanwhile, Sidney Powell made much the same point I did above to Carlson. So perhaps he really isn’t smart enough to understand what evidence is and is not. Most people simply don’t understand what evidence actually is because they are not intelligent enough to understand it. What most people, especially the media, consider to be evidence is simply testimonial evidence offered by an authority about the actual evidence. But a fair amount of the statistical evidence is already right in front of everyone, they just don’t have the math to understand it or its significance.

Maria Bartiromo: How did you respond to Tucker Carlson? Did you get angry with the show because they texted you and asked you to provide evidence of what you’re alleging?

Sidney Powell: No, I didn’t get angry with the request to provide evidence in fact I sent an affidavit to Tucker that I had not even attached to a pleading yet to help him understand the situation and I offered him another witness who could explain the mathematics of the statistical evidence far better than I can. I’m not really a numbers person. But he was very insulting, demanding and rude and I told him not to contact me again in those terms.


Totally credible reports

NeverTrumper Bill Maxwell very reliably reports, on the basis of his very close connections with people he hates, that President Trump is as demoralized as he wants you to be:

According to Trump’s inner circle, he is depressed, out of money, and afraid of going to jail.

I don’t know, if I was a NeverTrumper, that would frighten me considerably more than a President Trump who is confident of victory and is basking in the full-throated public support of his supporters. After all, he’s still got at least six weeks to utilize the U.S. military and order drone strikes on individual citizens he designates as enemies. 

Don’t buy into the demoralization campaign. Epstein didn’t kill himself. And Biden didn’t win.


She’s coming for the cucks

@SomeBitchIKnow is very unhappy with the conservatives who are too genteel and concerned about their perfectly adjusted bowties to talk about her exposure of obvious vote fraud:

I would just like to take the second to be a little bit salty to some of the conservative talking heads that refused to talk about maidengate.

They refused to even suggest that people check their old names and their registry. Something that simple, they said no.

Thanks to you fuckers, I’ve had to work uphill both ways to get the information I needed to get. If I had had some help from you, I would have done this so much sooner.

I have the screenshots.

I know who you are.

I am not done.

When I am vindicated from #MaidenGate, and I will be, I’m exposing your asses next.

Good for her. And good for Gab, for providing her a platform once Twitter deplatformed her.


This is what gatekeeping looks like

While whining about how Amazon won’t post his Very Important Review of The Plot Against the President, Powerline’s Scott Johnson reveals his real imperative as a conservative gatekeeper:

I found three of the several talking heads in the film to be out of place: Mike Cernovich, Kimberly Guilfoyle, and Jack Posobiec. However, I appreciated the inclusion of the eminent historian Edward Luttwak. Among Luttwak’s many books is Coup d’État: A Practical Handbook. He brings scholarly expertise to the theme of the film. He knows what he is talking about.

Keep in mind that the “eminent historian” is primarily known by historians for writing a book about Roman grand strategy while being clueless about Roman history, and is famous for wrongly predicting that Desert Storm was going to be a protracted and bloody campaign in which U.S. troops would suffer thousands of casualties. He has also written a book on the “grand strategy” of the Byzantine empire despite knowing no more about the Byzantine empire than you, me, or Kimberly Guifoyle.

Notice that Johnson doesn’t explain why three people who are active observers of U.S. politics are supposed to be more out of place than an obvious ticket-taking globalist who still doesn’t understand how Trump was elected in the first place, and whose referenced book is “a hilarious satire”.


Build your own platforms

Sam Francis saw it first, according to the Z-Man

A long time ago, Sam Francis pointed out that Conservatism was likely to fail as a political movement, because it was engaging in formal politics. In order to engage in formal politics, it had to accept the rules of politics and the process of creating those rules. Inevitably, conservatism would be assimilated into the system they set out to oppose. Go back and read the early conservatives. Listen to a Reagan speech from the 60’s. They are unrecognizable relative to the modern conservative.

The fact that Francis was correct has always stuck with me. Everyone that takes on the system directly is destroyed and made into a useful example by the system. Everyone that tried to work the system is assimilated and turned against its original mission. There have been no exceptions.

The logical first step toward an alternative approach is accepting the reality of the past. It means “doing something” outside the system. The first step in building a genuine alternative is to turn your back on the system and stop reacting to it.

The irony, of course, is that most post-conservatives, including the Z-Man, attack everyone who actually attempts to build any alternatives to the mainstream system as a “grifter”. Apparently you’re supposed to build your own platforms, but somehow do it without any resources and provide the end product to everyone for free.

Granted, it’s a different strategy for losing, but it’s still a strategy for losing.