In case it isn't clear, this is satire.
You will of course recall that dramatic scene in Gone with the Wind when Scarlett O'Hara's Irish surname is discovered, causing her to be immediately sold into slavery.
Already unbanned: https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/status/1409625906025488394
Probably, some bot or human drone mistook it for being actually right-wing and banned it, but YouTube corrected this after realizing it was anti-right-wing.
Jack Murphy is a pen name. His full name is John Murphy Goldman. His mother is Irish. His father is, well, take a guess.
Disclose.tv says it's "fixed" now: https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1407325281795387394
The guy did not even know that this was frequented by homosexuals.
This is a point worth emphasizing that the media tries to bury. The shooter just looked for nightclubs to target using Google Maps and searching for "downtown Orlando nightclubs", and he had no idea the one he chose was a gay club. This was not an "anti-gay hate crime", any more than the Atlanta mass shooting was anti-Asian.
Not a word about what actually caused it: Islamism.
Yup, Biden's statement never mentions Islam or even ISIS. Muslim terrorist attacks are used only as an excuse to strip Americans of their right of self-defense.
I will definitely donate exactly as much to women's groups as I was going to gift to Harry and Meghan's family.
Ngo confirmed it: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1400266501601513475
She's about 1/4 to 3/8 Samoan, with the rest white, mostly German-American. That still makes her a "person of color" (or BIPOC), and thus she is in a better position to criticize the likes of Lori Lightfoot without being called a white supremacist.
For those who don't know who Mara Gay is, she believed that a million times a million is a million, and when mocked for this unbelievable idiocy, said that she was being attacked because she is a "black woman in America".
If you prefer Thread Reader, you can read the whole thing here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1386739669866455043.html
(It includes her last tweets that were not included in the archive.)
But please note that the vote was extremely close. The "no statement" option only beat this "further overhaul your governance" so contributors "feel safe" option by one vote.
Being a woman didn't save Amber Guyger.
Giuffre did not accuse Minksy herself. Rather, her testimony in a 2015 suit against Ghislaine Maxwell became known, in which she stated that Maxwell had "directed" her to have sex with Minsky, but never said she actually did. But of course our reliable media ran with the story anyway, first falsely claiming Giuffre was only 17, and smearing Minsky (who died in 2016) by saying that he had had sex with an underage sex slave. His Wikipedia article even had a section titled "Allegation of child sex abuse". Eventually enough people came forward with more information, and Minsky's name is mostly cleared.
Giuffre has an active Twitter account, and could have clarified at any point, but never did.
Virginia Roberts Giuffre was born August 9, 1983, and the AI conference where she was directed to have sex with Marvin Minsky was in April 2002, so she was 18 at the time.
According to a witness, she did approach Minsky at one point, and he told her to get lost. Minsky's wife was with him the whole trip and confirmed that nothing untoward happened.
I saw that and looked into it. The comment that got him banned was, "Bye rapist. I don’t want to have sex with you that doesn’t make me a transphobe no matter how much you say it." It was deleted, and so only the first comment in the exchange is visible, giving the wrong impression that that's what got him banned.
(Of course, it's still ridiculous to call that "harassment".)
It is archived here: https://archive.is/wcJlu#selection-3315.0-3315.110
They already reconstituted on SaidIt and on their own https://www.ovarit.com/. They also have https://spinster.xyz/.
This archive has working stylesheets: https://archive.is/8eO4p
For Kevin MacDonald, I recommend checking out this debate with Nathan Cofnas: https://nathancofnas.com/debate-with-kevin-macdonald/ Cofnas is a Jewish scholar who is certainly not an SJW; he supports the free exchange of ideas and studying race differences in intelligence, and unlike many was willing to directly engage with MacDonald. MacDonald's views have some basis in truth: Jewish leftism is a major problem, and many are two-faced in their views on race and ethnicity. But he also goes beyond the evidence with his evolutionary theories. His arguments are interesting to read but should not be considered the final word.
It's not just messaging. There are also Telegram "channels", which are similar to Twitter feeds or Facebook pages, and include many individuals or groups banned from other social media (examples: Alex Jones, Proud Boys, VDARE, Tommy Robinson, Laura Loomer, American Renaissance, Milo Yiannopoulos). Channels can be viewed on the web without an account, although creating an account is easy enough.
Telegram has a pretty good track record. Like everyone they're under enormous pressure to censor, and still host a lot of content exiled from other mainstream platforms. They're not perfect or absolutist, but removing channels full of calls for violence (if that's true) as a sop to the mob may be a simple matter of survival.
Let's face it, options are limited. If Telegram were created today it would be killed in its cradle. Any new service that doesn't engage in systematic political censorship will be declared a Nazi haven by the media and isolated and possibly stamped out by Big Tech. It's only because Telegram is established and in widespread "normie" use that it can get away with this.
Will Telegram go the way of Twitter et al.? It might. If so, we adapt. Until then, it is a resource.
Just to follow up on the comments here, this is as likely to be Google's incompetence as malice.
This blacklist is mostly maintained by an automated system that scans sites for content that looks "suspicious" and red-zones them. Not only does Google's crawl bot do this, but browser users are recruited as an unwitting army. In Chrome there is a setting "Help improve security on the web for everyone"; unless this is turned off, every site you visit is scanned for suspicious content and keywords, and data is sent to Google without telling you.
These algorithms are primitive and shoddy and produce plenty of false positives, and many business owners have woken up to find their site wrongly smeared as deceptive, with no warning. There is an appeal process, which also seems to be mostly automated and usually gets you off the list fairly quickly. However, Google never admits wrongdoing; you'll get a follow-up mail advising you of steps to improve your security to prevent future hacks, even if there never was a hack nor any malicious content at all.
I don't know if there have been any lawsuits over this. I'm sure Google has a team of lawyers on the ready.
So far I've not heard of this list being used for political censorship. I would assume there are bigger fish than Vox Day if that was the intent, but then who can say? This is in contrast to Twitter, which does indeed throw up "unsafe"/"harmful" warnings for links to alt-tech sites or to news stories it wants to suppress (such as the Hunter Biden laptop coverage).
The warnings are now gone. It looks like as of a few hours ago Google has declared the "situation" resolved.
I've heard medical staff refer to people in their 40s as "young". Hospitals are filled with geriatrics clinging to life so it makes sense.
I see no reason to jump to the conclusion that she's lying. Doctors are seeing a biased sample: hospitalized patients are those with the worst reactions to WuFlu. It would naturally seem more deadly to them than to most people, who may have never seen a severe case.