Discover more from Dissident’s Essay
Absolute, totalitarian censorship
For over four years, all my publications have been either instantly removed or made unsearchable and undiscoverable by the public by the scumbags whom my writings expose.
Many people including prolific substack writers say that they are being censored. Often, they experience some elements of censorship such as de-platforming or inability to publish on the “mainstream media” websites. However, if you search in any combination phrases like “Malone substack,” “Kirsch substack,” or any other similar combination with the names of people that say that they are being censored, you will immediately discover their presence on the web. Experimenting with searching partial or full names of their pieces/articles brings similar results: they could be quickly located no matter what search engine or browser is used for the search.
There is also a different category of censorship when all publications vanish from the internet or made “unsearchable” or “undiscoverable.” Would you like to see an example?
When I copy the name of my post “The Fifth Circuit assists in crime cover-ups, manufactures a deceitful sham-“opinion” in tandem with corrupt public officials and “law enforcement” criminals” into any browser or search engine, I invariably see the following:
If I try to experiment with the search phrase and type some key words of my “publication,” I see this:
I can assure you that no matter how I search, the result would always be the same: Nada.
I mentioned that prolific substack writers are easily discoverable on the internet. Could it be because Kirsch, Malone, Berenson, Shrier, etc. have lots of followers and due to their popularity their journals always appear in the search? To further the experiment, I search for a newer or less popular journal that also talks about politically charged issues. I paste in the search the topic of the post, published in
When “Atty. Todd Callender Delivers Bonkers Testimony in Reiner Fuellmich's "Grand Jury Proceedings by the Peoples' Court of Public Opinion” is copied to the search field, that is what google is capable of finding:
It is clear that what I write is being deliberately hidden from the public. This time I wrote about the corruption in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit because corrupt courts, in conspiracy with other dirty “public officials” barricade my access to courts so that I cannot sue the dirty government no matter how strong my case is. (Because it is strong, it is being artificially suppressed by the scumbags). In the past, I was writing about the outrageous level of corruption that I witnessed in Baton Rouge police department, Baton Rouge city attorney and district attorney office, Louisiana department of “justice,” Louisiana “courts,” and other similar criminal organizations, detailing their falsification of public records and persecution of me simply because I wanted to expose their corruption. The result was exactly the same: my publications had been made entirely undiscoverable by the general public.
Before touching on whether I have the right to talk or publicly write about their corruption and whether they have the right to suppress it, I would like to show how the subreddit named “Censorship” that purportedly exists to report on the instances of unlawful censorship, and subreddit “Corruption” that claims that it is there to report and discuss the instances of the public corruption handled my attempts to contribute to their “feeds.” The “censorship” subreddit removed my post in less than 30 minutes after it was published:
And the one, called “corruption” let it be published for over 12 hours:
The printscreen above is the last one I took however when last checked, the post had around 679 total views and 88% upvote rate. When I checked today, I saw the following: “Help Fight Corruption has been removed by the moderator of r/Corruption:”
I think that the dirty criminals that suppress my political speech reached out to that subreddit and ordered them to take it down. The moderators did not have to comply with the criminal and unlawful “order,” however it is apparent that they did.
So who is violating the law here – I do when try to exercise my First Amendment rights or the criminals that do not want their corruption to be exposed?
Note that the First Amendment does not protect just about any form of speech. Coincidentally, the political speech that I want to exercise is the most protected by that amendment speech:
“Whatever differences may exist about interpretations of the First Amendment, there is practically universal agreement that a major purpose of that Amendment was to protect the free discussion of governmental affairs. This of course includes discussions of candidates, structures and forms of government, the manner in which government is operated or should be operated, and all such matters relating to political processes. The Constitution specifically selected the press, which includes not only newspapers, books, and magazines, but also humble leaflets and circulars, see Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S. 444[, 58 S. Ct. 666 (1938)] to play an important role in the discussion of public affairs. Thus the press serves and was designed to serve as a powerful antidote to any abuses of power by governmental officials and as a constitutionally chosen means for keeping officials elected by the people responsible to all the people whom they were selected to serve. Suppression of the right of the press to … criticize governmental agents and to clamor and contend for or against change … muzzles one of the very agencies the Framers of our Constitution thoughtfully and deliberately selected to improve our society and keep it free.” Mills v. Alabama, 384 U.S. 214, 218-19 (1966).
“[T]he purpose of the First Amendment includes the need . . . ‘to protect parties in the free publication of matters of public concern, to secure their right to a free discussion of public events and public measures, and to enable every citizen at any time to bring the government and any person in authority to the bar of public opinion by any just criticism upon their conduct in the exercise of the authority which the people have conferred upon them.’” Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 374 n.29 (1976).
“[T]he First Amendment was ‘fashioned to assure the unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people,’ Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 484, [77 S. Ct. 1304 (1957)].” Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy, 401 U.S. 265, 271-72 (1971).
“Speech concerning public affairs is more than self-expression; it is the essence of self-government.’ Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 74-75 (1964).” Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191, 196 (1992).
In Garrison v. Louisiana the Supreme Court reversed the Louisiana supreme court that upheld a criminal conviction (!) of a district attorney who dared to publicly criticize the Louisiana judges, calling them lazy and inefficient. The extent of sense of entitlement of those corrupt scumbags is simply mindblowing.
There are dozens of other such “cases” and “laws” like the ones, cited above that protect political speech and the right to criticize all forms of government.
Citing even all of them here will not change the fact: the corrupt criminal governments are lawless and will continue suppressing protected speech in order to cover up their crimes.