Facebook groups reportedly have the same problem identified earlier on Instagram The parent company of Facebook and Instagram continues to struggle with its algorithms enabling child molesters on its platforms‚ the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.  Earlier this year‚ the Journal and researchers at two US universities revealed that Instagram algorithms were helping connect accounts “devoted to the creation‚ purchasing and trading of underage-sex content.” Meta responded by setting up a child-safety task force and developing software tools to deal with the issue.  Five months later‚ the company is “struggling to prevent its own systems from enabling and even promoting a vast network of pedophile accounts‚” the Journal noted. Earlier this week‚ the Journal cited research by the Canadian Centre for Child Protection‚ showing that Instagram algorithms still recommended pedophile content. While some pedophilia-related hashtags have been banned‚ the system just spits out new ones with minor variations‚ they said. According to the Canadians‚ a “network” of Instagram accounts that had up to 10 million followers apiece “has continued to livestream videos of child sex abuse months after it was reported to the company.” Another group‚ the Stanford Internet Observatory‚ flagged several groups “popular with Instagram’s child sexualization community” to Meta back in June‚ and said that some of them are still operating. VasoBeet is now 40% OFF! This beetroot-based supplement was created to provide you with all the benefits of this nutrient-dense vegetable in one easy dose! Moreover‚ the problem also affects Facebook Groups‚ a key feature of the platform that has more than three billion monthly users worldwide. In one instance‚ when Journal reporters flagged a group named ‘Incest‚’ they received a response that it “doesn’t go against our Community Standards.” The group was removed only after the outlet brought this to the attention of Meta’s public relations department. “We are actively continuing to implement changes identified by the task force we set up earlier this year‚” a Meta spokesperson was quoted as saying. The task force has numbered more than 100 employees at times‚ and has banned thousands of hashtags used by pedophiles‚ as well as improved technology to identify nudity and sexual activity in videos broadcast live. Mark Zuckerberg’s social media behemoth also said it had disabled “thousands” of accounts‚ “hidden 190‚000 groups” in Facebook’s search results‚ and invested in new software tools to better deal with the issue. The task force also sent a team to work with Meta’s content moderator contractors in Mumbai‚ India. While Meta’s algorithms can connect users with “illicit interests” and tailor content to appeal to them‚ restricting or removing features that connect people with acceptable content would not be reasonable‚ a company spokeswoman told the Journal. Vivek Ramaswamy joins The Alex Jones Show to talk about the populist movement making its way around the globe.

If an America First administration gets into power in 2025‚ it could legally abolish automatic birthright citizenship One of our country’s most insane policies is that of automatic birthright citizenship for babies born to illegal aliens on U.S. soil. People in the Third World certainly know about this policy and take advantage of it. The policy’s defenders assert that it’s in the Constitution and it would be a great injustice to change. A surprising recent action taken by the U.S. government sheds some light on the issue. The U.S. State Department‚ under the Biden administration‚ rejected the citizenship of Siavash Sobhani‚ a doctor in Virginia who was born in the United States in 1961.Alex Jones' latest bestselling book 'The Great Awakening' is NOW AVAILABLE! Secure your limited edition autographed today! Sobhani was considered an American citizen all his life and was simply renewing his passport. But in June‚ the State Department informed Sobhani that he wasn’t a citizen‚ had never been a citizen‚ and shouldn’t have been recognized as such way back in 1961. The Daily Mail explains the case in an article entitled‚ “Virginia doctor‚ Siavash Sobhani‚ who was born in US loses his CITIZENSHIP after applying for new passport because his dad was Iranian diplomat and he wasn’t entitled to claim it.” Virginia doctor‚ Siavash Sobhani‚ who was born in US loses his CITIZENSHIP after applying for new passport because his dad was Iranian diplomat and he wasn't entitled to claim it https://t.co/PvkUohuFGt pic.twitter.com/uFb7ZWr8oe— Daily Mail Online (@MailOnline) November 26‚ 2023 As the article reports‚ “The State Department informed him that babies born in the US to parents with diplomatic immunity – which his father enjoyed as an Iranian Embassy employee at the time – shouldn’t automatically acquire citizenship.” Something similar occurred under the Obama administration in 2016‚ when the citizenship of Hoda Muthana was stripped on the grounds that her father was a Yemeni diplomat when she was born. Many of our politicians‚ if asked about birthright citizenship‚ will just say it’s in the Constitution‚ though they probably haven’t even investigated it. Current birthright citizenship policy is based on an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment‚ enacted in 1868‚ a few years after the Civil War ended in 1865. The Citizenship Clause in that amendment was placed there to ensure that recently-freed black Americans would be U.S. citizens. It wasn’t placed there to invite the Third World to colonize our country. The clause‚ in Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment‚ stipulates‚ “All persons born or naturalized in the United States‚ and subject to the jurisdiction thereof‚ are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Defenders of birthright citizenship for illegal babies stress the “born” part but skip over the “and subject to the jurisdiction” part. However‚ it’s that very clause which was utilized by the Biden administration’s State Department to strip Sobhani of his citizenship. “As a member of your parent’s household at the time of your birth‚ you also enjoyed full diplomatic immunity from the jurisdiction of the United States. As such‚ you were born not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Therefore‚ you did not acquire US citizenship at birth‚” the State Department explained to Sobhani in a letter. Therefore‚ the State Department still recognizes that a child born to a foreign diplomat is not “subject to the jurisdiction.” But is everybody else subject to the jurisdiction? Back in 1868‚ when they drafted the Fourteenth Amendment‚ Senator Jacob Merritt Howard of Michigan said that the Citizenship Clause was “simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already‚ that every person born within the limits of the United States‚ and subject to their jurisdiction‚ is by virtue of natural and national law‚ a citizen of the United States. This will not‚ of course‚ include persons born in the United States who are foreigners‚ aliens‚ who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States‚ but will include every other class of persons.” These “foreigners and aliens” not “subject to the jurisdiction” would sure seem to include the hordes of invaders currently pouring into our country. If a pro-American government gets into power in 2025‚ it could legally abolish automatic birthright citizenship based on Senator Howard’s explanation of the Citizenship Clause. This action would‚ of course‚ be strongly opposed and the case would probably go to the Supreme Court. But the rescue of American citizenship is worth the fight. Vivek Ramaswamy joins The Alex Jones Show to talk about the populist movement making its way around the globe.

Retail giant stops advertising on X‚ adding to a growing list of companies pressuring Elon Musk to bend knee to globalist agenda US retail giant Walmart has announced it is suspending advertising on X (formerly Twitter)‚ becoming the latest major brand to abandon the platform. Corporations including Apple‚ Coca Cola and Disney have halted their paid ads on X in recent weeks. “We’ve found some other platforms better for reaching our customers‚” a Walmart spokesperson said‚ explaining the decision. Walmart is the largest retailer in the US‚ with $500 billion in domestic sales in 2022. The mass exodus from X was sparked in November‚ when the advocacy group Media Matters for America claimed the platform had posted “pro-Nazi” and “anti-Semitic” content next to the posts of major advertisers.VasoBeet is now 40% OFF! This beetroot-based supplement was created to provide you with all the benefits of this nutrient-dense vegetable in one easy dose! X has denied the findings‚ publishing an analysis suggesting Media Matters had manipulated the algorithms with fake accounts. Owner Elon Musk personally came under fire in November after he publicly endorsed an antisemitic conspiracy theory in a post on X. The tech tycoon agreed with a user who said Jews hold a “dialectical hatred” of white people‚ sparking responding with: “You have said the actual truth.” Later Musk later backtracked‚ calling his reply “one of the most foolish” posts he’d ever made on X. Since buying Twitter in October 2022‚ Musk has been continually accused by the mainstream media and the political left of failing to adequately moderate content. Starting in December last year‚ Musk countered many of those allegations by releasing the Twitter Files – a select series of internal documents given to journalists – detailing the company’s activities under previous management. In one of the most damning examples‚ it emerged that Twitter had helped block the dissemination of a bombshell report alleging influence-peddling by Joe Biden’s family‚ just three weeks before he was elected president. When Musk purchased Twitter for an estimated $44 billion‚ he fired many of Twitter’s former staffers‚ and unbanned many accounts in the name of promoting free speech. Speaking earlier this week at a conference in New York‚ Elon Musk struck a defiant tone on the exit of major advertisers‚ telling them to “go f— yourself.” Vivek Ramaswamy joins The Alex Jones Show to talk about the populist movement making its way around the globe.

"When he [The President] acts in an unofficial‚ private capacity‚ he is subject to civil suits like any private citizen‚" court says Former US President Donald Trump cannot claim presidential immunity and can be sued for his alleged role in the January 6 Capitol riot‚ the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled on Friday. In its ruling‚ the court rejected Trump’s attempt to dismiss civil lawsuits against him on the basis of presidential immunity‚ saying he was not acting in his official capacity as president‚ but rather as a presidential candidate when he delivered his January 6 speech to his supporters. Several lawsuits have alleged that his speech incited the ensuing riot. “When he [The President] acts in an unofficial‚ private capacity‚ he is subject to civil suits like any private citizen‚” the court said in its ruling. The court said that the plaintiffs‚ who include Capitol Police officers and members of Congress present at the Capitol on that day‚ can seek civil damages for alleged harms arising from the riot. “The plaintiffs contend that‚ during President Trump’s final months in office‚ he conspired with political allies and supporters to obtain a second term despite his defeat in the 2020 election. He allegedly advanced that cause before January 6 by repeatedly making false claims that the election might be (and then had been) stolen‚ filing meritless lawsuits challenging the election results‚ and pressuring state and local officials to reverse the election outcomes in their jurisdictions‚” the ruling stated.Survival Shield X-2 is now 25% OFF! Treat your body with super high-quality nascent iodine &; enjoy one of nature's greatest essentials! The ruling was focused on determining whether Trump had successfully substantiated his claim to immunity‚ and left the door open for him to try to prove in district court that he was acting in his capacity as president‚ rather than his unofficial capacity as an office-seeker. “The sole issue before us is whether President Trump has demonstrated an entitlement to official-act immunity for his actions leading up to and on January 6 as alleged in the complaints‚” the court said in its ruling. “We answer no‚ at least at this stage of the proceedings. When a first-term President opts to seek a second term‚ his campaign to win re-election is not an official presidential act.” On January 6‚ 2021‚ after Trump’s election defeat‚ a mob of his supporters breached the US Capitol in an attempt to halt Congress’s Electoral College vote count. Since the riot‚ charges have been filed against over 1‚200 individuals for crimes related to the breach of the Capitol. Vivek Ramaswamy joins The Alex Jones Show to talk about the populist movement making its way around the globe.

Fentanyl the Chicom Dragon doesn't want pesky Americans to play epic new video game Download the NWO Wars video game featuring Alex Jones and join the culture war waging in cyberspace. Fight the enemies of freedom and support the information war at the same time!