The collected works of Brian of London
Why does Maajid Nawaz get to call Tommy Robinson’s views radical and what part did Maajid and Quilliam play in Tommy’s vastly increased reach and the widening of his base of people who broadly support his ideas? Tommy’s interview with Sargon of Akkad can be found here.
Watch all of this. State Persecution, Cambridge court case, deplatforming and the Nazi punching story.
If you derive value from my work, please consider donating some value my way. You can find all the details on the donation page.
UPDATE: You can directly contribute to the legal fees and have a stake in any future payout from this legal action by going to Fundition – a crypto based crowd funding tool.
It seems everyone I know is currently trying to sue one or all of the big tech giants. From my understanding most of the action is in the US and most of it makes a lot of noise but is unlikely to succeed. Almost all previous attempts to sue for viewpoint discrimination or arbitrary banning have not succeeded up to now.
So let me introduce a case that I actually do believe in. It’s a bit left field but that’s why I like it.
About a year ago all the tech giants took the somewhat extraordinary step of banning almost an entire industry from using their advertising services. As Google and Facebook (with Twitter desperately trying to keep up) are just vast advertising companies. Within weeks of each other all changed their terms and services (which you have no legal way to argue over) to exclude an entire industry from the most important advertising market on the planet.
Both Facebook and Google induce you to pump your information into their servers by offering you a “free” service. Once they have your data and your attention they then sell your data and your attention to the highest bidder: companies that want to advertise to you. You are their product and they sell you and your attention to become amongst the most profitable businesses in the world.
They claimed their ban on an entire industry built around a single technology most usually known as “blockchain” was because there were some scammers using this technology. It is as if they looked at some scam emails from Nigeria and decided, together, lets just take Nigeria off the internet. That would be good for everyone.
Now it turns out both Google and Facebook have reported teams looking at using blockchain technology themselves, this decentralised blockchain technology could well be a competitive way to win market share from these tech giants. Squashing an industry that might generate competitors is not allowed in certain parts of the world, especially when two companies (Google and Facebook) together control way more than 50% of the advertising spend in many countries (it’s as high as 80% in some places).
Andrew Hamilton (who I’ve known personally from his work with various pro-Israel groups like Shurat Ha’Din) is an expat Australian, now resident in Israel but with extensive legal experience in Australian competition law. He has done the work to figure out which laws these companies have broken, formed a company JPB Liberty and put a law suit together. He’s paid for independent legal advice to review his case and that’s been positive. He’s now moved into raising enough money to start the case which includes buying insurance against losing and paying the other sides costs.
BitCoin and the blockchain will replace the tech Goaliaths
Facebook and Google are very rich companies but they’ve broken Australian law and the potential scale of the damages are so big I won’t even type them. Within weeks of the advertising ban they both brought in the entire crypto currency industry suffered a monumental, public collapse in value. The crypto currency industry is one particular use of the blockchain technologies that Facebook Google discriminated against.
There are two ways to get involved, one is totally free and can even be completely anonymous:
Anyone worldwide who was adversely affected by the Crypto Ad Ban announcements on 30 January (Facebook) & 14 March 2018 (Google) and Google’s implementation of the ban in June 2018 including:
Joining as a class member is no-win-no-fee. You don’t pay to join or pay any of the legal costs, if there’s a win you collect a share.
The other way is to join as a funder of the legal costs. For this you will receive a share in 25% of the damages of people who’ve signed up for the Class Action. This is a comparatively high risk, high reward investment: I’m not giving investment advice here, but it is also an ideological way to wage lawfare against these tech giants.
One of the most interesting parts of this is that should there be a win or a settlement, the intention is to pay out via crypto currencies. That would have a doubly good effect because it would pump money into these alternative currencies driving value up for those in the market already and to replace some of the losses suffered when the advertising ban was first instituted!
All the details are on the JPB Liberty website. If you wish to sign up, you can go to this link and be sure to tell Andrew you heard about this from Brian of London!
Finally I recorded a detailed interview with Andrew, you can watch that here and I previously mentioned this case here.
You can join the fight against the Tech Goliaths in two ways, you have a no win no fee claim or you wish to help finance the case.
⭐️ Please join the case if you held crypto and have a claim.
🏅 You can directly contribute crypto on Fundition. To send fiat currency via PayPal click here. If you want to talk about a large donation, Telegram or email me.
If you derive value from my work, please consider donating some value my way. You can find all the details on the donation page.
My friend, Kay Wilson, writes this on Facebag:
It goes like this:
The organization I speak for, OneFamily Together, called me on Thursday, saying that the BBC News are doing a report about the funding of terrorists, and would I like to be part of it.
You bet, I thought.
So the BBC called me and explained that they would also be interviewing a Palestinian family who gets a load of money because of their murderous son, sitting in an Israeli jail.
I wasn’t put off.
I have UK citizenship.
I am fluent in English.
I am articulate.
And…. in my moral favor, I have also started a clandestine project in a Palestinian refugee camp with a Muslim friend, to counter-radicalize children and teach them to clutch onto life and resist adults who teach them to hate.I just heard back.
“Umm…. you’re too famous, we need someone less well known, so I’m very sorry, but we wont be interviewing you.”
They are scared of me. They would rather choose an Israeli who struggles with English, so he/she looks “foreign,” and it will bring the “balance,” needed
Moral cowards. I find them obscene.
Kay Wilson – Facebook.
For those of you who don’t know, Kay Wilson survived a brutal terrorist attack by two Palestinian terorrists. She watched as her friend was murdered before her and she was left for dead in a forest having been hacked 13 times with a machete with a final blow just a hair’s breadth from her heart.
Her would be murderers, the men who murdered her American, Christian friend (and another Israeli woman in a separate attack) now sit in an Israeli prison. They were caught quickly because Kay managed to stab and wound one of them in his thigh. The terrorists and their families receive a monthly “salary” from the Palestinian Authority.
Kay is by far and away the most eloquent speaker on the injustice and sheer horror of this “pay to slay” program you can imagine. Kay’s amazing book, “The Rage Less Traveled” will be published in the next couple of weeks.
Which is precisely why the evil BBC cannot and will not give her air time before the British public. She doesn’t fit their agenda of demonising Israelis and lifting up to sainthood the “Palestinian People”.
Here’s a clip of the real terrorist explaining why he murdered Kristine Luken and tried to murder Kay Wilson. This is not a drama, this is a real police interview tape at the scene of the murder, days after it took place.
I’ve been following Ezra Levant’s twitter feed for news from the court. Yesterday he was reprimanded for giving too many opinions on Twitter while the case is ongoing. As this is not a criminal trial with a Jury, there probably isn’t a law his breaking by giving opinion based commentary and reporting as the case goes on, but he is respecting the wishes of the Judge in her court.
Because at the heart of the case Cambridge Police are trying to justify why a man wearing flip flops and with 3 kids under 12 with him posed a significant risk to the city of Cambridge.
Follow me on Twitter for the snarky comments Ezra isn’t allowed to make.
You must be logged in to post a comment.