Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

Netflix Caves to Saudi Government’s Demands, Eliminating Episodes

In Saudi Arabia, there is no such thing as “free speech”. Netflix just endorsed that outlook with this cowardly move.

Published

on

Saudi ARabia

As the world around us continues to grow more diminutive by the minute, we have the internet to blame.

Now that we, as a species, can communicate with one another instantaneously, our figurative reach is nearly infinite.  Information changes hands in the blink of an eye, allowing the entire globe to share in the cultured omnipotence of the world wide web.

With this power comes the ugly truth, however, with those suffering at the hands of oppressive regimes now able to communicate their dastardly reality back out to the rest of the world.  Such is the case with Saudi Arabia – an incredibly wealthy nation with a horrendous record of human rights abuses.  Thanks to the power of the internet, we can research the Saudi Royal Family until our hearts are content…or until we begin to find ourselves despondent and terrified of what these wealthy thugs are capable of.

take our poll - story continues below

Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?

  • Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Tim Allen Beats Liberal Establishment, Ratings Soar for ‘Last Man Standing’

For Saudi Arabia, free speech isn’t so free.  This is on account of the Royal Family’s attempts to remain in power amid what would otherwise be terminable offenses.

And, at least for the time being, they seem to be getting away with it.

Netflix yanked an episode of its political comedy series “Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj” in Saudi Arabia last week after receiving a “valid legal request” from the Saudi government.

The episode, titled “Saudi Arabia,” allegedly violated the kingdom’s local anti-cybercrime law, according to the Financial Times, which first reported the news. It also criticized the United States’ financial connections to Saudi Arabia, the kingdom’s human rights abuses, and the Saudi-led military campaign in Yemen. The episode can still be viewed on the show’s official YouTube page and is available in other countries on Netflix.

“We strongly support artistic freedom and removed this episode only in Saudi Arabia after we had received a valid legal request — and to comply with local law,” a Netflix spokesperson said in an email statement to VICE News.

The Saudi Royal Family has been in the international spotlight for some time, following the recent murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi just weeks ago.

 

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Democratic Senator Says We’re Headed Toward INDICTMENT of POTUS!

It may all come down to whether or not Mueller is looking to play by the rules or not.

Published

on

Robert Mueller

There have certainly been a number of firsts within this still-young Trump administration.

It may or may not be the first time that we’ve served McDonald’s to a championship team.

And it is certainly the first time that a sitting President might be indicted.  At least according to one Senator from Rhode Island.

Never in thee history of our great nation has something like this been considered, and many on the left are clamoring for it.

Unfortunately for them, there is a longstanding belief in the Department of Justice that a sitting President cannot be indicted, however, he would be eligible to face the music once he leaves office.

According to Rudy Giuliani:

“The Justice Department memos going back to before Nixon say that you cannot indict a sitting president, you have to impeach him. Now there was a little time in which there was some dispute about that, but they acknowledged to us orally that they understand that they can’t violate the Justice Department rules.

“We think it’s bigger than that. We think it’s a constitutional rule, but I don’t think you’re ever going to confront that because nobody’s ever going to indict a sitting president. So, what does that leave them with? That leaves them with writing a report.”

But does that mean that Mueller would play by the rules?

I suppose the only way to find out is to see this out to its inevitable end, whether that be calm, collusion, or calamity.

Continue Reading

News

RED-HANDED! Google’s Anti-Conservative Bias Revealed with SMOKING GUN

Google thought they were too big to get caught. They thought wrong.

Published

on

Google

For months, it has been readily apparent that Google, YouTube, and other mainstream media platforms were actively working to suppress the conservative beliefs of America.

This seemingly newfound animosity toward the right side of the aisle came only from the left’s intense hatred for President Donald Trump.  For what reason?  Seemingly because he was victorious over Hillary Clinton in November 2016, and for few other reasons at all.

With companies such as Google and YouTube, (Google’s video streaming platform), being novel in their gargantuan size, there are no set rules about just how these very public platforms can operate only as private entities, with no regard to Americans’ Constitutional right to free speech.

take our poll - story continues below

Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?

  • Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Now, however, we finally have something resembling a smoking gun in the case.

In sworn testimony, Google CEO Sundar Pichai told Congress last month that his company does not “manually intervene” on any particular search result. Yet an internal discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News reveals Google regularly intervenes in search results on its YouTube video platform – including a recent intervention that pushed pro-life videos out of the top ten search results for “abortion.”

The term “abortion” was added to a “blacklist” file for “controversial YouTube queries,” which contains a list of search terms that the company considers sensitive. According to the leak, these include some of these search terms related to: abortion, abortions, the Irish abortion referendum, Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and anti-gun activist David Hogg.

The existence of the blacklist was revealed in an internal Google discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News by a source inside the company who wishes to remain anonymous. A partial list of blacklisted terms was also leaked to Breitbart by another Google source.

President Trump has hinted in the past about taking a look at regulations regarding free speech on the internet.  Perhaps this will be the impetus to real action.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend