Board index JoyofSatan666 Orwell's Nightmare is not coming...Its here

Orwell's Nightmare is not coming...Its here

For those who wish to establish a relationship with Satan.

Topics of discussion include: Demons, Magick, Satanic Witchcraft and much more!

http://www.joyofsatan.org/

Hoodedcobra666 User avatar
Site Admin

Posts: 1594
Location: America
Image

In a recent wave of banning, the Jews have been shutting down any and all material that does not comply with their agenda.

I uploaded a documentary mentioning all the known, proven and evident crimes of the jews in regards to the Black Race. And of course, this is 'hate speech'. I did this because I want the Black Comrades to be aware and awake when it comes to that enemy.

Meanwhile, deceived Blacks, jews that openly call of our extermination, making videos of Genocide and the list goes, these are all welcome. The jewish shills and many other instigators of hatred (real hatred, not ideological, such as publicly calling for wiping out all White people, or 'kill some crankas') are just welcome in the jew-tube community.

Apparently, this video hit a nerve on the jews, and its now down in around less than 48 hours of upload. Because the jews know, that if Black and White people too know who is the enemy, their reign is over, as Asians and many people down in Asia know them for the trash they are already.

We are living in Orwell's society. People who don't get this, will only understand it when it's too late.

I have done my part in revealing what the jews are going to do, as Satan and the Gods showed directly to all of us. The jews envision they will impose their own rule of technological slavery etc. This will be done through intelligent AI's and bots, and many other means, which they want to advance in the future.

As Hitler said to instruct and teach the people of the world in the Mein Kampf, reduce freedom little by little, almost to the degree that nothing is observable. Soon enough with that method, a nation or a state is plunged into complete and total slavery. Retarded and denial people who are too live and let be, and too much of an animal to accept the Truth and fight for it, will of course stay on the back, thinking this will never affect them. Until one day they will get to the Gulag, and work alongside those who raised a head against this tyranny.

This is exactly what the jews are doing. Reducing freedoms little by little. State law is becoming little by little talmudic law, the list goes. The second amandment in the USA has been crushed. Freedom of speech no longer exists.

The jews only are focused on very few 'groups' out all the 'trash talkers' and 'hate speech' groups. Jews proudly parade the bible, a book of extermination of all Races of people, and compliance to this is forced. Someone points the finger to this, and this is a criminal offense. The systematic attempt to genocide all races on the planet, instill jewish governments, etc, is all fine.

However let's be blunt, this universe does not work based on what is right, or righteous. It works on sheer force and domination, because right now, civilization has sunk on the level of a toilet. This is deliberate, and the jews want to bring down the last frontiers of civilization, that is, the White Nations.

Our worries, or damage, or wounds of war in this struggle matter not. What matters is who will win, and who will in the end prevail, because this is the future of the world at stake.

Humanity is marching into Orwell's nightmare, and those of us who are awake in this foggy night, we see it coming.

We have the time to change this now, and push back the enemy now, and not later.

It's a sad incident that many people disregarded Hitler's warning. When Hitler said that the crown of the jew will be the funeral wreath of Humanity, he was just looking into this grim, possible future. Like the prophet of prophets, he warned everyone.

In many places of the world this has shifted on level 2 here. Soon, it will get to level 3 if people don't do anything to revert things back to normal.

Image

-High Priest Hooded Cobra 666
http://www.joyofsatan.org

Come by and check Azazel's Marketplace!

http://www.josmarket.org

Help me grow a JooTube Channel for us all

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPTrmw ... fjz97Ciliw


Posts: 236
Come on. Enough buttons have been pushed, enough gentiles are free. You saved only a handfull, let's leave it at that. You don't wanna jewsus to come down here and scold you, do you?


Posts: 145
Is there any way you could upload it elsewhere? as I wanted to watch it...

FUCK THE JEWS!


Posts: 6
Very true ..Already level 2 in my country ..Many many people are unemployed and so many people imprisoned for selling drugs in desperate need for money to survive.A lot of people also lost their homes due to the goverment new plan of construction .Recently we even lost our educational right. The only way we've got to survive is by working 8 hours a day to clean toilets or streets or be waiters for a maximum wage of 250 dollars a month at best .. Things are getting worse and worse day by day unfourtenately it looks like we have no other choice but obeying to these disgusting filthy reptilian creauteres in order to fill our bodies with their poisened food just to survive so we can obey until death :(( ..


Posts: 100
That's a lot of "The Goyim Know - Shut it Down" memes.

The jews have released the ban hounds so fast, it's in the newspapers. Pretty much everyone except the people who says "Fuck white people" are banned from Twitter, especially Alt-Right, so they're moving to this new site called Gab.

I'm still wondering why there still aren't any violent revolts for what's going on, because it's pretty obvious.
Soldiers of Satan don't die, we go to Duat and regroup. -Brdredr (Yes I stole that from the Marines)


Posts: 307
Check this out, guys.. Jews are getting desperate, lol. They are using Azazels sigil directly in a Hollywood-movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEWhwNUY4HU
Poor jews, in their million dollar mansions.. Always mistreated. I feel more sorry for the jewish people than for the 17 000 children who starved to death today, because of jewish interests. Poor jews.


Posts: 24
To further support HP Cobra's argument, here's an article about "Hate Speech" (the reason the video was taken down).


No, there’s no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol ... 719f30e0a3

By Eugene Volokh May 7, 2015

I keep hearing about a supposed “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, “This isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech,” or “When does free speech stop and hate speech begin?” But there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas. One is as free to condemn Islam — or Muslims, or Jews, or blacks, or whites, or illegal aliens, or native-born citizens — as one is to condemn capitalism or Socialism or Democrats or Republicans.

To be sure, there are some kinds of speech that are unprotected by the First Amendment. But those narrow exceptions have nothing to do with “hate speech” in any conventionally used sense of the term. For instance, there is an exception for “fighting words” — face-to-face personal insults addressed to a specific person, of the sort that are likely to start an immediate fight. But this exception isn’t limited to racial or religious insults, nor does it cover all racially or religiously offensive statements. Indeed, when the City of St. Paul tried to specifically punish bigoted fighting words, the Supreme Court held that this selective prohibition was unconstitutional (R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)), even though a broad ban on all fighting words would indeed be permissible. (And, notwithstanding CNN anchor Chris Cuomo’s Tweet that “hate speech is excluded from protection,” and his later claims that by “hate speech” he means “fighting words,” the fighting words exception is not generally labeled a “hate speech” exception, and isn’t coextensive with any established definition of “hate speech” that I know of.)

The same is true of the other narrow exceptions, such as for true threats of illegal conduct or incitement intended to and likely to produce imminent illegal conduct (i.e., illegal conduct in the next few hours or maybe days, as opposed to some illegal conduct some time in the future). Indeed, threatening to kill someone because he’s black (or white), or intentionally inciting someone to a likely and immediate attack on someone because he’s Muslim (or Christian or Jewish), can be made a crime. But this isn’t because it’s “hate speech”; it’s because it’s illegal to make true threats and incite imminent crimes against anyone and for any reason, for instance because they are police officers or capitalists or just someone who is sleeping with the speaker’s ex-girlfriend.

The Supreme Court did, in Beauharnais v. Illinois (1952), uphold a “group libel” law that outlawed statements that expose racial or religious groups to contempt or hatred, unless the speaker could show that the statements were true, and were said with “good motives” and for “justifiable ends.” But this too was treated by the Court as just a special case of a broader First Amendment exception — the one for libel generally. And Beauharnais is widely understood to no longer be good law, given the Court’s restrictions on the libel exception. See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) (rejecting the view that libel is categorically unprotected, and holding that the libel exception requires a showing that the libelous accusations be “of and concerning” a particular person); Garrison v. Louisiana (1964) (generally rejecting the view that a defense of truth can be limited to speech that is said for “good motives” and for “justifiable ends”); Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps (1986) (generally rejecting the view that the burden of proving truth can be placed on the defendant); R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992) (holding that singling bigoted speech is unconstitutional, even when that speech fits within a First Amendment exception); Nuxoll ex rel. Nuxoll v. Indian Prairie Sch. Dist. # 204, 523 F.3d 668, 672 (7th Cir. 2008) (concluding that Beauharnais is no longer good law); Dworkin v. Hustler Magazine Inc., 867 F.2d 1188, 1200 (9th Cir. 1989) (likewise); Am. Booksellers Ass’n, Inc. v. Hudnut, 771 F.2d 323, 331 n.3 (7th Cir. 1985) (likewise); Collin v. Smith, 578 F.2d 1197, 1205 (7th Cir. 1978) (likewise); Tollett v. United States, 485 F.2d 1087, 1094 n.14 (8th Cir. 1973) (likewise); Erwin Chemerinsky, Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies 1043-45 (4th ed. 2011); Laurence Tribe, Constitutional Law, §12-17, at 926; Toni M. Massaro, Equality and Freedom of Expression: The Hate Speech Dilemma, 32 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 211, 219 (1991); Robert C. Post, Cultural Heterogeneity and Law: Pornography, Blasphemy, and the First Amendment, 76 Calif. L. Rev. 297, 330-31 (1988).

Finally, “hostile environment harassment law” has sometimes been read as applying civil liability — or administrative discipline by universities — to allegedly bigoted speech in workplaces, universities, and places of public accommodation. There is a hot debate on whether those restrictions are indeed constitutional; they have generally been held unconstitutional when applied to universities, but decisions are mixed as to civil liability based on speech that creates hostile environments in workplaces (see the pages linked to at this site for more information on the subject). But even when those restrictions have been upheld, they have been justified precisely on the rationale that they do not criminalize speech (or otherwise punish it) in society at large, but only apply to particular contexts, such as workplaces. None of them represent a “hate speech” exception, nor have they been defined in terms of “hate speech.”

For this very reason, “hate speech” also doesn’t have any fixed legal meaning under U.S. law. U.S. law has just never had occasion to define “hate speech” — any more than it has had occasion to define rudeness, evil ideas, unpatriotic speech, or any other kind of speech that people might condemn but that does not constitute a legally relevant category.

Of course, one can certainly argue that First Amendment law should be changed to allow bans on hate speech (whether bigoted speech, blasphemy, blasphemy to which foreigners may respond with attacks on Americans or blasphemy or flag burning or anything else). Perhaps some statements of the “This isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech” variety are deliberate attempts to call for such an exception, though my sense is that they are usually (incorrect) claims that the exception already exists.

I think no such exception should be recognized, but of course, like all questions about what the law ought to be, this is a matter that can be debated. Indeed, people have a First Amendment right to call for speech restrictions, just as they have a First Amendment right to call for gun bans or bans on Islam or government-imposed race discrimination or anything else that current constitutional law forbids. Constitutional law is no more set in stone than any other law.

But those who want to make such arguments should acknowledge that they are calling for a change in First Amendment law, and should explain just what that change would be, so people can thoughtfully evaluate it. Calls for a new First Amendment exception for “hate speech” shouldn’t just rely on the undefined term “hate speech” — they should explain just what viewpoints the government would be allowed to suppress, what viewpoints would remain protected, and how judges, juries, and prosecutors are supposed to distinguish the two. Saying “this isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech” doesn’t, I think, suffice.


Posts: 2767
"If you're not certain if your free speech is defined by us arbitrarily, which we don't tell you, as "hate speech", then we ask that you don't ask us to tell you how we define it arbitrarily so that we can continue to try and control you, stupid goyim slaves."

Perhaps you could upload it to Dropbox, for example, and make a short, simple video on j00t00bs with a link to it. Every active member on here and the Yahoo! Groups should create a brand new shittube account and upload your video there. Then once they remove them, do it again twice on 2 new accounts, then three times on 3 new accounts, etc. Make sure all of these numerous accounts are created first, in case they IP ban you from making new accounts.

There are also:


Some are more for entertainment/lols than serious posts, though.

Brdredr wrote:
The jews have released the ban hounds so fast, it's in the newspapers. Pretty much everyone except the people who says "Fuck white people" are banned from Twitter, especially Alt-Right, so they're moving to this new site called Gab.


As soon as I read you saying that it made me think that those who are not interested in politics; Spirituality; Nature; Humanity; freedom... will not be bothered to visit gab.ai, so the jew, with their jew-named "freedom of speech" site, are trying to separate us (and alt-right/alt-reich) from the rest. Separating the informed and understanding Goyim (and alt-right/alt-reich) from the ignorant Goyim.
If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes...

Shut up and click here

jew: Stupid goyim.

Click here to show your love for Misho

The Beast in the skies has risen - in time it would come. The lands have begun their schism; all bow to the Fallen One.

May the mighty Mjølnir
nail the bleeding and naked nazarene
upon the Pagan planks
pound in the painful nails now and hang him high and dry


Posts: 24
And I also think the following article is relevant to the post of HP Cobra.

My point is... you never know how free you are, until you challenge these concepts of freedom! THE AVERAGE PERSON DOESN'T CHALLENGE THOSE CONCEPTS, SO THEY REMAIN CHAINED IN THEIR OWN ILLUSION!

The same argument goes for people that think money isn't important and that freedom is what's important. Again, this is an illusion. Play a little mental game with yourself; think how free you are if you don't have any money! YOU CAN'T GO ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WITHOUT MONEY.

Political Correctness

In democracies we're told that we live under free
speech. Free speech means that every individual
has a right to express his or her opinion
democratically in media and debates. But like
with many other things today, free speech is a
catchy phrase that doesn't really live up to its
own ideals. Not all ideas are legitimate to
express, ideas our political leaders fittingly call
"anti-democratic" or "anti-freedom." In other
words, you're allowed to speak your mind as
long as your opinion is not in conflict with the
official political ideals.


This creates what we often address as "political
correctness," that is, all political ideas are equal
worth, but some ideas are more "correct" than
others. This is a clever move by the authority,
because it sustains a parallel world; one, where
all of these good-sounding concepts such as
"freedom" and "diversity" are praised, and
another, where some people question these
concepts and find that they don't correspond to
reality. Nobody is noticing the clash, because as
long as you don't put these concepts up to the
test - and most people don't - you will never
know just how "free" you really are.


Political correctness has also got a psychological
dimension. For example, while many people are
tired of mass immigration and ethnic conflicts,
they're well aware that it is "racist", or politically
incorrect, to express this in the open public,
fearing that they'll be labelled as Nazis. A
realistic point to make here, would be that you
aren't necessarily full of hate towards other
people, to express that you feel more
comfortable around people sharing your culture
and set of values. The authority has no
arguments against this, so instead they choose to
thrive on people's fear of being branded as
someone who is "against" the morally positive
things we see on TV.

Political correctness is just that: a fear of reality.
Truths, if really true, should be able to stand on
their own without a political dogma to support
them. Today, most of our "truths" are not built
around what's realistic, but what sounds good in
the ears of those who've listened to the same
message year after year. Suddenly, the dogmatic
shell breaks and reality knocks on the door. By
then, we stand up to our knees in problems
we've been trying to hide for years: global
ecological disasters, mass poverty, political
corruption, race riots and generations of
emotionally broken children.

But the worst thing about political correctness is
that it breaks consensus on how we should live
and organize our society. Two basic camps are
created: those who are "correct" and agree with
anything that is popular at the moment, and
those who thus are automatically "incorrect" and
shouldn't be listened to. Society will slowly fall
apart due to these internal divisions, while the
focus on realistic expectations for the future, is
drowning among all the dogma and massmedia
that are needed to support the "correct" ideas.
The most effective way of dealing with
dogmatic political correctness is to point to our
shared reality and show how our current ideas
do not meet the expectations we assess. We need
to find a path that will lead to a better future,
where ideas are measured logically and
realistically, regardless of their market value or
dogmatic capability.

Hoodedcobra666 User avatar
Site Admin

Posts: 1594
Location: America
Would you mind adding the posts about internet censorship? These must go in PDF aside with this. I will make this so just if you can, post these here.

This is a direct assault on freedom. Note the language of the kikes and how offensive and braggy it is in the banning statement.

Another thing that happened is that a lawyer or someone flagged another one of my videos, blocking it in 248 countries. It was a legal complaint and not copyright. However the bitch had no grounds so jewtube couldn't pull that one off.
http://www.joyofsatan.org

Come by and check Azazel's Marketplace!

http://www.josmarket.org

Help me grow a JooTube Channel for us all

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPTrmw ... fjz97Ciliw


Posts: 24
I'm reposing this previous post to this thread
post85456.html

The Internet Inquisition has already begun!

The new inquisition is happening right now. This is a war on information. The jews know that the internet is their weak spot and trying desperately to filter/censor everything.

..........................................

First Point... "Hate Speech Policy"
You're not allowed to hate on social media...

"Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft Sign Hate Speech Agreement"
http://fortune.com/2016/05/31/hate-speech-code/

From the above article...
"Based on a 2008 piece of legislation, the code of conduct describes the illegal material as “all conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.”"

Take a guess. The truth that we currently fight to spread, it will be "illegal" and considered "hate speech".

So... channels in youtube that spread the truth are being closed on that premise. Spreading the truth over facebook or twitter is "hate speech". And Microsoft is there also. Do you think the new Windows 10, that is updating automatically and spying on your every move, is for your own benefit?

Think again...
Take note and find alternatives to the jew owned social media and Operating Systems.

..................................................

Second point. Internet inquisition...

The new inquisition of the internet already has a name "Anti-Piracy Groups". They're supposed to protect the copyrights of the companies they represent (the jews ofc). Meaning that if the legislation in your country protects you, they will find a way to make you pay, even if these attempts are unlawful (with the law turning a blind eye).

"Anti-Piracy Group FACT Expands Reach Beyond Hollywood"
https://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-gr ... ntfreak%29

The point is that they are ignoring every legislation that exists in order to "fight piracy"!

They try to close the providers that hold the content... even if they are lawful in their country
See the megaupload trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megauploa ... s_advanced

Then they try to close the torrent sites... even if they aren't doing anything illegal (the users of the site are allegedly illegal)
See kickass torrents closing... http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/21/technol ... s-torrent/

But it doesn't end there...
They also harass all the search providers (also jew owned, so they comply), in order to remove results from the search engines (if you can't find it, it doesn't exist). This is the DMCA takedown notice, meaning "you have using copyrighted material, i can shut down your site if you don't remove it". So the jews can falsely accuse a site of copyright infringement (without cost), take it down (irregardless if it's illegal), and in order for the site to appeal you have to file a lawsuit (meaning cost money).

And don't get me wrong. Piracy IS Illegal! But the way they are pursuing this IS ALSO ILLEGAL. There is no way to protect the rights of the defendant! They don't care about the defendant. They only care about their money.

So... whose to tell if these copyright trolls will stop there. If they play dirty and unlawfully now, why stop here? They're getting away with it already! They're jews and they wont stop. Be sure about that. I'm sure they'll try to use these "Anti-Piracy Groups" to police the internet.

..............................................

You don't think so? Take a note at my first point.

Youtube/Facebook/Twitter etc. a few years back were the new revolution of the internet. Free video hosting, Social networking, Global publicity. They brought on the people. Got them addicted/used to these services. And then they police it.

What about Windows 10? Wow, what a revolution. FREE UPGRADE? WOW! Amazing. Guess what buddy, if the product is given for free, then "YOU ARE THE PRODUCT". The want to lure you and hook you in. Why? Maybe, just maybe, in this new operating system, there are routines that see if you visit the "wrong sites".

They wont do anything about it. They'll just gather data. They won't do anything for years. But then after a decade, like the Year Zero in Cambodia, they'll come in and slaughter everyone they think it's a threat for their agenda.
http://dawn666blacksun.angelfire.com/Year_Zero.html

.....................................................

Imagine the same thing in a different way. They feed the sheep to come closer. The take them into the slaughterhouse and close the door (and cutoff their other food sources). And lastly they start slaughtering.

The same thing happened with the European Union 20 years ago. A new united economic power. Feed the countries with money. Bring them into the EU. Close the door (no legislation to exit the EU). Start policing the countries (slaughtering). See Greece.

Guess what they're gonna try in the US by closing the borders with Jew-owned Trump?

...............................................

We have to keep fighting strong!

The enemy is not stupid. They are trying to cut us off our sources of information.
They will succeed, ONLY if we stop fighting.

We have to keep doing the RTRs.
topic16747.html

Be strong comrades! The fight just started!

HAIL FATHER SATAN
HAIL ALL THE GODS OF HELL


Posts: 24
And reposting this also
post85768.html


jason macsenn wrote:
The internet Inquisition Part 2

This is a continuation on a previous post
http://josministries.prophpbb.com/post85456.html

The corporations are already hunting down ISPs (Internet Service Providers) and are accusing them to being accomplices in piracy. In layman's terms, the ISPs want to protect the privacy of their clients (as any respectful business should do) and refuse to give data to the corporations in order to identify the internet usage (what you're doing on the internet) and identify the pirates.

The corporations then take a stance against the ISPs "if you're not with me, you're against me" and file a lawsuit against the ISPs, trying to bully them to comply with unlawful inquiries.

"An Internet service provider does not infringe copyrights merely by providing households access to the Internet," the CCIA and CTA write.

“Yet the district court allowed such a case to go to the jury, and asked the jury only whether Cox ‘materially contributed’ to infringement in any of the millions of households to which Cox offered Internet access,” they add.


SEE?! The jewish corporations are bending everything in their power to slaughter anyone that provides access to the internet with privacy. This isn't about alleged pirates, but about the rest of us that are mixed in all this.

“The decision […] forces ISPs like Cox and USTelecom’s member companies to restrict consumers’ access to the internet based on nothing more than unproven allegations of copyright infringement in the form of invalid DMCA notices.

“It upsets the careful balance of the interests of copyright holders, internet users, and ISPs that Congress struck in the DMCA,” the Telco association adds


RESTRICT CONSUMERS' ACCESS TO THE INTERNET
ON FALSE CLAIMS!!!

We have to be aware of this and fight in all levels.

First contact your state representatives and do something about it on the physical level. Put some pressure on this level.

Next and most important one, we have keep doing the RTRs.
Freeing communications is gonna help a lot with the internet!

Freeing Communications Genesis 11: 9
http://josministries.prophpbb.com/topic12115.html

We have to keep fighting comrades!

Hail Father Satan Forever!


Full article follows
https://torrentfreak.com/widespread-pro ... ict-161115
.....................................................................................


Widespread Protest Against Dangerous “Repeat Infringer” Piracy Verdict

By Ernesto on November 15, 2016

A broad range of industry associations, academic institutions, libraries and digital rights groups have submitted their opinions on the landmark piracy case between Cox Communications and BMG. They all warn the court that the district court's decision to hold the ISP available for pirating subscribers can have disastrous implications.

pirate-runningLast December a Virginia federal jury ruled that Internet provider Cox Communications was responsible for the copyright infringements of its subscribers.

The ISP was found guilty of willful contributory copyright infringement and ordered to pay music publisher BMG Rights Management $25 million in damages.

Last week Cox filed its appeal arguing that the district court made several errors that may ultimately restrict the public’s access to Internet services.

This week it became apparent that the Internet provider is not alone in this assessment. Today, several industry associations, academic institutions, libraries and digital rights groups submitted amicus briefs to the court of appeals, voicing their concerns.

The submissions total roughly 200 pages, and the overall theme is that if the current verdict stands, many Internet providers and services will unjustly face similar liability claims based on an incorrect interpretation of the law.

The CCIA, which represents global tech firms including Google, Facebook, and Microsoft, submitted a brief together with the Consumer Technology Association (CTA). According to both groups, the district court ignored Supreme Court rulings which limit contributory infringement for service providers.

“An Internet service provider does not infringe copyrights merely by providing households access to the Internet,” the CCIA and CTA write (pdf).

“Yet the district court allowed such a case to go to the jury, and asked the jury only whether Cox ‘materially contributed’ to infringement in any of the millions of households to which Cox offered Internet access,” they add.

As expected, several stakeholders from the telco industries have also chimed in to support Cox’s appeal.

The U.S. Telecom Association, for example, urges the appeals court to reverse the verdict as it would require other ISPs to disconnect subscribers based on one-sided piracy accusations.

“The decision […] forces ISPs like Cox and USTelecom’s member companies to restrict consumers’ access to the internet based on nothing more than unproven allegations of copyright infringement in the form of invalid DMCA notices.

“It upsets the careful balance of the interests of copyright holders, internet users, and ISPs that Congress struck in the DMCA,” the Telco association adds (pdf).

Similar arguments were submitted in separate briefs by the American Cable Association and the Internet Commerce Coalition, with the latter highlighting the dubious nature of the millions of standardized copyright infringement claims some copyright holders send.

“If the decision […] is not reversed, conduit ISPs, when they receive unverified, machine-generated infringement claims from profit-seeking agents of copyright holders, will be strongly incentivized to cut off vital Internet service to users, rather than face costly damages suits.

“This is not the system Congress intended when it enacted the DMCA, and it should not be one imposed through a misinterpretation of Congress’s plain words,” the Internet Commerce Coalition adds (pdf).

The Amicus Briefs submitted today

coxsupp

In their submissions, digital rights groups the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Public Knowledge highlight the risk the verdict poses for Internet users at large.

“Just as a tenant’s water should not ordinarily be cut off when a landlord alleges nonpayment of rent, a subscriber’s connection to the Internet should not be terminated in response to alleged copyright infringement except in the most extenuating circumstances,” the groups note (pdf).

The district court’s interpretation of ISP obligations under the DMCA was too strict, they argue, and should be reversed. Not doing so could ultimately violate the fundamental right of people to have Internet access.

“Termination impedes the subscriber’s ability to exercise one of our most cherished liberties, the right of free expression. And termination potentially imposes those far-reaching effects on an entire household sharing the subscriber’s Internet connection.”

Finally, there is a detailed brief from several academic groups and institutions, including several library organizations. The American Council on Education and the American Library Association, among others, fear that educational access to the Internet may become restricted if the verdict stands.

“It could force educational institutions to restrict student access to the Internet unreasonably. Similarly, it could require libraries to limit broadband availability to people who have no other way of accessing information they need,” they write (pdf).

“The DMCA does not mandate a uniform repeat infringer policy, and such uniformity would conflict with the flexibility afforded under the Higher Education Opportunity Act,” the groups add.

The barrage of submissions clearly shows the importance of this case, and it’s likely that many more will follow. It is now up to the appeals court to decide if and how these opinions should be factored in.

With the stakes being this high, it would be no surprise if this case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, to clearly define ISPs’ obligations when it comes to processing DMCA notices and dealing with repeat infringers.

Interestingly, no amicus briefs have been submitted in support of copyright holder BMG thus far.


Posts: 281
HP Hooded Cobra, if I may, may I suggest some solutions?

1.We simply need to go around the system. What I mean by this is, upload your documentary into any online cloud drive service. Then make a video explaining that this documentary has been banned because they don't want you to know the Truth things like that.... Publish it onto your Channel and leave the actual video link in the description:

(Here's an example of what I'm trying to explain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maADU1O ... OHSTIaZTys )

What is also possible is you could leave your videos as 'Unlisted' and do the same thing as stated above.

2.I'm sure you already do this but I wanna bring it up for our members....Mark your video license as Creative Commons/Public Domain. It is a stretch.... but in theory if there's no money to made they have no reason to take your video down, except for the whole "muh feelz, hate speech" bs

3. Maybe it's time we update the Satan's Library video archive? Have the videos uploaded in a private cloud drive as previously mentioned (or onto the site itself but that will eat up a lot of space.) and only publicly show the videos in there. Then advertise the video page meticulously. I know they've taken us down before, but as long as we're using jewtube we're playing ball in their court. YouTube wasn't here in the beginning, in theory no one can say shit for whatever is on your personal page.


Posts: 530
I think Egon's channel got shoahed...
Hail Satan Lucifer!


Posts: 2741
Location: Internet — "The cradle of 21st century White Supremacy"

HauptSturm wrote:
I think Egon's channel got shoahed...

Yes, it is a pity as "The Forced Suicide of Europe" and Muhammad Ali's video got tens of thousands of views and likes. I will be uploading everything again in my new channel and my Web Archive page, including HC's documentary:

https://archive.org/details/@alegria_de_satan

https://youtu.be/1QlViDsolyQ



Posts: 43
They even took down The greatest story never told, this is really a police state on the internet.


Posts: 2741
Location: Internet — "The cradle of 21st century White Supremacy"

The documentary is now avaliable in the Web Archive for those who want to download and watch it, here is the link:

Jews - The Real Enemy of Black People:
https://archive.org/details/Jews-The-Real-Enemy-of-Black-People


Return to JoyofSatan666