How to tell who is telling the truth and/or has the better argument

And in context, how to tell who the evil tyrants are.

Imagine that you are a neutral outsider coming to the U.S. Maybe even from another planet. The idea being that you have absolutely no prior knowledge of the political issues of today, or in the past. You have no bias of any kind, nor even any preferences with respect to specific people or specific debates, so you’ve been brought here to be a completely neutral arbiter.

In that scenario (or any other remotely like it), you need to get up to speed. You need to hear from the parties on each side of the arguments in order to make decisions. You want to gather as much information as possible, to hear all the relevant points made on behalf of any side. This is in fact pretty much how arbiters and arbitration works in the legal system. But in the U.S. now, and in fact much of the world, you would find that one side is trying to silence the other (or others) and control the entire narrative.

Sticking to the U.S. where we ostensibly have freedom of speech, the side that wants to control the narrative uses various tactics. They work to censor information wherever and whenever they can. They shout down those who oppose them. They seek to shut down events where ideas and arguments they don’t like will be discussed, including by using extreme violence. They harass and threaten people saying things they don’t like. They try to get them fired from jobs, cancelled from any speaking engagements, etc. They do whatever they can to keep their opposition from being allowed to make their arguments.

Meanwhile, they work with their allies in social media and other tech companies to not only censor the other side, but also to hide information that will undermine or even destroy their narrative. They will go to court over and over again trying to persuade judges to hide information. And again, they will harass, threaten, and even physically attack people trying to get the information and release it to the public.

If you’re reading this you already know which side works to suppress information. It’s the left. Just like with communist China, with fascist Nazi Germany, and with all the other tyrannical regimes worldwide for at least the past 100 plus years. The tyrants silence the opposition (if they can) in order to stay in power and increase their power.

Specific examples are left wing media ignoring news which doesn’t fit their narrative, and also spinning and even inventing topics and events that they do cover. Hard core left wing and evil Google, with algorithms that ensure that left wing content is at the top and anything they don’t like is buried way down or even not shown at all. With the ‘Climategate’ material in particular you can easily see that Google’s goal is for you to never actually see the material that goes against their narrative. They can’t have you reading the material and finding out what scammers the leaders of the global warming mantra are.

Then there’s FascistBook, Twatter, and even the supposedly professional site LinkedIn. With FascistBook you get “fact checks” slapped on material they don’t like, and you can’t provide your own evidence to counter the often ridiculous and horribly false “facts” that are plastered onto your post. You’ll also get downranked and shadow banned, and you will get blocked from posting or commenting at all at some point. With Twatter you’ll get shadow banned also, or your Tweets removed, and/or your account locked out.

With LinkedIn, posts and comments will be hidden, and at some point your account will be locked out such that your profile is hidden. As of late Decemember I have been locked out of LinkedIn. I posted truthful content on Corona and the so called “vaccines” and they locked me out. I did get an email with 3 examples of supposed “misinformation” from them, and I thoroughly backed up each point that they claimed was false. My detailed response did not make a difference.

With LinkedIn I also did a couple of tests to check their truth meter and their “professional content” meter. On the professional content side, I saw a post where a left winger had a long post bashing Ted Cruz personally. It had very little political content let alone “professional content”. It had a long thread of comments below it so it had been up for a while. Down in the thread I replied to a nasty personal left wing comment, and shortly afterward I got a notice that my comment had been hidden due to their “professional content” policy. So for a test I picked out one of the nastiest left wing comments and reported it to LinkedIn. Of course their response was that the left winger personally bashing a Republican was perfectly fine.

For my next test on LinkedIn’s “fact checking” policy, I reported a comment where a guy was claiming that before the “vaccines” were released, 15% (!!!!) of the people who got Corona were dying. I chose this one because LinkedIn did not like my comment about a 99.9% survival rate. There were multiple researchers who came up with that number early on, and John Ionnadis came up with ranges where the number could have been even lower. He also participated in a scientific study to estimate the number, and then a revised version after criticism of the first. Even if Ionnadis and company were wrong about the 99.85% or so survival rate, no one anywhere was claiming anything less than 95% overall.

Not even the wildest fear porn promoters in the world claimed that even 10% of people who got Corona were dying. The absurd early estimates were less than 4% if I recall correctly, and those were quickly shown to be vast overestimates. So what did LinkedIn decide when I reported the guy commenting that the overall death rate was 15%?? Of course that comment was perfectly hunky dory because it promoted fear and helped to scare people into getting jabbed. So LinkedIn’s censorship has nothing to do with “professional conduct” and nothing to to with “mis/dis-information”. It’s just more left wingers trying to control speech and information that they don’t like and/or that counters their narrative.

Of course the Hunter Biden laptop story and the information contained on the laptop are one of the best big examples. Left wing media claimed “Russian disinformation” a million times over, and left wing tech sites and social media sites suppressed it or censored it completely. And as of now it’s been completely verified as factual, and the content shows the complete corruption of the Biden family. If it were one of Trump’s sons it would have been covered non stop and Trump would have been impeached and prosecuted for the corruption.

In contrast, those on the right don’t seek to hide the left’s arguments. They can easily destroy each and every one of them. Many of the left’s ideas and arguments are self evidently false or obvious lies. The unborn baby being “part of the woman’s body” is one good example. The left being the non racist party when they constantly refer to skin color and clearly judge people based on skin color is another. In most cases the more a left winger talks the more obvious their idiocy and/or dishonesty is, so those on the right do not seek to silence them. (Keeping various forms of pedophiles and their perversions away from children is another matter.)

Those truly on the right don’t try to hide public information either. The inner workings of government, data on government spending, what’s in massive bills before congress, election data, etc., etc. Just look at how many times left wingers (and RINOs) went to court to stop investigations of 2020 election fraud. You don’t do that unless you have a lot to hide.

So if you’re any sort of neutral observer, it’s obvious who is lying and who has a weak argument or no real argument at all. It’s the left. If you’re telling the truth, and you have the better arguments and ideas, you have no need to silence your opposition and hide information. You don’t need to go on and on and on about “disinformation” and “misinformation” either. And you sure as hell aren’t out there railing against the first amendment and free speech rights.