John

John diary Forecast Events
Ad 2:
2021-02-25 03:08:00 (UTC)

Snitch on neighbors

It’s incredible that people don’t see history being recycled in the present, using Americans against one another as pawns of the beast system. Yet, here we have it again as Senator Joe Manchin wants to take the unconstitutional Department of Homeland Security’s “See something, say something” mantra to a whole new, but quite expected, level.

Media Urges Snitching On DC Rally Attendees – Children Encouraged To Snitch On Parents
Not Learning From History: Schools To Have Kids Snitch On Parents On What They Did Over Thanksgiving
Snitchgiving: Americans Are Being Urged to Report Families Gathering for the Holiday
The Viral Video YouTube Took Down In Just Hours: Bill Gates, Gavi Global Vaccine Summit & Turning Your Kids Into Snitches With Kate Shemirani

The Tenth Amendment Center reports:

Senator Joe Manchin wants to bring DHS’s spy on your neighbors, “If You See, Something Say Something” program to social media, blogs, websites, and much more. Manchin’s bill, the “See Something, Say Something Online Act” would essentially turn social media users into Federal spies by forcing them to report suspicious people to law enforcement.

Trending: Medical Doctors: “You Are Being Played” – “The SARS-C0v2 Virus Does Not Exist”

Just how bad is this bill?


This bill would essentially force anyone on social media to report suspicious “transmissions” to law enforcement.

“Known Suspicious Transmission.—The term ‘‘known suspicious transmission’’ is any suspicious transmission that an interactive computer service should have reasonably known to have occurred or have been notified of by a director, officer, employ, agent, interactive computer service user, or State or Federal law enforcement agency.”

Major Crime —The term ‘‘major crime’’ means a Federal criminal offense that is a crime of violence (as defined 13 in section 16 of title 18, United States Code); relating to domestic or international terrorism (as those terms are defined in section 16 2331 of title 18, United States Code)

What exactly is a known suspicious transmission or major crime?

The term “suspicious transmission” means any public or private post, message, comment, tag, transaction, or any other user-generated content or transmission that commits, facilitates, incites, promotes, or otherwise assists the commission of a major crime.

How could social media users, bloggers, web forum moderators, web conferencing users, etc. know that a comment left or uttered by someone would later lead to them committing a major crime?

The See Something, Say Something Online Act would force social media users into red-flagging every person’s comments just in case someone commits a major crime in the future.

Busybodies: Five Infuriating Cases Showing How People Are Getting Fed Up With All the Snitches
Minneapolis Encourages Snitching on Citizens for “Hate Speech” with “Shariah Hotline”
Turning Americans into Snitches for the Police State: ‘See Something, Say Something’ and Community Policing
Enemies of the Deep State: The Government’s War on Domestic Terrorism Is a Trap
This bill would effectively destroy the First Amendment as we know it, dispelling any vestiges of America still being a free country.

Social media users would be forced to submit a Suspicious Transmission Activity Report (STAR) on suspicious individuals within 30 days.

“In General.—If a provider of an interactive computer service detects a suspicious transmission, the interactive computer service, including any director, officer, employee, agent, or representative of such provider, shall submit to the Department a STAR describing the suspicious transmission in accordance with this section.”


As Reason warned, the See Something, Say Something Online Act would put reporting on your fellow American on steroids. It would create a glut of frivolous reports, including many that are politically motivated, or otherwise disingenuous.

Social media users and law enforcement would keep detailed personal information, including metadata of suspicious people for five years.

“Each STAR submitted under this section shall contain, at a minimum— (1) the name, location, and other such identification information as submitted by the user to the provider of the interactive computer service; (2) the date and nature of the post, message, comment, tag, transaction, or other user-generated content or transmission detected for suspicious activity such as time, origin, and destination; and (3) any relevant text, information, and metadata related to the suspicious transmission.”

Retention Of Records —Each provider of an interactive computer service shall— (A) maintain a copy of any STAR submitted under this section and the original record equivalent of any supporting documentation for the 5-year period beginning on the date on which the STAR was submitted. (B) make all supporting documentation available to the Department and any appropriate law enforcement agencies upon request.”

No one can tell a person that they have been flagged as suspicious.

“Non-Disclosure—Except as otherwise prescribed by the Attorney General, no provider of an interactive computer service, or officer, director, employee, or agent of such a provider, subject to an order under subsection (a) may disclose the existence of, or terms of, the order to any person.”

Social media users could face prosecution for not reporting suspicious people.

Imagine someone leaving a comment on social media like the police suck or calling someone a bitch, twit or twat and then they go on to commit a crime in the future. Would anyone like to guess what might happen next?

Every social media user who refused to file a STAR report on a suspicious person would open themselves up to prosecution or a lawsuit.

“Compliance—Any provider of an interactive computer service that fails to report a known suspicious transmission shall not be immune from civil or criminal liability for such transmission under section 230(c) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(c)).”

Where does one begin when it comes to describing just how bad this bill is?

Forcing social media users to essentially submit STAR reports on people they deem as suspicious opens up a Pandora’s box of problems.

Social media users who are forced into reporting on people could flag everyone’s comments to guard against being prosecuted or sued. This bill, if passed as it is written, would have a devastating effect on the civil rights and freedoms of every American.

Massachusetts: Someone Snitched On A Food Pantry Helping Needy During Pandemic – Government Shut It Down
Lockdown “Snitches” Now Fearing Retaliation For Reporting Neighbors After Their Names Are Released Online
Cops Being Told to Prioritize Social Distancing Snitching Calls Over 911 Emergencies
Commie Bill De Blasio’s Snitch Hotline Flooded With Obscenities
While we use social media for the message we have, which I’m sure some will be snitches about, and in fact, already have been, I would recommend if you don’t need social media to just ditch it or use a VPN to block what others can see you doing, but keep your comments and such to yourself.

Additionally, working in your state to stop the fed coats from advancing their tyranny further through nullification and interposition is something that you should be working together with your neighbors on rather than letting social distancing fester the worst part of humanity by turning us on one another.


Ad:0