Facebook has banned a page run by an Australian Member of Parliament that had over 100,000 followers over its anti-lockdown content, with MP Craig Kelly questioning how a “foreign entity” should have the power to silence an elected representative.

Kelly, an Independent Australian politician and member for the Division of Hughes in the Australian House of Representatives, ran a page that became popular for challenging the Australian government’s lockdown policy, which has proved to be one of the most draconian in the western world.

Kelly previously quit the Liberal Party back in February after the government apparently told him to “shut up” about his COVID claims and refrain from posting anything further about the issue.

However, he refused to do so despite having already been temporarily suspended by Facebook and continued to challenge the efficacy and legal standing of lockdowns and raise concerns over vaccine side-effects while also questioning the legitimacy of World Health Organization guidelines – leading to a permanent ban.

“Firstly, they refused to tell me what they say is misinformation … I stand 100% by everything I’ve posted. It’s not my random thoughts, it’s backed up by scientific evidence,” said Kelly.

The MP said he was “absolutely outraged” about how a “foreign entity” has the power to silence an elected official and is now working on a bill that would hit Big Tech firms with a $100,000 per day fine for unfairly banning people for political speech.

Facebook responded to criticism over the ban by indicating they didn’t care about the fact that Kelly was an elected representative.

“We don’t allow anyone, including elected officials, to share misinformation about COVID-19 that could lead to imminent physical harm or [misinformation regarding] COVID-19 vaccines that have been debunked by public health experts,” said a statement.

And there you have it. So-called “public health experts” are now gods who wield more power than elected politicians and cannot be criticized or questioned in any way.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

The newly released Nextdoor social media app warns users that they may be engaging in racism before allowing them to send certain words or phrases, including “all lives matter” and “blue lives matter.”

Yes, really.

Nextdoor, an app that connects neighbors with each other, has introduced a new “anti-racism” notification system that alerts users if they may be about to use offensive or bigoted language.

When the user is about to transmit the thought crime, the app asks them to consider revising their words.

“The new anti-racism notification detects certain phrases such as ‘All Lives Matter’ or ‘Blue Lives Matter,’ and prompts the author to consider editing their post or comment before it goes live,” a Nextdoor spokesperson said.

In a video demonstration for the feature, someone responds to a message about Black Lives Matter by asking, “Why just black lives? I believe all lives matter.”

A warning then pops up which announces “Hold on – the phrase “all lives matter” can be hurtful to people of color. Consider editing before you publish.”

The user in the demonstration then deletes their “all lives matter” message and writes something different to signify compliance.

The company also has a “kindness reminder” feature that “automatically flags offensive or hurtful comments.”

As Christina Maas points out, “Tech platforms are constantly trying to change and mold people’s speech.”

While race grifters and legacy media outlets have tried to brand “all lives matter” a racist dog whistle, its use is widespread.

A survey conducted last year found that a majority of Americans agreed more with the statement “all lives matter” compared to “black lives matter.”

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Biologist author Richard Dawkins has been stripped of an honour awarded to him by The American Humanist Association in 1996, following tweets that he says merely called for a discussion on transgender issues.

The AHA issued a statement that claims “Regrettably, Richard Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values.”

“Consequently, the AHA Board has concluded that Richard Dawkins is no longer deserving of being honored by the AHA, and has voted to withdraw, effective immediately, the 1996 Humanist of the Year award,” the organisation added.

Today the American Humanist Association Board voted to withdraw, effective immediately, the 1996 Humanist of the Year award it bestowed on Richard Dawkins.

Tap the preview below to read the board's statement explaining why. https://t.co/VfxMgbISh5

— American Humanist Association (@americnhumanist) April 19, 2021

Leaving aside the fact that the honour was awarded TWENTY FIVE years ago, the AHA has not actually provided any specific instances where Dawkins made statements that could be viewed as intentionally demeaning to trans people.

He has previously tweeted regarding transgenderism from a biological science standpoint, which he argues is necessarily in direct opposition to the modern phenomenon of ‘wokeism’:

Is trans woman a woman? Purely semantic. If you define by chromosomes, no. If by self-identification, yes. I call her "she" out of courtesy.

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) October 26, 2015

Yes, I know it’s behind a paywall but it’s worth it. Superb article by Trevor Phillips on the oppressive nonsense that can flow from aggressive “wokeism”, e.g. demanding that employees should sign a statement that “trans women are women”.https://t.co/EYp3EPElBg

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) November 8, 2020

Most recently, Dawkins compared people identifying as a different gender to their biological gender to Rachel Dolezal, a white woman who identifies as black, and complained that if you ‘deny’ their identity you will be vilified:

In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black. Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as.

Discuss.

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) April 10, 2021

The way Dawkins whacked ‘discuss’ on the end of the tweet in an effort to suggest it is not his opinion, but rather just a topic of debate, riled those who disagree:

I've had low expectations for you, for quite some time. As I believe I've made clear. Even so this is disappointing. You've worked hard to be the spokesperson for causes I hold dear; if you can't perceive an accompanying obligation to be more decent than this—step back. Way back.

— Greg M. Epstein (@gregmepstein) April 11, 2021

Why not read absolutely anything that's been written about this and understand it. Absolutely pathetic that you're going down the Gender Critical conspiracy theory hole after reading one stupid book. This is like a teenager level argument about trans people

— Katy Montgomerie 🦗 (@KatyMontgomerie) April 11, 2021

Cool. Can we stop pretending that Richard is "just asking questions" now?

Or does he need to just start tweeting slurs before we acknowledge that he was always an overly hyped up science communicator writing readable books about other people's work? https://t.co/EHkxGHTUcK

— Eli Bosnick (@elibosnick) April 11, 2021

For later, when people ask why I'm more than completely done with Dawkins' repeated obtuse transphobic crap.

It's long past time he could have been educated out of this crap. https://t.co/BkcrIdD1LI

— Matt Dillahunty (@Matt_Dillahunty) April 10, 2021

So it's not even fucking subtle anymore. Cool. Cool cool cool. https://t.co/Cav56kflTP

— Vi La Bianca (@AuthorConfusion) April 11, 2021

Dawkins issued a follow up tweet, claiming that it was not his intent to “ally in any way with Republican bigots” in America:

I do not intend to disparage trans people. I see that my academic “Discuss” question has been misconstrued as such and I deplore this. It was also not my intent to ally in any way with Republican bigots in US now exploiting this issue .

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) April 12, 2021

It appears that these latest tweets were the straw that broke the camel’s back for the American Humanist Association, prompting it to sever all ties with Dawkins.

Remarkable really, given that Dawkins has sent out far more controversial tweets in the past, such as that time he suggested eugenics, the practice of selective breeding supported by the Nazis, would work perfectly well if applied to humans, because it works on animals.

It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 16, 2020

Or the time that he tweeted about Winchester Cathedral’s bells being “nicer” than the “aggressive” Muslim call to prayer:

Listening to the lovely bells of Winchester, one of our great mediaeval cathedrals. So much nicer than the aggressive-sounding “Allahu Akhbar.” Or is that just my cultural upbringing? pic.twitter.com/TpCkq9EGpw

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) July 16, 2018

Some supported Dawkins’ cancellation, while others labelled it another successful attack on science by the woke mob:

The American Humanist Association is using the guise of secularism to enact religious zealotry; offering Dawkins up as a sacrifice to appease their woke gods.

— Many Bad Opinions (@OneBadOpinion) April 20, 2021

They have quite explicitly placed their political orthodoxy above science, above rational discussion, above reason. The feelings of approved minority groups trump that.

Fair enough, AHA, take that position. It's your party. But it's not humanist in any way. It's pseudoreligious

— Mar Vickers (@mar_vickers) April 20, 2021

I’m a humanist, and not a fan of, Dawkins, but if I were a member of @americnhumanist association, this action would lead me to terminate my membership and withdraw financial support. Enough of this nonsense.

— M Stone (@M_Stone969) April 20, 2021

Jesus. Disavowed over a tweet. I read the tweet. It was reasonable. These people are not. They have lost their minds.#richarddawkins #humanismhttps://t.co/ehcYW94zdG

— O.T. Ford (@ot_ford) April 20, 2021

This is a very bad call. Many well-intentioned people believe transracialism should be more accepted. That he broached the issue doesn't mean he thinks trans people are fraudulent.

— util forager (@util_forager) April 20, 2021