Alcoa is now the third largest aluminum producer in the world. Back in 1941, it was much more powerful. It had a monopoly on aluminum in addition to owning a massive amount of America’s electricity production and other minerals. Before America declared war on Germany, it sent so much of its aluminum product over to Germany that the country made upwards of sixty percent more aluminum products than America. When the US’s involvement in the war began, there was a massive aluminum production shortage in America, in no small part because of Alcoa’s monopoly. Alcoa essentially sold the Axis powers much of the material to build their war machines and a reprieve from the American war machine.
…
2. General Motors
Similar to their automotive rivals, General Motors was sued by Holocaust survivors for assisting the Nazi war machine. Beginning in 1935, GM built a factory in Berlin for the purpose of building “Blitz” trucks for the Wehrmacht. Ford began building similar trucks around the same time, but GM was the number one producer of the vehicles that were vital for the quick conquests of Poland, France, and much of the Soviet Union. Albert Speer, the minister of armaments and war production, claimed that the rubber GM supplied was the key to the ability of the Germans to wage war the way they did. Inevitably when America declared war on Germany, the Reich seized GM’s German production facilities.
Although neither Ford nor General Motors ever fully conceded that they had willingly participated in the use of slave labor, they both were massive contributors to a fund started in 2000 for Holocaust survivors.
From the ongoing US involvement in Ukraine, to an enduring US military presence in the Middle East, and growing US-Chinese tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, regardless of who controls the US Congress and regardless of who sits in the White House, these conflicts continue forward – often with a Democratic president setting the stage for his Republican successor, and vice versa.
Russia is said to be an imperialist world power, one in conflict with the imperialist superpower, the U.S. Russia has been characterized in this manner both during the period of the Soviet Union, and after the Soviet Union collapsed and separate states were formed. Russia has said to be imperialist both when it was a socialist state and now as a capitalist state.
The agreement, obtained through public record requests from CNBC and other sources, mostly portrays Apple as having a high degree of control over the government agencies responsible for issuing identification cards.
…
Apple has “sole discretion” for key aspects of the program, including what types of devices will be compatible with the digital IDs, how states are required to report on the performance of the effort, and when the program is launched, according to the documents. Apple even gets to review and approve the marketing that states are required to do.
Interestingly, some policy organizations have argued that “stripping this law away could entrench reigning tech giants because it would make it harder for smaller social media platforms with fewer content moderation resources to operate without facing costly lawsuits.”
Big Brother Watch has warned that the recently proposed Online Harms Bill is yet another piece of legislation designed to deceive us into thinking the government is protecting us all when something more sinister is likely. Free expression and civil liberty are at stake. The result is a piece of proposed legislation which is as BBW says is “blunt in its force and will have severe unintended consequences”. Think back to the Regulatory Investigations Powers Act 2000, designed to catch terrorists and high level wanted criminals – eventually used by the BBC to catch licence fee dodgers and local authorities to catch underage sunbed use. There are many laws that the government have brought in since the late 1990s now being used against civil liberty and basic human rights.
Section 230 protects working Americans more than it protects “big tech.” It protects us posting on social media. It protects us forwarding emails. It protects us when we retweet nonsense. It makes the open internet possible, and enables the next generation of competitors to “big tech” to exist. Lindsey Graham’s weird grandstanding about this is nonsense. Taking away 230 wouldn’t rein in big tech, it would lock in big tech. They have large legal teams and can handle the disruption. This is why Facebook already supports major 230 reform. Zuckerberg knows that it would harm upstart competitors way more than Facebook.
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 
You must be logged in to post a comment.