On June 1st (1/6/19) and June 2nd (2/6/19) he visited Switzerland.
On June 3rd (3/6/19) through to June 5th (5/6/19) he visited my native Britain.
On June 5th (5/6/19) through to June 6th (6/6/19) he will be visiting the Republic of Ireland.
On June 6th (6/6/19) President Trump will travel France.
There he will gather with leaders from across Europe. To mark the 70th anniversary of the D-Day Landings. These saw allied troops invade Nazi occupied France. At the beginning of the end of the Second World War in Europe.
The net result of all this is that Twitter has temporarily suspended my account. Much like they did during the 2018 Winter Olympics.
Yesterday (4/6/19) Sky News' account Tweeted a link to a story about Noa Pothoven. A teenager from Arnhem in the Netherlands who has been euthanized due to mental health problems. Most notably Anorexia.
This is highly controversial. Even in societies which allow assisted dying it is a right denied to people with severe mental health problems.
The accepted wisdom on which large swathes of law is based is that due to the nature of their illness these people a not considered able to make decisions about their safety and well-being. They are commonly denied the basic right of freedom after attempting to kill themselves.
I can't be bothered to get into the specifics of what is a complex issue here.
However the timing of the Noa Pothoven story is an attempt by the Netherlands to troll Britain. Specifically over Britain's longstanding attempts to force me to teach them how to do mental healthcare better.
Britain's plan involves not paying me at all. Instead paying other people upwards of five figure salaries to take credit for my work.
Britain particularly wants me to overhaul mental health services in Croydon. Which has been twinned with the Dutch city of Arnhem. Since shortly after the D-Day Landings.
Mental health care in Croydon comes under South London and Maudsley Hospital. Home to a supposedly European centre of excellence on eating disorders. Such as Anorexia.
I replied to the Sky News Tweet by pointing out that;
"It's quite a popular game amongst the mentally ill. Trying to get a psychiatrist to agree that you probably should kill yourself."
Officially Twitter's Artificial Intelligence algorithms have identified that sentence structure as a call for someone to kill themselves. In violation of their terms of service regarding the promotion of self-harm and suicide.
This is something the UK government have been putting Facebook under pressure over. Using the Molly Russell case.
To anyone familiar with mental health issues it's pretty clear that rather than caring Britain is exploiting the father, Ian Russell.
To use him as an example of the Remoaners who wish to not only block Brexit but silence anyone who supports the notion of Brexit. That in a democracy elected officials have to abide by the results of elections.
Ian Russell is clearly engaging in displacement activity. Rather than indulging that by giving him a public profile Britain should be forcing him to face up to the fact that he has failed in the most basic duty as a parent. He'll be much happier once he stops trying to blame everyone else and makes peace with that fact.
I've lodged an appeal against Twitter AI's clearly erroneous decision to block my account;
"Congratulations you have successfully inserted yourself into the dispute between Facebook & the UK government over the Ian Russell. The archetypal Remoaner dad.
The point you've raised is that you need to employ expensive
human moderators to police issue of self-harm. Rather than cheap AI algorithms.
You have incorrectly suspended my account for promoting
self-harm.
Specifically for a @SkyNews story about Dutch teenager, Noa
Pothoven, being euthanized due to her battle with psychological problems.
This is something which is strictly against UK law. Due to
the accepted belief that people with such mental health problems are not
capable of making decisions over their health and wellbeing. Particularly the
decision to end their lives.
From my experience working in mental health I know that it
is a popular game for hospitalised mental health patients to try and get their
caregivers to agree they should be allowed to kill themselves.
If you are concerned with the promotion of self-harm I think
your dispute is with @SkyNews for its Tweet promoting the idea that those with
mental health problems should be allowed to harm and/or kill themselves.
Or perhaps with the entire nation of the Netherlands for
promoting the eugenicist notion of exterminating the mentally feeble.
I doubt you would want to be sanctioning accounts for
arguing against it.
Particularly on the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings."
Twitter's widespread suspending of accounts which support President Trump is a big issue in the US.
Although I doubt it was their intent this incident has shown me that Twitter's entire terms & conditions are incompatible with US law.
In order to start the process of reinstating my Twitter account I have to acknowledge that my Tweet was in violation of their rules. It's clearly not. Their AI systems are just not up to the job of moderating this type of content.
It is a discussion about a news story. Which relates to an element of government policy. As such my Tweet is protected under the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. Therefore any disciplinary action Twitter takes regarding it must include due process. Under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.
That means that no sanction can be imposed until I have been given the right to respond. They certainly cannot begin the process of deciding who has made the mistake by forcing me to accept guilt.
If I had the resources of someone like prominent Trump supporter James Woods not only wouldn't I be acknowledging that my Tweet was in violation of Twitter's terms of use I'd be mounting a legal challenge on the grounds Twitter's terms of use are themselves a violation of US Constitutional law.
Meaning the US based company has to change them. Or have its right to operate as a US company suspended. Possibly forever.
The same thing applies for Twitter's operations in the European Union (EU). Under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
17:50 on 5/6/19 (UK date).
Edited at around 12:05 on 6/6/19 (UK date) to add;
Twitter have still not got back to me explaining how they came to suspend my account by error.
In their defence they have set themselves quite the challenge there.
Sky News is a transnational corporate entity. So Twitter's legal team are going to have a tough time explaining how they came to think a corporate entity could commit suicide. Let alone be urged to do so.
Deep in their terms and conditions Twitter have designated the legal jurisdiction under which any dispute between the company and its users is resolved. They have chosen US jurisdiction.
Meaning that in this dispute Twitter, Sky News and myself enjoy full US Constitutional rights. Including the 1st Amendment right to political free speech/expression and the 14th Amendment right to due process.
Therefore Twitter could attempt to cite; "Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad Company (1886)." This grants corporate entities personhood for the purpose of US Constitutional law. However that personhood is limited only to matters of Constitutional law.
Suicide is covered by US Common Law. It is defined as the intentional taking of one's own life. As with other offences against the person such as Homicide the act is defined by the extinction of life. Although corporate entities have personhood they have never been considered to have life.
So, for example, if a consumer boycott or class action lawsuit, puts a corporate entity out of business the boycotters or litigants can't be prosecuted for assaulting or murdering the corporation.
As a person for the purposes of US Constitutional law Twitter is also protected from having an undue regulatory burden placed upon it.
This is something even liberal sweetheart of the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) Ruth Bader-Ginsburg recently had to explain to Planned Parenthood. After that organisation's enthusiasm for the Nazi ideology of Eugenics disgusted even her.
As such Twitter is lawfully entitled to tell all these low-rent politicians with their Christchurch call nonsenses to f*ck right off.
I can only strongly suggest they hurry up and do. Rather than wasting anymore of my time.
12:30 on 6/6/19 (UK date).
Edited at around 12:05 on 6/6/19 (UK date) to add;
Twitter have still not got back to me explaining how they came to suspend my account by error.
In their defence they have set themselves quite the challenge there.
Sky News is a transnational corporate entity. So Twitter's legal team are going to have a tough time explaining how they came to think a corporate entity could commit suicide. Let alone be urged to do so.
Deep in their terms and conditions Twitter have designated the legal jurisdiction under which any dispute between the company and its users is resolved. They have chosen US jurisdiction.
Meaning that in this dispute Twitter, Sky News and myself enjoy full US Constitutional rights. Including the 1st Amendment right to political free speech/expression and the 14th Amendment right to due process.
Therefore Twitter could attempt to cite; "Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad Company (1886)." This grants corporate entities personhood for the purpose of US Constitutional law. However that personhood is limited only to matters of Constitutional law.
Suicide is covered by US Common Law. It is defined as the intentional taking of one's own life. As with other offences against the person such as Homicide the act is defined by the extinction of life. Although corporate entities have personhood they have never been considered to have life.
So, for example, if a consumer boycott or class action lawsuit, puts a corporate entity out of business the boycotters or litigants can't be prosecuted for assaulting or murdering the corporation.
As a person for the purposes of US Constitutional law Twitter is also protected from having an undue regulatory burden placed upon it.
This is something even liberal sweetheart of the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) Ruth Bader-Ginsburg recently had to explain to Planned Parenthood. After that organisation's enthusiasm for the Nazi ideology of Eugenics disgusted even her.
As such Twitter is lawfully entitled to tell all these low-rent politicians with their Christchurch call nonsenses to f*ck right off.
I can only strongly suggest they hurry up and do. Rather than wasting anymore of my time.
12:30 on 6/6/19 (UK date).
No comments:
Post a Comment