And it came to pass that yours truly wanted to click on this article, from the Canada Free Press, and was “warned” by the Great Nanny that the site I wanted to visit was dangerous and potentially harmful. I had to click “visit anyway” in order to read the article.
You can agree or disagree with the content of the page, but there can be no doubt that it is legitimate.
Am I very bad if I think that these kind of warnings are not due to some coding mistake or defect of security protocols, but are slapped on certain sites in order to dissuade the public from visiting them? It’s not that there is anything here that can really be seen as suspicious.
I opened the same page with another browser and there was no warning. This tells me that there are some people within Google Chrome who really don’t like the site, whilst other browsers just don’t have any issue.
Makes one think, doesn’t it?
I am not saying that this has to be a case of sabotage, and these technical matters are way above my programming pay grade (which is non-existent). Still, we live in times in which one cannot avoid thinking that there is some bad actor at play.
I think that all sites like Canada free Press should actively monitor the way all major browsers react to an attempt to contact their site, because they should not be surprised if they discovered that some SJW has decided to signal his virtue (notice here the conspicuous absence of the pronoun “they”) by playing censor. This can easily extend to all our post concerning religion, to all facets of academic speech, etc.
Beware of woke people, always. But beware of them particularly when they act as gatekeepers in the free flow of information.