A Discussion On DOXing
Why are we being polarised on this?
Disclaimer: This article is not legal advice. Speak with a legal professional.
Not a moment passes before another controversy on Twitter passes. The Daily Beagle would prefer to offer a wider spread of reporting — such as the mRNA madness — however, it is clear to The Daily Beagle that the ‘DOX controversy’ is being used as a divide-and-conquer tactic on the public.
It has forced the classic Robbers Cave duopoly experiment exploitation with ‘two’ sides: free speech absolutists, and those who are advocating to protect the kids. Essentially the two positive groups in the public are now divided in half (‘free speech’ vs ‘save the children’) by a gross oversimplification and sleight-of-hand ploys.
In truth there are way more nuanced positions than these two, and The Daily Beagle hopes to expand everybody’s thinking.
Won’t Someone Please Think Of The Children?
Something Elon Musk has suspended people for pointing out — is that Elon Musk never filed a police report with the LAPD over the supposed stalker. Elon had claimed it occurred in LA, so it would fall under their jurisdiction. He screams about the law, how illegal it all is, and the safety of kids, but… never filed a police report? Que?
Either this implies he knows the incident isn’t actually illegal, or, a more nagging question in The Daily Beagle’s mind,what if the incident was staged? It is a rather convenient ploy for Elon to silence dissenters he’d otherwise have no real justification in silencing.
We never actually see the masked assailant jump the hood. And Teslas have built-in cameras so it would have been readily possible for Elon to demonstrate this claim. In-fact, why would the supposed hood jumper be sitting in a car with their seatbelt on if they had just recently gotten out? There’s a whole slew of oddities.
As Twitter user Marie Oakes has noticed, this isn’t the first time Elon Musk has used his children to justify Twitter censorship:
Who would dare question the children? But it is an overused globalist ploy. Stay indoors to save the children. Take the shot to save the children. Use GMO crops to save starving children in Africa. Ban guns to save schoolchildren. Give up your freedoms, save the children. Take children away from parents to save the children. Give access to mutiliating surgeries to save children. Open your borders to save children. It’s so over-used because people keep falling for it.
Elon’s Child Claim Is Disputed By His Own Ex-Wife
The child used by Elon Musk to justify keeping Alex Jones banned, he claimed he held in his arms as he ‘felt his last heartbeat’ pulling on people’s heartstrings. But it turns out… it wasn’t Elon holding the child.
Elon’s ex-wife Justine, remarked she was the one holding him. Anyone who is familiar with the dangerous effects of the vaccines will know the term SIDS — Sudden Infant Death Syndrome — a variant of the ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’, which makes Elon Musk’s work for CureVac developing mRNA all the more hypocritical in context.
He bans Alex Jones for suspicions of school shootings, because his child died quietly in his wife’s arms, likely from a poison shot which Elon has no qualms with manufacturing. Que?
Elon Isn’t A Fan If You Disagree With Him, Either
Elon Musk asked Bari Weiss — one of the journalists given the Twittergate Files to report on, so clearly someone Musk trusted — for her opinion on DOXes.
Despite the fact she’s busy — you know, working as a journalist — Musk got impatient, and asked her several times, as if expecting an immediate response. When his needs weren’t immediately serviced, he denounced her for not coming up with a DOX policy on the spot.
When Bari Weiss reasonably commented that Elon Musk ought to be consistent with his earlier claims of being pro-free speech, and that he ought to notify people in advance if he has changed his mind — a reasonable stance — Elon Musk claimed she was “virtue signalling” for trying to hold him to account to his own words, unfollowed her, and then the pro-Elon Musk media quickly followed the drum beat, denouncing Bari Weiss.
You know, the same journalist who helped Elon publish the Twittergate files. Hardly enemy of the century. It was a pretty tepid take on her part (she didn’t even object to a policy against DOXing, just suggested signposting it) with no name calling.
But because she wasn’t 100% unquestioningly loyal to Elon Musk (who seems to have taken the place of the Internet’s Current Popular Person) in the new Internet Robber’s cave tribalism, she was tossed overboard as if she had personally abused Elon.
How dare she question infallible Elon Musk who the public were denouncing for aiding Ukraine and the US military only a few months earlier? Don’t you know what the Current Thing is now? Elon Musk is suddenly cool. Duh.
The Public Don’t Agree With Elon Either
Attempting to prove he was in the right, Elon then held two polls on the suspension. Note these were polls promoted to Elon’s own followers, so if anything, they would be skewered in his favour.
His first poll gave four options, where the option of unsuspending people “Now” had won. Notice he adds two additional, unnecessary options (“Tomorrow” and “7 days from now”) in an attempt to divide the vote (essentially, three options for extension):
When this didn’t work, he then held a second poll, more simplified, with only two options:
Once again, “Now” won out. Before long, Elon Musk loyalists — who had no issue with the results of the general amnesty poll that a majority voted for in yet another pro-free speech move — blamed everything from vote rigging (on a site Elon controls) to bots (again, on a site Elon controls) as justification for the general opposition to the suspension.
Elon — who has access to the data and can verify the poll results — did not lodge an objection and accepted the results. The Daily Beagle will credit him for both asking the public and upholding their decision.
In truth, the public are generally pro-free speech. It’s why they opposed suspensions in the first place. It’s why they hated the old Twitter management. Why would they want to see suspensions also under Elon?
Either-Or Fallacy: All DOXing Is Evil Or You Hate Children
One of the polarising — strategically so, we might add — aspects of this, is the public have been deftly and strategically polarised into a fallacious choice of either supporting free speech and being painted as closeted child haters…
…or have been cornered into becoming billionaire privacy cheerleadering advocates, even as said billionaires aid industries that erode your own personal privacy. Brain control chips and all. You know, same mind control Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos are backing. Rules for thee.
Obviously, it’s intended to divide the public so they fight amongst themselves rather than calling out the billionaire globalists for inconsistencies on their claims as they keep eroding our rights and then wanting exemptions for themselves.
Elon Musk has failed to demonstrate how a private jet tracking service that has been running for years — a service he said he’d allow to keep running because he was such a free speech absolutist — would result in his child being put at risk when they were travelling in an untrackable car. You can speculate, but speculation is not proof, and the burden is on Elon to convict Jack Sweeney of guilt, not presume it.
Just accept it at face value. You can question a pandemic, but don’t question Elon Musk’s story. Billionaire globalists have never lied and don’t have any hidden, green electric vehicle agendas or mind control chips.
DOXes Are Not Created Equal
If you joined this Substack from Steve Kirsch, chances are you already know The Daily Beagle has previously published leaked documents exposing mRNA instability.
This is a literal DOX. The documents, at time of publication, contained real-time information, that included people’s names and what they had done and where. It is why the video has to invoke the Public Interest defence in the opener.
In-fact, the EMA leak video can’t even be posted to Twitter, which gives a faux error message:
Readers with Twitter accounts are encouraged to try it for themselves — let us know if you have any success, and we’ll retweet your post. Here’s the video URL:
https://www.brighteon.com/f038068d-862b-41ae-81fe-96bcd52c4cb7
People may have forgotten a crucial detail from the EMA leak video at 1:52, where Jeff Taylor talks about the EU engaging in a secretive contract with CureVac (the very same organisation Elon Musk works for), that was so heavily redacted the EU Parliament members complained.
In Elon Musk’s Twitter, this DOX about the mRNA instability would be prohibited to publish and talk about. Unless it was “slightly delayed”. A time delay that results in deaths. Is that acceptable? Is that ‘saving the children’?
People DOX All The Time And Don’t Know It
You likely have done DOXing yourself unawares. Any time you republished information from Jeffrey Epstein’s blackbook, or mentioned anything from the Lolita Express’ flight logs, you were performing a DOX — remember, disclosing jet flights is banned on Twitter.
So if you expose where Klaus Schwab or Bill Gates are travelling to, you’re a bad person. You should feel bad, privacy hater! Boo! Billionaires deserve privacy! You can see where this slippery slope leads, right?
Perhaps people will argue a technicality. It is ‘slightly delayed’ (how long is a ‘slight delay’?), but there’s information that isn’t.
Any time you made reference to the mansion where Barack Obama still lives, or show videos visiting the St James Island where Jeffrey Epstein’s workers still reside, or the New Mexico Ranch. They’re all real-time DOXes. They all trigger the ‘personal risk’ complaint. Should they be banned?
The Daily Beagle doesn’t think so.
Biden His Time
In-fact, there’s even a DOX Elon Musk himself supports. The Hunter Biden laptop. In it, are details of Hunter Biden’s private life, crackpipe, child abuse and all. It contains details of who he knows, where he travels, what he does. It is literally his laptop, so his personal details. Not available from a public source.
Now, if you’re on the Elon Musk train, you’re probably trying to invent exceptions, justifications or excuses why these DOXes are acceptable, like ‘we would never go to Barack Obama’s house’ (it only takes one false flag) or ‘Hunter Biden is a paedophile we must expose his wrongdoing’, but as the character Sherlock Holmes once remarked, as an inversion of a classic saying:
An exception disproves the rule.
The moment you have to create an exception to a rule, the rule is proveably flawed and poorly designed. Elon Musk wants to ban all DOXes. No distinctions. From publicly available flight information to where the nearest sex offender billionaire now lives.
What Does The First Amendment Say On DOXes?
Nothing. DOXing is perfectly legal in the US. Elon Musk likes to try to insist it isn’t legal, however:
The Daily Beagle asked him under what law it is not legal, and unsurprisingly didn’t get a response:
If it was truly illegal, Elon Musk could point to whichever Statute, law, rule or court ruling to make the claim. In-fact, if it was illegal, he could have already referred it to the police to deal with. But, he hasn’t. Because it is Constitutionally protected speech, much to the glee of the propagandists and the dismay of the Elon Musk loyalists.
In-fact, it is precisely why so many of the propagandists in media engage in it. There is not a single law in any part of the United States that punishes a DOX. Remember when CNN bullied a 15 year old kid by DOXing him and ruining his life? CNN has done many more of those. Plus defamation.
Gab’s policy on DOXes, for contrast, are more straight forward. Any information that cannot be referenced publicly counts as a DOX. So the flight information wouldn’t count, but disclosing someone’s private address would.
What Is The Law’s View On DOXing?
With the exception of private information, which may be protected by a secrets act or some sort of “trade secrets” law — you know, the kind of thing Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are unfairly penalised on — US law doesn’t actually see the DOXer as the guilty party.
They see the person who commits a crime based on the information — whether that is assault, harassment, stalking, arson, etc — as the guilty party.
The basis is actually pretty sensible; posting a DOX will not instantly turn a non-murderer into a murderer, nor will hiding a DOX stop a sufficiently determined, crazy murderer from finding out information themselves and killing. If it’s public in one place, why make it illegal to show it in another?
Elon’s complaint that a teenager can keep picking up his new flight registrations and posting them are irrelevant, because it isn’t the posting that creates the risk. It’s the easy of access of the flight registration data in the first place.
Even if Jack Sweeney stopped making the posts public, the flight registration details are still available. If a teenager can get them, anyone can. Including an unhinged murderer.
Security Through Obscurity Is No Security At All
Elon Musk’s position is a classic fallacy committed by a great many CEOs of a great many tech firms, some of which The Daily Beagle had to intervene on.
Security through Obscurity is a fallacy as it falsely assumes something hidden from view will never be exposed, therefore requires no security mitigation strategies. Like stuffing a post-it note password in an unlocked drawer, hiding 30k in cash under your hat, or a key under a doormat.
Hidden from view, secure? Most people would say ‘no’. Instead of flight information on a giant billboard, it is “hidden” by a public ICAO lookup, which is no security at all. He hasn’t addressed his true risk and anyone who agrees with him is putting him in more danger as it is a false sense of security.
What Security Strategies Should Elon Musk Be Using?
Decoys
As Elon Musk owns the jet it is extremely easy to identify him on the flight register. Many billionaires who don’t want to be tracked actually rent private jets. The irony of Klaus Schwab’s words of ‘you will own nothing and be happy’. At a minimum, he should use rented jets for his children.
This is exactly the same thing the general public have to do with cars they don’t want openly tracked — they rent cars. Yeah, it’s bureaucratic, but welcome to the surveillance state, courtesy of the US government.
Additionally, it is easy enough for a jet to enter a hangar bay out of sight, and have a vehicle with tinted windows, or no windows at all, like a van, used to pick up the individuals. Some billionaires are paranoid and use convoy vehicle tactics — usually three vehicles — to hide which one they’re in.
Protection
In terms of vehicular security, the deployment of bulletproof doors and glass ought to be used on the vehicles carrying the passenger. Sure, the weight might slow down the vehicle and use up more fuel, but the trade-off is protection from a variety of handguns and low calibre rounds.
Elon also needs to hire a driver who is capable of evasive driving. Assuming the man filming the guy in the car was either the driver or bodyguard, he should be fired because he failed his job. You should never leave either the vehicle or the protectorate unattended. Dash cams exist for a reason, as do CCTV cameras you can subpeona.
Evasive drivers will not leave their vehicle — as it risks a hijacking and prevents them from escaping with the protectorate.
They will use unorthodox strategies to avoid being blocked in, such as driving on the sidewalk, ramming the opposing vehicle tactically (usually the car has armoured bumpers), or even breaking barriers and gates (money can be paid to restitute damages).
A bodyguard must never leave the protectorate unattended because they may be distracted by a red herring decoy whilst the real assailant moves in on the victim.
A former Secret Service detail as bodyguard, and an experienced evasive driver would likely have avoided the situation entirely. Someone with medical training who can administer treatment to wounds if the worst was to happen as well, along with appropriate medical equipment, which is useful in general, in medical emergencies.
Firearms For Self-Defence
Elon may have to let go of his liberal inclinations to not use firearms for self-defence, and use an armed protection detail as well. You can’t be assassinated if the assailant is swiss cheese. And the assassin is less likely to try if they know there are armed heavies.
Hire A Private Investigator And Go On The Offence
If it is going to be a common enough occurrance, hire a private investigator, with the goal of uncovering crimes the in-person harassers themselves have committed that are unrelated to the DOX. An ‘investigate me, investigate you’ strategy which will sour and discourage wannabe crooks. The goal is to find out who sent them in the first place.
Stop Visiting Liberal Cities
Another way to avoid the unhinged hatred of Antifa as a liberal outfit is to simply not visit where they’re based. In the same way a protection detail would not drive through a gang controlled South African village, don’t send your child to a liberal ridden city full of people who hate you. Prevention is better than the cure.
Should All DOXes Be Permitted On Twitter?
There are DOXes that are blatantly criminal. CNN DOXing a teenager just to intimidate and bully them, DOXes to disclose people’s addresses as part of threat and intimidation tactics are brazenly unacceptable.
However there’s a difficulty in distinguishing. If, for example, The Daily Beagle publishes images of Barack Obama’s home, but we don’t incite violence, is that acceptable?
If so — and we imagine it would be — it creates a very large loophole for the DOXers to step through. So instead of announcing a DOX with a threat, they simply announce the DOX without a threat, which means banning threats with DOXes alone would not suffice in preventing the problem.
What Is The Solution?
The problem is we’re in “I’ll know it when I see it” subjective territory, which makes consistent policymaking all but impossible to propose.
An ‘obviously Antifa’ account posting the Libs of TikTok owner’s address with no mentioned threats would obviously be unethical, but an account publishing the address of where a local paedophile resides on a sex register to warn children would not be.
They’re essentially the same thing — DOXing an address — but the subjective context determines the validity. This is an absolute moderation nightmare and it does not matter where the line is drawn, because determining which contexts are beneficial versus harmful will be determined by unaccountable Twitter moderators.
Like Plugging Holes In A Sponge
Twitter also can’t control DOXing on other websites anyway, although despite this they’re trying to — Twitter have banned the promotion of other social media websites, which is mildly ironic because Twitter was more free under the previous administration for alternative promotion:
You’re probably wondering why these sites in particular. Jack Sweeney has an ElonJet account on Mastodon. The others seem to be other liberal social media sites — except Truth Social, which is Donald Trump’s website. It’s not clear why Elon Musk has banned Truth Social, but he has.
Interestingly, Gab isn’t present on the list, nor is Parler.
It does seem to be an attempt at damage control against DOXes, however it continues to erode the ‘freedom of speech’ priniciple that everyone wanted for Twitter. Say what you will about liberals or Donald Trump, they too have a right to free speech.
Should The Public Decide On DOXes?
One possible mechanism that seems to have emerged is a Minds.com style model of having the public vote on what is and is not appropriate in terms of a DOX. A crowdsourcing model of sorts.
When Elon Musk polled the views of the public, it showed a split which seems to be accurate to the perception. It is very likely the public would object to things like CNN bullying teenagers with DOXes, or the harassment of Libs of TikTok, whilst permitting publicly available DOXes, and DOXes in the Public Interest, like the EMA leak documents.
Perhaps the solution here, dear friends, is Direct Democracy?
Help The Daily Beagle continue to give insightful work. Subscribe!
Learned something new? Perhaps something Elon should be aware of?
So dear reader, what do you propose about the DOX issue? Leave a comment below: