Since glowniggers are trying to crack down on porn so much, let me tell you WHY.

It's obviously not for your benefit. They don't give a fuck about you. No, they obviously want you dead. And they sure as hell have porn-fried brains. That's why they're all lunatic trannies, so they're not actually against porn. No. They want to create an anti-sex league right out of 1984. They believe that depriving fighting age men of an easy sexual outlet will make them frustrated and violent enough to sign up for the military to go die for kikes in a dirthole.

That's it. Remember: it is the duty of every poster on this board to countersignal the demonic ops of their terrorist governments.

>>509343758 (OP)
I have a hunch the anti-porn stuff is just to implement digital ID with the approval of the right. And sadly it looks like they're dumb enough to fall for it.

>>509343758 (OP)
MPD to compartmentalize military secrets?

>>509344666
Oh I'm sure there's that too. But this is too much of a crusade in pop culture right now. And it already has precedence.

>>509344666
Pretty much this. They want your digital fingerprint on everything you do even if you use VPN or whatever. Once they get the digital ID in place it wont be to long till they make it a crime to circumnavigate using ID. Right now they have to get subpoenas and search warrants to track people down.

>>509345435
>But this is too much of a crusade in pop culture right now.
Its nothing new. Conservatives have been fighting porn for a long time. The obscenity laws are still on the books even though they are all but enforceable. The pesky first amendment keeps getting in their way though. I will concede that digital ID is probably a way around the 1st adm.

It could also be that a growing amount of woman/girls are using and participating in porn and we all know no one really cares about a problem till its effecting females.

>>509343758 (OP)
>pic
these guys already all got canned

>>509346308
No. Not like this. Same with the Roe vs. Wade thing. I think they're connected.

>>509346453
Yes, I'm sure there are no more glownigger trannies.

>>509346632
Are you saying they're trying to turn around the birth rate? I think that would sum op your position better.

>>509346875
No. They'll just import a trillion thirdie brownskins. They don't give a shit about white birth rates. They care about white RECRUITMENT rates.

>>509346453
>these guys already all got canned
No way, bud. As your 2nd greatest ally, we're going all in on removing the scourge of heterosexuality and competence from our defence forces. We've go your back mate.
https://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2016/02/adf-priorities-on-display-in-washington-dc-with-australian-entourage-at-transgender-in-military-show.html

>>509344666
That was always what it was about.
Since before Facebook the US government has been trying to figure out how to remove all anonymity from the internet.
The SCOTUS just said if it means to block children from obscenity then it's perfectly fine to make laws that inconvenience everyone else.
Who defines obscenity?
Because the obscenity laws are absolute dogshit.