Anti Anti-War?

The United States is the world's strongest superpower. From the beginning of our nation's history, America has been involved in numerous wars, some we started, some we were brought into, and some we entered, which some might argue, that we had no business getting involved in. Many times in the news, we see stories about what our military advances are and what recent things have gone on where we have troops stationed. In recent years, the main place has been the Middle East. We have been at war for as long as I have been alive in the Middle East and it seems to be unending. And while many support our troops at home and overseas, many don't support our country being at war. They don't support the administration that sends our citizens to war to potentially be injured or die for a war we don't support. And while we see things in the news about our actual being at war, do we ever see opposition to war? In January of 2020, President Donald Trump ordered the assassination of Iran's top general, Qassem Soleimani. Although I saw on social media where some people were unhappy about this move and some were in full support of it, I did not see much on the news about being against this. Why is this? Why do we only see support for war in the news?

The memo written about the assassination of the Iranian general included President Trump's justification for the killing. The memo does not speak of any imminent threat that Soleimani or Iran posed to the United States. Instead, the memo cites many past instances that led Trump to his decision. The only things that I witnessed being in the news was the critiquing of Trump, not the actual act of war he committed. Trump has faced a lot of criticism ever since he was elected in 2016, and even before, so this was not a surprise. But why was the focus on the president and not the act of war, and the opportunity that it opened up for the United States to start another war?
Is the news just deciding that publishing anti-war opinions is not news-worthy? Will they face too much backlash from an article that promotes anti-war views, or even includes them? Why are they so few and far between? Why do people who do not support war have such a small voice in the media? Until I saw the AntiWar.com website, I had never seen so many articles that did not support war. Not that there were so many, but that I never see anything but social media about being against war. The most recent historic time I recall hearing about people being against war was the protests of the Vietnam War, and even hearing about that so many years later, it is looked down upon for people to have had that opinion about the war. Is it a patriotic, nationalistic thing, or is it a suppression of opposition issue? Are we infringing on the rights of those who have alternate opinions, not giving them the same freedom of speech as those who support war?
https://www.antiwar.com
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/02/14/white-house-justifies-killing-soleimani-for-past-actions-not-imminent-threats/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-war_movement#/media/File:War2.png

Is Google Violating Antitrust Laws?

When questions come to mind, we want to quickly find the answers. "How old is Kanye West?" "How long do you boil an egg?" "How do I tie a tie?" When we ask others these questions on a day-to-day basis, what is the usual response if they don't know? "I don't know, just Google it." The first website many people go to for research, for questions, shopping, and ideas is Google. In fact, Google is used for nine out of ten online searches. But, has this become too much? 

Many states, 48 of them to be exact, think so. The Attorney Generals of all states, including Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico, aside from California and Alabama, have begun an investigation of Google and if they have violated antitrust laws in becoming such a large corporation. Not only has Google become the main search engine, but their products and services have also begun to take over the market. Many of these investigations have focused on advertising. Google is being investigated on their paid advertising. Many of the first results shown are ads from companies and providers that have paid a lot of money to be one of the first shown when searched. The biggest concern in these investigations is if Google broke the law in the process of becoming such a powerhouse. It is a chain reaction for spending. Advertising for a higher search result means the advertisers pay more, which in turn leads to consumers paying more in the end. State Attorney Generals are not the only ones who think this is an issue. The Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission have begun to conduct investigations of Google and Facebook. One possible outcome they are looking for would be to split Google search into a separate entity, away from the bulk of the company. 

It is not something I have ever thought about, but this is a serious issue. I think many people are the same way. They don't think twice about it. You need to know something or want to buy something, you type it into the Google search engine, and you're done. It is easy, it is convenient, and it is comfortable. But when you really think about it, I rarely ever click to the next page of search results. Meaning, I only see the results from advertisers are paying an extensive amount of money to show me their product of service I searched. If I buy from them, I am paying for the product or service, and helping them pay off however much they paid for their advertisement on Google's first page of results. I think that splitting Google's search engine to a separate company would be a good idea. It would lessen the monopolistic hold that Google has on the internet. The question is though, did Google break any laws in doing this, and is Google a true monopoly? And even if these accusations are true, can they just pay their way out of it?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-antitrust-probe-48-u-s-states-launch-antitrust-investigation-of-google-dominance-in-search-ads-and-data/

https://money.cnn.com/2015/03/19/technology/google-monopoly-ftc/index.html

First Amendment Violated While Demonstrating for the Second

A peaceful demonstration for Second Amendment gun rights was quickly shut down at Montclair State University in New Jersey by officials at the school. An organization on campus, The Young Americans for Liberty, were demonstrating their opinions on gun rights peacefully on campus when university police told them to shut it down.
According to university policy, anyone who wishes to speak on campus must request permission from the Dean two weeks in advance and they will be given a specific time and place to do so. According to the lawsuit filed against the school, this was a violation of the students' First Amendment right to the Freedom of Speech, as there are no guidelines to the two-week policy to speak on campus. The Alliance Defending Freedom is representing the students in the lawsuit.

College is when you start to branch out as an individual. You start to form your own opinions based on your own experiences instead of just what your parents have told you growing up. Shutting down a peaceful demonstration on a college campus is in violation of two rights of the First Amendment. Not only freedom of speech but also freedom to assemble. They did so peacefully and I could see where this lawsuit could be successful in favor of the students trying to voice their opinions on a very controversial and currently hot topic in our country.
https://www.njspotlight.com/2020/01/lawsuit-claims-montclair-state-university-policies-limit-free-speech/
https://www.nj.com/essex/2020/01/nj-university-violated-1st-amendment-by-shutting-down-gun-rights-demonstration-lawsuit-alleges.html