PCR | The Nazi Biden Regime Takes Its Claim that it Has a Right to Impose Censorship on Media to Supreme Court
There is no doubt whatsoever that the Biden Regime is a Fascist
Censor controlling information in the interest of its criminal agendas.A Federal Appeals Court spelled out the censorship and banned it:
“Defendants, and their employees and agents, shall take no actions,
formal or informal, directly or indirectly, to coerce or significantly
encourage social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce,
including through altering their algorithms, posted social-media
content containing protected free speech. That includes, but is not
limited to, compelling the platforms to act, such as by intimating that
some form of punishment will follow a failure to comply with any
request, or supervising, directing, or otherwise meaningfully
controlling the social-media companies’ decision-making processes.”
The Biden Regime hopes to convince the Supreme Court that “national
security” requires abandoning the US Constitution and to coerce the
court into reinstating the Biden regime’s cancellation of the US
Constitution.
It is impossible for a country to survive when the values on which
the country is founded are abandoned by its leaders. America is so far
gone that not even the media believes in free speech and has happily
accepted the role as Ministry of Propaganda.
Certainly corporations do not respect the First Amendment. Employees
must take “harassment training” to remain employed. Failure to use
“Woke pronouns” constitutes harassment and grounds for firing. In other
words, employees do not have freedom of speech. A coerced Woke policy
has control of their tongues and forces the use of words they do not
voluntarily use and to which they object. Employees are forced to lend
their validation to the preferences of a tiny perverse collection of
confused people. Why do the non-normal minority have this power over
the normal majority?
Take a few minutes and try to identify any institution, public or private, that supports American values.
Trump’s goal of taking back our country might be a task too large.
CTH |The US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) has contracted New York-based Accrete AI to deploy software that detects “real time” disinformation threats on social media.
The company’s Argus anomaly detection
AI software analyzes social media data, accurately capturing “emerging
narratives” and generating intelligence reports for military forces to
speedily neutralize disinformation threats.
“Synthetic media, including
AI-generated viral narratives, deep fakes, and other harmful social
media-based applications of AI, pose a serious threat to US national
security and civil society,” Accrete founder and CEO Prashant Bhuyan said.
“Social media is widely recognized as
an unregulated environment where adversaries routinely exploit reasoning
vulnerabilities and manipulate behavior through the intentional spread
of disinformation.
“USSOCOM is at the tip of the spear in
recognizing the critical need to identify and analytically predict
social media narratives at an embryonic stage before those narratives
evolve and gain traction. Accrete is proud to support USSOCOM’s
mission.”
But wait… It gets worse!
[PRIVATE SECTOR VERSION]
– The company also revealed that it will launch an enterprise version
of Argus Social for disinformation detection later this year.
The AI software will provide
protection for “urgent customer pain points” against AI-generated
synthetic media, such as viral disinformation and deep fakes.
Providing this protection requires AI
that can automatically “learn” what is most important to an enterprise
and predict the likely social media narratives that will emerge before
they influence behavior. (read more)
Now, take a deep breath…. Let me explain.
The goal is the “PRIVATE SECTOR VERSION.” USSOCOM is the mechanical
funding mechanism for deployment, because the system itself is too
costly for a private sector launch. The Defense Dept budget is used to
contract an Artificial Intelligence system, the Argus anomaly detection AI, to monitor social media under the auspices of national security.
Once the DoD funded system is created, the “Argus detection protocol”
– the name given to the AI monitoring and control system, will then be
made available to the public sector. “Enterprise Argus” is then the
commercial product, created by the DoD, which allows the U.S. based tech
sectors to deploy.
The DoD cannot independently contract for the launch of an operation
against a U.S. internet network, because of constitutional limits via
The Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the powers of the federal
government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic
policies within the United States. However, the DoD can fund the
creation of the system under the auspices of national defense, and then
allow the private sector to launch for the same intents and purposes. See how that works?
We don't actually know what they've been hiding, what knowledge they actually possess - we only think we do, largely based on misinformation these exact same entities have
been responsible for propagating and disseminating these past decades.
Hence
the terms of the Authorization Act - it's not envisaged as a
get-out-of-jail card for people guilty of crimes against humanity: it's a
chance to get out from under what's legally coming in exchange for
lighter sentencing.
Nobody complicit in any actual criminal
activity is getting away with anything here - their own terms of being
under the blanket of National Security in the first place prohibits not only illegal activity but compliance with illegal activities - their own clearance authorization is enough to prosecute breaches.
The
Authorization act is simply to encourage further whistle blowing -
there are a lot of small fish involved in organizations like these,
especially on the technical side, who could do with the assurance
that they're not going to be crucified for getting out from under who and
where ever they currently are.
Currently
the only information we know about UFO's is what these SAP's have been
telling people is true - and the point is, they lie, rather often -
about pretty much everything.
If we want to get anywhere near the "truth" we will have to tolerate leaner
sentencing for proven intelligence assets - it's not like the bosses are going to come forward.
They know where the bodies are buried and more importantly, they know who else knows because they made sure to implicate them.
That's
how control works. Nobody's going to want to expose that, but the gig
as it currently stands is up - one way or the other.
Don't worry - the bosses will always
get away with whatever they've done, that's what the establishment
seeks to protect - the little people are the ones that get it in the
face: the Authorization Act isn't changing anything, not in the grand
scheme of things - but it does encourage human assets to come foreward and
that's what those authorizing the act need this minute.
Currently nobody knows what's going on, and that's down to these SAP's earning their pay checks.
The real question is, who actually is signing them.
consentfactory | GloboCap, Inc. and its innumerable subsidiaries, agents, assigns,
political puppets, media goons, and other loyal minions are desperately
endeavoring to enshrine the official Covid-19 narrative in the annals of
“history.” According to new figures from the WHO, “almost 15 million excess deaths” (or “a total of 336.8 million lost life-years”) had been caused by the virus by the end of 2021, none of which had anything to do with ventilators, or the classification of anyone who died of anything (i.e., cancer, heart disease, an auto accident, etc.) who had also tested positive as a “Covid death.”
When the globalist establishment realize they do not control the narrative anymore........ pic.twitter.com/o30WQpRmyt
Previously perfectly healthy young people are dropping dead left and
right from heart attacks and other “natural” (or “undisclosed”) causes
that have nothing to do with the experimental “vaccines” that they did
not need but were coerced into taking, which saved millions or 100 million lives. The masks that didn’t work worked, except that they didn’t, but that was only if you studied how they worked in reality.
Being locked down, forced to wear medical-looking masks, gaslighted and
terrorized by official propaganda, bullied, segregated, censored,
demonized, and otherwise systematically tortured, was actually good for people’s mental health,
except for “people with existing mental health conditions, and
children, and people with disabilities, and adolescents, and people
without financial or social security nets.”
Meanwhile, cognitively dissonant New Normals are taking to the
Internet to claim that no one knew better at the time, and that, OK,
sure, “mistakes were made,” but if we “science-denying conspiracy
theorists,” who they censored, demonized, and systematically persecuted
for over two years, had just spoken up …
I could go on, but you get the picture … or, rather, you either do or
you don’t. Because it’s not just the folks at GloboCap, Inc. that are
fanatically waging this War on Reality. Everybody and their brother is
trying to ram their “reality” down everyone’s throat. You got the
“Viruses Do Not Exist” people. You got the “There Are No Neo-Nazis in
Ukraine” people. The “Putin Is Our Savior” people. The Vote Blue Cult.
The Multipolar people. The Transgendered People’s Army. The Doomsday
Clock Hucksters. The Folks Who Still Listen to NPR. The Insurrection
Truthers. The Insurrection Deniers. The 9/11 Truthers. The Moon-Landing
Truthers. The Cult of Trump. The Church of Russiagate. The Rothschild
Obsessives. The Anti-Racism Racists. The Anti-Anti-Semitism
Anti-Semites. The Mass Formation Movement. The Cult of Marx. The Cult of
Capital. The Climate Change Fanatics. The Musk Cult. The list goes on
and on.
Historically, we humans have not done very well in such psychotic
ontological environments. When “reality” is shattered into a thousand
little shards, and things fall apart, and the center does not hold, we
tend to get rather scared, and confused, and agitated. We start to
panic. We try to put “reality” back together again. This does not work.
This worsens our panic. We start looking around for a new “reality
gilbertdoctorow | The many months long battle for the provincial Donbas city of
Bakhmut, or Artyomovsk as it is known in Russia, has been described
variously from on high in Washington, London and Berlin. When the likely
outcome was unclear, the defense of Bakhmut was called heroic and
demonstrative of the brave fighting spirit of the Ukrainians.
👴🇺🇸🇺🇦🇷🇺"The Russians have suffered over 100 000 cssualties in Bakhmut...I'ts hard to make up. It's hard to make up" - Joe Biden
Casualty figures issued by Kiev and then trumpeted from Washington
suggested that the Russians were stupidly throwing away the lives of
their fighting men by using WWI style human waves of attackers who were
decimated by the defenders. Russian lives are cheap was the message. The
fact that Russian artillery on site outnumbered and outperformed
Ukrainian artillery by a factor of five or seven to one was freely
admitted by the Western propagandists as they pleaded for increased
supplies to Kiev. They, nonetheless, issued casualty reports for the
Russians that inverted the force correlation. It was assumed, obviously
with reason, that the public was too lazy or too uninterested to do the
arithmetic.
At one moment, the spin doctors in Washington, London and Berlin said
that Ukrainian defense of Bakhmut made sense because it was pinning
down Russian forces and giving time to the Ukrainians to train and
position their men for the heralded “counter offensive” during which
they would overrun Russian positions at chosen points in the 600 mile
line of combat and drive a wedge through to the Sea of Azov, opening the
way for recapture of Crimea. Those were grand words and ambitions to
justify continued and ever rising Western military assistance to Kiev.
At another point, the spin doctors said it would be better if Ukraine
stopped losing men in Bakhmut and launched instead that much vaunted
counter-offensive. Now we were told that Bakhmut is just a Russian
fantasy, that it has no strategic value.
In the past couple of weeks, the Russian command has issued daily
reports on the progressive capture by Russian forces of Bakhmut, square
kilometer after square kilometer. We were told they controlled 75%, then
80% and most recently more than 90% of the city proper while artillery
bombardment of the remaining blocks of high rise residential buildings
that were being used by Ukrainian defenders for their sniper attacks and
intelligence reports on Russian troop movements pulverized everything
in their path.
At this point, the attention of Western media defending truth against
Russian disinformation was directed at the Ukrainian “successes” in
recapturing settlements on the flanks of Bakhmut. Just three days ago The New York Times
was telling its readers that these “breakthroughs” by the Ukrainians
put in jeopardy the Russian forces holding the city proper: they might
be surrounded and compelled to surrender or die. The possibility that
the offensives on the flanks were only intended to facilitate withdrawal
of remaining Ukrainian soldiers from Bakhmut and were tolerated by the
Russians to avoid bloody fights to the death – that possibility crossed
no one’s mind at the NYT, it seems.
Midday yesterday, 20 May, Yevgeny Prigozhin, the leader of the Wagner
Group which did most of the fighting for Bakhmut on the ground, claimed
total victory. In the evening, President Vladimir Putin announced to
the Russian public that Bakhmut was taken. Joyous messages of
congratulations filled the internet message services in Russia as the
broad public celebrated a victory as iconic as the Battle for
Stalingrad.
Meanwhile, the defenders of the Western public against Russian
“disinformation” were hard at work, straining their brains to find what
to say. This morning’s New York Times still speaks of the battle for Bakhmut as undecided, pointing yet again to the Ukrainian hold on the flanks.
Given their losses in men and materiel defending Bakhmut, the
surrender of the city to the Russians will be a great blow to Ukrainian
fighting morale when it is finally admitted. So will the fate of their
Commander in Chief General Zaluzhny who, according to Russian sources,
has been hospitalized for the past two weeks and remains in critical
condition after falling victim to a Russian strike on a provincial
command center which killed most of the high officers around him. If
nothing else, this speaks to the amazing success of Russian military
intelligence directing their firepower.
Meanwhile, Western media attention to Ukraine is conveniently
redirected at the nonstop travels of President Zalensky who went from
his European tour on to the Middle East, where he attended the meeting
of the Arab League, and thence via French military jet to the G7
gathering in Hiroshima where he held talks with fellow heads of state
and joined them for the obligatory group photos. All the talk was about
when the U.S. will formally give its consent to the dispatch of F16s to
Kiev. For the disseminators of Western disinformation this is a
wonderful distraction from a war that clearly is going badly for Kiev
and in particular a distraction from the counter offensive that looks
less likely with each passing day of Russian military strikes on the
command centers and weapons stores of the Ukrainian side.
The plume of radioactive smoke and ash that rose from the Khmelnitsky
store of British depleted uranium artillery shells in Western Ukraine
after a Russian missile strike, just like the extensive damage to the
Patriot air defense installation near Kiev by a Russian Kinzhal
hypersonic missile tell us all what will be the fate of future Western
arms deliveries to Ukraine. It is an interesting question how much
longer the Ukrainian military or politicians will put up with their high
flying, good life President while the country is well on its way to
hell.
The photo they ran with–depicting Vitaly Klitchko inspecting the downed wreckage of a hypersonic missile–is quite misleading. Firstly, its from earlier in the month, not the recent attack on the Patriot missile battery. Secondly, that's not Kinzhal wreckage… the Kinzhal is
much larger and has different nose cone angles.
Ukraine presented "proof" that they shot down a Kinzhal, hoping perhaps that people will fail a basic shape recognition test. pic.twitter.com/CHRCFJ3jJN
And while the article invites, indeed sets up the
inference that the Russians have rounded these guys up because the
missiles were shot down (even though they weren’t), buried in the
article is a little problem with timing:
NBCNews | The three scientists — Anatoly Maslov, Alexander Shiplyuk
and Valery Zvegintsev — were employees of the Khristianovich Institute
of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics in the Siberian city of
Novosibirsk. They were all detained on suspicion of high treason over
the past year, according to the letter published on the institute’s website.
The
letter professes the men’s innocence and praises their academic
achievements, adding that all three chose to stay in Russia rather than
accept highly paid and prestigious work abroad.
“We know
each of them as a patriot and a decent person who is not capable of
doing what the investigating authorities suspect them of,” it said.
It
is rare and risky in modern Russia to speak out in defense of people
charged with treason, especially after a bill was adopted last month
increasing the maximum sentence for the crime to life in jail.
The Russian state media agency Tass reported on the arrests of Maslov and Shiplyuk last summer and on Zvegintsev’s this week. It said Zvegintsev was detained about three weeks ago and is under house arrest. NBC News could not verify those details.
Shiplyuk was in charge
of the laboratory of hypersonic technologies at the institute, which
has “unique hypersonic aerodynamic installations designed to study the
fundamental and applied problems of hypersonic flight,” according to his
bio on the website. Maslov is a renowned expert in the field of
aerogasdynamics, it said.
The institute released an open letter
in support of Maslov after he was arrested in June for what it said was
“high treason,” saying his colleagues were “shocked” by his detention.
It was also raising money on behalf of the families of Maslov and
Shiplyuk to cover their legal expenses.
Tass reported
this week that the materials in Maslov’s case are classified and have
been handed over to a judge in a St. Petersburg court. The agency said
Maslov’s case was investigated by the FSB, Russia’s secret service.
While
the details of their cases have not been made public, the open letter
by their colleagues said the three men could have been arrested for
simply doing their jobs, including making presentations at global
conferences and taking part in international scientific projects. Their
work was also repeatedly checked by the institute’s expert commission to
ensure it did not include “restricted information,” the letter said.
“In
this situation, we are not only afraid for the fate of our colleagues.
We just do not understand how to continue to do our job,” it added,
raising concerns about “a rapid decline in the level of research” if
employees are too afraid to do their work.
racket |Today you’ll find two new #TwitterFiles threads out, one by longtime Racket contributor Matt Orfalea, and another
by Andrew Lowenthal, who worked for 18 years defending digital rights
at EngageMedia and watched activists in his space slowly be absorbed by
what we’re now calling “The Censorship-Industrial Complex.”
The
two new threads collectively show the wide political range of
revelations in the #TwitterFiles material, which have been slandered —
absurdly — as a partisan exercise. Lowenthal, who in his “Insider’s
Guide to ‘Anti-Disinformation’” describes himself as a
“progressive-minded Australian,” printed a series of exchanges between
journalists who attended a summer “tabletop exercise” at the Aspen
Institute about a hack-and-leak operation involving Burisma and Hunter
Biden, weeks before the actual event. When the actual scandal broke not
long after, the existence of that tabletop exercise clearly become
newsworthy, but none of the journalists present, who included David
Sanger of the New York Times and current Rolling Stone editor
Noah Schactman — said a word. Perhaps, as was common with anti-disinfo
conferences, the event was off the record. (We asked, and none of the
reporters commented). It doesn’t matter. Lowenthal showed how another
“anti-disinformation” conference featured the headline speaker Anthony
Blinken. He’s currently suspected of having “triggered” the infamous
letter signed by 50 intelligence officers saying the Hunter Biden laptop
story had the “classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”
As Lowenthal writes: “See how it works? The people accusing others of “disinformation” run the biggest disinformation campaigns themselves.”
On
the flip side, Orfalea found a document showing that both the Wikileaks
account and that of Dr. Jill Stein were algorithmically added by
Twitter to a list given the creepy name is_russian.
This was one of two buckets of “Russians” Twitter was collecting, one
called “A Priori Russians” (usually, accounts identified as Russian by
3rd party researchers), the other “Inferred Russians” (accounts that had
“strong,” “medium,” or “weak” “signals” of Russianness, involving
language, type of email account, location of IP address, tweet time,
etc). Even Twitter’s own analysts noted that any system that “captured”
Jill Stein as “Russian” spoke to the “overly broad nature of
is_russian.” It was just such a “signals” or “marker”-based methodology
that Twitter and other researchers used to identify “Russians” on the
Internet, a methodology Twitter internally called one of “educated
guesses,” concealing a company secret about identifying accounts linked
to Russia’s Internet Research Agency: “We have no realistic way of
knowing this on a Twitter-centric basis.”
As Stein
noted when I spoke to her yesterday, these unseen algorithmic tweaks to
the political landscape have the effect of decreasing the visibility of
political independents during a time of “record hunger for political
alternatives.” Stein noted a Gallup poll just showed
“identification with the Democratic and Republican parties is at an
all-time low,” and said such digital meddling is “an outrageous excuse
for political repression,” and “more that Joe McCarthy would be proud
of.”
When Stella Assange was told about the is_russian
list, she first speculated that any algorithm that demerited users based
on location might produce false positives if account holders used, say,
the Tor Browser, which could “randomly result in an RU exit node.”
Since “Tor is an essential tool for civil liberties and privacy
communities,” you could have people being tossed in a “Russian” bucket
for the crime of trying to evade surveillance.
In another part of
his thread, Orfalea notes that a Clemson University researcher hailed as
a “troll hunter” in the press and used as a source by major media
outlets, speculated that an account called @drkwarlord that was sharing a
hashtag, #BloombergisRacist because the account was tweeting at odd
hours:
That’s the “expert” opinion. Orfalea just called @drkwarlord, who laughed, “I’m a nurse at a hospital in Indiana. In 2020, I worked the night shift.”
Whether it’s suppression of a news story conservatives care about like the Hunter Biden laptop tale, or deamplification of a left-leaning Green Party candidate like Jill Stein, the #TwitterFiles consistently hit at the same theme, but it’s not partisan.
It’s really summed up by something Stella Assange said, about the difference between Wikileaks and the “anti-disinformation” facsimile, Bellingcat. “Wikileaks coined ‘intelligence agency of the people.’ Bellingcat went with ‘for the people.’”
Civil society institutions, the media, politicians, and government are supposed to maintain distance from one another in democracy.
The Censorship-Industrial Complex shows an opposite instinct, for all of these groups to act in concert, essentially as one giant, incestuous intelligence operation — not of the people, but paternalistically “for” the people, or so they believe. Journalists attend conferences where news happens and do not report it, breaking ranks neither with conference organizers, nor with each other. The Trump era has birthed a new brand of paranoid politics, where once-liberalizing institutions like the press and NGOs are encouraged to absorb into a larger whole, creating a single political cartel to protect against the “contagion” of mass movements. As Lowenthal notes, this explains why so many “anti-disinformation” campaigns describe language as a kind of disease, e.g. “infodemic,” “information pollution,” and “information disorder.”
Not long ago I was writing in defense
of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. When she first entered Congress as an
inner-city twenty something who’d knocked off longtime insider Joe
Crowley with a Sandersian policy profile, her own party’s establishment
ridiculed her as a lefty Trump. Nancy Pelosi scoffed that her win just
meant voters “made a choice in one district,”
so “let’s not get carried away.” Ben Ritz, director of the Progressive
Policy Institute, an offshoot of the old Democratic Leadership Council,
groused, “Oh, please, she just promised everyone a bunch of free stuff.”
This was before AOC decided to bethe
next Pelosi, instead of the next Sanders. The above sit-down on MSNBC
shows the transformation. Having shed the mantle of an outsider who
shook the old guard with online savvy, she appeared in soft light for a
softball “interview,” by a literal Biden official (Inside With Jen Psakiis as close as you can get to a formal dissolution of the line between White House and media). In it, she seemed to argue
for the outlaw of Fox News. “We have very real issues with what is
permissible on air,” she said, adding people like Tucker Carlson are
“very clearly” guilty of “incitement to violence,” a problem in light of
“federal regulation in terms of what’s allowed on air and what isn’t.”
detroitnews | Dilbert comic strip creator Scott Adams
experienced possibly the biggest repercussion of his recent comments
about race when distributor Andrews McMeel Universal announced Sunday it
would no longer work with the cartoonist.
Andrews
McMeel Chairman Hugh Andrews and CEO and President Andy Sareyan said in
a joint statement that the syndication company was “severing our
relationship" with Adams.
In the Feb. 22
episode of his YouTube show, Adams described people who are Black as
members of “a hate group” from which white people should “get away.”
Various media publishers across the U.S. denounced the comments as
racist, hateful and discriminatory while saying they would no longer
provide a platform for his work.
Andrews and
Sareyan said Andrews McMeel supports free speech, but the comments by
the cartoonist were not compatible with the core values of the company
based in Kansas City, Missouri.
“We are proud to promote and share many different
voices and perspectives. But we will never support any commentary rooted
in discrimination or hate,” they said in the statement posted on the
company website and Twitter.
The creator of the
long-running comic that pokes fun at office-place culture defended
himself on social media against those whom he said "hate me and are
canceling me.”
The backlash against Adams arose following
comments on “Real Coffee with Scott Adams.” Among other topics, Adams
used the YouTube show to reference a Rasmussen Reports survey that had
asked whether people agreed with the statement “It's OK to be white."
Most agreed, but Adams noted that 26% of Black respondents disagreed and others weren't sure.
The Anti-Defamation League says the phrase was
popularized in 2017 as a trolling campaign by members of the discussion
forum 4chan but then began being used by some white supremacists.
Adams,
who is white, repeatedly referred to people who are Black as members of
a “hate group” or a “racist hate group” and said he would no longer
“help Black Americans."
“Based on the current way things are going, the
best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from
Black people,” Adams said on his Wednesday show.
In
another episode of his online show Saturday, Adams said he had been
making a point that “everyone should be treated as an individual”
without discrimination.
To hear Eric Weinstein's entire "shut it down, the goyim know" drunken rant, - in which he repudiates everything he's professed about the DISC as well as placing himself squarely in the Epstein psy-op camp - go to the 3 hour 30 minute mark on the spotify podcast with Rogan.
realitysandwich |
The cause of our concern: while the original criticism against Hancock and Sheldrake was later retracted -- literally crossed out on the blog page -- after the speakers rebutted it, the initial decision to remove the videos still held. Statements from TED staff implied that the presentations were "pseudoscience," but
no specific allegations were made. Both Rupert Sheldrake and Graham
Hancock offered to debate a member of the anonymous science board, or
any other representative, about actual criticisms, but got no response.
To an outsider, TED's actions are baffling.
In your personal statements you
say that TED is not censoring the videos, since they are available on a
back page of your site, and technically that may be true. But by
relegating them to obscure blogs that are not indexed as part of the
regular pool of TEDx talks, the unequivocal message is that these talks
are not fit to be seen among the thousands of other presentations that
TED offers through YouTube. Somehow they were mistakes that slipped
through and need to be quarantined from the "good" TED talks, to keep
them from contamination. Given TED's influence, this treatment is
unfairly damaging to the reputations of the speakers singled out.
The subsequent cancellation of TEDxWestHollywood's license,
apparently due to the involvement of three of its speakers, who were
named in a letter from TED staff, seems to be a continuation of the same
baffling behavior. Again, the only reason given was a vague reference
to "pseudoscience." But why these speakers? What had they done to
justify reprimand -- especially since TEDxWestHollywood had been in
development for a year and was only two weeks from taking place?
The five people identified as problematic by TED work in different
fields. Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist. Graham Hancock is a journalist
who has written about archeological ruins. Larry Dossey is a doctor.
Russell Targ is a physicist. Marylin Schlitz is a social anthropologist
and consciousness researcher. The one subject they all have in common is
a shared interest in the non-locality of consciousness, the possibility
that consciousness extends beyond the brain. Each speaker has devoted
many years to the rigorous study of consciousness through the lens of
their respective disciplines, and they have come up with provocative
results.
Through its actions, TED appears to be drawing a line around this area
of investigation and marking it as forbidden territory. Is this true? In
the absence of any detailed reasoning in TED's public statements, it's
hard to avoid this conclusion. It would seem that, despite your
statement that "TED is 100% committed to open enquiry, including
challenges to orthodox thinking," that enquiry appears to not include
any exploration of consciousness as a non-local phenomenon, no matter
how it may be approached.
mises | There are themes in the West that are difficult to question without
running the risk of receiving sharp criticism. For the following themes,
for example, there is a position considered “correct” by Western
collective opinion: “Welfare State,” “climate policy,” “multicultural
society,” or “covid-19 vaccination.” It is implied that the “acceptable”
position to each one of these themes can and should be adopted without
any prior critical analysis at the individual level.
The list of these themes is not static; new ones rise to prominence
in society, while others become less important over time. In recent
years two new themes have emerged: “authoritarian Russia” and “communist
China,” which is not surprising considering that Washington, and thus,
by extension. the West, has decided to treat these two nations as
strategic enemies. A recent study
shows, for example, that in a very short time the percentage of
Americans with a negative view of China increased dramatically, from 46
percent to 67 percent. This is not a coincidence, but the result of a
media communication strategy.
The Critique of the Antiwar Position
As far as Russia is concerned, the “correct” attitude to have in the
West, especially since the start of the Ukraine conflict on February 24,
2022, is no less than an absolute condemnation of that country. Support
for Ukraine must be comprehensive and can receive social confirmation
by a small blue and yellow flag on Facebook. Unconditional support for
the economic war waged by Western leaders against Russia is also
socially required for Europeans, even though they will be the first to
suffer from it.
It is for this reason that the Amnesty International report of August 4, 2022, which confirmed
that “Ukrainian forces putting civilians at risk and violating the laws
of war when they operate in populated areas” became a media bomb, not only in Ukraine but also in the West. This report disturbs
a lot of people because it is not in line with the black and white view
of Russia as a criminal aggressor and Ukraine as an innocent victim.
The people who do not take the “correct” stance on the conflict in
Ukraine are often accused of being “pro-Russian,” even when this stance
simply consists in being objective; by considering the recent history
and behavior of the various protagonists. They are considered
“pro-Russian” because they do not express unconditional support for
Ukraine, but more often, propose conditions for peace. Indeed, the
position of most of these critics is not at all “pro-Russian,” but
“pro-peace” by supporting active Western efforts to reach a ceasefire,
thus sparing as many Ukrainian lives as possible.
Western media did not react when, on July 14, 2022, the Ukrainian government published
a black list of Western politicians, academics, and activists who,
according to Kiev, “promote Russian propaganda.” This list includes
leading Western intellectuals and politicians, such as Republican
Senator Rand Paul, former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, military and geopolitical analyst Edward N. Luttwak, the political realist John Mearsheimer, and award-winning freelance journalist Glenn Greenwald.
Though this Ukrainian blacklist should obviously have been condemned
in the West, it has hardly elicited any reactions at all, because the
Western media already agree with its conclusion: the people on the list
are already criticized in their own countries for not adopting
the pro-Ukrainian position. Moreover, would the Ukrainian government
have dared to publish such a list if it had not had the prior agreement
of Washington?
The Formation of the Collective Opinion
What is happening in the case of the attitude toward Russia, as well
as in the other themes mentioned above, is not surprising or new. In his
famous work, On Liberty
(1859), John Stuart Mill is perhaps today best known for his prescient
early warning of the dangers of the “collective opinion”; the “tyranny
of the majority” in the form of “the dominant opinions and feelings that
society is trying to impose” on a minority.
Society’s majority is naturally intolerant of nonconformism, because
thinking like everyone else gives psychological comfort and strengthens
social ties. Yet, though society depends on collective opinion for its
social cohesion, paradoxically it also depends for its well-being on
views that run counter to this majority opinion. Just as natural science
progresses only through the sometimes tortuous but generally respectful
process of peer review, society also needs minority opinions and
dissident voices to curb the permanent search for consensus on the part
of the majority.
caityjohnstone | None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
None are more hopelessly ignorant than those who falsely believe they’re informed.
None are more hopelessly propagandized than those who don’t know they are propagandized.
Living
in a liberal western democracy means having the freedom to criticize
the tyranny of your government, but instead spending your time
criticizing the tyranny of foreign governments who your government
doesn’t like.
Free
speech in a liberal western democracy means you have the freedom to say
whatever you want about the abuses of your government, and the press
has the freedom to hammer you with propaganda to ensure that you never
do.
In
a liberal western democracy you are free to criticize your government,
but instead you are propagandized into criticizing the impotent puppets
who get rotated in and out of office while your government continues
doing all the same evil things regardless of who gets elected.
In
liberal western democracies you are free to call the president “Drumpf”
or “Brandon”, but you are not free to know who’s actually calling the
shots in your country underneath the official government.
In
liberal western democracies people say, “I’m so glad I don’t live in a
country like Russia or China where people are forbidden to criticize
their government. I live in the west, where I’m free to criticize Russia
and China all I want.”
It
doesn’t matter if you have freedom of speech if those in power can
control what you will say. And in liberal western democracies, this is
exactly what happens.
We
grow up saturated with US empire propaganda in the west. We marinate in
it. It pervades our consciousness. But because it’s all we’ve ever
known, most of us don’t even notice it.
We
think it’s normal that we’re always told our government is on the good
and righteous side of every international conflict. We think it’s normal
that we hear constantly about the tyranny of foreign governments while
only occasionally hearing about bad things our own government did years
ago (but it was an innocent mistake and it’ll never happen again).
“If we were being propagandized, I’m sure we’d have heard about it in the news,” we tell ourselves.
But the news is the propaganda. And it will never report on that bombshell story.
Propaganda
is the single most overlooked and underappreciated aspect of our
society. In controls how the public thinks, acts, votes and behaves, but
hardly anyone ever talks about it. Because the sources they’ve been
trained to look to for information never say anything about it.
So
people say what’s on their mind, after what’s on their mind has been
carefully curated by the imperial narrative managers who are responsible
for controlling what information goes into their mind.
At
the end of the call, I remind her that she is engaging in illegal acts
by telling social media companies what content to censor. See page 7 for her message to Twitter showing them what to censor.
Twitter
follows orders, even though Carol is breaking the law. They aren’t
going to turn her in. On the contrary, they are in on it. This is
collusion to censor free speech.
If you’d like to tell her you support my suggestion, you can reach her at ccrawford@cdc.gov.
I’m sure she’d be delighted to hear from you.
You Tube censored my video within minutes of posting
I also uploaded the video on YouTube,
but it was censored after just 6 views! YouTube will censor anything
that makes the government look bad. So if you document government
corruption, YouTube is not the place to post it.
dissidentvoice | A military funded academic, working at a school launched by
Condoleezza Rice, claims leftist and anti-war journalists engage in
Russian disinformation. His report doesn’t provide any evidence or
refute anyone’s argument, but the legacy media laps it up.
On Thursday the University of Calgary School of Public Policy released “Disinformation and Russia-Ukrainian war on Canadian social media”. With the exception of a blog by Dimitri Lascaris that dismantled
its absurd ideological premises, coverage of the report was almost
entirely uncritical. Headlines included: “Canada target of Russian
disinformation, with tweets linked to foreign powers” (Globe and Mail),
“Why is Canada the target of a Russian disinformation campaign?” (CJAD
Montréal) and “Canada is target of Russian disinformation, with millions
of tweets linked to Kremlin” (City News Toronto). The report’s
lead author Jean-Christophe Boucher was a guest on multiple TV and
radio outlets, labeling those who question the role of NATO expansion,
the far Right and 2014 coup against an elected president in
understanding the war in Ukraine “useful idiots” of Vladimir Putin.
Boucher and his co-researchers claim to have mapped over six million
tweets in Canada about the conflict in Ukraine. They claim over a
quarter of the tweets fall into five categories they label “pro-Russian
narratives”. But they don’t even attempt to justify the five categories.
Instead, they simply list the most prominent commentators and political
figures promoting these ideas under the rubric of “Top
Russian-influenced Accounts”. The list includes leftist journalists
Aaron Maté, Benjamin Norton, Max Blumenthal, Richard Medhurst and John
Pilger. But no evidence is offered to connect these individuals to
Russia.
While “Disinformation and Russia-Ukrainian war on Canadian social
media” reveals little, it has served its political purpose. It will
further insulate Canadian officials from criticism of their policies by
suggesting anyone questioning Ottawa’s Ukraine/NATO policies are part of
a Russian disinformation campaign.
Boucher is a product of the Canadian military’s vast publicly financed ideological apparatus, which I detail in A Propaganda System: How Canada’s Government, Corporations, Media and Academia Sell War and Exploitation.
He has been a fellow at the military and arms industry funded Canadian
Global Affairs Institute and Dalhousie Centre for the Study of Security
and Development. He advocates theories amenable to the military’s
interests, including “strategic retrenchment:
falling back on the people you can really trust”, which is a
sophisticated way of saying Canada should deepen its alliance with the
US empire. His academic profile says Boucher “is a co-lead
of the Canadian Network on Information and Security, funded by the
Department of National Defence” while his Canadian Global Affairs
Institute bio notes that “he is currently responsible for more than $2.4M of funding from the Department of National Defence (DND) to study information operations.”
caitlinjohnstone | The
empire has had mixed feelings about the internet since its creation. On
one hand it allows for unprecedented surveillance and information
gathering and the rapid distribution of propaganda, which it likes, but
on the other it allows for the unprecedented democratization of
information, which it doesn’t like.
Its
answer to this quandary has been to come up with “fact checking”
services and Silicon Valley censorship protocols for restricting
“misinformation” (with “facts” and “information” defined as “whatever
advances imperial interests”). That’s all we’re seeing with continually
expanding online censorship policies, and with government-tied
oligarchic narrative management operations like NewsGuard.
Twitter has imposed a weeklong suspension on the account of writer and political activist Danny Haiphong for a thread he made on the platform disputing the mainstream Tiananmen Square massacre narrative.
The
notification Haiphong received informed him that Twitter had locked his
account for “Violating our rules against abuse and harassment,”
presumably in reference to a rule the platform put in place a year ago
which prohibits “content that denies that mass murder or other mass
casualty events took place, where we can verify that the event occured,
and when the content is shared with abusive intent.”
“This may include references to such an event as a ‘hoax’ or claims that victims or survivors are fake or ‘actors,’” Twitter said
of the new rule. “It includes, but is not limited to, events like the
Holocaust, school shootings, terrorist attacks, and natural disasters.”
That
we are now seeing this rule applied to protect narratives which support
the geostrategic interests of the US-centralized empire is not in the
least bit surprising.
Haiphong is far from the first
to dispute the mainstream western narrative about exactly what happened
around Tiananmen Square in June of 1989 as the Soviet Union was
crumbling and Washington’s temporary Cold War alignment with Beijing was
losing its strategic usefulness.
But we can expect more acts of online censorship like this as Silicon
Valley continues to expand into its role as guardian of imperial
historic records.
This
idea that government-tied Silicon Valley institutions should act as
arbiters of history on behalf of the public consumer is gaining steadily
increasing acceptance in the artificially manufactured echo chamber of
mainstream public opinion. We saw another example of this recently in
Joe Lauria’s excellent refutation of accusations against Consortium News of historic inaccuracy by the imperial narrative management firm NewsGuard.
As journalists like Whitney Webb and Mnar Adley
noted years ago, NewsGuard markets itself as a “news rating agency”
designed to help people sort out good from bad sources of information
online, but in reality functions as an empire-backed weapon against
media who question imperial narratives about what’s happening in the
world. The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal outlined the company’s many partnerships with imperial swamp monsters like former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen and “chief propagandist”
Richard Stengel as well as “imperialist cutouts like the German
Marshall Fund” when its operatives contacted his outlet for comment on
their accusations.
borkena | Hermela
Aregawi, born in Ethiopia and raised in the United States, is making
headlines in the Ethiopian media after she exposed pro-Tigray People’s
Liberation Front (TPLF) supporters in the diaspora in connection with
the delivery of humanitarian assistance in the Tigray region of
Ethiopia.
Her
favorite quote displayed on her Twitter profile reads “if all the
truth were known abt everything in the world, it would be a better
place,” and that is what she seems to be doing.
A journalist by
profession, works for CBS, from ethnic Tigray background, tweeted
earlier this week that the Pro-TPLF Tigreans in the diaspora “don’t want
aid to get to people because it will make @AbiyAhmedAli Government look
good.”
The Ethiopian government has been under immense pressure
from the US government and European Union, among other actors, on
alleged grounds of obstructing humanitarian aid delivery to the Tigray region.
Hermela
Aregawi’s view of the conflict in northern Ethiopia, including aid
delivery and alleged blockade of it, seems to have changed.
In fact, she said it in her three parts tweet:
“My
perspective on Tigray evolved bc of inconsistencies I’ve seen &
heard in 10+ mnths. I stayed quiet for mnths hoping to see a shift
towards peace & truth bc lives of millions – including my families’ –
depend on it. There was no such shift. #Ethiopia 1/3 … If you’re going
to label this a genocide from Day 2 then you can’t also try to control
efforts to send life-saving basics to the poor ppl in it. Likely
millions$ raised in diaspora but little to no accountability about where
it’s going. To fund a civil war? #Tigray #Ethiopia 2/3 …We’ve seen
counts of # of civilians killed in Tigray, but how many young soldiers
have been killed fighting this questionable war? Diasporans should have
the conscience to ask these ?s before continuing to blindly support an
ethnic-based war in the year of 2021. #Ethiopia 3/3”
Reacting
to a picture of a child affected by famine, she tweeted “Heartbreaking
images. I care enough to ask this ?: If it’s true @UN claims that
Ethiopian govt has aid blockade in effect, how is it @UNEthiopia
recently reported 466 aid trucks went into Tigray since July 12? A claim
neither side of the conflict denied.”
It
was only last week that the UN branch office in Ethiopia disclosed that
only 38 of 466 trucks that went to the Tigray region returned.
Ethiopia’s Ministry of Peace has confirmed the claim by the UN office.
Unverified video footage circulating on social media showed the trucks
being used by the TPLF to transport its forces to the battle front in
the Amhara region ,one of the regions where the TPLF took its war after
the Ethiopian Defense Force withdrew from Tigray region at the end of
June following unilateral declaration by the Ethiopian government.
Ethiopians
who have been trying to expose TPLF crimes on Twitter have been hailing
Hermela for standing for the truth. In reaction to her inquisitive
remark about Associated Press statement published on September 20,
Teshome Borago wrote :
“You are good woman of honor
Please
know that the writer of this article Cara Anna recently justified z mass
killing of Amharas in #ChenaMassacre by saying the Amhara civilian
victims were fighting back vs TPLF
These Westerners just want us Ethiopians to fight forever”
Many
other Ethiopians have been expressing appreciation for Hermela for what
she has revealed and for being inquisitive about narratives that were
rather regarded as distorted despite they seem to have been used by
policy makers including in the U.S government.
Last week, president Joe Biden signed an executive order approving action regimes against Ethiopia.
A Foundation of Joy
-
Two years and I've lost count of how many times my eye has been operated
on, either beating the fuck out of the tumor, or reattaching that slippery
eel ...
April Three
-
4/3
43
When 1 = A and 26 = Z
March = 43
What day?
4 to the power of 3 is 64
64th day is March 5
My birthday
March also has 5 letters.
4 x 3 = 12
...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...
