Twitter’s New CEO Parag Agrawal Has Disturbing Anti-American, Anti-White Tweet History.

With Twitter founder Jack Dorsey stepping down as CEO, it was announced that Parag Agrawal – the company’s current Chief Technology Officer – will take over the leadership role.

Agrawal, concerningly, is a vocal opponent of free speech and the First Amendment, and has sent tweets about all white people being racist:

“If they are not gonna make a distinction between muslims and extremists, then why should I distinguish between white people and racists.”

— Parag Agrawal (@paraga) October 26, 2010

The Indian-born migrant has used his tenure as Twitter’s tech chief to lead research on how best to silence voices across the platform under the myth of “fake news” and dismiss the ideals America was founded upon, often quoting his favorite leftist celebrities.

Keep reading

Twitter’s new CEO Parag Agrawal previously rejected free speech in favor of “healthy public conversation”

In a far-reaching November 2020 interview, Twitter’s new CEO Parag Agrawal, who was the company’s Chief Technology Officer (CTO) at the time, rejected free speech protections that are enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, wished the company had censored QAnon sooner, and touted the company’s approach of censoring content based on “potential for harm.”

“Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation,” Agrawal said in response to a question about protecting free speech as a core value and the role of the First Amendment.

He added that the company now focuses “less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.” In this context, Agrawal said the role of Twitter is increasingly moving toward recommendations and “how we direct people’s attention is leading to a healthy public conversation that is most participatory.”

Keep reading

Facebook’s ‘Race Blind’ Algorithm Found 90% Of Hate Speech Directed Toward White People And Men

We now know why Facebook decided to change its “race-blind” hate speech detection algorithm last year to allow more anti-white hatred.

The Washington Post reported last week that an “April 2020 document said roughly 90 percent of ‘hate speech’ subject to content takedowns were statements of contempt, inferiority and disgust directed at White people and men.”

They viewed this as a failure of the system because white people are supposed to be the targets of all hate.

Keep reading

The Metaverse Is A Scam: We’re Being Herded Into The Matrix

How do they get our souls?

Soul traps. The lures are the lusts and hungers of this life. The [soul], exploring the newfound freedom of the energetic world, finds himself able to visit his friends and enemies, to see their innermost being and thoughts, even to converse with them in ways that their elemental selves cannot perceive. He is in danger, but he does not know it, for he has not ascended. He is still ensnared by his lust. Soon he will be shown something that perfectly fulfills his most en and cherished desires, desires he has never fulfilled. Unable to resist the chance to do it at last, he enters by a golden door into eternal captivity.

The passage is from Whitley Strieber’s “The Key”, a purportedly true account as related by Streiber of an encounter with a mysterious humanoid being who simply knocked on the door of his Toronto hotel room at 3am on June 6, 1998, entered his suite and told him about mankind’s place in the cosmos and his inescapable fate.

Strieber’s account may be a synthesis: partly “true” (in that he believes it occurred as he relates it), part visioning, part somnambulistic dream state. Whatever emanates from the mind of Whitley Strieber, it originates from some realm outside of our Cartesian,  materialist notion of consensus reality.

He reminds me of that other prophetic visionary of yesteryear: Rudolf Steiner, whom as I wrote previously, spent much of his life in a hypnogognic state, possibly without even realizing it.

Steiner and Strieber. Odd that. They are both talking about the same thing. The idea that the souls of humanity could be captured in a technological machine, where they would wander forever, believing they have omniscience, even Godhood.

“At that point the longevity of one’s mind file will not depend on the continued viability of any particular hardware medium (for example, the survival of a biological body and brain). Ultimately software-based humans will be vastly extended  beyond the severe limitations of humans as we know them today. They will live out on the Web, projecting bodies whenever they need or want them, including virtual bodies, foglet projected bodies, and physical bodies comprising nanobot swarms and other forms of nanotechnology”.
— Ray Kurzweil, Director of Engineering @ Google and author of The Singularity is Near.

Steiner called it The Eighth Sphere and warned that sometime in the late 20th century, Arhiman would incarnate in the west and drive a global process of harvesting human souls into it. The zeitgeist of radical material reductionism would dampen, deaden and dumb down humanity to its coarsest, most basic layers: meat. Our minds, what we think is our own consciousness, our souls, self-awareness even our freewill, it’s all just an illusion. Our experts say. It’s just something that happens when our brains gas off certain neurochemicals.

However…

We can take that illusion, what we call our consciousness, and pretty soon now (just as soon as The Singularity happens), we’ll be able to upload that illusion “into the cloud”, into The Metaverse and we’ll be able to experience anything we want, for as long as we want, forever.

Keep reading

Leaked Documents Show Apple’s Attempts to Silence Whistleblowers

Tech giant Apple previously told the SEC that it does not attempt to silence employees in relation to workplace harassment or discrimination, but a whistleblower’s nondisclosure agreement is bringing new scrutiny to this claim.

Business Insider reports that on October 18, tech giant Apple made a number of statements to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) including claims that the company does not attempt to silence former employees or whistleblowers in relation to the company’s working conditions.

Now, a new nondisclosure agreement given to a company whistleblower is bringing greater scrutiny to these claims. Apple’s lawyers reportedly wanted former engineer Cher Scarlett to state only the following words upon her departure from the company: “After 18 months at Apple, I’ve decided it is time to move on and pursue other opportunities.”

This language was included in an extremely strict nondisclosure and non-disparagement agreement as part of a separation agreement that Apple offered Scarlett last month. Scarlett, who spent months working to improve pay equity at Apple allegedly resulting in harassment and intimidation from the company, said that when she received the nondisclosure agreement she was “shocked.”

She added: “In my mind, I should be able to say whatever I want as long as I’m not defaming Apple.” Scarlett refused to sign the gag order but was reminded of the agreement upon seeing Apple’s statements to the SEC.

Apple claimed that when it comes to NDAs “in the context of harassment, discrimination, and other unlawful acts,” its “policy is to not use such clauses.” Scarlett filed a whistleblower complaint with the SEC on October 25 in which she claims Apple made “false statements or misleading statements” to the SEC.

Keep reading

WHISTLEBLOWER: Facebook Internal Docs Likely Show How Tech Giant Blacklisted Kyle Rittenhouse

In order to do this, Facebook likely exploited a loophole that allowed them to skate around their terms of service and selectively moderate content. Internal documents shared with National File by Facebook whistleblower Ryan Hartwig shine light on these practices.

Hartwig worked on Facebook’s content moderation team while employed at a company called Cognizant from 2018-2020 until he eventually blew the whistle after realizing the platform’s content moderation efforts pushed political agendas and punished those who disagree. Hartwig now says he believes he knows the mechanisms Facebook used to purge all positive mention of Kyle Rittenhouse.

According to Hartwig, Facebook most likely branded the Kenosha shootings as a “mass murder”, then used that designation to purge pro-Rittenhouse content under the company’s “Dangerous Individuals and Organizations” policy.

“In an effort to prevent and disrupt real-world harm, we do not allow organizations or individuals that proclaim a violent mission or are engaged in violence to have a presence on Facebook,” reads the policy rationale.

Facebook will assess organizations both online and offline in order to gauge the likelihood of groups or individuals causing real world harm. Groups that fall under the dangerous organizations policy include terrorist organizations, “hate organizations”, organized crime syndicates such as drug cartels, and multiple-victim murderers.

Keep reading

Facebook Employees Pushed Company To Exclude Criticism Of White People, Men From Hate Speech Rules

Facebook employees urged executives to exclude criticism directed towards white people and men from the company’s hate speech policies, according to internal documents reported on by The Washington Post.

Facebook researchers tried to change the company’s content moderation algorithms that automatically delete hate speech, because they viewed the algorithms as inadequately protecting minority users, The Washington Post reported, citing internal memos and research. The effort came following a document from April 2020 which showed that around 90% of hate speech algorithms were detecting and removing content directed towards white people and men.

Researchers argued that these figures indicated bias in Facebook’s automatic deletion algorithms because the content reported to be the most “harmful” or “the worst of the worst” was more often directed at minority groups, the Post reported.

The employees then urged Facebook executives, including the vice president of global public policy, Joel Kaplan, to ditch Facebook’s “race-blind” hate speech algorithms which did not discriminate based on the race to which the hate speech was directed, according to the Post. Instead, the researchers pushed for algorithms that automatically removed hate speech directed only towards black people, Jews, LGBTQ individuals, Muslims and people of multiple races.

Keep reading

Social Media Companies Suppressed Claims of Kyle Rittenhouse’s Innocence

Social media platforms rendered a verdict on Kyle Rittenhouse long before he went to trial, suppressing claims that he was innocent and blocking users from searching for details of the case.

Immediately after the anti-police riots that thrust Rittenhouse into the national spotlight, social media companies began to block users who expressed support for the Illinois teen. Twitter suspended the accounts of users who called Rittenhouse innocent, including the defendant’s own lawyer. Facebook said it “designated this shooting as a mass murder and … removed the shooter’s accounts from Facebook and Instagram.” The platform also blocked searches for “Kyle Rittenhouse.”

Social media platforms often intervene to suppress posts expressing a particular stance on controversial issues. Both platforms censored news stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop in the month before the 2020 election. Facebook blocked a Gold Star mother’s criticism of President Joe Biden and suppressed a song that criticized the president. Twitter and Facebook also suspended users who oppose vaccine mandates.

The fundraising platform GoFundMe also removed a page set up to support Rittenhouse, which the company said violated its ban on fundraisers involving “the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance.” GoFundMe supported fundraising for the family of one of Rittenhouse’s assailants, Anthony Huber. The site regularly hosts fundraisers for individuals associated with Black Lives Matter. ​

When smaller platforms began raising funds for Rittenhouse, hackers breached the donation lists. News outlets doxxed paramedics and police officers who gave small donations to Rittenhouse’s defense.

Twitter is still banning or suspending users for supporting Rittenhouse, even as the trial proceeds. Facebook searches for Rittenhouse’s name turn up no results. Neither platform responded to requests for comment.

Keep reading

Aspen Disinformation Group Includes Twitter Exec Who Censored Hunter Biden Story

The Twitter executive responsible for blocking stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop is one of several advisers to the Aspen Institute’s disinformation commission.

Yoel Roth is one of several questionable advisers to Aspen’s Commission on Information Disorder, which on Monday released its much-anticipated report. Commission members include Katie Couric, who recently acknowledged that she edited comments on National Anthem protests out of a 2016 interview with Ruth Bader Ginsburg to preserve the justice’s reputation with liberals. Another commissioner, Rashad Robinson, helped fuel actor Jussie Smollett’s hate crime hoax.

Commission members’ censorship of legitimate news stories could undercut their lofty mission. The commission blamed “decreasing levels of public trust” in public institutions for the crisis, which it dubs a “whole-of-society problem that can have life-or-death consequences.” Its report calls for Congress and the White House to take action to counteract disinformation.

Roth, the head of site integrity at Twitter, blocked access to an Oct. 14, 2020, New York Post article regarding emails from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop. Roth told the Federal Elections Commission he blocked the story in part because the intelligence community had briefed him that foreign governments might release hacked materials prior to the election. No evidence has emerged that Biden’s laptop was stolen or hacked, and Twitter founder Jack Dorsey has since acknowledged that the company should not have blocked links to the story.

The Aspen Commission report criticizes Twitter and other social media companies for failures to rein in disinformation but does not cite Twitter’s censorship of the Biden article.

Keep reading