Tag: big tech

Biden Administration Files Emergency Motion to Strike Down Injunction in RFK Jr., CHD Censorship Case

Lawyers for the Biden administration today filed a motion with the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals seeking to block an injunction that would have prohibited White House officials from coercing or significantly encouraging social media platforms to suppress or censor online content.

The move came less than 24 hours after a lower court denied two crucial motions by government defendants seeking to overturn the preliminary injunction, set to take effect July 7, in the Kennedy v. Biden censorship lawsuit.

Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on Tuesday rebuffed the administration’s attempts to delay or modify the Kennedy v. Biden preliminary injunction.

The injunction was granted in February but temporarily stayed until 10 days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a similar injunction in a related censorship case, Murthy v. Missouri.

On June 26, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the plaintiffs in Murthy v. Missouri did not have standing to bring the case.

In their dissenting opinion, Justices Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. argued that the majority decision was “blatantly unconstitutional” and that the court was “shirk[ing] its duty” by failing to rein in government censorship.

Attorneys for Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — plaintiffs in Kennedy v. Biden — said they believe CHD and Kennedy have standing, and overall, a stronger case.

Given the 5th Circuit’s previous ruling upholding the injunction in the related Missouri v. Biden case (later named Murthy v. Missouri), attorneys who spoke with The Defender were cautiously optimistic about the new developments.

Keep reading

Zuckerberg’s Meta Cracks Down On Speech Criticizing “Zionists”

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, announced Tuesday an update to its policies on so-called “hate speech,” specifically users discussing “Zionists.”

The company’s social media platforms will begin removing posts that use the words “Zionism” or “Zionist” to refer to Jewish people or Israelis.

The updated policy will target those who mention Jews are found in prominent roles in financial, political, and media institutions.

Users who compare Zionists to animals or use the term to deny the Holocaust will also be punished under the new rules.

Perhaps using the power of the world’s most wealthy companies to silence your detractors isn’t the best way of convincing them you’re not secretly pulling the strings of the global elite.

Keep reading

Biden regime pressured Amazon to censor at least 43 books that discuss vaccine injuries and Big Pharma fraud

The House Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government has uncovered a book banning operation at Amazon that involves coercive, unconstitutional directives from Joe Biden’s rogue government. According to the Congressional report, Amazon was ordered by the federal government to change its algorithms to reduce visibility for books that are critical of pharmaceutical executives or vaccines.

The federal government compiled a “Do Not Promote” list that targeted at least 43 book titles, effectively limiting their reach and availability to the public. Representative Jim Jordan, Chair of the Judiciary Committee, highlighted these findings on social media, citing internal Amazon communications that link the censorship to requests from the Biden regime.

The Democrats, not the Republicans, are banning books and censoring important information

On numerous occasions, Joe Biden and his propaganda machine claimed that Republicans are fascists who are trying to ban books and take away our rights. We are constantly reminded that “MAGA Republicans are a threat to democracy!”

However, in 2021 and 2022, the Biden regime conscripted the Department of Homeland Security to target moms and dads who speak up at school board meetings about pornography in school libraries and the bodily restrictions that were forced on kids in the name of “safety.” Parents who stood up for common sense, who tried to get forced masking, pornography and perverse gender ideologies out of the schools were deemed “domestic terrorists” by Biden’s DHS.

Keep reading

Anthony Blinken Reveals Government’s AI Plan To Censor Free Speech

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken admitted last week that the State Department is preparing to use artificial intelligence to “combat disinformation,” amidst a massive government-wide AI rollout that will involved the cooperation of Big Tech and other private-sector partners.

At a speaking engagement streamed last week with the State Department’s chief data and AI officer, Matthew Graviss, Blinken gushed about the “extraordinary potential” and “extraordinary benefit” AI has on our society, and “how AI could be used to accelerate the Sustainable Development Goals which are, for the most part, stalled.”

He was referring to the United Nations Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development goals, which represent a globalist blueprint for a one-world totalitarian system. These goals include the gai-worshipping climate agenda, along with new restrictions on free speech, the freedom of movement, wealth transfers from rich to poor countries, and the digitization of humanity. Now Blinken is saying these goals could be jumpstarted by employing advanced artificial intelligence technologies.

Listen to Blinken, in the video below, openly describe how the government will use AI to clamp down on the free speech of citizens. (Fast-forward to the 3-minute mark and watch through the 7:07 mark.)

Keep reading

Despite Backlash, X Continues Digital ID Verification with New Partner Stripe

X, a prominent social media platform, has seemingly phased out its association with the Israeli identity verification firm AU10TIX, shifting instead to American company Stripe to manage its identity verification services.

The move followed reports that AU10TIX had suffered a data leak.

This transition comes amidst concerns raised by some of X’s users regarding the safety of their personal data, particularly their photo IDs.

The call for X to disengage from AU10TIX also gained momentum after specific users highlighted the risk of intelligence sharing.

But rather than dropping the controversial digital ID system entirely, X has simply switched companies.

Starting to introduce digital IDs for social media use can severely inhibit free speech by stripping away the protective layer of anonymity and pseudonymity.

This change could deter users from expressing controversial or minority viewpoints for fear of personal or professional repercussions, particularly under oppressive regimes or in sensitive situations.

Such a policy would also heighten surveillance risks, as linking social media profiles to real-world identities makes it easier for both governmental and non-governmental actors to monitor individuals. The ability of controversial or targeted vulnerable groups to safely organize and communicate could be significantly compromised, leading to a decrease in diverse voices and activism online.

Keep reading

Jim Jordan Investigates Stanford Internet Observatory Monitoring Election Speech for 2024

Recently the news arrived that what opponents see as a key linchpin in the government-Big Tech censorship collusion, the Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), was winding back its operations.

But before it does, the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government want to gain access to information requested through a previous subpoena.

On Monday, Chairman Jim Jordan sent a letter to SIO’s legal representative, the main point being the Committee’s desire to make sure that neither SIO, other groups operating as part of the university, nor any group that might succeed SIO will continue with their “disinformation studies” ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

Keep reading

Windows 11’s Sneaky OneDrive Sync

Those still using Microsoft Windows (now in version 11) as their operating system in 2024 have a lot of experience being left out of the “decision-making process” concerning their own computer and their own data.

This is what closed-source, proprietary software gets you (in addition to a lack of innovation and overall technical quality); but there are even more ways to avoid transparency, and, frankly, disrespect paying customers.

And one is introducing questionable features without even announcing them.

OneDrive – Microsoft’s cloud service – is also available to back up Windows folders like Desktop, Documents, Music, Pictures, Videos… and as it turns out, users don’t even have to agree to this – or even know it’s happening.

Namely, if you are installing Windows 11 (signed into the Microsoft account, as Microsoft prefers), the default is now to upload content from those folders to Microsoft’s cloud. And Microsoft didn’t bother informing their users about this change, compared to the previous installation process, Neowin reported.

“Informing” here means, not with a press release, and not even with prompts during installation and setup.

The backup, i.e., the syncing of the files is now already ongoing or done as soon as a fresh install is finished, and users are reportedly only (slowly) becoming aware of the change because of new visual indicators on their desktop shortcuts and folder icons (showing that the backup is in progress or done).

Windows users can still be grateful there are several ways to deal with the situation. One is to go to the OneDrive settings, and then go through several steps (Sync and Backup>Manage Backup…) and uncheck whatever folders should not sync with the Microsoft cloud service.

(But there are also older versions of OneDrive, where the way is, Manage Backup>StopBackup.)

Keep reading

SCOTUS Declines To Punish the Feds for Suppressing Social Media Speech

The Supreme Court will allow federal agencies to resume widespread communication with social media companies for the purposes of suppressing controversial speech. For everyone who was perturbed by the Twitter Files and Facebook Files—which revealed a vast web of government pressure on private actors, called jawboning—this is a regrettable outcome.

The case was Murthy v. Missouri—also known as Missouri v. Biden—and involved a group of individuals who were kicked off Facebook and Twitter. They contended that the platforms took such actions at the behest of the federal government. The Court held 6-3 that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring such a case and thus the lower court, the 5th Circuit, erred in prohibiting the government from engaging in said communications with social media companies.

Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett explained that the plaintiffs failed to offer up overwhelming evidence that government malfeasance was the cause of their woe.

“The primary weakness in the record of past restrictions is the lack of specific causation findings with respect to any discrete instance of content moderation,” she wrote. “And while the record reflects that the Government defendants played a role in at least some of the platforms’ moderation choices, the evidence indicates that the platforms had independent incentives to moderate content and often exercised their own judgment. The Fifth Circuit, by attributing every platform decision at least in part to the defendants, glossed over complexities in the evidence.”

In his writeup for The Volokh Conspiracy, Case Western Reserve University law professor Jonathan Adler notes other standing issues: The plaintiffs failed to show that a repeat injury was likely, for instance, which is a requirement for injunctive relief.

“The Court emphasizes that it is always more difficult to show standing when the alleged injury ‘results from the independent action of some third party not before the court,’ in this case the social media companies,” writes Adler.

Three of the justices—Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch—saw matters differently. In dissent, Alito expressed the view that the plaintiffs were being held to too high a standard, and that the evidence of government suppression was quite extensive.

“In sum, the officials wielded potent authority,” wrote Alito. “Their communications with Facebook were virtual demands. And Facebook’s quavering responses to those demands show that it felt a strong need to yield.”

Alito’s dissent includes a lengthy summary of the dubious actions taken by the federal government to induce social media companies to remove contrarian COVID-19 content; the justice concludes that White House communications staffers badgered Facebook into compliance.

Keep reading

‘Amazon Files’: Emails Show Amazon Caved to Pressure From White House to Suppress Books Critical of Vaccines

In addition to pressuring social media platforms to censor content during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Biden administration also worked with Amazon to suppress books questioning the safety or efficacy of vaccines, according to internal emails obtained through a series of subpoenas, Fox Business reported.

The emails — dubbed “The Amazon Files” — were included in a report by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

In a June 21 post on X (formerly Twitter), Committee Chair Jim Jordan shared a list of 43 books that Amazon initially added to a newly created “Do Not Promote” class of allegedly anti-vaccine books.

The No. 2 book on the list — “Vaccine Epidemic” — was co-authored and edited by Children’s Health Defense (CHD) CEO Mary Holland, CHD General Counsel Kim Mack Rosenberg and Louise Kuo Habakus.

The first book on the list is, “Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History” by Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk.

Keep reading

Biden Admin Asked Amazon To Hide Vaccine-Critical Books During Pandemic

The Biden Administration pressured Amazon to hide books for sale on its platform that were critical of vaccines during the pandemic, it has been revealed.

The findings were presented by the House Judiciary Committee and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in documents that show Amazon reduced the visibility of titles that the government deemed overly critical of big pharma shots.

The documents show that some books were simply generally critical of vaccines, with several written by medical professionals. Some were even just reviews of scientific studies.

The Federal government compiled a “Do Not Promote” list, to which more than 40 titles were added.

In a series of X posts, Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jim Jordan explained how internal emails from Amazon contain employees revealed that “the impetus for this request is criticism from the Biden Administration.”

Keep reading