“Shutting Down CISA” Senator Paul Rand’s Crusade Against Online Censorship

Senator Paul Rand, who is about to take over as chair of the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, has spoken in favor of shutting down the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

CISA, a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was established in 2018 to do just what its name says – but has in the meanwhile become weaponized to suppress free speech, opponents believe, citing a number of programs where CISA was involved in monitoring and flagging online posts for removal.

Senator Paul refers to the agency’s behavior – which he says included the ability to censor content and thus influence what information is available to people – as “intrusions into the First Amendment.”

“The First Amendment is important, that’s why we listed it as the First Amendment. I’d like to, at the very least, eliminate their ability to censor content online,” Paul said in a post on X.

Keep reading

Ireland’s New Online Censorship Rules Face Showdown With X in Court

X has initiated a High Court challenge against Ireland’s media authority, Coimisiún na Meán, over a newly introduced censorship code that imposes stringent regulations on video-sharing platforms.

The contentious safety code, finalized in October, emerged following the enactment of Ireland’s Online Safety and Media Regulation Act. Rooted in the European Commission’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), the code obliges platforms under Irish jurisdiction to implement measures shielding users—particularly children—from harmful content. Platforms found non-compliant could face severe penalties, including fines of up to €20 million or 10% of annual revenue, whichever is greater.

For platforms like X,  Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and more, the code signals a dramatic shift away from self-regulation and gives Ireland’s regulators more control over online speech.

According to Coimisiún na Meán, the rules are designed to curtail the dissemination of “harmful” material. Criminal content, such as child exploitation or terrorism-related media, also falls within the prohibited categories but was already covered by previous laws.

Keep reading

Free Speech: The Sine Qua Non of Democracy

One of the strangest developments in the recent history of Western democratic states has been the heartfelt call by duly elected officials for government censorship of citizens’ speech. This trend has emerged simultaneously across various nations, including the United Kingdom, Australia, and, oddly enough, the United States of America. No one is surprised that tyrants throughout history, who seize power by force, have retained their positions primarily through silencing dissenters and political opponents. The very foundation of democratic states, however, is what the nineteenth-century British philosopher John Stuart Mill, a great champion of liberty, called “the marketplace of ideas.”

In a public square conducive to open discourse among free people, individuals with diverse interests and opinions hash out ideas and prospective policies in order to determine which ones should prevail. In effect, this competition among ideas reflects the very process used to elect government officials in democratic states. The candidates are permitted to express their views and what they plan to do, and the voters then choose between the available options, however dismal, at the voting booth.

Just as candidates who do not stand to represent and promote the interests of the people are to be defeated through the electoral process itself, in a free marketplace of ideas, bad ideas and flagrant falsehoods will eventually be rejected. This takes longer in some cases than others, above all, when powerful lobbies have significant financial interests at stake, a salient example of which is war and what has become a military-industrial-congressional-media-academic-pharmaceutical-logistics-banking complex. But at some point, eventually, free thinkers come to believe that the policies of their government, which they formerly condoned, are in fact misguided, counter-productive, and even immoral. When many people change their view, concluding that practices such as slavery, or withholding the right to vote from women, have no rational basis whatsoever, then they press their representatives to alter the laws of the land.

Keep reading

Congressional Investigation into Authors of ‘Disinformation Dozen’ Intensifies

The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), authors of the “Disinformation Dozen,” faces a Nov. 21 deadline to provide Congress with documents related to its alleged collusion with the Biden administration and social media platforms to censor online users.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, on Nov. 7 subpoenaed CCDH as part of an ongoing congressional investigation, launched in August 2023, into the nonprofit’s censorship-related activities.

The subpoena requests all communications and documents “between or among CCDH, the Executive Branch, or third parties, including social media companies, relating to the identification of groups, accounts, channels, or posts for moderation, deletion, suppression, restriction, or reduced circulation.”

The subpoena also requests all records, notes, and other “documents of interactions between or among CCDH and the Executive Branch referring or relating to ‘killing’ or taking adverse action against Elon Musk’s X social media platform (formerly Twitter).”

Keep reading

Professional Liar Jen Psaki Wants Social Media to be Regulated Because of ‘Disinformation’

Former Joe Biden spokeswoman Jen Psaki wants to see social media regulated because of disinformation.

This is the same woman who lied for years about Joe Biden’s mental condition, lied about Joe Biden checking his watch when the bodies of dead sevice members were returned to the United States (for which she was forced to apologize), and who pushed the lie about 51 former intelligence officials claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.

But now she wants to control social media because of disinformation?

The Hill reports:

Psaki: ‘Disinformation space’ on social media a ‘core’ issue behind Harris defeat

Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki is blaming Vice President Harris’s loss to President-elect Trump in part on disinformation.

“One of the things that’s changed even since I got involved in politics is just the rise of the percentage of people who get their information off of platforms that have no fact checking mechanism and no accountability for having disinformation spread,” Psaki, who worked in the Obama administration and served as President Biden’s press secretary, told Katie Couric on an episode of her Next Question podcast.

She argued that local and national television outlets are held to a much higher standard for accountability than podcasts and social media platforms.

“Local TV is held to a higher standard of accountability than social media platforms in terms of accurate information on their platforms. That is crazy,” she added.

“Laws have to change. I don’t even know the entire answer to it but that seems to me to be a core issue.”

Keep reading

A Bizarre Kind of Executive Action: The Suppression of Epochal Documentaries

“The old lie: Dulce et decorum est /Pro patria mori
(It is a sweet and fitting thing to die for one’s country”)
– Wilfred Owen

Yes, it seems fitting that I am writing these words on November 11, Veterans Day in the U.S. and Remembrance Day in Commonwealth countries, a day that began as Armistice Day to celebrate the ending of World War I, the “war to end all wars.”

That phrase has become a sardonic joke in the century that has followed as wars have piled up upon wars to create a permanent condition, and the censorship and propaganda that became acute with WW I have been exacerbated a hundredfold today. The number of dead soldiers and civilians in the century since numbs a mind intent on counting numbers, as courage, love, and innocence wails from skeletons sleeping deep in dirt everywhere. The minds of the living are ravished at the thought of so much death.

Almost a year ago I reviewed a film – Four Died Trying – about four American men who were assassinated by the U.S. government because they opposed the wars upon which their country had come to rely: President John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Senator Robert F. Kennedy. I wrote of this documentary film, directed by John Kirby and produced by Libby Handros, that it was powerful, riveting, and masterful, the opening 58 minute prologue to a film series meant to be released at intervals over a few years. This prologue was released at the end of 2023 to great applause.
I wrote of it:

Today we are living the consequences of the CIA/national security state’s 1960s takeover of the country. Their message then and now: We, the national security state, rule, we have the guns, the media, and the power to dominate you. We control the stories you are meant to hear. If you get uppity, well-known, and dare challenge us, we will buy you off, denigrate you, or, if neither works, we will kill you. You are helpless, they reiterate endlessly. Bang. Bang. Bang.

But they lie, and this series of films, beginning with its first installment, will tell you why. It will show why understanding the past is essential for transforming the present. It will profoundly inspire you to see and hear these four bold and courageous men refuse to back down to the evil forces that shot them down. It will open your eyes to the parallel spiritual paths they walked and the similarity of the messages they talked about – peace, justice, racism, colonialism, human rights, and the need for economic equality – not just in the U.S.A. but across the world, for the fate of all people was then, and is now, linked to the need to transform the U.S. warfare state into a country of peace and human reconciliation, just as these four men radically underwent deep transformations in the last year of their brief lives.

This 58 minute prologue touches on many of themes that will follow in the months ahead. Season One will be divided into chapters that cover the four assassinations together with background material covering “the world as it was” in the 1950s with its Cold War propaganda, McCarthyism, the rise of the military-industrial complex, the CIA, red-baiting, and the ever present fear of nuclear war. Season Two will be devoted to the government and media coverups, citizen investigations, and the intelligence agencies’ and their media mouthpieces’ mind control operations aimed at the American people that continue today.

Then in March of this year I wrote about the second film in the series, The World As It Was, that explores the very disturbing history of the 1950s in the U.S.A., a decade that lay the foundation of fear upon which the horrors of the 1960s were built, and from which we now are reaping the flowers of evil that have sprung up everywhere we look because the evils of those decades have never been adequately addressed.

But I was hopeful that if enough people got see to see these illuminating and brilliantly done films, built on more than one hundred and twenty interviews over six years with key historical figures, including many family members of the four men, change was possible because more people would demand accountability. That the movies were also entertaining, despite their profoundly serious content, boded well for their reaching a wide audience.

Keep reading

UK government begins to implement digital IDs and tackle “misinformation” just like the UN wants it to

The following are summaries of articles published by Reclaim the Net over the last ten days, from 23 October to 13 November.  You can read the full article by following the hyperlink in the section title.

Table of Contents

  1. Ex-Facebook VP Joins UK Media Regulator Ofcom Sparking Fresh Conflict of Interest Concerns, 6 November 2024
  2. Tracking Health or Tracking You? The UK’s Expanding Health Surveillance, 23 October 2024
  3. UK Government Makes Major Digital ID Push, 3 November 2024
  4. UK Government To Test Digital ID on Veterans by 2025, Amid Plans for Wider Use, 13 November 2024
  5. UK Government Demands Regulator Create Social Media Overhaul to Curb “Misinformation,” Plans New Censorship Committee by 2025, 24 October 2024
  6. UN Wants Digital IDs To Combat “Hate Speech,” “Misinformation”, 7 November 2024

Keep reading

Missouri v. Biden UPDATE: Judge Orders ‘Jurisdictional Discovery’ to Settle Govt’s Bad Faith Arguments

Experts have said that the Missouri v. Biden case is “the most important free speech case in a generation.”

The case involves the federal government wholesale deleting and deplatforming millions of Americans from social media based entirely on their truthful political statements.

Just this past week, the trial court has issued a new order in the case, after an appeal to the Supreme Court was successful for the Biden administration, which sought to undo a preliminary injunction that would have stopped the censorship regime.

Now, the trial court is ordering the two sides to conduct “jurisdictional discovery” so that it can prove one issue critical to the case moving forward: whether the Plaintiffs on the side of free speech have enough legal ‘standing’ to move forward. What this means is that the parties are now going to fight about whether the specific Plaintiffs in the case can prove that they were specifically harmed.

You can read the court order here.

Whereas previously the parties could show the massive censorship regime and show that they were deplatformed, now the parties must show the connection and demonstrate that the specific Biden speech suppression complex deplatformed these specific Plaintiffs.

Thus the court is allowing both parties to issue ‘discovery’ to primarily third parties right now, meaning demand evidence, documents, and depositions from people, organizations, and companies, in order to build the record of evidence both parties need to make their arguments.

The claims in the case cannot rest on mere speculation, the parties need to be able to get tangible evidence to back up their claims. Lawyers involved in the case say the critical issue at this juncture is: proving that the federal government targeted a specific Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff’s speech was harmed as a result.

Keep reading

German Economics Minister renews calls for widespread internet censorship, claims that an “axis of autocrats” is using domestic “populists” to poison democratic discourse via social media algorithms

Our Green Minister of Economic Affairs, Robert Habeck, is increasingly a deranged and dangerous man, obsessed with unusual conspiracy theories. He believes that an “axis of autocrats” have instrumentalised TikTok and X to wage “hybrid warfare” on liberal European democracies. Specifically, he holds that these autocrats are directing domestic populists to poison public discourse with the help of Evil Algorithms. To beat back this nefarious influence, the European Union should comprehensively regulate – that is, censor – social media. Once again, we must much abridge central democratic freedoms, like the freedom of expression, to protect democracy from itself.

Habeck has been saying things like this for a while now, but his ominous Saturday speech in the Schinkel Church at Neuhardenberg Castle broke new ground in both detail and emphasis. Habeck’s remarks followed the twin political catastrophes of Trump’s election and the collapse of the traffic light coalition, and they came just as Habeck announced his intention to stand as Chancellor candidate for the Green Party. This was just not any speech, in other words, but rather a major policy statement by one of Germany’s most prominent politicians in advance of the approaching elections.

Habeck will never be Chancellor, but chances are high that the Greens will return to government when we vote again in February, and Habeck is a dominant voice in his party. Green policy statements also bear significance extending well beyond Green circles, reflecting as they do the general political outlook of the German elite. Demoralised by Trump’s election and their growing domestic unpopularity, our rulers are determined as never before to find some way of shutting up those inconvenient people who disagree with them. If only they can get us to stop sharing our unfiltered views on the internet, we can get back to the halcyon days of 2019 again, when the child saint Greta Thunberg was leading the children of the world on a glorious crusade against carbon dioxide and the Greens were polling stronger than ever before.

Keep reading

A License to Censor? The Fierce Fight Over the GEC’s Renewal

What happens when an agency meant to protect Americans from foreign propaganda starts tiptoeing over the line into the realm of domestic censorship? Enter the Global Engagement Center (GEC), a charming creation of the US State Department that was originally tasked with combating foreign disinformation. It sounds like something out of a spy novel: shadowy entities sowing chaos through whisper campaigns and disinformation dumps. But now, the real drama lies in how this agency has extended its reach beyond foreign threats and into the murky waters of the internet’s free speech landscape.

Of course, the GEC would prefer to be seen as a benevolent referee, helping social media giants like Facebook and YouTube play the good guys in the battle against digital deception. In theory, this agency is all about countering Russian bots and Iranian trolls. But somehow, along the way, its mission stretched to a point where the average American scrolling through a feed can almost feel the government’s fingers tapping on their shoulder, cautioning them about what’s “trustworthy.” It’s no wonder people are starting to worry.

Keep reading