Tag: censorship

UK “disinformation unit” spied on citizens and flagged online speech for removal during pandemic

New documents reveal that authorities in the UK considered placing government employees inside of social media companies to form a type of digital KGB that would control online speech during the pandemic.

This is according to recently released minutes from the governing board of the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU). They show that, as many people suspected, British authorities were actively involved in monitoring people’s speech online and flagging certain viewpoints for removal.

At one point, they discussed a strategy to “embed” civil servants in various companies that were running social media platforms, and there is nothing in the document to indicate that they did not follow through on this.

The CDU, which has since been rebranded the National Security Online Information Team in response to heavy scrutiny, insists that it is “countering disinformation and hostile state narratives” but the agency, along with government-hired private contractors, was put in charge of surveilling British citizens and silencing those who were deemed to be “COVID measures dissenters.”

Instead of going after foreign adversaries who were spreading misinformation, they were targeting British citizens – from journalists and medical professionals to politicians – who were criticizing the government.

Keep reading

“Act of madness”: Israeli officials seize AP equipment, cut live feed of Gaza

Israeli officials seized broadcasting equipment belonging to the Associated Press on Tuesday, arguing it was used to provide images to Al Jazeera, whose Jerusalem bureau was shuttered earlier this month following the passage of a new foreign broadcast law.

Why it matters: Press advocates have warned that the law creates a dangerous precedent for censoring independent news outlets in the region amid the ongoing war with Hamas.

  • Israeli lawmakers passed the measure last month, empowering the country’s communications minister to take action against any foreign media network that it can prove poses a national security risk.
  • Tuesday’s seizure has already garnered sharp criticism, with Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid calling it “an act of madness.”

Driving the news: Officials seized AP’s equipment in the southern town of Sderot on Tuesday afternoon, arguing the global news agency had violated the new law by providing a live feed of northern Gaza to Qatar-based Al Jazeera, AP reported.

  • According to the Israeli Ministry of Communications, the confiscated equipment includes a camera, tripod, live modem and two microphones.

AP reported that it “complies with Israel’s military censorship rules, which prohibit broadcasts of details like troops movements that could endanger soldiers.”

  • “The live shot has generally shown smoke rising over the territory,” it reported.
  • “The Qatari satellite channel is among thousands of clients that receive live video feeds from the AP and other news organizations,” it added.
  • The seizure of the equipment followed a refusal by AP to adhere to an order from Israeli officials last week to cut the live feed.

Keep reading

Dems CENSOR Viral Parody Music Video Exposing Joe Biden’s Cognitive Decline

Allies of Joe Biden appear to be attempting to scrub a viral parody music video highlighting Jee Biden’s cognitive decline.

Trump on Friday posted to Truth Social a parody music video of Tom Petty’s hit song “Free Falling” mocking Biden’s many gaffes.

The “Keeps Falling” video features Biden collapsing on stage, stumbling up the steps of Air Force One, aimlessly wandering around and creepily sniffing women and children.

But by Sunday, the video was removed across the X platform with a disclaimer that read, “This media has been disabled in response to a report by the copyright owner.”

The viral video was created by comedian and Fox News Saturday Night host Jimmy Failla, from his album “The More You Joe” produced by “C’Mon Man Records.”

It’s highly unlikely Failla would have made the copyright complaint given he shared the video on Thursday while boasting of “big accounts” that also shared it on social media.

Keep reading

The Trouble With World Government

A court in Australia has told the government’s own eSafety Commission that Elon Musk is correct: One country cannot impose censorship on the world. The company X, formerly known as Twitter, must obey national law but not global law.

Mr. Musk seems to have won a very similar fight in Brazil, where a judge demanded not just a national but global takedown. X refused and won. For now.

This really does raise a serious issue: How big of a threat are these global government institutions?

Dreamy, dopey, and often scary intellectuals have dreamed of global government for centuries. If you are rich enough and smart enough, the idea seems to be the perennial temptation. The list of advocates includes people who otherwise have made notable contributions: Albert Einstein, Isaac Asimov, Walter Cronkite, Buckminster Fuller, and many others.

Often the dream comes alive following huge upheavals such as war and depression. Or a pandemic period such as the one we’ve just gone through. The use of “disinformation” as a cross-border test case of global government power is designed to deploy a new strategy of governance in general, one that disregards national control in favor of global control.

That has always been the dream. In history, for example, following the Great War, we saw the creation of the League of Nations, which was a forerunner to the United Nations, at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson. Both were seen by the intellectual class as necessary building blocks for what they really wanted, which was a binding world state.

This is not a conspiracy theory. It’s what they said and what they wanted.

In 1919, H.G. Wells, inspired by the League, became so excited about the idea that he wrote a sweeping reinterpretation of world history that extended from the ninth century B.C. until that present moment. It was called “The Outline of History.”

The goal of the book was to turn on its head the popular Whig theory from the previous century, which saw history as the story of ever more freedom for individuals and away from powerful states. Wells told a story of tribes turning to nations and then to regions, with ever less power to the people and ever more to dictators and planners. His purpose was to chronicle and defend exactly this.

It was a huge bestseller at a time when the appetite for books was voracious because they were becoming affordable and there was a burning passion in the population for universal education. The thesis of his book, however valuable in some historical respects, was genuinely bizarre. He imagined a future world state ruled by a tiny elite of the smartest people who would plan all economies, information flows, migration patterns, and governance systems while crushing national ambitions, free enterprise, traditions, and constitutions.

Keep reading

Garland and Wray Launch “Election Threats Task Force,” Sparking Censorship Concerns for 2024

US Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray have spoken about their departments’ plans regarding what they refer to as election threats.

The plans were laid out during a meeting of a Department of Justice (DoJ) outfit called Election Threats Task Force, which was set up in 2021, shortly after the previous presidential election.

Critics of the Biden White House – particularly the way it handles opponents and their right to free speech, often “in collaboration” with Big Tech – are suspicious about the timing of the announced measures.

This has to do with both the fact that the next election is less than six months away and that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Intelligence Experts Group has just been disbanded as a result of a lawsuit brought by America First Legal non-profit and Ambassador Richard Grenell.

Executive Director of the Foundation For Freedom Online Mike Benz has explained whatever is branded as a misinformation narrative is also considered to be the result of a campaign – and so “any US civilian who clicks the retweet button to amplify said narrative is deemed to be participating in said ‘campaign’.”

Keep reading

The Israel lobby is First Amendment’s “principal enemy,” former senior diplomat warns

Amid pro-Palestinian demonstrations condemning Israel’s genocidal acts in Gaza, the Antisemitism Awareness Act was passed in Congress. For former Ambassador of the United States to Saudi Arabia Chas W. Freeman Jr., the Israel lobby that pushed for the legislation is the “principal enemy” of the First Amendment.

The act passed in Congress by a vote of 320 in favor and 91 against. The bill would mandate that the Department of Education adopt the broad definition of antisemitism used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental group, to enforce anti-discrimination laws.

This would also strengthen the crackdown efforts on nationwide university protests. The proposal first defines antisemitism and then gives the Education Department the ability to suspend funding if it determines a school does not act against students who violate that definition. Once passed and rolled out, it will give the department new tools to threaten or punish schools that don’t take the department’s definition of antisemitism seriously.

The bill is seen by Freeman as another attempt to suppress denouncement of Israel’s genocidal attacks in Gaza.

“The principal enemies of the First Amendment in recent years have been… the Israel lobby,” he said in a May 4 “Dialogue Works” interview. “Basically, they have tried to prohibit any speech opposed to the state of Israel.”

He also pointed out that the redefinition of “antisemitism” conflates opposition to the mass killing and starvation of civilians with an irrational hatred of Jews. “Anti-Semitism is not the same as anti-Zionism and people who object to genocide or the conduct of that by a foreign government cannot be called antisemitic,” he said.

Keep reading

Censorship Is Evil and Leads to Evermore Evil

A valid moral judgement cannot be made on the rightness or wrongness, the good or evil of an act planned or presently engaged in, if the factual truth of the situation is not first determined. An accurate and truthful awareness of the facts of the situation must precede a morally valid judgment by one’s conscience regarding how to respond to the situation. Knowing the facts is an essential requirement in Catholic moral decision making, indeed in the moral decision making in just about every philosophical moral system. In some theological moral systems facts are irrelevant. If a god says kill, you kill, facts be damned!

All censorship is intended to keep facts, truth, out of peoples’ awareness because the censor thinks if they were known people would not do what he or she or they desire. Censorship is the lethal enemy of Christian morality because when it is employed in a matter of morality where a person is called to make a choice, it is just another way of manufacturing an intentional lie by which to deceive people into thinking evil is a good which they should approve, support and in which they should consent and participate.

Once it is seen that censorship has entered into a situation where a moral judgment is to be made, a person must postpone his or her decision whether to participate in or support the activity the censor wishes him or her to endorse or to oppose because he or she knows for certain that facts pertinent to understanding the truth of what is happening are being concealed. Without access to the known facts an authentic moral choice is impossible. Censorship is integrally hostile to the morality of the Gospels and to basic human morality. Why? Because, censorship is hostile to truth and the search for truth, and the Spirit of truth, i.e., God. It is a process which intentionally manufactures untruth in order to pass it off as truth.

Keep reading

YouTube Removes 35,000 EU Videos for “Misinformation,” Enhances Content Censorship Ahead of 2024 Elections

YouTube has (“voluntarily” or otherwise) assumed the role of a private business entity that “supports elections.”

Google’s video platform detailed in a blog post how this is supposed to play out, in this instance, in the EU.

With the European Parliament (EP) election just around the corner, YouTube set out to present “an overview of our efforts to help people across Europe and beyond find helpful and authoritative election news and information.”

The overview is the usual hodgepodge of reasonable concepts, such as promoting information on how to vote or register for voting, learning about election results, etc., that quickly morph into yet another battle in the “war on disinformation.”

And what better way to “support” an election (and by extension, democracy) – than to engage in another round of mass censorship? /s

But YouTube was happy to share that in 2023 alone, it removed 35,000 videos uploaded in the EU, having decided that this content violated the platform’s policies, including around what the blog post calls “certain types of elections misinformation” (raising the logical question if some types of “election misinformation” might be allowed).

Keep reading

Merrick Garland and Chris Wray Proudly Announce Government Censorship Apparatus to Target “Cyber-Enabled Campaigns” and Censor Americans in Run-up to 2024 Election

Attorney General Merrick Garland, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, and FBI Director Christopher Wray announced on Monday their latest plan to censor Americans under the guise of combatting “election threats.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland who is directly tied to the historic persecution of opposition candidate Donald J. Trump led the discussion today in Washington DC on election threats.

He should have mentioned his name first when he lectured on current election threats.

Merrick Garland today mentioned the DOJ and FBI’s work to protect elections from national security threats. Garland added, “It includes our National Security Division’s and the FBI’s work to protect our elections from national security threats, including malign foreign influence and cyber-enabled campaigns.”

Talk about gaslighting! These are three of the most controversial and corrupt officials in Washington DC today lecturing on clean elections.

Keep reading

Beware of the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act

The House of Representatives passed the “Anti-Semitism Awareness Act” on May 2, by a vote of 320-91 in reaction to demonstrations on numerous university campuses and elsewhere against the brutal and genocidal policy of Israel in Gaza. The Act has now been sent to the Senate, where it seems certain to pass. This is an extremely dangerous bill that could criminalize the Bible, many Christian Churches, as well as any negative remarks about Israel and Jews. In brief, it threatens us with totalitarian thought control. We must do everything we can to oppose it.

First, let’s take an overview of the Act. It adopts the very broad definition of anti-Semitism of the “International Holocaust Remembrance Association.”  The Act calls this definition “a vital tool which helps individuals understand and identify the various manifestations of antisemitism.”

What does this definition say? “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed in hatred of Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” How you can be anti-Semitic toward someone who isn’t Jewish isn’t immediately apparent.

The authors of the definition give someone examples of what they consider anti-Semitic. These include saying that the Jews control the media and Congress, saying that Israel is a racist state, propagating the “blood libel” that the Jews killed Jesus, minimizing or denying the Holocaust, and claiming that Jews in America have “dual loyalty.”

As a number of writers including Tucker Carlson and John Zmirak have pointed out, the definition allows large parts of the Bible to be banned. The most famous such passage is Matthew 27: 25. “His blood be upon us and our children.” This is the “blood libel” that the Act wouldn’t let us teach!

You might object that the Act would never be enforced in this way. The American people would never stand for it! But it would always be there, like a sword of Damocles, hanging over our heads. And don’t be so sure it wouldn’t be enforced! The Scottish Hate Speech Act was passed in 2021, and people predicted it would never be enforced. Beginning in April 2024, though, it has been enforced, and many people have been fined and imprisoned for violating it.

Keep reading