Another fake fact check from Facebook’s “Science Feedback”: this one about Amish Covid-19 immunity

If you’ve paid attention, you already know that Facebook’s “Science Feedback” and other health-related fact checkers are prolific distributors of misinformation and false information that typically benefits the vaccine or pharmaceutical industry.

They tend to “fact check” articles about medical studies and topics that are having an impact on the public, in hopes of tamping down the buzz and circulation of the data or details.

This week, these players are working hard to keep the public from learning that the Amish have claimed to reach “herd immunity” with Covid-19 and fared better than places that imposed drastic measures. The Amish say they did so without masking, closing, social distancing, or vaccination.

The Amish claim of herd immunity was previously reported by Associated Press and other news organizations, but didn’t get wide circulation. The propagandists and fake fact checkers didn’t challenge the topic at the time.

But my report on the same, which aired last Sunday on Full Measure, must be having an impact.

In response, Facebook’s Health Feedback propagandists have made several false and unsupported claims in an attempt to discredit The Amish approach and the reporting about it.

The fake fact-checkers, edited by a woman named Fernanda Ferreira, falsely claim that “natural immunity post-infection is variable, while vaccination provides safer and more reliable immunity.” The bulk of the scientific studies show the opposite. (You can find them here and decide for yourself.)

Keep reading

‘Fact-checkers’ Rush to Defend Bill Gates Disturbing ‘Vaccine Depopulation’ Statement

In their obsession to stamp-out any countervailing narratives that might damage the standing of the ruling globalist establishment, the vaunted The Fact Checkers have once again scored a dramatic own-goal.

One of The Fact Checkers’ most common diversion techniques is to gaslight readers away from the factual provenance of the claim in question – in this case that is Bill Gates statement that ‘increased vaccine levels will reduce the world population’ – and instead divert them away to some relatively obscure over-the-top remark or comment made by someone else on an inconsequential social media or blog post. By appearing to ‘debunk’ someone else’s related comment online, the fact-checkers are then able to avoid addressing the actual issue.

The ‘fact check’ is then amplified by mainstream media and major news wire services, and pumped into Twitter and Facebook news feeds. Those who believe in the whole ‘fact-checker’ canard will no doubt be reassured that Bill Gates never made the statement in question, and that anyone who quotes him saying what he said must be a crazy conspiracy theorist.  

However, it’s been over 10 years since he made his dark depopulation statement and has never once denied what he said, or even tried to walk it back.

Suddenly, 11 years later, The Fact Checkers are scrambling to try and plaster over what is one of the most high-profile radical Malthusian statement.

Keep reading

Twitter backtracks after censoring a mother’s obituary

Twitter’s fact-checkers appended a “misleading” alert to an obituary about a young woman who allegedly died after contracting a rare blood-clotting condition provoked by the COVID-19 vaccine.

After being accused of going so far with its censorship that it would resort to censoring an obituary, Twitter relented to the backlash and reversed the censorship.

The woman in question, Jessica Berg Wilson, a 37-year-old mother of two, died in the first week of September from Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia, a rare blood disorder in which small clots grow throughout the body, damaging platelets and preventing blood from reaching key organs. According to her obituary, Wilson’s greatest life ambition was to “be the best mother possible” to her daughters Bridget and Clara.

“She had been vehemently opposed to taking the vaccine, knowing she was in good health and of a young age and thus not at risk for serious illness. In her mind, the known and unknown risks of the unproven vaccine were more of a threat,” it read.

Kelly Bee, a Twitter user, posted Jessica Berg Wilson’s obituary with the statement, “an ‘exceptionally healthy and vibrant 37-year-old young mother with no underlying health conditions,’ passed away from COVID Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia. She did not want to get vaccinated.”

Keep reading

Twitter Fact Checkers Just Revealed Their Whole Entire Backside as Shameless Shills For Big Pharma

Fact checkers at Twitter and elsewhere furiously took to their keyboards yesterday in defense of America’s Big Pharma Covid profiteers. This time, the fact checkers circled the wagons around Pfizer, which is developing an expensive drug that serves a suspiciously similar function to the cheap, time-tested, generic drug ivermectin. This time, Twitter’s approved fact checkers trafficked in deception, misinformation, and carefully worded lies, as they so often do, in order to “debunk” an article from ZeroHedge.

Let’s dissect their work.

Here is what Twitter highlighted at the top of their “fact check”:

Pfizer is not developing a version of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, according to fact-checkers and medical professionals

A new oral drug being produced by Pfizer is not a repackaged version of the antibacterial medication often used to prevent parasites in animals, according to PolitiFact, Snopes and Full Fact. While the drugs share similar functions and effects, this does not mean they are identical or interchangeable, according to fact-checkers. Pfizer’s new oral drug “is not similar to that of an animal medicine and is not the same mechanism,” according to a statement from the company.

Further on down the page, Twitter deigned to tell us “What We Need to Know.” Thanks, Twitter!

What you need to know

– Pfizer told Snopes that the new drug is “designed to block the activity of the main protease enzyme that the coronavirus needs to replicate”

– Dr. Stephen Griffin, a virologist at Leeds Institute of Medical Research, told Full Fact that the two drugs “are extremely structurally different”

– Health agencies around the globe have declined to authorize ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, and studies on its potential use have been inconclusive, according to FactCheck.org

Here’s more from the Twitter-approved fact checkers, who we can obviously trust so much. They are overly fixated on the fact that  ivermectin and the new Pfizer drug do not share the same chemical structures.

So, Twitter and our highly trusted “Fact Checkers” tell us that the two drugs are totally different, because they have a different chemical structure, which makes the Zero Hedge totally false, right? An open and shut case?

Keep reading

Facebook won’t respond to accusations it “asked fact-checking partners to retroactively change their findings”

“The Facebook Files” is an in-depth series based on leaked internal documents that expose the way social media giant Facebook views its platform and its social impact. It was released earlier this week.

Several factors are raised in The Journal’s reporting, including Instagram’s negative impact on minors, the implications of algorithmic changes on political discourse, and Facebook’s protection of influential users. Facebook’s internal research opposes its public assertions, and the company has internalized its societal ills while publicizing its positives in the report.

The Journal also highlighted that their decisions may not be as impartial as they appear on the surface and that “Facebook has asked fact-checking partners to retroactively change their findings on posts from high-profile accounts.”

The outlet also accused Facebook of having “waived standard punishments for propagating what it classifies as misinformation and even altered planned changes to its algorithms to avoid political fallout.”

Keep reading

MSM Refusing to Fact Check Themselves on Ivermectin Lie Is the Nail in the Coffin of Their Credibility

Everyone reading this article right now has likely experienced or knows someone who has experienced some form of social media censorship. Whether your entirely peaceful post received a “fact check” label, or was “removed for violating community guidelines” or you were unceremoniously silenced for life, Facebook and Twitter censorship affects millions. No matter what degree of big tech censorship you have faced, there is a common theme with all forms of it — it is censorship for thee, not for me.

When an independent news outlet puts out information that is verifiably factual but challenges the establishment narrative on issues, often times, this will trigger a fact check. As a result of the “fact check” that news outlet’s social media reach is diminished, all of their followers receive a notice that they shared false information, and in order to get the “fact check” lifted, that outlet has to appeal the decision and prove to the fact checker that there was never anything reported that was false.

The Free Thought Project knows this process all too well as we have a target on our backs and we have successfully refuted and overturned nearly  every fact check from the outlets who respond to our appeals. But even after the fact check is reversed, the damage is done. Even though they were all given a notification that they shared possibly false information, our users never get a notice that the ruling was overturned and our information was vindicated.

Our name is run through the mud on the public stage and when it’s finally cleared, it happens behind closed doors and no one see it.

Quite to the contrary, however, the establishment media can and does frequently publish information that is verifiably false and they face little to no recourse at all — though now, the heavily left-leaning fact checkers are becoming more prone to calling out right wing mainstream media like FOX. But even then, these media goliaths face almost no backlash for putting out false information that has led to mass suffering and even wars. 

To prove this point, we need only look at the recent push by many in the leftist establishment media to discredit the drug ivermectin. Whether or not it can help prevent covid is moot but one thing is for certain, blow hards like Rachel Maddow and the rest of the big pharma shills who do nothing but repeat the establishment’s narrative — have zero business telling you what to do with it. They are not doctors or scientists, they are paid actors whose jobs consist of rattling off the day’s talking points to keep their party followers believing an established narrative.

Case in point: “Horse dewormer.” Where are the ‘Fact-Checkers’ on the media referring to Ivermectin as a “live stock drug” or “horse dewormer”? While it is used for these things, it was invented by Japanese scientist Satoshi Omura who won the Nobel Prize for its discovery which saved millions of human lives.

Ivermectin is catalogued by the WHO as an essential medicine and referred to as a “magic bullet” for the global health of humans — not horses.

But these facts matter not to the establishment’s Praetorian guard. The mainstream is allowed to spout false information about medicine that could likely be leading to the needless suffering and even deaths of countless individuals. And they do so with impunity.

Recently, the NBC affiliate in Oklahoma, KFOR, ran a verifiably false news piece about Ivermectin overdoses backing up hospitals.

Keep reading

‘Fact-Checkers’ Rush to ‘Correct’ Grieving Parents

America’s leading “fact-checkers” describe themselves as “independent.” But watching their energetic defenses of President Joe Biden’s politically damaging behavior reveals they are taking a side. In the first 100 days, I found PolitiFact evaluated Biden’s critics eight times more often than they “fact-checked” the president.

It was truly shocking when Biden was caught on video checking his watch at Dover Air Force Base on Aug. 29 as the caskets of American soldiers were unloaded into vans. Both Snopes and USA Today felt the urgent, throbbing need to claim that the grieving family members who complained were wrong.

Keep reading

Facebook “fact checker” worked to bankrupt conservative and indy news sites by convincing advertisers to drop them

Facebook and other social media behemoths have consistently said they’re not biased against conservatives and independent publishers, and just as often as they deny it they are proven to be liars.

That happened again this past week and in a big way.

The National Pulse managed to unearth new evidence indicating that a so-called “fact checker” Facebook and TikTok, among other platforms, “attempted to coerce advertisers into dropping conservative media outlets as clients in social media posts,” the outlet reported.

The site said that it discovered Twitter posts from Lead Stories copy editor Leslie Lapides “follow the outlet’s founder and Editor-in-Chief Alan Duke repeatedly denying allegations of left-wing bias.”

But in fact, despite those denials, Lapides has posted at least four tweets showing support for Sleeping Giants, a left-wing internet activist organization whose members target advertisers seen on conservative sites like Breitbart News.

The activist group, which says it was formed to “make bigotry and sexism less profitable,” is well-known for convincing advertisers to drop listings on right-leaning sites through bullying campaigns, many of which have successfully bankrupted conservative media outlets.

Keep reading