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

German man raided by police after calling politician a “dick” on Twitter

Six police officers in Hamburg, Germany, raided the house of a man who insulted a politician on Twitter using a phrase that refers to the male genitalia. The raid was heavily blasted on social media as classic overreach by German authorities.

A little over three months ago, a Twitter user who goes by the screen name “ZooStPauli,” described Hamburg’s interior and sports minister Andy Grote as “pimmel,” (a “dick”) in a reply to a post by the minister. On early Wednesday morning, six officers raided his house to search for evidence.

“My house was searched at 6:00 this morning. Six officers in the apartment,” ZooStPauli tweeted on Wednesday. “They know there are two young children living in this household. Good morning Germany.”

Keep reading

Twitter, Facebook, President Biden, and Surgeon General sued for alleged censorship collusion

US data analyst Justin Hart is one of the recent victims of COVID-related censorship on social networks, but he’s also one of those joining to fight back in the legal arena.

The Liberty Justice Center, a non-profit focused on constitutional rights, is suing on his behalf, with Facebook, Twitter, US President Joe Biden and the Surgeon General Vivek Murthy all named as defendants.

We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.

Hart is alleging that his First Amendment free speech rights had been violated when his social media accounts got suspended for posting what is said to be a scientifically-based graphic under the title, “Masking Children is Impractical and Not Backed by Research or Real World Data.”

News outlets like the New York Post – who recall that their own factually correct, and occasionally bombshell stories (like the “Hunter Biden files“) got suppressed by Big Tech – suggest this claim should by now not be particularly contentious, let alone a reason for censorship.

“Study after study repeatedly shows that children are safer than vaccinated adults and that the masks people actually wear don’t do much good,” writes the Post.

But when Hart posted the infographic, Facebook reacted by locking his personal account, created in 2007, for three days. The filing indicates that the same happened to this data analyst and digital strategist on Twitter as well – but what’s particularly interesting is why top government officials, including the president himself, have been named in the lawsuit.

Namely, Hart alleges collusion between these privately owned giants and the US government, with the purpose of monitoring, flagging, suspending and deleting content that it chooses to label as misinformation.

Under current rules in the US dictated by its Constitution, the government would not be able to do this directly; but recent statements coming from Biden and some of his top collaborators have added fuel to the fire of suspicion that a form of collusion to suppress free expression on the internet might actually be taking place.

Biden recently went as far – to then be forced to walk back – as to publicly accuse Facebook of “killing people” by not getting rid of COVID content unwanted by the current administration fast enough.

This happened just after White House press secretary Jen Psaki said, “We are regularly making sure social media platforms are aware of the latest narratives dangerous to public health that we and many other Americans are seeing across all of social and traditional media,” adding, “You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others.”

Keep reading

Twitter’s ‘Safety Mode’ is just a new way to silence opponents to the tech giant’s woke social justice agenda

Ever keen to be seen doing more about online abuse among its users, Twitter has decided to nobble free speech with a novelty ‘Safety Mode’ button, which might reduce offence. Exactly what ‘offence’ means is up to the tech giant.

Something about Twitter has long irritated me, not so much the platform itself but the smug self-righteousness of a bunch of tech nerds adopting the moral high ground over the inalienable right to free speech.

I’m not just talking about Jack Dorsey and his Silicon Valley sidekicks who blocked Donald Trump’s social media account, but about their woke-fevered, sanctimonious, purse-lipped wowserish approach in imposing their own values in judging what should and shouldn’t be allowed to be said within their software apps.

Now, using the pretext of “Safety” –I mean, gimme a break– Twitter has announced a new “Safety Mode” which will automatically block, for seven days, “accounts that add unwanted replies, Quote Tweets and mentions to your convos.” Seven days. Smiley face with tears emoji.

Firstly, if unwanted replies or mentions on Twitter are the sort of thing that spoil your day, then might I suggest, my little snowflake friend, that social media is not the place for you. And if you believe that your life will be enhanced because you chose to switch on “Safety Mode,” then more fool you for signing up to the latest tech that implicitly denies the right to free speech.

Because Twitter has turned taking offence into a maths problem. No one is actually reading your tweets or replies to figure out if offence was caused – intentionally or otherwise – no, as a senior product manager explained“When the feature is turned on in your Settings, our systems will assess the likelihood of a negative engagement by considering both the Tweet’s content and the relationship between the Tweet author and replier.”

Our systems, hey? What sort of systems are they? And what sort of data will they be trawling through, analysing, keeping and using in the future? Just one click on a little green button on your phone can forever change your relationship with Twitter and the way they target you with their insidious promotions. Think about that.

That fatal click could also blow a real human-to-human relationship out of the water. Twitter’s bot decides you’ve been slighted and the offender it identifies is sin-binned for seven days. While you can unblock, it’s too late, the damage is done. They were deemed ‘abusive’ before Twitter came to the rescue and they were silenced. Now you have to pick up the pieces.

It sounds petty, but it’s the prim, disapproving nanny looking over your shoulder that gets my goat. No one voted for anyone at Twitter to monitor the public discourse on social justice and that’s exactly where you know they’ll be targeting their bots. Discussions on race, gender and even climate change will most likely be judged on Twitter’s terms, the conversation manipulated by an algorithm so that those voices taking the most offence prevail in the debate and those that dissent are simply labelled ‘abusive’ and silenced.

Keep reading

Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Berenson After Viral COVID Tweets

It was never a matter of if, but when.

Science journalist Alex Berenson has been permanently suspended from Twitter, just one day after a viral series of tweets spotlighting an Israeli preprint study which showed that natural immunity from a prior Covid-19 infection is 13 times more effective than vaccines against the delta variant.

“The account you referenced has been permanently suspended for repeated violations of our COVID-19 misinformation rules,” a Twitter spokesperson told Fox News.

The last tweet he posted, meanwhile, accurately noted that the vaccine “doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission.”

“Don’t think of it as a vaccine,” he added. “Think of it – at best – as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS.”

“And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”

“This was the tweet that did it. Entirely accurate. I can’t wait to hear what a jury will make of this,” wrote Berenson on his substack blog, Unreported Truths.

Keep reading

Twitter Locks House Candidate Jarome Bell’s Account Because Taliban Has ‘Recognized Right to Privacy’ When They Execute People

Virginia Congressional candidate Jarome Bell was locked out of his Twitter account after posting a Taliban execution video, because the Big Tech site determined that Afghan terrorists have a “recognized right to privacy.”

Conservatives and others across the political spectrum have been critical of the Joe Biden administration over the chaos that has resulted from the attempt to pull US troops out of Afghanistan. One of them was Jarome Bell, a candidate for Congress in Virginia’s 2nd District. “These men assisted our troops and were left behind with over 15000 Americans,” Bell wrote on Twitter, attaching a video of Taliban fighters executing men who were believed to have worked with American and Allied forces in the country. “This will be Joe Biden’s legacy and the democrats and some of you approve of this message.”

As a result, Bell’s Twitter account was locked, with the Big Tech platform seemingly determining that the video of Taliban executions violated the privacy of those involved. Specifically, Bell’s tweet allegedly violated their rules on “posting private media of an individual from a country with a recognized right to privacy law.” It is unclear how this could be the case, given that the Afghanistan government and therefore any regime that could implement such a law, has fallen to the Taliban.

Keep reading

Twitter ‘Frog’ Account Successfully Negotiates With Taliban To Secure Safety Of Spanish Diplomats After Government Fails

A Spanish Twitter account with an Apu Apustaja frog avatar has successfully negotiated with the Taliban for fair and humane treatment of Spanish citizens at the nation’s embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. The Spanish government had seemingly failed to establish a clear and open line of communication with the Taliban, inspiring the owner of the frog-avatar account to take action.

“Nangarhar’s sweet district was completely conquered,” Taliban spokesperson Mansoor Afghan announced on August 14, to which the account @panamach2 reached out to respond using Google translate, “Hello brother, please don’t hurt the Spanish people at the embassy, we were forces in your country by America. We don’t like them either.”

Mansoor Afghan responded in English, “We are human beings, we all respect each other, we don’t say anything to any foreign troops.” The exchange was viewed as somewhat humorous by many Twitter users, with one pointing out that “a guy with a picture of pepe has done more for the spanish people in afghanistan than the spanish government.”

Keep reading

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Reveals: ‘Taliban Can Stay On Platform, As Long As They Don’t Get Too Violent’

On Tuesday, Twitter’s CEO, Jack Dorsey said in a statement that the Taliban will be allowed to stay on its social media platform, as long as they don’t get too violent.

The company explains it will “proactively enforce our rules” however stopped short of saying it would blacklist the Taliban.

After receiving inquiries about whether Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid will be banned from Twitter in the wake of the terrorist group seizing control of Kabul last weekend, the company revealed that the Taliban will remain on the platform while Twitter “proactively” enforces its rules.

“We will continue to proactively enforce our rules and review content that may violate Twitter rules, specifically policies against glorification of violence, platform manipulation, and spam,” the statement reads.

“The situation in Afghanistan is rapidly evolving. We’re also witnessing people in the country using Twitter to seek help and assistance. Twitter’s top priority is keeping people safe, and we remain vigilant,” according to the statement.

Social media users quickly took to Twitter to point out that the company appears to have a much harsher protocol for U.S. presidents than it does for the Taliban, as President Trump was banned earlier this year after holding a rally at the White House.

Keep reading