Scott Adams just broke the internet.
— "History Rhymes"đ§ (@Dr_logicaI) January 22, 2023
"The anti-vaxxers clearly won, you're the winners!" pic.twitter.com/4boVgmd90C
Government
Trudeau should be next! Can you hear the thunder, Justin?
GOP AG Jeff Landry of Louisiana released a document last week showing clearly that the regime pressured Facebook to censor Carlson after he said in no uncertain terms what most Americans knew â that the COVID-19 vaccines âdonât work,â as evidenced by the fact that so many vaccinated people caught COVID again, including many of our elected leaders (and Biden).
by: JD Heyes
Friday, January 13, 2023
The discovery phase of a lawsuit against the Biden regime brought by the Republican attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana has revealed a stunning bombshell â the White House has been busted for being directly involved in pressuring social media companies to censor Americans over COVID-19 vaccine views and facts the regime did not want anyone to hear.
One of the people the Biden administration wanted to be censored was top-rated Fox News host Tucker Carlson, one of several people who were singled out by the regime within a few months after Joe Biden was installed in the Oval Office, according to documents that the attorneys general have discovered and revealed.
GOP AG Jeff Landry of Louisiana released a document last week showing clearly that the regime pressured Facebook to censor Carlson after he said in no uncertain terms what most Americans knew â that the COVID-19 vaccines âdonât work,â as evidenced by the fact that so many vaccinated people caught COVID again, including many of our elected leaders (and Biden).
âSince weâve been on the phone â the top post about vaccines today is [T]ucker Carlson saying they donât work. Yesterday it was Tomi Lehren [sic] saying she wonât take one,â White House Director of Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty said in an April 14, 2021 email, which the AG posted on Twitter.
âThis is exactly why I want to know what âReductionâ actually looks like â if âreductionâ means âpumping our most vaccine hesitant audience with [T]ucker Carlson saying it doesnât workâ then ⊠Iâm not sure itâs reduction!â Flaherty continued, revealing fully that he wanted Carlson to be censored.
Conservative Brief noted further:
Landry and then-Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, now a U.S. senator, sued the Biden administration in May, alleging that officials worked with social media companies to suppress information regarding the 2020 election, the pandemic, and other issues.
A federal court ordered the Biden administration to hand over relevant documents in July.
In response, the unknown Facebook employee said they were ârunning this down now.â
On his showâs Facebook page, Carlson wrote in September 2020: âFacebook is working hard to make sure youâre unable to see our latest post regarding a coronavirus whistleblower. They donât want you sharing the video, and they are limiting the number of people who can view it. This is censorship.â
But itâs no wonder Facebook was bending to this pressure. In December, Democratic lawmakers wrote a letter to Facebookâs parent company, Meta, demanding new censorship and appearing to threaten the company with new regulatory legislation if the platform followed Elon Muskâs direction in reducing censorship protocols for Twitter.
The letter shocked Georgetown University law professor and attorney Jonathan Turley.
âWith the restoration of free speech protections on Twitter, panic has grown on the left that its control over social media could come to an end. Now, some of the greatest advocates of censorship in Congress are specifically warning Facebook not to follow Twitter in restoring free speech to its platform,â he wrote in a column for Fox News.
In a chilling letter from Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., AndrĂ© Carson, D-Ind., Kathy Castor, D-Fla., and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Facebook was given a not-so-subtle threat that reducing its infamous censorship system will invite congressional action. The letter to Metaâs president of global affairs, Nick Clegg, is written on congressional stationery âas part of our ongoing oversight efforts,’â he added.
âWith House Republicans pledging to investigate social media censorship when they take control in January, these four Democratic members are trying to force Facebook to ârecommitâ to censoring opposing views and to make election censorship policies permanent. Otherwise, they suggest, they may be forced to exercise oversight into any move by Facebook to âalter or rollback certain misinformation policies,’â Turley noted further.
Got that? Democrats, not Republicans, are the party of tyranny, censorship, and unconstitutional limits on speech, as they have once again proven.
Sources include:
There are plenty of Canadians on that list, including Chrystia Freeland, the Globe and Mail editor, the TD Bank group, the Ontario Teachers Pension plan, RBC Bank, and more.
by Patrick CarrollÂ
Jan 9, 2023Â
This article was originally published by Patrick Carroll at The Foundation for Economic Education.
Thereâs an alternative to government licensing, and it already exists.
On January 3, Jordan Peterson used his recently-reinstated Twitter account to alert the world of a new development in his seemingly-endless battle with mainstream institutions.
âThe Ontario College of Psychologists has demanded that I submit myself to mandatory social-media communication retraining with their experts for, among other crimes, retweeting Pierre Poilievre and criticizing Justin Trudeau and his political allies,â Peterson wrote.
According to Peterson, the Collegeâs actions were prompted by roughly a dozen complaints submitted over the past four years. Notably, none of the complaints were brought by people Peterson interacted with in a clinical context. Rather, they seem to be motivated by political disagreements and only feature vague accusations of harm resulting from some of Petersonâs social media rhetoric.
âWhat exactly have I done that is so seriously unprofessional?â Peterson asks in a National Post column. âIt is hard to tell with some of the complaints (one involved the submission of the entire transcript of a three-hour discussion on the Joe Rogan podcast), but here are some examples.â
He goes on to list some of the accusations of unprofessional conduct levied against him, which include retweeting a comment about the unnecessary severity of the Covid-19 lockdowns, criticizing Justin Trudeau and other politicians, and making a joke about the prime minister of New Zealand.
Peterson has indicated he is eager to release all the details of the accusations so the public can see the evidence and judge for themselves who is in the right, but the College has thus far not given permission to this effect.
To atone for his errors, Peterson was told he needs to take a mandatory social-media retraining course at his own expense. The course will be considered finished when the Collegeâs experts are satisfied with his progress.
Naturally, Peterson refused to take the course. As a result, he now faces a mandatory public disciplinary hearing and the possible suspension of his clinical license. If he loses his license, he will be barred from practicing clinical psychology in Ontario and from representing himself as a psychologist.
A Tool for Censorship
This isnât the first time the licensing system has been weaponized against professionals with unpopular views. In an infamous 2021 statement from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontarioâthe provincial regulatory body for medical doctorsâdoctors were effectively told to get on board with the official Covid narrative or risk losing their license.
âPhysicians hold a unique position of trust with the public,â the statement reads, âand have a professional responsibility to not communicate anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing, and anti-lockdown statements and/or promoting unsupported, unproven treatments for COVID-19. Physicians must not make comments or provide advice that encourages the public to act contrary to public health orders and recommendations. Physicians who put the public at risk may face an investigation by the CPSO and disciplinary action when warranted.â
These were not empty threats. One Ontario physician, Dr. Patrick Phillips, had his license suspended in May 2022 for âinappropriateâ COVID-19 treatments and advice.
As these and many other examples make clear, the licensing system can be a powerful weapon for censorship. And itâs no mystery why. Professionals need licenses to legally practice their profession. Even if there are relatively few suspensions in practice, the mere fact that your license could be suspended has a huge impact. Self-censorship is likely rampant in fields like law, medicine, and psychology on account of this threat.
The Underlying Problem: Government Licensing
Though the administrators of licensing systems certainly carry much of the blame for intimidating professionals into conformity, the root of the problem is the licensing regulations themselves. If these were private clubs that were threatening to revoke membership, it wouldnât really matter. The reason this is such a big deal is that these bodies are empowered by the government to strip professionals of their livelihoods. If licensing laws were repealed, these regulatory bodies would have no teeth, and thus no ability to threaten and coerce professionals.
The objection, of course, is that we need licensing to protect consumers from unethical and incompetent practitioners. But why should the government get to decide who is unethical and incompetent? Why not you, the consumer?
âConsumers are ignorant,â we are told. âThey need an expert to help them verify competence.â
Fair enough, but that doesnât mean the government needs to get involved. Thereâs an alternative system that removes the coercive element while still allowing consumers to verify that the services they buy are trustworthy. That alternative is free-market certification. Anyone who cares about government censorship would do well to at least familiarize themselves with this alternative to the status quo.
Letâs briefly explore how it could work.
How a Free-Market Certification System Could Replace Government Licensing
Though a free-market certification system could take many forms, one form that would likely emerge is a series of voluntary professional associations. Though professionals would be legally allowed to work without an affiliation to a known association, their potential customers will be looking for indicators of trustworthiness, so professionals will find it to their advantage to join these groups. Professional associations like these already exist for precisely this reason in all sorts of unregulated professions, such as Osteopathy.
An association for psychologists might call themselves the Psychological Professionals of Ontario (PPO). To become a member, PPO would have certain requirements you must fulfill, such as graduating from a school they approve of and perhaps passing a test demonstrating to them that you know what youâre doing. Once youâve met these requirements, PPO would grant you their certificate of approval (membership) which you can then use when advertising to potential clients. PPO would also likely have a series of reasonable rules that their members must abide by in order to keep their certificate. Practitioners who transgress those rules can be kicked out of the association. This could make life somewhat difficult for these practitioners, butâand this is the key differenceâit doesnât interfere with their legal right to practice.
If PPO has a good reputation for high standards, consumers can be confident that a PPO-certified psychologist will be ethical and competent. If PPO gives certificates to psychologists who turn out to be poor practitioners, however, or if they are arbitrary and capricious in their judgments, their reputation could take a hit, and members might move to a competing association with a better track record. Professional associations, then, like any organization on the free market, will live and die by their competence and probity, and will constantly face accountability from the market.
So letâs say I live in such a society without professional licensing and I decide to see a psychologist. Clearly, I wonât just pay the first person on the street who adopts that title. Instead, I might ask friends for recommendations or look online for established practitioners who have been in business for a while. Once I have a short list, I would probably look up consumer reviews on the people Iâm considering and look up their professional affiliations. Armed with this information, Iâd make a choice. I might not get the best person, but chances are Iâll find someone decent. At the very least, Iâll easily be able to avoid gross incompetence.
âThat makes sense,â you might say, âbut what about the people who donât do their homework? Arenât they at risk of hiring someone incompetent?â
Yes, I suppose they are. But this is hardly for lack of information. They had ample opportunity to verify the qualifications of the seller if they wanted to.
There comes a point where we simply need to say Caveat emptorâlet the buyer beware. At the end of the day, itâs the buyerâs responsibility to make sure they know what theyâre getting into. And if they get hurt because they didnât do their due diligence, thatâs kind of on them. Itâs not the governmentâs job to protect people from making bad personal choices, especially since what constitutes a âbad choiceâ is often a matter of contention, as it is in Petersonâs case.
âOnce the principle is admitted that it is the duty of the government to protect the individual against his own foolishness,â Mises warned, âno serious objections can be advanced against further encroachments.â
The point is that consumers, not bureaucrats, should determine whose services will be bought on the market. And while itâs true that consumers generally know little about the field in question, professional associations, consumer reviews, and word of mouth are beyond sufficient to provide them with the necessary information to judge whether a given practitioner will be good at their job.
Petersonâs ability to practice psychotherapy should depend on his track record and reputation, not on the whims of bureaucrats. The same goes for every other professional, no matter their field.
This same censorship agenda by both administrations was also imposed upon Google, Facebook, Microsoft and other Big Tech platforms, the same internal files show.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-01-02-twitter-files-rigged-covid-debate-truth-censored.html
by:Â Ethan Huff
Monday, January 02, 2023
The latest drop from the Twitter Files shows that the worldâs most controversial social media platform rigged the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) debate to control the narrative.
It did this, according to journalist David Zweig, by censoring information that was true but inconvenient to U.S. government policy; discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed with the official government position; and suppressing ordinary users, including those who merely shared data from government agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
While on assignment for The Free Press, Zweig was given access to internal files from Twitter that show both the Biden and Trump administrations âdirectly pressed Twitter executives to moderate the platformâs pandemic content according to their wishes.â
This same censorship agenda by both administrations was also imposed upon Google, Facebook, Microsoft and other Big Tech platforms, the same internal files show.
âThe Trump White House, specifically Michael Kratsios, led the Trump Administrationâs calls for help from the tech companies to combat misinformation,â one of the files stated.
âAreas of focus included conspiracies around 5G cell towers, runs on grocery stores, and misinformation that could stoke panic buying and behaviors.â (Related: Twitter only opposed censorship when doing so negatively affected Twitter.)
The Trump administration was especially focused on the issue of panic buying, probably because it did not want such activity to interfere with or damage its reputation while in office.
âTwitter, alongside several other tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Microsoft, participated,â the files further said.
âActivities included a standing weekly call to share general trends and hosting a shared Microsoft Teams group. Some of the companies (not Twitter) gathered open-sources information from researchers. Our teams fed this information to the Twitter policy enforcement teams.â
Surgeon General Vivek Murthy released advisory in July 2021 warning about âinfodemic,â calling for more tech censorship of âmisinformationâ
The Biden regime, after being passed the baton from Trump and his people, continued to fight against online free speech.
Then-Surgeon General Vivek Murthy in July 2021 released a 22-page advisory about the âinfodemic,â as the World Health Organization called it, that was spreading online. More needed to be done on social media, Murthy argued, to combat the âmisinformationâ that was spreading as a result of this infodemic.
âWe are asking them to step up,â Murthy said at the time. âWe canât wait longer for them to take aggressive action.â
In private, Murthy and other government officials had already said these same things to Twitter and other tech platforms, pushing them to take action against online free speech â and particularly âanti-vaxxer accounts,â as Operation Warp Speed was in full swing at the time.
Of particular concern was Alex Berenson, whom we have cited here many times, because of his vocal skepticism against lockdowns, the âvaccinesâ and other tenets of the scamdemic.
The day after Murthy released his 22-page memo, Joe Biden himself publicly announced that social media companies were âkilling peopleâ by not censoring more information. Just hours later, Berensonâs Twitter account was locked, then permanently suspended a month later.
Berenson later sued and regained access to Twitter. And as part of that suit, Twitter was forced to provide certain internal communications about what had happened, revealing direct interference by the White House.
It turns out that Biden and his people were still âvery angryâ at Twitter for not taking more action against certain accounts, calling for more tyranny. Twitter, we now know, never fully complied with those demands, despite all the censorship that it did conspire to inflict upon users and their freedom of speech.
The latest news about the Twitter Files can be found at Censorship.news.
Sources for this article include:
This was posted almost one year ago and the post is still up. What does that tell us? Lou
Trudeau is ânot speaking from his heart,â insisted his brother, who added, âblackmail is a very powerful tool.â
Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a pawn of the global elite in service of the New World Order, according to a bombshell admission by his half-brother Kyle Kemper, who goes on to claim that Justin does not write his own speeches or tweets but instead performs scripts written for him by his globalist overlords.
Trudeau is ânot speaking from his heart,â insisted his brother, who added, âblackmail is a very powerful tool.â
Many of us have talked about and reported on New World Order for a long time now. Ready for some validation you can share around? Although, this one may mean more to CanadiansâŠ
If youâre Canadian, take a seat. If youâre American or from another country, pull up a chair and have a listen.
Asked why Trudeau is determined to tarnish the Canadian nation, Trudeauâs brother said that he is merely a puppet of the New World Order and takes orders directly from groups such as the Council on Foreign Relations and Bilderberger.
âHe is the face and the lead spokesperson of the Canadian government, but the policies and initiatives that are driving it and are driving this narrative that he continues to push, that in my opinion is anti-freedom and anti-Canadian, is coming down from the higher-ups, from groups like the World Economic Forum, the Council on Foreign Relations, and Bilderberg. They recognize they need to have these strong agents within governments and one thing we have seen within governments all around the world are weak leaders who are able to act as spokespeople.â
Trudeauâs brother also declared that Justinâs disastrous and anti-freedom policies do not represent his true self. In short, heâs being controlled by global elites.
âHe is not speaking from his heart. I donât honestly believe it⊠itâs not candid, there is no actual discussion. He is not allowed to actually engage with the Freedom Convoy and with these people, because there is a lot to unpack here and there are a lot of serious questions.â
âAlso when you look at the history of people like Jeffrey Epstein and what their role was, to trap people and blackmail people, and you think about a life of opulence and opportunity, you make mistakes and you get coerced into doing something bad.â
âBlackmail is a very powerful tool.â
…the FBI now declares us to be part of a disinformation danger that it is committed to stamping out â âconspiracy theoristsâ misleading the public simply by criticizing the bureau.
by Johnathan TurleyÂ
Dec 29, 2022Â
This article was originally published by Johnathan Turley at The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.
Below is my column in the Hill on the need for a new âChurch Committeeâ to investigate and reform the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) after years of scandals involving alleged political bias. In response to criticism over its role in Twitterâs censorship system, the FBI lashed out against critics as âconspiracy theoristsâ spreading disinformation. However, it still refuses to supply new information on other companies, beyond Twitter, which it has paid to engage in censorship.
Here is the column:
âConspiracy theorists ⊠feeding the American public misinformationâ is a familiar attack line for anyone raising free-speech concerns over the FBIâs role in social media censorship. What is different is that this attack came from the countryâs largest law enforcement agency, the FBI â and, since the FBI has made combatting âdisinformationâ a major focus of its work, the labelling of its critics is particularly menacing.
Fifty years ago, the Watergate scandal provoked a series of events that transformed not only the presidency but federal agencies like the FBI. Americans demanded answers about the involvement of the FBI and other federal agencies in domestic politics. Ultimately, Congress not only investigated the FBI but later impaneled the Church Committee to investigate a host of other abuses by intelligence agencies.
A quick review of recent disclosures and controversies shows ample need for a new Church Committee:
The Russian investigations
The FBI previously was at the center of controversies over documented political bias. Without repeating the long history of the Russian influence scandal, FBI officials like Peter Strzok were fired after emails showed open bias against presidential candidate Donald Trump. The FBI ignored warnings that the so-called Steele dossier, largely funded by the Clinton campaign, was likely used by Russian intelligence to spread disinformation. It continued its investigation despite early refutations of key allegations or discrediting of sources.
Biden family business
The FBI has taken on the character of a Praetorian Guard when the Biden family has found itself in scandals.
For example, there was Hunter Bidenâs handgun, acquired by apparently lying on federal forms. In 2018, the gun allegedly was tossed into a trash bin in Wilmington, Del., by Hallie Biden, the widow of Hunterâs deceased brother and with whom Hunter had a relationship at the time. Secret Service agents reportedly appeared at the gun shop for no apparent reason, and Hunter later said the matter would be handled by the FBI. Nothing was done despite the apparent violation of federal law.
Later, the diary of Hunterâs sister, Ashley, went missing. While the alleged theft normally would be handled as a relatively minor local criminal matter, the FBI launched a major investigation that continued for months to pursue those who acquired the diary, which reportedly contains embarrassing entries involving President Biden. Such a massive FBI deployment shocked many of us, but the FBI built a federal case against those who took possession of the diary.
Targeting Republicans and conservatives
Recently the FBI was flagged for targeting two senior House Intelligence Committee staffers in grand jury subpoenas sent to Google. It has been criticized for using the Jan. 6 Capitol riot investigations to target conservative groups and GOP members of Congress, including seizing the phone of one GOP member.
The FBI also has been criticized for targeting pro-life violence while not showing the same vigor toward pro-choice violence.
Hunterâs laptop
While the FBI was eager to continue the Russian investigations with no clear evidence of collusion, it showed the opposite inclination when given Hunter Bidenâs infamous laptop. The laptop would seem to be a target-rich environment for criminal investigators, with photos and emails detailing an array of potential crimes involving foreign transactions, guns, drugs, and prostitutes. However, reports indicate that FBI officials moved to quash or slow any investigation.
The computer repairman who acquired the laptop, John Paul Mac Isaac, said he struggled to get the FBI to respond and that agents made thinly veiled threats regarding any disclosures of material related to the Biden family; he said one agent told him that âin their experience, nothing ever happens to people that donât talk about these things.â
The âTwitter Filesâ
The âTwitter Filesâ released by Twitterâs new owner, Elon Musk, show as many as 80 agents targeting social-media posters for censorship on the site. This included alleged briefings that Twitter officials said were the reason they spiked the New York Postâs Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election.
The FBI sent 150 messages on back channels to just one Twitter official to flag accounts. One Twitter executive expressed unease over the FBIâs pressure, declaring: âThey are probing & pushing everywhere they can (including by whispering to congressional staff).â
We also have learned that Twitter hired a number of retired FBI agents, including former FBI general counsel James Baker, who was a critical and controversial figure in past bureau scandals over political bias.
Attacking critics
It is not clear what is more chilling â the menacing role played by the FBI in Twitterâs censorship program, or its mendacious response to the disclosure of that role. The FBI has issued a series of ânothing-to-see-hereâ statements regarding the Twitter Files.
In its latest statement, the FBI insists it did not command Twitter to take any specific action when flagging accounts to be censored. Of course, it didnât have to threaten the company â because we now have an effective state media by consent rather than coercion. Moreover, an FBI warning tends to concentrate the minds of most people without the need for a specific threat.
Finally, the files show that the FBI paid Twitter millions as part of this censorship system â a windfall favorably reported to Baker before he was fired from Twitter by Musk.
Criticizing the FBI is now âdisinformationâ
Responding to the disclosures and criticism, an FBI spokesperson declared: âThe men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public. It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.â
Arguably, âworking every day to protect the American publicâ need not include censoring the public to protect it from errant or misleading ideas.
However, it is the attack on its critics that is most striking. While the FBI denounced critics of an earlier era as communists and âfellow travellers,â it now uses the same attack narrative to label its critics as âconspiracy theorists.â
After Watergate, there was bipartisan support for reforming the FBI and intelligence agencies. Today, that cacophony of voices has been replaced by crickets, as much of the media imposes another effective blackout on coverage of the Twitter Files. This media silence suggests that the FBI found the âsweet spotâ on censorship, supporting the views of the political and media establishment.
As for the rest of us, the FBI now declares us to be part of a disinformation danger that it is committed to stamping out â âconspiracy theoristsâ misleading the public simply by criticizing the bureau.
Clearly, this is the time for a new Church Committee â and time to reform the FBI.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.
Reprinted with permission from JonathanTurley.org.
Click on the Twit to get the thread.
Mysterious government agencies were involved in censoring content along with Twitter Inc. on the social media platform, journalist Matt Taibbi said in newly-released Twitter Files.
The filesâwhich mostly were internal communications among Twitter executives and employeesâshow that unspecified agencies worked with Twitter before Elon Musk bought the company.
The agencies were usually referred to as âOther Government Agencies,â or OGA, inside Twitter.
In one email from June 29, 2020, FBI San Francisco Field Office official Elvis Chan asked Twitter executives if he could invite an âOGAâ to attend an upcoming event.
âI wanted to follow up to see if I could forward this invitation to an OGA?â he wrote.
47. One intel report lists accounts tied to âUkraine âneo-Naziâ Propaganda.ââ This includes assertions that Joe Biden helped orchestrate a coup in 2014 and âput his son on the board of Burisma.â
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/twitter-files-clandestine-government-agency-edition
BY TYLER DURDEN
SATURDAY, DEC 24, 2022
After writing quite the pre-Christmas reflection Friday, night, Journalist Matt Taibbi has decided to grace us with a Christmas Eve edition of THE TWITTER FILES – which he says details “Twitter’s relationship to other government agencies – including some that don’t like to see their name in print much.”
Continued;
2. It didnât refute allegations. Instead, it decried âconspiracy theoristsâ publishing âmisinformation,â whose âsole aimâ is to âdiscredit the agency.â
3. They must think us unambitious if our âsole aimâ is to discredit the FBI. After all, a whole range of government agencies discredit themselves in the #TwitterFiles. Why stop with one?
4. The files show the FBI acting as doorman to a vast program of social media surveillance and censorship, encompassing agencies across the federal government â from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA.
5. The operation is far bigger than the reported 80 members of the Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), which also facilitates requests from a wide array of smaller actors – from local cops to media to state governments.
6. Twitter had so much contact with so many agencies that executives lost track. Is today the DOD, and tomorrow the FBI? Is it the weekly call, or the monthly meeting? It was dizzying.
7. A chief end result was that thousands of official âreportsâ flowed to Twitter from all over, through the FITF and the FBIâs San Francisco field office.
8. On June 29th, 2020, San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan wrote to pair of Twitter execs asking if he could invite an âOGAâ to an upcoming conference:
9. OGA, or âOther Government Organization,â can be a euphemism for CIA, according to multiple former intelligence officials and contractors. Chuckles one: âThey think it’s mysterious, but it’s just conspicuous.”
10.âOther Government Agency (the place where I worked for 27 years),â says retired CIA officer Ray McGovern.
11. It was an open secret at Twitter that one of its executives was ex-CIA, which is why Chan referred to that executiveâs âformer employer.â
12. The first Twitter executive abandoned any pretense to stealth and emailed that the employee âused to work for the CIA, so that is Elvisâs question.â
13. Senior legal executive Stacia Cardille, whose alertness stood out among Twitter leaders, replied, âI knowâ and âI thought my silence was understood.â
14. Cardille then passes on conference details to recently-hired ex-FBI lawyer Jim Baker.
15.âI invited the FBI and the CIA virtually will attend too,â Cardille says to Baker, adding pointedly: âNo need for you to attend.â
16. The government was in constant contact not just with Twitter but with virtually every major tech firm.
17. These included Facebook, Microsoft, Verizon, Reddit, even Pinterest, and many others. Industry players also held regular meetings without the government.
18. One of the most common forums was a regular meeting of the multi-agency Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), attended by spates of executives, FBI personnel, and â nearly always â one or two attendees marked âOGA.â
19. The FITF meeting agendas virtually always included, at or near the beginning, an âOGA briefing,â usually about foreign matters (hold that thought).
20. Despite its official remit being âForeign Influence,â the FITF and the SF FBI office became conduit for mountains of domestic moderation requests, from state governments, and even local police:
21. Many requests arrived via Teleporter, a one-way platform in which many communications were timed to vanish:
22. Especially as the election approached in 2020, the FITF/FBI overwhelmed Twitter with requests, sending lists of hundreds of problem accounts:
23. Email after email came from the San Francisco office heading into the election, often adorned with an Excel attachment:
24. There were so many government requests, Twitter employees had to improvise a system for prioritizing/triaging them:
25. The FBI was clearly tailoring searches to Twitterâs policies. FBI complaints were almost always depicted somewhere as a âpossible terms of service violation,” even in the subject line:
26. Twitter executives noticed the FBI appeared to be assigning personnel to look for Twitter violations.
27.âThey have some folks in the Baltimore field office and at HQ that are just doing keyword searches for violations. This is probably the 10th request I have dealt with in the last 5 days,â remarked Cardille.
28. Even ex-FBI lawyer Jim Baker agreed: âOdd that they are searching for violations of our policies.â
29. The New York FBI office even sent requests for the âuser IDs and handlesâ of a long list of accounts named in a Daily Beast article. Senior executives say they are âsupportiveâ and âcompletely comfortableâ doing so.
30. It seemed to strike no one as strange that a âForeign Influenceâ task force was forwarding thousands of mostly domestic reports, along with the DHS, about the fringiest material:
31. âForeign meddlingâ had been the ostensible justification for expanded moderation since platforms like Twitter were dragged to the Hill by the Senate in 2017:
32. Yet behind the scenes, Twitter executives struggled against government claims of foreign interference supposedly occurring on their platform and others:
33. The #TwitterFiles show execs under constant pressure to validate theories of foreign influence â and unable to find evidence for key assertions.’
34. âFound no links to Russia,â says one analyst, but suggests he could âbrainstormâ to âfind a stronger connection.â
35. âExtremely tenuous circumstantial chance of being related,â says another.
36. âNo real matches using the info,â says former Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth in another case, noting some links were âclearly Russian,â but another was a âhouse rental in South Carolina?â
37. In another case, Roth concludes a series of Venezuelan pro-Maduro accounts are unrelated to Russiaâs Internet Research Agency, because theyâre too high-volume:
38. The Venezuelans âwere extremely high-volume tweeters⊠pretty uncharacteristic of a lot of the other IRA activity,â Roth says.
39. In a key email, news that the State Department was making a wobbly public assertion of Russian influence led an exec â the same one with the âOGAâ past – to make a damning admission:
40. âDue to a lack of technical evidence on our end, I’ve generally left it be, waiting for more evidence,â he says. âOur window on that is closing, given that government partners are becoming more aggressive on attribution.â
41. Translation: âmore aggressiveâ âgovernment partnersâ had closed Twitterâs âwindowâ of independence.
42. âOther Government Agenciesâ ended up sharing intelligence through the FBI and FITF not just with Twitter, but with Yahoo!, Twitch, Clouldfare, LinkedIn, and even Wikimedia:
43. Former CIA agent and whistleblower John Kiriakou believes he recognizes the formatting of these reports.
44.âLooks right on to me,â Kiriakou says, noting that âwhat was cut off above [the âtearlineâ] was the originating CIA office and all the copied offices.â
45. Many people wonder if Internet platforms receive direction from intelligence agencies about the moderation of foreign policy news stories. It appears Twitter did, in some cases by way of the FITF/FBI.
46. These reports are far more factually controversial than their domestic counterparts.
47. One intel report lists accounts tied to âUkraine âneo-Naziâ Propaganda.ââ This includes assertions that Joe Biden helped orchestrate a coup in 2014 and âput his son on the board of Burisma.â
48. Another report asserts a list of accounts accusing the âBiden administrationâ of âcorruptionâ in vaccine distribution is part of a Russian influence campaign:
49. Often intelligence came in the form of brief reports, followed by long lists of accounts simply deemed to be pro-Maduro, pro-Cuba, pro-Russia, etc. This one batch had over 1000 accounts marked for digital execution:
50. One report says a site âdocumenting purported rights abuses committed by Ukrainiansâ is directed by Russian agents:
51. Intel about the shady origin of these accounts might be true. But so might at least some of the information in them â about neo-Nazis, rights abuses in Donbas, even about our own government. Should we block such material?
52. This is a difficult speech dilemma. Should the government be allowed to try to prevent Americans (and others) from seeing pro-Maduro or anti-Ukrainian accounts?
53. Often intel reports are just long lists of newspapers, tweets or YouTube videos guilty of âanti-Ukraine narrativesâ:
54. Sometimes – not always -Twitter and YouTube blocked the accounts. But now we know for sure what Roth meant by âthe Bureau (and by extension the IC).â
55. The line between âmisinformationâ and âdistorting propagandaâ is thin. Are we comfortable with so many companies receiving so many reports from a âmore aggressiveâ government?
56. The CIA has yet to comment on the nature of its relationship to tech companies like Twitter. Twitter had no input into anything I did or wrote. The searches were carried out by third parties, so what I saw could be limited.
Watch @bariweiss, @ShellenbergerMD, @lhfang, and this space for more, on issues ranging from Covid-19 to Twitter’s relationship to congress, and more.
The FBI has issued a statement in response to the Elon Musk’s release of THE TWITTER FILES, which boils down to ‘Of course we’ve embedded ourselves in social media companies, and anyone who has a problem with it is a conspiracy theorist trying to tarnish our stellar reputation.’
We recently learned that Twitter hired at least 15 former FBI agents during that time, while Facebook brought in at least 115 people who formerly worked for the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and DHS.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-12-21-social-media-facebook-twitter-infested-cia-fbi.html
by:Â Ethan Huff
Wednesday, December 21, 2022
Almost immediately after Donald Trump was elected president in 2016, tech giants including Facebook and Twitter started aggressively hiring former intelligence agents from the likes of the FBI and the CIA to police their social media platforms in pursuit of truth so they could eradicate it.
We recently learned that Twitter hired at least 15 former FBI agents during that time, while Facebook brought in at least 115 people who formerly worked for the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and DHS.
As Trump was being sworn in, the FBI was frantically forming a Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF) to police the internet in the new age of Trump, which threatened the existing globalist power structures that have ruled this country for many decades.
In Part 6 of the Twitter Files, investigative journalist Matt Taibbi uncovered evidence showing massive coordination between the FBI (and its FITF) and Twitter between 2020 and 2022. We now know that Facebook was similarly colluding with the deep state to try to silence all truth.
At least 10 former intelligence agents were hired within Facebookâs âTrust & Safetyâ department, this being the department where Facebook focused its efforts to fight âmisinformation.â
One of them is named Aaron Berman, or âAaron B. (He/Him),â according to his public LinkedIn profile. This guy claims to have worked at the CIA for 17 years before joining Facebookâs misinformation team.
âAaron states that his experience at the CIA included writing Presidentâs Daily Brief, leading briefings for Cabinet members, senior NSC officials & members of Congress,â tweeted the âName Redactedâ Twitter account.
âOn Twitter, Aaron is followed by Yoel Roth & admits he is friends with Trust & Safety people at Twitter. Was Facebook coordinating with Twitter on info-sharing to censor posts they deem as âmisinfo?’â
(Related: According to former White House covid adviser Scott Atlas, tech platforms like Facebook and Twitter also played a critical role in the unleashing of covid pandemic tyranny.)
Facebook interfered with foreign elections, too
On Feb. 25, 2021, Berman tweeted about how Facebookâs policies regarding covid misinformation were guided by âhealth authoritiesâ who instructed the tech platform as to which information is âtrueâ and which information is âfalse.â
During a virtual YouTube discussion about the matter, Berman further admitted that Facebook works with a âglobal network of over 80 fact checker organizationsâ that direct the company about which posts require âreduced distribution,â âwarning labels,â and âshadow-banning.â
Facebook apparently goes to great lengths, according to Berman, to censor critical information about covid protocols like âvaccinesâ to ensure the narrative is controlled as much as possible.
Berman also played a role in censoring truthful information about foreign elections, including those in Brazil and the Philippines.
âHereâs how Meta is preparing for the Philippines election, including combatting misinfo by removing some content, partnering with fact-checkers, and helping users find voter registration information.â
Then we have the Russia-Ukraine war narrative, which Facebook (Meta) heavily controls in support of Ukraineâs power structure and against Vladimir Putin and his military operation there.
When it comes to the matter of climate change, Berman announced on Nov. 1, 2021, the release of an update from the âMeta Newsroomâ highlighting changes the platform was making at the time to combat âclimate misinfo.â
âSpecifically on the misinfo side, we partner with more than 80 independent fact-checking organizations globally to review and rate content, including content about climate change,â Berman tweeted.
âWhen they rate content as false, we reduce its distribution so fewer people see it and we show a warning label with more context. And we apply penalties to people who repeatedly share false information.â
The latest news about the Twitter Files revelations can be found at Censorship.news.
Sources for this article include:
“It’s been bought by corporations and the military-industrial complex.”
âIt has also been brought to my attention by a whistleblower from a very reliable source that one of these institutions is covering up clear data that reveals that the mRNA vaccine increases inflammation of the heart arteries,â he said. âThey are covering this up in fear that they may lose funding from the pharmaceutical industry.â
by:Â Arsenio Toledo
Sunday, December 18, 2022
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
British Member of Parliament Andrew Bridgen has called for an âimmediate and complete suspensionâ of the mRNA Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, alleging that a senior health official is covering up a report showing how these vaccines increase inflammation of the heart arteries.
Bridgen, a member of the Conservative Party and a member of parliament since 2010, made a plea for the House of Commons, the United Kingdomâs parliament, to pass a measure to stop giving small children mRNA COVID-19 vaccines during a debate focused on the potential harms associated with these vaccines. (Related: Tragedies lead doctors like Aseem Malhotra to question mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations.)
The conservative government of the U.K. recently approved giving children from six months old to four years old a low dose of Pfizerâs mRNA vaccine. Bridgen called on Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to overturn this decision, claiming that the mRNA vaccines are dangerous not just for children but also for pregnant and breastfeeding women.
Bridgen called the mRNA vaccines ânot safe, not effective and not necessary,â pointing out that the British government has received âalmost half a million reports of adverse effects from the publicâ since the Pfizer vaccines were first distributed in the United Kingdom.
The MP also questioned how effective the mRNA vaccines truly are, noting that real-world data during the post-vaccine omicron variant wave shows that âwe would need to vaccinate 7,300 people over the age of 80 to prevent one death.â
Bridgen: Leading British cardiologist covered up adverse effect data on mRNA vaccines
According to Bridgen, a leading member of the British Heart Foundation deliberately suppressed a report providing strong evidence that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can cause heart damage.
âIt has also been brought to my attention by a whistleblower from a very reliable source that one of these institutions is covering up clear data that reveals that the mRNA vaccine increases inflammation of the heart arteries,â he said. âThey are covering this up in fear that they may lose funding from the pharmaceutical industry.â
Without providing a specific name, Bridgen claimed that this person has a âprominent leadership roleâ in the heart foundation and is âthe leaderâ of a cardiology research department. Furthermore, he noted that this person forced his research team to sign non-disclosure agreements âto ensure that this important data never sees the light of day.â
âThis man is an absolute disgrace,â said Bridgen. âSystemic failure in an over-medicated population also contributes to a huge waste of British taxpayersâ money.â
In response to Bridgenâs statement, many have called for him to apologize. Shadow Health Minister Andrew Gwynne of the Labor Party said Bridgen is spreading âanti-vaccine misinformation,â and that he should not be allowed to use his platform as an elected official âto spread these kinds of baseless conspiracy theories.â
âVaccine hesitancy costs lives. COVID vaccines are safe and effective and politicians should be doing everything they can to encourage uptake,â he said. âMr. Bridgen needs to apologize and correct the record, and Rishi Sunak should get a grip on the conspiracy theorists in the Conservative Party.â
Learn more about the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines at Vaccines.news.
Watch Bridgenâs full statement calling for the suspension of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in the House of Commons.
https://www.brighteon.com/embed/859ddd60-e1f2-4bdb-b15b-7435de54a262
This video is from the channel The Big Logic on Brighteon.com.
More related stories:
Dr. Peter McCullough: Myocarditis is often the underlying cause when people die in their sleep.
CLOWN SCIENCE: Pfizer and Moderna to self-investigate their own COVID jabs for heart risks.
Sources include:
In an age when information has never been more easily accessible, the world is awash in lies.
Political speech was also censored through the collaborative efforts of the FBI and more than 50 intelligence community agents in violation of the First Amendment. In each case, the “narrative” proved to be either misleading propaganda or an outright lie. Yet they were created and sustained by online communication platforms that pushed the lies and excluded the truths.
BY TYLER DURDEN
SATURDAY, DEC 17, 2022
Authored by J.B.Shurk via The Gatestone Institute,
The heavy perils we face today include centralized governments micromanaging society, the growing prospect of global war, the growing prospect of forced surrender, and the replacement of reasoned debate and free speech with state-sanctioned “narratives” and censorship: totalitarian governance seems not far behind. This is a new kind of war against civilians for control of their minds.
The torrents engulfing us appear to be potentially catastrophic. In a few short years, the world has endured the COVID-19 pandemic, forced government lockdowns, extreme economic volatility, commodity shortages, and the World Economic Forum’s attempts to exploit this cascade of crises as an excuse to usher in a structural “Great Reset” in which global food and energy consumption can be strictly regulated according to the “climate change” goals of an unelected cabal. Governments are relying increasingly on controlling public “narratives” and vilifying dissent.
While health bureaucrats and politicians claimed to be “following the science,” mandatory compliance with unilateral rule-making precluded reasoned, good-faith debate. The predictable result: the lethal consequences of the Wuhan Virus were exacerbated by the lethal consequences of misguided public policies imposed to fight the virus. Students whose schools were shuttered now suffer the lifelong effects of learning loss. Patients whose timely diagnoses and preventative care were forestalled now suffer the debilitating outcomes of untreated disease. Small businesses unable to endure prolonged closures are gone for good. Middle class savings once reserved for unexpected “rainy day” funds or children’s future educations have dried up. Credit card debt is on the rise, while more and more people struggle to survive on less. The “safety nets” of government welfare programs have ballooned to leave nation states more indebted than ever but have also proved too perforated with leaky holes (often draining needed resources straight into the bank accounts of corporate campaign donors, interest group lobbyists, and foreign hackers) to keep society’s most vulnerable afloat. Governments’ justifications for reckless fiscal, monetary, and credit policies during short-term emergencies have weakened nations’ prospects for long-term solvency and the likelihood that they will be capable of preserving stable currencies. Still, for all the harms their actions have caused, governments have issued no apologies for enforcing such life-altering policies while silencing critics. It is as if “narrative engineers” have adopted an official position that they are incapable of being wrong.
Geopolitical conflict is wrenching the post-WWII international order apart. While America’s and the European Union’s “climate change” policies have already inflated the costs of energy, food and much else, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has only added to ordinary Europeans’ financial pain and jeopardizes the continent’s security more broadly. China’s territorial ambitions threaten peace in Taiwan, Japan, across Southeast Asia and beyond. The United States’ efforts to enlarge NATO’s European membership, while expanding its mission objectives into the Indo-Pacific, all but ensure that the U.S., China and Russia remain on a collision course.
Policymakers cannot help seeing parallels to the quickly falling geopolitical dominoes that ushered in WWI and WWII over the course of a few fateful weeks. They cannot help looking at the unsustainable accumulation of government debt around the world and the avalanche of investment derivatives balancing unsteadily upon fragile currencies unmoored from any real value in gold or silver and fearing the risks of a severe depression. They cannot help seeing Russian revanchism and Chinese territorial expansion as signs that the Great Powers have set course down a dangerous path. The more nervous about the future policymakers are, the more committed they seem to enforcing a standard “narrative” they can control.
It was the detonation of two nuclear warheads over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, of course, that brought combat in the Pacific Theater to a close and ended WWII with an exclamation point.
Now we stand on a new kind of battlefield. Just as with nuclear weapons, civilians have nowhere to hide from this war’s effects. Weapons systems are spread out across the Internet, deployed on mobile phones and active on every computer chip, tracking, sharing, and pushing digital information throughout the world. Instead of explosives and bullets, we have competing “narratives” whizzing past. The breadth of the campaign to control what information we see, how we process that information, and ultimately what we think and say makes even the most effective psychological operations of the past look antiquated and rudimentary. Whereas “mutually assured destruction” has so far succeeded as a deterrent against nuclear war, the tantalizing opportunities for governments to use programs of mass digital surveillance and communication to spread lies, manipulate opinion, and affect human behavior have created a kind of mutually assured dystopia, “where people lead dehumanized, fearful lives.”
In the 1930s, Adolf Hitler spoke with boisterous energy and theatrical gesticulation before tens of thousands of stormtroopers, Hitler Youth, and Nazi Party faithful. Today, the dictator’s raised stage has been replaced with Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and anywhere else a pop-up online audience can be found. The visual stimuli that enthralled Hitler’s crowds are now reproduced with the release of pleasure-causing endorphins rushing to the brain after every “politically correct” online statement is “rewarded” with approval from strangers providing instant fame. Online “influencers” have become the goose-stepping middlemen for campaigns of mass propaganda that touch more humans in a day than a decade of Hitler’s speeches. In an age when information has never been more easily accessible, the world is awash in lies.
Instead of encouraging public debate and rational argument, governments push the constant drumbeat of the “narrative” above all else. A citizen either obediently accepts the government’s vast and intrusive COVID-19 rules, or that person is labelled a “COVID denier.” A citizen either obediently accepts the government’s vast and intrusive “climate change” rules, or that person is labelled a “climate denier.” A citizen either accepts Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” as “Russian disinformation”, or that person is labelled a “Russian sympathizer.” Daring to say otherwise could get one banned from social media, professionally sanctioned, or even fired from a job. Except none of these established “narratives” has proved true.
In hindsight, it is clear that lockdowns unleashed more health, educational and economic problems than they solved. As Europe faces an expanding energy crisis that leaves its populations vulnerable to the cold, it is clear that “climate change” policies can kill those they are purportedly meant to protect. And as Elon Musk’s recent release of internal Twitter communications proves, Hunter Biden’s laptop was not only real news censored from the public during a presidential election. Political speech was also censored through the collaborative efforts of the FBI and more than 50 intelligence community agents in violation of the First Amendment. In each case, the “narrative” proved to be either misleading propaganda or an outright lie. Yet they were created and sustained by online communication platforms that pushed the lies and excluded the truths.
As global events increasingly threaten Western stability, governments have demonstrated no inclination to entertain a diversity of viewpoints or discussions along the way. Instead, the more serious the issue, the more committed to a single, overarching “narrative” they seem to become. Dissent is despised. Reasoned argument is lampooned. A citizen is expected to blithely accept government-approved messaging disseminated online, or risk the wrath of the technocracy.
This war for eight billion minds means that citizens must be more vigilant than ever in processing and evaluating what they see and read. Whether they like it or not, they are under attack at all times from those who seek to manipulate and control them. As in the last century, we are surrounded by totalitarian propaganda routinely disguised as “the truth.” In this century, though, the reach and scale of mass indoctrination seems endlessly expanding.
But, the most concerning revelation in the Twitter Files, according to Nunes, is that the DOJ and the FBI had informantsâwhether paid or volunteersâthat put forward a specific directive to Twitter, and that is likely happening on other social media platforms.
BY TYLER DURDEN
SATURDAY, DEC 17, 2022
Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The social media coordination between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI isnât limited to Twitter, former Congressman and current CEO of President Trumpâs Truth Social, Devin Nunes, alleged in an interview that aired on Newsmakers by NTD and The Epoch Times on Dec. 14.
The Twitter Files, a collection of internal emails and communications made public by Twitterâs new owner, Elon Musk, confirmed what many Conservatives have alleged for years. Namely, Twitter was shadow-banning accounts that didnât fit a specific ideology and suspending accounts that bucked the chosen political narrative, Nunes claimed.
But, the most concerning revelation in the Twitter Files, according to Nunes, is that the DOJ and the FBI had informantsâwhether paid or volunteersâthat put forward a specific directive to Twitter, and that is likely happening on other social media platforms.
âThe coordination that the Department of Justice and the FBI clearly had with Twitter? I donât think it stops there,â Nunes stated.
âIt seems like they were either running informants, or had paid informants, or had volunteers, where they were actively sending information on behalf of the government on who to look into, or who to ban, and that sort of thing.
âThe bigger issue is, Twitter is one thing, but what about Facebook? What about Instagram?â
Censorship and Shadow-Banning
According to Nunes, Trump developed Truth Social because, before Musk bought Twitter, Trump recognized that there was absolute control over public discourse in the United States.
Furthermore, that control led to shadow banning and suspending social media accounts, so those accounts couldnât criticize the controlling regime in the proverbial public square.
And while Nunes further stated that heâd recently discussed the Twitter File drops with Trumpâand in general, Trump is glad Musk purchased TwitterâTrump still believes Musk needs to release all of the Twitter Files to the public and not go through cherry-picked journalists.
âWhat [do] we really need from Elon Musk and Twitter at this point? Just release all the files. Donât just have selective journalists look at it. Release all the files so everyone can begin to evaluate them. You never know what youâre going to find [with more people looking at the files].â
Nunes said he believes that by releasing all the files, even more will be uncovered by citizen journalists and by Congress. He added heâs not alone in the belief that Musk should release all files and noted that Jack Dorsey, Twitterâs former CEO and founder, also called on Musk to release the Twitter Files to the public.
Legacy Media Silence
The Twitter Files contained explosive revelations. But the legacy media has largely avoided covering the drops. When asked why there was silence, Nunes stated that the legacy media had supported a particular narrative and political party.
Musk revealing damaging information on government censorship has put the media in an interesting predicament where if they cover the files, they also expose their complicity and damaging information to their preferred political group.
âThereâs a strange cat-and-mouse game where [Musk] is sitting on what seems to be a treasure trove of really damaging information to not only the fake news media but also to probably many areas within the United States government,â Nunes stated.
Read more here…
He is inviting Elon to address the EU parliament.
Tales from the Conspiratum 
