Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts

Sunday, October 13, 2024

A perfect storm against free speech

Would-be censors are not even pretending to be in favor of free speech anymore. 

Cut the Truth Out of Our Heads | Brownstone Institute | Jeffrey A. Tucker:

October 13, 2024 - "The censors are losing patience. They have gone from regretting the existence of free speech and gaming the system as best they can to fantasizing about ending it through criminal penalties. You can observe this change in temperament – from frustration to fury to calling for violent solutions – over the last several weeks. And it serves as a reminder: censorship was never the end point. It was always about controlling society’s 'cognitive infrastructure,' which is how we think.... 

"This week, Fox reporter Peter Doocy was sparring with the White House spokesperson over whether FEMA is funding migrants even as it cannot help American storm survivors. She immediately shot back and called this 'disinformation.' Peter wanted to know what part of his question qualified. Jean-Pierre said it was the whole context of the question and otherwise never said. It was clear to anyone who was watching that the term 'disinformation' means to her nothing other than a premise or fact that is unwelcome and needs to be shut down. This messaging has been further reinforced by a Harris/Walz ad blaming unnamed 'misinformation' from Trump for exacerbating hurricane suffering following Hurricane Helene. 

"This exchange came only days after Hillary Clinton suggested criminal penalties for disinformation, else 'they will lose total control.' It’s an odd plural pronoun because, presumably, she is not in control ... unless she regards herself as a proxy for an entire class of rulers. 

"Meanwhile, former presidential candidate John Kerry said the existence of free speech is making government impossible. Kamala Harris herself has sworn to 'hold social media accountable' for the 'hate infiltrating their platforms.' And well-connected physician Peter Hotez is calling for Homeland Security and NATO to put an end to debates over vaccines

"You can detect the fury in all their voices, almost as if every post on X or video on Rumble is causing them to lose their minds, to the point that they are just saying it out loud: 'Make them stop.' 

"Hurricane Milton seems to have caused the censors to flip out in a violent rage, as people wondered whether and to what extent the government might have something to do with manipulating the weather for political reasons. A writer in the Atlantic explodes: 'I’m running out of ways to explain how bad this is. What’s happening in America today is something darker than a misinformation crisis,' while decrying 'outright conspiracy theorizing and utter nonsense racking up millions of views across the internet.' Catch that? It’s the viewing itself that is the problem, as if people do not have the capacity to think for themselves. 

"The old meme of the man staying up late typing because 'someone is wrong on the Internet' applies now to an entire swath of the ruling class. They want freedom out and the stakeholders in control, somehow forcing the whole of the digital age into a version of 1970s television with three channels and 1-800 numbers. The Biden administration even refounded the Internet, replacing the Declaration of Freedom with a new Declaration of the Future....

"So far we’ve only experienced a relatively low-grade version of this compared with what they really want. YouTube accounts have been demonetized and deleted. Facebook posts have been throttled and banned. LinkedIn’s algorithms punish posts that take issue with regime narratives. This has not slowed down in light of litigation but rather continued and intensified. 

"The goal is to close up the Internet. They would have done it by now if it were not for the First Amendment, which stands in their way. For now, they will continue to work through university cutouts, third-party providers, phony baloney fact-checkers, pressure on tech firms that provide government services at a price, and other mechanisms to achieve indirectly what they cannot do directly just yet. 

"Among the strategies is the political persecution of dissenters. Alex Jones is a bellwether here and his company is being bankrupted. Steve Bannon, the philosopher king of MAGA, has been in jail for the entire election season for having defied a Congressional subpoena on the advice of counsel. The protestors on January 6 have been in prison not for damages caused or trespassing but for landing on the wrong side of the regime. 

"Most of us had an intuition that the Covid vaccine mandates themselves were not entirely about health but rather a tactic of exclusion of those who were not fully trusting of authority. This was rather obvious when it came to the military and the medical profession but less apparent within academia where noncompliant students and professors were effectively purged for their refusal to risk their lives for pharma. 

"There was an element of malice, too, in the mask mandates. Even though there was zero scientific evidence that a Chinese-made synthetic cloth worn on the face can change epidemiological dynamics, they did serve well as a visible sign to separate believers from unbelievers, and also as a sadistic means of reminding individualists of who is really running the show. 

"The final means of censorship is violence against person and property, while the end is to control what you think in service of one-party rule. Major tech companies and major media are wholly complicit in bringing this about. Only a handful of services are stopping this and they are all being targeted by the regime through myriad forms of lawfare.... 

"[I]t’s the liar more than anyone who has reason to fear free speech."

Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

Read more: https://brownstone.org/articles/cut-the-truth-out-of-our-heads/

Tuesday, September 24, 2024

United Nations adopts Pact for the Future

On September 22, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly voted to adopt the Pact for the Future, which aims to "transform global governance" by turning the UN into a vastly more powerful "UN 2.0".


UN Secretary-General António Guterres addresses opening of the Summit of the Future.. UN Photo/Loey Felipe.

New UN “Pact for the Future” Turbocharges Globalism | New American | Alex Newman:

September 23, 2024 - "Governments and dictators from around the world gathered in New York and adopted a sprawling agreement to expand and further empower the United Nations. The controversial declaration approved by the UN General Assembly, known as the 'Pact for the Future,' is seen by the UN and its member governments as a great leap forward for the cause of globalism.... [T]he UN is becoming 'UN 2.0,' as top leaders of the organization put it. However, in the United States, at least, lawmakers, governors, and grassroots leaders are growing increasingly restless about what they perceive as a historic power grab.... 

"According to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, former leader of the world’s preeminent alliance of socialist and communist political parties, the UN Summit of the Future represents 'an essential first step towards making global institutions more legitimate, effective, and fit for the world of today and tomorrow.... We can’t create a future fit for our grandchildren with systems built for our grandparents,' continued Guterres, a line that was printed out on giant signs throughout UN headquarters.... 'We recognize that the multilateral system and its institutions, with the United Nations and its Charter at the center, must be strengthened to keep pace with a changing world,' reads the Pact for the Future.... 'We renew our commitment to multilateralism and international cooperation,' the Pact adds. 'We will transform global governance and strengthen the multilateral system'....

"The term 'global governance,' often used as a less-ominous placeholder for global government, is mentioned repeatedly throughout the document, always as something positive to be advanced. Under the heading 'transforming global governance,' for instance, the pact calls for a dramatic expansion of these mechanisms for governing all of humanity.... One of the institutions that received a shoutout is the would-be global Supreme Court known as the 'International Court of Justice,' often ridiculed by critics as a 'kangaroo court'. 'We will fulfil our obligation to comply with the decisions and uphold the mandate of the International Court of Justice,' the Pact states.

"Another area where the UN hopes to expand its power is on taxation, vowing to 'explore options' for 'international cooperation' on taxes and in particular, on taxing 'high net worth' individuals. 'We are committed to strengthening the inclusiveness and effectiveness of tax cooperation at the United Nations,' the UN deal explains, one of many efforts to eventually implement global taxation....

"One of the major tools to help the UN 'renew' trust in globalism is controlling information, as the pact makes clear. It calls on governments to 'address' so-called 'disinformation, misinformation, hate speech and content inciting harm, including content disseminated through digital platforms'.... It is not just restricting information.... A confidential memo sent to communications executives across the UN system earlier this year and obtained by The New American magazine included provisions on how to propagandize humanity on the Summit of the Future and its agenda. 'The Summit of the Future is a pivotal moment on our agenda,' the memo said, adding that the UN Department of Global Communications 'wants to make sure we take the media with us – starting with briefs on specific parts of the agenda.' One way the UN has done that is by partnering with Google to hide information contrary to its narratives, especially on issues such as climate....

"One of the major power grabs in the final agreement inked this weekend involves the UN response to what it describes as 'complex global shocks.' These could be anything from 'climate' issues or economic problems to environmental crises or even unpredictable “black swan” events. Under a proposal outlined in a policy brief dubbed 'Our Common Future' released by UN boss Guterres last year, Guterres himself would essentially become a global dictator to deal with real or imagined international emergencies, declared at his discretion. The proposal called for nations, business, and all sectors of society to recognize the 'primary role of intergovernmental organs [such as U.N. agencies] in decision-making.' While the final agreement this week did not contain everything he asked for, it did provide a 'mandate' from member states for Guterres to pursue the agenda vigorously.... 

"UN Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a recipe for global tyranny adopted in 2015 as the 'master plan for humanity,' was a focal point of the new deal. 'We reaffirm our enduring commitment to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals,' the new agreement states, vowing to 'urgently accelerate' its implementation with “concrete political steps” and more tax money. As part of that, the UN claims it needs virtually limitless amounts of power and money to do everything from 'eradicate poverty' and 'eliminate food insecurity' to deal with alleged man-made 'climate change' and reduce 'inequality' both 'within' and 'among' countries".... 

"Already, more than half of U.S. governors have publicly pledged to resist UN dictates in their respective states. Meanwhile, for the first time, Congress currently has bills to end U.S. involvement in the UN in both houses of Congress: House Bill 6645 and Senate Bill 3428, both labeled the 'DEFUND Act.' There has been virtually no coverage of the UN summit or the pact from the establishment media in the United States — and that is no doubt by design. If and when Americans learn what the UN is up to, Congress would be compelled by a public outcry to stop funding it all at the very least."

Read more: https://thenewamerican.com/world-news/un/new-un-pact-for-the-future-turbocharges-globalism/

Read UN news release:  https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/09/1154581

Wednesday, August 28, 2024

Biden-Harris admin pressured Facebook to censor

In a letter to the US House Judiciary Committee, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said that the Biden-Harris administration pressured Facebook to censor posts about both COVID-19 and the infamous Hunter Biden laptop.

Biden-Harris administration pressured Facebook to censor COVID, Hunter Biden laptop content | Western Standard | Myke Thomas: 

27 August 27, 2024 - "In a letter sent to US House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jim Jordan on Monday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg acknowledged the Biden-Harris administration pressured Facebook to censor COVID-19 information, as well as news about the infamous Hunter Biden laptop. The letter comes more than a year after Meta provided the committee with thousands of documents as part of its investigation into content moderation on online platforms, reports Fox News, adding Meta has also provided the committee with access to a dozen employees for transcribed interviews. 

"'There’s a lot of talk right now around how the U.S. government interacts with companies like Meta, and I want to be clear about our position,' Zuckerberg wrote. 'Our platforms are for everyone, we’re about promoting speech and helping people connect in a safe and secure way. As part of this, we regularly hear from governments around the world and others with various concerns around public discourse and public safety.' 

"He told Jordan that in 2021, 'senior officials' from the Biden administration and White House 'repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire.' Zuckerberg said Facebook did not agree with the censorship.... Zuckerberg wrote. [that] 'I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it'.... 

"Fox News reached out to the White House for comment, with a spokesperson responding, 'When confronted with a deadly pandemic, this administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety. Our position has been clear and consistent: we believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present.' 

"Zuckerberg also confirmed the FBI 'warned' the platform "about a potential Russian disinformation operation about the Biden family and Burisma in the lead up to the 2020 election," reports the Post Millennial, adding the FBI also laid out a hypothetical Russian "disinfo campaign" would include a fake story about a discovered Hunter Biden laptop in an attempt to discredit Biden's campaign. The New York Post broke the story, which is now known to be true.... Zuckerberg wrote the impetus for the platform to censor and suppress the New York Post's reporting on the laptop was a direct result of the FBI's warnings."

Read more: https://www.westernstandard.news/international/biden-harris-administration-pressured-facebook-to-censor-covid-hunter-biden-laptop-content/57301

Zuckerberg admits Biden-Harris administration 'pressured' Facebook to censor Americans | Sky News Australia | August 27, 2024:

Friday, July 5, 2024

Online Harms bureaucracy to cost >$200 Million

Canada's Parliamentary Budget Office estimates that staffing the bureaucracy needed to enforce the Trudeau government's Online Harms Act will cost $200 Million over 5 years, a number that can be expected to increase. 

PBO says Liberals’ 'online harms’ act to cost $200 million; Poilievre vows to kill it | Western Standard | Shaun Polczer: 

July 4, 2024 - "An 'opportunity cost.' That’s how Calgary Nose Hill MP Michelle Rempel Garner is describing the Trudeau government’s “Online Harms Act” — otherwise known as Bill C-63 — to regulate social media platforms. According to the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) it will cost upwards of $200 million to impose what Rempel Garner is calling a 'censorship bureaucracy' to hire 330 people to enforce “yet-to-be defined” regulations regarding the use and management of social media platforms. 

"The bill would establish three separate entities: 

  1. the Digital Safety Commission, which is mandated to enforce the act and has the power to issue monetary penalties and fines; 
  2. the Digital Safety Ombudsperson; 
  3. and the Digital Safety Office, which would manage the day-to-day operations of all three.

"Opposition leader Pierre Poilievre on Thursday vowed to kill all three on arrival.

"The bill was ostensibly passed to prevent online harassment, persecution and stalking of vulnerable people in society. But Rempel Garner worries it’s morphed into a law focussed on 'banning opinions that contradict Justin Trudeau’s radical ideology'.... Canadian author Margaret Atwood called the bill 'Orwellian.' Noted American progressive news outlet The Atlantic called it 'Canada’s Extremist Attack on Free Speech.'

In her substack page, Rempel Garner noted 'the mind-blowing cost of the bill could grow.' That’s because C-63 doesn’t directly set out any structure that would allow for the recoupment of administrative expenses.... Worse still, the figures included in the PBO report would be in addition to a still-to-be-costed increase to the workload of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC), which, under the scope of bill, would be tasked with policing a flood of extra-judicial 'prosecutions' over individual user social media posts.... 

“'It's unconscionable that the Liberal government would consider dumping $200M and over 300 new staff into an ill-defined new bureaucracy that does little to materially protect Canadians from online harassment when Canada's existing law enforcement officials are begging for support to deal with the crime waves sweeping across our nation,' Rempel Garner said....

"The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is [also] criticizing the bill. 'Today’s PBO report shows the online harms bill will cost taxpayers hundreds of millions and further balloon an already bloated bureaucracy,' said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director.... For the cost of the online harms bill, the government could instead pay the salary of about 375 new police officers, according to the RCMP’s website. Instead of hiring hundreds of bureaucrats to snoop around social media, the government could hire hundreds of police officers to actually go after criminals,” Terrazzano said."

Read more: https://www.westernstandard.news/canadian/pbo-says-liberals-online-harms-act-to-cost-200-million/55784 

Liberals to spend $200 million on online censorship office | True North | July 4, 2024:
(Story begins at 6:40)


Sunday, December 17, 2023

The most dangerous Canadian internet bill you've never heard of

The Most Dangerous Canadian Internet Bill You’ve Never Heard Of Is a Step Closer to Becoming Law | Michael Geist:

December 14, 2023 - "After years of battles over Bills C-11 and C-18, few Canadians will have the appetite for yet another troubling Internet bill. But given a bill that envisions government-backed censorship, mandates age verification to use search engines or social media sites, and creates a framework for court-ordered website blocking, there is a need to pay attention. Bill S-210, or the Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act, was passed by the Senate in April after Senators were reluctant to reject a bill framed as protecting children from online harm. The same scenario appears to be playing out in the House of Commons, where yesterday a majority of the House voted for the bill at second reading, sending it to the Public Safety committee for review. 

"The bill, which is the brainchild of Senator Julie Miville-Duchêne, is not a government bill. In fact, government ministers voted against it. Instead, the bill is backed by the Conservatives, Bloc and NDP with a smattering of votes from backbench Liberal MPs. Canadians can be forgiven for being confused that after months of championing Internet freedoms, raising fears of censorship, and expressing concern about CRTC overregulation of the Internet, Conservative MPs were quick to call out those who opposed the bill (the House sponsor is Conservative MP Karen Vecchio).... 

"I should preface criticism of the bill by making it clear that underage access to inappropriate content is indeed a legitimate concern.... However, Bill S-210 goes well beyond personal choices to limit underage access to sexually explicit material on Canadian sites. Instead, it envisions government-enforced global website liability for failure to block underage access, backed by website blocking and mandated age verification systems that are likely to include face recognition technologies. The government establishes this regulatory framework and is likely to task the CRTC with providing the necessary administration. While there are surely good intentions with the bill, the risks and potential harms it poses are significant....

"Bill S-210 ... creates an offence for any organization making available sexually explicit material to anyone under the age of 18 for commercial purposes. The penalty for doing so is $250,000 for the first offence and up to $500,000 for any subsequent offences.... The enforcement of the bill is left to the designated regulatory agency, which can issue notifications of violations to websites and ... the steps the agency wants followed to bring the site into compliance. This literally means the government via its regulatory agency will dictate to sites how they must interact with users.... If the site fails to act as instructed within 20 days, the regulator can apply for a court order mandating that Canadian ISPs block the site from their subscribers. The regulator would be required to identify which ISPs are subject to the blocking order. The website blocking provisions are focused on limiting user access and can therefore be applied to websites anywhere in the world with Canadian ISPs required to ensure that the sites are rendered inaccessible.... 

"The bill not only envisions the possibility of blocking lawful content or limiting access to those over 18, it expressly permits it. Section 9(5) states that if the court determines that an order is needed, it may have the effect of preventing access to 'material other than sexually explicit material made available by the organization' or limiting access to anyone, not just young people. This raises the prospect of full censorship of lawful content under court order based on notices from a government agency. 

"If that isn’t bad enough, there are two additional serious concerns. First, the bill is not limited to pornography sites. Rather, it applies to any site or service that makes sexually explicit materials available. This would presumably include search engines, social media sites such as Twitter, or chat forums such as Reddit, where access to explicit material is not hard to find. If the bill was limited solely to sites whose primary purpose is the commercial distribution of sexually explicit material, it might be more defensible. As it stands now, the overbroad approach leaves this bill vulnerable to constitutional challenge.

"Second, consider the way sites are supposed to comply with the law, by establishing age verification systems. This effectively means that sites will require their users to register with commercial age verification systems in order to run a search or access some tweets. And the age verification systems raise real privacy concerns, including mandated face recognition as part of the verification process."

"Senate private members bills rarely become law, but this bill is suddenly on the radar screen in a big way. The bill should not have come this far and should not be supported. Creating safeguards for underage access to inappropriate content is a laudable goal, but not at the cost of government-backed censorship, mandated face recognition, and age-approval requirements to use some of the most popular sites and services in the world."

Read more: https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2023/12/the-most-dangerous-canadian-internet-bill-youve-never-heard-of-is-a-step-closer-to-becoming-law/

The End Of Online Privacy In Canada? A Lawyer Explains Bill S-210 | Runkle Of The Bailey | December 14, 2023:

Wednesday, March 10, 2021

YouTube removes Canadian doctors' Covid video

Concern mounts over censorship of Canadian doctors |  iPolitics - Rachel Emmanuel:

March 9, 2021 - "A video of Canadian doctors listing reasons not to be afraid of COVID-19 was censored within minutes of being posted to YouTube, says a group advocating to end government lockdowns. Liberty Coalition Canada posted the video to YouTube on Monday morning, and 20 minutes later, the video-sharing platform removed the post citing a violation of its policy....

"The move is indicative of the escalating censorship for anyone questioning the government’s approach to COVID-19, contended Independent MP Derek Sloan, a member of the End the Lockdowns National Caucus. 'What we’re seeing is: whatever the prevailing consensus is — if you run counter to that, then you’re silenced,' Sloan told iPolitics on Tuesday. 'But good science is all about consent and discussion, and we seem to be seeing the shutdown of that debate.'

"The video in question was created by The Canada Health Alliance, a group of medical doctors, nurses and other health practitioners with a goal to protect patients’ freedom of choice and autonomy through informed consent. Some professionals in the Canada Health Alliance are also part of the Liberty Coalition initiative Professionals Against Lockdowns. 

"The video, which was posted yesterday, and had been viewed on Rumble nearly 57,000 times at the time of iPolitics’ publication, begins with an introduction from B.C. medical doctor Stephen Malthouse. Malthouse lists a range of reasons not to be afraid of the novel coronavirus, including that: the vast majority of people with COVID-19 have few or no symptoms of being sick; there are less patients in the ICU than in the previous three years; and that yearly deaths since 2001 have remained relatively steady, other than a slight uptick in deaths in 2020, which he attributes to an aging population. He also says COVID deaths in children are so rare the death rate is statistically zero. Meanwhile, the survival rate for those under 50 is greater than 99.9 per cent, or 94.6 per cent for those over 70, before early treatment like Vitamin C or D.... 

"In what Sloan describes as the most controversial part of the video, Malthouse says PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests are 'practically worthless,' with research now showing that only three per cent of people with a positive PCR actually have COVID-19. This is worth debating because Ottawa is basing most of its decisions off case-counts determined by PRC tests, said Sloan.

Read more: https://ipolitics.ca/2021/03/09/concern-mounts-over-censorship-of-canadian-doctors/