META CEO Mark Zuckerberg appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast to discuss his recent announcement about removing all “fact checkers” from the operation of Facebook and Instagram and replacing the fact-checking system with ‘community notes.’

Within the interview, Zuckerberg outlines examples of the Biden administration contacting the platforms to demand the removal of information the White House deemed against the interests of government.  Zuckerberg talks about the collapse in credibility within the platforms that happened as he lost control of the process and widespread viewpoint censorship became the norm.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has announced that his platforms of Facebook, Instagram and Treads are going to change policies to permit free speech to reemerge on the social media networks.

According to the announcement, Zuckerberg admits his tech platforms have gone too far in their effort to control content, and censorship has been the outcome.  While providing no apology for the intentional control mechanisms that have created censorship, Zuckerberg notes he has met with Donald Trump and sees a “new opportunity” to reset his social media control to allow free speech to return.  WATCH:

Simultaneous to this announcement, Zuckerberg has offered Dana White a position on the board of directors.  Apparently, White has accepted. Dana White is a strong supporter of President Trump and the position by Zuckerberg is clearly an effort to open a channel of communication with the Trump administration.

(more…)

Great, years later, at a time when it seems that no one cares about the issue, nor will anyone in a position of capability actually do anything about what he now admits, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg says he was working with the White House specifically to censor Americans by removing content on social media and he regrets it.

Just effen’ perfect…. The zombie minded leftist killers of speech and information, have overwhelmed the ramparts, crossed the moat, destroyed our gates, constitutional defenses and drawbridges, and are now bashing loudly on the interior doors in their bloodlust effort to take full control.  Meanwhile the few of us who remain are on the other side of that splintering door; veins bulging, muscles strained, pushing and holding back with all our might against every surge and attack wave…. and Zuckerberg nervously says, “whoops, sorry for dropping the drawbridge guys.”  Good grief Mark, shut up and grab an axe now!

(more…)

In a previous ruling in the case of The State of Missouri v Joe Biden, Judge Terry Doughty agreed with the state position that evidence had clearly shown agencies of the U.S. government had infringed upon First Amendment free speech in targeting social media companies with demands for content removal. [Ruling and Injunction pdf]

The social media companies outlined in the state lawsuit include Facebook, Instagram, Meta Platforms Inc, Twitter, Google and YouTube.  Evidence provided by the states showed clear and convincing evidence the government was unlawfully monitoring social media and telling the platforms to remove content adverse to their interests.

The judge outlined an emergency injunction barring government agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services and the FBI from talking to social media companies for “the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech” under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  The ruling provided narrow exceptions.

Obviously, given the scale of government involved censorship of speech within social media, the injunction was a major loss to the Biden regime, who operate -in part- with the benefit of controlling public opinion and information.  The judicial ruling disrupts the ability of the Biden administration to censor the online speech of Americans.

As a result of the injunction, the DOJ is now asking Judge Doughty to stay or pause his injunction while the government files a full appeal to the 5th circuit court of appeals.

(Reuters) –  The Biden administration on Thursday asked a federal judge to put on hold his earlier order barring some government agencies and officials from meeting and communicating with social media companies about moderating their content.

(more…)

Comrade rebels, a remarkable bit of independent journalism by Lee Fang, who interviews a high-ranking Ukraine intelligence official named Ilia Vitiuk.

Within the interview the head of the Ukraine Cyber Information Security Service admits to how they use the FBI to pressure Facebook into removing content the Ukraine government doesn’t like.

[…] “Once we have a trace or evidence of disinformation campaigns via Facebook or other resources that are from the U.S., we pass this information to the FBI, along with writing directly to Facebook,” said llia Vitiuk, head of the Department of Cyber Information Security in the Security Service of Ukraine.

“We asked FBI for support to help us with Meta, to help us with others, and sometimes we get good results with that,” noted Vitiuk. “We say, ‘Okay, this was the person who was probably Russia’s influence.'” (read more) 

Apparently, Ukraine is as strong a democracy as the United States. Where the strength of democracy is defined by the thin-skinned sensibility of the government that must censor any voice that speaks against their policy.

All correct and good thinking citizens speak favorably about their government comrades.

(more…)

During my trip to DC in the summer of 2020 there were a myriad of disconcerting datapoints assembled; revelations that made sense of the madness and disappointments found everywhere. However, one of the key notations for future reference was to watch the political evolution of DHS and spot the jump where the ideological outlook turns into specific government action.

With the DHS/FBI portal within Twitter, and likely within all social media, now being openly discussed and mainstreamed, it’s worth revisiting an August 2021 tripwire crossed by DHS and then contemplating how that was influenced by a much larger ideological agenda.

The United States Department of Homeland Security made a quiet and alarming announcement on August 13, 2021, creating the official position of the United States Government under the Joe Biden regime. [SEE DHS STATEMENT HERE]  According to the statement if you questioned the orthodoxy of government mandates, or COVID-19 responses from the U.S. government, you were -effective immediately- considered a “terrorist”, specifically a “Domestic Violent Extremist” (DVE).

Most people missed this remarkable development, yet it seemed to underpin a tenuous, unstable and fragile disposition of the current administration.  Within this continuation of the Obama-era initiatives the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) seemed rather paranoid in their need to label anyone who would question the COVID-19 response.

Considering the polling at the time, more than half the country would be defined as dissidents and domestic terrorists within our homeland.  Think about that.

DHS – The Secretary of Homeland Security has issued a new National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) Bulletin regarding the current heightened threat environment across the United States. […] These threats include those posed by domestic terrorists, individuals and groups engaged in grievance-based violence. […] Such threats are also exacerbated by impacts of the ongoing global pandemic, including grievances over public health safety measures and perceived government restrictions. (read more)

Notice the wording of that introductory paragraph.  The government-imposed mandates, mask and vaccination requirements were only “perceived government restrictions.”

The chains that bound your expressions of liberty and freedom were essentially being defined as mere figments of your imagination.  The rules and denials of activity that we are forced to live by, under the auspices of “public health and safety measures“, were described as perceived demands.

(more…)

When various doctors and professionals in the healthcare industry were kicked off Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and social media platforms for holding a contrary view of the COVID-19 mitigation efforts, their voices found a way to alternate platforms including TikTok.  At the heart of the government argument about TikTock as a national security threat, you will find this dynamic.

The claims of data insecurity as a reason for government action against TikTok is a false justification.  The reason the U.S. govt is defining TikTok as a national security threat is not because a Chinese firm controls it, the threat is because the U.S. government does not control it.  Thus, DHS involvement in Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Google, Apple, Microsoft and more takes on a more accurate perspective.  TikTok is not under DHS control, therefore TikTok’s ability to transmit information without DHS filter controls is a threat.

Bread and circuses.  In this interview with California Congressman Ro Khanna, Maria Bartiromo notes he was one of the only Democrats in congress who wrote a warning to Twitter about the censorship issue.  However, even then, a key sentence in the letter from Khanna to Yoel Roth is ignored.  He’s no hero. WATCH:

The DHS Portal – […] discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February. (link)

It’s not just the First amendment being compromised by this collaboration, it’s also the Fourth Amendment against unwarranted searches of private papers (communication).

(more…)

… Both were targets of the U.S. government’s use of Twitter and social media to manipulate election outcomes.

While current conservative headlines are filled with discussion surrounding revelations of Twitter being used by U.S. government officials to control and manipulate public opinion, it is worthwhile reminding everyone how this process was first triggered – and then look at how the intelligence community applied the lessons to the USA in 2020.

The Obama administration first created the public-private partnership with Twitter and Facebook to support the “Arab Spring” uprising.   As a consequence, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was the first elected official to be taken out by former President Obama’s deployment of Twitter as a community activist tool for revolution in 2011. In direct and consequential ways, Egypt was the BETA test for a process that surface a decade later in the United States during the 2020 election.

Using and influencing social media was a tool created by the Obama state department, as noted years ago in Mic.Com:

[…] In countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen, rising action plans such as protests made up of thousands, have been organized through social media such Facebook and Twitter. “We use Facebook to schedule the protests” an Arab Spring activist from Egypt announced “and [we use] Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to tell the world.” The role that technology has taken in allowing the distribution of public information such as the kinds stated by the aforementioned activist, had been essential in establishing the democratic movement that has helped guide abused civilians to overthrow their oppressor. (link)

(NationalPulse) The most popular Twitter hashtags in the Arab region in the first three months of this year were “Egypt”, “Jan25”, “Libya”, “Bahrain” and “protest”.

Nearly 9 in 10 Egyptians and Tunisians surveyed in March said they were using Facebook to organise protests or spread awareness about them. All but one of the protests called for on Facebook ended up coming to life on the streets.

These and other findings from the newly released second edition of the Arab Social Media Report by the Dubai School of Government give empirical heft to the conventional wisdom that Facebook and Twitter abetted if not enabled the historic region-wide uprisings of early 2011. (link)

Fast forward to 2020, and those same elements deployed against the Egyptian government were deployed in the United States in a coordinated public-private partnership with Twitter, Facebook and social media.

The U.S. government control over these social media platforms is ultimately what lies at the heart of the latest Twitter Files release.

(more…)

We are still just watching, evaluating, seeing how this plays out, without making any determination about motive or intent. However, that said, Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk is beginning to go to the quiet places that no mainstream media has ever gone before.

Stunningly, with the recent discoveries of Twitter manipulating the free flow of information in the U.S as an example, Elon Musk now engages the discussion of how far social media platforms have gone to support the U.S State Department. Mr. Musk notes the ideologues within Twitter were engaged in tilting the outcome of the election in Brazil:

(Source)

If this direction of inquiry is maintained, it is very likely people will find themselves at the origin of the U.S. Government working with social media platforms to manipulate political outcomes.  The origin of that relationship is the ‘Arab Spring’, specifically the uprising in Egypt and neighboring Libya in 2011.

While average Americans were caught up with ObamaCare news in 2010, President Obama was building out a massive influence campaign in Egypt to install a Muslim Brotherhood candidate, Mohammed Morsi.   Almost no-one was paying attention to the State Dept enlisting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey into using social media to manipulate a population.

Zuckerberg and Dorsey were enlisted in the endeavor by like-minded travelers in Obama’s tight circle. At the time the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was John Kerry, and the Secretary of State was Hillary Clinton.  The U.S. State Department was in direct alignment with the White House policy objectives.

It wasn’t until the lambs were directed into the social media trap and took over Tahir Square, that most Western media began reporting in depth what was going on.  However, by the time people realized Obama and Clinton had used social media to open the Big Cat cages in the zoo, it was too late.

(more…)

It is very well known by now that FBI agents worked within social media networks like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram through direct portals connecting the government to the backdoors of the networks.  The Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) continue to operate in partnership with various tech systems and platforms to monitor content.

During a deposition this week the FBI admitted to giving instructions to tech companies like Google, Apple and Microsoft to block URLs without a basis in legality.  Essentially the ideology of the FBI and DHS determines the targets of the content removal, blockage and/or censoring.

To repeat, these are not FBI and DHS instructions based on defined criminal activity, these are government instructions based on disagreements over ‘information’ as espoused by the content provider.

Information the government agrees with is safe; however, information the U.S. government doesn’t agree with is targeted.   Obviously, a person of reasonable intelligence can see the problem with allowing law enforcement to determine which information is valid and which information is invalid.

(Fox News) – On Tuesday, lawyers from the offices of Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jeff Landry of Louisiana deposed FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan as part of their lawsuit against the Biden administration. That suit accuses high-ranking government officials of working with giant social media companies “under the guise of combating misinformation” to achieve greater censorship.

(more…)