DHS’s Plans to Spread Propaganda via Social Media

Ken Klippenstein and Lee Fang of the Intercept have just broken one of the most important news stories of the decade. Caveat: You can't read about it at the NYT, NPR, WaPo or NPR (I just checked) because it doesn't fit their narrative. The U.S. Federal Government has been putting enormous pressure upon social media outlets to censor certain stories and push others without factual justification. This brazen censorship being done by social media outlets (and spinelessly followed by corporate media) has long been obvious to all of us who are heterodox thinkers, but we didn't have access to the mechanism for this censorship and these lies . . . until now. Anyone who abhors tribal membership (I am one) constantly sees that social media and corporate media refuse to allow obvious questions and criticisms when publishing questionable claims (e.g., re COVID). What is the reason that so many of us are nodding in agreement at Noam Chomsky's recent comment: "“The United States has imposed constraints on freedom of access to information which are astonishing and, which in fact, go beyond what was the case in post-Stalin Soviet Russia.” If you find Chomsky's comment difficult to digest, read the article by Klippenstein and Fang. Here are a few excerpts from the much longer article, "TRUTH COPSLeaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation":

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.

The work, much of which remains unknown to the American public, came into clearer view earlier this year when DHS announced a new “Disinformation Governance Board”: a panel designed to police misinformation (false information spread unintentionally), disinformation (false information spread intentionally), and malinformation (factual information shared, typically out of context, with harmful intent) that allegedly threatens U.S. interests. While the board was widely ridiculed, immediately scaled back, and then shut down within a few months, other initiatives are underway as DHS pivots to monitoring social media now that its original mandate — the war on terror — has been wound down.

Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, 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. . . . .

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingDHS’s Plans to Spread Propaganda via Social Media

The “News” Media is the Dying Canary in the Coal Mine

I have lost respect for many institutions over the past few years. Not so much the members, but the leadership (which causes many member to fall silent). Exhibit A is our so-called "news" media. I have been collecting dozens and dozens of examples at my website, Dangerous Intersection.

It often boils down to these organizations failing to be curious about what is going on. Failing to question powerful people. Failing to vigorously cross-examine the leaders of the political parties they obediently serve. Journalists should be out there pissing off ALL of our leaders with probing questions, but they are too often serving as stenographers and megaphones for highly questionable positions. This great danger to our country is invisible as long as you cling to one side or the other (democrat serving or republican serving) "news" media.

I challenge anyone reading this to start reading "the other side" and, better yet, independent journalists, in order to get a much better view of what is going on. You'll find many of those independent journalists have left mainstream news to strike out on their own (e.g., on Substack), disgusted with what has happened to their employers.

Here's a recent example: Why were reporters failing to grill Pfizer executives and our political leaders on whether the vaccinations would stop transmission of COVID? How many dozens of bad policies resulted because our "news" reporters decided to parrot public officials rather than vigorously question them?

Continue ReadingThe “News” Media is the Dying Canary in the Coal Mine

Statement by FIRE on Attempts by Venmo and PayPal to Deny Financial Services based on the Speech and Viewpoints of Users

FIRE Statement on Free Speech and Online Payment Processors Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression by FIRE (September 30, 2022):

The issue: Online payment processors like Venmo and PayPal often deny Americans access to these vital services based on their speech or viewpoints.

The concern: When these companies appoint themselves the arbiters of what speech and views are acceptable, shutting people and organizations out of the online financial ecosystem for wrongthink, they seriously undermine our culture of free expression.

Imagine you could no longer use PayPal, Venmo, or another online payment processor because you run an organization that defends free speech for controversial speakers, operate an independent media outlet that challenges mainstream narratives, sell erotic fiction or “occult” materials, or . . . tried to submit an article about Syrian refugees into a newspaper awards competition.

These are not hypotheticals. They’re real, and they illustrate why online payment service providers should stay out of the business of policing their users’ speech and views.

Follow the link for the entire article by FIRE. The article includes numerous examples of abuses by these financial services companies.

Continue ReadingStatement by FIRE on Attempts by Venmo and PayPal to Deny Financial Services based on the Speech and Viewpoints of Users

PayPal and Etsy Cancel Colin Wright Because He Teaches Basic Biology in his Writings

Biologist Colin Wright explains how PayPal and Etsy banned him for taking the position that there are only two sexes and that they are biologically grounded. He explains the PayPal actions at about the ten-minute mark.

Consider also the context: Colin Wright's background as a Ph.D student studying biology:

Min 8:04:

"I had maybe 100 applications out actually turned my my twitter I locked it down for maybe six months while I was applying for jobs um and when I was writing this one essay the first one I wrote for Quillette called "The New Evolution Deniers." I sent it to my advisor at the time and some of my mentors. They both came back and they said, "This is a fantastic essay. I agree with everything it's completely right, but you cannot publish this. This will ruin your career. If you do publish it don't put your name on it."

To me when the first thing they said was "this is fantastic and it's true." Then, to me, everything after the "but." If I would have not went ahead and published it, that would have just been--every reason that I wanted to get into science in the first place and to be a scientist to pursue truth, to pursue what's real about biology and the natural world--all of a sudden it seemed like academia really wasn't what I wanted it to be like. Do I want to work in an environment that is not going to allow me to say completely obviously true, things is that male and female exist? So really I no longer even wanted to have that job anymore given how much it's changed, since I had gone into it you know 12 years ago now at this point um so yeah so I was actually okay with it destroying my career um because I wanted to to be able to speak the truth."

Continue ReadingPayPal and Etsy Cancel Colin Wright Because He Teaches Basic Biology in his Writings