Waiting for the Dust to Settle After the New Release of JFK Documents

It is all something to behold this morning on  X (Twitter). Numerous people, many assisted by AI are trying to make sense of the JFK assassination documents released at the direction of Donald Trump. I'd already seen credible accounts that suggest many CIA connections to JFK's assassination. An excellent place to start is The Devil's Chessboard, by David Talbot. Glenn Greenwald comments: Reading Talbot's book is like getting a kick in the stomach. I'm partway through the book and I am convinced more and more that JFK's assassination was a CIA coup. And I am more and more convinced that most of our presidential elections have been orchestrated by the CIA through the use of powerful tools of propaganda and censorship that heavily influence (if not outright control) legacy "news" outlets. [More . . . .]

Continue ReadingWaiting for the Dust to Settle After the New Release of JFK Documents

FFFO Report: EU, Financed by U.S. Taxpayers is Trying to Shut Down Free Speech in the U.S

Excerpt from a new must-read report issued by the Foundation for Freedom Online: "23 US-Funded Organizations Drive The EU’s War on Tech Companies."

The American taxpayer is bankrolling online censorship in Europe. Multiple organizations involved in enforcing the EU’s draconian Digital Services Act (DSA), which imposes massive fines on American tech platforms found guilty of carrying “misinformation” or “hate speech,” are American entities backed by American government funding.

Supporters of these efforts, many of whom are deeply tied to the legacy US foreign policy establishment, admit that the goal of these efforts is to shut down free speech for Americans. The pressure is about to mount, as the previously-voluntary EU code of practice on disinformation becomes a mandatory regulation governing tech companies operating in the region.

The Foundation for Freedom Online has analyzed organizations that signed the EU’s code of practice, or are involved in enforcing it, finding eight organizations that receive funding from US government sources.

Additionally, two of the organizations on the list, NewsGuard and Bellingcat, are drectly involved in enforcing the EU’s censorship regime, as active participants in Europe’s network of EU-backed “digital observatories” aimed at detecting disfavored online narratives that can be analysed and targeted for censorship.

Who are these U.S. funded entities that are working overtime to deny Americans their right to free speech?  The above report names the names. And it is all looking incredibly ominous. The bottom line is that the U.S. right to free speech is being attacked by "foreign" entities that are financed by U.S. taxpayers. Americans are afflicted with the free speech version of an auto-immune dysfunction. Here is more from the report:

As the Foundation for Freedom Online highlighted in its 2024 Censorship Index, the U.S. government also pushed censorship in Europe through the State Department’s office of public diplomacy:

Gave the Atlantic Council a $300,000 grant to build a “transatlantic response to disinformation.” This grant was seemingly used to fund a conference involving conversations about cooperating on the EU Digital Services Ac (DSA)t. A grant transaction description mentions a June 2022 conference.

The Delegation of the EU to the United States and the Atlantic Council hosted a June 2022 EU-US Defense and Future Forum. During the conference, members of an audience, which included officials from the U.S. State Department, asked questions to and attended a talk by Gerard De Graaf on the EU-US Digital Policy Agenda, largely centered around the DSA.

Gerard De Graff was the Director of Digital Transformation at the European Commission. He is responsible largely for the creation of the DSA. De Graff was named Special Envoy for Digital to the US and head of the newly created EU San Francisco Office in September 2022, seemingly fitted near Silicon Valley to push American tech platforms into compliance with Orwellian European regulations.

Continue ReadingFFFO Report: EU, Financed by U.S. Taxpayers is Trying to Shut Down Free Speech in the U.S

Walter Kirn: “Censorship is Just for the Prisoners who’ve Escaped the Info Dome.”

Walter Kirn: "In a way, censorship is just for the prisoners who've escaped the info dome. You know, censorship is just shooting the escapees but keeping people inside the dome and playing that 24 hour news act like music as maybe the main imperative. That is the part that I think will truly blow our minds." Walter has perfectly expressed something that distresses me every hour of the waking day. There are vast numbers of people in the US who ingest only the high-calorie low nutrition version of information. I've referred to this type of "news" hundreds of times as "corporate news" or "legacy news," to distinguish it from the work of journalists who rely primarily upon the contributions of individuals who value the quality of the work. The legacy news includes five major players who I have often featured in my posts about the legacy media walking in lockstep to withhold information or to propagandize us. Once upon a time these outlets practiced something more akin to journalism, but we can see and hear with our own eyes and ears (I have posted hundreds of examples) that these outlets are no even trying to tell us what is going on around us, no longer offering conflicting perspectives, no longer putting their stories into historical perspectives and no longer pointing out the hypocrisy of public figures who make claims that conflict with their prior statements each day. Rather, in coordination with the U.S. government (and its many agencies, such as DHS, DOD, CIA as well as CIA's cutout USAID) our major news outlets work hard to convince consumers of pre-determined narratives--they write these plot first, then they go out to construct the facts. They do it like lawyers representing their clients in court--their is no attempt to be even-handed.  In short, they engage in Censorship and Propaganda: The modern day versions of Scylla and Charybdis.

People who continue trust legacy news outlets have been convinced by these big corporate-monied narrative-purveyors that alternate opinions and dissident voices are radioactive. As they did throughout COVID, they argue that dissidents are far more nefarious than people, way worse than people you merely find disagreeable. Dissidents must be avoided at all costs because the dangers they pose with their facts and opinions are existentially dangerous. This way of promulgating news is a great danger. For example, by pounding a simplistic narrative about Ukraine-Russia, as many as one million people have died and the US Treasury funds have been diverted from helping Americans to going into a big black hole.  As a result of stifling COVID dissidents, they got almost everything wrong (I found this on X recently:

Dozens of people with whom I once experienced mutual warm feelings have cooled. If we bump into  each other, they look at me with suspicion. Some of them have accused me of being a Republican, even though my views are largely consistent with what I've always believed, including this: for the 40 years during which I voted almost entirely for Democrats. That said, I have spent my entire life declaring my independence from tribes, political, religious and otherwise. I'm proud of that and I have a lot of criticism for Republicans too, for instance the elimination of the CFPB. My acquaintances on the new Left tend to show intense unwillingness to consider alternative facts and opinions. They are locked down and in fetal position. This is not happenstance--this behavior is the result of one the tectonic plates underlying their media ecosystem. In earlier times, their information diet might have been more varied, but they are now victims of Stockholm Syndrome:

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingWalter Kirn: “Censorship is Just for the Prisoners who’ve Escaped the Info Dome.”

About the Illusion of Information Adequacy

What happens when to a person who fails to expose themselves to only a few "news" sources? What does it do to their world view when they fail to take affirmative steps to engage with a broadbased news ecosystem that includes viewpoints they disagree with? For instance, what happens when they only follow legacy (corporate) news outlets? What happens when they refuse to consider independent journalists? What I've noticed is that they are much more confident in their opinions, not less. What's going on? At X, Owen Gregoian offers an explanation of the "Illusion of of information adequacy." Excerpt:

Why We’re Confident with Only Half the Story | Neuroscience News

Summary: A new study reveals that people often overestimate the amount of information they have when making decisions, a phenomenon researchers call the “illusion of information adequacy.”

Participants who were only given partial information about a situation were just as confident in their decisions as those who had the complete story. They believed they had enough facts and thought others would likely make the same choice. However, when some participants were later presented with the opposing view, many were open to changing their decision, suggesting that having more complete information can bridge misunderstandings.

Key Facts

- People feel confident in decisions, even with only partial information.

- This “illusion of information adequacy” leads to overconfidence in judgments.

- Additional information often leads to more informed, balanced decision-making.

Source: Ohio State University

Of course, the same problems result with the government or the legacy news consortium limit your access to alternate viewpoints. In these circumstances we are fooled by a false consensus. It looks like everyone agrees, but this is only because everyone else has been censored. That leads to such things as allowing others to put a dangerous so-called vaccine into your arm.  When free speech is limited, it leads to things like this:

Continue ReadingAbout the Illusion of Information Adequacy