THE DURHAM REPORT, THE SPYGATE AND THE INEXTRICABLE TIE WITH THE ITALIAN DEEP STATE
By Cesare Sacchetti | The Eye Of The Needle | June 2, 2023
Fraud and treason. These are the first two words that come up to our mind when we read the Durham report.
In the report written by the special prosecutor appointed in 2019 by the then AG William Barr is narrated the plot to overthrow the Trump presidency.
When President Trump claims that this was the most subversive plot in the history of America, he’s certainly right.
An institution like the FBI, which was supposed to guard the regularity of the election, was the one who instead conspired to frame one of the candidates.
After the publication of the Durham report, the image of the FBI is definitely tainted.
And the most outrageous thing that shows how the FBI is a politicized institution is the fact that the latter acted on the orders of Hillary Clinton.
At page 98 of the report, we find the beginning of this conspiracy against Donald Trump.
Everything dates back to April 2016 when a legal firm that was working for the Clinton campaign was assigned a specific task.
Find, or better cook up, dirt to discredit Donald Trump. The legal firm hired Perkins Coie, a Washington based investigative agency.
Perkins Coie was tasked to find compromising information about Donald Trump in order to show that the Republican candidate was a sort of “Putin’s agent”.
This is the birth of the infamous Steele’s dossier named after his creator, Christopher Steele. Christopher Steele was a former agent of the British secret services, which apparently did not want to do anything with him.
Steel wrote a bogus dossier where he claims that Trump had intercourse in a Moscow hotel with Russian prostitutes whom were asked also to pee on the bed where Obama had supposedly slept years before.
This is the kind of outlandish garbage that was put into the dossier and this shows us, once again, the stunning proportions of this farce.
However, this “material” was the basis that allowed the FBI to launch the infamous Crossfire Hurricane probe.
Crossfire Hurricane is the beginning of the investigation where Trump was suspected of “Russian collusion”.
After the probe started, the FBI illegally wiretapped Carter Page, Trump’s former foreign consultant, and Paul Manafort, former director of Trump’s campaign.
And the Special Prosecutor is very clear in pointing out how their surveillance would have not been authorized without the Steele report.
The FBI and the intelligence community failed to do the proper due diligence of this information and the report, at page 96 of his report, points out this as well.
Durham writes that “neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”
Evidence against Trump could not be founded because it was simply not there. And the institutions that were supposed to check Steele’s claims basically took his allegations at face value.
However, Crossfire Hurricane was launched also through the involvement of a foreign actor, which is Italy in this case.
In May 2016, George Papadopoulos, a former Trump consultant made some incautious revelations to Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat close to the Clintons.
Papadopoulos said to Downer that he had received some compromising information about Hillary Clinton from Joseph Mifsud when he had met him in Italy two months before.
Joseph Mifsud is an enigmatic character. He is a Maltese professor at the Link Campus University in Rome, which is a university known to be quite close to the Anglosphere environment.
Actually, Papadopoulos took the bait of Mifsud who is close to the American Democratic party as well.
The Maltese professor has disappeared ever since. Some sources claim that the Italian secret service are hiding him because of his crucial role in the conspiracy against Trump.
However, we will come back later on the role played by the Italian deep state.
Now we must go back to Crossfire Hurricane.
Obama green lighted Spygate
Once the investigation against Trump was launched, President Obama was immediately informed about it.
In the summer of 2016 the word was spread in the intelligence community about the “Clinton Intelligence plan”.
Obama was briefed by then CIA director, Joseph Brennan, who said to the President how the Clinton campaign was working to frame Trump by falsely associating him with the Russian government.
Obama did not stop the plot nor he tried to halt the illegal FBI investigation. On the contrary, he gave a green light to it.
The conspiracy against Donald Trump had the blessing of Barack Obama who chose to help Hillary Clinton in her plan.
Some months later after this summit, in October, former Italian PM, Matteo Renzi, paid a visit to Obama in the White House.
In that period, Renzi was busy in supporting his failed Yes referendum campaign to reform the Italian constitution and he was also seeking endorsements from international relevant figures, like Obama.
Obama backed Renzi’s constitutional reform with a public statement that it clearly looked a meddling into Italy’s political affairs.
However, according to Papadopoulos, when Obama hosted Renzi at the White House asked him to play a part in the conspiracy against Donald Trump.
And here we have to meet new characters, who are the Occhioneros siblings, Giulio and Francesca Maria.
In that period, the Occhioneros were accused of illegal espionage against Italian institutional figures. The probe launched by the DA of Rome is called “EyePyramid” and it floods the pages of the Italian media.
The two were arrested and they later started denouncing a plot against them.
Giulio Occhionero is a nuclear engineer with advanced IT skills. He wrote to the then US Ambassador, Lewis Eisenberg, and to the US Congress.
Mr. Occhionero in his letters reveals the plot of the Italian authorities against him. According to him, his servers were hacked by the Italian postal police along with their respective IT division, the CNPAIC.
The goal of this operation was to plant some of Clinton’s email on the servers of his firm in the United States and then trying to associate these emails to Trump because of Occhionero’s relations with the Republican party.
So Occhionero in this story played the role of the classical patsy, chosen to frame someone else.
If his version is correct, the plot against Trump proceeded on two parallel ways: on the one hand, there was the American side of the FBI that was illegally spying on Trump campaign; on the other, there were the Italian authorities that were acting jointly with the US institutions to associate Trump with the Russian government.
In the first months of the conspiracy, we find tangible trace of this collaboration between the US and Italian authorities.
In April 2016, Kieran Ramsey, former legal attaché of the US embassy, wrote a letter to Nunzia Ciardi, director of the Italian postal police.

Ramsey’s letter to the Italian postal police
Ciardi is an interesting character because her name surfaced in the Italian mainstream media in 2021 when she was interviewed about the surveillance of the “no vax” activists.
It is still not clear to this day what was the extent of this surveillance and who authorized it considering the fact that the “no vax” activists were not committing any crime.
However, Ramsey wrote to Ciardi and he thanked her for the collaboration of her office in identifying the location of Occhionero’s emails.
It was April and Occhionero was still not investigated by the DA of Rome. Nevertheless, his name was in an official letter signed by the legal attaché of the American embassy and addressed to the Italian authorities.
The Italian engineer thinks that the kind of cybernetic attack that was enforced against his servers could not be operated without an ISP, Internet Service Provider, TIM, in this case.
And only a government could force to participate an ISP in this kind of hacking operation.
This also explains the visit paid by William Barr in Rome. Barr came to Italy to investigate Italy’s role in the Spygate case.
And here we can see once again the deep tie between the American and the Italian deep state. A “special relationship” that dates back to 1945 when after the loss of WW2, Italy has been living in a condition of limited sovereignity.
Italy has not been enjoying an autonomous foreign policy like the other countries who joined NATO. Italy’s foreign policy was mostly dictated by Washington and when Rome did not want to comply was threatened and harassed like what happened to former Italy’s PM, Aldo Moro, who was warned by Henry Kissinger to halt his policy.
Therefore, the Italian deep state finds itself in a condition of subordination to Washington. US governments used Italy as a strategic platform to keep up the old unipolar order of the past century.
This probably explains why Washington chose Italy to carry out its subversive plans against Trump. The Italian deep state is a sort of rogue agent, or just muscle for the US side to use in these kinds of “tricky” situations.
This also explains why Italy, once again, played a fundamental role in another subversive plot against Trump whose name is “Italygate”, which we exposed in this blog in December 2020.
After all, the Italian establishment can rule Italy only with the protection of the Washington guarantor and it must execute the orders of the latter.
When Trump stepped into the political arena, both sides saw a lethal treat. Trump had no interest in pursuing that relationship with the Italian establishment.
His mission was to free America from the rule of the Washington lobbies, which had been controlling Italy for decades.
Trump ended this axis. He severed the umbilical cord that tied the Italian deep state to the American one.
This is why the Durham report closed a cycle. A cycle where the walls were closed in on those who committed treason against the President of the United States.
Although the report does not explicitly mention Italy’s role, Trump has probably the proof about the involvement of everyone in this coup d’état. And this not only haunts the nights of the several people in Washington.
It haunts the nights of several people in Rome too.
Europe’s Digital Services Act Puts Free Speech at the Mercy of Eurocrats
BY DAVID THUNDER | THE FREEDOM BLOG | JUNE 3, 2023
The European Union’s Internal Market Commissioner, Thierry Breton, was apparently miffed that Elon Musk withdrew Twitter from the EU’s “voluntary code of practice against disinformation.” He was sufficiently put out by Twitter’s withdrawal from the “voluntary code” that he felt the need to publicly reprimand Twitter for not gratefully submitting to the European Union’s expert guidance: “You can run but you can’t hide… Beyond voluntary commitments, fighting disinformation will be legal obligation under Digital Services Act as of August 25th.”

The declared aim of the new Digital Service Act is “to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market for intermediary services by setting out harmonised rules for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment that facilitates innovation and in which fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, including the principle of consumer protection, are effectively protected.”
Who can argue against a “safe, predictable and trusted online environment”? Who would argue against “consumer protection”? And who would argue against Mr Breton’s commitment to the fight against “disinformation”? I certainly would, because when a person or institution in a position of great power endorses values like “predictability,” rails against “disinformation,” and promises to keep us all “safe” on the internet, you can be sure that it will be “safety,” “predictability,” and “disinformation,” as viewed from their self-serving ideological and political perspective.
I am just as worried as Mr Breton about “disinformation,” but my chief concern is with disinformation coming from official sources, which can do an extraordinary amount of harm due to the extraordinary reach and prestige of official organisations. It is these same organisations that Mr Breton would like to put in charge of policing “disinformation”: organisations like national governments, that have been among the most frequent perpetrators of false and misleading information, on matters of no small moment, from the efficacy and safety of Covid vaccines, masks and lockdowns to the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the true standing of climate “science,” and the potential harms to the economy and food supply chain of aggressive climate interventions such as the expropriation of farmland.
The Digital Services Act is an endless maze of complicated regulations worthy of a team of lawyers. Seeing as I don’t have a budget to hire a team of lawyers, I decided to skim through the Act for myself. It does not make for pleasant bedtime reading, not only because it is a morass of complicated legalese, but also, because what hides behind this legalese is an attempt by EU politicians to get social media platforms under their thumb, through
- the obligation on the part of social media companies to periodically submit content moderation and “risk mitigation” reports to EU bureacrats
- EU supervision of social media platforms’ policing of “harmful” information, which could potentially include health misinformation as well as “illegal hate speech”
- the creation of new emergency powers in the European Commission to “require” social media platforms to take actions to “prevent, eliminate or limit” any use of their services that might “contribute” to a “threat” to public security or public health
… and all backed up by crippling fines of up to 6% of a company’s worldwide turnover for non-compliance. Yes, you heard that right: up to six percent of a company’s worldwide turnover.
At bottom, the Digital Services Act is an attempt to ramp up the level of control that EU bureacrats have over the flow of information on social media platforms. You would have to have a very short historical memory to think that broad powers of censorship will generally be used to advance the cause of truth and justice. Whether Mr Thierry Breton and his colleagues will be successful in forcing social media companies to do their bidding, this much is clear: the Digital Services Act creates a European legal environment that is increasingly hostile to free speech.
EU’s Green Deal to have dire implications for East African farmers — study
North Africa Post | June 1, 2023
As the EU executive is adopting intermediate proposals in its international climate policy as outlined in the European Green Deal, this will have serious and multifaceted implications for Africa, according to a recent study by Eastern Africa Farmers Federation (EAFF).
The Green Deal provides a road map for a socioecological transition to a low-carbon future and the building blocks for a green economic growth strategy to address climate change, energy, and biodiversity.
According to Stephen Muchiri, CEO of the Nairobi-based EAFF, the stringent policies outlined in the Farm to Fork (F2F) and Chemical Sustainability Strategies will greatly affect global trade in agricultural inputs and outputs and, by extension, also the economies of African countries that greatly depend on agriculture. Muchiri also warns that the new additional requirements, as set by the European Commission, threaten the livelihoods of many small producers and may significantly reduce the export earnings of East African countries such as Uganda, which is the second largest horticulture exporter in the region.
Horticultural exports from East Africa to the European Union are valued at more than $2.3 billion, with smallholder farmers contributing up to 70% of the export volumes. The study revealed that farmers would be overburdened by the new regulations because substantial costs will be introduced with the new specifications on standards, certifications, logistics, and carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAM).
This prompts Muchiri to warn that the implementation of the Green Deal in its current form falls short in support of progressive and sustainable export-oriented farming for most East African smallholder farmers as it will introduce additional constraints that will impact the region’s competitiveness, sustainability, and livelihoods negatively, so whereas the EU will achieve its goals, the countries of export will be reeling from significant production and compliance challenges.
Western weapons used in Ukrainian raid inside Russia – WaPo
Moscow earlier published photos of destroyed Western hardware on Russia’s territory as Washington struggled to explain them

RT | June 3, 2023
Military equipment and small arms provided by several NATO nations, including the US, ended up in the hands of militants who launched a cross-border raid into Russia’s Belgorod region in May, the Washington Post reported on Saturday, citing sources linked to US intelligence.
At least four tactical vehicles initially supplied to the Ukrainian military by the US and Poland were employed in the May raid, raising concerns about Kiev’s commitment to fulfilling the demands of its Western supporters, the sources told WaPo.
The US and its Western allies have consistently expressed opposition to the use of Western arms by Ukraine in attacks on Russian territory. They also urged Kiev to “carefully track the billions of dollars’ worth of weapons that have flowed into the country,” WaPo reported.
The attack in question occurred in late May, and in response, the Russian Defense Ministry announced that “over 70 Ukrainian terrorists, four armored combat vehicles, and five pickup trucks” had been destroyed in the clash in Belgorod. The remaining militants were subsequently forced back into Ukraine and targeted by Russian artillery. The incursion resulted in one civilian death and 12 injuries, according to Russian authorities.
The Russian military shared a series of photographs showing what appeared to be destroyed Western equipment abandoned by the militants. Some of the images depicted two M1151A1 Humvee armored cars stuck in bomb craters, while others displayed two M1224 MaxxPro armored vehicles. An AMZ Dzik-2 armored car, manufactured in Poland, was also visible in the images.
Kiev attempted to distance itself from the raid by claiming it was carried out by the “Freedom of Russia Legion” and the “Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK),” the neo-Nazi units responsible for a similar attack in the Bryansk Region in March. The Pentagon and the US State Department expressed doubts regarding the authenticity of the images.
The State Department also said that the US “does not encourage or enable attacks inside of Russia.” Washington also does not “support the use of US-made equipment … for attacks inside of Russia,” it added.
According to the Washington Post, videos published by the “Freedom of Russia Legion” and the RDK militants themselves showed fighters using the Czech-made CZ Bren and Belgium’s FN SCAR assault rifles. Both types of weapons were provided to Ukraine by the respective nations, the paper said, adding that “Bren and SCAR rifles are commonly distributed to Ukraine’s soldiers” and foreign fighters who travel to Ukraine to combat Russian forces.
A spokesperson from the Belgian Defense Ministry informed the Washington Post that they only provided weapons to “official authorities and the regular army” in Ukraine, placing responsibility on Kiev for their usage. Poland and the Czech Republic declined to comment on the findings presented by the Washington Post.
The use of Western military supplies in an attack on Russian territory raises the issue of Kiev’s accountability, Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington-based think-tank, told WaPo. The Ukrainians “are clearly complicit here,” Cancian, a retired US Marine Corps officer, added.
The bureaucrats & science retards responsible for the last three years of destruction and mass medical experimentation are unrepentant and eager to do the same thing all over again
eugyppius: a plague chronicle | June 3, 2023
While I travel and work on a longer piece, I thought you might enjoy some outtakes from this recent article in Welt, about the complete lack of self-reflection exhibited by German pandemic Science-Followers even after the failure of their policies:
Helge Braun … the former head of Angela Merkel’s Chancellery, was invited to Berlin’s Futurium to discuss science and politics. Behind the scenes, Braun was a key figure in the German Corona response. Time for a few awkward questions? The CDU politician need not fear them – despite his vehement advocacy of school closures and lockdowns …
He was joined by three members of the Leopoldina [that is, the German National Academy of Sciences] – climate researcher Gerald Haug, its president; paediatrician and adolescent physician Jutta Gärtner and sociologist Armin Nassehi. The Academy became known during the pandemic not for its balanced scientific advice, but primarily for its politicised demands for tougher measures. And as often as its members emphasised institutional independence from the government that evening, you could tell their intellectual independence was notably lacking.
“Team Caution,” as members of the Leopoldina members still like to call themselves, was full of praise for their own work … “The pandemic was a good example of science-based policy advice,” Haug explains – and by “good” he really does mean that the Academy advised well … “Team Caution” always did everything right … The sensible majority followed the recommendations of the government, the Leopoldina and the RKI. Everything else is nasty fake news from the internet.
Yet Haug himself is a good example of the Leopoldina’s convoluted self-perception. On the one hand, he insisted repeatedly that science only represents “the facts”; that is, he claims objectivity for his profession. On the other hand, Haug freely admits that the Leopoldina aimed to “really hit it out of the park” and “make a splash” with their recommendations. “We’re often too soft…”
A real problem with the technocrats, is that they only have relevance in one direction. As soon as the National Academy of Sciences issues an opinion that the virus isn’t much to worry about and people should continue to live their lives as before, their political relevance is finished. For this reason alone, technocratic systems will be biased towards intervention, even in harmless situations, and nothing they tell you to do can ever be trusted.
The damage inflicted by lockdowns, the vaccines, social exclusion and attendant social conflicts – nobody wanted to talk about that. Nor did anyone want to discuss Braun’s role as one of the main instigators of the German pandemic response, distinguished internationally especially by the long school closures. As is well known, Braun’s promise that all measures would end “as soon as we have made an offer of vaccination to everyone in Germany” turned out to be empty talk. His threat that the vaccinated should receive “more freedom” than the unvaccinated, on the other hand, became brutal reality. No matter. For Braun, the Corona era represents a positive interaction between politics and science, which serves as an important example for the future.
Braun claimed that “Citizens don’t like arguments in politics. The strange democratic understandings of this unassuming Merkel confident could be summed up as “Dare to demand more expertocracy …
At the end, they moved on from Corona to discuss climate change. A scientist in the audience suggested that the Leopoldina should … take to the streets. The opinionated moderator suggested that, when it comes to climate, fear is rational; and that, in consequence, the rational mandate of science would be to spread fear …
Apparently, the politicians and academics who set the tone in the Corona crisis now feel encouraged to extend the Corona model to future grand programmes …
Mark my words: Should they ever be allowed to get the public panic juggernaut up and running again, what they do next will make Corona seem like a mildly rough case of cultural and political indigestion. They’ve learned that the hard limits on their power are far weaker than they ever imagined. Their dark ambitions will hang over us like a Sword of Damocles for decades now.
The UK’s “Chilling” Secret Unit That Monitored Lockdown Dissent
More revelations about the secretive Counter Disinformation Unit
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | June 3, 2023
A clandestine UK Government unit dubbed the Counter-Disinformation Unit (CDU) has been implicated in a troubling endeavor to curb and control online discussions about the controversial Covid-19 lockdown policies. The covert operation allegedly involved the collaboration of social media companies in a strategic bid to quell supposed domestic “threats.”
According to revelations from Freedom of Information requests and data protection requests from The Telegraph, posts critical of Covid-19 restrictions, including those questioning mass vaccination of children, were systematically removed.
Social media companies are now under scrutiny following allegations that their technologies were deployed to thwart the wide circulation or promotion of posts tagged as potentially problematic by the CDU or its Cabinet Office equivalent.
The files revealed the surreptitious monitoring of critics of the Government’s Covid plans. Artificial intelligence firms were reportedly enlisted by the government to search social media platforms, flagging any discussions opposing vaccine passports.
In a startling revelation, the BBC was implicated in clandestine government policy discussions regarding this alleged misinformation.
The CDU, hosted by the Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS), operated a “trusted flagger” system with major social media companies. This mechanism expedited requests for content removal. The CDU, still operational, was formed in 2019, initially focusing on the European elections, later shifting its attention to the pandemic.
Critics, including MPs and freedom of speech campaigners, have labeled the revelations as “truly chilling” and a strategy tantamount to “censoring British citizens” — a tactic likened to those of the Chinese Communist Party.
“Any attempt by governments to shut down legitimate debate is hugely concerning, but to discover that DCMS actively sought to censor the views of those who were speaking up for children’s welfare is truly chilling,” said Miriam Cates, a Conservative MP to The Telegraph.
A government spokesman refuted the allegations, stating that the unit was designed to track narratives and trends using publicly available information to safeguard public health and national security. The spokesman insisted that the unit never monitored individuals and had a strict policy against referring journalists and MPs to social media platforms.
Like the Curious Bride in “Bluebeard”
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | May 31, 2023
Recently I’ve been thinking about the old French folktale, Bluebeard. For readers who are unfamiliar with the story, Bluebeard is a nobleman who has been married six previous times to young women who have all mysteriously vanished. Wikipedia provides a succinct account of what happens when he marries a seventh time.
[A neighbor’s youngest daughter who decides to marry him] goes to live with him in his rich and luxurious palace in the countryside, away from her family.
Bluebeard announces that he must leave for the country and gives the palace keys to his wife. She is able to open any room with them, each of which contain some of his riches, except for an underground chamber that he strictly forbids her to enter lest she suffer his wrath. He then goes away, leaves the palace, and the keys in her hands. She invites her sister, Anne, and her friends and cousins over for a party. However, she is eventually overcome with the desire to see what the secret room holds, and she sneaks away from the party and ventures into it.
She immediately discovers that the room is flooded with blood and the murdered corpses of Bluebeard’s previous six wives hanging on hooks from the walls. Horrified, she drops the key in the blood and flees the room.
I’ve long been intrigued by Bluebeard as an archetypal expression of the horror we may experience when we become curious to know what is going on behind the closed doors of power. Bluebeard is a powerful nobleman who is apparently beyond the law. His young bride is an ordinary girl who becomes implacably curious to see all of the rooms of his castle, which seem to symbolize the rooms of his soul.
I spent this evening carefully reviewing declassified e-mails authored by the eminent Scripps Institute virologist, Kristian Andersen. The first one was dated January 31, 2020 and addressed to Anthony Fauci:

The most noteworthy sentences in the email are:
The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome [0.1%] so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially look engineered. … I should mention that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike [Edward Holmes, Robert Garry, Michael Farzan] and myself all find the genome [of SARS-CoV-2] inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.
3.5 days later—shortly after a phone conference with Dr. Fauci and others—Dr. Andersen completely changed his tune. By then, the decision had been to submit a letter to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine regarding the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

Please note the final sentence:
If one of the main purposes of this document is to counter those fringe theories [about the virus being engineered] I think it’s very important that we do so strongly and in plain language (“consistent with” [natural evolution] is a favorite of mine when talking to scientists, but not when talking to the public—especially conspiracy theorists).
After these e-mails were released to the public in response to a FOIA request, Dr. Andersen claimed that he learned revelatory things about the novel virus in the 3.5 days following his initial e-mail to Fauci, and that these revelations caused his perfect volte-face. However, it seems to me that his explanation doesn’t really account for his strident, unequivocal assertions in his second e-mail.
Many of the recipients’ names in his February 4, 2020 have been redacted, but there [are] many apart from the two men who received his January 31 e-mail (Dr. Fauci and Jeremy Farrar). His first e-mail was a matter of strictly confidential counsel. His second pertains to an open letter—about to be sent to a large institution with many members—declaring that anyone who even suspects the novel virus to have emerged from a lab is a crackpot conspiracy theorist.
What on earth could inspire a virologist to adopt a posture of such Machiavellian duplicity about an infectious agent that—as he well knew—was about to inflict a catastrophe on all of mankind? He had to have known that such pronouncements—coming from a virologist of his eminence—would likely retard a thorough and impartial investigation of the virus’s origin.
Contemplating this question this evening, I thought Bluebeard’s young bride when she discovers the chamber of horrors in her husband’s castle. I suspect that Tess Lawrie felt the same way in her encounter with Dr. Andrew Hill, which she recounted in the short documentary film Dear Andy.
The EU Plans To Test Twitter To See How Fast It Responds To Censorship Demands
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | June 3, 2023
The European Union will stress test Twitter and other platforms to see how well they comply with the upcoming censorship law, the Digital Services Act (DSA), whose enforcement will begin in August. In a similar style program to that created by the Chinese Communist Party, where government enforcers visit tech companies directly, a team of 10 digital specialists will visit the companies later this month, said Thierry Breton, the EU Commissioner for Internal Market.
The test will help companies learn how the DSA will be enforced. Breton, who will also visit the companies, said the team will review how platforms respond to what is problematic content under the law including content that has been flagged by the EU and content that has not been flagged.
The team will also review why some content is not flagged, citing an example of “fake news that caused disturbances but was promoted because it generated virality and advertising.”
“Did you have enough moderators beforehand? Was it promoted by the algorithm?” Breton said. “We want to do this for real, in the real world, so they see how it happens, and above all so they prepare,” Breton said.
Some of the findings from the test will be made public while some will only be communicated to the companies.
In an interview where he talked about the visits to the social media companies, Breton said: “I’m not threatening anyone. We are here to help companies comply with our new law.”
Last week, after Twitter withdrew from the voluntary Code of Conduct on Disinformation, Breton warned: “You can run but you can’t hide,” adding that “fighting disinformation will be legal obligation under #DSA as of August 25.”

