Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Congressman Ken Buck challenges Zuckerberg on COVID censorship and more

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim the Net | July 4, 2021

In a letter to CEO Mark Zuckerberg, GOP Rep. Ken Buck, from Colorado, criticized Facebook’s content moderation policies. Buck pointed out, among other things, how Facebook’s content moderation practices are biased against some opinions.

“During the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic, Facebook removed more than 7 million posts that purportedly spread misinformation about the virus, and your company placed contextual notes on more than 98 million posts it deemed as potentially misleading,” Buck wrote. “Monitoring posts across Facebook and Instagram for misinformation about COVID has been an undoubtedly herculean task, but Facebook has vigorously taken on this challenge.”

Buck said that the platform censored content on the origins of the pandemic and the Hunter Biden story for “the supposed interest of public informational safety.”

“Your company is only able to selectively moderate content based on the political agenda of your company and its employees because Facebook possesses monopoly power over the market,” Buck wrote. He warned that “stifling ideas can backfire if it leads people to believe there’s a ‘real story’ that is being suppressed.’”

In both cases (the Hunter Biden story and the origins of the pandemic), “Facebook has had the embarrassing position of having to defend its censorship of legitimate content.” In recent months, more evidence has emerged that supports the lab leak theory. Additionally, “the unconditional erasure of reports that were damaging to the-candidate Joe Biden regarding his son, Hunter Biden, has since proved to be unfounded.”

Buck continued to point out that Facebook has been keen on censoring legal content, but has failed to remove “illegal and sexually abusive content.”

“The company appears to have an astonishing lack of concern about illegal and sexually abusive content that is rampantly permitted on your company’s platforms,” Buck wrote to Zuckerberg.

“Facebook has established a rigorous system for policing speech that is Constitutionally protected, yet your company’s failure to effectively screen illegal and exploitative content represents a misalignment of values that is deeply disconcerting.”

Buck’s letter also highlights Zuckerberg’s recent testimony in Congress about reforms to Section 230, expressing disapproval of Zuckerberg’s recommendation of what the Congressman described as “counterproductive actions.”

“Recently, you testified before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. In this hearing, you advocated for vaguely defined Section 230 reforms, saying that the law should ‘condition immunity for the larger platforms on having a generally effective system in place to moderate clearly illegal types of content,’” Buck wrote.

“Simply because a company has established a system to review potentially illegal content does not create any standard for ensuring such content is systematically removed from the platform,” he explained. “I agree with you that no system is perfect, but if Congress were to adopt your recommendation, it would codify the status quo and fail to address the issues that are pervasive across Facebook.”

The letter concluded with a plea to Zuckerberg: “I urge you to take necessary steps to ensure your platform is an open platform for the free and open exchange of ideas and an unwelcoming place for illegal and exploitative content.”

July 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

What I am seeing happening in the world of Covid now

By Meryl Nass, MD | July 4, 2021

1. A case was adjudicated in Weimar, Germany regarding the necessity of pandemic measures (and the actual occurrence of a dangerous pandemic) for children several months ago. The plaintiffs won, and the Weimar government was ordered to dismantle its lockdown and school-based measures.

Next, the judge was attacked, had electronics seized, was searched and possibly jailed. This was a couple of months ago.

This week, 14 locations related to 8 people (the judge, another judge who was a friend of the first judge, the expert witnesses, the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s partner were all searched and electronics were seized. The best guess is that the German government is on a fishing expedition to build a case against the judge, witnesses etc. for some illicit behavior. This is unprecedented lawlessness against the judicial system itself, in an attempt to over turn the first successful legal challenge to the pandemic response. Very important case. Consider supporting the defense of those who were attacked.

2. The paper I wrote about earlier, published last week in the Vaccines journal was retracted, with no methodologic criticism, no inaccuracy alleged, simply because it found that for every 3 lives saved by vaccination, 2 are lost due to adverse reactions to the vaccine.

3. The CDC’s ACIP meeting made clear that CDC intends to begin booster shots in the fall, even without supportive evidence that they are needed or even beneficial.

4. The Army Times and Navy Times have written that vaccinations for servicemembers will become mandatory in September, after the vaccines are fully licensed. One article claims only 15% of Army soldiers have taken the vaccine.

5. CDC and FDA have dug their heels in to cover up the adverse reactions and hide the databases they use to determine actual adverse event rates.

6. It is said that 500 colleges are requiring vaccinations of students and usually of staff as well. Legal proceedings against these mandates have been threatened at U California, U Connecticut, U Indiana and Rutgers–interestingly, all state universities.

7. People in Sydney, Australia went out to the parks and open areas yesterday despite instructions to stay home, enjoying the unseasonable warmth without masks. Will Australia’s impossible “zero covid” policy remain standing?

8. Governments appear to be testing the waters regarding what the population will tolerate vis a vis lockdown measures.

9. The NEW BUSINESS ITEM #33 at the National Education Association’s (NEA) virtual assembly, which called for forced covid testing and vaccination of all students and staff to reopen schools in September, was overwhelmingly defeated. One post on twitter said 81% of the delegates voted no.  It seems the crowd is realizing there is almost no Covid in the US.

10. Fourteen states offered lotteries up to 1 million dollars to encourage vaccinations. The NYT reports there was a short burst in vaccinations then it ended, and at least 2 states have given up the lottery plan as it failed to continue to produce the desired increase in vaccinations.

11. 47% of the total US population has been vaccinated. 8% more had just one dose, and most of them stopped after one. 67% of those over 18 have had at least one dose of vaccine; 58% have had both doses. It looks like this is where the numbers will stay. I think 40% of US adults are going to remained unvaccinated, or have decided to stop after one dose. How the government tries to corral this group into taking these dangerous vaccines will be interesting.

July 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Facebook blocks #Revolution hashtag on July 4th weekend

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim the Net | July 4, 2021

Facebook users are blocked from the hashtag #Revolution. The timing of the censorship is rather suspect considering this the 4th of July Weekend, a commemoration of the declaration of independence, which was brought about by the revolutionary wars.

If you search #Revolution on Facebook, you get the following message:

“Posts with #Revolution are temporarily hidden here. Some content in those posts goes against our Community Standards.”

Clicking the “Learn more” link on the warning redirects you to Facebook’s long page of Community Standards, not an explanation on why #Revolution is censored.

Even more confusing is that the platform allows you to include #Revolution in your post. What is the point of being allowed to type something you cannot see/search?

“Welcome to the re-education of America on Independence Day weekend…” Congressman Thomas Massie commented, showing the censorship.

I

July 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

YouTube suspends Right Side Broadcasting network prior to Trump rally

By Christina Maas | Reclaim the Net | July 3, 2021

Right Side Broadcasting Network has been announced that it has been banned from broadcasting on YouTube for seven days, just hours before a Trump rally that it planned to cover.

Also, many of the channel’s videos of President Donald Trump’s events and rallies have been deleted from its popular channel.

YouTube deleted videos that had several million views.

Footage of Trump at the first “Save America” rally in Ohio last week was deleted, as well as footage of his speech at the North Carolina GOP Convention.

YouTube says the videos violate its “Community Guidelines” of “spam, deceptive practices and scams,” an increasingly given reason when videos are deleted on the platform these days.

RSBN will be using its own app and Rumble to broadcast the July 3rd rally.

RSBN was founded in 2015 by Joe Seales. The conservative media company rose in popularity for live streaming Trump’s rallies on YouTube. The over 3,000 videos on RSBN’s YouTube channel have millions of views.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Prosecutors Drop Charges Against British Army Veterans Over Killings In Northern Ireland’s Troubles

Sputnik – 02.07.2021

On 30 January 1972 the British Army’s Parachute Regiment shot dead 13 unarmed Catholic civil rights marchers in Londonderry. The incident, known as Bloody Sunday, became a recruitment tool for the Provisional IRA who were determined to kick British troops out of Ulster.

Two retired British Army soldiers have been told they will not face trial for murder over incidents during The Troubles in Northern Ireland.

More than 3,600 people suffered violent deaths during The Troubles – 30 years of sectarian strife in Northern Ireland, which was ended by the Good Friday Agreement.

​Soldier F – believed to be a former member of the Parachute Regiment – was awaiting trial over the deaths of James Wray and William McKinney on Bloody Sunday in Londonderry.

Soldier B was facing a murder trial in relation to Daniel Hegarty, 15, who was shot in the head in Derry in July 1972.

The Public Prosecution Service reviewed both cases after another trial collapsed earlier this year.

In that case Soldiers A and C were acquitted of murdering IRA member Joe McCann after a court ruled statements they made were inadmissible.

​The PPS announced on Friday, 2 July, that in view of that ruling and the similarity of the evidence against Soldiers F and B “there was no longer a reasonable prospect of key evidence in proceedings against Soldier F and Soldier B being ruled admissible.”

The decision was greeted with anger by families of the Bloody Sunday victims, who said they would seek a judicial review.

John Kelly, whose brother Michael died on Bloody Sunday, said: “It’s a day of devastation but we’re not going to give up. The fight for justice goes on.”

​Soldier F had been the only person charged in relation to Bloody Sunday. The PPS had already decided there was insufficient evidence to charge 16 other former soldiers.

The British government announced in May it would introduce legislation to give greater protection to former soldiers who had served in Northern Ireland.

That followed the resignation of defence minister Johnny Mercer, who quit in disgust at the treatment of British Army veterans who had served in Northern Ireland.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

YouTube censors video of Nobel Prize winner Dr. Satoshi Ōmura discussing ivermectin

By Tom Parker | Reclaim the Net | July 2, 2021

Before the coronavirus pandemic, ivermectin was described as a “wonder” drug by the medical community. And in 2015, Dr. Satoshi Ōmura and Dr. William C. Campbell were awarded half the Nobel prize in Physiology or Medicine for their work that led to the development of ivermectin.

“The importance of Ivermectin for improving the health and wellbeing of millions of individuals with River Blindness and Lymphatic Filariasis, primarily in the poorest regions of the world, is immeasurable,” the Nobel Assembly stated in its press release for the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

But after the pandemic began, the tech giants have gone all out to purge content that recommends ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.

And today, these Big Tech policies against ivermectin resulted in one of Ōmura’s speeches where he discussed ivermectin being struck down for “violating YouTube’s community guidelines.”

“When the fascists at YouTube censor the Noble Prize winner Dr. Satoshi Omura, a man whose discoveries have saved a hundred million + from blindness, the world has entered a very, very dark place,” Australian Member of Parliament Craig Kelly tweeted. “I cannot express in words how angry & sad this makes me & fearful for the future.”

Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care, an alliance of physicians and scholars that has committed to “research and develop lifesaving protocols for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in all stages of illness,” also spoke out against the censorship and warned that “brilliant scientists and lifesaving science are systematically being gagged.”

Ōmura joins the ranks of many other senatorslawmakersmedical journalsbiologists, and YouTubers who have been censored by Big Tech for discussing ivermectin.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

In many states, minors may consent to receive COVID-19 shot even without parent’s knowledge

By Mordechai Sones | America’s Frontline Doctors | June 30, 2021

District Administration survey conducted just before the FDA’s authorization for 12-15-year-olds to receive the COVID-19 shot found that only 3 in 10 parents said they would vaccinate their children right away, with most instead wanting to wait and see, or saying they would not get their child vaccinated at all or would do so only if required for school.

However, with the authorization of Pfizer’s shot for 12-15-year-olds, a group that totals almost 17 million, minors can consent to receive the COVID-19 shot even without the parent’s knowledge in many states.

The age at which a minor can consent to receive the experimental biological agent in Alabama is age 14; in San Francisco, 12; Philadelphia, 12; North Carolina, 11; South Carolina, 16. America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Legal Director Ali Schultz explained: “They can all consent, minors can consent, on their own, even if they live with their mom and dad who are married, they live with their parents, no issues, the child literally can consent at school to receive the vaccine, without the parents even knowing.”

She continued: “We’ve had so many people reach out, and they were just heartbroken, they cannot believe that their child was able to get this without them even knowing, because as parents they were personally against the vaccine, and no-one even ran it by them.

“And what’s even scarier: It’s up to the health care provider, in a multitude of states; Iowa, Idaho, Washington, Arkansas; so if a ‘health care provider’ deems that it is appropriate for a minor to get the vaccine, then they can do so without parental consent.”

According to District Administration, although most states still require parental consent, “the landscape may be shifting slightly as more jurisdictions seek to encourage vaccination of young people.” Their specific findings are as follows:

  • Most states (41) require parental consent for vaccination of minors below the age of 18, although one of these states (NE) requires consent below age 19. There are some exceptions to these requirements:
    • Many allow for certain minors, such as those who are emancipated, homeless or living apart from their parent or guardian, or married, to self-consent.
    • Cities in two states (San Francisco in CA and Philadelphia in PA), have moved to allow minors, ages 12 and older, to self-consent for COVID-19 vaccination.
    • In one state (AZ), if a parent refuses to consent for COVID-19 vaccination, but if a child or a doctor requests it, a court order can be obtained to allow for vaccination.
  • In 5 states, a minor’s ability to self-consent is based on a specific age as follows:
    • Two states where a minor must be at least 16 (RI and SC)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 15 (OR)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 14 (AL)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 11 (DC; in DC, each healthcare provider may institute additional requirements which could include requiring a parent or guardian to be present).
  • The remaining 5 states apply the “mature minor doctrine”, meaning that there is no specific age cut-off but providers have discretion to decide if a minor possesses the maturity to consent for themselves (AR, ID, NC, TN, WA).
  • This means that parental consent has already been required for 16-17 year-olds in most states (41) since the initial authorization of the Pfizer vaccine on December 11, 2020. Two additional states require consent for some subset of 12-15 year-olds, bringing the count to 43 states where most minors in this age group would need parental consent. Once the next group of children is eligible for vaccination, those below age 12, this number will grow to 45.

National Vaccine Information Center‘s Barbara Loe Fisher commented on the “shifting landscape”: “This past year, we have seen many lawmakers in the U.S. and other countries vote to eliminate or severely restrict civil liberties in the name of the public health.  One of the most outrageous legislative actions violating parental and human rights took place in Washington, D.C. in November 2020 when City Council officials gave doctors the power to vaccinate children as young as 11 years old and hide what they did from parents. The D.C. Mayor refused to veto the bill and, in January 2021, the U.S. Congress sat on its hands and gave tacit approval to enactment of the most dangerous child vaccination law in America.”

She continued: “In a breathtaking violation of medical ethics and several federal laws, the new vaccine concealment law in Washington, DC allows doctors to extract “informed consent” from young children too immature to know what informed consent means or what a vaccine reaction looks and feels like. The D.C. City Council majority, with only three members dissenting, cruelly disempowered parents by voting to make it illegal for a doctor, insurance company or school administrator to divulge a child’s vaccination history in records that can be seen by the child’s mother or father.

“An 11-year old child does not know or understand his or her personal health history but most parent do. If a child has experienced previous vaccine reactions, has severe allergies or other health conditions that could increase vaccine risks, parents kept in the dark will not have a way to protect their child from further harm.

“Parents who don’t know which vaccines their children have been given will not be able to monitor them for signs of a potentially life-threatening vaccine reaction that requires immediate medical treatment. If the child is injured or dies after vaccination, parents will not know they must apply to the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) before the filing deadline expires.

“Parents will not know their insurance company has been billed for vaccines. Parents will not know that a school the child attends is in possession of their child’s secret vaccination records even when there is a vaccine exemption for religious belief reasons on file with the school.

“This blatant violation of a parent’s moral right and legal responsibility to make medical risk decisions on behalf of a minor child was endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics22 and pushed through by the DC City Council, while the Mayor and the US Congress looked the other way.”

She concluded: “The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights states that:

“The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society;” and “For persons who are not capable of exercising autonomy, special measures are to be taken to protect their rights and interests;” and “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information.”

“It is a profound betrayal of public trust for any city, state or federal government to strip parents of their God given right to protect their children from harm by allowing a doctor to give a child a pharmaceutical product without getting a parent’s permission. Science is not perfect, doctors are not infallible, and pharmaceutical products like vaccines come with risks that can be greater for some individuals than others, which is why parents must retain the human right to exercise informed consent to medical risk taking on behalf of their minor children.

“Will the vaccine concealment bill that is now law in Washington, DC be exported to your state next?”

Mercury News provided the list of where parental or guardian consent is now generally required for COVID-19 vaccinations among people ages 12 to 15, based on a CNN query to health departments across all 50 states:

  • Alabama — Yes for younger than 14
  • Alaska — Yes
  • Arizona — Yes
  • Arkansas — Yes
  • California — Yes
  • Colorado — Yes
  • Connecticut — Yes
  • Delaware — Yes
  • Florida — Yes
  • Georgia — Yes
  • Hawaii — Yes
  • Idaho — Yes
  • Illinois — Yes
  • Indiana — Yes
  • Iowa — “It is up to each individual health care provider/health system”
  • Kansas — Yes
  • Kentucky – Yes
  • Louisiana — Yes
  • Maine — Yes
  • Maryland — Yes
  • Massachusetts — Yes
  • Michigan — Yes
  • Minnesota — Yes
  • Mississippi — Yes
  • Missouri — Yes
  • Montana — Yes
  • Nebraska — Yes
  • Nevada — Yes
  • New Hampshire — Yes
  • New Jersey — Yes
  • New Mexico — Yes
  • New York — Yes
  • North Carolina — No for teens
  • North Dakota — Yes
  • Ohio — Yes
  • Oklahoma — Yes
  • Oregon — Yes for younger than 15
  • Pennsylvania — Yes
  • Rhode Island — Yes
  • South Carolina — Yes
  • South Dakota — Yes
  • Tennessee — Yes for younger than 14
  • Texas — Yes
  • Utah — Yes
  • Vermont — Yes
  • Virginia — Yes
  • Washington — Yes
  • West Virginia — Yes
  • Wisconsin — Yes
  • Wyoming — Yes

Additionally, some private businesses or pharmacies have their own rules.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

The pandemic lies, according to Piers Corbyn

By Daniel Miller | The Conservative Woman | July 2, 2021

PIERS Corbyn is a well-known committed campaigner in the fight to stop the New Normal / New World Order / World Economic Forum being imposed on us all. He’s also a physicist, astro-physicist, long-range weather forecaster and former councillor.

Daniel Miller: You’ve been campaigning against the lockdowns and related matters since the very beginning. When did you first realise the pandemic narrative was a deliberate lie?

Piers Corbyn: About a week. I was always wary of these things because of the climate issue and I looked into what was happening and I understood these lockdowns were about control. I organised a few demonstrations in Glastonbury town centre and got back to London and met others (around May 9, 2020) who were attempting to do things in London. But things developed quite slowly at first, before we had a big breakthrough in August, getting 50,000 people to Trafalgar Square.

DM: The launch of the pandemic narrative was obviously very shocking and confusing . . .

PC: It was cleverly done. They had all corners covered.

DM: Do you feel you have a good theoretical understanding of the forces driving it forward?

PC: I think so. There are different interest groups coming together to make this and there could be splits between them. The Chinese want to carry on building their economy, and world domination in due course. Wall Street and the mega corporations want to defend their rate of profit. And at the same time, there’s the depopulation agenda of Bill Gates and others. I don’t think the big pharmaceutical companies want to simply depopulate everybody, they want to sell more vaccines. But Gates and others do want to reduce world population. They openly talk about that.

DM: There seems to be a strong connection with the green agenda with what used to be calling global warming and now is called climate change.

PC: Yes, that is their underlying religion, if you like . . . it’s an ideology that justifies anything that they want to do.

DM: This ideology is focused specifically on carbon emissions. It isn’t a holistic concern with the environment but only with this metric. In fact the green revolution is going to lead to massive environmental destruction, because they going to need to mine huge quantities of raw materials to create the new green infrastructure. But as you say, the climate change narrative is clearly useful from the point of view of centralising power. It means that governments can regulate in a way that will enable them to expand their control over society and the economy, in partnership with corporations. And this is also the point of the pandemic narrative.

PC: All governments love a crisis, and this one is a fantastic crisis for the governments of the world. And countries in Africa which have stood out against of course have found their Presidents murdered, in Tanzania and Burundi.

DM: One wonders who is handling that side of the operation.

PC: Yes, who is it? I haven’t seen any attempt to determine that.

DM: There are parts of America now which are much more clearly opposed, in particular in Florida. For whatever reason DeSantis was able to take that position, at least for now. In Britain on the other hand they seem very firmly in control, not only of the government, but also the parliamentary opposition led officially by Sir Keir  Starmer, who seems to have been been ordered to support the government in whatever they decide to do.

PC: That’s right, and they even call for stronger measures. What is Starmer all about? I think he’s a hyper-globalist and has been supporting this agenda for a long time. I first met him years ago in a Red-Green alliance meeting in Camden, and he just waffled, he made no sense at all.

DM: Beyond Starmer, the wider Left hasn’t offered any opposition. It seems to me they’ve been co-opted. You see this in the United States where ‘Leftism’ became the ideology of the professional managerial class. It evacuated the worker dimension, and shifted to policing cultural issues.

PC: Hate speech and identity politics have destroyed the Left, and I think it’s deliberate. Because class analysis is now completely absent, which is why American workers were supporting Trump. When that began to happen I was quite bemused. But it makes sense because the Democratic Party is now just serving Wall Street interests . . .

DM: And Silicon Valley interests, and military industrial  interests . . .

PC: And anything goes. The idea that a Leftist party can support the indiscriminate bombing and destruction of a country like Libya is just unbelievable, but that’s what they did.

DM: Some see the current political climate as an expression of the triumph of Leftism, or some form of Marxism. On the other hand, the Marxism now taught in universities or advanced in Leftist media appears to have been modified to support Democratic Party interests, and the people still committed to a more classical Marxist analysis are sidelined and repressed. This occurs from the Left, which is concerned with disciplining activism and channeling it into directions that create divisions and antagonism.

PC: The question must be, with respect to the Left, what percentage of activity is actually instigated by infiltrators and police agents.

DM: There almost seems to be a natural law of infiltration where eventually you reach a point where the Chief of Police is also the Head of the Anarchists . . .

PC: Yes!

DM: I want to ask you about your own background. Many people know you as Jeremy Corbyn’s brother, but your training is in meteorology, and you’ve been an activist for a long time. 

PC: Yes, I’m a physicist, a theoretical physicist and astrophysicist, and I run a long range weather forecasting operation which sells forecasts to farmers, commodity traders, the energy industry and others, and has been quite successful. As for my brother, I’m older than him for a start. And I was better known around the world than he was until he started to attempt to be the leader of the Labour Party. He was always a member of the Labour Party, whereas I was in groups more involved in direct action. He was always more involved with the trade unions. But we worked together in the miners’ strike for example, where there was a lot of direct action, and he was coming from a trade union point of view. But at the start of his leadership campaign I said to him, you should make it clear that the other candidates are ‘Tory light’ and you’re different. And he said, that’s right, and that’s what he did, and that succeeded. And it’s true, because he does have a different perspective from the others. But he failed at the last hurdle because he was forced into a complete muddle over BrexitAnd that was really the end of his great story at the upper levels of the Labour Party, although he still has a very important following.

DM: Your brother’s silence in the last eighteen months has been quite noticeable.

PC: No, he’s acquiesced basically and made minor comments . . . A lot of people in the anti-lockdown movement were, and some of them still are, supporters of Jeremy, and they come up to me in demonstrations and say, Piers, we supported your brother, where is he? Does he believe in all this? And I tell them, well, he’s a prisoner of the trade unions. And you’ve seen what’s happened. The authorities have been very clever. They thought about it a long time ahead, how to control the Labour movement, and because the Labour movement in Britain, all Labour movements, but especially Britain, is what I would call ‘economistic’. They don’t think very politically, they just think, where’s the money coming from? Anybody’s who has done any analysis, and Jeremy should have done this too, should have realised that this is the slow death of British industry, and those jobs will be destroyed.  But they are just not facing up to it.

DM: The future of public services in Britain looks bleak. It seems that the government’s plan is to destroy them, and then package the market to corporations like Microsoft. And this is how the post-automation underclass is going to be managed in the future, with digital communications, UBI [universal basic income] and pharmaceutical interventions to ensure compliance.

PC: Yes, total privatisation. You can see that people are going to be asked to defend the NHS by people like Starmer and my brother, and they are going to reply, ‘What are we defending? The NHS has been failing to help people with cancer, injecting people with a lethal vaccine, there’s been a suppression of treatment, what are we defending?’

DM: From a Machiavellian perspective I suppose you have to hand it to them, because the government has in effect destroyed the NHS while repeating all the time we have to save it. Meanwhile they are making it as difficult as possible to have a good experience in schools. Here at least there is a possible path which might actually be quite positive, from the point of view of a more decentralised education system. But only for some.

PC: A lot of parents are actually taking their children out. And that’s interesting because if you get a high percentage of parents who take their children out and home-school I wonder where that will go, because you have private enterprises that will pop up and say we can look after your kids and have a private independent schools then the whole thing will become privatised.

DM: What do you think is politically the path forward for people who want to resist what’s happening?

PC: The main way to stop this is not begging the government; we do actually have to break their impositions and if we don’t break them we’re going to lose. People have to go to work when they’re not supposed to, they’ve got to rip down all the signs. If people defy in sufficient numbers the whole agenda of the other side becomes irrelevant because people will be working, and will be having an economy, and so forth. What happens then, I don’t know. Formally the main decisions are made in Parliament even if Johnson and others are being told what to do. So we’re building a party in order to compete on the level but of course we’re tiny compared to existing forces. Politically the key issues now are accountability and democracy versus globalist diktats, and the Left and Right issues are really a diversion. The way forward has to be massive grassroots resistance, physical, legal resistance, and stopping the implementation of the New World Order. This also requires political organisation which is why we set up Let London Live. The primary thing is that we have to be a movement and build a movement and that’s what we’re doing.

DM: The vaccine passports is now clearly the aim that they’re trying to pursue.

PC: Yes, the vaccine seems to be at the centre of their strategy. Now what is the vaccine programme about? It’s not about public health. It is about control, mental control, ideological control, and they do want to kill people, I have no doubt about that. I think a lot of people will die. The powers that be are desperate now to rush out more vaccines, and to vaccinate children, before people realise what’s going on.

DM: Already the casualties from the new experimental vaccines are unprecedented compared with other vaccination programmes.

PC: Yes, in America more people have died from this vaccine than have died from all of the other vaccines in the USA in the past.

DM: Probably one should be generous to their position intellectually, as its unusual for people to self-consciously pursue evil. People want to believe that what theyre doing is necessary. What they seem to believe in is the rational, scientific management of global populations. You see this already with the formation of the Fabian Society in the nineteenth century, which is still very active, and later with people like Julian Huxley, H G Wells and others. A lot of this seems to have been in the works for a long time and suddenly switched on. Evidently not everybody knows all the steps, but only some.

PC: That’s right.

DM: It is very difficult to speak to many of our contemporaries about this matter. It seems like there is a kind of mental block . . .

PC: Exactly, it’s difficult to believe they want to kill us. But I’ve come to the conclusion that actually they do, they really are trying to kill a lot of the population. We need to have a principled united front against all these measures. And the vaccines have to be stopped altogether.

July 2, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Judge dismisses Children’s Health Defense lawsuit against Facebook censorship

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim the Net | July 1, 2021

A Northern District of California court has dismissed a complaint claiming that the First Amendment had been violated when Facebook started censoring the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) page.

The complaint was brought against Facebook, its CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and three third-party fact-checkers that the giant outsources to.

CHD, an activist group chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., asked to proceed with the case that alleges government-sponsored censorship, therefore making the First Amendment relevant even if Facebook is a privately-owned company. The complaint also cited false disparagement and wire fraud.

The issues that are the subject of censorship concern vaccines and public health agencies, and the plaintiff focused its argument on how the First Amendment was being challenged here by “the authorities openly censoring unwanted critique of its narrative.”

The defendants then filed a motion to dismiss, which Judge Susan Illston of the Northern District of California, after hearing both sides’ arguments on Wednesday, decided to accept.

We obtained a copy of the ruling for you here.

Where it concerns the First Amendment, the ruling states that the allegations failed to show that “Zuckerberg personally” was involved in censoring CHD – clearly, the court does not believe in the “command responsibility” of a CEO.

Next, the US federal government is exonerated, as the judge established that it did not form a “joint enterprise” with the social media company for the purpose of censoring the page.

“Emails between Zuckerberg and Dr. Fauci about a COVID information ‘hub’ on Facebook do not relate to any actions taken regarding CHD’s Facebook page,” the ruling stated.

And Judge Illston didn’t understand some members of Congress speaking publicly about the need for companies like Facebook to censor “misinformation,” including about vaccines, to constitute government coercion – and says she found no evidence that Facebook was pressured specifically into censoring CHD.

Regarding the filing’s count addressing wire fraud, the judge threw the case out saying that CHD had no valid argument either under the Lanham Act or RICO.

CHD sought to link Facebook’s censorship with more than a political or ideological matter, but one of monetary value, effectively accusing the giant of collusion for monetary gains with government’s health agencies, vaccine manufacturers, and the telecommunications industry.

Specifically, CHD has been strongly critical of the WHO, CDC and FCC, accusing them of corruption.

July 2, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

DC AG subpoenas Facebook for data on ALL users that have spread “COVID-19 misinformation”

Unmasking people for wrongthink

By Tom Parke | Reclaim the Net | July 2, 2021

The District of Columbia (DC) Attorney General (AG) Karl Racine, a Democrat, has subpoenaed Facebook for a wide range of records related to “COVID-19 misinformation” on the platform.

The subpoena was filed on June 21 and demands that Facebook identify all groups, pages, and accounts that have violated the platform’s far-reaching COVID-19 misinformation rules.

It also calls for Facebook to release an internal study that looked at vaccine hesitancy among its users. Media reports on this study in March claimed that it showed that non-rule breaking Facebook content may be causing “substantial” harm.

If Facebook were to comply with this subpoena, it would likely impact millions of users. Facebook has removed more than 18 million pieces of content from Facebook and Instagram for violating its COVID-19 misinformation rules and applied warning labels to more than 167 million pieces of COVID-19 content.

The subpoena is part of a previously undisclosed investigation into whether Facebook is violating consumer protection laws.

Racine’s director of communications, Abbie McDonough, told Politico that the investigation is part of an effort to ensure that Facebook cracks down on “vaccine misinformation.”

“Facebook has said it’s taking action to address the proliferation of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on its site,” McDonough said. “But then when pressed to show its work, Facebook refused. AG Racine’s investigation aims to make sure Facebook is truly taking all steps possible to minimize vaccine misinformation on its site and support public health.”

The move follows previous reports of Democrats working with Big Tech to censor content that they deem to be misinformation.

Most notably, a recent lawsuit showed evidence of Democrats flagging alleged misinformation to Twitter via a “partner portal” and Twitter responding by removing the flagged tweets.

Another example of this is Democrats demanding that Facebook and Twitter “address” 12 prominent vaccine skeptics in April. Since they made their demands, four of these vaccine skeptics have had their social media accounts shut down.

Lawmakers have also suggested that the federal government may have “induced Facebook to censor certain speech in violation of the First Amendment” and demanded that the tech giant explain why it censored lab leak theories.

This attempt from the DC AG to identify Facebook users for posting COVID-19 misinformation comes as the tech giant is using increasingly aggressive measures to target people based on the content they share and interact with.

Yesterday, it started asking users whether they’re concerned about their friends “becoming an extremist” and warned users that they “may have been exposed to harmful extremist content.”

And in May, a whistleblower revealed that Facebook is using a secret internal filter to flag “liberty-based” and “religious-based” vaccine skepticism and using a secret algorithm to suppress negative vaccine experiences.

July 2, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , , | Leave a comment

Facebook goes full Big Brother with new “extremism” warnings

Pop-ups mark an all-time high for creepiness from the internet giant

OffGuardian | July 2, 2021

Have you been reading things you shouldn’t online? Have you found yourself feeling frustrated and angry at the corruption of the ruling class, wealth inequality or the general state of the world?

Well then, the chances are good you’ve accidentally been exposed to “misinformation” or “extremist content” spread by “violent groups” in order to manipulate you.

But don’t worry, Facebook is on the case. Simply report the offensive and upsetting materials to your local content controller, and then contact their pre-approved counsellors for immediate de-programming.

If it’s not you that’s been exposed to harmful content, but a loved one, and they’re proving resistant to the proper un-extreming methods, then Facebook is here to help there, too.

Simply confidentially report your friend or family member to the proper authorities, and they’ll take it from there.

Remember that divergence of opinion is dangerous. Under no circumstances consume content that differs from your state-mandated opinions.

Report all infractions, refuse to see harmful facts, be sure to distance yourself from those who refuse to be corrected, for their own good and yours.

And have a nice day.

July 2, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Face Masks Cause Children to Inhale Dangerous Levels of Carbon Dioxide at SIX TIMES the Safe Limit, Study Finds

By Will Jones • Lockdown Sceptics • July 1, 2021

New research published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) has found that wearing a face mask causes children to inhale dangerous levels of carbon dioxide that becomes trapped behind the mask.

The peer-reviewed research letter from Dr Harald Walach and colleagues found that the air masked children inhaled contained more than six times the legal safe limit set down for closed rooms by the German Federal Environmental Office. The safe limit is 0.2% while the air the masked children inhaled was over 1.3% carbon dioxide.

The effect was worse for younger children, with one seven year-old child inhaling air with 2.5% carbon dioxide, over 12 times the safe limit.

The study looked at two types of mask, FFP2 masks and surgical masks, and found no significant difference between the two.

The authors explained that this alarming result likely explains the complaints from children who wear face masks for long periods.

Most of the complaints reported by children can be understood as consequences of elevated carbon dioxide levels in inhaled air. This is because of the dead-space volume of the masks, which collects exhaled carbon dioxide quickly after a short time. This carbon dioxide mixes with fresh air and elevates the carbon dioxide content of inhaled air under the mask, and this was more pronounced in this study for younger children.

This leads in turn to impairments attributable to hypercapnia. A recent review concluded that there was ample evidence for adverse effects of wearing such masks. We suggest that decision-makers weigh the hard evidence produced by these experimental measurements accordingly, which suggest that children should not be forced to wear face masks.

With face masks shown to have little to no impact in reducing infection or transmission, this suggests the policy is all pain and no gain and should be abandoned without delay.

Read the study in full here.

July 1, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment