There Is No Such Thing as Democracy without Free Speech. Period.
Truthstream Media | February 17, 2025
Truthstream Media Can Be Found Here:
Our First Film: TheMindsofMen.net
Our First Series: Vimeo.com/ondemand/trustgame
Site: TruthstreamMedia.com X: @TruthstreamNews
Backup Ch: Vimeo.com/truthstreammedia
DONATE: http://bit.ly/2aTBeeF
Newsletter: http://eepurl.com/bbxcWX
UK Refuses to Weaken Online Censorship Laws Despite US Pressure
Britain reaffirms its commitment to stringent online censorship, rejecting any compromises in the face of US trade talks or political pressure.
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 16, 2025
The UK government has firmly stated that its online censorship laws will not be softened to appease US President Donald Trump or to facilitate trade negotiations with the United States. Technology Minister Peter Kyle repeated Britain’s stance on maintaining strict digital speech regulations, shutting down any speculation of a shift in policy toward American AI firms.
During the Paris AI summit, Kyle dismissed claims that Downing Street was considering relaxing sections of the Online Safety Act in discussions with the US. Refuting a report from The Daily Telegraph, he asserted: “Safety is not up for negotiation. There are no plans to weaken any of our online safety legislation.”
The Online Safety Act, one of the strictest online speech crackdowns in a democratic nation, is set to come into force this year.
Industry moguls such as Elon Musk have voiced hopes that a Trump-led administration might resist global regulatory pressures on US-based tech companies.
Despite these concerns, Kyle expressed confidence that Trump would not obstruct Labour’s forthcoming AI legislation, which mandates that leading AI firms undergo “safety” evaluations before rolling out new software. He confirmed that voluntary safety pledges would now be replaced with enforceable mandates, ensuring strict compliance.
America’s ‘Democratic’ Allies Are Becoming More Authoritarian
By Ted Galen Carpenter | The Libertarian Institute | February 17, 2025
U.S. officials have a long history of portraying Washington’s allies and clients as democratic, even when their behavior is blatantly authoritarian. Such cynical hypocrisy was at its zenith during the Cold War, but it is surging again.
A similar trend is evident with respect to U.S. interference in the internal political affairs of other countries through such mechanisms as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Such agencies fund regimes and political movements that are deemed obedient to Washington’s wishes and supportive of American foreign policy objectives. Conversely, U.S. administrations actively undermine governments or movements that they consider hostile or even just insufficiently cooperative. The actual nature of U.S. clients often is a far cry from the carefully crafted democratic image of them that Washington circulates.
A recent example of American meddling in the internal affairs of another democratic country appears to have taken place in the Republic of Georgia. According to Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili, USAID spent $41.7 million to support its preferred candidates in the country’s recent parliamentary elections. Adjusted for the size of Georgia’s population, such an expenditure in the United States would amount to $3.78 billion,
The U.S. track record in Georgia since the dissolution of the Soviet Union lends credibility to the speaker’s accusation that Washington is meddling in his country’s internal political affairs. President George W. Bush fawned with praise for Mikheil Saakashvili, the leader of Georgia’s “rose revolution” in 2003. Under Saakashvili, Georgia had become a “beacon of liberty,” Bush crowed. Generous flows of aid from Washington ensued. However, massive corruption soon characterized Saakashvili’s rule, as did his growing repression of political opponents. Ultimately, Saakashvili’s adversaries ousted Washington’s beloved “democratic” client from power.
The contrast between the laudatory American portrayal of Saakashvili as a paragon of democratic reform and the reality of his conduct was stark. However, Washington’s role in Ukraine over the years has been even more pervasive and dishonest. Although Ukraine’s president, Victor Yanukovych, came to office in a 2010 election that even a team of European Union (EU) observers conceded was reasonably free and fair, officials in Barack Obama’s administration, especially Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, worked to undermine his presidency. Yanukovych’s preference for closer economic ties with Russia instead of the EU and the United States apparently was intolerable to Western policymakers.
In 2014, the United States and key NATO partners helped Ukrainian demonstrators (primarily in Kiev’s Maidan Square) force Yanukovych to flee. An intercepted telephone call between Nuland and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine confirmed the massive extent of Washington’s interference in Ukraine’s affairs. Nuland herself later admitted that the United States had poured more than $5 billion to Ukrainian groups in the years before the Maidan uprising. Supposedly, the purpose was to “promote democracy,” but as usual, the funds went almost entirely to groups Washington considered supportive of U.S. policies. It would be hard to identify a more flagrant case of outside interference in the affairs of another country.
Even if U.S. leaders sincerely intended their largesse to bring a stronger, healthier democracy to Ukraine—which is extremely doubtful—Washington did not achieve that goal. Corruption and blatant repression have become increasingly bad under the post-Maidan governments. Even though U.S. leaders invariably portray Ukraine’s current president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a democratic champion, his record proves the opposite. Under his rule, Ukraine has outlawed opposition parties, muzzled the press, harassed uncooperative churches, and amassed a record of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Much of that abuse was evident before the outbreak of war between Ukraine and Russia. Confirming that any attempt to portray Zelensky’s rule as democratic is a hypocritical farce, Ukraine has now postponed elections indefinitely.
The rot of hypocrisy and covert authoritarianism has infected even governments in NATO and the European Union. A grotesque example occurred earlier this month in Romania when an election commission dominated by the two governing parties, the Social Democratic Party (PSD and the National Liberal Party (PNL), annulled the first round of the presidential election held on November 24. Instead of the candidates of those two parties advancing to the second round runoff as expected, neither one did so. Instead, Caliin Georgescu, the candidate of a right-wing populist party led the field. Elena Lasconi, a reformer representing another “minor” party took the other runoff spot.
That outcome apparently was intolerable to Romania’s political establishment or its supporters in the EU and the United States. They viewed Georgescu as especially unacceptable, since he openly criticized NATO and opposed continuing to aid Ukraine. The country’s election commission nullified the voting results and rescheduled the first round balloting for May 4, 2025. Commissioners charged that, wait for it… Russia had illegally tampered with the election! Moscow’s horrid offense was its alleged support of a Tik Tok campaign that seemed to benefit Georgescu. Tangible evidence regarding Russian involvement was noticeably absent. Despite the lack of evidence, U.S. and EU officials denounced Russia and praised the Romanian government for trashing the election.
Eugene Doyle, a reporter for New Zealand’s Solidarity.com, noted the menacing significance of this episode. “To save democracy, the US and the European elites appear to have found it necessary to destroy democracy. For the first time ever an election was overturned in an EU/NATO country. Ever,” he wrote. Doyle also cites evidence that Russia was not even the likely culprit. The Tik Tok effort apparently originated with a botched PNL scheme to siphon off votes to Georgescu from other mainstream competitors.
Moreover, as Doyle points out, “Even if the Russians did it, in what crazy world would you wipe an election for a Tik Tok campaign, particularly one that was at best a few hundred thousands of dollars’ worth of advertising/messaging/ chatting—in contrast to the millions of dollars the U.S. State Department and various branches of the U.S. government spent on the same campaign?”
The answer is that it would happen in a world where political elites in the United States and its principal allies have never really been committed to democracy. Not as a domestic governing principle and definitely not as a foreign policy objective. Instead, the alleged commitment is a propaganda tool that is discarded whenever it becomes inconvenient. We live in such a world, and have done so for many years.
Zelensky’s key rival names Ukrainian election date
RT | February 16, 2025
Ukraine will hold elections in late October 2025, former President Pyotr Poroshenko has claimed. The politician cited a number of sources linked to government, and said that the relevant agencies have already started preparing.
“Write it down: [it will be on] October 26 of this year,” said the former president, who currently leads the European Solidarity party, which holds 27 seats in Ukraine’s 450-seat parliament. He was answering a question about the potential election date by the Censor.net media outlet.
When further pressed about the sources of his information, Poroshenko said he had contacts in the presidential administration, as well as within law enforcement agencies. He went on to claim that a Ukrainian printing house had already started producing the ballots. The nation’s Central Election Committee has also started its own preparations, he said.
The Ukrainian Interior Ministry is supposedly in the process of opening its first office in Berlin, the former president claimed, adding that it was being done “solely for the elections.” Germany hosts the biggest number of Ukrainian refugees, amounting to over 1.24 million people, according to online data aggregator Statista. Russia follows close behind, with 1.22 million Ukrainians having taken refuge there since the start of the conflict.
According to Poroshenko, the authorities intend to use the election to retain power. “They are preparing everything in such a way [that would] leave them without opponents,” the former president claimed, adding that the current government seeks to “crawl back into power, destroying democracy, freedom, and transparency of elections.”
Poroshenko led the country from 2014 to 2019, following the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovich in a Western-backed coup. He was succeeded by Vladimir Zelensky. Poroshenko then emerged as a fierce critic of his successor. In 2023, he condemned what he described as Kiev’s “authoritarianism.”
In December 2021, Poroshenko was charged with treason over alleged coal deals in Donbass during his presidency. His assets were frozen in January 2022, but he vowed in court not to flee the country. Earlier this week, Zelensky imposed a set of new sanctions against him linked to the treason charges. The move was condemned by Poroshenko as “absolutely illegal” and led to a protest by his party in the Ukrainian parliament.
Ukraine was expected to hold a parliamentary election in 2023 and a presidential poll in 2024. Both were suspended indefinitely by Zelensky, due to martial law. The Ukrainian leader has since repeatedly insisted the nation cannot hold elections amid the ongoing conflict with Russia.
US President Donald Trump’s special envoy for the Ukraine conflict, Keith Kellogg, has said Washington would like to see Kiev hold both votes before the end of the year.
Medvedev applauds Vance’s ‘humiliating rebuke’ of Europe
RT | February 15, 2025
The deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, has hailed US Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference, calling it a rare moment of American honesty about Europe’s weaknesses and Vance himself “a brave guy.”
In his speech on Friday, Vance touched on the migration crisis, security, freedom of speech, and apparent democratic backsliding on the continent.
Medvedev said Vance “unexpectedly lit up” the conference, calling his remarks a harsh but truthful indictment of modern Europe.
“Everyone expected to hear the usual partner-like curtseys to Europe and comments on Donald Trump’s words about the end of the Ukrainian conflict. But he went and harshly scolded the Europeans who have completely lost themselves in recent years: your democracy is weak, your elections are crap, your rules that violate normal human morality are crap,” Medvedev wrote.
He added that the Europeans would retaliate against him if he did not hold such a high post. “However, they will forgive him; they will begrudgingly accept the humiliating rebuke from their senior partner with resentment,” Medvedev concluded.
Vance was particularly severe in his indictment of European democracy. He voiced concerns over the erosion of democratic values in Europe, drawing attention to the annulment of the presidential election in Romania. The first round in November saw right-wing anti-establishment candidate Calin Georgescu come out on top with 22.94%, beating liberal leftist and social democrat candidates. Romania’s top court cited intelligence documents alleging “irregularities” in his campaign performance in making their ruling, although the validity of that evidence has been questioned.
The US vice president also cautioned against rising censorship in the region, told European member-states to take greater responsibility for their own defense, and raised the alarm over mass migration.
US President Donald Trump praised Vance’s speech as “brilliant.” However, some European officials were not so keen on the address. Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas warned that it signaled growing transatlantic tension. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius meanwhile, blasted the remarks, calling them “not acceptable.”
On the other hand, Russian Senator Alexander Shenderyuk-Zhidkov described Vance’s statements as a “cold shower” for European Russophobes.
Judge Pauses Murthy v. Missouri Amid Trump’s Free Speech Order
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | February 13, 2025
A federal judge has temporarily halted proceedings in Murthy v. Missouri, a case central to efforts aimed at curbing government involvement in online censorship, following a Supreme Court decision that declined to address the case’s core arguments.
On Tuesday, US District Judge Terry Doughty approved a motion from the defendants — former President Joe Biden and key administration officials — to stay the case. According to Jenin Younes, litigation counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance, the pause was granted in light of former President Donald Trump’s recent executive order titled “Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship.”
We obtained a copy of the order for you here.
“The government suggested that we move to stay discovery,” Younes told The Federalist. “They want to put in a statement about what effect they think the executive order has. I’m guessing they’re going to say it makes the case moot.”
If the judge agrees, the case could be dismissed as moot after President Trump’s new order. While plaintiffs went along with the stay to allow the judge time to review, Younes noted that the broader concern over government-driven censorship remains a live issue.
“We haven’t staked out our position yet, but there are arguments against mootness,” she said. “Especially if there’s a chance that could happen again and the executive order won’t necessarily be binding on a subsequent administration.”
Initially known as Missouri v. Biden, the lawsuit—brought by the states of Missouri and Louisiana—accused Biden administration officials of working with Big Tech to suppress online speech. The case unearthed extensive evidence showing how federal agencies collaborated with private platforms to censor topics ranging from The New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story to alternative viewpoints on the COVID-19 vaccine.
German Court Orders X to Share Data with Researchers Ahead of National Vote
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 13, 2025
With a ruling that raises serious concerns about government-endorsed monitoring of online speech, a German court has ordered Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, to provide researchers with data to track so-called “election-swaying” information. The decision, handed down by the Berlin district court, follows an urgent complaint filed by two civil rights organizations demanding access to platform analytics ahead of Germany’s national election on February 23.
The court justified its ruling by arguing that “waiting any longer for access to the data would undermine the applicants’ research project since the period immediately before the election is crucial.” X had reportedly failed to respond to a request for information, leading the court to rule against the company and order it to pay €6,000 ($6,255) in legal costs.
The GFF and Democracy Reporting International claim that under European law, platforms like X must provide structured, easily searchable access to information about post reach, shares, and likes.
While this data is already publicly available, albeit requiring manual collection, activists insist that X should make it more accessible to their research efforts — effectively demanding that the platform do its work for them.
With this ruling, X is now compelled to provide this data from now until shortly after the election, a move that could open the door for further demands to police speech under the guise of fighting “disinformation.” The broad and subjective nature of what constitutes “misinformation” raises concerns about selective enforcement, particularly given the German government’s increasingly aggressive stance toward online speech regulation.
Given the timing of the ruling and the increasing pressure on social media platforms to police political speech, this case highlights the growing tension between free expression and state-backed efforts to control online speech.
Larry Ellison Pushes for AI-Powered National Data Centralization and Mass Surveillance
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 14, 2025
Oracle co-founder and the company’s executive chairman and chief technology officer Larry Ellison is trying to persuade governments to descend deep into AI-powered surveillance dystopia by centralizing the entirety of their national data in a single place.
And when he says everything should go into this “unified” database, Ellison means everything. That includes health-related data, such as diagnostic and genomic information, electronic health records, DNA, data on agriculture, climate, utility infrastructure…
Once in there, it would be used to train AI models, such as those developed by Oracle – Ellison shared with former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair during a panel at the World Governments Summit in Dubai.
As for why any government would do such a thing – his “sell” is that it would allow AI to be used to provide better services. But this time, he left out how this centralization would also represent an exceptional opportunity to “turbocharge” mass government surveillance, even though there is little doubt that many governments are hearing him loud and clear on that point as well.
In September, Ellison wasn’t so coy regarding this angle when he spoke in favor of introducing real-time population surveillance. And naturally, that would be done with Oracle’s machine learning tech.
“As long as countries will put their data – all of it – in a single place we can use AI to help manage the care of all of the patients and the population at large,” Ellison told Blair.
As over the top, as all this may sound, Ellison appears to figuratively and literally mean business: he revealed that his company is building a 2.2 gigabyte data center to train AI models and spending “between 50 and 100 billion dollars” on these endeavors.
And, he suggested that massive amounts of data would not be the only thing centralized in a handful of places, going forward – the same is true of the AI model training, because of the high price tag attached.
In other words, Ellison’s vision of the future is complete control over everyone’s data in the hands of governments and a select number of super-rich companies capable of building and running this infrastructure for them.
Ellison also told Blair about Oracle’s AI-powered biometric ID that’s currently used only to log into the company’s system:
“The computer recognizes you. It recognizes your voice. It might ask you to put your index finger on the return key. And we know, we’re absolutely certain it’s you. There’s no reason to enter a password.”
Ohio Northern Sues Professor Scott Gerber for Defending His Rights in Court
By Ben Squires | Reclaim The Net | February 9, 2025
Ohio Northern University (ONU) is facing legal battles on multiple fronts after firing Professor Scott Gerber following his outspoken opposition to the school’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. The controversy has now escalated into a federal lawsuit, with the university suing Gerber after he took legal action to challenge his dismissal.
Gerber, a tenured professor and longtime critic of ONU’s DEI initiatives, became the subject of an administrative investigation in January 2023. Despite repeated requests, ONU refused to disclose the specific accusations against him. When he was finally informed of his alleged failure to maintain “collegiality,” free speech advocacy group FIRE argued that this charge resembled retaliation for his views on DEI, potentially violating ONU’s commitment to academic freedom.
In April 2023, ONU ordered campus police to remove Gerber from his classroom and escort him to the dean’s office, where he was pressured to resign immediately. Gerber refused, and the university terminated his employment. A state judge later criticized ONU’s “callous disregard for due process” and allowed Gerber’s breach of contract case to proceed to trial, citing the school’s “troubling” lack of justification for his termination.
Instead of addressing concerns raised in court, ONU responded by suing Gerber in federal court on Jan. 20, alleging that his lawsuit was a “perverted” effort to “unleash political retribution” against the university. The lawsuit accuses Gerber of attempting to “manufacture outrage” and claims his legal challenge constitutes an unlawful “abuse of process.”
A key aspect of ONU’s complaint is Gerber’s public statements regarding his firing. The university objects to his writings in The Wall Street Journal and a press release from his attorneys at America First Legal, dismissing them as a “manufactured narrative.” However, Gerber and his legal team maintain that their statements rely on ONU’s own records and policies, which the state court has deemed sufficient to warrant trial.
Critics have condemned ONU’s lawsuit as a classic example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)—a legal tactic intended to silence dissent by burdening individuals with costly litigation. By forcing Gerber to defend himself in federal court while preparing for his state trial, ONU’s actions raise broader concerns about the use of legal intimidation against faculty members.
“Professors should not have to go to court to defend their right to free speech,” said a spokesperson for FIRE. “And universities should not be using litigation to silence their critics.”
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) notes:
“Disturbingly, the crux of ONU’s complaint rests on Gerber’s protected speech. The university faults Gerber for expressing accurate information about his ordeal in the Wall Street Journal and through a press release published by his attorneys at America First Legal, maligned by ONU as a “manufactured narrative” designed to “manufacture outrage.” Yet Gerber and America First Legal cite the university’s own words and policies to make his case, which a state court has allowed to proceed by rejecting ONU’s efforts to dismiss his claims.”
USAID and NGOs for Narrative Control and War
By Professor Glenn Diesen | February 10, 2025
President Trump’s decision to cut funding to USAID revealed the extent to which the US government has been financing media, protests and other means to hijack the civil society around the world. In Ukraine, USAID had a key role in toppling President Yanukovych in 2014 and has since financed between 85-90% of Ukrainian media to ensure narrative control. The Georgian Prime Minister has also been warning that Western NGOs have been activated to topple the government and convert Georgia into a second front against Russia. There is also overwhelming evidence that the US government established “non-governmental organisations” (NGOs) since the 1980s that are financed by the US government, staffed with people linked to the US intelligence community, and pursue US geopolitical interests under the guise of promoting democracy and human rights. One of these “NGOs” is the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) established by Reagan to take over some of the tasks of the CIA. These organisations are instruments for the US to govern the societies of other nations and pursue regime change when necessary.
Subverting Democracy and Pursuing War
When Zelensky won a landslide victory in the 2019 presidential election on a peace platform, the US activated its NGOs to ensure that Zelensky would reverse and abandon his peace mandate. Zelensky had won 73% of the votes by promising to engage in talks with Donbas, make peace with Russia, and implement the Minsk peace agreement. Furthermore, Zelensky argued in favour of preserving language rights and religious rights to prevent divisions in society. Immediately, protests emerged with NGOs presenting Zelensky’s peace platform as “capitulation”.
One of the US-financed “NGOs” was the Ukraine Crisis Media Centre which had been established allegedly to “promote the development of a self-sufficient Ukrainian state and society”, something I would certainly support. However, this is yet another NGO created by the US to subvert society and prevent peace from breaking out.
The Ukraine Crisis Media Centre threatened Zelensky, and warned him against delivering on his election promises: “As civil society activists, we present a list of ‘red lines not to be crossed’. Should the President cross these red lines, such actions will inevitably lead to political instability in our country and the deterioration of international relations”.[1]
These red lines included “holding a referendum on the negotiations format to be used with the Russian Federation and on the principles for a peaceful settlement”; conducting negotiations without the Western states; “making concessions to the detriment of national interests”; failing to implement the security and defence policies of the former government; “delaying, sabotaging, or rejecting the strategic course for EU and NATO membership”; “initiating any actions that might contribute to the reduction or lifting of sanctions against the aggressor state by Ukraine’s international partners”; attempting to review the language law or supporting the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine; “ignoring dialogue with civil society” etc. Simply put, the peace platform supported by the overwhelming majority of the population or the NGOs would make sure Zelensky was also ousted from power.
This threat from the US-financed NGO was countered with death threats from US-financed far-right groups. Zelensky eventually abandoned the peace mandate, ignored the Minsk peace agreement and fell in line with US policy.
The donors to the Ukraine Crisis Media Centre that financed the cancellation of Zelensky’s peace mandate include USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, the US embassy, and various Nordic governments. On the list of donors is also The Institute for Statecraft, the discredited organisation behind the Integrity Initiative, which was caught in the covert operations of creating “clusters” of loyal politicians, journalists and academics to manufacture the impression of an established consensus to control the narrative. The integrity initiative was also working with UK intelligence agencies to target dissent in politics and the media.
My Encounter with these “NGOs”
USAID, NED and other NGOs also operate in countries allied with the US to prevent dissent and preserve bloc discipline. The Ukraine Crisis Media Centre wrote an entire article smearing me in its project of “shady horses of Russian propaganda”, which listed false accusations such as being a “defender of Russia’s aggression”. The evidence for the absurd accusations included conversations with Professor John Mearsheimer and former US Senator Ron Paul, which are labelled Kremlin “mouthpieces”.[2] The Norwegian government (my own government) is also listed as a donor to this project of intimidation and smears.
The US foreign ministry, the National Endowment for Democracy, and my own government also finance the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, another “human rights NGO”, which has pursued a project of systematic intimidation against me for the past 4 years. Their tactics against me include regular smear pieces in the media, almost weekly tweets labelling me a propagandist for Russia, letters and phone calls to the head of my university to end my position as a professor, calls on other academics to go against me, efforts to cancel me from events where I have been invited to speak, etc. After successfully whipping up hatred in the public, the police advised me to hide my address and phone number. At this point, an employee at the Norwegian Helsinki Committee published a picture of my house on social media. These are the activities that my own government finances under the guise of supporting an “NGO” that promotes democracy and human rights. In response to the purge of academic freedom, I am now in the process of acquiring another citizenship to relocate to a country where civil society is not outsourced to fake NGOs pushing war propaganda and censorship.
What was my great crime? I have been deeply critical of NATO’s policies towards Ukraine since the NGO-backed “Orange Revolution” in 2004. For years I criticised the efforts to pull Ukraine into NATO’s orbit when only a small minority of Ukrainians wanted to join the military alliance, and NATO was aware it would likely trigger a war. I criticised the EU’s rejection of Ukraine’s proposal for a trilateral EU-Ukraine-Russia agreement in 2013 that would have made Ukraine a bridge rather than a frontline. I warned that the NGO-backed toppling of Yanukovych in 2014 would result in Russia’s seizing Crimea and war. For 7 years, I insisted that sabotaging the Minsk peace agreement would result in a military solution to the conflict. Since 2022, I have argued that the sabotage of the Istanbul peace agreement and the boycott of all diplomacy and negotiations would result in Russia destroying Ukraine in a war of attrition. From my perspective, these are pro-Ukrainian arguments that would have preserved Ukrainian sovereignty, territory and lives.
The people who advocated for the policies that created this disaster have a monopoly on the media, and all dissent is crushed with smears, censorship and cancellation. We have more newspapers than I can count, yet they all write the same thing and cite the same “NGOs”. Even now, it is still considered controversial and suspicious to argue for peace negotiations, even as the majority of Ukrainians want negotiations, the war has been lost, and Ukraine suffers greatly with the loss of men and territory every day. Criticism of the NATO war narratives is not met with counterarguments, rather it is met only with accusations of having evil intentions, being “controversial” and “pro-Russian”, legitimising the invasion, not caring about Ukrainians, spreading propaganda etc. These crude and pathetic attacks do not have to be substantiated as the assault on free speech and academic freedom are always wrapped in moralistic language and claims about defending democracy.
Everything I have argued played out as predicted, including why the sanctions were destined to fail. I can confidently argue why my analyses have been correct and why my policy recommendations would have prevented this disaster. However, I do not live in an open society with the free exchange of ideas. I live in a society where government-sponsored smears, censorship and cancellation are permitted as long as an NGO is used as a middleman.
[1] Joint statement by civil society representatives on the first political steps of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky | UACRISIS.ORG
[2] Kremlin Shady Horse’s: Glenn Diesen – Russian propaganda aligned rhetoric, defender of Russia’s aggression, blames NATO for expansionism | UACRISIS.ORG
Senator Ron Johnson Demands Meta Releases Records on COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Censorship
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 9, 2025
Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has escalated his scrutiny of Meta’s alleged suppression of COVID-19 vaccine injury discussions, demanding that CEO Mark Zuckerberg release internal records detailing Facebook’s content moderation practices.
In a letter dated February 4, 2025, Johnson specifically questioned Facebook’s removal of vaccine injury support groups, including A Wee Sprinkle of Hope, which was described in the book Worth a Shot? as the largest such group in the world before it was shut down just five days after Johnson’s June 28, 2021, roundtable with vaccine-injured individuals.
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
The letter also reiterated claims that Facebook engaged in shadow banning, appended warning labels to users’ posts about vaccine injuries, and even censored private messages. One particularly tragic case cited in Worth a Shot? described a woman who took her own life after her private messages seeking help from fellow vaccine-injured individuals allegedly went unnoticed due to Facebook’s restrictions on message visibility.
The book in question: Worth a Shot? by Caroline Pover
Johnson’s letter followed recent remarks by Zuckerberg on The Joe Rogan Experience, where he acknowledged that the Biden administration exerted intense pressure on Facebook to suppress content about vaccine side effects. According to Zuckerberg, the government “pushed [Facebook] super hard to take down things that were honestly true” and even resorted to “yelling, cursing, and threatening repercussions” if the platform did not comply.
The senator’s letter outlined a sweeping request for documents, including records of Facebook’s interactions with government agencies, vaccine manufacturers, and third-party groups involved in content moderation policies. He specifically asked whether any federal entity requested the censorship of vaccine injury support groups and demanded details on Facebook’s policies regarding the suppression or removal of posts related to vaccine injuries.
Johnson has set a deadline of February 18, 2025, for Zuckerberg to comply with the request, emphasizing that the investigation seeks to uncover the full extent of the Biden administration’s involvement in what he characterizes as an aggressive censorship campaign in collaboration with Big Tech.
More: Facebook and YouTube Censored Victims of AstraZeneca COVID Vaccine
Featured Video
Trita Parsi: Middle East Unraveling — Are We on the Path to World War?
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
New Book
Trans agenda is ‘normalization of sadism’ – US author
RT | September 23, 2026
The US Democratic Party has embraced a transgender agenda that amounts to “the normalization of sadism,” author A.J. Rice has said, warning that radical trans policies would return if the party is allowed to regain power.
Speaking to RT’s America First host Scotty Nell Hughes about his new book, ‘The Curse of the Bearded Lady: How the Trans Mafia Whacked American Sanity’, Rice argued that activists have gained significant influence in schools, medicine, and corporate America while people who questioned the agenda have faced pressure to stay silent.
The author described the “trans mafia” as the sprawling network of people and institutions that have helped the movement gain influence. He singled out parts of academia, wealthy backers, and corporations, and stated that providers of transition-related treatment also have a financial incentive to keep young people in their care indefinitely.
Rice argued that the consequences of these policies ultimately fall on children who are being drawn toward gender-affirming medical treatments and on girls who are expected to share locker rooms or compete in sports with biological males.
He noted that while voters rejected the Democrats’ approach to gender in 2024, the party, which has been “captured by madness,” has since only doubled down and is seeking what is effectively “the normalization of sadism.” … Full report
Blog Roll
Aletho News- German chemicals giant reveals details of downsizing
- Refaat Al-Areer Was The Canary In The Coal Mine In Israel’s War On The Truth
- Israeli election committee bars candidate from Knesset race over Gaza war opposition
- French-Lebanese man files war crimes complaint over Israeli attacks
- Mahan Air Flight Lands in China Despite US Threat against Iranian Airlines
- US eyes $10bn fund to rebuild war-battered Gulf infrastructure
- Trump meets Rodríguez near Maduro’s prison as Venezuela’s oil flows to US
- Trita Parsi: Middle East Unraveling — Are We on the Path to World War?
- Iran FM meets with US envoy on UN meeting’s sidelines at American side’s insistence: Report
- Qatar PM calls for Gulf security framework with Iran, says war must be ‘wake-up call’
- If Americans Knew
- Caught on Tape: AIPAC CEO Boasted of Controlling Trump’s National Security Officials
- Why Hamas Attacked Israel in October 2023 – Israeli professor Ilan Pappé
- They see them, then kill them: Israeli quadcopters track, deliberately target civilians in Gaza
- Winter could turn Gaza’s treacherous, war-damaged buildings into deathtraps
- Majority of Democratic Voters Want to Prosecute Both Biden and Trump Administration Officials Over Gaza
- As Gaza languishes, world leaders gather at the UN – Daily Update
- Sanctions are collective punishment: immoral and self-defeating
- Phosphorus Munitions Fired by Israel Burn Groves, Orchards in Southern Lebanon
- Israel Carries Out New Ceasefire Violations Across Gaza
- AI – Emphasis on the ‘I’: Israel Is Funding AI Chatbot Propaganda
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
- Energy Crisis: Germany Enters Heating Season With Historically Low Gas Reserve Fill Levels
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
- Study: Ocean Heating Rates From Thousands Of Years Ago ‘Dwarf’ Modern Ocean Heating Rates
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany!
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
