Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ukraine’s top spy admits killing Russian public figures

RT | May 16, 2023

Ukrainian military intelligence (GUR) chief General Kirill Budanov has claimed responsibility for assassinating “many” Russian public figures. The spy boss made the bombshell admission in an interview with Ukrainian blogger Sergey Ivanov on Tuesday.

Asked whether top Russian “propagandists,” such as prominent journalist Vladimir Solovyov or RT’s Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan, are prime targets for his organization, Budanov responded that the GUR had already “gotten” multiple high profile targets.

“We have already gotten many, including public and media personalities,” Budanov said, without providing any names.

Pressed further by the blogger on the potential involvement of the GUR in the assassination of Darya Dugina, a journalist and the daughter of prominent Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, or the recent car bombing of Russian author and political activist Zakhar Prilepin, the spy boss said he could “neither confirm nor deny” the involvement of his service.

Budanov’s remarks were condemned by Moscow, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stating that they were a clear admission of wrongdoing.

“Terrorists. Those who provide excuses for the Kiev regime and sponsor it are accomplices of terrorists,” Zakharova wrote on Telegram. “Will the UN not notice that again?”

The remarks are the latest in a string of bloodthirsty statements made by the GUR boss amid the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev. Earlier this month, Budanov declared, “We’ve been killing Russians, and we will keep killing Russians anywhere on the face of this world until the complete victory of Ukraine.”

The pledge received an equally poor reception in Russia, with multiple top officials branding it an admission of engaging in state-level terrorism by Ukraine. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, for instance, said Budanov’s statement was “unprecedented in its essence,” and it was “strange” to not hear any condemnation “from European capitals and from Washington.”

“It’s evident that the Kiev regime is behind the killings, not only sponsoring them but organizing, inciting, and carrying them out. De facto, we’re talking about a state sponsor of terrorism,” Peskov concluded, warning that Russia’s “special services know what to do after such statements.”

May 16, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | | Leave a comment

Germany’s Governments still have totalitarian powers to direct the course of Justice – and make use of it today

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi’s Legal Case

BY UWE ALSCHNER | MAY 14, 2023

On May 23rd, 2023, Professor Sucharit Bhakdi MD, a distinguished scientist and prominent critic of experimental gene based injections, will be put on trial in Germany by the Chief Public Prosecutor of the State of Schleswig-Holstein.

The Prosecutor brought charges of “Anti-Semitism” and “Holocaust Relativization” after Professor Bhakdi had been acquitted of these very charges earlier.

Heribert Prantl, Member of the editorial board at Suddeutsche Zeitung, one of Germany’s most established newspapers comparable to the Washington Post or New York Times has called out the German Governments for perversion of the law in a video from 2020. He did not know the Bhakdi case then, of course, which is one of the most glaring examples of perversion of justice.

Below is a transcript of Prantl’s statement:

There are things in existence which are impossible, which ought not to be allowed to exist. Yet, they do exist. They are even written into Law.

Even though this in itself is perverse for a constitutional democracy, which is founded on the balance of powers.

One such perversity is that the Public Prosecutor’s office is bound by instructions of the Ministry of Justice. This is codified in the German Judicature Act, a law which was passed 140 years ago. [Those were the times of the Prussian Monarchy]

And this is the Law to this present day.

This Law was enacted to codify that Prosecutors are bound to directives of the states Ministers of Justice. It is up to the Ministers of Justice to direct that investigations be delayed, or expedited or dropped.

This is an intolerable state of affairs. The Judiciary shall be independent. That is what the German Basic Law says – but the Public Prosecutors are not!

Criticism of this intolerable state of affairs is brushed aside by politicians – brushed aside by saying such instructions to prosecutors would be “very rarely made use of”.

This doesn’t make it any better!

Why? It is exactly the delicate cases which are in need of independent judgement.

The German Association of Judges, which many German Judges and Public Prosecutors are members of, has just recently repeated its demand to abolish this power to issue instructions.

This demand is supported by the European Court of Justice and the European Commission. The ECJ has issued a spectacular decision but one year ago when it denied German Public Prosecutors the right to issue European Arrest Warrants because of the existence of the German power to issue instructions from the political authorities.

“Being bound by political instructions is a birth defect of the German Public Prosecutor’s offices. This power of instruction is due to the government’s desire to have control over the Penal Justice at any given time.”

This is a quote from the “Juristenzeitung” (Journal of Jurists), and it was printed during the Weimar Republic.

***

Also, see this by Dr. Meryl Nass — Several people asked me about assisting with Dr. Bhakdi’s legal defense

May 15, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Covid: The destruction of medical ethics and trust in the medical profession, Part 2

This is the second part of a discussion by a consultant surgeon of the damage done by the government’s irrational Covid policies. You can read Part 1 here. Part 2 focuses on the betrayal of informed consent.

By Ahmad K Malik | TCW Defending Freedom | May 13, 2023

It isn’t enough to get permission from a patient before you carry out an intervention. For consent to be valid it has to hold up to certain preconditions. Patients must be properly informed of all their options, including not having any treatment. They must be warned of the pros and cons of each choice. It has to be voluntary with no coercion, no intimidation and no threats. Patients should be allowed to ask questions. For example, what is in the vaccine? What are my individual risks of having it? (From Pfizer’s own data, serious adverse events were later reported at 1 in 800.) What is my absolute risk reduction from the intervention?

Other valid questions have remained the province of alternative media, raised only when they escaped censorship. Were aborted foetal cells used? Why was the spike protein (supposedly the most lethal part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus) produced for the vaccine? How much spike protein would be made? Would there be any risk to the body by its introduction?

At the time of the vaccine rollout we had been living under nine months of severe government restrictions, lockdowns, social distancing, mask mandates and bans on travel and even visits to a pub or restaurant. Sage’s SPI-B (Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours) and the ‘nudge unit’ had done a fantastic job along with the rest of Government and the MSM in scaring us, while dangling the freedom carrot on a vaccine stick. This was nothing if not coercive. Were the population clearly told that they would be receiving an experimental, novel, unproven gene therapy with no long-term safety data? No. They were told with a repetitive singularity that it was ‘safe and effective’ and anyone asking legitimate questions was labelled dangerous, a misogynist, a racist, an idiot, reckless and a danger to society. A ‘granny killer’. Against all the principles of medical ethics, a combination of fear, isolation, restriction of freedom, propaganda and information suppression was used to ‘persuade’ the population into signing up to being part of a mass experiment. Almost everyone I knew told me they had the vaccine only so that they could travel to see loved ones or go on holiday. If not coercion, it was certainly bribery. For the unvaccinated and unmasked it was difficult to access medical treatment. In some parts of the world a medical apartheid existed.

A further blow to medical ethics came with vaccine mandates, first for care home workers and then for all NHS and private healthcare workers, the latter rescinded only at the 11th hour. Mandates are anathema to medical ethics. They fly against the third pillar – the fundamental right to bodily autonomy and personal choice. Forty thousand care home workers lost their jobs in the UK for asserting this right and have never been compensated. Many, many more in the US lost their livelihoods or were coerced into mandatory vaccination.

Despite this systematic crushing of medical ethics, the vast majority of the 280,000 UK doctors stood silent. The Royal Colleges of physicians, surgeons, nurses etc went along with the Government narrative. The General Medical Council, which issues guidance to doctors on what it means to be a Good Medical Doctor, remained silent.

The few doctors who were bold enough to question the narrative and did raise concerns were investigated and suspended by the GMC. Doctors who were pro-narrative and stated incorrect facts were left unsanctioned by the GMC. The double standards were clear to see and set a warning to any dissidents of what lay in store if they questioned the narrative.

The GMC and disciplinary processes in hospitals were weaponised to create medical censorship, though the fightback is gaining strength.

When I published a video on Twitter questioning the safety of the Covid mRNA gene therapy shots, I was contacted by the national medical directors of two private hospital groups I work out of. They told me anonymous complaints had been made and I was to stop posting on Twitter and to take down my video, under threat of possible future action including review of my practising privileges. I argued that as a doctor it was my duty of care to speak up especially regarding patient safety issues. I was also following GMC guidance items 23 and 24 in the Good Medical Practice guide.

Guidance 23 states that to help keep patients safe you must: contribute to confidential inquiries, adverse event recognition, report adverse incidents involving medical devices that put or have the potential to put the safety of a patient, or another person, at risk, and report suspected adverse drug reactions and respond to requests from organisations monitoring public health, while always respecting patients’ confidentiality.

Guidance 24 says you must promote and encourage a culture that allows all staff to raise concerns openly and safely.

I haven’t stopped my social media posts and I will continue to raise awareness of the harms that I am seeing from these ‘therapies’. Referring to GMC guidance, other doctors should perhaps be braver about standing up to such attempted censorship.

Informed consent is not bound by one moment in time. Patients need to be made aware of new information that might affect their choice and future decisions, for example the emerging evidence that the shots do not remain in our arms only; that the lipid nanoparticles travel across the blood-brain barrier and throughout the body including reproductive organs. We were told the mRNA could not be written into our DNA, but a 2022 study shows that this can happen within six hours of taking the shot. Pfizer themselves produced a document listing hundreds of potential complications. Such risks are referred to by the MHRA but consistently downplayed or dismissed. Yet their Yellow Card reports show nearly 500,000 people impacted by adverse events, the majority seriously, despite which the MHRA repeats and insists on its ‘safe and effective’ mantra. Have patients being offered boosters been made aware of any of this?

It is hard to understand the MSM culture of silence and avoidance of anything that seems like a critique of either the mRNA ‘vaccines’ or of the government health agencies, who refuse to review the collateral health damage even though  informed consent and patient safety are at stake. The bodies that are meant to defend the patient and stand up for medical ethics remain quiet. The journalists, media outlets, celebrities, influencers and activists who speak out on ‘climate emergency’ or the UK getting there first on the vaccine remain deadly quiet when it comes to the greatest medical experiment inflicted on humankind.

Every week doctors tell me in whispered conspiratorial tones that they agree with me, that they support what I am doing, and that they won’t have any more shots. But when I ask them why they don’t go public, they shake their heads and look down at the ground. They are scared of losing their jobs and livelihood, of course. A neurologist mentioned to me how he had never been so busy; that he was seeing bizarre and rare conditions on an ever more frequent basis. When I asked what was driving this, he answered under his breath ‘the vaccines’, even though we were the only two in the room. I asked if he would go public, and he shook his head and walked away.

As a member of a private closed Facebook group for doctors numbering in the thousands, I witnessed the virtue signalling, professional hubris and groupthink and how they ridiculed colleagues and patients who chose not to have the vaccine. What I didn’t see was compassion, empathy and respect for people’s choices.

The fact that doctors, of all people, couldn’t see the hypocrisy and lies underlying the fear-mongering, manipulation and censorship is cause for grief.

Doctors have let their patients down badly. They have blindly followed the government narrative. They have abandoned any pretence at medical ethics. They now refuse or are reluctant to admit that there are mRNA gene injuries or see them for what they are, and help address them. This is medical gaslighting at its finest.

The public are not blind to this. Every day I get messages informing me that trust in the medical profession is dead, that it will never be regained.

If we, the medical profession, hope to regain that coveted position of most trusted profession, we need to first acknowledge a mistake was made (duty of candour), apologise, prevent it from happening again and seek to remedy and put to right the wrongs.

To stay silent is to be complicit to the greatest breach of our human rights and medical ethics in human history.

May 15, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Biden Misses Deadline To Hand Over Censorship Collusion Documents

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | May 15, 2023

The Biden Administration’s State Department has failed to meet the deadline to provide documents related to the “misinformation” and censorship efforts by its controversial Global Engagement Center (GEC). The House Foreign Affairs Committee demanded the documents in a letter sent on May 1.

The GEC has come under fire from Republicans after it was revealed that it funds the Global Disinformation Index, an organization that provides blacklists of media outlets to advertisers.

“State’s failure to meet the deadline continues a troubling Biden administration practice of noncompliance with congressional oversight and a lax attitude about its obligation to respond,” Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), the committee’s chair, told the Washington Examiner. “The Foreign Affairs Committee will keep this in mind as it considers any and all State Department-requested legislative proposals.”

In the letter, which was addressed to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, McCaul accused the GEC of straying from its mission to “direct, lead, synchronize, integrate, and coordinate” the government’s efforts to combat “foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation” by funding organizations like the Global Disinformation Index, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Lab, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, and Moonshot CVE.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee, now led by Republicans, delayed reauthorizations of the GEC, which was founded in the Obama era. The GEC’s legal authority will end in December 2024 unless Congress reauthorizes it.

“Neither the State Department, nor the GEC, have come close to detailing for Congress the extent of their censorship activities or provided any confidence that the problem isn’t even worse than is known right now,” said Rep. Dareell Issa (R-CA), one of the signatories to the letter sent to the State Department on May 1. “This is the time to come clean.”

May 15, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Yes, you can yell “fire” in a crowded theater

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | September 24, 2020

The manner in which free speech has been coming under attack over the past several years makes it easy to forget that this is not the only era of the internet and social media when this has been happening.

Different approaches and debates about how to handle what is, or is seen as “misinformation” and “disinformation” (used by most censorship champions interchangeably these days) have existed in the past as well, as have attempts to justify limiting freedom of speech protections provided by the US Constitution’s First Amendment.

And in the US, the go-to “crutch phrase” used by those favoring the stifling of speech over promoting freedom of expression has been to explain it as the need to sanction those who are, proverbially, “shouting fire in a crowded theater.”

The expression is derived from a 1919 US Supreme Court case, US v. Schenck, during which Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes remarked that, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic.”

The phrase would in the meantime all but inevitably appear whenever an argument is being made that censorship is acceptable and needed in order to prevent some type of harm. But the use of “shouting fire in a crowded theater” in this way is itself a form of disinformation.

Charles Schenck got himself in trouble, and in jail 100 years ago not by literally starting any fires, but by opposing the WW1 draft policy of his government, and putting together a pamphlet to this effect. Schenck v. The United States held that the defendant’s speech opposing the draft during World War I was not protected free speech under the First Amendment.

Some of the slogans he used are fairly universal, though, and can be applied to a variety of issues, including the present-day curtailing of online speech: messages like, “Do not submit to intimidation,” and, “Assert your Rights.”

Schenck was put on trial and found guilty under the Espionage Act, but in 1969, the US Supreme Court ruled on the issue of inflammatory speech in the Brandenburg v. Ohio case to annul the validity of that decision, when it established that the First Amendment does in fact protect free speech, all the way to the right of Ku Klux Klan members to advocate violence – unless there as a direct threat of “imminent lawless action.”

Although the expression about fires in crowded theaters never carried actual legal weight, the 1969 decision should have also made it less and less appealing to censorship proponents. However, it is still going strong.

There are several cases when the phrase was used in the last decade by officials and commentators, such as a Twitter user accused of spreading disinformation during Hurricane Sandy, WikiLeaks and its activities, and a pastor calling for the burning of Qurans.

In internet years, 2012 is today a distant past, however, the same issues concerning free speech and transparency around attempts to suppress it online were taking place at the time as well. What’s changed in the last eight years is the intensity of the argument that the only way to deal with misinformation or disinformation is to obliterate such suspected content in acts of, by and large, unaccountable censorship, particularly that taking place on social media.

In the US, this has become an often fear mongering campaign that promotes the notion that other approaches would directly and dangerously undermine democracy. In reality, though, it’s the rampant censorship that is more likely to achieve this; even Justice Holmes eventually came round to the idea that “free trade in ideas” was preferable to their suppression, when he later dissented in a case similar to Schenck’s.

The best, and likely the only truly legal and legitimate way to deal with false information on social media is to identify and expose it, rather than censor it, or prosecute its authors.

As for the “crowded theater” phrase, these days it is almost exclusively used in the media to heap criticism on US President Donald Trump, such as this recent Vanity Fair article that calls him “The Human Embodiment of Yelling ‘Fire’ in a Crowded Theater.”

This was said in the context of the coronavirus epidemic, and, of course, a particularly heated election campaign that is fertile ground not only for censorship but also for using strong and suggestive language like this – whether or not it has any legal, or ethical relevance.

May 15, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Teacher Sacked After Refusing to Use Eight Year-Old’s Trans Pronouns and Raising Safeguarding Concerns

BY WILL JONES | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | MAY 12, 2023

A primary schoolteacher has lost her job and is facing a raft of investigations from various regulatory bodies for questioning the advice from Stonewall and Mermaids to encourage a ‘gender transition’ of an eight year-old pupil without any medical evidence.

The child, who cannot be identified for legal reasons and is known only as ‘Child X’, believed she was born in a wrong body and wanted to be treated as a boy.

Based on the advice from trans rights organisations such as Mermaids and Stonewall, the council instructed all school staff always to refer to the child by male pronouns and her chosen male name and that she should use boys’ toilets, dressing rooms and dormitories as requested.

The teacher known as ‘Hannah’ (not her real name) invoked the school’s and the council’s whistleblowing procedure to argue that this approach was not based on medical evidence or compliance with the safeguarding procedures and was putting the child’s health and welfare at risk.

Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, Hannah relied on several expert reports from scientists and doctors highlighting the dangers of encouraging ‘gender transition’ in young children.

After her concern was brushed aside, Hannah brought a claim for judicial review against the school and the council.

The court ordered that the local council, the school and all its staff must remain anonymous to ensure this does not lead to a jigsaw identification of the child.

In response to Hannah’s legal action, the school summarily dismissed her for divulging confidential information to her lawyers and to the court.

The school reported Hannah to the Information Commissioner for a criminal offence under the Data Protection Act. The Information Commissioner has concluded there was no evidence of a criminal offence and decided to take no further action.

The school also reported Hannah to the professional regulator, Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA), for an alleged confidentiality breach. The TRA is currently investigating the case. If found guilty of professional misconduct, Hannah may face a lifelong ban from the profession.

Reporting Hannah to the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), the school sought to bar her from teaching. The DBS, however, has declined to impose a ban pending further enquiries following an investigation.

After a life-long career as a professional teacher, Hannah has been forced to find a job in a sandwich bar.

She has now brought a claim in Employment Tribunal against the school for victimising her for whistleblowing, unfair dismissal and religious discrimination.

She has alleged that the school dismissed her, and reported her to a raft of regulators, for blowing the whistle on the school’s practice which endangered the child’s safety, health and welfare.

The Employment Tribunal is expected to hear the claim in August 2024.

Hannah has this week written to Education Secretary, Gillian Keegan, requesting a meeting to discuss her case.

Her case and the TRA investigation come despite a scathing report published last month by think tank Policy Exchange.

The report reveals the disturbing extent of extreme transgender and gender identity ideology in U.K. schools. In the foreword to the report Rosie Duffield MP writes: “A generation of children are being let down, because well-established safeguarding standards are being compromised.”’

The report goes on to say that in relation to sex and gender issues: “Safeguarding principles are being routinely disregarded in many secondary schools, which are neglecting their safeguarding responsibilities in favour of a set of contested beliefs in a way that risk jeopardising child wellbeing and safety.”

Hannah said:

Like all teachers at the school, I owed a safeguarding duty to Child X. From day one I believe that I acted in Child X’s best interests as I had a legitimate belief that the treatment of Child X amounted to a serious safeguarding issue.

I followed all the correct procedures, I backed all of my concerns with expert evidence and believed the action I took was in the public interest.

It is because I care so much about children that I am taking this action. This isn’t about me simply trying to prove that I am right, but about the safety of a seriously distressed child.

I could not participate in causing harm to Child X. The tragic stories of ‘detransitioners’, the Policy Exchange report and clear expert scientific evidence, back and vindicate me.

Teachers are being bullied not to question trans affirming policies when evidence shows that the actual result of the approach is to put the welfare of children at serious risk.

I am determined to pursue justice over how I have been treated, but my number one concern and motivation is to protect this child and other children in this country from harm.

May 13, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Robert Kennedy Jr. is the only presidential candidate to still be banned from Instagram

By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | May 12, 2023

Robert Kennedy Jr., a Democratic candidate for the 2024 United States presidential election, revealed that his account is till banned from Instagram and accused the tech giant of preventing him from accessing the site, despite him being a contender for the White House.

This makes him the only 2024 US presidential candidate that’s unable to post to the influential social media platform and currently being subjected to direct Big Tech censorship.

Former President Donald Trump, who is running for president in 2024 as a Republican candidate, was suspended from Instagram on January 6, 2023 and banned on January 7. However, his ban was lifted on January 25, 2023.

The other 2024 presidential candidates, Joe Biden (D), Marianne Williamson (D), Larry Elder (R), Nikki Haley (R), Asa Hutchinson (R), Vivek Ramaswamy (R), and Corey Stapleton (R), all have active Instagram accounts.

Kennedy was banned from Instagram in February 2021 for violating the platform’s strict speech rules related to the coronavirus and vaccines. The ban came after several Democratic senators and 12 state attorneys general demanded that Kennedy and other Covid vaccine skeptics be deplatformed by Big Tech. Before the ban, Kennedy had over 800,000 Instagram followers.

Instagram’s failure to reinstate Kennedy since announcing his presidential campaign means that he won’t be able to directly post his message to the social media platform’s sizeable audience of two billion monthly active users.

May 12, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Brazilian Justice Will Punish Tech Companies That Criticize Government’s Censorship Law

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | May 11, 2023

Brazil’s Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, also the president of the country’s Superior Electoral Court, told tech platforms not to campaign against a proposed internet censorship bill.

If they do, he’ll punish them.

Moraes said that the tech companies were undermining Brazil’s democracy.

“The big tech platforms have been challenged and they will be penalized. They will be held accountable, to guarantee the voter’s freedom to vote,” Moraes said, speaking to judges and government employees studying electoral law.

He added that Big Tech platforms, “believe no jurisdiction in the world can oversee them.”

The proposed “Fake News Law” aims to put the responsibility of finding and reporting illegal content on internet platforms.

Non-compliance with the extreme measures would result in fines.

Tech platforms have obviously campaigned against the legislation, claiming it would lead to more censorship.

On Tuesday, Telegram Brazil posted to the Telegram app and said that “democracy is under attack in Brazil,” claiming that the bill would “kill the modern internet” and “put an end to freedom of expression.”

Moraes quickly went further and directly threatened messaging service Telegram with a nationwide ban unless it removed the post on its platform.

Telegram retracted the message and posted a state-ordered message.

Google recently deleted its criticism of the law after the legal threat of fines.

May 11, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Former Disinformation Board Chief Nina Jankowicz Sues Fox News For “Defamation”

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | May 10, 2023

Nina Jankowicz, who previously served in the Biden administration as the leader of the now-defunct Disinformation Governance Board, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News. The suit accuses the network of engaging in a “malicious campaign of destruction.”

She had previously hinted that she was considering a lawsuit.

We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.

Jankowicz’s lawsuit, filed in Delaware state court, claims that Fox News mentioned her over 300 times throughout 2022 in both broadcast and online publications.

She says the network’s hosts and commentators spread lies about her. The suit specifically accuses Fox News of defaming Jankowicz by falsely stating that she was dismissed from the board and aimed to censor Americans’ speech. This coverage, according to the lawsuit, resulted in violent threats against her.

Jankowicz’s attorney, Rylee Sommers-Flanagan, states that her client has suffered “irreparable harm,” both personally and professionally, due to Fox News’ reporting.

“Fox’s coverage of Jankowicz was neither news nor political commentary; it was cheap, easy entertainment untethered from the facts, designed to make consumers believe that Jankowicz could and would suppress their speech,” the suit alleges. “Fox chose to lie about Jankowicz deliberately.”

Jankowicz was appointed executive director of DHS board back in 2022. The pushback against the board was swift as it was accused of violating the First Amendment. The board was soon suspended and eventually scrapped.

May 11, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Israel prevents foreign journalists from entering Gaza

MEMO | May 11, 2023

The Israeli occupation authorities have been preventing foreign journalists from entering Gaza since the start of its offensive on Tuesday night.

In a press release, Head of Government Media Office (GMO) in Gaza, Salameh Maarouf, said: “The Israeli occupation has been closing Beit Hanoon Crossing and preventing foreign media crews from entering the strip to cover its offensive.”

Maarouf called on the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and all other bodies concerned with the freedom of the press and freedom of speech to take practical measures against the Israeli occupation so that it lifts its restrictions on the entry of media crews.

He considered the Israeli ban on the entry of foreign media as a “violation of the freedom of journalists to practice their work, as well as a violation of their right to free movement.”

At the same time, he pointed out that the Israeli occupation bans foreign journalists from entering Gaza during every offensive it carries out against the besieged coastal enclave.

Maarouf stressed that the “silence of the international bodies concerned with media is the reason that encourages the Israeli occupation to repeat and continue its oppressive and suppressive violations.”

May 11, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

NBC Host Worries No One Will Be Able to “Police” What Tucker Carlson Says if He Moves Show to Twitter

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | May 10, 2023

NBC host Tom Costello is worried that no one will be able to “police” what Tucker Carlson says if he moves his show to Twitter.

Oh no, the absolute horror.

The former Fox News host posted a video to Twitter yesterday announcing that he would move his content to the platform owned by Elon Musk.

“There aren’t many platforms left that allow free speech. The last big one remaining in the world is Twitter,” said Carlson, adding, “You can’t have a free society if people aren’t allowed to say what they think is true.”

The legacy media reacted by panicking that Carlson will go uncensored.

NBC host Costello accused Twitter of peddling “misinformation, disinformation, all out lies” (information that doesn’t fortify regime narratives) before expressing his real fear.

“Will anybody be able to police what Carlson says, or is this the point, it’s just a free for all?” he asked former CNN host Brian Stelter.

Stelter responded by claiming that Tucker’s increased presence on Twitter will cement the platform as a “right-wing website.”

Because God forbid someone be allowed to speak freely without having their activity ‘policed’ by censors – we can’t have that!

Yesterday, CNN faced ridicule for describing Carlson, who at his peak enjoyed a viewership of over 5 million people, as a “right wing extremist.”

Carlson moving full time to Twitter might be a way to circumvent the fact that Fox is trying to keep him locked in a contract until 2025, preventing him from being signed up by other broadcasters and freezing him out of the 2024 election.

Elon Musk responded to the announcement by clarifying that Twitter and Carlson have not signed “a deal of any kind whatsoever,” and that the former Fox host will be supported by user subscriptions and advertising revenue.

May 10, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Leaked Legal Analysis Of EU’s Private Message Snooping Plans Says It Interferes With “Fundamental Rights”

Undermining the EU’s self-described commitment to privacy

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | May 10, 2023

There are few things the EU Commission (the EU’s executive arm) would like to present more than the bloc and its institutions speaking with one voice, particularly on controversial topics, such as attempts to destroy encryption.

However, documents leaked from the EU Council Legal Service regarding the legality of a proposal known as “chat control” (formally, Child Sexual Abuse Regulation, CSAR), show that there may be “trouble in paradise.”

As digital rights advocate and European Parliament member (MEP) Patrick Breyer of Germany reports, the Service has warned the Commission that its idea probably runs contrary to the fundamental right to respect for private life – meaning that the European Court of Justice would likely annul it.

Summed up, the “chat control” scheme proposes forcing providers of chat, messaging, phone, and email services to screen all private messages in search for illegal content and then inform the police.

But the problem with this, as the Service has noticed, is that it very easily could be interpreted as general and indiscriminate, as well as permanent surveillance, given that the plan gives “generalized” access to every citizen, including those the analysis says are “not even remotely connected with child sexual exploitation.”

And with the high likelihood that CSAR’s “detection orders” would be considered a violation of the fundamental right to privacy and confidentiality of correspondence, the EU court is also highly likely to squash “chat control” as indiscriminate surveillance, the Service warns.

The analysis also notes that while if the justification for “communications metadata screening” is national security, the court allows it – the drastic measures proposed in the CSAR would probably not be considered proportional to their stated purpose.

There’s also the issue of the EU Commission making the dubious claim that the process, rather than generalized, is somehow “targeted” (it does target everyone – so perhaps that’s the sophistry those behind the CSAR chose to go with.)

But the Legal Service’s analysis fears this is actually a “contradiction” between what the Commission is saying, and what the proposal actually spells out.

The Service’s logical suggestion then is to actually target detection orders so that they apply to people “in respect of whom there are reasonable grounds to believe that they are in some way involved in, committing or have committed a child sexual abuse offense.”

Observers have noted that the analysis of the CSAR – whose UK counterpart is the Online Safety Bill, represents serious criticism of similar, encryption-undermining proposals on both sides of the Atlantic.

May 10, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »