Russia demands YouTube restore RT’s German broadcast channel
RT | December 17, 2021
Russia’s media regulator has warned that it could curtail or block access to YouTube unless the American tech giant restores the “RT auf Sendung” channel. The platform deleted RT DE’s newly launched service on Thursday.
Regulator Roskomnadzor, has sent a notice to Google, YouTube’s parent company demanding that the platform lift all restrictions on the channel, which allowed internet audiences to watch RT’s newly launched around-the-clock German-language broadcasts live.
YouTube took down RT auf Sendung (RT On the Air) five hours after it began showing content. As a result, Roskomnadzor blasted YouTube’s “unprecedented” actions as “an act of censorship” that violates Moscow’s law.
If the platform fails to comply, it could receive a formal warning and then be “partially or completely” blocked in Russia, the regulator warned.
YouTube said it deleted the channel for what it considered a violation of its terms of service. It later explained that owners of previously deleted accounts are barred from launching and operating new ones.
The platform took down two of RT DE’s accounts in September, over what it claimed was a violation of community guidelines for alleged “medical misinformation” in four videos, without elaborating further or providing specific examples.
RT’s editor-in-chief, Margarita Simonyan, called the move at the time a “declaration of media war against Russia by Germany.”
Before its removal, RT DE was the fourth-most influential German-language news source on the platform, surpassing Deutsche Welle and a number of other news broadcasters, according to Tubular Labs.
You can WATCH the live broadcast of the new channel on RT DE’s official website.
Head of European media authority says RT in Germany ‘will be taken care of’
RT | December 17, 2021
Tobias Schmid, the European Representative of the Directors’ Conference of the Media Authorities, in an interview to a German media outlet NDR baselessly disputed the validity of RT’s broadcasting in Germany, but said that the channel “will be taken care of.”
German-language television channel RT DE – part of the RT network – began its broadcasting from Moscow and to multiple European countries, via a Serbia-issued license on 16.12.2021. The license had been obtained in accordance with all applicable European laws and regulations, under the European Convention on Transfrontier Television. Schmid falsely claimed that the new channel is based in Berlin – perhaps missing the extensive coverage of RT DE’s launch from RT’s Moscow headquarters, where RT DE’s newsroom, VCR, on-air studio, post-production facilities, broadcasting complex etc. are all located. He further said, that despite the utmost transparency and legality of all of RT activities in Germany, the new channel is an irritant but “will be taken care of.”
Now Schmid is attempting to use his authority, as well as that of his and other German organizations, to pressure independent European satellite operators to breach contract and terminate RT DE’s broadcasting – an action that we consider not just misguided but grossly inappropriate and in violation of RT DE’s legal rights.
Twitter locked out think tank policy director for opposing “chemical castration” of kids
“Hateful conduct”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 16, 2021
Twitter temporarily suspended Jon Schweppe, the director of American Principles Project (APP), for encouraging governors to support legislation that would ban the chemical castration of kids with gender dysphoria. Twitter claimed that the tweet violated its rules against hateful conduct.
APP is a pro-family think tank. Its director, Jon Schweppe, took to Twitter to applaud South Dakota’s Gov. Kristi Noem for pressing the state lawmakers to pass a law that will restrict the participation of trans individuals in female sports at the K-12 and collegiate levels.
Shweppe wrote: “Now we hope that governors will likewise be emboldened to continue the fight against the evil gender ideology being forced on America’s children by joining Arkansas and Tennessee in banning the chemical castration and surgical mutilation of minors suffering from gender dysphoria.”
Twitter suspended him for that tweet, which it said went against its “rules against hateful conduct.”

APP’s account tweeted that Schweppe appealed the suspension arguing that he was “advocating for protecting children from violence.” Twitter rejected the appeal.
Digital Surveillance — the Real Motive Behind Push to Vaccinate Kids
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | December 15, 2021
COVID-19 may have caught much of the planet by surprise in late 2019 and early 2020, but much of the groundwork for the technology now widely used as a “response” to the pandemic was conceptualized and developed years prior.
In the U.S. and throughout the world, there has been a recent push to implement a variety of “vaccine passport” regimes, many of which rely on digital technologies such as mobile applications to carry a record of — so far, at least — one’s COVID-19 vaccination records.
These “tools” are presented by public officials and significant sections of the media in recent weeks and months as an inevitability of sorts, a technological progression as natural as breathing.
They are also presented as a “new” response to an unprecedented crisis.
These technological applications are touted as a means of keeping businesses open and ensuring “peace of mind” for members of the public who remain wary about entering public spaces.
But just how new is this “new” technology? And will the use of technology be limited to COVID vaccinations, or for purposes of “health?”
International ‘alliances’ backing the melding of ‘Big Tech’ and ‘Big Health’
It was the beginning of the preceding decade, January 2010, when Bill Gates, via the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, proclaimed “[w]e must make this the decade of vaccines,” adding that “innovation will make it possible to save more children than ever before.”
In launching this so-called “Decade of Vaccines,” the Gates Foundation pledged $10 billion in funding. But Gates wasn’t the only actor behind this initiative.
For instance, the “Decade of Vaccines” program used a model originating from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health to project the potential impact of vaccines on childhood deaths throughout the decade to come.
And the announcement for the “Decade of Vaccines” initiative was made at that year’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF).
These same actors — the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the WEF — organized the now-notorious Event 201 pandemic simulation exercise, in October 2019, just before COVID entered our lives.
Moreover, in 2010, a “Global Vaccine Action Plan” was announced as part of this initiative. It was a collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), with Dr. Anthony Fauci serving on the leadership council.
As the Gates Foundation stated at the time:
“The Global Vaccine Action Plan will enable greater coordination across all stakeholder groups — national governments, multilateral organizations, civil society, the private sector and philanthropic organizations — and will identify critical policy, resource and other gaps that must be addressed to realize the life-saving potential of vaccines.”
The steering committee for the “Global Vaccine Action Plan” included a member from the GAVI Alliance. Notably, the initial announcement for the “Decade of Vaccines” was made in the presence of Julian Lob-Levyt, then-CEO of the GAVI Alliance.
What, or who, is the GAVI Alliance? Also known as the “Vaccine Alliance,” it proclaims a mission to “save lives and protect people’s health,” and states it “helps vaccinate almost half the world’s children against deadly and debilitating infectious diseases.”
GAVI goes on to describe its core partnership with various international organizations, including names that are by now familiar: the WHO, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Bank. (Far from helping the world’s poor, the World Bank has been described by a former insider, John Perkins, as an organization that uses “economic hit men” to subjugate financially crippled countries).
In 2018, GAVI, through its INFUSE (innovation for update, scale and equity in immunization) Initiative, put forth the following “food for thought”:
“Imagine a future in which all children have access to life-saving vaccines no matter where they live — a future in which parents and health workers ensure their timely vaccination, a future in which they have their own digitally stored health record that cannot be lost or stolen, a future in which, regardless of gender, economic or social standing, this record allows each child (and parents) to have access to a bank account, go to school, access services and ultimately build a prosperous life.
“This future is possible today. With the latest advances in digital technologies that enable more effective ways to register, identify births and issue proof of identity and authentication for access to services — we are on the brink of building a healthier and more prosperous future for the world’s most vulnerable children.”
This would be accomplished, according to GAVI, through the INFUSE initiative, specifically by “calling for innovations that leverage new technologies to modernize the process of identifying and registering the children who are most in need of life-saving vaccines.”
As described by investigative reporter Leo Hohmann:
“Don’t be confused by the bit about ‘building a healthier and more prosperous future.’ That’s just window dressing. This is all about data collection and has nothing to do with health.
“The real purpose behind the historic, unprecedented push to vaccinate the very young, even against diseases like COVID that do not pose a threat to them, is to fold the current generation of children into the blossoming global digital identity system.”
GAVI itself confirmed the above statement, as it has described potential uses of these “new technologies” as going beyond the issuance of a “digital child health card” toward encompassing “access to other services,” including the broadly defined “financial services.”
Limitations on “access” to such “other services” are already apparent in jurisdictions where COVID passports restrict access to businesses, banks and other private spaces for the non-vaccinated
The GAVI Alliance also closely collaborates with the ID2020 Alliance, founded in 2016, which claims to advocate in favor of “ethical, privacy-protecting approaches to digital ID,” adding that “doing digital ID right means protecting civil liberties.
Unsurprisingly, there is no clarification provided regarding the potential loss of civil liberties for individuals who choose, for any reason, not to be vaccinated and who are therefore excluded from large swaths of society in areas where COVID passports have been implemented and enforced.
Such rhetoric on the part of ID2020 is reminiscent of the public statements put forth by the European Union (EU) as it was preparing to launch its so-called “Green Pass” earlier this year.
EU officials, such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen — who recently called for a “discussion” on mandatory vaccinations in the EU — went to great lengths to stress how individuals’ privacy would be protected.
In a manner which some may consider tone-deaf, they further emphasized that such a digital pass would enable people to “move safely” for “work or tourism,” as if such free movement is a new concept that only a digital pass could make possible.
Again, restrictions on the unvaccinated, including those involving “work or tourism,” were entirely absent from the public rhetoric surrounding this new measure.
Highlighting the possibilities that the GAVI-ID2020 collaboration could bring, the INFUSE call for innovation states:
“According to the ID2020 Alliance — a public-private partnership that includes Gavi — the use of digital health cards for children could directly improve coverage rates by ensuring a verifiable, accurate record and by prompting parents to bring their children in for a subsequent dose.
“From the parents’ perspective, digital records can make it convenient to track a child’s vaccines and eliminate unnecessary paperwork.
“And as children grow, their digital health card can be used to access secondary services, such as primary school, or ease the process of obtaining alternative credentials. Effectively, the digital health card could, depending on country needs and readiness, potentially become the first step in establishing a legal, broadly recognized identity.”
All of these proposals and initiatives appear, in turn, to be closely aligned with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, and in particular, Goal 16.9, which calls for the provision of a digital legal identity for all, including newborns, by 2030.
To this end, the UN established the UN Legal Identity Agenda Task Force in 2018. In May 2021, this task force, alongside the United Nations Development Programme and a variety of private sector actors, organized the “Future of Technology and Institutional Governance in Identity Management” roundtable sessions.
The final report from these sessions indicates, among other things, a desire from the stakeholders for the expansion of public-private partnerships for the further development and implementation of digital ID regimes worldwide, including in the Global South.
One of the stakeholders present, the not-for-profit Secure Identity Alliance, touts its support for “the provision of legal, trusted identity for all and driving the development of inclusive digital services necessary for sustainable, worldwide economic growth and prosperity.”
A paper published in July by the Security Identity Alliance discusses “making health certificates a workable reality.”
One of the five principles the paper puts forth for such health passports is that they are “futureproofed,” by offering “multi-purpose functionality” in order to “ensure ongoing value beyond today’s current crisis.”
The Secure Identity Alliance counts among its observers governmental authorities from countries such as Germany, The Netherlands, Estonia, Slovenia, the United Arab Emirates, Nigeria and Guinea.
Moreover, one of its founding members and current board members is the Thales Group, a private company involved in aerospace, defense and security — in short, a defense contractor.
On its website, the Thales Group proudly promotes its “smart health card” and Digital ID Wallet technology. Amidst utopian language claiming “we’re ready for change” and “putting citizens in control,” the Digital ID Wallet promises the public the ability to “access the rights and services to which we are entitled.”
Indeed, the documents that would be available via this Digital ID Wallet go beyond “health credentials” and include national identification cards, driver’s licenses and any number of other items of official documentation.
Numerous countries worldwide, including the U.S., currently find themselves in varying stages of implementing exactly this sort of “digital wallet.”
Taking ‘health passports’ a step (or more) further: digital wallet regimes take shape
The U.S. House of Representatives on Nov. 30 passed H.R. 550, the Immunization Infrastructure Modernization Act of 2021.
If passed by Congress, this law would provide $400 million in funding to expand vaccine-tracking systems at the state and local level, enabling state health officials to monitor the vaccination status of American citizens and to provide this information to the federal government.
Vaccine passports and no-fly lists for the unvaccinated — a concept for which Fauci expressed his support — could be created under the law.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Annie Kuster (NH-02), passed the U.S. House of Representatives with 294 votes, including all Democrats and 80 Republicans. It is now before the Senate, where it is being reviewed by the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Since being passed by the House, the bill has garnered a fair amount of attention — other recent digital identification developments in the U.S., however, seem to have remained relatively under the radar.
In September, for instance, Apple announced a partnership with eight states — Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Oklahoma and Utah — to make those respective states’ driver’s licenses available in digital form via the Apple Wallet platform.
Meanwhile, several states, including New York (via its “Excelsior Pass”) and Connecticut introduced their own digital COVID vaccination certificate.
Similar to how the EU has promoted vaccine passports, these state-level initiatives in the U.S. are touted as a means of “safely” reopening the economy and encouraging travel and movement.
Indeed, New York went so far as to make a “blueprint” of its vaccine pass platform available, “as a guide to assist other states, territories, and entities in the expansion of compatible COVID-19 vaccine credential systems to advance economic development efforts nationwide.”
Looking at the EU, one of the bloc’s priorities as part of its 2019-2024 five-year plan is to create a “digital identity for all Europeans.” Namely, each EU citizen and resident would have access to a “personal digital wallet” under this initiative.
This “personal digital wallet” could include documentation such as national ID cards, birth certificates, medical certificates and driver’s licenses.
The EU subsequently presented its plans for the “European Digital Decade,” where under the EU’s “Digital Compass,” 100% of key public services will be available digitally, with a target of 80% uptake of digital identification documents.
Already, several EU member states are getting into the act.
Germany, which had electronic national ID cards (via biometric chips) since 2010, introduced digital versions of these ID cards this past fall, via the AusweisApp2. The same app makes German driver’s licenses available digitally.
Germany and Spain also recently signed an agreement to launch a cross-border program for digital identification, which would entail mutual recognition of each other’s official digital documents
France also recently announced its intention to integrate its national identification card with smartphones.
Greece received praise from the global press when it introduced particularly draconian digital tools during its two COVID lockdowns, such as a government SMS platform to which residents would have to send a text message in order to circulate in public for a limited set of “reasons.”
More recently, Greece announced the forthcoming creation of a digital wallet that will contain documents such as one’s national ID card, driver’s license and health documentation.
Estonia, viewed as a world leader in introducing digital e-governance and which has had digital identification cards in place since 2002, is preparing its own digital wallet system while expressing support for the EU’s “Digital Compass.”
Outside of Europe, several other countries also have expanded their digital identification regimes in various ways.
In Australia, for instance, states such as New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland introduced or trialed digital driver’s licenses.
It is in India, though, where such digital documents appear to have generated the greatest degree of controversy thus far.
The Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission was announced in 2020 and launched as a pilot program in six regions of India in 2021. It is an app that provides a unique digital health ID to each citizen and is linked to their personal health records.
Its establishment comes on the footsteps of the development of Aadhaar, India’s national digital identification card system.
Aadhaar generated controversy over the government’s plans to link it to the national voter database, while it has also been the target of hackers.
Questions arise as more digital platforms rolled out for ‘official purposes’
The rollout of digital platforms gives rise to questions about the safety of individuals’ data on these digital platforms, despite government reassurances to the contrary regarding privacy.
Moreover, it remains unclear how long “COVID passports,” whether in digital or paper form, will remain enforced, or if governments plan to make such a regime permanent.
A recent article in The Atlantic, “Why Aren’t We Even Talking About Easing COVID Restrictions?” questioned why vaccine passport mandates in the U.S. have no sunset date.
Indeed, if the proclamation of the Secure Identity Alliance regarding the need to “futureproof” such digital documents is any indication, it may be the case that governments have no intention to scrap vaccine passports.
Even if such specific uses of digital “passports” eventually go away, the range of ways in which digital wallets can potentially be utilized is staggering, including, for instance, via the tracking of “personal carbon allowances,” as previously reported by The Defender.
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.
© 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
FDA Colludes with US Postal Service to Destroy Ivermectin Shipments
InfoWars | December 15, 2021
The US Food and Drug Administration is colluding with the US Postal Service to intercept inbound international shipments of Covid wonder drug ivermectin, reports circulating on social media claim.
According to letters from the FDA being shared online, the federal regulatory agency blocked shipments of ivermectin from reaching their intended recipients as they came through ports of entry.
“A shipment addressed to you from a foreign country is being held by the post office at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration,” reads one letter shared by attorney Aaron Siri.
According to the letter, the package containing 200 tablets of “Iverheal ivermectin tablets” was intercepted at the JFK Airport Port of Entry on November 9, 2021.
In another letter, the FDA intercepted 300 tablets of “Iverpac12” back in August, which they said were “subject to refusal of admission into the United States and are subject to administrative destruction.”
News of the FDA’s collusion with the US Postal Service comes as more people seek the effective drug and other preventative early treatments to remedy Covid-19 symptoms.
Meanwhile, the FDA has continued it’s fear-mongering campaign advising Americans not to consume the “horse dewormer” drug to treat Covid, as it has not been formally approved [for COVID use].
PSA: Be Careful on Telegram
eugyppius | December 15, 2021
Assume that most large chat groups are infiltrated by security services and that everything you say there is being surveilled by the police.
For a few weeks, regime-friendly press outlets in Germany, like the Süddeutsche Zeitung, have been ringing the alarm about Telegram as a “lawless space” that poses a “danger to society.” Apparently it is a den of hate speech and incitement. This coordinated hyperventilation comes with demands that the new German government regulate Telegram as a social media application, which would require its administrators to report illegal content to authorities. Right now German law regards Telegram as a messenger app and thus exempts it from some of these rules.
In perfect tandem with this false press hysteria, police have raided the apartments of a Telegram chat group in Dresden. Allegedly, members of the chat, in the context of discussions about vaccine mandates, contemplated assassinating Michael Kretschmer, the CDU minister president of Saxony. Whenever police actions and press messaging campaigns align this perfectly, you should presume it is the work of agents provocateurs. In all likelihood, German security services are infiltrating Telegram chat groups, and putting about violent rhetoric in the interests of creating arrests and headlines to reinforce the press narrative.
I understand most of my readers aren’t in Germany, but as a back-up to Twitter I have my own Telegram channel, so I just want to advise everyone that caution is extremely important here. If you’re in a chat and anyone proposes violence, the chances that this is a bad actor are high, and you should distance yourself from these statements immediately. “I disavow all political violence and you should too” is the line I always use. Protect yourself.
Mainstream media moves against “misinformation” in email
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 14, 2021
The boundary corporate media want to establish for what they think should be policed and censored as political “misinformation” keeps expanding.
The new “frontier” that seems to be shaping up, if narratives pushed by the likes of the New York Times are to be taken into account, are people’s email communications.
Unlike the politicians’ speech on public platforms like social media and TV broadcasters, that is tightly controlled and often censored by various fact-checkers hired by Big Tech, the medium of email remains elusive, the newspaper laments, even though it is a powerful way to reach constituents.
Mentioning several examples of fund-raising emails that the NYT said contained false information regarding benefits enjoyed by illegal migrants, and Medicare, abortion, etc., the article’s author goes on to qualify email as a tool “teeming” with misinformation.
The newspaper is trying to highlight email communication as a problem ahead of the 2022 mid-term election, and the “methodology” used was to sign up for mailing lists from 390 members of Congress seeking reelection, and then decide which ones were sending out “unfounded claims.”
After reviewing the emails sent from 390 campaign lists since August, the NYT said it discovered that 15% percent of messages coming from Republicans and only 2% of those authored by Democrats contained misinformation.
And more sinister undertones have also allegedly been detected, since “multiple” Republicans are accused of doing this in an organized manner, by repeating the same claims, while Democrats “rarely” do that.
Democrats are also painted as far more cooperative, with a spokesperson for one campaign saying they had made “honest mistakes” and would be more careful in the future – while several Republican candidates cited in the article ignored NYT’s requests for comment.
Unavoidably, President Trump is blamed for the “ubiquity” of misinformation among Republicans. The fact that political messages can freely and in a cost-effective way reach an audience despite the massive censorship efforts and deplatforming on big social media platforms is seen as particularly concerning.
However, no suggestion is made on what to do about this “problem” and how to make sure fact-checkers can gain access to emails as well.
Facebook tech guru questions fight against ‘misinformation’
RT | December 13, 2021
Attempts to turn social media into an exclusive club where only elites have a right to speak in the name of rooting out dangerous misinformation are fundamentally wrong, a senior Meta official said.
Andrew Bosworth, who leads technological research at Meta and is set to become the tech giant’s CTO next year, pushed back against critics who accuse social media like Facebook of harming society by failing to police speech on their platforms.
“If your democracy can’t tolerate the speech of people, I’m not sure what kind of democracy it is,” he said in an interview with ‘Axios on HBO’, which was previewed on Sunday. He was responding to a statement by host Ina Fried that some people think tools like Facebook should not exist at all because they are “fundamentally unsafe”.
Bosworth rejected the notion that the democratization of public speech brought by the advance of social media should be reversed due to the threat of misinformation.
I do believe in giving people more access to information and more access to connect with one another, and not reserving those tools to some small number of elite people.
US-based social media, Facebook in particular, have been put under increased pressure to increasingly police their platforms so that they are not used by ‘malicious’ actors. The initial push came after the 2016 election based on the claim that Russia used memes to interfere with the political process. More recently, the justification for censorship was that misinformation about Covid-19 and health was running rampant online.
Bosworth reiterated his discomfort over attempts to turn Facebook into an arbiter of what speech should be considered malicious and banned. Even using third-party checkers to do the job is far from a perfect solution, he said.
Our ability to know what is misinformation is itself in question, and I think reasonably so.
“I am very uncomfortable with the idea that we possess fundamental rightness even in our most scientific centers of study to exercise that kind of power on a citizen, another human, and what they want to say, and who they want to listen to,” he said.
Journalist Andy Ngô is sued for sharing riot videos on Twitter
The photographers claim it caused them “harassment.”Ngô’s lawyer says the lawsuit is “frivolous.”
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | December 11, 2021
Two photographers from Portland Oregon have filed a federal copyright infringement lawsuit against journalist and author Andy Ngô. The photographers claim that Ngô shared their videos of protests in Portland on his Twitter account.
Andy Ngô has amassed a following in conservative circles for documenting riots and other events from BLM supporters, Antifa, and other groups.
The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court of Portland. It cites two videos taken by the plaintiffs, Melissa Lewis and Grace Morgan, during protests in Portland. The plaintiffs want the court to order Ngô to stop sharing their videos and for financial compensation.
The suit claims that Ngô “has made a practice of illegally copying and uploading plaintiffs’ videos onto his own Twitter account.”
The suit also notes that Ngô is popular in “right-wing” circles, and the photographers are “left-wing.” As a result, they allege they are “are deluged with harassing comments” when their videos are shared.
“This has resulted in instances where (Morgan and Lewis) were physically attacked by (Ngô’s) followers,” the suit adds.
The lawyer representing Ngô, Harmeet K Dhillon, claimed that Ngô did not violate Twitter’s rules and described the lawsuit as “frivolous.”
“The plaintiffs shared their videos publicly on Twitter, a platform designed for exactly their purpose, and Mr. Ngô commented on this publicly posted content using Twitter platform tools, not somehow surreptitiously downloading and uploading the clips as the plaintiffs falsely claim,” Dhillon said in a statement.
The complaint appears to be somewhat contradictory, in that it expresses that using a standard Twitter feature to share videos in a way that credits the original tweeter is causing them harassment but also that sharing their videos themselves is copyright infringement.
“Being an effective journalist means people will try to silence you. I was beaten several times by antifa. Now two antifa videographers in Portland filed a lawsuit against me. Why? Because I retweeted them on Twitter,” Ngô commented, showing screenshots of times he used Twitter’s sharing features to share the videos.

If you regard the United States as perhaps flawed but overall a force for good in the world . . .