Mexico warns Israel for ‘protecting’ suspect in disappearance of 43 students
Press TV – April 6, 2024
Mexico has warned that if Israel continues with its refusal to extradite a fugitive security official wanted in connection with the disappearance of 43 Mexican college students a decade ago, their bilateral ties may be damaged.
Back in September 2014, 43 male students disappeared from the Ayotzinapa Rural Teachers’ College after being abducted in Iguala, in the southwestern state of Guerrero. The students were traveling to a demonstration in Mexico City amid a drug war.
The official narrative by the government said at the time that corrupt police handed the ill-fated students over to drug gang henchmen, who then incinerated the students at a garbage dump and threw the ashes in the San Juan River.
Questioning the official narrative by some experts as well as growing anger in Mexico at federal inaction prompted the current administration, led by President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, to pledge to re-open the case.
Tomas Zeron, who headed the Criminal Investigation Agency that led the inquiry into the case – dubbed one of Mexico’s worst human rights tragedies – is wanted by the Mexican justice system for the crimes of torture, violation of human rights and forced disappearance of the 43 students.
“The lack of progress in resolving this case is interpreted as de facto protection by Israel of Tomas Zeron and threatens to become an irritating and disruptive factor with” Tel Aviv, the Mexican foreign ministry said in a statement on Friday.
The former official, who fled to Israel in 2020, has also been charged with the abuse of power and authority, embezzlement, fraud and criminal association. He has consistently denied all allegations.
Although Mexico and Israel do not have an extradition treaty, Mexico City has repeatedly asked Tel Aviv to hand over Zeron over allegations of serious irregularities in the probe into the said case, but all to no avail.
Zeron is one of the architects of the 2015 official narrative or the so-called “historical truth” regarding the fate of the disappeared students, whose exact circumstances of their disappearance are still unknown.
The victims’ families have so far strongly rejected that narrative.
Reiner Fuellmich Team Find Bombshell Evidence Of A Dossier Showing Conspiracy To “Deal With” Him
ELSA | APRIL 4
On Reiner’s first court appearance after the long Easter break, he and his legal team made what can easily be termed bombshell – that there has been a Dossier Reiner Fuellmich from the German state with the express purpose to take him out, notably out of any possibility of gaining a position in the political arena.
I understand the concerns of the German state. Here was someone with integrity and courage, with charisma and intelligence, with extensive experience plus shared leadership in a small German political party. Very appealing to many people fed up with mandates, loss of freedom of speech, mass immigration, and ever so much else. Here was a suitable leader.
Anyway, here is the Dossier, from bittel.tv. You can also find it on Roger Bittel’s Telegram channel:
👉 Dossier Deutsch (https://t.me/bitteltv/25826)
👉 further languages (https://t.me/bitteltv/25838)
👉 the full broadcast (https://t.me/bitteltv/25839)
All of the dossier is important. However, you may be most interested in the last section:
Report and recommendations for action regarding Reiner Fuellmich
Date: August 24, 2021
Author: B**
Subject: Comprehensive analysis and recommendations for dealing with Reiner Fuellmich
Included within this last section:
The awarding of or the possibility of obtaining politically exposed offices must be prevented by all means within the rule of law.
How is this to be done:
The initiation of criminal proceedings on the basis of the evidence collected against Reiner Fuellmich must be prepared. This includes cooperation with public prosecutors [bolding and italics mine] and the preparation of charges in the event of demonstrable violations of the law. Any necessary constructions must be weighed up and suitable third parties recruited [bolding and italics mine].
NOW HERE, THE FULL DOSSIER. I RECOMMEND READING IT.
http://www.bittel.tv / Broadcast from 2.4.2024
Dossier Reiner Fuellmich
Reiner Fuellmich, co-chairman and candidate for chancellor of the party “dieBasis”, is a German lawyer who has become known in particular for his involvement in various legal disputes and his public statements on various issues, including the measures and political decisions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. His views and legal activities have attracted both national and international attention and are the subject of controversy.
Professional career:
Reiner Fuellmich began his legal career after graduating from law school. He is licensed to practice law in Germany and in California, USA. Over many years, he has specialized in various areas of civil law and has been involved in several legal disputes, some of which have attracted considerable media attention.
Engagement against banks and corporations:
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Fuellmich made a name for himself in particular through his involvement in cases against large banks and companies. These often involved consumer protection and claims for damages.
Read the rest of Elsa’s article here.
Deploying spies on campus in the US: The ‘Israel on Campus Coalition’
By David Miller | Al Mayadeen | April 4, 2024
Listen to Nancy Pelosi at the end of January this year: “What we have to do is to try and stop the suffering in Gaza. This is about women and children, people who don’t have a place to go. So let’s address that. But for them to call for a ceasefire is Mr Putin’s message… Make no mistake. This is directly connected to what he would like to see.”
“I think some of these protestors are spontaneous and organic and sincere. Some, I think, are connected to Russia and I say that having looked at this for a long time.”
What is going on here? These are Zionist talking points. As the Palestinians say – every Zionist accusation is a confession. In reality, the only entity with really significant spy networks in the US is the Zionist entity.
The FBI and the CIA know this, but they are either unwilling or unable to investigate Israeli espionage networks operating freely in universities, businesses, and government facilities across the United States.
One well-known spy network is the Anti-Defamation League. Created in 1913, it has been spying on Arab Americans since before the creation of the Zionist entity. Throughout this period, the ADL has also closely collaborated with the FBI. Today, the ADL is doing more than attempting to repress free speech on Palestine; it is attempting to have ordinary pro-Palestine activism declared to be “terrorism”.
What they are trying to do is to use a vaguely worded law, which they lobbied for, to entrap Palestine solidarity activism as falling under a legal definition of material support for “terrorism”.
In late October, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and another Zionist group published an open letter urging universities to investigate Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) under the material support statute introduced in 1996.
In addition to accusing SJP of supporting Hamas, they were also, the ADL claimed, “voicing an increasingly radical call for confronting and ‘dismantling’ Zionism on U.S. college campuses.”
Material support for “terrorism” can include giving advice or other speech so long as it is at the behest or in coordination with the “terrorist” group.
But there is also an attempt by the ADL and its allies to claim that routine pro-Palestine activism should be legally understood as support for “terrorism”. They are working to blur the line between independent advocacy, which is allowed, and coordination, which could be terrorism.
It is of little comfort that there is no public evidence any SJP student members coordinated with Hamas or any other armed group. The case law construing the material support statute’s punishment of advocacy is so underdeveloped that there is considerable room for investigative overreach by the FBI.
The line between independent advocacy and material support as speech in coordination with a listed “terrorist” group “remains unelaborated”.
Of course, the ADL is one of the few non-government groups that trains federal law enforcement on counterterrorism. It can use the gap to advance its overreaching conception of the material support statute.
To fight back, all campus groups and university management need to declare that no independent campus speech, no matter how incendiary, serves as a legitimate basis for a material support investigation.
Another group, the Israel on Campus Coalition has been spying on pro-Palestine students for years.
It is linked to Israeli intelligence and strategically targets individual students or faculty on campus in order the “crush” the movement.
ICC was created by Hillel International and the Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation in 2002 to promote “Israel” advocacy on campus.
The money came from the business Charles who at that stage had a “major interest in Bank Hapoalim, Israel’s largest bank, and has extensive interests in oil, real estate, banking and shipping in the US.”
Today, Hillel and the ICC maintain close organizational ties. The ICC continues to provide Hillel professionals with “Israel” advocacy training and support.
Hillel has taken on a more extreme form of Zionism in recent years, sparking a rebellion by some student members who are critical of some aspects of Zionism.
They called their challenge Open Hillel, which says it “promotes pluralism and open discourse on Israel-Palestine in Jewish communities on campus and beyond. We aim to eliminate Hillel International’s Standards of Partnership for Israel Activities, which exclude individuals and groups from the Jewish community on campus on the basis of their views on Israel.” But even calling for a debate on Zionism was too much for the ICC, which engaged in spying on the Jewish student group.
The spy operation is closely co-ordinated with the Zionist regime as was revealed by The Lobby USA.
Here is Lila Greenberg, formerly of AIPAC:
“The ICC pools resources from all of the campus organizations. So that they’re tapped in on all angles.”
According to Jacob Baime, currently the ICC’s chief executive officer, “We built up this massive national political campaign to crush [pro-Palestine activism].”
“It’s modeled on General Stanley McCrystal’s counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq. We’ve copied a lot from that strategy … And one of the pieces was this Operations and Intelligence Brief.”
This is then passed on to the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs.
Baime confirmed that ICC “coordinates with” and “communicates with” the Ministry.
Once collected, data from the ICC’s web of campus spies and high-tech Israeli surveillance equipment then flow to the Anti-Defamation League.
The ADL, is in itself closely in touch with Zionist intelligence agencies but also uses the data to weaponize anti-Semitism in its reports on BDS and Palestine activism.
Among its other activities, the ICC offered to pay any pro-“Israel” student $250 to attend the sparsely attended damp squib of the March for Israel in November 2023 in Washington DC.
Make no mistake, the Zionist regime has agents on campus all over the United States. Everyone must be removed.
Israel Passes Law, Giving Itself Power To Temporarily Shut Down Al Jazeera
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | April 1, 2024
On April 1, 2024, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a sweeping statement indicating the immediate ceasing of Al Jazeera’s operations within Israeli territory. The Prime Minister’s staunch decision followed the legislative green light enhancing the authority of senior ministers to terminate the operations of non-domestic news agencies that are perceived as a potential threat to national security.
Emphasizing his intention to immediately commence action according to newly approved legislation, Netanyahu proclaimed, “Al Jazeera will no longer broadcast from Israel.” The declaration, which received widespread publicity through a post on X, was made right after the final iterations of the law received parliamentary approval.
Netanyahu’s decision can be traced back to an ongoing conflict with the Qatar-based media house, which he accuses of biased reporting against Israel. With a 70-10 majority vote in the Knesset, the legislation empowers the Prime Minister, alongside the Communications Minister, to order the closure of foreign networks in Israel and seize their equipment if identified as a security hazard.
An immediate international reaction to the news came from the White House, where spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre opined that restricting Al Jazeera’s operations in Israel would be “deeply concerning.”
Al Jazeera has denied allegations that its coverage jeopardizes Israel’s security, labeling these claims as “dangerous and ridiculous lies.” The network, known for its critical stance on Israel’s military actions in Gaza, has accused Israeli authorities of deliberately targeting its offices and staff.
Hillary Clinton Takes Aim at “Disinformation,” “Negative, Virulent Content,” and Memes Ahead of the 2024 Elections
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 31, 2024
The last time the extent of Hillary Clinton’s tech “savviness” or lack thereof, became public knowledge was way back in 2016, when she lost the presidential election, amid, among other things, the (classified) emails scandal.
Now, Clinton has graduated from not knowing how email works, to feeling she is qualified to discuss the impact of immeasurably more complex technology, such as AI.
To give Clinton the benefit of the doubt, it has been a long time, and perhaps she has used that time to educate herself.
However, it also turns out that nearly a decade later she still blames her loss to Donald Trump on the since-debunked conspiracy theories about “election disinformation” that supposedly decided the outcome of that vote.
So, Clinton-the-victim’s comments now, half a year before the next US presidential election and amid mainstream media’s “disinformation/AI panic” might read as little, if anything, more than political campaigning.
She claims this is her focus now: still talking about the alleged wrongdoing done to her in 2016, still alleging this was all about “disinformation” – and that it was all “primitive” – compared to what she anticipates is happening now.
Clinton also plays her audience by at once “admitting” that she and hers are ignorant (“I don’t think any of us understood it. I did not understand it. I can tell you, my campaign did not understand it”), to then claim that, for some reason, she should now be taken as an authority.
Not about social media, memes, the “dark web” (or, God forbid, the concept of email…) but also, the regulation of online providers/content. Enter the CDA Section 230 debate – where it seems each side of the ideological aisle interprets its importance according to their political needs of the day.
“Their, you know, the so-called ‘Dark Web’ was filled with these kinds of memes and stories and videos of all sorts… portraying me in all kinds of… less than flattering ways,” Clinton said. “And we knew something’s going on, but we didn’t understand the full extent of the very clever way in which it was insinuated into social media.”
Clinton is now quoted in the press as saying that tech companies – enjoying, and, conservatives say, indulgently abusing their Section 230 protections over third-party content (to favor liberals) – suddenly should no longer have those privileges.
An experienced observer may see this turn of events – somebody like Clinton apparently advocating for Section 230 to be abolished – as simply a maneuver to pile on more pressure on major tech companies to be careful “not to slip” in their “censorship diligence” this election season – or else.
Either way, this is what Clinton said: “Section 230 has to go. We need a different system under which tech companies and we’re mostly talking obviously about the social media platforms – operate.”
Ukrainian police investigate ‘pro-Russian’ shelling victim
RT | March 31, 2024
Police in Ukraine’s second largest city, Kharkov, have said that criminal proceedings have been launched against a local woman who insisted that Ukrainians should not be celebrating their troops’ shelling of Russia’s border regions.
She expressed the opinion despite her own home being hit by a Russian airstrike on her city, which had reportedly targeted electrical infrastructure and defense industry facilities.
Police said in a statement on Saturday that officers “have found a video on social media,” in which a 59-year-old female resident of Kharkov’s Shevchenkovsky District “denied the armed aggression by Russia, supported the invasion of Ukraine and the occupation of part of the state’s territory and condemned the actions of the Ukrainian authorities.”
The clip in question featured a short interview following Russian airstrikes on Kharkov on March 24. The woman spoke with a journalist through an empty window-frame in her home; the glass had apparently been blown out by a nearby explosion.
In the footage, the local resident refused to condemn Moscow and called for an end to violence, saying that the Ukrainians should not “throw” missiles at Belgorod and other Russian border regions and “should not celebrate” those attacks.
When the journalist disagreed with her stance, she replied by saying that they simply had different views. “I believe that one must have friendly relations with neighbors,” the woman stressed, referring to Ukraine and Russia.
Kharkov is located just 30 kilometers (19 miles) south of the Russia–Ukraine border and remains a predominately Russian-speaking city.
She is now being probed for “collaborationist activities,” the police said. As part of a pre-trial investigation, the officers have spoken to witnesses, who “confirmed the pro-Russian stance of the person in question and reported conflicts with her on this issue,” the statement read.
The Ukrainian criminal code was adjusted in March 2022, a few weeks after the launch of Russia’s military operation. It criminalizes a vast array of activities, including the public backing of Moscow’s actions, offering direct material and financial aid to the Russian forces, and the execution of official roles in areas captured by Russia.
Earlier this month, a court in the Ukrainian city of Vinnytsia ordered the confiscation of the apartment of an 80-year-old woman for posting pro-Russian comments on social media. She was also slapped with a four-year prison term. The sentence was delivered in absentia because the defendant has been living in Russia for the past several years.
How Zionist interests are behind British gov’s attempted definition of ‘extremism’
By David Miller | Al Mayadeen | March 28, 2024
The British government has been grappling with the question of extremism for years now. It has failed even to define extremism in any clear fashion, and has been struggling to fight back against an avalanche of criticism that its counter-extremism policies are Islamophobic.
The genocide in Gaza has focused minds in the British elite, because of the massive sympathy for the Palestinians visible on the streets.
The desperate attempts to cast pro-Palestine protestors as genocidal is a desperate attempt to split the movement. The government is trying to reframe “extremism” in such a way that more radical supporters of Palestinian liberation are demonised, criminalised and disavowed by the rest of the movement.
Michael Gove
The minister leading this is the toxic Michael Gove, the most pro-Zionist minister in the government. He has a history of involvement with Zionist lobby groups, and for example, was the first chairman of the Neoconservative and Islamophobic think tank Policy Exchange.
It’s no coincidence that the new policy he is introducing was dreamt up by Policy Exchange in a paper published in 2022. It recommended: Firstly, a consolidated Centre for the Study of Extremism within government, dedicated to the research and diagnosis of Islamist and other forms of extremism. Secondly, a separate communications unit dedicated to publicly combatting disinformation about the Government’s counter-terrorism and counter-extremism strategies. Thirdly, a due diligence unit, which develops and monitors criteria for engagement with community organisations.
Lord Shawcross
All of its main proposals were adopted by Lord William Shawcross in his review of Prevent, published in 2023. Shawcross is famously Islamophobic and his review was even denounced by Amnesty. He was appointed as a senior Fellow at the Policy Exchange in 2018, prior to being appointed to the Prevent Review in 2021.
Shawcross’s recommendations were all accepted by the government, and thus the new policy has effectively been written by a leading Islamophobic think tank.
Blacklisting agency
Among the innovations are a new blacklisting agency in Gove’s department (a so-called counter-extremism centre of excellence) and a change in the status of the Commission for Countering Extremism which changes from being an advisory to an enforcement agency.
Behind Policy Exchange
But behind Policy Exchange lies a shadowy group of foundations which provide cash for its work. Though they are secretive, we can reveal at least two.
The first and most significant is the Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, which donates almost every year and has given Policy Exchange more than £3 million between 2007 and 2022. The Wolfson family, which runs the trust, are the owners of the Next retail chain. The boss, Simon Wolfson, declined his bonus in 2020-21, and despite this earned almost £3.4 million that year.
The Wolfson family also funds Beit Halochem, which channels money to the occupation forces which it describes as “heroes”. The family also gives money to the Jerusalem Foundation, which is engaged in promoting illegal settlements in occupied East Jerusalem.
Another source of funds is the Rosenkranz Foundation, which has given support to the think tank for more than a decade. Along with other Islamophobic causes. Its director, Robert Rosenkranz, was appointed a director of Policy Exchange in 2010.
In other words, British government policy on extremism is captured by Policy Exchange and Policy Exchange is in part a front for Zionist interests.
Defining ‘extremism’
The British government is in a bind. It can’t define extremism and yet it wants to pretend that it can. An amazing display of the lack of support the proposals have was shown on the BBC Question Time programme, where the presenter Fiona Bruce, after weathering many criticisms asked plaintively: “Let me just ask in the interests of balance, is there anyone here who welcomes what Michael Gove had to say?” She was greeted, as she put it with “not a hand up”.
The government claims that its new policy contains a “new definition” of extremism. But there was never an old definition. And the text they have published is not a definition either. There is still no legal definition of extremism, and this is why the government is at pains to point out that “This definition is not statutory and has no effect on the existing criminal law.”
The reason for this is that the government knows that if it tries and create a statutory definition, it will be subject to legal challenge which it will most probably lose. There is a nervousness about this which is intriguing.
First of all, Michael Gove named five “extremist” organisations under Parliamentary privilege, because he knows he would be subject to legal action were he to name them outside the House.
Disrupting the Palestine solidarity movement
Secondly, though the aim here is to destroy and disrupt the Palestine solidarity movement, primarily, no Palestine-related groups were named.
But pro-Palestine group Friends of al-Aqsa was named in drafts of the speech leaked to the media. It also named the Muslim news site 5Pillars and FoA as “divisive forces within Muslim communities”. The government was too nervous even to name them in Parliament.
Gove stated in the Commons that “Islamism is a totalitarian ideology which … calls for the establishment of an Islamic state governed by sharia law”. He named three groups, the Muslim Association of Britain, Cage, and Mend, all perfectly legal organisations.
Mend immediately challenged Gove “to repeat his claims outside of parliament and without the protection of parliamentary privilege… [to] provide the evidence… that MEND has called for the establishment of an ‘Islamic state governed by sharia law’”.
Even normally staunch allies, such as government adviser John Mann have criticised the policy. He stated that ministers should be prioritising “bringing communities together”. “The government needs to listen to people who are advising that the politics of division will not work,” he told the BBC.
Sophisticated engagement
The division appears to be between those pushing for a Likudnik scorched earth approach and those who favour a “sophisticated engagement” strategy – as it was described by the Zionist think tank Reut and their collaborators the US Zionist spy agency, the Anti-Defamation League in a report in 2016. Back in 2010, the Reut Institute urged Israel’s “intelligence establishment” to “drive [a] wedge between soft and hard critics” abroad. The former should be subject to “sophisticated engagement strategies” while the latter should be subject to “sabotage” and “attack”, it said.
This is not just a political and strategic difference, but a question of defending the millions in state and Zionist funding ploughed into the maintenance of hundreds of jobs in sophisticated engagements, such as the interfaith industry.
Underlying all this, the danger is that the definition best fits genocidal Zionist groups and their supporters within government, most notably Michael Gove himself. The penetration and capture of key elements of security policy by the Zionists is nothing if it is not, as the new so-called definition puts it, an attempt to “undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights” in the service of attempting to “negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others”, most obviously Muslims and Palestinians and their supporters.
Orwellian Tactics? Libertarian Party Fears Targeting By FBI After Letter
By Kyle Anzalone and Will Porter | The Libertarian Institute | March 29, 2024
The Libertarian Party has questions for the Department of Justice after the FBI claimed that a “foreign threat” had accessed its Facebook account. A preliminary analysis by the LP was hindered by Meta, which has offered little clarity on the incident.
In a statement published on Friday, LP chair Angela McArdle shared a letter the party received from the bureau warning of the alleged breach. “The FBI maintains active investigations that seek to identify the activities of hostile foreign governments and their intelligence services who target the US government, private sector, and political processes,” the letter says. “The FBI recently obtained information showing that one of these foreign threat actors was in control of various IP addresses that the group used to log into a Facebook account controlled by your organization. The group accessed the account sometime between August 2023 and February 2024.”
One LP employee with knowledge of the letter told the Libertarian Institute that roughly 10 people have access to the Facebook account. The party has not changed access to the page within the past two months.
The employee said the LP was unable to access the user archive for its Facebook account to determine if it had been hacked and has so far received no assistance from Meta in resolving the issue. The organization plans to do what it can to learn more about the supposed “foreign threat actor” and why the FBI was surveilling the account in the first place.
While the source acknowledged that the letter could be the result of “good police work,” the party is concerned the move could amount to a veiled threat from federal agents. Those worries are significantly heightened as two members of the party’s leadership have been contacted by the FBI within the past year, the employee added.
McArdle expressed similar fears in her statement. “We do not trust the FBI. Stories of aggressive FBI field agents have been popping up all over the country. The Biden administration seems to be cracking down on dissenting voices in preparation for the general election.” She continued, “We will continue to dissent, and we will call out the corruption of the current DOJ and Biden administration.”
“The greatest threat to freedom in the US isn’t an anonymous ‘hostile foreign government.’ It is the United States Government. It is the current administration, who has engaged in an unprecedented amount of censorship, coercion, and Orwellian control tactics.”
The letter to the LP came after multiple pro-Palestinian activists said they received visits by FBI agents interested in their social media posts. Rights group Palestine Legal said the house calls amounted to efforts to “intimidate and censor” activists as the US heads toward an election in which Libertarian voters and supporters of Palestine could play a crucial role.
More than 100,000 democratic voters in Michigan voted “uncommitted” in last month’s primary to protest US support for Israel, while LP presidential hopeful Jo Jorgenson received more votes than the margin between Donald Trump and President Biden during the 2020 general election.
YouTube Says It Has a “Responsibility” To Manipulate Algorithms Leading Up to the 2024 Election
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 28, 2024
“Responsibility” is a good word. It’s even better as an actual thing. But even just as a word, it’s a positive one. It signals that reliable people/entities are behind some project, or policy.
So no wonder then, that the thoroughly disgraced Google/YouTube – as far as censorship and biased political approach – are trying to use the word “responsibility” as a narrative fig leaf to cover what the giant platform is actually up to – and has been, for a long while.
Enter, YouTube’s newest chief product officer, Johanna Voolich. What are the priorities here? It could be summed up as, four R’s and One C – namely, YouTube’s “remove, raise, reward, reduce” content approach – that’s as per a blog post published by YouTube itself.
And then, C would be speculative, for “censorship” – which is what these supposedly fair and “uplifting” actions in reality end up achieving.
If you thought any of this could be achieved by YouTube without “boosting authoritative content” – think again. That is still a solid pledge, regurgitated by Voolich.
And if you thought somebody would finally come out and clearly spell out how, and according to whose definition, content gets to be dubbed “authoritative” or otherwise – just don’t hold your breath.
The sum total is that YouTube has a new product manager, but that nothing has changed.
Certainly not in this year of election.
And while Voolich made perfunctory references to creators benefiting from new features, and even being heard (via feedback), they also learn that when that’s convenient, AI is advertised as a tool to “empower creativity.” (Otherwise, AI is denounced as a scourge to democracy itself.)
But when all that’s said, there’s the overarching issue of YouTube’s “responsibility.” To do what, you might wonder – give its users/creators the best tools and opportunities – or act as proxy campaigner for a certain political and ideological option, in the US, but also, elsewhere in the world?
YouTube’s self-professed “4 R’s of responsibility” may or may not provide some insight into what the answer to that serious question might be.
R1 – “Remove content that violates our policy as quickly as possible.”
R2 – “Raise up authoritative voices when people are looking for breaking news and information.”
R3 – “Reward trusted, eligible creators and artists.”
R4 – “Reduce the spread of content that brushes right up against our policy line.”
And that, right there, is a solid foundation for continued, effective “C” – Censorship.
Google Is Ordered To Identify Who Watched Certain YouTube Videos
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 26, 2024
US federal law enforcement and courts have gone a step further in the extreme efforts they are making to surveil people’s activities online, including on Google’s vast platforms.
The latest is that the tech giant gets orders to identify all people who happen to be watching certain videos or livestreams on YouTube.
After directly censoring creators and channels, giving geolocation data of its users to the authorities in response to the controversial geofencing warrants, this is a new example of how Google can be used and abused in dragnet-style “investigations.”
Unmasking everyone who watched a particular video is similar to geofencing in that it makes everyone a suspect – and this, a number of experts and rights groups believe, is unconstitutional, i.e., in violation of the 4th Amendment, that protects from unreasonable searches.
Forbes writes that it has had access to several orders that name certain YouTube videos, citing one unsealed case originating in Kentucky and having to do with people viewing content posted by a user who law enforcement suspects of money laundering for selling bitcoin for cash.
Undercover agents had contacted the user, sending links to drone mapping and AR tutorials, to next turn to Google, asking to be told who watched the videos.
The videos had more than 30,000 views, and a court ordered that any user who did, between January 1 and 8, 2003, must be thoroughly unmasked.
The order wanted names, addresses, phone numbers, and account activity of each Google user, and IP addresses of everyone who watched the videos without an account.
“It’s fair to expect that law enforcement won’t have access to that (sensitive personal) information without probable cause,” commented Electronic Privacy Information Center’s John Davisson. “This order turns that assumption on its head.”
When the police asked for the order to be issued, they stated, “There is reason to believe that these records would be relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.”
Although Google complied with the demand to keep silent about all this until the records were unsealed last week, according to Forbes, they “do not show whether or not Google provided data in the case.”
A separate case in New Hampshire concerned a bomb threat in a public place, and people watching a livestream of the police searching the area. The livestream was possible thanks to a camera on nearby business premises.
Next, the police wanted to know exactly who watched it, including on a YouTube channel belonging to Boston and Maine Live, which has 130,000 subscribers.
Again, no word if Google delivered.
EU to start fining platforms up to 6% of global revenue if they fail to censor election “disinformation” under new law
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 25, 2024
The EU is about to start punishing large online platforms for not tackling “election disinformation” to the bloc’s satisfaction.
In order to make good on the threat, the EU is putting to use its censorship law – the Digital Services Act (DSA).
Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton is quoted as saying that platforms like X, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube and Facebook, but also search engines, must operate according to the guidelines that are currently being drafted.
Reports say that companies behind these platforms and services could be forced to pay fines of up to 6 percent of their global revenue unless they fight “disinformation” related to elections.
This figure specifically concerns whatever is designated as AI or deepfakes-based “disinformation.”
Tech companies are expected to “take measures and mitigate risks,” Breton, who is DSA’s “enforcer,” said. The Brussels bureaucrats speak about this as moderation, rather than censorship, and have decided to consider this year as “pivotal” when it comes to elections.
And the EU is in a hurry to start mandating the rules – reports say this could happen in the next few weeks. It will be possible to enforce the guidelines thanks to their inclusion in the DSA, and they will come into force as soon as they are adopted.
Heaping further pressure on tech companies to censor, and regulating them in this way, is explained as necessary to prevent things like turnout suppression, fake news, and, of course – and in particular, according to EU leaders – Russia’s “malign influence” ahead of elections in the bloc this year.
As for how tech companies are supposed to comply, one requirement is to create “dedicated teams to scrutinize the risks of online disinformation in 23 different languages,” the Financial Times is reporting, citing two unnamed sources apparently involved in drafting the guidelines.
Another anonymous EU official is cited as saying that platforms “need to show” they respect the new regulation – or “explain” that they are taking other actions to “mitigate risks.”
And if neither happens, the EU will get to punishing them with fines.
Another thing these firms will have to “show” is that they are closely cooperating with “cyber security agents” in all of the EU’s 27 member-countries.
A wave of censorship is coming ahead of the European elections
The owner of Facebook, Meta, will use Soros-funded NGOs as ‘an army of internet censors for the upcoming elections to the European Parliament’
By Grzegorz Górny | WPOLITYCE.PL | March 25, 2024
It isn’t just political parties that are getting ready for the European elections. Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, in liaison with the EU, is in the process of creating an Elections Operations Center, with scores of experts and analysts to identify and resolve potential threats.
The center will monitor cyberspace for disinformation, manipulation, and the abuse of AI, removing any content it considers to be false, harmful, or dangerous. In other words, they will act as censors.
The monitoring of 27 countries with a total population of 450 million has, according to Meta, required an investment of $20 billion to increase the number of people working in this sphere four-fold to 40,000. This includes 15,000 content verifiers who will examine material on Facebook and Instagram in 70 languages.
However, this army of 15,000 censors may not be enough, which is why Meta has decided to liaise with 29 organizations across Europe that have been chosen to monitor as well. All must have the IFCN (International Fact-Checking Network) certificate to guarantee transparency and neutrality.
The problem is that the IFCN is a Poynter Institute initiative, funded by leftist and liberal foundations, including those supported by George Soros and Bill Gates, which has engaged in promoting abortion, euthanasia, gender ideology, mass migration, and the U.S. Democratic Party. So who will check whether or not they are being neutral?
The danger is that there will be the urge to suppress controversial content — content that may turn out to be true, as in the U.S. when people argued that Covid 19 came from a Chinese laboratory.
Recently, The Wall Street Journal, one of the most renowned and prestigious mainstream titles in the United States, published an article proving that Covid-19 was artificially created in a laboratory in Wuhan. But when four years ago, Steven Mosher, one of the most distinguished experts on China in the West, presented the same thesis, his article was negatively verified by “fact-checkers” and removed as fake news from social media.
We also saw how such censorious operations may look in the last U.S. presidential election. Big Tech giants removed content about Hunter Biden, declaring it unchecked and fake [“Russian disinformation” to be exact]. In reality, the information turned out to be true and reached the public after the election. What’s to prevent this from recurring in Europe?
Featured Video
Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The Dirty Little Secret behind the “Global Terrorism Index”
The Omission of Israeli Terrorism in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
By Karin Brothers | Global Research | December 6, 2014
… The Israeli settlements — all of which are illegal – have been identified as a major impediment to peace. The refusal of a major “global” terrorism report to name the Israeli settlers as one of the groups most responsible for terrorism not only misrepresents a major source of regional violence but exposes the Global Terrorism Index as a propaganda tool that supports a U.S. agenda.
In recent years, governments have been attempting to thwart terrorism by blocking supportive fund-raising. When it comes to Israeli settlements, however, the US and Canada actually encourage fund-raising by giving organizations (such as Christian Friends of Israeli Communities (CFOIC) and the Jewish National Fund) financial support in the form of donor tax-deductions.
Charities which provide funds for the Israeli settlements should be regarded as terror-financing organizations. They should not only lose their tax-deductible status, but they should be banned because they support the violation of international humanitarian law. The terror-financing laws that are being strictly enforced for Muslim charities should be applied to Christian and Jewish charities as well. … Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
- Ukraine Sea Drone Fired From Libya Hit Russian Tanker in Mediterranean
- IRGC: Iranian forces launched no attacks during ceasefire hours
- Trump Administration Moves To Automate U.S. Military Draft Registration
- Spain orders reopening of Tehran embassy, condemns Israel’s carpet bombing of Lebanon
- Israel faces ‘unsustainable’ strategic crisis following 40-day war against Iran: Analyst
- Iran restricts Hormuz access to 15 vessels per day under ceasefire terms: Report
- The ‘Opposition Party’ Has Done Nothing to Stop the Iran War and Much to Goad Trump Into Continuing It
- Moscow backs Tehran on status of Lebanon in US-Iran deal
- How UK Regulator Ofcom Quietly Bypassed International Law to Police American Speech
- If Americans Knew
- Amnesty: Urgent – Protect Lebanese civilians from brutal escalation in Israeli attacks
- Is The War Against Iran Over?
- Inside the Israeli army’s propaganda wing
- Hundreds of Gaza Amputees Stranded in Legal Limbo
- The gallows law: Israel moves toward executing Palestinian children
- Tucker Carlson: The Path to Peace requires ending ‘special alliance’ with Israel
- This is ceasefire? Israel’s biggest massacre yet in Lebanon, another journalist killed in Gaza – Daily Update
- Tucker Carlson on Israel: This Is the Behavior of an Ally? Really?
- Gazans face a triple crisis: severe shortages of water and bread, healthcare in tatters
- NY Times reports how Netanyahu took the US into Iran War
- No Tricks Zone
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
Aletho News 
