Why Would Anyone Who Values Free Speech Use Twitter or Facebook?

No thoughtful user of Twitter or FaceBook can be unaware that political speech on those platforms is censored. Moreover, only the dullest or most inexperienced person can be unaware that Twitter and Facebook censor speech to insure conformity with the narrative of the corporate media. But for the benefit of any who may be unaware of that fact, consider this:

True, when Twitter says "This tweet is misleading" that is, technically, not censorship. 

Rather it is indoctrination, designed not merely to keep you ignorant, but to prompt you to assimilate the official line, namely, that "health officials recommend a vaccine for most people", meaning children, and even babies, presumably.

And  that claim is true. Dr. Fauci, the world's best known Covid-related "health official" apparently wants kids and babies vaccinated. 

The problem with that is that Covid vaccines -- which have not undergone long-term testing for possible harmful effects -- are of no demonstrated or reasonably expected value to children. 

Children infected by Covid19, are usually asymptomatic. Death from Covid among under twenties is extremely rare, and much less frequent than death from the seasonal flu. 

As for Martin Kulldorff, author of the tweet found "misleading" by Twitter? 

Just a Harvard Medical School professor with 20 years experience of vaccine research, which fact prompted Zero Hedge to comment:

Because, of course, a 22 year-old graduate in Whiteness Studies sitting in Twitter’s HQ in Silicon Valley knows much more about infectious diseases than a Harvard professor of medicine.

But if you don't care about your mind being shaped and twisted for profit by Silicon Valley and in the service of the Money Power, carry on Twittering.

POSTSCRIPT:

This just in:

Twitter temporarily suspended Georgia GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s account on Sunday after she tweeted an Easter message.

What was this damnable Easter tweet:

“He is Risen – Death could not hold him. Rejoice in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

How soon before the US follows the path of the defunct Soviet Union by making the expression or religious faith illegal. 

Related: 

Facebook ‘Fact-Checks’ Woman’s Post on Vaccine’s Adverse Reaction One Week Before It Killed Her

Supreme Court Justice Thomas Suggests Facebook, Twitter Could Be Regulated Like Utilities

Why Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon are More Dangerous than China

And Other Lying Bastards

"It Was Intentionally False": 60 Minutes Slammed For Fabricating "Pay-For-Play" Narrative Against Gov. DeSantis

The Hunter Biden Show: Why Biden's Most "Beautiful Thing" May Be Media Collusion

FaceBook/Twitter Dirty Tricks Control Your Access to Information

 No matter how much you dislike Trump, only a fool can fail to see the implications for public access to information of the massive suppression on the internet of the Hunter Biden leaks.

This blog has been suffering a ratcheting of social media suppression for years, which reached its apogee in my coverage of the Julian Assange trial. As I reported on 24 September:

Even my blog has never been so systematically subject to shadowbanning from Twitter and Facebook as now. Normally about 50% of my blog readers arrive from Twitter and 40% from Facebook. During the trial it has been 3% from Twitter and 9% from Facebook. That is a fall from 90% to 12%. In the February hearings Facebook and Twitter were between them sending me over 200,000 readers a day. Now they are between them sending me 3,000 readers a day. To be plain that is very much less than my normal daily traffic from them just in ordinary times. It is the insidious nature of this censorship that is especially sinister – people believe they have successfully shared my articles on Twitter and Facebook, while those corporations hide from them that in fact it went into nobody’s timeline. My own family have not been getting their notifications of my posts on either platform.

It was not just me: everyone reporting the Assange trial on social media suffered the same effect. Wikileaks, which has 5.6 million Twitter followers, were obtaining about the same number of Twitter “impressions” of their tweets (ie number who saw them) as I was. I spoke with several of the major US independent news sites and they all reported the same.

Read More

Related:

How Big Tech Will Corrupt Canada's Federal Election This Fall

Jim Balsillie, former CEO of Research in Motion, among Canada's brightest tech innovators, explained today on CBC's morning radio program, the Current, how Mark Zuckerberg and a handful of other tech tycoons will rig our election this fall.

Balsillie interviewed today, on CBC Radio's The Current.

To ensure a fair election, all that the Government of Canada need do is place Canada's political parties under the privacy regulations. However, the Liberal Party in power, having confidence in the liberal bias of big tech, has explicitly denied any intention to take the necesssary action to safeguard the integrity of Canada's next Federal election.

So if you think Canada should have fair elections, send the above links to your MP and ask what they action they will take to ensure a fair election this fall.

Here's where you can find the email address of your MP. Ask them what they are doing to ensure that political parties are placed under privacy regulation before the fall election.

Related: 
Parliament of Canada: International Grand Committee on Big Data, Privacy and Democracy
Financial Post: Jim Balsillie : ‘Data is not the new oil – it’s the new plutonium’
CBC: Balsillie on Cross Country Checkup

Zucks Demands Hate

Related:
Zero Hedge: Facebook Now Demands That You Hate Targeted People Or You Will Be Banned, Too!

Why Did It Take the Geniuses of Tech Until Now to Discover That Alex Jones of Infowars Is Full of Crap

Here's what we wrote seven years ago:

If you thought Dr. Webster Griffin Tarpley was a historian, think again. In this video, Tarpley and Alex Jones compete to spout the most rubbish about the British Parliamentary system of government. That was two years ago. Since then, they have learned nothing as this discussion arising out of the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton demonstrates. According to these geniuses, Britain and 15 other countries nominally headed by Britain's constitutional monarch are, in reality as well as in name, largely ruled by the octogenarian great grandmother, Elizabeth Windsor, who Tarpley decribes as a degenerate, psychopathic, genocidal Nazi maniac. Astounding. They cannot really be that stupid can they? But if not, what propaganda interest do they serve? For the record (from Wikipedia): In Britain, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 led to a constitutional monarchy restricted by laws such as the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701, although limits on the power of the monarch ('A Limited Monarchy') are much older than that (see Magna Carta). Today the monarchy in Britain is politically neutral and by convention the role is largely ceremonial.[1] No person may accept significant public office without swearing an oath of allegiance to the Queen. The claim agreed upon by these wackos that the Queen dissolves Parliament at will, chooses the Prime Minister, sets the Government's agenda by the "Queen's speech," declares war or made the decision to evict the residents of the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia to make way for an American air base is a farrago of nonsense or simply a collection of preposterous lies. Read More Source: CanSpeccy, Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley: Propagating Looney Lies About the British Monarch

Also in 2011 we pointed out another load of garbage from Jones in a piece entitled:

Cecil Rhodes' secret society for Anglo-Saxon global empire and Alex Jones--Master of Misdirection

That the tech media companies, Apple, Facebook, Youtube and Spotify took until now to figure out that Alex Jones is fake news, suggests that the geniuses of tech are not quite as as bright as they seem to think their fabulous wealth implies. That they acted against the lying loose wheel Jones only in concert, suggests that they don't have much in the way of guts either. 

Jews Promoting Anti-Semitism

In an interview with Recode, Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, said that Facebook will not automatically remove posts denying the Jewish Holocaust. Zuckerberg, who is Jewish, said that "people get [things] wrong" and that he doesn't think they are "intentionally getting it wrong." He then stated in a post-interview email that he personally finds Holocaust denial "deeply offensive" and that he "absolutely didn't intend to defend the intent of people who deny that [i.e., the Jewish Holocaust]".

On the face of it, Mark Zuckerberg seems mentally challenged on the issue. If people who deny the Holocaust are simply misinformed, as Zuckerberg appears to assume, then that is a matter for error correction, not deep offense. If on the other hand, Zuckerberg finds, as he claims, that Holocaust denial is "deeply offensive" that can logically only mean that he assumes the denial is inspired by anti-Semitism not a commitment to historical truth.

What we see, then, is a Jew running what is the World's most wide-reaching media corporation facilitating the spread of anti-Semitism, in the pretense that it is not anti-Semitism, while simultaneously holding that it is deeply offensive because, well, it is obviously anti-Semitism.

If this were the position adopted by just a single Jew, notwithstanding his enormous influence in the media world, one might dismiss it as some kind of unfortunate muddle-headedness. But action by Jews that promote anti-Semitism is remarkably common. For example, Ron Unz, a multi-millionaire California Jew with political ambitions recently published an extraordinary article in his own so-called Web-Zine, the Unz Review, in which he lends credence to the age-old anti-Semitic claim that Jews engage in ritual sacrifice of Christian babies, stating:

I do not doubt that much of the candid analysis provided above will be quite distressing to many individuals. Indeed, some may believe that such material far exceeds the boundaries of mere “anti-Semitism” and easily crosses the threshold into constituting an actual “blood libel” against the Jewish people. That extremely harsh accusation, widely used by stalwart defenders of Israeli behavior, refers to the notorious Christian superstition, prevalent throughout most of the Middle Ages and even into more modern times, that Jews sometimes kidnapped small Christian children in order to drain their blood for use in various magic rituals, especially in connection with the Purim religious holiday. One of my more shocking discoveries of the last dozen years is that there is a fairly strong likelihood that these seemingly impossible beliefs were actually true.

and suggests that Jews pay little attention to the Torah, and may more often pray to the Devil than to God. In which connection he writes:

Furthermore, religious Jews apparently pray to Satan almost as readily as they pray to God, and depending upon the various rabbinical schools, the particular rituals and sacrifices they practice may be aimed at enlisting the support of the one or the other. Once again, so long as the rituals are properly followed, the Satan-worshippers and the God-worshippers get along perfectly well and consider each other equally pious Jews, merely of a slightly different tradition.

To acknowledge the possibility that some Jews at some time and some place may well have engaged in the sacrificial murder of Christian babies, or that some religious Jews may pray to Satan is one thing. But to do so in a manner that would suggest to the uninformed reader the typical American Jew may well be a blood-thirsty, Devil-worshipping, Holocaust-faker is simply preposterous. However, it serves very effectively to make the the Unz Review comment section a magnet for anti-Semites and hence a site for the propagation of anti-Semitism.

The implication is that by promoting anti-Semitism, a component of the Jewish population seeks to maintain what is tantamount to a libel against the people among whom they live, specifically, the claim that Americans, Canadians, the people of Europe are all carriers of what Elie Wiesel called "the age-old mental illness of anti-Semitism."

The consequences of such behavior are clear. First, to encourage Jewish paranoia and hence to reinforce the Jewish tradition of racial separation and supremacism, while weakening the self-defensive reaction of the host population.