PSA for CNN-LoL viewers, aka Butt-Munch club

Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
Fauci lied, people died and they have 9 Millions receipts

NOT MAKING HEADLINES – FAUCI’S DARKEST DAY – CAUGHT IN BRIBERY SCHEME TO SAVE HIS SKIN – Repeatedly Lied on COVID Origins – PAID OFF DOCTORS – Former CDC Chair Dr. Redfield Testifies, Confirms All

Former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield confirmed during testimony that he was excluded and kept out of the loop by Dr. Tony Fauci in early February 2020 after he suggested the COVID-19 virus was leaked from a laboratory and did not act like a naturally occurring SARS coronavirus.

Dr. Redfield believed COVID came from a lab so Fauci excluded him from phone calls early on as he persuaded other doctors to side with him by handing out millions of dollars in research grants.

The only thing that changed was the BRIBES and NOT THE SCIENCE!

Chairman Jim Jordan was ON FIRE – questioning Dr. Redfield about the origins of the COVID19 virus during the House Coronavirus Committee.

Nine Million Reasons to Change Your Mind–
JORDAN: Dr. Redfield, you ran the CDC and you were on the Coronavirus task force, is that right? That was formed on January 29, 2020, is that right?

REDFIELD: Correct.

JORDAN: Two days later, Dr. Fauci gets an email from Dr. Andersen which says what? The virus looks engineered, the virus is not consistent with evolutionary theory. Is that accurate?

REDFIELD: That’s my understanding from what I’ve read.

JORDAN: Did he share that email with you? As a member of the task force and head of the CDC, did he share that email with you?

REDFIELD: No.

JORDAN: Next day, February 1, Dr. Garry sent Fauci another email saying, “I don’t know how this happens in nature but it would be easy to do in a lab.” Did he share that email with you?

REDFIELD: No.

JORDAN: You didn’t see either one of those emails, even though you’re head of the CDC? Even though you’re on the Coronavirus task force that had been formed just two days earlier?

REDFIELD: No.

JORDAN: Three days later, Dr. Andersen and Dr. Garry, who told us it came from a lab in emails to Dr. Fauci that Dr. Fauci wouldn’t let Dr. Redfield see, three days later they change their position 180 degrees. The question is why.

Mr. Wade, why would they chang their position that fast, when the only intervening event is a conference call with Dr. Fauci, the guy who wouldn’t let Dr. Redfield see the very emails that they had sent him, Dr. Redfield, head of the CDC, on the Coronavirus task force, why would they change their position, Mr. Wade?

NICHOLAS WADE, FORMER “SCIENCE” MAGAZINE EDITOR: This question does lay at the heart of the issue. What is pertinent it seems to me is there is no new scientific evidence that we can see that became available between these dates.

So you have to ask if there were other kinds of influence available.

Now, it is true that Dr. Fauci and [British expert] Dr. Farrar in London were very powerful research officials… I don’t know what the reason was… If you’re looking at the timeline on May 21, just a few weeks after the Nature Medicine article had come out, two of the signers of the original email to Dr. Fauci, that is Dr. Andersen and Dr. Farry, were rewarded a $9 million grant for the–

JORDAN: So there are nine million reasons why they changed their mind. I knew you’d get to it, I read that last night. Three days after they say it came from a lab, they change their position and the only intervening event is a conference call with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins. Again, a call that Dr. Redfield was not allowed to be on, the head of the CDC and on the Coronavirus task. And then three months later, shazam, they get nine million bucks from Dr. Fauci. Well isn’t that something?

That’s why we want to talk to these guys...
So I guess the only question left for most Americans to consider is: Would you help build the public gallows as your civic duty as volunteer work or how much would you pay for the privilege?
matchingmole's Avatar
no
nothing
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
Might keep an eye on this developing headline, as it's flying fast through the Twitter-verse:

Missouri and Louisiana File MASSIVE Summary of Evidence Discovered in Suit Against the Biden Administration with Gateway Pundit as Plaintiff – Detailing Government-Wide Conspiracy to Stifle Free Speech

Seems to me the Chief-Twitt may be the ultimate whistleblower even. Speaking of which - watch out for a low flying headline, i.e. below CNN-LoL's radar:

Matt Taibbi Drops Another Twitter Files Ahead of Testimony to Congress: The Censorship-Industrial Complex
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
Worry no MOAR!
Matt Taibbi
“Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on the Twitter Files”
Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government
Committee on the Judiciary
United States House of Representatives
March 9, 2023

Chairman Jordan, ranking member Plaskett, members of the Select Committee,

My name is Matt Taibbi. I’ve been a reporter for over 30 years, and a staunch
advocate for the First Amendment. Much of my three decades have been spent at Rolling Stone magazine. Over my carreer, I have had the good forturne to be recognized for the work I love. I’ve won the National Magazine Award, the I.F. Stone Award for independent journalism, and written ten books, including four New York Times bestsellers. I’m now the editor of the online magazine Racket, on the independent platform Substack.

Today, I’m here because of a series of events that began late last year, when I
received a note from a source online.

It read:
“Are you interested in doing a deep dive into what censorship and
manipulation... was going on at Twitter?”


A week later, the first of what became known as the “Twitter Files” reports came out. To say these attracted intense public interest would be an understatement. My computer looked like a slot machine as just the first tweet about the blockage of the Hunter Biden laptop story registered 143 million impressions and 30 million engagements.

But it wasn’t until a week after the first report, after Michael Shellenberger, Bari
Weiss, and other researchers joined the search of the “Files,” that we started to
grasp the significance of this story.

The original promise of the Internet was that it might democratize the exchange of information globally. A free internet would overwhelm all attempts to control information flow, its very existence a threat to anti-democratic forms of government everywhere.

What we found in the Files was a sweeping effort to reverse that promise and use machine learning and other tools to turn the internet into an instrument of
censorship and social control. Unfortunately, our own government appears to be playing a lead role.

We saw the first hints in communications between Twitter executives about
tweets before the 2020 election, where we read things like:

Hi team, can we get your opinion on this? This was flagged by DHS:

Or: Please see attached report from the FBI for potential misinformation. This
would be attached to excel spreadsheet with a long list of names, whose accounts were often suspended shortly after.

Following the trail of communications between Twitter and the federal government across tens of thousands of emails led to a series of revelations. Mr. Chairman, we’ve summarized these and submitted them to the committee in the form of a new Twitter Files thread, which is also being released to the public now, on Twitter at @ShellenbergerMD, and @mtaibbi.

We learned Twitter, Facebook, Google, and other companies developed a formal system for taking in moderation “requests” from every corner of government: the FBI, DHS, HHS, DOD, the Global Engagement Center at State, even the CIA. For every government agency scanning Twitter, there were perhaps 20 quasi-private entities doing the same, including Stanford’s Election Integrity Project, Newsguard, the Global Disinformation Index, and others, many taxpayer-funded...
But wait! There's MOAR coming, but not on CNNL-LoL
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
fauci is undoubtedly a fraud.

govt. organized censorship. when did this start?

theres a law that dealt with this issue. while it dealt with govt propaganda, censorship was part of it. it was law for 60 years, apparently, it was repealed in 2013.

I only got the image of the article. I will have to find the actual article.



fauci is undoubtedly a fraud.

govt. organized censorship. when did this start?

theres a law that dealt with this issue. while it dealt with govt propaganda, censorship was part of it. it was law for 60 years, apparently, it was repealed in 2013.

I only got the image of the article. I will have to find the actual article.



Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
Fauci is a Criminal.
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
The dark nail. That was under Obama and I remember it well. There is another name associated around that time frame and genre. Aaron Swartz. Most have likely forgotten about him. He died January 11, 2013. The free internet died with him that day.

From Aaron Swartz Wiki page
...Swartz was involved in the campaign to prevent passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which sought to combat Internet copyright violations but was criticized on the basis that it would make it easier for the U.S. government to shut down web sites accused of violating copyright and would place intolerable burdens on Internet providers.[66] After the bill's defeat, Swartz was the keynote speaker at the F2C:Freedom to Connect 2012 event in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2012. In his speech, "How We Stopped SOPA", he said:
This bill ... shut down whole websites. Essentially, it stopped Americans from communicating entirely with certain groups.I called all my friends, and we stayed up all night setting up a website for this new group, Demand Progress, with an online petition opposing this noxious bill.... We [got] ... 300,000 signers.... We met with the staff of members of Congress and pleaded with them.... And then it passed unanimously....
And then, suddenly, the process stopped. Senator Ron Wyden ... put a hold on the bill...
The wiki misses the big picture on him. He essentially was able to down load a ton of data and basically follow the pipe line of government $$ to universities (grants), to break through inventions (IP), to profit making for corporations with that IP - among other things.

He was Epsteined before Epsteining was cool. He had to be offed and made to look like a suicide in jail..He had flown too close to the sun, i.e. the slop trough of avarice, greed and government money in the system.


Oh... and Fauci is a Criminal


fauci is undoubtedly a fraud.

govt. organized censorship. when did this start?

theres a law that dealt with this issue. while it dealt with govt propaganda, censorship was part of it. it was law for 60 years, apparently, it was repealed in 2013.

I only got the image of the article. I will have to find the actual article.



Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
Apparently, Jim Jordan interrupted Daniel Goldman's intense search/quest (on going?) for the pee tapes to ask him a couple questions.
Jim Jordan Humiliates Former Adam Schiff Henchman Daniel Goldman

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) humiliated former impeachment counsel Rep. Daniel S. Goldman (D-NY) on Thursday in a hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on Thursday.

Goldman worked as the lead counsel for Rep. Adam Schiff (D-NY) on the House Intelligence Committee during its impeachment investigation into then-President Donald Trump in 2019. He was also an ardent proponent of the “Russia collusion” hoax, even taunting Trump on Twitter be declaring that the “pee tape” would be found.

In questioning witnesses on Thursday, Goldman joined other Democrats in defending censorship of social media. He also pushed witnesses to admit that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 presidential campaign...
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14...-to-americans/


The Cable

The Cable goes inside the foreign policy machine, from Foggy Bottom to Turtle Bay, the White House to Embassy Row.

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences.

By John Hudson

July 14, 2013, 7:06 PM

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government’s mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?

Until this month, a vast ocean of U.S. programming produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks could only be viewed or listened to at broadcast quality in foreign countries. The programming varies in tone and quality, but its breadth is vast: It’s viewed in more than 100 countries in 61 languages. The topics covered include human rights abuses in Iran, self-immolation in Tibet, human trafficking across Asia, and on-the-ground reporting in Egypt and Iraq.

The restriction of these broadcasts was due to the Smith-Mundt Act, a long-standing piece of legislation that has been amended numerous times over the years, perhaps most consequentially by Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright. In the 1970s, Fulbright was no friend of VOA and Radio Free Europe, and moved to restrict them from domestic distribution, saying they "should be given the opportunity to take their rightful place in the graveyard of Cold War relics." Fulbright’s amendment to Smith-Mundt was bolstered in 1985 by Nebraska Senator Edward Zorinsky, who argued that such "propaganda" should be kept out of America as to distinguish the U.S. "from the Soviet Union where domestic propaganda is a principal government activity."

Zorinsky and Fulbright sold their amendments on sensible rhetoric: American taxpayers shouldn’t be funding propaganda for American audiences. So did Congress just tear down the American public’s last defense against domestic propaganda?

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA "present fair and accurate news."

"They don’t shy away from stories that don’t shed the best light on the United States," she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: "Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate."

A former U.S. government source with knowledge of the BBG says the organization is no Pravda, but it does advance U.S. interests in more subtle ways. In Somalia, for instance, VOA serves as counterprogramming to outlets peddling anti-American or jihadist sentiment. "Somalis have three options for news," the source said, "word of mouth, al-Shabab, or VOA Somalia."

This partially explains the push to allow BBG broadcasts on local radio stations in the United States. The agency wants to reach diaspora communities, such as St. Paul, Minnesota’s significant Somali expat community. "Those people can get al-Shabab, they can get Russia Today, but they couldn’t get access to their taxpayer-funded news sources like VOA Somalia," the source said. "It was silly."

Lynne added that the reform has a transparency benefit as well. "Now Americans will be able to know more about what they are paying for with their tax dollars — greater transparency is a win-win for all involved," she said. And so with that we have the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, and went into effect this month.

But if anyone needed a reminder of the dangers of domestic propaganda efforts, the past 12 months provided ample reasons. Last year, two USA Today journalists were ensnared in a propaganda campaign after reporting about millions of dollars in back taxes owed by the Pentagon’s top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan. Eventually, one of the co-owners of the firm confessed to creating phony websites and Twitter accounts to smear the journalists anonymously. Additionally, just this month, the Washington Post exposed a counter-propaganda program by the Pentagon that recommended posting comments on a U.S. website run by a Somali expat with readers opposing al-Shabab. "Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet, especially social media, by posting material and images without necessarily claiming ownership," reported the Post.

But for BBG officials, the references to Pentagon propaganda efforts are nauseating, particularly because the Smith-Mundt Act never had anything to do with regulating the Pentagon, a fact that was misunderstood in media reports in the run-up to the passage of new Smith-Mundt reforms in January.

One example included a report by the late BuzzFeed reporter Michael Hastings, who suggested that the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act would open the door to Pentagon propaganda of U.S. audiences. In fact, as amended in 1987, the act only covers portions of the State Department engaged in public diplomacy abroad (i.e. the public diplomacy section of the "R" bureau, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors.)

But the news circulated regardless, much to the displeasure of Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), a sponsor of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012. "To me, it’s a fascinating case study in how one blogger was pretty sloppy, not understanding the issue and then it got picked up by Politico‘s Playbook, and you had one level of sloppiness on top of another," Thornberry told The Cable last May. "And once something sensational gets out there, it just spreads like wildfire."

That of course doesn’t leave the BBG off the hook if its content smacks of agitprop. But now that its materials are allowed to be broadcast by local radio stations and TV networks, they won’t be a complete mystery to Americans. "Previously, the legislation had the effect of clouding and hiding this stuff," the former U.S. official told The Cable. "Now we’ll have a better sense: Gee some of this stuff is really good. Or gee some of this stuff is really bad. At least we’ll know now."
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
Not to slice or dice the line too thin, propaganda and censorship are different pickles in my book. When broadcasting, one has to decide whether to receive it. With censorship, you never get that option.

We no longer have need of government funded broadcasting services, including NPR ad PBS. Those are dinosaurs that one could argue were needed at one time as the cost to enter that market was excessive. That argument no longer holds.I'm mostly in the "not our problem" category regarding the overseas business. Colonialism should die along with other cold war era programs.

What we are dealing with today is basic 1st Amendment rights..Hat tip to Britannica:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The clauses of the amendment are often called the establishment clause, the free exercise clause, the free speech clause, the free press clause, the assembly clause, and the petition clause...
In a nutshell, the problem we are currently facing is freedom of speech and press. Frankly - it's astonishing to hear the Demonicrats hammer them so badly. They must be entirely scared to let us think for ourselves to want to maintain control over what you hear and say so badly. Not to mention, wanting to be the only ones whose view and opinions are to be heard and seen.

I suggest we try like hell to keep the 1st Amendment intact before we revert to the Plan B options afforded us in the 2nd Amendment. Which is exactly why it is there in the first place. There are no bunny rabbits or dear in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is not called the Bill of Government Approved Temporary Privileges.

Let us focus on the 1st first.

P.S. Keep in mind that "Section 230" is also in play here in an insidious way and needs fixed as well, considering the exact avenue the Demonicrats are traveling to leverage/bribe/force private companies to enforce their demented speech and press gulag upon us.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14...-to-americans/


The Cable

The Cable goes inside the foreign policy machine, from Foggy Bottom to Turtle Bay, the White House to Embassy Row.

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans... Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
wyid, I agree with you on all points.

however, from what I am seeing is the blurring of the lines between propaganda and censorship.

when one is pushing a certain narrative and only that narrative, no other narrative applies and gets shut down as soon as possible.

authoritarian regimes use propaganda and censorship in a ham handed way and its usually phyiscal; but I've never seen one where its used at the same time. the american media does this effectively.

in authoritarian regimes, you know they are lying.

in democratic regimes, you can't tell who's lying or telling the truth.
in post #8... there i was, avidly reading

wondering all the while about the humiliation of this gold man

and then the post ended
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
in post #8... there i was, avidly reading

wondering all the while about the humiliation of this gold man

and then the post ended Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought
no doubt that goldman was a goofball, but I would not say the post ended.
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
...and then the post ended Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought
My bad. The pay-off was when he denied the WH and Congress requesting censorship and Jordan showed him the emails. Whump! Whump!
Another proven liar went down the fox hole.
You've proven you will say or believe anything... except fox news when they admit they are anti-American, and have POS hosts.

We know they have no shame.