The importance of free speech and the danger of censorship

“Official-government-sponsored-covid-and-covid-vaccine-plus-no-early-treatment-science” was pure shit and proves censorship does nothing good for our society and never will. The ignorant and tragic dominance of covid shit pseudoscience from a historical and philosophical perspective should end forevermore the argument that the public cannot deal with real information or that they have to be led by their betters or that what they see and hear must be curated. Voices that support any of that nonsense are not your friends and do not have your good in mind. The lesson from covid is UNIVERSAL for all subjects: censorship is bad and is always going to be bad. Hail the First Amendment in All Its Glory & Wisdom.

I cite covid shit science because the contrast is so glaring and immediate and felt deeply by all of us. The universality of the lessons we learned from covid censorship should never be forgotten but etched in stone. Our power and capacity to speak and listen freely must never be abridged. ABN

Jacinda Ardern illogically argues for internet censorship and “curated information” even after she caused a disaster by forcing her unchallengeable and profoundly mistaken covid policies on New Zealand and the world

PM Jacinda Ardern calls internet freedom a “weapon of war” in most recent UN speech. Calls for a new type of internet with “rules and transparency.”

“How do you tackle climate change if people don’t believe it exists”?

https://t.me/FreeMediaNZ/594

Jacinda, you and your kind decisively lost the argument on internet free speech during covid. You and your kind were wrong about everything–lockdowns, banning early treatment, masks, school closing, mandating vaccines, and more. All wrong. What’s worse is during the pandemic you had free-reign to do what you wanted without being questioned. As a consequence, you and your kind caused a worldwide policy disaster which is still plaguing us today. Its effects will be felt for many generations to come. In contrast, those of us who disagreed with almost everything you forced on your country and the world were polite, reasonable, logical, and far more science- and data-oriented. This contrast between us and you proves decisively that you and your kind lost the argument for controlling internet speech. If our side had been allowed uncurated free speech without censorship and deplatforming, the pandemic would have ended much sooner, early treatment would have ended any need for vaccines, lockdowns would have been stopped or never started, our economies would be fine, and you would not be talking dangerous nonsense at the UN as you are doing above. ABN

Senator Ron Johnson exposes the last false claim of the mandated program. No RCT demonstrated reductions in hospitalization or death. No valid non randomized studies support that claim. Johnson blows it wide open with UK data

Senator Ron Johnson exposes the last false claim of the mandated program. No RCT demonstrated reductions in hospitalization or death. No valid non randomized studies support that claim. Johnson blows it wide open with UK data.

Originally tweeted by Peter McCullough, MD MPH (@P_McCulloughMD) on September 17, 2022.

Johnson deserves a lot of credit. I believe he is the only senator who has spoken the truth about covid and definitely the only one who has pursued the subject relentlessly. Rand Paul pipes up a little bit but he is weak tea compared to Johnson. ABN

U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right regulate online speech

Sept 16 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Friday upheld a Texas law that bars large social media companies from banning or censoring users based on “viewpoint,” a setback for technology industry groups that say the measure would turn platforms into bastions of dangerous content.

The largely 2-1 ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, sets up the potential for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the law, which conservatives and right-wing commentators have said is necessary to prevent “Big Tech” from suppressing their views.

“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” Judge Andrew Oldham, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, wrote in the ruling.

link

BBC removes vaccine-injured group with hundreds of thousands of members

Under the headline: ANTI-VAX groups use carrot emojis to hide Facebook posts on the BBC website, Technology Editor Zoe Kleinman writes: “The BBC has seen several groups, one with hundreds of thousands of members, in which the emoji appears in place of the word ‘vaccine’. The groups are being used to share unverified claims of people being either injured or killed by vaccines. Once the BBC alerted Facebook’s parent company, Meta, the groups were removed.” 

Naturally the label ‘harmful mis-information’ is applied.

link

Zoe, they use the emoji to evade censorship. They are not running from the truth, you are. ABN

Sen. Hawley schools Facebook exec on painfully obvious FB collusion with the US government to violate First Amendment protections of its users

Furthermore, both the government and FB were wrong about most things covid and were themselves guilty of spreading misinformation and disinformation about covid origins, covid treatments, covid vaccines, and government policies on covid. All-in-all, this an excellent example of why First Amendment rights are of paramount importance. ABN

Bundy ranch: a good example of battling over semiotics

first posted APRIL 25, 2014

The Bundy ranch issue in Nevada is characterized by a battle over semiotics.

The other day, the New York Times used an edited video of Bundy that makes him look and sound like a racist.

This link compares the NYT video with a fuller version of Bundy’s remarks.

And here is another link where former U.N. Ambassador Alan Keyes, identified as a “black leader,“ defends Bundy, saying:

He wasn’t talking so much about black folks, but about the harm and damage that the leftist socialism has done to blacks.

What I see and hear in the longer version of the video is an unsophisticated man using ordinary language to express a legitimate idea. The way he puts his ideas and his use of the word “negro,” especially in the shorter version of the video, creates a bad impression which Harry Reid has been quick to exploit.

Reid has called Bundy a “hateful racist” and urged Republicans and other to “condemn Bundy” for his “hateful, dangerous extremism.”

Notice how your own feelings can go back and forth on this issue and how Bundy’s comments are probably going to destroy most of his support. In the realm of political semiotics, he was like an untrained boxer stepping into the ring with a pro. All Reid had to do was wait for Bundy to make a bad move and pounce, as he has done.

Whatever you may think about Bundy or this issue it is illustrative of how unsophisticated language can create a semiotic that is devastating to a political position.

Bundy rose to prominence on the semiotics of freedom, cowboys, and anti-federal government. He may well fall on the semiotics of unintended “racism.”

As with so many other complex issues, the Budy ranch standoff is being judged on small aspects of the whole, as the main weight of American political and media forces line up against him.

When that same political/media weight lines up in favor of “nice” semiotics—such as the Patriot Act or the Clean Air Act or the War on Terrorism—it wins the day time and again. The combination of sophisticated semiotics and media control almost always decides the course of American politics.

A co-author of a recent scholarly study on the American “oligarchy” has this to say about American politics:

I’d say that contrary to what decades of political science research might lead you to believe, ordinary citizens have virtually no influence over what their government does in the United States. And economic elites and interest groups, especially those representing business, have a substantial degree of influence. Government policy-making over the last few decades reflects the preferences of those groups — of economic elites and of organized interests. (Source, with other links)

We are now living in a “Semiotic Age” or an “Age of Signals.” The Modern era is gone. In this current age, we have to be ever mindful of how semiotics are manipulated and used to further the interests of powerful groups that have control of media, government, and the US economy. I do not believe there is a humble person anywhere in the USA that can stand up to those forces and win.

___________________

Edit: Readers may also want to notice that the short video version of Bundy’s comments was edited by Media Matters for America, a well-funded group that claims it is “dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” This group, and others, will very likely continue to use Bundy’s “racism” to slur what they will call Bundy’s “ultra right-wing” supporters, many of whom will make semiotic mistakes as bad or worse than Bundy’s. An individual going up against Media Matters, Harry Reid, the New York Times, or the Democratic Party is like a Baltic peasant going up against the Teutonic knights in the Middle Ages. They don’t have a prayer.

As a nation, I believe there is no hope for rational dialog on anything, but as individuals, we can understand our predicament.

_____________________

Update 4/26: Black Soldiers: Cliven Bundy Is Not Racist.

first posted APRIL 25, 2014

Covid has proved conclusively that uncontrolled information triumphs over controlled information

Controlled covid information is and was information promoted by the US government, US mainstream media, mainstream science, mainstream academia, Big Pharma, most state governments, school systems, etc.

Uncontrolled covid information is and was all the information that disagreed with the above and sometimes agreed with the above.

Everyone—all of us—had skin in the game. The debate between controlled and uncontrolled information has been waging since early 2020 and continues today.

It is very important and significant that today we can say that uncontrolled information won the debate conclusively. We beat the crap out of controlled information. The nudgers lost very badly.

I bring this up and emphasize it because it is important that we all reflect on this and seal it in our minds. Uncontrolled—anarchic—information is the path to truth, justice, and the American way. We winnowed out the bullshit, considered many ideas that did not pan out, were afraid of no thoughts whatever, yet rarely if ever supported or promoted anything that was not sound information.

Covid is the single best example in our lifetimes of the power and brilliance of the free exchange of uncensored information. Compared to the controlled and restricted information demanded by the parties described in paragraph one above, uncensored information has won the debate decisively and been on the winning side for the duration of the argument.

I believe this very large example involving the entire world can serve as an example for all kinds of information and all kinds of debates.

Clearly, we must work very hard to ensure free speech, free information, no censorship, no governmental control of information. There is no single issue that is more important and covid has proved it. ABN

Over 50 Biden Administration Employees, 12 US Agencies Involved In Social Media Censorship Push: Documents

Senior officials in the U.S. government, including White House lawyer Dana Remus, deputy assistant to the president Rob Flaherty, and onetime White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andy Slavitt, have been in touch with one or more major social media companies to try to get the companies to tighten rules on allegedly false and misleading information on COVID-19, and take action against users who violate the rules, the documents show.

In July 2021, for instance, after Biden said that Facebook was “killing people” by not combating misinformation effectively, an executive at Meta reached out to Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, a Biden appointee, to say that government and Meta teams met after the remarks “to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”

The same executive later wrote to Murthy saying, “I wanted to make sure you saw the steps we took just this past week to adjust policies on what we are removing with respect to misinformation, as well as steps taken to further address the ‘disinfo dozen,’” including removing pages linked to the group.

The White House publicly pressured social media companies to take action against a group that officials dubbed the “disinformation dozen,” which a nonprofit claimed were producing the bulk of “anti-vaccine misinformation” on the platforms. Also in July 2021, Murthy said Facebook hadn’t done enough to combat misinformation.

link

Justice Department fights demand for Anthony Fauci testimony, including “nature and content” of phone conversations with Mark Zuckerberg. Several White House staff among 50-plus federal officials tied to misinformation removal efforts

…The First Amendment lawsuit by Republican attorneys general and a civil liberties group against Biden, Fauci and several other high-level officials has revealed a “massive, sprawling federal ‘Censorship Enterprise'” related to COVID-19 and elections, the plaintiffs said in a 711-page “joint statement on discovery disputes.”

“If there was ever any doubt the federal government was behind censorship of Americans who dared to dissent from official Covid messaging, that doubt has been erased” by what the defendants have already turned over, New Civil Liberties Alliance lawyer Jenin Younes said. 

link