The Supreme Court rejected the standing of the State of Missouri and five individuals in the censorship and free speech case surrounding social media. The court came down with a 6-3 decision, Justice Amy Coney-Barrett writing the majority opinion. Justices Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas dissented in the minority.
The background of the case was very familiar to this audience, as the Biden administration was previously blocked by lower courts from telling social media platforms to remove content against their interests. Today, the Supreme Court rejected the standing of the plaintiffs, essentially giving a green light to the USA government to begin controlling social media platforms again.
If you read the opinion [FULL PDF HERE], I would strongly urge readers to focus beginning on page #11 of the Justice Barrett opinion. It is obvious in the three or four pages that follow, the court was looking for an exit from the free speech issue. Denying the case on “standing” grounds became their justification for the cop-out.
Barrett goes out of her way to make the standing issue the crux of the majority opinion. Comey-Barrett dismisses all the instances of censorship and coerced removal under the auspices that the relief sought by the plaintiffs was for future harm, not past injury. The lower courts had ruled the government could not interfere with speech in the future, without establishing that each individual plaintiff was harmed specifically by each action of the government.
Social media platforms did some censorship and content removal on their own, without government direction. Therefore, it becomes impossible for the court to determine which censorship decisions were made by government coercion, and which were made by the social media platform with ordinary moderation rules being applied. {pdf page #11}
Tag: censorship
Neil Oliver: How Banks Took Over Empires, and the Truth About WWII, Brexit, & COVID
The 20 min part of this talk that YouTube censored starts slightly after 1:47, but 1:47 is a good time to break in as it sets up Oliver’s take on covid. I commend him for understanding control of the plandemic was in the hands of the DOD or similar and not Big Pharma. ABN
ADL faces Wikipedia ban over reliability concerns on Israel, antisemitism
Wikipedia’s editors have voted to declare the Anti-Defamation League “generally unreliable” on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, adding it to a list of banned and partially banned sources.
An overwhelming majority of editors involved in the debate about the ADL also voted to deem the organization unreliable on the topic of antisemitism, its core focus. A formal declaration on that count is expected next.
The decision about Israel-related citations, made last week, means that one of the most prominent and longstanding Jewish advocacy groups in the United States — and one historically seen as the leading U.S. authority on antisemitism — is now grouped together with the National Inquirer, Newsmax, and Occupy Democrats as a source of propaganda or misinformation in the eyes of the online encyclopedia.
Moreover, in a near consensus, dozens of Wikipedia editors involved in the discussion said they believe the ADL should not be cited for factual information on antisemitism as well because it acts primarily as a pro-Israel organization and tends to label legitimate criticism of Israel as antisemitism.
Stanford’s top disinformation research group collapses under pressure
The Stanford Internet Observatory, which published some of the most influential analysis of the spread of false information on social media during elections, has shed most of its staff and may shut down amid political and legal attacks that have cast a pall on efforts to study online misinformation.
Just three staffers remain at the Observatory, and they will either leave or find roles at Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center, which is absorbing what remains of the program, according to eight people familiar with the developments, some of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters.
The Election Integrity Partnership, a prominent consortium run by the Observatory and a University of Washington team to identify viral falsehoods about election procedures and outcomes in real time, has updated its webpage to say its work has concluded.
Two ongoing lawsuits and two congressional inquiries into the Observatory have cost Stanford millions of dollars in legal fees, one of the people told The Washington Post. Students and scholars affiliated with the program say they have been worn down by online attacks and harassment amid the heated political climate for misinformation research, as legislators threaten to cut federal funding to universities studying propaganda.
The demise of this covert propaganda outlet is an example of how public opinion can overrule the cabal. ABN
This is noteworthy only because it reveals a crack in mind-control media or, more likely, a change in direction. Hard to say where they are going with this. Probably admit a bit of truth but claim it was worth it. ABN
US State Department Forced Scott Ritter Off Plane to Russia, Confiscated His Passport
Ritter was slated to participate in the annual St.Petersburg International Economic Forum as a guest speaker.
“As I was boarding my flight out of New York I was pulled aside by three CBP officers, who seized my passport. When asked why, they said orders of the State Department. No further information was provided. My bags were removed from the flight, and I was escorted out of the airport,” the former US Marine intelligence officer told Sputnik.
Scott Ritter added that his passport was not given back. He said he will appeal the decision.
Ritter believes US authorities are afraid of his participation in the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF).
Today I spent most of the day being examined and cross examined in a tribunal— Denis Rancourt
1/ Today, I spent most of the day being examined and cross-examined in a tribunal. My status as an expert witness was opposed. My 71-page CV was in evidence. At 3pm, the three Members (judges) of the tribunal unanimously determined that my status as an expert is established in the areas of epidemiology and toxicity and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines.
2/ A non-medical professional is being disciplined for publicly suggesting that the vaccines are dangerous and that the pandemic was organized. The professional order argues that truth and justification are not relevant and that, therefore, my testimony (as an expert recognized by the tribunal) cannot be relevant and should not be heard.
3/ Next, the tribunal will decide in the coming months, in writing, without hearing my evidence, whether or not my evidence would be relevant, and whether or not to allow my expert testimony moving forward.
4/ I kid you not.
How psyop theater works. The ludicrous nature of power when exposed looks like this when it is mild and doing specialist information control. Whole nations are summarily destroyed when it is severe. ABN
Katherine Maher, the CEO of NPR and intelligence spook?
Interview with Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram
His first interview in seven years, well-worth watching. Seems like a genuine good guy. ABN
Canadian Government Plans ‘Stalinist Show Trial’ of Dr Charles Hoffe
Prominent Canadian physician Dr. Charles Hoffe has spoken out courageously to warn people of the very serious dangers of the Covid mRNA genetic “vaccines”. He now faces trial from the Canadian health authorities aiming to silence him and effectively destroy his medical practice.
What is most disturbing about this unprecedented case is that, if the prosecution gets its way, all the evidence produced by the State claiming the Covid vaccines are “safe and effective” will be deemed indisputable, irrefutable—and Dr. Hoffe would not be able to defend himself or call expert witnesses!
link
This Is Crazy! Rabbi Barclay Attacks Me For Things I Never Said.
Cybernetics — (the basic theory underlying woke/ totalitarian control of language and behavior today)
Cybernetics, control theory as it is applied to complex systems. Cybernetics is associated with models in which a monitor compares what is happening to a system at various sampling times with some standard of what should be happening, and a controller adjusts the system’s behaviour accordingly.
The term cybernetics comes from the ancient Greek word kybernetikos (“good at steering”), referring to the art of the helmsman. In the first half of the 19th century, the French physicist André-Marie Ampère, in his classification of the sciences, suggested that the still nonexistent science of the control of governments be called cybernetics. The term was soon forgotten, however, and it was not used again until the American mathematician Norbert Wiener published his book Cybernetics in 1948. In that book Wiener made reference to an 1868 article by the British physicist James Clerk Maxwell on governors and pointed out that the term governor is derived, via Latin, from the same Greek word that gives rise to cybernetics. The date of Wiener’s publication is generally accepted as marking the birth of cybernetics as an independent science.
Wiener defined cybernetics as “the science of control and communications in the animal and machine.” This definition relates cybernetics closely with the theory of automatic control and also with physiology, particularly the physiology of the nervous system. For instance, a “controller” might be the human brain, which might receive signals from a “monitor” (the eyes) regarding the distance between a reaching hand and an object to be picked up. The information sent by the monitor to the controller is called feedback, and on the basis of this feedback the controller might issue instructions to bring the observed behaviour (the reach of the hand) closer to the desired behaviour (the picking up of the object). Indeed, some of the earliest work done in cybernetics was the study of control rules by which human action takes place, with the goal of constructing artificial limbs that could be tied in with the brain.
In subsequent years the computer and the areas of mathematics related to it (e.g., mathematical logic) had a great influence on the development of cybernetics—for the simple reason that computers can be used not only for automatic calculation but also for all conversions of information, including the various types of information processing used in control systems. This enhanced ability of computers has made possible two different views of cybernetics. The narrower view, common in Western countries, defines cybernetics as the science of the control of complex systems of various types—technical, biological, or social. In many Western countries particular emphasis is given to aspects of cybernetics used in the generation of control systems in technology and in living organisms. A broader view of cybernetics arose in Russia and the other Soviet republics and prevailed there for many years. In this broader definition, cybernetics includes not only the science of control but all forms of information processing as well. In this way computer science, considered a separate discipline in the West, is included as one of the component parts of cybernetics.
link
By seizing control of the psycholinguistic constellation of words and concepts within societies and fractally within individuals, societies and individuals are controlled by a cybernetic feedback loop that is self-sustaining.
This fully explains the why of speech controls (censorship, shaming, invention of new terms, etc) and how this leads very quickly to formation of a control mechanism for all of society.
The algorithms that control search engines and social media posts are extremely powerful cybernetic control mechanisms. As of today and probably well into whatever future arises, everything depends on the people (and their digital machines) that control societal cybernetics. As of today, there is no way to control those people.
It will probably always be easy for independent thinkers to see what is happening but never possible for them to effect change unless they are at the very top of the hierarchy which controls the cybernetics.
At the same time, it will always be all but impossible for independent thinkers lower down in the hierarchy to bring enough of the population to see what is happening and effect change from the bottom.
Independents and a responsive base of people at the bottom may occasionally effect some change, but the top has so much more control none of those bottom-up changes will matter for long if they matter at all. Everything we see in the world today supports this view. ABN
Why the TikTok Ban is So Dangerous
Did they tell you the part about giving the president sweeping new powers?
It’s funny how things work.
Last year at this time, Americans overwhelmingly supported a ban on TikTok. Polls showed a 50-22% overall margin in support of a ban and 70-14% among conservatives. But Congress couldn’t get the RESTRICT Act passed.
As the public learned more about provisions in the bill, and particularly since the outbreak of hostilities in Gaza, the legislative plan grew less popular. Polls dropped to 38-27% in favor by December, and they’re at 35-31% against now.
Yet the House just passed the “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” by a ridiculous 352-64 margin, with an even more absurd 50-0 unanimous push from the House Energy and Commerce Committee. What gives?
As discussed on the new America This Week, passage of the TikTok ban represents a perfect storm of unpleasant political developments, putting congress back fully in line with the national security establishment on speech. After years of public championing of the First Amendment, congressional Republicans have suddenly and dramatically been brought back into the fold. Meanwhile Democrats, who stand to lose a lot from the bill politically — it’s opposed by 73% of TikTok users, precisely the young voters whose defections since October put Joe Biden’s campaign into a tailspin — are spinning passage of the legislation to its base by suggesting it’s not really happening.
link
Belgian Nationalist Sentenced to a Year in Prison Over ‘Hateful Memes’ Shared in Private Group Chat
Belgian nationalist activist and former member of parliament Dries Van Langenhove was sentenced to one year in prison on Tuesday for being part of a private group chat seven years ago where people shared “racist” and “antisemitic” memes.
“Belgian nationalist activist and former member of parliament Dries Van Langenhove has just been sentenced to a year in prison, a 16,000 euro fine, and ten years of ‘deprived civil rights’ which will mean he is barred from politics,” Keith Woods reported on Twitter.
“His crime? He was in a private groupchat where offensive memes were posted,” he added. “This is an absolute disgrace. Western regimes are reaching new levels of tyranny to suppress nationalism.”
link
The offending meme can be found in the linked article. Van Langenhove did not even send the meme. He was simply in the chat at the time. ABN
AI ‘hate speech’ breakdown
click image for larger
Firstly, ‘hate speech’ is not illegal in USA and neither is hate. Let’s hope they never will be. Today, however, ‘hate speech’ is effectively illegal or close to illegal because ordinary people as well as AI will flag or punish you for it. Secondly, what does the graph above even mean? Does it mean that AI is more sensitive to ‘hate speech’ at the top of the graph or that ‘hate speech’ is more often directed against groups at the top? I do not recall anyone hating on disabled people, so probably the algorithm is dialed to be more sensitive for groups at the top. The AI could also use a wide variety of ways to determine what gets flagged. The graph was Xed by Elon Musk along with his statement that we should be concerned with how AI is programmed. X is still using ‘freedom of speech but not reach’, which Musk must know is total bs. The algorithm at X is horrible. You lose ‘reach’ if you follow accounts with low numbers of followers, or ‘like’ one of their Xweets, or repost it. This forces everyone into narrow silos that favor cunning over content. The excuse is always advertisers and money, which means we are controlled by the products sold in shopping malls and the hatred of whomever controls the AI. Reddit has a better format than X. Maybe Musk will consider buying Reddit and fixing it’s algorithm which would allow X-like censorship to be tailored to precise subreddits and thus not ruin the entire site. ABN
American Buddhist Net 
