| Stats |
Federal judge said FDA tweets disparaging ivermectin "bother" him, lacking "qualifier statements" about human use. Commissioner razzed by doctors for claiming bivalents, oral antivirals have "distinct possibility" of reducing long COVID risk.
The FDA's Twitter habits are getting scrutiny in court and from medical professionals as the feds seesaw between walking back their once-confident COVID-19 assertions and making sweeping new claims without providing evidence.
Having long ago conceded that COVID vaccines can't stop viral transmission and that assertions to the contrary by President Biden among others were based on "hope" rather than science, the feds are now downplaying the influence of their social media to escape liability for allegedly violating statutory limits by interfering in medical judgments.
At the same time, over the past two months, FDA Commissioner Robert Califf has gone on a spree of evidence-free tweets about bivalent boosters and oral antivirals, such as Pfizer's rebound infection-prone Paxlovid, prompting exasperation from leading doctors.
In July 2021 The Gateway Pundit reported that Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, the man who invented email, was able to uncover Twitter’s “partner support portal.”
Dr. Shiva discovered that Twitter built a special portal offered to certain governmental entities so that government officials can flag and delete content they dislike for any reason, as part of what they call their “Twitter Partner Status.”
Source: AP Photo/Susan Walsh
By Spencer Brown
TownHall.com
Emails between federal agencies and Facebook employees from November 2020 obtained and released by the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) show how the social media giant was guided in its messaging surrounding COVID-19, who it was told should be targeted, how users should be targeted, and what was being done to use social media to "drive uptake of vaccines."
In a chain of emails initially planning a meeting between Dr. Deborah Birx and Facebook's Vice President of Health, the CDC provided updates and suggestions for how Facebook could package government data to make it "resonate" with users more and to whom information needed to be directed.
By Glenn Greenwald
Greenwald.Substack.com
Critics of Silicon Valley censorship for years heard the same refrain: tech platforms like Facebook, Google and Twitter are private corporations and can host or ban whoever they want. If you don’t like what they are doing, the solution is not to complain or to regulate them. Instead, go create your own social media platform that operates the way you think it should.
The founders of Parler heard that suggestion and tried. In August, 2018, they created a social media platform similar to Twitter but which promised far greater privacy protections, including a refusal to aggregate user data in order to monetize them to advertisers or algorithmically evaluate their interests in order to promote content or products to them. They also promised far greater free speech rights, rejecting the increasingly repressive content policing of Silicon Valley giants.
Over the last year, Parler encountered immense success. Millions of people who objected to increasing repression of speech on the largest platforms or who had themselves been banned signed up for the new social media company.
As Silicon Valley censorship radically escalated over the past several months — banning pre-election reporting by The New York Post about the Biden family, denouncing and deleting multiple posts from the U.S. President and then terminating his access altogether, mass-removal of right-wing accounts — so many people migrated to Parler that it was catapulted to the number one spot on the list of most-downloaded apps on the Apple Play Store, the sole and exclusive means which iPhone users have to download apps. “Overall, the app was the 10th most downloaded social media app in 2020 with 8.1 million new installs,” reported TechCrunch.
It looked as if Parler had proven critics of Silicon Valley monopolistic power wrong. Their success showed that it was possible after all to create a new social media platform to compete with Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. And they did so by doing exactly what Silicon Valley defenders long insisted should be done: if you don’t like the rules imposed by tech giants, go create your own platform with different rules.
By Shane Trejo
BigLeaguePolitics.com
Documents obtained in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Judicial Watch show that government officials pleaded with tech platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, essentially begging them to censor content throughout last year’s election.
Judicial Watch has obtained 540 pages of documents showing how the California secretary of state’s office demanded for tech giants to censor claims of fraud and irregularities. The tech giants happily complied with the orders in most cases, showing how the private and public sectors are colluding to enforce Big Brother controls against free speech.
Jenna Dresner, who works as senior public information officer for the Office of Election Cybersecurity, admitted to the role of the secretary of state’s office to enforce Big Brother.
“We don’t take down posts, that is not our role to play,” Dresner said. “We alert potential sources of misinformation to the social media companies and we let them make that call based on community standards they created.”
Judicial Watch noted that the California secretary of state’s office has targeted their content, falsely claiming it is misinformation and demanding for social media companies to remove their videos.
“These new documents suggest a conspiracy against the First Amendment rights of Americans by the California Secretary of State, the Biden campaign operation, and Big Tech,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
“These documents blow up the big lie that Big Tech censorship is ‘private’ – as the documents show collusion between a whole group of government officials in multiple states to suppress speech about election controversies,” he added.
While it has been well-known that social media companies are in the tank for the Democrats for quite some time, these email leaks show how Democrat officials work hand-in-glove with monolithic corporations to control the flow of information.
One leaked email shows Chris Miller, listed as communications coordinator for California secretary of state Alex Padilla, demanding that certain information be censored, and Facebook’s affirmative response that they would comply with future requests.
Trump should have done this YEARS AGO. That being said, Gov. Ron DeSantis is stepping up to finally get a serious ball rolling. This looks to be the first serious effort to rein in the power of Big Tech monopolies that rest of the country needs to get on board with ASAP!
So Twitter has “permanently banned” President Donald Trump’s account.
While this will please Democrats, and perhaps lessen the (justifiable) heat the company is taking from regulators, it just proves again that Twitter’s claims that it is “just a platform” are hogwash.
Some of Trump’s tweets were untrue and incendiary, but so are the Ayatollah Khamenei’s. His account is still up. The difference is Twitter is run by American liberals, who only really police one type of person, of one political persuasion.
It’s a little ridiculous that what finally did Trump in was tweeting that he wouldn’t be attending Joe Biden’s inauguration. Twitter twisted that to mean that he still won’t accept the results of the election — which just shows they were looking for an excuse. Rather than let the readers judge, they pulled the plug.
This paper has a bit of history with Twitter’s bias, seeing as they shut us down over a true Hunter Biden story. That incident proved that they “fact check” stories critical of Democrats far more aggressively than they do for Republicans, just as they police conservatives far more than liberals.
If Twitter was a private publisher, this would be annoying but unavoidable. But it isn’t. It’s a “platform” that, thanks to Section 230, faces no responsibility for what is tweeted. Twitter gets to censor whomever it likes, but throws up its hands at hate speech and libel with a “not our problem!”
This is untenable. Either Section 230 needs to be repealed, and Twitter must responsibly police who it hosts, or Twitter needs to step back and let the public decide what is acceptable or not.
Another Facebook whistleblower and more hidden camera confessions of the kind of blatant rapant censorship of conservative views going on at Facebook.
We've all come across online fact checkers that purport to warn us away from independent media sites under the guise of protecting us from fake news. But who is behind these fact check sites? How do they operate? And if these ham-fisted attempts at soft censorship aren't the solution to online misinformation, what is? Join James for this week's important edition of The Corbett Report podcast, where we explore the murky world of information gatekeeping and ask "Who will fact check the fact checkers?"
By Robert Kennedy Jr.
LewRockwell.com
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. wrote last week about Malibu police’s ticketing Point Dume surfers $1,000 apiece for using the ocean during the quarantine. Was this merely an appalling police judgment at which we will laugh post-quarantine? Or does anyone else feel that this is the first wave of compliance and obedience training for something more permanent? Are powerful state and corporate entities using the current crisis to remove basic rights, and intensify pressures to promote vaccines and surveillance? Does anyone else feel the suffocating darkness of tyranny descending on our nation? And finally, does anyone share my dread that Bill Gates—and his long-time associate Tony Fauci—will somehow be running our Brave New World?
Imagine a world where the government doesn’t need police officers to apprehend those surfers or ticket you when you violate social distancing with your girlfriend. Suppose that computers discover your beach trip by tracking your movements using a stream of information from your cell phone, your car, your GPS, facial recognition technology integrated with real-time surveillance from satellites, mounted cameras, and implanted chips. Desk-bound prosecutors or robots will notify you of your violation by text while simultaneously withdrawing your $1,000 penalty in cryptocurrency from your payroll account. Welcome to Bill Gates’ America. It’s right around the corner.
5G Strategies
Recently, Bill Gates announced his financial support for a $1 billion plan to blanket Earth in video surveillance satellites. The company, EarthNow, will launch 500 satellites to live-stream monitor almost every “corner” of the Earth, providing instantaneous video feedback with only a one-second delay. According to Wikipedia, the company expects its customers to include “governments and large enterprises.” 5G Antennas deploying a vast array of ground-based 5G spy antennas. Through his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Gates purchased 5.3 million Crown Castle shares currently worth a billion dollars. The Foundation’s second-largest tech holding after Microsoft, Crown Castle owns 5G infrastructure in every major U.S. market. It operates and leases more than 40,000 cell towers, 65,000 small cell nodes which are the central infrastructure for 5G and 75,000 route miles of fiber to every major U.S. market that, instead of going to your home, providing you safe, fast, wired internet, has been confiscated to connect 5G cell towers.
… 5G has almost nothing to do with improving your lives; it’s all about controlling your life, marketing products, and harvesting your data for Artificial Intelligence purposes.
 |
You can send a check or money order to: The KTAO Project P.O. Box 1086 Crestone, CO 81131 or donate online:  |
| Stats |