{"id":1477485,"date":"2024-07-15T10:30:00","date_gmt":"2024-07-15T14:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/?p=1477485"},"modified":"2024-07-15T10:30:00","modified_gmt":"2024-07-15T14:30:00","slug":"censors-everywhere-we-look","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/censors-everywhere-we-look\/1477485\/","title":{"rendered":"Censors Everywhere We Look"},"content":{"rendered":"

Censors Everywhere We Look<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Authored by Lori Weintz via The Brownstone Institute,<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

“It is intolerable to us that an erroneous thought should exist anywhere in the world, however secret and powerless it may be.”<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

O\u2019Brien, Officer of the Inner Party\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0
1984, by George Orwell<\/a>,<\/em>\u00a0Berkley\/Penguin p. 225\u00a0<\/p>\n

“We\u2019re letting you know that we\u2019ve permanently removed [your] content\u2026<\/strong>An external report flagged the content for illegal or policy violations. As a result, our legal content and policy standards team removed the content for the following reason: unwanted content.”<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Google Groups email sent to me
\nJune 27, 2024<\/p>\n

On the morning of the June 27, 2024, Presidential debate between Trump and Biden, I noticed an announcement on a Substack post that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr was going to join the debate, even though\u00a0CNN<\/a>\u00a0had excluded him based on technicalities. Powered by Elon Musk\u2019s X, the Real Debate would be broadcast at the same time, with Kennedy giving his answers after Biden and Trump.<\/p>\n

Despite CNN\u2019s claim that he didn\u2019t qualify for the Presidential debate, and the Democrat Party\u2019s continual\u00a0barriers<\/a>\u00a0to RFK\u2019s name appearing on state ballots, he\u00a0is running<\/em>\u00a0for President of the United States and has significant popular support. <\/strong>To every normal American, it\u2019s obvious there is a benefit to hearing from all viable candidates running for President, regardless of one\u2019s political leanings. In that spirit, I sent out a few texts and a notice in a Google Group, with a link to\u00a0The Real Debate website.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Some commentary on the debate went back and forth in the Group. Thirty minutes after my first post, I received the following email from Google Groups stating that they had \u201cpermanently removed\u201d my content because \u201can external report flagged the content for illegal content or policy violations.\u201d <\/strong><\/p>\n

My post was removed \u201cfor the following reason:\u00a0unwanted content<\/strong>,\u201d and I was informed, \u201cYou may have the option to pursue your claims in court.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

I clicked on the link, to see what was deleted, which opened to the screen below notifying me that the content was unavailable:<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

For the first time, I was censored by Big Brother for sharing an idea, without even being informed what my\u00a0thoughtcrime<\/a>\u00a0was. I\u2019m not on social media, so I have only been informed by others of the rampant censorship surrounding posts about January 6, election integrity, and the official Covid response, among other taboo topics.<\/p>\n

Five years ago, if you had been told you needed to watch what you said on social media and in public in the US, no one would have believed it. It would have seemed a tongue-in-cheek reference to Orwell\u2019s\u00a01984<\/em>, or an absurd comparison to totalitarian states where freedom of speech is not a thing.<\/p>\n

So which group are you in? The group that thinks freedom of speech is alive and well in the US, and that our Constitutional rights are firmly protected? Or are you in the group that has watched the erosion of every civil liberty and human right over the past five years as an increasingly totalitarian machine censors discussions about topics deemed \u201cunwanted\u201d by\u2026Someone?<\/p>\n

After being censored, I learned that in addition to monitoring private groups for \u201cunwanted\u201d speech,\u00a0Google labeled emails<\/a>\u00a0and social media posts about The Real Debate as \u201cdangerous,\u201d and discouraged clicking on any links contained within, as shown below:<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Who initiated the \u201cexternal report\u201d that prompted Google to surveil a private conversation and remove \u201cunwanted content?\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Google isn\u2019t about to answer that question, but the case\u00a0Murthy v Missouri<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0provides a possible answer.\u00a0\u00a0As can be read in the June 26, 2024 ruling from the Supreme Court, during the pandemic social media companies were harangued by\u00a0various White House officials and the US Surgeon General\u2019s Office.\u00a0The platforms were pressured to remove posts, and even delete whole accounts, that were deemed \u201cunhelpful\u201d by the government.\u00a0Section 230\u00a0of the United States Code provides immunity to online platform services for content generated by their users. The White House threatened the removal of that protection if the social media platforms didn\u2019t comply with Big Brother\u2019s wishes. Obviously, the removal of Section 230 protection would potentially expose the platforms to financially crippling liability lawsuits.<\/p>\n

Through the\u00a0Twitter Files<\/a>, various\u00a0court cases<\/a>, Freedom of Information Act documents, and\u00a0Congressional hearings<\/a>, it has come to light that there are\u00a0many organizations<\/a>\u00a0monitoring your online posts, your searches, and as evidenced by my own experience, even your private email correspondence. Are you good with that?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

In October 2011, Supreme Court\u00a0Justice Antonin Scalia testified<\/a>\u00a0in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Scalia explained that what sets America apart from all other nations, is not the Bill of Rights, noting that \u201cEvery Banana Republic, and every president for life (dictator) has a Bill of Rights.\u201d Justice Scalia said what sets the US apart from all other countries is a Constitution that prevents the centralization of power in one person or in one party. Without that, a Bill of Rights is nothing more than a \u201cparchment guarantee,\u201d meaning, no better than the paper it was written on. (This particular line of thought starts at about the 18-minute mark in the\u00a0video<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

The Constitution has carried us this far, but there has been a gradual and insidious merging of government power. Something the Founding Fathers did not foresee was the rise of the\u00a0Bureaucratic State<\/a>. We live in a time when unelected heads of Federal and state agencies wield enormous power and money, often for decades, while elected officials come and go.<\/p>\n

Somehow, during the Covid-19 pandemic, the whole Constitutional system of checks and balances on power was largely disregarded. All of a sudden, a network of 3-letter agencies was calling the shots. The overreaching Executive branch called for a nationwide lockdown, and later for vaccine mandates. CISA decided if your job was essential or not. The CDC decided whether or not landlords could evict tenants. The FDA inserted itself between doctors and their patients, telling doctors not to use certain already approved meds to treat Covid, and pharmacists not to fill certain prescriptions. OSHA required you to wear a mask on public transportation and airplanes. NIH agencies and health departments shut down churches, schools, businesses, and civic, cultural, and sports clubs. They issued directives on how many people could gather in your home, and whether or not you could be with loved ones in hospitals and care centers. The NSC directed a Covid response that was militant, and unconcerned with individual rights.<\/p>\n

It went on and on and on, as we were bullied, browbeaten, and manipulated by Executive branch bureaucrats and other unelected officials inserting themselves into every aspect of our lives. The Judiciary and Legislative branches largely stood by or even supported what was happening.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Unfortunately, most people complied. With regard to information sharing, the established Legacy media mainly functioned as a mouthpiece of the government. Dissenting voices moved to social media and alternative news platforms. This was unacceptable to a voracious government that must control the official narrative, and access to information. We can\u2019t have any of that nasty \u201cmisinformation, disinformation, or malinformation\u201d going around. That might harm you.\u00a0Big\u00a0<\/a>Brother will let you know what you need to know.<\/p>\n

White House officials and the US Surgeon General\u2019s Office threatened and coerced social media platforms to remove information deemed \u201cunhelpful,\u201d even if it was factually true. Dangling Section 230 over their heads, the White House demanded action. The social media platforms learned to obey. Individuals with \u201cstrikes\u201d against them learned to self-censor.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In the\u00a0Murthy v Missouri<\/em>\u00a0ruling on July 26, 2024, the Supreme Court reversed (6-3) an injunction imposed by a lower court that prevented the government from contacting social media companies about the content on their platforms. The majority opinion stated that the plaintiffs \u201cdo not point to any specific instance of content moderation that caused them identifiable harm.\u201d The Court invoked a legal term, \u201cstanding,\u201d to say that there wasn\u2019t sufficient evidence to retain the injunction. Basically the Supreme Court said, \u201cWell, yeah, the White House did pressure social media companies to remove content, but the platforms might have taken that action anyway, so go ahead and \u2018abridge the freedom of speech, and of the press\u2019 for now, White House.\u201d<\/p>\n

In the\u00a0dissenting opinion<\/a>, Justice Samuel Alito stated that there was more than sufficient evidence to establish standing, which evidence he then cited for some 30 pages. It\u2019s not hard to understand and is worth your time to read. Justice Alito wrote:<\/p>\n

This evidence was more than sufficient to establish Hines\u2019s standing to sue\u2026and consequently, we are obligated to tackle the free speech issue that the case presents.\u00a0The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think<\/strong>\u2026It was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court\u2019s failure to say so. Officials who read today\u2019s decision\u2026will get the message. If a coercive campaign is carried out with enough sophistication, it may get by.\u00a0 That is not a message this Court should send. (p. 38) (emphasis added)<\/p>\n

Justice Alito also wrote, \u201cThis case involves what the District Court termed \u2018a far reaching and widespread censorship campaign\u2019 conducted by high-ranking federal officials against Americans who expressed certain disfavored views about COVID-19 on social media\u2026If the lower courts\u2019 assessment of the voluminous record is correct, this is one of the most important free speech cases to reach this Court in years.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0(p. 36)<\/p>\n

So let\u2019s see. On June 26, 2024 the Supreme Court said the Government could keep pressuring social media companies until\u00a0Murthy v Missouri<\/em>\u00a0and other cases that are laboriously and expensively working their way through the courts are fully heard and settled.<\/p>\n

The next day, Google Groups removed my post about the upcoming Presidential debate, in which I jokingly asked if anyone wanted to bet on whether or not Biden would be fed answers through some type of electronic\/neural device. That evening we saw an age-riddled, confused, doddery, tired old man try to hold his own in a Presidential debate. But the White House had been saying for days that all those videos of Pres. Biden stumbling and stammering were just \u201ccheap fakes<\/a>.\u201d The day after the debate, at a\u00a0White House press event<\/a>, Biden\u2019s press secretary claimed his poor performance was due to a cold.<\/p>\n

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a01984, by George Orwell (p.71)<\/p>\n

Freedom of speech serves many valuable purposes, but its most important role is protection of speech that is essential to democratic self-government, and speech that advances humanity\u2019s store of knowledge, thought, and expression in fields such as science, medicine, history, the social sciences, philosophy, and the arts.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Justice Samuel Alito
\nDissenting opinion Murthy v Missouri
\nJune 26, 2024<\/p>\n

Justice Alito wrote in his\u00a0Murthy v Missouri<\/em>\u00a0dissenting opinion, the \u201cWhite House threats did not come with expiration dates\u2026Facebook did not feel free to chart its own course\u2026rather, the platform had promised to continue reporting to the White House and remain responsive to its concerns for as long as the officials requested.\u201d (p. 35)<\/p>\n

It could very well be that my words, typed into a private email exchange, were gathered by AI, and not some lurking agent. But either way, they were gathered. It would appear that these \u201cOfficials,\u201d who generate \u201cexternal reports,\u201d still have \u201cconcerns.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

*\u00a0 *\u00a0 *<\/p>\n

Republished from the author\u2019s\u00a0Substack<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Tyler Durden<\/a><\/span>
\nMon, 07\/15\/2024 – 06:30<\/span><\/p>\n

\u200bhttps:\/\/www.zerohedge.com\/political\/censors-everywhere-we-look<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Censors Everywhere We Look Authored by Lori Weintz via The Brownstone Institute, “It is intolerable to us that an erroneous thought should exist anywhere in…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":1477486,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1477485","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","wpcat-1-id"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pbimBl-6cmp","jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/Shutterstock_1399687619-800x469-7etqVg.jpeg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1477485","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1477485"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1477485\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1477486"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1477485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1477485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1477485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}