Internet Censorship: So it continues...

[onawah]

ICAN Catches Facebook Dictating Content On CDC’s Website And Trying To Avoid FOIA In Discussions With CDC
10/7/24
https://icandecide.org/press-release...ions-with-cdc/

(FB hoisted by its own petard...Video at the link, and hyperlinks in the article not embedded here)





"ICAN has obtained emails showing that, in 2019, Facebook was collaborating with CDC on combating so-called “vaccine misinformation.” In the emails, Facebook sends CDC language on vaccines and requests that CDC add it to its website so that Facebook could cite CDC as the source! Worse yet, the emails reveal a Facebook employee actively trying to avoid disclosure of their scheme under FOIA.
Lead Counsel, Aaron Siri, Esq., lays out the details here:
In 2019, ICAN, through its attorneys, submitted a FOIA request for CDC’s communications with Facebook. Nearly four years later, CDC has finally produced them.
In a March 2019 communication titled, “Vaccine Misinfo,” a leader of Facebook’s public policy team, Payton Iheme, asks CDC to collaborate on combatting purported health misinformation, writing: “Facebook has been working on an effort to combat health misinformation which we take very seriously…we’ll be announcing the first stage of this process which involves establishing new policies and action we’re taking against misinformation about vaccines.”
This Facebook leader also highlighting that Facebook “plan[ned] to reference the CDC along with other health organizations,” and requested a meeting to discuss the CDC’s “thoughts around our longer term goals.” CDC responded enthusiastically.
As an example of that apparent collaboration, in one incredible exchange, a public policy manager at Facebook, Jason Hirsh, emails CDC proposed language that Facebook wanted to add to its website. Hirsh noted, however, that, to cite CDC as its source, CDC had to actually add the language to CDC’s website:
[W]e have also been considering this language: “According to the CDC, ‘the benefits of vaccines are much greater than the risks associated with them. Vaccines can protect you, your family, and your community by preventing the spread of serious illness.’” Any thoughts you have about this option would be very helpful. It zooms the focus out to include single people and adults without children. For this language, we would need to add the sentences to your website. On our last call you thought that would not be an issue, but I want to confirm that this is the case. [emphasis added]
“We would need to add the sentences to your website…” Facebook incredibly sees itself as part of CDC’s “we.” When CDC’s Digital Media folks responded saying that they would send over some proposed language, Hirsh followed up, again asking: “If we all like language that generally flows from your site but is not specifically on there, do you still think it is possible to get one of the web pages modified slightly?”
CDC ultimately proposes a few language options, one of which essentially adopted Facebook’s proposed language: “Safe, effective vaccinations are the best way to protect you, your family, and your community from the serious effects of certain diseases.”
At that point CDC and Facebook have another call to “align on final language.” Even more astonishingly, Hirsh sends another email acknowledging an attempt to avoid FOIA:
In addition to the invite, given FOIA and other sensitivities, I also sent a separate note without context including our current finalist options for the inform treatment.
ICAN’s attorneys sent an additional FOIA request specifically for this “separate note” meant to avoid FOIA, which turned out to be yet more language options for CDC to choose from regarding Facebook’s communication on vaccines.
This is all incredible on many levels and ICAN will, as it always does, continue to see how deep this incredible level of collusion between Facebook and the CDC runs.
See below for more instances of ICAN’s FOIA discoveries:
INTERNAL CDC PRESENTATION SHOWS IT KNEW FOR MONTHS THAT COVID-19 VACCINE EFFICACY WAS WANING AND KEPT IT A SECRET
EMAILS SHOW NIH DISMISSED POTENTIAL VACCINE RISK AND FOCUSED ON VACCINE DEVELOPMENT INSTEAD OF EARLY TREATMENT OPTIONS
CDC ADMITS ONCE AND FOR ALL IT HAS NO BASIS FOR ITS CLAIM THAT COVID-19 VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE VARIANTS
THE CDC’S RESPONSE TO SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY: BECAUSE WE SAID SO!
CDC HAS NO RECORDS TO SUPPORT CLAIM THAT COVID VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE VARIANTS
CDC CANNOT PROVIDE AN INSTANCE OF A SINGLE CONFIRMED COVID-19 DEATH IN A CHILD YOUNGER THAN 16
CDC CANNOT BACK UP ITS “FACTS” REGARDING POTENTIAL GENETIC MUTATION FROM COVID-19 VACCINES"

[Richter]

Tim Hinchcliffe Breaks Down What The UN's Global Digital Compact And Digital Control (13:16)
September 19, 2024
https://rumble.com/v5fldqd-tim-hinch...d-digital.html

[ExomatrixTV]

source ... full text here

cheers,
John 🦜🦋🌳

[onawah]

Lawyers for RFK Jr., CHD Present Oral Arguments in Landmark Censorship Case
by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.
October 9, 2024
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...tm_id=20241009

"A three-judge panel late Tuesday heard oral arguments in the landmark censorship case, Kennedy et al. v. Biden et al. The judges must decide if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Children’s Health Defense have standing to sue the Biden administration for colluding with social media companies to censor constitutionally protected speech.
The 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals late Tuesday heard oral arguments in the landmark censorship case, Kennedy et al. v. Biden et al.

The hearing focused on two points, Kim Mack Rosenberg, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) general counsel, told The Defender. First, the 5th Circuit is considering whether to uphold a lower court’s August decision that two of the three plaintiffs — Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and CHD — have legal standing to bring the suit.

Second, it’s considering whether to uphold the Lousiana court’s injunction, which would prohibit the Biden administration from coordinating with social media companies to censor Kennedy and CHD’s social media posts until the lawsuit is settled.

The case — brought by Kennedy, CHD and news consumer Connie Sampognaro — alleges that President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top administration officials and federal agencies “waged a systematic, concerted campaign” to compel the nation’s three largest social media companies to censor constitutionally protected speech.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Jed Rubenfeld — Yale law professor and attorney for the plaintiffs — told judges, “District court called this the most massive attack on free speech in this nation’s history, and it would be shocking if no plaintiff in the country had standing to challenge it.”

Standing is the legal doctrine that requires plaintiffs to be able to show they have suffered direct and concrete injuries and that those injuries could be resolved in court.

The issue of standing shut down another related government censorship case, Murthy v. Missouri. The plaintiffs in Murthy v. Missouri — the states of Missouri and Arkansas, Drs. Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff and Aaron Kheriaty, The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft and health activist Jill Hines — argued that the censorship they experienced on social media could be tied to government action and that they were likely to be censored in the future. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the plaintiffs didn’t have standing to bring their case.

The Murthy — originally Missouri et al. v. Biden et al. — and Kennedy v. Biden cases were consolidated because they shared common legal and factual issues. This allowed them to share processes, such as discovery of evidence. However, they continued to be heard and ruled on separately.

The plaintiffs in Kennedy v. Biden are much more likely to be able to prove standing than the Murthy v. Missouri plaintiffs, Mack Rosenberg said:

“With the Supreme Court’s decision in Murthy v. Missouri in the forefront on the issue of standing, we believe that the plaintiffs in our action have clearly demonstrated standing more than sufficient to meet the requirements the Supreme Court described in Murthy in June.”

Mack Rosenberg said there is clear evidence that plaintiffs Kennedy and CHD were specific targets of censorship and that they continue to be censored. “CHD in particular continues to be deplatformed from major social media sites with no end in sight.”

She said the facts “demonstrate that the injunction issued by Judge Doughty was appropriate given the circumstances and the government’s continued actions.”

Legal battle has dragged on for over a year

Tuesday’s hearing was the latest development in a class action lawsuit brought by Kennedy, CHD and Sampognaro on behalf of more than 80% of U.S. adults who access news from online news aggregators and social media companies, primarily Facebook, YouTube and Twitter.

The suit was filed on March 24, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

The case alleged that key officials and federal agencies in the Biden administration violated the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights by censoring online speech disfavored by the government.

According to the complaint, “the federal government’s censorship campaign has repeatedly, systematically, and very successfully targeted constitutionally protected speech on the basis of its content and viewpoint.”

Nearly a year later, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting key Biden administration officials and agencies from coercing or significantly encouraging social media platforms to suppress or censor online content containing protected free speech.

However, Doughty stayed the injunction until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a similar injunction in the Murthy v. Missouri case.

After the Supreme Court on June 26 ruled in favor of the Biden administration in Murthy v. Missouri, Doughty on July 9 denied two motions by lawyers for the Biden administration seeking to overturn the preliminary injunction, which was set to take effect July 7.

Less than 24 hours later, Biden administration lawyers filed an emergency motion with the 5th Circuit, seeking to block the injunction.

The 5th Circuit on July 25 sent the case back to the Louisiana District Court to decide if Kennedy, CHD and Sampognaro have standing to bring the suit. The 5th Circuit also stayed the injunction while the case was being revisited by the District Court.

The District Court on Aug. 20 gave the plaintiffs the green light to bring their suit, ruling that Kennedy and CHD had standing. Doughty concluded that plaintiff Sampognaro does not have standing.

Lawyers disagree on whether plaintiffs have standing

In Tuesday’s hearing, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Daniel Tenny argued on behalf of the defendants, saying that the Murthy v. Missouri decision “foreclosed” the plaintiffs’ theories on why the plaintiffs have standing.

Rubenfeld disagreed, saying that Kennedy v. Biden plaintiffs differ in key ways from the Murthy plaintiffs. First, unlike the Murthy plaintiffs, the Kennedy v. Biden plaintiffs have a “specific causation finding,” meaning there is clear evidence that “government defendants, through threats, caused the deplatforming and censorship that they suffered.”

Second, the Kennedy v. Biden plaintiffs have evidence of ongoing injury, not just past injury:

“CHD’s deplatforming — which happened a couple of years ago — is exactly the same right now, unchanged in status as it was then. In other words, the government defendants are directly responsible for the injury that CHD is currently suffering.”

“Number three,” Rubenfeld said, “we have specific evidence of, in the event of a favorable ruling from this court, a significant increase in the likelihood of our plaintiffs receiving relief.”

“That’s the established test for redressability,” he said. Redressability means that the plaintiffs’ alleged injuries are likely to be redressed if the court grants the relief the plaintiffs are seeking.

Right now there is zero likelihood that CHD will get relief, Rubenfeld said. “CHD has been litigating against Facebook for years. They have not reinstated them.”

If the 5th Circuit issues a ruling that Facebook’s actions were likely unconstitutional and that will likely be unconstitutional if Facebook keeps on doing it, “that changes [Facebook’s] incentive and that increases the likelihood that [CHD] will be reinstated.”

In their brief, plaintiffs’ attorneys also argued that Sampognaro, who is potentially immunocompromised, has what’s called “right-to-listen standing” because she needs access to accurate information about COVID-19 and possible treatments, and the censorship has obstructed that access.

Tenny urged the court to continue blocking the District Court’s injunction. Rubenfeld argued the injunction is needed because U.S. governmental agencies are “still today” trying to influence social media platforms “to suppress speech that they deem, they call misinformation.”

He added, “But we have seen over and over again that what they call misinformation often doesn’t turn out to be misinformation and turns out to be protected speech.”

The DOJ declined The Defender’s request for comment on Tuesday’s arguments.

Watch plaintiff Connie Sampognaro’s reaction to the hearing:" (Video at the link)

[ExomatrixTV]

• Congress ERUPTS as Robert F. Kennedy Jr DESTROYS Every Democrat in Congress:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=kuQ8Bv330C0

• 3,687,256+ views

How many times it is SUPER OBVIOUS and still there are people in complete denial of what is really going on ... The "mass psychology" that is going is so harrowing obvious ... you need to be really, stupid dumb, beyond help for "not to see it".

cheers,
John 🦜🦋🌳

[ExomatrixTV]

• source
• MAHAnow.org
• facebook.com/rfkjr
• x.com/RobertKennedyJr
• rumble.com/c/RFKjr
• youtube.com/@robertfkennedyjrofficial/videos
• instagram.com/robertfkennedyjr
• tiktok.com/@robertfkennedyjrofficial
• t.me/RealRobertKennedy
• bitchute.com/channel/RFKjr

[gini]

RFK responds to a slanderous -personal- attack with a powerfull plea for protecting the first amendment as the foundation of a funcional democracy & free society .

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=BgJsfNbjJec

--14 Oct 2024
'Dishonest Democrat Tries To CENSOR & SLANDER Robert F. Kennedy Jr.....BAD IDEA!!!'

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status...39489876021317

KanekoaTheGreat
@KanekoaTheGreat

Elon Musk Is The Most Consequential Figure In Free Speech Of Our Generation: Jonathan Turley

"Love him or hate him, @elonmusk is without question the most consequential figure in free speech of our generation. He's done more for free speech than any living person today.

In some ways, he actually stopped the progress of the anti-free speech movement by releasing the Twitter files. He's really that immovable object that this irresistible force encountered.

All of these CEOs, people like Zuckerberg and others, caved like a house of cards, but they finally found someone that couldn't be coerced, couldn't be threatened, couldn't be scared."



Added later



https://x.com/elon_docs/status/1846276022469333475

ELON DOCS
@elon_docs
Elon Musk: There must be some reason why 169 million people follow me. I must be keeping them amused in some way.

“I do post a lot on the 𝕏 platform, sometimes 100 times a day. So, once in a while, I'll do something dumb, for sure.

But I really try to say things that I think are interesting or funny. There must be some reason why 169 million people follow me. I guess, I don't know. I must be keeping them amused in some way.

Amuse, entertain, have opinions on something. Sometimes they're wrong, sometimes they're right.

Community Notes applies to me as well as it applies to anyone else. If I say something that's incorrect or not full-context, then Community Notes will correct me very quickly.

But it's only me doing these posts, ever. I don't have a team or anything.

In fact, I generally would recommend for leaders of the world to just literally post your own stuff. And once in a while, you make a mistake. Don't worry about it. Can't win them all. Nobody bats a thousand.”

European Jewish Association, 2024

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/reddit_lies/status/1846241902351577274

This is targeted voter suppression.

— Reddit Lies (@reddit_lies) October 15, 2024

[ExomatrixTV]

• David Icke banned from the Netherlands 🇳🇱 for another 2 years: 'Totally absurd, insane, bizarre':

The Dutch 🇳🇱 government has announced plans to ban speaker and author David Icke from entering our country for another two years, because he has not revised his ideas. Wrongthink. Only when he changes his ideas will the ban be lifted. Icke speaks on X of an extreme ban and extreme censorship. This includes 'conspiracy theories' (which ironically are confirmed in this way) that the world is run by a network of secret societies. Furthermore, the government notes that Icke called Covid a hoax. "It was," he says. They can go to hell, said Icke.

The Dutch 🇳🇱 government has announced plans to ban me from nearly 30 Euro countries for ANOTHER TWO YEARS because he has ‘NOT CHANGED HIS VIEWS’. The first two-year ban ends in November. I wonder if the mainstream hijack of the ‘alternative’ media might at last have something to say about this having virtually ignored the first ban. Even Toby Young and his ‘Free Speech Union’ tittered not a word.

And yet what we have here is the most extreme of bans and censorship with the implication that I must ‘change my views’ before the ban is lifted or it will be indefinite. These views include any ‘conspiracy theories’ (which have proved to be true as this ban ironically confirms) and that the world is controlled by a network of secret societies that I call the Global Cult. The government missive also notes that I have called ‘Covid’ a hoax which it was.

They demand that I change my views on this and so much more, but they can stick it where the sun never shines – especially when the Netherlands 🇳🇱 is among the European centres of the Cult. The government – of course – presents no evidence that what I say is not true.

I am banned from all countries of the Schengen border group on the basis of banned from one means banned from all and as many other countries use the Schengen criteria for allowing entry I am actually banned from many more.

The first ban was imposed in 2022 when I accepted an invitation from a Jewish friend in the Netherlands to speak for 20 minutes at PEACE RALLY in Amsterdam. Exception to this was taken by the Dutch-based Center for Information and Documentation Israel (CIDI) which claims to be ‘dedicated to combating antisemitism and spreading awareness of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict’ (very balanced ‘awareness’ naturally). CIDI’s ‘mission’ is to ‘safeguard the rights of Jewish people to a peaceful and secure existence, in Israel and around the world’.

To get the drift of ‘CIDI’ see the US Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Australian Anti-Defamation Commission which led the campaign to impose my ongoing ban from Australia. The ‘Commission’ was founded by the infamous B'nai B'rith that also founded the ADL. You get the picture. B'nai B'rith was founded in New York in 1843 by German Jewish immigrants and claims a ‘backstage role’ in the Rothschild-driven Balfour Declaration that led to the establishment of Israel.

The biggest party in the Dutch government is headed by fake ‘alternative’ hero and Israel-firster Geert Wilders (who blocked me on Twitter/X) and the Prime Minister installed by Wilders is the UNELECTED Dutch intelligence chief Dick Schoof. Until he became PM in July, Schoof was secretary-general of the Ministry of Justice and Security which was directly responsible for the first ban and for the planned extension.

The then hilariously termed ‘Minister of Justice and Security’, the Turkey-born Dilan Yeşilgöz, used parliamentary privilege to dub me a ‘Jew hater’ as part of an extraordinary and coordinated campaign of demonisation in which the Dutch media played a central and predictably disgraceful part.

How telling it is that while I have been banned from most of Europe the mainstream hijack of the ‘alternative’ media – including Carlson, Rogan, Brand, Owens, Musk, Oliver, etc, etc. – remained silent and while these ‘defenders of freedom’ are banned from nothing and nowhere I face another two years – indefinite in truth – banned from basically Western Europe, plus Australia and more besides.

It might be worth asking what I am saying that they are not saying which makes governments so terrified of a bloke from the Isle of Wight that they go to these lengths of what can only be described as fascism.

Oh, but then to do that we must go beyond right-wing politics, Trump, and religion into the so-called ‘far out’. And that would never do. Let’s stay safe, stay within strictly limited boundaries, play the game, and they may leave us alone.

NO WAY. I’ll die first.

• Prime Minister Dick Schoof

Because he has an entry ban for one of the Schengen countries, the ban automatically applies to the entire Schengen area. The ban was imposed after he was to speak at a peace demonstration in Amsterdam in 2022 at the invitation of a Jewish friend in the Netherlands. The CIDI put a stop to this because Icke was said to be spreading 'anti-Semitism'. He points out that Prime Minister Dick Schoof, as Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice in 2022, was directly responsible for the ban and its planned extension. Then-Minister of Justice Yesilgöz dismissed him as a Jew-hater, which the media eagerly played on. Icke wonders why governments are so afraid of the ideas of one man.

• Totally absurd, insane, bizarre

He gets a lot of support. "Crazy," Willem Engel responds. "Let this be a lesson to everyone who thinks that it will go away by itself or that we now have the PVV or that Schoof is less bad than Rutte. We are dealing with a completely radicalized regime, they will not stop until all human rights have been suspended." “Totally absurd, insane, bizarre,” says FVD leader Thierry Baudet. Former MP Ralf Dekker adds: “Shameful.” “Wow, unbelievable!” said ON! reporter Jonathan Krispijn. Aerospace expert Coen Vermeeren writes: "Unbelievable. If you read his books, you really understand that they are terrified of Icke. So don't read it, you'd better find out why."

• dutch 🇳🇱 (+ Multi-Language Options). 🦜🦋🌳

[ExomatrixTV]

Great Dutch 🇳🇱 Journalist @robertjensen, a proper alternative thinker, dissects my renewed ban from Europe - the official reasons he takes us through are beyond belief in their extreme nature. It is censorship on steroids. Meanwhile, the fake 'alternative stars' ignore all this while claiming to stand up for freedom. I have heard it said that they are silent because I call out their fakery, but they ignored the first @davidicke ban on the same grounds before I was calling them out.

• source

[ExomatrixTV]

• source

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status...62278486938080

KanekoaTheGreat
@KanekoaTheGreat
🚨BREAKING: Leaked documents from the Center for Countering Digital Hate reveal their primary goal is to "Kill Musk's Twitter" by targeting advertising and leveraging EU regulations.

The British non-profit organization hosted a private meeting with liberal groups opposing Musk’s free speech platform, including representatives from the Biden White House, Rep. Adam Schiff’s office, the Biden-Harris State Department, and Media Matters for America.


https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...-kamala-harris

"This Is War": Musk Responds To Bombshell "Kill Twitter" Plot Involving UK Advisors To Kamala Harris

by Tyler Durden
Tuesday, Oct 22, 2024 - 02:15 PM
Elon Musk has responded to a bombshell report by journalists Paul Thacker and Matt Taibbi which reveals that a the UK's Center for Countering Digital Hate - which is advising the Kamala Harris campaign, aims to "kill Musk's Twitter".

< very long detailed article and X posts at link >



https://x.com/lindayaX/status/1848790693952586134

Linda Yaccarino

@lindayaX
This is unconscionable and wrong.

Evil thrives in darkness. We will continue to expose those seeking to silence our users.

NOW IS THE TIME TO PROTECT FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND SAVE DEMOCRACY!

[ExomatrixTV]

• UK’s Secret Plan To KILL OFF Elon Musk’s X! w/ Dennis Kucinich:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=KlPmyaBeZe8

[ExomatrixTV]

• They’re trying to kill Tommy Robinson @TRobinsonNewEra in prison That’s been dubbed the UK’s “Guantanamo Bay”, where many terrorists and murderers are serving their time:

Please Help: They’re trying to kill Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra
) in prison That’s been dubbed the UK’s “Guantanamo Bay”, where many terrorists and murderers are serving their time. But the new prison governor has decided to make Tommy’s life hell — and to possibly put him in a position where he’ll be killed by jihadist prison gangs. At Tommy’s request, we’ve hired a UK law firm specializing in prison law to take action to compel the prison to protect Tommy. Tommy has been in Belmarsh before, but the previous prison governor put Tommy in a special unit called the “contingency suites” where no other prisoners had access to him. It was the same prison within a prison where Julian Assange was held. It’s psychologically damaging to be in solitary confinement for so long, but at least Tommy was allowed visitors and he knew he wouldn’t be attacked. But the new prison warden, a diversity hire named Jenny Louis, gave Tommy two choices: be thrown into the general population of the prison (where he would be killed by jihadist gangs) or to be locked up in a tiny cell “down the block” for 23½ hours a day. But being put “down the block” is a punishment, usually reserved for violent prisoners who engage in misconduct while in prison. It’s not a permanent holding cell meant for long-term use. According to a recent government inspection of Belmarsh, the average length of time a prisoner has been punished “down the block” is 18 days. Tommy was sentenced to 18 months. No-one could survive that, but that’s what this woke prison governor was threatening to do. She also threatened to punish Tommy in other ways, including severely limiting the number of visitors he’s allowed to receive. This is morally unacceptable. And it’s illegal, too. Tommy wasn’t convicted of a crime — contempt of court is a civil offence. As a civil prisoner, he has many more rights. A politically angry prison governor can’t just punish him because she dislikes him. She’s done this before, by the way. When Julian Assange was in prison there, she tried to stop him from even getting married. And she banned Reporters Without Borders from even visiting Assange to see if he was OK. She’s used to bullying prisoners. It’s only been a couple of days and she is adding extra punishments to Tommy’s sentence. Well, not if we have anything to say about it. We’ve got to fight back. Even the judge who sentenced Tommy to prison said how dangerous a prison setting is for Tommy. Before Tommy went to prison, he asked me to look after legal matters like this, and now that he sees what it’s like on the inside, he has approved the plan to hire specialist prison lawyers to challenge this out-of-control governor. I’m pleased to say the new law firm has already made contact with Tommy and is going to battle for him. I’ve promised to crowdfund the cost, so that Tommy’s family doesn’t have to bear this burden. Please help us protect Tommy in prison — it might even save his life.

• REPORT by @EzraLevant

That’s been dubbed the UK’s “Guantanamo Bay”, where many terrorists and murderers are serving their time.

But the new prison governor has decided to make Tommy’s life hell — and to possibly put him in a position where he’ll be killed by jihadist prison gangs.
At Tommy’s request, we’ve hired a UK law firm specializing in prison law to take action to compel the prison to protect Tommy.

Tommy has been in Belmarsh before, but the previous prison governor put Tommy in a special unit called the “contingency suites” where no other prisoners had access to him. It was the same prison within a prison where Julian Assange was held. It’s psychologically damaging to be in solitary confinement for so long, but at least Tommy was allowed visitors and he knew he wouldn’t be attacked.

But the new prison warden, a diversity hire named Jenny Louis, gave Tommy two choices: be thrown into the general population of the prison (where he would be killed by jihadist gangs) or to be locked up in a tiny cell “down the block” for 23½ hours a day.

But being put “down the block” is a punishment, usually reserved for violent prisoners who engage in misconduct while in prison. It’s not a permanent holding cell meant for long-term use. According to a recent government inspection of Belmarsh, the average length of time a prisoner has been punished “down the block” is 18 days. Tommy was sentenced to 18 months. No-one could survive that, but that’s what this woke prison governor was threatening to do. She also threatened to punish Tommy in other ways, including severely limiting the number of visitors he’s allowed to receive.

This is morally unacceptable. And it’s illegal, too. Tommy wasn’t convicted of a crime — contempt of court is a civil offence. As a civil prisoner, he has many more rights. A politically angry prison governor can’t just punish him because she dislikes him.

She’s done this before, by the way. When Julian Assange was in prison there, she tried to stop him from even getting married. And she banned Reporters Without Borders from even visiting Assange to see if he was OK.

She’s used to bullying prisoners. It’s only been a couple of days and she is adding extra punishments to Tommy’s sentence. Well, not if we have anything to say about it.
We’ve got to fight back. Even the judge who sentenced Tommy to prison said how dangerous a prison setting is for Tommy.

Before Tommy went to prison, he asked me to look after legal matters like this, and now that he sees what it’s like on the inside, he has approved the plan to hire specialist prison lawyers to challenge this out-of-control governor.

I’m pleased to say the new law firm has already made contact with Tommy and is going to battle for him. I’ve promised to crowdfund the cost, so that Tommy’s family doesn’t have to bear this burden.

• savetommy.com

• 58,6 Million views!
• #FreeTommyRobinson

[ExomatrixTV]

• source

[ExomatrixTV]

• Steve Bannon Speaks Out After Prison Sentence: "Political Prisoner":

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=185uyLxLi8c

Longtime Donald Trump ally Steve Bannon was released from prison early Tuesday, after serving a four-month sentence for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021. Steve Bannon spoke with reporters following his release.

Exactly one week before Election Day, Bannon left the Federal Correctional Institution in Danbury, Connecticut, according to Kristie Breshears, a spokesperson for the federal Bureau of Prisons. Bannon, 70, reported to the prison July 1 after the Supreme Court rejected his bid to delay the prison sentence while he appeals his conviction.

He previously served as the chief executive officer of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and served as the White House's chief strategist for the first several months of the Republican president’s administration. Trump is seeking to regain the presidency in next week's election against Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.

[ExomatrixTV]

• source

[Abondance]

WARNING: They Are Scrubbing the Internet Right Now


This article originally appeared on Brownstone Institute and was republished with permission.

Guest post by Jeffrey A. Tucker and Debbie Lerman

Instances of censorship are growing to the point of normalization. Despite ongoing litigation and more public attention, mainstream social media has been more ferocious in recent months than ever before. Podcasters know for sure what will be instantly deleted and debate among themselves over content in gray areas. Some like Brownstone have given up on YouTube in favor of Rumble, sacrificing vast audiences if only to see their content survive to see the light of day.

It’s not always about being censored or not. Today’s algorithms include a range of tools that affect searchability and findability. For example, the Joe Rogan interview with Donald Trump racked up an astonishing 34 million views before YouTube and Google tweaked their search engines to make it hard to discover, while even presiding over a technical malfunction that disabled viewing for many people. Faced with this, Rogan went to the platform X to post all three hours.

Navigating this thicket of censorship and quasi-censorship has become part of the business model of alternative media.

Those are just the headline cases. Beneath the headlines, there are technical events taking place that are fundamentally affecting the ability of any historian even to look back and tell what is happening. Incredibly, the service Archive.org which has been around since 1994 has stopped taking images of content on all platforms. For the first time in 30 years, we have gone a long swath of time – since October 8-10 – since this service has chronicled the life of the Internet in real time.

As of this writing, we have no way to verify content that has been posted for three weeks of October leading to the days of the most contentious and consequential election of our lifetimes. Crucially, this is not about partisanship or ideological discrimination. No websites on the Internet are being archived in ways that are available to users. In effect, the whole memory of our main information system is just a big black hole right now.

The trouble on Archive.org began on October 8, 2024, when the service was suddenly hit with a massive Denial of Service attack (DDOS) that not only took down the service but introduced a level of failure that nearly took it out completely. Working around the clock, Archive.org came back as a read-only service where it stands today. However, you can only read content that was posted before the attack. The service has yet to resume any public display of mirroring of any sites on the Internet.

In other words, the only source on the entire World Wide Web that mirrors content in real time has been disabled. For the first time since the invention of the web browser itself, researchers have been robbed of the ability to compare past with future content, an action that is a staple of researchers looking into government and corporate actions.

It was using this service, for example, that enabled Brownstone researchers to discover precisely what the CDC had said about Plexiglas, filtration systems, mail-in ballots, and rental moratoriums. That content was all later scrubbed off the live Internet, so accessing archive copies was the only way we could know and verify what was true. It was the same with the World Health Organization and its disparagement of natural immunity which was later changed. We were able to document the shifting definitions thanks only to this tool which is now disabled.

What this means is the following: Any website can post anything today and take it down tomorrow and leave no record of what they posted unless some user somewhere happened to take a screenshot. Even then there is no way to verify its authenticity. The standard approach to know who said what and when is now gone. That is to say that the whole Internet is already being censored in real time so that during these crucial weeks, when vast swaths of the public fully expect foul play, anyone in the information industry can get away with anything and not get caught.

We know what you are thinking. Surely this DDOS attack was not a coincidence. The time was just too perfect. And maybe that is right. We just do not know. Does Archive.org suspect something along those lines? Here is what they say:

Last week, along with a DDOS attack and exposure of patron email addresses and encrypted passwords, the Internet Archive’s website javascript was defaced, leading us to bring the site down to access and improve our security. The stored data of the Internet Archive is safe and we are working on resuming services safely. This new reality requires heightened attention to cyber security and we are responding. We apologize for the impact of these library services being unavailable.

Deep state? As with all these things, there is no way to know, but the effort to blast away the ability of the Internet to have a verified history fits neatly into the stakeholder model of information distribution that has clearly been prioritized on a global level. The Declaration of the Future of the Internet makes that very clear: the Internet should be “governed through the multi-stakeholder approach, whereby governments and relevant authorities partner with academics, civil society, the private sector, technical community and others.” All of these stakeholders benefit from the ability to act online without leaving a trace.

To be sure, a librarian at Archive.org has written that “While the Wayback Machine has been in read-only mode, web crawling and archiving have continued. Those materials will be available via the Wayback Machine as services are secured.”

When? We do not know. Before the election? In five years? There might be some technical reasons but it might seem that if web crawling is continuing behind the scenes, as the note suggests, that too could be available in read-only mode now. It is not.

Disturbingly, this erasure of Internet memory is happening in more than one place. For many years, Google offered a cached version of the link you were seeking just below the live version. They have plenty of server space to enable that now, but no: that service is now completely gone. In fact, the Google cache service officially ended just a week or two before the Archive.org crash, at the end of September 2024.

Thus the two available tools for searching cached pages on the Internet disappeared within weeks of each other and within weeks of the November 5th election.

Other disturbing trends are also turning Internet search results increasingly into AI-controlled lists of establishment-approved narratives. The web standard used to be for search result rankings to be governed by user behavior, links, citations, and so forth. These were more or less organic metrics, based on an aggregation of data indicating how useful a search result was to Internet users. Put very simply, the more people found a search result useful, the higher it would rank. Google now uses very different metrics to rank search results, including what it considers “trusted sources” and other opaque, subjective determinations.

Furthermore, the most widely used service that once ranked websites based on traffic is now gone. That service was called Alexa. The company that created it was independent. Then one day in 1999, it was bought by Amazon. That seemed encouraging because Amazon was well-heeled. The acquisition seemed to codify the tool that everyone was using as a kind of metric of status on the web. It was common back in the day to take note of an article somewhere on the web and then look it up on Alexa to see its reach. If it was important, one would take notice, but if it was not, no one particularly cared.

This is how an entire generation of web technicians functioned. The system worked as well as one could possibly expect.

Then, in 2014, years after acquiring the ranking service Alexa, Amazon did a strange thing. It released its home assistant (and surveillance device) with the same name. Suddenly, everyone had them in their homes and would find out anything by saying “Hey Alexa.” Something seemed strange about Amazon naming its new product after an unrelated business it had acquired years earlier. No doubt there was some confusion caused by the naming overlap.

Here’s what happened next. In 2022, Amazon actively took down the web ranking tool. It didn’t sell it. It didn’t raise the prices. It didn’t do anything with it. It suddenly made it go completely dark.

No one could figure out why. It was the industry standard, and suddenly it was gone. Not sold, just blasted away. No longer could anyone figure out the traffic-based website rankings of anything without paying very high prices for hard-to-use proprietary products.

All of these data points that might seem unrelated when considered individually, are actually part of a long trajectory that has shifted our information landscape into unrecognizable territory. The Covid events of 2020-2023, with massive global censorship and propaganda efforts, greatly accelerated these trends.

One wonders if anyone will remember what it was once like. The hacking and hobbling of Archive.org underscores the point: there will be no more memory.

As of this writing, fully three weeks of web content have not been archived. What we are missing and what has changed is anyone’s guess. And we have no idea when the service will come back. It is entirely possible that it will not come back, that the only real history to which we can take recourse will be pre-October 8, 2024, the date on which everything changed.

The Internet was founded to be free and democratic. It will require herculean efforts at this point to restore that vision, because something else is quickly replacing it.





https://vigilantnews.com/post/warnin...net-right-now/

[ExomatrixTV]

Every year, your freedom is eroded with millions of new rules.

High time your freedom was restored!

ELON MUSK: “The larger government gets, the less individual freedom you have. I think that's really the core thing… Your freedoms have just been eroded year after year with more and more government, laws and regulations and regulatory authorities”

• source