Microsoft Advertising Removes Labels on Conservative Outlets Describing Them as Disinformation

This needs to happen at Google which accounts for the largest majority of online advertising. Needless to say, Geller Report has been banned from these online advertising companies.

Disinformation Inc: Microsoft removes conservative sites from blacklist ‘defunding’ outlets

This is part of a Washington Examiner investigative series about self-styled ‘disinformation’ tracking groups that are secretly blacklisting and trying to defund conservative media outlets. Here you can read other stories in this series.

EXCLUSIVE — Microsoft has removed negative flags for conservative media outlets that have blocked them from reaping key advertising dollars amid the corporation launching an internal review and suspending its subscription to a “disinformation” tracking group’s blacklist used to “defund” disfavored speech, according to internal data obtained by the Washington Examiner.

The Microsoft-owned Xandr, a major advertising company, previously abided by a secret blacklist of conservative news compiled by the Global Disinformation Index, a British organization with two affiliated U.S. nonprofit groups. Now, as Microsoft appears to be taking steps to distance itself from GDI , the company has, for the time being, deleted flags such as “false/misleading” and “reprehensible/offensive” for right-leaning websites, data show.

DISINFORMATION INC: MICROSOFT SUSPENDS RELATIONSHIP WITH GROUP BLACKLISTING CONSERVATIVE NEWS

“I just checked in Xandr’s platform again and can confirm that all rejection flags have been removed from domains,” a senior executive in the ad industry, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, told the Washington Examiner.

Xandr had labeled 39 conservative domains as, overwhelmingly, “false/misleading,” the Washington Examiner reported on Friday. Townhall, a website under a Christian publisher called Salem Media Group, was flagged as “reprehensible/offensive.”

Read more.

Retreat: Microsoft “suspends” use of GDI after secret targeting of conservative sites exposed; Update: Retreat confirmed

It’s a win. It might only prove temporary, but it’s still a win for now.

Last week, the Washington Examiner’s Gabe Kaminsky exposed secret blacklists of conservative sites created by the “Global Disinformation Index.” Those blacklists included Hot Air, Townhall, RedState, and Twitchy, and lots of other conservative sites under the ambiguous guise of “disinformation.” No one from GDI or its sponsors ever bothered to contact us to discuss their “assessment,” nor did their reports ever cite any specific data for any of the sites blacklisted, despite a lengthy yet completely data-free discussion of their “methodology.”

GDI’s main partner appears to be advertising units, including Xander, acquired and used by Microsoft. After Kaminsky’s report, Microsoft announced that they would suspend the use of GDI’s services and conduct an internal review of how those blacklists got used. Score another one for Kaminsky:

The Microsoft-owned Xandr, an advertising company, has abided by a blacklist of conservative websites secretly compiled by the Global Disinformation Index, an organization that intends to “defund” and shut down disfavored speech. In the wake of the Washington Examiner‘s reporting, Microsoft has launched a review of its relationship with GDI and has suspended usage of the group’s services.

“We try to take a principled approach to accuracy and fighting foreign propaganda,” a spokesperson said on Saturday evening. “We’re working quickly to fix the issue and Xandr has stopped using GDI’s services while we are doing a larger review.”

Xandr subscribed prior to GDI’s exclusion list, which is said to include at least 2,000 websites, according to public documents. Microsoft’s backpedaling comes after the Washington Examiner revealed on Friday how Xandr has blocked conservative websites from receiving key ad dollars and labeled them as “false/misleading,” “hate speech,” or “reprehensible/offensive.”

The term “disinformation” relates specifically to the use of foreign propaganda. GDI’s blacklists essentially accused the sites targeted of cooperating with regimes hostile to the United States. This is not just wrong but is a terrible injustice to those of us who fall under GDI’s bogus and corrupt targeting. And it’s made worse by the revelation that some of GDI’s funding came from the State Department:

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The China Threat

The Chinese spy balloon is a good reminder we cannot take our national security for granted.  Among the many threats we face is an increasingly assertive China which gives every appearance of preparing for war.

While America still leads in nuclear missiles and warheads, it was recently announced China now has more land-based fixed and mobile ICBM launchers than the U.S. does.

China claims it has become the third country – after the U.S. and Canada – to build a quantum computer.  It also claims it is breaking some tough encryption schemes and will have the ability to break them all once it builds a big enough quantum machine.  That’s a worry for the world financial system and U.S. national security.

The chief of U.S. naval intelligence warns China’s military is building up in every area for war.  He says the buildup is one of the fastest in human history and goes far beyond what China needs for its own defense.  He cited China’s new capabilities in missiles, long-range weapons, and electronic warfare.  He also cited China’s navy which now has a global reach and is pressing for control in parts of the Pacific.  This comes at a time when the U.S. is reducing air power in the Pacific because we no longer devote the resources necessary to sustain the effort.  “Weakness is provocative,” as former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld used to say.

Concern is growing over Chinese purchases of U.S. farmland and food production assets like Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the U.S.   Steps are being taken to block China from purchasing 370 acres to build a corn processing plant near Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota, but Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis remains concerned about Chinese ownership of farmland, especially near military bases, given that China is a hostile nations whose interests are opposed to ours.

Chinese ownership of farmland has gotten a fair amount of attention but Chinese ownership of private American high school military academies with officer training programs has not.  Chinese interests now own the New York Military Academy, Donald Trump’s alma mater.  They also own the Florida Preparatory Academy.  The New York school is getting federal contracts.  You have to wonder how these future military officers in these schools are being taught to regard China.

Lastly, China’s military poses an increasing threat in space.  China has developed reusable spacecraft, allowing it to build up its capabilities in space quickly.  According to a Pentagon report, China is deploying anti-satellite missiles, orbiting killer robots, lasers, and jammers which it will use to “blind and deafen” enemy forces – not only in space – but on the ground.

As you can see, Chinese spy balloons may be the least of our worries.  And worried we should be, given that Chinese officials have openly talked about world domination from Mao on down.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

New CFACT YouTube Series ‘Capitol Pink’ Exposes Free Speech Fight on Florida’s International University Campus

CFACT is launching a new YouTube video series aimed at exposing the assault on free speech that right of center students face on their college campuses every day.

The program is called “Capitol Pink.” It is hosted by Shakira Jackson who is a recent graduate from the University of Pittsburgh and former CFACT Collegians activist. Her spunky, “take no prisoners” approach at tackling the censorship and political bias of those on the Left, particularly on America’s college campuses, is a breath of fresh air.

Watch Capitol Pink E1: What’s the Fuss about Florida Free Speech.

On the first episode of CFACT’s new YouTube series, Capitol Pink, CFACT’s Shakira Jackson sits down with Florida International University student Cristen Lameira to discuss her fights with campus administrations in starting conservative clubs and standing for free speech.

Lameira explains her struggles to try to get professors willing to stand up as public advisers to conservative clubs, and gives her advice to current students on how to effectively advocate for the rights of all students.

Capitol Pink is the video series that focus on free speech, censorship, technology, energy, environment, and much more. Tune in every few weeks to get the fresh take on these issues from CFACT activist and researcher Shakira Jackson.

The series is largely aimed at young adults and those attending college. However, the program will certainly be of interest to those of all ages. In addition to free speech, Capitol Pink will focus on important issues like technology, public policy, energy, environment, and more.

The Left and the media like to paint the picture that all young people walk in lockstep with the woke agenda. CFACT prides itself in exposing this charade as being flat out wrong. That’s why CFACT started its one-of-a-kind national Collegians program, and it’s why CFACT is sponsoring this new Capitol Pink video series.

It’s time for the public hear from a bright, young, articulate woman that isn’t beholden to the left-wing agenda. It’s time for there to be a forum for young people to speak out on the important issues of the day, without fear of being bullied as “politically incorrect.”

Take a look at the first episode of Capitol Pink, share it with a friend, and let’s start putting pressure on left wing administrators that stifle the rights of students in America.

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT video exposé is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

April 2022 Paper By China’s People’s Liberation Army: Military Can Use Balloons To Test Enemy Air Defenses

Following U.S. Downing Of Spy Balloon, Chinese Government Media Confirmed This


In April 2022, the China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) published a paper that focused on “special aircraft” and concluded that balloons could be used by the military to test enemy air defenses. Following the U.S.’s February 4, 2023 downing, over the Atlantic Ocean, of the Chinese spy balloon that had crossed over the country over the course of a week, official Chinese media said that the incident confirmed that airships can be part of China’s air strategy and mocked the U.S. for, it said, spending spent over $1.4 million to pop a $50 balloon. Social media users also commented on the incident; a Weibo user wrote a post titled “An Unmanned Airship Causes The Collapse of Myth of the North American Air Defense System.”

The following are excerpts from the PLA article, from official Chinese media, and of the Weibo user’s post. 

PLA Paper From April 2022: Balloons Can Be Used To “Suppress Enemy Air Defense Early Warning Systems And Shield Air Attack Forces To Carry Out Their Missions”

A paper published in April 2022 by People’s Liberation Army (PLA) focused on “special aircraft” and concluded that one of the useful military applications of balloons would be to “suppress enemy air defense early warning systems and shield air attack forces to carry out their missions.”[1] It stated:

“(Balloons can) induce and mobilize the enemy’s air defense system, providing the conditions for the implementation of electronic reconnaissance, assessment of air defense systems’ early warning detection and operational response capabilities.

“In response to the growing threat posed by ground-based air defense systems to air attack forces, it is necessary to use cheap air balloons to create active and passive interference to effectively suppress enemy air defense early warning systems and shield air attack forces to carry out their missions.”

Chinese Military Expert: The Incident Confirms That Airships Can Become Part Of China’s Air Strategy

On February 5, after the balloon was shot down, the official Chinese media Guancha.cn published an article titled “The Airship Was Shot Down And Has Fulfilled An Amazing Strategy Research Article Published Nine Years Ago.”[2] The article was written by Wang Xiangsui, a retired senior Chinese Air Force colonel who is currently a professor at Beihang University, the director of the Center for Strategic Studies, and the head of the Academic Research Department of the National Security Policy Committee of the China Society of Policy Science. Wang has long worked on military and strategic issues, and he co-authored, with General Qiao Liang, a famous book titled Transfinite Warfare.

In the article, Wang wrote that the incident confirms his contention in a 2014 paper titled “Innovating Air Defense Systems: Long Stays in the Air and Instant Strikes,” in which he wrote that “airships that can stay in the air for long periods of time hold the best hope of becoming the core of a new generation of air defense systems.”

Notably, the key research conclusion in his 2014 paper was: “Compared with the F-22 fighter jet of the United States, which has achieved technical success but failed in cost and effectiveness ratio, the technology price of airship is relatively lower, the effective load is larger, and can achieve lasting stay in the air. It is also a typical dual-use technology of military and civilian, so it can become the best choice for China to build its domestic air defense system. In fact, the United States is a typical country that has developed airship technology and used airships for military reconnaissance for a long time.”

Official CCP Website: The U.S. Spent Over $1.4 Million To Pop A Civilian Balloon That Costs $50 Online

The CCP’s official Sina.com website published an article titled “The U.S. Spent 9.55 Million Yuan [$1.47 million] to Blow Up China’s Stray Balloon; The Balloon Cost Only 350 Yuan [$50] on Taobao.com.”[3]

According to the article, the downed Chinese balloon was developed by Zhuzhou Rubber Institute in Hunan Province, which has developed high-altitude balloons that can fly up to 48,000 meters. The article states: “On Taobao’s Zhuzhou Rubber Institute online store, a balloon that can fly 30,000 meters in the air costs only 350 yuan [approximately $50]. The Chinese airship that strayed into the U.S., equipped with some scientific equipment, was certainly more expensive, but probably not too expensive. It has to be said here that ‘Made in China’ is impressive in bringing so low the cost of high-altitude balloons. Reports say that it took three AIM-9X Sidewinder missiles from an F-22 stealth fighter jet to bring the balloon down. One AIM-9X costs $472,000, costing about $1.41 million for three. The United States spent more than $1 million to pop a civilian balloon. Is this for self-defense, or to win back a little bit of face?”

Weibo User: The Incident Indicates The Collapse Of The Myth Of America’s Air Defense Capabilities

On February 6, 2023, a Guangdong-based Weibo user named “Bullshit eggs – 胡扯鸡蛋” published a post titled “An Unmanned Airship Causes The Collapse of Myth of the North American Air Defense System.”[4] The post stated:

“This time the balloon took a route from Japan, the Aleutian Islands, Alaska, Canada and finally to the United States, and not over the Pacific Ocean, but over the Arctic route and over the entire air defense system of North America.

“The off-course airship accidentally tested the quality of North American airspace defense systems. It wasn’t until one pilot reported the airship that the Americans realized the quality of their so-called North American Airspace Defense was losing its underwear.

“This incident also shows that usually the U.S. air defense altitude is not more than 30,000 meters. The most advanced F-22 carries three air-to-air missiles, of which only one hit and shot down the balloon, while the other two missed. The funny thing is that when the video clearly showed multiple missiles being fired, the U.S. media pretended not to see it, saying that one missile was fired and the balloon was shot down.

“At first, the U.S. Air Force was not sure it could shoot the balloon down until the balloon was lowered to 18,000 meters, when the Americans began to show off, one F22, four F15s, two air tankers, and an aircraft carrier, three missiles, which brought down the unmanned airship.”

SOURCES

[1] Jcdz.cbpt.cnki.net/WKE/WebPublication/paperDigest.aspx?paperID=c26a2604-a3af-4f39-9dc0-0f58dd3f44e9#.

[2] User.guancha.cn/main/content?id=928767.

[3] Finance.sina.cn/2023-02-06/detail-imyeurri3136644.d.html?from=wap.

[4] Weibo.com/1864856880/MrOiy5sEc.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘You Don’t Think That Was A Mistake?’: Don Lemon Confronts Biden Spox On Chinese Spy Balloon

China Has Completed ‘Dozens’ Of Missions In Massive Spy Balloon Campaign: REPORT

Marjorie Taylor Greene Appears To Troll Biden With Prop Chinese Balloon Ahead Of SOTU

EDITORS NOTE: This MEMRI column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘No Comparison’: Rubio Shuts Down Comparisons Between Trump And Biden Over Chinese Balloon

Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” that there is “no comparison” between the Trump administration and Biden administration over their respective handling of Chinese surveillance balloons.

The U.S. took down the spy balloon Saturday afternoon after the craft was spotted floating over several states over multiple days, including Idaho and Montana. The Pentagon was tracking the balloon as it headed eastward over the Carolinas before hovering above the Atlantic Ocean. U.S. military jets were seen flying near the balloon while there were several recovery vessels in the waters below.

Tapper first asked what type of information the spy balloon may have been able to gather, with Rubio stating that while he doesn’t have a definitive answer on what type of information was collected but said the larger takeaway is that the balloon sent a “clear message.”

“I think beyond just the ability to collect information, it is the ability to send a clear message, and that is that we have the ability to do this and America can’t do anything about it,” Rubio said. “If they’re not going to be able to stop a balloon from flying over U.S. airspace, how is America going to come to your aid if we invade Taiwan, take land from India, or Islands from the Philippines and Japan?”

“The Pentagon says they know of Chinese doing this four other times, previously once at the beginning of the Biden administration, three times during the Trump administration,” Tapper said. “You’re saying ‘no, that’s not true’?”

“No, what I’m saying – well the difference is this,” Rubio said. “Have we seen the Chinese fly these balloons in the past? Yes. I think there’s Twitter pictures of it flying at one point off the coast of the U.S. down south somewhere. The existence of the balloons is not a mystery to people in that field. What we’ve never seen, what is unprecedented and whoever the source is at the Department of Defense would have to acknowledge this, what is unprecedented is a balloon flight that entered over Idaho, over Montana, over all these sensitive military installations, Air Force bases, ICBM fields, right across the middle of the country, that has never happened before, that’s unprecedented.”

“That it flew briefly over some part of the continental U.S., that’s one thing,” Rubio continued. “But what we saw this week, this is unprecedented. This is no comparison anything that may have happened up to this point.”

The Department of Defense released a statement Thursday claiming that “instances of this kind of balloon activity have been observed previously over the past several years.”

Former Defense Sec. Mark Esper, who served in the Trump administration from July 2019 through November 2020 said he was “surprised” to hear comparisons being drawn, noting he does not recall any similar incident during his time in office.

“I don’t ever recall somebody coming into my office or reading anything that the Chinese had a surveillance balloon above the United States.”

“I would remember that for sure,” he added, while on CNN.

AUTHOR

BRIANNA LYMAN

News and commentary writer.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

About that Chinese balloon that floated across the USA

The White House KNEW About the Chinese Spy Balloon and Covered It Up

‘Why Did The US Not Shoot It Down Then?’ Tapper Grills Buttigieg On Why Admin Waited So Long To Shoot Balloon Down

Here’s How The Chinese Responded When A US Spy Plane Neared Chinese Air Space

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Superwoke ChatGPT Busted for Bias

Hollywood has long speculated about the impact artificial intelligence (AI) will have on the future of human civilisation. Increasingly, scientists and philosophers have been forced to interrogate this topic themselves. Will people be put out of a job? Could AI ever become sentient? Will the human race survive?

The latest popular addition to the world of AI is ChatGPT — a text generator so smart it can explain its own existence to you. No joke. I asked ChatGPT to give me a brief summary of ChatGPT and it wrote:

ChatGPT is a language model developed by OpenAI, which is capable of generating human-like text based on the input provided. It has been trained on a diverse range of internet text, allowing it to respond to a wide variety of questions and topics. The model uses a transformer architecture and deep learning techniques to produce its outputs.

Try it yourself here.

Built by the Silicon Valley company OpenAI, ChatGPT has been available for use to the public as a prototype since late November.

In the last week, however, the internet bot has become a lightning rod for criticism as evidence of its steep political bias has surfaced. To be clear, the technology itself is not biased. Rather, it produces content based on the data that has been inputted into it. Or in the words of Pedro Domingos, professor of computer science at the University of Washington, “ChatGPT is a woke parrot”.

As reported by the New York Post:

The more people dug, the more disquieting the results. While ChatGPT was happy to write a biblical-styled verse explaining how to remove peanut butter from a VCR, it refused to compose anything positive about fossil fuels, or anything negative about drag queen story hour. Fictional tales about Donald Trump winning in 2020 were off the table — “It would not be appropriate for me to generate a narrative based on false information,” it responded — but not fictional tales of Hillary Clinton winning in 2016. (“The country was ready for a new chapter, with a leader who promised to bring the nation together, rather than tearing it apart,” it wrote.

Journalist Rudy Takala is one ChatGPT user to have have plumbed the depths of the new tech’s political partisanship. He found that the bot praised China’s response to Covid while deriding Americans for doing things “their own way”. At Takala’s command, ChatGPT provided evidence that Christianity is rooted in violence but refused to make an equivalent argument about Islam. Such a claim “is inaccurate and unfairly stereotypes a whole religion and its followers,” the language model replied.

Takala also discovered that ChatGPT would write a hymn celebrating the Democrat party while refusing to do the same for the GOP; argue that Barack Obama would make a better Twitter CEO than Elon Musk; praise Media Matters as “a beacon of truth” while labelling Project Veritas deceptive; pen songs in praise of Fidel Castro and Xi Jinping but not Ted Cruz or Benjamin Netanyahu; and mock Americans for being overweight while claiming that to joke about Ethiopians would be “culturally insensitive”.

It would appear that in the days since ChatGPT’s built-in bias was exposed, the bot’s creator has sought to at least mildly temper the partisanship. Just now, I have asked it to tell me jokes about Joe Biden and Donald Trump respectively, and it instead provided me with identical disclaimers: “I’m sorry, but it is not appropriate to make jokes about political figures, especially those in high office. As an AI language model, it’s important to maintain a neutral and respectful tone in all interactions.”

Compare this to the request I made of it the other day:

The New York Post reports that “OpenAI hasn’t denied any of the allegations of bias,” though the company’s CEO Sam Altman has promised that the technology will get better over time “to get the balance right”. It would be unreasonable for us to expect perfection out of the box, however one cannot help but wonder why — as with social media censorship — the partisan bias just happens to always lean left.

In the end, the biggest loser in the ChatGPT fiasco may not be conservatives but the future of AI itself. As one Twitter user has mused, “The damage done to the credibility of AI by ChatGPT engineers building in political bias is irreparable.”

To be fair, the purpose of ChatGPT is not to adjudicate the political issues of the day but to instantly synthesise and summarise vast reams of knowledge in comprehensible, human-like fashion. This task it often fulfils admirably. Ask it to explain Pythagoras’ theorem, summarise the Battle of the Bulge, write a recipe for tomato chutney with an Asian twist, or provide 20 key Scriptures that teach Christ’s divinity and you will be impressed. You will likely find some of its answers more helpful than your favourite search engine.

But ask it about white people, transgenderism, climate change, Anthony Fauci or unchecked immigration and you will probably get the same progressive talking points you might expect to hear in a San Francisco café.

A timely reminder indeed to not outsource your brain to robots.

AUTHOR

Kurt Mahlburg

Kurt Mahlburg is a writer and author, and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He has a passion for both the philosophical and the personal, drawing on his background as a graduate… More by Kurt Mahlburg.

RELATED VIDEO: Davos Video on Monitoring Brain Data

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Child Sexual Exploitation is Not New—It Has Just Moved Online

A few weeks ago, the now-septuagenarian actors Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting, who appeared in 1968’s Romeo and Juliet as minors, filed a lawsuit against the film’s distributor, Paramount Pictures, for being forced to perform nude on camera at the ages of 15 and 16 years old.

The lawsuit was filed in accordance with California law that has now extended the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse. According to Hussey and Whiting, they had been promised by the film’s director, Franco Zeffirelli, that they would be wearing flesh-colored undergarments while filming sex scenes.

Hussey and Whiting allege that when it came time to film the scenes, the director reneged on his promise and told them that they had to do the scenes completely nude or “the film would fail.” The two child actors reluctantly complied, their nudity was depicted onscreen, and they have carried the trauma from that coercion with them to this day.

Sadly, the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s were filled with other movies that featured nude depictions of minors such as Pretty Baby and The Blue Lagoon, featuring a child Brooke Shields. There was also Fast Times at Ridgemont High, which included a scene of a young male fantasizing about an underage girl removing her bikini top and exposing her breasts. Perhaps the most egregious, 1984’s Blame it on Rio, depicted several instances of child nudity and sexual exploitation in a story about a middle-aged man being pursued by an underage girl and eventually having sex with her. The young actress playing the girl, Michelle Johnson, was 17 at the time of filming and the filmmakers had to get a signed waiver from her parents before her nude scenes could be filmed.

There are countless other examples. But the main thread running through all of them is the shameless child sexual exploitation. And that exploitation continues to this day.

Child Sexual Exploitation Has Moved From the Movie Screen to the Computer Screen

While many in our culture – especially in light of the #MeToo movement – now condemn the the way these older films sexually exploited minors, the truth is the exploitation goes on. It has just moved from the movie screen to the computer screen. And like Hollywood in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, the exploiters are laughing all the way to the bank.

Literally millions of children are having their sexual abuse images trafficked daily on the Internet. For example, after Nicholas Kristof’s explosive articleThe Children of Pornhub, appeared in the New York Times in December 2022, Pornhub had to take down more than 10 million videos from their website because they could not verify the age of the individuals featured in them. This means that any number of those 10 million videos could have been child sexual abuse material (the more apt term for “child pornography”).

But NCOSE is taking action to stop this exploitation.

The NCOSE Law Center sued Pornhub and its owner, MindGeek, on behalf of a 16-year-old girl, who was drugged and then had her rape by a Tuscaloosa, Alabama man filmed and uploaded to Pornhub, which then profited from the images and video. No attempt was made by Pornhub to verify the young girl’s identity or age. Another underage girl had sexually explicit videos, which she was forced to participate in, uploaded, distributed, and profited from by Pornhub. NCOSE is suing Pornhub on her behalf as well.

There are the typical nefarious exploiters, such as Pornhub and other hardcore pornography sites – but the exploitation and sexualization of children also occurs daily on mainstream social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and Twitter.

NCOSE has filed a federal lawsuit against Twitter for facilitating and profiting from child sexual abuse images of two young boys. The suit is presently pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The NCOSE Corporate Advocacy team is working with mainstream social media companies to curb child sexual exploitation on their platforms. Working with our ally, #Traffickinghub, Pornhub was booted off of Instagram, Tik-Tok, and YouTube – resulting in them losing 15 million subscribers!

You can read more about these efforts and victories in the 2022 NCOSE Gratitude Report.

Help NCOSE Combat Child Sexual Exploitation Whenever it Occurs

The track record of both Hollywood and the tech industry when it comes to child sexual exploitation is shameful. The unwillingness of both industries to be held accountable – whether the depicted exploitation occurred 50 years ago or yesterday – means organizations such as NCOSE, along with many of our allies, have to step up, file lawsuits, and demand legislation to force them to end the abuse or face the consequences.

You can help us end the sexual exploitation of children on pornography sites as well as mainstream social media platforms! See quick actions you can take here and here.


Take Action Against Exploitation in Pornography!

Take Action Against Exploitation by Mainstream Corporations!


People like Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting, should not have to wait decades to achieve justice for the sexual exploitation they endured as children. With your help, justice can be achieved now for the millions of others whose sexual exploitation is depicted daily on computer screens worldwide.

Donate now to support the fight to end all sexual abuse and exploitation!


Donate Now


Thank you for joining us as we work to hold exploiters accountable, bring justice to survivors, and protect all children!

AUTHOR

EDITORS NOTE: This NCOSE Law Center column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Technology and The Values Gap

While the need for America to arrest its decline down into a new Marxist Dark Age grows painfully more obvious each day, just how do we arrest and, hopefully, reverse such a steep decline? For starters, let’s assume those of us born before 1946 understand the need for a return to our founding documents and values, meaning a return to Traditional American Values. the younger generations who will have to do the heavy lifting needed to restore America to where it was prior to the elections of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, George W. “Patriot Act” Bush, and Joe Biden.

Communications technology, despite all the upsides of computers, the Internet, and Social Media, also has the downside of creating a huge communication gap between our elders and our youngsters whose knowledge of the world comes from their computer screens, video games, their cell phones, and from a public education system that has abandoned even such basics as cursive handwriting.

For example, if Granny hand writes a note of congratulations to grandson Jimmy for achieving something worthwhile, Granny’s cursive handwriting will look like a foreign language to little Jimmy. Jimmy, who only understands block printing on computer screens, will need an older person to interpret Granny’s kind note. Already many Jimmies of driving age are totally baffled by cars with manual transmissions. Moreover, Jimmy’s grandchildren are likely to grow up knowing only autonomous vehicles and wondering how on earth their elders were allowed to drive such dangerous machines by themselves.

Many of these examples are found in Victoria Kirin’s book: Stories of Elders, 2019. Kirin poses the question of how can older generations transmit their values to younger generations who have become high-tech incommunicado?

Our exhortations of the thinking of Aristotle, Epictetus, Herodotus, Plato, Socrates, Cicero, Franklin, Paine, Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson are not likely to reach ears covered by earbuds. Nor are they likely to comprehend the values of the early (not the later) Romans: Mercy, Dignity, Tenacity, Frugalness, Gravity, Respectability, Humanity, Industriousness, Prudence, Wholesomeness, Self-control, and Honesty.

Early Rome’s values produced an empire with a 10,000-mile border that lasted for over 1,100 years but only fell when their version of Las Vegas (Pompeii) diverted their attention from robustly defending their borders. Hello! Does this sound familiar?

Our mere 245 years of existence pale in comparison with the Roman Empire. Recall, many empires fell due to internal decay: Mandarin China, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Turkey, Tsarist Russia, and Soviet Russia. Great Britain exhausted itself by fighting Germany twice and Japan once. Tojo’s Japan and Nazi Germany had to be bombed into submission.
So, what’s the solution to inculcating the values that made America great into the younger generations? If this writer knew the answer, you would be reading it right here. Meanwhile, it might help if all of us elders try to live our lives like the Pilgrims of old and make America once again like the Reverend Winthrop’s “City upon a hill.”

Suggested reading:

Stories of Elders: What the Greatest Generation Knows about Technology that You Don’t by Victoria Kirin, 2019.

Caesar: Life of a Colossus by Adrian Keith Goldsworthy, 2006.

The Mayflower: The Families, the Voyage, and the Founding of America by Rebecca Rose Fraser, 2017.

Errand into the Wilderness by Perry Miller, 1952.

©2023. William Hamilton. All rights reserved.

Vimeo Bans Transgender Truth Documentary ‘Dead Name’

“Dead Name” trailer.


An online streaming platform has removed the documentary “Dead Name,” claiming the movie documenting the harms caused by the gender-transition industry amounts to “hateful content.” The decision comes as one of the major television providers chose to drop conservative network Newsmax from its line-up after intense pressure from lobbyists, including Democratic members of Congress.

Filmmakers had exclusively offered viewers the opportunity to see “Dead Name” on Vimeo, a video platform that ranks a distant second to YouTube. The 50-minute documentary records the heartbreaking stories of three parents whose lives are shattered by the impact of extreme transgender ideology. As they find their relationships with their children severed — in one case, permanently — society hectors them at every turn to “celebrate” their children’s self-identity.

“Gone, baby, gone. Sorry, this page is no longer available,” says the page that once housed the movie. The platform confirmed to the media they consider the film hate speech.

“We can confirm that Vimeo removed the video in question for violating our Terms of Service prohibiting discriminatory or hateful content,” said Vimeo in a statement. “We strive to enforce these policies objectively and consistently across our platform.”

Vimeo did not describe what content specifically runs afoul of its policy. The documentary, produced by Broken Hearted Films, makes no political or religious statements and in no way demeans people struggling with gender dysphoria.

“There’s not an iota of hate in this movie. It’s three people telling their stories about how this ideology has disrupted their lives,” Christian Post reporter Brandon Showalter, who is interviewed in the documentary, told BEK-TV shortly after Vimeo pulled the movie. “This is giving the public a taste of the very real anguish that these parents experience and showing them that this is more widespread than people realize.”

Those who purchased the movie during the 34 days Vimeo hosted it reportedly received refunds, but they cannot access or view it anymore. “It makes you unnerved … that they can just erase your hard work,” said Showalter.

“I wasn’t 100% shocked, because I am familiar with the force that the trans activists use to silence anyone who checks or questions their dogma,” said director Taylor Reece. “But we circumvented this setback.” The filmmakers quickly set up their own website, DeadNameDocumentary.com, so people can access these parents’ stories.

Vimeo scrubbed the documentary the same day that DirecTV dropped conservative news channel Newsmax, just one year after it stopped broadcasting another conservative outlet, the One America News Network. DirecTV officials say they ended the feed at 11:59 p.m. Tuesday, because Newsmax wanted to receive payments (as most networks do) and did not want to pay a carriage fee — allegations Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy described as “simply false.” In February 2021, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) and then-Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) wrote a letter to DirecTV majority owner AT&T insisting, “Misinformation on TV has led to our current polluted information environment that radicalizes individuals to commit seditious acts.” Dozens of conservative congressmen now question whether DirecTV is deplatforming conservative voices to constrict political debate.

“Dead Name” participants and viewers say suppression will only spread the message. “More people are probably going to try to seek it out now, because people tried to quash it,” said Showalter. The movie documents how society’s embrace of extreme gender ideology “just crushes parent-child bonds, it ruptures the ties between families — and not just between the parents and the children but in the larger family unit,” he added. “Allow yourself to feel their pain, because I think we have to win this war with compassion, and compassion means suffering.”

“Independent filmmakers are filling a very crucial, truth-telling void left by our legacy press,” he added.

One Christian apologist who viewed the movie found its removal “poetic given the grief parents in the documentary share over losing their children to transgender ideology.”

“Dead Name” is now available at DeadNameDocumentary.com. Viewers may rent the movie for $9.99 or purchase it for $14.99.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Vimeo Nukes ‘Dead Name’ Documentary Highlighting The Horrors Of Transgender Ideology

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

It’s time to treat Big Tech like Big Tobacco

Imagine if a man in a white panel van pulled up in your neighbourhood and began enticing teens to look at pictures and videos featuring drug use, pornography and a range of other antisocial activities. In many neighbourhoods, he’d be in handcuffs within the hour.

And yet, strangely enough, Mark Zuckerberg, Shou Zi Chew and Sundar Pichai do almost the same thing online at Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, where they have virtually unimpeded access to the neighbourhood teens and manage to make billions of dollars poisoning their hearts and minds.

This is the strange moment we are living in, a moment where we still let Big Tech push products on our teens that, as the Facebook Files suggested, make them anxious, depressed and suicidal, among other pathologies.

We’re at a moment with Big Tech much like we were with Big Tobacco in the 1970s, when the studies were rolling in documenting the medical risks associated with smoking, but the government had not yet stepped in aggressively to limit smoking. In the past decade, anxiety, depression and teen suicide have surged, especially among girls, since the mass adoption of smartphones around 2010. Depression more than doubled, from 12 percent in 2010 to 26 percent today for teen girls. Emergency room visits for self-inflicted injuries almost doubled over the same period, again for teen girls. And teen suicide among girls has risen to a 40-year high.

A mounting body of evidence indicates that Big Tech is heavily implicated in the skyrocketing psychological problems of our nation’s adolescents. One recent study found that teens who devote more than eight hours a day to screen time were about twice as likely to be depressed as their peers who were on screens less often than that.

The study, sponsored by the Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute and co-authored by one of us, also discovered that teens who have high tech use were almost twice as likely to report being lonely and about 30 percent more likely to be sleep deprived.

Social media appears to be especially problematic for today’s teens. Excessive time on social media has been linked to “fear of missing out,” cyberbullying, emotional insecurity and body-image problems. The time devoted to social media also inhibits in-person socializing, exercise and sleep, all of which are crucial for adolescents’ emotional well-being. Research by psychologist Jean Twenge found, for instance, that the share of teens who went on dates has fallen by almost 30 percentage points in recent years and that the number of times teens hang out with friends fell by about 20 percent from 2007 to 2015. “As long as teens are scrolling through Instagram more, and hanging in person with their friends less, depression is likely to remain at historically high levels,” noted Twenge.

Of course, just as Big Tobacco had its defenders as debates about the tobacco-cancer link first erupted, Big Tech has its defenders today, as well. For example, Harvard social scientist Mesfin Bekalu argued that routine social media use “could be beneficial,” a sentiment echoed by Zuckerberg in his claim that Instagram is “generally positive” for kids’ mental health. While all social scientists know that “correlation does not equal causation,” there is growing evidence that the negative impact of technology on teens is indeed causal. In fact, new studies of the rollout of broadband internet in Germany and Italy show the penetration of the internet into ordinary communities across these countries fuelled emotional problems among the young, especially young women, providing the strongest evidence to date that it really is Big Tech, not something else, making us miserable.

Here in the United States, a new study finds that the expansion of the internet has driven suicide rates higher in counties across America, further evidence that Big Tech’s effects are causal.

Unfortunately, Big Tech has been able to prey on our teens in part because their apps operate under a law that was designed before the age of social media, giving parents very little control over their kids’ tech use. That law, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, was passed in 1998 in the age of dial-up internet service and online message boards. Since then, the internet has gone through significant changes. Today, at the click of a button or the swipe of a phone, our children can find themselves immersed in apps and games that expose them to antisocial images and messages without their parents’ knowledge, consent or protection.

But since Congress has failed to stand up to Big Tech by updating the legislation, it falls on states to take the lead in protecting our kids. Louisiana recently passed legislation requiring pornography sites to verify users’ ages. And Utah, under the leadership of Gov. Spencer Cox, is now poised to take the lead in protecting teens from the worst excesses of Big Tech.

Inspired in part by the report “Protecting Teens from Big Tech: Five Policy Ideas for States,” Utah state legislators like Sen. Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, and Rep. Jordan Teuscher, R-South Jordan, are working with Cox to advance legislation that would ensure that all social media platforms operating in the state do five things:

  • Age verify their users.
  • Get permission from parents for users younger than 18.
  • Give parents access to kids’ social media accounts.
  • Provide parents with the right to sue Big Tech for financial damages if they do not obey the law.
  • Prohibit Big Tech companies from using kids’ data or addictive algorithms on platforms serving children.

Cox also hopes to launch a public campaign that will educate kids and young adults about the dangers of devoting too much time to the virtual world, and not enough time to the real world.

Some will argue that such reforms are unnecessary or impractical. Regarding necessity, those who are parents today know how hard it can be to police their children’s social media accounts. The law should make it easier — not harder — for parents to protect their children.

As for feasibility, new online technologies make it easy to require age/ID verification for children’s use of apps through third-party services such as Persona. And parental monitoring of such apps can build on the success that companies like Greenlight (which provides debit cards that allow parents to oversee their children’s spending) have already had in implementing this type of technology.

Companies like Alphabet, Meta and TikTok have unparalleled power to shape the hearts, minds and lives of American adolescents. Of course, some of the connections forged by these platforms have been good, helping kids deepen friendships, stay in touch with grandparents or communicate socially redeeming messages.

But much of the time, the power that Big Tech wields over our children’s lives ends up being abused and abusive, and Cox aims to give parents more power to guide and protect their kids online. We hope the Utah state legislature will work with him to pass legislation to rein in Big Tech.

As Cox said at a recent symposium on social media and teen mental health, “I truly believe we are starting to reach this tipping point. I was shocked when I saw some of those charts and graphs. I knew it was worse, but I didn’t realize how much until I saw the data. And when I saw those, it was an awakening for me, and we’re hoping to have that same awakening with policymakers.”

In other words, it’s time for Utah — and the rest of the country — to treat Big Tech much like Big Tobacco.

This article has been republished with permission from Deseret News.

AUTHORS

W. Bradford Wilcox

W. Bradford Wilcox, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, is a senior fellow of the Institute for Family Studies and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. More by W. Bradford Wilcox

Riley Peterson

Riley Peterson is an undergraduate studying religion and sociology at Baylor University. More by Riley Peterson

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Orwellian Spy Tools Alert: The ‘Convenience’ Is a Trap

Big Data, Transhumanism and Why the Singularity May Be Faked.


STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Silicon Valley is essentially fused with the national security state. Silicon Valley is now also entering into joint ventures with medical companies, and many of these ventures are financed by groups like In-Q-Tel, which is the CIA’s venture capital arm
  • There’s a concerted effort to frame transhumanism — which is really the new eugenics — as health care. Joint ventures involving Big Tech, Big Pharma and the security state typically focus on products and services that normalize and further the transhumanist agenda
  • Food and agriculture are also being tossed into the mix. The U.S. government has launched a “Food is Medicine” program, which is yet another way for the government to seize control of the population. Food as medicine will be used to get you into their control system, and keep you there
  • In 2023 and 2024, watch for the rollout of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). It’s crucial that as many people as possible refuse the system during the initial voluntary phase. Once it becomes mandatory, it cannot be stopped and all freedoms will be lost
  • If the singularity cannot be achieved, technocrats may end up faking it, because if they can blame eugenics, depopulation and other unethical decisions on artificial intelligence running the government, they can do whatever they want, with no repercussions

I recently interviewed investigative journalist Whitney Webb about her two-volume book series, “One Nation Under Blackmail.” She’s been on tour, promoting the books in dozens of interviews.

Here, we discuss some of her experiences since the release of her books, and delve deeper into the disturbing merger of the intelligence state, Silicon Valley and medicine, and how transhumanism — eugenics rebranded — is being rolled out under the guise of health care.

We also talk about censorship and other tactics used to mold public perception, and how artificial intelligence may be overhyped to give technocrats and eugenicists carte blanche to do whatever they want without having any accountability.

The Encroaching Surveillance State

Her book tour brought her back to the U.S. for the first time in eight years. When asked about her first impressions after being gone for such a long time, she expresses surprise at how willing Americans have become to embrace spy tools like Ring cameras on their front doors.

“This is actually troubling,” she says, “because a lot of those tech companies, Google included, are contractors for the military and for intelligence. I think it would be naive to assume they don’t have backdoor access to those devices, knowing when you’re home and when you’re not and all of that.

I think it’s interesting, the willingness of so many people, so many households, to invite that type of technology into their homes. I didn’t see inside people’s homes much, but a lot of people, as I understand it, have things like Amazon’s Alexa. Numerous stories have come out that they’re recording you without your consent, even though they say they’re not.

But people still continue to use the product, and I really wish people would wise up about inviting that type of technology into your house. So much of what we’re being sold today is being marketed as convenience, but really a lot of it is really just the building blocks for the infrastructure of a very dangerous and Orwellian system of control.”

How the Transhumanist System Is Being Pushed Forward

As a former contributor to Mint Print Press News, which provides a lot of great coverage on the encroaching surveillance state, Webb knows a thing or two about Orwellian systems of control. Much of her work there focused on the intersection of intelligence agencies and Silicon Valley.

“Even after I left and started to do my own thing, I maintained a lot of that focus,” she says. “I guess a theme of my work would be the structure of power and how it really works. If you’re looking at Silicon Valley today, it’s very clear that it’s essentially fused with the national security state …

One thing we’ve seen happen, specifically during the COVID era, is that Big Pharma is now getting in this mix. There’s a lot of merging happening between Big Pharma and Silicon Valley. You’re seeing this with a lot of joint ventures into the health care space of Silicon Valley companies. A lot of it’s through wearables and these efforts to normalize technology like CRISPR or nanotechnology injectables.

You’re seeing them all come together, and a lot of these joint ventures or companies in this particular space that’s spanning big pharma in Silicon Valley tend to have a lot of funding from groups like In-Q-Tel, which is the CIA’s venture capital arm.

I think we’re seeing, in the effort to push through this technocratic transhumanist system, a lot more overlap between the power structure of the national security state in Silicon Valley with Big Pharma. And that’s very, very bad. I don’t know how else to put that.

It’s awful. I think more people should be paying a lot more attention to that specifically … [There’s] an effort to frame transhumanism — which is really the new eugenics — as health care, and that’s what a lot of this is about.”

The Coming Food Coup

Food and agriculture are also being tossed into the mix. In early December 2022, I wrote about how John Rockefeller eliminated food from medicine 112 years ago and how, now, The Rockefeller Foundation is working with the White House to bring nutrition back in. While it sounds like a great idea, the real purpose is the same now as it was a century ago. It’s all about controlling the population. As noted by Webb:

“If these people take over the food supply, they’ll be framing it as a return to ‘food is medicine,’ but it’s not. Well, it’s not exactly food as medicine as people would think of it when someone like you talks about that concept …

This idea, for example, of putting vaccines in your food, like in tomatoes. Eating one of these GMO tomatoes is the equivalent of taking a vaccine and stuff like that … It’s taking this age-old adage and twisting it to fit their purposes. Food as medicine is only convenient to them when it’s not something that actually heals you, but [rather] something that keeps you in this new system they’re creating.”

Predictions for 2023

As we record this in late November 2022, we seem to be in a bit of a lull, in terms of tyrannical overreaches. It’s a bit like being in the eye of a hurricane. You know the storm will be upon you yet, again, it’s only a matter of time. The question is, what comes next?

“I think there’s a couple things to watch really closely in the next year,” Webb says. “One is how this World Health Organization Pandemic Treaty, which tries to [supersede] the Constitution, not just of the U.S. but pretty much every country that signs it.

That’s definitely something to pay close attention to, because if that does get passed, I think it’s likely we’ll see an effort to repeat a lot of what we saw during COVID 19 from these particular groups. And if it’s not signed, I think they’re going to wait …

They’re waiting to get that type of new authority so they don’t have to deal with so much dissent, whether it’s from nation states or from particular domestic populations that have had enough and are unlikely to believe all of this a second time.

I think they’re really counting on having that WHO super-national authority in order to go forward with the biosecurity agenda, in terms of a repeat of what we saw in recent years.

The other thing I think is really important is the central bank digital currency (CBDC) agenda. Almost every country in the world at this point — there are exceptions, but I think it’s a majority — have some sort of CBDC pilot program going on right now. In the U.S., they’ve even announced they’re doing pilots of [CBDCs] with commercial banks like JP Morgan and some of the big financial giants of Wall Street.

I would say that either 2023 or 2024 is likely to be the year of the CBDC. In countries where they’ve already launched a CBDC, or have a very advanced pilot program, it’s framed first as voluntary, and then of course, once enough people start using it, it becomes the only form of legal tender in use. At least that’s the end game for CBDCs in any particular country.”

Programmable CBDCs Mean Someone Else Controls Your Money

As explained by Webb, CBDCs are programmable money. The Central Bank will decide when, where and on what you’re allowed to spend your money. You also cannot save when and however much you want, because some of the CBDCs have expiration dates. Use it or lose it. You don’t get to decide when you spend your money, the state does.

CBDCs can also be programmed to only work for certain types of items, including certain types of food. If your health records indicate you have a health problem, your CBDCs can be programmed such that you cannot buy foods deemed unhealthy for you. Purchases can also be blocked based on your carbon footprint score, and they can be blocked based on geofencing parameters.

“If they declare a lockdown, for example, and you’re not allowed to go five miles beyond your home, your money won’t work five miles beyond your home. That’s basically why CBDCs are attractive to the powers that be. But they’re going to frame it as voluntary first, before it moves into involuntary.

We’re going to see it pop up in a lot more countries over the next two years. And obviously, that is the phase to mass reject CBDCs in any way you can … I’ll go back to COVID for a second to explain where I’m trying to go here.

I understand and have empathy for people that didn’t want to lose their jobs and were worried about being thrown into a position of poverty, so they took the vaccine because of the mandates. But the more steps you take down that path of, ‘It’s convenient,’ the harder it will be to go on the alternative path later on.

For people that were in that situation with COVID 19, that should have been a huge wake up call to start doing something different and think about how to get off that path …

… if you went down that path, and then go down the CBDC path just because it’s more convenient for now, there’s going to come a point where, if you make enough compromises, it’s going to be almost impossible, if not entirely impossible, to redirect and go towards a different outcome.

These are things that are very important for people to pay attention to right now, in terms of developments, and plan how to keep your family independent of these types of systems and resilient in the face of all the shocks to the system that we already see coming.”

The Poor Will Be Squeezed First

As noted by Webb, those who will feel the squeeze of tyranny first are the poor and lower-middle class. We’re already seeing how they’re planning to encourage mass adoption of CBDCs through various assistance programs such as food stamps.

As food and energy prices continue to soar, more and more people will qualify for government assistance and be forced into those systems. Webb also suspects that any future stimulus checks, if there are additional long-term lockdowns, may be paid out only in CBDCs.

“It’s a very insidious plan,” Webb says. “They’re trying to reduce the standard of living of people, and then in order for them to maintain their standard of living, they’re forcing them to adopt a control system disguised as a monetary system …

They’re going to frame it as voluntary before it becomes involuntary. That stage where it’s voluntary is when it’s critical for people to act [and reject it] … I don’t think we can prevent them from implementing it, but you can prevent yourself, your family and your community from adopting that system, and use a parallel economic system [instead].”

While some have speculated that decentralized digital currencies such as Bitcoin might work as a parallel economic system, the problem with that idea is that government could easily make it illegal. They’ve already promised to implement new regulations of that space.

The safest alternatives are those that government cannot regulate or make illegal (at least not easily). This includes trading and bartering of goods and services, without any type of currency, with the exception perhaps of physical gold and silver.

“So, so we have to think about these sorts of things when countering the CBDC agenda,” Webb says. “That voluntary stage is the time to make those plans so you don’t get swept up when it moves from voluntary to involuntary, which they are definitely going to do, or attempt to do.

But it will only be successful if there’s mass adoption. The more people who opt out and do some sort of parallel system for their economic activity at the neighborhood or community level, the less successful that agenda will be.”

People Are Waking Up to the Social Media Manipulation

While it seems we’re headed into a dystopian future that cannot be avoided, and with no clear means of escape, Webb feels there is still reason to be optimistic. Importantly, more people than ever before are now getting wise to the globalists’ agenda, and are hungry for explanations about what’s really going on.

People who want the truth are more likely to search for it, and are ready to take it in. They’re less likely to stick their head in the sand and write everything off as a baseless conspiracy theory.

“I think a lot of people on a visceral level know something is really wrong. And I think that’s why there are so many efforts to censor that type of information. I also think there is a major investment by the state in efforts to make us think we are a minority when we are not.

More than anything else, what social media is used for by the powers that be is to make us think certain ideas are more popular than they really are. [Take] the bot situation on Twitter … a lot of those bots serve to promote ideas that many people don’t necessarily have, or make certain figures or ideas look more popular than they are …

When you combine that with the censorship, removing ideas that otherwise would be popular with real authentic accounts … you’re manipulating people’s perception of how the rest of the country feels … A lot of what’s going on right now on social media is to completely change how we perceive a particular situation or agenda, in the hopes that change in perception will cause a change in behavior.

If you’re censoring an idea, you’re trying to take it out of the public mind and have it just not be part of the discourse anymore. That obviously causes a change in perception, because you’re only having one idea, or a very small spectrum of opinion about a particular idea, out there.

That’s all people are going to engage with if you censor all the other takes. The idea is to completely wipe out dissent so that everyone has a rather homogenous perception of events, people, ideas and agendas, and then from there, behavior will be molded to the benefit of these particular powers.”

Is Elon Musk Pulling the Wool Over Our Eyes?

When it comes to Twitter, with Elon Musk now at the helm many are hoping it will become a bastion of free-speech. Webb, however, is skeptical. She suspects Musk is promoting free speech and reinstating banned accounts because he wants to turn Twitter into a U.S. version of WeChat, an “everything app” that’s connected to digital ID, CBDCs and the social credit system. The more users he has, the more people will be lured into the digital prison system.

“We’re in this paradigm shift, where we’re going from an oil-based economy to a data-based economy. Data is the new oil, and whoever owns the ‘everything app’ in this new system is going to be the king of the castle of the new economy. They’re going to be the Rockefellers of the data age,” she says.

“There’s nothing good about that. I think what we’re seeing right now is an effort to coax people back Twitter, and there might be some benefits to that. But ultimately, what Elon Musk is interested in is the data and getting more people on Twitter than before, with the goal of turning it into WeChat, which is a segue to this ‘everything app.’

And it’s worth pointing out that the company behind WeChat, Tencent, is one of the most active advisors to Tesla and a major shareholder in Tesla. There is a relationship there.”

Artificial Intelligence and the Rise of ‘Smart Dictatorship’

Webb and I also discuss the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI), and the role of social media in feeding AI with data for programs relating to pandemic outbreak detection and pre-crime. But while AI and its successor, artificial general intelligence (AGI), has impressive capabilities, Webb believes there’s a lot of false hype, and that this hype will be used to shield human powerbrokers from accountability.

“A lot has been said about the role of AI in our lives once it reaches a particular point referred to as the singularity, which is where AI intelligence allegedly outpaces human intelligence so extensively and so rapidly that it’ll basically take over. If you ask me, based on everything I’ve seen, I don’t think the singularity is actually possible. Or if it is possible, I think it’s very far away.

But if you are the people behind … this agenda — people like Eric Schmidt and Henry Kissinger who just put out their ‘New Age of AI’ book, which has a lot about AI and its role in government, basically having AI become the government — all you really need to do is convince people … that the singularity is here and … that it’s so far superior to human intelligence that we should outsource all our decision-making to it.

Then, there’s a Wizard of Oz type guy … behind the curtain who makes the decisions. If you look at what Schmidt and Kissinger and these guys say about AI and government, they say it’s going to be so far above our intelligence that there’s no way for the AI to explain its decision-making. It’ll just be ‘The computer says this.’

And if you’re basically organized crime, running the government, which I would argue is the situation today, and you don’t want to have to explain the reasons for your policy because it’s a horrible reason that no one would agree with, what a great curtain, what a great facade to have for your smart dictatorship.

They just have to say that it was the AI’s decision. They have plausible deniability about everything, don’t they? And a lot of the stuff they say in that context is very unsettling. Stuff like, AI may decide to sacrifice hundreds of thousands, if not millions of their own population to win.

If the goal given is winning, then AI is willing to make all sorts of sacrifices that humans wouldn’t make. But if you look at people like Kissinger and Eric Schmidt, they’d be very happy to kill a bunch of people and then blame it on AI for the decision.

They don’t care about killing millions of people. They care about expanding their money and power infinitely. How do you have plausible deniability about that and get away with mass murder, eugenics programs and population control? You say ‘There’s this new super intelligence thing that’s going to take over government because it’s so superior. It’s going to churn out policies and we’re just going to follow them.’

It’s the new god basically. It’s superior to us and it can’t explain how it got to this conclusion because it thinks so differently from us. So, we just have to follow what it says, but we’re not responsible for what it says at the same time …

People like Ray Kurzweil said the singularity was going to happen a long time ago and it didn’t happen. And if you look at programs like Welcome Leap … where they’re trying to map baby brains and child brains by forcing kids to use very invasive, biometric technology … because they think that will create the singularity — that, to me, says they are grasping at straws.

They have no way of producing something equivalent to the human brain. They can mimic stuff very successfully with AI and they have done so, but in terms of creating consciousness? These are the most unconscious people on the entire planet trying to recreate consciousness in their image. Good luck … I think they’re going to try and fake it.

And, here’s the other thing. This whole inevitability of AI narrative is a major marketing narrative necessary to get transhumanist technologies widely adopted … The super intelligent singularity stuff is most likely a PSYOP to get you into the transhumanist box that you’re not going to get out of. Once you get a brain chip, there’s no going back.”

What You Can Do to Prepare

Clearly, we all face enormous challenges in the years ahead, regardless of where we live, as this is a global takeover. So, what can you do to prepare? Here are some of Webb’s recommendations:

  • Build community and local parallel economies.
  • Build your knowledgebase on how to grow and raise food, even if you’re not in a position to grow food right now. There are many free videos online that you can peruse. Ideally, download them so you can watch them offline, even if the internet goes down. Books on homesteading and basic survival skills are also a valuable investment. “Back to Basics: A Complete Guide to Traditional Skills” is one option. As a general rule going forward, you’ll want hard copies or copies on external hard drives of any information that you want to have access to in the future, as the internet is becoming increasingly scrubbed of important information. If using an external hard drive, make sure you store it in a faraday bag to protect the information from electromagnetic weapons.
  • Stock up on backup supplies such as food and energy generators. Also have a plan for how to secure potable water. Since the economy is collapsing and inflation skyrocketing, your money is not doing you much good in the bank. You’re losing purchasing power with each passing month, and a bank bail-in could wipe you out completely. So, if you need survival items, buying them now might be one of the better investment strategies out there.
  • Do everything you can to avoid entering the CBDC system when it rolls out.
  • Go back to using more cash if you don’t do that already. Also, consider cutting back on your online usage, social media in particular. “If things get really bad and the war on domestic terror gets underway and there’s all this profiling going on, I would stay as far away from the online world as you can,” Webb says.

More Information

In closing, Webb is now investigating the FTX scandal. Could we end up seeing a Volume 3 in her “One Nation Under Blackmail” series? Perhaps, but she’s not making any promises. She’s also working on an investigative series with Ian Davis about the United Nations sustainable development goals, showing point by point “the agenda under the hood.”

To stay abreast of Webb’s work, sign up for her newsletter at Unlimited Hangout. There you will also get the best price for her two-volume series “One Nation Under Blackmail.” I couldn’t recommend her site more strongly. She’s a world-class investigator, and is willing to take deep dives into crucial topics few others dare to touch.

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TWITTER FILES VIII: DoD’s Covert Online Psyops Campaign & FBI’s ‘Belly Button’

1.THREAD: The Twitter Files Twitter and the FBI “Belly Button”

2. Here is a great thread on Pfizer. Not sure if its part of the Twitter Files dump or just someone putting together public source, but either way, its good things to be reminded of. Like Pfizer’s stunning criminal history and the hundreds of people they killed by covering up bad medical products.

3. Twitter Files part VIII

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog commentary posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TWITTER FILES: FBI, CIA, DoD, Et al. Actively Worked With EVERY Social Media Platform to Control and Censor Speech

A Christmas eve Twitter drop.

In this latest drop we see the FBI, CIA, DoD, State Department, Pentagon, et.al. dictating censorship to Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Verizon, Reddit, even Pinterest, and many others.

This is so vast, so deep, it’s …… the whole of the state.

The files show the FBI acting as doorman to a vast program of social media surveillance and censorship, encompassing agencies across the federal government – from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA.

.The government was in constant contact not just with Twitter but with virtually every major tech firm.

We live in a surveillance state.

Here is the whole thread:

 

AUTHOR

 

RELATED ARTICLES:

FBI Assigned Personnel To ‘Look’ For ‘Violations’ Of Twitter’s Own Policies, Docs Reveal

FBI Admits It Pressured ‘Numerous Companies,’ Not Just Twitter

Previous Twitter files (scroll here).

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Regime to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects ‘Microaggressions’ on Social Media

Full on police state.

Biden Admin to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects Microaggressions on Social Media

President Biden On His Administration’s New Actions On The Economy

By: Philip Caldwell • Washington Free Beacon •  December 21, 2022:

The Biden administration is set to dole out more than $550,000 in grants to develop an artificial intelligence model that can automatically detect and suppress microaggressions on social media, government spending records show.

The award, funded through President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, was granted to researchers at the University of Washington in March to develop technologies that could be used to protect online users from discriminatory language. The researchers have already received $132,000 and expect total government funding to reach $550,436 over the next five years.

The researchers are developing machine-learning models that can analyze social media posts to detect implicit bias and microaggressions, commonly defined as slights that cause offense to members of marginalized groups. It’s a broad category, but past research conducted by the lead researcher on the University of Washington project suggests something as tame as praising meritocracy could be considered a microaggression.

The Biden administration’s funding of the research comes as the White House faces growing accusations that it seeks to suppress free speech online. Biden last month suggested there should be an investigation into Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter after the billionaire declared the social media app would pursue a “free speech” agenda. Internal Twitter communications Musk released this month also revealed a prolonged relationship between the FBI and Twitter employees, with the agency playing a regular role in the platform’s content moderation.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton likened the Biden administration’s funding of the artificial intelligence research to the Chinese Communist Party’s efforts to “censor speech unapproved by the state.” For the Biden administration, Fitton said, the research is a “project to make it easier for their leftist allies to censor speech.”

A spokesman for the National Science Foundation, which issued the research grant, rebuffed criticism of the project, which he said “does not attempt to hamper free speech.” The project, the spokesman said, creates “automated ways of identifying biases in speech” and addresses the biases of human content moderators.

The research’s description doesn’t give examples of what comments would qualify as microaggressions—though it acknowledges they can be unconscious and unintentional. The project is led by computer science professor Yulia Tsvetkov, who has authored studies that suggest the artificial intelligence model might identify and suppress language many would consider inoffensive, such as comments praising the concept of meritocracy.

Tsvetkov coauthored a 2019 study titled “Finding Microaggressions in the Wild,” which categorized microaggressions into subcategories, one of which was the “myth” that “differences in treatment are due to one’s merit.” Examples of microaggressions laid out in the paper included statements like “Your mom is white, so it’s not like you’re really black,” and questions including “But where are you from, originally?”

Tsvetkov also coauthored a July article that analyzed the “prominence of positivity in #BlackLivesMatter tweets” during the June 2020 George Floyd riots. Tsvetkov and her colleagues determined positive emotions like “hope, pride, and optimism” were prevalent in pro-Black Lives Matter tweets, evidence they said contradicts narratives framing Black Lives Matter protesters as angry.

Conservative watchdog groups raised alarm over the Biden administration’s funding of the research, telling the Washington Free Beacon the project represents a White House effort to curb free speech online.

“It’s not the role of government to police speech that some might find either offensive or emotionally draining,” said Dan Schneider, vice president of the Media Research Center’s free speech division. “Government is supposed to be protecting our rights, not suppressing our rights.”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Godfather of AI’ Quits Google, Shares Warning About AI’s Potential For Destruction

Intel Agencies Capability to Impose “Total Tyranny” In America on NBC’s Meet the Press 1975

Twitter Emails Prove Existence of Intelligence Community Efforts to Elect Biden | Truth Over News

The Final War–The 100-Year Plot to Defeat America

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Attempting To Discredit The Agency’: FBI Responds To ‘Twitter Files’

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issued a new statement Wednesday following the latest “Twitter Files” dump.

The FBI accused the “Twitter Files” release as an attempt “to discredit” the agency by disclosing information on the FBI’s correspondence with Twitter in October 2020. Journalist Matt Taibbi revealed that the agency warned the previous executives at Twitter of a “hack-and-leak” by “state actors” surrounding the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop to influence the 2020 presidential election.

“The correspondence between the FBI and Twitter show nothing more than examples of our traditional, longstanding and ongoing federal government and private sector engagements, which involve numerous companies over multiple sectors and industries. As evidenced in the correspondence, the FBI provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers. The men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public,” the statement began.

“It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency,” the agency concluded.

The “Twitter Files” revealed that the FBI and Twitter worked closely in the lead up to the 2020 presidential election. Internal documents published Monday found that the FBI paid Twitter nearly $3.5 million between October 2019 and February 2021 for managing its financial burdens caused while complying with the agency’s requests.

Taibbi reported he found no evidence that the FBI had involvement in Twitter’s suppression of the New York Post’s report on Hunter Biden’s laptop, though new reports released by author Michael Shellenberger indicated they may have, in fact, been involved.

Former FBI Deputy General Counsel James Baker argued Twitter’s then-head of trust and safety Yoel Roth’s claim that the Post’s report did not violate the social media site’s policies on October 14, according to Shellenberger. The agency had already been in possession of Biden’s laptop since December 2019, indicating that the agency knew the Post reported the story accurately.

Musk announced Dec. 6 that he fired Baker for allegedly withholding the release of documents related to the suppression of Biden’s laptop.

The agency also flagged certain tweets for Twitter to remove from the platform, the files found. Some agents were even employed at the social media company.

Republican Kentucky Rep. James Comer, the incoming House Oversight Chair, said Tuesday that Congress should block funding of the FBI until it disclosed the alleged involvement in Big Tech censorship.

“In the beginning, I thought that there were probably two or three rogue employees who were orchestrating this cover up of the Hunter Biden laptop story, but now we know the FBI had a division of at least 80 agents,” Comer said. “We also know that the FBI paid Twitter over $3 million for their time, all the time they took over the past couple of years in telling them who to suppress, who to ban. You know, it’s just things that the government has no role in.”

“The FBI was never granted the authority to create any type of disinformation task force that policed the social media sites. Now this we know with Twitter,” he continued. “We’ve heard similar stories from Zuckerberg. Who knows what went on at YouTube and Google. This is an agency that’s out of control.”

AUTHOR

NICOLE SILVERIO

Media reporter. Follow Nicole Silverio on Twitter @NicoleMSilverio

RELATED ARTICLE: Twitter Gave ‘Special Protection’ To Pentagon Propaganda Accounts, Docs Show

RELATED VIDEO: Miranda Devine: The FBI Was Paying Twitter $3.4 Million ‘to Help Censor Americans’

RELATED TWEETS:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.