Tag Archives: censorship

The Age of Intolerance: Cancel Culture’s War on Free Speech, by John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead

Can whatever is left of free speech survive the intolerant stupidity of cancel culture? From John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead at rutherford.org:

“Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners.”—George Carlin

Cancel culture—political correctness amped up on steroids, the self-righteousness of a narcissistic age, and a mass-marketed pseudo-morality that is little more than fascism disguised as tolerance—has shifted us into an Age of Intolerance, policed by techno-censors, social media bullies, and government watchdogs.

Everything is now fair game for censorship if it can be construed as hateful, hurtful, bigoted or offensive provided that it runs counter to the established viewpoint.

In this way, the most controversial issues of our day—race, religion, sex, sexuality, politics, science, health, government corruption, police brutality, etc.—have become battlegrounds for those who claim to believe in freedom of speech but only when it favors the views and positions they support.

Free speech for me but not for thee” is how my good friend and free speech purist Nat Hentoff used to sum up this double standard.

This tendency to censor, silence, delete, label as “hateful,” and demonize viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite is being embraced with a near-fanatical zealotry by a cult-like establishment that values conformity and group-think over individuality.

For instance, are you skeptical about the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines? Do you have concerns about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election? Do you subscribe to religious beliefs that shape your views on sexuality, marriage and gender? Do you, deliberately or inadvertently, engage in misgendering (identifying a person’s gender incorrectly) or deadnaming (using the wrong pronouns or birth name for a transgender person)?

Continue reading→

Scientific Journal Censorship With Dr. Malone, by Joseph Mercola

Science and censorship are mutually exclusive, they can’t coexist. From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

Sonia Elijah with TrialSite News was the first U.K. journalist to interview Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology.1 That interview was taken down by YouTube within a matter of hours because Malone detailed scientific truths that go against the narrative being pushed globally.2

Her second interview with Malone is above. You can now hear some of the points that have been censored, starting with scientific censorship at medical journals. Malone has had multiple peer-reviewed papers seeking to repurpose existing medications as COVID-19 treatments blocked from publication by journals.

In one example, Malone and colleagues found that combined treatment with celecoxib, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and high-dose famotidine, a heartburn drug sold under the brand name Pepcid, led to improved outcomes among COVID-19 patients, including 100% survival.3 It’s been repeatedly rejected for publication.

Malone was also a former guest editor of a special issue of Frontiers in Pharmacology, which published an abstract of a peer-reviewed study by Pierre Kory on ivermectin for COVID-19 — until it was pulled due to a third-party complaint, with no chance for resubmission.

“That was completely inexplicable,” Malone said. “Some third party complained to Frontiers and successfully had that pulled, even though it had passed peer review with an expert panel of peer reviewers including senior reviewers from the FDA.”4

A Coordinated Attack on Dissenters

Working in tandem with scientific censorship is a modern-day witch hunt targeting physicians. Malone describes it as a three-step process in which, first, third parties complain about physicians who are treating COVID-19 patients early on in the disease. “It’s almost never patients” who complain, Malone says, but once the third-party complaint is made, medical boards are obligated to open an investigation.

“Basically, physicians are accused of … the sin of administering licensed drugs off-label, which is about 30% of all prescriptions are off label. Then, then these complaints are filed with the medical boards,” he said. Once the investigation process is initiated, the press is alerted, which subsequently writes multiple articles about the physician being investigated, destroying their reputation.

“This destroys the credibility of the physician,” Malone said. “They’re typically fired from their hospital for creating a controversy. Often they are kicked out of their medical practice group and basically are forced to become free agents.”5 It’s a systematic attack that deprives those accused of their ability to earn a living, while frightening others who might speak out into remaining silent.

Meanwhile, scientific journals have financial motivation to print only research that’s favorable to the pharmaceutical industry. “They don’t have to advertise or buy stock in one of these companies,” Malone said. “What they do is buy very large numbers of reprints of papers that are favorable to their position.”

Continue reading→

Is YouTube Now Presuming to be in Charge of Science? By Jeffrey A. Tucker

Google and its YouTube subsidiary essentially dictate what millions of people perceive to be the truth. From Jeffrey A. Tucker at brownstown.org:

Courts around the country are striking down vaccine mandates and even Covid restrictions in general. Protests against both have erupted the world over. There is a trend in which major names and faces that imposed lockdowns on the country are resigning from their positions and otherwise dropping out of politics. The Biden administration in general has sunk in the polls. The resistance to the entire regime of command and control that seized the world in March 2020 is growing by the day. .

But none of this seems to matter to the dominant Internal portals of Google and YouTube, which Google owns. They occupy the number one and number two spots for global traffic and reach. That’s some serious power over what the majority of people read, see, hear, and believe. It’s true that critically thinking people have already shifted to DuckDuckGo, Rumble, and many other platforms, and their market share is growing, to be sure. But nothing can compare to the 75% market share of YouTube, or the 86% share of search controlled by Google.

Often individual users can develop a distorted sense of that whole based on their own browsing habits. You like Brownstone.org, for example, and you get great information from this site. It is easy to forget that its 4 million users seem nearly invisible compared with the traffic enjoyed by the larger sites. Being on the admin side, it is much easier to observe how a myth spread, for example, by CNN can reach tens of millions of people whereas its refutation on a small site might only reach a few thousand. The myth stands.

Continue reading→

The real story behind Facebook’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week, by Kit Knightly

If the government regulates Facebook and the rest of the Internet do you think that will expand or contract allowable expression on the Internet? From Kit Knightly at off-guardian.org:

The social media giant is in the crosshairs, and that might be bad news for the internet in general.

Facebook suffered a massive outage on Monday. At the same time a high profile “whistleblower” has come forward to dish the FB dirt. These two things have combined to create a perfect storm of narrative portraying Mark Zuckerberg’s company as a monster in desperate need of slaying by some deft government intervention.

But to what extent is that story contrived? Is Facebook willingly going along with it? And what does it mean for the rest of the internet?

What happened?

For several hours on Monday afternoon Facebook – and its subsidiaries Instagram and Whatsapp – were completely offline. Rumours circulated that large portions of the social media giant had been totally deleted. Others suggested it was a cyber attack.

Facebook itself insists there was no attack, and that it was purely an engineering error, but of course no tech company would ever admit to being vulnerable to a hack.

There’s always the possibility the whole event was staged of course. Either way, the timing is very suspicious.

Why do you say that?

For weeks an anonymous “whistleblower” has been “leaking” documents to the Wall Street Journal allegedly showing Facebook is utilising highly unethical business practices.

The leaker of the so-called “Facebook Files” finally revealed her true identity as Frances Haugen, a data scientist, in an interview with 60 Minutes this past Sunday.

The massive Facebook outage then happened on Monday, with Ms Haugen’s scheduled testimony in front of Congress happening the following morning on Tuesday.

Continue reading→

On censorship and heresy, by Simon Black

Today’s heresy often becomes tomorrow’s accepted truth. From Simon Black at sovereignman.com:

More than 400 years ago in the year 1615, the Catholic Church hired eleven ‘expert consultants’ and asked them to review the scientific work of Nicolaus Copernicus.

Copernicus, of course, was one of the first scientists to propose that the sun (not the earth) was at the center of the universe.

But even though Copernicus had been dead for more than 70 years at that point, his ideas still lived on… and were being advanced by none other than Galileo.

Galileo had published his own research with compelling evidence that Copernicus was right.

This view of the universe conflicted with Church teachings that the Earth was at the center of the universe.

So the Vatican decided to settle the matter with its panel of expert ‘fact checkers’.

On February 4, 1616, the fact checking committee issued its final report to Rome: the Earth is clearly the center of the universe. And any other view constituted heresy.

They concluded that the Copernicus/Galileo heliocentric view is “foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture…”

The fact checkers’ assessment ultimately helped convict Galileo of heresy later in life; his works were banned, was threatened with torture, forced to recant his scientific conclusions, and spent the last eight years of his life under house arrest.

It was a very sad ending to the life of a man who contributed so much to the world.

Vatican bureaucrats would go on to ban works by many other scientists and philosophers , including René Descartes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, and John Locke.

The Vatican may very well have felt that their censorship and fact-checking were righteous.

But we obviously know in retrospect that many of the people they censored were legitimate scientists whose only crime was having a different point of view.

It’s not so different from the legions of fact-checkers lurking the Internet today.

Continue reading→

Why I Am Deleting All Content After 48 Hours, by Joseph Mercola

You pay a price for challenging the mainstream consensus, especially when you build a follow like the one Joseph Mercola has. From Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

Today, I have the most important announcement in the quarter of a century history of this newsletter. My goal and passion has always been about supporting you and helping you take control of your health. I am beyond thrilled that there are tens of millions of people who have benefited from what I have shared over the years.

I am filled with joy and gratitude every time I travel and lecture as invariably many people tell me how I’ve changed their lives by providing vital information they couldn’t find anywhere else and even better that was completely free.

These were the times when many of the views I presented were criticized, but that’s to be expected. That was one of the great freedoms we enjoyed. We could have different views and we could speak openly about these views without fear of retribution.

But we are now in a different time. A much darker time. The silence of free speech is now deafening.

Not only is blatant censorship tolerated, it is being encouraged by the very people who were to be entrusted with protecting our freedom of speech.

We are not living from the lessons we’ve learned before. Never in my life, would I believe the sitting President of the United States call out 12 Americans in a McCarthyism like attack in the United States. As you are aware, I was placed at the top of this list.

Continue reading→

Biden Administration Completely Kills The “It’s A Private Company So It’s Not Censorship” Argument, by Caitlin Johnstone

When the government is telling a media company what it must delete from its platform the company can no longer be considered “private” in any meaningful sense of the word. From Caitlin Johnstone at caitlinjohnstone.com:

In what’s surely the biggest “Imagine the outrage if Trump had done that” moment to date, the Biden administration has admitted that it is giving Facebook a list of accounts to censor for spreading “disinformation” about the Covid-19 response.

“We’ve increased disinformation research and tracking,” Press Secretary Jen Psaki told the press on Thursday. “Within the Surgeon General’s Office, we’re flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation. We’re working with doctors and medical professionals to connect medical experts with people, who are popular with their audiences with accurate information and boost trusted content. So, we’re helping get trusted content out there.”

Psaki told the White House press corps that the administration has a list of accounts who produce most of the anti-vaccine information on Facebook, which civil libertarians are decrying as an obviously authoritarian government overreach.

“The Biden administration is telling Facebook which posts it regards as ‘problematic’ so that Facebook can remove them,” Glenn Greenwald said on Twitter in response to the news. “This is the union of corporate and state power — one of the classic hallmarks of fascism — that the people who spent five years babbling about fascism support.”

Continue reading→

mRNA Vaccine Inventor Erased From History Books, by Joseph Mercola

What was the vaccine inventor’s irredeemable transgression? He spoke out about the potential dangers of his own invention! Draw and quarter him! From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

June 11, 2021, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology,1 Dr. Robert Malone, spoke out on the DarkHorse podcast about the potential dangers of COVID-19 gene therapy injections, hosted by Bret Weinstein, Ph.D. The podcast was quickly erased from YouTube and Weinstein was issued a warning.

To censor a scientific discussion with the actual inventor of the technology used to manufacture these COVID-19 shots is beyond shocking. But the censorship of Malone goes even further than that. As reported in the video above, Malone’s scientific accomplishments are also being scrubbed.

Wikipedia Scrubs Malone’s Scientific Contributions

As recently as June 14, 2021, Malone’s contributions were extensively included in the historical section on RNA vaccines’ Wikipedia page. He was listed as having co-developed a “high-efficiency in-vitro and in-vivo RNA transfection system using cationic liposomes” in 1989.

In 1990, he demonstrated that “in-vitro transcribed mRNA could deliver genetic information into the cell to produce proteins within living cell tissue.” Malone was also part of the team that conducted the first mRNA vaccine experiments. In short, his scientific knowledge of mRNA vaccines is unquestionable.

Continue reading→

Censorship Kills, by Barry Brownstein

One of humanity’s evolutionary adaptations is the ability to process information and use it to our advantage. Anything that stifles the flow of information, including censorship, can have potentially deadly consequences. From Barry Brownstein at aier.org:

Whenever I write an essay critical of expert opinion on Covid, I immediately receive indignant replies. Some assume I must be a bleach-drinking supporter of President Trump. Others label me a dangerous libertarian since, in their view, I challenge the “best” source of expert opinion.

Among my critics are well-meaning people who see no alternative but to follow the policy prescriptions of their favored experts. They do not see they are on the path of illiberal, anti-science, authoritarian thinking that is endangering the well-being of so many people today.

Karl Popper helps us understand why an “authoritarian attitude to the problem of human knowledge” hinders scientific progress. His essay “On the So-Called Sources of Knowledge” appears in his collection In Search of a Better World.

Popper explains, “The question of the sources of our knowledge, like so many authoritarian questions, is a question about origin. It asks for the origin of our knowledge, in the belief that knowledge may be legitimate itself by its pedigree.”

Popper explains how the mistaken belief that knowledge has a pedigree leads us to seek the “‘best’ or the ‘wisest’” to be our political rulers. We make the mistake of assuming there are ultimate authorities best suited to rule because of the knowledge they possess. Popper explains that there are no such ultimate authorities, and “uncertainty clings to all assertions.”

Popper argues that instead of focusing on who should rule, our focus should be on “How can we organize our political institutions so that bad or incompetent rulers can do the minimum amount of damage?”

Continue reading→

Information-Management in the U.S. Dictatorship by Eric Zuesse

“Information-Management” is a nice term for brutal suppression and censorship on the one hand, and the manufacture of blatant propaganda on the other. From Eric Zuesse at strategic-culture.org:

Instead of fearing to be held to account like the Nazis were at Nuremberg, America’s tyrants face no such international prosecutions whatsoever.

The dictatorship manages information both by deceiving the public to believe what the regime itself knows to be actually false (such as that Saddam Hussein might be only six months away from having an atomic bomb), and also by removing the lie from its ‘news’-media as soon as that lie has served its purpose and becomes no longer useful to the regime. The lie goes down the memory-hole, instead of being focused upon and analyzed by the regime’s media, and the reason why they disappear the lie is that after a certain amount of time, the percentage of the public who know that it was false has risen high enough so that any further mention of that false allegation (remember ‘Saddam’s WMD’? Does anybody today even discuss that lie?) would serve only to increase the percentage of the public who will figure out that it hadn’t been a mistake, but instead had been an intentional deception of the public — a lie. The media hide their lies, instead of report on them. The lie is not investigated; it’s always a corpse that was buried without any autopsy, and that will always stay buried, by the regime.

Continue reading→