Re: Off-topic demand in Meta to ban users for their opinions chills free speech.
I also think that there should be no censorship on this forum.
Personally, I argued a lot with pro-Russian trolls in the Politics section [...]
Personally, I argued a lot with pro-Russian trolls in the Politics section [...]
Censorship is the story behind the story here. I am glad that the Bitcoin Forum, and especially theymos, have a strong tradition of supporting the freedom of speech.
Former Intelligence Officials, Citing Russia, Say Big Tech Monopoly Power is Vital to National Security
When the U.S. security state announces that Big Tech's centralized censorship power must be preserved, we should ask what this reveals about whom this regime serves.
[Glenn Greenwald]
[April 20, 2022]
A group of former intelligence and national security officials on Monday issued a jointly signed letter warning that pending legislative attempts to restrict or break up the power of Big Tech monopolies — Facebook, Google, and Amazon — would jeopardize national security because, they argue, their centralized censorship power is crucial to advancing U.S. foreign policy. The majority of this letter is devoted to repeatedly invoking the grave threat allegedly posed to the U.S. by Russia as illustrated by the invasion of Ukraine, and it repeatedly points to the dangers of Putin and the Kremlin to justify the need to preserve Big Tech's power in its maximalist form. Any attempts to restrict Big Tech's monopolistic power would therefore undermine the U.S. fight against Moscow.
While one of their central claims is that Big Tech monopoly power is necessary to combat (i.e., censor) “foreign disinformation,” several of these officials are themselves leading disinformation agents: many were the same former intelligence officials who signed the now-infamous-and-debunked pre-election letter fraudulently claiming that the authentic Hunter Biden emails had the "hallmarks” of Russia disinformation (former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Obama CIA Director Michael Morrell, former Obama CIA/Pentagon chief Leon Panetta). Others who signed this new letter have strong financial ties to the Big Tech corporations whose power they are defending in the name of national security (Morrell, Panetta, former Bush National Security Adviser Fran Townsend).
[...read the whole thing...]
When the U.S. security state announces that Big Tech's centralized censorship power must be preserved, we should ask what this reveals about whom this regime serves.
[Glenn Greenwald]
[April 20, 2022]
A group of former intelligence and national security officials on Monday issued a jointly signed letter warning that pending legislative attempts to restrict or break up the power of Big Tech monopolies — Facebook, Google, and Amazon — would jeopardize national security because, they argue, their centralized censorship power is crucial to advancing U.S. foreign policy. The majority of this letter is devoted to repeatedly invoking the grave threat allegedly posed to the U.S. by Russia as illustrated by the invasion of Ukraine, and it repeatedly points to the dangers of Putin and the Kremlin to justify the need to preserve Big Tech's power in its maximalist form. Any attempts to restrict Big Tech's monopolistic power would therefore undermine the U.S. fight against Moscow.
While one of their central claims is that Big Tech monopoly power is necessary to combat (i.e., censor) “foreign disinformation,” several of these officials are themselves leading disinformation agents: many were the same former intelligence officials who signed the now-infamous-and-debunked pre-election letter fraudulently claiming that the authentic Hunter Biden emails had the "hallmarks” of Russia disinformation (former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Obama CIA Director Michael Morrell, former Obama CIA/Pentagon chief Leon Panetta). Others who signed this new letter have strong financial ties to the Big Tech corporations whose power they are defending in the name of national security (Morrell, Panetta, former Bush National Security Adviser Fran Townsend).
[...read the whole thing...]
... please add me to your list. Also, please issue me negative trust feedback, as you have been doing to others for their opinions. Thanks. I’d be honoured, especially if you call me an information terrorist. 
...
OP has been reported to the moderators, with a request to move this off-topic thread to Politics & Society. I would be shocked if I were the first one to report it. I am shocked that it’s been allowed here in Meta for the past four months.
You are just stupid, since you cannot distinguish the wheat from the chaff and completely trust the fascist false propaganda....
OP has been reported to the moderators, with a request to move this off-topic thread to Politics & Society. I would be shocked if I were the first one to report it. I am shocked that it’s been allowed here in Meta for the past four months.
I live in a frontline area where many people speak Russian, no one wants war, but russia regularly shells civilian infrastructure where there are no soldiers. For me, this is an act of terrorism, and those who support it, for me they are also terrorists.
This is an obvious fact!
So follow the russian ship!
What do I need to do to get added to your list of censorship targets?
On grounds of “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander,” maybe I should ask
Don’t you care that innocent Russians and Ukrainians are dying because the U.S. professional nation-wreckers decided to blow up that part of the world? I wish that the war could stop. I am outraged at the U.S. and NATO for causing it. And I absolutely will stand up here on the Bitcoin Forum against the U.S. propaganda system’s censorship, misinformation, disinformation, and one-sided demonization of Russia.
Western Dissent from US/NATO Policy on Ukraine is Small, Yet the Censorship Campaign is Extreme
Preventing populations from asking who benefits from a protracted proxy war, and who pays the price, is paramount. A closed propaganda system achieves that.
[Glenn Greenwald]
[April 13, 2022]
If one wishes to be exposed to news, information or perspective that contravenes the prevailing US/NATO view on the war in Ukraine, a rigorous search is required. And there is no guarantee that search will succeed. That is because the state/corporate censorship regime that has been imposed in the West with regard to this war is stunningly aggressive, rapid and comprehensive.
On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet. [...many examples...]
[...important information; read it...]
Note that this censorship regime is completely one-sided and, as usual, entirely aligned with U.S. foreign policy. Western news outlets and social media platforms have been flooded with pro-Ukrainian propaganda and outright lies from the start of the war. A New York Times article from early March put it very delicately in its headline: “Fact and Mythmaking Blend in Ukraine’s Information War.” Axios was similarly understated in recognizing this fact: “Ukraine misinformation is spreading — and not just from Russia.” Members of the U.S. Congress have gleefully spread fabrications that went viral to millions of people, with no action from censorship-happy Silicon Valley corporations. That is not a surprise: all participants in war use disinformation and propaganda to manipulate public opinion in their favor, and that certainly includes all direct and proxy-war belligerents in the war in Ukraine.
Yet there is little to no censorship — either by Western states or by Silicon Valley monopolies — of pro-Ukrainian disinformation, propaganda and lies. The censorship goes only in one direction: to silence any voices deemed “pro-Russian,” regardless of whether they spread disinformation. [...]
[...read, read, read...]
Preventing populations from asking who benefits from a protracted proxy war, and who pays the price, is paramount. A closed propaganda system achieves that.
[Glenn Greenwald]
[April 13, 2022]
If one wishes to be exposed to news, information or perspective that contravenes the prevailing US/NATO view on the war in Ukraine, a rigorous search is required. And there is no guarantee that search will succeed. That is because the state/corporate censorship regime that has been imposed in the West with regard to this war is stunningly aggressive, rapid and comprehensive.
On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet. [...many examples...]
[...important information; read it...]
Note that this censorship regime is completely one-sided and, as usual, entirely aligned with U.S. foreign policy. Western news outlets and social media platforms have been flooded with pro-Ukrainian propaganda and outright lies from the start of the war. A New York Times article from early March put it very delicately in its headline: “Fact and Mythmaking Blend in Ukraine’s Information War.” Axios was similarly understated in recognizing this fact: “Ukraine misinformation is spreading — and not just from Russia.” Members of the U.S. Congress have gleefully spread fabrications that went viral to millions of people, with no action from censorship-happy Silicon Valley corporations. That is not a surprise: all participants in war use disinformation and propaganda to manipulate public opinion in their favor, and that certainly includes all direct and proxy-war belligerents in the war in Ukraine.
Yet there is little to no censorship — either by Western states or by Silicon Valley monopolies — of pro-Ukrainian disinformation, propaganda and lies. The censorship goes only in one direction: to silence any voices deemed “pro-Russian,” regardless of whether they spread disinformation. [...]
[...read, read, read...]
All italics are Greenwald’s. Highlighting is mine.
I linked to both of these articles, and many others, in my first post on this thread. Alas, most people do not read.
Anyway, I am not interested in debating the war here and now. I am interested in:
- Getting myself added to the list of censorship targets. Because I stand for free speech. Please target me with your censorship campaign. Pretty please?
- Getting this thread moved from Meta—a forum-governance board, where this thread is off-topic and its presence chills to free speech—to Politics & Society, the proper place for discussing politics.