DHS collaborating with FB and Twitter to censor information

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the definition of fascism, a term that gets misused often on here. Government working hand in glove with large corporations to stifle dissent is the text book definition of fascism.

You've got the definition right but the application wrong. "Dissent" is a keyword here. Disinformation and fake news including foreign fake news is not dissent or honest discourse.

Any tool can be abused. Some tools should not exist due to their potential for abuse. Would you want the Trump administration to be able to censor "disinformation?"

This story is about them doing it...

Stop being daft. The stories they were trying to stop from coming out, specifically the lab leak theory and other takes on Covid that have now been proven to be either correct or have merit (like vaccines not stopping transmission), was not an agenda being pushed by Trump. You are either are against fascism - that is, the collusion between government and big corporations to stifle opposition and free speech - or you are for it. Seems like they’re a lot of fascists in this thread that like to larp as anti fascist because they don’t like Trump.

The vaccines developed while the Wuhan strain was raging across the world were highly effective in stopping the transmission of the Wuhan strain.

However, COVID quickly mutated making the vaccines far less effective. It's nuanced. You can't just write "The vaccine is effective" and shut down anyone challenging that statement.

Compare our response to countries that used non-mRNA vaccines.

You really want to be right. But you're not being objective.

Neither are you. If you compare our response, the vaccine was ineffective at controlling spread in the population.

In fact, Pfizer knew that. It’s in their paperwork

Can you point us to that?

I can quote the fact check spin on it:

"It’s true that Pfizer didn’t know whether its COVID-19 vaccine stopped transmission before it was available to the public. But this wasn’t the primary goal of the vaccine, nor was it a requirement for authorization in the U.S. or Europe."

So they told us it would stop the spread and Pfizer didn't know if that was the case. Neither did our own FDA or CDC as a result

"About 15:23 into the video, Roos asks, “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? If not, please say it clearly. If yes, are you willing to share the data with this committee?”

Small answers the question at 15:31:45 into the video, saying, “No. We had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market.”
"

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Intercept framing of the “story” is trash.

I posted earlier that I respect Lee Fang and generally trust his reporting. However, it looks like he dropped the ball on this story:

There is evidence being revealed in a lawsuit showing coordination between the Administration (Biden's) and Twitter, Youtube and Meta regarding certain posts, tweets and videos.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/05/biden-sued-for-colluding-with-big-tech-to-suppress-free-speech-on-hunter-laptop/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The government's and Big Tech's actions to deplatform and sideline "undesirable" information is censorship. There is no other way to describe it. And it's very, very effective.

Correct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The government's and Big Tech's actions to deplatform and sideline "undesirable" information is censorship. There is no other way to describe it. And it's very, very effective.

Correct

Effective? Don't we all wish!

The "underground" is still mainstream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the definition of fascism, a term that gets misused often on here. Government working hand in glove with large corporations to stifle dissent is the text book definition of fascism.

You've got the definition right but the application wrong. "Dissent" is a keyword here. Disinformation and fake news including foreign fake news is not dissent or honest discourse.

Any tool can be abused. Some tools should not exist due to their potential for abuse. Would you want the Trump administration to be able to censor "disinformation?"

This story is about them doing it...

Stop being daft. The stories they were trying to stop from coming out, specifically the lab leak theory and other takes on Covid that have now been proven to be either correct or have merit (like vaccines not stopping transmission), was not an agenda being pushed by Trump. You are either are against fascism - that is, the collusion between government and big corporations to stifle opposition and free speech - or you are for it. Seems like they’re a lot of fascists in this thread that like to larp as anti fascist because they don’t like Trump.

The vaccines developed while the Wuhan strain was raging across the world were highly effective in stopping the transmission of the Wuhan strain.

However, COVID quickly mutated making the vaccines far less effective. It's nuanced. You can't just write "The vaccine is effective" and shut down anyone challenging that statement.

Compare our response to countries that used non-mRNA vaccines.

You really want to be right. But you're not being objective.

Neither are you. If you compare our response, the vaccine was ineffective at controlling spread in the population.

In fact, Pfizer knew that. It’s in their paperwork

Can you point us to that?

I can quote the fact check spin on it:

"It’s true that Pfizer didn’t know whether its COVID-19 vaccine stopped transmission before it was available to the public. But this wasn’t the primary goal of the vaccine, nor was it a requirement for authorization in the U.S. or Europe."

So they told us it would stop the spread and Pfizer didn't know if that was the case. Neither did our own FDA or CDC as a result

"About 15:23 into the video, Roos asks, “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? If not, please say it clearly. If yes, are you willing to share the data with this committee?”

Small answers the question at 15:31:45 into the video, saying, “No. We had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market.”
"

Contorting yourself into a pretzel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the definition of fascism, a term that gets misused often on here. Government working hand in glove with large corporations to stifle dissent is the text book definition of fascism.

You've got the definition right but the application wrong. "Dissent" is a keyword here. Disinformation and fake news including foreign fake news is not dissent or honest discourse.

Any tool can be abused. Some tools should not exist due to their potential for abuse. Would you want the Trump administration to be able to censor "disinformation?"

This story is about them doing it...

Stop being daft. The stories they were trying to stop from coming out, specifically the lab leak theory and other takes on Covid that have now been proven to be either correct or have merit (like vaccines not stopping transmission), was not an agenda being pushed by Trump. You are either are against fascism - that is, the collusion between government and big corporations to stifle opposition and free speech - or you are for it. Seems like they’re a lot of fascists in this thread that like to larp as anti fascist because they don’t like Trump.

The vaccines developed while the Wuhan strain was raging across the world were highly effective in stopping the transmission of the Wuhan strain.

However, COVID quickly mutated making the vaccines far less effective. It's nuanced. You can't just write "The vaccine is effective" and shut down anyone challenging that statement.

Compare our response to countries that used non-mRNA vaccines.

You really want to be right. But you're not being objective.

Neither are you. If you compare our response, the vaccine was ineffective at controlling spread in the population.

In fact, Pfizer knew that. It’s in their paperwork

Can you point us to that?

I can quote the fact check spin on it:

"It’s true that Pfizer didn’t know whether its COVID-19 vaccine stopped transmission before it was available to the public. But this wasn’t the primary goal of the vaccine, nor was it a requirement for authorization in the U.S. or Europe."

So they told us it would stop the spread and Pfizer didn't know if that was the case. Neither did our own FDA or CDC as a result

"About 15:23 into the video, Roos asks, “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? If not, please say it clearly. If yes, are you willing to share the data with this committee?”

Small answers the question at 15:31:45 into the video, saying, “No. We had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market.”
"

Contorting yourself into a pretzel.

It was your fact checkers that did. These are quotes from a fact checking site

The ACLU is apparently NOT happy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The government's and Big Tech's actions to deplatform and sideline "undesirable" information is censorship. There is no other way to describe it. And it's very, very effective.

Correct

Effective? Don't we all wish!

The "underground" is still mainstream.

NO! "We" don't all wish for government and Big Tech to be successful in censoring unpopular speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The government's and Big Tech's actions to deplatform and sideline "undesirable" information is censorship. There is no other way to describe it. And it's very, very effective.

Correct

Effective? Don't we all wish!

The "underground" is still mainstream.

NO! "We" don't all wish for government and Big Tech to be successful in censoring unpopular speech.

Fake false speech is not "unpopular speech".

This country was built on freedom of speech. Not freedom of disinformation and lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the definition of fascism, a term that gets misused often on here. Government working hand in glove with large corporations to stifle dissent is the text book definition of fascism.

You've got the definition right but the application wrong. "Dissent" is a keyword here. Disinformation and fake news including foreign fake news is not dissent or honest discourse.

Any tool can be abused. Some tools should not exist due to their potential for abuse. Would you want the Trump administration to be able to censor "disinformation?"

This story is about them doing it...

Stop being daft. The stories they were trying to stop from coming out, specifically the lab leak theory and other takes on Covid that have now been proven to be either correct or have merit (like vaccines not stopping transmission), was not an agenda being pushed by Trump. You are either are against fascism - that is, the collusion between government and big corporations to stifle opposition and free speech - or you are for it. Seems like they’re a lot of fascists in this thread that like to larp as anti fascist because they don’t like Trump.

The vaccines developed while the Wuhan strain was raging across the world were highly effective in stopping the transmission of the Wuhan strain.

However, COVID quickly mutated making the vaccines far less effective. It's nuanced. You can't just write "The vaccine is effective" and shut down anyone challenging that statement.

Compare our response to countries that used non-mRNA vaccines.

You really want to be right. But you're not being objective.

Neither are you. If you compare our response, the vaccine was ineffective at controlling spread in the population.

More of this same tired lie! Stop with the lies!

Cite a single source that proves your claim. I can post back to back sources that say vaccines are likely to slow spread and when being very very generous there may be more studies needed to confirm but NOWHERE does any legitimate source make the claim that vaccines do not slow spread as a fact like tou seem to believe. PROVE IT!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the definition of fascism, a term that gets misused often on here. Government working hand in glove with large corporations to stifle dissent is the text book definition of fascism.

You've got the definition right but the application wrong. "Dissent" is a keyword here. Disinformation and fake news including foreign fake news is not dissent or honest discourse.

Any tool can be abused. Some tools should not exist due to their potential for abuse. Would you want the Trump administration to be able to censor "disinformation?"

This story is about them doing it...

Stop being daft. The stories they were trying to stop from coming out, specifically the lab leak theory and other takes on Covid that have now been proven to be either correct or have merit (like vaccines not stopping transmission), was not an agenda being pushed by Trump. You are either are against fascism - that is, the collusion between government and big corporations to stifle opposition and free speech - or you are for it. Seems like they’re a lot of fascists in this thread that like to larp as anti fascist because they don’t like Trump.

The vaccines developed while the Wuhan strain was raging across the world were highly effective in stopping the transmission of the Wuhan strain.

However, COVID quickly mutated making the vaccines far less effective. It's nuanced. You can't just write "The vaccine is effective" and shut down anyone challenging that statement.

Compare our response to countries that used non-mRNA vaccines.

You really want to be right. But you're not being objective.

Neither are you. If you compare our response, the vaccine was ineffective at controlling spread in the population.

In fact, Pfizer knew that. It’s in their paperwork

Can you point us to that?

I can quote the fact check spin on it:

"It’s true that Pfizer didn’t know whether its COVID-19 vaccine stopped transmission before it was available to the public. But this wasn’t the primary goal of the vaccine, nor was it a requirement for authorization in the U.S. or Europe."

So they told us it would stop the spread and Pfizer didn't know if that was the case. Neither did our own FDA or CDC as a result

"About 15:23 into the video, Roos asks, “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? If not, please say it clearly. If yes, are you willing to share the data with this committee?”

Small answers the question at 15:31:45 into the video, saying, “No. We had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market.”
"

We don’t “know” the validity of the theory of gravity so go jump out a window and show us how smart you are? Stupid people who have no education to even interpret simple statements should just go watch tv and let the thoughtful people discuss things accurately.

[Anonymous]

The virus that causes COVID-19 most likely leaked from a Chinese laboratory, according to a classified report based on new intelligence and recently sent to the White House and key members of Congress.

The stunning assertion by the US Energy Department comes more than a year after the FBI concluded a lab accident in China was the origin of the disease, which has killed more than 6.8 million people around the world, including 1.1 million in the US.

The FBI’s decision was made with “moderate confidence” and remains the bureau’s opinion, said The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the Energy Department’s own finding on Sunday.

By contrast, the Department of Energy made its determination with “low confidence,” sources who’ve read the classified report told the Journal.

https://nypost.com/2023/02/26/chinese-lab-leak-likely-behind-covid-19-outbreak/?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=SocialFlow&utm_source=NYPTwitter

[Anonymous]

Don’t worry everyone there was plenty of misinformation and Russian propaganda on FB!

[Anonymous]

Free Speech doesn't apply when you publish lies to incite hate speech, racism, violence, sedition, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Free Speech doesn't apply when you publish lies to incite hate speech, racism, violence, sedition, etc.

So, claiming the virus originated in a lab is hate speech? Racist? Violent?

And, BTW - hate speech is actually protected by the First Amendment. You may not like it, but it is protected.

[Anonymous]