Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All good questions

How about the comments that “The border is being managed effectively.”

That’s disinformation right there. Or will this board police only viewports that go against the official govt position. I don’t think many people feel the border is being managed well at all, but Biden/Myorkas keep saying that all is good there!!!

Bull.

Exactly. Democrats consider “disinformation” anything that exposes their narrative as a lie. Mayorkas/Biden/Harris are absolutely peddling disinformation with the lie that the border has - in any way - been effectively managed by their administration.

I have business associates that live in Harlingen, Pharr, McAllen and Rio Grande City and the borders are not being managed effectively. My business associates do not leave their homes after 7:00 pm in the evening due to the criminal element crossing the border.

Creepy big time. It is also a huge waste of taxpayer monies.

Every dictator has a ministry of truth. This is not acceptable in the United States. It’s a Nazi - Commie move.

Anonymous wrote:Here's out new minster of truth. A year ago she was making Tik Tok videos. Her account has sense been made private.

They did not send us their best.

Also let’s imagine this scenario.


March 2020, it is well known that Covid can’t be spread by air, only by touching and surfaces. Masks were not needed and we were told just to wash and sanitize our hands. If I went and said, noooooo, covid can be spread by caught from and is airborn, that would be considered “Disinformation”, and I would be prosecuted by the board!!!!!!!


But then 2 months later, govt admitted it was airborn and we now had to wear masks!!! So the disinformation of March 2020 was correct after all!!!

See how this works.

Again!


Imagine what happens if Trump had a board like this.

Then he claims it’s all fake news and goes after all his enemies as if it was disinformation. Now you have a govt agency he can use.

Democrats, think what happens when it is controlled by a Republican? Then instead of censoring information from the conservative side, it will be used to censor information, labeled as disinformation from the liberal side?

Sound good to you?

Here's out new minster of truth. A year ago she was making Tik Tok videos. Her account has sense been made private.

Good question

Anonymous wrote:

Even further, it would be bad enough if this were done pursuant to a law passed by Congress. It’s actually even much worse that it’s pursuant to an action by the executive.

In Russia its called the KGB

In America its called the RGB

Anonymous wrote:this is the problem and it is tearing our country and the world apart

Personally, I don't want to live in the Orwellian distopia envisioned by the far right.

You have already proven you don’t by identifying and rejecting the efforts. Don’t give up your agency, ever. But if you do, NEVER ATTEMPT TO GIVE UP MINE.

Anonymous wrote:this is the problem and it is tearing our country and the world apart

Personally, I don't want to live in the Orwellian distopia envisioned by the far right.

But you were ok with the one where legitimate stories relating to candidates for the highest office could be banned? Wow.

Personally, I want it all out there. No filters, no protections. The more info there is ther more I can determine who the idiots, racists, fascists and liars are.
Who is this organization supposed to protect anyway? No me. You? Others? Who. How about some specifics.

Anonymous wrote:this is the problem and it is tearing our country and the world apart

Personally, I don't want to live in the Orwellian distopia envisioned by the far right.

Come back when you have a balanced source. The Washington Spectator is for LWNJs.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-washington-spectator/

LEFT BIAS

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.