Wednesday, November 30, 2022

Elon Musk scorches media for being ‘against free speech’

WH press secretary says Biden admin is 'keeping a close eye' on Elon Musk's Twitter

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that the Biden administration is "keeping a close eye" on Elon Musk's Twitter over concerns about "misinformation" on the platform.

Twitter users jumped on tech mogul Elon Musk’s tweet Monday attacking the media for being "against free speech."

At Monday's White House press conference, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed that the Biden administration is "keeping a close eye" on Twitter after Reuters' Andrea Shalal asked what is being done to prevent the platform from becoming a "vector for misinformation."

"There’s a researcher at Stanford who says that this is a critical moment, really, in terms of ensuring that Twitter does not become a vector of misinformation," Shalal said. "Elon Musk says there’s more and more subscribers coming online, are you concerned about that and what tools do you have – who is it at the White House that is really keeping track of this?"

Political commentator Dave Rubin shared video of the exchange, condemning the reporter for advocating for the government to intervene in social media. Musk responded by calling out the media for acting against free speech with regard to Twitter.

"Absolutely insane watching The Machine go after @elonmusk for defending free speech. This whole exchange is kabuki theater, from the ridiculous leading question by the ‘journalist’ to KJP’s obviously pre-planned response," Rubin tweeted.

Musk tweeted in response, "Why are so many in the media against free speech? This is messed up,"

Several social media users agreed with Musk, telling him that the mainstream media is now determined to limit free speech.

"Their world view doesn’t rely on truth. It relies on emotion and truth interferes with that. Freedom of speech interferes with them controlling the narrative. And here you are to flip that," RedState columnist Buzz Patterson tweeted.

Radio host Gerry Callahan wrote, "So messed up, so wrong, so unAmerican. Musk should be viewed as a hero for what he’s doing for free speech. Instead the media want the federal government to crush him. Freaking insanity."

"This is about raw power, and control over the flow of information. The same principle underlies the battle over ‘Spanish-language disinformation,’" director of MRC Latino Jorge Bonilla explained.

"They’re literally scared to death of Twitter 2.0. Massive implications for the future, especially in politics," PJ Media columnist Ryan Ledendecker commented.




Tuesday, November 29, 2022

Elon Musk Says He Has a Plan If Twitter Gets Kicked Off App Stores

Tech billionaire Elon Musk suggested he would make his own phone amid speculation Twitter could be booted from Google Play or Apple’s App Store.

“I certainly hope it does not come to that, but, yes, if there is no other choice, I will make an alternative phone,” he wrote in response to a Twitter post from podcaster Liz Wheeler. “The man builds rockets to Mars, a silly little smartphone should be easy, right?” Wheeler said.

Neither Apple, which makes iPhones, nor Google, which is behind the Android mobile operating system, have publicly indicated that Twitter could be jettisoned from either the App Store or Google Play.

Speculation ramped up earlier this month after Apple’s Twitter account deleted all of its posts and an Apple executive in charge of the App Store, Phil Scheller, appeared to delete his account. Apple CEO Tim Cook, however, is still active on the platform along with several other Apple Twitter accounts.

And Twitter’s former head of safety Yoel Roth wrote for the New York Times earlier in November that Twitter not adhering to “Apple and Google’s guidelines would be catastrophic” for the app and would risk its “expulsion from their app stores.” Roth also claimed that when he recently “departed the company, the calls from the app review teams had already begun,”




Monday, November 28, 2022

Elon Musk proves the woke left wrong again as he shares slides from talk with Twitter workers showing hate speech is DOWN since his $44B takeover

Elon Musk has shared slides from his talk with Twitter workers saying hate speech is down since his $44billion takeover.

The slides, posted to on his Twitter page, show between October 17 and November 13 hate speech impressions are lower.

The CEO also reported new user signups were at an all time high, averaging over two million per day in the past week.

These new figures counter reports early last month which claimed an uptick in the amount of hateful language being tweeted in the wake of Musk taking the helm.




Sunday, November 27, 2022

Elon Musk has uncovered a “woke” goldmine at Twitter’s headquarters

The company’s new owner shared a video of a storage closet filled with #StayWoke t-shirts on Tuesday night.

“Found in closet at Twitter HQ fr,” Musk tweeted. “And there’s an entire closet full of hashtag ‘Woke’ t-shirts.”

The word “woke” has been since reinvented as a term to describe politically correct, race-obsessed liberals. It’s broadly considered an epithet today.

But that wasn’t always the case. The term originally had a positive connotation, at least in the eyes of the liberals that used it.

The phrase can trace its origins to the early days of the Black Lives Matter movement, according to Fox News.

Its original definition referred to being awake to the knowledge of supposed wide-scale racism in American society.

The phrase was refitted as a criticism of sanctimonious liberals around 2020. It’s very rare to see the word “woke” used in its original context as of 2022, with liberals having acquiesced to the word’s retooling as a criticism of their worst excesses.




Friday, November 25, 2022

UK: Dominic Raab has renewed his commitment to crucial free speech protections in a resurrected Bill of Rights

It is the first time the Deputy Prime Minister has made clear measures to guard free speech will be pursued after the legislation was put on the back burner by Liz Truss's administration.

Mr Raab, who is also Justice Secretary, oversaw the first incarnation of the Bill – which set out to prevent human rights legislation being abused.

He told the Daily Mail last night: 'Free speech is a quintessentially British right and the Bill of Rights will strengthen its protection on these shores.'

Mr Raab told the House of Commons: 'The idea that the Human Rights Act was the last word on human rights in UK constitutional history is daft.

'Indeed, there is an opportunity here to strengthen things like free speech… but also deal with problems, particularly things like foreign national offenders abusing the right to Article 8 – the right to family life – to avoid deportation.'

The legislation, published in March, was due to make free speech a 'trump card' over other rights, barring the creation of European-style privacy laws by unelected judges through the back door.

The measures were drawn up following widespread concern at a legal ruling in favour of the Duchess of Sussex in a privacy dispute against The Mail on Sunday, as well as growing 'cancel culture' over other issues.

Legal experts predict it will face difficulties getting through the Lords.




Thursday, November 24, 2022

Senior Biden officials have been privately lobbying the WHO to rename monkeypox for months because the original 'is racist', sources say

The Biden administration has asked global health officials to rename monkeypox 'MPOX' because the current name is racist, according to reports.

Senior White House officials are said to have been privately lobbying the World Health Organization over the change, and even threatened to change the name in the US without the agency's blessing if it did not move quickly enough.

Monkeypox caused a global outbreak for the first time ever this year — infecting 30,000 Americans and killing 14 — but the virus has been triggering flare-ups in Africa for decades.

Biden staffers believe the original term outbreak carries an unnecessary stigma for people of color.

The WHO promised to re-consider the name in June over similar fears of stigmatization and a decision is expected within weeks.

There have been concerns over potential racist undertones of the name since the outbreak began this summer.

It comes after a study found monkeypox patients can spread the virus up to four days before symptoms appear, raising questions over current strategies to contain the infection.




Wednesday, November 23, 2022

Truth at last -- but not on YouTube

Still burning over past YouTube censorship of his site’s “factually accurate video about lefties’ “rigged election” comments,” TKNews’ Matt Taibbi jumps on the latest (CBS’s) “verification” of the Hunter Biden laptop, noting how “major news media — including CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and countless other outlets — actively embraced disinformation,” namely the false “Russian information operation” charge, to justify ignoring The Post’s reporting.

“YouTube also pushed this disinformation campaign. It still does”: “Despite the total absence of evidence ever existing that the laptop was either fake or part of a Russian ‘information operation,’ and a growing pile of evidence that the laptop is real,” it still hosts “countless videos promoting the conspiracy theory,” including by PBS, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and Washington Post writer David Ignatius. “YouTube has become a place that censors true content but traffics in official and quasi-official deceptions.”

TK News is at




Tuesday, November 22, 2022

UK: Ministry of Justice staff told to not use 35 everyday phrases including 'gender critical' and 'protecting women and girls' so they can be trans 'allies'

Ministry of Justice staff have been instructed not to use 35 everyday phrases - including ‘gender critical’ and ‘protecting women and girls’ - in order to be trans allies.

Ahead of transgender awareness week, thousands of officials were emailed a glossary titled ‘recognising transphobic coded language’ through the HMP Probation Service (HMPPS) diversity and inclusion team, according to The Sunday Telegraph.

The document claimed that the phrases were ‘turning what would be considered overt discrimination into covert behaviour’, and that it was ‘vital we keep scaremongering and misinformation at bay’.

For example, the term ‘gender critical’, which is used to refer to campaigners who believe biological sex is binary, is claimed to be a ‘term used to make anti-trans discrimination sound palatable or a respectable opinion’ and warns staff to look out for social media accounts that hold this view.

Also listed is ‘protect women’s spaces/protecting women and girls’, which the document says ‘relies on equating trans women with being predatory men, to play on unfounded fears and convince people that supporting trans inclusion threatens their safety’.

The glossary was shared by the HMPPS pride in prisons and probation LGBTI+ staff support network under the watch of a diversity lead who is paid a £37,166 salary.

Civil servants are warned in the introduction: ‘Whilst passing uses of these phrases might not be considered misconduct, the importance of challenging their use cannot be overstated.’

An MoJ staff member told the Telegraph: ‘When I first read the attachment in the email, I could not quite believe it - the worst thing was that I was unable to raise it safely at work for fear of being labelled a transphobe.

‘It came across as very aggressive and antagonistic towards anyone who believes in biological reality. I feel upset and powerless.’

The prison population that identifies as transgender stood at 197 in England and Wales last year, a 21 per cent jump from 163 in 2019.

A Prison Service spokesman said: ‘This guidebook was published by a staff network, its content was not approved prior to being communicated and it is a network rather than a corporate HMPPS view.

‘Following its publication, HMPPS is reviewing the rules around internal communications to staff from network groups.’




Monday, November 21, 2022

Almost half of young people in Britain are too frightened to dispute the idea of white privilege and some even feared being EXPELLED from school

Nearly half of Britain’s young people are too frightened of being ostracised to challenge beliefs in ‘white privilege’, a poll shows.

It reveals that 59 per cent of school leavers have been taught ‘critical race theory’ – the premise by American academics that racism shapes Western life and white people enjoy advantages because of their colour.

But 40 per cent of the 18-20-year-olds taught about ‘white privilege’ and similar concepts said they were afraid of being outed for their beliefs if they disagreed.

Some even said they worried about being expelled, according to research by the think tank the Policy Exchange.

Critics of the notion of ‘white privilege’ suggest it ignores the achievements of people from diverse backgrounds such as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who is Hindu and whose parents are of Indian descent.

Reacting to the study Dr Samir Shah, a member of the Government’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, said: ‘School children should be able to say what they think without feeling an inability to do so.

‘It is incumbent on teachers, lecturers and parents to allow to children to voice their own feelings without fear of favour and that is quite central in my mind to what makes a liberal democracy- that there is no constraint on what you say within the law.’

Dr Shah, called for balance to be provided in classrooms and warned against presenting only one side of the debate around “white privilege” and critical race theory.

He added: ‘This thought-provoking report is a stark warning against such complacency.

‘Views which remain on the fringe in society as a whole, are held by a significant number, or even a majority, by voters in this age category.

‘But what makes the survey disturbing is that these new attitudes challenge the very foundations of liberal thought: free speech, tolerance, debate, and democracy.’

The poll took a sample from 1,542 18- 20 year-old British young people between 14 April and 6 May 2022.

It also revealed that 42 per cent of respondents aged 18 to 24 believe that schools should: ‘Teach students that Britain was founded on racism and remains structurally racist today’.

Last night Toby Young of the Free Speech Union said: ‘Schools should not be teaching these politically contentious theories as if they were indisputably true.

‘It leaves children feeling ashamed of their country and fearful that if they say something positive about Britain they will be accused of racism and targeted for cancellation.

‘We passed a law in 1996 making it illegal to politically indoctrinate children. They can be taught about political issues, but only if they’re given a balanced presentation of opposing views.

‘Unfortunately, that law is more honoured in the breach than the observance.’




Sunday, November 20, 2022

Threats to free speech

Does it not make you shake your head in disbelief and despair that in the third decade of the 21st century there exists a frightening number of people who are jubilant that the ‘Satanic Verses’ author, Sir Salman Rushdie, was very nearly stabbed to death?  And, while it is reassuring that the overwhelming majority of people believe that no one should be killed for writing a book or, in the case of JK Rowling, receive ominous threats for voicing her support for Rushdie and her entirely legitimate stance on transgenderism, of greater concern is the disappointment some have exhibited because Rushdie survived his ordeal and wasn’t killed – which speaks volumes about the mindset of those who seek grievance where none exists, and insult when none is given.

It is reported that Rushdie has life-altering injuries, but his survival is testament to the EMT’s, doctors and surgeons who kept him alive, an outcome which all reasonable people should give thanks for.  Heck, some might even thank god for his ‘divine intervention’…though, which god they’re giving praise to is a question that only the religious can answer.

It is also reported that sales of the largely forgotten book have surged several hundred percent.  Sic transit.  Ultimately we should all give thanks and prayers – metaphorically of course – for the survival of a fine example and proponent of free speech, and whilst we are at it, we should express sentiments to all those who bang the drum for our Western values; values which bestow on us so many freedoms that too many of us often take for granted; values which the enemies of democracy loathe with every fibre of their being.

The attack on Rushdie is an attack on us all, a brief yet vivid skirmish in an insidious fight fought with the sole aim of dismantling our much-cherished values and freedoms, an outcome to strike fear in the hearts of all those who dare to criticise and question, and, yes, ridicule anything that does not adhere to antiquated or revisionist dogma.  Some even say that concerns over the fate of free speech are unfounded, and that those voicing such concerns are wrong-thinkers, racists, homophobes, xenophobes and anti-religionists, I disagree.  The perception that free speech is under attack may well be an unrealised one, but there’s no doubting that far too many of us appear impotent in the face of the new Woke religion – that word again – and its strange new credos, including the rewriting of our warts and all history, the bending of the knee to illiberal precepts, cancel culture, no platforming and the imposition of critical race theory, all of it policed by oh-so-pious, virtue signalling keyboard warriors.

Is history not replete with examples of such intolerances, from the book-burning of the Nazi’s to the fate of Galileo under The Inquisition.  On immigration, Brexit, transgenderism, antisemitism, terrorism, capitalism v socialism, rich v poor, the political left v the political right, and on a whole host of other issues where opinions are irreconcilably divided, behind every furore involving the shifting sands of free speech, censorship, offence and political correctness, numerous questions of principle arise in their wake.  It’s a problem that keeps arising, and it should be tackled head-on.  Every society requires some general guidance on what we can and cannot say if we are to travel unharmed the increasingly dangerous highways that those four ideas represent.

The salient point around which all must revolve is that free speech is a fundamental of such great significance that without it we could only have the most limited society and possibilities for individuals.  Such a thing should go without saying, right?  Well, remember that the next time you see a politician squirming when asked to answer the ‘can a woman have a penis?’, question.  Whilst it would be fair to say that, for all its importance, free speech is not an absolute and has to be responsibly and maturely used.  Without free speech we cannot lay claim to other civil rights and liberties or defend them when they are under attack.  Without free speech our lives would be as closed as our mouths.

It would be great to think that, in a perfect world, disparate views might reach an accord.  You don’t have to agree with someone whose religion tells them that 2 and 2 make 5.  Improve and win your argument.  And so, to all those who refuse to be kowtowed and silenced by the fanatics.  I say this – ‘We will not speak insultingly or act discriminatorily – even indirectly – with aspect to your race, age, sex, or disability, if any; we will not do so because it is unacceptable and bloody rude to disrespect someone for things over which they have no control.  But, with respect, to what you CAN choose to be and say and think, such as matters concerning your political and religious affiliations, it is open season’.  Feeling offended is no defence from an attack on your most cherished views or beliefs by those who do not share them, and violent retaliation is simply telling the world that you have lost the argument.




Friday, November 18, 2022

"Normality" is now incorrect

When I was chatting to Peta Credlin on Sky News the question came up of the word ‘normalcy’. It has exactly the same meaning as the far more common word ‘normality’– so ‘normalcy’ is not (to be honest) a word we need. ‘Normality’ is recorded from 1839 with the meaning we are all familiar with: ‘a situation in which things happen in the usual or expected way’ (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English).

‘Normalcy’ appears to have been coined in the US around 20 years later – perhaps as a ‘portmanteau’ word: two words packaged together. In this case ‘normal’ and ‘tendency’. At any rate ‘normalcy’ has not caught on in the same way, and is used far less frequently than ‘normality’ – although perhaps its use is increasing. Why might this be?

The word ‘normal’ is recorded in English from the 1500s (from a French source, behind which is a post-classical Latin word) with the meaning of: ‘Constituting or conforming to a type or standard; regular, usual, typical; ordinary, conventional.’ (Oxford English Dictionary).

But this is now a word the woke warriors find offensive – because if we say something is ‘normal’ then anything that doesn’t conform is (logically) ‘abnormal’. So, if I say it is normal for a child to have a Mum and a Dad – some people will take offence. It’s true of course – statistically it is normal for a child to have a Mum and a Dad. Fact.

But this word ‘normal’ frightens them. And (here’s my theory): in order to avoid that frightening word more and more people are resorting to this ugly word ‘normalcy’ – which enables them to dismiss ‘normal’ life and ‘normal’ behaviour as nothing more than a ‘tendency’ (perhaps, in their worldview, an unfortunate tendency).




Thursday, November 17, 2022

How war over trans rights is killing free speech at 'world's most sanctimonious' paper

The father of the late journalist Malcolm Muggeridge once advised him: ‘Never work for a liberal. They’ll give you the sack on Christmas Eve.’

Perhaps because Muggeridge was once employed by the Guardian, this piece of advice has been taken by some to refer to that great, though sometimes infuriating, liberal newspaper.

On the surface it appears virtuous and high‑minded, but underneath there is a good portion of dirty washing, which it is not keen to share with the rest of the world.

An obvious example is Guardian Media Group’s use of an offshore tax shelter in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying tax on the £302 million in profit it realised from the sale in 2007 of some of its shares in Auto Trader. The paper invariably decries tax avoidance in others.

I’ve written about many controversies at the paper over the years, but they largely pale into insignificance in comparison with the convulsions that have seized it for more than two years — and recently come to the boil.

The Guardian has been accused by one of its columnists of ‘censoring’ important discussions about gender identity. Hadley Freeman, who worked for the newspaper for 22 years, has resigned to go to another title.

In a valedictory letter to Katharine Viner, the editor-in-chief, which was leaked to Private Eye magazine, Freeman criticised the paper for abandoning its tradition of balance (which some may think has been more honoured in the breach than the observance).

Freeman alleged that the newspaper’s once‑willing embrace of complex questions had disappeared with respect to the ‘gender issue’. She also recalled being ‘repeatedly warned off in the Corbyn era [from] writing about Labour from my perspective as a Jew’.

In normal circumstances, the resignation of a columnist, even one so relatively well‑known as Hadley Freeman, would hardly be deemed headline news.

But her embittered departure is the latest episode in a culture war that has been raging at the newspaper for more than two years. It is no exaggeration to say that Freeman is a casualty of ‘cancel culture’ in the ‘gender wars’. As we shall see, she is far from being the only female Guardian journalist who has felt censored.

What is happening there is not merely alarming for those of us who, however much we may have been annoyed by it over the years, still respect the paper as a formidable bastion of Leftist thought.

The controversies are also an indication of the toxic divisions on the Left, and in particular within the Labour Party, about gender issues. After all, much to the dismay of some Labour MPs (let alone the rest of us) Sir Keir Starmer refused to say in March during a radio interview whether a woman can have a penis.

Hadley Freeman is no rabble-rouser. In an article for the online publication UnHerd in February — subsequently published in the Mail — she calmly laid out her reservations about the excesses of the trans lobby, and wrote ‘that for the first time in my 20-plus years of being a liberal journalist, I felt completely isolated’.

In a later piece for the same publication, she criticised ‘trans activists — and, most of all, [the LBGT lobby group] Stonewall — [for] pushing far beyond civil rights for trans people and insisting instead on unpopular and unworkable policies, such as trans women in sport, child transition and [opposition to] any open acknowledgement of female biology’.

Now I realise that most of us are mystified by the sometimes hysterical debate about an issue that seems peripheral to our everyday lives. But for a highly vocal minority, Hadley Freeman might as well have been lighting the touchpaper to the bonfire of their most cherished beliefs.

Prominent amongst them was Owen Jones, a trans-rights activist who is a columnist on the Guardian, where he is held in unparalleled esteem by the aforementioned editor, Katharine Viner (who, by the way, recently married BBC presenter Adrian Chiles).

Very many Mail readers will be unaware of Jones’s existence, but he is a significant figure. In fact, with his one million Twitter followers and his successful YouTube channel, this professional pugilist is one of the most influential people on the Left.

The Labour MP Jess Phillips has amusingly likened this former spear-carrier of Jeremy Corbyn’s to ‘a noisy, over-excited child who’s had too much sugar’. That is a rather gentle appreciation. His detractors regard the pint-sized polemicist with a mixture of fear and loathing.

But he’s clever and fluent and quick on the draw, and has used these attributes to his advantage on social media, where he expertly whips up his not usually very reflective followers, and sprays his critics with vitriol.

One of his occasional targets is the BBC, which he chooses to view as a reactionary outpost of the Conservative Party. Some of us see that as an eccentric standpoint, to put it mildly.

Jones has not yet responded on Twitter to Freeman’s resignation, though he has lashed out at her as a colleague on that platform in the past. But there seems little doubt he has been instrumental in fostering a culture at the Guardian which she, with others, found intolerable.

He has attacked several female Guardian journalists on social media over what he regards as their transphobic opinions without ever attracting any public censure from his indulgent editor. I’ve little doubt that on any other newspaper he would have been sacked.

His first major fight was with feisty fellow columnist Suzanne Moore more than two years ago. In March 2020, Jones was one of 338 Guardian Media Group employees (many working in America or Australia, and often not as journalists) who wrote a letter of complaint to Viner in response to a column by Moore which they deemed anti-trans.

Eight months later, Moore resigned, saying she felt ‘bullied and betrayed’ by her colleagues, who had reacted to her column standing up for women ‘as if it was Mein Kampf’.

Owen Jones later tweeted: ‘Suzanne Moore wasn’t targeted or bullied, and nobody tried to get her fired — yet she’s been able to pose as a free speech martyr silenced by the misogynist mob.’ For her part, Moore described Jones in one of several articles about the contretemps as a ‘twerp’.

Another woman journalist targeted by Jones was Sarah Ditum, a freelancer who writes for the Guardian. In August 2021, Jones denounced her to his Twitter followers as ‘cruel’, ‘an unpleasant weird person’ and an ‘anti-trans activist’.

Ditum’s ‘sin’ in Jones’s eyes was to have written a seemingly inoffensive article in the Times about the late author Terry Pratchett and an odd dispute regarding where he might, or might not, have stood on transgender rights.

Sarah Ditum complained to Viner about Jones’s attack. Catherine Bennett, a columnist on the Guardian’s sister paper, the Observer, also complained that she had been bullied on social media by Jones and others after writing a piece about maintaining women’s rights.

An independent investigator was brought in by Viner. A copy of the report was leaked to Private Eye. It found that Jones had breached social media guidelines and that ‘his use of language had been personalised and demonstrated a lack of professionalism’.

Nonetheless, the irrepressible troublemaker gleefully tweeted: ‘It is completely and utterly untrue that I was found guilty of bullying anyone at the Guardian.’ This is strictly correct, but he was undoubtedly criticised in the report. Despite its perennial insistence on political transparency, the Guardian has not published it.




Wednesday, November 16, 2022

Student at one of Australia's top universities lost marks on final engineering exam - because the paper didn't include an Indigenous Acknowledgement of Country

Coerced speech! Certainly not free speech. Leftist arrogance knows no bounds

A student's final year project was marked down because it didn't include an Indigenous Acknowledgment of County.

Melbourne's Monash University recently introduced a policy requiring students to add the message recognising traditional owners at the beginning of all assignments - or face losing marks.

But the rule has since been overturned after the engineering student made an official complaint.

The university has agreed to reinstate the original marks and says students will not be deducted in future for failing to include it.

Monash made the concession even though it argued that including it showed 'the standard of professionalism required of an engineer in Australia'.

'Monash respects the rights of students to respectfully and appropriately decline to provide an Acknowledgement of Country if they believe it conflicts with their right to free speech or academic freedom,' a spokeswoman told the Herald Sun.

'Monash will continue to encourage students to include the Acknowledgement of Country where relevant and appropriate.'

On the university's web page it states that 'recognising traditional owners is important and that all staff and students are encouraged to do so.

It is the second major backdown by Monash this year in linking academic grades to recognition of Aboriginal land.

Following an outcry generated by media reports the university removed the threat that students who did not complete a mandatory module on 'Indigenous Voices' would not be allowed to sit exams or graduate.

The university said the module was to 'ensure students fully understand Monash values' and 'contribute to a society that respects Australia's Indigenous Peoples, cultures and knowledges'.

While the institution quietly dropped the threat of denying academic awards to those who fail to complete the course, anyone who does not finish it remains locked out of Monash's online learning system.

A spokesperson for the university confirmed Indigenous Voice remained a compulsory unit along with units on academic integrity and respectful relationships.

Victorian shadow education minister David Hodgett said although universities should offer courses on Indigenous people it was wrong to force students to study them.

'This is really yet another mandate by stealth as students are going to be punished and lose access if they don't complete,' he said

'Universities are about education. If they can't present this information in a way that encourages take up, then it's almost an admission of failure by the university'.




Tuesday, November 15, 2022

Texas teacher on leave after telling kids white race is ‘superior’

Only a few decades ago this was a common view so it is strange that it is now penalized. Black educational performance is notoriously poor so it is understandable that teachers in close touch with that would see a broader generalization underlying it.

The problem is with generalizations. Their coverage of reality is always limited

A Texas teacher has been placed on leave after a shocking video emerged of him saying he believes white people are “the superior” race.

In the video, the unidentified white teacher in the Pflugerville Independent School District, northeast of Austin, was captured saying, “Deep down in my heart, I’m ethnocentric, which means I think my race is the superior one.”

It’s unclear what led to the controversial conversation inside a classroom at Bohls Middle School, the New York Post reported.

Video obtained by broadcaster KVUE shows the students’ quick reaction to the statement, which prompted one student to ask, “So white is better than all?”

The teacher then asks the students to let him finish speaking before adding, “I think everybody thinks that, they’re just not honest about it.”

Stream more US news live & on demand with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer available for a limited time only >

Several students then appear to confront the teacher about his bold claim, asking him if he just openly admitted to being racist.

“I think everybody is a racist at that level,” the teacher responded.

When asked a second time if he just said he is racist, the teacher said, “I did. I did. If I’m going to be honest with you.”

“No, I’m not going to say it again. I said it enough,” the teacher added.

The teacher, seemingly done with the conversation, can then be heard asking students to put their phones down.

Parents of students in the school district said they found the conversation inappropriate and upsetting for their young children.

“I think the most disturbing piece is that it was a situation where kids had experienced this real-time,” Dr Shante Lyons, a parent in the district, told KVUE.

Another parent, Brian Hennington, told the outlet that this kind of conversation should have never taken place in school.

“There are other personal experiences we’ve had as people of colour that we had individually, but to see this in the classroom setting is just not acceptable,” Mr Hennington said.

Pflugerville Independent School District Superintendent Douglas Killian released a statement following the incident, saying officials were aware of “an inappropriate conversation” that took place during an advisory class.

“This interaction does not align with our core beliefs as a district. The video of the conversation includes statements that we find wholly inappropriate. The teacher has been placed on administrative leave while Human Resources conducts an investigation,” Dr Killian said.




Monday, November 14, 2022

Elon Musk’s Twitter ‘hellscape’ for Australia's public broadcaster

The petals can't take blowback?

New Twitter owner Elon Musk has been desperately trying to reassure advertisers in recent days the social media platform won’t become “a free-for-all hellscape”. But try telling that to the ABC, Elon.

Alarming statistics quietly released by the public broadcaster show that trending on Twitter has already become dangerous for many of its journalists, who are seeking help in record numbers from an in-house “social media wellbeing adviser” to help them deal with the online “hellscape”.

The numbers show by far the highest incidence of workplace health and safety (WHS) incidents at the ABC over the past year has occurred as a direct result of interaction with social media, including Twitter – which is used by more journalists at Aunty than any other platform.

In total, 76 work-related incidents at the ABC – or 32 per cent of the entire total of workplace incidents at Aunty for the year to June 2022 – were put down to what the public broadcaster dubbed “social media safety” incidents.

Furthermore, in the fine print of the 2022 ABC annual report, it is noted that the ABC’s in-house social media wellbeing adviser, Nicolle White – who has apparently been with the public broadcaster since October 2020 — has “assisted with 94 incidents and proactively reached out to 48 staff following recognition of high-risk of abuse, such as trending on Twitter or media mentions”.

That revelation comes as ABC Media Watch host Paul Barry hinted on his weekly show last week the ABC was currently “weighing up if it wants to remain on Twitter under Musk’s new world order”.

Some of the ABC’s highest-profile journalists have also been “weighing up” whether to stay on social media, with the likes of former 7.30 host Leigh Sales and ABC News Breakfast presenter Lisa Millar deleting their accounts over bizarre Twitter attacks claiming they had a ‘‘right-wing bias’’.

The ABC annual report has acknowledged the seriousness of the current social media issues being faced, amid an increasingly toxic online environment.

“Online safety, especially in the social media environment, represents a growing risk to ABC workers, talent, and audiences,” the report said. “The ABC actively manages these risks through its dedicated in-house staff and is working in collaboration with the Australian eSafety Office to publish materials that support the broader media community.”

The growing number of incidents on Twitter and other platforms appears to be costing the ABC money. The ABC’s annual report shows indicative premiums for Comcare, the government’s workers compensation insurer, will rise from $3.3m in the year to June 2022, to more than $3.8m in the year to June 2023.

The ABC notes the rise reflects “higher-than-expected ABC claims costs … due to increased mental stress claims”.

The revelations of the mental and financial cost to the ABC are likely to ratchet up pressure for the public broadcaster to more strongly police the use of Twitter by staff.

Under questioning from the Liberals’ Sarah Henderson and James McGrath in Senate estimates last week, ABC managing director David Anderson said he was putting “all employees on notice” about Twitter use, amid suggestions some were too engaged.

“In regards to the fact that all people who are active on personal use of social media, especially Twitter, I think you can say I’ve cautioned all of them,” he said.




Sunday, November 13, 2022

Sports Star to Be Jailed 10 Months for ‘Transphobic’ Message That ‘God Created Adam and Eve’

One of the most legendary soccer players of his time received a jail sentence and a fine for posting “transphobic” social media messages citing the Bible’s creation account.

“God created Adam and Eve,” wrote retired Greek football legend Vassilis Tsiartas in the second of two Facebook posts opposing a 2017 law that would have lowered the age to legally change one’s gender to 15 and removed other legal barriers.

The 49-year-old initially responded by saying, “I hope that the first sex changes will be made to the children of those who voted for this abomination.” Members of Parliament may as well “legalize pedophiles and complete their crimes” against nature, he wrote.

While citing the Book of Genesis, the 18-year soccer standout explained his faith-based objection to extreme gender ideology and the redefinition of marriage.

“Anyone can have his preferences whether he is a man or a woman, and I completely respect that. For me, however, a couple is only a man and a woman, the rest are just together. I’m not going to accept all the weddings, all the parades, and anything else they do as normal,” Tsiartas wrote. He said he had no time for anyone who claims “those who don’t agree are racists.”

Human “dignity,” he said, came from a higher power than mankind. “God created Adam and Eve. The rest [of gender identities] were manufactured for consumption,” he concluded.

Tsiartas received a 10-month suspended prison sentence and a suspended fine of 5,000 euros from the Single-Member Misdemeanor Court of Athens. The Transgender Support Association, which brought the lawsuit, called punishing his biblical views “particularly important for the transgender community.” Tsiartas plans to appeal the decision.

The ruling marks at least the second time a European court has ruled that biblical values violate the human rights of transgender individuals.

In 2019, a British court ruled that “belief in Genesis 1:27, lack of belief in transgenderism, and conscientious objection to transgenderism in our judgment are incompatible with human dignity and conflict with the fundamental rights of others.” Genesis 1:27, often cited as the cornerstone of human rights, states: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

“This I understand to be legalese meaning that my belief in God and the dishonesty of using transgender pronouns is akin to Nazism,” wrote Dr. David Mackereth, a Reformed Baptist physician who was fired from his job with the U.K.’s Department for Work and Pensions in 2018 for theoretically declining to refer to “any six-foot tall, bearded man” as “madam.”

“The teaching of Genesis 1:27 is repeated throughout the Bible, including by Jesus Christ himself,” said Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which represented Mackereth. “It is fundamental to establishing the dignity of every human person but is, in a bizarre ironic twist, being branded as incompatible with that dignity.”

On June 29, the Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled that the lower court had erred in saying that Mackereth’s “belief in Genesis 1:27 did not amount to a protected characteristic” covered by the freedom of religion secured by the U.K.’s 2010 Equality Act. It also took aim at the lower court’s contention that Mackereth’s views were “likely to cause offence” to others. “The fact that a belief is likely to cause offence cannot, however, mean that it is automatically excluded from protection,” ruled the tribunal.

But the tribunal ruled that Mackereth’s actions stemmed from his “belief in Genesis 1:27, not the present state of information available” on transgenderism. Ultimately, the tribunal let his termination stand, saying that Christians have the right to practice their faith, but only if it does not conflict with the “rights” of others, such as LGBTQ provisions.

“I am grateful to the court for recognising that a belief that we are made by God, both male and female ‘in His image’ is not incompatible with human dignity,” said Mackereth, while he opposed its decision that religious liberty ranks below other putative rights.

Mackereth announced he will take his case to the Court of Appeal, because “my case affects everyone, not just me and Bible-believing Christians, but anyone who is concerned by compelled speech and transgender ideology being enforced on the NHS and other public services.”

“As Christians, we are not trying to be unkind to people in any way. As Christians we are called to love all people with Christian love,” Mackereth concluded. “But we cannot love people truly when we live and disseminate a lie.”

Ironically, the controversial bill’s supporters also invoked God while arguing for its passage. “What God is it that has us take decisions that push children into bullying, humiliation, and suicides?” asked left-wing then-Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, promoting a bill the Greek Orthodox Church called “Satanic.” Tsipras lost his position in 2019 to the more conservative Kyriakos Mitsotakis, who opposed the measure.

U.S. President Joe Biden has also cited the Bible to argue in favor of transgender injections and surgeries for minors.

Sources inside the Orthodox Church did not immediately respond to The Washington Stand’s requests for comment on the Tsiartas case.




Friday, November 11, 2022

What is "wellness"?

Is ‘wellness’ really a word? It was coined in America (where else?) in the late 1950s to mean: ‘the state or condition of being in good physical, mental, and spiritual health’. It was coined by people who said, in effect, let’s stop focussing on people being ill, or suffering from illness, and focus on being well instead.

It has been taken up enthusiastically since then – especially by the alternative medicine group who are more than happy to take money from people who are not especially ill, but who want to buy some ‘wellness’ to add to their present state of good health. These are the people who will tell you that you need to have a holistic approach – so you need the herbal teas, plus the sauna, plus the meditation plus anything else they can attach a price tag to.

But does ‘wellness’ work as a real word? How could you use it in a sentence? With its opposite ‘illness’ the answer is clear – you would always use it with a definite article, as in, ‘I’m suffering from an illness at the moment’. You would then name the illness concerned (which might be anything from whooping cough to rabies). But could you ever say, ‘I’m suffering from (or I have) a wellness at the moment’.

Oh, really, I respond, and what wellness might that be? What on earth could you possibly reply? ‘I have good skin tone at the moment. And my dandruff has gone away…’ The well-meaning clowns who coined ‘wellness’ did so as a deliberate antonym to ‘illness’ (which has held a useful place in the English language for 500 years).

But, well-meaning or not, the concept is inherently incoherent. I think if you have ‘wellness’ that means you are feeling pretty normal at the moment. But this is not something that needs dealing with, or treatment, or can be bought in a packet.




Thursday, November 10, 2022

Musk is right - free speech must cost something

Elon Musk is the type of person who feels compelled to say what he thinks out loud. Doing so has just cost him $US44 billion. It will soon cost other Twitter users around $US8 a head. Now that the self-described free speech absolutist owns Twitter, free speech will come at a price.

Maybe it’s about time. Information might seem free on the internet, but that’s because we rarely measure the cost of receiving it. Back in 2006 – coincidentally the year that Twitter launched – Esther Dyson, the philanthrepreneur daughter of physicist Freeman Dyson – penned an article for The New York Times, arguing that it should cost money to send email. “The Internet is ridden with spam, most mail is unwanted and some is objectively dangerous,” Dyson wrote, which “illustrates a market failure”.

Elon Musk has taken over Twitter and you might soon have to pay for your coveted blue tick.
Elon Musk has taken over Twitter and you might soon have to pay for your coveted blue tick.CREDIT:AP

The system which Dyson proposed was one in which senders would get charged by the email. And she had it all worked out. “I’d charge nothing for people I know, 50 cents for anyone new (though if I add the sender to my list after reading the mail, I’ll cancel the 50 cents) and $3 for random advertisers. Ex-boyfriends pay $10.” The problem she diagnosed is more relevant than ever and the solution, as anyone who receives too many emails can agree, is very attractive. There is, after all, a time-cost to receiving and reviewing emails. It feels right that we should be paid for that time.

Under the new Chief Twit’s proposal, everyone who cares to prove they are a real human being and pay for a subscription will have their tweets marked with a blue tick. Subscribers’ tweets will be prioritised in replies and searches and they will be served half as many ads. It’s an elegant solution to a couple of common Twitter problems: it would become financially burdensome to operate a Twitter “trollfarm”, in which individuals operate many accounts.

It would also ensure that tweeters become more accountable: a credit card would be on file for each handle, making the perpetrators of genuine hate speech easier to trace. And it would facilitate interaction between verified users who care enough about the exchange of ideas to pay for the opportunity to converse. Oh, and the blue check mark which currently claims to identify which accounts are “trustworthy” would now be allocated to subscribers rather than meted out as a symbol of status.

So of course, the Twitterati is outraged. Not because the price tag will limit who can afford free speech – it won’t, as people will continue to be able to interact with Twitter for free – but because their blue checks will be taken away from them. The downwardly mobile are aghast, and are threatening to abandon a site which no longer marks them as special. Twitter’s internal apparatchiks who once conferred (and enjoyed) these badges of power are also lamenting their loss.

Former Twitter head of global policy communications Nu Wexler, frets that this will make it harder to spot misinformation. But a day spent among the swill tweeted out by blue-ticked conspiracy theorists and verified has-beens quickly puts the lie to this claim. Much of the disinformation on Twitter is generated or boosted by these blue ticked somebodies, while many of the world’s foremost academics have not been granted – and probably never applied for – the online honour.

Even though it often feels like wading through a sewer, the platform has value. For information addicts, Twitter often still is “simply the most interesting place on the Internet”, as Elon Musk said. In an unusual turn of events in the tech world, someone has taken over the platform who genuinely cares about making it good.

For people who like encountering new ideas and even debating them, Twitter has become the last social platform where words take priority over selfies, if not over self-aggrandisement. Unlike LinkedIn, nobody is “humbled” or “privileged”. Unlike Instagram, it’s more than pets and pouts. Unlike Facebook, people still use it. When it works well, it provides an opportunity to engage with others on a wide range of topics. Lonely people find community. Curious people are exposed to different perspectives. Movements are started. Some people like it so much they even hack in through ministers’ accounts to watch porn.

Musk, who has described himself as a “free speech absolutist” is unusually passionate about the opportunities that Twitter provides to create a “digital town square” in which a wide range of ideas can be debated important for civilisation’s future. It’s undoubtedly important for civilisation to find a way to be civil.

Now that Netflix and the new puritanism has killed the appointment pub night, there are fewer and fewer spaces in which the price of a beer will buy you great conversation. Without a global town square, we become intellectual villagers. There have been a number of attempts to replace Twitter. Platforms have been started that cater to the “right” or the “left”, allowing them to hang out with like-minded people. The failure of these platforms to catch on is a reminder that conversation is boring when everyone agrees. Twitter is toxic but would no Twitter be better?

Free speech has consequences, as the Twitterati likes to say. But the “consequences” delivered by the online mob were too often the type of consequences meted out by schoolyard bullies. Now instead, in one corner of the internet, free speech will come with a price tag. Maybe Musk is onto something. Maybe if we’re lucky he’ll take on email next. Maybe in the online world, free speech needs to cost something to be worth anything.




Wednesday, November 09, 2022

Elon Musk has reiterated his commitment to free speech despite cracking down on parody accounts on Twitter.

The new CEO of the social media platform said he still allows one user to track his private jet despite risks to the billionaire's personal safety.

It came as the Tesla boss is facing increasing criticism for banning accounts impersonating him on the social media site, in apparent defiance of his free speech claims.

Musk tweeted Sunday: 'My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk.'




Tuesday, November 08, 2022

How a silly little bit of satire got me sacked

I always advise younger journalists never to use irony or make jokes on social media, so when I was effectively sacked for alluding to an edible fruit of the palm family, I should have known better. And of course I did know better. I deleted my three-word tweet within minutes. But screenshots live for ever. There are no second thoughts on Twitter, no clarifications allowed. No second chances either. It is judge and jury and will take away your career, reputation and livelihood at the click of a mouse, if pusillanimous employers allow it to.

I’d been in countless Twitter storms in the past over Scottish nationalism, hate crime, gender. It’s what Twitter does. So when the editor of the Scottish Herald, for which I had been a columnist for more than 20 years, rang to tell me I was suspended, I thought he was joking. He wasn’t. The order had come from ‘upstairs’. I was out.

What for? Had I libelled someone? Nope. Broken the law? Nah. Had I been accused of groping? Of course not. I hadn’t even offended Twitter’s notoriously woke algorithms. I had used a word that is ‘not acceptable’ and the Daily Mail (shock horror) had asked for a comment. I pointed out that publications including the Guardian and Newsweek had recently published articles about how black Tories had been abused as ‘coconuts’ (brown on the outside, white on the inside) by the left. My tweet – ‘a coconut cabinet?’ – was an allusion to this, an ironic response to another tweet by someone who had said the presence of black ministers in the Conservative cabinet does not make it truly ‘diverse’.




Monday, November 07, 2022

AIDS to language?

During the height of the Aids epidemic a body was established called the ‘Aids Council of NSW’. I’m sure in fighting that awful illness they did splendid work. But that epidemic is now over. So, was the ‘Aids Council of NSW’ thanked politely and dissolved?

Oh, no. Like too many organisations set up for a special purpose it just changed course, kept getting taxpayers’ money and did other things. Its current project seems to be to undermine the English language.

They now appear to see their role in Australian life as wiping out of the dictionary any words to do with normal family life. They are now telling employers to ban the words ‘mother’ and ‘father’. According to the Daily Telegraph Acon encourages:

‘…using terms like “primary caregiver” (and) “secondary caregiver” making sure we’re not referring to partners using gender terms like “mother” and “dad” is really important’.

Well, no. What is really important is that we ignore knuckleheads like this. But here’s what’s really alarming – up to sixty government departments and agencies including the prime minister’s office, schools, universities, police, the ABC as well as private businesses have signed up as members to the training schemes they run.

And who is paying for this? You are. They receive $13 million in taxpayer funding a year. I hereby call upon governments to withdraw all this funding. The Aids epidemic is over. Acon is no longer needed, and appears to have been taken over by fanatics. The public should not be funding the enemies of the English language!




Sunday, November 06, 2022

Is Gmail Silencing Republicans?

I have felt the effect of this. I get lots of begging emails from Democrat candidates -- including from Brainless Biden and Camelhead Harris. But it is quite rare for an email from a Republican candidate to come through via Gmail.

Seeing my preference is for the GOP, that is pretty weird. The story below may explain it

It started as strange conflicts sometimes do: with a couple of older people telling their son that something is wrong with their shared email account. “My parents, who have a Gmail account, aren’t getting my campaign emails,” Representative Greg Steube of Florida told Google CEO Sundar Pichai in July 2020, during a congressional hearing that was ostensibly about antitrust law. “My question is, why is this only happening to Republicans?”

Though this exchange was widely regarded as goofy and kind of random, it started a conversation about Republicans’ relationship to the email inbox and Google’s alleged interference with it. This spring, the conflict escalated following the publication of a study conducted by researchers at North Carolina State University, which found that Gmail sent most emails from “left-wing” candidates to the inbox and most emails from “right-wing” candidates to the spam folder. Over the next couple of months, Republicans in Congress took private meetings with Google’s chief legal officer and railed against the company in public. Then, in June, a group of Republican senators introduced a bill called the Political BIAS Emails Act, which would “prohibit providers of email services from using filtering algorithms to flag emails from political campaigns that consumers have elected to receive as spam.”

This bill hasn’t gone anywhere, partly because Google has made the point moot. Shortly after the bill was introduced, Google asked the Federal Election Commission to review its plan for a pilot program that would allow political campaigns to apply for exemption from spam filtering. (The review was requested to ensure that Google’s program wouldn’t constitute an illegal “in-kind” campaign contribution, which it could have even though it was offered to all political parties.) The Democratic National Committee called the program “unfortunate” and accused Google of succumbing to a “bad-faith pressure campaign,” but the FEC ultimately approved the plan in August. The pilot program is now in full swing; Republicans have gotten their way just ahead of the midterm elections. ?




Saturday, November 05, 2022

The incorrect past

Another attempt to change what cannot be changed

A National Archive blogger has red-flagged Sir Winston Churchill’s use of the ‘derogatory’ term Huns to describe the Nazis.

Mark Dunton, Principal Records Specialist, described undertaking research into the signing of the Atlantic Charter on August 14, 1941.

In the blog, titled 'Winston Churchill’s secret voyage (Part one)', Mr Dunton referred to a letter Churchill wrote to US President Franklin D Roosevelt on August 4.

It read: 'We are just off. It is twenty-seven years ago today that Huns began their last war.

'We must make a good job of it this time. Twice ought to be enough. Look forward do much to our meeting. Kindest regards.'

The archives author then warned readers: 'The use of the derogatory word "Huns" to describe the Germans obviously needs to be viewed in the historical context.'

The National Archives is located in Kew, Richmond, and 'are the guardians of over 1,000 years of iconic national documents.'




Thursday, November 03, 2022

The ultimate in female bitchiness

I am no fan of Meghan Markle but can it be wrong for ANY woman to refer to her husband as her husband?

Megyn Kelly slammed Meghan Markle for constantly referring to Prince Harry as 'her husband,' claiming the Duchess is only doing it for attention.

Kelly, 51, didn't hold back during the latest episode of her podcast, where she criticized the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for 'ripping on the Royals to whom they owe, literally, all of their fame and most of their fortune.'

Kelly - who claimed Americans 'don't like royalty' - took great annoyance to Markle's constant reference to Harry as 'her husband.'

'We get it, you bagged the gorilla,' she said on Tuesday's episode. 'Congratulations, you got the big bear, [and] you want us all to know.'




Wednesday, November 02, 2022

Democrats desperate to censor anyone that disagrees with them

A report Monday from the left-wing Intercept revealed shocking details on how the FBI and Department of Homeland Security secretly affected the 2020 election and are rapidly expanding their suppression of dissent.

In the spring, DHS revealed that it had a Disinformation Governance Board, headed by a wacky zealot named Nina Jankowicz. The New York Post led the charge against that “Ministry of Truth,” and many people believed the peril ended when that board was dissolved. But far more insidious federal censorship efforts are proliferating.

The FBI, DHS, Secret Service and even Customs and Border Protection are elbowing social-media companies like Facebook and Twitter to engage in “censorship by surrogate,” as law professor Jonathan Turley observed.

As the covert war against “misinformation” expands, the list of federally prohibited online thoughts is snowballing. DHS is targeting “inaccurate information on ‘the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine,’ ” The Intercept reported.

Are federal censors still seeking to enforce President Biden’s delusion that COVID vaccines prevent transmission? Are they continuing to suppress any information about COVID originating in a Wuhan lab? Is any criticism of Biden’s botched Afghan withdrawal considered heresy? In many cases, DHS notified Facebook and Twitter to suppress parody accounts — perhaps because nothing is more subversive than laughing at politicians.

How many votes were swayed by federal censorship in 2020, and how many will be swayed in next week’s midterm election? The campaign by the feds and former CIA poohbahs to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story was only the tip of the iceberg in the presidential race.

“The FBI agent who primed social media platforms to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story continued to have a role in DHS policy discussions,” The Intercept noted.

As the Foundation for Freedom Online recently reported, federal contractors also alerted DHS (which then elbowed Big Tech) to suppress hundreds of posts by Americans that were “‘casting doubt on the integrity of the election outcome’ via criticism of things like the viability of drop boxes and mail-in ballots.”

The real goal of the Truth Cops is to control America’s minds. Jen Easterly, Biden’s Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency chief, declared that “the most critical infrastructure is our cognitive infrastructure, so building that resilience to misinformation and disinformation . . . is incredibly important.”

And the most important cognitive “fix” is to train Americans to never doubt Uncle Sam.

Biden’s National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism explicitly proclaims a “broader priority” of “enhancing faith in government.”

In a March meeting with top Twitter executives, FBI official Laura Dehmlow “warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government.” The FBI has 80 agents on a task force to curb “subversive data utilized to drive a wedge between the populace and the government.” Mike Benz, a former top State Department official, warns that thanks to DHS string-pulling, “The U.S. government, in effect, censored the ability to ‘cast doubt’ on the U.S. government.”

On Sunday’s “Face the Nation,” Biden chief censor Jen Easterly warned that the midterm elections face a “very complex threat environment” because “you have rampant disinformation.”

Easterly didn’t offer as an example Biden’s claim last week in Syracuse that the price for a gallon of gas was “over $5 when I took office.” What moral standing do federal officials have to suppress alleged private misinformation when the commander-in-chief is brazenly lying?

Federal censorship efforts have almost certainly been far more extensive than yet revealed. Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter, could give a heroic booster shot to the First Amendment by revealing all the emails, texts and other messages federal agents sent to pressure Twitter to muzzle American citizens. If federal agencies have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear, right?




Tuesday, November 01, 2022

Arizona GOP candidate's Twitter account restored after Musk tweets that he was 'looking into' suspension

Mark Finchem, the Republican candidate for Secretary of State in Arizona, tweeted on Monday that his Twitter account was temporarily suspended then restored after new owner Elon Musk said he was "looking into" the incident.

"Twitter has blocked my account from speaking truth with one week left until the election," Finchem wrote on his Facebook page on Monday afternoon.

Jenna Ellis, a former advisor to Donald Trump, tweeted at Musk, saying that Finchem's account was placed in "read-only mode," meaning that his timeline is still visible but he can't tweet or like posts.

Musk, who closed the $44 billion deal to purchase Twitter last week, responded that he was "looking into" the suspension, and Finchem's account was restored within an hour.