Connect with us

censorship

UN Moves Towards Handing Dictatorships Power to Control the Internet

Legitimizing web blackouts and free speech censorship.

Published

on

The United Nations wants to hand power to dictatorial regimes like China to control the Internet, prompting fears of a massive new free speech purge.

The General Assembly has approved a resolution sponsored by China and Russia to set up a committee of “international experts” whose role would be to stop “the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes.”

However, many caution that the move is merely a back door for authoritarian regimes to further censor dissent.

“The United States, European powers and rights groups fear that the language is code for legitimizing crackdowns on expression, with numerous countries defining criticism of the government as “criminal,” reports AFP.

Human Rights Watch said the list of sponsors for the resolution is “a rogue’s gallery of some of the earth’s most repressive governments” and “gives countries legal cover for internet blackouts and censorship, while creating the potential for criminalizing free speech.”

Governments like China already censor and turn off the Internet during times of civil unrest while doling out ‘social credit score’ punishments for those who criticize the state.

The Communist country is also rolling out a plan to force its citizens to pass a facial recognition test to use the Internet. Criticized the authorities? No Internet for you.

null

We predicted that all this would come to fruition nearly 10 years ago in an article entitled ‘Cybersecurity Measures Will Mandate Government “ID Tokens” To Use The Internet’.

“Under the guise of “cybersecurity,” the government is moving to discredit and shut down the existing Internet infrastructure in the pursuit of a new, centralized, regulated world wide web,” I wrote in June 2010.

The fact that the United Nations is attempting to legitimize this framework by handing oppressive regimes more power to define certain types of speech as criminal is part of a long term agenda.

As we previously highlighted, the United Nations global compact on migration expanded the definition of ‘hate speech’ to make it a crime to criticize mass immigration.

Under a second Trump administration the U.S. is almost certain to ignore any UN attempt to impose its hegemony over the Internet, but if the Democrats win in 2020 it could be a very different story.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.

Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading
Comments

censorship

Media Outlet Files Lawsuit to Challenge FAA Ban on Drone Footage at Texas Border

10,000 plus migrants massing as White House attempts cover-up by censoring press.

Published

on

Video Screenshot

A media outlet has filed a lawsuit in response to the Biden administration’s attempt to censor coverage of the 10,000-plus strong Haitian migrant army amassing under the Del Rio International Bridge by banning drones from flying over the area.

After Fox News, Infowars and other media outlets captured shocking footage of the huge mass of migrants, the FAA issued new flight restrictions banning the flight of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), a clear attempt to help the White House cover-up what’s really going on and control the narrative.

The lawsuit, filed by Free Speech Systems, argues that the federal government’s shut down of drone coverage “serves no other purpose than to hamper the efforts of the press in covering the unfolding crisis, in violation of Free Speech Systems’ First Amendment rights and should not stand.”

“Because of the significant number and the remote location of the migrants, it is difficult for the press to photograph the mass of migrants with traditional means, which renders the press unable to fully express the scope of the crisis in visual format, which is a critical component of the news stories that are being covered on the ground,” argues the lawsuit.

It further asserts that the use of drones is a crucial “newsgathering tool to capture images and videos of the mass of migrants and to measure, estimate, and document facts such as crowd size and movements across the border during this breaking news event and humanitarian crisis.”

The federal government’s ban on drones represents interference in the function of newsgathering and the exercise of the First Amendment, the lawsuit states, adding that drones do not represent a security risk because they operate below 400 feet, an elevation “not likely to interfere with the operation of manned aircraft, including any government aircraft that may be operating in the area.”

The lawsuit demands that the feds immediately rescind the ban on the use of drones for newsgathering purposes.

With at least 10,000 migrants already gathered in the area, intelligence suggests that this number could at least double in the coming days, emphasizing again why the Biden administration would like to censor the press to stop the truth being broadcast.

Read the full lawsuit here.

Infowars was able to capture shocking exclusive footage before the ban took effect after a launching a drone from the Mexico side of the border. Look out for that to be posted soon.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

censorship

Reddit Bans Vaccine-Skeptic Subreddit Just Days After CEO Promised to Defend “Dissent”

Subreddit deplatformed after hissy fit by left-wing users.

Published

on

SOPA Images via Getty Images

Reddit has completely banned a vaccine-skeptic subreddit just days after CEO Steve Huffman promised not to while claiming the site values “dissent.”

Well, that lasted long.

“Dissent is a part of Reddit and the foundation of democracy,” Huffman wrote in a blog post. “Reddit is a place for open and authentic discussion and debate.”

However, this sentiment wasn’t shared by Reddit’s notoriously censoriously intolerant left-wing community, which protested against Huffman’s free speech stance by switching numerous major subreddits to ‘private’ and vowing to keep them locked until vaccine skeptics were deplatformed.

That duly happened when the ‘r/NoNewNormal’ subreddit was placed in quarantine and then banned altogether.

The site justified the move by claiming ‘r/NoNewNormal’ users were brigading other forums (invading them to cause discord), something that’s only acceptable when left-wingers do it.

“In short, Reddit used an evidence-free claim to banish a forum which had 120,000 members engaging in “open and authentic discussion and debate” over vaccines, masks, and authoritarianism,” reports Zero Hedge.

54 other subreddits that dared to question mask mandates or the efficacy and safety of vaccines were also put under quarantine, meaning they don’t appear in search and users have to enter an email address to access their content.

As we highlighted last year, Reddit’s site policy openly allows hate speech against “people who are in the majority” – in other words, white people.

Back in 2019, a Reddit page dedicated to black issues declared that white people are no longer allowed to post there anymore.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

censorship

Questions Over Why Twitter Gives Taliban a Platform While Banning American Dissidents

Apparently, actual terrorist organizations are fine.

Published

on

Getty Images

Questions continue to swirl over why some social media platforms like Twitter are giving the Taliban, a terrorist organization under U.S. law, a public platform having permanently banned American dissidents and the President of the United States himself.

After Facebook and YouTube moved to ban any accounts associated with the Taliban following their takeover of Afghanistan, Twitter faced scrutiny as to why it hadn’t followed suit.

When a Taliban representative was asked for a response on the ban, he chided Facebook for tacitly supporting free speech while silencing those who express the wrong opinions.

“This question should be asked to those people who are claiming promoters of freedom of speech, who do not allow publication of all information. I can ask the Facebook company. This question should be asked to them,” said the Taliban spokesman.

However, Twitter has yet to suspend any major Taliban accounts, having previously banned the sitting President of the United States, Donald Trump, back in January.

“A spokesman for the radical Islamist group that has seized control of Afghanistan, Zabihullah Mujahid, has been using the platform to give updates about the group’s advance,” reports Fox News.

“Mujahid’s account is not verified but has nearly 280,000 followers and is regularly cited by major news outlets.”

Twitter has indicated that prominent Taliban members will be free to continue to use the platform so long as they “obey the rules.”

The Babylon Bee joked that Trump had secretly sneaked back on Twitter by identifying as a Taliban spokesperson.

While Islamic terrorist organizations are given free reign to amplify their propaganda by Twitter, American dissidents like Alex Jones, Roger Stone and countless others were banned years ago.

“Joe Rogan interviews all-American Alex Jones and the corporate media demands he be banned for “giving a platform to extremists,” commented Mike Cernovich.

“These same corporate media employees are giving a platform to the Taliban, and uncritically sharing their propaganda.”

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Trending