Breaking News

Governments clamp down on Politically “Dangerous” Speech & “Hate” Speech while Facebook’s AI which helps spread both can’t be fixed

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Ireland is introducing “hate speech” laws. “Hate speech” laws are not simply censorship. Their deeper purpose is to terminate equality under the law, so the normative indigenous members of a nation are made to feel like an alien underclass.

The US Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) is broadening its efforts to curb “dangerous speech” – misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation.

Meanwhile, Facebook’s artificial intelligence (“AI”) algorithms have given it an insatiable habit for “lies and hate speech.” But the man who built them can’t fix the problem.

One of the latest, and perhaps most disturbing, new frontiers of censorship is the escalating means of excluding citizens from the financial system as extra-judicial punishment for expressing views or engaging in political activism disapproved of by establishment power.

The Exposé has been a victim of this latest new frontier of censorship.  A week ago, for the third time this year, The Exposé’s account was frozen and the donations in the account have been “temporarily” blocked.  Read more HERE. Support the Expose HERE .


Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…


How Facebook Got Addicted to Spreading Misinformation

The company’s AI algorithms gave it an insatiable habit for lies and hate speech. Now the man who built them can’t fix the problem.

[Note: read the article to understand what the author means by “lies” and “hate speech.”]

When the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke in March 2018, it would kick off Facebook’s largest publicity crisis to date. It compounded fears that the algorithms that determine what people see were amplifying fake news and hate speech, and prompted the company to start a team with a directive that was a little vague: to examine the societal impact of the company’s algorithms.

Joaquin Quiñonero Candela was a natural pick to head it up. In his six years at Facebook, he’d created some of the first algorithms for targeting users with content precisely tailored to their interests, and then he’d diffused those algorithms across the company. Now his mandate would be to make them less harmful. However, his hands were tied, and the drive to make money came first.

Read the full article by MIT Technology Review HERE

“Hate Speech” laws: Welcome to Stasi Ireland!

Those who have doubted that Western Civilisation is in the process of being dismantled are about to receive their definitive reply.  The supposedly ‘unavoidable’ fire-brigade damage inflicted on our freedoms in the Spring of 2020, which has never been repaired or reversed, is about to be consolidated.

Since those fateful days in the Spring of 2020, this was always going to happen, being baked into the lockdown cake. This is because, if an ‘authority’ suspends supposedly inalienable rights and freedoms, and then, after a long period of withholding them without objectively discernible justification, trickles their simulacrum back out under the rubric of concession, it soon becomes clear that these rights and freedoms have ceased to exist. After that, it is only a matter of carting the husks away.

This week, in my country, Ireland, the bulletin board has overnight been posted with a new set of instructions, concerning what may be written, said or — in the first analysis — thought. It is called the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022, and relates to the issue that has become known as “hate speech,” which refers to the manner in which the citizenry is henceforth to be permitted to speak to and about certain named categories of ‘protected minorities’ whom we awoke not long ago to find unexpectedly in our midst.

Having had an opportunity to read the draft Bill, I believe it to be extremely dangerous and, in fact, capable of, in the first instance, entirely deleting what is left of public debate or discussion on a number of issues: viz, race, “colour,” sexuality, what is called gender, Islam, atheism, et cetera — i.e., “protected characteristics,” which essentially means characteristics protected under Political Correctness/Cultural Marxism – as well as, purely tokenistically, nationality, disability and “descent,” whatever that may be.

Instead of “critical opinions,” however, the Bill uses the term “hatred,” an amorphous term that is nowhere defined other than tautologously, as follows:

‘Hatred’ means hatred against a person or a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their protected characteristics or any one of those characteristics.

In some contexts, by way of offering clarification, readers of the Bill are referred to the EU Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of November 2008, dealing with ‘combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law’. (Confirming that the Bill is, accordingly, the expression of EU policy and mandates.) However, the Framework Decision tells us very little else, its ‘definitions’ being just as tautologous as those in the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022. “Hatred,” for example, is defined in the Framework Decision as follows:

‘Hatred’ shall be understood as referring to hatred based on race, colour, religion, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

This is in no sense a definition of “hatred.” In fact, it tells us nothing of what hatred is, assuming that everyone already knows. The trouble is that when the law starts to trick around with notions that ‘everyone already knows, we very rapidly descend into subjectivism, arbitrariness, and – yes – prejudice.

Read the full article by John Waters Unchained HERE

Big Brother’s Playbook: DHS Efforts to Curb “Dangerous” Speech

The federal government’s guidelines to counter “misinformation” and “disinformation” – what we might more accurately describe as Big Brother’s Playbook – has been released. The US government and its allies, including media gatekeepers and educational institutions and global corporations, have become the judges and juries of “misinformation.”  And Big Tech is their executioner.

According to recently-filed court documents in Missouri v. Biden: “The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous.”

It’s especially relevant to the 2022 and 2024 elections:

  • DHS is “directly engaging with social media companies to flag MDM.”  MDM is defined as misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation. It is doing so “ahead of midterm elections in 2022” and is readying its efforts with eyes focused on 2024.
  • DHS is questioning how to “inspire innovators to partner with the government” without this “being seen as government ‘propaganda’.”
  • The DHS focus on disinformation isn’t limited to elections. It is recommended to focus on misinformation “that undermines critical functions carried out by other key democratic institutions, such as the courts, or by other sectors such as the financial system, or public health measures.”
  • The DHS plan would “provide financial support” to non-governmental partners who counter “false and misleading narratives.” In other words, US government contractors who would receive funding to suffocate anti-government narratives.

I hope the dangers of these programs and initiatives are apparent. It would be the federal government and its partners who would define misinformation. These aren’t neutral observers; rather, their power relies on a narrative. Perceived illegitimacy is a risk.

In other words, it’s the belief that’s the threat, not the “misinformation” by itself. Thus, the real targets are those who listen and read and watch. Beliefs are shaped by limiting what they can see. Better to keep those dangerous ideas out of public view.

Read the full article by The Reactionary HERE

The Consortium Imposing the Growing Censorship Regime

There has been some reporting – by me [Glenn Greenwald] and others – on the new and utterly fraudulent “disinformation” industry. This newly minted, self-proclaimed expertise, grounded in little more than crude political ideology, claims the right to officially decree what is “true” and “false” for purposes of, among other things, justifying state and corporate censorship of what its “experts” decree to be “disinformation.”

The industry is funded by a consortium of a small handful of neoliberal billionaires (George Soros and Pierre Omidyar) along with U.S., British and EU intelligence agencies. These government-and-billionaire-funded “anti-disinformation” groups often masquerade under benign-sounding names: The Institute for Strategic Dialogue, The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Lab, Bellingcat, the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.

That these groups are funded by the West’s security state, Big Tech, and other assorted politically active billionaires is not speculation or some fevered conspiracy theory. For various legal reasons, they are required to disclose their funders, and these facts about who finances them are therefore based on their own public admissions. So often the financing is funnelled through well-established front groups for the CIA, the State Department and the U.S. National Security State, such as “National Endowment for Democracy.”

One of the latest, and perhaps most disturbing, new frontiers of censorship is the escalating means of excluding citizens from the financial system as extra-judicial punishment for expressing views or engaging in political activism disapproved of by establishment power. In one sense, this is not new.

In 2012, the Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee demanded that financial services companies such as the online payment processor PayPal, credit card companies MasterCard and Visa, and the Bank of America all terminated the accounts of WikiLeaks as punishment.

This year PayPal has expanded the use of expulsion from the financial system as punishment for what it deems “extremist” political views and activities. There is no question that exclusion from the financial system is becoming the tool of choice for Western censors in both the public and private sectors, who work together — just as Big Tech and the US Security State do – to identify and punish dissidents too dangerous to be permitted to speak.

Read the full article by Glenn Greenwald HERE

Share this page to Telegram

Categories: Breaking News, World News

Tagged as:

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

27 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sarah Connor
Sarah Connor
1 month ago

Projection at it’s finest.
They are so gutless it’s pathetic.
Vengeance is mine sayth the Lord.

Truthbknown
Truthbknown
Reply to  Sarah Connor
1 month ago

The Lord better step aside! We the People demand blood!

Bob - Enough
Bob - Enough
Reply to  Sarah Connor
1 month ago

Maybe I am missing something, but the more they continue to push .. I mean whether it be for the jabs, the masks, theutter BS from the MSM, the LGBT agenda, the general control of the Nanny and Police state, just general changes in our chosen lifestyle etc., whereas you state “Vengeance is mine sayth the Lord.” … well I think he can come later, because first, I believe the people will undertake revolutions that make the French one look like a child’s party in McDonalds …then he can come and help us. I no longer care if that is their plan, I have had enough.

Not the greatest French lover, but read the subtitles = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MQ-SC9bmp4

john
john
1 month ago

Anything that they do ONLY applies to those who use the NAME’s that belong to those making the draconian laws.
If humanity wants to be free, STOP using variations of NAMES that are NOT the property of the individual using them. It really is that simple.
He who creates owns.
Legal fiction NAME’s are the property of the Crown Corporation under Crown Copyright.
Any individual using their property automatically enslave themselves to the Crown Corporation and its Laws, Statutes and Bills.
None of which applies to Men or Women. Just Corporate slaves.

raj patel
raj patel
Reply to  john
1 month ago

Yes, I read a book about this by Gary Fraughen. In the book he references the birth certificate where your first/christian name is in lower case and your surname is in upper case. The lower case first name is related to being born on the land and the upper case surname relates to a ship’s name – which are always in upper case – and this takes you to the sea where you become an inc. or something that can do business. The birth certificate places you into bondage as a debtor. Recommended reading.

john
john
Reply to  raj patel
1 month ago

The error that parents make when “registering” their property (child), is to hand over the given (Christian) name. The Christian name is private property and parents were never under any obligation to give it.
Without the Christian name, the State is unable to form joinder with their SURNAME.
So, although the fraudulent birth certificate places a child into bondage and Wards of the State, it cannot be achieved without the relinquishment of private property. The given (Christian) name.
For the record. ANYTHING registered 100% of the time ends in a loss of something. To register anything is to transfer ownership.

Plebney
Plebney
Reply to  john
1 month ago

Doesn’t really work. Jesus has a prior claim which obviates all others.

john
john
Reply to  Plebney
1 month ago

The Christian name is the property of Jesus. The SURNAME is the property of Satan. Which is why the two joined together is an abomination.

Watcher Seeker
Watcher Seeker
1 month ago

Was this an example of hate speech?

“Nicola Sturgeon is slammed for ‘dangerous’ language after raging that she ‘detests the Tories and all they stand for’ in interview where SNP chief hinted she WOULD do an election deal to put Keir Starmer in No10”.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11296243/Nicola-Sturgeon-hints-election-deal-Labour.html

What the legal system considers to be hate speech will depend on who says it. The law is no longer blind. Certain groups are shown favourtism. They can get away with saying things that would get others charged and convicted.

The “hate speech” laws are not about justice, they are tools for oppression and for silencing those who oppose agenda of the elite rulers.

Jayna Dinnyes
Jayna Dinnyes
Reply to  Watcher Seeker
1 month ago

The elite rulers of Great Britain are the Monarchy under The Christian Vatican in Rome, Italy (but they don’t want you to know that!)

Names
Names
Reply to  Jayna Dinnyes
1 month ago

I don’t think Evelyn De Rothschild is complimenting Charles’ necktie.

comment image

john
john
Reply to  Names
1 month ago

May i suggest you get up to date with the facts.
https://aim4truth.org/?s=british+pilgrims+society

trackback
1 month ago

[…] 1. Listopadu 2022 […]

Truthbknown
Truthbknown
1 month ago

Most “dangerous” and “hateful” speech in last 100 years:

“SAFE AND EFFECTIVE!!!”

Jayna Dinnyes
Jayna Dinnyes
1 month ago

The word “Facebook” is no longer in my vocabulary. I was kicked off of there last year for how to naturally prevent COVID-19 and ALL Coronavirus’ and to not take the poison quackcines. I won’t be trying to go back either. I now post publicly and freely on MeWe.
SURVIVE AND STAY WELL NATURALLY!
ETERNAL LIFE BLESSINGS FOR YAHWEH’S SAINTS!

The Happy Road.png
Islander
Islander
1 month ago

The main headline on the BBC News today is “Dover attack driven by hate, say terror police”.
Of course, it was! Is not this blindingly obvious?
Such a headline would hardly have been necessary when describing the IRA bombing atrocities back in the 60s and 70s, would it?!

John Steeples
John Steeples
1 month ago

What I do not understand with all three voting countries. The people in the country pay for the people work for us, but the not working for us any more because keeping this information in so the doing is a great injustice and it is going to get any better not be happy to live in full control of everybody

bill
bill
1 month ago

This has nothing to do with disinformation, and everything to do with free speech that doesn’t parrot the govt.’s self-serving narrative. Our Founding Fathers would have rightly recognized this as Tyranny.

john
john
Reply to  bill
1 month ago

A man or woman can say whatever they like. It is the slaves in their capacity as residents, citizens, legal fiction NAME’s that can’t.

trackback
1 month ago

[…] was frozen and the donations in the account have been “temporarily” blocked.  Read more HERE. Support the […]

trackback
1 month ago

[…] [Related: Governments clamp down on Politically “Dangerous” Speech & “Hate” Speech while Facebook…] […]