fourth estate

The jab: The UK Telegraph calls for justice

Posted on by hk80u

The statement

“Matt Hancock should be arrested for wilful misconduct in public office. The slithy tove can – and must – be dragged before a Select Committee and made to answer for his actions and the vast hurt they have caused.”

(Matt Handcock is the former UK Secretary of State for Health and Social Care.)


The source

The UK Telegraph, viewed today; quoted by NaturalNews.com, cited by Martin Geddes on Telegram, 15 March 2023)

( https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2023/03/07/matt-hancock-should-arrested-wilful-misconduct-public-office/ )

https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-03-12-telegraph-headline-arrest-covid-lockdown-matt-hancock.html

My take on it

And so it begins.

I just hope that it’s true. According to the Telegraph, “Award-winning journalist Allison Pearson is a columnist and the chief interviewer of the Daily Telegraph.”

Question: What has prompted this headline, against the tide?

Answer: “The Telegraph has obtained more than 100,000 WhatsApp messages between Matt Hancock and other ministers and officials at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. … For eight days now, The Telegraph has published the most breathtakingly damning stories about the misuse of power (and “science”) by Matt Hancock and his cabal during the pandemic.”

The very word secret is repugnant in a free and open society.

“The Telegraph has obtained …” I love that well-worn phrase. And I thank God for leaks and for whistleblowers who bring light and fresh air where it’s needed. Suddenly the obvious conclusions may now be spoken out – that the UK’s former Health Minister is only an individual after all, despite all that power; that he has abused that power in a most egregious way; and that justice cries out for him and his lackeys to be brought to fair trial for wilful misconduct in public office.

Can’t happen here? You watch.

Covid censorship: “Twitter was basically a subsidiary of the FBI.”

Posted on by hk80u

The statement

“Did the US government ever contact you or anyone else at Twitter to moderate or censor certain tweets? Yes or No?”

“We received legal commands to remove content from the platform from the US government and governments all around the world.” (Ms Gadde)

“Thank God for Matt Taibbi. Thank God for Elon Musk, for allowing to show us and the world that Twitter was basically a subsidiary of the FBI, censoring real medical voices with real expertise that put real American lives at risk because they didn’t have that information.”

The Source

Representative Nancy Mace, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, quizzing Twitter executives including Ms Gadde on 9 February 2023 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0ME1Mx50gQ )

My take on it

My earlier post on the whole-of-society censorship model explains how the whole system collaborates.

This congressional testimony fleshes out a significant player in just one of its four domains, ie the media.

Dr Pierre Kory has recently condemned the general stance of the media in steadfastly refusing even to recognise vaccine injury.

It is probably helpful to overall awakening of the general public for these revelations to be coming from both directions.

Censorship: the ‘whole of society’ model

Posted on by hk80u

The statement

A ‘whole-of-society’ effort … that’s actually the terminology of basically every mainstream, censorship professional … What that means is four categories of institutions in society all working together towards the common goal of censorship. So you’ve got government, the private sector, civil society and the news media and fact checking. … At the News Media & Fact Checking level you’ve go political like-mindeds among the media that are propped up by the government, by the public sector, by the civil society, so that they can manage public narratives about various issues and can amplify pressure for censorship by creating negative press on the tech companies.”

 

The source

Mike Benz, Executive Director, Foundation for Freedom Online, interviewed on American Thought Leaders

(https://t.me/DowdEdward/2252)

 

My take on it

It becomes clear that Censorship is worthy of being called an industry.

It is also a system; which raises the question, What is its objective, its deliverable?

One slide on this clip makes that statement that ‘Disinformation is not going to be fixed by government acting alone.’ So there you have it: Disinformation is the claimed justification for censorship.

In the Perfect Markets model there is a full, free and instantaneous flow of information. In a free society each individual gets to make of what they will of whatever information may cross their path.

Censorship is then a barometer of whether the government is seeking to serve the people, or just to control them.

 

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Disinformation-CIA-Casey.png

Covid-19: ‘Relatively no effect on deaths in the United States’

Posted on by hk80u

The statement

‘Johns Hopkins published this study on Sunday which posits that Covid is nowhere near the disaster we’re being told it is. I would summarize it for you or offer pull-quotes but honestly you just have to read it yourself because it’s mind-blowing. The original article is now deleted from the Johns Hopkins website … for some reason. Luckily the internet is forever and it’s available via the Wayback Machine.’

Following are just  two paragraphs from that article:

‘According to new data, the U.S. currently ranks first in total COVID-19 cases, new cases per day and deaths. Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Hopkins, critically analyzed the effect of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in her webinar titled “COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data.”

…..

These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.’



The source

Doc Holliday, writing about Professor Genevieve Briand (https://notthebee.com/article/a-few-days-ago-johns-hopkins-published-a-study-saying-corona-is-nbd-they-then-deleted-it-read-it-here-in-its-entirety)

Dr Genevieve Briand is Assistant Director for the Master’s in Applied Economics program at Johns Hopkins University. 

On 22 November 2020 the Johns Hopkins News-Letter reported on a webinar presented by Briand entitled ‘COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data.’

Four days later the News-Letter removed the article from its website.  The reasoning?

‘It was brought to our attention that our coverage of Genevieve Briand’s presentation ‘COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data’ has been used to support dangerous inaccuracies that minimize the impact of the pandemic.  We decided on Nov. 26 to retract this article to stop the spread of misinformation, as we noted on social media. However, it is our responsibility as journalists to provide a historical record. We have chosen to take down the article from our website, but it is available here as a PDF.’


My take on it

I agree with ‘Doc Holliday’ that the article is well worth reading.  This is precisely the sort of analysis that we need in order to restore some perspective to the discussion. 

Universities are supposed to be seats of learning, and discovery, and debate.  This censorial behaviour does not honour that purpose.  What it does do is protect and enshrine the status quo, and serve vested interests.

Is it coincidental that JHU hosted ‘Event 201, A Global Pandemic Exercise’, in October 2019?  The participants in that simulation exercise openly discussed the challenge of keeping public commentators ‘on message’.  Strategies include social media becoming active participants that can ‘flood the zone’ in order to displace discordant information.  (And we have certainly witnessed that.) 

But who gets to decide what is accurate?  Clearly not ourselves, if that option is being taken out of our hands.