By Ethan Huff - afinalwarning.com |
The military-industrial complex is doubling down on its crusade against free expression, warning that the First Amendment should no longer be tolerated because it threatens "national security."
Citing the Jan. 6 "insurrection" against the United States Capitol as proof, Divya Ramjee and Elsa B. Kania, writing for the Pentagon's Defense One blog, contend that all online free speech needs to be filtered by a Ministry of Truth in order to prevent the type of "disinformation and incitements to violence" that led to the Capitol false flag attack.
"The events of January 6 showed existing approaches to quell disinformation and incitements to violence on social media platforms have failed, badly," Ramjee and Kania write.
"Even though the companies that run these platforms are displaying a new willingness to police them, up to and including banning the worst offenders, claims that U.S. tech companies can self-regulate and moderate dangerous content comprehensively should be regarded with extreme skepticism."
Twitter recently announced the rollout of a new "Birdwatch" feature that allows the leftist mob to snitch on other users who spread "wrongthink." This is still not enough for the Pentagon, though.
"Twitter's recent launch of Birdwatch, a crowd-sourcing forum to combat misinformation, is a welcome measure but at best a partial and imperfect solution to a far more systemic problem," Ramjee and Kania further write. "Instead, it is time, at long last, to regulate."
No matter what anti-free speech measures they try to impose on users, the tech giants always seem to come up short in the eyes of the Pentagon. The only solution, according to this deep state behemoth, is to "restructure fundamentally how social media platforms operate."
"New rules must be introduced for the algorithms that decide what users see and for the data these companies collect for themselves, as well as data scraping by third parties," Ramjee and Kania contend.
Another tool is artificial intelligence (AI), which can be programmed to steer traffic away from "misinformation" and towards the official government narrative on a particular subject. A Facebook user might be steered away from an article exposing 2020 election fraud, as one example, and instead be presented with an article claiming that Joe Biden is the rightful "president."
Twitter already uses AI technology to promote the "best" tweets that are considered "more relevant," meaning content that is government-approved. All other tweets are buried or shadow-banned for deviating from the "rightspeak" narrative.
The Pentagon wants to see Congress pass "robust legislation" to oversee how data is aggregated. AI algorithms need to be specifically programmed, it says, to ensure that all users are receiving the same propaganda at the same time, producing uniformity in belief.
The Pentagon also wants Congress to "tackle issues of far-right extremism and white supremacist violence that have become global threats." No mention is made in Ramjee and Kania's report about the threat of black and other racial group supremacy, which is also a threat.
"As social media continues to enable radicalization and mobilization by a range of threat actors, the questions that arise for tech policy and regulation are no longer only abstruse concerns for technocrats," Ramjee and Kania insist.
"To the contrary, these are core issues for U.S. national security that require attention and robust responses from multiple stakeholders. The attacks on the U.S. Capitol were coordinated across several platforms and fueled by falsehoods about a 'rigged' election that spread online. These platforms have consistently facilitated the rapid diffusion of groundless conspiracies, often in ways that can prey on those viewing such content out of curiosity or by mere passive exposure."
USA TODAY DENOUNCES TOM BRADY FOR BEING WHITE
By Paul Joseph Watson - Infowars.com
USA Today published an op-ed which denounced Tom Brady for refusing to walk back his previous support for Donald Trump and for being "white."
With the Super Bowl just days away, Nancy Armour (who is white), took the opportunity to fan the flames of more political and racial division by attacking Brady for refusing to cave to the woke mob that requires total subservience to its ideological consensus.
As Dave Blount explains, the motivation for the hit piece is the fact that Brady committed the sin of refusing to recant his previous statements about Trump. In order to terrify the rest into compliance, leftists appear to reserve their most vitriolic invective for celebrities who simply try to avoid wading into the putrid swamp that is modern politics.
"Brady has expressed support in the past for his golfing buddy Donald Trump. Nowadays, Brady is keeping a low profile on anything political, which is understandable, considering that the establishment is out for blood. People suspected of being among the 74 million who voted to reelect Trump are having their lives destroyed by vindictive liberals who hold all the levers of power."
"The left-wing piranhas comprising the media would love for Brady to denounce his friend, so they could revel in his submission and humiliation. They wouldn't mind for him to defend Trump, so they could feature Brady for the Two Minutes Hate. But just keeping his mouth shut on the grounds that athletes should not have to justify their political views to ideological bullies is not acceptable. So USA Today attacks in the most vicious way liberals can conceive of: by denouncing him for being Caucasian."
Armour vents her fury at Brady simply because he wants to mind his own business and won't be trampled by the mob into being an amplifier of demented progressive authodoxy.
"The Make America Great Again hat in his locker, the flippant endorsement of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. Only when those ties became inconvenient did Brady decide he wanted to "stick to sports," and that he preferred to be a beacon of positivity rather than delve into society's thorny ills," she writes.
She then engages in brazen racism by declaring, "How mighty white of him."
Armour then whines about how Brady's refusal to be ideologically browbeaten into submission by duplicitous racial grifters like her is an example of his "white privilege."
"Brady's ability to enter and exit the debate at his choosing, to shield himself from accountability, is the height of white privilege. As this country grapples with the far reaches of systemic racism, look no further than Brady, for whom the expectations, and allowances granted, will always be different [because he is white]."
Armour, who has been with USA Today since 2014, has a history of disguising social justice activism behind a thin veil of sports journalism.
She previously called for the abolition of NFL cheerleaders and has consistently pushed Black Lives Matter rhetoric.
Armour is a cretin, a bully and an intellectual coward, but then again you knew that already because she's a mainstream journalist.