Censorship - Is Censorship Sweeping the Nation?

The right thing to do would be to arrest WHO-Director Tedros.

The WHO Chief That Spread Dangerous Covid Misinformation Calls to Regulate ‘Monkeypox Disinformation’ on Social Media

The World Health Organization spread disastrous Covid-19 misinformation at a critical time early in the pandemic. But now, the unelected health body wants nations to regulate ‘monkeypox disinformation’ in favor of supporting the government’s official narrative about the virus.

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said, “The stigma and discrimination can be as dangerous as any virus and can fuel the outbreak. As we have seen with COVID 19 misinformation and misinformation can spread rapidly online. So we call on all social media platforms, tech companies, and new organizations to work with us to prevent and counter harmful information.”

Tedros, who is not a medical doctor but a former Egyptian communist official, is thus equating social stigma with the virulence of monkeypox, demonstrating that there is a political motivation behind the WHO’s call to suppress citizens’ speech.

1 Like

Legislation would require social media users be assigned a ‘truth score’ in latest dystopian effort by Western leaders to control the masses

Western ‘liberals’ who are adherents to World Economic Forum fascist Klaus Schwab continue to mimic the dictators, authoritarians and tyrants in other countries they claim to oppose.

According to a report by Great Game India, an amendment to a bill introduced in the UK would require social media users to be tagged with a “truth score” that rates the honesty and truthfulness of their posts.

The proposal would restrict “legal but harmful” content and was added on to an already abysmal “Online Safety Bill” by Conservative Party member John Penrose, the report added.

“Like something out of dystopian fiction, Penrose, the MP for Weston-super-Mare, has proposed that the government forces online platforms to maintain a score of how truthful a person is, determined by their past statements,” noted an assessment of the amendment at Reclaim The Net.

The provision states that all users who “produced user-generated content,” publish news or just write “comments” or “reviews” should be evaluated by the social media platform and then given a rating that indicates the “historic factual accuracy” of the post. In other words, someone just giving their opinion can (and would) be rated poorly, so there goes what remains of freedom of speech, so far as it still exists online.

Reclaim the Net adds:

“The purpose of this section is to reduce the risk of harm to users of regulated services caused my (sic) disinformation or misinformation,” the proposal states, with a typo that shows just how much care goes into the wording of legislation that wipes away citizens’ freedoms.

The proposal says that every user that produces online content, including “comments and reviews” and who receives a certain number of online views, which is to be determined by the UK communications regulator, should have their content indexed and assigned a truth score.

The user’s speech is then to be “displayed in a way which allows any user easily to reach an informed view of the likely factual accuracy of the content at the same time as they encounter it.”

And of course, like in the U.S. with the criminal Biden administration, the impetus for this blatant political censorship is to ‘curb misinformation’ — while the left-wing regimes running Western governments put out actual disinformation under the lie of ‘speaking the truth.’

Make no mistake, these scores will be determined by a government bureaucrat who has been instructed to ‘tag’ citizens whose viewpoints differ or refute those of the current regime, thus rendering them arbitrarily ‘dishonest’ and ‘untrue,’ and of course, setting them up to be censored and/or banned online altogether.

This will harm online publishers for certain, especially a) those who publish ‘opposing views’ and b) those who grow large enough (usually by ‘buying’ likes and traffic) to have a decent-sized following and readership.

‘Russia, Russia, Russia!’ was also used to justify this dystopian crackdown (sound familiar?).

Digital Secretary Nadine Dorries said the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine has proven how Moscow uses social media to spread lies, Great Game India noted (none of the Western governments lie online, only Russia).

“We cannot allow foreign states or their puppets to use the internet to conduct hostile online warfare unimpeded,” she claimed. “That’s why we are strengthening our new internet safety protections to make sure social media firms identify and root out state-backed disinformation.”

Others in Britain’s Conservative Party are expressing concern and outrage over the amendment because they know what the leftist government will use it for.

“The ratcheting effect on our civil liberties is already happening in real time,” says a letter from several Conservative MPs addressed to Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries. “The Labour Party has expressed its intention to expand the regulatory framework to include ‘health-related misinformation and disinformation.'”

“This could lead to the state designating social media companies as the arbiter of truth online and presents serious problems for freedom of speech,” the letter warns.

That, of course, is the point.

Judge refuses to dismiss Trump lawsuit against YouTube

The lawsuit is stayed to see how the other lawsuit against Twitter progresses.

A district judge stayed former President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against YouTube until the end of the appeal against the dismissal of his case against Twitter. The judge also denied YouTube’s motion to dismiss the case and Trump’s motion for preliminary injunction.

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

Trump sued YouTube, Twitter, and the other tech companies that suspended his accounts following the January 6, 2021 riot at the US Capitol.

In the lawsuit against YouTube, he argued that the permanent ban had a negative impact on his donor platforms and stifled public debate, as well as his efforts to endorse candidates.

The lawsuit, initially filed in the Southern District of Florida, also argues that the censorship violates Florida’s Stop Social Media Censorship Act, which was blocked by a federal court, and his First Amendment rights. The suit also asks the court to overturn the protections afforded tech platforms under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Trump also claims that YouTube deceived users and “unevenly” applies its standards, which is a violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. He further claims that YouTube “worked with the government” to violate his free speech rights.

During Trump’s motion for a preliminary injunction, YouTube said that Trump cannot claim his free speech was violated because rules about what content is allowed and not allowed are laid out in the platform’s community guidelines. Additionally, the platform said reinstating Trump’s account would cause it “irreparable injury” and it would violate the company’s First Amendment rights, which give it the freedom to determine what speech to allow.

“Former President Trump and seven other plaintiffs are attempting to turn their disagreement with YouTube’s editorial choices into a federal lawsuit on behalf of a putative nationwide class,” YouTube said. “This effort fails as a matter of law. By seeking to treat the judgments of a private online service provider as state action, plaintiffs flip the First Amendment on its head.”

YouTube Suspends Dr. Drew After He Shows Vaccine-Induced Eye Injury

YouTube has blocked renowned physician Dr. Drew Pinsky from going live on its platform after he showed a vaccine-related eye injury he incurred after receiving an experimental Covid jab.

Pinsky exposed the censorship effort via Twitter Monday, saying he received “another” strike on his channel “because I showed an unedited pic of my spontaneous raccoon eye after my J&J vaccine.”

1 Like

Is it time to boycott PayPal?

New PayPal rule: The company can take $2,500 from your account for sharing misinformation

Elon Musk Fires Back at PayPal’s ‘Insane’ Policy to Seize $2,500 from Users If It Disagrees with Their Beliefs

PayPal’s new user agreement to seize $2,500 from users if the company deems that someone is guilty of spreading ‘misinformation’ or offending other people has drawn the attention of one prominent tech billionaire: Elon Musk.

According to the DailyWire, “The new policy update from PayPal will permit the firm to sanction users who advance purported ‘misinformation’ or present risks to user ‘wellbeing’ with fines of up to $2,500 per offense.”

“The financial services company, which has repeatedly deplatformed organizations and individual commentators for their political views, will expand its ‘existing list of prohibited activities’ on November 3,” the report added. “Among the changes are prohibitions on ‘the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials’ that ‘promote misinformation’ or ‘present a risk to user safety or wellbeing.’ Users are also barred from ‘the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory’.”

Disturbingly, these criteria are entirely subjective and violate basic principles of due process and free speech. The policy would apply to actions taken using PayPal’s platform.

The fund seizures would be made at the “sole discretion” of PayPal, which would unilaterally inflict purported “damages” — including the withdrawal of $2,500 “debited directly from your PayPal account” per each offense.

PayPal’s policy has caused a wave of outraged users who are promptly canceling their accounts or terminating their digital banking relationships with the firm.

Behold all lairs all who do wicked shall have there place in the Lake of Fire that burneth day and night.

The greatest enemy to an enemy is a free thinker.

PayPal Reverses Course, Says Company Will Not Seize Money From People for Promoting ‘Misinformation’

Company says policy change was sent out mistakenly, would have allowed firm to deduct $2,500 from users' accounts as penalty.

In a censorship experiment gone awry, PayPal reversed course Saturday night and said it was withdrawing a new policy that would have allowed the company to fine users $2,500 if they spread "misinformation."

The company sent a statement to the National Review saying the Acceptable Use Policy had been sent out mistakenly,

“An AUP notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy," the firm said in the statement.

"Our teams are working to correct our policy pages. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused,” it added.

The policy lit up social media over the weekend, drawing widespread rebuke even from the company's former CEO.

Until the reversal, PayPal was set to impose the new terms, which laid out a list of policy violations which "may subject [users] to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation, which may be debited directly from [their] PayPal account."

Among those violations is any activity that "promotes misinformation," though the company did not clarify what it means by that term.

Also disallowed are "any messages, content, or materials" that the company dubs, in part, "objectionable."

The company policy also encouraged users to "immediately" report other PayPal customers for violations of the policy.

1 Like

THEY just dont want the TRUTH to be known, THEY need people to stay silent as possible so THEY can continue to act there plot for world domination. If people stood up and exposed THEM and there plot the people would then find so much evidence on what is really happening. THEY want to act there satanic plot then cover there tracks, let the TRUTH be known let everyone become aware of what is REALLY happening.

1 Like

Newsmax cannot handle the truth? No debate, no argument put forth, just no more of her? The story of her being banned by Newsmax is on social media / MSM making the saying "bad press is better than no press" is sometimes the case. Soft exposure for an ugly topic.

Newsmax cuts ties with Lara Logan after she said world leaders ‘dine on the blood of children’

The Newsmax cable news outlet has severed ties with Lara Logan after the former “60 Minutes” correspondent went on a bizarre rant alleging that world leaders “dine on the blood of children.”

Logan, an award-winning former war correspondent, was interviewed Wednesday by Newsmax host Eric Bolling, who anchors a show called “The Balance.”

Bolling invited Logan to his program to discuss global elites and their favoritism toward leftist policies. He then asked Logan about the situation along the southern border, where undocumented migrants have crossed into the United States in droves.

“God believes in sovereignty, and national identity, and the sanctity of family, and all the things that we’ve lived with from the beginning of time,” Logan responded. Her comments were transcribed by the news site Mediaite.

“And he knows that the open border is Satan’s way of taking control of the world through all of these people who are his stooges and his servants.”


Lara Logan


Lara Logan dropped by talent agency after comparing Fauci to Nazi doctor

](Lara Logan dropped by agency after comparing Fauci to Nazi doctor)

Logan then added: “And they may think that they’re going to become gods. That’s what they tell us. You’ve all known [historian Yuval Noah] Harari and all the rest of them at the World Economic Forum.

“You know, the ones who want us eating insects, cockroaches, and that while they dine on the blood of children?”

Logan added: “Those are the people, right? They’re not gonna win. They’re not going to win.”

“Newsmax condemns in the strongest terms the reprehensible statements made by Lara Logan and her views do not reflect our network,” Newsmax said in a statement to the Daily Beast. “We have no plans to interview her again.”

Before appearing on Newsmax, Logan made frequent contributions to the Fox Nation streaming service run by Fox News — which is owned by the Fox Corporation, the sister company to The Post’s corporate parent, News Corp.

But she was dropped by Fox Nation as well as her talent agency after she appeared on “Fox News Primetime” last November and compared Dr. Anthony Fauci to the notorious Nazi “Angel of Death,” Dr. Josef Mengele.

“This is what people say to me, is that he doesn’t represent science to them — he represents Josef Mengele, the Nazi doctor who did experiments on Jews during the Second World War and in the concentration camps,” Logan, 50, said on the show.

The South African-born Logan began hosting “Lara Logan Has No Agenda” on Fox Nation after parting ways with CBS News in 2019.

Logan rose to become chief foreign affairs correspondent at the Tiffany Network. But her stint was marred by trauma after she was sexually assaulted by a violent mob while covering the 2011 political upheaval in Egypt.

CBS asked Logan to take a leave of absence in 2013 after she aired a debunked “60 Minutes” piece that was found to have contained errors about the Benghazi incident.

1 Like

Speak the Truth and let the world know Who it is they truly serve.

1 Like

YouTube will 'certify' doctors before they can share medical information

Will be required to follow World Health Organization standards.

YouTube announced a new policy Thursday that will allow “healthcare information providers” to be certified in an effort to combat misinformation.

“YouTube Health has been working on additional ways to help doctors, nurses, mental health professionals and healthcare information providers to bring high quality health information into the spaces that people visit throughout their day – like their favorite video-sharing app,” Dr. Garth Graham, global head of YouTube Health, said in a blog post.

Certain medical professionals and health information providers will be eligible to apply for specific YouTube Health features, Graham wrote, adding that users of the platform would be able to identify “authoritative sources” to more easily evaluate information on topics surrounding health.

Those applying for the certification must provide their medical license, follow “best practices” criteria for health information sharing set by the Council of Medical Specialty Societies (CMSS), the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) and the World Health Organization (WHO), and have an account in good standing with YouTube while meeting other criteria.

YouTube announced guidelines aimed at cracking down on “vaccine misinformation” in September 2021, specifically stating that those who called WHO-approved vaccines “dangerous” or “ineffective” would be targeted. The site’s policies specifically prohibit contradicting the WHO on “vaccine safety, efficacy, and ingredients.”

Prior to issuing the September 2021 guidelines, the video-sharing site issued a seven-day suspension to Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in August 2021 for saying cloth masks were ineffective at stopping COVID-19, while banning LifeSite News in February 2021 for violating “COVID misinformation” policies.

A Media Research Center study released in February 2022 found 800 instances of censorship by tech companies, including YouTube, from March 17, 2020 to Feb. 3, 2022.

“All channels that apply will be reviewed against these guidelines, and the license of the applying healthcare professional will be verified,” Graham said in the blog post. “In the coming months, eligible channels that have applied through this process will be given a health source information panel that identifies them as a licensed healthcare professional and their videos will appear in relevant search results in health content shelves.”

Schwab’s WEF Young Global Leader puppet Trudeau is about to take control of Canada’s Internet and censor everything opposing the Establishment’s sinister narrative

The Trudeau Bill C-11 is an authoritarian law that will tell Canadians what they can watch on the Internet. It regulates user content and hides content it doesn’t like on YouTube, Rumble, and other platforms. It forces streaming services to serve up content the government likes and shadow-ban services it doesn’t like. Every service becomes the CBC. These rules will be applied to Facebook too.

The unelectable and unaccountable would have unprecedented power.

It’s the last chance to stop it, and continue free speech on the Internet. If Canada loses free speech, it will embolden the Left currently trampling over US constitutional rights, beginning with the 1st and 2nd Amendments.


The law was presented as protecting content creators, but like a Mussolini, Trudeau is actually silencing speech.

Winnepeg Free Press warns “it’s clear PM Trudeau doesn’t care about Canadian content creators. It invades Canadians’ privacy and lessens ability to hold the government accountable by influencing what they can see or say online.

Their rationale for it has been “thoroughly debunked.

C-11 force-feeds domestic viewers content from YouTube and Tiktok they may have no interest in and lower click rates, leading the platforms to deprioritize Canadian content beyond Canada. Foreigners enjoy more than 80% of Canadian content on platforms like YouTube.

Content might fare a little better in Canada but it will fail around the world, the Free Press states.

The Trudeau government claims Censorship Bill C-11 will help Canadian content creators and preserve their role for the future.

The Toronto Sun notes that Canadians from all walks of life are calling on the Senate to kibosh the Trudeau government’s censorship bill.


Last week, a letter from over 40,000 Canadian content creators urged senators to reject Bill C-11 in its current form. They see it as a very dangerous piece of legislation.

Digital First Canada, a group representing tens of thousands of small-time Canadian content creators, sent a letter to every senator, warning Bill C-11 could kill the careers of the very artists the Trudeau government claims it wants to help.

“Right now, our livelihoods are at risk,” reads the letter. And it notes the government rammed Bill C-11 through the House of Commons without any room for debate or amendments. “Earlier this year, over 40,000 creators and users raised our voices in the House and through letters to defend our digital businesses against these changes. We were ignored.”

Trudeau, a Prince of the World Economic Forum, wants to ensure that Canadians believe as he believes. As is the United States, Canadians are heading for a Hellscape of totalitarianism. People don’t need the government to pick and choose what they can see.

STOP BILL C11 - Trudeau's censorship Bill is about to become law

1 Like

Vivek Ramaswamy Debates the CNBC Panel on Twitter’s Role in Censoring Americans

DHS Censorship Agency Had Strange First Mission: Banning Speech That Casts Doubt On ‘Red Mirage, Blue Shift’ Election Events


  • Network throttled millions of posts ahead of 2020 election, blocked “emerging narratives” from reaching “virality threshold.”
  • Censors boast on video of getting tech companies to ban entire categories of election speech under threat of “huge regulatory pressure.”
  • Months before the 2020 election, censors systematically targeted all speech categories that could challenge a future “red mirage, blue shift” election scenario.

Last week, The Intercept published a set of leaks that drew broad interest in perhaps the most undercovered scandal inside the US government today: the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) quiet move to establish, for the first time in US history, an explicitly inward-facing domestic censorship bureau.

What The Intercept glimpsed, however, is just the tip of a much larger iceberg.

The size, scale and speed of DHS's censorship operation are vastly larger have been reported. Based on our investigation, below are seven bottom-line figures summarizing the scope of censorship carried out by DHS speech control partners, as compiled from their own reports and videos:

  • 22 Million tweets labeled “misinformation” on Twitter;
  • 859 Million tweets collected in databases for “misinformation” analysis;
  • 120 analysts monitoring social media “misinformation” in up to 20-hour shifts;
  • 15 tech platforms monitored for “misinformation” often in real-time;
  • <1 hour average response time between government partners and tech platforms;
  • Dozens of “misinformation narratives” targeted for platform-wide throttling; and
  • Hundreds of millions of individual Facebook posts, YouTube videos, TikToks, and tweets impacted, due to “misinformation” Terms of Service policy changes that DHS partners openly plotted and bragged tech companies would never have done without DHS partner insistence and “huge regulatory pressure” from government.

The citations above are from just the DHS censorship network’s impact on the 2020 election cycle alone. That was two years ago, when the narrative management machine referenced by The Intercept was first getting formed. Even the above figures, however, just scratch the surface of the full story.

While The Intercept rightly noted that DHS's “truth cops“ now take on a range of other topics – such as Covid-19 and geopolitical opinions – it all started from, and grew out of, DHS's speech control infrastructure set up to censor speech about elections.

That started with the 2020 election. But it continues, importantly, with the 2022 midterm elections, which are ongoing this week.

Britain is sleepwalking into censorship and we’re running out of time to stop it


When Rishi Sunak ran for the Conservative Party leader, one of his promises was to defend freedom of speech. It was certainly in jeopardy: Nadine Dorries was planning a bill that would give her, as culture secretary, the power to censor anything deemed “legal but harmful.” That dangerously nebulous phrase could mean anything: She cited a Jimmy Carr joke as an example. Social media companies would be instructed to break their censorship algorithms and pay hefty fines if anything slipped through. Britain would end up with one of the most draconian regimes in the free world.

Earlier this week we heard that the online safety law is set to be changed and the threat lifted. But this turned out to be a false alarm. The legal but harmful rule remains in place, albeit intended for those under the age of 18. The problem, of course, is that cyberspace doesn’t differentiate between children and adults. Not even if anonymity and privacy are to be preserved.

Michelle Donelan, who has become the 10th culture secretary in 10 years, has told Silicon Valley she will be after them for “billions of pounds” if kids find the wrong content. So the obvious thing for them is to censor for everyone.

Which brings us back to where we started: Britain is sleepwalking into a system far tougher than anything the EU or US is proposing. Worse, that’s not even intended. It’s happening because ministers haven’t really thought through the implications and are in a panic rush to clean the internet for the youth. Big Tech has no friends and very many enemies, but a censorship law that tries to take them down will end up having profound consequences that will transform our public debate.

A robot, for example, will have already read this column and tried to determine whether my reasoning justifies the headline. If not, the article will be penalized and pushed way down in the search results. This is a standard Google practice designed to improve search results.

But how, I asked a tech boss the other day, does an algorithm assess the quality of an argument? As an editor, I have found that top notch sub-editors are the most valuable and rarest people in the business. Can their craft really be judged by a bot? I have my doubts. But we will never know as the process is invisible.

And this is the problem. Bots make mistakes all the time – but nobody knows because their decisions are never made public. The online safety law could end up with all kinds of articles being targeted, but we would never know or know. YouTube will say that such secrecy is vital. For example, it has recently removed thousands of Russian propaganda videos. Does she really have to inform the Kremlin every time?

But then come the other victims. The audience recently aired an interview with a Harvard scholar about the Ukraine war. It was removed (by a TikTok bot) and found to lack “integrity and authenticity”. We have appealed. We lost. No explanation.

Part of an editor’s job now is battling with these bots. I wish I could say that my magazine is untainted by the digital world, but we rely almost exclusively on digital to find new readers in print.

A third of The audienceTraffic comes from search engines, a quarter from social media. They’re the new kiosks where people pick us up, browse, see if they want to buy something. Every publication, even the oldest weekly newspaper in the world, now sails these waters. And we’re doing this against a swarm of bots that will make the British government even more powerful.

The notion that all of this will be solved with age restrictions is naïve. Surely, say ministers, are we imposing age restrictions on films, magazines and video games? Yes, but for the last few centuries we haven’t censored the written word (with a handful of fairly famous exceptions). Why start now? Where could it lead?

The anonymity of Internet use is an important principle of data protection. Keystrokes and browsing history can help companies guess a user’s age, but it’s just a guess. If they’re being fined billions for doing something wrong, why take the risk? Why not just treat everyone like a kid without telling them?

Ms Donelan argues that Big Tech wouldn’t dare because they make such good money off news. If only. Facebook, Google et al wield more power than all the press barons combined, asking bots to curate the newsfeeds of billions. But they never asked for such power – and now see it as a liability.

That brings a lot of headaches, regulatory risks – and hardly any cash. YouTube makes a lot of money selling ads in exchange for things like baby shark Videos (his all-time number one). Less than 2 percent of Google searches are related to news, and ads are rarely sold against it.

If news were enormously profitable, its independence could be defended more vigorously. But in my own conversations with big tech bosses, they’re usually pretty frank. For them, news is a marginal part of their business. And if the UK is the most dangerous place in the free world to post anti-seed opinions, it gives them tremendous incentive to tell these bots to take a more risk-averse approach.

The role of algorithms in our everyday lives is far greater than is assumed at Westminster. The rise of machine learning means even Google doesn’t know exactly why its bots make the decisions they do. But such decisions curate the digital world and the news as seen by billions. Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter, is quite vocal about the politicization of the system he inherited. “The obvious reality,” he said recently, is that Twitter “interfered with elections.” The question, he says, is what to do about it.

Another apparent reality now is that more kids get their news from TikTok than the BBC, more adults get their news from Facebook than any newspaper — and it’s all being orchestrated by algorithms. The government has tremendous power to tamper with these algorithms by threatening such insanely large fines – but is it certain what impact that will have? How are they monitored?

The best option would be to ban the really bad things and not censor the written word – as successive governments have done for centuries. This is an enormously complicated problem. But Mr. Sunak still has time to do the right thing.

Cancel Culture Adopts "Technical Glitches" To Shut Off American Christians

Do you see what I see? I know cancel culture when I see it. Here,. watch for 30 seconds . . .

Not to put too fine a point on this . . . WHO is it that primarily runs the media? It ain't Irish names doing it. It just so happens to be people who literally HATE Jesus.

Now, as you watch TV from this moment on, you'll be more aware of how they're using "technical glitches" to silence American Christians.

Big Tech Colluding To Shut Down Independent Media: Keeping You Up To Speed With The Illegalities Of The Censorship Of Free Speech

“The deep state, as it is called, is nothing more than just a straw-man to blame when, in fact, it is the politicians doing the biddings of special interest groups that are implementing that which is illegal (Romans 3:20)”

Free speech has been rightly called the bulwark against tyranny (Ephesians 5:11).

President George Washington stated: “If the freedom of speech is taken away than dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

Interestingly enough, it is exactly what is happening today and that with our own government’s approval. What’s worse is this is how they are getting away with much of what they are a part of doing.

Newspunch.com recently highlighted: Twitter Policy Director Confesses ‘Deep State’ Is Eliminating Independent Media: “ALL Big Tech Companies Are Colluding With Them.”

The third installment of the “Twitter Files” was released on Friday evening, and it vindicates everything independent media outlets have been saying for years.

According to the documents, every single Big Tech giant is colluding with the ‘Deep State’ to eliminate independent media outlets and free thinkers from their platforms.

Journalist Matt Taibbi on Friday dropped part three of the “Twitter Files”.

According to files, Twitter executives were regularly meeting regularly with the FBI in an ongoing effort to censor conservatives, independent journalists…
Thegatewaypundit.com reports: Now-fired Twitter executive Yoel Roth was meeting with the FBI and other government officials weekly!

This is a huge release.

It also happens to coincide with the Missouri and Louisiana lawsuit with plaintiff Jim Hoft from The Gateway Pundit on government and social media collusion to silence conservative voices in America today.

This is really BIG NEWS!

Taibbi posted incriminatting text messages from Twitter Policy Director Nick Pickles.

In conclusion: I know that the people are always looking for a straw-man and when it comes to what they call the deep state, it does not exist. The deep state, as it is called, is nothing more than just a straw-man to blame when, in fact, it is the politicians doing the biddings of special interest groups that are implementing that which is illegal (Romans 3:20). Deal with the corrupt politicians and this will all come tumbling down (Psalm 94:16).