Censorship by Google and Facebook is now common. August 2023 JFK Jr. sued Google for censoring his content. 2018, Google launched a censored search engine in China. YouTube censors right leaning videos. 2010 Google stated that it had received orders to censure content from the ‘authorities’ including; Canada, US, Thailand, Spain, and Germany. Interestingly, the Washington Post and New York Times, as CIA draft liberal media spinners, also claim Google is illegally censoring.
Google claims that it provides “Transparency Reports” to show exactly who they censor and why. Oddly the last update was June 2022.
The First Amendment – Freedom of Speech Law refers to government censorship. Clearly, both Twitter and Google have been subjected to government censorship. Yet, government courts continually reject the claim and any lawsuits.
A little known outlet, Ad Fontes Media, formed in Colorado in 2019 has released a media bias chart. The chart claims to rank media outlets based on left lean, right lean and middle. In addition, it provides a ranking for reliability and value. It was created by Vanessa Otero, a registered Democrat.
While claiming to work with all sides of the media spectrum, Ad Fontes Partners include META & Newsela among others. Newsela Partners include WAPO, NYT, AP, The Economist, Soros, Al Jazeera, and Bloomberg – among others. All middle ground highly unbiased according to Ad Fontes – including our beloved CNN! The results were tabulated by their partner Comscore via an online survey. Comscore founders, Magid Abraham & Giani Fulgoni, are both World Economic Forum Pioneers.
Incredibly UNBIASED…
These are the censors – the media bias analysts and ‘watchdogs looking forward to the government council which will determine what news is allowed. Technically, everyone is biased. It is why we have two parties – bias. It is why we have alternate media to the bias of the liberal media. Bias is inherent in everything and everyone. The Civil War was about bias. Attempting to censor bias is mandated by the World Economic Forum so as to turn the masses into one big slavery package.
In the US Constitution the First Amendment protects “Freedom of Speech”. With caveats. It only applies to the prohibition of the government initiating the censorship.
The Supreme Court has added caveats including defamation. “False information that harms the reputation of a person or business”. A bias pyramid would fall under this caveat. By using a comparative, Ad Fontes has sullied the reputation of those on the rungs below a linear CNN, BBC, NPR etc.. as of better quality. An individual could be seen to have an opinion, but the pyramid presented does not suggest ‘opinion’, it suggests a Truth Bomb. And now comes under the heading of libel for publishing this as Fact.
In the case of Twitter, it was clearly shown by Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey that the CIA was heavily involved in the censorship. Yet the US government, our Congress, took no action. Why? Because the CIA/FBI have a file on ‘everyone’. Quite literally. And the vast majority of Congress, whether right or left, are owned by the CIA.
What happens when the government doesn’t exist? The Constitution is no longer valid. In a world of NGO Stakeholders, censorship is legal. A Stakeholder ‘government’ is the goal of The World Economic Forum. The same Forum that is creating fake pyramids of left and right bias.
The world of censorship has been hijacked.
Protecting children from books deemed inappropriate is a meandering line. To Kill A Mockingbird is banned because it is classified as racist – yet libraries brimming with transexual and homosexual depictions is considered protected speech for elementary children. Until this is addressed by the Supreme Court and /or an Amendment to the Constitution clarifies this, the NGO’s and Stakeholders will continue their arbitrary classifications.
The fastest way to topple the vast majority of NGO’s is to eliminate the Charitable Status completely. And yes, that would have to apply to churches, otherwise every NGO would claim they were a church… The 16th Amendment gave Congress the Power to Tax. It was led by democrats and ‘progressive republicans (rhinos). The Revenue Act of 1917 gave individuals the ability to make charitable contributions a deduction. The first NGO was the UN.
The difference between an NGO and a charity is that an NGO can make a profit. In addition, despite its nongovernmental status, an NGO can get its funding from governments. Diluting the entire means of charity or charitable deduction. The Revenue Act of 1954, signed under Eisenhower, began the deluge of NGO’s. It established a wealth maker by creating a false charitable definition and allowing profits to be untaxed.
Because the entire point of a charity vs a corporation is one entity is supposed to have No Profit to tax – because as a charity you give it all away…
Reprinted with permission from Helena-The Nationalist Voice.
