Geen evolutie en ecolutie zonder revolutie!

Albert Einstein:

Twee dingen zijn oneindig: het universum en de menselijke domheid. Maar van het universum ben ik niet zeker.
Posts tonen met het label D. Broze. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label D. Broze. Alle posts tonen

woensdag 26 juni 2019

Trump tekent 'executive order' om GMO voedsel in de schappen te krijgen zonder waarschuwing op het label

Op 11 juni jl. heeft Trump een 'executive order' gelanceerd waarmee de 'strenge regels' t.a.v. gentech voedsel (zowel genetisch gemanipuleerde planten als dieren....) teniet moeten worden gedaan...... 'Strenge regels' tussen aanhalingstekens, daar die regels in de VS allesbehalve streng zijn.......

Trump wil genetische manipulatie van planten en dieren o.a. om de voedselveiligheid te verbeteren..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Voor ons zal e.e.a. betekenen dat we straks met een vrijhandelsverdrag als TTIP te maken krijgen, waarin de VS gewaarborgd wil hebben dat gentech producten, hetzij plantaardig dan wel dierlijk, ook in de schappen van onze supermarkten zullen worden aangeboden..... Waar geheime rechtbanken (ISDS) zullen zorgen dat de bedrijven die dergelijke producten aanbieden aan het langste eind trekken en waarbij wij fiks zullen moeten inleveren op voedselveiligheid...... 

Voedselveiligheid een woord dat met een groot aantal producten al geweld wordt aangedaan, neem met gif platgespoten fruit en groente uit arme landen, waar Nederlandse telers zich niet hoeven te houden aan 'de strenge regels' zoals die hier gelden, maar wel hun producten uit die landen mogen verkopen op de Nederlandse markt.........

Trump heeft met deze order ook opdracht gegeven aan de 'minister' die over landbouw en veeteelt gaat, de bevolking te onderrichten over GMO voedsel en dat dit 'volkomen veilig is voor consumptie.......' 

Overigens opvallend 'weinig aandacht' in de reguliere media voor deze stap van het beest Trump, niet in de laatste plaats daar de plutocraten en investeerders die deze media in handen hebben, 'niet zelden' grote aandelenpakketten hebben in firma's als Bayer-Monsanto.......

Overigens is ook de EU voor een fiks deel tegen het duidelijk etiketteren van GMO voedsel, maar ja, de EU is er dan ook in de eerste plaats voor bedrijven en welgestelden, waar de EU bevolking ergens achteraan hangt.... Ofwel: ook hier gaan de centen ver voor op de volksgezondheid.....

Het volgende artikel werd geschreven door Derrick Broze en gepubliceerd op The Mind Unleashed:

Trump Just Made It a Lot Easier for GMOs to Enter the Food Supply

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor Trump Just Made It a Lot Easier for GMOs to Enter the Food Supply

President Trump issued an executive order aimed at "streamlining" GMO regulations in the US.

DERRICK BROZE

(TMU) — On June 11, President Donald Trump quietly issued an executive order to “streamline” GMO regulations in the United States. The order, titled Modernizing the Regulatory Framework for Agricultural Biotechnology Products, is the latest move by the Trump administration aimed at promoting the use of genetically engineered or modified crops.

In his executive order, Trump called on federal agencies to fix what he called a “regulatory maze” related to the farming and selling of GMO products.

The executive order states:
Biotechnology can help the Nation meet its food production needs, raise the productivity of the American farmer, improve crop and animal characteristics, increase the nutritional value of crop and animal products, and enhance food safety. In order to realize these potential benefits, however, the United States must employ a science-based regulatory system that evaluates products based on human health and safety and potential benefits and risks to the environment. Such a system must both foster public confidence in biotechnology and avoid undue regulatory burdens.

The order goes on to instruct the Secretary of Agriculture and other officials to develop an action plan to facilitate engagement with consumers in order to build public confidence in, and acceptance of, the use of safe biotechnology in agriculture and the food system” [emphasis added].

The executive order also lays out plans for the Trump administration to work with other nations in developing GMO policies. Section 8 of the order gives the Ag Secretary and Secretary of State 180 days to develop an international communications and outreach strategy to facilitate engagement abroad with policymakers, consumers, industry, and other stakeholders.

Additionally, the order calls on the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Administration to design a website that contains and provides links to relevant United States Government regulatory information.

Greg Jaffe, biotechnology director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, told the Associated Press that the impact of the order depends on how the federal government responds. “There needs to be an assurance of safety for those products,” Jaffe said.

The topic of genetically engineered food has been controversial for years. Scientists, health advocates, and concerned citizens have been raising questions about the technology over the last decade, including activists forming global marches against biotechnology giant Monsanto between 2013 and 2016.

More recently, criticism of GMOs has centered around labeling laws. To understand the current battle for labeling genetically engineered foods, one must look back to 2015. At that time, the controversial Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act passed the House in June before ultimately failing amid heavy opposition.

To critics, the bill was known as the “DARK” (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act because the law was also aimed at nullifying GMO labeling measures, such as a state labeling bill passed in Vermont. Mike Pompeo, author of the bill, criticized mandatory labeling laws as unnecessarily costly and insisted a federal standard was the answer.

In late February 2016, U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts introduced another bill which attempted to create a federal voluntary standard for labeling GE food. Roberts’ Senate Bill 2609, or the Biotech Labeling Solutions Act, would have blocked mandatory labeling efforts by states.

In March 2016, the bill failed to reach the 60 votes needed during a procedural vote, with 49 votes in favor and 48 votes against. However, by July 2016 the labeling measure was added to the National Sea Grant College Program Act as the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard. It was that measure which was ultimately signed into law by Obama, placing the U.S. Department of Agriculture in charge of labeling America’s genetically engineered food supply.

Under the Trump administration, the battle for labeling has died down largely due to a lack of reporting in the mainstream press and misinformation which falsely tells Americans that labeling rights have been won.

However, in July 2018, an analysis of proposed rule changes revealed that thousands of genetically engineered foods may be exempt from upcoming labeling requirements. In early May 2018, the Department of Agriculture released a draft rule describing how the labeling law is supposed to be implemented.

Between May and July 3, the USDA received 14,008 public comments.
The comments indicate that some of the public is concerned about the language used in the rule. “The term bioengineered should not be used. It is both misleading and confusing to consumers. GMO, GE or Genetic Engineering should be used instead,” one commenter writes. “Please make all food items labeled correctly as GMO so consumers know exactly what they are purchasing,” another said.

The Environmental Working Group reports that if companies want to label foods which are made with genetically engineered ingredients, they must use the terms “bioengineered” or “bioengineered food ingredient,” instead of the widely known phrases “genetically modified” or “genetically engineered.”

Interestingly, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) recently conducted a survey to see how people respond to these different labels, including new symbols being tested by the USDA. The IFIC found that in every combination of label, the level of concern among consumers increased. In the survey consumers were shown bottles of canola oil without any label, with one of three symbols (plant, sun, or smile), with a symbol plus “bioengineered” on the label, and a symbol with “may be bioengineered” on the label.

As the USDA works to establish a uniform national standard for labeling foods that may be genetically engineered, critics continue to call out the dangers of putting the federal government in charge of the situation. Donald Trump’s recent executive order will only exacerbate the already confusing situation.

Americans who have concerns about the safety of GMOs will have to wrestle with the fact that these products may not be labeled and—with the latest executive order from Trump—will enter the food supply at an increasing pace in the coming years.


===============================
Zie ook:
'Trump geeft groen licht aan gentechvoedsel, nu nog toestemming van de EU.........'

'VS ontwikkelt nieuw biowapen: genetisch gemanipuleerde insecten'

Voor meer berichten over gentech, GMO, genetische manipulatie, klik op het betreffende label, direct onder dit bericht.

donderdag 13 juni 2019

Gelekte documenten tonen aan dat Google en Pinterest censuur uitoefenen

Gelekte documenten van Google en Pinterest tonen aan dat Google en Pinterest censuur uitoefenen op onafhankelijke media, christelijke websites en 'niet populaire' opinies op de sociale media.....

Niets nieuws, maar zoals al vaker opgemerkt, hoe meer bewijs voor dit soort maatregelen die thuishoren in een dictatuur, hoe beter.....

Overigens wordt in het hieronder opgenomen artikel gesproken over het zoeken op het internet waarbij bepaalde resultaten aan de hand van een lijst met termen worden gemanipuleerd, anders gezegd: je krijgt in feite niet te zien waar je naar opzoek was.... Niets nieuws, al een paar jaar geleden viel het me op dat op een ander vlak, namelijk de naam van de website of blog, genoeg was om niet te worden opgenomen in de zoekresultaten, of ze werden pas na een aantal pagina's weergegeven, ook de Azijnpisser is sindsdien moeilijk te vinden in de zoekresultaten..... Het is dan ook aan te raden dat wanneer je zeker weet een artikel op een site of blog te hebben gezien, de naam van die site of blog toe te voegen aan de zoektermen die je gebruikt.

Gelukkig zien meer en meer mensen dat censuur op de sociale media zich tegen hen keert, ofwel zoeken naar feiten op het internet wordt gedomineerd door platforms die censuur uitoefenen en dan gaat het niet alleen om Google en Pinterest, maar ook om Facebook en Twitter, waardoor men geen of moeilijk informatie op onafhankelijke media kan vinden......

(foto van The Mind Unleashed)

Het voorgaande is van groot belang als je ziet dat de reguliere media voor het overgrote deel al lang niet meer onafhankelijk zijn en ondanks alle beschuldigingen door die media van sites op de sociale media als zouden deze fake news (nepnieuws) en andere desinformatie verspreiden, zijn het juist de reguliere (massa-) media die aantoonbaar een enorme berg fake news brachten en op andere manieren het publiek manipuleerden met desinformatie, dit gebeurt overigens nog steeds........ Neem de totaal gekleurde berichtgeving in die media voorafgaand en tijdens de illegale oorlogen van de VS, met de NAVO als oorlogshond, uiteraard onder opperbevel van de VS....

Lees het volgende artikel, geschreven door Derrick Broze, eerder gepubliceerd op The Mind Unleashed en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media:

Leaked Documents From Pinterest Reveal Censorship of Anti-Media

June 12, 2019 at 10:24 pm
Written by Derrick Broze

Newly leaked documents from Google and Pinterest reveal ongoing efforts to censor independent media, Christian websites, and unpopular opinions.

(TMU— As more and more Americans question the practices of tech companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon, the topic of censorship on social media and in search results continues to be a hotly debated topic. Do these companies essentially act as publishers, and if so, should they be regulated as such? Should the government make efforts to break up the tech giants? These questions and more need answering as the public grapples with the reality that “Big Tech” is gaining more control over what we see, hear, and read while surfing the internet.

Now, more fuel has been added to the fire as the controversial conservative investigative outlet Project Veritas has released leaked documents which show Pinterest blocking links of alternative media websites and search terms related to Christianity and abortion. The apparent blacklist is part of a “porn domain block list” designed to keep the social media platform free of sexually explicit content. Veritas published the internal documents and reportedly interviewed a company insider who claimed Pinterest directly and indirectly censors content related to pro-life and Christian themes, as well as alternative health sites, and several independent news websites known for challenging the U.S. government narrative on a range of topics, including the War on Terror. These sites include ZeroHedgeThe Anti-Media, NewsWars (operated by Alex Jones’ Infowars), The PedoGate, Tracking Vaccinations, and Organic Healthy Tips.

Other documents leaked to Project Veritas include a large text file titled “Sensitive Terms List” containing search terms that Pinterest considers “sensitive.” A user searching one of these “sensitive” terms will received modified search results per Pinterest internal policy. The documents note that search terms are assigned an “abusive,” “sensitive,” and “brand unsafe” value. Pinterest employees have the option to either block auto-complete results in the search bar, show the user a warning, or remove the term from recommended or trending feeds. The so-called “Sensitive Terms List” reveals that Christianity-related terms like “christian easter” and “bible verses” were marked as “brand unsafe.”

This is not the first time Pinterest made the news for censoring certain material. In February, the platform also blocked searches related to “anti-vaccination” material.

However, the company is not alone in their efforts to remove unpopular opinions and alternative media from their platforms. One day after Project Veritas‘ report, the Daily Caller reported that a whistleblower within Google leaked screenshots of two apparent blacklists of websites which are being scrubbed from the search engine’s results. The Daily Caller reviewed documents and found that employees are instructed to add the line “# REMOVE url” to ensure that a “fringe” website is removed from Google’s “featured snippets” search results. The “featured snippets” feature is responsible for finishing users sentences when they type questions into Google’s search box. The document suggests that the removal of certain websites from featured snippets is being conducted manually by a human employee rather than the result of a mistake by an algorithm or artificial intelligence.

The Caller also reports that a second blacklist, called “all_fringe_domains,” is designed to block websites labeled “fringe.” Some of the websites being blocked include the American Spectator, Breitbart, Breaking911, the website of pastor Brian Jones, the website of Bring Your Bible to School Day, Consortium News (published by Robert Parry), St. Philip the Deacon Lutheran Church, speakerryan.com, The Franklin Society (a cryptocurrency blog), Free Thought Project, The Gateway Pundit, and The Gorka Briefing”.

The leaked documents reported on by the Daily Caller and Project Veritas raise a number of questions regarding how much control and influence the Big Tech giants have over public discourse. Even more worrisome is the fact that websites like the Free Thought Project, the Anti-Media, and ZeroHedge have been facing waves of censorship for over a year, with both the Anti-Media and the Free Thought Projectbeing purged from Facebook in October 2018.

===============================
Zie ook:
'Twitter verwijdert accounts vanwege 'propaganda', maar werkt zelf met een militair propagandist'

'Australische politie valt kantoor ABC binnen vanwege gelekte documenten'

'Facebook stelt klimaatsceptisch Daily Caller aan als 'factchecker...' ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Twitter launches tool to report misleading content ahead of Indian & EU elections'

'Twitter meldpunt voor nepnieuws in aanloop EU verkiezingen'

'Russiagate geslaagd: geen impeachment van Trump, waar Clinton en haar team na bewezen misdaden vrijuit gaan.....'

'Facebook: uit gelekte documenten worden de steeds veranderende regels voor censuur op dit platform openbaar gemaakt: Facebook als geheime tak van de VS overheid'

'NewsGuard, het nieuwste wapen van Big Brother VS tegen de alternatieve media'

'Netflix censureert aflevering van humoristisch programma, 'na een geldig verzoek' op grond van Saoedische wetgeving....'

'Facebooks departement voor censuur: een hoognodige uitleg over een maatregel die alleen in een dictatuur thuishoort'

'Facebook censureert foto's van verhongerende Jemenitische kinderen als 'sexual content''

'Google manipuleerde VS presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 en censureert niet alleen linkse/alternatieve sociale media'

'Facebook gebruikte 'fake news' beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden'

'Google Maps veegt Palestijns gebied van de kaart'

'Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert'

'Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp'

'Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen'

'Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika's.......'

'Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder..........'

Zie voorts:
'Warren (democratisch presidentskandidaat) toont met hulp van Facebook aan dat dit bedrijf niet hoort te gaan over wat wel en niet is toegestaan' (en zie de links in dat bericht, die hier niet zijn vermeld)

'Russiagate: nog overtuigd van bestaan daarvan? Lees dit!'

'Julian Assange (brekend nieuws) veroordeeld tot 50 weken gevangenisstraf......'

'Jan Kuitenbrouwer ('journalist'): Assange is een charlatan en WikiLeaks heeft beelden van de moord op 2 journalisten gemanipuleerd'

'Julian Assanges vervolging is de genadeklap voor klokkenluiders en (echte) journalisten

'Russiagate haat- en angstcampagne samenzweerders als FBI en Clinton moeten strafrechtelijk worden vervolgd'

'BBC verslaggever is beschaamd over de 25 jaar die hij voor deze zendgemachtigde heeft gewerkt'

'BNR 'denkt' als één van de vele mediaorganen nog steeds dat Russiagate werkelijk plaats vond'

'BBC topman waarschuwt dat de BBC haar geloofwaardigheid en reputatie kwijtraakt...... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Geen rectificaties voor meer dan 2 jaar brengen van fake news over het kwaadaardig sprookje Russiagate'

'Bedrijf dat voor 'Russische bots' waarschuwde, heeft een leger met nep-Russische bots'

'Britse militaire geheime dienst bedient zich van moddergooien en andere manipulaties om Europese en VS politiek te manipuleren, zo blijkt uit gelekte documenten'

''Fake news': alternatieve media en bloggers in het westen zouden onzin brengen, echter niet als dit soort groepen wat roepen in landen die het westen niet welgevallig zijn'

'Two More Spiegel Employees Out After Fake News Scandal Expands' Ofwel: het zoveelste 'gevalletje fake news', gebracht door de reguliere massamedia........

donderdag 25 april 2019

Roundup rechtszaak toont nauwe banden aan tussen EPA en Monsanto

Een derde rechtszaak tegen Monsanto vanwege het zwaar kankerverwekkende Roundup (met het werkzame gif glyfosaat) toont aan dat Monsanto nauwe banden heeft met regelgevers in de VS, zoals het Environmental 'Protection' Agency (EPA), protection tussen aanhalingstekens daar het EPA allesbehalve het milieu en de bevolking beschermd, zoals uit het hieronder opgenomen artikel ten overvloede nog eens blijkt........

Het EPA was al tot de slotsom gekomen dat glyfosaat* niet kankerverwekkend is..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Nee, je doet op verzoek van de producent, die miljarden heeft verdiend aan dit smerige gif, onderzoek en komt dan tot de conclusie dat het niet kankerverwekkend is, terwijl echte deskundigen en zelfs de rechter stellen dat dit wel zo is........

Het is ronduit een schande dat de EU Roundup weer heeft toegelaten voor een aantal jaren, mede met dank aan 'GroenLinks' EU grofgraaier Bas Eickhout......

Niet geheel toevallig dat de grote insectensterfte (twee derde van de insecten is inmiddels gestorven) begon nadat Roundup in de 70er jaren op de markt kwam.......

Lees het volgende artikel over deze zaak en verbaas je ook over deze smerige lobby van de EPA voor Monsanto, een samenwerking die ten koste gaat van het milieu, de dieren en als onderdeel van die laatste groep: de mens. Het artikel werd geschreven door Derrick Broze, verscheen eerder op The Mind Unleashed en werd door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media:

New Roundup-Cancer Lawsuit Exposes Cozy Relationship Between Monsanto and EPA

April 20, 2019 at 8:38 am
Written by Derrick Broze

A third lawsuit related to claims that Monsanto’s Roundup causes cancer has revealed new details about the cozy relationship between the biotech giant and U.S. regulators.

(TMU— On Monday, Monsanto Co. corporate spokesman William Reeves admitted the corporation has regularly communicated with U.S. regulatory agencies regarding reviews of the controversial Roundup herbicide. Reeves denied that Monsanto had given the agencies orders to follow. Reeves’ testimony came about during the latest lawsuit against biotech giant Monsanto, as Alva and Alberta Pilliod fight to prove that Roundup caused their cancer.

The Pilliods are both living with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after spraying the herbicide Roundup on their properties for nearly 30 years. The septuagenarian couple were diagnosed with the most common form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, in 2011 and 2015.

Now the couple is seeking damages related to their use of Roundup after recent studies have linked the world’s most popular herbicide to cancer.

Courthouse News reported on the latest developments in the case:
Attorney Brent Wisner, representing plaintiffs Alva and Alberta Pilliod, played video testimony of Monsanto corporate spokesman William Reeves in court Monday, in which he acknowledged Monsanto executives had exchanged text messages with regulators who sat on a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency committee that found glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, is not carcinogenic for humans.The Pilliods’ legal team hopes these email and text exchanges will be enough evidence of collusion between Monsanto and the EPA to delay a review by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a public health agency connected to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The text messages show that on June 18, 2015, Monsanto scientist Eric Sachs sent a text message to former EPA toxicologist Mary Manibusan, looking for help finding a contact in the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Sachs was looking to communicate with someone in relation to the agency’s ongoing work developing a toxicological profile of glyphosate, Roundup’s main ingredient. The ATSDR had begun working on the profile after the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research concluded that glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

(foto van The Mind Unleashed)

In another text, Manibusan told Dan Jenkins, Monsanto’s liaison to U.S. regulatory agencies like the EPA, that he may need help “trying to do everything we can to keep from having a domestic IARC occur with this group,” in reference to the ATSDR. By June 23, 2015, Jenkins wrote to his Monsanto colleagues alerting them that Jack Housenger, director of EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, would put a hold on the report.  “ATSDR Director and Branch Chief have promised Jack Housenger (Director of the US Office of Pesticide Programs) to put their report ‘on hold’ until after EPA releases its preliminary risk assessment (PRA) for glyphosate,” Jenkins wrote.

When questioned about these texts by the Pilliods’ lawyers, Reeves confirmed the text messages were authentic, but stated, “I never heard anyone at the EPA say they were going to tell ATSDR what to do.”

The testimony from Reeves comes a week after Dr. Dennis Weisenburger testified that years of spraying Roundup likely caused the Pilliods’ lymphoma. Dr. Weisenburger testified that Alberta used Roundup an estimated 279 times, and Al 729 times—both without wearing protective equipment.“It’s not a hard call,” Weisenburger said on the witness stand, stating that using Roundup more than two days per year doubles the risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma. “It’s the intensity of exposure that’s more important than the length.”

The Pilliods’ trial is expected to wrap up in the coming weeks, with Monsanto’s lawyers beginning their cross examination next week.

The case is the third lawsuit brought against Monsanto in the last two years. In 2018, a California jury found that Monsanto’s Roundup contributed to cancer in DeWayne Johnson, a former school groundskeeper. In that case, evidence of corporate misconduct played a key role in the jury’s decision. In August 2018, Johnson was awarded $289 million after a jury found that Monsanto failed to notify him and other consumers of the dangers of Roundup.

Additionally, a jury in San Francisco recently found that Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer played a significant role in contributing to 70-year old Edwin Hardeman’s cancer. Hardeman used Roundup on his 56-acre Sonoma County property for decades before he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2015. The unanimous verdict concluded a trial that may determine the future of thousands of similar lawsuits filed against biotechnology giant Monsanto.


By Derrick Broze / Republished with permission / The Mind Unleashed / Report a typo
=====================================
* Onlangs werd na onderzoek in de VS vastgesteld dat werkelijk iedereen in meer of mindere mate glyfosaat heeft opgeslagen in het lichaam (hetzelfde geldt overigens voor microplastics, al is dit het geval bij de hele wereldbevolking.......). Overigens gezien die vaststelling over glyfosaat, dit ook voor de bevolking in vele andere landen geldt, neem alleen al het enorme gebruik van glyfosaat in de EU landbouw, waar zoals gezegd 'GroenLinks' EU grofgraaier Eickhout een voorstander was van langer gebruik van dit kankerverwekkende gif.......

woensdag 17 oktober 2018

Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder..........

Derrick Broze betoogt in het artikel dat hieronder is opgenomen, dat Facebooks censuur wordt 
gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex. Zo is de zogenaamd wetenschappelijke site 'PropOr Not', dat zich in de praktijk bezighoudt met het brengen van anti-Russische propaganda, onderdeel van The Interpreter en dat is op haar beurt onderdeel van Broadcasting Board of Governors, een organisatie die VS propaganda over de wereld verspreid met een stuk of zes mediaorganen zoals 'Voice of America' (VOA).

Ook de Atlantic Council is een lobbyorgaan van het militair-industrieel complex, waar de NAVO een dikke vinger in de smerige pap heeft.......

Het artikel van Broze komt van zijn website The Conscious Resistance, ik nam het over van Anti-Media:

The Facebook Purge of Independent Media: What You’re Not Being Told

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor The Facebook Purge of Independent Media: What You’re Not Being Told


October 15, 2018 at 11:26 am
Written by Derrick Broze

Victims of Facebook’s most recent purge should not forget the connections between the social media giant and the Western Military-Industrial Complex.

(CR— On Thursday, Facebook announced they were unpublishing, or purging, over 500 pages and 200 accounts who are accused of spreading political spam. Several of these pages and writers were also removed from Twitter on the same day.


Today, we’re removing 559 Pages and 251 accounts that have consistently broken our rules against spam and coordinated inauthentic behavior,” Facebook stated in a blog post. Facebook states that the people behind this alleged spam “create networks of Pages using fake accounts or multiple accounts with the same names” and “post the same clickbait posts in dozens of Facebook Groups”.

Essentially, Facebook is accusing these pages of writing articles related to politics and then using the social media platform to…. post the articles in as many places as possible to reach as many people as possible. Hardly dangerous or scary stuff. However, these actions are in violation of Facebook’s Terms of Service. Facebook also accused the pages and accounts of using their fake accounts to generate fake likes and shares which may artificially inflate their reach and mislead people about their popularity. According to Facebook, “This activity goes against what people expect on Facebook, and it violates our policies against spam.”

Facebook also stated that “sensational political content” from across the political spectrum is being used to “build an audience and drive traffic to their websites, earning money for every visitor to the site”. Again, this does not qualify as dangerous or threatening activity. This is a standard practice for most media outlets who are trying to earn revenue to pay writers, editors, social media managers, etc. It is true that some of the pages on this list (see below for a current list) have indeed used clickbait headlines or even posts that are likely untrue. However, the list also includes legitimate independent news outlets such as The Anti Media, The Free Thought Project, Cop Block, and Police the Police, which focused on countering mainstream and establishment narratives related to politics and police.

Facebook’s statement that the pages and accounts were “often indistinguishable from legitimate political debate” begs the question – which pages and accounts are “legitimate political debate”? And by which metric does Facebook decide what counts as legitimate? These questions are yet to be answered. Perhaps with time Facebook will come clean about their process, but in the meantime it’s important to reflect on Facebook’s recent partnership with the Atlantic Council and attempts to stifle the flow of information in the name of fighting “fake news”.

The fight against Fake News started immediately following the election of Donald Trump. In November 2016, Merrimack College associate professor Melissa Zimdars posted a public Google document titled, “False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and/or Satirical ‘News’ Sources” which went viral after being reported on by most corporate mainstream outlets. This list lumped in some of the same outlets which fell victim to Facebook’s most recent purge with actual fake news websites which are well known among the indie and alt media industry. Within a matter of weeks, a new list appeared online from an organization calling itself PropOrNot, an allegedly independent group of researchers trying to find the truth about the dissemination of Russian propaganda and fake news. This list also contained names of prominent independent media outlets like Anti-Media, The Corbett Report, MintPress News, and many others.

It was this combination of the Zimdars list and the PropOrNot list which had the immediate effect of placing a target on the vast majority of independent journalists and outlets who were now being accused of directly or indirectly conspiring with the Russians. Websites and social media pages for these outlets began suffering a drastic reduction in reach and interaction with their audiences and many websites lost access to Google advertising money due to these false associations.

The problem is that the majority of the mainstream media unquestionably reported on and repeated the claims made by these two lists without any attempt at investigative work. For example, PropOrNot claims they are “completely independent” and “nonpartisan” because they are not funded by anyone and have no formal institutional affiliations or political connections.

They say the must remain anonymous for now because they are a “are civilian Davids taking on a state-backed adversary Goliath”. However, a report by Russian news outlet Sputnik (yes, I am aware many readers will automatically scream, “Fake news!”, but I encourage you to read on.) challenges the alleged unbiased nature of PropOrNot.


Sputnik reports that George Eliason, a Ukraine-based investigative journalist, authored an expose of PropOrNot in which he argued the organization was a “deep-state hitjob on alternative news outlets”.

So when you’re looking at PropOrNot, it’s just basic investigative techniques. Who are they — that’s the first thing you need to know,” Eliason told Sputnik. “So you look them up on the web and you find nothing. I went to their website and did a basic scan, and the funny thing about PropOrNot is that to get into their website, you need to be logged into the dashboard of The Interpreter magazine.”

So who runs The Interpreter?

Eliason states that “The Interpreter is also overseen by the the Broadcasting Board of Governors, who run Voice of America and half a dozen other US propaganda projects across the globe”.
In addition, “The Interpreter is a product of the Atlantic Council committee, who is basically setting our foreign policy right now in Eastern Europe and Russia,” Eliason stated. “They’re an NGO, they work outside the government, and they work with the Ukrainian diaspora. They actually have a signed contract with the diaspora — you can view them signing it.”

The important takeaway from this report is that only 4 months later, in May 2018, Facebook announced a new partnership with the Atlantic Council – the same think tank tied to PropOrNot – which officially claims to provide a forum for international political, business, and intellectual leaders. Facebook said the partnership is aimed at preventing  the social media tool from “being abused during elections.” The press release promoted Facebook’s efforts to fight fake news by using artificial intelligence, as well as working with outside experts and governments.

The Atlantic Council of the United States was established in 1961 to bolster support for international relations. Although not officially connected to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Atlantic Council has spent decades promoting causes and issues which are beneficial to NATO member states. In addition, The Atlantic Council is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Organization, an umbrella organization which “acts as a network facilitator in the Euro-Atlantic and beyond.” The ATA* works similarly to the Atlantic Council, bringing together political leaders, academics, military officials, journalists and diplomats to promote values that are favorable to the NATO member states. Officially, ATA is independent of NATO, but the line between the two is razor thin.

Essentially, the Atlantic Council is a think tank which can offer companies or nation states access to military officials, politicians, journalists, diplomats, etc. to help them develop a plan to implement their strategy or vision. These strategies often involve getting NATO governments or industry insiders to make decisions they might not have made without a visit from the Atlantic Council team. This allows individuals or nations to push forth their ideas under the cover of hiring what appears to be a public relations agency but is actually selling access to high-profile individuals with power to affect public policy. Indeed, everyone from George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton to the family of international agent of disorder Zbigniew Brzezinski have spoken at or attended council events.

The list of financial supporters reads like a who’s-who of think tanks and Non-Governmental Organizations. The Atlantic Council receives funding from the Brookings Institution, Carnegie Endowment, Cato Institute, Council on Foreign Relations, and the Rand Corporation, to name a few. In addition, various members of the Military-Industrial Complex are benefactors of the Atlantic Council, including Huntington Ingalls, the United States’ sole maker of aircraft carriers; Airbus, the plane manufacturer; Lockheed Martin, the shipbuilder and aviation company; and Raytheon, which makes missile systems. All of the companies have contracts with the U.S.
Department of Defense and offer financial support to the Atlantic Council. The Council also receives support from Chevron and the Thomson Reuters Foundation. Finally, the Atlantic Council receives direct financial support from the U.S. Departments of the Air Force, Army, Navy and Energy and from the U.S. Mission to NATO.

Is it possible Facebook is acting under the direction of their partners at the Atlantic Council to suppress anti-war, anti-establishment voices three weeks before the U.S. midterm elections? It is absolutely possible and likely.

We should also remember this is not the first time Facebook has deleted accounts which operate outside the mainstream corporate media. In August, Facebook deleted accounts containing “fringe or holistic medicine”, including Just Natural Medicine (1 million followers), Natural Cures Not Medicine (2.3 million followers), and People’s Awakening (3.6 million followers). The same month Facebook and Twitter deleted pages they claimed were connected to Iran and Russia.

This entire ongoing attack of independent media and free thought stemmed from the establishment media’s nonstop coverage of what has become known as fake news. Anyone and everyone who has countered the establishment narrative of endless war, a growing surveillance and police state, and an allegedly growing divide in American politics, has been labeled a Russian bot, accomplice, or useful idiot. One way or another, the message is clear: stand against the establishment and you will be labeled an enemy of the state.

By spreading the fake news meme the elitists behind the American power centers are able to attack  growing independent media icons by painting them as propagators of false Russian propaganda. The media is also using this fake news meme and Russian prop to accuse Trump of being an illegitimate president, further playing into the “Trump is an outsider” narrative. All of this is being done with the goal of keeping the domestic front as divided as possible while selling the brainwashed masses into another war. Coincidentally, all of this non-sense is taking place while the corporate media spreads lies about Syria and Russia.

It’s more important than ever to remain level headed and use critical thinking. It’s never been more important to follow the pages that were purged directly from their websites. See the full list below and decide which outlets you want to continue to support in the information war.

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor The Facebook Purge of Independent Media: What You’re Not Being Told
List of pages taken down on Thursday October 11, 2018:
The Free Thought Project – 3.1 million fans
The Anti-Media – 2.1 million fans
Police the Police – 1.9 million fans
Cop Block – 1.7 million fans
Filming Cops – 1.4 million fans
Rachel Blevins – 69,000 fans
V is For Voluntary – 160,000 fans
End the War on Drugs – 460,000 fans
Mass Report – 500,000 fans
Get Involved, You Live Here – 360,000 fans
Press for Truth – 350,000 fans
Political Junkie News Media – 300,000 fans
Murica Today – 180,000 fans
Choice & Truth – 2.9 million fans
You won’t see this on TV – 172,000 fans
Modern Slavery Hilarious Vines – 129,000 fans
Fuck the Government – 168,000 fans
Punk Rock Libertarians – 190,000 fans
Reverb Press – 700,000 fans
Nation In Distress – 3.2 million fans
Free Your Mind Conference – 75,000 fans
Right Wing News – 3.6 million fans
Reasonable People United
Psychologic Anarchist
Policing the Police
Cop Logic
Legalizing Cannabis
Hemp
End the Drug War
Anonymous News

By Derrick Broze / Republished with permission / Conscious Resistance / Report a typo

* ATA zou in dit geval moeten staan voor Atlantic Treaty Association, vrees dat hier een spelfout werd gemaakt, ATA werkt vanuit Roemenië en is een organisatie die VS propaganda steunt, echter gezien niet één verdere verwijzing, vraag ik me af of deze organisatie wordt bedoeld.

Zie ook:
'Robert Epstein: Google en Facebook corrumperen de politiek en manipuleren de presidentsverkiezingen

'Facebook staat valse informatie toe tijdens de (voor-) verkiezingen van het presidentschap in de VS'

'Facebook gebruikte 'fake news' beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden'

'New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!'

'Noord-Koreaans 'bedrog met nucleaire deal' is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times'

''Fake News' misbruikt door dictaturen en de reguliere (massa-) media'

'Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen'

'Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp'

'Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert'

'Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen'

'Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax'

'The US military’s vision for state censorship'

'Israël en VS werken samen in tegenwerken van critici op beleid t.a.v. Palestijnen'

'Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika's.......'

'Why the Coordinated Alternative Media Purge Should Terrify Everyone' (Tyler Durden op Zero Hedge)

'First They Came for Alex Jones — We Told You We Were Next — We Were' (Matt Agorist op The Free Thought Project)

'Facebook en Twitter verwijderen nu volledige accounts.........'

'9/11 forum geblokkeerd, de waarheid mag niet gezegd worden........'

'CNN, de grote brenger van 'fake news!!!''

'Facebook (en Twitter) onderdrukt meningsvorming door het verwijderen van (echt) onafhankelijke media'


'Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld......'

'Facebook en Twitter verwijderen de eerlijke journalistiek en oprechte opinie >> censuur.....'

Facebook verlaat 'tranding news' voor 'brekend nieuws' van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer 'fake news.....''

'Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News.... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Censuur op het internet met vliegende start in de VS, 'het land van het vrije woord....''

'Facebook en NAVO werken samen in censuur op niet welgevallig nieuws......'

'Facebook helpt Saoedi-Arabië: doodstraf door onthoofding van vrouw die het waagde kritiek te uiten.....'

'Aanval op alternatieve media 'succesvol': meer en meer sites worden van het net geweerd.........'

'ThinkProgress eiste censuur van Facebook en werd inderdaad gecensureerd.... ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'VS staatscensuur op Facebook (ook in de EU)'

'Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent...... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama.......'

'Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici.....'

'Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren.... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Media Too Busy Defending John McCain to Report the News That Actually Affects You' Onder andere aandacht voor PRISM.

'Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII......'

'VS gebruikt sociale media om 'fake comment' te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel 'fake news....''

'Eis een nee tegen censuur op het internet!

'Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door.......'

'Jeremy Corbyn wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet.......'

'VS gebruikt sociale media om 'fake comment' te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel 'fake news....''

'Facebook: verrijking van oliemaatschappijen en andere grote bedrijven, plus wereldwijde corruptie.......'

'Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'