VS staatscensuur op Facebook (ook in de EU)

Facebook maakte onlangs bekend dat het de strijd verder aangaat met 'fake news' ('nepnieuws') door samen te werken met 2 propaganda organen van de overheid, het National Democratic Institute (NDI) en het International Republican Institute (IRI). Eerder werd al bekendgemaakt dat Facebook samenwerkt met de rechtse, door de NAVO gesteunde Atlantic Council (dat lobbyt voor de buitenlandse terreur van de VS en haar oorlogshond de NAVO, plus uiteraard het militair-industrieel complex)......

Met name 'linkse' alternatieve mediaorganen die op internet werkzaam zijn zoals Common Dreams, worden al aangepakt door Facebook, waardoor de zichtbaarheid van deze sites op het platform zwaar is teruggebracht........

Het is dan ook meer dan duidelijk dat de VS steeds verder verandert in een politiestaat, inclusief de daarbij horende censuur......

Bovendien is Facebook met deze samenwerking verworden tot het zoveelste propaganda orgaan van de VS, de grootste terreurentiteit op onze kleine aarde........ Ofwel het sociale netwerk wordt opgescheept met censuur en dat voor het zogenaamd brengen van 'fake news' (nepnieuws) en propaganda, terwijl de 'normale' reguliere (massa-) media voortdurend fake news en propaganda brengen (en zichzelf daarbij censureren, althans als het gaat om artikelen van de journalisten die werken voor die media, maar die hun werk nog wel serieus nemen.....)

De meeste nieuws en actualiteiten sites en blogs op het internet danken hun ontstaan juist aan de smerige berichtgeving in/op de reguliere (massa-) media, berichtgeving die zoals gezegd bol staat van nepnieuws en propaganda voor de huidige inhumane neoliberale maatschappij en waar de illegale oorlogen van de VS op basis van doorzichtige leugens worden voorgesteld als absoluut noodzakelijk, zelfs als dat meer dan 1,5 miljoen doden kost, zoals in het geval van de illegale oorlog die de VS en NAVO partners in 2003 tegen Irak begonnen....... 

Facebook heeft in samenspraak met de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël, besloten een groot aantal accounts van Palestijnen te verwijderen van haar platform........ Alsof de Palestijnen zionisten onderdrukken....... 

Lees het volgende artikel van Alan MacLeod, eerder gepubliceerd op FAIR.org, door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media, en geeft het door, ook in Nederland gaat men dezelfde kant op, bovendien is de censuur op Facebook ook van toepassing op Nederlandse accounts.....

Meet Facebook’s New Propaganda Partners

September 26, 2018 at 2:46 pm

Written by Alan Macleod

(FAIR) — Media giant Facebook recently announced (Reuters, 9/19/18) it would combat “fake news” by partnering with two propaganda organizations founded and funded by the US government: the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI). The social media platform was already working closely with the NATO-sponsored Atlantic Council think tank (FAIR.org, 5/21/18).

                    

Reuters (9/19/18) described two branches of the National Endowment for Democracy, set up by the Reagan administration during the Cold War to promote US foreign policy objectives, as “two US nonprofits.”

In a previous FAIR article (8/22/18), I noted that the “fake news” issue was being used as a pretext to attack the left and progressive news sites. Changes to Facebook’s algorithm have reduced traffic significantly for progressive outlets like Common Dreams (5/3/18), while the pages of Venezuelan government–backed TeleSur English and the independent Venezuelanalysis were shut down without warning, and only reinstated after a public outcry.

The Washington, DC–based NDI and IRI are staffed with senior Democratic and Republican politicians; the NDI is chaired by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, while the late Sen. John McCain was the longtime IRI chair. Both groups were created in 1983 as arms of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a Cold War enterprise backed by then–CIA director William Casey (Jacobin, 3/7/18). That these two US government creations, along with a NATO offshoot like the Atlantic Council, are used by Facebook to distinguish real from fake news is effectively state censorship.

Facebook’s collaboration with the NED organizations is particularly troubling, as both have aggressively pursued regime change against leftist governments overseas. The NDI undermined the Sandinista government of Nicaragua in the 1980s, and continues to do so to this day, while the IRI claimed a key role in the 2002 coup against leftist President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, announcing that it had

“served as a bridge between the nation’s political parties and all civil society groups to help Venezuelans forge a new democratic future…. We stand ready to continue our partnership with the courageous Venezuelan people.”

The Reuters report (9/19/18) mentioned that Facebook was anxious to better curate what Brazilians saw on their feeds in the run-up to their presidential elections, which pits far-right Jair Bolsonaro against leftist Fernando Haddad. The US government has a long history of undermining democracy in Brazil, from supporting a coup in 1964 against the progressive Goulart administration to continually spying on leftist President Dilma Rousseff (BBC, 7/4/15) in the run-up to the parliamentary coup against her in 2016 (CounterSpin, 6/2/17).

           

Glenn Greenwald (Intercept, 12/30/17) reported that “Facebook has been on a censorship rampage against Palestinian activists who protest the decades-long, illegal Israeli occupation, all directed and determined by Israeli officials.”

Soon after it partnered with the Atlantic Council, Facebook moved to delete accounts and pages connected with Iranian broadcasting channels (CNBC, 8/23/18), while The Intercept (12/30/17) reported that in 2017 the social media platform met with Israeli government officials to discuss which Palestinian voices it should censor. Ninety-five percent of Israeli government requests for deletion were granted. Thus the US government and its allies are effectively using the platform to silence dissenting opinion, both at home and on the world stage, controlling what Facebook‘s 2 billion users see and do not see.

Progressives should be deeply skeptical that these moves have anything to do with their stated objective of promoting democracy. Bloomberg Businessweek (9/29/17) reported that the far-right Alternative fur Deutschland (AfD) party went to Facebook headquarters for discussions with US companies about how it could use the platform for recruitment and micro-targeting in the 2017 elections. AfD tripled its previous vote share, becoming the third-largest party in Germany, the far right’s best showing since World War II.

Public trust in government is at 18 percent—an all-time low (Pew, 12/14/17). There is similar mistrust of Facebook, with only 20 percent of Americans agreeing social media sites do a good job separating fact from fiction. And yet, worldwide, Facebook is a crucial news source. Fifty-two percent of Brazilians, 61 percent of Mexicans, and 51 percent of Italians and Turks use the platform for news; 39 percent of the US gets their news from the site.

This means that, despite the fact that even its own public mistrusts it, the US government has effectively become the arbiter of what the world sees and hears, with the ability to marginalize or simply delete news from organizations or countries that do not share its opinions. This power could be used at sensitive times, like elections. This is not an idle threat. The US created an entire fake social network for Cubans that aimed to stir unrest and overthrow the Cuban government, according to the Guardian (4/3/14).

That a single corporation has such a monopoly over the flow of worldwide news is already problematic, but the increasing meshing of corporate and US government control over the means of communication is particularly worrying. All those who believe in free and open exchange of information should oppose Facebook becoming a tool of US foreign policy.

By Alan Macleod / Republished with permission / FAIR.org / Report a typo

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

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

'The US military’s vision for state censorship'

'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)

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

'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!'

Facebook Purges Independent Media for “Political Disinformation”

Facebook Blocks Links to Free Speech Competitor ‘Minds’

Hier nog wat links over de ongebreidelde agressie, beter gezegd terreur van de VS:
'VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen..........'

'List of wars involving the United States'

'VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII........'

'VS: openlijke militaire oefening met terreurgroep in Syrië......'

'NAVO gaat VS helpen in Zuid-Amerika terreur uit te oefenen: Colombia lid van de NAVO.........'

'VS commando's vechten o.a. in Midden- en Zuid-Amerika, aldus het VS ministerie van oorlog.........'

'De VS, een duivels imperium, dat achter haar psychopathisch moordende troepen staat??'

'De war on drugs is veel dodelijker dan over het algemeen gedacht'

'Terreuraanslag in Iran moet acties uitlokken die de VS tot een oorlog met Iran 'dwingen''

Koenders: NYT en Ass. Press gaven toe dat Russia-gate een canard is, waar blijft jouw openlijke schuldbekentenis?

Associated Press (AP) en de New York Times (NYT) hebben toegegeven dat de bewering als zouden alle 17 geheime diensten in de VS achter de claim staan, dat Rusland de VS presidentsverkiezingen zouden hebben beinvloed t.b.v. van het beest Donald Trump.

De directeur van de National Intelligence (DNI), Clapper, die over alle geheime diensten gaat, zou hebben bedoeld dat het om 3 diensten ging, de CIA, de FBI en de NSA. Echter daar deze directeur over 17 diensten gaat, nam men aan, dat het de bevinding van 17 diensten was, dat Rusland de verkiezingen t.g.v. het beest Trump had beïnvloed........

De democratische kandidaat, hare kwaadaardigheid Clinton stelde dat er geen twijfel is als alle 17 diensten hetzelfde stellen..........

Eerlijk gezegd snap ik al niet, dat er nog iemand is, die ook maar gelooft wat welke geheime VS dienst dan ook verklaart, daarvoor hebben deze diensten, om het zachtjes te stellen, iets te vaak laten zien, dat liegen één van hun belangrijkste eigenschappen is..........

Het is dan ook aan politici als Koenders en Rutte en de reguliere westerse media te danken dat de leugens van de bedoelde VS diensten hier als waarheid worden verkocht.......

Hier kan nog het volgende punt bij opgeteld worden: NB de NSA heeft bewezen ingebroken in computers en telefoons van regeringen in het buitenland, zelfs van haar partners zoals Duitsland (en gegarandeerd ook in Nederland), m.a.w. de zwarte pot verwijt een niet zwarte ketel zwart te zijn!!! Daarnaast is de VS sinds 1945 verantwoordelijk voor een flink aantal staatsgrepen (ook voor 1940, 'maar goed....')......

Moet je nagaan, hoeveel onzinnige energie en hysterie er al in de valse claim is gestoken, dat Rusland alles en iedereen zou hacken en manipuleren........ Als gevolg waarvan men geen maatregelen nam, de boel beter te beveiligen, zo bleek onlangs weer met de 2 ransomware aanvallen.......

Benieuwd hoe lang figuren al Hubert Smeets, Rob de Wijk, Han ten Broeke (VVD hufter), Arend Jan Boekestijn (ook al VVD, maar dan een echte sufferd) en vele anderen uit de politiek en de reguliere westerse media, de leugen blijven volhouden dat Rusland de VS (en andere) verkiezingen heeft gemanipuleerd.......

New York Times and AP Finally Retract False Claims on Russia Hacking

July 2, 2017 at 7:54 am

Written by Jason Ditz

(ANTIWAR.COM) — Among the most oft-repeated claims of the entire Russia election hacking scandal is that of absolute unanimity among US intelligence agencies, with media and politicians regularly claiming that “all 17 US intelligence agencies have agreed that Russia tried to influence the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump.” It’s not true.

Nearly a year into the hacking scandal, both the New York Times and the Associated Press are finally copping to the fact that this allegation is untrue, and retracting it outright. The AP confirmed falsely making the claim in at least four distinct articles, most recently on Thursday.

What actually happened? The Director of National Intelligence made the allegation, claiming it was based on information from three US agencies, the CIA, FBI, and NSA. The Director of National Intelligence nominally represents all 17 intelligence agencies, and that was quickly and incorrectly extrapolated into all 17 agencies being in consensus.

In practice, however, the DNI is an increasingly politicized office, and their publications aren’t necessarily in line with actual reality, let alone proof of a consensus among the intelligence agencies. Indications are that the overwhelming majority of the US intelligence agencies were never even involved in assessing the Russia hacks.

Nor would they be expected to be. It would be bizarre if the Pentagon’s intelligence agency, for example, was probing US elections, or if the National Reconnaissance Office, which operates spy satellites looking for missile launches, was chiming in on the Trump Campaign.

It sounded better, particularly for those trying to make this into a bigger scandal, however, to claim that “all 17” US intelligence agencies had agreed on the narrative, because this would give the impression that it’s indisputable fact, as opposed to a heavily politically-motivated assertion backed up by limited circumstantial evidence dug up by a couple of US spy agencies.

By Jason Ditz / Republished with permission / AntiWar.com / Report a typo
===============================================
Hier een bericht van Information Clearting House, geschreven door Robert Parry, dat iets uitgebreider bericht over deze zaak (onder dat artikel kan u klikken voor 'een Dutch vertaling'):

NYT Finally Retracts Russia-gate Canard
A founding Russia-gate myth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies agreed that Russia hacked into and distributed Democratic emails, a falsehood that The New York Times has belatedly retracted, reports Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry

June 30, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - The New York Times has finally admitted that one of the favorite Russia-gate canards – that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies concurred on the assessment of Russian hacking of Democratic emails – is false.

On Thursday, the Times appended a correction to a June 25 article that had repeated the false claim, which has been used by Democrats and the mainstream media for months to brush aside any doubts about the foundation of the Russia-gate scandal and portray President Trump as delusional for doubting what all 17 intelligence agencies supposedly knew to be true.

In the Times’ White House Memo of June 25, correspondent Maggie Haberman mocked Trump for “still refus[ing] to acknowledge a basic fact agreed upon by 17 American intelligence agencies that he now oversees: Russia orchestrated the attacks, and did it to help get him elected.”

However, on Thursday, the Times – while leaving most of Haberman’s ridicule of Trump in place – noted in a correction that the relevant intelligence “assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.”

The Times’ grudging correction was vindication for some Russia-gate skeptics who had questioned the claim of a full-scale intelligence assessment, which would usually take the form of a National Intelligence Estimate (or NIE), a product that seeks out the views of the entire Intelligence Community and includes dissents.

The reality of a more narrowly based Russia-gate assessment was admitted in May by President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan in sworn congressional testimony.

Clapper testified before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on May 8 that the Russia-hacking claim came from a “special intelligence community assessment” (or ICA) produced by selected analysts from the CIA, NSA and FBI, “a coordinated product from three agencies – CIA, NSA, and the FBI – not all 17 components of the intelligence community,” the former DNI said.

Clapper further acknowledged that the analysts who produced the Jan. 6 assessment on alleged Russian hacking were “hand-picked” from the CIA, FBI and NSA.

Yet, as any intelligence expert will tell you, if you “hand-pick” the analysts, you are really hand-picking the conclusion. For instance, if the analysts were known to be hard-liners on Russia or supporters of Hillary Clinton, they could be expected to deliver the one-sided report that they did.

Politicized Intelligence

In the history of U.S. intelligence, we have seen how this selective approach has worked, such as the phony determination of the Reagan administration pinning the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II and other acts of terror on the Soviet Union.

CIA Director William Casey and Deputy Director Robert Gates shepherded the desired findings through the process by putting the assessment under the control of pliable analysts and sidelining those who objected to this politicization of intelligence.

The point of enlisting the broader intelligence community – and incorporating dissents into a final report – is to guard against such “stove-piping” of intelligence that delivers the politically desired result but ultimately distorts reality.

Another painful example of politicized intelligence was President George W. Bush’s 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s WMD that removed State Department and other dissents from the declassified version that was given to the public.

Since Clapper’s and Brennan’s testimony in May, the Times and other mainstream news outlets have avoided a direct contradiction of their earlier acceptance of the 17-intelligence-agencies canard by simply referring to a judgment by “the intelligence community.”

That finessing of their earlier errors has allowed Hillary Clinton and other senior Democrats to continue referencing this fictional consensus without challenge, at least in the mainstream media.

For instance, on May 31 at a technology conference in California, Clinton referred to the Jan. 6 report, asserting that “Seventeen agencies, all in agreement, which I know from my experience as a Senator and Secretary of State, is hard to get. They concluded with high confidence that the Russians ran an extensive information war campaign against my campaign, to influence voters in the election.”

The failure of the major news organizations to clarify this point about the 17 agencies may have contributed to Haberman’s mistake on June 25 as she simply repeated the groupthink that nearly all the Important People in Washington just knew to be true.

But the Times’ belated correction also underscores the growing sense that the U.S. mainstream media has joined in a political vendetta against Trump and has cast aside professional standards to the point of repeating false claims designed to denigrate him.

That, in turn, plays into Trump’s Twitter complaints that he and his administration are the targets of a “witch hunt” led by the “fake news” media, a grievance that appears to be energizing his supporters and could discredit whatever ongoing investigations eventually conclude.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load
==============================
Op 18 december 2017 heb ik de kop en een het label AP aangepast. Waar eerder AP stond, staat nu Ass. Press, (Associated Press), daar de letters 'AP' al werden gebruikt voor de Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens.