LEAK: Google Employees Defend Discrimination Against Conservatives
Bombshell: Twitter, Google Admit Deliberately Censoring News
“Fake news” being used as a weaponized term to bury opposing viewpoints
During a House Intelligence Committee hearing into Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election, TwitterGeneral Counsel Sean Edgett brazenly admitted that Twitter censors Infowars stories in favor of mainstream media.
Edgett was asked by Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) why an Infowars story about New York Mayor Mike De Blasio ignoring warnings from an Imam about terrorist radicalization in New York appeared at thetop of the #NYCTerroristAttack hashtag during the vehicle attack in Manhattan last week.
“This is a real-time example of when we talk about this information being weaponized, how quickly can you act and what’syour responsibility to set the record straight so that the people who saw this know that it’s fake news?” asked Quigley, adding thatTwitter needed to prevent Infowars “spreading like some sort of virus through the legitimate world.”
Twitter Sean Edgett responded by telling Quigley, “The system self-corrected, that shouldn’t be the first tweet yousee anymore, it should be a USA Today article,” before going on to assure the Congressman that only “verified accounts” and“accurate information and reporting” (in other words mainstream media only) would be seen in future.
Infowars was also attacked on Sunday when the media started apressure campaign to have Google de-list my tweets from appearing in search results about breaking news stories. Google responded by saying they would “make some changes” to ensure this didn’t happen again.
The New York Times contacted me for a comment and I made it clear that there is no “strategy” for getting my tweetsto the top of Google’s rankings – I am simply interesting and have a lot of followers. The threat of a different perspective is sothreatening to the MSM and the left that they are now directly demanding tech companies bury our content in real time.
Hoping I get quoted on that. pic.twitter.com/wI7OlEW3bE
— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) November 7, 2017
The story cited by Congressman Quigley in the clip above was also labeled “fake news” despite being completely true.
An Imam – Mohammad Tawhidi – did indeed warn De Blasio about terrorists being radicalized in New York andsubsequently posted the letter to prove it.
RELEASED: My Feb 2016 letter to Mayor de Blasio warning him of terrorist breeding in NYC. I was completelyignored! https://t.co/IbDcFp92mD pic.twitter.com/ul5TpIcs6L
— Imam Tawhidi (@Imamofpeace) November 2, 2017
He also felt that De Blasio ignored his warnings because he was too busy wasting “all his energy and resources intrying to bring down President Trump and not Islamic Extremists.”
Not a single aspect of this story is “fake news,” it simply makes De Blasio look bad – and that’s the point.
As Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) pointed out in the hearing, “fake news” is completely subjective. “How in theworld do you intend to identify fake news without weaponizing this in the political realm?” he asked.
The entire “fake news” moral panic was an invention of the Democrats as an excuse because they lost theelection, when in reality, a Stanford University study found that fake news (actual fake news websites publishing made up stories) did not influence the election and thatthe most widely believed fake news stories actually benefited Hillary Clinton.
Fake news is a weapon being used by the left to push censorship of anything that challenges their dogma or debunks theirarguments, and Silicon Valley has indicated its willingness to jump in bed with Democrats to ensure that very outcome.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
The idea of small groups of humans having control over some of the most powerful weapons ever to be built is scary, but it’s the reality we live in. In the not-so-distant future, that incredible power and responsibility could be handed over to AI and robotic systems, which are already in active development. In a pair of open letters to the prime ministers of bother Australia and Canada, hundreds of AI researchers and scientists are pleading for that not to happen.
The fear, they say, is that removing the human element from life and death decisions could usher in a destructive age that ultimately spells the end of mankind. The AI weapons systems are, as the researchers put it, “weapons of mass destruction” which must be banned outright before they can do any serious damage.
“Delegating life-or-death decisions to machines crosses a fundamental moral line – no matter which side builds or uses them,” the letter explains. “Playing Russian roulette with the lives of others can never be justified merely on the basis of efficacy. This is not only a fundamental issue of human rights. The decision whether to ban or engage autonomous weapons goes to the core of our humanity.”
In a setting where computers have the ultimate say in whether or not to engage in hostile acts — even under the guise of defending their own territories or protecting the populations they are programmed to protect — conflicts could escalate much faster than humans have ever seen. Weeks, months, or even years of posturing and diplomacy could turn into mere minutes or even seconds, with missiles flying before humans can even begin to intervene. And then, of course, there’s the issue of the AI being manipulated in unforeseen ways.
“These will be weapons of mass destruction,” the scientists say. “One programmer will be able to control a whole army. Every other weapon of mass destruction has been banned: chemical weapons, biological weapons, even nuclear weapons. We must add autonomous weapons to the list of weapons that are morally unacceptable to use.”
It’s a frightening thought, but it hasn’t stopped military contractors from exploring the possibility of AI-controlled weapons and defense systems. This could be yet another way mankind engineers its own destruction.