06 May, 2020

Trillion Euro Torpedo: Covid Censorship, Disinformation or Global Warfare?

Who do you believe?
Is the world living through a Covid crisis affecting football fans or a Global Famine?
We could be facing multiple famines of biblical proportions within a short few months
There is also a real danger that more people could potentially die from the economic impact of COVID-19 than from the virus itself. The World Food Programme analysis shows that, due to the Coronavirus, an additional 130 million people could be pushed to the brink of starvation by the end of 2020. That’s a total of 265 million people.
The World Food Programme Executive Director, David Beasley, 21 April 2020


Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel CoronaVirus identified in Wuhan, China.
World Health Organisation, Director Tadros, 14 January 2020

How do you tell information from disinformation, truth from lies?
By analysis of all information sources. A censor is someone who is authorised by a State to stop uncomfortable information from reaching the public.
What is the difference between a censor and someone stopping ‘disinformation’? A censor stops all information the authorities do not like. Someone stopping disinformation stops information that he or she defines as not acceptable. But who guards her choice?
Disinformation may originate from someone trying to help the public because official sources are wrong or inadequate.
  • Why should that be stopped rather than lead to a public debate?
The usual sources of information may be biased as they come from commercial interests, wanting to fleece the public.
  • How should that be corrected except by public debate?
They may be party political, where, for example a Marxist or revolutionary or perhaps a fascist ideology is overactive in news media organisations.
  • Shouldn’t the people with opposing views have similar access to public debate?
Disinformation may also originate from a one-party State, such as Communist China, that wants to dominate the coming century.
  • There too, information needs to be exposed, not stopped.
The real difference with censorship and stopping ill-defined or self-defined ‘disinformation’?
  • NOTHING. Both functions depend on control and ideological judgement.
The function of a journalist and the duty of a citizen is to publish information that the controllers do not want the public to know. Authoritarian States and technocratic organisations would like to make any disagreement ILLEGAL.

YouTube CEO Wojcicki “Remove information”

Anything that went against World Health Organisation recommendations would be a violation of our policy. So REMOVE is an important part of our policy.”
Censorship? Can journalists correct government spin and disinformation (only some States are under democratic control).Who can oppose global commercial cartels, bigger than States? Can journalists correct international organisations with global power and little public control?
Only if they can publish and circulate diverse view points and unwelcome facts.
Take the case of WHO, the World Health Organisation. It gives out contradictory opinions. Must the public and the press follow this in lock-step.
* First yes sir, no threat.
* Then yes sir, just follow China’s lead about how to deal with the global pandemic threat you are in.
In mid-January it advised the world that CoranaVirus was not contagious! It was, it seems, following instructions from the Chinese Communist Party who were trying to cover up the chaos in Wuhan while letting the virus be spread worldwide. Why were no proper checks made?
The virus had already spread to France and USA in December. It is therefore likely that the Chinese knew about the contagion in November, perhaps earlier.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said there was ‘an enormous amount of evidence‘ that the virus came from the Wuhan Level 4, Biological Warfare/Defence laboratory. It is known to be leaky from previous virulent epidemics like SARS. The best experts say the virus was man-made.
Several months later the world is in lock-down or rather a lock up or ‘stickum-up’.

Trump: “Who would believe that!”

The West economies are cut to ribbons. And China? China released statistics showing that very few people died in China.
“Anything that went against World Health Organisation recommendations would be a violation of our policy. So REMOVE is an important part of our policy.”
What does the European Commission say about ‘censorship’?
YouTube is banning any discussion which criticises the WHO (World Health Organisation). They have taken down other YouTube videos which are very relevant on the statistics of Covid problems in various countries. And so the whole discussion on the economics and politics of the Covid problem are being curtailed by YourTube and other large international InfoTech companies. They are taking down important information. Has the Commission reacted to this policy?
Commission Spokesman Response
I am not aware of any information that would substantiate the comments that you are making on this issue. We would need more precise information from you to ascertain that this is really happening in order to assess it.
DP, EurDemocracy
The Chief Executive Officer of YouTube, Susan Wojcicki, made this public announcement.

“Anything that went against World Health Organisation recommendations would be a violation of our policy. So REMOVE is an important part of our policy.”
Commission Spokesman
We are not aware of that statement. We will come back to you if we have a comment on this.

My Email from eurDemocracy to Commission
re: My question today at the midday press conference.
At around 5 minutes
This is the interview with Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube, on CNN and comments by Fox analyst Tucker Carlson. YouTube is the largest video hosting site in the world.
In it she says that anything that disagrees with WHO policy will be taken down. (WHO has had contradictory policies and has been shown to be unreliable and biased leading to corruption.) Are journalists supposed to follow its pronouncements or be banned?
She also says that anything her company disagrees with will also be taken down. Who guards the guardians?
The company has also taken down video of press conferences by doctors with millions of views reporting on serious problems with official positions on
  • vaccines
  • therapeutics
  • false post mortem designations and
  • other matters having implications for the work and mental health of the public.
This information censorship has massive implications about how to resolve Europe’s political, social and economic policy problems about Covid-19, its origin and dispersion, here and elsewhere. Trillions of euros are involved. Fundamental freedoms are being denied. The effects of the pandemic have unforeseen consequences. This is no time for censorship.
A number of international disputes and court cases are under way so a diffusion of accurate information to the public is vital.
Q: What is the Commission’s reaction to the misuse of dominant position of this infoTech company and its effects on the EU?
Reply from Commission Spokesman
Thank you for following up and for providing clarifications to your Midday question in writing.

We are aware of the statements by Youtube CEO Susan Wojcicki – from several weeks ago – saying that the platform was focused on “raising authoritative information” and removing information that is false and “medically unsubstantiated.” We have no comment to make on her comments directly. We would however suggest not to confuse the fight against disinformation with “censorship”.
As I had the occasion to express also from the podium recently, we are aware of an increasing number of false information about the coronavirus outbreak appearing in public discourse. We are concerned that some of them can lead to public harm. In this context, we are in contact with online platforms.
The Commission is meeting regularly with online platforms, including Google / Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Mozilla and trade association EDiMA to discuss the spread of disinformation around the outbreak of coronavirus. All these platforms are signatories of the Code of Practice on Disinformation.
To help fight disinformation, the EU is working in close cooperation with these platforms. We are encouraging them to promote authoritative sources, such as public health authorities or the World Health Organisation, and demote content that is fact-checked as false or misleading, and take down illegal content or content that could cause physical harm.
During her last meeting with the platforms, Vice President Věra Jourová urged the companies to share relevant data with the research and fact-checking community, as well as to work together with authorities in all Member States and the Commission to fully enforce their new policies and offer more evidence that their measures are working. The Commission will continue to monitor actions taken by the platforms.
You may have also seen today the reaction of the Commission on the intermediary report of the European Regulators Group of Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) regarding the effectiveness of the Code of Practice on disinformation, that is the framework of cooperation with these platforms. It will feed in the reflection for upcoming actions, such as the Digital Services Act and the European Democracy Action plan.
(my emphasis)
Schuman’s open information policy
Robert Schuman the architect of the European Community, implemented a fair and open, democratic system for the European Community’s information policy. Schuman was asked by the United Nations Secretary General to advise them on how to do the same for their organisation. I passed on a copy of his report to the then European Commissioner for Information, vice president Margot Wallstrom.
Both the EU and the UN seem to have buried it. The EU in general, and the European Commission, ‘the Guardian of the Treaties’, have seemingly forgotten that this year 9 May should celebrate the longest period of peace, 75 years, initiated by the Schuman Declaration, seventy years ago.
Fake News and Fraudulent Information is now rampant in Europe and USA. The European Union is projected to lose more than 7 1/2 percent of its economy in the Covid crisis.
Q: Is this economic torpedo due to Fake News, Fraud, student errors in the Wuhan Virology Institute laboratory or economic warfare? If the latter who are the willing or unconscious troops?

No comments:

Post a Comment