Internet Censorship

[Amo]

Yes, the end approaches rapidly. As we have been told the final events would be rapid. God's word and prophets have predicted all that is coming upon this world. The evil one and his minions use these predicted events to manipulate the ignorant masses through fear mongering politics regarding the same. Calling all to increasingly trust and submit to their control and salvation over and above God's, in the sacrifice of all of their freedoms and liberties unto the false security and salvation they offer. So be it, as God has determined and predicted for all to see and know if they truly desire. Nevertheless, many desire no such thing, preferring such as the song which follows.

Fleetwood Mac - Tell Me Lies

If I could turn the page
In time then I'd rearrange just a day or two
Close my, close my, close my eyes

But I couldn't find a way
So I'll settle for one day to believe in you
Tell me, tell me, tell me lies

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies
(Tell me lies, tell me, tell me lies)
Oh, no, no you can't disguise
(You can't disguise, no you can't disguise)
Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

Although I'm not making plans
I hope that you understand there's a reason why
Close your, close your, close your eyes

No more broken hearts
We're better off apart let's give it a try
Tell me, tell me, tell me lies

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies
(Tell me lies, tell me, tell me lies)
Oh, no, no you can't disguise
(You can't disguise, no you can't disguise)
Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

If I could turn the page
In time then I'd rearrange just a day or two
Close my, close my, close my eyes

But I couldn't find a way
So I'll settle for one day to believe in you
Tell me, tell me, tell me lies

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies
(Tell me lies, tell me, tell me lies)
Oh, no, no you can't disguise
(You can't disguise, no you can't disguise)
Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

(Tell me lies, tell me, tell me lies)
Oh, no, no you can't disguise
(You can't disguise, no you can't disguise)
Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies
(Tell me, tell me lies)

Joh 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

[Amo]

https://catherinesalgado.substack.com/p/pope-francis-joins-dems-and-un-in

Quoted article below from link above.

Pope Francis Joins Dems and UN In Call for More Censorship

Pope Francis, following his pretty consistent tradition of ignoring his spiritual duties to latch onto popular leftist political movements, is calling for more censorship of "disinformation" online. Just like the US Democrats and the socialist United Nations (UN) called for. And like the tyrannical Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with which Francis's Vatican has made and renewed an infamous deal.

Strange how Francis was perfectly happy to make a deal with the murderous CCP and meet amicably with late Cuban tyrant Fidel Castro but online "disinformation" (and we know the Vatican has been trying to force the dangerous, abortion-tainted Covid jab onto employees, so include any Covid honesty under that heading) is suddenly a major threat.

Reclaim the Net reported on the pope's latest move to support tyranny versus liberty:

"In a virtual meeting during the weekend, Pope Francis called on tech companies to be more responsible about the spread of 'misinformation.'

The Pope made the remarks during the World Meeting of Popular Movements, which, according to Reuters, is 'a grouping of grassroots organizations and social movements which bring attention to inequality in labour, land ownership, health care, and other social issues in the developing world.'

The pope noted that 'the pandemic had laid bare the social inequalities that afflict our peoples.' He added that 'technology can be a tool for good, and truly it is a tool for good, which permits dialogues such as this one, and many other things, but it can never replace contact between us, it can never substitute for a community in which we can be rooted and which ensures that our life may become fruitful.'

In his speech, the Pope singled out tech platforms for aiding the spread of misinformation."

Too bad Francis has been going along with the Covid shutdown and vaccination segregation craziness. Talk about bad for community—and talk about "misinformation."

Unfortunately Francis used God's name to call for more censorship:

"[Francis] said: 'In the name of God, I ask the technology giants to stop exploiting human weakness, people's vulnerability, for the sake of profits without caring about the spread of hate speech, grooming, fake news, conspiracy theories, and political manipulation.

'In the name of God, I ask the telecommunications giants to ease access to educational material and connectivity for teachers via the internet so that poor children can be educated even under quarantine.

'In the name of God, I ask the media to stop the logic of post-truth, disinformation, defamation, slander and the unhealthy attraction to dirt and scandal, and to contribute to human fraternity and empathy with those who are most deeply damaged.'"

Again, this is the pope responsible for making up to Communist dictators and pressuring employees to take the abortion-tainted jab. Somehow Francis's call for "human fraternity and empathy" rings hollow—as hollow as empty St. Peter's Basilica when it was entirely shut down during the plandemic.

[Amo]

https://summit.news/2021/10/19/pope-demands-silicon-valley-in-the-name-of-god-censor-hate-speech-conspiracy-theories/

Quoted article below, from link above.

Pope Demands Silicon Valley "In the Name of God" Censor "Hate Speech," "Conspiracy Theories"

Pope Francis thinks empowering giant corporations to silence free speech is Godly.

Yes, really.

The Pope made the remarks during a World Meeting of Popular Movements, a shadowy organization created to promote "social justice" and fight racism with the help of religious leaders.

"In the name of God, I ask the technology giants to stop exploiting human weakness, people's vulnerability, for the sake of profits without caring about the spread of hate speech, grooming, fake news, conspiracy theories, and political manipulation," he stated.

Pope Francis also invoked the term "post-truth," which was invented by establishment media organs after they began to lose their monopoly on controlling the narrative following the election of Donald Trump.

The Catholic leader apparently believes it's Christian and Godly to empower giant corporations to shut down free speech.

This is no surprise given his previous stance on free speech in response to the slaughter of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, when he rhetorically sided with the terrorists who murdered them in cold blood.

As we document in the video below, which Pope Francis would surely love to see banned, the Supreme Pontiff smears his critics as performing "the work of the devil."

In reality, his every action and position has served to further the anti-Christ globalist beast system for which he is a willing puppet.

No doubt the Pope would respond to such claims by characterizing them as "conspiracy theories" and "hate speech."

Beginning to see how this works?

[Amo]

https://protestia.com/2022/01/28/pope-declares-fake-news-on-jabs-is-a-human-rights-violation/

Quotes below from link above.

Pope Declares 'Fake News' On Jabs Is A Human Rights Violation

Pope Francis has been awful on issues surrounding the novel coronavirus. When he's not busy affirming the faith of Joe Biden and saying he would never refuse him communion, releasing his most outrageously blasphemous statement, and endorsing civil unions for gay couples, he's been instituting "vaccine" "passports" at Vatican City, asking Big Tech to censor "conspiracy theories," and hating on anti-maskers and those urging caution at taking the COVID vaccine.

It's no surprise then that the emblem and servant of the Antichrist has met with the  International Consortium of Catholic Media on COVID-19 Vaccines (aka catholicfactchecking.com) and gave the fact-checking organization his seal of approval.

The group, which is funded in part by Google, George Soros, and Bill Gates and is the frequent target of attack by conservative Catholic organizations like LifeSite News and Church Militant, received a vigorous defense from the corrupt Pontiff, who denounced "fake news" about COVID and the vaccine, saying that those engaging in misinformation are promulgating a "distortion of reality based on fear" [Editor's note: Apparently the Irony is strong with this one...], and that being free from vaccine misinformation and fake news is a "human right." [Ummmmm... -Ed.]

"We can hardly fail to see that these days, in addition to the pandemic, an 'infodemic' is spreading: a distortion of reality based on fear, which in our global society leads to an explosion of commentary on falsified if not invented news..to be properly informed, to be helped to understand situations based on scientific data and not fake news, is a human right.

...Correct information must be ensured above all to those who are less equipped, to the weakest and to those who are most vulnerable. [Editors note: Question: Who gets to decide what information is correct? And who is busy redefining words to make sure it's as confusing as all get-out?]"

Francis has previously explained that Roman Catholics have an obligation to take the Covid vaccine, even if it is derived from fetal cells, chastising anyone unwilling to take the shot as living in "suicidal denial."

"I believe that ethically everyone must take the vaccine. It is not an option; it is an ethical action, because you are playing with your health, you are playing with your life, but you are also playing with the lives of others. I've signed up. One must do it...

I don't understand why some say, 'No, vaccines are dangerous.' If it is presented by doctors as a thing that can go well, that has no special dangers, why not take it? There is a suicidal denial that I wouldn't know how to explain. [Editor's note: Hey Frankie! About those "special dangers" you mentioned...ask the CDC about those...]"

[Amo]

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2021/09/02/on-censorship-and-heresy/

Quoted article below, from link above.

On censorship and heresy

More than 400 years ago in the year 1615, the Catholic Church hired eleven 'expert consultants' and asked them to review the scientific work of Nicolaus Copernicus.

Copernicus, of course, was one of the first scientists to propose that the sun (not the earth) was at the center of the universe.

But even though Copernicus had been dead for more than 70 years at that point, his ideas still lived on... and were being advanced by none other than Galileo.

Galileo had published his own research with compelling evidence that Copernicus was right.

This view of the universe conflicted with Church teachings that the Earth was at the center of the universe.

So the Vatican decided to settle the matter with its panel of expert 'fact checkers'.

On February 4, 1616, the fact checking committee issued its final report to Rome: the Earth is clearly the center of the universe. And any other view constituted heresy.

They concluded that the Copernicus/Galileo heliocentric view is "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture..."

The fact checkers' assessment ultimately helped convict Galileo of heresy later in life; his works were banned, was threatened with torture, forced to recant his scientific conclusions, and spent the last eight years of his life under house arrest.

It was a very sad ending to the life of a man who contributed so much to the world.

Vatican bureaucrats would go on to ban works by many other scientists and philosophers , including René Descartes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, and John Locke.

The Vatican may very well have felt that their censorship and fact-checking were righteous.

But we obviously know in retrospect that many of the people they censored were legitimate scientists whose only crime was having a different point of view.

It's not so different from the legions of fact-checkers lurking the Internet today.

Facebook, for example, banned the heretical question last year: did COVID-19 escape from a lab in Wuhan?

Its fact-checkers based their censorship on a letter penned by a zoologist named Peter Daszak, who said it was anti-Asian hate speech to suspect a Wuhan lab leak.

Daszak's day job is packaging federal grants for scientific labs, some of which funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Daszak was also later sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology as part of a World Health Organization 'fact-finding' mission. Shockingly, he concluded that everything in Wuhan was fine.

In other words, the guy responsible for funding the lab which may have leaked COVID-19 was presented as a neutral, third party fact-checker.

And he was given the authority to decide what you were allowed to say on social media.

Then, of course, there's PayPal and the Anti-Defamation League, which recently announced their own inquisition of fact checkers to decide if your online free speech is too "extremist" or "anti-government".

These terms, of course, are defined in the sole discretion of the fact checkers. Do you have a problem with the current administration? That might make you 'anti-government', and you'll end up banned from using PayPal's platform.

Not to be outdone by the private sector, the White House said it will partner with Big Tech companies in its new initiative to encourage you to report your "radical" family and friends to the government.

Then there's David Mikkelson, the co-founder of the 'fact-checking' website Snopes; he recently admitted to plagiarizing at least 54 articles, demonstrating that the Godfather of fact-checking has absolutely zero ethical standards.

FactCheck.org set up a special "COVID-19/Vaccination Project" on its website, in order to fact check claims about vaccines.

Funding for the project came from a foundation started Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which owns billions of dollars worth of stock in Johnson & Johnson (the foundation's namesake).

So FactCheck.org is supposed to be scrutinizing its primary benefactor. Isn't this at least a major conflict of interest?

It reminds me of an article I read in Forbes last summer entitled, You Must Not 'Do Your Own Research' When It Comes To Science.

The author claimed that "when it comes to issues like vaccinations, climate change, and the novel coronavirus" doing your own research "can be dangerous, destructive, and even deadly."

Ignorance is strength!

Abandon all reason you peasant. If you think for yourself, you are putting lives at risk. Believe what the woke fact-checking elites tell you.

Calling attention to the conflicts of interests makes you a science denier— a heretic. Questioning the ulterior motives of the people involved makes you a conspiracy theorist.

I'm not sure if the writer of the above article is aware of the Vatican's involvement in the present internet and social media censorship, he should at least know, that the Vatican certainly does not speak out against such. Unless of course the censorship was regarding the Vatican itself. The Vatican like so many others is of course concerned about freedom for itself and or its obedient adherents.

[Amo]

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/vatican-looks-to-censor-lay-catholics

Quoted article below, from link above.

VATICAN LOOKS TO CENSOR LAY CATHOLICS

Vatican leaders are now calling for Catholics on the internet who do not meet their approval to be censored. The censorship would come in the denial of official certification from the Holy See.

Precisely how such a process would work was not specifically addressed within the final Youth Synod document, or any other place at the moment. What is clear is that leaders in the Vatican are feeling the heat and are concerned about continuing to lose control of their carefully constructed narrative.

Paragraph 146 of the final approved Synod document speaks to the need for creating "certification systems for Catholic websites, to counter the spread of fake news regarding the Church."

In March, the Vatican itself was taken to task for presenting its own "fake news": a deliberately altered photo of a letter from Pope Benedict supposedly praising the "theology of Pope Francis."

However, some in the media, including faithful Catholic internet sites the Vatican now seeks to censor, were suspicious, and when everything eventually came out (as it always does), the Vatican was forced to admit that it had indeed deliberately doctored the photo to change significantly the point of the story. The man responsible, Vatican Communications Secretary Msgr. Dario Viganò (no relation to Abp. Carlo Maria Viganò), eventually resigned in disgrace.

Since Church Militant specifically has already been unfavorably singled out by a semi-official publication of the Vatican, La Civiltà Cattolica, in June of 2017, Church Militant is presumed to be one of the internet sites accused of fake news and thereby targeted.

The threat to apostolates that do most of their work on their independent internet sites and are administered by faithful Catholics seems peculiar to many — especially coming from a Vatican that was, in point of fact, actually discovered and humiliated for the very same action it so ardently claims it now wants to prevent.

Aside from the somewhat totalitarian-minded approach to dealing with criticism, which Pope Francis has said publicly he welcomes, the mechanism of how such a "certification" would work is a complete mystery.

For example, what would be the criteria for applying and being granted certification? How many sites would be eligible? Is the Vatican communications office sufficiently staffed with people fluent in multiple languages to review each website during the application?

How frequently would the renewal process be triggered? Would a renewal process even exist? What would be the mechanism for revoking a "certification" already granted? (The presumption is that the certification would not be in perpetuity, but even that is a presumption.)

Would websites continue to be monitored following certification, and if so (which would seem almost necessary) by whom, how frequently, to what degree? (Some websites, like Church Militant, churn out a large amount of content every day.) Would everything on a given website be monitored, including ads? What if the website joined a coalition of other websites and one or more of the others was not certified?

Would "certification" apply to just postings designated as news, or would it extend to commentary? And if commentary would be included, would certifiers sitting in the Vatican communications basement be sufficiently trained in cultural nuances and social circumstances to render a verdict on the commentary?

If a given commentary on a newsworthy issue were determined to be out of bounds by the Vatican toleration and certification police, would that one instance trigger an automatic revocation of the certification? If not, how many "chances" would be granted before the certification would be withdrawn?

If certification were to be withdrawn, could it be reapplied for, and following what length of time, under what conditions? Would applying for certification entail a financial cost, an "application fee" — because a large number of people would presumably need to be hired (and compensated) by Rome to establish and maintain an operation like this, if it were being done fairly. Literally thousands of articles would have to be read weekly, perhaps even daily, as the internet continues to grow, because every single posting would have the potential to trigger some kind of audit and then be set aside for review.

The internal bureaucracy that would need to be established and then maintained and continually updated to oversee and run the "Holy See Catholic Social Media Certification Department" would become a behemoth and, given how personalities and kingdoms are constantly at war within the walls of the Vatican, one could only imagine the never-ending turf wars that would ensue from this poorly thought-out idea.

But we can also imagine that much of this has already been considered and ruled out as impractical; that the real reason any talk like this is being presented in official Church documents is because it creates the appearance that some Catholic sites are simply untrustworthy and should not be followed. So a heavy-handed censorship passed off as official Vatican "certification" has been introduced into the conversation with an appeal to the popular understanding of "fake news." (No, folks, this isn't fooling anyone with a pulse.)

But "fake news" is to some degree in the eye of the beholder, and we can easily see how those with agendas that an independent Catholic media keep in check would want to use the "certification" process to steamroll their critics out of existence.

There is one point, however, worth concluding with: Since the "certification" would be immediately suspected or even correctly viewed by faithful Catholics as "fake" in and of itself, a tool for modernists in the Church to try and silence opposition from faithful, orthodox Catholics, its very absence would serve the exact opposite purpose: as a kind of seal of approval for orthodoxy, the proverbial badge of honor.

And once that understanding took hold in the minds of the Catholic internet world, the presence of the Vatican "seal of certification" might very well begin to work as a type of "scarlet letter" on sites that did give it prominence.

In Nathaniel Hawthorne's 19th-century novel The Scarlet Letter, the letter "A" that Hester Prynne had to wear called attention to her adultery. Given the current climate in the Church and the men running the Vatican, faithful Catholics may begin to see that "seal of certification" as a scarlet letter "A" for apostasy — and turn away from such websites.

Censorship is never a good idea, much like distorting the truths of the Faith and twisting them to the ways of the world. Neither turns out well in the end. But for the faithful Catholic websites, it could prove to be a boon.

Strange, that Catholics themselves are either unaware of the Vaticans extensive use of censorship throughout its history, or simply don't mind what immense crimes against humanity were committed by her in the past, against all those inside or outside the fold who refused to acknowledge her censorship. They should be happy for the Reformation  and revolutions which stripped the Vatican of the power to persecute and kill which she once had via civil authorities under her thumb. If it weren't for these institution altering events, these very individuals might be facing excommunication, persecution, the wrack, burning at the stake, or certain death today, for daring to disagree with their leadership and publishing those disagreements. They would do well to remember, that almost all Protestants, were first Catholics who came to disagree with the Popes and Vatican.

[Hobie]

Continued excerpts from -
PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL COMMUNICATIONS
ETHICS IN INTERNET

(All emphasis mine, my comments on blue)

III
                                   SOME AREAS OF CONCERN

10. A number of concerns about the Internet are implicit in what has been said so far.
One of the most important of these involves what today is called the digital divide—a form of discrimination dividing the rich from the poor, both within and among nations, on the basis of access, or lack of access, to the new information technology. In this sense it is an updated version of an older gap between the 'information rich' and 'information poor'.

Strange to see the church of Rome, fighting for the right of all to information. She fought so long and hard historically to prevent people from obtaining the same regarding the scriptures and all those who disagreed with her regarding them and what they teach. She destroyed the writings of all the same whenever possible, and has continued her war upon negative history in relation to her by removing as much as possible from public view. This is not to mention her unending efforts to revise all sources of history excluding or revising the same according to her own vision. I suppose having already accomplished the same to a large extent, and expecting control over the internet information she is speaking of, she can afford to pretend to be the benefactor of access to such information. Especially if she succeeds in establishing censorship by nations and political entities which are offended by certain information. As a nation state herself, she will then have the right to censor and outlaw as it were, all negative information regarding herself.

The expression 'digital divide' underlines the fact that individuals, groups, and nations must have access to the new technology in order to share in the promised benefits of globalization and development and not fall further behind. It is imperative "that the gap between the beneficiaries of the new means of information and expression and those who do not have access to them...not become another intractable source of inequity and discrimination".21 Ways need to be found to make the Internet accessible to less advantaged groups, either directly or at least by linking it with lower-cost traditional media. Cyberspace ought to be a resource of comprehensive information and services available without charge to all, and in a wide range of languages. Public institutions have a particular responsibility to establish and maintain sites of this kind.
As the new global economy takes shape, the Church is concerned "that the winner in this process will be humanity as a whole" and not just "a wealthy elite that controls science, technology and the planet's resources"; this is to say that the Church desires "a globalization which will be at the service of the whole person and of all people".

Of course it is only natural that Rome seeks to supply her sanitized version of information to all the world, that they might be the more easily influenced and controlled by the same. This that she and the political elites of the world which she is constantly in bed with, might censor and sanitize all information according to the fulfillment of their own designs. Notice her reference to the new global economy which she envisions and ever seeks to establish, is not spoken of as though it might take place, but is simply stated as taking place now. This is of course according to her own design and wishes, which design and wish now includes the subject at hand, internet control and censorship subordinate to the same.

All of this is in relation to her global designs. Not what might take place, but that which she herself is implementing right now, and intends to be on top of.

11. We are particularly concerned about the cultural dimensions of what is now taking place. Precisely as powerful tools of the globalization process, the new information technology and the Internet transmit and help instill a set of cultural values—ways of thinking about social relationships, family, religion, the human condition—whose novelty and glamour can challenge and overwhelm traditional cultures.
Intercultural dialogue and enrichment are of course highly desirable. Indeed, "dialogue between cultures is especially needed today because of the impact of new communications technology on the lives of individuals and peoples".23 But this has to be a two-way street. Cultures have much to learn from one another, and merely imposing the world view, values, and even language of one culture upon another is not dialogue but cultural imperialism.

So now according to Rome, the free expression of cultural views and values apart from her superior supervision and control, amounts to cultural imperialism. How is it not just another form of the same, to submit all to censorship and control of her and her minions regarding the same? Will they not be lording themselves over the rest of us, and determining that which each of us should choose for ourselves regarding personal conviction in relation to the same? Is this not just Rome imposing her own vision and convictions upon all as she did during the dark ages once again? Yes it is and will be. Through her adulterous relations with the kings and political leaders of this earth she seeks and establishes control over all the individuals of the same in relation to the internet and all else. Freedom of conviction and expression must be sacrificed to her global vision of the unification of all humanity under her guiding influence and eventual control. This is the same old church of Rome which created and sustained the dark ages as long as she could. Same plan, same vision, under a new guise.

All of this again is addressed as if people everywhere who have internet, are somehow forced to read, believe, and agree with what they examine on the same. All are free to read, examine, and make their own decisions regarding all of the same, or not. The advice and attempt therefore to control the content of the internet, is nothing else but an attempt to control peoples access to knowledge, and the decisions they would make for themselves regarding the same. Just exactly who then, is likely to agree with and want to enforce such control? Obviously, those with the most to lose by allowing freedom in the pursuit of knowledge in order to make well informed decisions. As always, Rome does not believe humanity can handle this for themselves. They must be protected from themselves by those of superior understanding and ability. Which of course is Rome and the elitist politicians she is and always haas been in bed with. Together, they have always trampled upon the rights of the "ignorant masses".

Well, if they do it, then they will always claim its for the social good. But if it's done by others, they will say it's social disruption or a danger to society, or worse the 'cultural imperialism' label to block it.

[Amo]

Actually, having others do it for them is the preferred method. Listen to their encyclicals, doctrinal notes, and instructions, then put them in place through legislation. Keeps the heat off of them, when others do it for them. Which is why of course, it is so important to point out who is really behind and calling for all of this old world elitist class tyrannical rule over all. They won't complain unless you censor them. To the contrary, they will support your efforts to enforce what they preach.

[Amo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvtNnQnapU

Good video, regarding those seeking to put the papacies calls for more censorship in place. Though such is not really addressed in the video.

The Left - misinformation with a little misdirection on the side.

The Right - Misdirection with a little misinformation on the side.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

The local bookstore used to have this poster hanging...



It's true.  When narratives are controlled, then there can be no new ideas, and progress stops.  This is basically already the case in academic circles around most of the "free" world.

[Amo]

Yea. Their "New World Order", sure looks a lot like the old world order our nation and many others broke away from. A great reset being a more accurate term, resetting the unelected tyrannical powers of the past dark ages. 

[Amo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMida01WGIM

Glen Beck video about border bill not passing. The video brings up censorship and the White House censoring and trying to ban books. Then refers to George Orwells 1984, as though such was or is based upon some 70 year old "Orwellian" book.

To the contrary, such is based upon actual historical events. The Dark Ages of Europe not being among the least if such events. The Roman Catholic Church censored speech and writings for about a thousand years. The bible itself being on their forbidden book list until the early 1960's. They persecuted, imprisoned, murdered, and burned people at the stake for saying our writing things the church did not agree with, or was recording unfavorable history about the Roman Catholic institution. Often burning authors, with many copies of their own books or writings.

This is not to mention the far more recent calls for censorship by the Vatican recorded here on this thread, including many others not on this thread no doubt as well. It should therefore be no surprise that our ever increasing Roman Catholic leadership in this nation, is resulting in ever increasing calls for, and actual government action concerning censorship. Roman Catholics are of course more heavily influenced by the elitist Pope and the Vatican, who are diehard globalists and elitists.

We need not be looking for some Orwellian future of science fiction, but carefully considering the actions of those infesting our government being influenced by those who abusively established censorship in the past, and continue to call for such at present. Sound the alarm, or be censored in the near future as many already are, because of your silence today. 

[Hobie]

Actually, having others do it for them is the preferred method. Listen to their encyclicals, doctrinal notes, and instructions, then put them in place through legislation. Keeps the heat off of them, when others do it for them. Which is why of course, it is so important to point out who is really behind and calling for all of this old world elitist class tyrannical rule over all. They won't complain unless you censor them. To the contrary, they will support your efforts to enforce what they preach.

Notice how they want to change or take out any entity, company, or even court that disagrees with their views, and muzzle as much as possible..

[Amo]

Notice how they want to change or take out any entity, company, or even court that disagrees with their views, and muzzle as much as possible..

Silencing those who do not agree with their agenda, is an important step in reestablishing the authority they once had over everyone's lives.

[Amo]

https://reclaimthenet.org/pope-francis-calls-on-social-media-platforms-to-censor-more-misinformation

Quoted article below from link above. A little dated, but I missed this one, among many others no doubt. My comments in blue.

Pope Francis calls on social media platforms to censor more "misinformation"

In a virtual meeting during the weekend, Pope Francis called on tech companies to be more responsible about the spread of "misinformation."

The Pope made the remarks during the World Meeting of Popular Movements, which, according to Reuters, is "a grouping of grassroots organizations and social movements which bring attention to inequality in labour, land ownership, health care, and other social issues in the developing world."

The pope noted that "the pandemic had laid bare the social inequalities that afflict our peoples." He added that "technology can be a tool for good, and truly it is a tool for good, which permits dialogues such as this one, and many other things, but it can never replace contact between us, it can never substitute for a community in which we can be rooted and which ensures that our life may become fruitful."

In his speech, the Pope singled out tech platforms for aiding the spread of misinformation.

He said: "In the name of God, I ask the technology giants to stop exploiting human weakness, people's vulnerability, for the sake of profits without caring about the spread of hate speech, grooming, fake news, conspiracy theories, and political manipulation.

"In the name of God, I ask the telecommunications giants to ease access to educational material and connectivity for teachers via the internet so that poor children can be educated even under quarantine.

"In the name of God, I ask the media to stop the logic of post-truth, disinformation, defamation, slander and the unhealthy attraction to dirt and scandal, and to contribute to human fraternity and empathy with those who are most deeply damaged."

A call from the Vatican to basically censor everyone who disagrees with the Roman Catholic Social Justice agenda of equity over equality, a Roman Catholic determined and defined "common good", the redistribution of the worlds wealth under their moral guidance, and on, and on. A call in the name of God basically, to reestablish papal dominance over the entire world. Nothing to see here, move on.

[Amo]

https://catherinesalgado.substack.com/p/pope-francis-joins-dems-and-un-in

Quoted article below from link above.

Pope Francis Joins Dems and UN In Call for More Censorship

Pope Francis, following his pretty consistent tradition of ignoring his spiritual duties to latch onto popular leftist political movements, is calling for more censorship of "disinformation" online. Just like the US Democrats and the socialist United Nations (UN) called for. And like the tyrannical Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with which Francis's Vatican has made and renewed an infamous deal.

Strange how Francis was perfectly happy to make a deal with the murderous CCP and meet amicably with late Cuban tyrant Fidel Castro but online "disinformation" (and we know the Vatican has been trying to force the dangerous, abortion-tainted Covid jab onto employees, so include any Covid honesty under that heading) is suddenly a major threat.

Reclaim the Net reported on the pope's latest move to support tyranny versus liberty:

"In a virtual meeting during the weekend, Pope Francis called on tech companies to be more responsible about the spread of 'misinformation.'

The Pope made the remarks during the World Meeting of Popular Movements, which, according to Reuters, is 'a grouping of grassroots organizations and social movements which bring attention to inequality in labour, land ownership, health care, and other social issues in the developing world.'

The pope noted that 'the pandemic had laid bare the social inequalities that afflict our peoples.' He added that 'technology can be a tool for good, and truly it is a tool for good, which permits dialogues such as this one, and many other things, but it can never replace contact between us, it can never substitute for a community in which we can be rooted and which ensures that our life may become fruitful.'

In his speech, the Pope singled out tech platforms for aiding the spread of misinformation."

Too bad Francis has been going along with the Covid shutdown and vaccination segregation craziness. Talk about bad for community—and talk about "misinformation."

Unfortunately Francis used God's name to call for more censorship:

"[Francis] said: 'In the name of God, I ask the technology giants to stop exploiting human weakness, people's vulnerability, for the sake of profits without caring about the spread of hate speech, grooming, fake news, conspiracy theories, and political manipulation.

'In the name of God, I ask the telecommunications giants to ease access to educational material and connectivity for teachers via the internet so that poor children can be educated even under quarantine.

'In the name of God, I ask the media to stop the logic of post-truth, disinformation, defamation, slander and the unhealthy attraction to dirt and scandal, and to contribute to human fraternity and empathy with those who are most deeply damaged.'"

Again, this is the pope responsible for making up to Communist dictators and pressuring employees to take the abortion-tainted jab. Somehow Francis's call for "human fraternity and empathy" rings hollow—as hollow as empty St. Peter's Basilica when it was entirely shut down during the plandemic.

[Amo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI2wRV_ju-I

A Medical Phenomenon That's Being Suppressed by Hate Speech Policies.

[Amo]

https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/01/1158886

It's not censorship to stop hateful online content, insists UN rights chief

"Allowing hate speech and harmful content online has real world consequences. Regulating this content is not censorship," Volker Türk wrote on X.

In a longer LinkedIn post on the same theme, Mr. Türk maintained that labelling efforts to create safe online spaces as "censorship...ignores the fact that unregulated space means some people are silenced – in particular those whose voices are often marginalized. At the same time, allowing hatred online limits free expression and may result in real world harms."

Meta chief Mark Zuckerberg announced last Tuesday that the company would cease its fact-checking programme in the United States, stating that fact-checkers ran the risk of appearing politically biased, with self-regulation resulting in too much censorship. He called for a return to freer speech on Meta's platforms, adding that user's trust had been eroded.

The International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) has reportedly rejected Mr. Zuckerberg's "false" argument and warned it could cause harm.

Mr. Türk highlighted that social media platforms have a tremendous ability to shape society positively by connecting people. But they can also fuel conflict, incite hate and threaten people's safety.

"At its best, social media is a place where people with divergent views can exchange, if not always agree," he said.

The UN human rights chief noted that he would continue to call for "accountability and governance in the digital space, in line with human rights. This safeguards public discourse, builds trust, and protects the dignity of all."

When asked about the impact of Meta's recent decisions on the social media policy of the United Nations, a UN spokesperson in Geneva emphasized that the global organization continually monitors and evaluates the online space.

"It remains crucial for us to be present with fact-based information," said Michele Zaccheo, Chief of TV, Radio and Webcast. He added that the UN remained committed to providing evidence-based information on social media platforms.

The World Health Organization (WHO) also reaffirmed its commitment to providing quality, science-based health information, maintaining a presence across various online platforms.

In response to the growing crisis fueled by digital misinformation, the UN Department of Global Communications (DCG) has been actively working to combat false narratives.

This includes developing a code of conduct for information integrity, known as the UN Global Principles for Information Integrity.

The main problem with the above argument is of course, that we almost all know that the UN and their buddies have lied to us many times. Who can trust them to be fact checkers, when they have already censored known truths, contradicting their supposed scientific facts?  And how does stopping censorship silence certain of those who voices are "marginalized"? Censorship is what marginalizes peoples voices, not the banishment of censorship. The UN sure does talk and sound a lot like the Pope.