Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

1. 🧵Google & Meta function as extensions of the US Intelligence Community. With Jacqueline Lopour, Google's Head of Trust & Safety, and Aaron Berman, Meta's Head of Elections Content/Misinformation Policy, both being career CIA officers, it underscores the CIA's substantial control over online censorship. Why is this CIA-Big Tech...

2,263,056 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

19 Yorum

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

2. Why would Google specifically choose these six senior executives to attend an @ISF_OSAC event in DC? Everyone in this picture, alongside former CIA Director Robert Gates, is a current senior executive at Google & a former career CIA officer, except for the attorney from Perkins Coie (2nd from the left).

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

3. Jacqueline Lopour spent 10 years at the CIA before joining Google in 2017. She is currently Head of Trust & Safety, where she not only determines what constitutes misinformation but also wields considerable power in content moderation on Search & YouTube. In this interview, Lopour is promoting the RussiaGate conspiracy theory. I wonder if she believes her own propaganda.

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

4. Jacqueline Lopour, a career CIA officer, played a significant role in developing various intelligence programs at Google & YouTube: *Manages intel operations for violent extremism, misinformation, hate speech, etc. *Led development of intelligence programs for global election analysis. *Developed the “YouTube Intelligence Desk.” *Developed Google’s first machine-learning threat detection & analysis program. *Provided daily COVID-19 briefings to senior leadership at Google & YouTube CEO LinkedIn -

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

5. In 2015, Lopour authored a rather bizarre article titled: “The best reason for Iran deal? The West will learn where to drop bombs.”

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

6. Nick Rossmann spent over 5 years at the CIA before joining Google in 2022 as Senior Manager of Trust & Safety. His activity on Twitter/X is troubling, especially considering his current position in content moderation. Why does Nick Rossmann have a problem with white people? Here are some examples of Rossmann’s unhinged behavior on Twitter/X (all archived): *Negative tweets about white people: *Hoping Trump voters cough on their grandparents (giving them COVID) & “get to rot”- *Asking Trump if he is an agent of a foreign power - *Calling Trump “a lunatic & a racist”, tagging Keith Olbermann & using the hashtag “Resist” - *Calling anti-vaxxers Nazis & Confederates -

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

7. Christopher Porter spent most of his professional career in the Intelligence Community. After 9 years at the CIA, he joined ODNI where he was Head of the IC Cyber Analysis Council leading a team of CIA, FBI, NSA & DOD regarding US elections. While at the ODNI, he regularly briefed President Biden so it’s only natural that as of June 2022, he joined Google as Head of Threat Intelligence. Porter is also a member of the Atlantic Council His LinkedIn bio states that he likes to talk about Russia & election security LinkedIn-

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

8. Deborah Wituski joined Google in 2018 as Senior Director Global Intelligence. Her only prior work experience was 19 years at the CIA, where she was Chief of Staff to the Director. Wituski is a member of Council on Foreign Relations.

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

9. Now why would Deborah’s intelligence desk at Google be so concerned about Putin’s personal life or the innerworkings of the Kremlin? Full video for reference-

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

10. Katherine Tobin joined Google in 2021. Her career path is like the others listed in this thread: after 6 years at Booz Allen Hamilton, she spent 4 years at the ODNI, followed by 4 years at the CIA, & then returned to the ODNI for another 3 years. With over 10 years of experience in the Intelligence Community, Google was the obvious choice for her. On her LinkedIn bio, she states that her favorite problems to solve are promoting DEI

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

11. Katherine wrote a blog post on LinkedIn, sharing her transition from the CIA to the private sector titled “My New Mission: From Spying to Startups.” For anyone interested, here is her personal blog-

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

12. Beth Schmierer joined Google in 2022 as a Global Threat Analyst and Intel Manager. Her only prior work experience was five years at the CIA. Additionally, she spent nine years in Madrid working for the State Department, where she claims to have been tasked with “implementing the US government’s agenda in Spain & Latin America”

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

13. Omar Ahmed joined Google in 2020 as Manager of Trust & Safety at Google/YouTube. His only prior work experience is 10 years at the State Department. I suppose his experience in Indonesia, Afghanistan & Senegal qualifies him to be a content moderator.

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

14. Jamie Washington joined Google in 2018 as Director of Threat Intelligence. Her only experience prior to joining Google is 2 years at the FBI and 13 years at the CIA (2 years in Iraq).

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

15. Chelsea Magnant joined Google in 2018 as Public Policy Manager. Her only prior work experience was at the CIA for 9 years. She’s also an instructor at Aspen Institute

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

16. Dawn Burton joined Google’s Trust & Safety team in 2022. She was previously at Twitter Trust & Safety but was fired by @elonmusk. Prior to this, she spent 6 years at DOJ, then 4 years at FBI as a Senior Advisor to James Comey. After a career at DOJ & FBI, working for James Comey, it’s totally normal that she would transition to Trust & Safety departments at tech platforms, right?

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

17. Yong Suk Lee joined Google in 2019 as Director Global Risk Analysis. His only prior work history is 22 years at the CIA where he was the Deputy Assistant Director of Korea Mission Center. He is also a member of Council on Foreign Relations

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

18. Candice Bryant joined Google in 2021 as Executive & Internal Comms Manager. Her only other work experience was 17 years at the CIA. She led the CIA's social media team with the goal of boosting the agency's public image.

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

19. I could list over 100 more examples of individuals whose sole work history is within the Intelligence Community or career State Department diplomats. Many of these individuals hold positions as content moderators and policy managers. Most of them joined Google/YouTube after 2018. Is it merely a coincidence that censorship has increased aggressively since then?

Name Redacted profil fotoğrafı
Name Redacted2 yıl önce

20. If you are a “journalist” who covers the censorship issue but chooses to ignore the revolving door, you lack integrity. If you are a notable figure who’s been censored on Facebook, Instagram, or YouTube, it's crucial to start questioning why career CIA officers are employed by these companies as content moderators.

Benzer Videolar

1. 🚨VIDEO - FACEBOOK EXECUTIVE ADMITS TO CENSORSHIP OF COVID MISINFORMATION, INCLUDING TRUE CONTENT LEADING TO VACCINE HESITANCY Former CIA Operative, Aaron Berman, currently Head of Meta’s Misinformation Policy & Head of Elections Content Policy, is interviewed by “CIA Renee” DiResta (h/t Mike Benz). @AaronDBerman states the following: 'We do reduce the distribution of certain content about vaccines that doesn’t otherwise violate our policies.' He goes on to describe in detail Facebook’s efforts to censor posts about COVID & vaccines, including consultations with World Health Organization (WHO), health experts, and fact-checkers. Rep. Jim Jordan has released selected & cropped emails received from Meta, suggesting that Facebook would not have censored content about COVID if it weren't for pressure from the Biden White House. This claim is misleading, as Meta was a willing partner in this censorship effort. In the below Jordan tweet, you can see he has unredacted the names of only two Facebook employees, but many others' names remain redacted, including Aaron Berman. Why is that? If Jim Jordan were fully transparent & published all documents received by Meta with no redactions, you would see an alarming number of people currently working for Meta, including Aaron Berman, who used to work for the CIA, FBI, DHS, CISA, DOD, State Department, NSA, and DOJ - all hired since 2018. Jordan won’t do this because it collapses his narrative and exposes a larger Operation where the Intelligence Community has infiltrated Social Media platforms, similar to Operation Mockingbird, to censor, manipulate, interfere in elections, and conduct disinformation operations. More...🧵

Name Redacted

1,112,382 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

Here it is: Documents obtained by investigative journalist John Solomon through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). CONFIRMS King Solomon. In a stunning exchange, CIA Director Mike Morell turns to fellow Director John Brennan and asks if he would join in toppling the United States government during the November 3, 2020, election. Brennan not only agrees—but also expresses his gratitude. CIA Director Mike Morell: “Can I add your name to this list? Will be adding Leon Panetta, Sue Gordon, Jeh Johnson, George, Lisa Monaco, and Mike Rogers. And working on adding Dan Coats, Mike Rogers (HPSCI), and Tom Bossert. And lots of other IC career folk. “Trying to give the incapacitated vegetable, particularly during the debate on Thursday, a talking point to push back on Trump on this issue.” CIA Director John Brennan: “Ok, Michael, add my name to the list. Good initiative. Thanks for asking me to sign on.” ——- It wasn’t just 51 former intelligence officials who were involved. The Central Intelligence Agency itself was actively involved as well, and its director, Gina Haspel, approved it. •David S. Cariens was informed about the Hunter Biden “intel” statement by a CIA employee. •David Cariens was read the text from the statement by a CIA employee. •David Cariens was asked to sign the statement by a CIA employee. Janice Cariens is retired CIA (1995), and she was also asked to sign the letter. In fact, Mike Morrel was a CIA contractor, and Christopher Wray had been sitting on the laptop since December 2019. CIA contractor—Mike Morell testified that such action by a CIA employees would be unethical and inappropriate. In other words: 2020 was a coordinated conspiracy involving the Obama-Biden campaign, the intelligence community—including the CIA and the FBI—to topple the U.S. government.

🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸

36,569 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

“Totalitarian” Powers, Fear, And Psychopathy Behind CIA’s Secret Rule Over U.S. The agency remains out of control, beyond the law, and a direct threat to democracy and freedom, including in the U.S. by Michael Shellenberger Last week, we published two stories about a senior CIA whistleblower who was one of four CIA analysts who helped write a January 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment” (ICA) that falsely claimed, with high confidence, that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help elect President Donald Trump in 2016. The person said that the CIA Director under Obama, John Brennan, had a “pathological need for control” and put the writers of the ICA “under duress” to include a mention of a fraudulent dossier, commissioned by the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. The CIA also included in the classified version of the ICA an annex consisting of the dossier written by a former British spy, which went to roughly 200 people in Washington, some of whom leaked related information to journalists. Unfortunately, the CIA employee said, his employer remains corrupted by “systemic rot” and that crucial steps “have not been put in place" to prevent a Russiagate-like abuse of power from happening again, since the arrival of its new director, John Ratcliffe, in January of this year. “Two critical steps that have not been put in place are,” said the senior analyst turned whistleblower, “to first, formalize expectations about the delivery timeline for sensitive intelligence analyses, and second, to remove the CIA Director from the review process of intelligence reporting or finished analysis.” In response to questions from Public, the CIA said it was taking necessary reforms. “Director Ratcliffe has overhauled the Agency senior ranks and revoked clearances from bad actors and even created a mission center to better execute on Presidential priorities like the Southern Border. The notion that he’s not making significant reforms or holding people and the Agency accountable is not just ridiculously false but beyond absurd.” But the CIA’s revoking security clearances and creating a mission center do not address either of the whistleblower’s recommendations, much less the “systemic rot” within the CIA. The whistleblower called for the removal of the Director of the CIA from review and writing of intelligence analysis, and taking a step to avoid rush jobs, like the kind Brennan used to create a deliberately misleading ICA in January 2017. The whistleblower’s credibility is high. They were one of just four CIA analysts chosen to help write a major ICA. That might make them seem biased toward Brennan, but Ratcliffe has retained the person, rather than fired them, which suggests that the Director or the direct reports he trusts view the person as valuable. Our sense was that the person was loyal to the CIA, wants to engage in objective apolitical analyses, and wants to remain at the CIA. Their two modest proposed reforms are consistent with loyalty to the CIA. As such, the person is precisely the kind of professional the CIA, Congress, and the American people should want to have in our institutions. If a legitimate criticism is to be made of the person it would be that they didn’t turn whistleblower earlier, which is the same criticism that could be made against hundreds and perhaps thousands of people involved in the Russiagate hoax. One might hope that it was just a bad day for the PR people at the CIA, and that Ratcliffe will be out with a new statement this week announcing new reforms, but we are not hopeful. The CIA appears to be following its informal motto, “Admit nothing, deny everything, and make counteraccusations.” That was the advice that former CIA Director Porter Goss said he would give to “a graduating class of CIA case officers” in 2006. The Russiagate hoax is hardly an unusual scandal in the history of the CIA. The agency has “long gone beyond the borders of American values,” noted Tim Weiner in his 812-page history, Legacy of Ashes. The CIA has murdered its employees, overthrown democracies, propped up dictatorships, tortured innocent people, trained death squads, induced mental illness in illegal medical experiments, spied illegally on law-abiding Americans, and may have been behind the assassination of an American president. All of these illegal behaviors required cover-ups, many of them elaborate. “Fundamentally, the founding fathers of U.S. intelligence were liars,” said James Angleton, one of the CIA’s founders, and its Director of Counterintelligence for two decades, on his deathbed in 1987. “If you were in a room with them, you were in a room full of people that you had to believe would deservedly end up in hell. I guess I will see them there soon.” The CIA’s record is poor when evaluated on its own terms. “The CIA was established to prevent unanticipated disasters, such as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor,” noted John Judis in 2005, “but it has repeatedly failed to warn the White House of looming threats. It missed the North Korean invasion of the South in 1950, and the Chinese entry into the war that fall; Israel, France, and Great Britain's attack on the Suez Canal and Egypt in 1956; the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968; the Shah of Iran's ouster in 1979; the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan that year; the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990; the Indian nuclear tests in 1998 (‘We didn't have a clue,’ CIA director George Tenet remarked afterwards); the attack on the World Trade Center in 1993; the bombing of American military barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996 and of U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998; the attack on the USS Cole in 2000; and of course the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon in September 2001.” The truth, admitted a CIA station chief, “was that the agency at the height of its powers had a great reputation and a terrible record.” It never had a single Soviet spy “who had deep insight into the workings of the Kremlin,” and thus didn’t know communism was collapsing. “The one crime of lasting consequence has been the CIA’s inability to carry out its central mission: informing the president of what is happening in the world,” writes Weiner. Its record in the real world is one of “fleeting successes and long-lasting failures.” The politicization and weaponization of the CIA for ideological aims has occurred for decades. The CIA’s charter prevents it from spying on Americans and yet it has done so repeatedly, from opening mail to spying on students. Between 1947 and 1963, the CIA was “a dark and invasive force — at home and abroad — violating citizens’ privacy, kidnapping, torturing, and killing at will,” concluded David Talbot in his 686-page history of the CIA, The Devil’s Chessboard. There were many reforms proposed in the 1970s. In 1975, Congress held hearings, revealing CIA misdeeds around the world, including assassinations using a heart attack gun, and efforts at mind control. Congress then took steps to provide greater oversight of the CIA and more protections for whistleblowers. Calls for reforms began again in the 1990s after a decade of CIA scandals in the 1980s, which included selling weapons to the Iranian government and illegally diverting the money to an equally illegal war in Central America. In 1991 and 1996, the US Senator from New York, Patrick Moynihan, who had been one of America’s most influential public intellectuals for thirty years, proposed abolishing the CIA entirely and reassigning its various functions to the State Department. The proposal never came up for a vote. In 1998, America’s intelligence leaders warned the White House that America would suffer “a catastrophic, systemic failure,” unless the U.S. dramatically changed how it gathered and analyzed intelligence. That didn’t happen. Then, in 2001, the CIA failed to communicate with the FBI and thus played a central role in allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen. In 2002, the CIA manipulated intelligence that led to the catastrophic invasion of Iraq. In response to these failures, Congress in 2004 sought to reform the agency and the broader Intelligence Community. The intent of Congress in passing new legislation was to reduce the power of the CIA, and its Director, and increase the power of a new intelligence coordinator role, which it called the Director of National Intelligence. That didn’t happen. The “CIA is broken,” wrote John Judis one year later. The 2004 reform act didn’t address the “historical problems with the CIA.” “To repair it,” he concluded, “we may need to start from scratch.” That didn’t happen either. In 2016 and 2017, the CIA manipulated intelligence to falsely frame the democratically elected U.S. president as a puppet for a foreign power, and from 2016 to 2020, individuals who worked at the CIA oversaw various efforts to control what people are allowed to say on social media. Neither the Russiagate hoax scandal nor the CIA’s role in creating a Censorship Industrial Complex resulted in reform or even serious calls for it by Congress. Multiple sources tell Public that the CIA remains both the dominant agency of the 18 total in the IC, and the one most resistant to reforms. The Washington Post reported last week that the CIA resisted efforts for greater transparency led by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. And now the CIA has said we should ignore the whistleblowing by one of its most trusted senior analysts, and their demands for reform. None of this is new. In 1947, the year Congress created the CIA, the Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, said he “had the gravest forebodings” about it and “warned the President that neither he” nor anyone else would be able “to control it.” Between 1947 and 2005 there were 14 major studies by various bodies into how to reform the IC. The CIA “has had an almost perfect record of resisting fundamental changes,” noted Weiner in his 2006 book. Meanwhile, Congress has failed its Constitutional duty to provide oversight. “The CIA has tried to assassinate foreign leaders, mined harbors, and most recently, tortured prisoners,” wrote Judis in 2005. “If Congress had openly debated these actions, they would not have been approved.” They didn’t and have never much demanded to be able to. Members of Congress “have been derelict in this work for much of the past three decades,” noted Weiner two years later, “but their conduct since 9/11 has bordered on criminal negligence.” Looking at the full historical record, it is hard not to conclude that the American people only partially govern themselves, that we are burdened with a rogue and violent intelligence agency that continuously interferes not only in foreign elections and governments but also our own, and that many on the Right and the Left who appear to be in a position to change that refuse to do so. Why is that? Why have Congress and the American people failed for 80 years to reform a rogue intelligence agency that is not only ineffective but also destructive to the point of undermining national security? And what, if anything, can be done about it? If you're not already a subscriber, please subscribe now to support Public's defense of free speech and democracy, watch the rest of the video, and read the rest of the article!

Michael Shellenberger

48,655 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

🚨🚨SCOOP🚨🚨 One of the Nazis who I caught on camera yesterday at the Nazi rally in Altamonte Springs, FL has been working with the CIA by his own admission to help recruit Nazis to fight in Ukraine where he himself fought alongside “Right Sector” and “Azov Battalion” with help from the CIA. The Nazi rally in Florida yesterday is directly tied to the CIA and FBI and law enforcement sources have told me FBI agents were undercover at this rally. Here is another video of Florida Nazi Kent “Boneface” McLellan saying the CIA helped him get to Ukraine years ago to fight alongside “Right Sector”, a Ukrainian Neo Nazi group that was propped up by the CIA in an effort to combat Russia. He was one of the Nazis I spotted yesterday in Altamonte Springs, FL where he was waving a swastika flag, doing Roman salutes and saying “heil Hitler”, and shouting anti-Jewish slurs at me alongside his fellow Nazi friends. He was arrested by the FBI in Florida in 2012 for planning what they called an act of domestic terrorism against minorities. He also reportedly served time in for prison for physically assaulting and beating immigrants. Two years after he was arrested/ detained by the FBI, he was placed in touch with the CIA who helped him travel to Ukraine in 2014. He obtained a Ukrainian passport in 2022. How is he walking the streets of Florida? Is he still working with the CIA and FBI? Also, why is Ron DeSantis allowing for the CIA to plant Nazis all over Florida in staged appearances which are then used by the media to falsely accuse Right wingers of being Nazis? This guy is a Democrat deep state operative who is on video admitting that the CIA Helped him get to Ukraine and join a Nazi militia.

Laura Loomer

3,355,016 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

‼️Erika Kirk’s Drect CIA Connection EXPOSED: Dr. Peter Pry Was CIA, Not Homeland Security — And Erika Kirk Interviewed Him MULTIPLE Times 👀 New information confirms that Dr. Peter Vincent Pry was not Homeland Security — he was a career CIA Intelligence Officer for over 20 years. Pry spent a decade inside the CIA analyzing Soviet, Russian, Iran and China nuclear strategy before moving into congressional roles, where he continued operating with full intelligence community access. He even received an official CIA certificate of recognition for his service. Erika Frantzve (now Erika Kirk) interviewed this longtime CIA operative on her “Wake Up America” podcast at least twice. She gave a high-level CIA asset a platform while running a charity tied to Romania — the same charity now facing serious questions about grooming and trafficking networks involving underage girls and possible U.S. government connections. When you combine Erika’s repeated access to a senior CIA figure like Pry, her mother’s documented intelligence and defense ties, and the growing evidence surrounding Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the picture becomes much darker. Erika wasn’t some random conservative activist. She had direct lines into the intelligence community. This is why so many people believe she played a role in what happened to Charlie. ⚠️If you value our work and want to help us financially, your support is what helps us stay independent and keep the lights on. DONATE Here: CC: Erika Kirk any comment?

Project Constitution

20,694 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

United States government officials have for decades reassured the public that they are releasing all they have, save for the most sensitive information, on the origin of Covid, the CIA mind control program known as MKUltra, the JFK assassination, and the Church Committee investigation into the intelligence community (IC) abuses in 1975. In 2023, then-Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines delivered a five-page summary of Covid origins in response to a unanimously passed law requiring the declassification of files. MKUltra involved drugging individuals without their knowledge in an effort to control their thoughts and behaviors. The CIA stated in 2022 that it had released 95% of its JFK collection, and the Trump administration released roughly 80,000 pages of JFK records on March 18, 2025. But an active-duty CIA official testified to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today that the CIA and the Intelligence Community (IC) are still hiding information. James Erdman III, a senior CIA operations officer who led the Director’s Initiatives Group investigation into Covid origins under DNI Tulsi Gabbard, appeared under subpoena from committee Chairman Rand Paul. Erdman told senators that the CIA “did not comply with lawful oversight” during his investigation, and said, “CIA managers retaliated against [analysts] for their refusal to agree with management’s middle-of-the-night anonymous review.” Erdman testifie,d “The CIA illegally monitored the computer and phone usage of DIG [Director’s Initiative Group] personnel, their investigations, and contact with whistleblowers…One CIA contractor assisting with the DIG’s investigation into the events that transpired between 2022 and 2023 was fired by the CIA one day after meeting with the DIG.” Erdman said the CIA had not cleared his testimony or written statement before the hearing. The CIA denounced the hearing as “dishonest political theater,” and not a single Democratic Senator showed up for it. A CIA spokesperson, Liz Lyons, said in a statement that “the Committee acted in bad faith by subpoenaing an Agency officer for testimony today without notifying CIA.” She added that “the witness testifying today is not appearing as a whistleblower in pursuit of the truth, but instead in response to the subpoena issued by Chairman Paul.” And she implied the hearing was not needed since “the CIA has already assessed Covid-19 most likely originated from a lab leak, and efforts to undermine that conclusion are disingenuous.” But the public CIA statement quoted at the hearing did not address Erdman’s specific claims about DIG monitoring, the contractor firing, or the 40 boxes of JFK and MKUltra files. Sen. Paul, who noted that “closed-door testimony doesn’t provide oversight” and “public testimony provides oversight.” The CIA made public in January 2025 a low-confidence assessment that COVID-19 likely had a research-related origin, while saying both lab and natural-origin scenarios remained plausible, which Paul called “a cleanup operation.” Nor did she address Erdman’s claim that, “When the DIG ceased operations, the CIA also took back 40 boxes of JFK files and MKUltra files being processed for declassification by DNI.” Public reached out to the CIA for comment on Erdman’s specific allegations and will update this article if it replies. Support for Erdman’s claims came from former CBS News investigative reporter Catherine Herridge. “As early as February,” she wrote on X, “I began receiving credible reporting that DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s investigative team was being tracked and communications collected because their work was revealing ‘uncomfortable facts.’” Paul opened the hearing by describing the Biological Sciences Experts Group (BESG), an ODNI advisory body that he said included Dr. Ralph Baric and Dr. Peter Daszak, both of whom collaborated with Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers on coronavirus gain-of-function studies. Daszak, Paul noted, received “hundreds of millions of dollars from the US government and worked with Dr. Zhengli Shi in Wuhan to create gain-of-function coronaviruses,” and that Baric “was also part of BSEG and an active consultant to intelligence agencies on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.” Paul noted that “Dozens of times, [former NIAID Director Anthony Fauci] referred to the idea that the pandemic originating in the lab was a conspiracy theory.” Erdman said that as of August 12, 2021, the CIA was considering calling Covid a lab leak, but that the conclusion “changed on August 17th of 2021.” Erdman told the panel that “the CIA would not provide us documentation that we asked for” and “we have no idea why that changed.” Erdman also testified that “Director Gabbard is working through, I believe, 2,000 pages” of Covid origins records the CIA had been resisting releasing. That figure contrasts with the five-page summary the ODNI delivered to Congress in 2023. Senator Josh Hawley asked Erdman whether the five-page report was “all the information the United States government had,” and Erdman replied, “that is not all the information.” Erdman described a 2022 CIA “re-look” in which eight of 10 analysts and six of seven technical experts leaned toward a lab leak. He said management overruled the team and changed the analytic line to read that “we may never precisely know the origin of SARS-CoV-2.” Paul noted that there have been over 1,500 major lab leaks. Sen. Paul revealed that the CIA is still denying him information that Senators are entitled to see under the Constitution, which requires Congressional oversight of the executive branch. Paul said the CIA had resisted releasing to him the underlying Covid origins analyses by its own scientists, even in classified form. Paul also said, “I’ve been trying to get the classified version of the [1975] Church Committee [files] for over two years,” he said, “but I’m being blocked by the [Intelligence] Committee, including someone from our own party who is blocking me. They’ve shown me a room with 400 boxes. I can go look in all the boxes to see if I can find it. My staff’s not allowed to go in the room.” The CIA told Senate investigators in 1977 that, after the Church inquiry, it had discovered seven additional boxes of MKUltra files in its retired records center that prior searches had missed. The 1977 hearing identified 149 MKUltra subprojects involving human testing and 33 additional subprojects whose subject matter remained undisclosed. Reuters reported that in early April 2025, an ODNI team led by Defense Intelligence Agency official Paul Allen McDonald II arrived unannounced at a CIA archival facility in the Washington area to seize Kennedy assassination files. The team included Amaryllis Fox Kennedy, a former CIA officer and daughter-in-law of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The standoff stretched into the early morning hours and ended only after the CIA agreed to transfer a “massive trove” of documents to the National Archives for digitization. Why did these cover-ups occur and why are some of them still ongoing? And why didn’t any Democratic senators participate in the hearing?... Please subscribe now to support Public's award-winning investigative journalism, read the rest of the article, and watch the full video!

Michael Shellenberger

31,434 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

This is: The Overthrower Barack Hussein Obama: “The allegations are so absurd that even Republican-controlled committees looking into it have dismissed them. One of the central foundation stones of democracy is that idea that you do not allow the politicization of criminal justice system, the intelligence system, the military right?” And the overthrow of a government. That is stuff that you keep out of politics. The Director of the National Intelligence, A decade in the making, DNI Tulsi Gabbard “LIE: The fabricated Steele Dossier was not used as a source in the Obama administration’s January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment of the November 2016 election. TRUTH: Not only did CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, DNI Clapper, and others include the Steele Dossier in the 2017 ICA, they overruled senior intelligence officials who warned them it was fabricated and should not be used.” And this is, The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Ratcliffe: “Barack Obama said I want this done,’” CIA Director John Ratcliffe “All the world can now see the truth: Obama, Brennan, Clapper and Comey manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals — all to get Trump.” CIA Director John Ratcliffe “This was Obama, Comey, Clapper and Brennan deciding ‘We’re going to screw Trump. We’re going to create this and put the imprimatur of an IC assessment in a way that nobody can question it.’ They stamped it as Russian collusion and then classified it so nobody could see it.”

🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸

24,681 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

On March 15th, 2021, an anonymous Twitter user asked Harvard Medical professor Martin Kulldorff a question. “Do you think younger age groups and or people who have already had the virus need to be vaccinated?” Who is Martin Kulldorff? He’s a Harvard Medical School professor for 21 years, a well-known Swedish biostatistician who developed widely used software for disease mapping, the co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration on how to deal with the COVID pandemic, and an advisor to the world’s leading health organizations. What he said was that “Thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should get COVID. Vaccines are important for older high-risk people and their caretakers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it, nor do children.” Natural immunity. Is it a myth — a “conspiracy theory” — that once you have been sick from a virus, then you won’t get sick, or as sick, again? In fact, we’ve known for 2,500 years that natural immunity is real. “The same man was never attacked twice, never at least fatally,” wrote Thucydides, describing the plague of Athens. He observed that recovered individuals could safely nurse the sick without falling ill themselves. And yet Twitter censored Martin Kulldorff’s tweet. “Learn why health officials recommend a vaccine,” read a warning that Twitter employees put on it. For most people, the Tweet cannot be replied to, shared or liked. In other words, Twitter had decided that this professor at Harvard Medical School was wrong, and that natural immunity wasn’t really something that could protect you from COVID. Jay Bhattacharya, who’s currently our Director of the National Institutes of Health, and thus one of the highest-ranking public health officials in the world, was a Stanford epidemiologist before that. Twitter put him on a “Trends Blacklist.” Not long before we discovered this, we were told that shadow-banning was a conspiracy theory, because Twitter had said it didn’t shadow-ban. Now the European Commission is trying to censor the entire global internet. They want to put a 140 million Euro fine on X. They want to end anonymity, which was what allowed that question of Kulldorff to be asked. They want to use a “Democracy Shield” program to shield the Commission from democracy. And the Commission wants to impose “chat control” so they can read your private messages. It just gets worse and worse. Unsubstantiated and likely false claims of Russian government election interference through TikTok and social media were made in Romania and in the Czech Republic. Truth is not something that anybody holds as a possession and rather emerges through dialogue. We’ve known that since Plato and Socrates. We need free speech for science, public health, and national security. It’s essential to journalism, democracy, and human freedom. Free speech enabled civilization; censorship threatens it. This is the only political cause that I would die for. And yet there is currently an active coordination between Stanford, Brazil, Australia, and others to impose what I think we can call, without exaggeration, global totalitarianism. They’re pushing for digital identification that will end anonymity online. Why is that? Why are these guys behaving in this way? When Elon Musk took over Twitter on October 28th, 2022, unprecedented insight into multiple secret government mass censorship efforts emerged from this exploration. We had unlimited access to Twitter files. They revealed that the mainstream news reporters, who don’t deserve the name, were demanding censorship. No true journalist demands censorship of his fellow journalists. What emerged from this was an understanding of something we call the “Censorship Industrial Complex,” which directly grew out of the military industrial complex and was run by active or former intelligence community officials who often operate under that banner. It led to multiple congressional investigations and hearings, and it spread across every social media platform. So we now know the censorship that occurred, not just at Twitter, but at YouTube, at Facebook, TikTok, and other platforms. What is the Censorship Industrial Complex? The model isn’t that complicated to understand. The government chooses people whom they call “researchers” to serve as censors. These are government-funded individuals who often come from the intelligence community and foreign policy establishment. They work at non-governmental organizations funded by governments or at universities funded by governments. They conduct “fact checks” to serve as “trusted flaggers.” These “trusted flaggers” demand censorship by social media platforms. It’s all done in secret. They’re looking to censor narratives. This is essential because, as decades of good cognitive science have shown, people understand and retain information through storytelling. We think in terms of stories, not bullet points. And so they were out to censor whole narratives. From the Stanford censorship project on COVID, the “Virality Project,” they said they wanted to censor “true stories” of vaccine side effects. Why? Because it might “fuel hesitancy.” In other words, they want to control your behavior. They don’t want you to receive true information that might lead you to not get the vaccine. If that isn’t totalitarianism straight out of 1984, I don’t know what it. These people were on the verge of passing legislation in the United States that would’ve authorized the National Science Foundation to choose these “researcher” censors. I’m presenting slides to Europeans and the world for situational awareness into what totalitarian politicians and bureaucrats have planned because this is still going strong. Stanford helped the US government censor COVID dissidents, and then they lied about it. You might be detecting a pattern. They’re really not interested in censoring “misinformation.’ They’re very interested in censoring true information. The censors flagged an Israeli preprint which came out in December, 2020 and found, lo and behold, that natural immunity is a real thing. In fact, it’s more protective than the vaccine. But the censors flagged somebody’s Google Drive. “See the following Google Drive links being used to compile testimonies about vaccine shedding, Covid videos, showing side effects and whatnot.” Google then removed that content from that person’s Google Drive. You don’t control your Google Drive. Contrary to Stanford’s claim that the project did not ask social media platforms to remove any content, they privately said they did. And we know that many hundreds of thousands of tweets and Facebook posts were removed, even though they were a hundred percent accurate. In fact, in 2021, Stanford’s “Virality Project” flagged accurate claims that the World Health Organization did not recommend vaccinating children. The people who spread the misinformation are the people demanding the censorship. They claimed Covid couldn’t have come from a lab, that the Covid vaccine prevented infection, and that natural immunity didn’t exist. The only solution to hate speech and misinformation is free speech. If you censor false information, how would anybody get the true information? The whole point is the debate. They lied when they said false information travels faster than true information. It’s a completely bogus study and involved six seconds of content on Twitter. Who are these people? As of 2020, there were so many former FBI employees at Twitter that they called them “Bu alumni.” They created their own private Slack channel and a crib sheet to onboard new FBI arrivals. Intriguingly, we discovered that the general counsel of the FBI — arguably the second most powerful person of the FBI, or maybe the first, if you think, consider that what their actual job is to decide what the FBI can and can’t do — resigned from FBI in early 2020 and went to Twitter to take the deputy general counsel role. Isn’t that interesting? Somebody in one of the most powerful legal positions in the world would take a junior legal role at a social media company. Why would that be? This email popped up when we were going through Twitter files and it really jumped out at us. It’s from the director of policy at Twitter. “We have seen a sustained if uncoordinated” — supposedly — “effort by the intelligence community to push us to share more information and change our API policies. They’re probing and pushing everywhere they can.” The Hunter Biden laptop censorship occurred later that year. The FBI and the intelligence community discredited accurate, factual information about Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings both before and after the New York Post revealed the contents of his laptop on October 14th, 2020. How could the FBI spread false information about something that nobody knew about? Because the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop, which showed his family’s massive influence peddling scheme. It consisted of accepting tens of millions of dollars, including from the Chinese government. The FBI had been sitting on that laptop since December of 2019. They had been given it by the computer repair store owner, who had been given the laptop by Hunter Biden, likely because he dropped it in his bathtub or in the pool, when he was on one of his many crack and alcohol benders. The government strategy is always the same: spread disinformation first, then demand censorship of accurate information on the basis of it . “The FBI came to us in the summer of 2020,” Mark Zuckerberg told Joe Rogan two years later, “and they were like, ‘Hey, you should be on the alert. We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in 2016. There’s about to be some kind of dump.’” In the summer of 2020, the New York Post had not published the story about the Hunter Biden laptop. It would only come out in October. We see something very interesting show up in the Twitter files: the Aspen Institute, an intermediary between the intelligence community and the public. It’s known as a Davos-style gab fest in the United States. It’s also the place where intelligence community operations are run. They hosted a workshop to train reporters and all of the social media’s top censorship officials, known as “trust and safety officials,” how to deal with a story they would hear in the future relating to Hunter Biden and Barisma. A few months earlier, the Stanford Cyber Policy Center had published a report attacking what we in the United States call the Pentagon Papers Principle. The Pentagon Papers Principle says that if a government official gives me, a journalist, a bunch of Pentagon documents showing that we’re losing the war in Vietnam, I, as a journalist, can publish them, and not risk prison. That was decided in a famous Supreme Court case in 1971. Stanford argued that, really, we should get rid of that principle, which may be the most important investigative journalism principle in the United States, and said, “You should cover the person who leaked the materials, not the leaked emails.” In other words, you should cover and expose the whistleblower. The person who exposed the Pentagon Papers is the real bad guy, not the DOD, CIA, and presidents who had lied to us for over a decade. Stanford was training the journalists and the social media trust and safety officers in how to cover a story that had not yet come out. This is known as “pre-bunking,” and it’s also part of the European Union strategy to shield themselves from democracy. When the Hunter Biden story appeared October 22nd, Twitter’s trust and safety censorship official said it didn’t violate its terms of service. There’s nothing illegal about any of this. The Supreme Court has made it very clear that you’re allowed to report on information that’s been leaked to you. At that moment, the former FBI general counsel, Jim Baker, argued vigorously that Twitter really needed to censor it. Baker won and they censored the story. It’s not that we didn’t hear about the Hunter Biden laptop story when it came out. I certainly did. But we had the impression that there was something wrong with it, that it was not really the whole story. And so many of us dismissed it. What they had done was a psyop on this major story. They had changed our perception of the story. And it worked. It worked on me, it worked on everybody I knew. What is the role of the intelligence community of social media companies? The former CIA people are the head of elections at Meta, and Google’s head of trust and safety. Former and current CIA officers have a history of spreading misinformation and promoting the Russiagate conspiracy theory. We now know that between 2018 and 2023, there were 36 people from the CIA 68 from the FBI 44, from the National Security Administration and 68 from the Department of Homeland Security who had moved to work at the social media platforms. This is not unique to the United States. My colleague Cecilia Jilková, the daughter of famous Czech dissidents, discovered that European Union officials claimed, days before the European elections in 2024, that a “pro-Kremlin website” was spreading propaganda and were paying off European politicians. That was the headline in Politico. We wrote to them and asked, “Where’s the evidence of this? Just go ahead and share the evidence to support your accusation days before the European parliamentary elections.” Nobody was arrested. They never produced the evidence. The former Czech president, Václav Klaus, who was accused of this, said, “We don’t even know what the ‘Voice of Europe’ is.” Another Czech politician said, “How could I have known it would be a security threat? At the time I gave the interview, they weren’t on any list.” Another said, “If they’re such a big threat, why did the European Parliament let the Voice of Europe’s journalists inside?” Nobody responded. Nobody talked to us. This was a disinformation campaign carried by Politico, which, in my view, is a suspect publication. In the spring of 2022, Barack Obama went to Stanford to give a speech at the Stanford Cyber Policy Center run by Michael McFaul, his former ambassador to Russia. Obama said misinformation harms democracy and urged support for legislation in Congress that would empower government-appointed researchers to serve as “trusted flaggers.” Six days later, the Department of Homeland Security rolled out their Disinformation Governance Board. What a coincidence that they got Obama to frame the issue for them. Facebook in 2021 censored accurate vaccine information so the White House would help it to get data from Europe. In addition to removing vaccine misinformation, wrote Facebook to the White House, we have been focused on reducing the virality of content discouraging vaccines that does not contain actionable misinformation. White House said jump, and Facebook said how high? Why did they do it? Why would they voluntarily censor? This also emerged from the Facebook files. Nick Clegg on the left wrote an email to his colleagues. He said, “My sense is that given we’ve got bigger fish, we have to fry with the administration, e.g., data flows, it doesn’t seem like a great place for us to be.” Data flows. What’s he talking about? He’s talking about billions of dollars worth of business that he has to, that they would have to pay the European Commission for if they didn’t have the support from the Biden administration to lean on the European Commission. In other words, this was a shakedown by the White House of Facebook and it worked in France, the country of Liberté. Turns out it has a special role.... Please subscribe now to support Public's defense of free speech, watch the full video, and read the rest of the article!

Michael Shellenberger

174,749 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

It sounds like a Hollywood movie. Government intelligence agencies, perhaps CIA and Mossad, use sex with dozens of teenage girls to blackmail some of the world’s most powerful people, including Bill Gates, Prince Andrew, and Bill Clinton. But it’s not a movie. It appears to be what New York investor Jeffrey Epstein did from the 1990s until 2018. One year later, he died in jail, either by suicide or murder. There’s a lot of misinformation out there about this case. The truth is that we don’t have the hard proof that the CIA, FBI, or Mossad were involved in Epstein’s sex trafficking. But we do know that the U.S. Attorney for South Florida at the time, who arranged Epstein’s lenient sentence, said, “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone.” And all of the top journalists who have looked into the Epstein case believe that intelligence agencies, including Mossad and CIA, were involved with Epstein and may have even controlled him. The reason any of this matters is because it’s wrong for the people who are supposed to be protecting us to be involved in sex trafficking. That goes for both minors and adults. Government agencies asking their employees or contractors to be prostitutes is coercive, exploitative, and wrong. How did this happen? Miami Herald reporter Julie Brown gave the answer in her 2021 book: “Epstein got away with his crimes,” she said, “because nearly every element of society allowed him to get away with them.” The includes the FBI, US Department of Justice, Florida State Attorney General, and the media. Vanity Fair and ABC killed stories about Epstein, and the New York Times just last week dismissed new court documents as “fodder for conspiracy theorists.” We don’t really know if Epstein was the mastermind or if he’s working for someone else....
2:35

Sensitive content

It sounds like a Hollywood movie. Government intelligence agencies, perhaps CIA and Mossad, use sex with dozens of teenage girls to blackmail some of the world’s most powerful people, including Bill Gates, Prince Andrew, and Bill Clinton. But it’s not a movie. It appears to be what New York investor Jeffrey Epstein did from the 1990s until 2018. One year later, he died in jail, either by suicide or murder. There’s a lot of misinformation out there about this case. The truth is that we don’t have the hard proof that the CIA, FBI, or Mossad were involved in Epstein’s sex trafficking. But we do know that the U.S. Attorney for South Florida at the time, who arranged Epstein’s lenient sentence, said, “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone.” And all of the top journalists who have looked into the Epstein case believe that intelligence agencies, including Mossad and CIA, were involved with Epstein and may have even controlled him. The reason any of this matters is because it’s wrong for the people who are supposed to be protecting us to be involved in sex trafficking. That goes for both minors and adults. Government agencies asking their employees or contractors to be prostitutes is coercive, exploitative, and wrong. How did this happen? Miami Herald reporter Julie Brown gave the answer in her 2021 book: “Epstein got away with his crimes,” she said, “because nearly every element of society allowed him to get away with them.” The includes the FBI, US Department of Justice, Florida State Attorney General, and the media. Vanity Fair and ABC killed stories about Epstein, and the New York Times just last week dismissed new court documents as “fodder for conspiracy theorists.” We don’t really know if Epstein was the mastermind or if he’s working for someone else....

Michael Shellenberger

1,908,185 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce