oromagi

65% of people are visual learners. This means a video would actually be more effective for most people than reading a news article.

You are also assuming most people can read competently. Just 15% of Americans can read at a college level. And 15-35% of Americans are not considered literate.

Moreover, how do you know it is evidence? The New York Times regularly issues corrections to both their newspaper and articles:  They already had to correct 6 articles today (November 3). They issue corrections to their articles pretty much every day.

Idk. What's your motivation for reposting whole entire AP articles? And spamming wikipedia as a source in everything you write?

Idk how you possibly missed all that..

Kinda like talkshow hosts on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News.

• Since NewsGuard's motivated and disgruntled accuser is misleadingly pretending to be something other than an advertisement for itself and also spreading lies about Bill Gates, and
  
• SInce NewsGuard has not been shown to be factually inaccurate on any point regarding AIER,
  
• Let's conclude that it is AIER who is in fact the propaganda machine and no evidence supports any such claim vs. NewsGuard.

Tell me where the Great Barrington Declaration tells people not to wear masks? And tell me where it tells people not to distance themselves?

• Do you have any evidence that Bill Gates has something to do with NewsGuard?  
  
• If not, don't you regret publishing this disinformation?
  

-->@oromagi

https://www.debateart.com/debates/3075-constantine-the-great-should-not-be-considered-a-mainstream-christian-because-he-was-actually-a-heretic

• here is a debate that lays it out pretty well
  

I remember this debate quite well. Nevets issue was in trying to contrast Constantine I with what he considered "mainstream" Christianity, i.e. Catholicism, despite the fact that modern Catholicism was heavily influenced by Constantine I. And despite my having some qualms with your vote--e.g. not considering that fauxlaw refused on a personal level to accept Wikipedia as a citation--your assessment of Nevets' argument wasn't unfair. If it were me, I probably would have deemed the debate a tie since most of fauxlaw's responses were apoligistic as opposed to contradictory or even refuting. But I suppose I'm preaching too much from my armchair since I did not vote.

• So case in point and right off the bat, your video claims that Bill Gates owns NewsGuard.  This does not seem to be true in any sense.  Microsoft has a contract with NewsGuard for an extension add-on for its web-browser but that deal was made four years after Gates gave up any decision-making capacity at Microsoft.
  
• Is NewsGuard owned by BIll Gates, as claimed by AIER?  
  
• FACT CHECK: FALSE
  
• AIER is best known for their medically and ethically irresponsible "Great Barrington Declaration" of Oct 2020 which called on all Americans to deliberately infect one another as soon as possible all at the same time in effort to precipitate an economic and political crisis and maximize potential deaths from COVID by creating a human tsunami that might trash the entire healthcare network.  Almost all of science and medicine rejected the declaration's plan outright- the head of Yale Medicine called the plan "grotesque."
  
• Naturally, the Trump administration, ever in favor of maximizing crisis in America, pushed full bore for enactment of this Jim Jones style approach to medicine.
  

• It's not clear why AIER is particularly singling out DataGuard here since it seems  that just about every serious fact-checking organization  rates AIER as a source of COVID misinformation.
  
• I assume that's why AIER falsely links DataGuard to BIll Gates- because Gates is already the subject of massive amounts of COVID disinformation and right-wing propaganda so they hope to discredit one fact-checker by inventing some fake association.
  

• here is a debate that lays it out pretty well

->@oromagi

all conclude that Falun Gong is lying 

They also all concluded Trump colluded with Russia. They were wrong on that one too lmao.

It's amazing what one can "conclude" when they ignore evidence.

• Seems like you are pretty desperate to change the subject.
  
• In POST #31 you complained that "Nobody is actually reading the emails that The Epoch Times has in their article."  Well, I read the emails and pointed out to you that they were a a very sloppy tangle with all the pertinent information seemingly redacted out, resulting in almost zero establishment of fact and making your OP seem like nonsense.  I have asked you a whole bunch of specific questions about those emails which you are dodging like Neo dodged bullets in the Matrix.  I wonder why?
  

I have never been sure as  how to differentiate between a cult and a religion.

• Well, if you go by any standard of evidence or purity test the distinction will always be fuzzy.
  
• Certainly, Dionysian cults, Imperial cults, Cargo cults were all considered orthodox and genuine in the context of their time- they were only considered cults by the standards of later religions.
  
• The distinction I generally use is secrets and lies.  Any authentic expression of faith without ulterior motive seeks to maximize attention, attendance, patronage.  If you genuinely believe that you hold the secret to human salvation, eternal life, that alone is sufficient motivation for evangelism.  If membership is limited, if there are rituals or beliefs that are done in secret, if a members' relationships must be monitored to control the message- then that is what I call a cult.
  
• By this standard, there are certainly many cults within the Catholic Church, some officially sanctioned, many not.  In high school, I was recruited into one such cult.  We spent a week forbidden to speak, given much work with little opportunity to sleep and pressed in shoulder to shoulder for long hours into a tiny dark crowded room for worship.  I was very much taken in by the simple satisfaction of hard work without much worry about social niceties or personal decision-making.  We were expressly forbidden from speaking about those practices but fortunately my mother called bullshit on that as soon as I got home.  Even though she was a devoted Catholic she immediately recognized that if one has to keep one's religious practice secret in a free society, then there's something wrong, something dangerous being cultivated within the shadows of that secrecy.
  

• It is true that CDC officials were told by some lady that they spread misinformation
  
• There is no evidence to sustain that lady's claim that the CDC spread misinformation
  

If you read their rebuttals on their website, you'd know they said it was an administrative error. But you likely didn't read it because you aren't interested in truth, only advancing your own opinions.

"Whereas the digital team was made up mostly of people who grew up in or around New York, the print staff was geographically diverse, hailing from China, Europe, Canada, and Australia. Many of them seemed to be married to or seeing someone else on staff. They were workaholics, arriving each day before the digital team and leaving well after. Stranger still, many—if not all—of them were followers of Falun Gong."

Oh, and they once interviewed me for a position over at NTD, their cable news network. I hadn't even heard of Falun Dafa at all back then. And I am certainly not an adherent.

Also, here's a 2022 application page:

https://link.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/epoch-times-seeking-to-hire-reporters-in-canada_4494046.html?utm_source=andshare

As you can see, the position is open for any Canadians at all.

You're talking about Epoch Vietnam, which, despite the similar name, is not currently affiliated with The Epoch Times and has not been for about 10 years

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/facebook-smears-epoch-media-group-with-false-claim-of-linkage-to-the-bl_3183172.html

It was also 2018, not 10 years ago. But outside of that what I said was accurate.

Does any of that sound like supporting the movement to you? They didn't and still don't. In fact you can read all the other articles on their website about qanon here:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/t-qanon

The Epoch Times has promoted an array of pro-Donald Trump conspiracy theories[41][89] and is known as one of Trump's closest media allies and defenders.[41][36]
The paper has financially benefited from its promotion of Trump conspiracies, increasing its revenue nearly fourfold during the first three years of Trump's administration (from $3.9 million in 2016 to $15.5 million in 2019) as it catered to Trump's most ardent supporters, to whom the paper marketed itself via targeted social media advertising.[19][90]
The publication championed Trump's Spygate conspiracy theory in its news coverage and advertising, and the Epoch Media Group's Edge of Wonder videos on YouTube spread the far-right, pro-Trump QAnon conspiracy theory[30] and embraced false QAnon claims.[91]
An NBC News report found that two of Edge of Wonder's hosts have been a creative director and chief photo editor at The Epoch Times. The newspaper promoted Edge of Wonder videos in dozens of Facebook posts through 2019.[30]
In September 2019, during the Trump–Ukraine scandal, Hunter Biden's Wikipedia article included dubious claims about his business dealings in Ukraine and his father Joe Biden's motivations for going after a Ukrainian prosecutor; the claims were sourced to The Epoch Times and The New American.[92] The Epoch Times promoted the conspiracy theory that Joe Biden had abused his power in 2016 to protect Hunter's business interests in Ukraine.[93]
During the February 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses, The Epoch Times shared viral disinformation from the conservative group Judicial Watch that falsely alleged inflated voter rolls.[94][95] The disinformation, which went viral on Facebook, was debunked by fact checkers and the Iowa secretary of state.[95][96][97] A Harvard media expert said that The Epoch Times employed a "classic disinformation tactic" known as "trading up the chain", in which false stories are repackaged and shared.[94]
After Trump lost the 2020 presidential election, The Epoch Times consistently sought to question the election results.[35] The organization produced a 93-minute video that falsely suggested widespread fraud in the counting; one interviewee, attorney Lin Wood, falsely alleged that China had bought an American election vendor.[42] Versions of the video on YouTube, the Epoch Times website and NTD were viewed hundreds of thousands of times.[42]
The Epoch Times created a network of seven new YouTube channels to pump out election disinformation and other false claims, including falsehoods about the Nashville Christmas Day bombing.[41] Only one of the seven YouTube channels disclosed its ties to The Epoch Times or Falun Gong.[41] In the two and a half months after their creation, the disinformation channels garnered tens of millions of views and at least 1.1 million subscribers.[41]
One of the channels ("Eye Opener With Michael Lewis") portrays itself as an independent effort by the host "and a few friends".[41] After the videos' false and misleading claims were reported, YouTube removed several of the videos in accordance with the site's policy against election disinformation.[41]
The newspaper helped publicize the January 6, 2021, Trump rally in Washington, D.C., that led to the storming of the Capitol by a violent pro-Trump mob. Afterward, one of its columnists suggested that the riot was a "false flag" operation,[35] and Michael Lewis's Epoch Times-linked YouTube channel echoed the same lie, suggesting that the Capitol attack was orchestrated by "antifa" as part of an "old Communist tactic."[41]

I have employed very specific evidence (Atlantic Monthly, NY TImes, LinkedIn, Epoch Times)

When did you cite an Epoch Times article?

The others are not primary sources about The Epoch Times.

You wanna know what's really funny about this forum post?

Nobody is actually reading the emails that The Epoch Times has in their article.

Everyone on here spent so much time bullshitting about credibility that they didn't even read the emails from CDC STAFF.

It doesn't matter if Russia Today released this article

• It does matter because when you submitted this claim yesterday, the email and the accusation were all concealed behind a wall which required me to give my contact information to a cult.  Since there was no way I was going to do that I had to wait until I could see a copy on archive.  I was able to read the emails and point out to you how totally unconcerning and nothingburger they were, which you failed to respond to.
  

Also, Li's writings do not state any of these things he reportedly said.

• I don't know about Li's writings but here is a portion of 1999 Time magazine interview that establishes that products controlled by Master Li ought not to be treated as reliable sources for information.
  

TIME: What happens after one attains the Tao?

Li: We have all heard about the Chinese deities. When one completes cultivation, one has special powers.

TIME: Can qigong prevent death?

Li: In the West, one can reach paradise through cultivation practice after death. In the East, one can achieve a divine status through cultivation practice while one is still alive.

TIME: You talk about the period of the end of Dharma.

Li: While Buddha Sakyamuni [563-483 B.C.] was teaching his Dharma, there was no written language so the Dharma was passed by word of mouth. After 500 years, human discourse changed Buddha Sakyamuni's original words and it came to an end. The ending of the Dharma means that the cultivation method began to become chaotic and could no longer enable people to practice cultivation.

TIME: Why does chaos reign now?

Li: Of course there is not just one reason. The biggest cause of society's change today is that people no longer believe in orthodox religion. They go to church, but they no longer believe in God. They feel free to do anything. The second reason is that since the beginning of this century, aliens have begun to invade the human mind and its ideology and culture.

TIME: Where do they come from?

Li: The aliens come from other planets. The names that I use for these planets are different . Some are from dimensions that human beings have not yet discovered. The key is how they have corrupted mankind. Everyone knows that from the beginning until now, there has never been a development of culture like today. Although it has been several thousand years, it has never been like now.

The aliens have introduced modern machinery like computers and airplanes. They started by teaching mankind about modern science, so people believe more and more science, and spiritually, they are controlled. Everyone thinks that scientists invent on their own when in fact their inspiration is manipulated by the aliens. In terms of culture and spirit, they already control man. Mankind cannot live without science.

The ultimate purpose is to replace humans. If cloning human beings succeeds, the aliens can officially replace humans. Why does a corpse lie dead, even though it is the same as a living body? The difference is the soul, which is the life of the body. If people reproduce a human person, the gods in heaven will not give its body a human soul. The aliens will take that opportunity to replace the human soul and by doing so they will enter earth and become earthlings.

When such people grow up, they will help replace humans with aliens. They will produce more and more clones. There will no longer be humans reproduced by humans. They will act like humans, but they will introduce legislation to stop human reproduction.

TIME: Are you a human being?

Li: You can think of me as a human being.

TIME: Are you from earth?

Li: I don't wish to talk about myself at a higher level. People wouldn't understand it.

TIME: What are the aliens after?

Li: The aliens use many methods to keep people from freeing themselves from manipulation. They make earthlings have wars and conflicts, and develop weapons using science, which makes mankind more dependent on advanced science and technology. In this way, the aliens will be able to introduce their stuff and make the preparations for replacing human beings. The military industry leads other industries such as computers and electronics.

TIME: But what is the alien purpose?

Li: The human body is the most perfect in the universe. It is the most perfect form. The aliens want the human body.

TIME: What do aliens look like?

Li: Some look similar to human beings. U.S. technology has already detected some aliens. The difference between aliens can be quite enormous.

TIME: Can you describe it?

Li: You don't want to have that kind of thought in your mind.

TIME: Describe them anyway.

Li: One type looks like a human, but has a nose that is made of bone. Others look like ghosts. At first they thought that I was trying to help them. Now they now that I am sweeping them away.,

TIME: How do you see the future?

Li: Future human society is quite terrifying. If aliens are not to replace human beings, society will destroy itself on its own. Industry is creating invisible air pollution. The microparticles in the air harm human beings. The abnormality in the climate today is caused by that [pollution], and it cannot be remedied by humans alone. The drinking water is polluted. No matter how we try to purify it, it cannot return to its original purity. Modern science cannot determine the extent of the damage. The food we eat is the product of fertilized soil. The meat we eat is affected. I can foresee a future when human limbs become deformed, the body's joints won't move and internal organs will become dysfunctional. Modern science hasn't realized this yet.

At the beginning you asked why I did such things. I only tell practitioners, but not the public because they cannot comprehend it. I am trying to save those people who can return to a high level and to a high moral level. Modern science does not understand this, so governments can do nothing. The only person in the entire world who knows this is myself alone.

I am not against the public knowing, but I am teaching practitioners. Even though the public knows, it cannot do anything about it. People can't free themselves from science and from their concepts. I am not against science. I am only telling mankind the truth. I drive a car. I also live in the environment. Don't believe that I am against science. But I know that modern science is destroying mankind. Aliens have already constructed a layer of cells in human beings. The development of computers dictates this layer of body cells to control human culture and spirituality and in the end to replace human beings.

Look, I don't agree with Falun Dafa at all. But they arent crazies who are going around lying to people. The Epoch Times is a very honest paper. Biased, yes. But honest.

• How did the epochtimes acquire these emails and why are they presented as they are, jumbled in with a lot of other irrelevant emails?
  
• Who did the redacting and why are the essential responses redacted?
  
• Did Ms. Krohnert receive Ms. Oliver's response  and what was her reaction?
  
• Were Ms. Oliver and Ms. Fleming-Dutra contacted for this article?  What was their response?
  
• SInce the epochtimes appear to have been made aware of this in mid-June, why wait to mid-October to run it as a story?
  
• Ultimately, this story boils down to a non-scientific general criticism of scientists' use of data.  Although we don't get the details of the scientists' responses, we do get the impression that they were unimpressed by the non-scientists concern.
  
• Since other papers looked into this and decided it was a non-story in June, what aspect of this makes it a story now?  Was it just a slow news day? 
  
• Since the data was shared internally and never seems to have been treated as hard fact, what are the grounds for calling this disinformation?

They are no more a cult than buddhism is.

The fact you listen to CCP propaganda is astounding.

• https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-21/inside-falun-gong-master-li-hongzhi-the-mountain-dragon-springs/12442518
  
• https://ben-d-hurley.medium.com/-10677166298b
  
• https://web.archive.org/web/20080820045926/http:/exposingthefalungong.org/
  

• "For a brief period in 2016, a half-dozen nonpractitioners—a category also referred to as “sentient beings”—were hired as reporters. But for the most part, the newspaper appears to bring in Falun Gong practitioners to do the work. (The Epoch Times disputed this, without elaborating.) “A lot of these guys are kind of hippies,” my source said. “They just picked up a pamphlet like anyone else.” Once inside either The Epoch Times or NTD, they have tended to shuffle from one to the other and from job to job. Ben Chasteen, a co-host of Edge of Wonder, had studied massage therapy at the American Institute of Alternative Medicine. Before hosting his own show, he was a staff photographer. Jan Jekielek hosts the marquee interview program American Thought Leaders, but I have also seen him identified as the newspaper’s PR contact." -The Atlantic Monthly
  
• "One email circular in particular made my blood boil. It dictated to all global Epoch Times staff how they should describe The Epoch Times, be it to the general public or their friends or family. We were not to reveal we were volunteers, as this would project an unprofessional image of the paper. And we were not to draw any association between The Epoch Times and Falun Gong. Rather, we should describe ourselves as staff, and there were suggestions about how we should answer the question about whether or not we were paid, while still adhering to Falun Gong’s teaching of “Truth”.   We were all being paid in “virtue” — a white substance in another dimension that you gain when you do good things and that leads to blessings in this life and the next. We would all later be paid with glorious futures. We all believed that, deeply." -Medium
  

• https://www.epochtimesviet.com/
  
• Doesn't seem very credible given their headline is still Falun Gong's dance troupe.
  
• What is your source for this claim?
  

SOURCE: https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-cdc-officials-told-they-spread-misinformation-but-still-didnt-issue-correction-emails_4826960.html

• I have warned PC before regarding this source so the fact that he continues to rely on it is telling
  
• The Epoch Times is owned and operated by the Falun Gong religious cult and their leader Li Hongzhi 
  
• Since escapees report that members of this cult have little control over who they marry or what profession they choose or where they live, it is reasonable to assume that these reporters have no control over what stories they print or the truth of those stories.  They are required to attend daily sessions where the writings and will of Li are constantly consulted.
  
• Mediabias/factcheck:  "The Epoch Times is an international, multi-language news media company in print and online. The Epoch Times was first published in New York in April 2000 (in Chinese only) and the online edition in August 2000. In 2003, The Epoch Times launched an online edition in English, printing as a newspaper in New York in 2004.  The Epoch Times was founded by John Tang and a group of Chinese-American Falun Gong practitioners. The Epoch Times publishes in 21 languages in 35 countries across five continents. Their focus topics include sections for world and national news, op-eds, sports, entertainment, business, arts and culture, travel, and health.
  
• On December 20, 2019,  Facebook took down more than 600 accounts connected to The Epoch Times. According to an NBC News report, “The network was called ‘The BL’ and was run by Vietnamese users posing as Americans, using fake photos generated by algorithms to simulate real identities. The Epoch Media group, which pushes a variety of pro-Trump conspiracy theories, spent $9.5 million on ads to spread content through the now-suspended pages and groups.”
  
• Further, the Epoch Times frequently publishes pseudoscience news, such as Supernormal Abilities Developed Through Meditation: Dr. Dean Radin Discusses. They also publish false claims from Pseudoscience and anti-vaccination activist Joeseph Mercola who has a long track record of publishing misinformation. Finally, the above referenced NBC News report states, “In addition to claims that alien abductions are real and the “deep state engineered the drug epidemic,” the channel pushes the QAnon conspiracy theory, which falsely posits that the same “Spygate” cabal is a front for a global pedophile ring being taken down by Trump.”
  
• Overall, we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well as numerous failed fact checks.
  

Oro is a very strong believer in the value of governance by technocratic oligarchs. You won't see any of his opinions sway one inch from that core belief.

The CIA doesn't do that anymore. 

-->@oromagi

Your point is obscure at best.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers

the Pentagon Papers had demonstrated, among other things, that the Johnson Administration had "systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers

Yeah? How about not using Facebook and Twitter and news corporations and internet service providers as an extension of the Federal Government's psyops and let people be free to say what they want unless it will cause real, trackable, and provable harm to someone else?

Or is that not a policy that a government can implement?

The government isn't a newspaper or a social media website or an internet service provider, so it should stop controlling them.

-->@oromagi

The US does not censor RT:

censorship takes many forms that are not exclusively by the command of the federal government

https://youtu.be/nrXlY6gzTTM

-->@oromagi

Your interpretation of this declaration's intent seems baseless and paranoid.

any mention of "disinformation" is a red flag

-->@3RU7AL

that's why RT is now banned, because "censorship bad"

Exactly lol. The inconsistency of this is astounding. And I don't even really trust RT any more than any other news outlet. I am just showing how nutso this resolution is. "We hate censorship! But we are allowed to censor whatever we want and have our own laws and work together to keep it that way!"

-->@oromagi

So, no committee just a declaration and a shared vision

From the declaration:

In signing this Declaration, the United States and partners will work together to promote this vision and its principles globally, while respecting each other’s regulatory autonomy within our own jurisdictions and in accordance with our respective domestic laws and international legal obligations.

They will all WORK TOGETHER on this. If committee isn't the right word here then what word do you suggest???

So, no connection to WEF.

Where did I say it was connected to the WEF? I said they took the idea of stakeholder capitalism and applied it. I was EXPLAINING WHAT THAT MEANT.

What is Multi-Stakeholder Internet Governance? The term multistakeholder governance (MSG) came into use in the Internet arena around 2004. Markus Kummer, who served as executive coordinator for the IGF Secretariat, describes MSG as a vehicle “for policy dialogue where all stakeholders took part on an equal footing” via a process that is open, inclusive and transparent (Kummer, 2013). He also said that “While multistakeholder participation in the World Group on Inter - net Governance (WGIG 1 ) and IGF meant and means that all stakeholders participate on an equal footing, it is also clear that in most organizations, whether intergovernmental or not, some structures are in place to facilitate decision-making processes” (Kummer, 2013). Lawrence E Strickling, Administrator of the National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA) in the U.S. Depart - ment of Commerce, adds in an April 2013 blog post, “consensus-based decision making” to the MSG definition (Strickling, 2013): “The Internet has flourished because of the approach taken from its in - fancy to resolve technical and policy questions. Known as the multi-stake - holder process, it involves the full involvement of all stakeholders, consensus-based decision-making and operating in an open, trans - parent and accountable manner. [Emphasis added.] The multi-stake - holder model has promoted freedom of expression, both online and off. It has ensured the Internet is a robust, open platform for innovation, investment, economic growth and the creation of wealth throughout the world, including in developing countries.” These descriptions do not specify principles for the creation of multi-stakeholder organizations except to say that they should be open, transparent and inclusive. They don’t specify how business is to be conducted except to say that “stakeholders participate on an equal footing”

INTERNET MULTISTAKEHOLDER GOVERNANCE is "participation is a specific governance approach whereby relevant stakeholders participate in the collective shaping of evolutions and uses of the Internet.   In 2005, the Working Group in Internet Governance (WGIG), set up by the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), defined Internet governance as: 'development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programs that shape the evolution and use of the Internet'. This is not identical to undifferentiated public participation in Internet issues. Instead, the concept of 'multistakeholder' signals specifically the distinct clusters of interests involved in any given digital issue and how these interests can be aggregated into decisions towards an Internet for the general interest, rather than being captured by a single power center.  The general principle of participation in decision-making that impacts on the lives of individuals has been part of the Internet from its outset, accounting for much of its success.   It recognizes the value of multistakeholder participation, incorporating users and a user-centric perspective as well as all other actors critical to developing, using and governing the Internet across a range of levels. The other principles are enriched by the multistakeholder participation principle, because it states that everyone should have a stake in the future of the Internet.

It is possible to define a number of broad categories of stakeholders in the Internet, with subgroups as well: State, businesses and industries, non-governmental actors, civil society, international governmental organization, research actors, individuals, and others. Each of these categories has more or less unique stakes in the future of the Internet, but there are also areas of great overlap and interdependence. For instance, some NGOs, are likely to prioritize the promotion of human rights; meanwhile parliaments are primary actors in defining laws to protect these rights. Still other stakeholders are key to shaping rights online, such as search engine providers, and Internet Service Providers (ISPs).  Individuals also have particular roles to play in respecting, promoting and protecting rights."

Do you purposely misinterpret people to win debates? If so that is really dishonest.

In other words, no signatory has to change any law they don't feel like changing.

So then, by your own admission, this resolution allows them to keep censoring content they are already censoring anyways.

But that isn't what it says. It says they reserve the right to implement this partnership however they want, and they are therefore free to censor other people.

• False.  
  
• Reaffirm our commitment that actions taken by governments, authorities, and digital services including online platforms to reduce illegal and harmful content and activities online be consistent with international human rights law, including the right to freedom of expression while encouraging diversity of opinion, and pluralism without fear of censorship, harassment, or intimidation.
  
• Protect and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms across the digital ecosystem, while providing access to meaningful remedies for human rights violations and abuses, consistent with international human rights law. 
  
• Refrain from misusing or abusing the Internet or algorithmic tools or techniques for unlawful surveillance, oppression, and repression that do not align with international human rights principles, including developing social score cards or other mechanisms of domestic social control or pre-crime detention and arrest.
  

So they basically denounced censorship by China and Russia

and then said they can censor whatever they want.

This is a censorship partnership. That is all this is.

-->@oromagi

And when Facebook censors information and the mainstream press say it is lies and Google deletes articles from their blogger blogs they host and other stuff, that doesn't bother you?

China censors searches for 'Hu Jintao,' the former president removed from congress

By RFA Mandarin and Cantonese services

2022.10.24

Chinese government censors on Monday limited keyword searches for former president Hu Jintao, who was unceremoniously removed from the ruling Chinese Communist Party congress over the weekend.

Seated at the leaders’ rostrum on Saturday, a confused-looking Hu was physically lifted from his seat by a security guard and firmly escorted past leader Xi Jinping, whom he tried to talk to, and out of the hall.

The incident prompted rampant speculation that Hu's removal was a political statement from Xi and to show the total destruction of Hu's political faction, which is closely linked to the Communist Party Youth League. Xi was later voted in for an unprecedented third five-year term in office, making him the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong.  

No discussion of the incident was allowed on Chinese social media platforms after the event, while keyword searches for "Hu Jintao," "Granddad Hu" and "Xi Jinping" were blocked, or only showing very limited results.

A keyword search for "Hu Jintao" on the Weibo social media platform on Monday resulted in just a couple of generic posts from the party congress, which ran from Oct. 16-22 in Beijing, with comments turned off on both.

State news agency Xinhua later tweeted that Hu had turned up to the session despite feeling "unwell," and was escorted out due to his health.

Some messages managed to get around censors for a brief time by referring to Hu as a "former principal" who had been sent out by the current principal.

Clues from photos

Ming Chu-cheng, professor of political science at National Taiwan University, said important clues could be found in news photos of the incident, broadcast by the Spanish-language channel ABC Internacional.

"In the first photo, Hu Jintao is about to open the file [on the desk in front of him], but [outgoing Politburo standing committee member] Li Zhanshu stops him," Ming told a recent discussion forum in Taiwan.

"In the second photo, Li Zhanshu takes the file away from Hu Jintao, who tries to take it back, but Li won't let him."

In the third and fourth photos, party leader Xi Jinping indicates to the security guard that Hu should leave. Hu is escorted out, but tries to talk to Xi on his way out.

"Xi doesn't give him the time of day," Ming said, saying that Xi's behavior was rude according to Chinese culture's veneration of elders. "The leaders ... on either side stay expressionless throughout ... they didn't dare show any expression due to Xi's power."

But he added: "I think it was likely an emergency of some kind [rather than a premeditated gesture target the Youth League faction]."

Former Chinese president Hu Jintao leaves his seat next to Chinese President Xi Jinping during the closing ceremony of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China October 22, 2022. REUTERS/Tingshu Wang

Wu Guoguang, a senior research scholar at the Center for China Economics and Institutions at Stanford University, agreed that Xi's treatment of Hu was disrespectful.

"Regardless of why he was leaving, the least the leaders on the rostrum could do would be to at least get up, shake hands, and say goodbye," Wu said. "There was a total absence of that etiquette."

"Why do former leaders come at all? Generally, as a platform for them to show unity with the current leader, but ... the [treatment] of Hu Jintao shattered those illusions," he said.

U.S.-based popular science writer Fang Zhouzi said via Twitter that the man who escorted Hu outside the hall was Xi's personal bodyguard.

The man following along behind was named by the Associated Press's Beijing correspondent Dake Kang as Kong Shaoxun, deputy director of the Communist Party's general office, which is in charge of practical arrangements, housing and other services for leaders past and present.

Japanese journalist Akio Yaita, Taipei bureau chief for the Sankei Shimbun, said rumors of a coup attempt were far-fetched. "It's more likely that Hu Jintao had an opinion on the ... amendments to the party charter," he said. "Hu's departure showed that Xi Jinping rules over everything, but also made public contradictions within the party."

After Hu left, the party charter was amended to enshrine Xi Jinping as a "core" party leader.

Answer 1:

The censorship Committee that is outlined in the declaration:

Today, the United States with more than 60 partners from around the globe launched the Declaration for the Future of the Internet.

This Declaration represents a political commitment among Declaration partners to advance a positive vision for the Internet and digital technologies.

i.e. the 60 member partners will all collude on it.

Answer 2:

The stakeholder ideology is straight from the WEF's playbook:

That is the core of stakeholder capitalism: it is a form of capitalism in which companies do not only optimize short-term profits for shareholders, but seek long term value creation, by taking into account the needs of all their stakeholders, and society at large.

Source: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/klaus-schwab-on-what-is-stakeholder-capitalism-history-relevance/

The Declaration states:

Protect and strengthen the multi-stakeholder approach to governance that keeps the Internet running for the benefit of all.

That was my only connection to the WEF, that they took the idea of stakeholder capitalism and applied it to internet Censorship.

Answer 3:

I already cited it, but ai might as well cite it again:

In signing this Declaration, the United States and partners will work together to promote this vision and its principles globally, while respecting each other’s regulatory autonomy within our own jurisdictions and in accordance with our respective domestic laws and international legal obligations.

Respecting our own regulatory autonomy = censoring whatever we want.

Answer 4:

I am usually against it. I think censorship makes people stupider and more susceptible to things like a flat earth or Naziism or totalitarianism. We need herd immunity against ideas just as much as herd immunity against diseases. By exposing people to the dirty things in life, and allowing people to argue against it freely, the facts win out.

But when you censor things, the public has no idea what the other side really believes, and then they fall prey to stupid ideas or dangerous ideologies.

So censorship is dangerous to society.

• So- condemning authoritarian censorship while re-affirming their commitment to freedom of expression as a human right.
  

--->@oromagi

You don't see any red flags in any of that?

• If I had I would not have described the document  as  a "very generic, freedom-of-speech affirming, non-binding resolution," now would I?
  
• You're dodging so hard.  Why can't you just answer a simple direct question?
  

-->@oromagi

Did you read what I posted or nah?

It affirms censorship of local governments while saying censorship is bad. They denounce Russia and then say "but we want to censor whatever we want."

• Seems like a very generic, freedom-of-speech affirming, non-binding resolution.
  
• No organization seems to be formed or funding spent, so what is the censorship committee you are talking about?  Where does it meet?  How is it funded?  What is its mission?
  
• What does the World Economic Forum have to do with this document?

The World Economic Forum Plans To Use Pandemic Infrastructure To Rewrite People's DNA

• False
  

• "sophisticated technologies can potentially lead to one-time lifelong cures for infectious and non-communicable diseases (e.g. HIV, sickle cell disease) that affect tens of millions of people around the globe"
  
• true
  

•  Lower and Middle Income Countries invest in the global gene therapy market, prioritizing the needs of communities carrying the highest disease burdens
  
• offers 5 expert opinion on where to invest.