• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Ministry Of Truth being implemented

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
8,055
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Or as thebiden admin calls it, "Disinformation Governance Board".

Headed up by Nina Jankowicz, this board's aim is to suppress "disinformation" and save democracy, from the Russians?

How Orwellian.
 
Oh hush, ain't nobody cared about what Edward Snowden exposed so we get what we get as a result. No shock and awe here. ~Truly yours, The Hood~
 
Or as thebiden admin calls it, "Disinformation Governance Board".

Headed up by Nina Jankowicz, this board's aim is to suppress "disinformation" and save democracy, from the Russians?

How Orwellian.
The consequence of liberal democracy free speech is free speech with few limitations.

Unlike Cuba, North Korea, China, and Russia where the truth is dictatedd by government controlled media enforced by the police..

Consider it is the un-Orweilian system you live inthat enbales you to be a gadfly without fear of the government knocking on your door.

Ho about the Trump disinformation, or is Trump and Shaum Hannity the truth?

As revealed today from released text messages Shaun Hannity asks Trump associates whay he should say.

On an Orwellian scale of 1-10 how do you rate Trump and FOX News?
 
You are free to run for office and be in charge.
 
It's fascinating how Reich-wingers are all for banning books and new draconian laws stopping social and emotional learning, but when a government board gets created to help debunk disinformation from the nation's enemies suddenly Russianpublicans are like "THEY'RE GOING TO ARREST YOU FOR FREE SPEECH!!!11one!" This is classic accuse the other guy of what you're doing. It would probably be a little funny, too, if they weren't creating national security issues and destroying democracy.
 
Or as thebiden admin calls it, "Disinformation Governance Board".

Headed up by Nina Jankowicz, this board's aim is to suppress "disinformation" and save democracy, from the Russians?

How Orwellian.
Calling disinformation the truth doesn't make it so. Your side is descending farther and farther into loony-bin territory. You'll probably lose the civil war you're trying to trigger because you'll be so far out of touch with reality. The keystone coup writ large.
 
It's fascinating how Reich-wingers are all for banning books and new draconian laws stopping social and emotional learning, but when a government board gets created to help debunk disinformation from the nation's enemies suddenly Russianpublicans are like "THEY'RE GOING TO ARREST YOU FOR FREE SPEECH!!!11one!" This is classic accuse the other guy of what you're doing. It would probably be a little funny, too, if they weren't creating national security issues and destroying democracy.
"Misinformation." What a shit term. Could you define it? Who gets to define it? And why should a law enforcement agency be in charge of it?
 
Or as thebiden admin calls it, "Disinformation Governance Board".

Headed up by Nina Jankowicz, this board's aim is to suppress "disinformation" and save democracy, from the Russians?

How Orwellian.
Calling disinformation the truth doesn't make it so. Your side is descending farther and farther into loony-bin territory. You'll probably lose the civil war you're trying to trigger because you'll be so far out of touch with reality. The keystone coup writ large.
Who gets to define "disinformation"? Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"? Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
 
In the past I looked at 19th century newspapers that are digitized on line going back to the beginning.

What we see today is really not new. It is the speed of propagation and scope that has changed. The scope gives the Hannities a lot of influence on a daily basis across the country.

It is not like people are suddenly believing conspiracy theories and bogus political propaganda. Newspapers were always biased and influenced by money and special interests.

As I first leaned during the pandemic the Spanish Flu really did not originate in Spain. It was our government' war time disinformation.
 
Who gets to define "disinformation"?
Reality, as revealed by the application of the scientific method.
Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"?
No. All speech that is factually incorrect is.
Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
Because the world is full of cunts who are very effectively spreading lies in order to achieve personal benefit at the expense of wider society.

It's the same fundamental reason as why we give law enforcement agencies the power to stop bank robberies.
 
Who gets to define "disinformation"?
Reality, as revealed by the application of the scientific method.
Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"?
No. All speech that is factually incorrect is.
Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
Because the world is full of cunts who are very effectively spreading lies in order to achieve personal benefit at the expense of wider society.

It's the same fundamental reason as why we give law enforcement agencies the power to stop bank robberies.
How very Soviet of you.
 

The Department of Homeland Security’s creation of a Disinformation Governance Board has set off a backlash on the right — even as it’s not entirely clear what the perhaps unfortunately named board will do.

Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas mentioned the creation of the board in multiple congressional hearings this week. In one, he linked it to efforts to combat misinformation from human smugglers. In another, he said it would be used to counter Russian cyber and election misinformation: “We have just established a mis- and disinformation governance board in the Department of Homeland Security to more effectively combat this threat, not only to election security but to our homeland security.”
Amid growing anti-censorship fervor on the right, a bevy of Republicans have suggested that the initiative amounts to policing speech. Elon Musk declared it “messed up.” Many on the right likened it to the “Ministry of Truth” from George Orwell’s book “1984.”

They’ve also questioned the fitness of the board’s executive director, Nina Jankowicz, who has in the past supported Democrats, praised efforts to crack down on coronavirus misinformation on social media and expressed skepticism about the provenance of Hunter Biden’s laptop.

“Rather than police our border, Homeland Security has decided to make policing Americans’ speech its top priority,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) claimed.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) offered some more toned-down skepticism, citing his own work on combating foreign misinformation.
Doesn't this all sound familiar.
 
Who gets to define "disinformation"?
Reality, as revealed by the application of the scientific method.
Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"?
No. All speech that is factually incorrect is.
Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
Because the world is full of cunts who are very effectively spreading lies in order to achieve personal benefit at the expense of wider society.

It's the same fundamental reason as why we give law enforcement agencies the power to stop bank robberies.
How very Soviet of you.
?

There's nothing Soviet about recognising the existence of objective reality. Quite the reverse.

Reality exists. Many questions have a right answer; Many deeply held opinions are simply and factually wrong.

People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
 
Who gets to define "disinformation"?
Reality, as revealed by the application of the scientific method.
Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"?
No. All speech that is factually incorrect is.
Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
Because the world is full of cunts who are very effectively spreading lies in order to achieve personal benefit at the expense of wider society.

It's the same fundamental reason as why we give law enforcement agencies the power to stop bank robberies.
How very Soviet of you.
?

There's nothing Soviet about recognising the existence of objective reality. Quite the reverse.

Reality exists. Many questions have a right answer; Many deeply held opinions are simply and factually wrong.

People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
And why do we need a law enforcement agency for that? Do you just trust everything government tells you?
 
Who gets to define "disinformation"?
Reality, as revealed by the application of the scientific method.
Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"?
No. All speech that is factually incorrect is.
Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
Because the world is full of cunts who are very effectively spreading lies in order to achieve personal benefit at the expense of wider society.

It's the same fundamental reason as why we give law enforcement agencies the power to stop bank robberies.
How very Soviet of you.
?

There's nothing Soviet about recognising the existence of objective reality. Quite the reverse.

Reality exists. Many questions have a right answer; Many deeply held opinions are simply and factually wrong.

People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
And why do we need a law enforcement agency for that?
Because highly effective liars are directly and maliciously harming other people, for the benefit of those liars.

Again, it's the exact same reason why we need a law enforcement agency for bank robberies. The world contains malicious people who seek personal gain at the expense of others, and we should not permit them to thrive.
Do you just trust everything government tells you?

No, of course not. What would make you think that?

I don't trust the police either; I expect them to have checks and balances on their actions. But that doesn't mean I don't think they should arrest bank robbers.
 
Back
Top Bottom