Mass murdering NYT thinks the internet promotes violence

Free Speech Is Killing Us

Noxious language online is causing real-world violence. What can we do about it?

There has never been a bright line between word and deed. Yet for years, the founders of Facebook and Twitter and 4chan and Reddit — along with the consumers obsessed with these products, and the investors who stood to profit from them — tried to pretend that the noxious speech prevalent on those platforms wouldn’t metastasize into physical violence. In the early years of this decade, back when people associated social media with Barack Obama or the Arab Spring, Twitter executives referred to their company as “the free-speech wing of the free-speech party.” Sticks and stones and assault rifles could hurt us, but the internet was surely only a force for progress.

No one believes that anymore. Not after the social-media-fueled campaigns of Narendra Modi and Rodrigo Duterte and Donald Trump; not after the murder of Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, Va.; not after the massacres in a synagogue in Pittsburgh, two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, and a Walmart in a majority-Hispanic part of El Paso. The Christchurch gunman, like so many of his ilk, had spent years on social media trying to advance the cause of white power. But these posts, he eventually decided, were not enough; now it was “time to make a real life effort post.” He murdered 51 people….

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/opinion/sunday/free-speech-social-media-violence.html

How many Iraqis did the NYT help murder?   What about Ukrainians, Syrians, Libyans and Afghans.   What about the decades of US-funded death squads and torture regimes in latin america?   When was the last time time they pointed out the inconsistencies and psych-drug conections in establishment gun violence narratives?   Ever?

There are literally millions dead and devastated because of NYT editorial policies pursued while they had access to the facts at all times.

They have a hell of a business model: parrot whatever the dominant interests dictate.    They don’t even have to put lipstick on it, the corporo-governmental psyop experts package it very neatly for them.

The internet presents us with a choice we hadn’t had before: can we trust the emergent intelligence manifested by masses of mostly well-meaning empathic people (and the occasional eyewitness) sharing information that the NYT is accustomed to parsing out and mixing with lies as needed by the most corrupt and psychopathic interests imaginable, interests which have led this country down  bloody rivers of endless war to the brink of catastrophe.

At least the internet self-corrects over time, unlike the MSM which has latched onto one big lie after another.

Gee, I can’t make up my mind.

Church of Science Examines Speed of Heresy in Society

The Beast Examines the Problem of Controlling Information Contagion

Media Matters Chat Hacked, Run Like Military Psyop

Rob Reiner’s “Shock And Awe”: What Soros Doesn’t Want You to See

This is CNN, and CBS and NBC and ABC and MSNBC and NYT and the Brainwashington Compost and the entire US MSM

How the Empire’s Child Abusers Censored Revolutionary Research into Causes of Violence

error

Biden’s $1.5B China Partnership

Six months ago, the Chinese walked away from the trade negotiations.

The move caught nearly everyone by surprise.

After all, the talks had been going on, with increasing intensity, almost since President Trump took office. And they had made significant progress by early 2019.

By March the draft trade agreement had reached an impressive 150 single-spaced pages. In it, the Communist regime promised to abandon many of its predatory practices, from currency manipulation and the theft of intellectual property to the forced transfer of technology and its secret subsidies to its hi-tech companies.

Beijing even appeared ready to back these promised structural changes by agreeing to actual enforcement provisions similar to those imposed on North Korea. The draft called for heavy penalties to be imposed on Chinese companies, or levied on China itself, if the agreement was violated.

The cable that arrived in Washington late on Friday, May 3, changed everything. The draft agreement had been gutted. Section after section had been crossed out. Americans who saw it said that Beijing was reneging on nearly all the concessions it had made earlier.

Had China’s trade negotiators been acting in bad faith all along?

Perhaps. After all, Beijing has a long history of duplicitous behavior.

But I think the real reason that China backtracked is named “Joe Biden.” The former vice president had just ended months of speculation over his political future by announcing he was running for president on April 25.

The Chinese blew up the negotiations a few days later.

They had decided to run out the clock on President Trump’s first term, convinced that they would get a much better deal from a future President Biden.

Who can blame them? Biden has a long history of being a friendly voice for US-China relations. The Chinese side had every reason to expect that Biden, like Obama, would turn a blind eye to the theft of American jobs, factories, and intellectual property by an increasingly arrogant and rapacious PRC.

They probably even hoped that he, in return for a few empty promises, would quickly set aside the Trump tariffs that were crippling the Chinese economy.

But Beijing had another reason to bet on Biden: they had given sweetheart deals to his son, Hunter Biden.

As Peter Schweizer has documented in his book, “Secret Empires,” the vice president took his son along on Air Force Two when he flew to Beijing in December 2013.

Not long after the father and son duo returned to the US, Hunter Biden’s small firm received a $1 billion private equity deal from the Chinese government. This was later increased to a cool one-and-a-half billion.

As Schweizer wrote, “The Chinese government was literally funding a business that it co-owned along with the sons of two of America’s most powerful decision-makers.”…

https://nypost.com/2019/09/28/why-china-thinks-its-got-a-future-president-biden-in-its-pocket/

error