Tag Archives: Censorship

May 23 2023

WWII Who Bombed Cities First?


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted May 22, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Hi Marty,
May I ask your indulgence? Am trying to come to terms with my own ignorance of real history and figured that if someone as smart as you made the same error as I, wouldn’t feel as bad (good company and all that).
The German Blitz, the bombing of London, is a classic historical reference to the evil Hitler and the stoic peaceful Brits. Some claim that Churchill ordered the bombing of German cities first, and Hitler retaliated.
So here goes (no peeking):
Which of Great Britain or Germany was the first to bomb the cities/civilians of the other country during WWII?
Now, you may infer the answer b/c of the setup, but did you know that? I sure didn’t. Feeling a bit gaslit.
How about you?
All the best,
Greg

ANSWER: Yes. History is written by the victor – not the loser. It is not politically correct, to tell the truth. The only way to confirm the truth is to resort to contemporary reports before history is assembled. As I have explained, governments will engage in physiological warfare and this goes back to ancient times.

Augustus’ confrontation with Mark Antony was sold to the people that Antony was under some spell of the evil Cleopatra. He was actually telling the truth, for Cleopatra funded Mark Antony and pushed for civil war so that Egypt would thus conquer Rome. When Augustus (Octavian) defeated Antony at the Battle of Actium and invaded Egypt, he issued a coin announcing his victory. Look closely. It simply displays a crocodile on the reverse announcing Egypt is captured – not that he defeated a fellow Roman. Emperor Claudius was born to Drusus, brother of Emperor Tiberius, and Antonia Minor, the daughter of Mark Antony.

Perhaps the most daming confirmation of Cleopatra’s plot was that she struck Roman denarii with her and Antony’s portrait. These were certainly not struck in Rome or by any official Roman mint. They were part of her campaign to conquer Rome just as the West has always been seeking to conquer Russia which had the largest gold reserves of any nation up until the Communist Revolution of 1917.

We must always look closely at war for indeed the first casualty is always the truth. There was a gentlemen’s agreement that all sides would only bomb military targets and not cities at the start of WWII. Yes, Hitler also agreed. Modern history portrays Hitler as just evil in every respect. There were rules to warfare that everyone adhered to at the beginning of the war.

The first air raid on the German capital city of Berlin was actually carried out at night by an antiquated French bomber which had been a cargo plane converted for bombing. As it approached Berlin at midnight on June 7th, 1940, the city was fully illuminated thanks to the gentlemen’s agreement. The pilot, Henri Yonnet, pretended to act as though they were landing at Berlin’s Tempelhof Airport. As they neared the field, they overflew and headed at a very low altitude to the real target – the Siemens factory. It was a daring maneuver for the plane was vulnerable and could even be impacted by the blast at such a low altitude.

On August 17th, 1940, the German Luftwaffe dropped bombs on a factory in Southwestern London which was unfortunately in a residential neighborhood. On August 25th, 1940, the British RAF launched its first raid on Berlin in retaliation for the German bombing of London apparently using the excuse that some residential properties were hit. The gentlemen’s agreement was null-and-void. Hitler responded by unleashing the Blitz, (September 7th, 1940–May 11th, 1941), with a relentless intense bombing campaign of London. For eight months the Luftwaffe dropped bombs on London and other strategic cities across Britain. The attacks were authorized by Germany’s chancellor, Adolf Hitler after the British carried out a nighttime air raid on Berlin. The offensive came to be called the Blitz after the German word blitzkrieg (“lightning war”).

Apr 11 2023

Tucker Carlson Discusses Bud Light Rebranding Effort


Posted originally on the CTH on April 11, 2023 | Sundance 

Outlining much of what was previously discussed here, Tucker Carlson ponders the effectiveness of rebranding the #1 bestselling domestic beer to a 4% target audience that eliminates 96% of its customer base.  The facial expressions at 01:32 are priceless and funny – WATCH:

.

Mar 30 2023

Zuckerberg Could Not Buy TikTok So He Wants to Ban It


Armstrong Economics Blog/Censorship Re-Posted Mar 29, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

China banned Facebook in 2009, instantaneously eliminating 700 million users from the platform. Mark Zuckerberg was unwilling to give up a piece of his social media empire without a fight. Zuckerberg actually learned to speak Mandarin and toured mainland China, delivering speeches in their native tongue and attempting to align himself with the Chinese.

There was a popular app called Musical.ly with content reminiscent of the original version of TikTok, and Zuckerberg wanted to incorporate that platform into his empire. After 14 months of tough negotiations, ByteDance outbid Zuckerberg for Musical.ly to the tune of $800 million, and that app later merged with the TikTok we have in the US today.

https://www.tiktok.com/embed/v2/7213123097396792618?lang=en-US&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.armstrongeconomics.com%2Finternational-news%2Fpolitics%2Fzuckerberg-could-not-buy-tiktok-so-he-wants-to-ban-it%2F

“Until recently, the internet in almost every country outside China has been defined by American platforms with strong free expression values. There’s no guarantee these values will win out,” Zuckerberg said in a speech at Georgetown University. “While our services, like WhatsApp, are used by protesters and activists everywhere due to strong encryption and privacy protections, on TikTok, the Chinese app growing quickly around the world, mentions of these protests are censored, even in the US.”

Ironically, the feeling is mutual as China has always feared the US collecting its personal data. Zuckerberg mentioned his apps offer “strong free expression values,” but we have seen that lie explode numerous times over. He worked with the FBI to hide damning evidence against Joe Biden before his presidential campaign, de-platformed a sitting president, and wiped out hundreds if not thousands of users from the platform during the pandemic for spreading “fake news.” Zuckerberg used “fact-checkers” to ensure his version of the truth was promoted while silencing everything else. He appeased the NWO by promoting COVID-19 regulations and “the science.”

Facebook attempted to release a service similar to TikTok called Reels but failed miserably. Once he realized he could not reach China, Zuckerberg turned his attention toward banning his competitor entirely. Zuckerberg’s lobbying efforts temporarily paid off when Donald Trump signed an executive order to ban TikTok in 2020, primarily to show he was tough on China. TikTok then had an opportunity to be acquired by a US entity to avoid a ban, and Zuckerberg hoped his company would win. Around this time, US lawmakers were considering breaking up the Zuckerberg social media empire for having too much influence. This was when the propaganda against TikTok went into overdrive. He met with countless US senators and politicians to personally push his agenda.

Facebook was caught running a smear campaign against Google. In 2018, Facebook hired PR firm Definers to dig up dirt on its critics, including George Soros. They pinned that debacle on one employee and forced him to resign. Turning its sights to TikTok, the company hired a Republican consulting firm called Targeted Victory to “orchestrate a nationwide campaign” against TikTok. They hired unethical journalists to print op-eds bashing TikTok.

Meta was the largest internet lobbyist last year after spending over $20 million to sway US lawmakers. Zuckerberg hopes that his competition can be eliminated to remain the king of social media. However, the public is not rushing back to Instagram, Meta, or Facebook. In fact, people have begun deleting their accounts on those platforms to show that they will not return in the event of a TikTok ban.

Why do people love TikTok? Free speech. Political ads are banned on the platform but people may speak freely about any topic of their choosing, so long as it does not break obvious laws. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, something sinister is usually at play when both political parties unanimously agree.  Zuckerberg is more than willing to hand over all the data he collects to the US government on a silver platter. The US wants to monopolize your data and control the content you view. They cannot break into the TikTok database as easily and that is the main driving factor behind the proposed ban.

Nov 5 2022

Blue Check Twitter is Big Mad


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 4, 2022 | Sundance

As anticipated, Blue Check Twitter is big mad today….

(Politico) – Elon Musk began firing hundreds of Twitter employees on Friday, four days before the midterm elections, including members of the teams that work on U.S. elections and content moderation on the high-profile social-media platform.

Tweets flooded the platform on Friday, many using the hashtags #LoveWhereYouWork and #OneTeam, as employees let others know that they had been let go. Many of those posting had previously worked in roles including public policy, trust and safety, communications, engineering, marketing and human resources.

Half of Twitter’s public policy team was cut, including members of a team handling verification of politicians’ accounts, according to a person close to the company who requested anonymity. That work will now be folded into a team rolling out a subscription service that is expected to launch on Nov. 7.

[…]  Friday’s layoffs, however, appear to be adding fuel to the anxieties of both users and advertisers that Twitter is gutting its ability to keep tabs on who and what shows up on its platform. And the across-the-board cuts come just as the company’s moderation systems are expected to be tested during the midterms.

In a press call, a coalition of civil rights and activists groups called #StopToxicTwitter called for a global pause on advertising in the light of the mass layoffs on Friday. […] “With today’s mass layoffs, it’s clear that Musk’s actions betray his words,” Jessica González, co-CEO of the media advocacy group Free Press, said on the call. (read more)

Oct 27 2022

Report, Twitter Employees Draft Letter Demanding Assurances Against Discrimination for Their Political Beliefs


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 26, 2022 | Sundance

According to a released article in Time Magazine, Twitter employees have drafted a letter containing several ‘demands.’ In addition to demanding they are not fired, they demand assurances against discrimination for their political beliefs.

(TIME) […] TIME reviewed a draft of the open letter circulating among Twitter employees on Monday. “Elon Musk’s plan to lay off 75% of Twitter workers will hurt Twitter’s ability to serve the public conversation,” said the draft of the letter, which has not yet been published. “A threat of this magnitude is reckless, undermines our users’ and customers’ trust in our platform, and is a transparent act of worker intimidation.”

The letter demands that Musk commits to preserving Twitter’s current headcount if his takeover of the company goes through. It also demands he does not discriminate against employees based on their political beliefs and that he commits to “fair” severance policies and more communication about working conditions. “We demand to be treated with dignity, and to not be treated as mere pawns in a game played by billionaires,” the list of demands says. (read letter here)

Jun 9 2022

Twitter Reverses Position, Will Allow Elon Musk Access to Background Data


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on June 8, 2022 | Sundance

I think most people agree, the request from Elon Musk to see the background data from Twitter, used to evaluate bots and fake accounts, was entirely reasonable.

Twitter’s prior position that they would not permit Musk’s team to see the data stream was in ordinary violation of the terms of purchase.  It would seem to be commonsense that Musk has every right to inspect the data and evaluate Twitter’s prior assertions.

WASHINGTON POST – After a weeks-long impasse, Twitter’s board plans to comply with Elon Musk’s demands for internal data by offering access to its full “firehose,” the massive stream of data comprising more than 500 million tweets posted each day, according to a person familiar with the company’s thinking, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the state of negotiations.

The move aims to end a standoff with the billionaire, who has threatened to pull out of his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter unless the company provides access to data he says is necessary to evaluate the number of fake users on the platform.

The firehose could be provided as soon as this week, the person said. Currently some two dozen companies pay for access to the trove, which comprises not only a real-time record of tweets but the devices they tweet from, as well as information about the accounts that tweet.

[…] Twitter’s leaders are skeptical of Musk’s ability to use the fire hose to find previously undetected information: The data stream has been available for years to some two dozen companies, which pay Twitter for the ability to analyze it to find patterns and insights in the daily conversation. They, along with some analysts and Silicon Valley insiders, say that Musk is using the data requests as a pretext to wiggle out of the deal or to negotiate a lower price. (read more)

May 26 2022

Twitter Agrees to Pay $150 Million FTC Fine for Using Two Factor Authentication as Ruse to Sell Targeted User Data to Advertisers


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 25, 2022 | Sundance

Two-Factor authentication has always been a platform ruse for gathering data on platform users.  Twitter was just one company amid a large number of on-line platforms who pushed “two factor authentication” as a security measure.  The real motive of TFA was to gain the user cell phone number in order to gain more specific information about the user.

Today multiple media outlets are reporting the FTC and Twitter have agreed to a settlement where Twitter will pay a $150 million settlement for violating user privacy and selling user data.  Twitter collected cell phone and email account information for users under the auspices of user security.  However, Twitter actually planned to use the cell phone and email data to sell a more comprehensive package of user identification to advertisers.

(Reuters) – […] The company will pay $150 million as part of the settlement announced by the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In addition to the monetary settlement, the agreement requires Twitter to improve its compliance practices.

The complaint said that the misrepresentations violated the FTC Act and a 2011 settlement with the agency.

“Specifically, while Twitter represented to users that it collected their telephone numbers and email addresses to secure their accounts, Twitter failed to disclose that it also used user contact information to aid advertisers in reaching their preferred audiences,” the complaint said.

[…]  “Twitter obtained data from users on the pretext of harnessing it for security purposes but then ended up also using the data to target users with ads,” said FTC Chair Lina Khan in a statement. “This practice affected more than 140 million Twitter users, while boosting Twitter’s primary source of revenue.”

The complaint also alleges that Twitter falsely said it complied with the European Union-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks, which bar companies from using data in ways that consumers do not authorize.

Twitter’s settlement follows years of fallout over the privacy practices of tech companies.

Revelations in 2018 that Facebook, the world’s biggest social network, was using phone numbers provided for two-factor authentication to serve ads enraged privacy advocates.

Facebook, now called Meta (FB.O), similarly settled with the FTC over the issue as part of a $5 billion agreement reached in 2019. (read more)

Two Factor Authentication (TfA) and the 5G telecommunications network work hand in glove.

By connecting the registered user id to their cell phone number, advertisers can target platform users with far more granular detail.  3G networks tracked user history to build the user portfolio.  5G networks bridge the space between user identity, cell phone, and geolocation services and apps on cell phones.

Cell phones are registered to people.  The TfA purpose was to identify the actual people behind the registered accounts and then monitor them for enhanced targeting.  The data of the user is monetized and your unique identity is sold to advertisers.

This is one of the reasons CTH does not track anyone, or ask for any data on any user.  We do not monetize users at The Conservative Treehouse, and all of our engagement systems, including the comment system, are built around the principle that user privacy is our number one priority.

Any engagement platform that asks you to enter your cell phone as part of the registration process is going to have the ability to sell your data and user identity to a third party.  It really is that simple.

May 14 2022

Elon Musk Puts Twitter Acquisition on Hold Pending Verification of 95 Percent Authentic Users


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 13, 2022 | Sundance

Earlier today Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted, “Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting calculation that spam/fake accounts do indeed represent less than 5% of users.”  He also said, “still committed to acquisition.”

While tech stocks have been collapsing over the past 15 days, from a big picture perspective this approach by Musk looks like a potential negotiation strategy to lower the offer.  The actual number of spam/bot accounts on the platform is unknown.

CNBC – […] Twitter shares fell more than 8% Friday and are down about 23% from Musk’s agreed-upon purchase price of $54.20 per share. Part of the dip is related to an overall slump in technology stocks this month. The Nasdaq has fallen another 11% since the market close on April 25, the day Twitter accepted Musk’s offer.

“This is probably a negotiation tactic on behalf of Elon,” Toni Sacconaghi, Bernstein senior research analyst, said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “The market has come down a lot. He’s probably using the guise of true active users as a negotiation ploy.”

Musk may feel some pressure or obligation to other potential investors in Twitter to lower the price, even if the world’s wealthiest man is more price agnostic.

Musk is in talks with outside investors for both equity and preferred financing to lessen his personal stake in Twitter. If he can get a lower price for Twitter, the returns could be higher for outside investors if and when Twitter returns to public ownership or is resold. (read more)

Suspicious Cat remains, well, suspicious…