Censuur

[Der Wanderer]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door patrickve

Ja uiteraard zijn wij gebouwd rond schrik hebben van dood gaan om Darwinistische redenen, en het rationele heeft niet altijd de bovenhand in de bovenkamer he. Maar rationeel gezien is dood gaan niet erg, en gelukkig maar want iedereen gaat dood.

Ik bedoel dat er een radicale perspectiefverschuiving kan optreden en men zich plots zonder omwegen, uitvluchten en uitstel geconfronteerd kan zien met wie men nu eigenlijk geweest is.

[Der Wanderer]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door patrickve

Dat laatste betekent dan dat men investeert in toekomstige geneugten he. Nu afzien om nadien meer fun te hebben. Waaronder misschien liefde, fierheid, weet ik veel.

"nu met mijne houten kop toch maar opstaan om morgen niet buiten te vliegen omdat ik niet op 't werk kwam opdagen" he.

Ik alludeerde met die 'kelk' niet voor niets op de kruisdood...

[gunter5148]

Waar exact hebben we het over?

[Dadeemelee]

Lol, Fox News removed stock ticker during ‘Liberation Day’.

https://www.tvinsider.com/1184858/fo...-trump-tariff/

[gunter5148]

censuur in duitsland; https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...-abolishing-it

de CDU en de SPD willen "liegen" verbieden.

De CDU en de SPD claimen dus het bezit op "de waarheid."

Sie sind wieder da.

[gunter5148]

Censuur in canada.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...nt-after-state

Wat de censors niet begrijpen is dat ze als censors gewoon alleen achtergelaten zullen worden. Want eens je weet dat uw mening gecensureerd wordt, kan je nooit meer terug.

Stomme idioten.

[patrickve]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door gunter5148

Censuur in canada.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...nt-after-state

Wat de censors niet begrijpen is dat ze als censors gewoon alleen achtergelaten zullen worden. Want eens je weet dat uw mening gecensureerd wordt, kan je nooit meer terug.

Stomme idioten.

Prachtig: religies worden dus verboden in Duitsland

(toch tenminste die gebaseerd op openbaringen die duidelijk factueel fout zijn zoals de Hebraische religies).

[gunter5148]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door patrickve

Prachtig: religies worden dus verboden in Duitsland

(toch tenminste die gebaseerd op openbaringen die duidelijk factueel fout zijn zoals de Hebraische religies).

Wat is uw punt? Dat censuur toch goed is om aan de macht te blijven?

[gunter5148]

Meer vrijheid of meer tyrannie.

Waar kiest de Europese burger voor?

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2...tyranny-europe

[gunter5148]

meer duiding over het EU censuur project.

https://tkp.at/2025/05/21/geheimer-p...eu-aufgedeckt/

[gunter5148]

Maken we ons op voor een strijd tussen de entiteiten die zich langs weerszijden van het nieuwe (digitale) ijzeren gordijn bevinden?

90% van de bevelen die de EU onder de mantel van de DSA (digital services act, het nieuwe digitale ijzeren gordijn) richtte aan "X" kwam van (tromgeroffel....)

Duitsland.

Herinner U de speech die JD Vance gaf in München, en waar hij duidelijk aangaf dat de vijand de Censors zijn. En wat blijkt nu, de Censors zijn de Duitsers.

Sie sind zurück...

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...-eu-censorship

[gunter5148]

Die Gedankenpolizei;

https://rmx.news/article/german-poli...t-politicians/

[hamac]

Noord-Koreaanse toestanden.

https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/...e-the-leakers/

President Donald Trump is suggesting his administration will pressure reporters into giving up sources on their recent stories on the impact of the military strike on Iran — and then potentially prosecuting those sources.

Bij elke uitspraak of handeling die Trump doet moet men zich eens afvragen "Wat als het Biden was?" en hoe de GOP en hun gattenlikkertjes zouden reageren.

[Voltian]

Deze draad heeft nood aan meer “balans”.

[Pandareus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Voltian

Deze draad heeft nood aan meer “balans”.

Dat klopt.

En liefst gebaseerd op feiten, want in de diverse 'Kirk' gerelateerde draadjes en reacties stroomt de bias ervan af...

[Pandareus]

Call Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension exactly what it is: government censorship
The Trump administration’s unprecedented thought police regime is only getting started.

Wednesday I published a column responding to the Trump administration’s opportunistic crackdown on dissent following Charlie Kirk’s horrific assassination: “What’s needed now is courage,” I wrote. “Corporations, nonprofits, colleges and other institutions must understand — if it isn’t evident already — that capitulation will not save you. This is a lawless bandit of an administration that disdains the First Amendment as much as any other constitutional limit on the federal government’s power, no matter how much it brands itself a champion of free speech.”

Almost on cue, ABC demonstrated my point and suspended late-night host Jimmy Kimmel for comments he made in a monologue that seemed to characterize Kirk’s assassin as “one of them” — referring to the MAGA movement — though there was no evidence of that at the time, and the charging documents released Tuesday, a day after Kimmel made these comments, suggest the suspect was deeply ideologically opposed to Kirk. That suspension followed an explicit threat to the companies that broadcast Kimmel’s show from Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr.

Let’s be very clear about what happened: A government official, who openly disdains “mainstream media” and has already used his bully pulpit to influence companies’ news coverage — such as when the FCC approved the Paramount-Skydance merger only after CBS News agreed to install a “bias monitor,” who turned out to be a Trump-supporting, conservative think tank veteran with no journalistic experience — leaned on a corporation to silence a comedian for saying things the government official doesn’t like.

It’s called “jawboning,” and it doesn’t matter if a private company is the entity that ultimately took Kimmel off the air. That entity did so under duress from the government. This is censorship.

Earlier Wednesday, Carr gave an interview to MAGA podcaster Benny Johnson, a well-known serial plagiarist and propagator of false conspiracy theories, also known as lies. Carr characterized Kimmel’s comments from two days earlier as lies and said the late-night host was “frankly talentless and [is] looking for ways to get attention.”

The comedy critic who happens to hold the power to halt corporate media mergers and revoke broadcasting licenses also used the menacing language of a black hat-wearing villain in an old Hollywood Western film when he told Johnson, “When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” sounding every bit the enforcer of what I am even more justified in calling a “lawless bandit of an administration.” Carr added, “These companies can find ways to change conduct, on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

America, say these words aloud: “We can do this the easy way or the hard way.” Does this sound like a request?

Let’s dig into Carr’s reasoning for why he believes FCC action would have been appropriate. He said: “We have a rule on the books that interprets a public interest standard that says news distortion is something that is prohibited. Likewise, we have a rule that addresses broadcast hoaxes, and so again, over the years, the FCC has stepped back from enforcing it, and I don’t think it’s been to the benefit of anybody. Just look at the credibility of these legacy media.”

Shortly after Carr’s threat, Nexstar — which has a pending merger deal that is subject to FCC approval — announced it was pulling Kimmel’s show from the ABC affiliate stations it owns. Hours later, ABC “indefinitely” pulled the plug on Kimmel’s show entirely.

Carr gloated to media reporters by sending cheeky GIFs. President Donald Trump celebrated that Kimmel had joined the recently canceled Stephen Colbert (Kimmel’s show has not, to date, been canceled) and called on NBC to cancel Jimmy Fallon’s and Seth Meyers’ late-night shows, as well.

The FCC chair justified his intervention by invoking the “public interest,” but during the first Trump administration he tweeted: “Should the government censor speech it doesn’t like? Of course not. The FCC does not have a roving mandate to police speech in the name of the ‘public interest.’”

In 2022, Elon Musk released the “Twitter Files” after allowing a small group of hand-picked journalists to read internal communications from before he purchased Twitter (now known as X). The files showed members of both the Trump and Biden administrations jawboned the company in hopes of getting it to moderate content to their liking. But despite the outrage ginned up by Musk and MAGA, people who actually understood what they were reading in the “Twitter Files” raw material found that while the company did submit to demands in some cases, for the most part, Twitter told both administrations to pound sand.

It was jawboning, for sure — an attempt to coerce self-censorship. But it was a largely unsuccessful attempt at censorship.

What is happening now is actual, successful, speech-chilling censorship. And it shows what may just be a preview of the levels to which the Trump administration is trying to make a “Reichstag fire” moment out of Kirk’s assassination — exploiting the fears of a traumatized public to use government power to silence political dissent. I expect the MAGA thought police and their civility cop allies will take issue with the comparison, but the historical precedents are there.

For good measure, Benny Johnson posted after Kimmel’s suspension: “We did it for you, Charlie. And we’re just getting started.” And Sinclair, the largest owner of ABC affiliates, in a statement Thursday called for the FCC to “take immediate regulatory action to address control held over local broadcasters by the big national networks” and demanded Kimmel “issue a direct apology to the Kirk family” and “make a meaningful personal donation to the Kirk Family and Turning Point USA,” adding that even if ABC puts Kimmel back in the air, Sinclair stations won’t “until we are confident that appropriate steps have been taken to uphold the standards expected of a national broadcast platform.” And speaking on “The Scott Jennings Radio Show” on Thursday, Carr suggested he might pursue FCC intervention into ABC’s “The View.”

As I also wrote Wednesday, “America doesn’t have time to litigate the double standards; the future of free expression in this country is at stake.”

This is not a time to “both sides” the censorious tendencies of Democrats and Republicans. This is a time to choose sides — between free speech for all and submitting to the ideological thugs who currently run the most powerful government in the world.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-...hip-rcna232154


Het stuk dat ik in rood aanmerkte is iets wat PatrickVE al meerdere keren op heeft gewezen.

[Pandareus]

En Trump zelf ? Het ziet er niet goed uit...

‘Not allowed’: Trump makes ridiculous new claims about media critics and the free press
The president suggested that government might revoke the licenses of broadcast networks that are “against” him — before he went just a bit further.

As Donald Trump sparks a new national conversation about his hostility toward free speech, the free press and the rights of American protesters, the president had an opportunity to demonstrate that he hasn’t completely given up on the First Amendment.

On his way back from his trip to the U.K., he did the opposite. CNBC reported:

President Donald Trump on Thursday suggested that the federal government might revoke the licenses of broadcast television networks that are ‘against’ him. Trump’s comment came a day after ABC suspended airing the ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ show because of comments its host made linking the alleged killer of conservative activist Charlie Kirk to Trump’s MAGA movement.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said, “I have read someplace that the networks were 97% against me, again, 97% negative, and yet I won and easily, all seven swing states. ... They give me only bad publicity, press. I mean, they’re getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away.”

As with many of the numbers the Republican likes to throw around at random, the 97% statistic was absurd. (Bill Lueders recently wrote for The Bulwark, “Whatever the claim, the president has the numbers to prove it, even if he has to make them up.”)

For that matter, while Trump’s rhetoric about revoking the broadcast licenses of networks that displease him was certainly radical, it iss also familiar: He’s peddled this same line for roughly eight years.

Part of the president’s new pitch, however, was new. From the same Q&A:

When you have a network and you have evening shows, and all they do is hit Trump. That’s all they do. If you go back, I guess they haven’t had a conservative on in years or something somebody said. But when you go back, take a look, all they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that. They’re an arm of the Democrat [sic] Party.

To the extent that reality still has any meaning, the First Amendment also applies to “evening shows.” They are “allowed” to criticize the president, praise him or some combination therein, at ratios of their choosing, with whichever guests they choose.

I can say this with confidence because we still live in a free country, whether the president understands this or not.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-...ess-rcna232231

Een president die open en bloot zegt dat hij de licentie zou willen intrekken van diegenen die 'tegen hem zijn' schrapt de freedom of speech en laat enkel nog media toe op zijn russisch.

[Dadeemelee]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Pandareus

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-...hip-rcna232154


Het stuk dat ik in rood aanmerkte is iets wat PatrickVE al meerdere keren op heeft gewezen.

Een voorzitter van de FCC, een federale instelling die openlijk zegt dat ze Andersdenkenden gaan cancelen.

Kan het nog duidelijker?

[Pandareus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Dadeemelee

Een voorzitter van de FCC, een federale instelling die openlijk zegt dat ze Andersdenkenden gaan cancelen.

Kan het nog duidelijker?

En die kerel steekt het niet eens weg hee...

[Dadeemelee]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Pandareus

En die kerel steekt het niet eens weg hee...

Frank Herbert zei het decenia geleden al over extreemrechts: