Category Archives: Censorship

Hurricane Ian is in the history books, having unleashed its Category 4 fury on southwestern Florida. Even as the area slowly digs out and rebuilds, the devastation and tragedies will linger in reality and memories.

Ian was the latest of 123 hurricanes to hit the Sunshine State since official recordkeeping began in 1851. But not surprisingly, some wasted no time trying to link Ian to the most dominant issue of our time.

Climate change is rapidly fueling super hurricanes, a Washington Post headline proclaimed. I grew up [in Florida] and these storms are intensifying, CNNs Don Lemon insisted. Rising temperatures in the atmosphere and ocean are making hurricanes stronger, slower and wetter, reporter Morgan McFall-Johnsen asserted. Theyre becoming more frequent and intense, multiple commentators pronounced.

Ian should have finally ended the debate about whether theres climate change, President Biden stated, as he assessed damage along Floridas Gulf Coast with Governor and First Lady DeSantis.

The newest fear-mongering is slightly more sophisticated. Now hurricanes are gaining strength more rapidly, because of fossil fuels. The phenomenon even has a fancy name: rapid intensification.

This clever claim cannot be proven or disproven, because we didnt have technologies to measure how rapidly certain storms intensified even a few decades ago. But for climate-obsessed White House and Deep State officials, news and social media campaigners, and academic and corporate grant seekers, its another incontrovertible truth.It certainly enhances climate propaganda efforts and advances anti-fossil-fuel, pro-wind-and-solar agendas. But are rapid intensification and these other assertions supported by actual evidence?

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides an extensive, handy resource: the complete record of all hurricanes that struck the continental United States (made landfall), 1851-2021. It offers fascinating insights, reveals surprising short term and recurrent cycles, but does not provide data to support claims of any recent trends, such as more frequent and intense, or stronger, slower and wetter.

Among its revelations is the sheer number of hurricanes hundreds of them, many of which struck multiple states before dissipating, returning to pound other unlucky states, or heading back out to sea to maul Caribbean or Atlantic islands. Florida appears to have been hit more often than any other state.

Also surprising is the number of times New York and other Upper Atlantic States got pummeled. Superstorm Sandy (2012) was barely a Category 1, but NY State and City have been pounded and inundated by hurricanes as far back as 1869, including two Category 3s, in 1954 and 1985.

Another northernmost cyclone, Fiona (barely a Category 2 when it hit Nova Scotia this September 24), was quickly branded Canadas strongest and costliest cyclone on record. It may have been costly for the same reason todays US hurricanes are: extensive, expensive development along coastlines. But the powerful 1775 Newfoundland hurricane caused storm surges up to 30 feet high and killed over 4,000 people; its still Canadas deadliest natural disaster.

Returning to the southernmost USA, Florida was absolutely slammed by five Category 4, two Cat 3, one Cat 2 and four Cat 1 hurricanes in just six years. Thankfully, it was October 1944 through October 1950, before coastal development took off. But the loss of life was still horrific.

Imagine those twelve hurricanes punishing the states Gulf and Atlantic coasts today. It could happen.

Florida got bludgeoned again more recently with one Category 2, one Category 4 and six Category 3 hurricanes hitting it in just 15 months: August 2004-October 2005. Some would call that an upward trend (doubtless due to global warming). However, not a single hurricane of any magnitude hit Florida during the following eleven years. (Was that significant downward trend also due to manmade climate change? Or must we employ liberal double standards again?)

Even more startling, during the nearly twelve years between Wilma (Florida, Category 3, October 2005) and Harvey (Texas, Category 4, August 2017), followed two weeks later by Irma (Florida, Category 4) not a single Category 3-5 major hurricane struck the US mainland, anywhere. Thats an all-time record, surpassing the previous nine-year record, set in 1860-1869.

Equally amazing, the USA didnt experience a single Category 5 hurricane until 1935. The next three struck in 1969, 1992 and 2018. All but Camille hammered Florida. Either these monsters truly didnt exist before 1935, or we just couldnt measure winds speeds above 156 mph until the 1930s.

The NOAA records reveal, and experts like Roger Pielke, Jr. can find, no upward trend in hurricane frequency or intensity. There are cycles of multiple monstrous storms, interspersed with stretches of few or no major hurricanes, or any hurricanes at all. But no discernable trends. (The strength of the epic Nueva Senora de Atocha hurricane of Mel Fisher fame in 1622 is anyones guess.)

But because of hyper-hyped hurricanes and other climate crisis fables, were supposed to abandon the fossil fuels that are 80% of the energy the United States and world require to sustain our factories, homes, hospitals and living standards; that give us affordable food, strong houses, early warning systems, and vehicles with enough fuel to get us out of harms way and rescue people trapped by flood waters.

Michael Bloomberg is now funding an $85 million campaign to end petrochemical manufacturing in the United States! That would force us to do without or import feed stocks for nitrogen fertilizers, makeup, paints, pharmaceuticals, synthetic fiber clothing, and plastics for toys, cars, boats, medical devices, packaging, solar panels and wind turbine blades and nacelles. Even the frames on the Glock and Springfield pistols that Bloombergs private security guards carry are derived from petrochemicals.

(Billionaire Bloomberg also thinks you just drop seeds in the ground, add water, they grow and you eat.)

As to that fossil-fuel-free utopia how many thousands of wind turbines, millions of solar panels and millions of backup battery modules would Florida alone need to power its economy? How many of them would have survived Ians, Andrews or Michaels ferocious winds, floods and storm surges? How many years would it take to replace them afterward? How many EV and backup batteries will spontaneously ignite when theyre immersed in floodwaters, causing unprecedented problems for firefighters?

We can build gas turbines and nuclear power plants to withstand these natural furies and we wouldnt need many of them. How do we fortify sprawling renewable, sustainable energy systems?

So while youre filling your gas tank, looking at your grocery bill and reflecting on whats left of your retirement savings, you may want to listen less to Joe Biden and John Kerry and more to real experts like Joe DAleo, Joe Bastardi, Stanley Goldenberg, Roger Pielke, Jr. and the Miami National Hurricane Centers Jamie Rhome, whom Don Lemon tried to browbeat into linking climate change to Ian.

The Biden White House and UN Intergovernmental Politicized Climate Cabal (IPCC) cannot abide that. They mean to monopolize the conversation, impose their climate and energy agenda, and silence anyone who challenges them.

The White House even has an Office of the National Climate Advisor, which works hand-in-glove with Big Tech and news organizations to censor, deplatform and demonetize inconvenient facts about climate models, actual global temperatures, hurricane and climate change reality, fossil fuel benefits, and the massive land areas, raw materials and mining required for wind, solar and battery power. Anything that differs from its narrative is denial and disinformation.

At stake are our freedoms and living standards, our access to reliable, affordable energy, and the looming specter of life in a totalitarian state of constant deprivation and censorship. Remember that in November.

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books, reports and articles on energy, environmental, climate and human rights issues.

Photo: NASA via Flickr under CC 2.0 License.

Read more here:
Hurricane Hype, Lies, Censorship and Reality - newgeography.com

Youve heard of Big Tech censoring or quashing orthodox views on hot-button issues such as abortion and radical gender theory, but what about Big Medicine?

In a bold plea for censorship, the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Childrens Hospital Association sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland this week, asking him "to investigate the increasing threats of violence against physicians, hospitals and families of children for providing and seeking evidence-based gender-affirming care," per their news release.

REPUBLICANS OFFER A REAL HEALTHCARE ALTERNATIVE

The letter specifically urged the Justice Department to "investigate the organizations, individuals, and entities coordinating" the flow of information, including social media posts, that questions or contradicts what the health organizations called "evidence-based gender-affirming care." They also asked technology platforms and large social media companies including Twitter, TikTok, and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram to help censor similar "rhetoric that often incites threats or acts of violence."

Asking the Justice Department to tag-team with Big Tech to investigate and deplatform citizens, journalists, and others is profoundly unethical. The letter is written under the guise of safety concerns, citing previous threats of violence toward a few childrens hospitals. Those threats occurred after researcher Chris Rufo exposed their performing of sex-change surgeries on minors.

To be clear: No one, Rufo certainly included, would deliberately instigate or condone any threat or act of violence toward a hospital for any reason. But exposing concerns over gender-related sex-change surgeries on minors is not violence. It is journalism and research.

In turn, if the procedures are not harmful to children, let these healthcare organizations stand by their medical decisions and move forward. Yet by calling for an end to any criticism, these organizations suggest they are not as sure about their medical decisions as they purport to be. Put simply, Big Medicine doth protest too much, methinks.

Again, no hospital should be threatened with violence. Still, a concerned parent, teacher, journalist, or physician has the right to call into question unorthodox treatments of minors.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Nicole Russell is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist in Washington, D.C., who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota. She is an opinion columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Read the original post:
Big Medicine joins the conservative censorship campaign - Washington Examiner

Report Captures Growing Anxiety Over Efforts to Stifle Artistic Expression in 19 Countries in South, Southeast, Central, and East Asia

(NEW YORK) Threats against free expression and artistic freedom in Asia are rising, with artists increasingly vulnerable to violent attacks, censorship, and persecution, stemming in some cases from laws restricting digital security rights and suppressing criticism of government and ruling parties, according to a new publication from PEN Americas Artist at Risk Connection (ARC), in partnership with the Mekong Cultural Hub (MCH) and the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA).

The report, Connecting the Dots: Artist Protection & Artistic Freedom in Asia, captures growing anxiety among artists and creative practitioners across South, Southeast, East, and Central Asia around stringent security laws, the lack of unencumbered spaces for free expression, and the impact of authoritarian measures to crack down on artistic production and criminalize free expression.

Connecting the Dots presents key findings from a closed-door virtual workshop held in November 2021 with 25 people who shared the belief that cultural rights are human rights.

Key findings include:

In addition, the publication offers the following recommendations to help cultural institutions, human rights partners, and civil society shape a basis for actionable steps to protect artists:

In the last two years, we have witnessed a steady rise in threats and persecution of artists across Asia, a trend where governments are deliberately targeting and silencing cultural rights defenders, said Julie Trbault, director of the Artists at Risk Connection (ARC) at PEN America. The situation in Asia is very dire. Now more than ever, it is both essential and urgent to facilitate dialogue between the human rights defenders, cultural, and legal stakeholders in the region.

Trbault said the report captures discussions from artists in the aftermath of the fall of Afghanistan, as well as other deeply concerning repression in Myanmar, India, Malaysia, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, and Taiwan.

She said: This publication illuminates the realities on the ground and challenges endured by artists in some of the worlds worst conflict zones and areas where growing socio-economic and political inequalities are exacerbated by the deliberate efforts of authoritarian regimes to extinguish free speech and democratic discourse.

Artists in Asia continue to play a powerful role in shaping democratic movements in their countries. Despite their precarious position, artists such as muralists like Art Lords and graffiti artist Shamsia Hassani in Afghanistan were at the forefront of protests against the Taliban takeover in August 2021, using their work to draw attention to the unfolding humanitarian crisis in the country. In Malaysia, artists such as Fahmi Reza create art to assert the need for accountability by the government and the monarchy; these artists have been met with harassment and threats of persecution.

More recently in Myanmar, artists such as rapper and former lawmaker, Pho Zeya Thaw, were among others brutally executed for their pro-democracy activism. In addition, artists have used their work to question the status quo and highlight inequities and discrimination meted out to women, LGBTQ+ people and members of marginalized groups. In India, artists face severe community backlash for any work that is critical of gender-based violence and supportive of minority rights. In Sri Lanka, creative expression has been embedded in the mass protests sweeping the capital as is evident from the work of artist collectives like the Fearless Collective, who created a mural that has taken centre stage in the Gota Go Gama site of protests.

A Philippines-based session facilitator, cultural researcher, and activist said: We are missing out on the details of each layer or stage of repression as it happens. We are missing out on capturing how swiftly things are changing for many of us in our contexts, whether its in the state of our un-freedom in general or in terms of artistic repression in particular.

The agents of oppression, and the methods used to stifle artists freedom are constantly evolving, said Kathy Rowland, co-founder of Singapore media company ArtsEquator. So, too, are the ways that artists in Asia challenge and circumvent these attacks on their right to free expression. This latest publication provides those in Asia, as well as those outside, with the latest information and connections necessary to support the integrity of artistic freedom in the region.

Connecting the Dots builds on findings from ARCs 2020 publication, Arresting Art: Repression, Censorship, and Artistic Freedom in Asia along with its limited run podcast series, Creating Artistic Resilience: Voices of Asia, which featured conversations with five artist activists from Myanmar, Hong Kong, Philippines, Malaysia, and Bangladesh.

The fragile state of artists wellbeing is of growing concern, said MCH managing director Frances Rudgard. The stressful environment in which they operate, navigating an increasingly complex web of direct and indirect limits to their artistic freedoms, against a backdrop of financial insecurity and difficulty accessing essential information, support and resources, is not sustainable. More must be done to take care of cultural workers or the whole sector is at risk.

According to representatives from FORUM-ASIA, Freedom of expression is a human right that is often neglected and violated in Asia, and many artists continue to face censorship, ostracization, and repression due to their work. At the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, we recognize the close connection between artistic freedom and human rights work, and that often the suppression of one leads to the suppression of another. The report Connecting the Dots is a much needed publication that captures the prevalence of repression in Asia and ways to overcome the challenges.

Connecting the Dots is available online and downloadable as a PDF.

About the Artists at Risk Connection

PEN America leads the Artists at Risk Connection (ARC), a program dedicated to assisting imperiled artists and fortifying the field of organizations that support them. ARC recently released A Safety Guide For Artists, a resource that offers practical strategies to help artists understand, navigate, and overcome risk, and features an interview with Cuban artist Tania Bruguera about the state of free expression on the island. If you or someone you know is an artist at risk, contact ARC.

About PEN America

PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect open expression in the United States and worldwide. We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Our mission is to unite writers and their allies to celebrate creative expression and defend the liberties that make it possible. Learn more at pen.org.

Contact: Suzanne Trimel, STrimel@PEN.org, ,201-247-5057

Go here to read the rest:
NEW PEN America Report: Digital Censorship and Threats to Creative Expression Rise Against Artists in Asia - PEN America

From ashes they rise, opens Paula Vogels play Indecent, at the CAA Theatre on Yonge Street starting this Friday.

That opening moment is a haunting image a troupe of actors coated in dust, seemingly lost to history before this instant. The story then begins as we meet Lemml, the stage manager, who promises to tell us a story about the play that changed his life. The play in question? Sholem Aschs God of Vengeance, which in 1907 became the subject of Yiddish newspaper headlines in New York due to the plays strikingly contemporary lesbian plot line.

In 1907, God of Vengeance was called filthy, immoral and, yes, indecent for its content and thats where Vogels investigation into the plays history begins.

I read God of Vengeance when I was 22 years old, and it always stayed with me, said Vogel in an interview. It was an important play for me to read.

Fast forward 20 or 30 years, and I get a call from Rebecca Taichman, who for a directing project had directed a performance of the God of Vengeance obscenity trial and she asked if Id like to work with her. She would direct it, and I would write it.

I didnt just see this as a play about the obscenity trial, Vogel said. I tried a version just concentrating on the trial, and I thought it was kind of flat and not really getting at the issues of why this was shocking. So I went at it just from what I saw. And what I saw the moment she called me was a dusty theatre troupe rising from a kind of limbo in an attic room. I knew that was the play.

Indecent had its Broadway premiere in 2017 nearly 100 years after God of Vengeance hit the Great White Way in 1923. Indecent was Vogels Broadway debut, despite an illustrious playwriting premiere including a Pulitzer Prize for How I Learned to Drive.

Vogel made clear in our interview that while Taichman is credited as a co-creator in the printed version of the play, Vogel wrote every word of the text including those haunting stage directions.

If theres a word in the script thats a stage direction, thats coming from me, said Vogel.

On the other hand, you know, I would hand her a few pages, and say something like do a tour around the world in four scenes on the stage. And shed say, how do I do that? And I told her I didnt know thats her problem, said Vogel with a laugh.

I wrote it, but I feel very collaborative, she continued. Even with directors Ive never met who are doing my work (like Joel Greenberg, who is directing the Toronto production).

Part of what makes Indecent so special is its music while its not a musical, per se, its certainly a play with music that plays an integral part in the storytelling.

I immediately heard a Klezmer band as I was writing it, said Vogel, and I recorded over 600 Klezmer songs to find the songs I wanted. I selected all the music, and I always write to music musics very important to me it goes back to this Wagnerian notion of a total work of theatre. A total work of theatre always includes music and dance in some ways and movement.

Indecent, while weaving in music and dance, also pays homage to a long legacy of theatrical censorship from Edward Bonds Saved in 1965 to Sarah Kanes Blasted 30 years later. In the early 20th century, God of Vengeance was similarly reviled for its content and themes and through Indecent, Vogel has honoured this history of great work being smothered by its context.

Theres a long history of what I call benign censorship, said Vogel. You suppress someone through criticism and the marketplace. You cant say its illegal although before 1968 in England, you could say it was illegal but I think capitalist marketplaces do that benign censorship, through criticism, through marketing. There are so many writers not being done because what theyre saying isnt the status quo.

Vogel has spent the past few years working to make sure those writers rejecting the status quo can get produced and paid for their work, in an initiative titled Bard at the Gate.

Im in my third year of producing digital theatre of BIPOC writers in America, who are writing brilliant plays that are not being done by American theatres, said Vogel.

We have to have a resistance to the censorship going on. Were not looking at it as censorship because when we think of censorship, we think of book-burning in 1933. We think of the 1930s in Germany.

But I feel like we need to resist that. We need to create desire. Im hoping 18-year-olds start to watch these plays and they think, this is what theatre is supposed to be.

Indecent, a Studio 180 Theatre production. Onstage at the CAA Theatre, 651 Yonge Street, Oct. 14 to Nov. 6, 2022. For tickets, visit mirvish.com or call 1-800-461-3333

JOIN THE CONVERSATION

Anyone can read Conversations, but to contribute, you should be registered Torstar account holder. If you do not yet have a Torstar account, you can create one now (it is free)

Sign In

Register

Excerpt from:
This is what theatre is supposed to be: How Paula Vogels Indecent remembers a century of dramatic censorship - Toronto Star

Dr. Phil McGraw spoke to Sean Hannity on Tuesday to share his view and concern on the rise of cancel culture and speech censorship, as it permeates into society.

He shared how he always thought individuals went to the universities to hear other people's ideas - "not necessarily agree with them, but at least learn something about what they had to say."

Dr. Phil also addressed that there are now surveys that say anywhere from 15 to 30% of students think it's okay to yell down the speaker that you don't agree with.

"We're just getting to the point that we are in a bubble and we don't want to talk to anyone that doesn't agree with our thinking," the talk show host admitted. "If someone says something that is offensive to our sensibilities, then people go on the attack and they may choose a wrong word," he said.

Dr. Phil discussed canceled words and phrases with his audience and guests. (CBS)

Dr. Phil referred to a Cato Institute survey revealing how 62% of Americans are afraid to speak out for fear that they will say something they shouldn't say.

In a recent episode of "Dr. Phil," he asked his audience, how many of them are afraid to speak up or say something in the show and recalled how the studio audience looked like "the wave at Texas Stadium."

DR. PHIL GUESTS DUEL OVER CANCEL CULTURE: YOU CANT SAY THAT!'

Dr. Phil outlined that the reason why many individuals have a fear of speaking out is not because people think, feel or behave in the wrong way, but are just afraid they'll run a red light and the word police will get all over them.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

WATCH THE FULL SEGMENT BELOW:

Joshua Comins is an associate editor for Fox News Digital. He joined Fox News in 2020.

Joshua covers media, politics and breaking news, and has covered the annual CPAC conference for Fox News Digital.

He also photographs and documents current events.

Joshua is a New Jersey native and graduated from Southeastern University in Lakeland, Florida with a B.S. in Communication. Story tips can be sent to joshua.comins@fox.com.

See the rest here:
Dr. Phil speaks out on the dangers of cancel culture and censorship - Fox News

John Solomon, CEO and Editor-In-Chief of Just The News, joins Glenn to expose The Election Integrity Partnership a coalition of entities that responds to censorship requests by urging social media and Big Tech platforms to throttle certain posts, users, or pages. And, Solomon explains, this is something theyre doing in conjunction with the U.S. State Department: Its the largest federally sanctioned censorship operation ever uncovered in America, he says. But, it gets even worse. One of the players involved in this all is Robbie Mook former Hillary Clinton campaign manager AND one of the culprits in the Russian collusion hoax to take down Donald Trump. Solomon explains the 2 reasons why Mooks involvement is so significant and what this means for U.S. censorship moving forward

TranscriptBelow is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Our good friend and a serious journalist, John Solomon. Welcome to the program, sir. How are you?

JOHN: Good to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: Can you recap this story for anybody who may have missed it or may have forgotten about it, that you broke three or four weeks ago?

JOHN: Yeah. And there's a big development today I'll get to. But the election integrity partnership, was a three -- four-person, or four-entity -- private entity that came together. Two universities. Cyber community companies. And they formed this sort of left-leaning project that worked with the Homeland Security Department, and the State Department, to create a concierge ticket system, that people could file tickets, saying, I think this information will use the election integrity project. Go on behalf of us. And ask the social media companies to throttle the post, delete the post, or block the post, or flag the post.

And they did this. And they did it with significant reach. According to their own after action report, which we obtained. They impacted 4800 URLs, websites, 4800 of them, 20 journalists. More than two dozen conservative influencers. And by the way, we're one of the news organizations that was censored or blocked by this.

GLENN: Right.

We are too, and I was named as a super spreader.

JOHN: You were.

GLENN: I mean, there's a chart that you obtained, introducing the narrative, mainstreaming it, and then super spreaders. And this was about the Colour Revolution.

Which I don't know any -- I don't know who -- Beattie is. I don't know any of the others who were saying this. We were doing our even independent research.

And then it says -- Darren Beattie appears on Tucker Carlson. The next one is: Significant influencer pickup. Glenn Beck and mass spreading, sharing dynamics, as users post stories, and claims to Facebook groups.

So I'm a super spreader.

JOHN: Yeah. Welcome to the club. It's just amazing. The idea that -- and the country that was founded with the First Amendment. The very first one that our Founding Fathers gave us. Free speech. To see this collaboration, DHS sanctions. The State Department actually sends requests.

Helmuth didn't send any requests to actually censor the State Department. Private groups, including the Democratic National Committee did.

And this partnership itself, did a lot of its own flagging under the name of the government, forwarding it to -- 22 million tweets. Social media posts were impacted by the targeting that this group did.

Thirty-five percent of the time, when the request was maid of Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, and Google, the request was granted by social media.

That's a pretty good batting average. I know some baseball players that would take a batting average. A really, really significant -- the largest federally sanctioned censorship operation ever uncovered in America. And today we have a brand-new development. It turns out that one of the players, who was instructing the Homeland Security department during the 2020 election was a Harvard University entity, traded by Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager, Robbie.

Now, why is that significant? First off, another left-leaning person involved in the machinery. But it was Robbie, in 2016, who testified during the Sussmann trial, recently, he and Hillary Clinton sanctioned the idea of leaking key things about the Russia collusion there. The fake Russian collusion narrative, to the news media, even though they weren't sure it was true.

Think about that, in 2016, he's the perpetrator in one of the largest disinformation campaigns ever pulled out in American electorate history, and four years later, he's advising his group at the developer center, at Harvard University is advising the government on how to fight this information

GLENN: This is craziness. Is there anyone picking this up, to break this up? Or is this just getting worse?

JOHN: Absolutely -- well, it's definitely accelerating.

The group is back in action. They said they got the gang back together in a tweet post just a few days ago.

There are multiple members of Congress that have jumped in. Johnson, the Senate Homeland Committee.

James Comer, likely to be the chairman of the House Oversight Committee. Jim Jordan, likely, to be the chairman of judiciary committee, if Republicans gain control, Chuck Grassley, likely to be Senate judiciary community chairman. They're all asking questions. My understanding is, there may be a preservation letter going out in the next couple of days.

GLENN: What is it? Okay.

So, John, can I ask a question that maybe you're not prepared to answer. But --

JOHN: Sure.

GLENN: You know, just based on my gut, and I could very well be wrong, but this doesn't feel like an election that's going to be close.

And I hope it's not. One way or another, I hope it's not.

Because I don't think people are going to believe, that it wasn't fixed. The -- the Democrats will know that it was fixed. But if they lose, they'll say, it was the other side fixing it. And conservatives are so concerned about the last election. And it feels at least in Texas, it feels like a -- a red wave.

And I'm not suggesting that it feels like a 20-point margin. But it feels like we will win if they are close. We would win.

Could be wrong.

Are these elections safe? Are they secure?

JOHN: Well, listen, they're -- we have a much better handle on the rule changes, that really tipped the election to the favor of Democrats in 2020.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court rulings. Arizona legislation. Georgia legislation. Florida legislation. Texas legislation.

A lot of the states, particularly the red states, and the battle ground states, have attempted to fix the issues, that a lot of people believe hijacked the 2020 election. There are some states where the issues aren't fixed. Pennsylvania is a concern for a lot of people.

There has been some unusual activity in Colorado.

I think 30,000 registrations went out. We just confirmed this, this morning, to noncitizens who aren't supposed to vote in Colorado. So there are still failures and mistakes. We know Iran hacked into the 2020 election. We learned that a year after it occurred.

But I think the system is more insulated against the sort of tactics that the Democrats and liberals and their bureaucratic friends and the election bureaucracy, try to use during the covid-19 are wiser, smarter.

There are more election poll watchers ready to go and train, something that I think Glenn Youngkin did very well. And praised the model for the Republican Party, nationally. So I think people have greater confidence, that the system will be better oiled, less craziness.

And, also, changes to rules that they've done in the name of COVID-19, have been rolled back in a big way.

And I think another important thing happened two weeks ago, Glenn. I don't know if a lot of people paid attention. Because it happened on a Friday night.

But an Obama-era judge, Obama-appointed judge, declared that the whole concept that made Stacey Abrams, the national figure that she is, that Georgia is the epicenter of a 21st century Jim Crow race this voting system, an Obama judge struck down every count of her lawsuit. That sends a pretty powerful message to Americans and Georgians alike, that just asking for someone's ID is not racist. Checking somebody's citizenship is not racist.

Having a court declare that. By the way, a court led by a Democratic judge is I think, probably a very important force, going into this election.

GLENN: Let me switch subjects.

Ukraine. First of all, why is the teacher's union head, Randi Weingarten over on the front lines of Ukraine today?

I mean, I'm not even going to joke about it.

Anyway, why is she over there?

She's assessing the situation. What kind of payoff favors are -- what is happening there?

JOHN: Yeah. It's a mystery for a lot of people. She obviously has been over there. She says that she's trying to help the Ukrainian schools weather and perform the middle of a war. Who knows what's really going on there.

Listen, Ukraine has long been a favor to liberal Democrats. They have championed these causes. And, you know, they're in the middle of a brutal war. Putin's attack on Sunday was a brutal attack, because it targeted civilians.

It killed lots of people, unnecessarily.

I don't know what actually motivates are there. We're trying to find out. We put some FOIAs in at the State Department.

Because the State Department probably would have cleared or been -- we found out beyond what she said, what's there.

But, listen, this is a very dangerous war. It is already -- had enormous consequences on the economy of the European Union. Enormous human consequences to the Ukrainian people.

And Vladimir Putin is acting more and more desperate, and I think a lot of people have to look for, do we have a president? Do we have a leadership in the world, that can find an offramp?

Right now, stop this war, and try to create a negotiated settlement.

GLENN: Does it seem like we're looking for an off-ramp to you?

JOHN: I had an amazing interview with Victoria Coates over the weekend. Former Deputy National Security Adviser. She said, that Joe Biden is missing the opportunity.

He has not defined to the American people, what the endgame is, why we're spending this money.

And, well, he tried to find the exit strategy beyond regime change in Russia. And there's no answer. She said, this is a sign of an extraordinary weak leadership, that Joe Biden has brought before foreign policy.

GLENN: Yesterday, we had our airports, the outward facing websites went down. It looks like the Russians, not the government, but probably a front organization, claimed responsibility, that they are going to start to hassle and make our lives more difficult by hacking into systems here.

JOHN: Yeah. That's -- that's something that we're seeing increasingly -- and including indictments. There was an indictment about three weeks ago, of some Iranian hackers, who were targeting a key infrastructure, particularly energy infrastructure.

You see the airport this week, and we know the Iranians successfully hacked a database. Let's keep this in mind. The guy who went on 60 Minutes, said, we have a completely secure proof election in 2020.

We later found out a year later, because of an indictment, because of the FBI and Justice Department. That wasn't true. That, actually, beginning in the summer of 2020, our homeland security department, the agency knew that we had been penetrated by Iran.

They were able to get into one state's voter database, and steal 150,000 American's identity. That's a really remarkable revelation that was kept from us, during the 2020 election. The infiltration of state-sponsored hackers is growing every day in our infrastructure.

It's way behind being insulated. I think that's one of the concerns. We have hospital systems. Energy systems. Water systems. All being penetrated and tested every day. And this is the next front of warfare. Right?

The digital warfare is -- I remember it about a decade ago, was Leon Podesta, the CIA director said we're going to have a digital Pearl Harbor, one day, because we're just not ready for it.

And I think the efforts to get that digital Pearl Harbor, started by our enemies, are growing by the day.

GLENN: If you could, hang on for one minute. I want to take a one-minute break, and then back in with John Solomon, who is just -- he's one of the guys that I really trust. If you don't read just the news, you should. Justthenews.com.

All right. Tonight, when you climb into bed. You're going to be lying down on excellent sheets with maximum comfortability. Or are you just going to get the average sleep?

I'm something of a sheet snob, or I like to say, aficionado. I could tell you, my favorite sheets, and I mean this, bar none. Are the Giza dream sheets. They're from MyPillow. They're absolutely fantastic. I've been sleeping on them for years. I wouldn't trade them for my life. And you can get them for the lowest price ever, new. 39.99. Really good sheets. Cost a fortune.

Well, these are made with Giza cotton. Best cotton comes from Egypt. These are Giza cotton.

And they're fantastic. I do not know about the thread count. I don't really care. I just know, they're super soft. 39.99. Right now. They're as low as they've ever been. So I want you to go to MyPillow.com. MyPillow.com. Click on the radio listener special square.

Check out the flash sale on the Giza dream sheets, along with limited time offers. Enter the promo code Beck, or call 800-966-3117. 800-966-3117.

Promo code Beck. Right now, at MyPillow.com. Ten-second station ID.

(music)

John, I don't know if you follow the story. I watched it a couple of times. First, the New York Times came out and said, that's a conspiracy theory. And then the very next day, Gasgon from LA put a warrant out for the arrest of this voting machine company, and he was arrested, I think in Michigan, or she, and brought to California because of the transfer of information to China, which they say was a mistake.

But I'm not sure I believe that. Do you know what this story is really all about?

JOHN: Well, this is a really important story.

First off, it's a far left prosecutor, that has brought it.

But acknowledging that this company, this Michigan-based company appears to have stored valuable data about the election poll workers and election system workers on a server in China.

And that this was not only a breach of the contract according to the district attorney's office. It was a national security risk. And it shows, once again, just like the Iran hacking deal we talked about a few days ago. Our foreign adversaries are looking for any way to steal data. To steal identities in America. To influence elections. To influence corporate business decisions.

And this possibility, this idea that this was sitting on the servers, while they were trying to penetrate or not. The indictment is silent on that issue right now.

But it shows it was -- at the very least, very sloppy. And put, you know, this software. This poll chief software, in a location where it could easily be penetrated by the Chinese.

GLENN: But here's what doesn't make sense to me. That's a violation of a corporate contract. What's the criminality here?

JOHN: False representations in the contract, is basically the -- and if you look at the indictment, right? There's a representation that they weren't doing what they were doing.

But there's also, it says, in the charges that were released by the district attorney. A suspicion of theft of personal identifying information. A suspicion of theft.

We don't know more about that yet. We expect more of that, when the extradition of court hearings begin going on. But a lot of cross-pollination. A Michigan county -- L.A. County working together to unravel this case. And bring in this indictment. A lot of eyes are on this, because it goes against the grain of a lot of narratives of the left. But in this case, one of the left's favorite. Gasgon, he's the one bringing this case, and my understanding is, the FBI has been involved. There's a lot of different pieces of -- different players still trying to figure it out --

GLENN: Yeah. That's one of the reasons why I don't trust.

Oh, it's Gasgon and the FBI. Oh, well, I feel safe now. One last thing. You know, I'm seeing something. And I just can't believe is true. But I think it is. They're not going to do anything about Hunter Biden, are they?

JOHN: We'll see. Listen, I think there was a significant amount of activity before the grand jury this spring, that brought forth the sort of evidence that would support charges for tax evasion, or tax violations.

I think for improper foreign lobbying, is one of the things that I worried about people being asked about in the grand jury. This gun charge came in late. Obviously other people have been charged with lying about using drugs, on their -- on their federal firearms license.

So I think at the end of the day, right after the election, the prosecutors will make a final decision. I think there are three outcomes, right?

One, they could cut a deal. That's the thing -- most likely thing will happen. Although a lawyer for Hunter says, two, there will be an indictment. Or, three, there will be some dispute, between the line U.S. attorney and the main justice, that will freeze this up.

But the evidence is now pouring out into the public. It will be hard for the Justice Department, not to take any action.

GLENN: And if the Democrats control the House and the Senate, will they be able to do anything about this?

JOHN: That's a great question. Right?

Read the rest here:
A Russian hoax culprit now is helping government CENSOR US! - iHeartRadio

Every month, hundreds of galleries add newly available works by thousands of artists to the Artnet Gallery Networkand every week, we shine a spotlight on one artist or exhibition you should know. Check out what we have in store, and inquire for more with one simple click.

What You Need to Know: Unit London presents Sensitive Content, a group show featuring artists that have all dealt with censorship in one form or another in their careersdue either to confronting taboos or expressing progressive views and attitudes on themes such as sex and politics in their work. The exhibition, which is open through October 16, 2022, and runs concurrently with Frieze London, is curated by art historians Alayo Akinkugbe and Maria Elena Buszek with artist Helen Beard, who has work included in the exhibition. Surveying censored artworks and artworks that address censorship from the 1940s through today, the show features work by 19 artistsfrom Betty Tompkins to Pussy Riotand a full range of media, including painting, collage, photography, video, and more.

Why We Like It: Art plays a special role in the advancement of cultural norms and progressive ideals, and as such it is often the target of those who seek to preserve the status quo. Sensitive Content spotlights the art and artists that boldly confront and challenge pervasive preconceived notions around subjects like sex, identity, government power, and more. Even censorship itself is addressed, such as in the work of Mauro C. Martinez. Tapping into the social-media vernacular, in Sensitive Content No. 34 (2022), Martinez overlays a sexually explicit image with Instagrams widely recognizable sensitive content warning, which blurs the image until users click See Photo. Renee Coxs Yo Mamas Last Supper (1996) depicts the last supper with 12 Black apostles and the nude artist herself in the place of Jesus, a criticism of the Catholic churchs domination by white men. Shown at the Brooklyn Museum in 2001, then New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani decried its exhibition and called for a commission to be appointed to enforce decency standards. Together, the works shown in Sensitive Content offer historical and contemporary vantages of the ways censorship has and can affect creative expressionand the ways artists are pushing back.

According to the Gallery: The work in this exhibition tracks what has and hasnt changed in terms of objectionable imagery since the rise of post-World War II civil rights movements. Whether blocked by government censors or A.I., the artists chosen for exhibition in Sensitive Content have all faced censorship in their careersnot necessarily due to the prurient or agitational nature of their work, but more often because their marginalized perspectives on sex, beauty, and politics confuse or threaten the dominant narratives on these topics. Maria Elena Buszek, co-curator

See inside the exhibition below.

Installation view of Sensitive Content (2022). Courtesy of Unit London.

Installation view of Sensitive Content (2022). Courtesy of Unit London.

Installation view of Sensitive Content (2022). Courtesy of Unit London.

Installation view of Sensitive Content (2022). Courtesy of Unit London.

Sensitive Content is on view at Unit London through October 16, 2022.

Go here to see the original:
Spotlight: The Group Exhibition Sensitive Content Focuses on the Past and Future of Censorship in Art - artnet News

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry announced Monday the filing of a 164-page second amended complaint against 47 additional defendants, bringing the total to 67. The two announced their plan to file a motion requesting the court to allow them to take depositions of the defendants.

Schmitt and Landry filed apreliminary injunctionin a lawsuit against President Joe Biden and other officials earlier this year. The motion argued social media platforms are the equivalent to the public square from decades ago.

Additions to the list of defendants are Andy Slavitt, a White House senior advisor for the COVID-19 response and the former leader of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Rob Flaherty, the White House director of Digital Strategy. Laura Dehmlow, the FBI section chief for the foreign influence task force, also was added along with Elvis Chan, who oversees cyber-related issues for the FBIs San Francisco Division near Silicon Valley.

Chan has performed a critical role in communicating with social media platforms on behalf of the FBI relating to censorship and suppression of speech on social media, the complaint states.

Missouri and Louisiana filed a landmark lawsuit, seeking to expose that the federal government has worked hand-in-hand with social media companies to censor freedom of speech on their platforms, said Schmitt, a Republican running against Democrat Trudy Busch Valentine for the seat of retiring Republican U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt. Our lawsuit has done exactly that weve found a staggering censorship enterprise that extends to a multitude of federal agencies and implicates government officials at the highest levels of government, but were not done yet.

The complaint alleges the defendants censorship squelches plaintiffs core political speech on matters of great public concern. This includes speech relating to COVID-19 policies especially speech criticizing the governments response to COVID-19. It also extends to speech about election security and integrity, including core political speech. and the censorship targets speech simply because it is critical of the President of the United States.

Throughout this case, we have uncovered a disturbing amount of collusion between Big Tech and Big Government, Landry said in a statement. This egregious attack on our First Amendment will be met with an equally full-hearted defense of the rights of the American people.

Follow this link:
Lawsuit alleging government collusion with social media companies to censor speech expands - L'Observateur - L'Observateur

Liam Neeson, the actor, is among those to have been considered too offensive to speak on a university campus

ANDER GILLENEA/GETTY IMAGES

It is difficult to pinpoint when the corrosive practice of banning speakers from campuses ceased to be reserved for genuinely inflammatory figures. In recent years, however, would-be censors have dramatically expanded the list of non-desirables. Amongst those recently considered to be too offensive were the comedian Harry Enfield and the actor Liam Neeson.

Concerns about free speech at British universities are not novel, but a new report suggests the problem is burgeoning. The Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi) argues that a culture of fear has set in at British universities whereby students are so concerned by the potential backlash from a controversial debate or contentious speaker that they are simply giving up on these events entirely. They call it quiet no-platforming.

While the report notes

See the article here:
The Times view on free speech in universities: Tacit Censorship - The Times

The University of California, Berkeley is known for many things, some good and some very bad, even outrageous.

In 1964, a ban on campus political and religious activities launched what was called the free speech and academic freedom movement that quickly spread to other campuses. During his run for governor in 1966, Ronald Reagan promised to clean up the mess at Berkeley, and end what had evolved from free speech, to strikes related to the draft, civil rights, discrimination and womens liberation.

Whatever ones view of the unrest at the time liberals loved it and conservatives like Reagan vowed to stop it what is happening now at Berkeley ought to shame especially those who believe in free speech and oppose discrimination.

Nine law student groups at the law school have managed to amend the universitys bylaws to ban any speakers who support Israel or Zionism.

These are not groups that represent only a small percentage of the student population, according to the Jewish Journal. They include Women of Berkeley Law, Asian Pacific American Law Students Association, Middle Eastern and North African Law Students Association, Law Students of African Descent and the Queer Caucus.

Berkeley Laws dean, Erwin Chemerinsky, a progressive Zionist, has observed that he would be banned under this standard, as would 90% of his Jewish students.

Writing in the Jewish Journal, Kenneth L. Marcus, a former assistant U.S. secretary of Education for Civil Rights and an alumnus of U-C Berkeley Law School, notes: Berkeley law students are not the first to exclude Zionists. At the State University of New York at New Paltz, activists drove two sexual assault victims out of a survivor group for being Zionists.

Despite his statement that he would be silenced under the change in bylaws, Dean Chemerinsky responded to Marcus, claiming that not all student groups have banned pro-Israel and Zionist speakers. This prompted Marcus to counter: Would it be okay for only 5 percent or 10 percent of the campus to be segregated? What percentage of the Berkeley campus should be open to all? Shouldnt it be 100 percent?

The question answers or should answer itself.

Marcus further rebuts Chemerinskys assertion of a campus that does not discriminate: Chemerinsky misses the point when he insists that all clubs admit Jewish students as members. No one denies this. Nevertheless, an unmistakable signal is sent to those same students when they are told that they would be barred from appearing as invited speakers. This sends a clear signal: Jews are not welcome, unless they deny their support for Israel which, for many, is an integral element of Jewish identity.

What do students have to fear from hearing arguments on all sides of an issue? If a university does not protect free speech, it becomes an agent of censorship, even propaganda.

As anti-Semitism again rises in Europe and the United States, educational institutions should be teaching its history, not allowing a new strain to be promoted. Isnt that the point of those who support critical race theory?

Especially with Americas history during World War II when the Roosevelt administration limited the number of Jews desperately fleeing Nazi Germany to enter this country, Berkeley and other students should be more welcoming to Jews, protect their free speech, and not silence them.

Read this article:
Ever hear of a university that promotes censorship over open thoughts? - Norfolk Daily News