This incident sheds light on the broader implications of the fight against online “misinformation,” particularly how premature labeling of claims can potentially suppress legitimate grievances and criticisms that later prove to have been based on some truth, something that happened often in 2020 and the Covid era.

The controversy surrounding a FEMA employee who allegedly directed a relief team to ignore homes displaying support for then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has sparked outrage and demands for a thorough investigation by legislators. As first reported by The Daily Wire, the employee, who has now been fired, instructed team members to bypass these homes, an action condemned by FEMA administrator Deanne Criswell as a “clear violation of FEMA’s core values & principles to help people regardless of their political affiliation.”

Criswell’s confirmation of the dismissal came through a post on X, following online reports about the employee’s conduct. While she didn’t specify which hurricane’s relief efforts were affected, ABC News and The New York Times reported it was during the aftermath of Hurricane Milton in Florida. This hurricane struck shortly after the catastrophic Hurricane Helene.

The rush to curb the spread of misinformation online is a top priority for many pro-censorship platforms and legacy institutions claiming to protect public discourse from false narratives. However, this incident exemplifies the complexities and risks inherent in these efforts. Initially, the claims regarding any of FEMA’s discriminatory practices were quickly categorized as baseless and part of an online misinformation campaign. This not only stifled debate but potentially delayed the scrutiny necessary to uncover and address any wrongdoing.

Hoffman has also been vocal about his disdain for current tariffs and his preference for the US to revert to its longstanding free trade policies, which he discussed in a CNN interview.

CNN reporter Matt Egan highlighted Hoffman’s specific grievances against FTC Chair Lina Khan, whom he accused of harming American businesses. Hoffman hoped that under a Harris presidency, Khan would be replaced.

“Lina Khan is…a person who is not helping America,” Hoffman told CNN. “I would hope that Vice President Harris would replace her.”

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) received overwhelming bipartisan support in the House, passing with a vote of 310 to 118. This count far exceeded the two-thirds majority needed for approval. Following its passage, the bill is now headed to the White House, where it awaits President Joe Biden’s signature to become law.

The temporary extension in question belongs to the surveillance capabilities under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was slated to expire at year’s end and have now been renewed through April 2024.

Utah GOP Senator Mike Lee led a robust effort to axe this extension, despite facing defeat.

Notably, a group of thirty-five senators, featuring Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul, rallied behind him. However, the movement fell short of the forty-one votes needed to successfully exclude the provision.

A warrantless surveillance mechanism provided for by Section 702 targets non-Americans overseas, a point of sensitive debate because the provision has, despite failed promises from the likes of the FBI to stop, caused surveillance of US citizens.

Two improvement proposals for these mandates were put forth by Republican members but were subsequently withdrawn by House Speaker Mike Johnson amid significant intra-GOP conflicts over the issue.

Kentucky GOP Rep. Thomas Massie expressed his dissatisfaction with the inclusion of the FISA extension in bill.

Fort Meade, also known as the steering wheel of the US Government’s paramount signals intelligence organization, the National Security Agency, has seemingly struck a discreet deal to expand its espionage services.

DISA, commodiously located at Fort Meade, is now purported to have voluminous exposure to public posts from assorted social media platforms, including X, formerly Twitter.

Dataminr is a company specializing in AI-driven real-time information discovery and is known for detecting, classifying, and determining the significance of public information in real time. It’s plausible that government entities, including the Department of Defense, may leverage services like Dataminr to monitor social media and other public data sources to maintain situational awareness and respond to emerging events or threats more rapidly.

When privacy buffs and free speech advocates look at governmental use of tools like Dataminr, it’s met with a hefty dose of suspicion, and rightfully so. The potential implications for personal freedom, civil rights, and the pillars of democracy are considerable. There’s this looming worry about the government, potentially with too loose a leash, exploiting these tools to spy on lawful activities and on people living their everyday lives with no criminal intentions.

The breadth and depth of data that can be scooped up – often slipping under individuals’ radars and without their green light – are considered intrusive, lighting up alarm bells about losing the privilege of anonymity on the web. The knowledge that one’s online whispers and digital footprints might be under the watchful eye can put a damper on free speech. It can make people think twice before voicing opinions that swim against the current or stir the pot.

It’s no secret that I am not a fan of either Zelensky or Vladimir Putin. Both are worthy of massive amounts of criticism. Both are either intentionally or unwittingly doing harm to the whole world on behalf of the globalist elite cabal by prolonging this regional conflict and milking it for all the geopolitical turmoil they can get. But American corporate media only highlights the foibles of one of those men, which is why we make certain that Americans are aware of Zelensky’s massive shortcomings as well. That’s why it’s important to share this article by Dan Frieth at Reclaim The Net…

On Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed off a controversial bill that substantially increases the government’s regulatory authority over the news media. The new law will give the government new censorship powers and is a fresh blow to press freedoms in the country.

The legislation significantly increases the powers of Ukraine’s state broadcasting regulator to allow it to regulate both the print and online news media. Further, it allows for fines to be imposed on media outlets, their licenses to be revoked without due process, and even some websites to be temporarily blocked without going through the courts. Finally, it gives the regulator authority to order search giants such as Google and other social media platforms to remove content.

Zelensky’s actions are already being criticized by press freedom advocates. As this bill moved through Parliament, members of international organizations such as the European Federation of Journalists and the Committee to Protect Journalists expressed their concerns about its provisions.

“The coercive regulation envisaged by the bill and in the hands of a regulator totally controlled by the government is worthy of the worst authoritarian regimes. It must be withdrawn. A state that would apply such provisions simply has no place in the European Union,” said EFJ General Secretary Ricardo Gutiérrez. “Media regulation should be implemented by a body independent of the government and its objective should be media independence, not media control,” Gutiérrez added.

“Ukraine’s media bill seriously imperils press freedom in the country by tightening government control over information at a time when citizens need it the most,” remarked Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, in a statement. “Ukrainian legislators should abandon the bill, or at least pause its progress in parliament until the European Union can weigh in with recommendations.”

Members of Ukraine’s National Union of Journalists strongly opposed the bill due to its potential to reduce fundamental freedoms within the country. Nevertheless, Yevheniia Kravchuk, the deputy chairperson for Parliament’s Information Policy Committee contradicted those worries by stating that Ukraine’s media legislation had not been updated since the absence of the internet 16 years prior. This new broader bill was needed to bring their media laws up to date and provide greater access to accurate information and technologies.

Back in 2020, The Post reported that Twitter and Facebook employees warned the Pentagon of the existence of fake accounts suspected to be created by the US military. A Facebook executive contacted the Pentagon’s head of influence operations policy, Christopher Miller, about the accounts, noting that foreign adversaries are likely to know the origins of the accounts, given that Facebook employees were able to.

The two social media platforms removed about 150 fake profiles, some masquerading as media outlets, that they suspected were created by the military for psychological operations, aka psyops. The US has long accused Russia and China of such operations.

According to reports, the Biden administration has requested the Pentagon provide more information on psyops policies, arguing that the deployment of these operations could undermine the US’s credibility to speak against similar operations by foreign adversaries and justify the social media oversight by governments in countries like India, Nigeria, and Indonesia.

A report released in August by the Stanford Internet Observatory and Graphika revealed the extent pro-Western influence operations.

The report said that the researchers found suspicious pro-Western accounts on Meta’s platforms and Twitter that were, “fake personas with GAN-generated faces, posed as independent media outlets, leveraged memes, and short-form videos, attempted to start hashtag campaigns, and launched online petitions.”

Article cross-posted from Reclaim The Net.

Since he became president, Bolsonaro has said the electoral process in the country is not transparent and that there was election fraud in the 2014 and 2018 elections. The claims have been disputed by the Superior Electoral Court.

In the video YouTube removed, which was posted in July 2021, the president said that the electronic voting machines were not secure.

The video is still available on another channel on YouTube – on the TV BrasilGov channel run by the federal government.

In a statement to CNN Brasil, YouTube said it has rules that “must be followed by all users.”

“We have worked to keep our policies and systems up to date in order to give visibility to credible content and reduce the spread of misleading information, while allowing political debate to take place,” it added.

YouTube noted that since March, it has removed claims of election fraud in the 2018 election and those about the voting machines getting hacked.

“This is one of the examples of what we don’t allow under our policy against election disinformation,” the platform added.

Bolsonaro repeated the same claims of election fraud in a meeting held this week with ambassadors. YouTube is yet to censor that video.

Article cross-posted from Reclaim The Net.