Yaccarino, in her conversation with the Financial Times, appeared initially to champion the concept of free speech, only to subsequently divert the discussion towards other organizational aspects. This oscillation between defending free speech and avoiding the subject has drawn scrutiny, raising questions about the possible politicization of free speech and the role of tech giants in shaping public discourse.

“How is freedom of speech politicized?,” Yaccarino asked during the interview. “It is one of the foundational core values of what this country was formed on, so I don’t really understand how that’s a political issue. I think that would be something everyone, no matter what your opinions are, would agree on.”

But Yaccarino also during the interview repeated the contentious phrase “freedom of speech, not reach,” something that she has already been widely criticized for, as it suggests that X will have control over which voices are heard and which are not.

Yaccarino also repeated the equally contentions idea of X restricting what is “lawful but awful” speech and the interview reveals that X is “successfully” restricting such speech. Who is to decide what constitutes “awful?”

Yaccarino’s conflicting statements have come amidst rising debates over censorship and the rights of individuals to express their viewpoints openly.

Elon Musk, the tech magnate known for his eclectic political affiliations, previously vocalized support for Democrats but has been seen mingling with prominent Republicans like Tucker Carlson lately. The apparent change in Musk’s affiliations has heightened discussions around whether freedom of speech is increasingly becoming a politicized concept, a question Yaccarino claims she struggles to process.

When questioned about the establishment of a “content moderation council with widely diverse viewpoints,” a proposal made by Musk during his initial tenure, Yaccarino responded with unfamiliarity, stating, “That is news to me. You’re the first person that mentioned that.”

This controversy emerged shortly after Yaccarino’s reputedly fruitful with ADL head Jonathan Greenblatt. The ADL has been calling for censorship on the platform and Elon Musk has threatened to sue the ADL for causing what he says is a drop in 60% of its advertising revenue after the ADL asked advertisers to suspend advertising on the platform.

Both Yaccarino and Greenblatt have publicly described their meeting as productive. Yaccarino clarifies, “The issue that’s being debated is not about supporting ADL’s mission to fight antisemitism. We’re all in on fighting antisemitism. The issue is about the ADL misrepresenting or not addressing the progress that we’ve made in our ongoing efforts.”

In anticipation of the upcoming 2024 US presidential election, Yaccarino is intensifying efforts to guard against manipulation and the prominence of inauthentic accounts, whilst maintaining stringent surveillance of the platform to thwart emerging threats.

“World Economic Forum Executive Chair.”

Since it’s well established that Musk isn’t stupid, that leaves only two possible conclusions. Either he thinks we’re stupid and so hooked on his platform that we won’t be skeptical of a high ranking member of a purely evil organization running the show… or he’s compromised and under the control of Klaus Schwab et al.

As I noted in an article and podcast 53 weeks ago, I think he is a globalist, has always been a globalist, and was deployed to bring conservatives back on Twitter so the powers-that-be could go after us all over again:

What’s Really Behind Musk’s Twitter Acquisition?

So that brings us to the all-important question – what’s the true reason for Musk’s acquisition of Twitter?

When Musk gave his initial statement regarding his plans for the social media platform, there was one phrase that stood out as being particularly odd.

I also want to make Twitter better than ever by enhancing the product with new features, making the algorithms open source to increase trust, defeating the spam bots, and authenticating all humans.

While I have doubts as to whether Musk will follow through with any of these promises, the part that struck me the most was his comment about “authenticating all humans”.

Maybe I’m way off base here, but for me, the only way to “authenticate” people on the platform is to integrate it with some kind of digital ID or biometric identifier. And that sounds eerily similar to the WEF’s vision of making it necessary to have a “digital identity” in order to access online services. Hell, maybe Musk has been tasked with instituting that as well. Who knows?

Good Cop, Bad Cop

It’s quite clear that Musk is on board with the whole technocratic/transhumanist agenda, so why is he all of a sudden being cast as a champion of democracy and free speech? Simple. The globalists are playing “good cop, bad cop”. Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, the Rockefellers, etc are the “bad guys” and Musk is the “good guy” who has come along to offer humanity a better way forward.

There’s only one problem. Schwab’s vision for the future and Musk’s vision for the future are exactly the same. The paths to getting there may be different but the destination hasn’t changed.

So why choose Musk to play the role of the “good cop”? First of all, he’s got the right personality, he’s eccentric and he’s already worshipped as a genius of our time. Secondly, he’s not associated with either the political right or left and thus he appeals equally to people on both ends of the spectrum.

While it’s a good thing that banned accounts have returned to Twitter and that freedom of speech on the platform has (supposedly) been restored, it’s important to stay cautious before bowing down to Musk as some sort of savior.

In fact, I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t trust Elon Musk to tell me the time in a room full of clocks.

How Elon Musk May Be a Trojan Horse

The globalists’ plan is working on a vast majority of people around the world. Most of them are simply oblivious, living their lives and being herded where they’re told to go. Those on the left who are at least partially aware of The Great Reset are giddy with anticipation and often participating in ushering in the Neo-Marxist future.

The problem for the architects of The Great Reset is us. Those who are conservative, who likely hold a Biblical worldview, and who place strong value on our freedoms are no longer listening to the standard indoctrination channels at the disposal of the globalist elites. We’re not watching CNN or reading the NY Times. We’re cautious about anything that Twitter, Google, YouTube, or Facebook allow and we’re often careful about what we say on these platforms. We’re not buying into “Build Back Better” and we’re opposed to the idea of owning nothing and being happy about it.

IF the globalist elites wanted to reach resistant people with their message and IF Elon Musk was among their ranks, then everything that has happened so far happened exactly as they had planned. There’s a misconception surrounding Musk’s persona that needs to be addressed so freedom-lovers will be more skeptical. This was all planned out. Let me explain.

The common (false) perception is that Elon Musk started Tweeting one day about wanting Twitter fixed. His followers started encouraging him to buy Twitter. A few days later, he purchased over 9% of the company and became the top shareholder, prompting an invitation to join the board. He declined, which had many anticipating that he didn’t want to be capped at 14.9% of ownership. Then, he made his offer which the board initially rejected before coming back to the table and making the deal.

This is how things look, but it’s not all true. He didn’t come out on a whim on Twitter to see if people had an appetite for him to own it. He had already initiated the purchase of the stocks a month BEFORE he even mentioned it on his feed. The Tweets about whether or not he should get involved were all for show. As for the board invitation, this was another staged event. He never intended to join the board. He’s not new. He was very well aware what he could or could not do as a board member. Moreover, he could have negotiated with Twitter to join the board without having to buy his way in. They would have taken him in a heartbeat.

The offer was very likely established long before he even filed to buy the initial shares. The board had to balk for Kabuki Theater and to cover up the intentions, but they quickly came back to the table despite no real need to give up so quickly. That brings us to today where he is being ushered in on a donkey like a messiah figure, and the vast majority of conservatives on Twitter are ecstatic about it all.

Again, I’m not saying that’s exactly how it went down. But it’s suspicious that he went through the act of considering buying into Twitter a month after he’d already made his move. It’s also conspicuous when you consider his roots in transhumanism and the Young Global Leaders initiative. I’m still at 50/50 on him at this point.

Nothing changes for us either way. Those who want to use Twitter should continue to do so whether Musk buys the company or not. Those who want to stay off should do so as well. But if he buys Twitter, we should double-down on sharing the truth and exposing the machinations of the New World Order. Whether he’s really a free speech absolutist or not will play out based on whether our attacks against the globalists are allowed to stick.

Remember, that was written over a year ago and I stand by most of it today.

The World Economic Forum is running the show. Whether that’s because Musk has been compromised or if this was the plan all along, we may never know. Use the platform as you wish, but don’t get hooked. Be ready to abandon it when the time comes.

Plugging in a high-ranking member of the globalist elite cabal as CEO should be a crystal clear warning that Twitter is a trojan horse. I don’t care if Tucker Carlson is putting his show there. I wouldn’t care of Donald Trump started Tweeting again. I do not trust Elon Musk and I definitely do not trust Twitter to be the venue for the free expression of controversial ideas. Here is one of the reasons why, detailed by Tom Parker at Reclaim The Net…

Twitter’s likely new CEO, Linda Yaccarino, a World Economic Forum Executive Chair and NBCUniversal advertising executive, recently tried to get Twitter owner Elon Musk to commit to self-censorship and urged him to allow advertisers to feel that they can “influence” Twitter.

During an April 2023 interview with Musk, Yaccarino told Musk that advertisers “need to feel there’s an opportunity for them to influence what you’re building.”

She then proceeded to pressure him to self-censor by not tweeting after 3 am. Musk agreed to try to tweet less after 3 am but partially pushed back against the attempt to influence his speech.

“If I were to say, ‘Yes, you can influence me,’ that would be wrong,” Musk said. “That would be very wrong because that would be a diminishment of freedom of speech.”

Yaccarino disagreed, claiming that “influencing” is “more of an open feedback loop” for advertisers to “help develop Twitter into a place where they will be excited about investing” in areas such as “product development, ad safety, and content moderation.”

However, Musk continued to push back:

“It’s totally cool to say that you want to have your advertising appear in certain places in Twitter and not in other places but it is not cool to try to say what Twitter will do and if that means losing advertising dollars, we lose it, but freedom of speech is paramount.”

Despite Musk making it clear that he felt it was wrong for advertisers to try and influence Twitter, Yaccarino kept trying to press the point.

She asked Musk to recommit to reinstating an “influence council” that allowed advertisers to have “recurring access” to Twitter leadership.

“I would be wary of that creating a backlash among the public,” Musk warned.

Prior to being tapped as the upcoming Twitter CEO, Yaccarino was the Chairman of Global Advertising and Partnerships at NBCUniversal. She has previously served as NBCUniversal’s Chairman of Advertising & Client Partnership and President of Cable Entertainment & Digital Advertising Sales during her almost 12-year tenure with the company.

She also has several ties to the World Economic Forum (WEF), a global group that consistently advocates for the censorship of “misinformation” and supports mass data collection.

In her LinkedIn profile, Yaccarino notes that she’s been a WEF Executive Chair since January 2019. Currently, she’s the Chairman of the WEF’s Taskforce on Future of Work. She also sits on the WEF’s Media, Entertainment, and Culture Industry Governors Steering Committee. Additionally, she is highly engaged with the WEF’s Value in Media initiative. Yaccarino has spoken at the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting about shaping the future of media, entertainment, and culture.

Article cross-posted from Reclaim The Net. Header image CC BY-NC-SA 2.0