Can't stop myself from donating some time translating stuff for the A&N audience. Source [A]
A reader asks:
Of course. It's being censored. Right now, I saw this here on Twitter - again - the original video is from the onset of the year, but to show the effects in Germany:
Interior minister Nancy Faeser is saying: "First we want to uncover the financial connections of right wing extremist networks. So far, on the operative level, we have done this through the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution [which is subservient to the interior ministry], but we are lacking further legal means, because so far it is solely linked to violence. We want to change this. We want to start from the level of a threat. There, the Federal Constitutional Court has already given us the necessary tool. You need a change in the law for this. We want to tackle this now. Nobody who donates to right wing extremist organizations is permitted to be sure in this not being uncovered. [...] If we have a suspicion that illegal things are being financed with such moneys, or things to subvert the democratic order are being financed, then we can freeze bank accounts. [...] It is especially about the networking in the "new right". And if we can prove that the AfD has connections in these right wing extremist networks of the so-called "new right", then this would have consequences for the AfD."]
I want to point out something else, however - No, wrong, the same thing, but someone else who describes it! Namely: An article by the Brownstone Institute: They Are Scrubbing the Internet Right Now
It's not just about hard censorship, but also the disappearing or getting-your-reach-reduced in search engines and search functions, summaries, media bouquets. Maybe you won't get banned - but you won't get found anymore. No longer seen, no longer read. No longer promoted, no longer financed, demonetized.
But not just the present is being changed - the past is too, like in 1984:
Why is someone attacking archive.org?
Archive.org does nothing but archive websites which are public anyway and thus making copies of (former) real websites accessible.
But who could take issue with that? And why?
The only answer can be that people take issue with the fact that you can see old websites - which have in the meantime been deleted or changed - in their former state. Like in 1984: Whoever retroactively changes newspapers and web articles doesn't like the existence of copies of the original versions.
However, this means that we are facing a big change in propaganda, the narrative, the mainstream. Maybe because they're changing course in some positions and doesn't want evidence of the change to exist. Pattern: Oceania has never been at war with Eurasia.
Either that, or we are facing the extinction of many government-critical sites, and they don't want them to be available in the archive.
But there is much evidence for the hiding of old lies - or wanting to hide lies in the future, so that you can make different claims on a daily basis:
It reminds me of my experiences in the NDR [North German public broadcasting channel] where my question, "what is this hate, which isn't allowed to be an opinion, actually?", got answered "the discourse is deciding that". On a daily basis. Today it's this, tomorrow it's that.
The Internet as we know it is currently being destroyed rapidly.
The future of the Internet is: Bread, circuses, propaganda, and surveillance.
We are being provided streaming, television programs, porn, and political indoctrination. And the Internet is being used to surveil us completely and in every way. What we look at, who we're corresponding with, what we say. Everything. Using AI. They're also working on prohibiting and preventing end-to-end encryption and using AI to surveil everything we say.
It is the Internet the way the Stasi of the GDR would have built it if they had the technical means back then.
Maybe they were simply waiting until they have the technical means.
How censorship is getting ever tighter and the Internet is being scrubbed and choked
A reader asks - Danisch answers.A reader asks:
Of course. It's being censored. Right now, I saw this here on Twitter - again - the original video is from the onset of the year, but to show the effects in Germany:
[translation of the video, for your convenience:Kazim Bridges
@KazimBridges
THE NEXT LEVEL IS BEING LAUNCHED
#Agenda2030
#GreatReset
Faeser [interior minister, notorious radical communist] is using bank account closures as a censorship tool:
NEW LEVEL OF CENSORSHIP
In this video, the German interior minister Nancy Faeser talks about a planned change in the law that allows government agencies to freeze bank accounts of alleged "right wing extremists", even if they committed no violence. Allegedly, "right wing extremist networks" are supposed to be hit financially.
However, reality paints a clear picture:
This law is supposed to serve as a new tool for control and censorship against all critics of the government!!!
It is obvious that the AfD and other critical voices are being targeted because they oppose the agenda. The threatened account closures are being extended to include everyone who isn't conformist and the government uses the accusation of "right wing extremism" to silence people...
This escalation in the name of "democracy" shows the true plan of the government: suppress all kinds of opposition and use targeted methods to cut critics off from financial means.
Such a measure is going far beyond the alleged protection from extremism and directly targets the control and censorship of wrongthinkers. The new law reveals the next level of repression and censorship.
[translator's note: I'm skipping hashtags and shit]
Interior minister Nancy Faeser is saying: "First we want to uncover the financial connections of right wing extremist networks. So far, on the operative level, we have done this through the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution [which is subservient to the interior ministry], but we are lacking further legal means, because so far it is solely linked to violence. We want to change this. We want to start from the level of a threat. There, the Federal Constitutional Court has already given us the necessary tool. You need a change in the law for this. We want to tackle this now. Nobody who donates to right wing extremist organizations is permitted to be sure in this not being uncovered. [...] If we have a suspicion that illegal things are being financed with such moneys, or things to subvert the democratic order are being financed, then we can freeze bank accounts. [...] It is especially about the networking in the "new right". And if we can prove that the AfD has connections in these right wing extremist networks of the so-called "new right", then this would have consequences for the AfD."]
I want to point out something else, however - No, wrong, the same thing, but someone else who describes it! Namely: An article by the Brownstone Institute: They Are Scrubbing the Internet Right Now
It's not just about hard censorship, but also the disappearing or getting-your-reach-reduced in search engines and search functions, summaries, media bouquets. Maybe you won't get banned - but you won't get found anymore. No longer seen, no longer read. No longer promoted, no longer financed, demonetized.
But not just the present is being changed - the past is too, like in 1984:
Why is someone attacking archive.org?
Archive.org does nothing but archive websites which are public anyway and thus making copies of (former) real websites accessible.
But who could take issue with that? And why?
The only answer can be that people take issue with the fact that you can see old websites - which have in the meantime been deleted or changed - in their former state. Like in 1984: Whoever retroactively changes newspapers and web articles doesn't like the existence of copies of the original versions.
However, this means that we are facing a big change in propaganda, the narrative, the mainstream. Maybe because they're changing course in some positions and doesn't want evidence of the change to exist. Pattern: Oceania has never been at war with Eurasia.
Either that, or we are facing the extinction of many government-critical sites, and they don't want them to be available in the archive.
But there is much evidence for the hiding of old lies - or wanting to hide lies in the future, so that you can make different claims on a daily basis:
It reminds me of my experiences in the NDR [North German public broadcasting channel] where my question, "what is this hate, which isn't allowed to be an opinion, actually?", got answered "the discourse is deciding that". On a daily basis. Today it's this, tomorrow it's that.
The Internet as we know it is currently being destroyed rapidly.
The future of the Internet is: Bread, circuses, propaganda, and surveillance.
We are being provided streaming, television programs, porn, and political indoctrination. And the Internet is being used to surveil us completely and in every way. What we look at, who we're corresponding with, what we say. Everything. Using AI. They're also working on prohibiting and preventing end-to-end encryption and using AI to surveil everything we say.
It is the Internet the way the Stasi of the GDR would have built it if they had the technical means back then.
Maybe they were simply waiting until they have the technical means.
