It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


CENSORSHIP: The Universal Language of Dictators

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

+6 more 
posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:11 PM

I don't expect that too many Americans would prefer to discuss our nation in terms of it being a dictatorship. I suspect many individuals 'would never believe it', to the tune of it requiring an outcome mirroring that of the aftermath of Germany in World War 2 to finally come to terms with such a reality... if it were the case. Such a full spectrum discussion of this notion is beyond the scope of this piece, but I do propose a 'thought experiment' of sorts. May we let this "Language of Dictators" metric by itself be the judge, with the history of other dictatorships and their use of coercive censorship as our scale, and where to go from there is up to you.


PROLOGUE: Is there a 'Nazi' lurking inside of YOU?

CHAPTER 1: Human Vs. Nature (Intro to Self-Deception & Brutality)
CHAPTER 2: Politics as a Sadomasochistic (BDSM) Spectator Sport
CHAPTER 3: The 'Patriarchy' is REAL
CHAPTER 4: Dark Mind Sciences: The Cult of PC
CHAPTER 5: HATE Speech Hillary
CHAPTER 6: DNC Paid Riot Squads
CHAPTER 7: 5,000,000+ Strong Civilian "National Service" (SJW) Brigades

CHAPTER 8: CENSORSHIP: The Universal Language of Dictators

Censorship is a precarious 'thing': It can be lies, although it tends to be more about blocking truth (and perspective).

Censorship is a metric of propaganda: The most basic definition of "propaganda" is 'a communiqué meant to persuade (or divert)'. Academically speaking, it's the scientific study and use of persuasive communications. In the sense of this essay, it's important to note that persuasion without a voluntary choice for its subjects becomes coercion.

Likewise, where all human societies use spoken & written language, and all societies can become dictatorships, dictatorships aren't inherent to any specific society or it's micro-language. Instead it transcends into the macro, while descending the societies it takes hold of into the abyss.

And as such censorship is the coercive Language of Control, which is universally spoken naturally by dictators no matter where or when they were from.

Now before we get too far ahead, let's first review the five main classes of censorship:

Corporate censorship occurs when any major corporation makes the decision to implement restrictions on what product manufacturers can produce to reach the free market. They can also suppress what customers can purchase, watch, or hear in conjunction with their relationship with that corporation.

Military censorship is conducted by personnel of our armed forces and they keep our military intelligence and strategies from reaching the enemy. It is utilized to combat espionage and protect our national security. Graphic war photos can also be censored from reaching the media.

Moral censorship is the suppression of materials that the public considers obscene or offensive. Child pornography is restricted in many countries because it is seen as being morally wrong. This is the most common type of censorship, but it is the most problematic as well. The problem with moral censorship is the narrowing definition of obscenity.

Political censorship is when governments or political parties withhold information from their citizens in order to avoid rebellious acts or embarrassment. A more recent form of political censorship is the use of disinformation, which is basically used as a distraction to draw peoples’ attention away from some controversial issue at hand.

Religious censorship is when any material that is considered objectionable to a certain faith is suppressed. A majority of the time, the most dominant religious groups in a particular area or region pose restrictions or limitations on less prevalent ones. Some religions may completely reject the ideas of other groups because they may believe that their content is not appropriate for their religion.

Below we shall take a look at some of the various censorship methods & models of some of the more well known dictatorships since the age of modern mass communications, and towards those ends a full review of the full array of censorship practices from each is beyond the scope of this essay. I'll try to keep the focus of each limited to the unique striking aspects from each case study. None the less, we shall run the gauntlet of history's most damning realms of censorship while bumping up against it's ugly cousin: propaganda. For anybody interested in going beyond this scope I recommend Wikipedia's detailed Censorship by Country series.

NOTICE: This new Mainstream Media (MSM) "FAKE NEWS" agenda that has come into full since the election is what really inspired this project. By leaps & bounds it's the most pressing post-election trend, which in my well informed view is the most dangerous censorship precedent our nation has ever faced. It's so critically important for everyone to fully comprehend the implications of this situation I'm compelled to insert it at the top here so that nobody misses it. I will mention it a bit at the very end, while I have two new chapters coming right up that deal specifically with the "fake news" subject of times past and present that run the entire gauntlet of propaganda and censorship in the United States over the past century. .

Censorship Under The House of Saud (1726-current):

To allow the construction of places of worship other than Islamic ones in Saudi Arabia, it would be like asking the Vatican to build a mosque inside of it.
-Kind Abdullah

edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:11 PM

The House of Saud has been around for hundreds of years, and as such it's an interesting case study for anyone wanting to review old world practices of the past that still go on in the present. The fact that the House of Bush and House of Clinton are unapologetic cronies of the House of Saud makes the story all the more grand, especially considering the House of Clinton is at the forefront of the recent "Fake News" censorship push here in the United States (which supposedly isn't a dictatorship). Meanwhile, in all of the above the brutally undeniable reality is that Saudi Arabia is essentially the go to model of a theocratic Islamic monarchy, whereas Islam in general is the most drippingly oppressive model of a censorful society that can be imagined. When to the majority of the members of this religion slash culture slash political ideology the idea of drawing a cartoon image of Muhammed is strictly off limits (even if in an non-offensive manner), to the tune of it being punishable by death (even in the United States), what hope of freedom of expression might one expect from the House of Saud?

Saudi Arabia has one of the most censored media environments in the world, according to Freedom House, an advocacy group that monitors the freedom in the countries around the world. The content in Saudi Arabia's domestic mass media is under the control of the government, having to pass through censors before it makes it on air or in print. Furthermore, while the press is said to be privately owned, the editor-in-chief of each newspaper is appointed by the government.

Furthermore, the government has some of the strictest Internet practices in the world. Criticism of the government, the royal family, or religious leaders and their decisions tends to not be tolerated, and does not pass the censors. In some cases, it can lead to journalists being banned and news offices closing in the kingdom.

In this tightly-controlled media environment, there is much that cannot be said.

Saudis are looking elsewhere for uncensored news and entertainment. They are finding it through satellite signals. Even though technically it is illegal to own a satellite dish in the country, the skyline of every city is dotted with them on people's rooftops.

Censorship Under Vladimir Lenin (1917-1924):

Freedom of the press’ in bourgeois society means freedom for the rich systematically, unremittingly, daily, in millions of copies, to deceive, corrupt and fool the exploited and oppressed mass of the people, the poor.

The Russian Revolution started 'it all' for the global rise of Socialism & Communism. It went on to prove how 'pure Socialism' (Communism) has to be enforced to make everyone in a large system comply, and that enforcement begins with censorship. From there the formula is simple really: the more 'pure' the Communism the most Total the brutal Authoritarianism required to establish and maintain it. One of the first precedents they had to enact was revising their own history, to which ends destroying pre-Communist literature was the model. It only went downhill from there of course, especially the more 'pure' system that followed Lenin's death.

Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production and centralized planning. Socialism grows directly out of capitalism; it is the first form of the new society. Communism is a further development or "higher stage" of socialism.

Destruction of printed matter
The Soviet government implemented mass destruction of pre-revolutionary and foreign books and journals from libraries. Only "special collections" (spetskhran), accessible by special permit granted by the KGB, contained old and politically incorrect material.[2] Towards the end of Soviet rule, perestroika led to loosened restrictions on information and publishing. Soviet books and journals also disappeared from libraries according to changes in Soviet history. Often Soviet citizens preferred to destroy politically incorrect publications and photos, because those connected to them frequently suffered persecution.

Lenin’s Theory of the Press
The “ultimate mastermind” behind the Bolsheviks’ power was Vladimir Ulyanov, better known by his nom de guerre, Lenin. For the future development of Russia, perhaps no-one has been as influential. For Lenin, the party press was an integral part of the party apparatus and firmly linked with its organizational and agitational function. In the famous passage in Where to Begin?, an article published in Iskra, Lenin stresses that a newspaper “is not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, it is also a collective organizer.” (Lenin [1901].)
The origins of Lenin’s theory of the press have to be seen as lying in general traditions of the socialist movement (Sparks 1998, 47). Lenin did not study only the works of German Marxists. Lenin’s media strategy was worked out on the experience of the Paris Commune of 1871. In Lenin’s view, the leaders of the Commune did not undertake tough enough measures against the opposition press, and failed entirely at the time with their own counter-propaganda. Therefore, the Commune was defeated. Lenin envisaged the closure of alien publications as a priority for Bolsheviks after seizing power, to prevent a repetition of the situation which led to the collapse of the Paris Commune. (Strovsky and Simons 2007, 4.) The Bolsheviks headed firmly towards socialism and they did not want that anything would stop them. They had a revolution to make.
Many of the measures were very probably meant to be only temporary, and to be lifted when ”the time is right” and the society is more stable. The Bolshevik power relied on political censorship (which could be considered originating from the second and third “elements” described above). Political censorship can be considered the strongest form of censorship in a sense that political power can lay down restrictions which affect the society as a whole. Still, moral censorship (here manifesting itself as the first of the “elements”) is the one that really controls people’s minds. It is not so visible than the political form of censorship, however important. On the one hand, censorship is suppression: the control of official powers on content, release and distribution of printing products so that ominous ideas could not be accepted by society. On the other hand, censorship is one of institutionalization of human culture: an attribute of the relationship between the state and the public.


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:11 PM

The influences affecting Bolsheviks attitudes and practices on censorship could be arranged in three underlying “elements” that the Bolshevik censorship laid its foundations on:
(1) First, the Russian, historical element: the censorship by the tsarist regime, the conventions, the structures Bolsheviks inherited from the old regime, and social traditions.
(2) The second element in Bolsheviks’ censorship was ideological, namely Socialist element. It presented a change towards the previous practices. Ideologically, the Bolsheviks were strongly influenced by the Social Democratic Party of Germany and its organizational practices and principles.
(3) The third element is circumstantial, the practices developed in the wartime, and the need to hold the power – the measures needed to save the revolution. -in-russia/

Censorship in the Soviet Union was pervasive and strictly enforced. Censorship was performed in two main directions:
-State secrets were handled by the General Directorate for the Protection of State Secrets in the Press (also known as Glavlit), which was in charge of censoring all publications and broadcasting for state secrets
-Censorship, in accordance with the official ideology and politics of the Communist Party was performed by several organizations:
>Goskomizdat censored all printed matter: fiction, poetry, etc.
>Goskino, in charge of cinema
>Gosteleradio, in charge of radio and television broadcasting
>The First Department in many agencies and institutions, such as the State Statistical Committee (Goskomstat), was responsible for assuring that state secrets and other sensitive information only reached authorized hands.

Censorship Under Joseph Stalin (1920's-1954):

It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.

Under Stalin the true scope of Soviet Censorship came to fruition. This was would due to maturity of the system in general, as well as in particular regards to "The Great Purge". That was Stalin's "large-scale purge of the Communist Party and government officials, repression of peasants and the Red Army leadership, widespread police surveillance, suspicion of "saboteurs", imprisonment, and arbitrary executions" in his pursuits of unrivaled control of the USSR. While the initial Great Purge istself is estimated to have been responsible for some 600,000-1,200,000 deaths, the operation of his "Gulag" network of forced labor camps are estimated to have gone on to see the demise of perhaps 20 million persons (including his rivals, dissidents, criminals and so on). Given teh harsh conditions of the Gulag's, greatscores of these people never made it out.

The following condensed snippet from Wikipedia gives a pretty good summary of the freedom of speech & information in the Soviet Union:

Soviet censorship of literature
Works of print such as the press, advertisements, product labels, and books were censored by Glavlit, an agency established on June—6, 1922, to safeguard top secret information from foreign entities. From 1932 until 1952, the promulgation of socialist realism was the target of Glavlit in bowdlerizing works of print, while Anti-Westernization and nationalism were common tropes for that goal. To limit peasant revolts over the Holodomor, themes involving shortages of food were expunged. In the 1932 book “Russia Washed in Blood,” a Bolshevik’s harrowing account of Moscow’s devastation from the October Revolution contained the description, “frozen rotten potatoes, dogs eaten by people, children dying out, hunger,” but was promptly deleted.[3] Also, excisions in the 1941 novel “Cement” were made by eliminating Gleb’s spirited exclamation to English sailors: “Although we’re poverty-stricken and are eating people on account of hunger, all the same we have Lenin.”

Censorship of images

Repressed persons were routinely removed not only from texts, but also from photos, posters and paintings.

[Censorship of images in the Soviet Union was widespread in the USSR. Visual censorship was exploited in a political context, particularly during the political purges of Joseph Stalin, where the Soviet government attempted to erase some purged figures from Soviet history, and took measures which included altering images and destroying film. The USSR curtailed access to pornography, which was specifically prohibited by Soviet law.]

Soviet censorship of film
Censorship of film was commonplace since the USSR’s inception. Beginning with the Russian Civil War (1917-1922), censoring film effectively advanced socialist realism, a mode of art production that positively portrays socialism and constituents of socialist nations. As propaganda tools against the masses—particularly the illiterate—themes of Anti-Westernization and nationalism depicted socialist realism in films by negatively portraying elements of capitalist countries while positively depicting the Soviet Union. Elements of Anti-Westernization included censoring religion and technological superiority, while signs of weakness in the Soviet military like lost battles or frightened soldiers were expurgated to further nationalistic goals. Nationalism was also achieved by obfuscating the reality of the Holodomor in order both to prevent exposing information to the West about the inhumane collectivization and to discourage peasant revolt. Film censorship peaked during the rule of Stalin (1941-1953). Acting as the chief censor for films, Stalin was demanding meticulous revisions in a way befitting his interpretation, as if a co-author. One famous letter Stalin wrote to Alexander Dovzhenko pertained to The Great Citizen, a film about the purge trials. Stalin's letter made several intrusive revisions on the characters, props, and vital scenes such that the entire film needed restructuring.[9] More moderate cases were recorded, such as a picture by Ivan Pyryev, where Stalin only changed the title from Anka to The Party Card. However, movies which Stalin thought did not cohere with socialist realism were denied being released to the public.


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:12 PM

Control over information
All media in the Soviet Union were controlled by the state including television and radio broadcasting, newspaper, magazine and book publishing. This was achieved by state ownership of all production facilities, thus making all those employed in media state employees. This extended to the fine arts including the theater, opera and ballet. Art and music was controlled by ownership of distribution and performance venues. ...Possession and use of copying machines was tightly controlled in order to hinder production and distribution of samizdat, illegal self-published books and magazines. Possession of even a single samizdat manuscript such as a book by Andrei Sinyavsky was a serious crime which might involve a visit from the KGB. Another outlet for works which did not find favor with the authorities was publishing abroad. It was the practice of libraries in the Soviet Union to restrict access to back issues of journals and newspapers more than three years old.

Jamming of foreign radio stations
Due to the appearance of the foreign radio stations broadcasting in Russian and inaccessible for censorship, as well as appearance of a large number of shortwave receivers, massive jamming of these stations was applied in USSR using high-power radio-electronic equipment. It continued for almost 60 years. Soviet radio censorship network was the most powerful in the world.

Censorship Under Adolf Hitler (1934-1945):

The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.

Nazi era propaganda & censorship is likely the most well studied in general, and described on TV. Indeed, one can hardly envision a historical diorama of propaganda & censorship without figurines wearing Nazi uniforms being present in the exhibit. In the past, when viewing Third Reich documentaries, I've always slanted my perception bias around studying Nazi propaganda techniques. For this project I reviewed many documentaries with censorship being my focus, and to my own surprise it turns out censorship itself played a major role in the very origins of the rise of Nazism.

The Nazi Party began building a mass movement. From 27,000 members in 1925, the Party grew to 108,000 in 1929. The SA was the paramilitary unit of the Party, a propaganda arm that became known for its strong arm tactics of street brawling and terror. The SS was established as an elite group with special duties within the SA, but it remained inconsequential until Heinrich Himmler became its leader in 1929. By the late twenties, the Nazi Party started other auxiliary groups. The Hitler Youth, the Student League and the Pupils' League were open to young Germans. The National Socialist Women's League allowed women to get involved. Different professional groups--teachers, lawyers and doctors--had their own auxiliary units.
... Party propaganda proved effective at winning over university students, veterans' organizations, and professional groups, although the Party became increasingly identified with young men of the lower middle classes.

Nazism being a sort of spawn of censorship came in two forms. First, it was World War 1 propaganda & censorship that had the German people with the false impression of being on the verge of victory when all the sudden, to the shock of the entire nation, came out of no where a swift surrender and humiliating defeat. Given the shock we've all witnessed this year post-election, with the Hillary supporters rioting and having cry-ins, this all sounds familiar. Second, after Hitler's early failed coup attempt, for a few years he was banned from public speaking. He went on to use this very well-deserved censorship in his rise to power martyrdom speeches. What irony there, that censorship would promptly become a mainstay of the Nazi Propaganda Model.

Once the Nazi's were in power, their censorship is mostly similar to the summary of Soviet censorship, although more in tune with Nazi's unique 'architecture of aggression' style. Aside from 'style points', the other key difference between Nazi & Soviet censorship & propaganda is their obsession with Identity Politics.

Degenerate Art
Degenerate art (German: Entartete Kunst) was a term adopted by the Nazi regime in Germany to describe Modern art. Such art was banned on the grounds that it was un-German, Jewish, or Communist in nature, and those identified as degenerate artists were subjected to sanctions. These included being dismissed from teaching positions, being forbidden to exhibit or to sell their art, and in some cases being forbidden to produce art.

Nazi anti-Jewish policy functioned on two primary levels: legal measures to expel the Jews from society and strip them of their rights and property while simultaneously engaging in campaigns of incitement, abuse, terror and violence of varying proportions. There was one goal: to make the Jews leave Germany.
Ceremonial public book burnings took place throughout Germany. Many books were torched solely because their authors were Jews. The exclusion of Jews from German cultural life was highly visible, ousting their considerable contribution to the German press, literature, theater, and music.
Jews were banned from universities; Jewish actors were dismissed from theaters; Jewish authors’ works were rejected by publishers; and Jewish journalists were hard-pressed to find newspapers that would publish their writings. Famous artists and scientists played an important role in this campaign of dispossession and party labeling of literature, art, and science. Some scientists and physicians were involved in the theoretical underpinnings of the racial doctrine.

They pioneered Identity Politics, compared to anything that came before it (which unfortunately has been mimicked on occasion since). Many would quickly point out their obsessive racism, but that was only one key plank of the Nazi Social Identity Model (NSIM). Where before them nations and groups would stress group identities around nationality, or religion, or political party, or race, the Nazi's merged all of these core identities into one. I've still yet to see a description of this model put into such plain terms, but I've been harping and warning about this practice [url=]for about a decade.


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:12 PM

The model is quite brilliant both in terms of fostering an impossible to crush sense of social group solidarity, and for installing a social schema of endemic self-censorship. Where many have a simple ideology as their group identity, with the NSIM Ideology they merged the social group solidarity concepts of nation & government & party & race and ultimately religion as one. Consider if one wanted to criticize one of the Hitler's policies, well that would mean they were being anti-Nazi Party, which means they were also being unpatriotically anti-German, where "German" had been spun into being both the national race and religion. This goes far beyond them just "being white", or "black": their nationality had been spun into being a distinct "race"... and "religion"! The religion part wasn't even merely the total impact from the NSIM Model, it grew to being quite literal following the Nazi's pageantry and ideals of being a divine "super race", and more. The Nazi's certainly pushed the Cult of Personality model... to the highest points with Hitler being the destiny demigod. What I call the Nazi Social Identity Model (NSIM), to me that is the ultimate warning from history to never repeat (above the common & simple terms of them being racist nationalists wielding centralized propaganda). That was the propaganda (and you have been warned).

So along all of those lines was framed their censorship. One of the more famous examples of Nazi censorship was the Book Burnings. Where the Communists were known to 'quietly' 'destroy' works from the times before Communism, the Nazi's Book Burnings where public spectacles of affairs. They mainly took place in 'all' of the various schools, led by the Brownshirt's, the students would pile into the bonfires every single book authored by Jew's.

Censorship in Nazi Germany was extreme and strictly enforced by the governing Nazi Party. It was implemented by the Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels. All media—literature, music, newspapers, and public events—were censored. Attempts were also made to censor private communications, such as mail and even private conversation, with mixed results.

The aim of censorship under the Nazi regime was simple: to reinforce Nazi power and to suppress opposing viewpoints and information. Punishments ranged from banning of presentation and publishing of works to deportation, imprisonment, or even execution in a concentration camp. Hitler outlined his theory of propaganda and censorship in Mein Kampf: "The chief function of propaganda is to convince the masses, whose slowness of understanding needs to be given time so they may absorb information; and only constant repetition will finally succeed in imprinting an idea on their mind."

On April 8, 1933, the Main Office for Press and Propaganda of the German Student Union proclaimed a nationwide "Action against the Un-German Spirit", which was to climax in a literary purge or "cleansing" ("Säuberung") by fire. Local chapters were to supply the press with releases and commissioned articles, sponsor well-known Nazi figures to speak at public gatherings, and negotiate for radio broadcast time. On the 8th of April, the Student Union also drafted the Twelve Theses which deliberately evoked Martin Luther and the historic burning of "Un-German" books at the Wartburg festival on the 300th anniversary of the posting of Luther's Ninety-Five Theses. The theses called for a "pure" national language and culture. Placards publicized the theses, which attacked "Jewish intellectualism", asserted the need to "purify" German language and literature, and demanded that universities be centres of German nationalism. The students described the "action" as a response to a worldwide Jewish "smear campaign" against Germany and an affirmation of traditional German values.

Censorship Under Mao Zedong (1945-1976):

To read too many books is harmful.

Mao era censorship sounds a lot like Soviet censorship, although it went on to have more of an emphasis towards 'culture'. Communist censorship is interesting in that revisions of their own cultural histories is core to the model, meanwhile in their propaganda they had crafted a pejorative term "Revisionism" where "Revisionists" where those whom tried to "water down" Marxism / Communism into ideologically or economically impure heresy.

The goal of the Cultural Revolution was to get rid of the "four olds" ("old customs," "old culture," "old habits," and "old ideas"). If newspapers touched on sensitive topics like these, the journalists were subject to arrests and sometimes violence. Libraries in which there were books containing "offensive literature" would often be burned down. Television was regulated by the government and its goal was to encourage the efforts of chairman Mao Zedong and the Communist Party. Radio was the same way, and played songs such as, "The Great Cultural Revolution is Indeed Good".

Media censorship in China goes hand in hand with the rise of the communist party in China paralleling with the rise of the revolutionary leader, Mao Zedong. After World War I ended in 1918, Mao quietly started building up forces against the nationalist government that ruled China at the time. In 1927 the nationalist party enforced the “white terror”, a long march that drove the communist party to an area known as Shaanxi Province. The reason the “white terror” occurred was to try to drive away the communists. This idea backfired as the communist party was now all in one place, allowing them to recruit followers and creates a home base. Most people who were loyal to the communist party during the nationalist sweep in China were large supporters of Mao later on[2]. During this time, Mao used tactics such as strengthening the military and using deceiving propaganda. These popular propaganda posters helped enforce that Mao was supposedly creating a patriotic movement as a way to gain followers. Shown in the illustrations, Mao used images to promote himself as a thoughtful leader. Considering all the positive promotion Mao used, the Chinese people were unaware that the rise of Mao was also the rise of communism. Little by little their freedoms were being with held and censored[3]. During World War II, the nationalist and communist parties of China teamed up to fight against Japan. As China was recovering from the War, Mao’s Red Army attacked the People’s Liberation Army, the Nationalist Party, in 1949[4]. Mao took control of the big cities in China, prompting a civil war. The communist party promised to redistribute land to the citizens if they won the war, which gained the interest of most of the “common” people. Eventually the communist party won and took control of China, making Mao the new leader. Since Mao was a well-liked leader, the Chinese were oblivious to the fact that his dictatorship entailed censorship.


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:12 PM

Censorship in the USA during the Cold War (1947-1991):

McCarthyism is Americanism with its sleeves rolled.
-Joseph McCarthy

The complete history of propaganda & censorship under the Cold War is a long & ugly affair, which is a key subject in the next chapter in this series. For now:

Literature Censorship
The most popular form of censorship through the ages, the censorship of literature in the 1950s saw an effort to ban not only classics, but also newly emerging comic books and college curricula. During the 1950s horror comic books were scrutinized as a corrupting force on the minds of young people, an issue overseen by the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenal Delinquency, which sought to ban comic books. Educational literature became a particular target of censorship efforts due to the influence of McCarthyism, an inquisition headed by Sen. Joseph McCarthy to oust communists and communist sympathizers. Several works that became targets of both local and widespread censorship during the 1950s include J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye," Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" and "The Invisible Man" by Ralph Ellison.

Music Censorship
The 1950s saw an increase in music censorship as radio made new kinds of music available to wider audiences. While music had always drawn the attention of would-be censors, the emergence of new music, including rhythm and blues, drew particular attention. Those who fought to censor music considered R&B;, among other genres, a socially corrupting influence. Some other factors that led to the censorship of music in the 1950s included race, fear and the generation gap. Several examples of music censorship in the 1950s, according to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, include ABC radio's banning of Billy Holiday's song "Love for Sale," because it was believed to promote prostitution; censorship of the rock band The Weevers for their perceived leftist views; and the refusal of Chicago radios stations to play R&B; music after receiving thousands of letters calling it "dirty."

Film Censorship
Like music, the technology that made new innovations in film possible in the 1950s also drew the attention of groups that fought to censor the silver screen. According to the American Bar Association, film was especially weak against attempts to censor its material due to a 1950s Supreme Court ruling, Burstyn v. Wilson, that found the film industry deserved no constitutional protection. Notably, in addition to outside censorship, the film industry between the 1930s and the 1960s had a system of self-censorship, much like the modern ratings system, that determined what was and was not acceptable in movies. Two notable films that drew the attention of censors in the 1950s, according to the ACLU, were "A Street Car Named Desire," which had morally ambiguous characters, and "African Queen," which perpetuated “immoral” relationships between characters.

Workplace Censorship
Censorship in the 1950s was not reserved solely for the arts, but also affected the workplaces of many Americans. Those who were believed to hold subversive or dangerous views were often banned from the workplace. Notably, the fear of communism in the 1950s was a motivating factor in much workplace censorship. Workplace censorship extended particularly to teachers, who many feared would use their position to influence the minds of children. The workplace censorship of teachers in the 1950s was upheld by the Supreme Court ruling in Adler v. Board of Education, which held that it was a necessary measure to protect children.

Censorship Under 'The House Of Kim' (1948-current):

No production of high ideological and artistic value can evolve out of a creative group whose members are not united ideologically and in which discipline and order have not been established.
-Kin Jong Il

They truly have 'lived the Communist dream' over there, haven't they? Above all other Communist social experiments, the regime there had managed to maintain the pure version of 'itself'. None of that "Revisionist" heresy like with the other Communist nations. Just pure, strict, Total Communism. To those ends propaganda has been key, but been censorship has also been every bit crucial to maintain their dystopia.

Censorship in North Korea (the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) ranks among some of the most extreme in the world, with the government able to take strict control over communications. The country is routinely ranked at the bottom of the World Press Freedom Index Rankings published annually by Reporters Without Borders. From 2007 to 2016, North Korea has been listed second to last (behind Eritrea) of some 180 countries, and from 2002 through 2006 it was listed as the worst in the world.
Radio or television sets, which can be bought in North Korea, are preset to receive only the government frequencies and sealed with a label to prevent tampering with the equipment. It is a serious criminal offense to manipulate the sets and receive radio or television broadcasts from outside North Korea. In a party campaign in 2003, the head of each party cell in neighborhoods and villages received instructions to verify the seals on all radio sets.
In 2006, Julien Pain, head of the Internet Desk at Reporters Without Borders, described North Korea as the world's worst Internet black hole in its list of the top 13 Internet


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:13 PM

Journalism in North Korea
To become a journalist in North Korea, one has to graduate from college. After an ideology review and a strict background check, the student is drafted by the college dean and the managers. The drafted journalist will normally go through a probation period of 4 to 5 years and is then stationed after an assessment.

In North Korea, journalism as a job is to guard, defend, and advocate for and defend both the party and party head's ideologically. Since the role is defined as being a political activist and a fighter who can mobilize a crowd, a journalist in North Korea should be a true Kim Il-sung-ist and a fervent political activist, with a war correspondent spirit and political qualification. Journalists in North Korea are reeducated continuously.

The organization that takes charge of the reeducation of journalists in North Korea is the 'Chosen Reporter Alliance.' It is the strongest and the most systematized organization among the reporters and journalists' political idea education organizations. Usually the organization trains journalists and reporters intensively on philosophy, economics, world history, world literature, foreign language, etc.

Arguing about the contradictions in the system of North Korea itself is considered treason and is treated as a major violation in North Korean society. Over 70 percent of reports of Korean Central Broadcasting are allotted for Kim's idolization and propaganda system. The rest of the reports are spent on blaming and predicting the collapse of the United States, Japan, and South Korea. The Reporters in North Korea spend their time writing flattering articles about Kim. Kim Jong il used to punish the people who wrote from different point of view, saying "Words describe one's ideas." After reeducation, a journalist who works for over 15 years and has made a major contribution is titled a 'distinguished journalist.'

Censorship Under The Zionist Regime (1948-current):

There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies ­not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience.
-Moshe Katsav

The case of Israel is a rather unique example of censorship. Their state based censorship initiatives have global reach. I've never kept too close of an eye on the tedious happenings over there, and there are many angles to this section in general, so its hard to say for sure where to best begin. Zionists aren't going to appreciate my work here, but let me state this is the first time I've ever bothered to type this up despite having recognized it about a decade ago.

I have no greater pet peeve than Identity Politics when it comes social engineering & propaganda as evidenced in my many critiques of the 'new' progressive Political Correctness 'dogma' that also follows this same basic model (which I've also criticized the Neocons along the same lines in the past), but not even to such parallel precision as the Zionists: That is, they have merged the concepts of nation & government & ideology & religion & race as one. In social psychology terms, this is tantamount to pure cultish mind control. I cant speak to how it works over there, but I've seen more than enough of how things work over here to get it. If anybody anywhere criticizes the practices of the Israeli government, then they are faced with a typically vitriolic smear campaign as being "anti-semites" (which is a twisted up jumble of religion & race). Images of the Holocaust tend to get conjured up, and them being "God's People" will go thrown at you if you're really lucky. Even Jewish rabbi's are forbidden from criticizing the regime:
So in short, this political ideology is a globally hegemonic (imperialistic) style censorship schema, that has a zero tolerance policy of criticique, whether it be the basic premise of Zionism in general, or even it's most brutally apartheid (for example) practices.

I have been labelled by the ADL as a “rabid Anti Semite.”
And Real Jew News has been harassed by the “Anti Defamation League” by intimidating my last two Web Hosting Companies and causing them to shut down Real Jew News without warning. I have incurred much expense both in money & time because of the ADL’s intimidation tactics. Americans are asking, “Why does the ADL hate us?” They hate us right here in our Internet chambers - a bastion of free speech. The ADL hates our freedoms - - our freedom to publicly display our love of Christmas, our freedom of speech, our freedom to have the press publicize all available presidential candidates, our freedom to disagree over US policy towards Israel. The ADL indeed hates our freedom to disagree over US policy towards Israel. An example of this is illustrated in the incident known as “The Judt Affair.” On October 4 2006, a renowned NYU historian by the name of Tony Judt was scheduled to speak at the Polish Consulate in Manhattan. Judt was to give a talk on the Israel Lobby & planned to argue that the Israel Lobby stifles honest debate.

Canadian censorship: Palestinian ‘disappearing land’

Canada’s Jewish population is relatively small — some 370,000. About half live in Toronto and a quarter in Montreal. But what it lacks in numbers, it possesses in the ferocity of its organized community’s defense of what they see as Israel’s interests. For example, the organized Jewish community has tried to keep Queers Against Israeli Apartheid out of the city’s annual Gay Pride parade since the group was founded in 2008. Although it sometimes came up to the wire, so far the group has marched in every Parade. In the latest effort to muzzle critics of Israel, as the Electronic Intifada reports, “The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) has rejected a group’s bus ad showing Israel’s appropriation of Palestinian land over time, claiming the ad could incite anti-Jewish discrimination and violence,” as if it is the information rather than the practice itself that’s the problem. Not to be left behind, Canada’s second city, Montreal, has ramped up censorship of Israel’s critics.


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:13 PM

Censorship Under Soviet Rule [East Germany] (1949-1990):

The press is our chief ideological weapon.
-Nikita Khrushchev

The Wikipedia page for Censorship in East Germany is as long as the main USSR page. Indeed, the Berlin Wall itself was a mechanization of censorship. Over the years artists tagged it with expected political art. And on that note, this would be a good time to zoom in on Soviet Bloc art censorship.

Censorship was one of the GDR’s worst kept secrets. Everyone knew that the arts were censored, but the word censorship was still taboo. The GDR’s leaders spoke instead of ‘planning’ cultural processes and ‘protecting’ socialist art, and they constantly reminded artists of their ‘responsibility’ not to damage the state or its reputation. Functionaries avoided the word ‘verboten’: when they did ban films or plays, they referred euphemistically to ‘administrative measures’ and ‘instructions’, and in most cases theatre managers officially took the decision to ‘cancel’ performances.

After the GDR collapsed, few people admitted to having acted as censors. Instead, the functionaries in charge of overseeing film, literature or theatre tended to argue that they had made things possible and had prevented worse excesses from taking place. This was not just to self-delusion, but reflects the fact that their roles included both the promotion and the restriction of culture. The GDR had a vibrant theatre scene, and some new plays were only staged because state and Party officials had taken a calculated risk. But this was scant consolation to those theatre practitioners who had their projects cancelled or banned, were unable to secure work, and found themselves subjected to Stasi surveillance and intimidation.
In the GDR, theatre practitioners and other artists faced the worst of both worlds: they suffered all the controls of censorship, with none of the securities. Theatre managers, directors, dramatists and publishers were held personally liable for their work, even though productions and publications had been filtered through prior controls. So if cultural officials misjudged the political climate and a theatre production generated a scandal, the company would be left to face the music alone.

Censorship Under The Castro Regime (1959-current):

The universities are available only to those who share my revolutionary beliefs.

Cuba, like Saudi Arabia, is a good example of how censorship itself becomes a anti-modernity mechanism. There do exist cell phones there, of course, yet the government even filters TXT messages on phones!

The Cuban Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, belief, conscience, speech, and press; grants rights of assembly, demonstration, and association; and recognizes the freedom and full dignity of man and the enjoyment of the people’s rights. Yet the Cuban Human Rights and National Reconciliation Commission estimates that there were more than 4,000 arbitrary detentions in Cuba in 2013 related to free press, expression, and association. Cuba’s communist regime has refused to grant its citizens the right to free speech, free expression, and free assembly.

The government censors books, newspapers, radio stations, music, movies, television, and internet, restricting access to materials that criticize or fail to support its regime. Cuba has one of the lowest internet penetration rates in the world, and the International Telecommunication Union ranks Cuba 125 out of 166 countries in telecommunications development.

As recently as September of this year, the Cuban government has refused to guarantee Cuban freedom of speech or peaceful assembly for native Cubans. They also have denied the right to free activity for human rights defenders, those in opposition to the government, and even independent journalists. The UN Human Right Council formulated 292 recommendations for the Cuban government, but the level of freedom of speech for Cubans has still seen little to no improvement. The Cuban government has continued to implement laws that prevent freedom of speech or expression.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes freedom of speech as a human right for all. Historically, the freedom of speech has been a realized right for various peoples and societies throughout the ages, but to this day, the Cuban people are limited in their freedom of speech. With oppressive censorship from the Cuban government, the citizens of this island nation will never have that freedom unless things radically change. We are calling for major government reform in this area of Cuban freedom of speech.

Today only 25 per cent of Cubans use the internet, while only five per cent of homes are connected. -Amnesty International

Censorship In Modern China (1976-current):

Strengthening Internet regulation is the will of the people.
-Xi Jinping's Regime

The various faces of oppression under Communist regime of China are well known, but did you know that in the press, as 'needed', they even censor the words their own president!

Given the rise in popularity of of not just Socialism,but even Communism in the USA in recent years, how easily has modern history apparently forgotten about the Tiananmen Square Protests of 1989:

The protests were forcibly suppressed after the government declared martial law. In what became widely known as the Tiananmen Square Massacre, troops with assault rifles and tanks killed at least several hundred demonstrators trying to block the military's advance towards Tiananmen Square. The number of civilian deaths has been estimated at anywhere between the hundreds to the thousands. ...The students called for democracy, greater accountability, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech, though they were loosely organized and their goals varied. At the height of the protests, about a million people assembled in the Square.

... ...


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:13 PM

... ...
The Communist Party of China (CPC) forbids discussion of the Tienanmen Square protests, and has taken measures to block or censor related information. Textbooks have little, if any, information related to the protests. Following the protests, officials banned controversial films and books, and shut down a large number of newspapers. Within a year, 12 percent of all newspapers, 8 percent of publishing companies, 13 percent of social science periodicals and more than 150 films were banned or shut down. In addition, the government also announced it had seized 32 million contraband books and 2.4 million video and audio cassettes.[208] Access to media and internet resources on the subject are restricted or blocked by censors. Banned literature and films include Summer Palace,[210] Forbidden City, Collection of June Fourth Poems, The Critical Moment: Li Peng diaries, and any writings of Zhao Ziyang or his aide Bao Tong, including Zhao's memoirs. However, contraband and internet copies of these publications can be found.

China's constitution affords its citizens freedom of speech and press, but the opacity of Chinese media regulations allows authorities to crack down on news stories by claiming that they expose state secrets and endanger the country. The definition of state secrets in China remains vague, facilitating censorship of any information that authorities deem harmful (PDF) to their political or economic interests. CFR Senior Fellow Elizabeth C. Economy says the Chinese government is in a state of “schizophrenia” about media policy as it “goes back and forth, testing the line, knowing they need press freedom and the information it provides, but worried about opening the door to the type of freedoms that could lead to the regime's downfall.”

In May 2010, the government issued its first white paper on the Internet that emphasized the concept of “Internet sovereignty,” requiring all Internet users in China, including foreign organizations and individuals, to abide by Chinese laws and regulations. Chinese Internet companies are now required to sign the “Public Pledge on Self-Regulation and Professional Ethics for China Internet Industry,” which entails even stricter rules than those in the white paper, according to Jason Q. Ng, a specialist on Chinese media censorship and author of Blocked on Weibo.

Today, although the society has far more liberty, the censorship metrics have hardly changed in decades. If anything, "news" on this subject in the meantime is more towards how American tech companies have even bowed to the Communist Chinese Censorship Model. Considering in recent years these same tech companies have wrapped their own domestic propaganda around trendy Social Justice, this fact screams pure hypocrisy down in Silicon Valley.

The CEOs of Apple, Google, Microsoft, and other major technology firms should press Chinese President Xi Jinping and Internet czar Lu Wei to reverse their expansion of surveillance, censorship, and data collection, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter.

China Presses Tech Firms to Police the Internet
Picture an internet where tech companies are deputized as crime-fighters, where censors keep radical views in check and where governments work together to achieve global order in cyberspace.

That is China’s vision, and its third-annual World Internet Conference that ended Friday was aimed at proselytizing that view to tech executives and government leaders who assembled here from around the world.

China’s efforts to promote its concept of the internet had fresh resonance as Western minds now debate whether social media sites should screen out fake news, or if smartphone makers should help police gain access to the secrets locked away in the devices of suspected criminals.

Censorship Under Saddam Hussein (1979-2003):

Politics is when you say you are going to do one thing while intending to do another. Then you do neither what you said nor what you intended.

On account American's refereed to him by his first name, not much background explaining needed here.

Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq as a single-party dictatorship from 1979 - 2003, with the Ba'athist Party being the only lawful party in Iraq. During this era, political criticism or dissent of the Iraqi government was illegal. Similar restrictions against political expression were found in the Iraqi Constitution.

While elections were sometimes held in Iraq during this time period, they essentially "mock" elections with Saddam Hussein as the sole candidate. No legitimate free and fair elections were held in Iraq.

The Iraqi National government was (in accordance with Article 37 of the Constitution of 1990) limited to the membership of the Revolutionary Command Council. Among other powers, this council had (Article 36) the right to prohibit anything that they felt harmed "national unity", the "objectives of the People" or their "achievements".

Censorship Under Vladimir Putin (1999-current):

I don't read books by people who have betrayed the Motherland. -Putin

The modern tale of post-Communist Russian censorship is an interesting one. They've faced a lot of upheaval during the past 25 years. They've been robbed by "Oligrach's". They're constricted by mass corruption and organized crime. Putin just wont go away. Odd social issues from human trafficking to a declining population. All of this despite having 99.7% literacy rates, in the 13th most well educated society in the world.

It's well known that more educated societies breed less children. And as such, Russia has been afflicted with declining populations since the year the USSR collapsed. This has fueled an anti-homosexuality sentiment in the government, which means censorship. This situation became internationally famous, when members of the band "Pussy Riot" were imprisoned for promoting LGBT rights.

In the larger scope, despite having such a high literacy and education rate, it seems the ghosts of Communism still exist in regards to the Internet, as 60% of Russian's support Internet censorship. And to those ends, Putin delivers.


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:13 PM

Nearly half of Russians (49 percent) believe that information on the Internet should be subject to censorship, while 58 percent would not mind it if – in the event of a national threat – the Russian segment of the Internet is shut down completely. This conclusion was reached by the authors of the report "Benchmarking Public Demand: Russia’s Appetite for Internet Control."
Among the most "dangerous" content that should be banned, Russians name homosexual propaganda (59 percent), social network groups linked to organizing anti-government protests (46 percent) and videos by the Pussy Riot band (46 percent).

Censorship Under The Republican National Committee (2001-2009):

See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.

NOTICE: Democrat's in Congress also carry some blame for what follows:

Here we saw the Post-Internet & Post-9/11 Era's come to a head almost at once. Before the Internet, there weren't too many Media outlets for American's, and even less avenues for the mass free exchange of ideas, leaving the citizenry generally clueless about the realities of our world & the world outside of the echo chamber lens by which it was presented to us. "Coincidentally", right about the time the Internet was beginning to mature in terms of width (public access) & breadth (content & scope), the Twin Towers came crashing down and behold we got to experience a modern rendition of the United States under the War Powers Act (meaning more towards de facto Martial law).

Before all of this, back in the days before Cable TV we basically just had 3 major TV networks for visual news. Then there was all the print and the rest as expected (newspapers, magazines, TV & radio stations, books, music, film, wire services & photo agencies). Long story short, there were 50 corporations that owned 90% of all types of media outlets. Today, event though there are now hundreds of TV "channels", aside from the Internet itself, there are only six major corporations that control all of the above! These are the same corporations involved in electioneering our elections (meaning influencing the outcomes of our elections via the never ending barrage of propaganda that all of their print & broadcasting represents).

Following 9/11, the attack on Afghanistan was inherent, and therefore military secrecy in such regards became inherent as well. Meanwhile, the Neocon's had a pre-existing regime change agenda in the Middle East, whih we saw come to a head in Iraq. Along those lines, they tried all the way through Bush's POTUS tenure to push a war with Iran, and there we saw plenty of censorship as well.

Other highlights of anti-Free Speech / Censorship during the Bush Administration era include:
-Flirting with Soviet style revisionism, we saw the White House website undergo numerous rounds of "scrubbing".
-In 2003, Phil Donahue was fired by "liberal media" outlet MSNBC for criticizing the War in Iraq.
-We saw the beginning of the end for Whistleblower Rights. In 2005, the DOJ moved to prosecute anyone involved with leaking information about Bush's illegal domestic wiretapping operations.
-Presidential Memorandum authorizes Telcoms to lie about illegally handing over phone records.
-Many other examples of the Federal Government using private companies to perform spying and other subversive actions that would be illegal if actual government agencies had done it (aka Bush's Private KGB).
-In a classic example of a propaganda euphemism, 'Fox follows Bush's lead, renames domestic spying program as "terrorist surveillance program"'.
-Although the MSM (aka Corporate Media) did go on to cover some of the illegal domestic spying activities of the Federal Government, they still dropped the ball on numerous well documented programs such as "Echelon", "FirstFruits" and plenty of others. Eventually Edward Snowden would come out exposing even more deeper secrets in great detail, which surprisingly the MSM did pick up on, but for many of us none of that came as a surprise. For a decade before that that same MSM had been helping coverup the bulk of this stuff, even to the tune of labeling any of us in the know who tried to talk about it all as "Conspiracy Theorists" (a derogatory term they essentially invented originally to discredit people trying to expose government corruption and the like).
-Google as a startup was funded by NASA, along with the NSA, DARPA, CIA and NSF. Google goes on to be exposed for being totally in cahoots with the NSA (and ther government agencies) in regards to domestic spying. The MSM in general hardly ever lift a finger to help expose these facts. This same trend is well documented with the rest of Silicon Valley Big Tech companies. Google will go on to become essentially part of Obama's cabinet. Today they can be found investing as partners with those same kinds of agencies into new tech startups.

edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:13 PM

For dictatorial measures committed specifically by the Bush Administration, the list is beyond measure, but the following two (outlined) lists cover in-depth plenty of material not yet mentioned:

The Battle for the Control of the Press
A host of recent developments have made it clear that the Bush White House is doing battle against the journalistic standards and practices that underpin of our democracy. With its unprecedented campaign to undermine and stifle independent journalism, Bush & Co. have demonstrated brazen contempt for the Constitution and considerable fear of an informed public. In short, America’s leadership is waging a war against the journalistic standards and practices that underpin not only a free press but our democracy. The Fourth Estate is withering under an unprecedented White House assault designed to intimidate, smear and discredit investigative journalism — and allow the president and his political cronies to lie with impunity.
(major scopes of interest here include

-Infiltrating Public Broadcasting ...
-Manufacturing Fake News ...
-Bribing Journalists ...
-Lying about the Iraq War ...
-Eliminating Dissent in the Mainstream Media ...
-Consolidating Media Control ...

Top Ten Abuses of Power Since 9/11
1. Warrantless Wiretapping ...
2. Torture, Kidnapping and Detention ...
3. The Growing Surveillance Society ...
4. Abuse of the Patriot Act ...
5. Government Secrecy ...
6. Real ID ...
7. No Fly and Selectee Lists ...
8. Political Spying ...
9. Abuse of Material Witness Statute ...
10. Attacks on Academic Freedom ...

Granted, a lot of that was covered in the "News", and yet that which was tended to be given all the attention by the MSM thus ended up as the vehicle to censor the rest.

Censorship Under The Erdoğan Regime (2002-current):

We’ll eradicate Twitter. I don’t care what the international community says. Everyone will witness the power of the Turkish Republic. -Erdoğan

Turkey is a choice example of a modern dictatorship (propped up by the US & NATO). There are multiple nuclear warheads (normally) stored in a NATO base there. Turkey smuggles ISIS's oil for them. Never mind all the human rights violations. And so on.

Despite legal provisions, media freedom in Turkey has steadily deteriorated from 2010 onwards, with a precipitous decline following the attempted coup in June 2016. President Tayyip Erdogan has arrested hundreds of journalists, closed or taken over dozens of media outlets, and prevented journalists and their families from traveling.

In 2013, when large demonstrations against Erdoğan began, some AKP officials were concerned about the growing role of social media in the protests. A number of emails show that since the 2013 Gezi Park protests the AKP has invested in controlling social media, including hiring people to work on Twitter to influence messaging on the platform, despite blocking normal internet access to it for those within Turkey. In 2013 the Wall Street Journal also claimed that the government had formed a 6,000-strong social media team. The emails show that the AKP set up two teams to insert their own propaganda into social media platforms. The proposal for one team consists of coders, graphic designers, script writers and two experts on psychological warfare . A larger team consists of Twitter bot accounts that receive and spread pro-Erdoğan messages on social media . On 28 June 2013 the team initiated one of its first planned hashtag campaigns, “#DirenÇözüm”, using the protestors' keyword “diren” (“resist”), while also suggesting that government wants a peaceful solution. In this email the team sends the hashtag and six possible messages for the AKP trolls to use . According to an 11 January 2016 email, Albayrak was lobbying to keep the third most popular media group in Turkey, Ipek, either under the control of the government or to be sold to a business group close to the government, instead of being returned to its rightful owners . The Ipek Group had been seized by police in October 2015. The email archive details the Turkish government's crackdown on the media, and shows how serious the situation in Turkey really is. Last year the situation deteriorated further when Turkish police commandos uploaded videos of themselves killing people and destroying homes onto social media during the Turkish government's relaunch of armed confrontations against the Kurds. Many Turkish media outlets, already powerless to report on this brazen illegality, became particularly vulnerable just before the November 2015 elections after the break-up of the coalition of the AKP and the Gülen movement, when the government proceeded to forcefully take over Gülen-aligned media. -WikiLeaks "Berat's Box" Email Archive

Censorship Under The Democratic National Committee (2009-2017):

I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes.

NOTICE: Republican's in Congress also carry some blame for what follows:

What I think a lot of people overlook when considering some of the things they'd see Obama's admin up to is how he inherited essentially all of the dictatorial type stuff that Bush had set in place. Keep all of that in mind as rush through some of Obama's highlights. Note that censorship in the US became a complicated subject under Obama, where the 'new Left' became hell bent on what they insist is about "Social Justice" have set about implementing all many of self & authority instilled censorship under the guise of "Political Correctness" (PC). I'll try my best to separate differentiate between Obama admin and societal induced models of censorship. Note that governments attempting to enact political censorship doesn't much surprise me, but the society itself screaming for it I find most extremely disturbing. Then fast forward to the last month of Obama's reign, the MSM & DNC are all about screaming how we need massive government interference and mass scale Internet level censorship such as all across social media, where we're witnessing liberals out in droves out defending the merits of if not outright arguing for this so-called "fake news" narrative despite it already well showing clear signs of being about targeting anti-establishment perspectives and facts.

edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:14 PM

Right out of the gates of Obama's reign, the liberal machine quickly started branding any and all criticisms of Obama's policy initiatives as being "racist". Like with Obamacare, not only were criticisms of it branded racist, but even calling it "Obamacare" was too. What better way to stymie prodction discussions about it if it didn't even have a brand name? This argument still persists in the MSM to this day.

Backtrack to 2007. Here the DNC was stomping all about trying to have the "Fairness Doctrine" implement to put a gag on conservative talk show hosts. This would carry on later as a theme, where a common argument became about silencing people from questioning the nation in which Obama was born in. Note that the controversy itself only persisted the way it did given the dubious handling of releasing his birth certificate, which they could have squashed the story early on, but decided to instead let it go on for years. This played out as political gold, as anyone who dared entertain the whole idea was also silenced in the form of being labelled racists. This same theme would continue on in other ways, such as how the Tea Party movement was smeared inside and out as being purely about racism. Maybe a lot of it was a vehicle for typical left/right mud flinging? Nope! RACIST! Nevermind the fact the Tea Party was born out of a disenfranchised public given ever increasing awareness of the Two Party stranglehold & MSM electioneering over our politics & election process, amongst many other growing ills with the Big Government.

In line with liberal PC, with particular regards to Islam we saw all sorts of odd measures and behaviors on the part of Obama (and then some). Of particular note that has had half the nation scratching it's head for nearly a decade, is how even the phrases "Islamic Extremism" & "Islamic Terrorism" are to be a hush hush phrases, despite the fact that the entire War on Terror is based on it. Whether anyone likes it or not, the US is in a culture & military war with this front, thus making these extremists our enemies, and yet he wont name them. But it goes even further than that. Consider the case of the New Army Manual Orders Soldiers Not To Criticize Taliban. The design there was meant to not merely force the troops in Afghanistan not criticize Islam in general, its was very specific in that they weren't even supposed to discuss “anything related to Islam”, especially not barbaric cultural norms over there such as their well documented pedophilia culture. This whole ordeal was but one in a long list of pro-censorship measures such as url=]U.S. Bans Linking Terrorism To Muslims In Agent Training[/url], the White House ordered a cleansing of training materials that Islamic groups deemed offensive, Loretta Lynch Vows to Prosecute Those Who Use 'Anti-Muslim' Speech That 'Edges Toward Violence', and Federal Government Authorizes Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to Censor “Anti-Islam” Speech; Lawsuit Filed despite there only being less than one anti-Muslim hate crime per 1,000,000 US residents.

Traditional governmental forms of censorship didn't look much better under Obama:

Censorship: 38 journalism groups slam Obama’s ‘politically-driven suppression of news’
In unprecedented criticism of the White House, 38 journalism groups have assailed the president’s team for censoring media coverage, limiting access to top officials and overall “politically-driven suppression of the news.” In a letter to President Obama, the 38, led by the Society of Professional Journalists, said efforts by government officials to stifle or block coverage has grown for years and reached a high-point under his administration despite Obama’s 2008 campaign promise to provide transparency. Worse, they said: As access for reporters has been cut off, the administration has opened the door to lobbyists, special interests and “people with money.” And as a result, they wrote, Obama only has himself to blame for the current cynicism of his administration. “You need look no further than your own administration for a major source of that frustration – politically driven suppression of news and information about federal agencies. We call on you to take a stand to stop the spin and let the sunshine in,” wrote David Cuillier, president of SPJ.

Censorsh ip and Kangaroo Courts: Alive and Well in Obama Administration
As I have reported here before the Obama administration is using kangaroo courts known as military tribunals at the Guantánamo military base. These “legal” proceedings have proven to be an embarrassment to the administration and in its latest move it is trying to silence the media in its reports from Gitmo. The Pentagon has banned four reporters from future Guantánamo Military Commissions’ proceedings for reporting the name of a witness in the pre-trial hearings of Guantánamo detainee Omar Khadr. At these hearings even the government’s own witnesses have revealed some of the abuse that Omar has been subjected to in his years of incarceration in U.S. hellholes. The identity of the witness had already been disclosed in previous news reports and an on-the-record interview he gave in 2008 to the media.

CNN Whistleblower says Obama Admin pays media for censorship and propaganda
“Instead of watchdogging governments around the world, CNN International is earning money from them, producing what might as well be called ‘infomercials-for-dictators’, sponsored shows and content that cast a positive light on some of the world’s most oppressive regimes. With vague disclosures, the news organization is defrauding unsuspecting viewers and its own journalists who often risk their
edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:14 PM

US Government Has Secret Kill Switch for Communications
Someday, your cell phone and internet may suddenly go out, but it will have nothing to do with failing to pay your bills. Unbeknownst to most Americans, the President has the authority to shut down everyone’s internet and phone service in one fell swoop, reports Mother Jones.

Obama’s lawyer threatens TV stations that run NRA ad
Straight out of the Democratic handbook Harry Reid used to threaten ABC’s broadcast license for showing the “Path to 9/11,” here’s Obama lawyer Robert Bauer warning station managers not to air the NRA’s new anti-Obama “Hunter” ad if they want to stay in the FCC’s good graces. Succumbs to Pressure of Obama’s Censorship Regime
Apparently, the Obama Regime has reached down to, one of the most popular blogging sites on the Internet, and has gotten WP to “suspend” Rick Rozoff’s website, Stop NATO. ...However, as Rozoff notes in the above link, “no incitement to violence or other illegal action, no attempt to solicit money and no derogatory statement toward any demographic group have ever appeared” on Stop NATO or its mailing lists.

Trusted News Organization Blasts Obama Administration over Continuing Censorship
AP blogger, Erin Madigan White, wrote: 8 ways the Obama administration is blocking information on Sept. 19, 2014. She quoted AP Washington Bureau Chief Sally Buzbee, who addressed a meeting of American Society of News Editors, the Associated Press Media Editors and the Associated Press Photo Managers. For years, we know Mr. Obama has reneged on his pre-election vow to be transparent. But now, not only the federal government fails to provide information, state and local governments are following his example.

Her eight criticisms:
-There’s a blackout on the war on Islamist terrorists. In previous wars, reporters were even embedded with the troops.
-The administration won’t let journalists observe meetings with foreign leaders. Instead, the White House hands out pictures taken by government photographers.
-With the 9/11 trial of the Guantanamo detainees approaching, there isn’t any access to court filings – even non-classified documents.
-Formerly, during the Bush Administration, Guantanamo information was readily made available. Now, however, nothing is revealed about “the number of prisoners on hunger strikes or the number of assaults on guards.”
-“Day-to-day intimidation of sources is chilling.” Government officials say they’re ordered to censor anything that’s “controversial or that makes the administration look bad.”
-Federal agencies aren’t complying with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Journalists request information as they’re legally entitled to do, but the government is nonresponsive.
-Worse, the Obama Administration is using the FOIA to spy on “what news organizations are pursuing” and “Requests are now routinely forwarded to political appointees. At the agency that oversees the new health care law, for example, political appointees now handle the FOIA requests.”
-The Obama Administration “is trying to control the information that state and local officials can give out.” Ms. White cited clandestine behavior on cellphone spying.

Groundbreaking 'War on Whistleblowers' Investigation Exposes Obama Admin's Record of Censorship & Persecution of Whistleblowers & Journalists
War on Whistleblowers: Free Press and the National Security State traces how two of the most powerful and secretive Washington power centers—the Pentagon’s military-industrial complex and Internet era’s national security state—ran amok after 9/11 and declared war on a handful of whistleblowers who went to the press to expose lies, fraud and abuses that meant life or death for troops and spying on millions of Americans. It explores why Obama, who promised the most transparent administration, became the most secretive president in recent decades and even more vindictive to intelligence-related whistleblowers than George W. Bush.

Whistleblowers are not spies or traitors, as the Bush and Obama administration’s lawyers have alleged. They are patriotic and often conservative Americans who work inside the government and with military contractors, and who find unacceptable—and often life-threatening—or illegal behavior goes unheeded when they report it through the traditional chain of command. They worry about doing nothing and feel compelled to go to the press, even if they suspect they may lose their jobs. What they don’t realize is that their lives will never quite be the same again, because they underestimate the years of government persecution that follows.

Obama's CIA Director Pick Called for Censoring the Media
In his 1980 graduate thesis at the University of Texas at Austin, John Brennan denied the existence of “absolute human rights” and argued in favor of censorship on the part of the Egyptian dictatorship.

“Since the press can play such an influential role in determining the perceptions of the masses, I am in favor of some degree of government censorship,” Brennan wrote. “Inflamatory [sic] articles can provoke mass opposition and possible violence, especially in developing political systems.”

Obama Launches Full Court Press On Media Censorship, Control, Targeting Fox
The full court press on media censorship and control surfaced a week ago when White House Communications Director Anita Dunn said Fox News was operating as, “a wing of the Republican Party.” The White House attack on Fox escalated this weekend when White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Obama senior adviser David Axelrod said that other media outlets should not consider Fox News as a bonafide news network, suggesting other outlets should boycott Fox News.

IRS wasn’t only agency hassling True the Vote
Since filing for tax exemption as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit in 2010, the founders of True the Vote, a Houston-based group that tries to prevent elections fraud, have been overwhelmed with scrutiny from a host of government agencies, in particular, by the Internal Revenue Service. Catherine and Bryan Engelbrecht have suffered through 18 separate encounters with five government agencies, from surprise audits to FBI visits to never-ending demands for paperwork. The government has been scrutinizing True the Vote, the Engelbrechts’ tea party group, which is called King Street Patriots, and the family’s oil services manufacturing business.

edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:15 PM

IRS finally reveals list of tea party groups targeted for extra scrutiny
More than three years after it admitted to targeting tea party groups for intrusive scrutiny, the IRS has finally released a near-complete list of the organizations it snagged in a political dragnet. The tax agency filed the list last month as part of a court case after a series of federal judges, fed up with what they said was the agency’s stonewalling, ordered it to get a move on. The case is a class-action lawsuit, so the list of names is critical to knowing the scope of those who would have a claim against the IRS.

Barack Obama Announces Plan to CENSOR Fox News
And while there are secret efforts to control Fox News through the FCC, now Obama is being completely open about his censorship agenda. Obama announced to the world he wants to “change how the media reports.”

Obama’s Plan to Surrender Internet Control May Be Unconstitutional
Critics of the move worried that the rest of the world, including much of the Western world, has nothing close to the United States’ ideological commitment to free speech. Even though the old gray mare of free speech ain’t quite what she used to be in these parts, we still have stronger institutional, and Constitutional, resistance to government control of communications than most of the planet.

In the year and a half since ICANN handover was announced, the rest of the world has merrily gone about validating the fears of these critics by censoring and controlling the Internet every way they can. Just a few days ago, the United Nations was expressing its eagerness to turn search engines into censorship engines to battle “cyber violence against women,” which evidently includes spirited disagreement with feminists. Of course, the “global stakeholders” who don’t think women should be allowed to drive cars will want some input into Internet standards, too.

Obama’s Sordid Record on Censorship and Secrecy

While Obama’s record on press freedom is not as disgraceful as Egypt’s, or Turkey’s, or Gabon’s, he has shown enough duplicity on this subject to gain easy admission into the hypocrites’ club. His administration spent almost six years hounding courageous New York Times’ reporter James Risen over material in his 2006 book, A State of War. Last June, the Justice Department persuaded the Supreme Court not to hear a free-speech case involving Risen and leaks he received regarding national security. But the Supreme Court’s refusal to consider Risen’s case ensured that the Justice Department and the White House would continue to have a stack of cards that could legally trump the right to know the truth about federal abuses.

Net Neutrality: Obama's gateway to censorship?
FCC could determine what is in public's 'best' interest
In divining the ultimate intent of the FCC’s new regulations, it may be instructive to look at some of the ideology of the personalities involved in crafting and pushing Net Neutrality. The FCC’s Net Neutrality ruling seems to be the continuation of a plan put in place by the agency’s former chairman, Julius Genachowski. In 2010, FCC’s Genachowski proposed a “third way” to regulate broadband by reclassifying the transmission of data as a telecommunications service to be directly regulated by the agency.

Obama administration sets record for censoring and denying transparency requests
The US censored and refused to provide more documents than ever last year while responding to Freedom of Information Act requests, according to an analysis of federal data performed by the Associated Press. The government responded to just over 647,000 FOIA requests last year, a 4 percent drop from the year prior. In just over 250,000 of those cases, it censored documents or refused to provide access to them outright — nearly two out of every five requests. Censoring, however, may range from a single phone number's removal to the redaction of nearly an entire page.

'The Greatest Enemy of Press Freedom in a Generation'
In any case, Risen has a point. In addition to his own persecution, the Justice Department has pursued Fox reporter James Rosen. Ann Compton, who covered every president from Ford to Obama, also said this is the least transparent. While Holder has promised not to jail reporters, it seems to be a statement of personal preference, not Justice Department policy. He hasn't pulled back from trying to get reporters to divulge their sources—only from certain tactics—and he has presided over a massive crackdown on leaks inside the administration. There are of course good reasons why the government would wish to reduce leaking, but it's also an essential outlet for whistleblowers. Leaks lubricate the machinery of free press.

Stop Obama's Planned Gag Order on Firearm-Related Speech
It's happening again— President Obama is using his imperial pen and telephone to curb your rights and bypass Congress through executive action. Even as news reports have been highlighting the gun control provisions of the Administration's "Unified Agenda" of regulatory objectives (see accompanying story), the Obama State Department has been quietly moving ahead with a proposal that could censor online speech related to firearms. This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second. Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published.

Straight-Talking US Admiral Takes Down Obama’s Bible Censorship
Though the president personally professes to be a practitioner of the faith, it is becoming obvious that Christianity has been targeted for censorship and attack by President Barack Obama’s administration. Nowhere is this more evident than in the military, where Obama administration lawyers have virtually demonized the Bible and outlawed so-called “proselytizing” by the men and women of our military. They have practically been ordered to “check their religion at the door,” and are more or less forbidden from speaking about their faith with fellow service members, but are instead instructed to direct all religious matters to a chaplain.

edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:15 PM

Omar Mateen Swore Allegiance To ISIS, And The Obama Administration Is Censoring It
Here’s a thought experiment: Imagine Omar Mateen had been an outspoken member of the Tea Party. Or the Catholic Church. Or the Republican Party. Or some other group that isn’t considered acceptable outside of Flyover Country. Imagine that even as Mateen was murdering all those people in Orlando, he called the cops and the media to tell them exactly why he did it. Imagine Obama’s Justice Department had transcripts of his every word.

Considering corporations own all of our old mass media, as well as our primary means of new social media, corporate censorship is a paramount issue. Here is a peer into the corporate censorship climate during and specific to Obama:

YouTube Caught Censoring Obama Deception Video
YouTube has deleted ChangeDaChannel’s honors formerly attached to Alex Jones’ high quality encode of The Obama Deception in a crass effort to knock the film’s ratings down, an obvious effort by Google’s YouTube to make sure people remain unaware of and do not watch the video. In essence — and not unlike the old Soviet Union — YouTube is acting as a political police goon squad for the establishment, attempting to make sure as few people as possible see this important documentary.

Flickr Censors Political Image Critical of President Obama
There's an interesting piece over at the Los Angeles Times today about the unmasking of the author of the iconic Obama/Joker photo. The photo recently began turning up in Los Angeles with the word "socialism" printed underneath it in similar style to the famous Shepard Fairey Obama HOPE poster and since then has been the subject of considerable debate and online interest. ...
After creating the image Alkhateeb posted it to his Flickr account and ended up getting over 20,000 views on it. 20,000 views that is until Flickr pulled the image down censoring him, along with everyone who commented on the image, citing "copyright-infringement concerns," according to the Times. ... "If you produce something that is transformative, and not derivative, then it's fair use (Folsom v Marsh). In Campbell v Acuff-Rose, 510 U.S. 569, Souter seemed to suggest that the main idea is substitutability, and that makes a lot of sense when you consider what copyright protects (i.e. your interest in your own work). The Jokerbama does not replace the original photo in any sense."

Sources: Twitter CEO Dick Costolo Secretly Censored Abusive Responses To President Obama
According to a former senior Twitter employee, Costolo ordered employees to deploy an algorithm (which was built in-house by feeding it thousands of examples of abuse and harassing tweets) that would filter out abusive language directed at Obama. Another source said the media partnerships team also manually censored tweets, noting that Twitter’s public quality-filtering algorithms were inconsistent. Two sources told BuzzFeed News that this decision was kept from senior company employees for fear they would object to the decision.

Twitter Censorship Targets Conservatism and Classical Liberals:

Anti-Obama Benghazi Meme Gets Censored for ‘Violating Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities’
Facebook reportedly took down an image, or a meme, posted by the Special Operations Speaks PAC (SOS) that was critical of President Barack Obama’s handling of the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. ...The meme...shows both Obama and deceased al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden with the following message: “Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama, THEY GOT DENIED.”

The censorship methods & behaviors by government outsiders has been something far beyond even that of the McCarthy era, and that's without even getting into this new "fake news" paradigm the left has been running wild with recetly. Essentially all of the kind of thinking going on in the following material is rampant across essentially all of the "Liberal Media" (which is the majority of the MSM these days). The following random set of anti-free speech activities of the new left also excludes the violence and literal rioting that happened at Trump campaign events and so on (for a full visual assault on that front and more see my "Social Justice Assault Warriors TV Marathon!" thread):

Violence erupts as protesters block entrance to conservative’s speech at public university
Hundreds of student demonstrators at Cal State University Los Angeles on Thursday blocked the entrance to a theater where conservative Ben Shapiro gave a speech on “when diversity becomes a problem” in a protest so rowdy that several shoving matches ensued and many guests who sough to attend the event were effectively prevented from doing so. The crowd of student protesters choked the theater lobby, and when someone would try to access the door to the speech, a group of rowdy demonstrators in front of the entrance would hold up their hands and form something like a human wall, chanting “no violence” over and over. No guests were able to enter through the front.

Watch Bill Maher Take Down the Students Protesting His Berkeley Commencement Address
“Whoever told you you only had to hear what didn’t upset you?”
Bill Maher had a sharp message Friday for the University of California, Berkeley students who want to disinvite him from giving a commencement speech, telling them that “my reputation isn’t on the line. Yours is.” More than 4,000 people have signed a petition to cancel Maher’s December commencement speech amid growing criticism about his views on Islam, which Maher has called “the only religion that acts like the mafia that will f—ng kill you if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture, or write the wrong book.”


posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:15 PM

Maher Goes Off on PC College Protesters: ‘Who Raised These Little Monsters?!’
Maher said... the protesters’ tactic of a media-free zone made them “look like the Chinese army” because “their right to not be offended does not supersede the First Amendment.” But Yale pissed him off a lot more. In the past week Yale students have been outraged that a school official dared suggest in an email that people maybe chill about supposedly offensive Halloween costumes.

Comedian and actor Chris Rock told New York magazine he stopped playing colleges because they’ve gotten “way too conservative.”
Rich asked Rock about his thoughts on students’ attempt to block Bill Maher from speaking on campus due to his comments on HBO about Muslims. That’s when Rock said college campuses in America were too conservative, though, not necessarily in a political way: "Not in their political views — not like they’re voting Republican — but in their social views and their willingness not to offend anybody. Kids raised on a culture of “We’re not going to keep score in the game because we don’t want anybody to lose.” Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can’t say “the black kid over there.” No, it’s “the guy with the red shoes.” You can’t even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive."

10 Most Absurd Things Banned On Politically Correct College Campuses
In October 2014, a seemingly innocuous proposal came before the Goldsmiths student union to commemorate the Holocaust. However, the students voted against commemorating the Holocaust, voting it down almost unanimously—60 to 1.

Grad students at UCLA use rare tactic of interrupting a course, setting off debate over whether this was necessary to combat racial insensitivity or took away rights of other students and a professor.
The statement accuses “the professor” (it does not identify Rust by name) of correcting “perceived grammatical choices that in actuality reflect ideologies” and “repeatedly questioning the value of our work on social identity and the related dynamics of oppression, power and privilege.” The “barrage of questions by white colleagues and the grammar ‘lessons’ by the professor have contributed to a hostile class climate,” it continues.

“I have attempted to be rather thorough on the papers and am particularly concerned that they do a good job with their bibliographies and citations, and these students apparently don’t feel that is appropriate,” Rust said in the letter.

Liberals Are Killing the Liberal Arts
On campuses across the country, hostility toward unpopular ideas has become so irrational that many students, and some faculty members, now openly oppose freedom of speech. The hypersensitive consider the mere discussion of the topic of censorship to be potentially traumatic. Those who try to protect academic freedom and the ability of the academy to discuss the world as it is are swimming against the current. In such an atmosphere, liberal-arts education can’t survive.

Smith College Paper Considers the Word 'Crazy' an 'Ableist Slur'
The campus far-left: Ruining the English language for all of us. This story—an argument between the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and Smith College, a women's liberal arts school—is as insane an example of the zeal for self-censorship at college campuses as any.

College apologizes for serving 'offensive' Mexican food during space-themed alien event
A residential college at the University of California, Santa Barbara had to apologize after serving Mexican food during a science fiction-themed event. According to the apology, the Mexican food paired with an event that featured aliens was offensive to students residing in the U.S. illegally. All programs staff will be forced to undergo cultural competence training for future events.

Biased Language - University Of New Hampshire
Students at the University of New Hampshire had their vocabulary drastically shortened for the sake of political correctness. The university gave its students a series of resources on its website so they could tackle their college life, including a “bias-free language guide” that instructs students to stop using a long list of seemingly inoffensive and common words. The university offered alternative phrases to replace the offensive word. The guide claimed the word “homosexual” was not politically correct enough and should be replaced with the term “same gender loving.” “American” is offensive because using the term implies that the US is the only country in the continents of North and South America. (It’s certainly imprecise, even if finding it offensive is a bit of a stretch.) Similarly, the guide instructed its students to stop using the word “Caucasian” and instead use the more politically correct “European-American individuals.” “Elderly” was replaced by “people of an advanced age,” and “healthy” with “non-disabled individual.” The guide would also complicate parental visits; students were told the words “mothering” or “fathering” should no longer be used. According to the guide, students should “avoid gendering a non-gendered activity.”

Holyoke Is Too PC For Vagina Monologues
Ever since the 1996 Off-Broadway premiere of The Vagina Monologues, written by Eve Ensler to “celebrate the vagina” and women’s empowerment, the play has been performed annually at hundreds of colleges across the country, embraced for years by gender studies departments as the Holy Grail of feminism. But this year, Mount Holyoke College, an all-women’s university in Massachusetts, is permanently breaking from tradition over concerns that the play—long championed for its political correctness—is not politically correct enough. ...“At its core, the show offers an extremely narrow perspective on what it means to be a woman… Gender is a wide and varied experience, one that cannot simply be reduced to biological or anatomical distinctions, and many of us who have participated in the show have grown increasingly uncomfortable presenting material that is inherently reductionist and exclusive.”


edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:16 PM

Hampshire College Cancels Afrobeat Band Shokazoba After Concerns Over Mostly White Members
A band scheduled to play a college party had its performance canceled after a controversy erupted over whether the musicians were “too white.” Shokazoba, an afrobeat band based in Northampton, Mass., received an email from Hampshire College (located in the nearby town of Amherst) on Thursday that said a decision had been reached to cancel the group’s performance at the Friday event. The email, obtained by The Huffington Post, did not provide a reason for the sudden cancellation. However, a statement posted on the private liberal arts college’s website noted that controversy over the band’s mostly white membership had caused concern among students at the school.

The University of California’s Insane Speech Police
Administrators of the UC system think referring to America as a ‘melting pot’ is somehow offensive—and want teachers to stop using that and many other innocuous phrases.
Fifty years after the birth of the free speech movement at the University of California, Berkeley, officials across the UC system are encouraging faculty and students to purge mundane, potentially offensive words and phrases from their vocabularies. Administrators want members of campus to avoid the use of racist and sexist statements, though their notions about what kinds of statements qualify are completely bonkers. “America is a melting pot,” “Why are you so quiet?” and “I believe the most qualified person should get the job,” are all phrases that should raise red flags, according to the UC speech police.

I'll stop there. Note this list was mostly derived from just one 'top 10' list of absurd things banned by PC thought police. All of that noise I find disturbing, of course, yet for me the most frightening thing is the agenda on college campuses to effectively burn all historical and otherwise non-echo-chamber perspectives via this whole "trigger warning" model. The "Trigger Warning Sticker Model" goes that if any given book may be "offensive" in regards to what has become everything & anything socially & politicaly speaking, then the PC thought police will go around college campus libraries placing "trigger warning" stickers on such books to warn people not to open and read them. This goes even further beyond what the Nazi's did in their book burnings, as it was mainly just books written by Jews that they burned. Historically speaking, this whole model is straight out of Soviet Russia & China, where had set about destroying all potential thoughts & perspectives that held any cultural lines of non-conformity to Communism within them.

Please note that there's just so much of this PC material that belongs in this expose that there just isn't even room for it all here. The specter of PC thought police style censorship will take an entire chapter every bit as long as this one just to run pure citations alone to cover it all, while this subject is but a side illustration in how intense censorship under the liberal machine has come to be during the past 8 years.

Next we have the subject of the WikiLeaks.

What is WikiLeaks?

WikiLeaks is a multi-national media organization and associated library. It was founded by its publisher Julian Assange in 2006. WikiLeaks specializes in the analysis and publication of large datasets of censored or otherwise restricted official materials involving war, spying and corruption. It has so far published more than 10 million documents and associated analyses. “WikiLeaks is a giant library of the world’s most persecuted documents. We give asylum to these documents, we analyze them, we promote them and we obtain more.”
-Julian Assange

Obama Scolds Media ‘Obsession’ Over Wikileaks Emails
“I’m finding it a little curious that everybody’s suddenly acting surprised that this looked like it was disadvantaging Hillary Clinton, because you guys wrote about it every day, every single week, about every little juicy tidbit of political gossip,” he said, adding that even John Podesta’s risotto recipe was news.

Note that the WikiLeaks were barely even touched by the MSM:
Exclusive MSM Analysis Reveals: They Have Gone FULL TABLOID (Trump Tapes vs. WikiLeaks Reveals All)

This followed an entire year of the MSM malreporting the controversies:

Meaning the WikiLeaks barely even leveled the playing field, as the polls show:

Podesta's riscotto recipe is an interesting example, as if anything where ever it was 'reported' it was more likely a diversionary ploy from the juicy stuff:

originally posted by:
[url=]The Bernie Sanders Files
The Clinton Foundation / Clinton Global Initiative Files
The Character Witness & Ethics Files
The Collusion / Corruption / Election Rigging Files
The Email Scandals / State Secrets / Benghazi Files
The Al Qaeda / ISIS / Middle East Files
The Lapdog Media Files
The George Soros Files
The Economy & TPP Files
The Social inJustice Files

edit on 2-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:16 PM

Yet that was all the climax. The DNC's censorship war with the WikiLeaks goes way back:
Assange's mental, physical health deteriorating under embassy confinement – medical records
Obama 'Considering Legal Action' Against Wikileaks
Obama to Issue 'Wikileaks Order'
Obama Pushing For The Death Penalty For Bradley Manning And Wikileaks
Reactions to the United States diplomatic cables leak
Chelsea Manning Faces Indefinite Solitary Confinement & Extra Prison Time After Suicide Attempt

And that should about cover it.

Last but not least we have the "FAKE NEWS" subject, but that will be covered in-depth in the next two chapters of PREVENTING THE FOURTH REICH.

In closing, how does the modern United States fall on the scale of Censorship: The Language of Dictators?

When you add in all of the censorship evils of the Bush Administration, and add them in as the forebear of the Obama Administration, compare all of that combined with all of the historical examples I managed to pull in. How rampant would you rate how this Language of Dictators is in the United States following the heels of the Republican's and Democrat's heels after all of these years of them outright dominating American politics?

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:16 PM

posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 08:05 AM
Man, detail the sins of both parties and get nothing but crickets?

edit on 3-1-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in