Posted by Curt on 30 September, 2022 at 10:47 am. 16 comments already!


by William M. Briggs

We all recall that in order for there to be official disinformation or misinformation, there must necessarily exist Official Truths.
And if there are Official Truths there must necessarily exist an agency or agencies tasked with providing, maintaining, and distributing these Official Truths.
It is also so, and quite obvious, that official disinformation does not have to be false, and Official Truths do not have to be true.
Here from earlier in the week is New Zealand’s elected, and re-elected, leader at the UN calling for the strengthening of Official Truth agencies, and for censoring official disinformation.
She has a way of speaking like she is always on the verge of tears. It’s an effective gag. How can we not give a crying woman what she wants? Let’s let government censor all its opposition and put a smile back on Jacinda’s attractive face!
“How do you tackle climate change if people don’t believe it exists?” she asked.
Of course, she means by “climate change” not a changing climate—because a changing climate by itself is not of interest. She means the “solutions” she and Experts want to impose on us. It is those most do not “believe in”.
How much easier would it be to impose those “solutions” by, in effect, outlawing their criticism? Or at least making that criticism difficult to spread. She wants a coordinated effort at both censorship and promulgating Official Truths:

But what if that lie [official disinformation], told repeatedly, and across many platforms, prompts, inspires, or motivates others to take up arms. To threaten the security of others. To turn a blind eye to atrocities, or worse, to become complicit in them. What then?
This is no longer a hypothetical. The weapons of war have changed, they are upon us and require the same level of action and activity that we put into the weapons of old.
We recognized the threats that the old weapons created. We came together as communities to minimize these threats. We created international rules, norms and expectations. We never saw that as a threat to our individual liberties – rather, it was a preservation of them. The same must apply now as we take on these new challenges.

This is a happy message. Not to us, but to the UN delegates. It tells Experts they are needed, and badly.
If Jacinda gets what she wants, she might not love it, though. Putting a bureaucracy as large and staid as the UN in charge of propaganda is more likely to generate rich comedy than stifle the flow of information.
The agency she has in mind isn’t needed. The woke are, and have been, doing fine without it.

The tweet preceding Miller’s fun reminder said “Read more about our efforts to disrupt a Chinese influence operation focused on US domestic politics ahead off the midterms and an unconnected Russian operation focused on the war in Ukraine.”
See? Facebook is, and has been, doing a terrific job throttling official disinformation, and, we must assume, touting Official Truths. The UN just isn’t needed.
Of course, the UN could hire Facebook, like the American government did (remember how Zuckerberg was visited pre-election by the not-so-secret police?). But the union would produce tepid water. So perhaps it should be encouraged. The existence of the Ministry of Truth would quiet the mothering urges of people like Jacinda. She could rest feeling she has done enough. And we could enjoy the UN’s efforts, which would as comical as a man wearing a $39.99 toupee trying to sell us a used car sitting on a pool of oil.
Something like this:

A better approach is being taken by the Land of Bans, California. Experts are pushing a Assembly Bill 2098, which

would empower the Medical Board of California to go after the licenses of physicians who disseminate “misinformation” or “disinformation” regarding Covid-19. The bill in its latest iteration defines misinformation as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.” The inscrutability of this definition lies at the core of the bill’s opponents concerns.

This is brilliant. If a doctor speaks at variance to Official Truths, the government will pull his license, and presto!, he’s no longer a doctor.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x