I'm forwarding this excellent analysis and commentary to many family members and friends who may not be fully aware, because of the censors' more or less successful attempts to mute the public's of this most iknowledge of what's at stake in this mportant lawsuit coming up for Supreme Court review. Got to admit, I'm proud to be a Missourian today.
"There's a more accurate term for the government's takeover of our "cognitive infrastructure": mind control. I don't know a single American of any political persuasion who wants to be subjected to that."
Amazing piece & incredible punch to land on.. write on Dr K we <3 you!
Salute your and your colleagues arduous efforts to hold the United States government accountable according to the Constitution! Hopefully this case will lead to a final judgement which puts a stop to this pervasive, corrosive and deadly censorious rot.
As you wrote, in addition to the in-principle and constitutional arguing against covert and overt government control of Internet communications, beyond existing laws which are intended to protect privacy and guard against defamation and incitement to immediate violence, the government itself would benefit from the freewheeling public discussions it has been hell-bent on suppressing.
Groupthink is a natural feature of most organizations and groups. Most people cannot imagine that they and most or all of the people they consider to be experts could be wrong about something important. So arguments and evidence that they are wrong is not given proper consideration.
Add corruption, ineptitude, tribal cohesion, and the personal and institutional reluctance to admit having got something entirely wrong, and it becomes extremely difficult to turn the groupthunk juggernaut right around, which is the direction it needs to go in to avoid disaster.
A simple example of this, is that many people *especially* doctors, can't imagine that the great majority of the population has crippled immune systems because their circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D level is less (often 1/10 top 1/2) than 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L. Please see the research articles cited and discussed at: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ including Sunil Wimalawansa "Rapidly Increasing Serum 25(OH)D Boosts the Immune System, against Infections - Sepsis and COVID-19", Nutrients 2022-07-21 , https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/14/2997. Prof. Wimalawansa has been researching vitamin D since the late 1990s. The most common response he responses he receives from other medical professions to his efforts to raise awareness of vitamin D's importance is: "How could it be true? Its too simple."
The United States has a well-engineered constitution and First Amendment. I know of no other country which enjoys constitutional prohibition of government actions which would curtain freedom of speech.
So there's no constitutional protection in European countries against the recently enacted EU Digital Services Act: https://armageddonprose.substack.com/p/brutal-eu-censorship-regime-takes . The EU government bureaucracy threatens social media sites and search engines with crushing fines if they do not act to prevent their users from writing, speaking or whatever in ways which the EU defines, so broadly, as "harmful", "disinformation" or "inauthentic use of their service".
"This proposed Act represents the heights of egregiously inept, toxic, power-drunk, hubris - because it is conceived in a groupthunk framework that assumes the government and its official bodies – and the courts – are a more reliable source of information than the best of what results from free, genuinely democratic, discussion among all Australian citizens.
"The proposed Act is an attempt to turbocharge the groupthink which threatens us all, by creating an explicit mechanism of control and suppression of information, ideas and discussion which fall outside whatever bounds the government believes reflects truth and long-term public benefit."
The Founders knew all about the "cognitive infrastructure" and how it could be influenced by a free press. Some of them even engaged in anonymous libelous accusations of one another. They also knew that certain ideas of philosophers and the Iroquois were toxic, mostly to monarchies, that had proven safe in many cases, but also to comfortable state religions. The Founders knew that free speech would make some, and sometimes almost everyone, angry. Still and yet, they opted for a "cognitive infrastructure" of the people, free to question authority and control. That experiment, quite dangerous to tyrants and their minions, is still underway.
Awesome! I’m making my way through the court as well E.D. Cal. 9th Cir. 1:22-CV-01468. Read my declaration in document 034. Use PACER to access the case.
Thank you Dr. K for your courage, insight and intelligence. Your work is staggeringly important.
I'm forwarding this excellent analysis and commentary to many family members and friends who may not be fully aware, because of the censors' more or less successful attempts to mute the public's of this most iknowledge of what's at stake in this mportant lawsuit coming up for Supreme Court review. Got to admit, I'm proud to be a Missourian today.
Another home run article, Dr. Kheriaty. Keep up the excellent work. Thank you for your courage!
The pervasive gov’t psyops and censorship stranglehold will not be easily slowed; the Orwellian surveillance state grip must also be broken.
"There's a more accurate term for the government's takeover of our "cognitive infrastructure": mind control. I don't know a single American of any political persuasion who wants to be subjected to that."
Amazing piece & incredible punch to land on.. write on Dr K we <3 you!
Salute your and your colleagues arduous efforts to hold the United States government accountable according to the Constitution! Hopefully this case will lead to a final judgement which puts a stop to this pervasive, corrosive and deadly censorious rot.
As you wrote, in addition to the in-principle and constitutional arguing against covert and overt government control of Internet communications, beyond existing laws which are intended to protect privacy and guard against defamation and incitement to immediate violence, the government itself would benefit from the freewheeling public discussions it has been hell-bent on suppressing.
Groupthink is a natural feature of most organizations and groups. Most people cannot imagine that they and most or all of the people they consider to be experts could be wrong about something important. So arguments and evidence that they are wrong is not given proper consideration.
Add corruption, ineptitude, tribal cohesion, and the personal and institutional reluctance to admit having got something entirely wrong, and it becomes extremely difficult to turn the groupthunk juggernaut right around, which is the direction it needs to go in to avoid disaster.
A simple example of this, is that many people *especially* doctors, can't imagine that the great majority of the population has crippled immune systems because their circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D level is less (often 1/10 top 1/2) than 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L. Please see the research articles cited and discussed at: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ including Sunil Wimalawansa "Rapidly Increasing Serum 25(OH)D Boosts the Immune System, against Infections - Sepsis and COVID-19", Nutrients 2022-07-21 , https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/14/2997. Prof. Wimalawansa has been researching vitamin D since the late 1990s. The most common response he responses he receives from other medical professions to his efforts to raise awareness of vitamin D's importance is: "How could it be true? Its too simple."
The United States has a well-engineered constitution and First Amendment. I know of no other country which enjoys constitutional prohibition of government actions which would curtain freedom of speech.
So there's no constitutional protection in European countries against the recently enacted EU Digital Services Act: https://armageddonprose.substack.com/p/brutal-eu-censorship-regime-takes . The EU government bureaucracy threatens social media sites and search engines with crushing fines if they do not act to prevent their users from writing, speaking or whatever in ways which the EU defines, so broadly, as "harmful", "disinformation" or "inauthentic use of their service".
The UK has just passed similar legislation, which will soon attain royal assent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Safety_Bill
Here in Australia the government has proposed the same kind of indirect, broad, censorship regime, which would force the operators of any social media site, or any website with comments, to prevent their users from conveying anything which is "harmful" or "false": https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/new-acma-powers-combat-misinformation-and-disinformation . My submission to their call for comments is at: https://www.firstpr.com.au/issues/ . This includes:
"This proposed Act represents the heights of egregiously inept, toxic, power-drunk, hubris - because it is conceived in a groupthunk framework that assumes the government and its official bodies – and the courts – are a more reliable source of information than the best of what results from free, genuinely democratic, discussion among all Australian citizens.
"The proposed Act is an attempt to turbocharge the groupthink which threatens us all, by creating an explicit mechanism of control and suppression of information, ideas and discussion which fall outside whatever bounds the government believes reflects truth and long-term public benefit."
Did SCOTUS do anything with the case? I have been anticipating they would and still nothing?
Thank you for keeping this exceedingly important issue alive and focused!
The Founders knew all about the "cognitive infrastructure" and how it could be influenced by a free press. Some of them even engaged in anonymous libelous accusations of one another. They also knew that certain ideas of philosophers and the Iroquois were toxic, mostly to monarchies, that had proven safe in many cases, but also to comfortable state religions. The Founders knew that free speech would make some, and sometimes almost everyone, angry. Still and yet, they opted for a "cognitive infrastructure" of the people, free to question authority and control. That experiment, quite dangerous to tyrants and their minions, is still underway.
Go Saint George. The dragon of censorship must be slain.
Awesome! I’m making my way through the court as well E.D. Cal. 9th Cir. 1:22-CV-01468. Read my declaration in document 034. Use PACER to access the case.