FreeSpeech and Censorship: Thread

[grarpamp]

Internet crowdsourcing uncovers and speaks against potential
censorship, re another potential political assassination...


'Democracy Dies In Darkness' - Unless You Want Pelosi Video Released

https://newrepublic.com/article/70097/against-transparency
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-democrats-horrific-paul-pelosi-attack-hold-onto-censorship
https://twitter.com/FearTheFloof/status/1586763293389193216
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1587528200711983104
https://twitter.com/MarketsPuke/status/1587658208348348416
https://twitter.com/realDerekUtley/status/1586561337362157569
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1587248636961984513

The Washington Post - which carries the slogan "Democracy Dies in
Darkness" - is now suggesting that people who want to see video of the
Pelosi attack are stoking conspiracy theories.

In a Wednesday article, columnist Philip Bump draws a line from 2020
election deniers, to QAnon, to people who think there's something
fishy about last week's attack on the Pelosis' San Francisco house by
a mentally ill homeless man who was living at a house with a BLM flag,
and who back-dated posts on one of his websites after registering it
in September.

Bump writes;

    The internet makes all of this so depressingly easy. Not only is
it a warehouse of information, it is also the corkboard and the
colored yarn. You can forage for evidence of your belief system to
your heart’s content and you can see how other sympathetic allies have
strung together their own theories.

    I frequently come back to Lawrence Lessig’s 2009 essay “Against
Transparency” in which he warned that publishing information in the
interests of governmental transparency would simply give people scads
of material to generate their own narratives. That’s exactly what
happened, though Lessig didn’t foresee that the advent of social media
would vastly speed up the narrative-building process.

    As an employee of a newspaper, I would, in fact, like to see the
video that the Capitol Police overlooked, and the body-cam footage. It
is the media’s job to question authority and to ensure accountability.
It is also the media’s job to present accurate information to the
public and to stamp out misinformation. So while seeing that footage
would be useful, there is not at this point any reason to believe that
the attack on Paul Pelosi was anything other than what various legal
documents have suggested.

    The lure of conspiracy is too strong to accept that, however, and
the public understanding of how logic works is too weak. -WaPo

So - people might continue to spread conspiracy theories despite video
evidence, so best not to release it.

In closing, Bump puts conditions on transparency; "More transparency
and more information are good when considered responsibly. The
challenge is that one can no more control how that information is
applied than the people who, say, write magazine articles scrutinized
for patterns of numbers by the corkboard set can control getting
looped into a delusion."

So - no transparency for you, if you aren't qualified to process it.

*  *  *

Cameras outside the San Francisco home of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
recorded last Friday's break-in, but Capitol Police officers weren't
watching the feed at the time, the Washington Post reports.

    The Pelosi mansion has more security cameras than the Federal
Reserve Bank… https://t.co/T3Is6ylo4K pic.twitter.com/aE84Tel9xx
    — NevilleTheCat (@FearTheFloof) October 30, 2022

Instead, officers were alerted to the incident because police lights
were flashing outside the house, causing them to rewind the footage
and view additional camera angles.

    The officer in D.C. quickly pulled up additional camera angles
from around Pelosi’s home and began to backtrack, watching recordings
from the minutes before San Francisco police arrived. There, on
camera, was a man with a hammer, breaking a glass panel and entering
the speaker’s home, according to three people familiar with how
Capitol Police learned of the break-in and who have been briefed on or
viewed the video themselves. -WaPo

So there's not only police bodycam footage, the Capitol Police have
footage of the break-in itself - and rewound it to investigate after
seeing flashing lights. So, that exists.

And why haven't we seen any of it?

    Transparency is the antidote to “misinformation.” Yet for some
reason, the San Francisco Police Department is refusing to release
bodycam video of the attack on Paul Pelosi. https://t.co/8bFxJgIiRx
pic.twitter.com/vmjdYmhoKe
    — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) November 1, 2022

    pic.twitter.com/0Qmj8fcVd3
    — Black Swan, The Darkness Consumes (@MarketsPuke) November 2, 2022

The official story, which suspect David DePape has admitted to, is
that he was there to kneecap Nancy Pelosi. Instead, he ended up in a
fight with 82-year-old Paul Pelosi at 2AM after allowing Paul to use
the bathroom - where he allegedly used a charging cell phone to call
911. Paul told the dispatcher that "David" was in the house and that
he was "a friend."

    Paul Pelosi’s 911 call reveals he knew the man, his name is David
and describes him as his friend.

    In the beginning he said he didn’t know him but later, Paul confessed.

    The Pelosi’s are not being honest. Retweet so everyone sees this.
pic.twitter.com/zRozccWceq
    — Derek Utley (@realDerekUtley) October 30, 2022

Who is David DePape?

    Tucker just took a SLEDGEHAMMER to the fraudulent Paul Pelosi
narrative and CRUSHED it in 47 seconds.

    Wow pic.twitter.com/j9wf0f0gRK
    — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 1, 2022