The TNI was set up in (2019) to protect audiences and users from disinformation, particularly around moments of jeopardy, such as elections. The TNI complements existing programmes partners have in place.
*The partners within the TNI are: AP, AFP; BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Facebook, Financial Times, First Draft, Google/YouTube, The Hindu, Microsoft, Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, and The Washington Post.
The TNI is already working together to tackle to spread of harmful coronavirus disinformation and previously has had success running a rapid alert system during the UK 2019 General Election, Myanmar and Taiwan 2020 General Elections and the US Presidential Election.
TNI also announces plans to engage with ‘Project Origin’ verification technology which will tag content in order to identify when it has been manipulated. And it has done that. (July 2020)
Speaking about Project Origin, Eric Horvitz, Chief Scientific Officer for Microsoft, says: “We’ve forged a close relationship with the BBC and other partners on Project Origin, aimed at methods and standards for end-to-end authentication of news and information.
“We’re enthusiastic about Project Origin and the potential for it to help publishers and technology companies deliver people greater assurance that the content they’re consuming is authentic.
• The World Health Organization hosted a meeting at Facebook's Menlo Park campus , early 2020, with some of the largest tech companies to discuss how to tamp down on misinformation about the coronavirus. see here;
Well, FB is still actively censoring. I posted a meme yesterday making fun of the fact that Pfizer never said the shots would stop infection, and within a minute, I got a popup saying it was "misinformation".
Our ancestors did not believe the earth was flat. The sun is round. The moon is round. They most likely easily inferred that the earth was also round (Since they were orders of magnitude more intelligent that we are. Evidence? -> History and contemporary times).
We are told by our Creator that the earth is round:
Isaiah 40:22-23
"He is the one who sits above the circle of the earth,
NOTHING LESS THAN BRIBERY... TO CONCEAL THAT THE $$$ IS COMING FROM PAGAN MARXIST ✡s
AIPAC’s new super PAC, the United Democracy Project, has focused all of its spending so far — $1.2 million — on four Democratic primary races, according to FEC filings. The super PAC raised $15.7 million in the first quarter — $8.5 million of that from AIPAC itself — and has so far spent $1.2 million across four Democratic primary races set for early May: Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, Ohio’s 11th and the 1st and 4th Districts in North Carolina. It made no expenditures for or against Republicans. Its spending included expenditures in support of three Democrats and against two. AIPAC’s PAC has endorsed more than 300 candidates as of last week, all but 10 of them incumbents. https://jewishinsider.com/2022/04/aipac-super-pac-spent-1-2-million-in-four-democratic-primaries/
The Biden Administration’s collusion with FB, and others, to promote censorship of information about the risks and serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines runs afoul of the First Amendment and also runs afoul of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) statute.
The EUA statute is 21 U.S.C. section 360bbb-3, entitled “Authorizations for medical products for use in emergencies.” The required conditions for authorization of unapproved products are set forth in subsection (e)(1)(A).
• Under that subsection, the Secretary of HHS is required to establish conditions on an EUA authorization that are “designed to ensure that health professionals administering the product are informed . . . of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of the emergency use of the product , and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown.”
• Under that subsection, the Secretary of HHS is also required to establish conditions on an EUA authorization that are “designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed . . . of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and . . . of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.”
• Further, under that subsection the Secretary of HHS is required to establish “[a]ppropriate conditions for the monitoring and reporting of adverse events associated with the emergency use of the product.”
The EUA statute was enacted in July 2004 as section 4 of Public Law 108-276, entitled the “Project BioShield Act of 2004,” which can be found at 118 Stat. 853 et seq. As indicated in its legislative history, the Project BioShield Act was passed to address the threat of bioterrorism which was a significant concern in the aftermath of the anthrax attacks that followed 9/11. See https://www.congress.gov/crec/2004/07/14/CREC-2004-07-14-pt1-PgH5721-3.pdf . Representative Maloney from New York made these remarks on behalf of the Committee on Government Reform:
• “The provisions of Bioshield authorizing the emergency distribution of unapproved drugs and devices, whose risks and benefits are not fully tested, impose an unprecedented responsibility on the government FDA must be vigilant in protecting the public against unnecessary risks from these products. In part because of these concerns, the bill requires that health care providers and patients be informed that the products have not been approved and be informed of their risks.”
• “We expect the Secretary to consider the needs for these additional conditions in each case and to impose them to the full extent necessary to protect the public from the risk of these products.”
Representative Waxman from California made similar remarks in support of the Act. In discussing the required conditions for emergency use authorization, he said:
• “These conditions are essential for the safe use of unapproved products, and they should be imposed in all cases, except in truly extraordinary circumstances.”
• “We expect the Secretary to consider the need for these additional conditions in each case and to impose them to the full extent necessary to protect the public from the risks of these products.”
Instead of following the language and the intent of the EUA statute, the Biden Administration and its allies, including FB, are censoring information about the risks and serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines in order to prop up the false official narrative that the vaccines are “safe and effective.” In so doing, the Biden Administration may very well have destroyed the manufacturers’ immunity from liability for damages caused by their vaccines.
White Coat Killers can be taken two different ways....... there are healthcare providers (those who wear the white coats) that have injected people with the COVID19 gene therapy, resulting in harm and death, which I hope that most of them did not intend at all. As a physician, this is how my mind first framed it. But, where I think you are going, there are also those wearing White Coats who have been silenced, censored, had their professional licenses and Board status attacked, or fired by the government, the CDC, Facebook, Twitter, Big Healthcare, etc. for trying to get the truth out, questioning the treatment protocols, or resisting injection. They have tried to "kill" those spreading health mis/disinformation. They are trying to turn our white coats into straitjackets.
In my opinion, "White Coat Killers" is not going to be a hook that works. Are they killing white coats? And this implies a degree of cooperation/co-conspiracy that just was not there.
The evil people are the government and the captured health agencies (still government) and health organizations (like AAP -- pseudogovernment but certainly bureaucrats). You need words that capture these things.
The TNI was set up in (2019) to protect audiences and users from disinformation, particularly around moments of jeopardy, such as elections. The TNI complements existing programmes partners have in place.
*The partners within the TNI are: AP, AFP; BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Facebook, Financial Times, First Draft, Google/YouTube, The Hindu, Microsoft, Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, and The Washington Post.
The TNI is already working together to tackle to spread of harmful coronavirus disinformation and previously has had success running a rapid alert system during the UK 2019 General Election, Myanmar and Taiwan 2020 General Elections and the US Presidential Election.
TNI also announces plans to engage with ‘Project Origin’ verification technology which will tag content in order to identify when it has been manipulated. And it has done that. (July 2020)
Speaking about Project Origin, Eric Horvitz, Chief Scientific Officer for Microsoft, says: “We’ve forged a close relationship with the BBC and other partners on Project Origin, aimed at methods and standards for end-to-end authentication of news and information.
“We’re enthusiastic about Project Origin and the potential for it to help publishers and technology companies deliver people greater assurance that the content they’re consuming is authentic.
• The World Health Organization hosted a meeting at Facebook's Menlo Park campus , early 2020, with some of the largest tech companies to discuss how to tamp down on misinformation about the coronavirus. see here;
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/02/14/facebook-google-amazon-met-with-who-to-talk-coronavirus-misinformation.html?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR0jhIhGYpNBpbP_4RpVcHgmH7gMH49276x19uQER1JD_UTaNWEXrgK8N4A
Well, FB is still actively censoring. I posted a meme yesterday making fun of the fact that Pfizer never said the shots would stop infection, and within a minute, I got a popup saying it was "misinformation".
Just a side note, the "flat earth myth" was started around 1828:
https://www.history.com/news/christopher-columbus-never-set-out-to-prove-the-earth-was-round
Our ancestors did not believe the earth was flat. The sun is round. The moon is round. They most likely easily inferred that the earth was also round (Since they were orders of magnitude more intelligent that we are. Evidence? -> History and contemporary times).
We are told by our Creator that the earth is round:
Isaiah 40:22-23
"He is the one who sits above the circle of the earth,
and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers;
the one who stretches out the heavens like a veil
and spreads them out like a tent to live in,
the one who brings princes to nothing;
he makes rulers of the earth like nothing."
NOTHING LESS THAN BRIBERY... TO CONCEAL THAT THE $$$ IS COMING FROM PAGAN MARXIST ✡s
AIPAC’s new super PAC, the United Democracy Project, has focused all of its spending so far — $1.2 million — on four Democratic primary races, according to FEC filings. The super PAC raised $15.7 million in the first quarter — $8.5 million of that from AIPAC itself — and has so far spent $1.2 million across four Democratic primary races set for early May: Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, Ohio’s 11th and the 1st and 4th Districts in North Carolina. It made no expenditures for or against Republicans. Its spending included expenditures in support of three Democrats and against two. AIPAC’s PAC has endorsed more than 300 candidates as of last week, all but 10 of them incumbents. https://jewishinsider.com/2022/04/aipac-super-pac-spent-1-2-million-in-four-democratic-primaries/
The Biden Administration’s collusion with FB, and others, to promote censorship of information about the risks and serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines runs afoul of the First Amendment and also runs afoul of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) statute.
The EUA statute is 21 U.S.C. section 360bbb-3, entitled “Authorizations for medical products for use in emergencies.” The required conditions for authorization of unapproved products are set forth in subsection (e)(1)(A).
• Under that subsection, the Secretary of HHS is required to establish conditions on an EUA authorization that are “designed to ensure that health professionals administering the product are informed . . . of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of the emergency use of the product , and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown.”
• Under that subsection, the Secretary of HHS is also required to establish conditions on an EUA authorization that are “designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed . . . of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and . . . of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.”
• Further, under that subsection the Secretary of HHS is required to establish “[a]ppropriate conditions for the monitoring and reporting of adverse events associated with the emergency use of the product.”
The EUA statute was enacted in July 2004 as section 4 of Public Law 108-276, entitled the “Project BioShield Act of 2004,” which can be found at 118 Stat. 853 et seq. As indicated in its legislative history, the Project BioShield Act was passed to address the threat of bioterrorism which was a significant concern in the aftermath of the anthrax attacks that followed 9/11. See https://www.congress.gov/crec/2004/07/14/CREC-2004-07-14-pt1-PgH5721-3.pdf . Representative Maloney from New York made these remarks on behalf of the Committee on Government Reform:
• “The provisions of Bioshield authorizing the emergency distribution of unapproved drugs and devices, whose risks and benefits are not fully tested, impose an unprecedented responsibility on the government FDA must be vigilant in protecting the public against unnecessary risks from these products. In part because of these concerns, the bill requires that health care providers and patients be informed that the products have not been approved and be informed of their risks.”
• “We expect the Secretary to consider the needs for these additional conditions in each case and to impose them to the full extent necessary to protect the public from the risk of these products.”
Representative Waxman from California made similar remarks in support of the Act. In discussing the required conditions for emergency use authorization, he said:
• “These conditions are essential for the safe use of unapproved products, and they should be imposed in all cases, except in truly extraordinary circumstances.”
• “We expect the Secretary to consider the need for these additional conditions in each case and to impose them to the full extent necessary to protect the public from the risks of these products.”
Instead of following the language and the intent of the EUA statute, the Biden Administration and its allies, including FB, are censoring information about the risks and serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines in order to prop up the false official narrative that the vaccines are “safe and effective.” In so doing, the Biden Administration may very well have destroyed the manufacturers’ immunity from liability for damages caused by their vaccines.
White Coat Killers can be taken two different ways....... there are healthcare providers (those who wear the white coats) that have injected people with the COVID19 gene therapy, resulting in harm and death, which I hope that most of them did not intend at all. As a physician, this is how my mind first framed it. But, where I think you are going, there are also those wearing White Coats who have been silenced, censored, had their professional licenses and Board status attacked, or fired by the government, the CDC, Facebook, Twitter, Big Healthcare, etc. for trying to get the truth out, questioning the treatment protocols, or resisting injection. They have tried to "kill" those spreading health mis/disinformation. They are trying to turn our white coats into straitjackets.
In my opinion, "White Coat Killers" is not going to be a hook that works. Are they killing white coats? And this implies a degree of cooperation/co-conspiracy that just was not there.
The evil people are the government and the captured health agencies (still government) and health organizations (like AAP -- pseudogovernment but certainly bureaucrats). You need words that capture these things.