Dear Gillian (From Adrian)
There’s a block of Council Flats (although many now sold off) near me and these roses bloom for at least six months of the year (Spring to Autumn) in the small communal garden we nicknamed ‘The Paddock’ years ago! I just walked down the road and photographed this beauty and thought I would share it with you! I have, (as they say), made it to 55-years-old – but news of my survival has been greatly exaggerated – to misquote Mark Twain (more than is normal or to be expected)! Living in a second floor flat tends to mean I can spot aeroplanes taking-off and landing at Gatwick – but flowers are thin on the ground! Sometimes those who believe in religion get annoyed at what they think is my overly venerating attitude when it comes to assessing material reality – and ask ‘What the hell do you know about Metaphysics, anyway?’ Having spent years acquiring a PhD in it – I often ask myself exactly the same question! It is not that I venerate matter – but rather that I try to find the best I can from what we have got – as it always seems to be ‘in-front’ of senses even if we would rather it was not! What I do find is that quite often people misinterpret the religion they think they believe in, often getting very basic beliefs entirely wrong and incorrect! They then limit their interpretation of material reality to this disjointed understanding – so who can we trust to report back? The Soviets possessed some very well respected academics who were masters of religious teaching and understanding – but who did not believe in any particular religion. The Soviet System (like China) works to interface Socialist (Marxist-Leninist) ideology with religious understanding. When the Boxer Muhammed Ali visited the USSR in 1978 he said that religious freedom was protected and thriving! He said he roamed freely and visited Churches, Mosques, Temples and Synagogues – the Holy places the West said did not exist! I am a Commissar for Interfacing Religious Belief with Socialism (CPC) – which means that in a future World Wars against fascism I must carry the Red Flag and advance into combat leading Regiments of religiously-minded volunteers! My function being explaining the reasons and lifting the load through proper Marxist-Leninist education that is relevant to the individuals concerned! Anyway, my Comrades jokingly state that as I will be at leading from the front – I will not be fulfilling this role for very long!
Dear Adrian (From Gillian)
Hence the importance of old skool dates and times of events. It is hard to argue with chronology, though part of the current anti-intellectualism is to completely ignore the basic facts of what happened and when it happened.
However, metaphysically, time is only a local thing so probably a lot of what we perceive to be happening now may due to events which from our perspective are in the future! Who knows…….
Dear Gillian (From Adrian)
Obviously, not an opinion!
Facebook Admits ‘Fact-Checking’ Just an Opinion!
In a court filing, attorneys for Meta, formerly Facebook, admit that their fact check labels aren’t based on facts at all — they’re actually just opinions
The “fact checks” that Facebook, now known as Meta, has used to silence and censor throughout the pandemic are actually just “opinions.” The stunning admission came from Meta’s own attorneys, who stated in a court filing, “The labels themselves are neither false nor defamatory; to the contrary, they constitute protected opinion.”[1]
The court filing came in response to a lawsuit filed by television journalist John Stossel, who claims the social media giant’s fact-checking amounted to defamation when it flagged his content as false, causing all would-be viewers to doubt its integrity.[2] Stossel wrote in October 2021:[3]
“I just sued Facebook. I didn’t want to sue. I hate lawsuits. I tried for a year to reach someone at Facebook to fix things, but Facebook wouldn’t. Here’s the problem: Facebook uses ‘independent fact-checkers’ to try to reduce fake news on their site. That’s a noble goal.
Unfortunately, at least one Facebook ‘fact-checker’ is a climate-alarmist group that cleverly uses its Facebook connections to stop debate. Facebook is a private company. It has every right to cut me off. But Facebook does not have the right to just lie about me, yet that’s exactly what Facebook and its ‘fact-checker’ did. That’s defamation, and it’s just wrong.”
‘Fact Checks’ Are Actually Opinions
Stossel’s lawsuit relates to a video he published on Facebook about the 2020 California wildfires. He suggested that government mismanagement, not climate change, was probably the greatest factor in causing the fires.
It was the downplaying of climate change that got Stossel’s video flagged as “misleading” in this case, but during recent years virtually any mention of vaccine side effects or ineffectiveness, or questioning of lockdown procedures or mask mandates, yields a similar fate.
The farce is that Meta and their fact checkers have their own agendas, and it’s now been admitted in a court filing that they’re actively censoring information based not on facts but on their own opinions.
“So-called ‘fact checking’ is a fraud used to cover up the censorship of opinions that differ from those of the powerful Silicon Valley oligarchy. And now we have proof attested to in a court filing by one of the richest companies in the world, represented by some of the most elite lawyers in the world,” ZeroHedge reported, adding that Meta’s attorneys come from “Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dore, with over a thousand attorneys and more than a billion dollars a year in revenue.”[4]
Fact Checkers Don’t Check Facts
It’s dangerous to allow a private company to dictate what you see and don’t see online. By labeling valid information as misleading, they’re controlling the narrative and suppressing scientific debate. With each person who doesn’t click, or is left believing that truth is false, the more deeply embedded their narrative becomes in our collective psyche.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has stated that when a post is identified as misinformation, meaning it’s given a warning label like Stossel’s video received, it results in users not clicking through 95% of the time.[5] But as Stossel tweeted December 10, 2021, “Court filing: Facebook admits its ‘fact checkers’ don’t check facts!”[6]
Not only does the court filing state this, but Stossel found this out personally when he contacted Climate Feedback, the group that fact-checked his video. Two of three scientists who are reviewers for the group spoke with Stossel. Neither had seen the video, but when one of them finally did, he agreed with Stossel that the misleading label wasn’t necessarily fair. Despite this, Stossel wrote, “neither Climate Feedback nor Facebook will change their smear.” He continued:[7]
“Climate Feedback and its parent group, Science Feedback, use Facebook to censor lots of responsible people, such as science writers John Tierney, Michael Shellenberger and Bjorn Lomborg. Facebook has every right to choose who can use its platform. But Facebook does not have a legal right to knowingly and recklessly lie about what I say. That’s defamation.”
Considering the admission that fact checks are merely opinions, Anthony Watts of Watts Up With That? further noted, “[I]n a court of law, in a legal filing, Facebook admits that its ‘fact checks’ are not really ‘fact’ checks at all, but merely ‘opinion assertions.’ This strikes me as public relations disaster, and possibly a looming legal disaster for Facebook … [and other] entities that engage in biased ‘fact checking.'”[8]
Ironically, Meta’s lawyers also point to Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Act, which protects the company from liability for material posted by third parties.[9] Yet, this Act, and the immunity it provides to social media companies, also negates the need for “fact checks” in the first place[10] — from a legal perspective, at least, not for other, perhaps more nefarious, motivations.
Who’s really in control of dictating what’s flagged or “passed” on social media? Follow the money; several of Meta’s fact-checking partners, including Africa Check[11] and The Poynter Institute,[12] receive funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, for instance. This means news flagged as “false” or “misleading” by fact checkers isn’t necessarily untrue, incorrect or deceitful; it may simply go against the funder’s agenda.
And oftentimes, the opposite is true in that news items flagged as false may be the ones you should delve into more deeply in your search for real, unbiased news. Hopefully, lawsuits like Stossel’s will help to uncover the censorship and defamation taking place at the hands of social media, but if not, understand that when it comes to fact checks, you can’t just take their word as fact, because it’s actually their opinion.
Facebook “fact-checked” the Greenmedinfo.com page into oblivion, deleting it earlier this year, effectively preventing half a million of our followers from receiving our updates. Censorship has never been more concerning, given that independent sources of information on the benefits of natural health approaches and the harms of pharmaceutically-driven medicine are extremely hard to find. Moreover, without this information informed consent when it comes to medical decisions is not possible. If you believe that our information (and your access to it) is important, please consider becoming a member, making a one-time donation, and following us on our censorship-free Telegram channel, and registering to become a member of our own media platform: BeSovereign.com, launching very soon!
References [1] John Stossel v. Facebook, Inc. Court Filing, Page 2, Line 8 https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Facebook-admits-its-fact-check-is-opinion-page-2.pdf [2] John Stossel v. Facebook, Inc. Filed September 22, 2021 https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3543&context=historical [3] The Sun October 3, 2021 https://www.lowellsun.com/2021/10/03/smeared-by-facebook/ [4] ZeroHedge December 10, 2021 https://www.zerohedge.com/political/stunning-facebook-court-filing-admits-fact-checks-are-just-matter-opinion [5] Reclaimthenet.org May 21, 2020 https://reclaimthenet.org/zuckerberg-defends-censoring/ [6] Twitter, John Stossel December 10, 2021 https://twitter.com/JohnStossel/status/1469438439816929288 [7] The Sun October 3, 2021 https://www.lowellsun.com/2021/10/03/smeared-by-facebook/ [8] Watts Up With That? December 7, 2021 https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/12/09/bombshell-in-court-filing-facebook-admits-fact-checks-are-nothing-more-than-opinion/ [9] John Stossel v. Facebook, Inc. Court Filing, Page 2, Line 8 https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Facebook-admits-its-fact-check-is-opinion-page-2.pdf [10] KHMER Times December 17, 2021 https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50990032/in-facebooks-virtual-universe-opinion-substitutes-for-fact/ [11] Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Grants, Africa Check https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2019/08/OPP1214960 [12] Gates Foundation, Grants, The Poynter Institute for Media, Studies https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2015/11/OPP1138320
The GMI Research Group (GMIRG) is dedicated to investigating the most important health and environmental issues of the day. Special emphasis will be placed on environmental health. Our focused and deep research will explore the many ways in which the present condition of the human body directly reflects the true state of the ambient environment.
THE SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 