Niall Bradley
Sott.net
Censorship has been put into effect like never before in the aftermath of the multi-site terror attacks in Christchurch last Friday. There's no other word for what governments and Internet corporations have instituted. New Zealand and Australian Internet Service Providers have been blocking access to video-hosting sites, forums and other websites that mirrored, in part or whole, the 17-minute long video footage 'lone gunman' Brenton Tarrant recorded from a GoPro camera attached to his head-gear, along with footage of the aftermath of the shooting at the Linwood mosque, and copies of Tarrant's 'manifesto'. Media outlets and social media platforms globally have followed suit. The Internet has effectively been 'bleached' of this evidence (though it's not entirely gone, if you're prepared to look hard enough for it).
Tarrant's video in particular has been "classified by the Chief Censor's Office as objectionable," under a 1993 New Zealand law, meaning Kiwis face prison time and a $10,000 fine for 'downloading a copy of it' or 'distributing' it. The government has been leaning heavily on ISPs to block websites until they have removed it while, globally, several million iterations (including just links to it) have been removed by all media outlets and all social media platforms - and not just by Facebook, YouTube and Twitter; it's also gone from BitChute and similar lesser-known video-hosting platforms. New Zealand Police have also been demanding personal data on users who even discuss Tarrant's 'manifesto' or video.
Though ostensibly done out of consideration for the victims of the attacks and their families, to 'protect children and the vulnerable from seeing these images', and to not 'give the attacker the attention he wants', no such 'clean sweeps' have previously been conducted following the many gruesome mass shootings and bombings in terror attacks around the world, particularly those in non-Western countries. All these years 'ISIS' and affiliated terrorists have enjoyed full use of Western social media platforms to share footage of their crimes - footage which is then typically shown by corporate media outlets, complete with running commentary (just search 'Charlie Hebdo massacre' or 'ISIS beheadings' on YouTube) - but now suddenly it's imperative that all "objectionable materials" relating to this event be excised from global consciousness. Why would that be the case?
Read more
Sott.net
Censorship has been put into effect like never before in the aftermath of the multi-site terror attacks in Christchurch last Friday. There's no other word for what governments and Internet corporations have instituted. New Zealand and Australian Internet Service Providers have been blocking access to video-hosting sites, forums and other websites that mirrored, in part or whole, the 17-minute long video footage 'lone gunman' Brenton Tarrant recorded from a GoPro camera attached to his head-gear, along with footage of the aftermath of the shooting at the Linwood mosque, and copies of Tarrant's 'manifesto'. Media outlets and social media platforms globally have followed suit. The Internet has effectively been 'bleached' of this evidence (though it's not entirely gone, if you're prepared to look hard enough for it).
Tarrant's video in particular has been "classified by the Chief Censor's Office as objectionable," under a 1993 New Zealand law, meaning Kiwis face prison time and a $10,000 fine for 'downloading a copy of it' or 'distributing' it. The government has been leaning heavily on ISPs to block websites until they have removed it while, globally, several million iterations (including just links to it) have been removed by all media outlets and all social media platforms - and not just by Facebook, YouTube and Twitter; it's also gone from BitChute and similar lesser-known video-hosting platforms. New Zealand Police have also been demanding personal data on users who even discuss Tarrant's 'manifesto' or video.
Though ostensibly done out of consideration for the victims of the attacks and their families, to 'protect children and the vulnerable from seeing these images', and to not 'give the attacker the attention he wants', no such 'clean sweeps' have previously been conducted following the many gruesome mass shootings and bombings in terror attacks around the world, particularly those in non-Western countries. All these years 'ISIS' and affiliated terrorists have enjoyed full use of Western social media platforms to share footage of their crimes - footage which is then typically shown by corporate media outlets, complete with running commentary (just search 'Charlie Hebdo massacre' or 'ISIS beheadings' on YouTube) - but now suddenly it's imperative that all "objectionable materials" relating to this event be excised from global consciousness. Why would that be the case?
Read more
No comments:
Post a Comment