While hearing a plea by Uttar Pradesh government yesterday regarding felling of trees for the widening of Krishna Govardhan Road Project in Mathura, the Supreme Court questioned why trees needed to be cut for widening the roads. The Court said that if roads were built in zig-zag way, it would reduce the speed of vehicles and thereby it will reduce the number of accidents.
A Bench headed by CJI SA Bobde said, “Why do roads have to be laid in a straight line by cutting trees? Keep roads zigzag. It will reduce speed, lessen accidents on roads and save many lives”. The Court asked the state government to evaluate the value of trees based on the amount of oxygen that they would release in nature in their lifetime.
Supreme Court directs the Uttar Pradesh government to evaluate value of trees taking into account the cost of oxygen, that the trees would have given to nature in their lifetime, while hearing plea of government to fell trees for Krishna Goverdhan road project in Mathura. pic.twitter.com/YTDa1dXePi
The Public Works Department of Uttar Pradesh government assured the court that they the government would compensate by planting the same number of tress in another area so that no loss was caused to the environment in general. To this the court responded that there could be no compensatory reforestation if a 100-year old tree was cut down. Pointing out that no information was available regarding the age of trees, the court said, “It is not possible for us to accept a compensation in merely arithmetical terms especially when there is no statement forthcoming from Uttar Pradesh or PWD as to nature of trees whether they are classified as shrubs or large trees”.
“Clearly they cannot do so in terms of timber but must adopt a method of evaluation which takes into account oxygen-producing capacity of the particular tree over the remaining life span, assuming it may be cut now”, the court said. Amicus Curiae advocate ADN Rao told the court that Net Present Value (NPV) method could be used for evaluation of trees. The court asked the government to consider the NPV method and respond within two weeks. “The UP government is to ascertain the total number of trees to be felled for building roads. It is clear that only effect, if trees are retained, would be roads may not be straight and therefore inapplicable of high speed traffic. Such an effect may bot be necessarily deleterious”, the court said.
UP PWD had filed an application in 2017 for cutting down 2,940 trees for the project and Central Empowered Committee had given clearance. SC asks UP to evaluate value of trees taking into account the cost of oxygen, that the trees would have given to nature in their life time.
The plea was filed by the Public Works Department of Uttar Pradesh in 2017 for felling 2,940 trees for the Krishna Govardhan Road Project. The Central Empowered Committee had clearance for the project.
The court fixed the next date of hearing after four weeks.
The radical Muslim supporters of Habib Rizieq Shihab, the leader of Indonesia’s biggest anti-vice organisation Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), have now posted four different versions of a video where they can be seen replacing some words of the Islamic call to prayer (Azan) to call for Jihad. According to scmp.com, a verse of the chant, which originally means “hurry to the prayer”, has been changed to “hayya alal jihad”, or “rise up for jihad”.
Reportedly, the videos replacing this verse called for Musims to ‘rise up for Jihad’ followed, by Allahu Akbar chants. Also, in one of the videos, radical Muslims were seen wielding swords.
These videos were posted on Twitter with the caption, “Calls to jihad will be heard from mosques, Islamic boarding schools, and other Muslim communities if Rizieq Shihab continues to be criminalised”.
Jika azan jihad sudah mulai di kumandangkan di beberapa daerah di Indonesia, siapa yg mau di salahkan?? pic.twitter.com/PwFq677KSc
The FPI has, however, denied their involvement in making these videos and claimed that it was made by some of their supporters since they are miffed over the treatment of their leader, radical cleric Habib Rizieq Shihab by the Indonesian government. “I think [the call for jihad] is normal because people see the unfair treatments on Muslim clerics who are opposing the government,” Aziz Yanuar, the FPI’s deputy general secretary, was quoted by local news portal Detik as saying on Monday.
Rizieq was in a ‘self-imposed’ exile in Saudi Arabia and has reportedly recently returned to Indonesia. He had recently staged massive gatherings in Jakarta to commemorate the birth of Prophet Mohammed and protest against the government and was going to be interrogated by the Jakarta police.
According to scmp.com, Rizieq did not appear for police questioning. Before the summoning, authorities had imposed a fine of $3,500, drawing public anger from citizens who viewed the move as being too lenient towards the Islamic cleric. The government had later decided to take a tough stand against those who break Coronavirus protocol, regardless of their position.
Reportedly, several Muslim groups of Indonesia have also demanded an investigation and action after the call to prayer was altered by the followers of Rizieq.
Rizieq returned to Indonesia after the National Police dropped a charge against him in connection with a pornography case in 2018, but Rizieq, who had originally travelled to Saudi Arabia for religious purposes, decided to stay.
The charge centred around a WhatsApp chat between Rizieq and a female supporter that include naked images of the woman – a crime under Indonesia’s anti-pornography law. Interestingly, while Rizieq was accused of sending lewd pictures, he campaigns for the implementation of Sharia law in Indonesia and his group has been accused in several cases of harassment of minorities in Indonesia.
A top United States security panel has released a report [PDF] in which it has alleged that the Chinese government had planned the Galwan clash in June 2020. The report further added that the Chinese government was expecting fatalities on the Indian side. Titled “2020 REPORT TO CONGRESS of the U.S.-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION,” the report mentioned that just before the June 15 India-China faceoff in the Galwan Valley, China signalled its intent to intensify the tension between the two countries along the Line of Actual Control.
Excerpt from the report submitted by top United States security panel
On the said night between June 15 and 16, the Indian Army and China’s People’s Liberation Army’s troops had a violent hand-to-hand clash. 20 Indian soldiers lost their lives, including a commanding officer. As per the reports, the Chinese side also suffered casualties anywhere between 35 to 40.
The US’s report noted that there was some evidence pointing out that the Chinese government planned the Galwan incident “potentially including the possibility for fatalities”. It said, “For instance, several weeks prior to the clash Defense Minister Wei made his statement encouraging Beijing to “use fighting to promote stability.”Just over two weeks before the incident, in another potential indication of Chinese leaders signaling their intent to escalate tensions, an editorial in China’s state-owned tabloid Global Times warned that India would suffer a “devastating blow” to its trade and economic ties with China if it got “involved in the U.S.-China rivalry.”
The satellite images showed considerable Chinese build-up
The US report highlighted the analysis of satellite images that were taken before the clash. The images pointed out to the considerable Chinese build-up in the Galwan Valley just a week before the clash. The report suggested that there were around 1,000 PLA soldiers at the site. It further pointed out that under the current regime of President Xi Jinping, such border invasive actions have increased from the Chinese side.
Excerpt from 2020 REPORT TO CONGRESS of the U.S.-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION
It said, “China and India have engaged in multiple physical clashes along their border for decades, but since General Secretary Xi assumed power in 2012 the two countries have seen five major altercations along their border. The exact motivations behind the Chinese government’s provocative behavior on the LAC this year remain unclear.” The report further added that the cause of the clash might be “construction of a strategic access road to support troops stationed along the LAC.”
The Galwan Valley faceoff
On the intervening night of June 15 and 16, troops of the Indian Army had a violent hand-to-hand clash with the Chinese counterparts. In the clash, 20 Indian soldiers lost their lives. Since then, the tension between the two nations has intensified, resulting in the cancellation of several projects allotted to Chinese companies. The call for Atmanirbhar Bharat has also put a dent in the market share of Chinese products. As per the reports, China has lost as much as Rs.40,000 crore during the Diwali season as the consumers preferred non-Chinese products.
Controversy seems to follow actress Kangana Ranaut wherever she goes. Ranaut has once again landed in legal trouble over a Twitter post regarding farmer protests that she later deleted. Ranaut had mistaken an elderly woman who had participated in women’s march taken out as part of the farmer protests for the famous Bilkis Bano also known as ‘Dadi’ who had participated in Shaheen Bagh protests. Retweeting a post on Twitter that claimed that the woman in farmer protests was Bilkis Bano, Ranaut had said that Dadi was available for hire to appear in protests.
Screenshot of Kangana Ranaut’s tweet (Source: Republic)
“Ha ha ha she is the same dadi who featured in Time magazine for being the most powerful Indian….And she is available in 100 rupees. Pakistani journo’s have hijacked international PR for India in an embarrassing way. We need our own people to speak for us internationally”, she commented. However, she deleted the tweet later.
Legal notice sent by Chandigarh based advocate
A Chandigarh based advocate named Hakam Singh has sent a legal notice to Ranaut for mistaking the elderly woman for Bilkis Dadi and saying that the latter was available for money. In the notice, Singh said that the woman in farmer protests was Mahinder Kaur, the wife of a farmer.
Advocate expressed displeasure over her comments calling it a ‘mockery of an old female’ and sought a public apology from Ranaut within seven days. “That by using such lower remarks for the said lady, you have not only lowered down the prestige and image of the said lady, but you have also lowered down the image and prestige of each lady as well as of each person, who takes part in protests for noble cause and for fighting their rights”, Singh wrote in the notice.
The notice further read, “That by tweeting in such a manner, the same also points towards the fact that the protests which is being conducted by farmers, is being conducted by bringing persons on rent. Such a low thinking from you, who is herself is lady an celebrity, is not acceptable”. Advocate Singh said that Ranaut had mocked the farmers who put their lives at risk and were protesting for their rights.
‘Shaheen Bagh Dadi’ Bilkis Bano participated in farmer protests
The Shaheen Bag Dadi, who was featured in the list of top 100 influential people of 2020 in Time Magazine, joined the farmer protests yesterday. However, she was detained by police at Singhu Border. Police said that Dadi was stopped for her own safety amid the Covid-19 pandemic as she was a senior citizen.
Social media giant Twitter is already known to have a left-liberal bias, but the same has intensified over the last one year, during the US presidential elections. The bias was most prominent in a new policy by Twitter to flag tweets spreading wrong information, apparently in an effort to prevent the spread of fake news.
While it is true that social media plays a big role in the wide distribution of fake news, and it is laudable that Social Media platforms have started pointing out fake news, what Twitter did was completely influenced by its bias. While flagging of contentious tweets by US Donald Trump by Twitter was regular news ahead of US elections, no such news was heard about any action taken on any controversial claim by the Joe Biden camp. In fact, even when counting for several states were not complete, Twitter had wrongly claimed that the official result of the US presidential election was out, fact-checking a claim by Trump that he has won.
Now, two incidents over the last few days reiterate the well-known bias of Twitter. On Tuesday, Twitter flagged a tweet by BJP IT cell head Amit Malviya as ‘manipulated media’. Malviya had posted a video to claim that an elderly farmer, who was allegedly beaten by a cop during the ongoing farmer protests, was not actually beaten. Referring to images circulating on social media, where a cop was seen raising his stick to hit the farmer. But the video posted by Malviya indicated that the cop may have missed the farmer, and he had flung the stick in the air.
Twitter cited fact-checks by Islamist site Alt News and Leftist site Boom Live to claim that Malviya had posted a short and edited video, and the farmer was actually hit by another cop. According to “Synthetic and manipulated media policy” of Twitter, manipulated media means media (videos, audio, and images) that have been deceptively altered or fabricated. But the fact is that, even in the longer video, it is not sure whether the other cop also managed to hit the farmer or not. While the farmer may have been hit by cops during the protests, the video is not conclusive proof of the same.
On the other hand, a clearly fake tweet by a prominent Chinese official remains untagged by Twitter as fake, underlying the bias in implementing the fake news and manipulated media policy of the microblogging platform.
On Monday, Lijian Zhao, the spokesperson of Foreign Ministry of the hHinese govt, had posted a digitally morphed image to claim that it showed an Australian soldier beheading a teen boy in Afghanistan.
Shocked by murder of Afghan civilians & prisoners by Australian soldiers. We strongly condemn such acts, &call for holding them accountable. pic.twitter.com/GYOaucoL5D
Australian govt had strongly objected to the tweet, and PM Scott Morrison had demanded an apology from the Chinese govt for posting a fake image to defame Australia. Mr Morrison had also informed that the Australian government has formally requested the Chinese government to delete the post and contacted Twitter to have the post removed.
But despite the request by the Australian govt, Twitter has declined to remove the post, and remains on the platform. Moreover, despite it is known that it is a fake image, Twitter has not added any tag to it saying that it is fake or manipulated.
It may be noted that even the creator of the image has acknowledged that it is not a genuine photo. The image used by Lijian Zhao was originally posted on Chinese micro blogging site Weibo, where a user with the username Crowd Kylin had posted it.
It looks like Zhao Lijian lifted that Afghanistan image from a Weibo post by nationalist artist / keyboard warrior “Crowd Kylin." He seems to be enjoying the attention, posting “I heard ScoMo had big problem with my work." HT my ABC colleague Iris Zhao https://t.co/HsboXv7bIj
After Australia objected to the image, he posted a message saying “I heard ScoMo had big problem with my work.” The fact that user referred to the image as “my work” proves that the image was created by the user, and it is not a photograph.
But despite such evidence, and an official request from the Australian government, Twitter refuses to delete the tweet containing the fake image, and also refuses to tag it as fake or manipulated. Thereby, Twitter is clearly legitimising a fake tweet because it was posted by an official from Communist China. This shows that Twitter’s decisions are based on its ideological stand, not on pure facts.
Since fining for not wearing masks in public does not seem to be working as an effective deterrent, the Gujarat High Court has come up with an interesting punishment to deal with people who are caught without masks.
The court has directed the state government to issue a notification, mandating compulsory community service at COVID-19 centres to those who are found violating mask-wearing protocol.
Gujarat High Court orders compulsory community service at COVID19 care centres for those who do not wear masks, directs State Government to issue a notification pic.twitter.com/7EMYx1kKbZ
On November 30, the court heard a petition filed by Advocate Vishal Awtani who sought a fine of Rs 2,000 as well as community service in Covid care centres for those who did not wear masks. The division bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Judge JB Pardiwala had asked the Government to reply to a petition filed by Advocate Vishal Awtani.
The court had observed that imposing steep fines on the violators did not act as a sufficient deterrent and the State Government should consider making offenders work at COVID-19 centres.
Violators will never forget to wear masks for life if sent for COVID-19 community service: Guj HC
Hearing the petition, the bench appeared positive and agreed with the demand made by advocate Awtani. The bench opined that it is important to tell people who violate COVID-19 protocols the fear of the law.
“If it is necessary to give punishments to such irresponsible people by sending them to COVID-19 centres, they will not forget to wear masks for life,” the bench noted.
The court added that they believe the violators should be sent for 10-15 days of non-medical service at COVID-19 care centres along with penalties instead of letting them loose after they pay their fines. The court said if strict rules are enforced, it will imbibe a sense of discipline among the state residents and play a crucial role in containing the coronavirus spread.
Surge in coronavirus cases in Gujarat
Recently, there has been a surge in coronavirus cases in Gujarat. Last one month has seen an increase of over 45,000 new positive cases in Gujarat. The active cases which had gone down to under 12,000 has gone up to almost 15,000. Over 4,000 people have succumbed to the virus in Gujarat. The recent surge in the virus has been noticed after the Diwali festivities.
In a major decision to combat the menace of ‘grooming jihad’, the Uttar Pradesh government is reportedly planning to withdraw a decades-old scheme that promoted and incentivised interfaith marriage in the state, reports Times of India.
According to the reports, the Uttar Pradesh government’s Intercaste & Interfaith Marriage Incentive Scheme, that was started in 1976, promoted and rewarded interfaith couples with a monetary incentive. The scheme was initiated by the national integration department in Uttar Pradesh.
However, the Uttar Pradesh government has now reportedly decided to withdraw the controversial scheme amidst the rising number of forced conversions and ‘Grooming Jihad’ cases. The significant decision also comes days after Uttar Pradesh government had brought an ordinance to curb the rising menace of Grooming Jihad cases in the state, where increasinv number of non-Muslim women are being targeted under false identities and later forced to convert.
The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020, which has been promulgated with the approval of the Governor, will now land offenders in jail for up to 1 to 5 years and attract a fine of Rs 15,000. Under the new law, the offenders proven guilty for mass conversion will attract a jail term of 10 years.
No amount has been released this year: Uttar Pradesh govt
Reportedly, the interfaith couples had to apply to the district magistrate within two years of marriage to become the beneficiaries of the scheme. After verification, the district magistrate forwarded the application to the UP national integration department.
Speaking to TOI, a senior government official said 11 interfaith couples were beneficiaries of the scheme last year and got Rs 50,000 each in UP. The officer added that no amount has been released this year. The four applications that were filed remain pending as it will be reconsidered after the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion ordinance, the officer added.
Earlier in 2017, the state government had also added a caveat to the scheme stating that the interfaith couple will not be eligible for the scheme if either gets converted after the marriage.
UP Minister Shrikant Sharma said that the scheme exists for now. He said, however, that he cannot comment on its continuation. Speaking on the ordinance, the UP Minister added, “The ordinance means to stop forced conversion and punish those who hide their identity to cheat their partners.”
Uttarakhand to follow Uttar Pradesh, to scrap the scheme
Uttarakhand, which retained most of the laws from the parent state Uttar Pradesh, had also continued with the controversial 1976 scheme to provide incentives to interfaith couples for their marriage.
However, Uttarakhand has decided to withdraw the scheme after a controversy had erupted recently in the state after a district administration shared a notice regarding the same.
In an order passed by Tehri Garhwal district’s social welfare officer recently, it was specified that the government had decided to incentivise and promote interfaith and intercaste marriages in the state in an effort to bring unity in the society and country at large. Under the scheme, the social welfare department in the state would provide Rs 50,000 to a person marrying outside his caste or religion.
The Uttarakhand government faced a lot of criticism for the notice, alleging that such schemes will only promote religious conversions and ‘Grooming Jihad’ (Love Jihad) in the state. following the controversy, the order was revoked and a probe was ordered by the CM.
“We do not allow anyone to use Twitter to manipulate or interfere in elections or other civic processes”, said Twitter in early October 2020. Little did people know, however, that Twitter would become a driving force behind information vital to the democratic process being censored thereby tarnishing the democratic process.
In the run-up to the US elections, Twitter played a significant role in censoring content that was inconvenient to now President elect Joe Biden. According to a report by Twitter itself, the social media giant labelled 3,00,000 tweets related to the US elections in just 15 days, between October 27th and November 11th. In fact, in a heinous act of censorship, Twitter had the gumption to censor the then President Donald Trump on election night itself.
Tweet by Donald Trump censored on election night
Earlier, his tweet was censored for vowing to enforce law and order in the wake of massive riots across the country.
It is pertinent to understand here that one may or may not agree with Donald Trump’s assertion of the elections being stolen. However, while the election is yet to be officially called and hearings to establish the authenticity of the voting process is still on, Twitter unilaterally decided what information American citizens should or should not read. While Twitter did not even desist from censoring the President of the United States, it also censored an important story that had surfaced in the run-up to the US Presidential Elections.
An investigative story by the New York Post, showing shady deals between Hunter Biden, Joe Biden and China was censored militantly by Twitter. Any tweet that shared the story was masked. The New York Post Twitter account itself was locked by Twitter for publishing that story and sharing it on Twitter.
In the investigative report the New York Post had asserted that they had accessed material from a damaged Macbook Pro, which revealed that Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, had introduced a businessman from Ukraine to his father while the latter was Vice President of the United States. It is pertinent to note here that Hunter Biden at the time was appointed to the Burisma Board and received a salary of $50,000 per month.
The report had published several documents and mentioned a video that proved that Joe Biden met Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Burisma, where the extent of the Biden family’s involvement, and the sacking of a prosecutor, allegedly after pressure from the then VP Biden, is now under scrutiny.
Later, Fox News confirmed those reports. Furthermore, Fox News also reported that Joe Biden himself was in on a deal that involved Hunter Biden, his son, and a Chinese company.
By all accounts, this was an important story that could have changed the course of the US elections. The authenticity of this story or whether to base their vote on this story should have ideally depended on the citizens of the United States. One of the central principles of a thriving democracy is that the people have access to all the information and then, based on that information, they are free to make their decision. However, Twitter proved to be a great impediment to the election process itself when it chose to censor the story.
Ted Cruz, the junior states senator from Texas questioned Jack Dorsey of Twitter and asked him who elected him to take such decisions. Jack, in the process, was caught lying and fumbling his way through.
The obvious question that would arise in the minds of the people would be to wonder if the election result truly would have been any different had Twitter minded its business and not censored just one story that exposed the proximity of the Biden family to China and the corruption that seemingly ran deep.
The question was answered by a survey that claimed that one in six people who voted for Joe Biden would have changed their mind had they got the full information about the Hunter Biden story.
In a survey, 4.6% of Biden’s voters said they would not have selected him had they been aware of his son’s China money affair. According to a McLaughlin & Associates poll done for the Media Research Center, 36% of Biden voters were not aware of the scandal. And 13% of those said they would not have voted for Biden had they known.
While the mainstream media was equally complicit, Twitter outright censored the story, almost militantly. With the survey surfacing, it becomes clear that Twitter played a pivotal role in the outcome of the US Presidential Elections, deliberately hiding vital information about one of the candidates from the voters.
With Twitter admitting that it has a left-bias, it becomes evident that what they did, and got away with, during the US elections was only a blue-print of the times to come.
Only today, Twitter censored a Tweet by Amit Malviya, the IT cell head of the ruling party of India.
Tweet censored by Twitter
The backstory to this is rather interesting. Rahul Gandhi, the leader of Congress party had shared an image with an insinuation that the police was beating up an old farmer. While Khalistani elements have taken over the farmer protests, the opposition parties are trying to prove that the protest is still spearheaded by farmers. That apart, in this exact moment where this picture was captured, the old farmer was not being beaten up by the police.
Twitter, instead of flagging the original picture with misleading claims, flagged a ‘fact-check’ video by Amit Malviya and added the label that read ‘manipulated media’.
Of course, this label itself might not have far-reaching implications as far as any democratic process is concerned, but it is pertinent to note that this is the first time a label like this has been applied to ANY Indian Twitter handle. Several fake claims have been shared by several politicians of the Congress party and even the so-called ‘fact-checkers’ that Twitter seems to have relied on, however, none of those claims was ever flagged. With Twitter’s admitted Left-wing bias, nobody needs to wonder which side they would choose to censor and the trajectory is rather evident with the censorship of Malviya’s tweet.
The inherent control that Twitter wishes to wield over elections, as clear from their own election guidelines
In an ‘update‘ by Twitter on what steps they plan to take to ensure that elations are free and fair, there are several problematic plans that they have put into place that expose just how much power they wish to wield over information flow. Here are some excerpts and why they are problematic:
1. Twitter in its blogpost says that they have ensured that in the ‘trends for you’ page, they will only show trends with ‘added context’ where Twitter itself will add a description and a “representative tweet or article”.
Twitter election update
This clearly signals to Twitter moving from being just an intermediary and wading into editorial control. Also, Twitter can thus decide what information they choose to show when a subject is trending on Twitter. So for example, if everyone was talking about how Khalistanis had taken over the farmer protest, they could choose to plug a shoddy article from some Left-leaning portal exclusively that whitewashes the Khalistani slogans being raised.
2. They admit that they reinforced the claims that the election process is safe evenjhough the Republicans were alleging something completely different, and, more importantly, there was a legal process underway.
Twitter election update
Now, whether those claims are true or false, Twitter as an intermediary has no right to control the narrative or decide what people should or should not read. Whether there was fraud or not, is presumably for the US courts to decide. Whether to believe that fraud was done or not, is for the American people to decide after reading all the information available from both sides of the spectrum. Twitter is not an election expert, as was even pointed by Ted Cruz and therefore, it has no right to issue verdicts.
If they indulge in such blatant propaganda, in this case, Twitter is free to define the counters of any conversation that voters might want to hold. An intermediary’s job should be to ensure free and fair conversation around elections. If the left media is free to present their side, so should the ‘right’. The eventual decision on what should be believed and what should not be, should be left up to the readers and voters. However, Twitter wishes to ensure a strict hold on which direction the conversation should go.
3. Twitter admits that they slowed down the process of information dissemination
Twitter has also admitted that they slowed down the process of information dissemination.
Twitter election update
Twitter in its update has admitted that the reach of tweets reduced by 20% after they introduced their new feature. Mind you, this feature does not work with every account. It only works with accounts and tweets that Twitter deems necessary. Here too, they have assumed the role of an editor to decide which tweet’s reach should be limited and which tweet should be amplified.
4. Twitter has no plan to stop this madness
Twitter has made it exceptionally clear that they will continue to interfere in elections.
Twitter election update
It is pertinent to note that they have claimed that they will “protect integrity of election conversation” and they have done this for “many elections around the world”.
I would like to remind our readers what a recent survey found:
4.6% of Biden’s voters said they would not have selected him had they been aware of his son’s China money affair. According to a McLaughlin & Associates poll done for the Media Research Center, 36% of Biden voters were not aware of the scandal. And 13% of those said they would not have voted for Biden had they known.
This was a direct consequence of Twitter brutally suppressing this story.
It is therefore evident that Twitter has no plans to stop its interference in elections around the world. With the censorship of Tweet by Amit Malviya, the indication is rather clear – the next target is India and the central government has to be on its toes to ensure that Twitter does not censor any side, no matter how ludicrous the claim, and let democracy take its own course.
Facebook an equal participant in election interference and must be brought to its knees as well
Facebook is an equal participant in its election manipulation. We all remember the story of Cambridge Analytica and how it was manipulating user data to push voters in a particular direction.
The detailed analysis of Facebook’s policies will be saved for another article, however, it is pertinent to note who controls the dissemination of information on Facebook and who decides which pages and posts are to be censored.
The Facebook Oversight Board has been a cause of much consternation ever since it was proposed. Ultimately, when the board to regulate content on the social media platform was set up, it created quite the stir after it was revealed that 18 of the 20 members were linked to the American Billionaire and prominent Democrat donor, George Soros.
Since then, another revelation has come to light. One of the members of the Facebook Oversight Board is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist outfit banned in multiple Arab and Western countries, in addition to being a Nobel Peace Laureate. The Nobel Peace Prize does not carry much meaning at this point given the fact that Barack Obama, another winner, went on to bomb Libya into slavery apart from plunging the entire Middle-East into further chaos.
But membership of the Muslim Brotherhood does carry a lot of meaning. The Middle-East Online (MEO) reported in June that Yemeni journalist and activist Tawakkol Karman, co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011, is a member of the terrorist outfit who was awarded a place in the Facebook Oversight Board in order to regulate the platform’s content.
According to the report, Tawakkol Karman was formerly a member of the Islamist Yemeni Islah Party (YIP) that was backed by the Muslim Brotherhood. She called the MB “one of the victims of official tyranny and terrorism in the region.” The MB acknowledged their ties with her and proudly congratulated her after she won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Our full report on Facebook’s Oversight Board and how it is run by people close to George Soros, who vowed to fight nationalism, and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, can be read here.
Reach of Facebook and Twitter in India – the country it plans to interfere with next
There are certain statistics that we need to look at before we understand just how detrimental censorship on social media can really be.
Worldwide, Twitter has over 336 million monthly active users and 100 million daily active users.
23% of the Internet population is said to be on Twitter.
Top 5 countries on Twitter accounts for 50% of overall Tweets.
2 billion Queries are served by Twitter on a daily basis.
83% of the World’s Leaders have Twitter accounts.
There are 24.6% verified Journalists on Twitter.
Twitter now can handle 18 quintillion user accounts.
500 million people view Twitter without logging in.
In fact, in India alone, we have over 34.4 million monthly active users on Twitter.
While the Twitter statistics are from 2019, the following Facebook statistics are from October 2020.
Facebook users across the world (Source: Statista)
With such a massive reach of both Facebook and Twitter, it is imperative that the government ensures that the social media giants remain intermediaries and don’t take on the roles of editors, elected representatives or even Soros-esque clandestine disruptors who want to ensure that their political ideology is enforced upon the world – by manipulation or censorship.
There is a protest, a riot or a corruption scandal. The public needs to know the facts about what is happening on the ground. You can’t just believe what any random person tells you. So, who do you trust to tell you the truth?
The “fact-checkers” of course. They will examine what people are saying all around. They will weigh the evidence and ascertain the facts on the ground. And then they will tell us what really happened. That’s why they are called fact-checkers, right?
Wait a minute. Didn’t we already have an entire class of people who claimed they were doing exactly this already? I don’t remember any prominent “fact-checkers” say ten years ago. What did we do back then? Did we just put our faith in random people?
Ah, I remember. We used to have people called “journalists.” They would reach out to people on the ground, weigh the evidence, ascertain the facts and tell us what really happened.
So what happened to these journalists? There are plenty of people still around who call themselves journalists.
I will tell you what happened. The journalists lost all credibility, that’s what. Why did they lose all credibility? Because bit by bit, we realized that journalists were just feeding us an agenda, not reporting facts.
What does a con artist do when their fraud is exposed? They can’t function any longer under their old name. Because everyone knows they are a fraud. The con artist simply comes back under a new name, wearing a fake moustache. That’s exactly what “fact-checking” is. A new name for the same old fraud of agenda driven journalism.
Ten years ago, a “reputed” newspaper or news channel would go out there and pretend to report facts. And most people would have believed it. But, over the years, they lost credibility. In story after story, situation after situation, their bias and agenda got exposed. Once upon a time, people would be surprised if you showed them examples of media bias. People used to look up to journalists. Those who grew up in the 90s will remember movies and serials where journalists were cast as heroes. Today, nobody would do that. The public has become wiser. They have no respect for journalists any more.
The con artists have had to rebrand themselves. The new way to suppress your opinion is to claim they are “fact checking” you.
Consider this. There is a riot. The journalists say that community X burned 10 houses of community Y. Ten years ago, those reports would have been the last word. But today, everyone has a phone with a sophisticated recorder and camera, and a social media account to broadcast their views across the planet. Today, someone will hit back by showing that community Y burned 50 houses of community X in another part of town.
And so it will keep going back and forth. Everyone has a bias. Journalists know they can’t win this.
So they create this new myth of a “fact-checker.” An unbiased angel who descends from above and brings you the facts. The angels find one guy who disagrees with you. Instead of calling it an opinion, they scream that you have been “fact-checked” and proven to be false. That’s the headline: FACT-CHECK! As long as you claim to be “fact-checking,” you have a magical aura of neutrality and moral superiority.
And now that fact-checkers have certified one particular version of the story, it becomes fact. Big Tech can now seize upon this certificate and censor you. It happened exactly the way it would happen ten years ago. Back then, they censored your version because journalists disagreed with it. Now they censor your version because fact-checkers disagree with it.
“Fact-checking” sounds like a new business. Not enough people have figured out their tricks yet. And it certainly sounds like a noble thing to do. Just like journalism, back in the day.
I challenge you: show me one difference between the job description of a journalist and a fact checker. If it walks like a duck, if it looks like a duck and if it quacks like a duck, it’s a duck! You can’t seriously fall for this.
Ten years ago, the online right waged a battle against “journalism.” And they won. The con artists are back. Dressed as fact-checkers. The struggle starts all over again.
In a setback to Congress supporter Saket Gokhale, the Attorney General KK Venugopal has declined to give his consent to initiate contempt proceedings against activist-author Shefali Vaidya, reports Live Law.
Saket Gokhale, who claims to be an ardent follower of Gandhi-scion Rahul Gandhi, had sought the permission of the Attorney General to file a contempt petition against writer Shefali Vaidya under Section 15 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that she had made some objectionable comments against country’s judiciary.
Responding to the letter received by Congress supporter Saket Gokhale seeking action activist Shefali Vaidya, Attorney General KK Venugopal said that the tweets posted by Shefali Vaidya on her Twitter page, which according to Gokhale was contempt of court, were made almost a year back.
Attorney General KK Venugopal Declines Consent to @SaketGokhale to Initiate Contempt Proceedings against @ShefVaidya on the ground of Limitation since her alleged tweet was posted one Yr ago pic.twitter.com/eZ55Qiosmp
The Attorney General KK Venugopal said that according to the Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, one cannot initiate any contempt action either suo motu or otherwise after the expiry of one year from the date of the allegedly contumacious conduct.
“In these circumstances, therefore, without going into the merits of your request, no action can be taken against Ms Shefali Vaidya. I accordingly decline consent,” the AG Venugopal said.
The tweets posted by Shegali Vaidya, against which Gokhale wanted to file contempt of court case, were posted in 2017, 2018 and 2019. Last month, he had posted screenshots of the tweets he had targeted, saying that he was “working on an interesting contempt of court petition”. In the tweets, Shefali Vaidya had criticised the apex court on the ban on firecrackers during Diwali, and other contentious observations made in other cases.
Been working on an interesting contempt of court petition since yesterday.
A little glimpse of it.
Now hope the law is really equal for everyone in the eyes of the Attorney General For India. pic.twitter.com/SXtMRzeVqq
Needless to say, Saket Gokhale wanted to file a contempt case against Shefali Vaidya as a retaliatory move after the Attorney General had allowed contempt of case to be filed against left-liberals who had severely criticised the Supreme Court for granting bail to Republic TV Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami.
AG gives consent to initiate contempt action against far-left trolls
The decline of consent by Attorney General KK Venugopal comes a day he had granted his consent to initiate contempt proceedings against comic artist Rachita Taneja for making derogatory remarks against the country’s judiciary.
Terming the comic artist’s grave efforts to malign judiciary, KK Venugopal said that the act was an “audacious assault and insult to the institution”.
A law student had approached the Attorney General urging him to grant the necessary permission to initiate a contempt proceeding against comic artist Rachita Taneja, the founder of web-comic Sanitary Panels, following her two Tweets dated November 11 and 12. Through her cartoons, the comic artist had insinuated a quid pro quo relationship between the apex Court and the central government, alleging that on the govt’s direction, the court granted interim relief to Republic TV Editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami.
While granting the consent, the AG stated that the tweets by Sanitary Panels has a clear implication that Supreme Court is biased towards the ruling political party BJP, which is somehow interested in protecting Republic TV Editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami.
Last month, Attorney General KK Venugopal had also granted his consent to initiate contempt of court proceedings against far-left troll masquerading as a ‘stand-up comedian’ Kunal Kamra. A Mumbai based lawyer had sought the Attorney General’s permission to initiate contempt proceedings against Kunal Kamra for his tweets against the Supreme Court after the apex court had granted bail to Arnab Goswami.
