Categories Society
google has memory holed the great barrington declaration
not only have they wiped it from the top results, they have salted it with false claims about "climate denial"
it's pure, simple propaganda
here's bing (who plays it straight)
simple, right? here's the declaration, here's the wiki page.
you can see the authors, kulldorf, gupta, bhattacharya's names and know this this was written by medical professors at harvard, stanford, and oxford.
there's no slant, not editorializing, it's primary source info.
now let's have a look at google.
pretty different looking results, huh? not only do they not lead with the declaration itself or its authors, they lead with dishonest hit pieces.
they try to tie it to climate denial and fake science.
um, no. this is "fake search."
the google results for "great barrington declaration" are simply not search results at all.
it's a propagandistic hit piece ducking the science, ignoring the credentials of the authors, failing to show the declaration, and spinning it as some kind of fringe cabal of "deniers."
it's staggeringly blatant once you see it, but will anyone?
or will they be fooled by this because it's subtle and you think google is a search engine, not a radicalized editorial column.
and it's now EVERYWHERE.
reddit will not allow users to see
OMG \U0001f62f
— Ivor Cummins (@FatEmperor) October 10, 2020
- reddit has censored discussion of The Great Barrington Declaration
- and Google has removed it from their search engine results (can only see articles about it now, as they cannot censor those
1984 is here?
Sign up here: https://t.co/lBaMxnQD1xhttps://t.co/1decFrnoCs
Social media: *bans people plotting or encouraging violent overthrow of country*
The right: It's not fair! You're just attacking us because of our politics. You're being anti-democratic!
Everyone else:
The way Republicans and the right have responded to the Jan. 6 attack--explicitly by Trump supporters on Trump's behalf--has been an abusive tactic known as
DARVO: Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender: https://t.co/Q2ofRX13tl
— Olivia Waite (@O_Waite) January 9, 2021
DARVO is so effective because perpetrators of abuse twist reality so their victims look less believable and more aggressive.
Hence Republicans on the evening of the attack saying, "We're better than this. This is what Democrats do, not what we do."
My first observations in the main thread are here, but this offshoot is needed because there's been so many wise & witty things I've
37.90/ Limbaugh was a cruel hate-machine who made a fortune off hurting people. To say "don't speak ill of the dead" is the attitude of abuse enablers.
— Joshua Cypess (@JoshuaCypess) February 18, 2021
If you can't condemn a ghoul who dedicated his life to destroying society, you're part of the problem! https://t.co/ijvG2zDACH
2/ First, re: those who in their wayward moral obtuseness feel we "can't speak ill of the dead." I've said that this is what abuse enablers say, but I hear that some religious traditions preach this. Oy.
So there's this: https://t.co/7Ky4RA3nkZ &
This is how Rush's death should be honored. Let's not speak ill of the dead, let's quote Rush speaking ill of the dead.
— Sane English (@SaneEnglish) February 17, 2021
3/ Drucker is another great wit, and this carries the proper mood
It's easy to make fun of Rush Limbaugh right now, but it's important to remember that he also brought a lot of people a lot of joy by dying
— Mike Drucker (@MikeDrucker) February 17, 2021
4/ There's definitely a Jewish Tradition angle for how to treat evil people who die: the only respect is to justice, right & wrong, and above all compassion's existence necessitates condemning cruelty
It\u2019s ok\u2014essential, even\u2014to speak the truth about people who caused great harm.
— Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg (@TheRaDR) February 17, 2021
Even after their death.
5/ We're coming up on #Purim, and that's all about how to remember evil. There may be a reason, then, that I share the attitude of many other people committed to righting
today i said Jewish culture requires dancing on the graves of those who have wronged us and i picked up like 300 followers LMAO
— Erin Biba (@erinbiba) February 18, 2021
people love Jewish vengeance \U0001f923\U0001f923
wait till they hear about Purim
Equalities Minister \u2066@trussliz\u2069 says the government has been too focused on \u201cfashionable\u201d race, gender and sexuality issues and will now pivot towards focusing on poverty and levelling up. https://t.co/UOrxSapG7Z
— Paul Brand (@PaulBrandITV) December 17, 2020
So really simple questions
And there are so so many
Why are concerns over race, gender and sexuality put into air quotes e.g. "fashionable"?
Is "fashionable" meant as a derogatory?
Who are you selling this shite to when you write it this way?
When did the government become "too focused" on race, gender and sexuality issues?
Define "too focused" ?
Will now "pivot" - what you mean from today 17th December 2020?
Why could you not focus on "poverty and levelling up" at the same time as equality issues since some of these issues go hand in in hand after all?
Who and what are you "levelling up" from?
District 1: @SupervisorAlejo
District 2: @PhillipsForSupe
District 3: @SupervisorLopez
District 4: @WendyRootAskew
District 5: @MaryLAdams https://t.co/PbrHnXPTGY
Thanks to the Grupo Flor team for showing me their Salinas facility this week. Glad to hear more about their cannabis retail operations. pic.twitter.com/3xSiObpUSS
— Rep. Jimmy Panetta (@RepJimmyPanetta) January 29, 2021
The more thinking I do the less serious - and more ludicrous - the entire thing looks. And the more obvious it becomes that this is the proposal of deeply unwell individuals who are not thinking clearly.
Can you game out where it would go it theoretically Trump did enact some EO demanding the impounding of voting machines? As that\u2019s clearly the game. Like he signs it, then what? Do marshals listen or refuse? Do states sue and get an emergency injunction and that\u2019s the end?
— Bryan Duva (@duva60) December 21, 2020
On the legal side, I read through the list of emergency powers - the whole list - that was assembled by the Brennan Center. Nothing on that list fits. Nothing comes even
It seems extraordinarily unlikely that any executive order along the lines of what has been discussed would be legal. In this case, it can be taken as a given that one or more targeted jurisdictions would dash right off to the courthouse.
Standing would not, it should go without saying, be likely to be an issue. I doubt redressability would either. I think it's very likely that restraining orders and injunctions would be swiftly issued.
That's the legal side, to the extent it's possible to speculate on that at all at this point. Basically, there's no readily apparent legal basis for such a thing, so it probably wouldn't be legal.
That's the easy part. Now for the nuttier side - the logistics.
*Black-owned homes devalued 23%
*Black-owned property taxes 13% higher
*Bank fees 2x higher for black customers
*Black-owned biz closed at twice the rate in pandemic
*Black people w/ NO criminal record earn $10k less than white people w/ criminal record
Sources on all that
1. Homes devalued https://t.co/PChbtDLtDF
2. Property taxes https://t.co/N6ELUlaZsR
3. Bank fees https://t.co/SzLqWQ7IG3
4. Small business closures https://t.co/8OWj0G2f9Z
5. Pay/criminal record comparison
*Black college grads have 50% less wealth than white high school dropouts
*Top 10 most-audited counties are 79% people of color
*Black-white homeowner gap is bigger now than 120 years ago
*Electoral college gives white people 16% more voting power than Black people
Sources on that:
1. College/high school dropout wealth gap: https://t.co/jSPDQhOFSm
2. Most audited counties: https://t.co/IhEliUPPSD
3. Homeownership gap https://t.co/cJl9G2Roan
4. Electoral college
*All Black Americans combined have half the wealth of richest 400 ppl
*White ppl get inheritance at 3x the rate of Black ppl
*Black college grads have $25k more in student debt than white grads
*Black families have $166k less wealth than white families, more than pre-Civil Rights
The equal opportunities section in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female (including trans female)
Male (including trans male)
Non-binary
Other.
1/12
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/12
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that. 'Other' is not a valid option.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/12
'trans female', 'trans male' and 'Non-binary' are also not valid options are not used or defined in the Act.
4/12
You then ask "Is your gender the same as the gender you were assigned at birth?"
'Gender' at birth is a meaningless concept and 'gender' is not 'assigned' at birth: sex is observed and recorded and is immutable.
5/12
The EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES MONITORING FORM in your job application correctly has sex in a list of protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010
However...
https://t.co/rZk1bAiooU
1/11
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male.
2/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/11
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/11
Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.
5/11