We Live In A Mad Society.
"We live in a mad society, where the most insane are chosen to lead, and the people who call out the madness are ridiculed and silenced." -- Timo Malum
Bluesky Proves The Land Of The Left Is The Land Of The Lost.
It didn't take long. Another social media site run by the radical left has kicked me out. Not long after having my Mastodon accounts deleted without cause, Bluesky has now done the same. To be honest, I'm surprised I lasted as long as I did, but not because I broke any rules. To the contrary, I was polite and civil and did my best to link to sources whenever I posted anything related to health and science issues. But I did post news articles and podcasts that I hoped would open some minds and maybe create a dialog. For my efforts I was called a Nazi and a MAGA cultist, and my sources were all dismissed as being not good enough for the pseudo-intellectuals who read my posts. But I wasn't very active on Bluesky at all, preferring to keep a low profile and gently nudging rather than shoving in an attempt to not be cancelled. How did it work out? Here's the email I received from the "Bluesky Moderation Team":
Bluesky's moderators claim I posted content that promoted "hateful content" or was "disruptive to others". This claim is a lie. I was careful to be respectful of others. I'm not a bully and never have been, but I will stand up for myself if attacked and I will correct misinformation when I see it. But apparently in the land of the left, replying with factual data is perceived as being disruptive. The left has become so obsessed with conformity and obedience that instead of resembling the free-love hippies of the 1960's they're now more like the hive-mind Borg creatures of Star Trek. Independent thought isn't allowed. Be assimilated or be destroyed.
They don't believe in shared truth. They use words as weapons. They rely on you implicitly assuming that they have good intentions and are aiming at shared truth. It's a deception. For Marxists, dialogue is not a way of attaining truth. It is a forum for manipulation.
Although I had low expectations, I did go through the motions of filing an appeal to my account's deletion. Two days later and no one at Bluesky has bothered to reply. And honestly, the only reply I expect to get is "appeal rejected", which is the reply I got from Mastodon and also a year earlier from Elon Musk's Twitter/X.
This is the world we now live in: a world where mentally weak anonymous authoritarians function as social media moderators and censor anything that upsets their frail emotions or is seen as a threat to their demonic Marxist agenda. It isn't possible to have a real conversation with these people. Dissenting opinions are dismissed without thought. Their minds are closed. Their science is settled. Nothing changes until new propaganda is sent to them like a software upgrade.
I gave it my best shot. I tried on three separate social media sites. And now I question if it's possible to co-exist with people who are so mentally shut down, intolerant, and (strangely) arrogant.
Bluesky has proven to me that the land of the left is the land of the lost. But I won't stop talking. I have a voice. It's too bad the people who need to hear it the most will hear nothing but echoes of propaganda and hate coming from the soulless entities that control them. 
Do Wealthy Donors Influence How The Associated Press Reports The News?
The Associated Press is one of the largest news agencies in the world, writing stories that are republished or recited by hundreds of newspapers, magazines, and television news programs. Much of the news coverage you read or watch every day was created by the AP. You may not even realize the story you're reading or watching came from the AP unless you happen to notice the letters "AP" at the top of the column, or you notice that TV news hosts on different stations are saying exactly the same thing on the same day. Since news outlets can't afford to keep large staffs of reporters on their payrolls anymore, they rely on the Associated Press to take up the slack. That shouldn't be a problem if the reporting is accurate and impartial.
Their website states "We were founded as an independent news cooperative, whose members are U.S. newspapers and broadcasters, steadfast in our mission to inform the world. To this day, AP remains independent, beholden only to the facts."
Does the AP meet that standard? Are they really independent and impartial? Do they accurately report the facts?
I took a look at the AP's website and saw news stories that definitely appeared to be pushing the political elite's agendas. There's an entire page filled with dozens of reports on climate change, but no stories from any of the thousands of scientists who dispute the official narrative that climate change is caused by human activity. If you get your news from the Associated Press, you probably have no idea that there isn't a consensus among scientists on climate change. No alternative viewpoints seem to be allowed. On their health page, there are several articles suggesting you get flu and COVID vaccines, but there's no mention of the potential risks of doing so. I saw no stories about vaccine injuries. There are no stories questioning the pseudoscience of virology. But there IS a story that defends ultraprocessed foods. And the AP's site has an entire section devoted to questionable "fact checking" on subjects including election fraud, Haitians eating pets, and FEMA's hurricane response in North Carolina. Granted, many of their articles seem to be well researched and impartial, but that's to be expected on a site that is essentially controlled opposition: sprinkle some truth onto a pile of propaganda and the public will believe it all.
So I don't buy their claim of being "beholden only to the facts". But who are they beholden to? Perhaps to their many financial supporters:
Let's take a look at some of them. The list is in alphabetical order with one glaring exception: the Gates Foundation is at the top of the list. In late 2023, the Gates Foundation gave the AP $1,829,815. It's probably safe to assume that Bill Gates has a lot of influence at the Associated Press. Gates is notorious for pushing vaccines, the COVID psyop, fake meat, digital ID's, the climate change agenda, and censorship. While the AP may say it is independent, the senior editors are almost certain to keep Gates' interests in mind when deciding which topics to cover and how they're reported. Even if there isn't an official policy to please Gates, it would be career suicide to piss him off.
Who else funds the Associated Press? For the sake of brevity, I'll only mention the funding sources that have a clear focus on an agenda that could influence the AP's work. Some, such as the Carnegie Corporation of New York, award hundreds of grants every year for a wide range of projects and most of them look reasonably harmless. Others have a much narrower range and thus are more likely to exert influence on the media for favorable coverage of those projects.
For example, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation awards a significant number of grants to environmental issues, particularly climate change and renewable energy.
The Climate and Land Use Alliance "advances land use policies and finance that help countries achieve ambitious climate targets".
The Hearthland Foundation is focused on equity and justice, which are buzzwords of the radical left.
The Hollyhock Foundation has climate change as one of its priorities.
The KR Foundation's primary goal is "to address the root causes of climate change and environmental degradation". They fund projects that promote the elimination of fossil fuels, cars, and the consumption of meat.
The Nathan Cummings Foundation websites states "We believe the dual crises named in our mission (inequality and climate change) cannot be addressed without first addressing their root causes and oppressive manifestations. That’s why we are focused on the long-term and interconnected goal of advancing racial, economic, and environmental justice (REEJ)".
The Outrider Foundation "supports multimedia storytelling about nuclear threats and climate change". Its advisory board includes the infamous Michael E. Mann.
The Patrick J. McGovern Foundation pushes artificial intelligence and other digital technologies to solve "the world’s most pressing challenges, from the COVID-19 pandemic to climate change to health inequities".
Pivotal Philanthropies Foundation refers to Pivotal Ventures, a company founded by Melinda Gates that advances left-leaning ideologies, with diversity being their main focus.
Quadrivium has five main focus areas: democracy, technology & society, scientific understanding, climate change, and ocean health. How connected are they to the Associated Press? Their website brags, "We helped to stand up a climate desk at the Associated Press (AP). AP’s member cooperative business model helps the largest and smallest news organizations reach populations across a wide range of geographies and cultural and economic backgrounds with climate change stories that matter in their communities. Importantly, these stories improve public understanding of the existential threats we face as well as the many solutions available and underway." Quadrivium also helped set up an organization called 'SciLine', which among other things provides vaccine propaganda to news reporters. SciLine fails to mention any adverse reactions (such as death) from vaccines, choosing instead to repeat the standard "safe and effective" talking points of the medical industrial complex.
With the Associated Press accepting so much money from foundations with clear-cut agendas, especially climate change, its difficult to accept that the AP is impartial in its reporting. Reporters and editors are bound to self-censor even if there isn't a written policy to do so. News and research that runs counter to what the foundations pay for likely never sees the light of day.
Public ignorance is the inevitable result.
Censorship Is Fast & Furious On Mastodon.
Pictured above is a screenshot of the message I received from the power-mad moderators on Mastodon.social, one of the largest servers in the Mastodon social media network. Less than two days after I joined, I got my first strike against my account for merely reposting someone else's content. The original post stayed up, but my repost was taken down. The reason given? "Content violates the following community guidelines: Do not share information widely-known to be false and misleading."
Here's the post:
The original post by Lesley Carhart said, "I am not sure that people outside the US who have not had to deal with a similar party leader understand when we say, 'cult', we mean an actual, completely brainwashed cult. Not just racists. Not just people who like strong men or fascism, as exists globally today. An actual cult, where the members are willing to abandon their families and long-time friends, give away their belongings, and even resort to violence. Nothing, no matter how vile or rational, will get through to them except careful deprogramming. We have to contend with that. It can happen to you. Please be careful out there."
At first I thought she had to be talking about the Marxist Democratic Party, since all the things she describes are what I see every day among the brainwashed leftists. But then I saw her hashtags, which all point to "blue" targets. It was then I realized she was talking about Republicans and probably anyone who supports Donald Trump.
I could go point by point and destroy Carhart's post, but my concern isn't so much with her as it is with the moderators at Mastodon. Why was my repost considered a violation of community standards? Was it what Carhart said, or how I replied? My reply to the post said, "Members of a radical leftist cult think YOU'RE in a cult, and must be "deprogrammed".
My reply was true, because that's clearly what Carhart said should happen to Republicans. Is pointing out the truth a violation of community standards, or is the act of criticizing a leftist my real violation? To be clear, Carhart's post originally appeared on Infosec.exchange, another Mastodon server, but was then made visible on Mastodon.social, where my account is. (If you're not familiar with the Mastodon "Fediverse", this probably seems confusing.) It's possible the original post met the standards on Infosec.exchange, but not Mastodon.social, and by reposting it and adding a comment, I brought it to the attention of the Mastodon.social moderators who might have been okay with my comment but not the original post. Unfortunately, I will never know. I appealed the strike, asking how the repost and comment were "widely-known to be false and misleading". Within a few minutes, I got a reply: Appeal Denied. I wasn't given the courtesy of an explanation.
I really wasn't surprised. The same thing happened to me on Twitter/X, only worse: a permanent suspension with no reason given, and no response to my appeal. This seems to be the standard operating procedure for social media sites now that the stench of authoritarianism has begun spreading around the world.
But what makes it so ironic is that the majority of the posts on Mastodon are from Democrats and other Marxists who constantly whine about the dangers of MAGA fascism. Can one of them explain how censorship from the left, often in cooperation with the government and big tech companies, is anything but fascism?
Worse than I've ever seen in my life, people are radically divided by their political ideologies. We all have more common ground than we realize, but the powerful people in the establishment and the media hacks they employ work day and night to drive wedges between us. In many cases, each side believes outright lies about the other, fueled by propaganda and other deliberate efforts to keep us fighting. It's a situation that works very well for the establishment.
Social media promised to bring us together and usher in a new era of communication and understanding. But if power-mad, intolerant moderators abuse their positions and censor things they disagree with, they end up doing harm to society even if they think they're doing something noble.
Mastodon.social has disappointed me in less than two days. They should do better. They HAVE to do better. They, and every other social media site, have a vital responsibility to the public.
They must begin to understand: there is no place for censorship in a free society. But we must begin to understand: many on the left don't want us to be free.
The Light Paper Issues 49 & 50 Are Now Available.
UK's only honest newspaper is now available for free download. Issue 49 has stories on infighting within the freedom movement, government & media manipulation, the dangers of smartphones, the dirt on clean energy, how to fight back against tyranny, and much more!
Issue 50 has stories on the killer drug Midazolam, wasteful government spending, COVID censorship, the war on the elderly, the transgender pronoun debate, insane chicken registries, and of course, much more!
The Mainstream Media Is The Enemy Of The People.
"The mainstream media is the enemy of the people." [art credit: unknown]