Dr Shiva Blasts Musk, Conservative Influencers as 'Controlled Opposition' in Fight for Free Speech
Don't Miss An Update
Get the latest independent journalism from Alexandra Bruce delivered straight to your inbox.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. Your email stays private.
The Article
And that led to the judge in that lawsuit, if you remembered, the judge said, 'This lawsuit, Dr Shiva's lawsuit will go down in history as a lawsuit that will be covered in every Constitutional Law class.
Dr Shiva says that none of the Free Speech influencers covered this, because it is a "Third Rail".
Dr Shiva says he was also the first to expose the Stanford University Internet Observatory's "Long Fuse Report", which details not only Twitter's "Partner Support Portal", not only the government and non-government actors but it also details the fact that The Intercept founder, Pierre Omidyar, the Murdochs and other billionaires had contributed to create the non-governmental NGO called The Center for Internet Security, which served as the laundering mechanism so government would send their requests to silence someone to this NGO and then the NGO would tell Twitter, Facebook, etc. Dr Shiva created this diagram to illustrate how this works. Dr Shiva describes the revelations of the Twitter Files as a "limited hangout" for damage control. He says it's been basically a plagiarism of his lawsuit but only a small fraction of it. He says, "Musk is really the Devil, here and conservatives are being sheepled back into thinking that he's solving Free Speech. In fact, what he's done is created an environment where it's essentially the death of Free Speech 2.0." Dr Shiva says, "Musk is not there to fix the crime scene, he's part of the crime scene and that Matt Taibbi and the other journalists publishing the Twitter Files are Musk's lap dogs, feigning transparency." However, a few hours after this interview was published this past Friday, Matt Taibbi, himself announced that he was leaving Twitter, because he claimed the latter was blocking links from the Substack domain, where he has a very popular blog.For his part, Musk tweeted:
1. Substack links were never blocked. Matt’s statement is false.Libby Emmons at Human Events checked and found that indeed, the links are not blocked, they are placed behind a warning window but they are still accessible.2. Substack was trying to download a massive portion of the Twitter database to bootstrap their Twitter clone, so their IP address is obviously untrusted.
3. Turns out Matt is/was an employee of Substack.
Emmons wrote:
Twitter recently made their code open source so that users could see and understand the algorithms employed, make suggestions, and develop tools to use on the platform. But Substack, apparently, was downloading the code wholesale and using it to create a competing social media product. That the code was made open source, however, was not an invitation to wholesale theft, which is what Musk has alleged Substack basically did.It's now unclear if Taibbi will continue to publish "Twitter Files" reports after his departure from the platform, where he has 1.8 million followers. He had been given access to Twitter's internal communications on the condition that he would publish his findings on Twitter first.
Alexandra Bruce
Publisher of Forbidden.News and curator of independent investigative reporting focused on censorship, geopolitics, and stories overlooked by mainstream outlets.
