Thumbing My Nose at Lying Censors

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© October 3, 2022

 

I have kept a very small presence on Facebook since after maintaining a profile there for over a greater part decade while experiencing multiple Facebook jail sentences ultimately ending with a permanent ban of my original Facebook presence.

 

THEN I waited a couple of months and joined Facebook with new profile information primarily to reconnect with old graduating High School classmates (Class of 1975). Sadly being in Washington State I discovered too many of those Classmates were members of the Sheeple Darkside Dem-Marxist Party swallowing lying propaganda hook-line-and-sinker. BUT some were teen friends and acquaintances so - Que Sera, Sera – I avoid writing politics to old Classmates for memory’s sake.

 

Maybe it was an error on my part. I joined 10 Conservative-oriented Groups and a couple anti-Medical Tyranny Groups. Apparently a FB protected troll sifted through some of my old posts on the anti-Medical Tyranny Groups which have landed me AGAIN in Facebook Jail for about 5-days with an implied warning that if keep telling documented truth the Facebook Censors label “Misinformation”, I AGAIN could be permanently banned.

 

Yet another banning will not break my heart, because in all truth I spend a very limited time on truth-deficient Facebook. AND YET, I will miss checking some of the Class of 1975 because none of us are spring chickens any longer. I just hope I was not trolled by a Dem-Marxist Sheeple Class of 1975 and my current jail term is the result of downright Leftist Facebook Censors.

 

On the other hand, if I survive ye-old-permanent-ban, I’ll not be posting on Facebook much to stay in contact with the non-brainwashed. In case anyone is curious I belong to many other Social Platforms, some of which lack Facebook technical sophistication but censorship is not an issue. My largest presence is on MeWe. I’ve heard from others that they have face MeWe censorship as in mostly some form of shadow-culling. Fortunately for me I have not experienced one bit of censorship on MeWe. My MeWe profile: https://mewe.com/i/johnhouk7

 

In the spirit of thumbing my nose at Facebook, I have a couple of Bitchute videos that would undoubtedly raise the ire of their lying censors and an interesting cross post from Valiant News on faux-elected Biden’s Intel Brown Shirts redefining truth as “misinformation” to go after American Conservatives and Patriots who believe in the ORIGINAL premises of the U.S. Constitution prior to judicial fiat extra-constitutionally diluting ORIGINAL INTENT.

 

Bitchute VIDEO: HIT ME WITH YOUR DEATH SHOT MRNA!

Posted by Rogue Nation Eternal Militia - Operation Rubicon

First Published May 18th, 2022 12:04 UTC

 

Hit Me With Your Death Shot mRNA!
(Bill Gates Parody)

 

I hope you enjoy this hilarious musical parody aimed at Bill Gates, but on a serious note, below you will find more information on how to combat the COVID Plandemic.

 

… MORE DESCRIPTION

 

AND

 

Bitchute VIDEO: ONLINE CENSORSHIP: THEY’RE BECOMING DESPERATE

Posted by 99Percent

First Published October 2nd, 2022 07:06 UTC

 

JRH 10/3/22

Thank you to those who have stepped up!

READER SUPPORTED! I need Readers willing to chip in $5 - $10 - $25 - $50 - $100. PLEASE I need your generosity. PLEASE GIVE to Help me be a voice for Liberty:

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

******************************

Intelligence Community Developing AI Tool To Unmask Anonymous Writers

The program will also be used to scramble linguistic patterns, making it impossible to crack the identity of authors that they wanted to keep under lock and key…

 

IARPA AI to Spy on Anonymous-Writers

 

By Jack Hadfield

September 30, 2022

Valiant News

 

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has announced they are developing an AI tool to unmask anonymous writers.

 

A press release on Tuesday from the ODNI revealed that the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), their research and development arm, is starting work on the Human Interpretable Attribution of Text Using Underlying Structure program – HIATUS for short.

 

“Humans and machines produce vast amounts of text content every day,” with “text containing linguistic features that can reveal author identity,” a document from IARPA notes. The HIATUS tool would therefore use AI to identify anonymous writers via features such as “word choice, sentence phrasing [and] organization of information.”

 

“Think about it as like your written fingerprint, right?” program manager Dr Timothy McKinnon said in February. “What characteristics make your writing unique? So the technology would be able to identify that fingerprint compared against a corpus of other documents, and match them up if they are from the same author.”

McKinnon said that the AI program would be used by the intelligence community to track “disinformation campaigns,” and combat “human trafficking and other malicious activities that go on in online text forums.”

 

In the same vein, HIATUS would be able to detect whether text was not authored by a human, but generated by another machine.

 

The second use of the HIATUS program is to hide the identity of authors that it wanted to keep under lock and key. Using the same system, HIATUS could rewrite and modify text so that those same linguistic fingerprints in a text could be scrambled, making it impossible to attribute authorship.

 

With AI models that use deep learning, they often function as a “black box,” where the AI works perfectly well, but their methods are undecipherable to the human eye. HIATUS will be designed differently, implementing “explainable AI techniques” so that human operators can understand why it has identified a text as having a certain authorship, so that no mistakes are made.

 

20 different contracts have been awarded as part of the HIATUS project, including to groups such as Raytheon, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Southern California.

“We have a strong chance of meeting our goals, delivering much-needed capabilities to the Intelligence Community, and substantially expanding our understanding of variation in human language using the latest advances in computational linguistics and deep learning,” McKinnon concluded.

 

According to the timeline provided by the ODNI, the project will take at least three and a half years to conclude before the intelligence community will be able to use it, if it is successful.

 

Jack Hadfield is the Associate Editor at Valiant News. An investigative reporter from the UK, and the director and presenter of "Destination Dover: Migrants in the Channel”, his work has appeared in such sites as Breitbart and The Political Insider. You can follow him on Gab @JH, on Telegram @JackHadders, or see his other social media by visiting jackhadfield.co.uk.

 

Copyright © 2022 Valiant Media 

Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections

Intro to ‘Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections’

Blog Editor John R. Houk

By Fred Fleitz

Posted 4/6/17

The Dems and the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) have been hell-bent to disqualify President Trump since election day 2016. All disqualification agendas seem to gravitate around President Trump colluded with Russia to win over Crooked Hillary.

It is my belief the “collusion” accusation is horse pucky, but Russian attempts to manipulate the American voter is very possible. AND if POSSIBLE turns into reality, Russia needs to suffer any kind consequences the Trump Administration is willing to inflict. By inflict I mean at least with a Cold War-style agitation to see how far the Russians are willing to confront the still most powerful nation in the world which of course is the United States of America.

That being said, the continuous disparaging of President Trump should be examined by the Trump Administration Department of Justice for crimes by Dems, the Left MSM, current government civil servant lifers loyal to BHO AND former Obama Administration Officials INCLUDING the treasonous former President Barack Hussein Obama.

My thoughts on American collusion with evil leads me to a Fred Fleitz article entitled, “Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections”.

JRH 4/6/17

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

***************

Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections

By Fred Fleitz

April 6, 2017

The Federalist

The truth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies did not conclude that Russia tried to interfere in the election or help Trump win. Not even close.

Although there are strong indications the Obama administration abused intelligence collection by U.S. agencies to gather information on the Trump campaign to leak to the news media, it also appeared to abuse another U.S. intelligence mission: intelligence analysis.

Congressional Democrats and the mainstream media consider it gospel truth that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies unanimously concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump win. But should we treat this assessment as true in light of major errors in U.S. intelligence analysis in the past and its politicization? Is something gospel truth just because U.S. intelligence agencies say it is?

The truth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies did not conclude that Russia tried to interfere in the election or help Trump win. Not even close.

What Intelligence Has Really Confirmed About Russia

U.S. intelligence agencies issued two assessments on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The first was an October 7 statement by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that said WikiLeaks disclosures of Democratic emails during the election were “consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts” but did not say there was any evidence of Russian involvement.

Moreover, although this statement said the U.S. intelligence community held this position, the memo was issued by only two agencies, and was called a “Joint DHS and ODNI Election Security Statement.” Hillary Clinton seized on this statement in the last presidential debate on October 19 by inaccurately claiming “We have 17, 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyber attacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin.”

The fact that this memo was not an intelligence community document issued by all agencies with equities in this issue was very unusual. It also was suspicious that an unclassified intelligence analysis so advantageous to one presidential candidate was issued just before the election and only two weeks before the last presidential debate. In my view, this looked like looked like a clumsy attempt by the Obama White House to issue an intelligence assessment to boost Clinton’s presidential campaign and hurt the Trump campaign.

The second intelligence assessment on this question, issued on January 6, 2017, I believe represents a serious instance of a presidential administration manipulating U.S. intelligence analysis to issue a politicized analysis to sabotage an incoming president from a different political party. The January 6 analysis found that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election and hurt Hillary’s candidacy to promote Trump. The assessment said this interference came at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

What About All the Missing Intelligence Agencies?

Like the October memo, congressional Democrats and the news media have said this was the unanimous conclusion of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. But also like the October memo, this was not the case. The January 6 assessment was an “Intelligence Community Assessment.” Such analyses are usually issued and cleared by most if not all U.S. intelligence agencies and have a statement on the first page that usually reads “this is an IC-coordinated assessment.”

The January 6 Intelligence Community Assessment lacked such a statement because it reflected the views of only three U.S. intelligence agencies: Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and National Security Agency. The CIA and FBI concluded with high confidence that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win. NSA concluded this with moderate confidence.

Why did other U.S. intelligence agencies with major equities in this issue not participate in the January 6 assessment? Why were the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security part of the October assessment but not the January one? Where were the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the military intelligence agencies?

The January assessment also was very unusual because it was such a conclusive analysis of a very controversial subject with no dissenting views. Based my CIA experience, this is unprecedented and makes me wonder whether intelligence agencies that may have dissented were deliberately excluded.

There also is the question as to whether this assessment was written to conform to a predetermined conclusion by the Obama White House to undermine the Trump administration. The U.S. intelligence community has played political games like this before with interagency assessments to promote political agendas. One of the most notorious examples of this was the controversial 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program that was intended to undermine President Bush’s Iran policy.

There Are Indications Intelligence Has Been Politicized

CIA Director John Brennan’s role in approving this assessment raises serious questions about whether it was manipulated for political reasons. Brennan has been heavily criticized for politicizing intelligence for the Obama administration. This includes the role he played in the 2012 CIA talking points on the Benghazi terrorist attacks. He also has been openly and extremely hostile toward Trump before and after the election.

Given FBI Director James Comey’s statements at a recent House Intelligence Committee hearing that the conclusion in the January 6 assessment that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump was based on logic and not evidence, it is hard to believe this was not a pre-cooked conclusion driven by the highly partisan Brennan.

I strongly believe that if there were any evidence that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win, or that Russia and the Trump campaign collaborated to affect the outcome of the election, this intelligence would have been leaked by Obama holdovers in government and the so-called “Deep State” to The New York Times long ago. The fact that Comey could not point to such evidence and this information has not been leaked suggests there is no such evidence because this didn’t happen.

The current congressional investigations of possible Russian interference in the election and the Obama administration’s misuse of U.S. intelligence collection to surveil the Trump campaign must also include whether intelligence analysis was politicized to damage Trump’s candidacy and presidency. These investigations must look at how the above analyses were drafted, who drafted them, and why some agencies did not participate. The committees also need to uncover any evidence of the White House trying to influence the outcome of these assessments or excluding certain agencies from participating.

It is time to call out Democrats and reporters who portray the idea that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win as established truth because it is the unanimous assessment of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. I expect the congressional investigations will conclude this claim is false and actually represented a deliberate effort to manipulate intelligence analysis to undermine the Trump presidency.

________________

Fred Fleitz is senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for Security Policy. He worked in national-security positions for 25 years with the CIA, the State Department, and the House Intelligence Committee. Follow him on Twitter @fredfleitz.

Copyright © 2017 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.