Information operations · Information Warfare

Caitlin Johnstone: I’ve Been Banned From Facebook For Sharing An Article About False Flags

I’ve Been Banned From Facebook For Sharing An Article About False Flags

My personal Facebook account, which has the maximum 5,000 friends and an additional 5,000+ followers, has been blocked from posting for three days. My page hasn’t been blocked yet, but we’ll see; I shared the article there, too.

The reason given for this ban by the little pop-up boxes when I logged on just now was that a couple months ago I had shared an article about admitted false flag operations perpetrated by governments around the world. I don’t know what happened that made Facebook’s system decide to crack down on me now all of a sudden, but I do know I’ve been a bit naughtier than usual in my last couple of articles.

The article I got the banhammer for sharing is titled For Those Who Don’t ‘Believe’ In ‘Conspiracies’ Here Are 58 Admitted False Flag Attacks. According to the site’s ticker it has 50,667 shares as of this writing. It’s laden with hyperlinks for further reading, and lists only instances of false flag operations that insiders are on the record as having admitted to themselves. It’s a good compilation of important information. People should be allowed to share it.

The notifications say I can be permanently banned if I continue posting that sort of material. I’ve had that account since 2007.

So. Who wants to see my Barbra Streisand impression?

In a corporatist system of government, corporate censorship is state censorship. When there’s no meaningful space between corporate power and government power, it doesn’t make much difference whether the guy silencing your dissent is Mark Zuckerberg or Jeff Sessions. America most definitely has such a system.

If they’re going to get us locked down and propagandized into their vapid brain boxes, this will be how they’ll do it. Not by government censorship, but by corporate censorship. Government can’t make an overt attempt to stop a dissenting voice from speaking, but the corporations who own the venue of their speech can.

In a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, plutocrat-sponsored senators spoke with top legal and security officials for Facebook, Twitter and Google in a very disturbing way about the need to silence dissenting voices.

Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii demanded that the companies adopt a “mission statement” declaring their commitment “to prevent the fomenting of discord.”

A former FBI agent Clint Watts kicked it up even further, saying, “Civil wars don’t start with gunshots, they start with words. America’s war with itself has already begun. We all must act now on the social media battlefield to quell information rebellions that can quickly lead to violent confrontations and easily transform us into the Divided States of America.”

“Stopping the false information artillery barrage landing on social media users comes only when those outlets distributing bogus stories are silenced — silence the guns and the barrage will end,” he added.

This was on the Senate floor. Officials were speaking about the need to censor social media to prevent people from sharing dissenting ideas on the Senate floor.

World Socialist Web Site said of the hearing,

That such a statement could be made in a congressional hearing, entirely without objection, is an expression of the terminal decay of American democracy. There is no faction of the ruling class that maintains any commitment to basic democratic rights.

None of the Democrats in the committee raised any of the constitutional issues involved in asking massive technology companies to censor political speech on the Internet. Only one Republican raised concerns over censorship, but only to allege that Google had a liberal bias.

I’ll admit right now that this really scares me. Ever the optimist, I’ve been reassuring my readers that the corporatocracy would never risk taking off the black hole sun mask of corporate cheerfulness and move into regular, overt totalitarianism. I’ve contended that they must remain covert in order to keep successfully manufacture consent.

But, here we are. Through a studious application of psy-ops they have their censorship and they have their consent. Remember, in the book “Fahrenheit 451” the public wasn’t unhappy about the book burnings. They cheered them on, and that’s what we have now. The herd is mindlessly clapping their approval at censorship and even volunteering to report naughty behavior like good little hall monitors for the oligarchy. I’m sure that even some of my close friends and family will silently approve of my banning and will meet my distress with the pursed lips of a church lady secretly pleased at my comeuppance.

I tried joining Gab when I saw this coming, but it’s really alt-righty there and the energy there is just gross. Finding a new social media outlet might not even matter anyway, since these creeps just target any place people gather in large numbers.

I don’t know. I always freak out a bit when the eye of corporate censorship focuses on me. I’ve recently been told by a number of people that they’ve been banned for sharing my articles, and now it’s hitting me.

I’m babbling. This is weird. I just really, really don’t want humanity to become what these people are trying to turn it into, you know? Help me make some noise about this stuff, please. Manipulators can’t do their job when there’s a big spotlight pointed at them.

UPDATE 11/17/17 7:30PM EST — Facebook has unblocked me with an anonymous message apologizing for what they claim was an accident and a mistake. It was no accident, but it was most certainly a mistake. The Streisand effect works, everybody. Thanks to everyone who helped me shine a big, fat spotlight on this Orwellian fuckery. I just worry about the 1.86 billion monthly active Facebook users who don’t have a large audience to help kick up a major fuss about it.

I am a bit tickled that the social engineers can’t figure out how to deal with me. Can’t get me fired since I’m crowd-funded, can’t de-platform me since my only platform is social media, the character assassination campaigns always fail, and when they try for overt censorship it backfires.

Keep fighting.



One thought on “Caitlin Johnstone: I’ve Been Banned From Facebook For Sharing An Article About False Flags

  1. I’m surprised you posted this. While Caitlin Johnstone’s concerns and protest are legitimate irrespective of the content she promoted through Facebook (we can’t allow such corporations to be the judge of free speech), the author herself, her writings and the “article” she has been banned for are conduits for Russian disinformation.

    Caitlin Johnstone is not a supporter of truth. She is a far-left promoter of the 9/11 “inside job” fabrication. She has been published by Zero Hedge and Russia Insider, the former a front for Russian disinfo. The article she has been banned for, “For Those Who Don’t ‘Believe’ In ‘Conspiracies’ Here Are 58 Admitted False Flag Attacks”, is, on the face of it, a very clever Russian disinfo piece of work.

    Its source is an obvious conspiracy / pro-Russian / loony site, but the contents are better than that. It’s a huge list of so-called “proofs” that the West “has been doing it” for ever (the unnecessary length in itself being a suspicious sign), and of course it mentions many (apparently) genuine false flags originating from the West. The real genius is, there are also false flags from Soviet Russia, and the Putin-era apartment blocks bombings even get a mention (but the provided source, in a typical KGB-way, does not support what the article claims).

    Once those red herrings have been planted, they are of course overwhelmed by the huge number of false flags concocted by non-Russian baddies. There’s even a line about the “alleged” false flag theories about 9/11 : the author pretends 9/11 does not really belong to the list, but he mentions it nonetheless. So that was the real subject after all !… Typical Russian hypocrisy.

    Once you’ve read this wall of text (or even part of it), you’re under the impression that of course all Western great powers are false-flagging all the time, so a number of anti-Western conspiracy “theories” must also be true. Russia gets across as a minor culprit by comparison, and it gives an added veneer of “objectivity” to the piece.

    There are also items that are not false flags at all, but legitimate intelligence work, such as infiltrating agents into enemy movements.

    So even though I don’t want Facebook (or others) to be the arbitrary judges of what is fit to publish, Caitlin Johnstone is the last person I would trust to lead this battle.

Comments are closed.