Michael Schellenberger

Rank 39 of 47
|
Score -98
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
761d
The US Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) says it didn't censor the American people, but it did. What's more, DHS used front groups to mask its censorship as "cybersecurity." DHS thus violated the Constitution and undermined national security.

My testimony today before Congress.
2/15/2025, 12:32:03 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
331d
CISA is the agency that created third party censorship groups in an effort to give itself plausible deniability
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
794d
Representatives of a US government front group, "Stanford Internet Observatory," denied ever demanding censorship of anyone. They lied, and we have the proof. They got social media companies to censor accurate Covid information in a clear violation of the First Amendment. Bam.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
331d
CISA’s work involved representatives of NATO, the DOD, and UK Ministry of Defense. They explicitly said they were engaged in counter populism. They used tactics developed in the regime change and regime stabilization efforts abroad.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
331d
DHS is a key government agency in the Censorship Industrial Complex. It began its illegal censorship efforts in 2018 with the help of the US and UK military. We only learned of this thanks to a whistleblower who gave us a trove of documents that sent chills up our spines:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
776d
CTIL Files #1: US And UK Military Contractors Created Sweeping Plan For Global Censorship In 2018, New Documents Show

Whistleblower makes trove of new documents available to Public and Racket, showing the birth of the Censorship Industrial Complex in reaction to Brexit and Trump…
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
331d
Victory! US Dept. of Homeland Security has fired 12 employees in its corrupt and totalitarian cybersecurity agency engaged in censorship. Thank you DHS Sec. @Sec_Noem ! 🔥❤️🌹
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
930d
US officials and their contractors say they did not "advocate for social media platforms to take any action to limit the spread of speech," but they did. Not only that, they really thought it was their job to protect "cognitive infrastructure," otherwise known as mind control.

The statement argues that cybersecurity should be prioritized over censorship, suggesting that diverting resources to censorship undermines both national security and the First Amendment. It engages in public discourse by addressing government policy and constitutional rights.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to highlight potential harm caused by diverting resources from cybersecurity, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects privacy and dignity by focusing on policy rather than personal attacks. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding of the importance of cybersecurity and free speech. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    It engages in constructive criticism of government actions without personal attacks. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses its platform to advocate for prioritizing cybersecurity and protecting constitutional rights. [+1]