Print 
PDFYesterday on the radio, I discussed Elon Musk's conversation with Donald Trump on X/Twitter and the fact that tens of millions of people visited the conversation on the internet.
Trump gave God the glory for saving his life in the assassination attempt in Pennsylvania, calling it a true miracle and encouraging non-believers to "think about the miracle."
They also discussed the state of our nation under the Biden-Harris administration, stating what is obvious to most of us: things are not good.
The richest man in the world (net worth is more than $220 billion), who is also a Democrat---Elon Musk, said, "We are at a fork in the road in the destiny of civilization. We need to take the right path and I think you are the right path" he told Trump.
We're now learning that there was, and is, an all-out effort to censor the conversation, even after more than 30 million people have seen and listened to it.
Here's the rest of the story.
Be informed, not misled.
____________________
The European Commission, described as the “executive arm” of the European Union, is trying to force X CEO Elon Musk to censor presidential candidate Donald Trump on an American platform.
Musk announced on Sunday that he and Trump were set to host a “live conversation” on X, marking Trump’s return to the platform. However, a letter from Thierry Breton of the European Commission issued a threat on Monday to Musk over the “amplification of harmful content.”
Musk, as you know, went ahead with the "conversation with Trump.
The letter claims Musk, who owns a U.S.-based company, must adhere to EU law meant to govern European politics. The letter also claims Breton and his “services” aim to “protect EU citizens from serious harm.”
Is it really "harmful" for Britts and other Europeans to hear a point of view different than that of their government?
Breton's letter continued: “This notably means ensuring, on one hand, the freedom of expression and of information, including media freedom and pluralism, are effectively protected and, on the other hand, that all proportionate and effective mitigation measures are put in place regarding the amplification of harmful content in connection with relevant events, including live streaming, which, if unaddressed, might increase the risk profile of X and generate detrimental effects on civic discourse and public security,” the letter states.
The letter then suggests Musk must inform “EU judicial and administrative authorities without undue delay on the measures taken to address their orders against content considered illegal, according to national and/ or EU law” and “publicly report[] about content moderation measures,” among other things.
It would be foolish to believe that Biden-Harris didn't have some degree of influence in the demand letter, but we'll likely never know the truth about that.
We do know, however, "Musk has torpedoed the government’s efforts to use X as a platform to censor Trump or suppress any story that may hurt the Democratic candidate as they did in 2020. Now, other countries threaten Musk for supporting free speech, the bedrock of the American foundation."
The American press is also trying to censor the conversation.
Yesterday morning, the Associated Press published an article that said, "As X’s owner and most followed user, Elon Musk has increasingly used the social media platform as a microphone to amplify his political views and, lately, those of right-wing figures he’s aligned with. There are few modern parallels to his antics, but then again, there are few modern parallels to Elon Musk himself."
Of course, none of this should come as a surprise.
Back in 2022, when he was trying to buy Twitter, Musk said he was doing so because it wasn’t living up to its potential as a “platform for free speech.” Protecting free speech — not money — was his motivation because, as he put it, 'having a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive is extremely important to the future of civilization.'
Barbara, what's-her-name, who wrote the article, then goes deep in her attempt to discredit Musk for exercising his and Donald Trump's right to free speech.
A reporter for The Washington Post openly suggested that the Biden White House censor so-called "misinformation" from the interview between X owner Elon Musk and former President Trump.
During Monday's press briefing, the Washington Post's Cleve Wootson Jr. invoked Musk's highly anticipated viral conversation with Trump that night, insisting misinformation is not a "campaign issue" but "an America issue" as well.
"What role does the White House or the president have in sort of stopping that or stopping the spread of that or sort of intervening in that? Some of that was about campaign misinformation, but, you know, it’s a wider thing, right?" Wootson Jr. asked White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre.
Remember that this is the so-called "news" paper claiming "democracy dies in the darkness."
Jean-Pierre responded by telling the reporter that social media companies have a "responsibility" of clamping down on misinformation on their platforms, adding that the Biden administration is "mindful" that they are private companies.
"It is incredibly important to call that out, as you’re doing. I just don’t have any specifics on what we have been doing internally," Jean-Pierre added.
I personally believe they have been doing a great deal internally.
"Truly pathetic, @CleveWootson," conservative lawyer Mike Davis told the Leftist journalist. "You are a White House reporter for @washingtonpost. And you think your job is to collude with the White House press secretary to censor Americans with whom you disagree? Do you understand how dumb and dangerous you sound? You're truly shameful."
Another posted, "The Washington Post trying to get the government to shut down private citizen interviews with presidential candidates. Because democracy dies in people speaking freely?"
"This Washington Post propagandist @CleveWootson is an anti-speech activist. Here he begs Biden admin to punish @elonmusk for doing journalism," The Federalist editor-in-chief Mollie Hemingway wrote.
Takeaway
No, they are not really advocating for free speech. They're advocating against conservatives and Christians who are taking action to remove some of the most perverted, vile LGBTQIA+ endorsed pornography ever placed in front of America's 4 and 5-year-old children.
Unbiased, publicly supported, truth-seeking Public Broadcasting Company begins with this:
BOISE, Idaho (AP) — In Idaho, an art exhibit was censored and teens were told they couldn’t testify in some legislative hearings. In Washington state, a lawmaker proposed a hotline so the government could track offensively biased statements, as well as hate crimes. In Florida, bloggers are fighting a bill that would force them to register with the state if they write posts criticizing public officials.
Meanwhile, bans on books and drag performances are growing increasingly common nationwide.
“We are seeing tremendous attacks on First Amendment freedoms across the country right now, at all levels of government. Censorship is proliferating, and it’s deeply troubling,” said Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
“This year, we’re seeing a wave of bills targeting drag performances, where simply being gender nonconforming is enough to trigger the penalty. We’re also seeing a wave of bills regulating what can be in public or K-12 school libraries,” Cohn said. “On college campuses, we have been tracking data about attempts to get faculty members punished or even fired for speech or expression and the numbers are startling — it’s the highest rate that we’ve seen in our 20 years of existence.”
First Amendment rights had been stable in America for decades, said Ken Paulson, director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, but in recent years many states have reverted to the anti-speech tactics employed by people like Sen. Joe McCarthy during the “Red Scare” of the early 1950s.
It concludes: "For Cohn, the efforts in Idaho and elsewhere reflect the danger of trying to restrict the expression of people who hold opposing views."
“We have to be ever-vigilant if we want our culture of individual freedoms to prevail,” he said. “Bad ideas are better dealt with through debate and dialogue than government censorship.”
The good guys are the perverts, and the normal people are the bad guys.
I'm reminded of something the prophet Isaiah (5:20,21) said: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.