WEF Panelist Says COVID Response Made People More Receptive to Central Bank Digital Currencies
Didi Rankovic, Reclaim the Net, May 3 2024
The World Economic Forum (WEF) “globalism caravan” was in Saudi Arabia late last month, when one of these “special meeting” panels heard about the usefulness of what one might call “behavioral population lessons learned” during the Covid pandemic. Specifically, regarding the current push to introduce central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) around the world. The pandemic itself may have done a sudden disappearing act about two years ago, but it’s clearly seen by some as paving the way for a host of other things. One: the vast majority of people responded to extreme movement and activity restrictions that profoundly affected their lives, plus vaccines, without basically any resistance.
And this by no means went unnoticed. And that has clearly emboldened a certain class of policy-makers to make further assumptions, about other controversial policies (like CBDCs). A Gulf central bank chief, Khalid Humaidan of Bahrain, told WEF’s Riyadh “Digital Currencies’ Opportunity in the Middle East” panel that his country is working to get rid of cash altogether, and replace it with digitally centralized, (therefore almost perfectly controlled and tracked) CBDCs.
That’s in and of itself not a Middle East thing. Many governments around the world want to do the exact same. Nevertheless, Humaidan for some reason “went there” and actually made the link between what some theorists see as “the great social experiment,” namely the pandemic, and how it has opened the path for, effectively, corralling billions of people into a certain pattern of thinking and acting. Humaidan had an interesting take on what “control over cash” means. According to him, central banks were previously “very much in control with all aspects of cash.” And now:
We’re comfortable to the point where the private sector plays a big role in the printing of the cash, in the distribution of the cash, and with the private sector we use interest rates to manage the supply of cash.
That’s how the pioneers in the space now feel comfortable speaking, and how about this take on “state-private sector collusion.” This aspect is not something the US public is even aware of now, thinking instead of how that collusion affects social media accounts, etc. Meanwhile, we also have Humaidan saying that CBDCs might shortly undergo a rebranding.
The central bank will have a role, but at some point in time, the same way we don’t call it central bank cash, we’re probably going to stop calling it central bank digital currency.
As for why any of this clearly marketing and spinning would succeed, faced with an informed and critical thinking public, this central bank chief was clear he thought the ground has been tested with the pandemic, and the precedent (apparently) permanently reliably set:
There’s less use of cash. The transition to fully digital is not going to be a stretch. People are used to it. Its adoption rates increased because of COVID. There is very little resistance.
Australian PM Pushes for Crackdown on “Misogynistic” Speech Amid Fears Free Speech Is Fading
Christina Maas, Reclaim the Net, May 3 2024
Following his more recent online censorship demands, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is doubling down and has advocated for more stringent controls on what is labeled as “misogynistic” online content. This initiative comes as plans are set for a national cabinet session in 2024 focused on women’s safety, which will address online harassment, among other issues. This move marks another significant focus by the government, ostensibly on enhancing women’s safety, but raising alarms about potential overreach in curtailing free speech, as its other speech-related policies have done. Prime Minister Albanese said:
Young adults should not be coached in disrespect or misogyny by online influencers. I understand parents want to protect their kids from harmful material online. Social platforms have important social responsibilities and we need them to step up. Taken together, these reforms will give Australian families some of the tools they need to navigate the complexity of the digital world.
The Prime Minister added that the legislation would carry “serious criminal penalties.” The proposed measures include better tracking and monitoring the speech of those considered high-risk or repeat offenders and a drive to significantly reduce the presence of misogynistic content on social media platforms. Communications Minister Michelle Rowland has expressed concern about the widespread dissemination of such content, particularly its impact on young users of social media. Rowland said:
The reality is that digital platforms are influencing our culture and social lives. They have a responsibility to do more to meet community standards.
However, critics argue that the measures could infringe on digital rights and free expression, especially given the opaque nature of the algorithms that determine content dissemination. The Australian government is now leveraging alleged recent incidents of online misogyny as a pretext to potentially expand the powers of the eSafety commissioner under the revised Online Safety Act. This prospect has ignited a heated debate about the balance between safety and freedom on the internet. Just last year, Albanese expressed a desire to ban social media if he had dictatorial powers, particularly in light of challenges with “misinformation.” This statement coincided with parliamentary discussions on a controversial bill, raising alarms about potential government overreach in regulating online speech. Albanese highlighted his frustrations with anonymous “keyboard warriors” who spread false information, disrupting traditional news cycles. More recently, the Prime Minister called for the banning of memes that made fun of him.
Free Speech Platform Gab Rejects German Request for Data on User’s Posts Insulting Politician Ricarda Lang
Didi Rankovic, Reclaim the Net, May 2 2024
The German authorities have attempted to get Gab, a free speech software company, to release personal data identifying a user of its platform, for making comments about a politician’s weight that are considered offensive. Gab founder and CEO Andrew Torba revealed this in a blog post, reassuring the user community that the request will not be complied with, the response was “a firm rejection,” he wrote. He also provided details of this fairly, even by today’s standards of government speech control and repression, an extraordinary case.
Namely, the user targeted by Berlin made a comment in 2022 that described the Greens politician, Ricarda Lang, as “fat.” In addition, the user is accused of making two posts that “sexualize” Lang, the sum total of all this, according to the German government (the request came from the German Federal Criminal Police Office), being an attack “on the honor of the politician,” as well as a show of disrespect. And that, the notice received by Gab continued, violates the section of the German criminal code that deals with the offense of “insult” (and envisions imprisonment, up to five years according to Torba, or a fine).
From here, things start to spiral: the posts, the federal police said in the request, were in German, so they suspect the user is located in Germany. But to “confirm the real identity and current location” they wanted Gab to turn over an exhaustive list of personal information, including account ID, registration date and time, and IP address, port number included. Further, they wanted the user’s full name, date of birth, display name, usernames, email addresses, alternatives included, and phone numbers. The list goes on: postal and billing addresses, payment method, means of payment. In all instances the data was to be both current and historical. The German police also wanted ID and proof of address and copies of ID, if available. Torba said:
At Gab AI Inc, we stand resolute in our belief that free speech is a fundamental human right and that our users should be able to express themselves without fear of censorship or retaliation. We also take the privacy of our users very seriously and will not compromise their civil liberties for the sake of appeasing foreign governments that seek to stifle free speech. In light of this, we have responded to the German government’s request with a firm rejection. We will not be providing any user data related to the alleged offense, as the speech in question is protected by US law.
House Passes Antisemitism Bill Amid Free Speech Fears
Cindy Harper, Reclaim the Net, May 2 2024
In response to the ongoing tensions concerning Israel and Hamas, coupled with a wave of pro-Palestinian protests at colleges across the US, the US House of Representatives, led by a New York Republican, voted in favor of a divisive antisemitism awareness bill. Despite engendering controversy, the bill was successful with 320 votes for and 91 against, manifesting some level of bipartisan support. The legislation, fronted by Mike Lawler, aims to “provide for the consideration of a definition of antisemitism set forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance for the enforcement of federal anti-discrimination laws concerning education programs or activities, and for other purposes.” The legislation mandates that the Department of Education adopt the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism to enforce anti-discrimination laws.
The bill faced opposition beyond political disagreements. The ACLU also disapproved of the legislation, pointing out that antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded bodies were already legally prohibited. The Union contended that the bill’s presence is unnecessary for combating antisemitism and instead, it may curb free speech among college students by misinterpreting criticism of the Israeli government as antisemitism. Critics of the bill, however, including Rep Matt Gaetz, argue it infringes on free speech. Gaetz notably derided the measure as a “ridiculous hate speech bill” and voiced his concerns that it could potentially label biblical passages as antisemitic. Expressing his stance on the social platform X, Gaetz announced:
This evening, I will vote AGAINST the ridiculous hate speech bill called the ‘Antisemitism Awareness Act.’ Antisemitism is wrong, but this legislation is written without regard for the Constitution, common sense, or even the common understanding of the meaning of words. The Gospel itself would meet the definition of antisemitism under the terms of this bill!
According to Gaetz, the bill’s definition of antisemitism, as per the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), would include biblical assertions such as “claims of Jews killing Jesus.” Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene also opposed the bill for similar reasons. She argued that it could unjustly accuse Christians of antisemitism simply for adhering to Gospel narratives. She stated on social media:
The bill could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews.
MTG’s version of the Gospel is wrong; Jesus was purportedly crucified by the Romans, but at the behest of the Jews – RB
Niqnaq 