Censorship gives officials opportunity to engage in cover-up
Kit Daniels | Infowars.com - NOVEMBER 23, 2015
The police told local Twitter users to refrain from posting live updates on the search for Paris terror suspect Salah Abdeslam to “keep the police and military safe.”
“To prevent terrorists from following police activity, Belgian police asked residents not to share details of the #BrusselsLockdown via social media, and civilians took over the hashtag and flooded it with pictures of their feline friends,” Twitter said in a statement.
But by burying news on the raid with kitten photos and by censoring their own speech, residents gave Belgium officials the opportunity to suppress facts which placed authorities in a bad light while also allowing corrupt government officials to potentially engage in a cover-up.
This is nothing short of an attack on the press because media outlets use social media as a primary source of news, and such censorship only benefits the government while doing little to ensure public safety.
Kit Daniels | Infowars.com - NOVEMBER 23, 2015
IMAGE CREDITS: FURLINED / FLICKR.
After Belgian police asked residents to censor themselves on social media during a terrorist raid, the compliant public saturated Twitter with kitten photos to drown out news on the #BrusselsLockdown.The police told local Twitter users to refrain from posting live updates on the search for Paris terror suspect Salah Abdeslam to “keep the police and military safe.”
“To prevent terrorists from following police activity, Belgian police asked residents not to share details of the #BrusselsLockdown via social media, and civilians took over the hashtag and flooded it with pictures of their feline friends,” Twitter said in a statement.
But by burying news on the raid with kitten photos and by censoring their own speech, residents gave Belgium officials the opportunity to suppress facts which placed authorities in a bad light while also allowing corrupt government officials to potentially engage in a cover-up.
This is nothing short of an attack on the press because media outlets use social media as a primary source of news, and such censorship only benefits the government while doing little to ensure public safety.
For example, it was just last week that German authorities covered up the fact that explosives were found during an attempted terror attack at a soccer stadium and told an eyewitness to keep quiet about what he saw.
“…Given that German police have been caught covering up rapes and other crimes involving migrants flooding into the country via the wave of refugees in order to not legitimize critics of the migrant influx, could the decision to cover-up the discovery of the bombs have been made under a similar justification?” Paul Joseph Watson asked.
If Belgium is truly concerned about the safety of its public officials in the face of terrorism, why doesn’t the country start by cutting down on the number of migrants it lets inside its borders?
And why doesn’t Belgium also raise an issue with the fact that NATO has been backing ISIS in its war against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad?
Those two steps alone would be 100X more effective in the fight against terrorism than flooding Twitter with cat photos.
