Documents made available in a federal lawsuit demonstrate that Big Tech has an agreement with the U.S. government to censor American citizens
It’s not just a left-right issue. Whether Republicans or Democrats, there is an actual written agreement between Big Tech and at least one state government to censor people who are critical of politicians. The Deep State documents are now a matter of public court record, made available by Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai. And according to the court record, the judge presiding over the case has insisted on the documents being entered into the public record because they are absolutely revolutionary.
Gideon Knox Group has published many #1 world news stories and we have been cited in everything from the New York Times to Newsweek, from the London Telegraph to the UK Daily Mail. And never, ever have we seen an explosive and grossly under-reported story like this one. It’s imperative that real news consumers take time to understand this article and share it via email, social media, and messenger apps like Telegram and Signal. We have got to get the word out.
Tomorrow, Gideon Knox Group will send out this article to our massive Insurgency email news service. You can subscribe to The Insurgency blasts, for free (click the graphic below).
Around the United States in more than a dozen states, legislative efforts have been underway to stop the censorship of conservatives by companies known colloquially as Big Tech. These companies, which act as communication utilities with monopolistic control over social media, have been censoring conservatives and Christians at breakneck speed – as almost everyone is aware. The argument set forth by freedom advocates is two-fold.
First, freedom advocates argue that Big Tech is itself a monopoly. Facebook, for example, has a 69.87% market share of all non-direct online communications. But combined with their federation with other Big Tech gatekeepers, they have well over 90% of the market share. YouTube, for example, maintains a 5.97% market share. Twitter has a 9.62% market share. Pinterest maintains an 8.96% market share. Instagram and Reddit hold another 4% combined. Ultimately, these companies coalesce together and share the same censorship policies. As the world learned following their crackdown on conservatives in 2020, bans on various figures are well-coordinated and happen often times simultaneously. Whether it was the coordinated single-day purge of Alex Jones, Donald Trump, of Parler and its millions of users, or hundreds of thousands of Americans on January 8 – just a few days after the mostly peaceful protests at the U.S. Capitol, Big Tech works in tandem in a way that heretofore has been unexplained.
However, it has been difficult for conservatives to hold Mark Zuckerberg and his Big Tech acolytes accountable for their viewpoint discrimination. In congressional testimony, Zuckerberg repeatedly denied acting prejudicially against conservatives. Despite the large number of Facebook whistleblowers who have detailed their intentional targeting of conservatives and Christians, Zuckerberg currently is hiding behind Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects Big Tech from accusations of bias. The law, written in the early days of home computing in 1996, is designed to protect Internet companies from legal liability when posting third-party content. This protection has been applied to traditional communications utilities (like phone companies) since the invention of the telegraph in 1832. This is why it is illegal for phone companies to stop the communication from one consumer to another, despite not approving of the message.
However, Section 230 also allows Big Tech companies to act as publishers and not just utilities, which are ordinarily liable for slander, defamation, libel, or criminal activity in their publications. A newspaper, for example, may be sued for publishing material that is factually wrong, harmful, or criminal. But Section 230 allows companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, and YouTube to have their cake and eat it, too. Under the law, they can restrict messages between individuals (unlike utilities) but can’t be sued for damages (unlike publishers). They have the best of both worlds, with Internet users helpless to be heard.
To combat this, some conservatives have taken a second approach. This strategy was employed by Montana legislators, Theresa Manzella, Lola Sheldon-Galloway, and Brad Tschida in their various bills to stop Big Tech censorship in the Big Sky State (which failed to pass the Montana House of Representatives, with one bill failing by a single vote). These political leaders sought to provide a system of due process (a Constitutional right under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments) to Americans who would want to challenge their censorship. Additionally, Section 230 seems to violate the right to equal protection under the law.
Chiefly, the argument against these approaches presented by liberals and conservatives alike (for example, Americans for Prosperity, a Koch Brothers organization, lobbied against the bills in Montana) is that Big Tech corporations are private businesses. Ergo, their thinking is, private companies can discriminate against viewpoints all day long. The First Amendment right of free speech guarantees our speech isn’t limited by the government, not by private businesses. Of course, that sentiment is technically correct but largely misses the point. This isn’t a free speech issue when dealing with private corporations, but a due process and equal protection issue. Without new legal safeguards in place, America has been effectively muzzled.
The argument by Big Tech has remained consistent; the government is not violating your free speech, but we are…and we are private businesses, so we can censor you all that we want.
A GAME-CHANGING DEVELOPMENT
What if it could be demonstrated – beyond a doubt – that Big Tech is censoring the American public on behalf of the federal or state governments? If true, that revelation would instantly make invalid any argument that Big Tech can do what they want because they are private businesses. If they are censoring American citizens in a legal partnership on behalf of the government, then suddenly this has become a First Amendment issue without any question.
If there was solid evidence that demonstrates Big Tech is acting as a surrogate of the government, censoring Americans at their request, then this would mean that the rise of Big Tech censorship is actually the largest instance of state-sponsored censorship in world history. This would mean, in no uncertain terms, that Big Tech is a puppet of an oppressive and tyrannical government regime and is pulling off a greater level of state-sponsored censorship than anything dreamed by Kim Jong Un or Red China.
Well guess, what? That evidence absolutely exists and has been entered into sworn testimony and the public record thanks to Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai.
Dr. Ayyadurai, known better simply as Dr. Shiva, is an Indian-American engineer, entrepreneur, and inventor who is best known for his candidacy for U.S. Senate against Elizabeth Warren in 2017 (he also ran in the 2020 Republican primary). Since emerging as a prominent thought-leader, Ayyadurai has been the subject of vicious defamation campaigns perpetrated by American media and his political foes.
Ayyadurai was a prodigy in Internet communications and holds four degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). In addition, he holds a Ph.D. in biological engineering and is a Fulbright grant recipient. At the age of only 14, Ayyardurai attended the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences in New York University and studied computer programming. During this period of time, Ayyadurai copyrighted the name ‘EMAIL’ and created a program that allowed interdepartmental workers at his mother’s company to send electronic communications between one another. Since gaining notoriety from his political activism, Ayyadurai’s critics complain that a similar communications system had already been invented by ARPANET, although it had not yet gained widespread use and was classified. In reality, the 14-year-old created the system, coined it ‘EMAIL,’ and copyrighted it with the U.S. government despite what critics have diminished decades later.
Those aren’t shabby credentials. Ayyardurai is no mere academic, however, but also a successful entrepreneur. He founded Millennium Cybernetics in 1994 and pioneered a user-friendly email interface for the home computer. It was, and still is, used by major Fortune 500 corporations to handle their communications. Since then, Ayyardurai has had many successful business ventures and gained a reputation as a certified genius. More recently, Ayyardurai has used his credentials in biological engineering to become an activist against certain kinds of genetically modified crops, as well as issuing his opinions about the novel coronavirus (neither have gained him popularity with global elitists).
However, what Ayyardurai is doing now will make history, even more so than his trailblazing contributions to Internet technologies. He is suing the federal government in order to demonstrate how the State of Massachusetts has partnered with Big Tech communication utilities to censor the public. And what the doctor found is earth-shattering.
BIG TECH IS WORKING FOR BIG GOVERNMENT TO CENSOR AMERICANS
Using his prowess in collating informational data via computer systems, Ayyardurai uncovered an incredible document on federal servers entitled, Elections Interference Operations Playbook for State and Local Officials. The document outlines an agreement between the government and one of Big Tech’s largest companies, Twitter, to censor speech that is critical of elected officials.
The document, now revealed on Ayyardurai’s website, centers on a curious invention known as the Twitter Trusted Partnership and Twitter Partner Support (PSP) Portal. This is the means and mechanism by which federal or state governments can issue a “censorship order” to Twitter, which has agreed to comply with such orders, as the price of avoiding regulatory oversight.
Shiva filed the handbook for government and Big Tech censorship partnership with the United States District Court in Massachusetts as a supplemental memorandum. You can find a pdf of the document by clicking below.
In the legal brief, Ayyadurai points out that Twitter’s legal counsel “began formulating and designing the framework for silently violating the free speech rights of US persons by first characterizing speakers as Influence Operators (IOs) thereby fabricating a sinister connotation where none exists, as the ideological framework to justify canceling speakers who exercise their right to express their opinion.”
After labeling problematic thought-leaders and American citizens as Influence Operators, “they created a new centralized Governing Coordinating Council (GCC) that brought together both state and federal officials to create an electronic infrastructure for surveilling speech and monitoring Influence Operators.”
In this wedding between the Twitter Trusted Partnership and the Governing Coordinating Council, the federal government began working in tandem with Big Tech to censor Americans. When Americans complained about Big Tech censorship, Big Tech companies simply shrugged it off as their right as private companies to censor whomever they want; they did not explain that Big Tech is censoring Americans on behalf of the government.
That changes things signficantly.
As Ayyadurai’s documents demonstrate, Twitter’s executives created The State and Local Election Cybersecurity Playbook which was published in February 2018. They also formulated the Election Cyber Incident Coordination Communication Guide, which would further formulate how the federal government would get Twitter to ban those whose speech they don’t like.
The efforts culminated in the above-mentioned Elections Influence Operations Playbook for State and Local Officials, submitted by Ayyarurai into the court record. And it’s this document that demonstrates irrefutably that Big Tech has conspired with the federal government to illegally infringe upon Americans’ free speech rights.
In that playbook, the Big Tech and government partnership very explicitly state that those hashtagging tweets with #electionfraud should be banned immediately. According to the playbook, those with the biggest social media influence should be targeted for censorship first, and it lines out how government agents should report Americans to Twitter to be banned, including screenshots and other information about the speech they don’t like. Incredibly, the playbook also states that “more credible voices” should be banned by Twitter first.
The playbook also explains how a threat assessment of ‘low, medium, and high’ should be given to American citizens based upon their credibility and level of post-engagement. Those deemed ‘the highest threat’ (reminder: we are talking about U.S. Citizens who are only guilty of free speech) should be “consistently monitored and surveilled” by both Twitter and the government.
In other words, the government is out-sourcing state-sponsored censorship to Twitter. That way, Twitter can hind behind the veil of Section 230, and the government can claim that it isn’t censoring anyone.
In total, Ayyadurai has posted 23 court filings with the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts detailing the partnership between Big Tech and Big Government to violate the free speech of American citizens. The proof seems incontrovertible, and the judge has vocalized his shock at the documents.
Meanwhile, the mainstream media has yet to pick up the story. It is little wonder why. Should they report these indisputable facts, they will be censored by Big Tech next. Americans, do your due diligence and research the matter for yourselves; you can find all the court documents here.
In the estimation of Gideon Knox Group, the “baddest good guys in media,” this story has the potential to overthrow the United States government or whichever states are partnering in this scheme, which has been caught red-handed orchestrating the largest censorship plan in the history of humanity. If there is indeed a New World Order, the facts uncovered by Ayyardurai might just bury it.
If this story makes the light of day, and is able to evade the Big Tech gatekeepers, it will lead to congressional inquiries and ultimately, prison sentences for those involved. America has been muzzled not by Silicon Valley, but by Washington D.C. The greatest traitors are not only Big Tech executives but politicians who are using technology innovators to silence their critics. If the federal government has this arrangement with Twitter, certainly similar arrangements with Facebook, YouTube, and other technocrat overlords have also been made. And now that we know what Ayyadurai has uncovered, there is no telling how far down the rabbit hole this trail goes.
Americans, share this article. Get it out. People need to hear the truth about why they’ve been censored in social media.