Daniel Greenfield / Sultan Knish Articles at DanielGreenfield.org

“Governments Should Act Now to Curb Climate Disinformation” demands a letter backed by Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Center for Countering Digital Hate, which has close ties to the British government, along with over 50 other organizations. The open letter calling for ending free speech to save the planet from global warming accuses social media, broadcast and publishing companies of being “enablers to planetary destruction” for allowing dissenting views and demands that governments step in and crack down. The groups call on “governments worldwide to take immediate and decisive action” and urge that “those responsible must be held accountable.” Or free speech will destroy the planet. Signatories to the censorship call also include the Union of Concerned Scientists, which would like to ban scientific debate, Avaaz, the radical Kairos Fellowship and Reporters Without Borders which started out protecting freedom of information, but now suppresses it. While green censo...

Agatha Christie, an elderly lady from Devon, had plenty of blood on her hands, all of it fictional. But none of the killers in her many books and short stories are nearly as monstrous or obsessed as the censorious wokes who have been coming after the deceased author for decades. The latest episode in the long-running saga takes place not on a luxurious train speeding through Yugoslavia or on the Nile, but at the Philadelphia High School for Creative and Performing Arts (CAPA) which had performed Christie’s play, “And Then There Were None.” “And Then There Were None” is a natural fit for a high school setting. With lots of different balanced roles and one-note characters who reveal a hidden side, it’s a training wheels production for students learning the basics of performing a character and acting on stage. It’s also fun. Ten people. One island. And a killer. There’s a reason why “And Then There Were None” has remained popular and Hollywood keeps ripping it off for movies like 2022’s ‘...

While most people forgot about Al Gore a decade ago, the 75-year-old environmental tycoon with a net worth in the hundreds of millions (also a former vice president) has doubled down on his flavor of green fascism in the name of saving the planet from everyone but himself. Gore is making $2 million a month from his “green investment firm” which has been having some problems. Its assets fell from $39 billion to $30 billion and its biggest fund suffered a 28% decline . And investors may be rethinking whether a firm that pays Gore $2 million a month so it can claim it’s saving the planet by buying Microsoft, Amazon and Adidas stocks is worth it. But Gore is keeping busy. At COP28, the UN climate summit, he demanded that voting rules be changed so that a majority of countries, rather than a full consensus of nations, could impose mandates on the United States and oil-producing nations. That means a bunch of third world countries would have veto power over our entire economy. Good for the...

When Judge Terry Doughty issued an injunction in Missouri v. Biden that banned the government from “specifically flagging content or posts on social-media platforms and/or forwarding such to social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression”, all hell broke loose. Evelyn Douek, a Stanford law professor, formerly of the Knight First Amendment Institute, warned that preventing the government from colluding with corporations to censor citizens would have a “chilling effect on communication between the government and platforms.” In traditional free speech jurisprudence, ‘chilling effects’ were inflicted by the government, but Douek is worried that free speech might have a chilling effect on government censorship. After advocating, in cases like Lamont v. Postmaster General, that any interference with speech, no matter how odious including, in the aforementioned Supreme Court case, asking recipients of Communist propaganda t...

 Live from Manhattan, where the World Economic Forum boasts comfortable digs in a luxurious midtown tower on Madison Avenue, the WEF’s Tackling Disinformation forum began. “With increasing fears about the cost of living – exacerbated by the pandemic and the energy crisis – it is now more critical than ever to tackle disinformation head-on,” the WEF explained. What do costs of living have to do with state and corporate censorship? As prices rise and standards of living drop, and the WEF’s slogan of “I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better” will only have been proven two-thirds true, the peasants may get restless. Peasants like Uncle Bob whom the WEF is deeply concerned about. Very deeply. “We need to take certain actions there to prevent Uncle Bob from sharing misleading information at the Thanksgiving table,” Claire Wardle (She/Her) PhD explicated in a chummy Brit accent over Zoom. Wardle sits on the WEF’s Global Agenda Council on the Future of Information an...

In New York City, world leaders dodged traffic, deranged panhandlers and the city’s unique fall funk, to lecture the planet about their views at the United Nations General Assembly. Their theme was the threat that “misinformation” or “disinformation” poses to their power. “Hate speech, misinformation and abuse — targeted especially at women and vulnerable groups — are proliferating,” UN Secretary-General Guterres claimed. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov blamed his country’s PR problems on, “disinformation, crude staging, and provocations”. “Today I have listened to further instalments of Russia’s catalogues of distortions, dishonesty, and disinformation,” UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly retorted. Catherine Colonna, minister for Europe, countered that, “Where Russia employs disinformation and propaganda, justice must be grounded in facts.” The one thing the Russians and Europeans can agree on is that the whole matter of the war can be reduced to “disinformation”: bad speech that we ...

Free speech on the internet endangers democracy, Barack Obama told Stanford University. The widely hailed speech at Big Tech’s favorite university claimed that autocrats are "subverting democracy" and that democracies have "grown dangerously complacent". In the slow parade of teleprompter clichés he even warned that "too often we've taken freedom for granted." To Obama, the threat to democracy doesn’t come from government power, but the lack of it. “You just have to flood a country’s public square with enough raw sewage. You just have to raise enough questions, spread enough dirt, plant enough conspiracy theorizing that citizens no longer know what to believe. Once they lose trust in their leaders, in mainstream media, in political institutions, in each other, in the possibility of truth, the game’s won,” he summed up. Like every Obama speech, “Challenges to Democracy in the Digital Information Realm” didn’t offer anything new, just a distillation of ...

After spending the last few years banning Dr. Seuss and literally   burning   copies of Harry Potter novels in bonfires, and   denouncing   classic children’s literature like   Little House on the Prairie  and   Mary Poppins   as racist, leftists are now accusing conservatives of “banning books”. When a Minnesota school district  removed   The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn  and  To Kill A Mockingbird  from its curriculum because it made students "uncomfortable", the NAACP, which has been trying to ban Huck since at least  the 50s , cheered. So did the media which celebrated the effort to remove "racist language" that “triggered students of color” from the classroom. The removal of Mark Twain's authentically anti-racist masterpiece was carried out by anti-racists in school districts from Burbank, California to Lawrence, Kansas. In 2016, a Virginia school district, now at the center of media fear mongering about book b...

After campaigns to censor “election misinformation”, and “medical misinformation”, the latest wave of the censorship campaign calls for banning “climate misinformation” from the internet. A report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate warns of the free speech threat from, "climate disinformation, including articles that undermine the existence or impacts of climate change or misrepresent data in ways that might erode trust in climate science experts." And nothing builds trust like eliminating dissent. Big Tech monopolies like Google and Facebook are already preparing censorship measures, but CCDH provided them with a list of censorship targets that covers much of the conservative media including the Washington Times, Breitbart, PJ Media, Town Hall, Western Journal, and many others. The CCDH’s censorship pitch was then swiftly picked up by the Washington Post. If the past pattern of CCDH reports holds, Senate Democrats will use it as a prop in their latest demand that Bi...