Elon Musk vs. the Ministry of Truth

News about Elon Musk’s bid to take over Twitter is tweeted on April 25
Scott Olson/Getty Images

Elon Musk vs. the Ministry of Truth

Radical leftists don’t want a may-the-best-facts-win debate. They want power.

The culture war is now an open nationwide conflict. Revolutionaries have captured and consolidated power over news media and social media. They are using that power to smash tradition, religion, history, family, childhood and even biology, rebelling against reality itself. And they are using their power to censor people who oppose them.

Now they are striking against the very existence of free speech.

In reaction to radical tech censorship, entrepreneur Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, has made a deal to buy Twitter for more than $40 billion. He has been an active Twitter user for years and said he loves it as perhaps the world’s best “town square,” a way to freely exchange and debate ideas. He considers himself a moderate liberal left behind by his fellow liberals over the past few years as they have turned increasingly radical. He also noticed, like many others, that Twitter seemed to be secretly turning down certain people, ideas and even political candidates while turning up the influence of the other side.

That suspicion was confirmed to the world surrounding the 2020 presidential election.

Twitter executives actively intervened to ban negative but true information about Joe Biden in October 2020 when legally obtained information on his son’s laptop was made public. They blocked and then froze the account of a very old, very large, legitimate news publisher, the New York Post, for reporting on the story and blocked all Twitter users from sharing that information. Later—after the election—Twitter chief executive officer Jack Dorsey claimed it was a “total mistake” and “a process error” that was “not against them [the Post] in any particular way.” He made that statement with Joe Biden safely in the White House—and refused to answer a congressman who asked whose decision it was to ban that information.

Twitter executives took an equally radical action in early 2021. After evidence emerged that the 2020 election had been not only unfairly influenced by media coverage and censorship but also that tens of thousands of actual votes were manipulated, Americans protested, United States President Donald Trump among them. They demanded that the relevant courts, legislatures and prosecutors investigate the fraud, disqualify illegal votes, and ensure that the election was constitutional—or even just democratic. But the big steal continued, from the dead of election night on November 3 through to the congressional certification on January 6. In fact, more than 100 U.S. representatives and senators were ready to contest the certification due to evidence of fraud in six swing states, but those behind the big steal were ready for that. The January 6 protest turned unruly and, in a few instances, violent. Evidence has emerged that the federal government itself, through the Federal Bureau of Investigation, helped cause that riotous behavior to discredit the opposition and force through the certification. It worked.

Hours later, Twitter censors went into action, actually suspending the account of the president to block him from one of his most-used forms of communication. The next day, former first lady Michelle Obama demanded that Twitter ban the president permanently. Twitter obeyed within 24 hours. It permanently blocked the account, including all prior posts, of President Donald Trump, cutting him off from his 85 million followers (Joe Biden had 8 million).

Musk was one of those who protested Twitter’s activist-style censorship. He was not known for supporting Trump, did not necessarily think he was a good president, and had significant disputes with him, including opposition to Trump withdrawing America from the Paris Climate Accords, a major priority of Barack Obama and other leftists. Musk was not a Trump supporter. He just recognized the obvious fact that free speech is integral to freedom itself. He told one associate that a tech company banning a sitting president from its platform was “insane.”

Now Musk is seeing if he can do something about it. He has said that if his purchase of Twitter succeeds, he wants to make it unbiased and transparent, even opening up the underlying computer code so that users can prove for themselves how Twitter executives are determining what they see, and whether they are artificially turning down the reach of some content and turning up the reach of other content. He said another top priority is getting rid of “bots.” These are automated Twitter accounts used to promote products or individuals, to perpetrate monetary scams, and to artificially amplify certain viewpoints. This would have the effect of revealing how many real people support which ideas, and how many accounts are the social media equivalent of fraudulent ballots.

Musk wants Twitter executives to use their control of the platform to enforce whatever laws are applicable, but few additional rules beyond that. In a constitutional republic like America, if people want something stopped, they make a law through their elected representatives. Musk said that those laws are what should govern what can be posted on a social media platform, not a censorship board with radical ideas. It’s a clear-cut case for free speech.

Radical leftists don’t want this!

They are furious! The line of attack for many of them is not that Musk will fail to bring free speech to Twitter: It is that he will succeed, and free speech is bad.

One radical liberal news host went all-out and said that Musk’s changes to Twitter “could affect the fate of the planet.”

They have compelling reasons to fight Musk and to continue denying free speech on Twitter and elsewhere. What could happen if people could more freely discuss the adverse effects of covid-19 vaccines, the true effects of the covid-19 pandemic itself, rampant Biden family corruption, and the level of fraud in the 2020 presidential election? Their grip on power depends on censoring the truth.

The Bible foretold that, in our lifetimes, the truth would be cast down to the ground by an organized, evil influence. But every secret will be brought into the open.

Liberal Meltdown

msnbc host Ari Melber said, “If you own all of Twitter or Facebook or what have you, you don’t have to explain yourself, you don’t even have to be transparent. You could secretly ban one party’s candidate, or all of its candidates, all of it nominees.” He continued, “Or you could just secretly turn down the reach of their stuff and turn up the reach of something else, and the rest of us might not even find about it till after the election.”

Melber and his radical leftist msnbc friends acted like he had no clue that the world knows this is exactly what Twitter’s censors openly did surrounding the momentous 2020 election! Twitter completely blocked legitimate, legal information about the laptop of Joe Biden’s son, and it permanently banned the sitting president of the United States, Donald Trump!

This is late-stage “political correctness.” It’s radical censorship in support of a cultural and literal revolution.

Twitter employees have been caught on video admitting that the company “shadow bans” conservatives and flags posts that contain words like “God” or “America.” And after the news that Musk’s offer had been accepted, Twitter executives appear to have changed their algorithms to reduce how heavily it manipulates information. Prominent conservatives suddenly found that they had far more followers, and prominent liberals found that they had far fewer.

Censoring your opponents does not prove them wrong. It only proves that you fear what they might say. This is why radical leftists and media propagandists are exploding with anger against Elon Musk. They are projecting their own crimes onto him.

Musk says that speech should be governed only by the laws that are passed by democratically elected representatives. People like Elizabeth Warren, an elected representative, say that this is “dangerous for democracy.”

But running Twitter as a Democrat-aligned propaganda machine? That’s not dangerous for democracy, she would say, because she is a Democrat.

Radical leftists like Warren are fearful not only that Twitter will reflect the actual opinions of real people at a 1:1 ratio going forward, but that what Twitter has been doing in the past will come to light.

You would think that senators and other politicians or especially journalists, even if they are Democrats, would avoid vociferously, hypocritically attacking such a fundamental, cherished value as free speech. But we’re in the late stages of the culture war now. The radical leftists are very deep into their long march of laying waste to America’s institutions.

Time magazine recently published an article titled “Elon Musk and the Tech Bro Obsession With ‘Free Speech.’” It actually asserted that free speech is racist: “The tech rhetoric around free speech has become an obsession of the mostly white, male members of the tech elite, who made their billions in the decades before a rapidly diversifying workforce changed the culture at many of the biggest companies in Silicon Valley.”

Even California tech elites—most of whom vote Democrat, many of whom promote Democrats, donate to Democrats and use free speech to amplify Democrat policies—are racist if they favor free speech.

msnbc’s Joy Reid accused Musk of pushing for free speech because he wants to bring back the era of Apartheid from his native South Africa. You read that right. Musk is a liberal billionaire who spends a large part of his fortune fighting climate change and who has supported Barack Obama. But he wants free speech on Twitter, so now the liberal attack forces are slurring him as a white racist.

George Soros, who for decades has used his billions to destroy the Constitution and traditions of America, used his Open Markets Initiative to, ironically, try to block Musk’s purchase. Activists, many of which almost certainly trace back to people like Soros, are targeting Twitter’s largest advertisers to try to intimidate or thwart Musk.

Another attack against the acquisition came from 26 nongovernmental organizations and advocacy groups that have signed a letter urging the nation’s biggest brands—including Coca-Cola, Disney and Kraft—to boycott Twitter if Elon Musk goes through with his plan. “Under Musk’s management, Twitter risks becoming a cesspool of misinformation,” their letter stated. “Your ad dollars can either fund Musk’s vanity project or hold him to account. We call on you to demand Musk uphold these basic standards of community trust and safety, and to pull your advertising spending from Twitter if they are not.”

Musk responded to this letter by asking who funds these groups. The answer is George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, various nongovernmental organizations founded by former Clinton and Obama administration staffers, wealthy Democratic donors, labor unions, and, in some cases, the governments of European nations. All of these various left-wing groups are united by their belief that free speech must play second fiddle to socialist speech.

But how did Barack Obama respond?

Now that leftists might lose the ability to amplify their own message and to censor conservatives on Twitter, Obama has called for government intervention. During a speech at Stanford University that he gave while Musk was negotiating the deal, Obama sent a message saying that more “regulation has to be part of the answer.” Less than a week later, as if on cue, the Department of Homeland Security announced that it is creating what it calls the Disinformation Governance Board.

Ministry of Truth

The Disinformation Governance Board has been compared to the dystopian “Ministry of Truth” in George Orwell’s novel 1984. Its alleged purpose is to advise the dhs secretary on how to analyze online content. But when you look at the decades of “politically correct” censorship and now brazen manipulation of information, you can see that this board is a major step on the way toward Chinese Communist Party-like censorship.

The most powerful person on this board is Nina Jankowicz, a former disinformation “expert” at the Woodrow Wilson Center. She apparently argued, when Trump was president, “I would never want to see our executive branch have that sort of power”—the sort of power she now has. When Twitter decided to reduce some of its censoring on free speech about the 2020 election earlier this year, Jankowicz said she was “dismayed about this decision” considering “the long-term damage these lies do to our democracy.” She must be doubly dismayed now that Twitter is headed for new ownership entirely. At the end of the day, radical leftists believe that true information is whatever the party says is true information.

Jankowicz is most well known for spreading the misinformation that the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian misinformation.” Now that even the radically liberal New York Times admits that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Hunter Biden’s laptop, Jankowicz is revealed as someone whose expertise in disinformation is not stopping it but spreading it.

When news came out about the infamous, dubious and now thoroughly discredited Steele dossier, an attempt to portray Donald Trump as vulnerable to blackmail by Russia, Jankowicz vouched for the dossier’s authenticity. In October 2020, with the election on the line, Jankowicz went so far as to tell cnn that she thought people across the nation were concerned that Trump supporters would show up at voting places with firearms to frighten Democrats into not voting. This baseless misinformation tells you everything you need to know about how Jankowicz will use the power of the Disinformation Governance Board.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki claimed Jankowicz is an “expert” with “extensive qualifications” for her new post. dhs Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas called her “eminently qualified, a renowned expert in the field of disinformation.” “And neutral?” the interviewer asked. “Absolutely so.”

But even the Wall Street Journal can see that this radical partisan appointment to a radical new institution is a deliberate design by Democrats to control what you are allowed to see and hear.

The dhs made the decision to form a board to “review questions of privacy and civil liberty for online content” last year, but the fact that the Disinformation Governance Board officially launched just after Obama’s speech, and two days after Musk’s purchase of Twitter was announced, is probably not a coincidence. For the left, when one finger slips off its stranglehold on Big Tech, its response is the “Ministry of Truth” at the well-armed Department of Homeland Security.

Leftists have a lot of censoring work they need done. Illegal immigration is out of control. covid facts are coming out. covid vaccine information is being released. Brazen fraud of several kinds was committed in plain view all over the country on election night 2020. Information is emerging that the fbi played a significant role in stirring up violence at the January 6 protest.

Conservative commentator Jack Posobiec said that Musk “didn’t just purchase a company, he purchased evidence.” Whether that is his intention or not, owning Twitter could mean owning evidence that radical leftists have been censoring and shadow banning conservatives for years. We can expect some shocking revelations if and when Musk takes Twitter private and reprograms the platform to allow free speech. The world just might get a look into what Twitter has been doing, and that would give it a look into what the radical left has been doing.

From Democrats to socialists to Communists, the leftists have targeted free speech for years. Political correctness has gone from an absurd idea to accepted to a major factor in our politics and culture.

Now and again, you will hear Democrats say positive things about “free speech.” But this God-given right is part of the original, constitutional, conservative side of the culture war. The progressive, socialist, Communist side of the war fundamentally rejects the Constitution, the right to free speech, and the beliefs about God that ultimately underpin the entire concept of inalienable rights. They don’t believe in it in the first place.

Radical leftists don’t want a may-the-best-facts-win debate. Like everything else in our society, they want to use information as a weapon. They want their opponents silenced.

We are getting a good look at just how far the radical left is willing to go to maintain its hold on power. In his 2018 article “Saving America From the Radical Left—Temporarily,” my father, Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry, wrote, “Had Hillary Clinton been elected, the destructive trends that unfolded during the Obama presidency would have continued unchecked, and they surely would have intensified. Many people—including me—believe it would have meant an end to our constitutional republic!” At the time that view might have seemed extreme. I don’t think President Obama was a great leader, some may have thought. But destroy our republic? Really?

The war over Twitter and disinformation in general gives a glimpse at just how correct my father was. The radical left is on the cusp of turning this historic bastion of freedom into an altogether different nation. It is nothing short of miraculous that Elon Musk has gotten as far as he has in his attempt to restore free speech. But the left is striking back boldly in a variety of ways, up to and including a Disinformation Governance Board.

The Prophet Daniel said an end-time Antiochus would “cast down the truth to the ground” (Daniel 8:12). This applies to a destructive leader who used his power over God’s Church to destroy it. But it also applies to what is happening in America right now.

Barack Obama was at the epicenter of the radical left’s effort to prevent Donald Trump from being reelected, and he is at the epicenter of the effort to keep people from finding out about it. That’s why his political allies and organizations are targeting Twitter.

Just as the people in the Church allowed the truth to be cast to the ground, Americans, even the ones opposed to radical leftism, are also allowing the truth to be cast to the ground. At this late stage, they are far too weak to stop it. God has to intervene to save our republic. If He does not, the Trumpet certainly couldn’t get our message out and many people would never get to hear God’s warning message. God has promised to give America one last chance to repent (Amos 7:8), so He absolutely must save this country from the forces that are muzzling and destroying it.

“For the Lord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter: for there was not any shut up, nor any left, nor any helper for Israel. And the Lord said not that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven: but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam the son of Joash” (2 Kings 14:26-27). This describes a crucial moment in the history of ancient Israel that is also a specific prophecy for that nation’s modern descendants, including the Americans. This country is indeed suffering grievous affliction. It is on the brink of final destruction as a constitutional republic, and even as a sovereign nation! But there is an end-time type of King Jeroboam ii: Donald Trump.

God will save America primarily through President Trump. But why? He is giving those who are casting the truth to the ground and those who are allowing it, an opportunity to hear his warning message and decide whether or not to repent of the sins that brought us to this point. The tide might be turning. Which means you have a choice to make.

Request your free copy of America Under Attack, by Gerald Flurry.