05/23/2020 / By Ethan Huff
Fake news empire The Washington Post is on a mission to make sure that every single copy of the popular Plandemic documentary film is removed from every last crevice of the internet.
The Jeff Bezos-owned, left-wing rag recently published an article in its “technology” section explaining that fake news employees of the paper are basically being paid to scour the web in search of Plandemic so they can report it to the hosting website and try to have it removed.
One perhaps unexpected place that the Post has had no trouble getting Plandemic removed from is Google Drive, a cloud-based file-sharing service that many Facebook users and YouTubers have been linking to whenever public copies of the film get censored or removed by Big Tech platforms.
Even though Google Drive accounts are supposed to be private, much like your personal hard drive, the Post has reportedly been successful in convincing Google to invade users’ files and remove Plandemic whenever they find a copy.
To those who know the Constitution, this is an obvious violation of free speech and personal privacy. But to the Post, it is a necessary response to the “weaponization” of Google Drive’s services for the purpose of “amplify[ing] dangerous content.”
Because Plandemic offers a different take on the pandemic that does not fully align with the official narrative, the Post and its Big Tech partners do not believe that you should be allowed to view it.
Listen below to The Health Ranger Report as Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, discusses how even Brighteon is now being censored by Facebook, probably because it hosts the Plandemic film without question or restriction:
One would think that, logically speaking, there is nothing to fear from allowing Plandemic to circulate far and wide if the content it contains is “false” and “dangerous” as the Post claims. It will eventually debunk itself, right?
Since the fix is on to force it down the memory hole, however, we can only conclude that there must be something to Plandemic that those fomenting the sham crusade against it do not want the public to learn.
Facebook and YouTube both announced back in early May that Plandemic had to go from their platforms because it makes “medically unsubstantiated” claims about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.
Among other things, the film questions the alleged importance of lockdowns. It also features the astute Dr. Judy Mikovitz who wrote a powerful book entitled, Plague of Corruption: Restoring Faith in the Promise of Science that questions vaccine safety and effectiveness, a big no-no.
What many social media users are having to do in order to still draw attention to Plandemic online is manually edit out Dr. Mikovitz’s interviews, for instance, or remove the “most problematic claims,” to quote the Post. In other words, only censored versions of the Plandemic trailer are being allowed to circulate.
Elon Musk of Tesla conducted his own witch hunt back in March against the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine, which is similarly being targeted by Big Tech. Musk tweeted a link to a Google Drive document citing a study about the alleged efficacy of the drug, and since that time Google has removed and blocked that document.
When asked if Google actively scans the files that users store in Google Drive, Google spokeswoman Alex Krasov refused to say, adding that her company “doesn’t go into details” about how its anti-misinformation policies are enforced.
More of the latest news about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is available at Pandemic.news.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under: banned, Big Tech, CCP virus, Censored, Censorship, coronavirus, covid-19, deleted, evil, Google, Google Drive, misinformation, Orwellian, Plandemic, tech giants, Wuhan coronavirus
COPYRIGHT © 2017 FIRSTAMENDMENT.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. FirstAmendment.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. FirstAmendment.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.