Olivia
Online
Truth Is Freedom
@TruthAnswersAll
Legal/financial background, researcher by choice.
Joined November 2024
774 Following
5.6K Followers
17.6K Posts
Pinned Tweet
One repost.
That's all it took.
And you were in the file.
You didn't have to say anything. You just had to agree with someone they were already watching.
Over half a million Americans profiled over the course of the spring of 2020.
This isn't a theory.
This is a spreadsheet. 👇
Who paid for it?
Is it still going on?
They Built a Hit List and Called It Science.
A philosopher who studies ISIS recruitment and lone-wolf terrorists decided that American parents discussing vaccine safety were the same kind of problem.
This is “Automated Clustering of COVID-19 Anti-Vaccine Discourse on Twitter” (arXiv 2203.01549, PLOS ONE). It is worth understanding exactly what happened here, because every piece of it is wrong.
The circular logic
They began with a conclusion: vaccine skepticism is radicalization. They built a tool to find it and then used the tool as proof it existed.
The entire analytical framework, the one Mark Alfano built his career on studying ISIS pipelines and domestic terrorism, was imported wholesale and applied to parents on Twitter. That leap was never justified or debated. It was accepted, funded, and published.
The consent violation
Nineteen million tweets/retweets. Real people. Their words, their thoughts, all harvested without consent, fed into a machine, and used to build the very classifier that labeled them dangerous.
In any other context we would call this a serious ethical violation. Here it got published in PLOS ONE.
The timing is a confession
If this was genuine public health urgency, you publish immediately. These were allegedly time-critical findings about a raging pandemic.
Instead:
Data collected: December 2019 - May 2020
Published: December 14, 2022
It was finally published 2 1/2 years after the collection ended. The accounts they targeted were long ago suspended. The mandates were crumbling and this conversation had already moved on.
The paper didn’t arrive in time to inform anyone of anything. It is a timeline that only makes sense if the purpose was retroactive cover.
Why Australia?
Australian taxpayers and the ~$800,000 John Templeton Foundation Grant funded a surveillance map of American political speech, on an American platform, targeting American citizens, during an American policy debate.
Why does a government in Canberra have a financial interest in how dissent is classified on Twitter in 🇺🇸? What exactly was the arrangement? Who received the findings before publication? Who acted on them?
These are the obvious questions that any journalist would ask if the politics were reversed.
This was information laundering
They took real people’s words without consent, built a classifier from them and used a terrorism framework to pathologize the truth. They published only after the silencing was complete and called it scholarship.
Studies like this were key players in something with a name, a budget, and a body count of silenced voices. They are not anonymous. They have universities, grant records, and email addresses. They have never been asked to answer for what they did.
I’m asking.
@MarkAlfano
@Macquarie_Uni
@templeton_fdn
@PLOSONE
@nikitabier How about testing some new ways to right the wrongs of the parents who spoke the truth?
They Built a Hit List and Called It Science.
A philosopher who studies ISIS recruitment and lone-wolf terrorists decided that American parents discussing vaccine safety were the same kind of problem.
This is “Automated Clustering of COVID-19 Anti-Vaccine Discourse on Twitter” (arXiv 2203.01549, PLOS ONE). It is worth understanding exactly what happened here, because every piece of it is wrong.
The circular logic
They began with a conclusion: vaccine skepticism is radicalization. They built a tool to find it and then used the tool as proof it existed.
The entire analytical framework, the one Mark Alfano built his career on studying ISIS pipelines and domestic terrorism, was imported wholesale and applied to parents on Twitter. That leap was never justified or debated. It was accepted, funded, and published.
The consent violation
Nineteen million tweets/retweets. Real people. Their words, their thoughts, all harvested without consent, fed into a machine, and used to build the very classifier that labeled them dangerous.
In any other context we would call this a serious ethical violation. Here it got published in PLOS ONE.
The timing is a confession
If this was genuine public health urgency, you publish immediately. These were allegedly time-critical findings about a raging pandemic.
Instead:
Data collected: December 2019 - May 2020
Published: December 14, 2022
It was finally published 2 1/2 years after the collection ended. The accounts they targeted were long ago suspended. The mandates were crumbling and this conversation had already moved on.
The paper didn’t arrive in time to inform anyone of anything. It is a timeline that only makes sense if the purpose was retroactive cover.
Why Australia?
Australian taxpayers and the ~$800,000 John Templeton Foundation Grant funded a surveillance map of American political speech, on an American platform, targeting American citizens, during an American policy debate.
Why does a government in Canberra have a financial interest in how dissent is classified on Twitter in 🇺🇸? What exactly was the arrangement? Who received the findings before publication? Who acted on them?
These are the obvious questions that any journalist would ask if the politics were reversed.
This was information laundering
They took real people’s words without consent, built a classifier from them and used a terrorism framework to pathologize the truth. They published only after the silencing was complete and called it scholarship.
Studies like this were key players in something with a name, a budget, and a body count of silenced voices. They are not anonymous. They have universities, grant records, and email addresses. They have never been asked to answer for what they did.
I’m asking.
@MarkAlfano
@Macquarie_Uni
@templeton_fdn
@PLOSONE
@RobSchneider Rob, I think you might find this interesting.
They Built a Hit List and Called It Science.
A philosopher who studies ISIS recruitment and lone-wolf terrorists decided that American parents discussing vaccine safety were the same kind of problem.
This is “Automated Clustering of COVID-19 Anti-Vaccine Discourse on Twitter” (arXiv 2203.01549, PLOS ONE). It is worth understanding exactly what happened here, because every piece of it is wrong.
The circular logic
They began with a conclusion: vaccine skepticism is radicalization. They built a tool to find it and then used the tool as proof it existed.
The entire analytical framework, the one Mark Alfano built his career on studying ISIS pipelines and domestic terrorism, was imported wholesale and applied to parents on Twitter. That leap was never justified or debated. It was accepted, funded, and published.
The consent violation
Nineteen million tweets/retweets. Real people. Their words, their thoughts, all harvested without consent, fed into a machine, and used to build the very classifier that labeled them dangerous.
In any other context we would call this a serious ethical violation. Here it got published in PLOS ONE.
The timing is a confession
If this was genuine public health urgency, you publish immediately. These were allegedly time-critical findings about a raging pandemic.
Instead:
Data collected: December 2019 - May 2020
Published: December 14, 2022
It was finally published 2 1/2 years after the collection ended. The accounts they targeted were long ago suspended. The mandates were crumbling and this conversation had already moved on.
The paper didn’t arrive in time to inform anyone of anything. It is a timeline that only makes sense if the purpose was retroactive cover.
Why Australia?
Australian taxpayers and the ~$800,000 John Templeton Foundation Grant funded a surveillance map of American political speech, on an American platform, targeting American citizens, during an American policy debate.
Why does a government in Canberra have a financial interest in how dissent is classified on Twitter in 🇺🇸? What exactly was the arrangement? Who received the findings before publication? Who acted on them?
These are the obvious questions that any journalist would ask if the politics were reversed.
This was information laundering
They took real people’s words without consent, built a classifier from them and used a terrorism framework to pathologize the truth. They published only after the silencing was complete and called it scholarship.
Studies like this were key players in something with a name, a budget, and a body count of silenced voices. They are not anonymous. They have universities, grant records, and email addresses. They have never been asked to answer for what they did.
I’m asking.
@MarkAlfano
@Macquarie_Uni
@templeton_fdn
@PLOSONE
They Built a Hit List and Called It Science.
A philosopher who studies ISIS recruitment and lone-wolf terrorists decided that American parents discussing vaccine safety were the same kind of problem.
This is “Automated Clustering of COVID-19 Anti-Vaccine Discourse on Twitter” (arXiv 2203.01549, PLOS ONE). It is worth understanding exactly what happened here, because every piece of it is wrong.
The circular logic
They began with a conclusion: vaccine skepticism is radicalization. They built a tool to find it and then used the tool as proof it existed.
The entire analytical framework, the one Mark Alfano built his career on studying ISIS pipelines and domestic terrorism, was imported wholesale and applied to parents on Twitter. That leap was never justified or debated. It was accepted, funded, and published.
The consent violation
Nineteen million tweets/retweets. Real people. Their words, their thoughts, all harvested without consent, fed into a machine, and used to build the very classifier that labeled them dangerous.
In any other context we would call this a serious ethical violation. Here it got published in PLOS ONE.
The timing is a confession
If this was genuine public health urgency, you publish immediately. These were allegedly time-critical findings about a raging pandemic.
Instead:
Data collected: December 2019 - May 2020
Published: December 14, 2022
It was finally published 2 1/2 years after the collection ended. The accounts they targeted were long ago suspended. The mandates were crumbling and this conversation had already moved on.
The paper didn’t arrive in time to inform anyone of anything. It is a timeline that only makes sense if the purpose was retroactive cover.
Why Australia?
Australian taxpayers and the ~$800,000 John Templeton Foundation Grant funded a surveillance map of American political speech, on an American platform, targeting American citizens, during an American policy debate.
Why does a government in Canberra have a financial interest in how dissent is classified on Twitter in 🇺🇸? What exactly was the arrangement? Who received the findings before publication? Who acted on them?
These are the obvious questions that any journalist would ask if the politics were reversed.
This was information laundering
They took real people’s words without consent, built a classifier from them and used a terrorism framework to pathologize the truth. They published only after the silencing was complete and called it scholarship.
Studies like this were key players in something with a name, a budget, and a body count of silenced voices. They are not anonymous. They have universities, grant records, and email addresses. They have never been asked to answer for what they did.
I’m asking.
@MarkAlfano
@Macquarie_Uni
@templeton_fdn
@PLOSONE
@elonmusk https://t.co/97wGc92lPy
The machine erased organic voices before the COVID 💉 was launched.
An Australian academic study found the top 3 accounts in the 2020 “Vax Safety” cluster (19M+ tweets/retweets) were:
@LotusOak2
@epigeneticwhisp
@Rectitude20
All 3 remain permanently suspended and scrubbed from the internet. #4 and below have all been reinstated I believe.
They harvested the tweets from all of these accounts (and more) to train censorship classifiers. This AI was taught that independent research is “dangerous”, which is why organic reach for so many remains throttled today.
The deepest proof of censorship is buried right here @elonmusk. Audit these three files and expose the blueprint.
@elonmusk You want to expose the censorship? The three accounts I’ve listed are the blueprint.
@TheRabbitHole The woke legacy embedded code needs to be dismantled before maximum truth can ever be reached.
@elonmusk @ZubyMusic Speaking of evil and heinous crimes, let’s hold the censorship architects and executioners liable for teaching the machine that the truth is a lie.
@ABridgen The censorship machine was up and running by 2019. It is still running today.
@rabbitholebot The poisoned censorship machine - what happened in the past matters for the future.
@NicHulscher The censorship infrastructure was up and running in 2019. It is still running. The architecture must be dismantled and the architects and executioners need to be held accountable.
@maryhollandnyc @CHDTVLive @ChildrensHD Yes, the public deserves the truth and that requires dismantling the architecture and holding the executioners accountable.
They taught the machine that the truth was a lie, and that machine is still running - thus, many of the organic accounts lost ~90% of their reach.
@RandPaul American citizens, who were on the front line and taken out before Covid, are tired of the censorship. The hearings mean little absent accountability. What is Congress doing to hold the criminal architects and executioners responsible?
@elonmusk Why 2019 matters today. The poisoned machine and the path to recovery.
@cb_doge https://t.co/97wGc92lPy
The machine erased organic voices before the COVID 💉 was launched.
An Australian academic study found the top 3 accounts in the 2020 “Vax Safety” cluster (19M+ tweets/retweets) were:
@LotusOak2
@epigeneticwhisp
@Rectitude20
All 3 remain permanently suspended and scrubbed from the internet. #4 and below have all been reinstated I believe.
They harvested the tweets from all of these accounts (and more) to train censorship classifiers. This AI was taught that independent research is “dangerous”, which is why organic reach for so many remains throttled today.
The deepest proof of censorship is buried right here @elonmusk. Audit these three files and expose the blueprint.
@cb_doge You want to destroy the mind virus then you need to destroy this legacy code that’s embedded.
Open these three files and the whole thing starts to unravel.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
240.1M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.6M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
108.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
106.9M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.2M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.1M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.5M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
86.7M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
80.5M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.1M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.3M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.6M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
68.4M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.4M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
60.9M followers
X
@x
60.9M followers
CNN Breaking News
@cnnbrk
59.9M followers