Censorship Chronicles - Part 2: A Recent History of the Contemporary American Censorship Complex

How the National Endowment for Democracy Openly Continues the CIA’s covert legacy of Digital Surveillance and Information Control.

Following my first shorter article about the contemporary landscape of censorship, it is now time to dive deeper. In this exploration, we peel back the layers of a complex network that has evolved from the shadows of secrecy to the forefront of public operation.

We uncover the role of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which now openly carries out the influence and intervention activities once covertly executed by the CIA.

Our journey reveals the emergence of the Global Disinformation Index, a tool wielding significant power under the guise of combating disinformation but casting a shadow over conservative websites through a controversial blacklist.

The expansive reach of the U.S. State Department's Global Engagement Center comes to light, highlighting its dedicated fight against “disinformation” with a broad scope that impacts global narratives.

Meanwhile, the Stanford Internet Observatory's Election Integrity Partnership and its successor, the Virality Project, unveil an almost all-encompassing surveillance of social media, demonstrating a significant shift towards open censorship practices.

This intricate web, described as the Modern American Censorship Network, showcases not only the mechanisms of control and influence but also the shifting boundaries between public discourse, private interests, and governmental power.

Through this comprehensive overview, we explore the multifaceted dimensions of censorship in the digital age, where the battle for information integrity and freedom of expression continues to unfold.

If you appreciate my articles, please consider giving them a like. It's a simple gesture that doesn't cost you anything, but it goes a long way in promoting this post, combating censorship, and fighting the issues that you are apparently not a big fan of.

On September 26, 2022, an unprecedented act of industrial sabotage, unmatched in scale since the dark days of World War II, unfolded beneath the waves of the Baltic Sea.

In a meticulously coordinated assault, three out of four Nord Stream pipelines, nestled 80 meters deep near the Danish island of Bornholm, were ruptured by explosions of such ferocity that they registered up to 2.3 on the Richter scale, capable of breaching walls of steel and concrete 10 centimeters thick. While the fourth pipeline miraculously withstood the onslaught, the incident marked an escalation in the covert battlegrounds of modern warfare and geopolitical strategy.

Yet, in the aftermath of what arguably stands as the most significant act of sabotage on European soil in over seven decades, the response from the German Federal Government was marked by a bewildering silence. For half a year, the specter of accountability seemed to evaporate, leaving a void filled only by whispers and speculation.

Enter Seymour Hersh, a journalist whose name is synonymous with fearless investigative journalism and whose legacy is built on exposing the truths that power seeks to conceal.

On February 8, 2023, Hersh shattered the silence with a bombshell revelation: the orchestration of the Nord Stream pipeline's destruction, he argued, was a calculated move by the US government. The objective? To sever Germany's energy lifeline to Russia, a dependency viewed as a ticking time bomb for Germany's allegiance in the event of conflict.

Hersh, a Pulitzer Prize laureate revered for unearthing the My Lai Massacre and the abuses at Abu Ghraib, embarked on this investigation armed with the credibility forged in the crucibles of previous exposés. Despite relying on unnamed sources within the intelligence community and pipeline manufacturing circles, the granularity of planning and execution details he disclosed lent his narrative an air of credibility that remains unmatched.

Hersh's account reveals that in December 2021, two months before Russian tanks would breach Ukrainian borders, Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor, convened a newly formed task force.

This coalition of military, CIA, and various governmental department representatives was charged with a grave task: to devise a response to Putin's looming threat. According to Hersh's sources, Sullivan's expectation was clear—a plan to annihilate the Nord Stream conduits, an operation implicitly sanctioned by President Joe Biden himself.

The reaction—or rather, the lack thereof—from both the press and the Federal Government to Hersh's exposé speaks volumes. In a stunning display of collective silence, the German media enveloped the narrative in a cloak of invisibility, until Der Spiegel dictated the terms of engagement: not to scrutinize the veracity of Hersh's claims, but to launch an offensive against the man himself.

In a stunning pivot, the same publication that once lauded Seymour Hersh as a “legendary investigative journalist” in 2016 has now relegated him to the realm of controversy. This reclassification by Der Spiegel, branding Hersh as “disputed” and his credibility as “severely damaged” due to allegedly “questionable research,” is a bold accusation from an outlet marred by its own scandal of publishing the fabricated reports of Claas Relotius.

This critique leans heavily on the judgment of the Amsterdam-based “research network” Bellingcat, an entity financially supported by the EU, the US government, and the National Endowment for Democracy—a detail pointedly criticized by journalist Glenn Greenwald.

Greenwald articulates a broader indictment of the contemporary media landscape, portraying Hersh as ostracized in Washington for his refusal to conform to the narrative dictates that once defined journalistic excellence but now seem lost in an era where mainstream media willingly prostrates itself before the corridors of power.

The crux of Hersh's sin, according to Greenwald, lies in his audacity to report a truth inconvenient to the prevailing geopolitical narrative: that it was the United States, not Russia, who sabotaged its own Nord Stream pipeline—a revelation that aligns with the discernment of the informed public.

Greenwald underscores his critique by highlighting the echo chamber of defamation, noting the striking similarities between narratives pushed by Business Insider and Der Spiegel, both of which disparage Hersh's reporting on Syria by relying on the controversial Bellingcat.

This network, as Greenwald asserts, not only receives substantial funding from the US government and its intelligence and diplomatic arms but also from entities like the EU, casting a shadow over its independence and objectivity.

Despite Bellingcat founder Eliot Higgins' claim of significant funding from donors like the Open Society Foundation, the organization's financial entanglements with state actors suggest a compromised ability to produce unbiased investigative journalism.

The disdain Bellingcat harbors for Hersh, as Greenwald points out, stems not from a dedication to truth but from Hersh's undermining of the narratives cherished by the US intelligence apparatus and echoed by the Western media.

This critique illuminates a troubling paradox: outlets like Spiegel and Business Insider, by leveraging the resources of a network like Bellingcat, which is intricately linked to US propaganda efforts, simultaneously accuse Hersh of enabling “Russian propaganda” with his findings.

Glenn Greenwald's vehement exclamation, “Who cares?!”, cuts through the noise, challenging the prevailing norms of journalism with the piercing question of truth's paramount importance. His critique exposes a profound shift in journalistic ethos, from an unwavering commitment to veracity to a terrain mired in political calculus and opportunism.

The transformation of global influence strategies by the United States, particularly through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), encapsulates a paradigm shift from covert operations to overt support for the prevailing narratives. This shift, vividly described by David Ignatius in 1991 and echoed by NED co-founder Allen Weinstein, underscores a profound evolution in how geopolitical ambitions are pursued on the world stage.

The end of the Cold War marked not just the collapse of the Soviet Union but also a turning point in the tactics of international influence, with telecommunications technology playing a pivotal role in the spread of democratic ideals.

The NED, in stark contrast to the secretive machinations of the Cold War era's CIA, embraced an open strategy of supporting pro-democracy groups, training dissidents, and undermining communist rule. This approach, according to Weinstein, played a crucial role in the dissolution of the USSR and spurred the 1989 protest movements across Eastern Europe.

The NED's efforts extended beyond the Iron Curtain, promoting democratic transitions worldwide through election observation, constitutional advisory, and the toppling of undemocratic regimes.

Notable figures in the push for democracy in Eastern Europe included investor George Soros with his Open Society Foundations, indicating a collaborative effort among various actors to orchestrate a “revolution from above.”

However, the NED's activities did not cease with the USSR's fall; it continued to promote democracy in the era when the United States stood as the sole superpower.

The NED's role in the so-called “Color Revolutions” and its collaboration with entities like the Open Society Foundations signal a continuation of its mission into the 21st century. These efforts have not been limited to post-communist states but have also targeted authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and North Africa, as seen in the Arab Spring.

U.S. government-supported NGOs played a significant role in nurturing the democratic movements that emerged in these regions, demonstrating the NED's adaptability to the changing landscapes of global politics.

The U.S. strategy of democratization, exemplified by the NED's operations, reveals the multifaceted nature of American soft power. While championing democracy and human rights, these efforts also raise questions about sovereignty, the legitimacy of external influence in domestic politics, and the long-term implications of such interventions for global stability and democratic integrity. The narrative of promoting democracy, as woven through the activities of the NED and its partners, continues to shape international relations in an increasingly interconnected and politically complex world.

While free content and knowledge is undoubtedly something amazing, creating and maintaining it requires a significant investment of time, money, and effort. I don't have the support of a massive media conglomerate; it's just me here. Regrettably, Klaus is still not providing me with free insects to eat. So, if you have the means and are willing to support my work by upgrading to a paid subscription, I would greatly appreciate it.