Mario Nawfal

🚨MAINSTREAM MEDIA'S ASSAULT ON CITIZEN JOURNALISM I was warned by many: ‘Mario, the more of a threat you become, the bigger you are as a target’. I scoffed at this statement, dismissing it as dramatic exaggeration. I WAS WRONG. While I’ve been critical of mainstream media, I’ve also been very balanced and understanding. But last week I became the victim of their dark side as they began to tarnish my image, and reality kicked in! Media is dying, and due to their desperation, many are resorting to dirty tactics. Bias, conflicts of interest, and cancel-culture is becoming the norm, eroding the public’s trust in one of the most important pillars of a democracy: journalism. NOTABLE VICTIMS OF MAINSTREAM MEDIA: 1) ELON MUSK: The media’s attack on Musk hits close to heart for two reasons: I’ve been watching it closely, and I was personally dragged into it. I saw first hand how the media attacked Elon’s Twitter Blue strategy, yet praised Instagram for copying the strategy. They ignored or dismissed SpaceX’s successes and praised NASA’s. They pounced on a glitch in DeSantis’ presidential announcement on Twitter Spaces, but ignored the record audience numbers. And it got personal: Journalists started digging into my life, trying to find dirt, and then trying to link it to Elon with NO BASIS WHATSOEVER. One example is Crickey, an Australian outlet that doesn’t like Elon. They wrote a hit piece on me and called me "Elon Musk’s go-to guy”, then labelled my health and wellness company I launched a decade ago: a “surprisingly controversial kitchen appliance company”. Want to know why? Because we got fined $8,000 USD 8 years ago for keeping a product discounted too long. Yep, because my company kept ONE product on sale for too long, we got fined, and that makes my business “controversial”. An $8,000 fine for a company turning over millions a year is NEGLIGIBLE. A worse example is NBC News, a media outlet I held to a higher standard over others, yet they sank the lowest. Their headline against me read: “FBI and SEC respond to complaints about Twitter audio star Mario Nawfal”. Yep, some random person complained (I know the person, an unstable individual with a grudge, and I know the complaint, a laughable allegation I know is untrue), the FBI or SEC “replied”, maybe asking questions, and suddenly this is a headline. There is NO INVESTIGATION, the authorities NEVER CONTACTED ME, but yeh, the journalist (who also HATES Elon) thought this was a good enough story to publish, and took a jab against Elon in his subheading: “Nawfal, who has rapidly gained online fame and been boosted by Elon Musk” The attacks against Elon shouldn’t come as a surprise, but Elon has been actively hitting back. Here’s a few examples of Elon hitting back on the media: - "The mainstream media is essentially the propaganda arm of the establishment." (2018) - "The media is so biased against me and my companies that it's not even funny." (2018) - "The media is more concerned with clicks and views than with the truth." (2020) - "The media is the enemy of the people." (2021) 2) TUCKER CARLSON: When Tucker, the host of the biggest show on Fox, was fired, mainstream media was out for blood, tarnishing Tucker’s image and adding salt to the wound: - "Carlson's firing is a sign that Fox News is finally taking steps to address its culture of misogyny and toxicity." (The New York Times) - "Carlson's firing is a victory for decency and a rebuke to the far-right extremism that he has helped to normalize." (The Washington Post) Ironically, Tucker relaunched his show on Elon’s Twitter, and his numbers have eclipsed those of the same media that enjoyed cancelling him. 3) JOE ROGAN: Rogan’s past comments were used to try and cancel him and his podcast. The media used a compilation of him using the N-word to frame him as a racist. Things got worse during Covid as the media lambasted Spotify for what they called ‘misinformation’ being spread by Rogan. Here’s a few headlines: - "Joe Rogan's Spotify Deal Sparks Backlash Over Spread of Misinformation" (The New York Times) - "Joe Rogan's Coronavirus Misinformation Is a Threat to Public Health" (The Washington Post) - "Joe Rogan's Spotify Deal Is a Disaster for the Company and for Public Health" (The Atlantic) - "Joe Rogan's Coronavirus Misinformation Is a Threat to Public Health" (Fox News) 4) THE TATE BROTHERS: While the phrase "presumption of innocence" is not in the Constitution, the 5th and 14th Amendments both touch on "due process". This means you are innocent until proven guilty. The legacy media decided that without any due process they could create a presumption of guilt against the Tates. I am not going into whether the Tates are innocent or guilty, but if I read media articles without questioning them, I would be almost certain they are guilty. - “Tate has long been accused of violence against women, and in 2020, he was banned from Twitter for violating the platform's policy on "hateful conduct." (The Daily Beast) - “Tate has built a large following on social media, where he has posted videos in which he promotes violence against women and makes misogynistic comments. He has also been accused of running a website that pimped out women.” (The Guardian) They have essentially undergone a public lynching fueled by the media, even though they have not yet stood trial for the accusations against them. MY THOUGHTS: What I’m going through is a small taste of what RFK, Jordan Peterson, Bernie Sanders, Anthony Scaramucci, Eric Weinstein, celebrities and politicians experience when they get on the wrong side of mainstream media. BUT, I still have hope. I understand and respect the importance of journalists in our world, and instead of further eroding the last bit of trust that remains, I prefer to play a role in finding a solution. Issue is… WHERE TO BEGIN? Do you agree with my stance? CAN LEGACY MEDIA GAIN BACK OUR TRUST?

🚨US TO SEND CLUSTER MUNITIONS TO UKRAINE, VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL LAW | NATO OPPOSES Cluster munitions are controversial weapons that have been banned by many countries. They are indiscriminate and can cause widespread civilian casualties, with unexploded clusters lingering for many years. Biden says sending cluster munitions to Ukraine was ‘difficult decision’ but ‘they needed them’ US STANDS BY ITS DECISION: The US says that it will only send cluster munitions that have a low dud rate, meaning that there will be fewer unexploded rounds that can pose a danger to civilians. However, some experts have criticized the decision, saying that even low-dud rate cluster munitions can still cause significant civilian casualties. NATO OPPOSITION: The decision to send cluster munitions to Ukraine is no doubt a controversial one. Even the British, who are staunch allies of the US, have voiced opposition and "discourage" the use of cluster munitions. In fact Canada, Germany, Spain, and France, who are also signatories of 'The Convention on Cluster Munitions', have voiced their disapproval and urged the US to reconsider. The use of cluster munitions is a violation of international law. The Convention on Cluster Munitions, which came into force in 2010, prohibits the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of cluster munitions. The US, Russia, and Ukraine are not parties to the treaty and never signed as they believe that in certain circumstances they should be allowed to utilize cluster munitions. RUSSIAN RESPONSE: The Russian Foreign Ministry made a statement yesterday saying that the use of cluster bombs by Ukraine would be a "serious violation of international humanitarian law" and that Russia would "respond accordingly.” EXAMPLES OF CLUSTER BOMB USE: Afghanistan, 2001-2021: The US dropped about 10 million cluster bombs, killing/injuring over 20,000 people. Syrian Civil War: Both sides used cluster bombs, killing/injuring over 10,000 people, mostly civilians. Kosovo, 1999: NATO dropped about 1.3 million cluster bombs on Kosovo, killing/injuring 1,500 people Lebanon, 2006: Israel dropped about 4 million cluster bombs on the country, killing/injuring over 1,200 people. MY THOUGHTS: Cluster munitions can be devastatingly effective when used against dug-in soldiers in trenches and fortified positions, but at what cost? As always, I worry about Russia’s response to the continuous escalations by the West. There is a line, and once crossed, I fear Putin will resort to nuclear weapons. I don’t know where that line is and I definitely don’t want to find out. With all the escalations we've seen over the past year, HOW do you see the Ukraine War ENDING?

🚨META'S HALF-BAKED TWITTER COPYCAT: Threat, or Blessing in Disguise? Zuckerberg's Twitter clone is riding on Instagram to attract new downloads, but there are major issues with this new app, as well as an interesting twist to this saga... CENSORSHIP: Meta was caught out today when it demonstrated its partisan political bias by censoring content from people Zuckerberg doesn't like. Its justification is that 'terms and conditions' agreed upon under Instagram have been migrated over. Wait, what!? Why can't they simply change them? Some conservatives had 'misinformation' warning messages attached to their accounts. When challenged by the victims of Meta's censorship, Meta tried to backtrack by claiming that "it was an error." Despite this, several posts have been censored. BRIDGE FOR INSTAGRAM USERS TO JOIN TWITTER? Meta's clone app could backfire on Zuckerberg since most of its users are from INSTAGRAM, and NOT from Twitter as many assume. By moving to Meta's inferior imitation of Twitter, these users will be cannibalized from Instagram. In other words, they'll swap out Instagram for the Twitter rip-off that Meta has created. Then, when they realize Twitter is a better version with more features, better privacy, and censorship-free, Meta’s clone will become a bridge for more people to move to Twitter rather than the other way around. Not sure if this will actually materialize, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it is. A PREMATURE APP LAUNCH: Upon using the platform, it's clear Meta released the app prematurely. They've shamelessly copied so much of Twitter's user experience that it looks like a stripped-down version. Twitter clearly has a better product in terms of usability, functionality, responsiveness, security, and reliability. Meta created a weak imitation of Twitter 2010. EXAMPLES OF MISSING KEY FEATURES: Below are just five of the many issues I have identified: 1) No web interface This is a major drawback as a significant number of people use web browsers on PCs, but they cannot interact with the app. Being unable to migrate across various platforms is a major deficiency. 2) Account Dependency Accounts linked to Instagram cannot be deleted without deleting both. This inability to decouple is frankly unacceptable; surely you should be as free to leave as you are to join. 3) No search function I actually feel embarrassed for Meta. You are unable to search key terms. I know their app is new, but this seems like a very basic feature. 4) Unresolved non-compliance with privacy laws The app is simply not available in the European Union as the privacy issues have not been resolved. Europeans value their privacy, but Meta values exploiting user data. 5) Censorship, Censorship, Censorship Do I really need to explain? MY THOUGHTS While the features, the functionalities and the community are important, they are NOT the reason I use Twitter. I use it as I stand for something. I’ve been vocal in my concerns around CENSORSHIP and the MONOPOLIZATION OF POWER, and Meta perfectly fits both these concerns. Meta’s censorship policy has crossed the line from ‘the greater good’ to ‘benefiting the few’, and their Twitter clone is an attempt to expand their monopoly and essentially DOMINATE the narrative. I’m not concerned though, and the reason is simple: Meta and Twitter are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT. It’s not a battle of social media platforms, it’s a battle of CENSORSHIP versus FREE SPEECH. Do you think Meta's clone will HELP or HARM Twitter? Do you agree Meta and Twitter are FUNDAMENTALLY different, beyond features & functionalities?

🚨PRIGOZHIN MISSING: Belarus and Russia Lose Wagner's Boss | Dead, Alive, In-Hiding or Planning? In surprising developments, it appears that Prigozhin has disappeared, and the authorities are clueless about his whereabouts. The last confirmed footage of Prigozhin was broadcasted on June 24th, the day the mutiny ended. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko claimed that Prigozhin is "in St. Petersburg. Or maybe this morning he would travel to Moscow or elsewhere." On the other hand, the Kremlin's spokesman said "the Kremlin does not follow the movements of Prigozhin, has neither the ability nor the desire." Pavel Felgenhauer, a defense and military analyst based in Moscow, stated that Prigozhin only briefly left Russia but is now "traveling in Russia, doing his business." RUSSIAN MEDIA SHARES ANTI-PRIGOZHIN RAID PHOTOS: Meanwhile, Russian news outlets have shared multiple images and videos of apparent raids conducted by Putin's men on Prigozhin's residences in Russia (see below) Footage from the raids shows that Prigozhin had stashes of gold and money. Furthermore, it is purported that he had wigs, along with weapons and several passports apparently belonging to him under different aliases. EXAMPLES OF PUTIN SENDING HIS ENEMIES TO THE GRAVE: 1) In December 2022, Pavel Antov, a Russian tycoon, reportedly fell from a hotel window in India after criticizing ‘Putin's war with Ukraine.’ 2) Ravil Maganov, chair of Lukoil, also criticized the Ukraine war and died by falling out of the window of a Moscow hospital in September 2022. 3) Businessman Dan Rapoport publicly condemned the Ukraine war. He was found dead in front of an apartment building in Washington, D.C., in August 2022. 4) Russian press minister Mikhail Lesin was found dead of "blunt force trauma to the head" in a Washington D.C. hotel room in November 2015. 5) Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was poisoned in 2020 with a nerve agent while on a plane to Moscow, and jailed in 2021. The above are only some recent alleged victims of Putin, but based on his record, some commentators think Putin plans to have Prigozhin eliminated. PRIGOZHIN'S OPTIONS: Having humiliated Putin with this public treason, Prigozhin must tread very carefully. His role as the head of Wagner makes his options arguably more limited than those of other Russian dissidents. The reason is that he is unlikely to be welcomed in NATO nations. 1) Prigozhin can live in exile in Belarus, though Lukashenko will undoubtedly be nervous with him in his country. 2) Prigozhin could also continue to run Wagner and pose a menacing threat to Kyiv or the Ukrainian northern borders. 3) Prigozhin could go into hiding by escaping to a neutral country if he has allies or assets that he has kept for such an eventuality. 4) If Prigozhin is free to move unhindered into Russia, he could attempt another mutiny or coup d'état against Putin with more carefully considered plans and potentially a better strategy. This is assuming Prigozhin and Putin are not on good terms, and that he has the support of higher-ups to make this possible. 5) Prigozhin may already be dead or in secure detention. This would explain why the Russians appear carefree and are discrediting Prigozhin in front of the public. Russian intelligence services will most definitely be keeping tabs on Prigozhin. He is too valuable of a target and threat to not keep under surveillance. MY THOUGHTS: I cannot imagine Prigozhin being alive in the next 10 years, as what happened on June 23rd constitutes the biggest threat against Putin during his 23 years of presidency. I also cannot imagine him seeking asylum anywhere: - The West does not see him as an ally, and while this can change, I can't imagine any circumstances that can make it possible. NATO wants to see Russia lose the war, but they also need to tread carefully to avoid Putin escalating matters. Harboring the man who led a mutiny against Putin, and one that loathes the West and Ukraine, brings more risks than potential advantages. There is a possibility, however unlikely, that Prigozhin becomes a bargaining chip. - The rest of the world is either allied with Putin or cannot afford to have Russia become an enemy. Do you agree with my analysis? Is Prigozhin DEAD, preparing a COUP, HIRING, or simply ROAMING AROUND with Putin's blessing?

🚨BREAKING: TWITTER TO SUE META | FACEBOOK'S LITANY OF COPYCAT FAILS Elon's lawyer Alex Spiro sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg threatening legal action, claiming that Meta hired former Twitter employees to create a clone. This isn't surprising, as Facebook's Moto has always been 'Why Innovate When You Can Imitate' Unlike great tech innovators, Meta literally just takes others’ ideas and repackages them. It is no secret that Meta has a copycat culture, and we know this because a US House Judiciary Committee probe in 2020 revealed emails from April 2012 with Facebook employees stating “copying is faster than innovating,” Zuckerberg was asked by the Judiciary Committee whether "Facebook ever threatened to clone the products of another company while also trying to acquire that company?” He responded "not that I recall" (please don't laugh) Remember when @ElonMusk was mocked for Twitter Blue, then a few months later Instagram copied the strategy? Old habits die hard. A QUICK GUIDE TO EXAMPLES OF FACEBOOK'S COPYCAT FAILS: 1) Facebook Check In deals - started in 2011 and closed after 4 months. This was a copy of Groupon and LivingSocial. 2) Facebook Gifts - started in September 2012 and closed after 1 year. This was a copy of the gifting app Karma. 3) Facebook acquired Parse in 2013 but had to shut it down. It was doing well before Facebook bought it 4) Facebook Credits - Users said it was too confusing. Credits were used by many companies like Disney Dining Credits. 5) Facebook Messages with email - this was touted as a "Gmail killer" but it was dropped as it was not popular. 6) Facebook Places - This was similar to Foursquare. In September 2011 it was shut down due to privacy concerns. 7) Facebook Stories - This was a failed copy of Pinterest and Snapchat. 8) Facebook Slingshot - This was a Snapchat imitation that launched in 2014, but it was scrapped in 2015. 9) Facebook Poke - This was probably the first Snapchat feature imitation, launched in December 2012 but pulled in 2014. MY THOUGHTS: Firstly, I hope Twitter proceed with their lawsuit as someone needs to stand-up to Meta's vulture-like approach to business: Acquiring competitors or destroying them by copying their product. But at the same time, I do NOT think Meta is a threat to Twitter. Twitter and Meta are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT It's not about functionality, it's about each platform's stance on FREE SPEECH. Both platforms can co-exist, they are NOT mutually exclusive. The same way Twitter is shifting to 'X', the 'everything app', Meta is expanding so they compete with Twitter. I expect both ecosystems to exist a decade from now, with similar apps, but VERY DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES. This difference makes it impossible for each to copy the other. Twitter will always be the Free Speech Town Hall and no other platform can take away that crown. Certainly not Meta. So you simply need to ask yourself: How important is Free Speech to you? META vs TWITTER, who comes out on top?

🚨OpenAI to Counter ‘HUMAN EXTINCTION RISK’ (this is NOT clickbait) OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, plans to counter what they call "the vast power of super-intelligence [that could] lead to the disempowerment of humanity or even human extinction." And they admit that "we don't have a solution for steering or controlling a potentially super-intelligent AI, and preventing it from going rogue." Remember, OpenAI are the makers of arguably the most advanced Generalised Artificial Intelligence alongside Google's DeepMind. If this was a Hollywood script, it could pass as a Terminator spin-off or a new prequel to Battlestar Galactica! Remember when @elonmusk warned that “the pace of progress in artificial intelligence is incredibly fast —it is growing at a pace close to exponential. The risk of something seriously dangerous happening is in the five-year timeframe. 10 years at most.” WHY BUILD ‘SKYNET’ DESPITE EXTINCTION RISKS? This is the first thing that comes to my mind. Why do we want to make super-intelligence? Well… I'm not alone. In April this year, more than 1000 people in the field of AI including Elon Musk, Emad Mostaque (Stability AI), many researchers at DeepMind and various professors said “the big players are becoming increasingly secretive about what they are doing, which makes it hard for society to defend against whatever harms may materialize." So we’re at a crossroads, either we: 1. Pause innovation in regards to super-intelligence 2. Keep innovating as fast as possible 3. Somewhere in the middle, slowing development to avoid things getting out of control Option 3 obviously seems like the most logical solution, except that we’re human and humans are stupid. We’re too short-term oriented, focusing on financial returns at the detriment of long term risks. Another issue is capitalism, meaning that any slowing of innovation in the US will simply give competitors like China the edge. WHY IS IT HARD TO CONTROL? DeepMind and OpenAI have been dealing with a problem they call alignment of AI, which can give unexpected results. In a nutshell, these systems are 'taught’, not programmed (think of a program as a script). So the AI is given feedback that is positive if ir does what we want, but if it does something wrong, it is given negative feedback. It’s essentially the same as training a dog or a small child. Unfortunately, the issue with alignment is that sometimes this doesn't work and the machine does something unpredictable. Now mix this with super-intelligence that's basically smarter than us, and the mistakes could be the launch of nukes or the release of an infectious disease. SO WHAT WILL OpenAI DO? Well they have a plan and it goes something like: We will train AI to correct the alignment of AI and make it as smart as possible. Yep, you read that correctly: AI will fix AI’s problem. Connor Leahy, an AI safety advocate, said the plan was flawed because "you have to solve alignment before you build human-level intelligence, otherwise by default you won't control it. I personally do not think this is a particularly good or safe plan." IS ALL A.I. DANGEROUS? The answer is obviously no, AI will change the world we live in for the better in many ways, more than we can imagine. The question is though, will the benefits outweigh the risk? Here’s a list of current risks of A.I based on today’s limited applications: 1) Autonomous weapons 2) Social manipulation 3) Invasion of Privacy 4) Misinformation and fake news 5) Bias and Discrimination 6) Security and Internet 7) Job Displacement… And the list goes on. MY THOUGHTS: AI worries me more than Russia, more than a Nuclear war, more than pandemics and more than global warming. At the same time, it’s one of the most exciting technologies I could even imagine. I think the ship of regulating AI before it gets out of control has sailed. Human nature will force us to innovate as fast as we can despite the risks to our very existence. People will not pay attention to this either, not until it's too late. I hope I'm wrong... DOES A.I. WORRY YOU?

OFFICIAL: Crypto's biggest UNRESOLVED multibillion dollar story will be settled on Twitter Spaces, if @BarrySilbert agrees. As always, we will remain NEUTRAL and OBJECTIVE

🚨RUSSIA/UKRAINE: Zaporizhzhia NUCLEAR Power Plant | Nuclear Disaster Fears | False Flag IMMINENT? Zaporizhzhia, the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, 10x LARGER THAN CHERNOBYL, is currently under Russian control and has become a major point of concern in the Ukraine war. Ukraine claims Russia is planning to blow it up as a false flag attack, and Russia is claiming a Ukrainian sabotage is imminent in order to frame Russia. CONTEXT: - The plant is located in southeastern Ukraine but is currently under Russian control. - Russia seized the plant in February 2022. - The Kahkova dam, which was recently blown up, acted as a secondary cooling source for the nuclear reactors at the Zaporizhzhia plant. Thankfully, the nuclear plant has a significant standalone cooling pond that is currently undamaged. - It is the biggest power plant in Europe. - The Chernobyl power plant, which famously blew up and is considered one of the biggest nuclear disasters of all time, is considered RELATIVELY SMALL compared to Zaporizhzhia. WHY IS THIS A BIG DEAL: If the plant were to blow up, the repercussions would be unimaginable, leaving thousands of lives at risk, vast amounts of land uninhabitable, and forcing thousands more people to relocate. It would also add an extra layer of an unprecedented amount of chaos to an already brutal war. Zelenskyy has claimed that "objects resembling explosives" have been planted on the roof of the power plant by the Russians. Russia has denied these allegations and claimed that Ukraine's military is planning an attack on the plant. UKRAINE'S CLAIM: Zelenskyy believes that Russia is planning to blow up the power plant. Many Ukrainians and war analysts believe that this could be done to halt the advance of Ukrainian troops and force Kyiv into premature peace talks that favor the Kremlin. Many also believe that if Ukraine's current "counteroffensive" achieves major success, Russia will blow up the power plant to save face and push back the advance of Ukrainian troops by contaminating the area. Yesterday, Zelenskyy spoke to French President Emmanuel Macron and warned him that the Russians are preparing a "dangerous provocation" at the Zaporizhzhia power plant. RUSSIA'S CLAIM: "Under the cover of darkness overnight on 5 July, the Ukrainian military will try to attack the Zaporizhzhia station using long-range precision equipment and kamikaze attack drones," Russian news agencies quoted Renat Karchaa, chief adviser to the head of Russia's atomic energy agency, as telling Russian television. Many Russians, supporters of Russia, and war analysts also believe that Ukraine will blow up the plant in hopes of involving NATO in the war. The Russians have tried to support their claim by commenting that Ukraine has a further 3 nuclear power plants located at: 1) Rivno 2) Khmelnitsky 3) South Ukraine And that these have not been targeted, so why would the Russians target any nuclear plants that they have custody over? It is a compelling argument as logic dictates you destroy assets of the enemy and not those that you occupy. A nuclear disaster caused by Russia has the power to trigger Article 5 of NATO, based on Lindsey Graham's proposed resolution. Article 5 of NATO is "collective defense," meaning that an attack against one Ally is considered an attack against all Allies. Last year a report by the Congressional Research Service confirmed that Russian or Ukrainian artillery is enough to destroy a nuclear power plant as they are not designed with defenses from artillery attack. This means that both sides have the ability to easily destroy the Zaporizhzhia power plant. IF the plant was attacked, WHO WOULD YOU BLAME AND WHY?

🚨BREAKING: FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS SOCIAL MEDIA FROM GOV INTERVENTION A federal judge has barred key members of the Biden administration from engaging in communication with social media companies regarding "protected speech." The injunction was filed by two Attorneys Generals from Louisiana and Missouri, who alleged that the actions taken by the Biden administration constituted "the most severe violations of the First Amendment in the history of the United States of America." If their claims are accurate, this would represent a Constitutional triumph, coinciding with the significant anniversary of US Independence. Although the case is still ongoing, Judge Terry A. Doughty stated that he was presented with "evidence of a substantial effort from the White House to suppress speech based on its content." The injunction carries wide-ranging implications, as it affects various branches of government agencies, including Homeland Security, FBI, HHS, CDC, among others. There exists a partisan history of lawsuits brought forth by both Republicans and Democrats concerning the role of social media. Republicans have maintained the viewpoint that free speech has been restricted, whereas Democrats have accused social media platforms of undermining democratic institutions by failing to curb "misinformation" and fake news. MY THOUGHTS: Having covered social media censorship comprehensively during the Twitter Files drops, I've seen first hand the negative impact of censorship, despite the mostly good intentions. I also witnessed the Government's tentacles within social media platforms, abusing their power for political and/or personal gain. The war between FREE SPEECH and the spread of MISINFORMATION rages on, and I cannot think of a solution. On the one hand, censorship is an example of consolidation of power that can be abused for good, but also for evil, and can be subject to bias and corruption. But at the same time, some things need censorship (hate speech, illegal action, gruesome content, pornography), and decentralized solutions are being tested (such as @ElonMusk’s Community Notes) WHICH SIDE DO YOU ALIGN WITH? Do you believe that social media hampers free speech or that it causes harm by disseminating fake news?

🚨THREE MASS SHOOTINGS AHEAD OF JULY 4TH HOLIDAY 10 Murdered and 38 Wounded in 48 hours of mayhem ahead of July 4th holiday in the US. In less than 2 days, three mass shootings in: 1) Philadelphia 2) Baltimore 3) Fort Worth (Texas) On Tuesday US officials described the carnage as "a grim illustration of the United States' decades-long failure to curb gun-fueled violence." Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families in this time of sorrow. Speaking about mass shootings, President Joe Biden on Tuesday said gun violence was tearing apart U.S. communities. Biden continued calls for Republican lawmakers in Congress to negotiate with Democrats on Gun Law Reform. In the past decade, there have been an average of five mass shootings on July 4th, more than on any other day of the year. Why? This could be because it is a time when people are gathered in large numbers to celebrate, which makes it easier for shooters to inflict maximum casualties. And the U.S continues to lead the world in mass shootings with 1.2 mass shootings per 1 million people, more than 3x more than the #2 country El Salvador. WHY ARE MASS SHOOTINGS IN THE U.S MORE COMMON THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD?

🚨SEC CHAIRMAN SACKED? Or Did A.I Trick Us? On Saturday, a rumor spread stating that "Gary Gensler (Chairman of the SEC) submitted his resignation following an internal investigation." But when you look into this FAKE rumour, the story takes a concerning DARK TURN... The story spread like wildfire, with one tweet alone reaching more than 1M views by Monday, as the crypto world celebrated! How did this get out of control, and who exposed it? You're in for a surprise... WHAT MADE IT BELIEVABLE? In April, a similar rumor spread claiming Gensler was FIRED, and this was reported and circulated widely by multiple small news sources and some folks on twitter.  Those articles name-dropped Republican Congressman Warren Davidson as a key individual involved in the firing. No reputable or highly respected source shared this rumor (including the mainstream media we all love to hate), but it was out there, and anyone on Twitter who sells their soul for engagement tweeted it without verifying. Next, on June 12, Warren Davidson (yes the same congressman) led other congressmen in introducing the 'SEC Stabilization Bill' where he stated: "U.S. capital markets must be protected from a tyrannical chairman, including the current one" He was obviously referring to Gensler, and even joined our show to discuss his bill. With this week's fake news, it was not until yesterday that Fox Business journalist Eleanor Terrett (a regular on our show) verified from the SEC that Gensler was NOT fired. This was further corroborated by Fox senior correspondent Charles Gasparino. It's ironic that, despite their MANY imperfections, the mainstream media at least VERIFY their stories (worried for their reputation and any lawsuits), unlike random social media 'influencers' chasing engagement. AI & FAKE NEWS Multiple journalists identified two issues with the original source of the information: 1) The source was a new website registered on June 24. How could it have such high level insider information when it's a week old?? How didn't anyone spot this?!? 2) A greater than 95% confidence in the article being fake news written or generated by AI. POINT 2 is what concerns me... In a world of fake news, the ability of AI to generate articles cannot be matched by humans. Maybe now we can appreciate what Gartner (the research and consulting service for IT and Computer Science) warned us of in 2019 when their article predicted "bots and AI [will] counterfeit reality and fake news" TWO FACES OF AI Ironically, the people who found out that AI was used to write the fake news actually used... Wait, for it... You guessed it right, AI! So AI was able to expose the fake AI-generated story! There is a new war where fake news articles and deep fakes are pitting AI against AI, with each side trying to outdo the other. It may appear that, at least for now, fake news is winning the war in a world where 'real time' news gets more engagement than facts, making ‘BEING FIRST’ more important for engagement-whores than ‘BEING RIGHT’. But the war is just getting started... Unfortunately for the crypto bros, no celebration yet, Gensler is still the Chairman of the SEC. MY THOUGHTS: As AI gets smarter, it is being used to capitalize on the darker side of human nature, in this case leading to the spread of fake news (including deep fake) It is both a worrying and exciting time for humanity as we learn to live with an intelligence that is on the verge of outsmarting us. I have 2 QUESTIONS for you: 1. Do you think Gensler will be fired this year? Should he be? 2. Will the AI vs AI war lead to MORE or LESS FAKE NEWS?

🚨BREAKING: META's Answer to Twitter (Threads) Release Date CONFIRMED 'Threads' will be released on Thursday in the U.S. The app has been described as a competitor to Twitter. According to an executive at Meta, its goal is to establish a "sanely run" social media site. However, the term "sanely run" might suggest that the app will collect ALL your data (something Meta typically has a penchant for 😉), as mentioned in the app's description. Personally, I firmly believe that @elonmusk's vision for Twitter is significantly superior and that he genuinely champions freedom of speech, in stark contrast to Zuckerberg's track record. If there is a glimmer of positivity in this situation, it is likely that Elon will train A LOT in preparation for his fight with Zuckerberg 😂 I'm wholeheartedly on team Twitter. Are you?

🚨 / 🇫🇷 FRANCE RIOTS: PROPAGANDA/MISINFO WARFARE Since the riots in France began, A TON of Misinformation has been spread on various social media platforms. In this thread, I’ll address some videos/pictures that many believe are from the riots, when in fact, are not. What drives me nuts the most are people who KNOW what they're posting is false, but they keep it anyway for engagement. What is the best solution to misinformation & disinfromation? Let's check out a few examples: /1

🚨TWITTER LIMITS: What’s Going On? What’s Next? (explanation & analysis) Elon is shaking up Twitter, pushing back against aggressive A.I data scraping with controversial measures: Verified accounts limit of reading 10,000 posts per day (if you spend all day on Twitter, excluding sleep, that’s over 700 tweets an hour, or 11 per minute) Unverified accounts limit is 1,000 posts per day, so 90% less New unverified accounts, 500 per day BUT WHY? Under Elon’s directive, Twitter imposed limits on daily tweet views, trying to curb rampant data scraping by hundreds of organizations. This move has sparked a heated debate about data privacy and openness on the platform. ELON’S MOTIVE? Preventing Twitter from becoming a "bot-strewn hellscape", preserving the user experience while fighting "data pillagers." WHAT'S THE IMPACT? Twitter's new limitations could drastically change the social media landscape. For users, it might mean adjusting to restricted access, especially if they're not verified. For A.I companies, it presents a new challenge in collecting big data. The change in Twitter’s policy could be a tectonic shift similar to the advent of Twitter Blue and the premium API, according to critics. CAN IT DELIVER? The drastic measures have stirred the Twitterverse, with users divided over the imposed limits. Twitter's move can be seen as a response to the growing issue of data scraping, which has plagued social media and affected user experiences. However, industry pundits like Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, have raised concerns over these 'account walls' and the potential detrimental effects on browsing the platform. ADDITIONAL DETAILS: - Elon said that current limits are TEMPORARY. This means that the limits may be changed, or scrapped altogether in the future. - In response to this move, Truth Social (Trump’s alternative to Twitter) has surged to the 18th position of most popular apps whilst Twitter has declined to the 62nd. Bluesky, another Twitter competitor, had to apparently halt sign ups due to the influx of users. I think people migrating to other platforms are acting prematurely based on emotion. We’ve seen this rodeo multiple times since Elon took over Twitter, yet the numbers at Twitter continue to hit All Time Highs. MEDIA ATTACK: I witnessed first hand the nasty ire of mainstream media over the past few days, so I can only imagine what bigger personalities like Elon go through. And they didn’t disappoint. Headlines included: - "Rate Limit could be Elon Musk's excuse, Twitter is broken likely due to bug or cloud issues” - “Elon Musk imposes idiotic limitations on how many tweets you can view” - “RIPTwitter begins to trend after Elon Musk announced limits on users” We’ve seen the same drama before, especially when Elon began unbanning accounts, or when Twitter Blue was introduced. While criticism is healthy, media has biases like all of us, and it is undeniable they see Twitter as a growing threat. Ironically, Elon’s tweet announcing the limitations had a record half a billion views. We’ve also seen Tucker Carlson’s videos hit figures that dwarf Fox News, and yesterday comedian Theo Von released his podcast on Twitter after it was banned on Spotify, reaching 30m views in 24 hours. MY THOUGHTS: We are in the EXTREMELY EARLY stages of Elon’s Twitter (less than a year). Elon still remains committed to free speech, and to me, THIS is the biggest improvement we’ve seen over ANY other social media platform. FREE SPEECH is more important than user experience, glitches or occasional downtime, and users will realize this as time passes. A.I's impact on Twitter could be transformative, but the platform is just starting to navigate these choppy waters. TIME WILL TELL Do you agree with my thoughts? Is Elon's Twitter BETTER or WORSE?

🚨 / 🇫🇷 FRANCE ON FIRE After Boy Shot at Traffic Stop You’ve probably seen all the videos of buildings and cars on fire, the explosions and reported shootings in Europe’s 3rd largest economy. Some have even compared the footage to a war zone. While this is very dramatic, to say the least, it still shows the extent of the unrest in the country. But why? WHY? An officer shot and killed a 17-year-old North African boy at a traffic stop. A prosecutor has determined the need for an investigation for voluntary homicide. It was the third killing this year during a police traffic stop, after a record 13 deaths last year. Most of the victims have been black or Arab. A study by an independent French human rights watchdog found that Blacks and Arabs in France were 20x more likely to be stopped by Police. Amnesty International has been critical of French Police’s ethnic profiling and discrimination records. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? Protests kicked off 3 days ago and continue to get worse. 40,000 law enforcement personnel were deployed in response to the unrest with hundreds of arrests and counting. Fears are mounting of a repeat of the 2005 riots, also sparked by the death of African boys during a Police chase, which saw mayhem in the country and thousands arrested. While most of France agree violent protests are never ok, some are using this as an opportunity to attack migrants and religious minorities, blaming them for the violence and claiming these riots are a result of lenient immigration laws. MY THOUGHTS: First, this hits close to home. I’ve spent a LOT of time in France and speak the language fluently. France is one of the most beautiful countries in the world, but they have their flaws, and we’re seeing one of them unravel yet again. We all agree the boy should not have been shot by the officer. We also agree that violent protests are NOT the answer. BUT, the problem goes deeper than this. Studies have shown systemic racism within the French police, despite denial by President Macron and France's Foreign Ministry. So, if there IS systemic issues, aren’t protests one way to force needed change? Yes and no. Protests serve an important piece of our democracy, one that should be cherished. They pressure authorities and Government officials to act. Unfortunately though, there will ALWAYS be bad actors in any protest, and these bad actors sometimes turn a peaceful protest in to a riot. When that happens, when a protest is dominated by rioters, a line is crossed. Do you agree with my take? WHEN does a protest CROSS THE LINE?

🚨BREAKING: SUPREME COURT MADNESS | Controversial LGBTQ+ Decision | Student Loan Relief AXED Today, the U.S. Supreme Court made two decisions that have caused uproar among members of the LGBTQ+ community and college students. CONTROVERSIAL LGBTQ DECISION: The Supreme Court has ruled that businesses can refuse to offer services to members of the LGBTQ+ community if the requested services go against their personal or religious beliefs. The issue brought to court originated in Colorado, involving an evangelical Christian named Lorie Smith, who was a web designer that declined to work on same-sex weddings. Her reasoning was that it contradicted her religious beliefs. Consequently, she sued the state, and to the surprise of many, the Supreme Court agreed with her, resulting in her victory. Many dedicated members and supporters of the LGBTQ+ community perceive this as a significant setback to their rights, while others view the decision as a victory for the First Amendment. It’s also worth noting that of the 9 justices of the Supreme Court, 6 are Republican. Of the 6, 3 were appointed by Trump, and the other 3 are Democrat. The court's decision today was 6-3, with the conservative justices taking Lori's side, while the Democratic justices opposed her. “Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion. A liberal justice, Sonia Sotomayor, wrote, “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.” Many argue that this law will heighten discrimination towards the LGBTQ+ community. SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN BIDEN’S STUDENT LOAN RELIEF: The Supreme Court has recently made a series of controversial rulings. Yesterday, it deemed race-based college admissions unconstitutional, and today, it struck down Biden's plan to cancel $400 billion in student loan debt. Biden proposed the idea of canceling student loan debt during his 2020 presidential election campaign, and it would have resulted in forgiving up to $10,000 in debt for borrowers earning less than $125,000 a year. Again, it was a 6-3 ruling that foiled Biden’s plans, as the 6 Justices said Biden does NOT have the authority to cancel student loan debt. Biden responded by saying, "I will stop at nothing to find other ways to deliver relief to hard-working middle-class families. My administration will continue to work to bring the promise of higher education to every American." All 3 decisions made by the Supreme Court in the last 2 days have caused high levels of controversy, with a notable uproar from the left. Do you agree with the recent decisions made by the Supreme Court? Is the court being POLITICIZED?