Here is the expanded-details OP text for the thread: Facebook is stealthily blocking / hiding posts and post-shares featuring verified information inconvenient to US / UK propaganda

Blocked By Facebook and the Vulnerability of New Media

Quote

What is especially pernicious is that Facebook deliberately imposes this censorship in a secretive way. The primary mechanism when a block is imposed by Facebook is that my posts to Facebook are simply not sent into the timelines of the large majority of people who are friends or who follow. I am left to believe the post has been shared with them, but in fact it has only been shown to a tiny number. Then, if you are one of the few recipients and do see the post and share it, it will show to you on your timeline as shared, but in fact the vast majority of your own friends will also not receive it. Facebook is not doing what it is telling you it is doing – it shows you it is shared – and Facebook is deliberately concealing that fact from you.

 

Twitter have a similar system known as “shadow banning”. Again it is secretive and the victim is not informed. I do not appear to be shadow banned at the moment, but there has been an extremely sharp drop – by a factor of ten – in the impressions my tweets are generating.

The person this information comes from, Craig Murray, is a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is probably most known for whistle-blowing US, UK, and Uzbekistan partnership in torturing people in 2005, and also for delivering the leaked DNC emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 US federal election. Recently, Craig Murray exposed a series of lies the UK government made about a chemical attack that occurred in Salisbury, UK, which resulted in the UK government backtracking on many of its former claims, and denying having made some of them despite its video interviews and social media posts (which the UK government started deleting before that too was called out) proving otherwise.

For more detailed coverage of the Craig Murray's recent activity which has likely led to Facebook censoring his content, see my LTT blog post on the subject.

This information comes from Craig Murray, who is a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan. Craig has been in the news some recently because of his blasting apart many of the lies the UK government was pushing about the Salisbury, UK chemical attack. Craig Murray used to work in the UK's Foreign & Commonwealth Office, which communicates with the UK's Porton Down chemical weapons facility that analyzed samples of the Salisbury chemical agent and reported its findings to the UK government.

The UK government had tried to propagandize the public against Russia by claiming that its Porton Down chemical facility had verified the Salisbury chemical agent to have come from Russia. But because Craig Murray still has contacts within the FCO, and because he knew by first-hand experience from his time as a UK diplomat the type of manipulation and deception that goes on behind the scenes with government narratives that aim to bias public opinion towards or against an objective, he reached out to his FCO contacts about the Salisbury "Novichok" chemical agent, and heard that what the UK government was telling the public was a lie - the Porton Down facility had been completely unable to identify the source of the chemical used in the Salisbury attack.

It has also since been verified by many  sources that almost any country is capable of making "Novichok", a chemical whose recipe has been publicly available since the mid 1990s (using the Look Inside feature, it's on page 449) and which has been researched by many EU countries since 1999, and which is known to have been produced by Iran in 2016. And the UK and US have both made it, while the US even patented weaponized "Novichok" in 2015.

Many of these details were brought to light by Craig Murray, who is a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, where Novichok was developed and tested. Craig Murray had also visited the Uzbekistan facility during its dismantling, which was done by the USA in 1999, with the US becoming responsible for the facility's housed remaining stockpiles of chemical agents, to dispose or do otherwise with them.

As a result of Craig's reporting the truth, the UK government was cornered into admitting it had been lying to everybody when it said that any analysis had confirmed Russia to be responsible. The UK government was then caught lying about its earlier lying about the Salisbury agent, and was also caught deleting a Twitter post in which the UK government asserted that Porton Down had verified the Salisbury agent to have come from Russia.

https://www.rt.com/uk/423075-porton-down-skripal-proof/

https://www.rt.com/uk/423162-russia-poison-government-twitter/

https://www.rt.com/uk/424478-skripal-opcw-origin-poison/

Craig Murray also reported on the internal negotiations between the UK government and Porton Down, where the UK government had coerced Porton Down into signing-off use of the phrase 'of a type developed by Russia' when describing the Salisbury attack agent - which was designed to manipulate and connive the public into assuming that the Salisbury agent came from Russia, despite the only semi-accurate meaning of 'of a type developed by Russia' being that it could refer to the fact that the USSR originally developed the "Novichok" class of chemicals.

The UK government thought that so long as 'of a type developed by Russia' had almost a sliver of truth to it, that that would make it permissible to use to convince the public of a wholly different understanding: That it implied the Salisbury agent had any kind of association with Russia. Of course, the "Novichok" family of chemicals wasn't developed by Russia, either, but by the USSR - so the UK government and Porton Down's agreed 'of a type developed by Russia' phrase was a lie, no matter which way it's looked at.

Craig Murray has now just reported what he thinks is plausible Western responsibility for the poisoning of the Skripals:

Probable Western Responsibility for Skripal Poisoning
 

Quote

Quote

I meant to add that the policeman who ‘just happened’ to be around was almost certainly the special branch ‘minder’ who was keeping Yulia under surveillance. The media are not allowed to mention the existence of a D notice.

 

Those of us who have been in the belly of the beast and have worked closely with the intelligence services, really do know what they and the British government are capable of. They are not “white knights”.

 

I would add it has been very plain from day one that there is a D notice on Pablo Miller.