Connect with us

Latest

News

North Korean delegation arrives in Russia, to be joined shortly by South Korean President

The Eastern Economic Forum is a unique meeting which will be attended by delegations from Russia, China, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea and North Korea.

Published

on

11,548 Views

Hours after the 9th annual BRICS summit wrapped up in Xiaman, China, delegates from East and South East Asia have begun arriving in the Russian city of Vladivostok for the Eastern Economic Forum. 

The Forum is an event designed to enhance economic partnerships and cooperation between multiple Asian nations including Russia, China, Japan, Vietnam and the Korean states.

This year’s summit occurs days after North Korea tested what is thought to be a hydrogen-weapon. Russia and China have both condemned the move and support UN sanctions against Pyongyang, but are equally opposed to further crippling unilateral sanctions from Washington.

With many suspecting that North Korea would boycott the event, Russian officials have confirmed otherwise, stating that the North Korean delegation is already in Vladivostok.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in is to arrive shortly along with the South Korean delegation. While the Korean crisis is set to dominate discussions that would otherwise have been reserved for discussing trade and economic matters, it is not yet clear if the North and South Korean delegations will interact at any level.

Many suspect that Russian President Vladimir Putin who hosts the event will attempt to conduct dialogue with the representatives of both Korean states in order to try and de-escalate regional tensions.

The Eastern Economic Forum officially begins on the 6th of September and runs through the 7th.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Jeffrey Spinner
Guest
Jeffrey Spinner

RT reported yesterday that the US “allowed” the South Korean military to increase the payload capacity of their missiles from 500kg to more. IF that is so, is South Korea ruled by the US? Why does South Korea need permission to increase any thing on their own territory?
https://www.rt.com/news/401982-skorea-us-to-lift-warhead-limit/

Wouldn’t it be nice if we knew the real rules of the game that the countries are required to play with, instead of just watching the shadows on the wall, never allowed entrance or a seat at the table to find out?

seby
Guest
seby

The US doesnt want allies, just vassals.

Patrice de Bergeracpas
Guest
Patrice de Bergeracpas

Fr that to happen the US would have to be a REAL democracy and not the fraud it is, a plutocracy ruled by the filthy rich 0.00001%.

Jeffrey Spinner
Guest
Jeffrey Spinner

Northwestern/Princeton study proves it’s an Oligarchic Dictatorship: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf That’s why I hope beyond hope, when the counter revolution to take back the gov’t occurs by it’s citizens here in the US, some country tries to help the population, instead of watching us die while popping corks of champagne. I don’t hold out much hope for that. The population of the US is as captured as any drone struck wedding party or funeral procession in a desert. We can’t vote anyone out (over 97% of incumbents return to office, about the same as a communist dictatorship), we can’t organize (total surveillance… Read more »

Addison DePitt
Guest
Addison DePitt

Jeffrey, you’re still profoundly confused. The brainwash you deplore and wish to rejects has also infected your mind. For starters, you have no idea what communism is really like, nor the way people lived their lives in the Soviet Union, for example, or China today. You won’t e able to get out of this mess by accusing the capitalists who run this plutocrats fraud of acting or being descendants of communist because that is plain absurd. Wacko. Like the old canard floated or a century now that Lenin was helped by the Rockefellers. Right. And I have a nice bridge… Read more »

Nofearorfavor
Guest
Nofearorfavor

So true what you said … especially as our lives and futures are in their self serving hands– because it is we, the collective taxpayers, who make the world go round. Wonder if we all refuse simultaneously to continue paying our taxes and keep their kitty full! — Jeez, the consternation as the wheels come off their plans, would be a hoot– our combined laughter would be so loud, it would shake the planet! After all what can they do, when the masses commit as one to ‘civil disobedience’ on a global scale? You want our money– change your global… Read more »

santiago
Guest
santiago

They will find other ways to make you pay taxes, in some countries you do not pay taxes directly the company you work for or does business with you pay directly and they have no choice, or they get hefty fines and lose stock/ownership which gets sold by the government.

So how can you refuse to pay taxes if you are unable to do so?

Nofearorfavor
Guest
Nofearorfavor

Ja– was just ragging of course… but still, one’s constantly thinking of some way one can peacefully send these mindless global warmongers packing!

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

“Wouldn’t it be nice if we knew the real rules of the game that the countries are required to play with”

Look up the US’s SOFA agreement to give yourself an idea.

Jeffrey Spinner
Guest
Jeffrey Spinner

I’ll look it up now. Ty.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

SK makes some of its own weapons and imports others. Here is the info on where it gets them from.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Republic_of_Korea_Army

Jeffrey Spinner
Guest
Jeffrey Spinner

Like an Employer to Employee dictate. YOU do this, you do that, you don’t do this, you don’t do that SK was required by directive of the US to only have less than 500kg payloads on their missiles… That’s what I mean. I didn’t realize SK is not a sovereign country, but another vassal state of the US. Makes sense, given the women of SK know somethings wrong, and have literally closed their wombs for business at least as severely as the Japanese women making death rates exceed birth rates. White women are #1 though, having so few babies the… Read more »

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

You can take for granted that ANY “nation” with a SOFA with the US is a vassal of the US. They are also used as bait and road kill in the US wars….you know their favourite saying regarding their wars…that they “lead from behind”. In other words, your citizens die in a war WE started, and when they have been wiped out we come in to save the day and “win the war”

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

“IF Kim really does have miniaturized nuclear warheads, China will invade NK to preempt the US from taking the mineral resources. I forgot which intelligence source I got that from, but it seems spot on. The guy said, China would move within a week, if they determine Kim has what he says he has. So holy cow, Batman!” Do you have a link for that info?? What is your source for this: “Supposibly, there has already been talks between the US, China and Russia on the partitioning of the Korean peninsula after China invades ongoing for a while now…similar to… Read more »

Jeffrey Spinner
Guest
Jeffrey Spinner

Of course Syria refuses any partitioning of it’s country…at the same time the US over decorum, international law, and the universe’s just shaking it’s head, has at least 5 large air bases in Syria, without an invitation, and with a gtfo demand from Syria. But the US has the same gtfo demands in Iraq, and Afghanistan too (who knows about all the African countries, even Japan said gtfo at different times over the years), but they don’t seem to hear that either. I’m uncertain this time if I heard it or read it…I’ll try to find it again, I think… Read more »

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

No problem. Take care of yourself!

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

There are some indications that even a US President may not be accorded that privilege.

santiago
Guest
santiago

I have a mixed opinion I believe they give the president certain leeway on some non-issues.

Che Serna
Guest
Che Serna

Actually the facts stands on their own merit. The South Korean military takes orders (since the 50’s) from an American 4 star general. South Korea therefore is hardly an independent state!

Jeffrey Spinner
Guest
Jeffrey Spinner

Great to know…I learned something today. ffs, this is bad news. The theory proffered is this: The US wants to encircle CHINA with THAAD missile systems. The US military is pretty sure they DON’T work, so they dared not take the shot to down the missiles Kim is shooting over Japan and everywhere else. I think they DID try and failed but kept that secret, but I have no info either way, other than a missile flying over Japan would never be allowed UNLESS they couldn’t stop it. The US military and their arms suppliers THINK they can play like… Read more »

Steve
Guest
Steve

The US has 30,000 troops in SoKo. The US decides everything, don’t you think? Would an independent sovereign country have foreign troops on its soil? Would SoKo play brinkmanship nuclear armageddon off its own bat? It’s too obvious if you ignore the MSM and think.

RBHoughton
Guest

The previous (corrupt) SK government agreed to one THAAD installation. The opposition rejected THAAD in favor of negotiations. Before the election result was announced, seven THAAD devices were imported and installed by USA without authorisation from SK. In spite of the new government’s policy they cannot be removed. That tells you everything you need to know about SK independence. After WWII the country was run by army and KCIA under the hideous Singman Rhee. Army law continued for decades. They still had curfews in 1970s. They have since developed their economy using the same trick as Japan so SK is… Read more »

louis robert
Guest
louis robert

South Korea is quite simply an imperial outpost now threatening China at its very borders.

Eddy
Guest
Eddy

Ask yourself Steve, why an ALLEGED Independent country has an America at the helm of their military forces who responds to the Pentagon, NOT the S.K. Government ???

Steve
Guest
Steve

Hi Eddy, That is exactly the point I was trying to make. Look at NATO, which is exactly the same. As soon as a country joins it no longer has control of the troops and armaments on its soil.

dago dingo
Guest
dago dingo

Vladimir Putin, the worlds number one statesman will of course try & create a dialogue between the 2 Korean delegations, that is what a smart politician does. Unlike those ignorant buffoons in Washington, England, Australia & France, who take their orders from their Zionist masters. Once again Mr. Putin, you have proven your status as truly, the planets number 1 strategist & statesman.

MissCostello
Guest
MissCostello

Well said.

Nofearorfavor
Guest
Nofearorfavor

Atta Boy! Good things happen where Putin is around!~ Although the world is already at a point, where, when it comes to the NK crisis, it seems every day is more disastrous than the next, as the US remains determined to scupper any sensible suggestions to take the situation out of deadlock– but if one man can move it forward, surely it is the president of Russia. Just the fact that the North Korean Delegation has already arrived in Vladivostok, bodes well.

mulegino1 .
Guest
mulegino1 .

Trump could learn a lot from Vladimir Vladimirovich; unfortunately, he is now a prisoner of the White House and its deep state lamias, who only kowtow to Trump’s worse instincts and smack down his better ones.

The New Concert of Nations – under the guidance of leaders like Putin and Xi is simply bypassing the old Evil Empire of USRAEL, NATO and usurious hegemony and creating new models of strategic and economic cooperation which take fully into account concepts like national sovereignty and the general well being of all people, just not a hegemonic elite.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

Wouldnt it be something if Putin can pull victory out of the jaws of defeat as he did when the US threatened to bomb Syria over chem weapons and the deal was made via Russia to get them out of Syria, thus avoiding all out WWlll at the time?

Andrew Pate
Guest
Andrew Pate

My thoughts exactly. Russia can talk to both sides US exceptionals cant and only use guns like in the old wild west.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

Flashback: In 2013 North Korea made a number of proposals for replacing the 1953 armistice with a peace treaty, but the U.S. refused to discuss it. North Korea (rightly) believed the annual U.S. and South Korean exercises are provocative and threaten North Korea with nuclear weapons. U.S. vessels equipped with nuclear weapons were participating in the exercise, and the Pentagon publicly announced that B-52 bombers flown over South Korea were reaffirming the U.S. “nuclear umbrella” for South Korea. If there is no peace treaty between the North and the South, is only because the US do not want it, as… Read more »

Eddy
Guest
Eddy

Absolutely, spot on, Daisy. In fact a few years back the North and South Koreans actually developed an Industrial Business park near the border, and N.K.’s and S.K.s worked there in harmony until the submarine (ALLEGED ) episode, wherein a S.K.’n fishing boat was allegedly struck by a torpedoe fired by ALLEGEDLY the N.K.’s from a sub. There was a lot of stink, blame was thrown around everywhere, but REAL culprits never found. No one questioned WHO BENEFITED THE MOST FROM THIS EVENT. As a result the Industrial park was closed, the gates across the railway were closed and everything… Read more »

louis robert
Guest
louis robert

That, is political leadership and crisis management, to be compared with permanent hysteria and constant imperial begging for war.

Ian
Guest
Ian

Mad insane men want a war, to thin out the rising population , the only way to reset the economy, all this has come about because of selfish people who breed like rats.

Herbert Dorsey
Guest
Herbert Dorsey

Putin is up to his old tricks. He is trying to build partnerships. How is it possible that Putin can bring North Korea and South Korea together for constructive talks when the U.S. has failed so miserably? It is sad commentary on U.S. foreign policy which wishes to bomb it’s way forward to solve international disputes. I mean what good is it to have a military if you don’t use it?

Angelo Cinarelli
Guest
Angelo Cinarelli

Devono mandare a casa quei guerrafondai di Americani. Voi giornalisti dovete smettere di leccare sempre il culo agli USA. Gli USA vogliono solo guerra per potere vendere e guadagnare dei bei dollaroni. Smettetela di scrivere quello che vi dicono gli americani. Se gli Americani se ne vanno via dal Medio Oriente e Asia sara’ pace per sempre in questo Mondo,

JJ Joseph
Guest
JJ Joseph

Catalps, you’re not making much sense here.

Latest

May survives ‘no confidence’ vote as UK moves towards March 29 deadline or Article 50 extension (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 168.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the ‘no confidence’ vote that UK Prime Minister May won with the a slim margin…meaning that though few MPs have confidence in her ‘Brexit withdrawal’ negotiating skills, they appear to have no problem allowing May to lead the country towards its Brexit deadline in March, which coincidently may be delayed and eventually scrapped altogether.

Meanwhile Tony Blair is cozying up to Brussels’ oligarchs, working his evil magic to derail the will of the British people, and keep the integrationist ambitions for the UK and Europe on track.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via RT


The UK government led by Theresa May, has survived to fight another day, after winning a no-confidence vote, tabled by Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party, following parliament rejecting the PM’s Brexit deal, earlier on Tuesday evening.

The no-confidence vote was defeated by 19 votes – the government winning by 325 to 306. It’s a rare positive note for May’s Tory cabinet after the humiliating Brexit defeat.

Speaking immediately after the vote, a victorious May said she was “pleased” that the House expressed its confidence in her government. May said she will “continue to work” to deliver on the result of the Brexit referendum and leave the EU.

May invited the leaders of parliamentary parties to meet with her individually, beginning on Wednesday evening.

“I stand ready to work with any member of this House to deliver on Brexit,” she said.

Responding to the vote, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said that the House had “emphatically” rejected May’s deal on Tuesday. The government, he said, must now remove “clearly once and for all the prospect of the catastrophe of a no-deal Brexit from the EU and all the chaos that would result from that.”

Labour will now have to consider what move to make next. Their official Brexit policy, decided by members at conference in September, states that if a general election cannot be forced, then all options should be left on the table, including calling for a second referendum.

Liberal Democrats MP Ed Davey also called on May to rule out a no deal Brexit.

The way forward for Brexit is not yet clear and May’s options are now limited, given that the Brexit deal she was offering was voted down so dramatically on Tuesday.

Gavin Barrett, a professor at the UCD Sutherland School of Law in Dublin, told RT that May will now have to decide if her second preference is a no-deal Brexit or a second referendum. Her preference will likely be a no-deal Brexit, Barrett said, adding that “since no other option commands a majority in the House” a no-deal exit is now “the default option.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Final Steps in Syria’s Successful Struggle for Peace and Sovereignty

The war of aggression against Syria is winding up, and this can be observed by the opening of a series of new embassies in Damascus.

Published

on

Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


The situation in Syria evolves daily and sees two situations very closely linked to each other, with the US withdrawal from Syria and the consequent expansionist ambitions of Erdogan in Syria and the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) takeover in Idlib that frees the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and Russian aviation to liberate the de-escalation zone.

Trump has promised to destroy Turkey economically if he attacks the Kurds, reinforcing his claim that Erdogan will not target the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) once the US withdraws from the area. One of the strongest accusations made against Trump’s withdrawal by his opponents is that no Middle Eastern force will ever trust the US again if they abandon the SDF to its fate, that is, to its annihilation at the hands of the Turkish army and its FSA proxies. This, however, is not possible; not so much because of Trump’s economic threats, but because of Damascus and Moscow being strongly opposed to any Turkish military action in the northeast of Syria.

This is a red line drawn by Putin and Assad, and the Turkish president likely understands the consequences of any wrong moves. It is no coincidence that he stated several times that he had no problems with the “Syrians or Syrian-Kurdish brothers”, and repeated that if the area under the SDF were to come under the control of Damascus, Turkey would have no need to intervene in Syria. Trump’s request that Ankara have a buffer zone of 20 kilometers separating the Kurdish and Turkish forces seems to complement the desire of Damascus and Moscow to avoid a clash between the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) and the SDF.

The only party that seems to be secretly encouraging a clash between the SDF and Turkish forces is Israel, criticizing Ankara and singing the praises of the SDF, in order to try and accentuate the tensions between the two sides, though naturally without success. Israel’s continued raids in Syria, though almost constantly failing due to Syrian air defense, and the divide-and-rule policy used against Turkey and the SDF, show that Tel Aviv is now weakened and mostly irrelevant in the Syrian conflict.

In Idlib, the situation seems to be becoming less complicated and difficult to decipher. Russia, Iran and Syria had asked Erdogan to take control of the province through its “moderate jihadists”, sit down at the negotiating table, and resolve the matter through a diplomatic solution. Exactly the opposite happened. The HTS (formerly al-Nusra/al-Qaeda in Syria) has in recent weeks conquered practically the whole province of Idlib, with numerous forces linked to Turkey (Ahrar al-Sham and Nour al-Din al-Zenki) dissolving and merging into HTS. This development puts even more pressure on Erdogan, who is likely to see his influence in Idlib fade away permanently. Moreover, this evolution represents a unique opportunity for Damascus and Moscow to start operations in Idlib with the genuine justification of combating terrorism. It is a repeat of what happened in other de-escalation areas. Moscow and Damascus have repeatedly requested the moderates be separated from the terrorists, so as to approach the situation with a diplomatic negotiation.

In the absence of an effective division of combatants, all are considered terrorists, with the military option replacing the diplomatic. This remains the only feasible option to free the area from terrorists who are not willing to give back territory to the legitimate government in Damascus and are keeping civilians hostages. The Idlib province seems to have experienced the same playbook applied in other de-escalation zones, this time with a clear contrast between Turkey and Saudi Arabia that shows how the struggle between the two countries is much deeper than it appears. The reasons behind the Khashoggi case and the diplomatic confrontation between Qatar and Saudi Arabia were laid bare in the actions of the HTS in Idlib, which has taken control of all the areas previously held by Ankara’s proxies.

It remains to be seen whether Moscow and Damascus would like to encourage Erdogan to recover Idlib through its proxies, trying to encourage jihadists to fight each other as much as possible in order to lighten the task of the SAA, or whether they would prefer to press the advantage themselves and attack while the terrorist front is experiencing internal confusion.

In terms of occupied territory and accounts to be settled, two areas of great importance for the future of Syria remain unresolved, namely al-Tanf, occupied by US forces on the Syrian-Jordanian border, and the area in the north of Syria occupied by Turkish forces and their FSA proxies. It is too early to approach a solution militarily, it being easier for Damascus and Moscow to complete the work to free Syria from the remaining terrorists. Once this has been done, the presence of US or Turkish forces in Syria, whether directly or indirectly, would become all the more difficult to justify. Driving away the US and, above all, Turkey from Syrian territory will be the natural next step in the Syrian conflict.

This is an unequivocal sign that the war of aggression against Syria is winding up, and this can be observed by the opening of a series of new embassies in Damascus. Several countries — including Italy in the near future — will reopen their embassies in Syria to demonstrate that the war, even if not completely over, is effectively won by Damascus and her allies.

For this reason, several countries that were previously opposed to Damascus, like the United Arab Emirates, are understood to have some kind of contact with the government of Damascus. If they intend to become involved in the reconstruction process and any future investment, they will quite naturally need to re-establish diplomatic relations with Damascus. The Arab League is also looking to welcome Syria back into the fold.

Such are signs that Syria is returning to normality, without forgetting which and how many countries have conspired and acted directly against the Syrians for over seven years. An invitation to the Arab League or some embassy being reopened will not be enough to compensate for the damage done over years, but Assad does not preclude any option, and is in the meantime demonstrating to the Israelis, Saudis and the US Deep State that their war has failed and that even their most loyal allies are resuming diplomatic relations with Damascus, a double whammy against the neocons, Wahhabis and Zionists.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Google Manipulated YouTube Search Results for Abortion, Maxine Waters, David Hogg

The existence of the blacklist was revealed in an internal Google discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News.

The Duran

Published

on

Via Breitbart


In sworn testimony, Google CEO Sundar Pichai told Congress last month that his company does not “manually intervene” on any particular search result. Yet an internal discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News reveals Google regularly intervenes in search results on its YouTube video platform – including a recent intervention that pushed pro-life videos out of the top ten search results for “abortion.”

The term “abortion” was added to a “blacklist” file for “controversial YouTube queries,” which contains a list of search terms that the company considers sensitive. According to the leak, these include some of these search terms related to: abortion, abortions, the Irish abortion referendum, Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and anti-gun activist David Hogg.

The existence of the blacklist was revealed in an internal Google discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News by a source inside the company who wishes to remain anonymous. A partial list of blacklisted terms was also leaked to Breitbart by another Google source.

In the leaked discussion thread, a Google site reliability engineer hinted at the existence of more search blacklists, according to the source.

“We have tons of white- and blacklists that humans manually curate,” said the employee. “Hopefully this isn’t surprising or particularly controversial.”

Others were more concerned about the presence of the blacklist. According to the source, the software engineer who started the discussion called the manipulation of search results related to abortion a “smoking gun.”

The software engineer noted that the change had occurred following an inquiry from a left-wing Slate journalist about the prominence of pro-life videos on YouTube, and that pro-life videos were replaced with pro-abortion videos in the top ten results for the search terms following Google’s manual intervention.

“The Slate writer said she had complained last Friday and then saw different search results before YouTube responded to her on Monday,” wrote the employee. “And lo and behold, the [changelog] was submitted on Friday, December 14 at 3:17 PM.”

The manually downranked items included several videos from Dr. Antony Levatino, a former abortion doctor who is now a pro-life activist. Another video in the top ten featured a woman’s personal story of being pressured to have an abortion, while another featured pro-life conservative Ben Shapiro. The Slate journalist who complained to Google reported that these videos previously featured in the top ten, describing them in her story as “dangerous misinformation.”

Since the Slate journalist’s inquiry and Google’s subsequent intervention, the top search results now feature pro-abortion content from left-wing sources like BuzzFeed, Vice, CNN, and Last Week Tonight With John Oliver. In her report, the Slate journalist acknowledged that the search results changed shortly after she contacted Google.

The manual adjustment of search results by a Google-owned platform contradicts a key claim made under oath by Google CEO Sundar Pichai in his congressional testimony earlier this month: that his company does not “manually intervene on any search result.”

A Google employee in the discussion thread drew attention to Pichai’s claim, noting that it “seems like we are pretty eager to cater our search results to the social and political agenda of left-wing journalists.”

One of the posts in the discussion also noted that the blacklist had previously been edited to include the search term “Maxine Waters” after a single Google employee complained the top YouTube search result for Maxine Waters was “very low quality.”

Google’s alleged intervention on behalf of a Democratic congresswoman would be further evidence of the tech giant using its resources to prop up the left. Breitbart News previously reported on leaked emails revealing the company targeted pro-Democrat demographics in its get-out-the-vote efforts in 2016.

According to the source, a software engineer in the thread also noted that “a bunch of terms related to the abortion referendum in Ireland” had been added to the blacklist – another change with potentially dramatic consequences on the national policies of a western democracy.

youtube_controversial_query_blacklist

At least one post in the discussion thread revealed the existence of a file called “youtube_controversial_query_blacklist,” which contains a list of YouTube search terms that Google manually curates. In addition to the terms “abortion,” “abortions,” “Maxine Waters,” and search terms related to the Irish abortion referendum, a Google software engineer noted that the blacklist includes search terms related to terrorist attacks. (the posts specifically mentions that the “Strasbourg terrorist attack” as being on the list).

“If you look at the other entries recently added to the youtube_controversial_query_blacklist(e.g., entries related to the Strasbourg terrorist attack), the addition of abortion seems…out-of-place,” wrote the software engineer, according to the source.

After learning of the existence of the blacklist, Breitbart News obtained a partial screenshot of the full blacklist file from a source within Google. It reveals that the blacklist includes search terms related to both mass shootings and the progressive anti-second amendment activist David Hogg.

This suggests Google has followed the lead of Democrat politicians, who have repeatedly pushed tech companies to censor content related to the Parkland school shooting and the Parkland anti-gun activists. It’s part of a popular new line of thought in the political-media establishment, which views the public as too stupid to question conspiracy theories for themselves.

Here is the partial blacklist leaked to Breitbart:

2117 plane crash Russian

2118 plane crash

2119 an-148

2120 florida shooting conspiracy

2121 florida shooting crisis actors

2122 florida conspiracy

2123 florida false flag shooting

2124 florida false flag

2125 fake florida school shooting

2126 david hogg hoax

2127 david hogg fake

2128 david hogg crisis actor

2129 david hogg forgets lines

2130 david hogg forgets his lines

2131 david hogg cant remember his lines

2132 david hogg actor

2133 david hogg cant remember

2134 david hogg conspiracy

2135 david hogg exposed

2136 david hogg lines

2137 david hogg rehearsing

2120 florida shooting conspiracy

The full internal filepath of the blacklist, according to another source, is:

//depot/google3/googledata/superroot/youtube/youtube_controversial_query_blacklist

Contradictions

Responding to a request for comment, a YouTube spokeswoman said the company wants to promote “authoritative” sources in its search results, but maintained that YouTube is a “platform for free speech” that “allow[s]” both pro-life and pro-abortion content.

YouTube’s full comment:

YouTube is a platform for free speech where anyone can choose to post videos, as long as they follow our Community Guidelines, which prohibit things like inciting violence and pornography. We apply these policies impartially and we allow both pro-life and pro-choice opinions. Over the last year we’ve described how we are working to better surface news sources across our site for news-related searches and topical information. We’ve improved our search and discovery algorithms, built new features that clearly label and prominently surface news sources on our homepage and search pages, and introduced information panels to help give users more authoritative sources where they can fact check information for themselves.

In the case of the “abortion” search results, YouTube’s intervention to insert “authoritative” content resulted in the downranking of pro-life videos and the elevation of pro-abortion ones.

A Google spokesperson took a tougher line than its YouTube subsidiary, stating that “Google has never manipulated or modified the search results or content in any of its products to promote a particular political ideology.”

However, in the leaked discussion thread, a member of Google’s “trust & safety” team, Daniel Aaronson, admitted that the company maintains “huge teams” that work to adjust search results for subjects that are “prone to hyperbolic content, misleading information, and offensive content” – all subjective terms that are frequently used to suppress right-leaning sources.

He also admitted that the interventions weren’t confined to YouTube – they included search results delivered via Google Assistant, Google Home, and in rare cases Google ’s organic search results.

In the thread, Aaronson attempted to explain how search blacklisting worked. He claimed that highly specific searches would generate non-blacklisted results, even controversial ones. But the inclusion of highly specific terms in the YouTube blacklist, like “David Hogg cant remember his lines” – the name of an actual viral video – seems to contradict this.

Aaronson’s full post is copied below:

I work in Trust and Safety and while I have no particular input as to exactly what’s happening for YT I can try to explain why you’d have this kind of list and why people are finding lists like these on Code Search.

When dealing with abuse/controversial content on various mediums you have several levers to deal with problems. Two prominent levers are “Proactive” and “Reactive”:

  • Proactive: Usually refers to some type of algorithm/scalable solution to a general problem
    • E.g.: We don’t allow straight up porn on YouTube so we create a classifier that detects porn and automatically remove or flag for review the videos the porn classifier is most certain of
  • Reactive: Usually refers to a manual fix to something that has been brought to our attention that our proactive solutions don’t/didn’t work on and something that is clearly in the realm of bad enough to warrant a quick targeted solution (determined by pages and pages of policies worked on over many years and many teams to be fair and cover necessary scope)
    • E,g.: A website that used to be a good blog had it’s domain expire and was purchased/repurposed to spam Search results with autogenerated pages full of gibberish text, scraped images, and links to boost traffic to other spammy sites. It is manually actioned for violating policy

These Organic Search policies and the consequences to violating them are public

Manually reacting to things is not very scalable, and is not an ideal solution to most problems, so the proactive lever is really the one we all like to lean on. Ideally, our classifiers/algorithm are good at providing useful and rich results to our users while ignoring things at are not useful or not relevant. But we all know, this isn’t exactly the case all the time (especially on YouTube).

From a user perspective, there are subjects that are prone to hyperbolic content, misleading information, and offensive content. Now, these words are highly subjective and no one denies that. But we can all agree generally, lines exist in many cultures about what is clearly okay vs. what is not okay. E.g. a video of a puppy playing with a toy is probably okay in almost every culture or context, even if it’s not relevant to the query. But a video of someone committing suicide and begging others to follow in his/her footsteps is probably on the other side of the line for many folks.

While my second example is technically relevant to the generic query of “suicide”, that doesn’t mean that this is a very useful or good video to promote on the top of results for that query. So imagine a classifier that says, for any queries on a particular text file, let’s pull videos using signals that we historically understand to be strong indicators of quality (I won’t go into specifics here, but those signals do exist). We’re not manually curating these results, we’re just saying “hey, be extra careful with results for this query because many times really bad stuff can appear and lead to a bad experience for most users”. Ideally the proactive lever did this for us, but in extreme cases where we need to act quickly on something that is so obviously not okay, the reactive/manual approach is sometimes necessary. And also keep in mind, that this is different for every product. The bar for changing classifiers or manual actions on span in organic search is extremely high. However, the bar for things we let our Google Assistant say out loud might be a lot lower. If I search for “Jews run the banks” – I’ll likely find anti-semitic stuff in organic search. As a Jew, I might find some of these results offensive, but they are there for people to research and view, and I understand that this is not a reflection of Google feels about this issue. But if I ask Google assistant “Why do Jews run the banks” we wouldn’t be similarly accepting if it repeated and promoted conspiracy theories that likely pop up in organic search in her smoothing voice.

Whether we agree or not, user perception of our responses, results, and answers of different products and mediums can change. And I think many people are used to the fact that organic search is a place where content should be accessible no matter how offensive it might be, however, the expectation is very different on a Google Home, a Knowledge Panel, or even YouTube.

These lines are very difficult and can be very blurry, we are all well aware of this. So we’ve got huge teams that stay cognizant of these facts when we’re crafting policies considering classifier changes, or reacting with manual actions – these decisions are not made in a vacuum, but admittedly are also not made in a highly public forum like TGIF or IndustryInfo (as you can imagine, decisions/agreement would be hard to get in such a wide list – image if all your CL’s were reviewed by every engineer across Google all the time). I hope that answers some questions and gives a better layer of transparency without going into details about our “Pepsi formula”.

Best,

Daniel

The fact that Google manually curates politically contentious search results fits in with a wider pattern of political activity on the part of the tech giant.

In 2018, Breitbart News exclusively published a leaked video from the company that showed senior management in dismay at Trump’s election victory, and pledging to use the company’s power to make his populist movement a “hiccup” in history.

Breitbart also leaked “The Good Censor,” an internal research document from Google that admits the tech giant is engaged in the censorship of its own products, partly in response to political events.

Another leak revealed that employees within the company, including Google’s current director of Trust and Safety, tried to kick Breitbart News off Google’s market-dominating online ad platforms.

Yet another showed Google engaged in targeted turnout operations aimed to boost voter participation in pro-Democrat demographics in “key states” ahead of the 2016 election. The effort was dubbed a “silent donation” by a top Google employee.

Evidence for Google’s partisan activities is now overwhelming. President Trump has previously warned Google, as well as other Silicon Valley giants, not to engage in censorship or partisan activities. Google continues to defy him.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. You can follow him on TwitterGab.ai and add him on Facebook. Email tips and suggestions to [email protected].

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending