Here's one of the project members thanking Open Technology Fund on twitter: https://twitter.com/alisonkilling/status/1298938437412810753

Open Technology Fund is part of the US Agency for Global Media. Here's how Wikipedia describes them:

The U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), formerly the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG),[2] is an independent agency of the United States government that operates various state-run media outlets.[3] It describes its mission, "vital to US national interests", to "inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy"[4] and in accordance with the "broad foreign policy objectives of the United States".[5] It is considered an arm of US diplomacy.[6]

USAGM supervises Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio y Televisión Martí, Radio Free Asia, and Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa.[7] The board of USAGM has an advisory role. It previously supervised USAGM media networks directly, but was replaced with a single appointed chief executive officer (CEO) as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, passed in December 2016.[8][9][10][11]

The article itself tries to justify pretty extreme claims based almost entirely on blurry satellite photos, which to me is reminiscent of the successful use of grainy satellite photos as "proof" that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, which was used to justify the invasion of Iraq.

There is a propaganda blitz against China happening right now for the purpose of justifying future sanctions, isolation, and potentially war. I just want to make sure everyone here is aware of what's really going on, because the consequences of this will likely be quite serious.

EDIT: Reading more about the Open Technology Fund specifically. Holy shit:

The Open Technology Fund was created in 2012 as a pilot program within Radio Free Asia.[2][7] Under U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the State Department adopted a policy of supporting global internet freedom initiatives.[8] At this time, RFA began looking into technologies that helped their audiences avoid censorship and surveillance.[8] Journalist Eli Lake argued that Clinton's policy was "heavily influenced by the Internet activism that helped organize the green revolution in Iran in 2009 and other revolutions in the Arab world in 2010 and 2011".[8]

I feel like this definitely deserves a bit more attention.

  • GnastyGnuts [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Remind the libs of the parallels with WMDs: https://web.archive.org/web/20210525021703/https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/02/06/irreremovedble/e598b1be-a78a-4a42-8e1a-c336f7a217f4/

    Non Archive link because as I post this the archive site is being fucky: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/02/06/irreremovedble/e598b1be-a78a-4a42-8e1a-c336f7a217f4/

    "AFTER SECRETARY OF STATE Colin L. Powell's presentation to the United Nations Security Council yesterday, it is hard to imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Powell left no room to argue seriously that Iraq has accepted the Security Council's offer of a "final opportunity" to disarm. And he offered a powerful new case that Saddam Hussein's regime is cooperating with a branch of the al Qaeda organization that is trying to acquire chemical weapons and stage attacks in Europe. Mr. Powell's evidence, including satellite photographs, audio recordings and reports from detainees and other informants, was overwhelming. Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., the senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, called it "powerful and irreremovedble."** Revealing those tapes and photographs had a cost, as Iraq will surely take countermeasures. But the decision to make so much evidence public will prove invaluable if it sways public opinion here and abroad. At a minimum, it will stand as a worthy last effort to engage the United Nations in facing a threat that the United States could, if necessary, address alone or with an ad-hoc coalition.

    • GnastyGnuts [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Hey the profanity filter is being stupid and fucking up my links, someone help. You really can't say irreremovedble? As in, "impossible to be refuted?"