As I’ve said for a long time, engaging on the toxic anti-Semitic, mysogynist Swastika (formerly known as Twitter) platform is like offering law enforcement a shortcut to identifying potential harms. It’s akin to saying, “Hey police, here’s your guide to spotting national security threats!”
Today’s verdict proves that the defendant’s fraudulent actions crossed a line into criminality and flatly rejects his cynical attempt to use the constitutional right of free speech as a shield…
The initial question we must ask revolves around whether it constitutes entrapment for an individual to currently publish content on Swastika (formerly known as Twitter).
It’s akin to questioning whether someone participating in a KKK rally or, for that matter, displaying the unquestionably racist Betsy Ross flag at a Nazi march in Chicago should be held responsible for promoting domestic terrorism. The pressing issue arising from the initial query is how to handle active U.S. military personnel discovered in such a treasonous situation.
The second question is whether individuals are aware when they’ve unwittingly become conduits for Russian influence, as highlighted in this CNN article.
…Western voices that eventually became mouthpieces for Russian propaganda were almost certainly unaware of the role they were playing.
Reflect on the fact that America First was never going to openly associate itself with the KKK, even though it was the KKK that constructed and popularized the America First campaign. Does that make sense?
The essence is that mules being entirely oblivious is the objective, and the more unaware a mule is, the more effective they become—whether for Wilson (KKK), Hitler (Nazi), or presently, Putin (X and Z), as illustrated in this Yahoo News article.
The real threat, [a former army intelligence officer] concluded, came from Russia, which was running what appeared to be a wide-ranging disinformation campaign aimed at destabilizing… democratically-elected governments…
Considering the above two inquiries, the Swastika-affiliated account @sentdefender (OSINTdefender) is recognized for disseminating perilous “poison” posts. Moreover, it has garnered attention for being actively endorsed by Elon Musk.
…”@sentdefender are good,” Musk posted on the platform formerly called Twitter…
…Emerson T. Brooking, a researcher at the Atlantic Council Digital Forensics Research Lab, posted that @sentdefender is an “absolutely poisonous account. regularly posting wrong and unverifiable things … inserting random editorialization and trying to juice its paid subscriber count.”
Pushing poison for profits sounds awful, as though Elon Musk has decided the American opioid crisis is a viable business model for him by platforming toxic content.
What happens when Elon Musk’s “poison pusher” accounts such as OSINTdefender are noticed and become worthy of investigation by U.S. military and law enforcement?
This particular Swastika (formerly known as Twitter) account has recently been revealed to be purportedly operated by an active-duty officer in the U.S. military.
The OSINT group Molfar has provided extensive identity data for the case, suggesting action.
While the CEO of Swastika somehow manages to delay or evade personal accountability, regulatory bodies and law enforcement agencies may intensify their scrutiny of those associated with him. Elon Musk appears to be attempting a precarious blend of Bernie Madoff and John Kapoor. Yet, the scale of his “business of harm” is significantly larger and raises an increasingly pressing question of accountability for anyone associated with it.
The subsequent query might delve into whether Russian military intelligence has compensated Elon Musk for endorsing OSINTdefender and, if so, to what extent.